I don't really care what you think is healthier, you are accusing another poster of posting obsessively.
Yes. I commented, not accused, it's not a crime.
"Accuse" means to charge with fault, so BeansnBread was using the term properly. It's okay. Chris Roberts and the CiG team apparently couldn't grasp the English language very well either which is what got them into their current mess.
"Accuse" means to charge with fault, so BeansnBread was using the term properly. It's okay. Chris Roberts and the CiG team apparently couldn't grasp the English language very well either which is what got them into this whole mess.
English is not my 1st language btw. Also, you're cheating, no more quotes for today or I'll declare a mistrial.
You mean like the guy from the quote below who was so hurt he used that as an excuse to act like a first class jerk?
I think you must be mistaking this with a forum where proper discussions are on offer to have. There are plenty of informative posts here for Star Citizen, you won't find much discussion in those, plenty of in game footage and amazing pics, you won't see much talked about in there. Then there are lots of useless posts like the OP's that have only one goal in mind, defame and ridicule, you will find LOTS of posts in those by the same 10 people!
Tell me what it is you would like to talk about surrounding this insightful OP? what can we engage in to further our depth and breadth of knowledge and enlightenment?
Or we could just post soppy drivel grandstanding about nothing in particular while casting insults, I don't mind which.
Ohh wait, that is you! You make this too easy mate, I know you want to have the last word but stop making a fool out of yourself. Just more hypocrisy while trying to be a smart ass.
But since you clearly want to have the last word, let me finish our discussion with a little insight. Some posts ago you told me that you didn't have to respond to me because clearly people could read themselves. Guess what? They did. So I decided it would be interesting to see how they have judged our little back and forth. Are you ready? I counted only the posts between us and how people thought we did:
Lahnmir: 6X Agree, 1X insightful Orinori: 3X LOL
We also both got a WTF but we gave that to each other so I didn't count those. So you were right, people can read, they just thought I was right and you weren't.
And with all this out of the way I am going to stop. You won't have a decent response anyways, just some smart one liner. Hey wait, that's something you've accused me of too. And so it comes full circle, hypocrite. I am done wasting my time on you.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
So who has the stronger cult following, SC or SotA? Not number of cult members, but average level of devotion?
SoTA. At least till vials of blood are sold to Star Citizen fans...selling blood vials to "fans" is the very definition of what a cult does (at least the cults you see in movies and what not).
But nothing beats that (SoTA) thus far
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
So who has the stronger cult following, SC or SotA? Not number of cult members, but average level of devotion?
SoTA. At least till vials of blood are sold to Star Citizen fans...selling blood vials to "fans" is the very definition of what a cult does (at least the cults you see in movies and what not).
But nothing beats that (SoTA) thus far
Give it time. CR will probably offer some bodily fluid for the superfans to buy at ridiculous prices and I doubt it will be blood
So who has the stronger cult following, SC or SotA? Not number of cult members, but average level of devotion?
SoTA. At least till vials of blood are sold to Star Citizen fans...selling blood vials to "fans" is the very definition of what a cult does (at least the cults you see in movies and what not).
But nothing beats that (SoTA) thus far
Half of the blood proceeds went to charity (...or were stated that they'd go to charity, at least). So that muddies that sale a bit in terms of how much of it can be chalked up to devotion and how much of it can be chalked up to some guy thinking "It supports the game AND it supports charity! Awesome!"
How long was Shroud of the Avatar in development again? I forget. "Amount of patience" should probably be a factor when gauging devotion, though.
I just went to that link, there is nothing at all in that video Interview about how many backers have pledged. This was an absurdly rounded number with no source stated in the article column itself written by random person of Numa Media? The actual quotes of Benjamin Fardel say nothing at all about this (and nothing in the video). So why on earth are people using this as an official figure?! and one that I have even heard before, this is totally bizarre. Sorry but this figure presented from that link is useless.
You have got to be joking, it is right there in the transcript.
...500,000 fans have already pre-purchased content in the game, which is actively involved in its funding.
Your figures are wild, inventive and mostly inaccurate.
Try a simpler one -
1892 new Citizens giving
$127,659
an average of $67 between them over the last 3 days.
Seems pretty simple.
(and this isn't even trying to state that the average is 100%, it is just that you can start to make reasonable assumptions from here.)
I've already addressed this or did you forget?
With that amount of money coming in per day from new backers only it would amount to $15.5 million a year, 44% of CIG's annual income, not the majority by any stretch of the imagination.
The amount of paying backers is roughly 1/3rd of accounts, the majority of money comes from whales not new backers. The only speculation is how many own the base game and how many have spent hundreds or thousands on pixel ships.
I just went to that link, there is nothing at all in that video Interview about how many backers have pledged. This was an absurdly rounded number with no source stated in the article column itself written by random person of Numa Media? The actual quotes of Benjamin Fardel say nothing at all about this (and nothing in the video). So why on earth are people using this as an official figure?! and one that I have even heard before, this is totally bizarre. Sorry but this figure presented from that link is useless.
You have got to be joking, it is right there in the transcript.
...500,000 fans have already pre-purchased content in the game, which is actively involved in its funding.
Your figures are wild, inventive and mostly inaccurate.
Try a simpler one -
1892 new Citizens giving
$127,659
an average of $67 between them over the last 3 days.
Seems pretty simple.
(and this isn't even trying to state that the average is 100%, it is just that you can start to make reasonable assumptions from here.)
I've already addressed this or did you forget?
With that amount of money coming in per day from new backers only it would amount to $15.5 million a year, 44% of CIG's annual income, not the majority by any stretch of the imagination.
The amount of paying backers is roughly 1/3rd of accounts, the majority of money comes from whales not new backers. The only speculation is how many own the base game and how many have spent hundreds or thousands on pixel ships.
That is not a transcript lol. That is an opinion piece from random at Numa Media with some quote marks dotted here and there in the article, your 500,000 not being part of those quotations. I had a translator run over the video and there is nothing about 500,000 backers. Seriously even if there was, if you want to add figures to do maths from it is best to get an official source, not some random french guy I have never even seen or heard of before conducting an interview spurting out random crap from some unknown time that he probably knows nothing about xD. Take that figure and delete, new figure is my personal guestimate because hey why not. 99.9% of star citizens are backers!
I addressed what you are repasting already. This is from a low period of 3 days, your method for math is irrelevant, we could easily pick 3 days outside of a sale that are much higher to 'unequivocally' prove my point in your bad math conversion but that was not the intention of the figures I posted, if you were not trying so hard to be disingenuous you would have acknowledged that because you are not stupid, but I guess you are desperate!
Amount of paying backers is not 1/3rd until you can give a good source for it, until then I will only use my guestimate of 99.9%
Glad you dropped the other nonsense maths at least.
So to reiterate point. Majority of backers own a single ship. They are not individuals buying over and over and over and over like you lot want to paint the picture of.
I just went to that link, there is nothing at all in that video Interview about how many backers have pledged. This was an absurdly rounded number with no source stated in the article column itself written by random person of Numa Media? The actual quotes of Benjamin Fardel say nothing at all about this (and nothing in the video). So why on earth are people using this as an official figure?! and one that I have even heard before, this is totally bizarre. Sorry but this figure presented from that link is useless.
You have got to be joking, it is right there in the transcript.
...500,000 fans have already pre-purchased content in the game, which is actively involved in its funding.
Your figures are wild, inventive and mostly inaccurate.
Try a simpler one -
1892 new Citizens giving
$127,659
an average of $67 between them over the last 3 days.
Seems pretty simple.
(and this isn't even trying to state that the average is 100%, it is just that you can start to make reasonable assumptions from here.)
I've already addressed this or did you forget?
With that amount of money coming in per day from new backers only it would amount to $15.5 million a year, 44% of CIG's annual income, not the majority by any stretch of the imagination.
The amount of paying backers is roughly 1/3rd of accounts, the majority of money comes from whales not new backers. The only speculation is how many own the base game and how many have spent hundreds or thousands on pixel ships.
That is not a transcript lol. That is an opinion piece from random at Numa Media with some quote marks dotted here and there in the article, your 500,000 not being part of those quotations. I had a translator run over the video and there is nothing about 500,000 backers. Seriously even if there was, if you want to add figures to do maths from it is best to get an official source, not some random french guy I have never even seen or heard of before conducting an interview spurting out random crap from some unknown time that he probably knows nothing about xD. Take that figure and delete, new figure is my personal guestimate because hey why not. 99.9% of star citizens are backers!
I addressed what you are repasting already. This is from a low period of 3 days, your method for math is irrelevant, we could easily pick 3 days outside of a sale that are much higher to 'unequivocally' prove my point in your bad math conversion but that was not the intention of the figures I posted, if you were not trying so hard to be disingenuous you would have acknowledged that because you are not stupid, but I guess you are desperate!
Amount of paying backers is not 1/3rd until you can give a good source for it, until then I will only use my guestimate of 99.9%
Glad you dropped the other nonsense maths at least.
So to reiterate point. Majority of backers own a single ship. They are not individuals buying over and over and over and over like you lot want to paint the picture of.
Of course you got a translator to run over the video.... no reason not to believe that at all despite your penchant for talking out of your ahole.
Listen, CIG are happy to get corrections/retractions for comments and yet there has never been any correction for this info, either in the forums or in the media. The only person that is contesting this number is you, even the most rabid subredditor doesn't have a problem with it.
You want to claim that my numbers are based on nothing and yet they use a 62 month timeframe instead of 3 poxy days!, they're based on the probability that most people will only spend conservatively on a pre-order and not that the majority suddenly lose control and become pixel ship collectors, worse still is that you moan about speculation but then try to use complete speculation as a counter.... Your figure of 129k and 1900 signups could easily be 100 backers spending $1290 each and the rest of the 1800 backers simply being forum signups, you really have no way to tell.
You want to claim that my numbers are based on nothing and yet they use a 62 month timeframe instead of 3 poxy days!, they're based on the probability that most people will only spend conservatively on a pre-order and not that the majority suddenly lose control and become pixel ship collectors, worse still is that you moan about speculation but then try to use complete speculation as a counter....
The months were the only thing of use that you provided. The rest was nonsense.
Your figure of 129k and 1900 signups could easily be 100 backers spending $1290 each and the rest of the 1800 backers simply being forum signups, you really have no way to tell.
Yes I already said that, but it is not very rational. Given current info there isn't anything else we can do except make guesses.
The months were the only thing of use that you provided. The rest was nonsense.
The rest is speculation, I would be the first to admit that but it is not unfounded speculation, perhaps you just don't understand the difference or perhaps this is just you "having fun with you lot" aka trolling.
I'm far more inclined to believe it's the latter given the standard of your posts and your history.
@hfztt I find something rather funny in this discussion that sparked here.
So if you noticed or remember, we came from arguing some months ago in this very same forum that SC was not a game because "it's not released". And that SC is not one MMO because "it's still 24 players per instance" and it can't be called one until they have massive numbers.
And when the argument is convenient, the narratives spin to sustain that SC is one MMO.
I mean I do always stood that it is one MMO under dev, but still, rather funny
I do not think we disagre, really. Both sides flip definitions and arguments all the time.
Personally, I mock the low current player count, but also laugh when someone says it is not the intention to make an MMO
All that stuff about %75 (when should have been 51%) and using starter ships instead of single ships......
It was nonsense, not founded speculation. Then basing all those figures off this absurdly rounded figure from an unknown source stapled onto a video of some unknown guy rambling about the game buried in the back of the internet! Well sure that was speculation at it's finest.
My assertion was that majority of payments come from new backers buying single ships, there is little to confirm or deny that beyond our intuition. We could make an average of ship prices, that could certainly help give us another figure but seems a long drawn out process to just reaffirm something that seems well within reason when looking at these figures -
1892 new Citizens giving
$127,659
an average of $67 between them over the last 3 days.
Seems pretty simple.
we can double that figure if we want, probably even triple it (not that we need to) and it is still well within the range of most people owning a single ship. Which lets not forget was the whole point of all this.
That people out there are not spending more and more and more and more and more and more and more.........thousands and thousands of Star Citizens running around with armadas in huge debt because evil CR and evil CIG
Vast majority of people are spending no more than they feel comfortable with and easily in the range and less of ED for example.
rpmcmurphy said: "having fun with you lot" aka trolling.
and no fun is not aka trolling. I have fun at my own expense, sometimes at defenders, sometimes at SC and often with you lot. fun is just that...fun intended to make smile although it probably falls flat a lot because 'must hate this person he can't be fun' or something.
All this discussion about wether or not it's an MMO...The fact is. The business model has gone too far. The game, when released, won't be a good experience for anyone. There will be too many with high end ships from day one, it'll be a nightmare to balance. The game will either (a Feel like a cash grab in order to have a chance of "catching" up to the big spenders or b) The big spenders will feel cheated as it's too easy to catch up to their 1000 dollar ships.
All that stuff about %75 (when should have been 51%) and using starter ships in stead of single ships......
It was nonsense, not unfounded speculation. Then basing all those figures off this absurdly rounded figure from an unknown source stapled onto a video of some unknown guy rambling about the game buried in the back of the internet! Well sure that was speculation at it's finest.
My assertion was that majority of payments come from new backers buying single ships, there is little to confirm or deny that beyond our intuition. We could make an average of ship prices, that could certainly help give us another figure but seems a long drawn out process to just reaffirm something that seems well within reason when looking at these figures -
1892 new Citizens giving
$127,659
an average of $67 between them over the last 3 days.
Seems pretty simple.
we can double that figure if we want, probably even triple it (not that we need to) and it is still well within the range of most people owning a single ship. Which lets not forget was the whole point of all this.
That people out there are not spending more and more and more and more and more and more and more.........thousands and thousands of Star Citizens running around with armadas in huge debt because evil CR and evil CIG
Vast majority of people are spending no more than they feel comfortable with and easily in the range and less of ED for example.
I believe that what is being said here is that 500,000 has not been countered by CIG so one can garner a reasonable figure for the number of current backers. 690,000 or a third of forum accounts being a decent estimate. We know that income increases significantly during sale periods which far outweighs your claim that the majority of funding comes from new backers.
The 75/25 split you are getting hung up on is irrelevant, run the numbers for 60/40 or 90/10 and all it shows is that there is a smaller group of people financing the game far more significantly than people new to the project or buying in at base price.
Why bring up 1892 citizens giving $127,659 repeatedly because as the other guy already said it is a completely irrelevant sum. The only reason you are bringing it up is to make it sound as though all 1.9M accounts are paying customers and that the amount per person is quite small when we know that is far from the truth. Approximately one third of those 1892 signups are paying accounts which would mean 630 paying backers so $127659 / 630 = $202 per backers, not $67
I believe that what is being said here is that 500,000 has not been countered by CIG so one can garner a reasonable figure for the number of current backers. 690,000 or a third of forum accounts being a decent estimate.
A decent estimate? based on what? feel goods? how about getting stats from a range of other sites that actually give sign up to backer ratios? at least THAT might be something worth going off.
We know that income increases significantly during sale periods which far outweighs your claim that the majority of funding comes from new backers.
And what is to support that a lot of these people are not buying in as new backers at these sales? Or that people are buying ships off of these guys who run a business selling ships from sales are not new backers?
The 75/25 split you are getting hung up on is irrelevant, run the numbers for 60/40 or 90/10 and all it shows is that there is a smaller group of people financing the game far more significantly than people new to the project or buying in at base price.
COMPLETELY INCORRECT
the figure percent needed to run proof was 51% and the figure to use was average single ship NOT STARTER SHIP PRICE as already stated, please read responses all ready pointed out in the stuff you are quoting, it helps a lot.
Why bring up 1892 citizens giving $127,659 repeatedly because as the other guy already said it is a completely irrelevant sum. The only reason you are bringing it up is to make it sound as though all 1.9M accounts are paying customers and that the amount per person is quite small when we know that is far from the truth. Approximately one third of those 1892 signups are paying accounts which would mean 630 paying backers so $127659 / 630 = $202 per backers, not $67
here we go back to the magical 1/3 rd based off nothing worth talking about. So not $202, it is an unknown as already pointed out in the stuff you quoting. What it is is $67 or maybe $120 or maybe $202 or maybe $80 or maybe $78 or maybe $97
but what it is NOT is far off from the price of a SINGLE SHIP
read it again as people seem to have difficulty with comprehension around here........the price of a SINGLE SHIP. That is what the majority of backers have, it is where the majority of money comes from, new backers buying a single ship.
Not millions of Star Citizens hooked on some evil horrible business scheme going into debt buying stuff endlessly. The average is small no matter what way you look at it for a project that has been collecting funds for over 5 years. I even made this point, so far game cost me $35 for access over 5 years, a whopping $7 dollars a year average, feel free to divide some of the others expense by 5 and look at those massive figures. Game has given access for a long time, other games for sub for a single year give near $150, over 5 years - $750. sure apples and oranges and all that BS you want to keep the narrative of BAD CIG! but this is our money for our game that WE WANT to spend money on!
As the cat said, no animals were hurt in the making of SC. Everyone knows what they are backing and what is at risk, no one is being forced, those dumb enough not to, have been free to get refunds. Majority are spending very little. Most have single ship price range. Star Citizen's funds are completely NORMAL compared to cash spent on games within the industry and considering it has almost 2 million interested and potential backers. The only thing abnormal is that it is happening for a crowdfunded game during development and that is simply down to a belief in Chris Roberts, a desire for a title just like this and a huge amount to do with the fact that we have access to the game already.
The lengths you guys go to to try and paint CIG and SC funding as somehow bad because 'meh crowdfunding' is truly unreal.
A decent estimate? based on what? feel goods? how about getting stats from a range of other sites that actually give sign up to backer ratios? at least THAT would be something worth going off.
Yes a decent estimate based on averages. Turbulent's letter stated 500000 paid customers at a time when the project was 45 months old, that gives an average for the amount of paying customers per month. Now that the project is 67 months old one can use that monthly average to garner a decent estimate. In other words it is not a number pulled from the sky, it has a basis on a number released by a partner of CIG and the duration of the project.
If you want to provide "stats from a range of other sites that actually give signup to backer ratios" be my guest, it would be interesting to see statistics from another source and it would be interesting to see how they achieve those numbers.
And what is to support that a lot of these people are not buying in as new backers at these sales? Or that people are buying ships off of these guys who run a business selling ships from sales are not new backers?
But this is obvious. CIG quite often offer a new ship and it will be limited in numbers, therefore we can see how many they sell in that week, we can also see how much their total income is for that week. We can also reasonably assume the majority of brand new backers are not going to drop $600 on a space ship right off the bat.
the figure percent needed to run proof was 51% and the figure to use was average single ship NOT STARTER SHIP PRICE as already stated, please read responses all ready pointed out in the stuff you are quoting, it helps a lot.
Why bring up 1892 citizens giving $127,659 repeatedly because as the other guy already said it is a completely irrelevant sum. The only reason you are bringing it up is to make it sound as though all 1.9M accounts are paying customers and that the amount per person is quite small when we know that is far from the truth. Approximately one third of those 1892 signups are paying accounts which would mean 630 paying backers so $127659 / 630 = $202 per backers, not $67
here we go back to the magical 1/3 rd based off nothing worth talking about. So not $202, it is an unknown as already pointed out in the stuff you quoting. What it is is $67 or maybe $120 or maybe $202 or maybe $80 or maybe $78 or maybe $97
Duh, yes it is one third. This is based on the monthly average which has already been talked about. If it is an unknown why do you keep trying to say it is $67 as well as pushing the assumption that every signup is a paying backer. Turbulent's letter shows that the number of paying backers was approximately one third of the forum signups at the time the letter was released. That is where one third comes from.
but what it is NOT is far off from the price of a SINGLE SHIP
read it again as people seem to have difficulty with comprehension around here........the price of a SINGLE SHIP. That is what the majority of backers have, it is where the majority of money comes from, new backers buying a single ship.
What does this even mean? What is the price of a single ship? What meaningless drivel is this because in case you haven't noticed a single ship can range from $30 to $2500.... so how can you say "the price of a shingle ship."
The majority of money does not come from new backers buying a single ship. A new backer is far more likely to buy a game package which includes an Aurora or a Mustang and possibly a copy of Squadron 42. As you have been shown those packages account for a small portion of total income. Show some maths to refute this instead of waving your hands in the air and shouting "price of a single ship."
Not millions of Star Citizens hooked on some evil horrible business scheme going into debt buying stuff endlessly. The average is small no matter what way you look at it for a project that has been collecting funds for over 5 years. I even made this point, so far game cost me $35 for access over 5 years, a whopping $7 dollars a year average, feel free to divide some of the others expense by 5 and look at those massive figures. Game has given access for a long time, other games for sub for a single year give near $150, over 5 years - $750. sure apples and oranges and all that BS you want to keep the narrative of BAD CIG! but this is our money for our game that WE WANT to spend money on!
As the cat said, no animals were hurt in the making of SC. Everyone knows what they are backing and what is at risk, no one is being forced, those dumb enough not to, have been free to get refunds. Majority are spending very little. Most have single ship price range. Star Citizen's funds are completely NORMAL compared to cash spent on games within the industry and considering it has almost 2 million interested and potential backers. The only thing abnormal is that it is happening for a crowdfunded game during development and that is simply down to a belief in Chris Roberts, a desire for a title just like this and a huge amount to do with the fact that we have access to the game already.
The lengths you guys go to to try and paint CIG and SC funding as somehow bad because 'meh crowdfunding' is truly unreal.
No one is trying to paint the game as bad. How do you even arrive at this conclusion? You are just being corrected on your claim that the majority of money comes from new backers purchasing a single ship because that is complete and utter bullshit.
Comments
I think you must be mistaking this with a forum where proper discussions are on offer to have. There are plenty of informative posts here for Star Citizen, you won't find much discussion in those, plenty of in game footage and amazing pics, you won't see much talked about in there. Then there are lots of useless posts like the OP's that have only one goal in mind, defame and ridicule, you will find LOTS of posts in those by the same 10 people!
Tell me what it is you would like to talk about surrounding this insightful OP? what can we engage in to further our depth and breadth of knowledge and enlightenment?
Or we could just post soppy drivel grandstanding about nothing in particular while casting insults, I don't mind which.
Ohh wait, that is you! You make this too easy mate, I know you want to have the last word but stop making a fool out of yourself. Just more hypocrisy while trying to be a smart ass.
But since you clearly want to have the last word, let me finish our discussion with a little insight. Some posts ago you told me that you didn't have to respond to me because clearly people could read themselves. Guess what? They did. So I decided it would be interesting to see how they have judged our little back and forth. Are you ready? I counted only the posts between us and how people thought we did:
Lahnmir: 6X Agree, 1X insightful
Orinori: 3X LOL
We also both got a WTF but we gave that to each other so I didn't count those. So you were right, people can read, they just thought I was right and you weren't.
And with all this out of the way I am going to stop. You won't have a decent response anyways, just some smart one liner. Hey wait, that's something you've accused me of too. And so it comes full circle, hypocrite. I am done wasting my time on you.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
But nothing beats that (SoTA) thus far
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
How long was Shroud of the Avatar in development again? I forget. "Amount of patience" should probably be a factor when gauging devotion, though.
...500,000 fans have already pre-purchased content in the game, which is actively involved in its funding.
I've already addressed this or did you forget?
With that amount of money coming in per day from new backers only it would amount to $15.5 million a year, 44% of CIG's annual income, not the majority by any stretch of the imagination.
The amount of paying backers is roughly 1/3rd of accounts, the majority of money comes from whales not new backers. The only speculation is how many own the base game and how many have spent hundreds or thousands on pixel ships.
just to add fuel to the fire lol
Have fun
I addressed what you are repasting already. This is from a low period of 3 days, your method for math is irrelevant, we could easily pick 3 days outside of a sale that are much higher to 'unequivocally' prove my point in your bad math conversion but that was not the intention of the figures I posted, if you were not trying so hard to be disingenuous you would have acknowledged that because you are not stupid, but I guess you are desperate!
Amount of paying backers is not 1/3rd until you can give a good source for it, until then I will only use my guestimate of 99.9%
Glad you dropped the other nonsense maths at least.
So to reiterate point. Majority of backers own a single ship. They are not individuals buying over and over and over and over like you lot want to paint the picture of.
Have fun
I see your sense of humor is still absent. Perhaps CIG doesn't pay you enough to laugh?
Of course you got a translator to run over the video.... no reason not to believe that at all despite your penchant for talking out of your ahole.
Listen, CIG are happy to get corrections/retractions for comments and yet there has never been any correction for this info, either in the forums or in the media. The only person that is contesting this number is you, even the most rabid subredditor doesn't have a problem with it.
You want to claim that my numbers are based on nothing and yet they use a 62 month timeframe instead of 3 poxy days!, they're based on the probability that most people will only spend conservatively on a pre-order and not that the majority suddenly lose control and become pixel ship collectors, worse still is that you moan about speculation but then try to use complete speculation as a counter....
Your figure of 129k and 1900 signups could easily be 100 backers spending $1290 each and the rest of the 1800 backers simply being forum signups, you really have no way to tell.
Yes I already said that, but it is not very rational. Given current info there isn't anything else we can do except make guesses.
I'm far more inclined to believe it's the latter given the standard of your posts and your history.
Personally, I mock the low current player count, but also laugh when someone says it is not the intention to make an MMO
It was nonsense, not founded speculation. Then basing all those figures off this absurdly rounded figure from an unknown source stapled onto a video of some unknown guy rambling about the game buried in the back of the internet! Well sure that was speculation at it's finest.
My assertion was that majority of payments come from new backers buying single ships, there is little to confirm or deny that beyond our intuition. We could make an average of ship prices, that could certainly help give us another figure but seems a long drawn out process to just reaffirm something that seems well within reason when looking at these figures -
1892 new Citizens giving
$127,659
an average of $67 between them over the last 3 days.
Seems pretty simple.
we can double that figure if we want, probably even triple it (not that we need to) and it is still well within the range of most people owning a single ship. Which lets not forget was the whole point of all this.
That people out there are not spending more and more and more and more and more and more and more.........thousands and thousands of Star Citizens running around with armadas in huge debt because evil CR and evil CIG
Vast majority of people are spending no more than they feel comfortable with and easily in the range and less of ED for example.
I see no way this will be a clean experience
We know that income increases significantly during sale periods which far outweighs your claim that the majority of funding comes from new backers.
The 75/25 split you are getting hung up on is irrelevant, run the numbers for 60/40 or 90/10 and all it shows is that there is a smaller group of people financing the game far more significantly than people new to the project or buying in at base price.
60/40 split
414000 * 60 = 24.84M
276000 * 527 = 145.5M
90/10 split
621000 * 60 = 37.26M
69000 * 1981 = 136.74M
Why bring up 1892 citizens giving $127,659 repeatedly because as the other guy already said it is a completely irrelevant sum. The only reason you are bringing it up is to make it sound as though all 1.9M accounts are paying customers and that the amount per person is quite small when we know that is far from the truth.
Approximately one third of those 1892 signups are paying accounts which would mean 630 paying backers so $127659 / 630 = $202 per backers, not $67
And what is to support that a lot of these people are not buying in as new backers at these sales? Or that people are buying ships off of these guys who run a business selling ships from sales are not new backers?
COMPLETELY INCORRECT
the figure percent needed to run proof was 51% and the figure to use was average single ship NOT STARTER SHIP PRICE as already stated, please read responses all ready pointed out in the stuff you are quoting, it helps a lot.
here we go back to the magical 1/3 rd based off nothing worth talking about. So not $202, it is an unknown as already pointed out in the stuff you quoting. What it is is $67 or maybe $120 or maybe $202 or maybe $80 or maybe $78 or maybe $97
but what it is NOT is far off from the price of a SINGLE SHIP
read it again as people seem to have difficulty with comprehension around here........the price of a SINGLE SHIP. That is what the majority of backers have, it is where the majority of money comes from, new backers buying a single ship.
Not millions of Star Citizens hooked on some evil horrible business scheme going into debt buying stuff endlessly. The average is small no matter what way you look at it for a project that has been collecting funds for over 5 years. I even made this point, so far game cost me $35 for access over 5 years, a whopping $7 dollars a year average, feel free to divide some of the others expense by 5 and look at those massive figures. Game has given access for a long time, other games for sub for a single year give near $150, over 5 years - $750. sure apples and oranges and all that BS you want to keep the narrative of BAD CIG! but this is our money for our game that WE WANT to spend money on!
As the cat said, no animals were hurt in the making of SC. Everyone knows what they are backing and what is at risk, no one is being forced, those dumb enough not to, have been free to get refunds. Majority are spending very little. Most have single ship price range. Star Citizen's funds are completely NORMAL compared to cash spent on games within the industry and considering it has almost 2 million interested and potential backers. The only thing abnormal is that it is happening for a crowdfunded game during development and that is simply down to a belief in Chris Roberts, a desire for a title just like this and a huge amount to do with the fact that we have access to the game already.
The lengths you guys go to to try and paint CIG and SC funding as somehow bad because 'meh crowdfunding' is truly unreal.
Yes a decent estimate based on averages. Turbulent's letter stated 500000 paid customers at a time when the project was 45 months old, that gives an average for the amount of paying customers per month. Now that the project is 67 months old one can use that monthly average to garner a decent estimate. In other words it is not a number pulled from the sky, it has a basis on a number released by a partner of CIG and the duration of the project.
If you want to provide "stats from a range of other sites that actually give signup to backer ratios" be my guest, it would be interesting to see statistics from another source and it would be interesting to see how they achieve those numbers.
But this is obvious. CIG quite often offer a new ship and it will be limited in numbers, therefore we can see how many they sell in that week, we can also see how much their total income is for that week. We can also reasonably assume the majority of brand new backers are not going to drop $600 on a space ship right off the bat.
LOL
Duh, yes it is one third. This is based on the monthly average which has already been talked about. If it is an unknown why do you keep trying to say it is $67 as well as pushing the assumption that every signup is a paying backer.
Turbulent's letter shows that the number of paying backers was approximately one third of the forum signups at the time the letter was released. That is where one third comes from.
What does this even mean? What is the price of a single ship? What meaningless drivel is this because in case you haven't noticed a single ship can range from $30 to $2500.... so how can you say "the price of a shingle ship."
The majority of money does not come from new backers buying a single ship. A new backer is far more likely to buy a game package which includes an Aurora or a Mustang and possibly a copy of Squadron 42. As you have been shown those packages account for a small portion of total income. Show some maths to refute this instead of waving your hands in the air and shouting "price of a single ship."
Wut?
No one is trying to paint the game as bad. How do you even arrive at this conclusion?
You are just being corrected on your claim that the majority of money comes from new backers purchasing a single ship because that is complete and utter bullshit.