Howdy, Stranger!

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

State of Elyria update from Caspien (Jan 2018)

1235718

Comments

  • EponyxDamorEponyxDamor Member RarePosts: 726
    dadazar said:
    dadazar said:

    Why do you pull out the sidenote and don´t answer to the relevant arguments, like the different scope and easier to attract players and easier to bring out moving pictures and the backup arguments?
    I did address the scope in the original post you quoted, unless you missed it:

    "Compared to CoE, AoC has relatively modest claims to innovation and features; however, unlike CoE, AoC has already provided a working alpha demo after less than one year of game development."

    I already addressed it, which is why I didn't feel the need to repeat myself.
    Heh, but that was my arguments about.

    "modest claims"

    vs

    "AoC pulls on the same mechanics all MMOs does and thus alone get more of the unboreable - or regrowing - grind-questing players out there.."

    which also plays into the alpha they already got out. And i further argued

    "Thus, a playable alpha "zero" (which doesn´t look anywhere promising for me) isn´t nearly as hard to make, as most of that stuff is done manyfold elsewhere. More moving pictures means more moving cash. But SBS got a different approach.."

    So, i feel i had relativised your main argument in the comparison of AoC and CoE.
    The point you're missing is that AoC's alpha zero is a working pre-alpha with network components. So, regardless of the intended final product, AoC already has working network components and background setup. It really wouldn't be much different than CoE's pre-alpha voxel-based client in terms of development. Again, however, SBS hasn't even released their pre-alpha client showing basic background setup after nearly two years ... CoE did that in less than a year.
    Gdemami
  • EponyxDamorEponyxDamor Member RarePosts: 726
    edited January 2018
    dadazar said:

    Why do you pull out the sidenote and don´t answer to the relevant arguments, like the different scope and easier to attract players and easier to bring out moving pictures and the backup arguments?
    I did address the scope in the original post you quoted, unless you missed it:

    "Compared to CoE, AoC has relatively modest claims to innovation and features; however, unlike CoE, AoC has already provided a working alpha demo after less than one year of game development."

    I already addressed it, which is why I didn't feel the need to repeat myself.
    Just for clarity guys... AoC has nothing to do with Intrepid Games but rather Intrepid Studios...

    So both AoC and CU are tiny self started indie developers making MMORPGs.  Both are confident enough to offer refunds.  Again, SpatialOS was advertised as the foundation of the game and people have stated (on forums and Discord) that it was why they believed the promises were remotely possible. 

    So again, since they changed the fabric the game was built on, their direct crowdfunding competitors offer refunds, and they claim all 16,000 pledged people are happy....  shouldn’t they offer a refund?  If the supporters are happy then nobody would use it so no harm done.  Obviously there is a fear that if offered a chance, people would ask for a refund.  
    You're absolutely right. Intrepid Studios and Intrepid Games are not the same. However, Intrepid Studios did have experience working on some MMOs, though. By SBS's own admission, they didn't have much experience in developing MMOs, which is why SpatialOS was so important to their development process.

    Which is why, after nearly two years, SBS hasn't even been able to produce the pre-alpha test bed client with networking features and Intrepid Studios did within 6 months ... It speaks directly to the inexperience of SBS's team regarding MMO development.
    Gdemami
  • dadazardadazar Member UncommonPosts: 40
    edited January 2018
    dadazar said:

    Why do you pull out the sidenote and don´t answer to the relevant arguments, like the different scope and easier to attract players and easier to bring out moving pictures and the backup arguments?
    I did address the scope in the original post you quoted, unless you missed it:

    "Compared to CoE, AoC has relatively modest claims to innovation and features; however, unlike CoE, AoC has already provided a working alpha demo after less than one year of game development."

    I already addressed it, which is why I didn't feel the need to repeat myself.
    Just for clarity guys... AoC has nothing to do with Intrepid Games but rather Intrepid Studios...

    So both AoC and CU are tiny self started indie developers making MMORPGs.  Both are confident enough to offer refunds.  Again, SpatialOS was advertised as the foundation of the game and people have stated (on forums and Discord) that it was why they believed the promises were remotely possible. 

    So again, since they changed the fabric the game was built on, their direct crowdfunding competitors offer refunds, and they claim all 16,000 pledged people are happy....  shouldn’t they offer a refund?  If the supporters are happy then nobody would use it so no harm done.  Obviously there is a fear that if offered a chance, people would ask for a refund.  
    Yea, i think you said fabric thing often enough. You might don´t understand why ppl don´t get it, don´t you?

    So can you now show me a link to that Intrepid "Studio" homepage or at least history? I can´t tell if they are someone totaly different, as i don´t find enough.

    Would you tell me now why you are so dedicated to convince people of your opinion? Do you think you will get your money back or ease your frustration by that or are you on some mission or what is it, that you pull on every bit of hint of why this must be worth to warn the world about?

    "..they claim all 16,000 pledged people are happy.." with "they" i assume you mean SBS? Where did they said that?

    "..shouldn´t they offer a refund.." Why, did they promised a refund as they asked you for support?

    You running in circels, dude.
    Slapshot1188EponyxDamormystichazeYashaX
  • DakeruDakeru Member EpicPosts: 3,721
    dadazar said:

    Would you tell me now why you are so dedicated to convince people of your opinion? 
    You of all people ask this? 
    I lost count but isn't this like your 6th account here?
    Slapshot1188YashaX
    Harbinger of Fools
  • dadazardadazar Member UncommonPosts: 40
    Dakeru said:
    dadazar said:

    Would you tell me now why you are so dedicated to convince people of your opinion? 
    You of all people ask this? 
    I lost count but isn't this like your 6th account here?
    er, sry?

    I´m dedicated because i´m positivly enganged. Meaning, i would like to see CoE´s concept become real, and i support its development with the risky pledge of money and good will. I took a look at this platform and saw some(?) people reassuring each other with noting everything CoE related quite badly and with unfavor, very engaged in creating and commenting post in the games forum on this shady platform. And i asked myself, and you as well btw, why is someone so engaged with speaking bad about this only promising concept i can see on the whole market?
    I really don´t care how experienced they are, or are incompetent or not, or if my money is lost or not.

    I want to support and vote (with my effort and money) for change in this mush of MMOs out there.

    Speaking of multipile accounts, hm?

    So, why do you guy(s) ranting quite constantly about a game you consider a fail anyway?
    DleatherusBestinna
  • DakeruDakeru Member EpicPosts: 3,721
    dadazar said:
    I really don´t care how experienced they are, or are incompetent or not, or if my money is lost or not.

    You see that's why you are wasting your time here.
    Because the average gamer does care whether he get's a playable game for his money or not.
    NildenYashaXBestinna
    Harbinger of Fools
  • dadazardadazar Member UncommonPosts: 40
    It´s no game, it´s a concept that will lead to a game. That will be delivered when it´s done.
    You didn´t seem to understand the purpose of crowdfunding.
    You just seem to me quite negativly motivated to discredit the project - nothing more. No way better then a "Ivory Tower" - stupid fakenews vocabulary, btw.

    And again, you just picked on what you can put a to you cool seeming phrase.
    EponyxDamorSlapshot1188YashaX
  • EponyxDamorEponyxDamor Member RarePosts: 726
    edited January 2018
    dadazar said:
    It´s no game, it´s a concept that will lead to a game. That will be delivered when it´s done.
    You didn´t seem to understand the purpose of crowdfunding.
    You just seem to me quite negativly motivated to discredit the project - nothing more. No way better then a "Ivory Tower" - stupid fakenews vocabulary, btw.

    And again, you just picked on what you can put a to you cool seeming phrase.
    The purpose of crowdfunding a game is to ... make a game -- which you seem to blatantly leave out of every post you make claiming people don't understand it. Crowdfunded projects are a risk. People donate to crowdfunding campaigns to (hopefully/eventually) see them created, and then to receive that product as a result of their donation.

    People like to know how much of a risk it is to donate money. In this case, it is very risky, as up to this point SBS has delivered on none of its promises, is severely underfunded, and has recently lost one of its major cited reasons for not needing massive funding/time to develop the game.
    YashaX
  • mystichazemystichaze Member UncommonPosts: 378
    edited January 2018
    dadazar said:
    @Slapshot1188 - how much crowdfunding projects are there, which do refunds? It´s in the nature of crowdfunding (and it´s still a sort of), that there are risks involved. You can´t blame the studio for you not realising this.
    Again.  The only reason not to offer refunds is if you think people will use them. If the 16,000 backers are all happy then there is no risk.  The Ivory Tower has stated that the 16,000 backers are happy.

    Also, you must not look outside of CoE much... both CU and AoC offer refunds.  
    People also pledged knowing there was a no refund policy in place, so it was a risk they apparently were willing to take. If they didn't know or weren't willing to take the risk without a refund policy then they should have done more research before pledging. 

    That responsibility is on the Pledgers, not SBS.
  • dadazardadazar Member UncommonPosts: 40
    edited January 2018
    dadazar said:
    It´s no game, it´s a concept that will lead to a game. That will be delivered when it´s done.
    You didn´t seem to understand the purpose of crowdfunding.
    You just seem to me quite negativly motivated to discredit the project - nothing more. No way better then a "Ivory Tower" - stupid fakenews vocabulary, btw.

    And again, you just picked on what you can put a to you cool seeming phrase.
    The purpose of crowdfunding a game is to ... make a game -- which you seem to blatantly leave out of every post you make claiming people don't understand it. Crowdfunded projects are a risk. People donate to crowdfunding campaigns to (hopefully/eventually) see them created, and then to receive that product as a result of their donation.

    People like to know how much of a risk it is to donate money. In this case, it is very risky, as up to this point SBS has delivered on none of its promises, is severely underfunded, and has recently lost one of its major cited reasons for not needing massive funding/time to develop the game.
    "..which you seem to blatantly leave out.." = pretension. Said: "will lead to a game"

    "..of every post you make.." - yea? can´t see that.

    "..claiming people don´t understand it.." = nonsense. Where? I mostly talk only to you.. er.. accounts.

    "..like to know how much of a risk.." = yea, judged from reasonable people. I know there is a point in your spatialOS argument, but that doesn´t mean you not already had bad intentions way before that release of information. And i don´t consider you professional insiders that can judge the situation, but propably just one frustrated backer, or his peers. You could leave arguments and let others bring forth their argument. You could report things without that notion you put in almost every post, as far as i read them.

    "..SBS has delivered on none of its promises.." - which exact promises are you talking of? You don´t refer to the ETA argument, dont you?! x) we running in circles..

    "..severely underfunded.." - yea yea.. not only you got the expertise, but you also got the insight, right. OK. As well regarding the SpatialOS influence on the gamedevelopment, there are no other possibilities than the only one you can see. I see.
    Slapshot1188EponyxDamor
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,149
    @EponyxDamor

    I warned you guys.  It's pointless to debate the Ivory Tower.  Facts are meaningless.  Don't let them get you off target. Just focus on SpatialOS.  Don't follow them down the rabbit hole.  Gotta love when a guy has been here for 1 day and is an expert on the site and previous conversations  ;)



    EponyxDamorDakeruYashaX

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

  • EponyxDamorEponyxDamor Member RarePosts: 726
    dadazar said:
    dadazar said:
    It´s no game, it´s a concept that will lead to a game. That will be delivered when it´s done.
    You didn´t seem to understand the purpose of crowdfunding.
    You just seem to me quite negativly motivated to discredit the project - nothing more. No way better then a "Ivory Tower" - stupid fakenews vocabulary, btw.

    And again, you just picked on what you can put a to you cool seeming phrase.
    The purpose of crowdfunding a game is to ... make a game -- which you seem to blatantly leave out of every post you make claiming people don't understand it. Crowdfunded projects are a risk. People donate to crowdfunding campaigns to (hopefully/eventually) see them created, and then to receive that product as a result of their donation.

    People like to know how much of a risk it is to donate money. In this case, it is very risky, as up to this point SBS has delivered on none of its promises, is severely underfunded, and has recently lost one of its major cited reasons for not needing massive funding/time to develop the game.
    "..which you seem to blatantly leave out.." = pretension. Said: "will lead to a game"

    "..of every post you make.." - yea? can´t see that.

    "..claiming people don´t understand it.." = nonsense. Where? I mostly talk only to you.. er.. accounts.

    "..like to know how much of a risk.." = yea, judged from reasonable people. I know there is a point in your spatialOS argument, but that doesn´t mean you already had bad intentions way before that release of information. And i don´t consider you professional insiders that can judge the situation, but propably just one frustrated backer, or his peers. You could leave arguments and let others bring forth their argument. You could report things without that notion you put in almost every post, as far as i read them.

    "..SBS has delivered on none of its promises.." - which exact promises are you talking of? You don´t refer to the ETA argument, dont you?! x) we running in circles..

    "..severely underfunded.." - yea yea.. not only you got the expertise, but you also got the insight, right. OK. As well regarding the SpatialOS influence on the gamedevelopment, there are no other possibilities than the only one you can see. I see.
    You seriously only further the argument about dismissing the "Ivory Tower" when you make posts like this. SBS *has* missed every deliver ETA that they have given and hasn't delivered *any* working alphas demonstrating their networking ability -- so it doesn't seem like they are very good at estimating how long development takes.

    If you're going to make arguments from authority, at least come back with some sort of differing information besides "well, you're not a game developer, so you don't know" ...
    Slapshot1188YashaX
  • dadazardadazar Member UncommonPosts: 40
    edited January 2018
    oh dear! picky pretensions, hollow phrases and discrediting accusations.

    didn´t i just split up the arguments and argumented my thoughts on them while you only come up with these? oO
    Farewell.
    EponyxDamorSlapshot1188YashaXIselin
  • Tiamat64Tiamat64 Member RarePosts: 1,526
    dadazar said:
    oh dear! picky pretensions, hollow phrases and discrediting accusations.

    didn´t i just split up the arguments and argumented my thoughts on them while you only come up with these? oO
    Farewell.
    What are you rambling about? :open_mouth:
    EponyxDamorSlapshot1188YashaX
  • RhoklawRhoklaw Member EpicPosts: 6,561
    Question, if you don't like the game at all, cant stand the developer. Why are you not only reserving discussion threads for said game but also hanging out in discord with them? Seems a little stalkerish or troll. Not trying to be rude but on every thread about CoE you are there non stop, if you don't like the game that much why are you putting in so much time for it? Is there some personal beef you have with the dev team or something?

    Just seems theres got to be more to the story.
    Think of it this way. You have a game developer making a game. Not everything that developer says seems truthful or possibly misleading. For instance, I have no stake in Star Citizen whatsoever. I never bought into the hype. I honestly believe Chris Roberts is hiding a lot from his fans. I'm not claiming him of being a criminal, but I do believe he's hiding something. Specifically, I believe his financials are not being managed properly.

    Anyhow, while I'm not as dedicated to the cause as Slapshot is with CoE, I do understand his purpose. He is trying to steer fans, potential customers and anyone associated with CoE down a clear and narrow path.

    Most if not all of what he states is either opinion or fact. One thing I've learned over the years is to take what a developer says with a grain of salt. Making an MMO, especially as an indie developer is a huge investment and financial risk. That kind of edgy lifestyle CAN and HAS caused developers to be anything but honest in order to save their game, and ultimately their livelihood, from failing.

    However, this does not make it okay to lie to people because you are not able to fulfill your promises. This includes misleading or false advertisement, specifically bait and switch tactics or using vague descriptions or cryptic answers. Doing stuff like that is a sure tell sign that you no longer believe in your product.

  • mystichazemystichaze Member UncommonPosts: 378
    Rhoklaw said:
    Question, if you don't like the game at all, cant stand the developer. Why are you not only reserving discussion threads for said game but also hanging out in discord with them? Seems a little stalkerish or troll. Not trying to be rude but on every thread about CoE you are there non stop, if you don't like the game that much why are you putting in so much time for it? Is there some personal beef you have with the dev team or something?

    Just seems theres got to be more to the story.
    Think of it this way. You have a game developer making a game. Not everything that developer says seems truthful or possibly misleading. For instance, I have no stake in Star Citizen whatsoever. I never bought into the hype. I honestly believe Chris Roberts is hiding a lot from his fans. I'm not claiming him of being a criminal, but I do believe he's hiding something. Specifically, I believe his financials are not being managed properly.

    Anyhow, while I'm not as dedicated to the cause as Slapshot is with CoE, I do understand his purpose. He is trying to steer fans, potential customers and anyone associated with CoE down a clear and narrow path.

    Most if not all of what he states is either opinion or fact. One thing I've learned over the years is to take what a developer says with a grain of salt. Making an MMO, especially as an indie developer is a huge investment and financial risk. That kind of edgy lifestyle CAN and HAS caused developers to be anything but honest in order to save their game, and ultimately their livelihood, from failing.

    However, this does not make it okay to lie to people because you are not able to fulfill your promises. This includes misleading or false advertisement, specifically bait and switch tactics or using vague descriptions or cryptic answers. Doing stuff like that is a sure tell sign that you no longer believe in your product.
    The tactics you mention such as a false advertisement, bait and switch, vague descriptions or cryptic answers are things that -I feel- SBS is not guilty of.  Instead, I perceive it as a new development team experiencing growing pains, making changes to find better solutions and trying to be as transparent with their community as possible during the process. And trust me I am a very skeptical person when it comes to my pocketbook and the internet.

    I am not sure how much you follow the development process of CoE, but if your assessments are based solely on what has been said in these forums then you haven't been getting the full picture. Perhaps now that there are individuals involved that can express a different perspective it might alter your perspective as well, or not. Either way, more information is never a bad thing. :)

    I also want to thank you for your mature approach to a debate, it is refreshing to see. 
    Slapshot1188dadazar
  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 16,552
    I felt deception the very first two threads on this game.

    First thread i was like hmmm,sounds good and not asking for any money,great,has promise.
    Second thread again had me feeling good,perhaps this wil come out a good game.

    Third thread BAM..i KNEW IT was too good to be true.Money,we need your money,we really don't have a game just need your money.

    Well how about NO !!.

    I will end this short,you CAN NOT ever make a quality game winging it ,lets see how much money we can get along the way.You have to be fully organized both in structure and financially,if you cannot do this ,then don't even bother to attempt to make a game.

    Let me see,what kind of analogy could i use.Ok got it,this type of game design is like i am going on a trip to Greenland,hmm might be cold,might be very cold,i'll just bring a sweater and wing it,maybe i can buy whatever i need later,maybe it won't be that cold.
    EponyxDamorDakeru

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • RhoklawRhoklaw Member EpicPosts: 6,561
    Rhoklaw said:
    Question, if you don't like the game at all, cant stand the developer. Why are you not only reserving discussion threads for said game but also hanging out in discord with them? Seems a little stalkerish or troll. Not trying to be rude but on every thread about CoE you are there non stop, if you don't like the game that much why are you putting in so much time for it? Is there some personal beef you have with the dev team or something?

    Just seems theres got to be more to the story.
    Think of it this way. You have a game developer making a game. Not everything that developer says seems truthful or possibly misleading. For instance, I have no stake in Star Citizen whatsoever. I never bought into the hype. I honestly believe Chris Roberts is hiding a lot from his fans. I'm not claiming him of being a criminal, but I do believe he's hiding something. Specifically, I believe his financials are not being managed properly.

    Anyhow, while I'm not as dedicated to the cause as Slapshot is with CoE, I do understand his purpose. He is trying to steer fans, potential customers and anyone associated with CoE down a clear and narrow path.

    Most if not all of what he states is either opinion or fact. One thing I've learned over the years is to take what a developer says with a grain of salt. Making an MMO, especially as an indie developer is a huge investment and financial risk. That kind of edgy lifestyle CAN and HAS caused developers to be anything but honest in order to save their game, and ultimately their livelihood, from failing.

    However, this does not make it okay to lie to people because you are not able to fulfill your promises. This includes misleading or false advertisement, specifically bait and switch tactics or using vague descriptions or cryptic answers. Doing stuff like that is a sure tell sign that you no longer believe in your product.
    The tactics you mention such as a false advertisement, bait and switch, vague descriptions or cryptic answers are things that -I feel- SBS is not guilty of.  Instead, I perceive it as a new development team experiencing growing pains, making changes to find better solutions and trying to be as transparent with their community as possible during the process. And trust me I am a very skeptical person when it comes to my pocketbook and the internet.

    I am not sure how much you follow the development process of CoE, but if your assessments are based solely on what has been said in these forums then you haven't been getting the full picture. Perhaps now that there are individuals involved that can express a different perspective it might alter your perspective as well, or not. Either way, more information is never a bad thing. :)

    I also want to thank you for your mature approach to a debate, it is refreshing to see. 
    Actually, I'm a huge fan of CoE, even made my account on the forums about a year ago, maybe longer, can't remember. I was a decent supporter because I loved the vision of the game and the concepts Caspian had in mind. I also put more faith in him than most because he put a large chunk of his own financials behind the development. In response to that, I feel that Caspian has made some design choices that do not reflect the same passion he had in this game originally. This mostly stems from the cash shop and what the packages involve.

    If this was a PvE game, I wouldn't see any problem with the cash shop. However, this is most certainly a PvP game in the sense that power = dominance. Allowing people to purchase kingdom ownerships puts people with real money in a clear position of advantage. I for one do NOT enjoy seeing any style of PvP being corrupted with clear advantages such as increased financial, resource or skill / stats. Owning an entire Kingdom because you threw down $10,000 or whatever it is may seem like just a way to support a game you love, but what truly happens when you own your own Kingdom? What does it give you access to that say, some guy who just spends $50-100?

    This slippery slope with PvP and cash shop / founders packages is what can kill a game before it even launches. I also understand it would only take a few suicidal maniacs to coup de grace this false king, or can they? What sort of defenses, what sort of incentives come with owning your own kingdom? Sure these store bought kings must have something to keep them from dying on day one. The reason I know this is because I'm willing to bet, if any of these people die within the first month, probably even the first year, you will get a huge surge of angry posts about the game being a complete disaster. Putting $10,000 players in positions of power in a PvP game is just begging for a bad outcome no matter what happens. Either you give those people too much power, to where everyone else screams P2W or you give them no advantages whatsoever where I find anyone who didn't know this would be an idiot for spending $10,000 only to see it lost in the first month to "fair" gameplay.
    DakeruYashaXGdemami

  • mystichazemystichaze Member UncommonPosts: 378
    @Rhoklaw I really want to respond to this but unfortunately, I am just heading to town (a two-hour drive) So I will take a rain check and respond later this evening. :)
  • dadazardadazar Member UncommonPosts: 40
    edited January 2018
    @Rhoklaw That have been a discusion on the CoE forums quite some while ago. And yes, it appeals like a P2W first. But actualy it is no product you buy, but a thank you for giving the support to the game, meaning a king may "start" as such to build the "initial" story of the world. It will be no usual competition-to-the-top-game, but a game to play a story. Be it a story of a king or a story of a peasant. Former one will have far more troubles and responsibilities than the latter. It´s about stories, less about winning!
    YashaXSlapshot1188
  • OrangeBoyOrangeBoy Member UncommonPosts: 169
    Glad I didn't put in a single penny, as much as I'd have liked for the project to succeed, the fact they're optimistic for only Alpha at this point is lethal to it's prospect.

    Though, from looking at what Mystic, D, and that clown with 10 accounts have posted, I'm sort of glad I won't be in the same game as them anytime soon.
    Slapshot1188YashaX
  • mystichazemystichaze Member UncommonPosts: 378
    OrangeBoy said:

    Though, from looking at what Mystic, D, and that clown with 10 accounts have posted, I'm sort of glad I won't be in the same game as them anytime soon.
    Are personal attacks really necessary? I don't see how they are beneficial to the game on either side of the debates.
  • OrangeBoyOrangeBoy Member UncommonPosts: 169
    OrangeBoy said:

    Though, from looking at what Mystic, D, and that clown with 10 accounts have posted, I'm sort of glad I won't be in the same game as them anytime soon.
    Are personal attacks really necessary? I don't see how they are beneficial to the game on either side of the debates.
    I was being transparent, spare me
  • dadazardadazar Member UncommonPosts: 40
    Accusations are often made out off own thoughts. But im curious whom you which accounts would declare to? As if it´s not obvious..
    EponyxDamor
  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,776
    Here's my math

    16000 is not enough
    No, it isn't, but anyone that is paying attention would notice that even now that our event has finished the pledge total keeps increasing. That suggests to me that we have new pledges joining daily with still a year+ before launch. In addition, the bulk of members are expected to join after launch because some aren't as willing to take a risk as others. 
    That means nothing if it's not enough to cover the expenses.
    EponyxDamor
Sign In or Register to comment.