Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Officially The Greatest YEAR Ever For SC Crowdfunding

2456789

Comments

  • parrotpholkparrotpholk Member EpicPosts: 4,644
    Babuinix said:
    Will give some credit where it is due and game is starting to resemble something that will be worth playing in another 2 - 3 years.

    That being said I still do not see where 200 million has disappeared too.  This is just crowd funding and not including loans and other investors to my understanding.  Nothing produced so far seems like it should have taken that kind of money.
    Are you accounting for the fact that building and maitaining 5 studios across the globe is costly plus the fact that they are building not only a mmorpg game but also a single-player campaign with Squadron 42?

    I Mean does this look like a "low budget game" trailer?

    Why in the world does it matter how much a trailer cost to make.  If they are spending excess money on that then people need to quit buying 1000 dollar ships.

    I also do not see what 5 studios are doing either if you want to put it in that context.  Game should be done for the money and people they are throwing at it.  Instead they are releasing a minimum viable product sometime in the future......

    This is a game for entertainment and not a real life simulator.
    Sal1ZenJellyDerpangedOdeezee
  • parrotpholkparrotpholk Member EpicPosts: 4,644
    Kyleran said:
    Will give some credit where it is due and game is starting to resemble something that will be worth playing in another 2 - 3 years.

    That being said I still do not see where 200 million has disappeared too.  This is just crowd funding and not including loans and other investors to my understanding.  Nothing produced so far seems like it should have taken that kind of money.
    They have raised $200M, does not mean they have spent the same.

    No telling what the burn rate has been without published financials.


    True and fair point.
    ZenJelly
  • BabuinixBabuinix Member EpicPosts: 3,063
    Why in the world does it matter how much a trailer cost to make.  If they are spending excess money on that then people need to quit buying 1000 dollar ships.

    I also do not see what 5 studios are doing either if you want to put it in that context.  Game should be done for the money and people they are throwing at it.  Instead they are releasing a minimum viable product sometime in the future......

    This is a game for entertainment and not a real life simulator.
    Sorry but I think the point flew right over you lol

    The trailer is from another game that is being developed by the company , it's a single player campaign style game set in the same universe of Star Citizen, it will act as the introduction to the lore/game.


    So you have a new company raised from nothing through crowdfunding making 2 games highly ambitious games who are pushing the marks of what is done in the industry by established and multi decade old companies.

    You not "seeing what 5 studios are doing" is a fault of yours not an remark, there's plenty of their work showcased along the years, being ignorant about it doesn't nullifies it's existence lol

    Read Dead Redemption 2 took about 8 years and involved around 1700 people to make, A single player game sequel that uses a lot of work from previous games from a established studio with deeper pockets than CIG lol

    Cyberpunk, Beyond Good&Evil2, Starfield, Diablo4.... can you play them? Where's their alpha?

    Being developed behind doors like most big production games, because most gamers ignore what difficulties making games entails and take anything said as gospel lol

    Please if you have no clue about the subject refrain from spelling uninformed bull crap.
    ZenJellyDerpanged
  • VitaminKVitaminK Member UncommonPosts: 76
    edited December 2018
    I will laugh when all the people yelling SCAM come back at release...




    in a couple years.
    BabuinixIselinkikoodutroa8ZenJellyDerpanged
  • hikaru77hikaru77 Member UncommonPosts: 1,123
    3.3.6 Update is the 1st time ever that SC feels like a real game, and is just amazing what they did, and impossible game is now real. 3.6 update on Q2 2019 if they hit that market, the release the SC won't be far away. 
    TalaharZenJellyOctagon7711
  • Sal1Sal1 Member UncommonPosts: 379
    Here is my post from November of 2015 - https://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/422887/star-citizen-current-ship-pipeline-status/p10  

    "Yes here are the prices in ships in a game you have never played. lol Please give us more money for ships you may never see in a game you haven't played. We need more money to delelop a game you may never play. 
    Read more at https://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/422887/star-citizen-current-ship-pipeline-status/p10#MBpuDxMyJ5JScrkd.99" How is it going playing ships you payed for in a game that isn't released? lol

    Derpanged
  • BabuinixBabuinix Member EpicPosts: 3,063
    Sal1 said:
    Here is my post from November of 2015 - https://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/422887/star-citizen-current-ship-pipeline-status/p10  

    "Yes here are the prices in ships in a game you have never played. lol Please give us more money for ships you may never see in a game you haven't played. We need more money to delelop a game you may never play. 
    Read more at https://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/422887/star-citizen-current-ship-pipeline-status/p10#MBpuDxMyJ5JScrkd.99" How is it going playing ships you payed for in a game that isn't released? lol
    You really gonna want to bring that quote after a Free-Fly-Week where thousands of gamers played the game and flew all the ships available for free lol?

    Something tells me you didn't thought that through. B)
    ZenJellyDerpanged
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    Babuinix said:
    Why in the world does it matter how much a trailer cost to make.  If they are spending excess money on that then people need to quit buying 1000 dollar ships.

    I also do not see what 5 studios are doing either if you want to put it in that context.  Game should be done for the money and people they are throwing at it.  Instead they are releasing a minimum viable product sometime in the future......

    This is a game for entertainment and not a real life simulator.
    Sorry but I think the point flew right over you lol

    The trailer is from another game that is being developed by the company , it's a single player campaign style game set in the same universe of Star Citizen, it will act as the introduction to the lore/game.


    So you have a new company raised from nothing through crowdfunding making 2 games highly ambitious games who are pushing the marks of what is done in the industry by established and multi decade old companies.

    You not "seeing what 5 studios are doing" is a fault of yours not an remark, there's plenty of their work showcased along the years, being ignorant about it doesn't nullifies it's existence lol

    Read Dead Redemption 2 took about 8 years and involved around 1700 people to make, A single player game sequel that uses a lot of work from previous games from a established studio with deeper pockets than CIG lol

    Cyberpunk, Beyond Good&Evil2, Starfield, Diablo4.... can you play them? Where's their alpha?

    Being developed behind doors like most big production games, because most gamers ignore what difficulties making games entails and take anything said as gospel lol

    Please if you have no clue about the subject refrain from spelling uninformed bull crap.
    Squadron 42 can you play them? Where’s that alpha? 

    Thats right its its being developed behind closed doors like most big production games and the fans take anything said about it as gospel. Answer the call 2015!
    PhaserlightOdeezee
  • BobVaBobVa Member UncommonPosts: 125
    I remember @Erillion , saying in 2016 that games this big do not get finished in 4 years. 

    2 years later, he's basically saying the same. I wonder what he'll say in 2022.
  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    <snip> This is just crowd funding and not including loans and other investors to my understanding.  <snip>
    Its all "crowdfunded".

    There are no "loans"; there was - still is? - an arrangement were a bank (Coutts) loaned the UK office money at the <<start>> of a quarter that was "repaid" at the <<end>> of a quarter by a UK government game development grant. Why? Possibly cashflow but more likely a cheaper means of managing exchange rate fluctuations - most (probably all) companies that operate in multiple countries use "forex" to try and manage curremcy movements, which comes at a cost.

    There are no investors. No shareholders expecting dividends. Probably some larger backers early on but no investors.
    Derpanged
  • BabuinixBabuinix Member EpicPosts: 3,063
    Kefo said:
    Squadron 42 can you play them? Where’s that alpha? 

    Thats right its its being developed behind closed doors like most big production games and the fans take anything said about it as gospel. Answer the call 2015!
    You might be unaware of the fact that Squadron 42 is not playable because it's a single-player focused campaign where story matters and you don't spoil it until it's ready. Despite that a lot of assets from Star Citizen are shared with Squadron 42 like ships, gear, weapons, game mechanics and as such you can say that you can play test several aspects that will be present in Squadron42 already. Nice try though.
    BobVa said:
    I remember @Erillion , saying in 2016 that games this big do not get finished in 4 years. 

    2 years later, he's basically saying the same. I wonder what he'll say in 2022.
    Well he's not wrong now is he? Why ignore that many other games have taken just as long lol?
  • AethaerynAethaeryn Member RarePosts: 3,104
    edited December 2018
    Erillion said:
    Aethaeryn said:
    * snip *

    I left the hanger in my ship. . almost immediately left the "safe zone" and was almost instantly shredded by someone . . shields gone instantly and lasted about 2 seconds.

    I tried again. . same thing.  .this time I was able to maneuver a little more and hit them a few times but still. . their guns where like a knife through warm butter.. . 

    I get that I can get a better ship with in game currency but that will be pretty hard to make when I can't even leave the starting area.  At least for initial start up I don't see how these ships being purchased for real money aren't pay to win.  Maybe I am missing something.

    ** snip **
    I suggest you stay in the safe zone. It's not small. Choose a destination. Spool up your quantum drive. Fly there. Repeat. Then the spawn zone camping troll cannot bother you. You can tell others in chat about the troll - often a multi pilot hit squad will clean him out in a missile Alpha Strike.


    Have fun
    Ah okay, I did see the drive spool up etc.  Looking for newbs I guess.. . still though, if i meet that guy and he bought that ship outright and gets to start with it I am not as impressed.  I did back mostly for S42 though.  The safe zone only exists immediately around the station. . there aren't any "forces" that patrol the space around it?  I had only left the hanger and moved ahead for about a minute. . less even. . maybe 20 seconds.  Seems odd.  I will have to look more stuff up.

    Thanks

    Wa min God! Se æx on min heafod is!

  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    My general comment would be "so what". The critical point was when they annonced they had enough money to finish. 

    Now more money will be welcome. They won't have to rely on game sales, it provides greater protection from things going wrong etc. 

    The biggest takeaway of such milestones being reached, imo, is that it re-inforces the "we have enough to release" message. We have the funding to finish. Not everyone believed them when they first said it but few seem to doubt it now.

    Still a risk I am sure but now I suspect it is now being funded not just by the "hopeful" but by people with no interest in supporting this "dream" but have no problem supporting something that is "sure" to launch.

    And free fly weekends - giving such potential backers the opportunity to try before they pledge - is the other side of the coin. After all money alone is not enough to guarantee a good game - there have been enough expensive flops for us to know that. 

    And for me the big question is when will they move from "crowdfunding" to "selling" pre-orders. Will they make the change when the MVP launches - which looks like it should be about 3.6. Have to see.
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    Babuinix said:
    Kefo said:
    Squadron 42 can you play them? Where’s that alpha? 

    Thats right its its being developed behind closed doors like most big production games and the fans take anything said about it as gospel. Answer the call 2015!
    You might be unaware of the fact that Squadron 42 is not playable because it's a single-player focused campaign where story matters and you don't spoil it until it's ready. Despite that a lot of assets from Star Citizen are shared with Squadron 42 like ships, gear, weapons, game mechanics and as such you can say that you can play test several aspects that will be present in Squadron42 already. Nice try though.
    BobVa said:
    I remember @Erillion , saying in 2016 that games this big do not get finished in 4 years. 

    2 years later, he's basically saying the same. I wonder what he'll say in 2022.
    Well he's not wrong now is he? Why ignore that many other games have taken just as long lol?
    So other game studios are the devil for not talking about their alphas and how everything is closed door but when the most open development project ever keeps pushing back the release date, not by weeks or months, but by years approaching half a decade and there is almost nothing in terms of quality information  it’s fine because we don’t want to spoil the story. 

    So double standards for everyone and typical white knight drivel. Gotcha
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229

    gervaise1 said:
    <snip> This is just crowd funding and not including loans and other investors to my understanding.  <snip>
    Its all "crowdfunded".

    There are no "loans"; there was - still is? - an arrangement were a bank (Coutts) loaned the UK office money at the <<start>> of a quarter that was "repaid" at the <<end>> of a quarter by a UK government game development grant. Why? Possibly cashflow but more likely a cheaper means of managing exchange rate fluctuations - most (probably all) companies that operate in multiple countries use "forex" to try and manage curremcy movements, which comes at a cost.

    There are no investors. No shareholders expecting dividends. Probably some larger backers early on but no investors.
    Fairly certain that coutts loan is still outstanding. I’d have to go back and look at the most recent financials filed but I’m 90% certain it hasn’t been paid.
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member EpicPosts: 7,275
    edited December 2018
    Kefo said:
    So other game studios are the devil for not talking about their alphas and how everything is closed door but when the most open development project ever keeps pushing back the release date, not by weeks or months, but by years approaching half a decade and there is almost nothing in terms of quality information  it’s fine because we don’t want to spoil the story. 
    The project does not have a release date for multiple years now, there's no release date being pushed back because there is no release date to push back, and they open about that reality.

    They have a roadmap that when push backs on features happen, they are open and explain what is going on, such as 3.3 and the OCS requiring more work.

    Now about the devil... why not a company that releases this game called Fallout 76 on a literal early access status as a fully released game and acting like that is okay just by doing statements like "we'll fix it later". Yet one of the many examples where release dates are more important than product quality. People rage at SC while AAA devs be like early access now means fully released!
  • Branko2307Branko2307 Member UncommonPosts: 327
    A Fool and his money...

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Holy Flamin' Frost-Brand Gronk-Slayin' Vorpal Hammer o' Woundin' an' Returnin' an' Shootin'-Lightnin'-Out-Yer-Bum!! ~Planescape: Torment~

  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    Kefo said:

    gervaise1 said:
    <snip>
    Fairly certain that coutts loan is still outstanding. I’d have to go back and look at the most recent financials filed but I’m 90% certain it hasn’t been paid.
    From what was said its a "rolling loan". Coutts provided money equal to quarterly grant; quarterly grant came in - and repaid loan; new quarterly loan. The whole thing seemed somewhat odd last year but that is what was implied.

    Does the arrangement still exist? Don't know. What you can ascertain from the financial results filed at the end of 2017 though is that: "Interest on Bank Overdrafts and Loans" was all of £8,534 - to put that in context the auditor costs were £8k! Which supports what they said. The Coutts thing was just a money management thing.
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    MaxBacon said:
    Kefo said:
    So other game studios are the devil for not talking about their alphas and how everything is closed door but when the most open development project ever keeps pushing back the release date, not by weeks or months, but by years approaching half a decade and there is almost nothing in terms of quality information  it’s fine because we don’t want to spoil the story. 
    The project does not have a release date for multiple years now, there's no release date being pushed back because there is no release date to push back, and they open about that reality.

    They have a roadmap that when push backs on features happen, they are open and explain what is going on, such as 3.3 and the OCS requiring more work.

    Now about the devil... why not a company that releases this game called Fallout 76 on a literal early access status as a fully released game and acting like that is okay just by doing statements like "we'll fix it later". Yet one of the many examples where release dates are more important than product quality. People rage at SC while AAA devs be like early access now means fully released!
    Really? so that whole answer the call going on for multiple years before they just removed the year entirely for SQ42 was just a figment of my imagination? 

    Also fallout 76 is a terrible example since people are raging at them for their broken product and demanding refunds. Refunds that SC doesn’t offer anymore cause too bad you should have known better that we are early access and we will fix it later.
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member EpicPosts: 7,275
    edited December 2018
    Kefo said:
    Really? so that whole answer the call going on for multiple years before they just removed the year entirely for SQ42 was just a figment of my imagination? 

    Also fallout 76 is a terrible example since people are raging at them for their broken product and demanding refunds. Refunds that SC doesn’t offer anymore cause too bad you should have known better that we are early access and we will fix it later.
    SC doesn't have a release date for long, last given was in 2014 I think of 2016. SQ42 had its date removed after 2017 was pushed back. So as it stands, there is no release date to push back or even expect aside of the short-medium term roadmap (that came after the push backs, aka open development, with SQ42 incoming stated to be this month too).

    It's not a terrible example, it's just one more of the many times the release dates too over the product quality, same with the latest Mass Effect. SC has a better refund policy than they do that for sure, if you inside its early access and don't like it you have a month (they are only obligated to provide 14 days) to request one independent of play time (while on the case of Fallout 76 as reported just starting the game on the launcher was used as a reason to deny them), beyond that they have offered such for years having fully stopped this year.


    Post edited by MaxBacon on
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    MaxBacon said:
    Kefo said:
    Really? so that whole answer the call going on for multiple years before they just removed the year entirely for SQ42 was just a figment of my imagination? 

    Also fallout 76 is a terrible example since people are raging at them for their broken product and demanding refunds. Refunds that SC doesn’t offer anymore cause too bad you should have known better that we are early access and we will fix it later.
    SC doesn't have a release date for long, last given was in 2014 I think of 2016. SQ42 had its date removed after 2017 was pushed back. So as it stands, there is no release date to push back or even expect aside of the short-medium term roadmap (that came after the push backs, aka open development, with SQ42 incoming stated to be this month too).

    It's not a terrible example, it's just one more of the many times the release dates too over the product quality, same with the latest Mass Effect. SC has a better refund policy than they do that for sure, if you inside its early access and don't like it you have a month (they are only obligated to provide 14 days) to request one independent of play time (while on the case of Fallout 76 as reported just starting the game on the launcher was used as a reason to deny them), beyond that they have offered such for years having fully stopped this year.


    Just because they no longer list a release date on the website doesn’t absolve them of stringing along backers with the SQ42 release date. We are almost in 2019 and they honestly didn’t know they never would have hit the date in 2015? Or 2016? That tells me they have some horrible planning going on or they are actively deceiving potential backers.

    I haven’t played fallout 76 or know anyone who has so I can’t comment on it but I could tell it was going to be half baked from the get go. Bethesda isn’t exactly known for releasing bug free games and something on this scale you had to know there would be issues.  And if I remember correctly depending on where you live SC is entitled to refund you until the game is released so the 14 days is garbage. 
  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 8,967
    This guy is a supporter but talks about the positives and the negatives.

    "We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa      "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."  SR Covey

  • BabuinixBabuinix Member EpicPosts: 3,063
    edited December 2018
    This guy is a supporter but talks about the positives and the negatives.
    That's not a supporter, that's a whining crybaby who spent 10k without even understanding what he was getting into lol

    He bought some capital ship using a glitch in the website and when CIG removed it from him became salty and went on a "I quit ,Star CItizen is bad" only to little later come back with the tail between is legs and going "well Star Citizen is not so bad after all I'll continue to pledge and play the heck out of it" lol
    Post edited by Babuinix on
    PhaserlightDerpangedOdeezee
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    This guy is a supporter but talks about the positives and the negatives.

    That was an enlightening video.  Thanks for sharing.
    Odeezee

    image
  • MensurMensur Member RarePosts: 921
    This game will be released after diablo 5

    Proud MMORPG.com member since 2009! 




Sign In or Register to comment.