The legal part is about being able to read it in the context of a contract. The meaning of the word is not really any different in legalese, but its understanding can change in different context. What has happened with these wonderful utterly useless conversations is that people seem to have attached emotion from what they believe it to mean instead of understanding the true interpretations of what was written, then proceeded to lecture me on 'why I am wrong' (that's the polite version) using completely unrelated arguments and analogies some of which are also wrong. This is my interpretation of events so far.
==> Whats happened is that a legal definition has been inserted into a colloquial context, and people didn't realise that. So you end up with two parallel arguments. Like I said, just explain that up front and this won't happen. ==>
When you said"alpha access is a privilege granted by the developer and whether you pay them or they pay you for that privilege is irrelevant", my issue is that whether "I" pay (I'm a customer) or "they" pay (I'm an employee) is VERY MUCH relevant, not irrelevant as you stated.
This is a misunderstanding, the point being made is that for the company to offer access is itself a privilege and not some natural right. ... ==> agreed ==>
As a customer I expect certain legal rights ("privileges") and relationships. As an employee I don't, I expect a different set.
And SC is very much treating me as a customer. The range of services and the state of the product don't change that.
Unless you now want to claim "customer" and "employee" have the same legal definition and that's what you meant all along? I dunno, I mean you can get as absurd as you like of course.
So here is a different subject. You can indeed expect legal rights, being granted a privilege can even mean just that. However with a service (also a privilege granted), in most circumstance you can't physically force someone to continue to grant service but you can indeed try to seek remedy if needed. I am not really sure what can be gained from discussing this further, I was never interested in the other issues.
==> fine ==>
Thank you for persevering with the discourse without the insinuations and insults. As noted previously you have taken an aggressive insulting stance from your opening comments with me on other threads, do expect to be treated in kind. I would also like to note that through all of this, it was very very boring! Derailment value 10/10.
==> In my opinion you caused the derailment by changing context without notification ==>
Edit: ah i just saw your comments at the top again shame.
==> I was annoyed by your original and ongoing insults and insinuations, and yes, that came across. Like you said, you get what you give. ==>
Wasn't this game supposed to be released last year?
SC does not have a release date, the way they go at it is by continually developing and releasing updates.
The released term in the reality of SC is diluted on its own, SC "1.0" set to be a version number that only means the game available is stable, with its development continuing as normal.
Correct me if am wrong, but this whole debate is it a product or not, right? So way back when RSI sent an unasked refund to (who will rename nameless) isn't that showing they believe it's a product? Which, also started the most amazing gaming fight of all time.
Heck, starting to feel like I should pay RSI for the entertainment we all been enjoying the last couple years.
“The reason I talk to myself is because I’m the only one whose answers I accept.”
―
George Carlin
Correct me if am wrong, but this whole debate is it a product or not, right? So way back when RSI sent an unasked refund to (who will rename nameless) isn't that showing they believe it's a product? Which, also started the most amazing gaming fight of all time.
Heck, starting to feel like I should pay RSI for the entertainment we all been enjoying the last couple years.
This is very entertaining and a part of gaming history that will be talked about for ages, regardless the outcome.
"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
Did it ever occur to you that others may not want what passes as "education" in your mind?
Being an annoying fanboy hardly give you the authority to belch your opinion across a thread in the guise of "educational material".
I would just ignore him and report him if you feel it is needed. Don't fall for his passive aggressiveness and attempts at baiting you into arguing with him. That is exactly what he wants and it really is not worth it.
Yeah, you're right. Not sure what his problem is. Probably not enough hugs as a child.
You could even claim that this game is not even in alpha yet. It is mostly techdemo's so far.
I got this from the wiki for dev cycles!
"Alpha software can be unstable and could cause crashes or data loss. Alpha software may not contain all of the features that are planned for the final version.[2] In general, external availability of alpha software is uncommon in proprietary software, while open source software often has publicly available alpha versions. The alpha phase usually ends with a feature freeze, indicating that no more features will be added to the software. At this time, the software is said to be feature complete."
so sounds like an alpha to me? but could have been written by a drunk hobo who has never even seen a computer, so I don't know (but then how......)
Well, if you look at just about any other project that is crowd funded, you see how different it normally works (hint : no selling of game objects for ridiculous amounts of money). Usually a promised funder bonus is marginal and have barely any gameplay meaning.
Oh you are one of those that likes out of context quoting. How convenient for you. I explained in my post why you could even consider it not even being alpha, but you cut my explanation away. Not gameplay features, just mechanics and graphics, like a techdemo.
Anyway, I notice that you really like to twist and turn any meaning to your favour and that is just too tiring for me. It is like talking to a wall.
Guys, at a certain point it is good to realise that some people are not interested in a genuine discussion. But instead use any shitty debate technic possible. This person is taking you all down the rabbit hole. There is no benefit at all by responding to him. Just one litany of platitudes , straw men and twists. He should become politician imo.
You could even claim that this game is not even in alpha yet. It is mostly techdemo's so far.
I got this from the wiki for dev cycles!
"Alpha software can be unstable and could cause crashes or data loss. Alpha software may not contain all of the features that are planned for the final version.[2] In general, external availability of alpha software is uncommon in proprietary software, while open source software often has publicly available alpha versions. The alpha phase usually ends with a feature freeze, indicating that no more features will be added to the software. At this time, the software is said to be feature complete."
so sounds like an alpha to me? but could have been written by a drunk hobo who has never even seen a computer, so I don't know (but then how......)
Well, if you look at just about any other project that is crowd funded, you see how different it normally works (hint : no selling of game objects for ridiculous amounts of money). Usually a promised funder bonus is marginal and have barely any gameplay meaning.
Oh you are one of those that likes out of context quoting. How convenient for you. I explained in my post why you could even consider it not even being alpha, but you cut my explanation away. Not gameplay features, just mechanics and graphics, like a techdemo.
Anyway, I notice that you really like to twist and turn any meaning to your favour and that is just too tiring for me. It is like talking to a wall.
but it has gameplay features, and no i wasnt tryi.....just also, forget it, think im done with this stuff. thanks for taking time. enjoy.
There are games that have been thought of and finished in the time this one has taken to get into alpha... Well I guess maybe at least it's nice to dream of how awesome it'll be when it's done, lol.
Better be one hell of a game with their budget and development time.
I disagree with the post I've been waiting for over at least 5yrs, I could care less its in alpha. its time to finish the game and stop asking for more money period.
" Life Liberty and the Pursuit of Those Who Would Threaten It " MAGA
I disagree with the post I've been waiting for over at least 5yrs, I could care less its in alpha. its time to finish the game and stop asking for more money period.
No it's not.
We can kick & shout all we want but the only guy who gets to decide that is Chris Roberts.
And CIG doesn't need to ask for more money, they present stuff that people like so they give them money. It's a great move for everyone that like Star Citizen.
I would like to take a moment of time to thank Chris Roberts for creating a shit show that is exactly reminiscence of the Aventurine's Darkfall debacle. It is a spitting image of exactly what happened, but it is starting to come to the climax. Aventurine released a fully functional product will CSI? Find out on the next exciting episode!
[[ DEAD ]] - Funny - I deleted my account on the site using the cancel account button. Forum user is separate and still exists with no way of deleting it. Delete it admins. Do it, this ends now.
...and when you think Star Citizen white knights can't get any more desperate to defend this shitshow, they have to compare Braben to Croberts... a salesman who doesn't understand zero gravity trying to make a space game.
Elite had made videos that had nothing to do with real gameplay and sold it as "gameplay". Just like most other studios ;-)
Interesting enough we later got the option to move around the camera outside the ship - which was the way they made these videos all those years ago.
No Sandworms. I am still looking for Arakis ;-) in E:D
I am not sure if the "Singing Barnacles" classify as "wild animals" ;-) , but there are videos of those.
Have fun
Are you talking about the ED launch trailer? Sure that was "spiced up" but calling it "nothing to do with real gameplay" is pretty much lying.
Not sure why you mention the camera? Completely irrelevant.
Sandworms? Braben said they'll do Big Game Hunting sometime in the future... Croberts showed a video of a worm to promote sales. No in-game sightings of the worm have been seen since it was shown more than a year ago.
Anyone following ED development knows BGH is vary far off. Lots of more important dev things to do before that.
Elite had made videos that had nothing to do with real gameplay and sold it as "gameplay". Just like most other studios ;-)
Interesting enough we later got the option to move around the camera outside the ship - which was the way they made these videos all those years ago.
No Sandworms. I am still looking for Arakis ;-) in E:D
I am not sure if the "Singing Barnacles" classify as "wild animals" ;-) , but there are videos of those.
Have fun
Are you talking about the ED launch trailer? Sure that was "spiced up" but calling it "nothing to do with real gameplay" is pretty much lying.
It has been a long time since I have seen the launch trailer but did that not have a disclaimer saying "Not Actual Gameplay"? If that is the case how can @Erillion claim it was sold as gameplay?
It has been a long time since I have seen the launch trailer but did that not have a disclaimer saying "Not Actual Gameplay"? If that is the case how can @Erillion claim it was sold as gameplay?
Because the disclaimer "Not Actual Gameplay" was quickly added later after loud protests from people that knew.
Have fun
PS:
"Doing crazy stuff" ... watch the launch trailer ... no, you cannot do the things as they are depicted in that trailer. You can fly, you can fight ... but not in the way it is shown here.
PPS:
Nowadays ... with free camera ... you can make videos in E:D that look more like the launch trailer. Not quite the same, but better than all the in-cockpit videos from the past.
SC also has this free camera options ... and there are some real artists (see the thread here with videos) amongst the backers that create stunning videos with those tools.
It has been a long time since I have seen the launch trailer but did that not have a disclaimer saying "Not Actual Gameplay"? If that is the case how can @Erillion claim it was sold as gameplay?
Because the disclaimer "Not Actual Gameplay" was added later after loud protests from people that knew.
Have fun
That is not true at all.
The only version of the launch video is the one released to the press on the 10th of December 2014 and that clearly has the disclaimer in it.
Comments
The released term in the reality of SC is diluted on its own, SC "1.0" set to be a version number that only means the game available is stable, with its development continuing as normal.
Heck, starting to feel like I should pay RSI for the entertainment we all been enjoying the last couple years.
― George Carlin
"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
~~ postlarval ~~
Oh you are one of those that likes out of context quoting. How convenient for you. I explained in my post why you could even consider it not even being alpha, but you cut my explanation away. Not gameplay features, just mechanics and graphics, like a techdemo.
Anyway, I notice that you really like to twist and turn any meaning to your favour and that is just too tiring for me. It is like talking to a wall.
Better be one hell of a game with their budget and development time.
MAGA
We can kick & shout all we want but the only guy who gets to decide that is Chris Roberts.
And CIG doesn't need to ask for more money, they present stuff that people like so they give them money. It's a great move for everyone that like Star Citizen.
Hummm.... Wrong game?
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.
..Cake..
Elite had made videos that had nothing to do with real gameplay and sold it as "gameplay".
Just like most other studios ;-)
Interesting enough we later got the option to move around the camera outside the ship - which was the way they made these videos all those years ago.
No Sandworms. I am still looking for Arakis ;-) in E:D
I am not sure if the "Singing Barnacles" classify as "wild animals" ;-) , but there are videos of those.
Have fun
Are you talking about the ED launch trailer?
Sure that was "spiced up" but calling it "nothing to do with real gameplay" is pretty much lying.
Not sure why you mention the camera? Completely irrelevant.
Sandworms? Braben said they'll do Big Game Hunting sometime in the future... Croberts showed a video of a worm to promote sales. No in-game sightings of the worm have been seen since it was shown more than a year ago.
Anyone following ED development knows BGH is vary far off.
Lots of more important dev things to do before that.
..Cake..
It has been a long time since I have seen the launch trailer but did that not have a disclaimer saying "Not Actual Gameplay"? If that is the case how can @Erillion claim it was sold as gameplay?
Have fun
PS:
"Doing crazy stuff" ... watch the launch trailer ... no, you cannot do the things as they are depicted in that trailer. You can fly, you can fight ... but not in the way it is shown here.
PPS:
Nowadays ... with free camera ... you can make videos in E:D that look more like the launch trailer. Not quite the same, but better than all the in-cockpit videos from the past.
SC also has this free camera options ... and there are some real artists (see the thread here with videos) amongst the backers that create stunning videos with those tools.
The only version of the launch video is the one released to the press on the 10th of December 2014 and that clearly has the disclaimer in it.