Actually I am still offering my help to CIG even today (with advice), and its not because i like them, because i don't. But because their current approach is causing harm to the genre, and crowd funding, and it is only becoming worst. Sure, they ban people who persist to make questions that they do not want to answer, because, in practice, those would lead to some people fired, like Sandi or Lesnick, are always will be banned. They comes with thos funny rules of "controversial topics" are against their law, and ban people. In the same thread that Ben opened, I saw he making threats of ban hammer because someone else asked about the directions of the game in terms of mouse or joystick. We can make a test if you want. We create a good question, and open a thread there and see what happens. Even Eric was banned from therr. They are far to be fair people there. I still remeber of white knights that made a witch hunt against me in their forums that get banned later by doing that with other people, that just like me, opened suggestions for improvements necessary.
If you are meaning about CIG hiring me or something, they couldn't afford a better paycheck to make me swallow to work with incompetent people like Lesnick and Sandi. If these two be fired, mayne I can give me a chance, if they show me that they are worthy.
I saw, for example, they building some very pretty (visually) offices, expensive chair and other office stuff very much high level, and expensive, which is odd. Game development companies only makes that when they want to impress angel investors or publishers.
But I suppose that you backers are all ok that they spend more with the company for profit, and future for profit ventures of Roberts, than with he spending the money with the game that you paid for.
That's probably why they so eagerly changed that clause in their TOS, adding more 6 months to show how they spend your dollars pledged. They don't want you see how bad the employees there are paid, how bad are their benefits, while they keep making Hollywwod Star offices, what simply does not make sense for what they are doing now... except... except if they are having to impress some publisher or angel investor?
Well... that could explain so much push on ship sales regardless the damage for their image with the public that only grows and grows. Maybe they are just making sure to keep some hidden investors happy and trying to impress new ones with nice offices? Who knows. There's nothing but their word and a fake counter, that can corroborate that all these dollars, mainly in the first year, really came from pledges, you know? Most easy of the things to do, would be keeping the investors hidden while pretending to got the money from backers, because in a way or another, they would motivate themselves and pledge more, with that idea of "freedom". Then, some things happening with AMD and Crytek... hmmmm.
Anyway, I wish them luck to impress whoever they are trying and spending so much money to polish offices.
And keep the good fight folks, fighting with all your forces to do not know how they spent their money. Remember to send an warning to them earlier next year, so they add mlre 6 months to that clause in their tos. It will be better, because the true probably would disappoint you all, and make you cry like a baby, jjst like Ben Lesnick did after saw an unfinished animation of the kind that we see all over youtube, but that "reminded him of the greatness to come".
And there are still people waiting for sq42 this year? What happened with the brain of these folks i wonder.
Keep fighting the good fight,though. It's quite obvious that the FTC has a strong case based on your legal expertise, supported by your strong, fact-based arguments.
I sent your post to a friend who works there. Just for his entertainment.
Stating that there is "precedence" in "murder" cases about intention and then "intention" is now considered in the Fair Act, was indeed... how can I say politely? Funny.
And saying that FTC wouldn't go to a case like this, when they are actually going to cases against crowd-funding of a couple thousands dollars recently (because its starting to raise the number of broken promises in these campaigns) was funny.
And the part of the "thank you CR to put YOUR 85 million dollars in the game" (pretty sure that not a single employee of that company have this weird mindset)
ROFL
You know nothing Jon Snow... not even the deal that you made with CIG you know. You know the bs that fanboys spread around to try to make people less entitled and criticize less their heroes... that's what you know. Nothing, except bs. And worst... Refuse to learn. That's what is even more ridiculous about these fanatics (no offense intended... fanatics is a mere group of fans... your passion blinds you... that happens with everyone in some point of our lives).
I'm sure this "friend" who works at the FTC will tell you, then, that this non-case will never see the light of day. I'm sorry, but saying you have a friend at the FTC and then having ABSOLUTELY no clue about the law in North America is ridiculous and, actually, quite hilarious. If you're friend WAS actually a lawyer, he'd have a clue as to how intent plays a MAJOR role in the law. If, for instance, there was an internal email which detailed a scheme to continue with ship sales, but also mentioned that they had no idea how they were every going to deliver the game, then THAT shows intent. As long as they are actively developing the game and have the intention of shipping the game, there is nothing that the FTC can do. IT IS AN ESTIMATED DATE. Sorry, just going to outright call you out and say that you have NO friend at the FTC, so just stop making stuff up. Sorry, if you actually spoke relatively comprehensible English and made some amount of sense with what you have said about SC in the forums, then I might be inclined to believe some of what you say, but you absolutely have no clue how things operate, how the law works, or how to even construct a sentence.
Delays and a failure to award are two different things, if it weren't most software companies would be held accountable to false advertising every-time they fail to meet on a previously stated pre-order date. Unexpected delays are common place in the software industry, so much so, that if I'm not mistaken, it's accounted for in law. It's been a while since I read up or had much interest in the subject.
For the record, I'm no SC backer or a backer of any other KS project, I'm not arguing from any position on this. I'm just pointing out your argument of legality, failure to meet.. etc in this debate hasn't been exactly concrete or without fault.
First of all there is nothing in law that states that software development is always delayed and therefor contracts can be broken willy-nilly. That is the most ridiculous thing i ever read.
Secondly the myth that software delays are normal is just that: A Myth. It was true in the 70's and 80's but since around 2000 when most good software development companies switched to SixSigma, AUD or DSDM delivery on time is really not a problem anymore. I have started with software development in 1985 and trust me, a lot has changed since.
The reason we see these delays in game development is because they can (or they are still stuck in the 70's). Gamers are a very special type of customers that are so conditioned to the lies these companies tell them they have lost all objectivity. Some go even as far as defending the big companies like EA, SONY or Valve despite the facts.
The only thing driving a release in game development is the finance department saying: "Enough money spent, we need to make a profit now".
---
Companies are actually accountable for pre-order and delivery dates. The Federal Trade Commission's mail order rule requires that the seller ship it to you in the time frame it specified in its offer to you. If it does not specify a time period, then the time period is set by the rule at 30 days. If the seller is unable to ship by the promised time, it must give the buyer a refund unless the buyer gives consent for a later shipping date. The aforementioned also applies to Kickstarter delivery dates and stretch goals.
Kickstarters own rules clearly state the obligation to deliver in a timely fashion and list precise steps that need to be taken if such obligations can not be fulfilled.
If a Kickstarter Project is being transparent and forward with information regarding the development and possible delays then i see no reason for the FTC to step in and any attempt at a legal recourse by backers might be thrown out in court, but if there is clear reason to suspect foul play and communication stops or is vague like in some well documented cases like GreedMonger and Jason Appleton for example then the FTC has every right to step in.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling." - Michael Bitton Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about." - SEANMCAD
Delays and a failure to award are two different things, if it weren't most software companies would be held accountable to false advertising every-time they fail to meet on a previously stated pre-order date. Unexpected delays are common place in the software industry, so much so, that if I'm not mistaken, it's accounted for in law. It's been a while since I read up or had much interest in the subject.
For the record, I'm no SC backer or a backer of any other KS project, I'm not arguing from any position on this. I'm just pointing out your argument of legality, failure to meet.. etc in this debate hasn't been exactly concrete or without fault.
First of all there is nothing in law that states that software development is always delayed and therefor contracts can be broken willy-nilly. That is the most ridiculous thing i ever read.
Secondly the myth that software delays are normal is just that: A Myth. It was true in the 70's and 80's but since around 2000 when most good software development companies switched to SixSigma, AUD or DSDM delivery on time is really not a problem anymore. I have started with software development in 1985 and trust me, a lot has changed since.
The reason we see these delays in game development is because they can (or they are still stuck in the 70's). Gamers are a very special type of customers that are so conditioned to the lies these companies tell them they have lost all objectivity. Some go even as far as defending the big companies like EA, SONY or Valve despite the facts.
The only thing driving a release in game development is the finance department saying: "Enough money spent, we need to make a profit now".
---
Companies are actually accountable for pre-order and delivery dates. The Federal Trade Commission's mail order rule requires that the seller ship it to you in the time frame it specified in its offer to you. If it does not specify a time period, then the time period is set by the rule at 30 days. If the seller is unable to ship by the promised time, it must give the buyer a refund unless the buyer gives consent for a later shipping date. The aforementioned also applies to Kickstarter delivery dates and stretch goals.
Kickstarters own rules clearly state the obligation to deliver in a timely fashion and list precise steps that need to be taken if such obligations can not be fulfilled.
If a Kickstarter Project is being transparent and forward with information regarding the development and possible delays then i see no reason for the FTC to step in and any attempt at a legal recourse by backers might be thrown out in court, but if there is clear reason to suspect foul play and communication stops or is vague like in some well documented cases like GreedMonger and Jason Appleton for example then the FTC has every right to step in.
Well put. If backers wanted to go after CIG, they would have no problem doing so. This is no drop in the bucket scenario. We are talking about $85 MILLION, and counting, in public funds. And no this is not a donation. It is payment in advance for services/products rendered. The evidence is overwhelming for a show of proof of allocation of funds. My gut feeling tells me that the majority of these backers/fanboys would be jumping out of windows if CIG was served with a discovery subpoena.
Now this will, in all likelihood, never happen. CIG will be allowed to buy time and they will ultimately release a game freeing them from any and all liability. Odds are, however, that this being the case the game that is ultimately released will amount to nothing more than vaporware to account for the upwards of, at last count, $85 MILLION in "donated" public funds. And that will be a shameful act that will set the MMO genre back for a good long while. A good question would be ... could the genre ever recover from such a fiasco, and if so, in what shape will it leave it?
Well put. If backers wanted to go after CIG, they would have no problem doing so. This is no drop in the bucket scenario. We are talking about $85 MILLION, and counting, in public funds. And no this is not a donation. It is payment in advance for services/products rendered. The evidence is overwhelming for a show of proof of allocation of funds. My gut feeling tells me that the majority of these backers/fanboys would be jumping out of windows if CIG was served with a discovery subpoena.
Now this will, in all likelihood, never happen. CIG will be allowed to buy time and they will ultimately release a game freeing them from any and all liability. Odds are, however, that this being the case the game that is ultimately released will amount to nothing more than vaporware to account for the upwards of, at last count, $85 MILLION in "donated" public funds. And that will be a shameful act that will set the MMO genre back for a good long while. A good question would be ... could the genre ever recover from such a fiasco, and if so, in what shape will it leave it?
I don't see any problems with CIG at this point. They seem to be at least making an effort to communicate with their customers. Even with the allegations of nepotism and mismanagement there is just not enough to take legal action. You will also never get them to open the accounting to the public, that would be a first in corporate history, hoping the public will ever find out where the $80+ million really went is wishful thinking, not in the USA that's for sure. You have to remember that CIG is a privately held company and as such has no obligation to disclose their financials.
The time however is running out for CIG. They have to deliver something substantial soon if they want to avoid not only the wrath of their own fans but also possible refunds and lawsuits. If by this time next year they have not delivered something resembling an Alpha game then they will be in real trouble.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling." - Michael Bitton Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about." - SEANMCAD
I don't understand why they are trying to deliver space combat and FPS at the same time. It makes sense in some way to make sure the engine is in place, but it also will delay EVERYTHING.
I suppose it's no coincidence that WoW (biggest MMO in the west) and Star Citizen (biggest Kickstarter game project) are relentlessly attacked on these forums.
Originally posted by FrodoFragins I don't understand why they are trying to deliver space combat and FPS at the same time. It makes sense in some way to make sure the engine is in place, but it also will delay EVERYTHING.
I don't think that's the intent at all. It's actually very modular. I'm assuming that there are little to no dependencies that would force them to release in tandem.
The plan is to be > Hangar (done) > Arena Commander (done) > Planetside (social) > FPS > Squadron 42 > Full game
It's actually a great idea. Not requiring the entire game to give something to users is a concept I'd like to see more of. So as of right now the Planetside stuff should be next up. Will we see it this year? IDK. However, I think they are executing to plan so far. Theoretically, they could gut FPS and still deliver their final game minus the FPS.
I suppose it's no coincidence that WoW (biggest MMO in the west) and Star Citizen (biggest Kickstarter game project) are relentlessly attacked on these forums.
The tallest trees catch the most wind...
They were a big Kickstarter, but remember that they only raised about $2 million through KS which puts them NEARLY outside the top 20 video game projects.
This is the other thing I've been saying. Should the FTC consider stepping in, and if the main complaint is the estimated delivery date, as eluded to by some here, then they could simply refund their entire KS campaign, since there is no deliver date listed on their own funding. Oh yeah, and if they wanted to be real a-holes they could simply increase their package prices so they can force those 25,000/35,000 KS backers under the $60 mark to spend more to get back in. That would be super dirty and I'm sure that those people would be burning down a government building somewhere
This is the other thing I've been saying. Should the FTC consider stepping in, and if the main complaint is the estimated delivery date, as eluded to by some here, then they could simply refund their entire KS campaign, since there is no deliver date listed on their own funding. Oh yeah, and if they wanted to be real a-holes they could simply increase their package prices so they can force those 25,000/35,000 KS backers under the $60 mark to spend more to get back in. That would be super dirty and I'm sure that those people would be burning down a government building somewhere
I am not sure why you referred as "Kickstarter" as the only possible target for FTC.
They would come across Cloud Imperium Games, not Kickstarter, if they came.
Which means all the crowd-funded money from CIG, until now (and further), both from Kickstarter and their own website.
The delivery date exists in all package offers, both from KS and from their website.
Besides, basically the same information that they put on KS, they put also in their website. Yes, they changed the original website wiping that, but:
Originally posted by CrazKanukI'm sure this "friend" who works at the FTC will tell you, then, that this non-case will never see the light of day. I'm sorry, but saying you have a friend at the FTC and then having ABSOLUTELY no clue about the law in North America is ridiculous and, actually, quite hilarious. If you're friend WAS actually a lawyer, he'd have a clue as to how intent plays a MAJOR role in the law. If, for instance, there was an internal email which detailed a scheme to continue with ship sales, but also mentioned that they had no idea how they were every going to deliver the game, then THAT shows intent. As long as they are actively developing the game and have the intention of shipping the game, there is nothing that the FTC can do. IT IS AN ESTIMATED DATE. Sorry, just going to outright call you out and say that you have NO friend at the FTC, so just stop making stuff up. Sorry, if you actually spoke relatively comprehensible English and made some amount of sense with what you have said about SC in the forums, then I might be inclined to believe some of what you say, but you absolutely have no clue how things operate, how the law works, or how to even construct a sentence.
Backers are supporting devs, not they are not ordering a game to make. Thus this delay discussion, like all the discussion with jcrg99, is moot.
Sure, you can sue anyone over anything but there is no substance to make a case here. The terms and relationship between developers and backers are clear here, regardless how one wants to twist it.
Backers are not investors, they are not customers. The closest they are, is donors but at the same time CIG is no charity. There is no support in law for this concept, for crowdfunding, and as it is there is no liability for collected money.
There is nothing FTC or government can do about it, unless they start telling people how they can spend their money which is very unlikely.
I'm sure this "friend" who works at the FTC will tell you, then, that this non-case will never see the light of day. I'm sorry, but saying you have a friend at the FTC and then having ABSOLUTELY no clue about the law in North America is ridiculous and, actually, quite hilarious. If you're friend WAS actually a lawyer, he'd have a clue as to how intent plays a MAJOR role in the law. If, for instance, there was an internal email which detailed a scheme to continue with ship sales, but also mentioned that they had no idea how they were every going to deliver the game, then THAT shows intent. As long as they are actively developing the game and have the intention of shipping the game, there is nothing that the FTC can do. IT IS AN ESTIMATED DATE. Sorry, just going to outright call you out and say that you have NO friend at the FTC, so just stop making stuff up. Sorry, if you actually spoke relatively comprehensible English and made some amount of sense with what you have said about SC in the forums, then I might be inclined to believe some of what you say, but you absolutely have no clue how things operate, how the law works, or how to even construct a sentence.
Backers are supporting devs, not they are not ordering a game to make. Thus this delay discussion, like all the discussion with jcrg99, is moot.
Sure, you can sue anyone over anything but there is no substance to make a case here. The terms and relationship between developers and backers are clear here, regardless how one wants to twist it.
Backers are not investors, they are not customers. The closest they are, is donors but at the same time CIG is no charity. There is no support in law for this concept, for crowdfunding, and as it is there is no liability for collected money.
There is nothing FTC or government can do about it, unless they start telling people how they can spend their money which is very unlikely.
So people who buy various packages for the game, ships etc, are donors now, not customers. Sorry, but no, really no, they are most definitely customers, as they are buying something, something that might not actually exist, but they are buying the 'promise' of something to be delivered in the future.
Whether or not they will ever get the things they have 'purchased' is moot at this point, as CIG have managed to miss release dates, and now one part of the game, one significant part of the game at that, is now on 'indefinite' hold, which could well be a linchpin, the removal of which, causes the entire facade to collapse.
This is no longer about stretch goals, this is about whether or not they can deliver at all, further stretch goals at this point only serve to obfuscate, deliberately or not.
CIG are very much reliant on their customers patience, and faith. At some point in the future they, the customers, are going to want more than just words to justify that patience and faith, and that is when things will probably get very interesting indeed, probably for all the wrong reasons.
I'm sure this "friend" who works at the FTC will tell you, then, that this non-case will never see the light of day. I'm sorry, but saying you have a friend at the FTC and then having ABSOLUTELY no clue about the law in North America is ridiculous and, actually, quite hilarious. If you're friend WAS actually a lawyer, he'd have a clue as to how intent plays a MAJOR role in the law. If, for instance, there was an internal email which detailed a scheme to continue with ship sales, but also mentioned that they had no idea how they were every going to deliver the game, then THAT shows intent. As long as they are actively developing the game and have the intention of shipping the game, there is nothing that the FTC can do. IT IS AN ESTIMATED DATE. Sorry, just going to outright call you out and say that you have NO friend at the FTC, so just stop making stuff up. Sorry, if you actually spoke relatively comprehensible English and made some amount of sense with what you have said about SC in the forums, then I might be inclined to believe some of what you say, but you absolutely have no clue how things operate, how the law works, or how to even construct a sentence.
Backers are supporting devs, not they are not ordering a game to make. Thus this delay discussion, like all the discussion with jcrg99, is moot.
Sure, you can sue anyone over anything but there is no substance to make a case here. The terms and relationship between developers and backers are clear here, regardless how one wants to twist it.
Backers are not investors, they are not customers. The closest they are, is donors but at the same time CIG is no charity. There is no support in law for this concept, for crowdfunding, and as it is there is no liability for collected money.
There is nothing FTC or government can do about it, unless they start telling people how they can spend their money which is very unlikely.
You need to read the articles better. The only thing that campaigner is obliged to provide are rewards, not to finish the project.
Further on, as you can see that spending collected money on personal and other project expenses does not make a case for fraud either. There is no accountability, it is all legal.
Originally posted by Phry So people who buy various packages for the game, ships etc, are donors now, not customers. Sorry, but no, really no, they are most definitely customers, as they are buying something, something that might not actually exist, but they are buying the 'promise' of something to be delivered in the future.
It does not matter whether you agree with it or not, that is the way it is and how crowdfunding works.
Kickstater projects do not sell games, they do not sell ships or w/e. It is a simple relationships:
"We make a game like this, will you support our endeavor? Back us and we will provide you some trinkets."
If you disagree with this concept, fine, do not send any money their way, if you do tho, you have to accept it with all that comes with it.
Once again, all the delay discussion is moot since you are not ordering a game - you are neither a customer nor investor, you are a "supporter".
Backers are supporting devs, not they are not ordering a game to make. Thus this delay discussion, like all the discussion with jcrg99, is moot.
Sure, you can sue anyone over anything but there is no substance to make a case here. The terms and relationship between developers and backers are clear here, regardless how one wants to twist it.
Backers are not investors, they are not customers. The closest they are, is donors but at the same time CIG is no charity. There is no support in law for this concept, for crowdfunding, and as it is there is no liability for collected money.
There is nothing FTC or government can do about it, unless they start telling people how they can spend their money which is very unlikely.
That could be an arguable case for the actual Kickstarter campaign but I can't see how that would apply post-kickstarter.
It seems bonlers to say the store on RSI's website is not an online shop or that every purchase via their shop does not make you a customer.
Originally posted by rpmcmurphyThat could be an arguable case for the actual Kickstarter campaign but I can't see how that would apply post-kickstarter.It seems bonlers to say the store on RSI's website is not an online shop or that every purchase via their shop does not make you a customer.
Yeah, I am talking about KS and crowdfunding in general.
Well, aren't all shop items available or easily available via already released or "soon" released modules? So technically you get what you paid for... But let's not dab into these specific "what if" waters, my point was purely clearing out what KS concept is that some people still do not understand or they try to twist it into something it isn't when they aren't happy about their money spent.
While I am not one of you guys who are waiting for this game I do think it's great that the developers take there time to adress concerns from the players.
This is were many many many developers have failed before.
May want to rethink that position on the no support for crowdfunding.
You need to read the articles better. The only thing that campaigner is obliged to provide are rewards, not to finish the project.
Further on, as you can see that spending collected money on personal and other project expenses does not make a case for fraud either. There is no accountability, it is all legal.
I did. The polygon article is talking about how they didn't deliver the promised rewards by the delivery date. SC hasn't either so a case could be made against it based on their kickstarter page.
First article the charges were for deceptive business practices, just because he spent the money on personal matters doesn't change anything. Seeing as how CIG has stated that certain things would never be available again in order to trigger a buying frenzy to get whatever it is before it is gone for good and then they bring it back later would be a deceptive business practice.
So there is some accountability. Hell, kickstarter even updated its TOS to say that backers are now entering into a contract with the kickstarter creator to create more accountability. The gears are turning, just really slowly.
Originally posted by RemyVorender Pay for games, not ideas, and things like this won't happen.
It's ironic that you post this AND have the signature that you have. Paying for games clearly hasn't worked out for you. Big publishers don't give a shit about gamers.
Originally posted by Kefo SC hasn't either so a case could be made against it based on their kickstarter page.
What rewards weren't supposedly delivered? Where did CIG promised any delivery date?
Kickstarter TOS is the same, they only changed wording a bit to make it more clear.
Nothing is turning, it is the same as always and very likely remain this way since there is no reason for change - if people want to throw money on someone/something, it's their own choice, their own decision and responsibility.
SC hasn't either so a case could be made against it based on their kickstarter page.
What rewards weren't supposedly delivered? Where did CIG promised any delivery date?
Kickstarter TOS is the same, they only changed wording a bit to make it more clear.
Nothing is turning, it is the same as always and very likely remain this way since there is no reason for change - if people want to throw money on someone/something, it's their own choice, their own decision and responsibility.
+1 I agree
also what I will NEVER understand are the "feature creep" allegations, the game they are making is exactly what I imagined (and heard them telling us in videos, FAQs, etc.) two years ago when I backed it. They revealed stretch goals as they got more funds from backers instead of taking the missing money they had lined up from investors, which would have been required, yeah, but they talked about that stuff even in the first pitch video. Persistent universe, different jobs, multicrew ships, customizable hangars, shops and stuff on planets, and a single player campaign like Wing Commander.
The only "surprising" things were for me: The switch to Physical based rendering and the extremely detailed damage model. Maybe those two qualify as feature creep but....... HELL YEAH
If that´s feature creep, fine, creep some more - I can wait. First I need to play Fallout 4 anyway, that will keep me busy for a while.
Comments
people who persist to make questions that they do not want to answer, because, in practice, those would lead to some people fired, like Sandi or Lesnick, are always will be banned. They comes with thos funny rules of "controversial topics" are against their law, and ban people.
In the same thread that Ben opened, I saw he making threats of ban hammer because someone else asked about the directions of the game in terms of mouse or joystick. We can make a test if you want. We create a good question, and open a thread there and see what happens. Even Eric was banned from therr. They are far to be fair people there. I still remeber of white knights that made a witch hunt against me in their forums that get banned later by doing that with other people, that just like me, opened suggestions for improvements necessary.
If you are meaning about CIG hiring me or something, they couldn't afford a better paycheck to make me swallow to work with incompetent people like Lesnick and Sandi. If these two be fired, mayne I can give me a chance, if they show me that they are worthy.
I saw, for example, they building some very pretty (visually) offices, expensive chair and other office stuff very much high level, and expensive, which is odd. Game development companies only makes that when they want to impress angel investors or publishers.
But I suppose that you backers are all ok that they spend more with the company for profit, and future for profit ventures of Roberts, than with he spending the money with the game that you paid for.
That's probably why they so eagerly changed that clause in their TOS, adding more 6 months to show how they spend your dollars pledged. They don't want you see how bad the employees there are paid, how bad are their benefits, while they keep making Hollywwod Star offices, what simply does not make sense for what they are doing now... except... except if they are having to impress some publisher or angel investor?
Well... that could explain so much push on ship sales regardless the damage for their image with the public that only grows and grows. Maybe they are just making sure to keep some hidden investors happy and trying to impress new ones with nice offices? Who knows. There's nothing but their word and a fake counter, that can corroborate that all these dollars, mainly in the first year, really came from pledges, you know? Most easy of the things to do, would be keeping the investors hidden while pretending to got the money from backers, because in a way or another, they would motivate themselves and pledge more, with that idea of "freedom".
Then, some things happening with AMD and Crytek... hmmmm.
Anyway, I wish them luck to impress whoever they are trying and spending so much money to polish offices.
And keep the good fight folks, fighting with all your forces to do not know how they spent their money. Remember to send an warning to them earlier next year, so they add mlre 6 months to that clause in their tos. It will be better, because the true probably would disappoint you all, and make you cry like a baby, jjst like Ben Lesnick did after saw an unfinished animation of the kind that we see all over youtube, but that "reminded him of the greatness to come".
And there are still people waiting for sq42 this year? What happened with the brain of these folks i wonder.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
I'm sure this "friend" who works at the FTC will tell you, then, that this non-case will never see the light of day. I'm sorry, but saying you have a friend at the FTC and then having ABSOLUTELY no clue about the law in North America is ridiculous and, actually, quite hilarious. If you're friend WAS actually a lawyer, he'd have a clue as to how intent plays a MAJOR role in the law. If, for instance, there was an internal email which detailed a scheme to continue with ship sales, but also mentioned that they had no idea how they were every going to deliver the game, then THAT shows intent. As long as they are actively developing the game and have the intention of shipping the game, there is nothing that the FTC can do. IT IS AN ESTIMATED DATE. Sorry, just going to outright call you out and say that you have NO friend at the FTC, so just stop making stuff up. Sorry, if you actually spoke relatively comprehensible English and made some amount of sense with what you have said about SC in the forums, then I might be inclined to believe some of what you say, but you absolutely have no clue how things operate, how the law works, or how to even construct a sentence.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
First of all there is nothing in law that states that software development is always delayed and therefor contracts can be broken willy-nilly. That is the most ridiculous thing i ever read.
Secondly the myth that software delays are normal is just that: A Myth. It was true in the 70's and 80's but since around 2000 when most good software development companies switched to SixSigma, AUD or DSDM delivery on time is really not a problem anymore. I have started with software development in 1985 and trust me, a lot has changed since.
The reason we see these delays in game development is because they can (or they are still stuck in the 70's). Gamers are a very special type of customers that are so conditioned to the lies these companies tell them they have lost all objectivity. Some go even as far as defending the big companies like EA, SONY or Valve despite the facts.
The only thing driving a release in game development is the finance department saying: "Enough money spent, we need to make a profit now".
---
Companies are actually accountable for pre-order and delivery dates. The Federal Trade Commission's mail order rule requires that the seller ship it to you in the time frame it specified in its offer to you. If it does not specify a time period, then the time period is set by the rule at 30 days. If the seller is unable to ship by the promised time, it must give the buyer a refund unless the buyer gives consent for a later shipping date. The aforementioned also applies to Kickstarter delivery dates and stretch goals.
Kickstarters own rules clearly state the obligation to deliver in a timely fashion and list precise steps that need to be taken if such obligations can not be fulfilled.
If a Kickstarter Project is being transparent and forward with information regarding the development and possible delays then i see no reason for the FTC to step in and any attempt at a legal recourse by backers might be thrown out in court, but if there is clear reason to suspect foul play and communication stops or is vague like in some well documented cases like GreedMonger and Jason Appleton for example then the FTC has every right to step in.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling."
- Michael Bitton
Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about."
- SEANMCAD
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Well put. If backers wanted to go after CIG, they would have no problem doing so. This is no drop in the bucket scenario. We are talking about $85 MILLION, and counting, in public funds. And no this is not a donation. It is payment in advance for services/products rendered. The evidence is overwhelming for a show of proof of allocation of funds. My gut feeling tells me that the majority of these backers/fanboys would be jumping out of windows if CIG was served with a discovery subpoena.
Now this will, in all likelihood, never happen. CIG will be allowed to buy time and they will ultimately release a game freeing them from any and all liability. Odds are, however, that this being the case the game that is ultimately released will amount to nothing more than vaporware to account for the upwards of, at last count, $85 MILLION in "donated" public funds. And that will be a shameful act that will set the MMO genre back for a good long while. A good question would be ... could the genre ever recover from such a fiasco, and if so, in what shape will it leave it?
I don't see any problems with CIG at this point. They seem to be at least making an effort to communicate with their customers. Even with the allegations of nepotism and mismanagement there is just not enough to take legal action. You will also never get them to open the accounting to the public, that would be a first in corporate history, hoping the public will ever find out where the $80+ million really went is wishful thinking, not in the USA that's for sure. You have to remember that CIG is a privately held company and as such has no obligation to disclose their financials.
The time however is running out for CIG. They have to deliver something substantial soon if they want to avoid not only the wrath of their own fans but also possible refunds and lawsuits. If by this time next year they have not delivered something resembling an Alpha game then they will be in real trouble.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling."
- Michael Bitton
Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about."
- SEANMCAD
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
I suppose it's no coincidence that WoW (biggest MMO in the west) and Star Citizen (biggest Kickstarter game project) are relentlessly attacked on these forums.
The tallest trees catch the most wind...
I don't think that's the intent at all. It's actually very modular. I'm assuming that there are little to no dependencies that would force them to release in tandem.
The plan is to be > Hangar (done) > Arena Commander (done) > Planetside (social) > FPS > Squadron 42 > Full game
It's actually a great idea. Not requiring the entire game to give something to users is a concept I'd like to see more of. So as of right now the Planetside stuff should be next up. Will we see it this year? IDK. However, I think they are executing to plan so far. Theoretically, they could gut FPS and still deliver their final game minus the FPS.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
They were a big Kickstarter, but remember that they only raised about $2 million through KS which puts them NEARLY outside the top 20 video game projects.
This is the other thing I've been saying. Should the FTC consider stepping in, and if the main complaint is the estimated delivery date, as eluded to by some here, then they could simply refund their entire KS campaign, since there is no deliver date listed on their own funding. Oh yeah, and if they wanted to be real a-holes they could simply increase their package prices so they can force those 25,000/35,000 KS backers under the $60 mark to spend more to get back in. That would be super dirty and I'm sure that those people would be burning down a government building somewhere
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
I am not sure why you referred as "Kickstarter" as the only possible target for FTC.
They would come across Cloud Imperium Games, not Kickstarter, if they came.
Which means all the crowd-funded money from CIG, until now (and further), both from Kickstarter and their own website.
The delivery date exists in all package offers, both from KS and from their website.
Besides, basically the same information that they put on KS, they put also in their website. Yes, they changed the original website wiping that, but:
http://web.archive.org/web/20121018170629/http://www.robertsspaceindustries.com/star-citizen/
Also, all the packages from there were migrated to the CIG website later.
Backers are supporting devs, not they are not ordering a game to make. Thus this delay discussion, like all the discussion with jcrg99, is moot.
Sure, you can sue anyone over anything but there is no substance to make a case here. The terms and relationship between developers and backers are clear here, regardless how one wants to twist it.
Backers are not investors, they are not customers. The closest they are, is donors but at the same time CIG is no charity. There is no support in law for this concept, for crowdfunding, and as it is there is no liability for collected money.
There is nothing FTC or government can do about it, unless they start telling people how they can spend their money which is very unlikely.
So people who buy various packages for the game, ships etc, are donors now, not customers. Sorry, but no, really no, they are most definitely customers, as they are buying something, something that might not actually exist, but they are buying the 'promise' of something to be delivered in the future.
Whether or not they will ever get the things they have 'purchased' is moot at this point, as CIG have managed to miss release dates, and now one part of the game, one significant part of the game at that, is now on 'indefinite' hold, which could well be a linchpin, the removal of which, causes the entire facade to collapse.
This is no longer about stretch goals, this is about whether or not they can deliver at all, further stretch goals at this point only serve to obfuscate, deliberately or not.
CIG are very much reliant on their customers patience, and faith. At some point in the future they, the customers, are going to want more than just words to justify that patience and faith, and that is when things will probably get very interesting indeed, probably for all the wrong reasons.
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2015/06/crowdfunding-project-creator-settles-ftc-charges-deception
http://www.polygon.com/2014/5/2/5675834/washington-sues-card-game-developer-for-failing-to-deliver-on
May want to rethink that position on the no support for crowdfunding.
You need to read the articles better. The only thing that campaigner is obliged to provide are rewards, not to finish the project.
Further on, as you can see that spending collected money on personal and other project expenses does not make a case for fraud either. There is no accountability, it is all legal.
It does not matter whether you agree with it or not, that is the way it is and how crowdfunding works.
Kickstater projects do not sell games, they do not sell ships or w/e. It is a simple relationships:
"We make a game like this, will you support our endeavor? Back us and we will provide you some trinkets."
If you disagree with this concept, fine, do not send any money their way, if you do tho, you have to accept it with all that comes with it.
Once again, all the delay discussion is moot since you are not ordering a game - you are neither a customer nor investor, you are a "supporter".
That could be an arguable case for the actual Kickstarter campaign but I can't see how that would apply post-kickstarter.
It seems bonlers to say the store on RSI's website is not an online shop or that every purchase via their shop does not make you a customer.
Yeah, I am talking about KS and crowdfunding in general.
Well, aren't all shop items available or easily available via already released or "soon" released modules? So technically you get what you paid for... But let's not dab into these specific "what if" waters, my point was purely clearing out what KS concept is that some people still do not understand or they try to twist it into something it isn't when they aren't happy about their money spent.
While I am not one of you guys who are waiting for this game I do think it's great that the developers take there time to adress concerns from the players.
This is were many many many developers have failed before.
I did. The polygon article is talking about how they didn't deliver the promised rewards by the delivery date. SC hasn't either so a case could be made against it based on their kickstarter page.
First article the charges were for deceptive business practices, just because he spent the money on personal matters doesn't change anything. Seeing as how CIG has stated that certain things would never be available again in order to trigger a buying frenzy to get whatever it is before it is gone for good and then they bring it back later would be a deceptive business practice.
So there is some accountability. Hell, kickstarter even updated its TOS to say that backers are now entering into a contract with the kickstarter creator to create more accountability. The gears are turning, just really slowly.
It's ironic that you post this AND have the signature that you have. Paying for games clearly hasn't worked out for you. Big publishers don't give a shit about gamers.
What rewards weren't supposedly delivered? Where did CIG promised any delivery date?
Kickstarter TOS is the same, they only changed wording a bit to make it more clear.
Nothing is turning, it is the same as always and very likely remain this way since there is no reason for change - if people want to throw money on someone/something, it's their own choice, their own decision and responsibility.
+1 I agree
also what I will NEVER understand are the "feature creep" allegations, the game they are making is exactly what I imagined (and heard them telling us in videos, FAQs, etc.) two years ago when I backed it. They revealed stretch goals as they got more funds from backers instead of taking the missing money they had lined up from investors, which would have been required, yeah, but they talked about that stuff even in the first pitch video. Persistent universe, different jobs, multicrew ships, customizable hangars, shops and stuff on planets, and a single player campaign like Wing Commander.
The only "surprising" things were for me: The switch to Physical based rendering and the extremely detailed damage model. Maybe those two qualify as feature creep but....... HELL YEAH
If that´s feature creep, fine, creep some more - I can wait. First I need to play Fallout 4 anyway, that will keep me busy for a while.