The problem with SC is that you can actually play parts of it. See the typical MMORPG poster needs the game to be 100% not possible to play yet in order to be excited about it and even to consider it an active game. games with actual game play are not something to enjoy basically
Heeeeeeey........ I see what you're doing there.......
you would be shocked at what you can see when not involved in the group think.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
[...] but then once its complete they wont have the revenue to stay afloat.
Why do you think that? Because the game will not be subscription based?
It's obvious to me they'll have several income sources after release. Among them is Squadron 42 sales their biggest potential income source, but they'll also get money from Centurion and Imperator Subscriptions, new starter packages for the PU, limited real money account deposits, in-game ads (think AMD ad on a huge space board when you approach a landing site: "$10 discount on our new graphic card for all Star Citizens!"), possible licensing of the StarEngine, marketing deals with real life companies, and other things.
My guess is that revenue from Squadron 42 (and its sequals) alone will keep CIG floating nicely.
As for OP's question, for me the attractive things about ships are a) I'm a collector and want them all - if possible; b) I want to contribute with pledging because I want this game to be made. I could write a lot about this last pt. in particular but it's sufficient to say I believe this game will be special and I trust the developer.
The problem with that reasoning is that they have already sold a shitload of SQ42 copies to backers including some of the expansions depending when you bought in.
So relying on revenue for a game that you have sold to many backers already (and this is an niche market for space based games) and if it turns out mediocre and gets tepid reviews then I wouldn't be surprised to see CIG panicking
Yes CIG already got some of the niche of the hardcore fans of the space-sim genre but there's a lot more to cater to. From EVE players, Elite players, NoManSky players that are on the fence and will jump on it if not just to try something new in a sci-fi setting.
MMORPG players will have a reason to be interested in it, FPS players the same.
There's still a LOT of money to be made from mainstream players. Not even taking into account the Squadron 42 with a cast of hollywood actors that will provide plenty of news in mainstream media giving awareness to more casual gamers.
Then there's still the console market that could be explored for extended revenue.
Yes CIG already got some of the niche of the hardcore fans of the space-sim genre but there's a lot more to cater to. From EVE players, Elite players, NoManSky players that are on the fence and will jump on it if not just to try something new in a sci-fi setting.
MMORPG players will have a reason to be interested in it, FPS players the same.
There's still a LOT of money to be made from mainstream players. Not even taking into account the Squadron 42 with a cast of hollywood actors that will provide plenty of news in mainstream media giving awareness to more casual gamers.
Then there's still the console market that could be explored for extended revenue.
The thing is though you can't be 100% sure of all of this money floating around out there just like I can't be sure that it's already peaked for sales.
Also if CR took the game to consoles there might be a backer revolt as that was one of the key selling points of the campaign lol
Also if CR took the game to consoles there might be a backer revolt as that was one of the key selling points of the campaign lol
Not at all.
SQ42 is a great example if brought to consoles, in fact, they could also easily get a company like Amazon (cause Lumberyard has that on its selling points) to have a marketing level partnership to get it on consoles.
I don't see the backers revolting with that, the point here is that the PC game is the priority. What PC gamers are sick and tired of is bad and cheap ports from console>pc.
Also if CR took the game to consoles there might be a backer revolt as that was one of the key selling points of the campaign lol
Not at all.
SQ42 is a great example if brought to consoles, in fact, they could also easily get a company like Amazon (cause Lumberyard has that on its selling points) to have a marketing level partnership to get it on consoles.
I don't see the backers revolting with that, the point here is that the PC game is the priority. What PC gamers are sick and tired of is bad and cheap ports from console>pc.
And CR has stated this game won't be able to run on current consoles or even next gen consoles so do you really think this would go over well?
Kefo said: And CR has stated this game won't be able to run on current consoles or even next gen consoles so do you really think this would go over well?
The next-gen is here and its current hardware power meets what SC's take to run on PC, and mind the real optimization is still to come.
Over that, it's no biggie to lock it at 30 frames in consoles like some AAA titles do to keep the visual quality, not that I think SQ42 would want 4K over 60FPS like some of those...
[...] but then once its complete they wont have the revenue to stay afloat.
My guess is that revenue from Squadron 42 (and its sequals) alone will keep CIG floating nicely.
The problem with that reasoning is that they have already sold a shitload of SQ42 copies to backers including some of the expansions depending when you bought in.
We'll just have to agree to disagree. I believe Squadron 42 will sell enough copies, even if I am aware of your contra arguments (i've heard them many times before) for this, and you don't. Let's leave it at that.
[...] but then once its complete they wont have the revenue to stay afloat.
My guess is that revenue from Squadron 42 (and its sequals) alone will keep CIG floating nicely.
The problem with that reasoning is that they have already sold a shitload of SQ42 copies to backers including some of the expansions depending when you bought in.
We'll just have to agree to disagree. I believe Squadron 42 will sell enough copies, even if I am aware of your contra arguments (i've heard them many times before) for this, and you don't. Let's leave it at that.
Comments
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
The cake is a lie.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
So relying on revenue for a game that you have sold to many backers already (and this is an niche market for space based games) and if it turns out mediocre and gets tepid reviews then I wouldn't be surprised to see CIG panicking
MMORPG players will have a reason to be interested in it, FPS players the same.
There's still a LOT of money to be made from mainstream players. Not even taking into account the Squadron 42 with a cast of hollywood actors that will provide plenty of news in mainstream media giving awareness to more casual gamers.
Then there's still the console market that could be explored for extended revenue.
Frank 'Spankybus' Mignone
www.spankybus.com
-3d Artist & Compositor
-Writer
-Professional Amature
Also if CR took the game to consoles there might be a backer revolt as that was one of the key selling points of the campaign lol
SQ42 is a great example if brought to consoles, in fact, they could also easily get a company like Amazon (cause Lumberyard has that on its selling points) to have a marketing level partnership to get it on consoles.
I don't see the backers revolting with that, the point here is that the PC game is the priority. What PC gamers are sick and tired of is bad and cheap ports from console>pc.
Over that, it's no biggie to lock it at 30 frames in consoles like some AAA titles do to keep the visual quality, not that I think SQ42 would want 4K over 60FPS like some of those...
We'll just have to agree to disagree. I believe Squadron 42 will sell enough copies, even if I am aware of your contra arguments (i've heard them many times before) for this, and you don't. Let's leave it at that.
Viking
MAGA