Alpha/Beta testing.....why is it only available to people who want to test the game!!!!! LOL
Alpha/beta testing...why is it only available(minus evocati) to subscribers when it's a crowdfunded game!!!! LOL
Not that many people care. In my experience 99 % of people do not write bug reports during Alpha tests anyway. And for everyone else the difference is only a few days. Then Alpha 2.4 will be on the Live server anyway for all.
Alpha/Beta testing.....why is it only available to people who want to test the game!!!!! LOL
Alpha/beta testing...why is it only available(minus evocati) to subscribers when it's a crowdfunded game!!!! LOL
Not that many people care. In my experience 99 % of people do not write bug reports during Alpha tests anyway. And for everyone else the difference is only a few days. Then Alpha 2.4 will be on the Live server anyway for all.
Have fun
That's great that I'm sure many people don't care but for the people who do care why is the latest game patch locked behind a paywall when they already bought access/testing through a pledge?
Alpha/Beta testing.....why is it only available to people who want to test the game!!!!! LOL
Alpha/beta testing...why is it only available(minus evocati) to subscribers when it's a crowdfunded game!!!! LOL
Not that many people care. In my experience 99 % of people do not write bug reports during Alpha tests anyway. And for everyone else the difference is only a few days. Then Alpha 2.4 will be on the Live server anyway for all.
Have fun
That's great that I'm sure many people don't care but for the people who do care why is the latest game patch locked behind a paywall when they already bought access/testing through a pledge?
Because they don't want to flood the servers with people who're not motivated to contribute - and will not provide much in the way of useful feedback.
The concept is to get the current version to a playable state in the most efficient manner possible, and you don't do that by exposing a version they know to be highly flawed to the masses. Even if people did want to contribute, a lot of the information would be counterproductive noise.
It's 100% normal procedure during game development, and that's why the first alpha tests of any game is available to a very small audience - typically friends and family only. It's not because they want to exclude people - but because they want to focus on fixing the most severe bugs before opening it up to the masses.
Since subscribers are inherently more supportive - it makes a ton of sense to go for them first, as they're highly motivated to provide useful feedback.
Now, other people might THINK they want to play a broken version early - but the vast majority actually don't - and even if they did, they're not entitled to a pre-pre-alpha.
Don't forget Erilion is a long time subscriber so there's not much chance of impartiality on this subject.
This is just the usual CIG bungling Bill "Aww shucks" blunder. I think it's great that subscribers are getting something more for their money, they've been handing over $10 - $20 a month for a load of tosh so far. However, I don't think CIG should award earlier PTU access to new subscribers, that's either badly thought out or simply a money grab.
A few days over other backers doesn't really matter but the sake of PR and customer goodwill it really could have been handled a lot better.
Don't forget Erilion is a long time subscriber so there's not much chance of impartiality on this subject.
That subscribers have PTU access is a bonus that is now 3 DAYS old.
I have been subscriber for the last 3 YEARS. I am subscriber to support the community with extra information content via video blogs. Not because I want to test one Alpha version a week sooner than a few hundredthousand other backers.
That's great that I'm sure many people don't care but for the people who do care why is the latest game patch locked behind a paywall when they already bought access/testing through a pledge?
Submit a lot of good bug reports and you can become an Evocati tester and see any new Alpha patches weeks sooner than i will see them as a subscriber or the rest of the backers. And you do not have to pay ANYTHING for it. Just your time as a volunteer and your willingness to make things better.
Your "paywall" claim is pure propaganda - and futile.
Don't forget Erilion is a long time subscriber so there's not much chance of impartiality on this subject.
That subscribers have PTU access is a bonus that is now 3 DAYS old.
I have been subscriber for the last 3 YEARS. I am subscriber to support the community with extra information content via video blogs. Not because I want to test one Alpha version a week sooner than a few hundredthousand other backers.
Have fun
So all those times you mentioned that you where not that invested as you had only bought the $60 package or whatever, you kinda failed to mentioned the few hundred you had put into subs...
So all those times you mentioned that you where not that invested as you had only bought the $60 package or whatever, you kinda failed to mentioned the few hundred you had put into subs...
Nice one.
Then you have not read my posts ;-)
Because I have often mentioned this before. I even have THIS ongoing thread about SC subscribers here in this subforum.
Nice try. Still no cigar.
Have fun
PS: And its STILL a single account and a single ship, a Constellation. I pledged 250 $ back then. I value the "Jump Point" subscriber magazine and its stories quite highly.
Because they don't want to flood the servers with people who're not motivated to contribute - and will not provide much in the way of useful feedback.
[...]
I am sorry but this makes no sense, you are literally telling people that they can buy the early patch access for a $10 sub. Therefore them who bought in are not filtered by any means, it is a pay $10, come in, come all. In a result - They payed for the access why bother to write reports on top of that.
The people who are motivated to contribute have already been filtered they are called evocati, the waves of invitation are working at the moment the following way: 1st - Evocati > Selected NDA group of contributers 2nd - Subscribers > Pay $10, come in, come all 3rd - Selection of contributers 4th - Rest of the world
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.
Don't forget Erilion is a long time subscriber so there's not much chance of impartiality on this subject.
That subscribers have PTU access is a bonus that is now 3 DAYS old.
I have been subscriber for the last 3 YEARS. I am subscriber to support the community with extra information content via video blogs. Not because I want to test one Alpha version a week sooner than a few hundredthousand other backers.
Have fun
I know. If you think I'm saying you're a subscriber because you want PTU access then you're mistaken. What I am saying is that people who are subscribers and gain from this action will probably look at it in a different light because they are receiving a benefit. It reduces a person's chance to remain impartial. That's all.
Your "paywall" claim is pure propaganda - and futile. [...]
Not at all, it is more like pointing out a fact, because at the moment this is exactly what is happening. To deny it fits more in the propaganda term.
For 3 days now a subscription is not longer just fluff items to pay for the community videos.
If EA, Acti/Blizz or Ubi would have pulled this trick (subscription to get alpha access before people who payed for alpha access) the fans would have burned them to the ground. If CIG is doing this the fans defend them to the blood, ignoring years of life experience.
To be fair, I like it when devs are trying something different/the impossible to please players. I like it when a small company show the big ones that a good game does not require a publisher. But CIG is a big milking machine about to destroy crowd funding with exploiting the gamers to buy in more than they want by selling dreams for a horrendous price tag.
nuff said, the cake is a lie.
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.
Because they don't want to flood the servers with people who're not motivated to contribute - and will not provide much in the way of useful feedback.
[...]
I am sorry but this makes no sense, you are literally telling people that they can buy the early patch access for a $10 sub. Therefore them who bought in are not filtered by any means, it is a pay $10, come in, come all. In a result - They payed for the access why bother to write reports on top of that.
The people who are motivated to contribute have already been filtered they are called evocati, the waves of invitation are working at the moment the following way: 1st - Evocati > Selected NDA group of contributers 2nd - Subscribers > Pay $10, come in, come all 3rd - Selection of contributers 4th - Rest of the world
I'm sorry you don't understand something this simple.
I'll try again, though.
If people are willing to pay 10$ each month for a game that's yet to be released, then they're OBVIOUSLY more likely to be invested in the game than those who're not willing - and in contributing to its development in a positive way.
No, that's not a guarentee - but it's a super simple and obvious way to maximise the chances of getting quality testers in larger numbers. Not to mention a signal to subscribers that their contribution is appreciated, beyond the fluff items.
I don't know how it could get any simpler than that, frankly.
Evocati testers are a select few that's been established as quality testers - that's why they get access before anyone else, including subscribers.
If they had some magical way of conjuring up thousands of Evocati testers - they'd have no need for anyone else before the patch was considered release ready.
It's not rocket science.
The attempt to make this "perk" into some kind of money-grabbing scheme is even more pathetic than the usual fabrications and usubstantiated paranoid bullshit.
Alpha/Beta testing.....why is it only available to people who want to test the game!!!!! LOL
Alpha/beta testing...why is it only available(minus evocati) to subscribers when it's a crowdfunded game!!!! LOL
Not that many people care. In my experience 99 % of people do not write bug reports during Alpha tests anyway. And for everyone else the difference is only a few days. Then Alpha 2.4 will be on the Live server anyway for all.
Have fun
That's great that I'm sure many people don't care but for the people who do care why is the latest game patch locked behind a paywall when they already bought access/testing through a pledge?
Because they don't want to flood the servers with people who're not motivated to contribute - and will not provide much in the way of useful feedback.
The concept is to get the current version to a playable state in the most efficient manner possible, and you don't do that by exposing a version they know to be highly flawed to the masses. Even if people did want to contribute, a lot of the information would be counterproductive noise.
It's 100% normal procedure during game development, and that's why the first alpha tests of any game is available to a very small audience - typically friends and family only. It's not because they want to exclude people - but because they want to focus on fixing the most severe bugs before opening it up to the masses.
Since subscribers are inherently more supportive - it makes a ton of sense to go for them first, as they're highly motivated to provide useful feedback.
Now, other people might THINK they want to play a broken version early - but the vast majority actually don't - and even if they did, they're not entitled to a pre-pre-alpha.
Except as others have pointed out they can easily flood the servers with useless people who just plunk down 10 extra bucks to see what's going on in the super secret ptu. Or people who think they are helping when they are submitting bug reports that are already known or have incomplete info and therefore adding a bunch of noise.
I will agree that it is normal to have pre alpha go out to only a select few people but it has been available to anyone who has pledged for a long while now and then they suddenly change their mind? If CIG had this in place from the start it wouldn't matter as much and it could be justified but putting it in now and offering access to anyone who subs reeks of desperation for more cash flow.
The vast majority are entitled to a pre pre alpha though because that's what was promised them when they backed. The whole selling point was most open development ever and now it's changed to most open development ever only if you give us money above and beyond what you already paid us.
That's great that I'm sure many people don't care but for the people who do care why is the latest game patch locked behind a paywall when they already bought access/testing through a pledge?
Your "paywall" claim is pure propaganda - and futile.
Have fun
I'm just curious if you are just used to the smell of bullshit or just don't care? Saying its behind a paywall when it now is because you can get early early access for 10 a month isn't propaganda. @Turrican187 thanks for calling it out as well.
Alpha/Beta testing.....why is it only available to people who want to test the game!!!!! LOL
Alpha/beta testing...why is it only available(minus evocati) to subscribers when it's a crowdfunded game!!!! LOL
Not that many people care. In my experience 99 % of people do not write bug reports during Alpha tests anyway. And for everyone else the difference is only a few days. Then Alpha 2.4 will be on the Live server anyway for all.
Have fun
That's great that I'm sure many people don't care but for the people who do care why is the latest game patch locked behind a paywall when they already bought access/testing through a pledge?
Because they don't want to flood the servers with people who're not motivated to contribute - and will not provide much in the way of useful feedback.
The concept is to get the current version to a playable state in the most efficient manner possible, and you don't do that by exposing a version they know to be highly flawed to the masses. Even if people did want to contribute, a lot of the information would be counterproductive noise.
It's 100% normal procedure during game development, and that's why the first alpha tests of any game is available to a very small audience - typically friends and family only. It's not because they want to exclude people - but because they want to focus on fixing the most severe bugs before opening it up to the masses.
Since subscribers are inherently more supportive - it makes a ton of sense to go for them first, as they're highly motivated to provide useful feedback.
Now, other people might THINK they want to play a broken version early - but the vast majority actually don't - and even if they did, they're not entitled to a pre-pre-alpha.
Except as others have pointed out they can easily flood the servers with useless people who just plunk down 10 extra bucks to see what's going on in the super secret ptu. Or people who think they are helping when they are submitting bug reports that are already known or have incomplete info and therefore adding a bunch of noise.
I will agree that it is normal to have pre alpha go out to only a select few people but it has been available to anyone who has pledged for a long while now and then they suddenly change their mind? If CIG had this in place from the start it wouldn't matter as much and it could be justified but putting it in now and offering access to anyone who subs reeks of desperation for more cash flow.
The vast majority are entitled to a pre pre alpha though because that's what was promised them when they backed. The whole selling point was most open development ever and now it's changed to most open development ever only if you give us money above and beyond what you already paid us.
Yes, they can do whatever they want - but I'm talking about being productive and trying to ensure efficiency as best they can.
No, it hasn't been available to everyone so far. They've always used restrictive invites - it just used to be a different system including both random invites and invites based on participatory metrics. Then they came up with the Evocati testers - and now they've elected to maximise quality by picking invested supporters, instead of doing it based on flawed metrics like they used to. Maybe in a month they'll try something else.
If you subscribe because you want to play a broken build a few days before other backers get their hands on a more stable version, then you're taking a chance - as it can change at any moment.
No, there hasn't been a single promise related to how and when backers get to test a version that's not ready for release to live. It's completely and utterly up to CIG.
Really, is this the best conspiracy theory the haters can come up with these days? Not getting access to a broken build a few days before it's released is now a big deal that's about grabbing money?
I think you need to be careful lumping people who think they have a genuine grievance and those that are haters, SC has become so polarising it's scary, ulitmately it's going to go 1 of 3 ways: 1 total fail, mass hysteria ensure's and of course law suits, 2 MVP gets released, and is truely an MVP, mass hysteria ensure's ad nausem, 3 SC is released, game works, is ok and Derek Smart apologies.
It's that simple, people are allowed to have thier own views, no matter how wrong you think they are, I'm personally totally on the fence, the only thing that is tipping me off the fence is the 5 year wait and the fact that this pre-alpha version seems to be missing some seriously key parts and that has me worried.
“Nevertheless, the human brain, which survives by hoping from one second to another, will always endeavor to put off the moment of truth. Moist” ― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
I think you need to be careful lumping people who think they have a genuine grievance and those that are haters, SC has become so polarising it's scary, ulitmately it's going to go 1 of 3 ways: 1 total fail, mass hysteria ensure's and of course law suits, 2 MVP gets released, and is truely an MVP, mass hysteria ensure's ad nausem, 3 SC is released, game works, is ok and Derek Smart apologies.
It's that simple, people are allowed to have thier own views, no matter how wrong you think they are, I'm personally totally on the fence, the only thing that is tipping me off the fence is the 5 year wait and the fact that this pre-alpha version seems to be missing some seriously key parts and that has me worried.
If people are allowed to have their own views, which is really generous of you, then it's my view that most detractors are either:
1. Ignorant of the things they talk about in relation to SC 2. Hateful 3. Both
As such, feel free to interchange the words hate and ignorance as you see fit.
The tiny, tiny minority of detractors who have genuine concerns based on all available information can safely be excused.
I think you need to be careful lumping people who think they have a genuine grievance and those that are haters, SC has become so polarising it's scary, ulitmately it's going to go 1 of 3 ways: 1 total fail, mass hysteria ensure's and of course law suits, 2 MVP gets released, and is truely an MVP, mass hysteria ensure's ad nausem, 3 SC is released, game works, is ok and Derek Smart apologies.
It's that simple, people are allowed to have thier own views, no matter how wrong you think they are, I'm personally totally on the fence, the only thing that is tipping me off the fence is the 5 year wait and the fact that this pre-alpha version seems to be missing some seriously key parts and that has me worried.
If people are allowed to have their own views, which is really generous of you, then it's my view that most detractors are either:
1. Ignorant of the things they talk about in relation to SC 2. Hateful 3. Both
As such, feel free to interchange the words hate and ignorance as you see fit.
The tiny, tiny minority of detractors who have genuine concerns based on all available information can safely be excused.
Thats abit high handed, but that's cool, it's your opinion, does that make you a fanboi then? And as an aside is there anything that does bother you about SC thats not related to people following the game?
“Nevertheless, the human brain, which survives by hoping from one second to another, will always endeavor to put off the moment of truth. Moist” ― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
I think you need to be careful lumping people who think they have a genuine grievance and those that are haters, SC has become so polarising it's scary, ulitmately it's going to go 1 of 3 ways: 1 total fail, mass hysteria ensure's and of course law suits, 2 MVP gets released, and is truely an MVP, mass hysteria ensure's ad nausem, 3 SC is released, game works, is ok and Derek Smart apologies.
It's that simple, people are allowed to have thier own views, no matter how wrong you think they are, I'm personally totally on the fence, the only thing that is tipping me off the fence is the 5 year wait and the fact that this pre-alpha version seems to be missing some seriously key parts and that has me worried.
If people are allowed to have their own views, which is really generous of you, then it's my view that most detractors are either:
1. Ignorant of the things they talk about in relation to SC 2. Hateful 3. Both
As such, feel free to interchange the words hate and ignorance as you see fit.
The tiny, tiny minority of detractors who have genuine concerns based on all available information can safely be excused.
Thats abit high handed, but that's cool, it's your opinion, does that make you a fanboi then? And as an aside is there anything that does bother you about SC thats not related to people following the game?
I don't know what a fanboi means to you. If you're talking about a person who's well informed about the game and has elected to support its development even when fully aware of how everything can go wrong, then I'm certainly a fanboi.
As for things that bother me about Star Citizen? There are things that worry me, yes. I worry that the game is too ambitious - and I worry they can provide a game that will be able to perform reasonably, even on high-end hardware. I worry that the game will be released too soon and without being properly done, because they realise they can't finish it with available funds.
But I have faith in Chris Roberts and his team - and I'm a huge supporter of its ambition and bold vision.
One thing that might set me apart from the average detractor is that I'm absolutely and completely aware that I'm taking a chance - and that there are no guarentees when it comes to crowdfunding.
But I would much, much rather support a vision like this that's not certain to come to fruition than yet another publisher green-lit clone of whatever is perceived to be profitable by suits.
I think you need to be careful lumping people who think they have a genuine grievance and those that are haters, SC has become so polarising it's scary, ulitmately it's going to go 1 of 3 ways: 1 total fail, mass hysteria ensure's and of course law suits, 2 MVP gets released, and is truely an MVP, mass hysteria ensure's ad nausem, 3 SC is released, game works, is ok and Derek Smart apologies.
It's that simple, people are allowed to have thier own views, no matter how wrong you think they are, I'm personally totally on the fence, the only thing that is tipping me off the fence is the 5 year wait and the fact that this pre-alpha version seems to be missing some seriously key parts and that has me worried.
If people are allowed to have their own views, which is really generous of you, then it's my view that most detractors are either:
1. Ignorant of the things they talk about in relation to SC 2. Hateful 3. Both
As such, feel free to interchange the words hate and ignorance as you see fit.
The tiny, tiny minority of detractors who have genuine concerns based on all available information can safely be excused.
Thats abit high handed, but that's cool, it's your opinion, does that make you a fanboi then? And as an aside is there anything that does bother you about SC thats not related to people following the game?
I don't know what a fanboi means to you. If you're talking about a person who's well informed about the game and has elected to support its development even when fully aware of how everything can go wrong, then I'm certainly a fanboi.
As for things that bother me about Star Citizen? There are things that worry me, yes. I worry that the game is too ambitious - and I worry they can provide a game that will be able to perform reasonably, even on high-end hardware. I worry that the game will be released too soon and without being properly done, because they realise they can't finish it with available funds.
But I have faith in Chris Roberts and his team - and I'm a huge supporter of its ambition and bold vision.
One thing that might set me apart from the average detractor is that I'm absolutely and completely aware that I'm taking a chance - and that there are no guarentees when it comes to crowdfunding.
But I would much, much rather support a vision like this that's not certain to come to fruition than yet another publisher green-lit clone of whatever is perceived to be profitable by suits.
Can't argue with you on that, it's pretty much how I feel, I've loved pretty much every game that Chris Roberts had a hand in, only thing I didn't like was the WC film, and even that I do watch from time to time, because it's WC lol
“Nevertheless, the human brain, which survives by hoping from one second to another, will always endeavor to put off the moment of truth. Moist” ― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
I think you need to be careful lumping people who think they have a genuine grievance and those that are haters, SC has become so polarising it's scary, ulitmately it's going to go 1 of 3 ways: 1 total fail, mass hysteria ensure's and of course law suits, 2 MVP gets released, and is truely an MVP, mass hysteria ensure's ad nausem, 3 SC is released, game works, is ok and Derek Smart apologies.
It's that simple, people are allowed to have thier own views, no matter how wrong you think they are, I'm personally totally on the fence, the only thing that is tipping me off the fence is the 5 year wait and the fact that this pre-alpha version seems to be missing some seriously key parts and that has me worried.
If people are allowed to have their own views, which is really generous of you, then it's my view that most detractors are either:
1. Ignorant of the things they talk about in relation to SC 2. Hateful 3. Both
As such, feel free to interchange the words hate and ignorance as you see fit.
The tiny, tiny minority of detractors who have genuine concerns based on all available information can safely be excused.
Thats abit high handed, but that's cool, it's your opinion, does that make you a fanboi then? And as an aside is there anything that does bother you about SC thats not related to people following the game?
I don't know what a fanboi means to you. If you're talking about a person who's well informed about the game and has elected to support its development even when fully aware of how everything can go wrong, then I'm certainly a fanboi.
As for things that bother me about Star Citizen? There are things that worry me, yes. I worry that the game is too ambitious - and I worry they can provide a game that will be able to perform reasonably, even on high-end hardware. I worry that the game will be released too soon and without being properly done, because they realise they can't finish it with available funds.
But I have faith in Chris Roberts and his team - and I'm a huge supporter of its ambition and bold vision.
One thing that might set me apart from the average detractor is that I'm absolutely and completely aware that I'm taking a chance - and that there are no guarentees when it comes to crowdfunding.
But I would much, much rather support a vision like this that's not certain to come to fruition than yet another publisher green-lit clone of whatever is perceived to be profitable by suits.
Can't argue with you on that, it's pretty much how I feel, I've loved pretty much every game that Chris Roberts had a hand in, only thing I didn't like was the WC film, and even that I do watch from time to time, because it's WC lol
WC movie was complete crap as far as I'm concerned
Comments
Have fun
That's great that I'm sure many people don't care but for the people who do care why is the latest game patch locked behind a paywall when they already bought access/testing through a pledge?
The concept is to get the current version to a playable state in the most efficient manner possible, and you don't do that by exposing a version they know to be highly flawed to the masses. Even if people did want to contribute, a lot of the information would be counterproductive noise.
It's 100% normal procedure during game development, and that's why the first alpha tests of any game is available to a very small audience - typically friends and family only. It's not because they want to exclude people - but because they want to focus on fixing the most severe bugs before opening it up to the masses.
Since subscribers are inherently more supportive - it makes a ton of sense to go for them first, as they're highly motivated to provide useful feedback.
Now, other people might THINK they want to play a broken version early - but the vast majority actually don't - and even if they did, they're not entitled to a pre-pre-alpha.
This is just the usual CIG bungling Bill "Aww shucks" blunder. I think it's great that subscribers are getting something more for their money, they've been handing over $10 - $20 a month for a load of tosh so far.
However, I don't think CIG should award earlier PTU access to new subscribers, that's either badly thought out or simply a money grab.
A few days over other backers doesn't really matter but the sake of PR and customer goodwill it really could have been handled a lot better.
I have been subscriber for the last 3 YEARS. I am subscriber to support the community with extra information content via video blogs. Not because I want to test one Alpha version a week sooner than a few hundredthousand other backers.
Have fun
Your "paywall" claim is pure propaganda - and futile.
Have fun
Nice one.
Because I have often mentioned this before. I even have THIS ongoing thread about SC subscribers here in this subforum.
Nice try. Still no cigar.
Have fun
PS:
And its STILL a single account and a single ship, a Constellation. I pledged 250 $ back then.
I value the "Jump Point" subscriber magazine and its stories quite highly.
Therefore them who bought in are not filtered by any means, it is a pay $10, come in, come all.
In a result - They payed for the access why bother to write reports on top of that.
The people who are motivated to contribute have already been filtered they are called evocati, the waves of invitation are working at the moment the following way:
1st - Evocati > Selected NDA group of contributers
2nd - Subscribers > Pay $10, come in, come all
3rd - Selection of contributers
4th - Rest of the world
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
The cake is a lie.
I know. If you think I'm saying you're a subscriber because you want PTU access then you're mistaken.
What I am saying is that people who are subscribers and gain from this action will probably look at it in a different light because they are receiving a benefit. It reduces a person's chance to remain impartial. That's all.
To deny it fits more in the propaganda term.
For 3 days now a subscription is not longer just fluff items to pay for the community videos.
If EA, Acti/Blizz or Ubi would have pulled this trick (subscription to get alpha access before people who payed for alpha access) the fans would have burned them to the ground. If CIG is doing this the fans defend them to the blood, ignoring years of life experience.
To be fair, I like it when devs are trying something different/the impossible to please players.
I like it when a small company show the big ones that a good game does not require a publisher.
But CIG is a big milking machine about to destroy crowd funding with exploiting the gamers to buy in more than they want by selling dreams for a horrendous price tag.
nuff said, the cake is a lie.
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
The cake is a lie.
I'll try again, though.
If people are willing to pay 10$ each month for a game that's yet to be released, then they're OBVIOUSLY more likely to be invested in the game than those who're not willing - and in contributing to its development in a positive way.
No, that's not a guarentee - but it's a super simple and obvious way to maximise the chances of getting quality testers in larger numbers. Not to mention a signal to subscribers that their contribution is appreciated, beyond the fluff items.
I don't know how it could get any simpler than that, frankly.
Evocati testers are a select few that's been established as quality testers - that's why they get access before anyone else, including subscribers.
If they had some magical way of conjuring up thousands of Evocati testers - they'd have no need for anyone else before the patch was considered release ready.
It's not rocket science.
The attempt to make this "perk" into some kind of money-grabbing scheme is even more pathetic than the usual fabrications and usubstantiated paranoid bullshit.
I will agree that it is normal to have pre alpha go out to only a select few people but it has been available to anyone who has pledged for a long while now and then they suddenly change their mind? If CIG had this in place from the start it wouldn't matter as much and it could be justified but putting it in now and offering access to anyone who subs reeks of desperation for more cash flow.
The vast majority are entitled to a pre pre alpha though because that's what was promised them when they backed. The whole selling point was most open development ever and now it's changed to most open development ever only if you give us money above and beyond what you already paid us.
@Turrican187 thanks for calling it out as well.
No, it hasn't been available to everyone so far. They've always used restrictive invites - it just used to be a different system including both random invites and invites based on participatory metrics. Then they came up with the Evocati testers - and now they've elected to maximise quality by picking invested supporters, instead of doing it based on flawed metrics like they used to. Maybe in a month they'll try something else.
If you subscribe because you want to play a broken build a few days before other backers get their hands on a more stable version, then you're taking a chance - as it can change at any moment.
No, there hasn't been a single promise related to how and when backers get to test a version that's not ready for release to live. It's completely and utterly up to CIG.
Really, is this the best conspiracy theory the haters can come up with these days? Not getting access to a broken build a few days before it's released is now a big deal that's about grabbing money?
I mean, seriously.
It's that simple, people are allowed to have thier own views, no matter how wrong you think they are, I'm personally totally on the fence, the only thing that is tipping me off the fence is the 5 year wait and the fact that this pre-alpha version seems to be missing some seriously key parts and that has me worried.
― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
1. Ignorant of the things they talk about in relation to SC
2. Hateful
3. Both
As such, feel free to interchange the words hate and ignorance as you see fit.
The tiny, tiny minority of detractors who have genuine concerns based on all available information can safely be excused.
― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
"Cause this is a really useful comment in the grand scheme of the conversation"
Compared to some posters here my post was more to point and factual but yes, lets cut out all the useless hate and pointless posts....you start!
As for things that bother me about Star Citizen? There are things that worry me, yes. I worry that the game is too ambitious - and I worry they can provide a game that will be able to perform reasonably, even on high-end hardware. I worry that the game will be released too soon and without being properly done, because they realise they can't finish it with available funds.
But I have faith in Chris Roberts and his team - and I'm a huge supporter of its ambition and bold vision.
One thing that might set me apart from the average detractor is that I'm absolutely and completely aware that I'm taking a chance - and that there are no guarentees when it comes to crowdfunding.
But I would much, much rather support a vision like this that's not certain to come to fruition than yet another publisher green-lit clone of whatever is perceived to be profitable by suits.
― Terry Pratchett, Making Money