For me personally it comes down to a matter of trust. Whom do i trust more ? Chris Roberts, creator of functioning, working games (milestones in computer game history) that gave me some of my most memorable moments in my personal gaming history ? Or Derek Smart, creator of some of the worst pieces of buggy untested rubbish i ever bought out of the second hand bin, self-proclaimed internet troublemaker desperately trying (by flaming CIG) to get SOME publicity for himself (and his old games and his failing steam early access MMO that is currently burning up in a downward spiral).
The answer: I trust Chris Roberts more than i trust Derek Smart. I gave CIG my money (1 ship, Constellation) and trust them to come up with a new milestone in the space sim genre - and I personally do not care how much time they need, as I rather have a well tested, well polished, content heavy game like Witcher 3 than a buggy rush job delivered on time like Batman (PC).
Have fun
It's not a question of past games though.
It's a question of this game.
It's a question of: Can Star Citizen be delivered? When? and in what state with what features?
And in your case - when a game is delivered - will you be able to play with the content you have already paid for?
Hate Derek Smart and like Chris Roberts all you like - none of that addresses the questions.
As for "trust" - well - good luck - I hope it pays off for you. If it does - well done. If it doesn't - please learn from it.
So in other words, all who have pledged to Star Citizen, but now for whatever reason want their money back... they simply have to copy Derek Smart's article to get back their pledge? Strange decision.
Crowd funding, give me your money, if you want information there is the door.
Originally posted by sketocafe Are they on schedule as per the kickstarter timeline? If no, question away. If yes, have some patience.
They are NOT on schedule per the Kickstarter timeline. They HAVE informed the backers (often and in detail) that the timeline has changed due to the immense success of the crowdfunding campaign and the change in scope (many more stretch goals added). Of course this is known to our most vocal CIG critics here, but they conveniently fail to mention this and continue to quote ad infinitum the old Kickstarter timeline from Nov 2012 (which was already outdated in Dec 2012).
Furthermore - even in the original Kickstarter documentation and the Terms of Service - CIG has made it VERY clear that the timeline is subject to change and is not cut in stone. With such an ambitious project, problems will and have happen(ed) and that may cause delays.
The overwhelming majority of backers on the SC forums have told CIG since Nov 2012: "Take the time you need to make this a new milestone in space sim history. We do NOT want a rush job. We are not from a big publisher that wants a game out for the next quarter report. Make it the best you can do. We understand that such a revised, enlarged project will take the 4-5 years typical for a AAA game." And that is what CIG is currently doing (and they publish VERY detailed reports about it).
The overwhelming majority of backers on the SC forums have told CIG since Nov 2012: "Take the time you need to make this a new milestone in space sim history. We do NOT want a rush job. We are not from a big publisher that wants a game out for the next quarter report. Make it the best you can do. We understand that such a revised, enlarged project will take the 4-5 years typical for a AAA game." And that is what CIG is currently doing (and they publish VERY detailed reports about it).
...
The problem is that 4-5 years in computer games is an eternity.
Not just in terms of player patience - but in terms of technology.
My first thought was: "Who the hell is Derek Smart, and why in the blazes would I care?"
Anyway. As a backer, I pretty much knew what I was getting into. There's always the chance, with crowdfunding, that you'll fund something that will end up being incomplete, or different than originally projected. I can accept that. Of course, I'm not one who's spent hundreds, or thousands, of dollars on it. :P
My first thought was: "Who the hell is Derek Smart, and why in the blazes would I care?"
Anyway. As a backer, I pretty much knew what I was getting into. There's always the chance, with crowdfunding, that you'll fund something that will end up being incomplete, or different than originally projected. I can accept that. Of course, I'm not one who's spent hundreds, or thousands, of dollars on it. :P
Derek Smart is an urban legend. The story goes that there was this developer who was forced to ship an unfinished game by their publisher. The backlash on forums about the quality of the game was so intense the developer was sucked into the internet itself, forced to appear in threads about the game and defend himself. No matter what dark and forgotten corner of the internet you were in, if you typed his name three times on a keyboard then he would be summoned to insult and argue with you.
Originally posted by Erillion ... The overwhelming majority of backers on the SC forums have told CIG since Nov 2012: "Take the time you need to make this a new milestone in space sim history. We do NOT want a rush job. We are not from a big publisher that wants a game out for the next quarter report. Make it the best you can do. We understand that such a revised, enlarged project will take the 4-5 years typical for a AAA game." And that is what CIG is currently doing (and they publish VERY detailed reports about it)....
The problem is that 4-5 years in computer games is an eternity.
Not just in terms of player patience - but in terms of technology.
The length of time is miner compared to the other questions being asked. If your money is paying other people's wages then you should have a way of seeing what you are paying these people. Surly as a backer you should be able to have a breakdown of where funds are going even if it's every tax year. This is not a company who are spending there own money 99% is from donations. Of course as a non backer this is just my opinion.
The overwhelming majority of backers on the SC forums have told CIG since Nov 2012: "Take the time you need to make this a new milestone in space sim history. We do NOT want a rush job. We are not from a big publisher that wants a game out for the next quarter report. Make it the best you can do. We understand that such a revised, enlarged project will take the 4-5 years typical for a AAA game." And that is what CIG is currently doing (and they publish VERY detailed reports about it).
...
The problem is that 4-5 years in computer games is an eternity.
Not just in terms of player patience - but in terms of technology.
The length of time is miner compared to the other questions being asked. If your money is paying other people's wages then you should have a way of seeing what you are paying these people. Surly as a backer you should be able to have a breakdown of where funds are going even if it's every tax year. This is not a company who are spending there own money 99% is from donations. Of course as a non backer this is just my opinion.
Wish this would be the case with people and their governments.
I also wish charity's like Unicef etc. etc. were held to the same scrutiny.
Originally posted by Gazwkd Oh deary me. Poor old Derek smart has made it his job to try and destroy anything related to Chris Roberts. He has tried to get hi'articles' out everywhere and has met little success. I expected better of this site than to publicise an individual who simply rants and raves whilst promoting his own buggy, badly designed, badly conceived games that no one really cares about. He has a massive case of jealousy, upon looking at his posting history he obviously needs professional help. That this site has fallen for the ravings and rantings of this individual does the sites credibility no favours.
Whatever one thinks of Derek, he raises some valid points in his article. And quite simply, there's a story developing here, in one way or another, which it's our duty to report.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Just because someone makes a couple of good points doesn't mean he is right or should be listned to or followed...
I haven't backed StarCitizen, I'll buy it when I see a decent working copy and has enough features to get me interested. But I think that many people bought stuff and didn't fully understand what was going on. The challenges and risks of crowdfunding. The point is that if people didn't fund it and took a risk it might never come out, now it still might not come out, but that was the risk you should have known of when you backed. Giving people refunds at this time is just not fair to the rest of the backers, removing 30% of the funding at this time would create a far larger risk of the game never comming out in working order, screwing over the rest of the 70%. If you think that a release date is a hard target in software development, you have no clue...
As a backer and a owner of 3 ships..... one of which I can only look at I feel like I have made a poor investment. I have felt this way for sometime and way before Mr Smart. At this time I feel that SC will not be completed and that my few 100$ have been lost. I think the main point here is what will this do to crowdfunding?
Another point is what should RSI do? I don't think that this was a scam but I do feel that the tech just is not there (at this time) to do the things that they want too. Like the crewed ship... how do they make them work? The answer is they don't know! This is just one problem they have and I think that RSI should just come clean and tell the truth! If and at this point I think it's a big IF the game ever completed it will not be as promised and to save crowdfunding RSI just needs to come clean.
Originally posted by SavageHorizon The length of time is miner compared to the other questions being asked. If your money is paying other people's wages then you should have a way of seeing what you are paying these people. Surly as a backer you should be able to have a breakdown of where funds are going even if it's every tax year. This is not a company who are spending there own money 99% is from donations. Of course as a non backer this is just my opinion.
Now, being Austrian i am not THAT familiar with US corporate law, but as I understand it they do not have to make any numbers available to the public, only to the IRC. Which is different compared to Frontier Games in the UK which developed Elite:Dangerous (they are listed on the London stock exchange, so they have to publish a very detailed 60 page leaflet for the public).
Taking Austrian companies or Austrian persons of public interest as example - NO ONE voluntarily publishes any data on the topic of money or salaries unless the law specifically forces him/her to do that. It is my understanding that this is somewhat different in the US, especially for politicians (they have to publish in great detail their financial situation). Still - i do not expect CIG to publish more information than is required by the law.
Personally (being an early backer) i do NOT require a detailed break-down of CIG's money spending activities. I am more interested in the progress of the game and the studio(s) working on Star Citizen. And THIS information i get in great detail every month. I am sufficiently familiar with the fees of personnel and the price tag of keeping infrastructure running - its not hard to calculate my own estimate of CIG's expenditure. And based on that i am quite confident that they have more than enough to finish the game.
Originally posted by SavageHorizon The length of time is miner compared to the other questions being asked. If your money is paying other people's wages then you should have a way of seeing what you are paying these people. Surly as a backer you should be able to have a breakdown of where funds are going even if it's every tax year. This is not a company who are spending there own money 99% is from donations. Of course as a non backer this is just my opinion.
Now, being Austrian i am not THAT familiar with US corporate law, but as I understand it they do not have to make any numbers available to the public, only to the IRC. Which is different compared to Frontier Games in the UK which developed Elite:Dangerous (they are listed on the London stock exchange, so they have to publish a very detailed 60 page leaflet for the public).
Taking Austrian companies or Austrian persons of public interest as example - NO ONE voluntarily publishes any data on the topic of money or salaries unless the law specifically forces him/her to do that. It is my understanding that this is somewhat different in the US, especially for politicians (they have to publish in great detail their financial situation). Still - i do not expect CIG to publish more information than is required by the law.
Personally (being an early backer) i do NOT require a detailed break-down of CIG's money spending activities. I am more interested in the progress of the game and the studio(s) working on Star Citizen. And THIS information i get in great detail every month. I am sufficiently familiar with the fees of personnel and the price tag of keeping infrastructure running - its not hard to calculate my own estimate of CIG's expenditure. And based on that i am quite confident that they have more than enough to finish the game.
Have fun
This is not a question of whether or not they have a legal obligation to disclose. It is simply a matter of voluntarily providing disclosure as a good faith gesture to their backers for the unrelenting loyalty and support they have given CIG for the past four years. They have been given upwards of $85 MILLION Dollars and counting! That is no drop in the bucket and it's backers not only have a right, but they deserve to be kept abreast of how those millions are being allocated. I find it ludicrous that any reasonable individual would have anything against CIG being held accountable for the tens of millions of dollars it has received. Don't you want to know how this money is being allocated? If you don't you are a fool!
You are not helping yourself or CIG by defending them in this matter. By not holding CIG regularly accountable for the allocation of funds received you are increasing the potential that what you will receive in the end will be nothing but vaporware and you will have no recourse at that time but to accept it because you failed to engage in due diligence while development was in progress. It is so plainly obvious to anyone with a modicum of sense that what these people are doing is extending this development process for as long as possible because it has become a gold mine for them. Mark my words, once the money begins to dry up they will then rush out a game for a fraction of the funds contributed and walk away with tens of millions of pocketed contributor money. You are all fools if you allow this to happen unchecked and unsupervised. And you will have no one to blame but yourselves.
It really amazes me that people just blindly give these kickstarter companies money.......I guess gamers are so starved for anything resembling a game anymore.
Originally posted by Theocritus It really amazes me that people just blindly give these kickstarter companies money.......I guess gamers are so starved for anything resembling a game anymore.
Why do you believe that people gave that money blindly in the case of Star Citizen ?
a) An experienced team with some world famous games in the genre of interest under their belt.
b) A clear concept for an ambitious game on the very edge of what is possible
c) Strong support from the developer of the game engine to be used
d) An open development concept with regular VERY detailed updates to the community
e) An eye-catching trailer to show to the public
f) A new approach of doing things, specifically avoiding publishers and their demands ("has to be finished by quartely report XX no matter what state the game is in ..." / "has to work on all consoles or else ..." / "has to have feature XXX in it because Grand Assassins Battlefield of Duty has it too and it brings us an extra million teenage players...")
Not many Kickstarter game projects even remotely approach these criteria and those that do (e.g. those from inXile) usually work extremely well (e.g. Wasteland 2).
So ... maybe people have chosen this project not as blindly as you think.
Ok, so ... if one does not follow your way of thinking and has a different opinion one is a fool.
This makes any further discussion superfluous.
Have fun
That's not at all the case and that is plain to see by anyone reading my post . Unlike yourself, I am imploring people to be cautious for their own well being. Stop being disingenuous.
Originally posted by Theocritus It really amazes me that people just blindly give these kickstarter companies money.......I guess gamers are so starved for anything resembling a game anymore.
Why do you believe that people gave that money blindly in the case of Star Citizen ?
a) An experienced team with some world famous games in the genre of interest under their belt.
b) A clear concept for an ambitious game on the very edge of what is possible
c) Strong support from the developer of the game engine to be used
d) An open development concept with regular VERY detailed updates to the community
e) An eye-catching trailer to show to the public
f) A new approach of doing things, specifically avoiding publishers and their demands ("has to be finished by quartely report XX no matter what state the game is in ..." / "has to work on all consoles or else ..." / "has to have feature XXX in it because Grand Assassins Battlefield of Duty has it too and it brings us an extra million teenage players...")
Not many Kickstarter game projects even remotely approach these criteria and those that do (e.g. those from inXile) usually work extremely well (e.g. Wasteland 2).
So ... maybe people have chosen this project not as blindly as you think.
Have fun
So what would be wrong with adding ...
G) And most importantly, they are accountable and make great effort to show transparency through every phase of the development process. They make it a priority to keep their backers, who have contributed tens of millions of their own hard earned money, abreast of their contributions and how their money is being allocated on a regular basis.
(G) above should be the most important functions that they perform. Yet you and your kind, for whatever reason, choose to give them a pass in that very important regard. With people like you, its no wonder they've managed to gather $85 million dollars with no expectation of accountability.
Managing and being accountable to people's money is not a joke.
No matter what you say or think about Derek, he has some very legitimate points.
yeah, no. He pretty much copy/pasted Manzes (the troll who attacks anything Star Citizen, all the time), added a healthy dose of self aggrandizing, and threw in some advertising for his shitty games.
Right. well that's a hard opinion to weigh! A "chronic troll" vs. 1 post count pr damage mitigation
I am sufficiently familiar with the fees of personnel and the price tag of keeping infrastructure running - its not hard to calculate my own estimate of CIG's expenditure. And based on that i am quite confident that they have more than enough to finish the game.
You must've forgotten to carry a 1 somewhere, the result of your math is completely wrong.
Originally posted by Theocritus It really amazes me that people just blindly give these kickstarter companies money.......I guess gamers are so starved for anything resembling a game anymore.
Why do you believe that people gave that money blindly in the case of Star Citizen ?
a) An experienced team with some world famous games in the genre of interest under their belt.
Experienced at making games does not mean experienced at running companies. I sure hope they know what they are doing.
UPDATE: This was just posted on the Star Citizen forums by Ben Lesnick regarding the refund of Derek Smart's investment in Star Citizen:
From here Smart analyzes what he believes is RSI's attempt to obfuscate significant happenings at the company and bury important news in other, less significant, announcements. Most notably, he mentions the departure of Alex Mayberry and how the news about this significant event was buried in a "news release" that partner CIG had moved into a new office in Germany -- an office that he contends has been open since August of 2014. This, Smart implies, is evidence that RSI is being less than up front with its patrons.
After hours and days of research, Smart writes that he has come up with 33 important points for fans to consider, then posts what he believes are the most significant ten:
The project slipped it’s original Nov 2014 ship date as promised in the Oct 2012 Kickstarter pledge
Almost four (1 year prior to KS, 2 years pledged timeline, 8 months delayed) years, they have not delivered a game; of any scope as originally pitched in 2012
Key people (we have a running list) have been leaving, some for patently dubious reasons
Key modules are either buggy, to the point of unplayable for the most part (Arena Commander), or put on indefinite hold (Star Marine fps module)
Technological hurdles, and the limitations of the CryEngine3 they chose, have only now started coming to light as recently as June’s dev update
Chris, as seen/heard in the video above, had already stated, and I quote “the game on the low side was going to be about 14 million dollars to make and the high side, which is where we are at now, is going to be about 20 million” We’re $85m in. No game.
They continued to increase the scope of the project, not only as a way to continue raising money through stretch goals, but also thereby putting the project at risk of never being completed as originally visioned; as doing so, makes it a very expensive proposition
They continue to crowd-fund and raise money, selling virtual items for a game that doesn’t exist, and based on a TOS that all but guarantees that people who pledge, will have little to no recourse to get their money back, unless they sued and got the TOS tossed (as we suspect that it will, if the FTC doesn’t get there first) by a judge
Investigations in the past weeks, and discussions with various people, have led to some very alarming, and disturbing things that, I’m not even going to bother making public – yet.
Further, he notes:
The hangar module is not the game they promised. That just ended up being a conduit for viewing virtual ships sold, for a game that doesn’t exist
The Arena Commander, largely a broken mess, is not the game they promised. That just ended up being a test module, and conduit for testing virtual ships sold, for a game that doesn’t exist
The Star Marine FPS module has been put on indefinite hold. Plus, sources tell me what they have now is just two test levels. Which means it will end up being another shoddy mess like Arena Commander upon release (if ever).
There is no Squadron 42 game
There is no Star Citizen game
As backers of this project, here is our list of demands:
disclose the full detailed (private jet travel? we want to see it) P&L accounting (money in off-shore bank accounts? we want to know about them) for every crowd-funded dime that has been raised and spent on this project. Allow an independent forensics accountant, hired by backers, to come and do an audit. This is standard practice in developer-publisher relationships. So you know how that works.
disclose the true state of the project in terms of what is expected to be delivered, and when. Allow an independent Executive Producer, hired by backers, to come and do a project review in order to get an accurate picture of the game state, so we know when it is likely to see the light of day – if ever
disclose the true timeline for the project’s completion. As per the above.
setup a page offering refunds to all those who REQUEST it. The TOS is going to be the first thing attacked in any lawsuit. It is not likely to survive a legal challenge. Plus, the FTC will trump all that crap anyway, so there is that.
admit, in no uncertain terms, and apologize that the scope of the project has changed since the original $2.1m kickstarter crowd-funding campaign
halt all further crowd-funding activities until a sizable part of the game – as originally pitched in 2012 – has been delivered to backers who have paid for it. In other words, STOP selling virtual items and taking money for vaporware
address the nepotism issues associated with the hiring of unqualified family members to head key parts of this crowd-funded project. In this regard, explain the benefits of a) promoting your brother to an Executive Producer position, as opposed to hiring someone (like the departed Alex Mayberry) who has the experience to match the job. Also what new benefits (pay raise, shares etc) he now has access to, for going into that position b) hiring someone, allegedly your wife, to a position that she is seemingly not qualified to hold. And why a more experienced executive wasn’t put in this position. Especially since that dept has several men, and women, with more experience and qualifications to do the job. Instead, they get to answer to her; and naturally, she gets paid more, as per the position
Smart believes that Roberts must issue a statement regarding his and other backers' concerns about Star Citizen. Should he choose not to, Smart says, Roberts should be removed from the company or that backers en masse should demand his resignation.
Don't know him...
His posts shows he has no knowledge of the industry or was rage quitting.
All those points are quite null.
1- Budget increase = scope increase, even from the get go it was ambitious they also had to rewrite much of the cryengine tools to allow them to make the game they were aiming to make, some implementations had to be scraped or change because they were too time consuming(ex. Damage stage). When I backed I knew 2014 was too optimistic end of 2016 we will have the SQ 42 and FPS, I really doubt the MMO will be ready by the end of 2016.
This is a triple A game so at least expect the amount of time GTA 5 took to develop.
2 - We have hangar we have space game... and FPS will be out this year.
3 - The core of devs especially the people that make the game eg Programmers are still there.. If lead and the core of programmers remain there, it won't have a noticeable impact on the game.
4 - Such a small sample and it's not the right way to measure the productivity of the studio, I have seen many bugs that have been fixed in a ~42h patch, this shows a well oiled machine working.
5 - The concept of modules is very rarely used in the industry, having to produce a full game that has so many relations and hierarchies and then have to unplug them and replug them to a striped game, is very time consuming.
6 - They are working together with Crytek and core team members that created Cryengine at the end of the day it's an engine everything can be rewritten and added.
7, 8 - Other than choosing to individual model each piece of armor in FPS.. there hasn't been an increase in scope for the Star Citizen Game only post official launch will the scope increase.
9 - Well they are pretty clear, when they say every ship can be gain ingame and you are only getting before anyone else you won't have to grind has bad. THERE ARE RICH PEOPLE IN THE WORLD! It's their money they burn has they want to burn, at least they money will mean a better game for everyone.
10 - Nothing out of the ordinary there are ups and down on the developing of games.
1.1, 2.2 = 5
1.3 - For what I understood FPS will be release this year. Yes two levels is pretty normal when you are making a game from the ground up with a custom made engine or heavily modified. I think when I started playing H&G there were 2 and warthunder probably had 5.. How about the new Star Wars battlefront, how many maps have you seen?
They are still making the foundations of the FPS engine making new maps is unwise and most of team is probably focus on the FPS engine than maps.
1.4, 1.5 - Expected
I found offensive when he refers that the backers required a list of demands, I pretty sure the majority would not even want that list of demands.
I would mind a clear budget and an open expenses and revenues but I feel this would do more harm than good at this stage and add too much noise. I also feel he confuses KS with a shares in a company. Sometimes having a brother or someone you can trust is better than having a hardcore professional because can leave the project when they want to, with friends you have the sentimental and more than a financial connection many games if not the majority where develop among friends and those who failed are usually a pure professional company created for making X game.
ASROCK Z97 E-ITX Intel i7 4790k @ 4.5Ghz+KrakenX41 Gigabyte 1070 8GB Mini OC 16GB Crucial 1333mhz 1.3V SWG 8 Year Vet, WW2OL 8 Year Vet. Aka Darksparrow Rancorheart(tempest/farstar), Fxmkorp
Comments
It's not a question of past games though.
It's a question of this game.
It's a question of: Can Star Citizen be delivered? When? and in what state with what features?
And in your case - when a game is delivered - will you be able to play with the content you have already paid for?
Hate Derek Smart and like Chris Roberts all you like - none of that addresses the questions.
As for "trust" - well - good luck - I hope it pays off for you. If it does - well done. If it doesn't - please learn from it.
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
So in other words, all who have pledged to Star Citizen, but now for whatever reason want their money back... they simply have to copy Derek Smart's article to get back their pledge? Strange decision.
Crowd funding, give me your money, if you want information there is the door.
They are NOT on schedule per the Kickstarter timeline. They HAVE informed the backers (often and in detail) that the timeline has changed due to the immense success of the crowdfunding campaign and the change in scope (many more stretch goals added). Of course this is known to our most vocal CIG critics here, but they conveniently fail to mention this and continue to quote ad infinitum the old Kickstarter timeline from Nov 2012 (which was already outdated in Dec 2012).
Furthermore - even in the original Kickstarter documentation and the Terms of Service - CIG has made it VERY clear that the timeline is subject to change and is not cut in stone. With such an ambitious project, problems will and have happen(ed) and that may cause delays.
The overwhelming majority of backers on the SC forums have told CIG since Nov 2012: "Take the time you need to make this a new milestone in space sim history. We do NOT want a rush job. We are not from a big publisher that wants a game out for the next quarter report. Make it the best you can do. We understand that such a revised, enlarged project will take the 4-5 years typical for a AAA game." And that is what CIG is currently doing (and they publish VERY detailed reports about it).
Have fun
The problem is that 4-5 years in computer games is an eternity.
Not just in terms of player patience - but in terms of technology.
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
My first thought was: "Who the hell is Derek Smart, and why in the blazes would I care?"
Anyway. As a backer, I pretty much knew what I was getting into. There's always the chance, with crowdfunding, that you'll fund something that will end up being incomplete, or different than originally projected. I can accept that. Of course, I'm not one who's spent hundreds, or thousands, of dollars on it. :P
Derek Smart is an urban legend. The story goes that there was this developer who was forced to ship an unfinished game by their publisher. The backlash on forums about the quality of the game was so intense the developer was sucked into the internet itself, forced to appear in threads about the game and defend himself. No matter what dark and forgotten corner of the internet you were in, if you typed his name three times on a keyboard then he would be summoned to insult and argue with you.
The problem is that 4-5 years in computer games is an eternity.
Not just in terms of player patience - but in terms of technology.
The length of time is miner compared to the other questions being asked. If your money is paying other people's wages then you should have a way of seeing what you are paying these people. Surly as a backer you should be able to have a breakdown of where funds are going even if it's every tax year. This is not a company who are spending there own money 99% is from donations. Of course as a non backer this is just my opinion.well its now official clear Star Citizen is on the right path, anything that fool says is worthless.
Also to be honest I am happy with the just Areana Commander.
Wish this would be the case with people and their governments.
I also wish charity's like Unicef etc. etc. were held to the same scrutiny.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Just because someone makes a couple of good points doesn't mean he is right or should be listned to or followed...
I haven't backed StarCitizen, I'll buy it when I see a decent working copy and has enough features to get me interested. But I think that many people bought stuff and didn't fully understand what was going on. The challenges and risks of crowdfunding. The point is that if people didn't fund it and took a risk it might never come out, now it still might not come out, but that was the risk you should have known of when you backed. Giving people refunds at this time is just not fair to the rest of the backers, removing 30% of the funding at this time would create a far larger risk of the game never comming out in working order, screwing over the rest of the 70%. If you think that a release date is a hard target in software development, you have no clue...
As a backer and a owner of 3 ships..... one of which I can only look at I feel like I have made a poor investment. I have felt this way for sometime and way before Mr Smart. At this time I feel that SC will not be completed and that my few 100$ have been lost. I think the main point here is what will this do to crowdfunding?
Another point is what should RSI do? I don't think that this was a scam but I do feel that the tech just is not there (at this time) to do the things that they want too. Like the crewed ship... how do they make them work? The answer is they don't know! This is just one problem they have and I think that RSI should just come clean and tell the truth! If and at this point I think it's a big IF the game ever completed it will not be as promised and to save crowdfunding RSI just needs to come clean.
CIG corporate form is an LLC
http://www.mlrpc.com/articles/requirements-for-the-financial-statements-of-llcs
Now, being Austrian i am not THAT familiar with US corporate law, but as I understand it they do not have to make any numbers available to the public, only to the IRC. Which is different compared to Frontier Games in the UK which developed Elite:Dangerous (they are listed on the London stock exchange, so they have to publish a very detailed 60 page leaflet for the public).
Taking Austrian companies or Austrian persons of public interest as example - NO ONE voluntarily publishes any data on the topic of money or salaries unless the law specifically forces him/her to do that. It is my understanding that this is somewhat different in the US, especially for politicians (they have to publish in great detail their financial situation). Still - i do not expect CIG to publish more information than is required by the law.
Personally (being an early backer) i do NOT require a detailed break-down of CIG's money spending activities. I am more interested in the progress of the game and the studio(s) working on Star Citizen. And THIS information i get in great detail every month. I am sufficiently familiar with the fees of personnel and the price tag of keeping infrastructure running - its not hard to calculate my own estimate of CIG's expenditure. And based on that i am quite confident that they have more than enough to finish the game.
Have fun
This is not a question of whether or not they have a legal obligation to disclose. It is simply a matter of voluntarily providing disclosure as a good faith gesture to their backers for the unrelenting loyalty and support they have given CIG for the past four years. They have been given upwards of $85 MILLION Dollars and counting! That is no drop in the bucket and it's backers not only have a right, but they deserve to be kept abreast of how those millions are being allocated. I find it ludicrous that any reasonable individual would have anything against CIG being held accountable for the tens of millions of dollars it has received. Don't you want to know how this money is being allocated? If you don't you are a fool!
You are not helping yourself or CIG by defending them in this matter. By not holding CIG regularly accountable for the allocation of funds received you are increasing the potential that what you will receive in the end will be nothing but vaporware and you will have no recourse at that time but to accept it because you failed to engage in due diligence while development was in progress. It is so plainly obvious to anyone with a modicum of sense that what these people are doing is extending this development process for as long as possible because it has become a gold mine for them. Mark my words, once the money begins to dry up they will then rush out a game for a fraction of the funds contributed and walk away with tens of millions of pocketed contributor money. You are all fools if you allow this to happen unchecked and unsupervised. And you will have no one to blame but yourselves.
Have fun indeed.
Ok, so ... if one does not follow your way of thinking and has a different opinion one is a fool.
This makes any further discussion superfluous.
Have funWhy do you believe that people gave that money blindly in the case of Star Citizen ?
a) An experienced team with some world famous games in the genre of interest under their belt.
b) A clear concept for an ambitious game on the very edge of what is possible
c) Strong support from the developer of the game engine to be used
d) An open development concept with regular VERY detailed updates to the community
e) An eye-catching trailer to show to the public
f) A new approach of doing things, specifically avoiding publishers and their demands ("has to be finished by quartely report XX no matter what state the game is in ..." / "has to work on all consoles or else ..." / "has to have feature XXX in it because Grand Assassins Battlefield of Duty has it too and it brings us an extra million teenage players...")
Not many Kickstarter game projects even remotely approach these criteria and those that do (e.g. those from inXile) usually work extremely well (e.g. Wasteland 2).
So ... maybe people have chosen this project not as blindly as you think.
Have fun
That's not at all the case and that is plain to see by anyone reading my post . Unlike yourself, I am imploring people to be cautious for their own well being. Stop being disingenuous.
So what would be wrong with adding ...
G) And most importantly, they are accountable and make great effort to show transparency through every phase of the development process. They make it a priority to keep their backers, who have contributed tens of millions of their own hard earned money, abreast of their contributions and how their money is being allocated on a regular basis.
(G) above should be the most important functions that they perform. Yet you and your kind, for whatever reason, choose to give them a pass in that very important regard. With people like you, its no wonder they've managed to gather $85 million dollars with no expectation of accountability.
Managing and being accountable to people's money is not a joke.
Right. well that's a hard opinion to weigh! A "chronic troll" vs. 1 post count pr damage mitigation
Whose side to pick....
Cherry picking part of a sentence to try and make you sound like you are the better just reinforces the whole "you are fools" thing
You must've forgotten to carry a 1 somewhere, the result of your math is completely wrong.
Experienced at making games does not mean experienced at running companies. I sure hope they know what they are doing.
Don't know him...
His posts shows he has no knowledge of the industry or was rage quitting.
All those points are quite null.
1- Budget increase = scope increase, even from the get go it was ambitious they also had to rewrite much of the cryengine tools to allow them to make the game they were aiming to make, some implementations had to be scraped or change because they were too time consuming(ex. Damage stage). When I backed I knew 2014 was too optimistic end of 2016 we will have the SQ 42 and FPS, I really doubt the MMO will be ready by the end of 2016.
This is a triple A game so at least expect the amount of time GTA 5 took to develop.
2 - We have hangar we have space game... and FPS will be out this year.
3 - The core of devs especially the people that make the game eg Programmers are still there.. If lead and the core of programmers remain there, it won't have a noticeable impact on the game.
4 - Such a small sample and it's not the right way to measure the productivity of the studio, I have seen many bugs that have been fixed in a ~42h patch, this shows a well oiled machine working.
5 - The concept of modules is very rarely used in the industry, having to produce a full game that has so many relations and hierarchies and then have to unplug them and replug them to a striped game, is very time consuming.
6 - They are working together with Crytek and core team members that created Cryengine at the end of the day it's an engine everything can be rewritten and added.
7, 8 - Other than choosing to individual model each piece of armor in FPS.. there hasn't been an increase in scope for the Star Citizen Game only post official launch will the scope increase.
9 - Well they are pretty clear, when they say every ship can be gain ingame and you are only getting before anyone else you won't have to grind has bad. THERE ARE RICH PEOPLE IN THE WORLD! It's their money they burn has they want to burn, at least they money will mean a better game for everyone.
10 - Nothing out of the ordinary there are ups and down on the developing of games.
1.1, 2.2 = 5
1.3 - For what I understood FPS will be release this year. Yes two levels is pretty normal when you are making a game from the ground up with a custom made engine or heavily modified. I think when I started playing H&G there were 2 and warthunder probably had 5.. How about the new Star Wars battlefront, how many maps have you seen?
They are still making the foundations of the FPS engine making new maps is unwise and most of team is probably focus on the FPS engine than maps.
1.4, 1.5 - Expected
I found offensive when he refers that the backers required a list of demands, I pretty sure the majority would not even want that list of demands.
I would mind a clear budget and an open expenses and revenues but I feel this would do more harm than good at this stage and add too much noise. I also feel he confuses KS with a shares in a company. Sometimes having a brother or someone you can trust is better than having a hardcore professional because can leave the project when they want to, with friends you have the sentimental and more than a financial connection many games if not the majority where develop among friends and those who failed are usually a pure professional company created for making X game.
ASROCK Z97 E-ITX
Intel i7 4790k @ 4.5Ghz+KrakenX41
Gigabyte 1070 8GB Mini OC
16GB Crucial 1333mhz 1.3V
SWG 8 Year Vet, WW2OL 8 Year Vet.
Aka Darksparrow Rancorheart(tempest/farstar), Fxmkorp