I applaud CIG for both refunding and for sending that message.
As an outside observer whose simply waiting to pick the game up when it's finished, this doesn't look good for CIG. By unwillingly refunding his pledge and terminating his status as a contributor they've eliminated any right he had to complain, and taken his ability to speak on behalf of dissatisfied and worried backers. It's a move that's only purpose is to try to invalidate his past and future claims, in other words, they're just silencing his criticism.
Whether or not there is any truth to Derek's claims doesn't matter to me, this is a negative for CIG in my book.
This.
All of these posters bringing up DSmarts past history is just a deflecting tactic in an attempt to dismiss his credibility. The fact of the matter is that this matter stands on its own. The name authoring the information does not invalidate the information brought forth if we can all read the information and see it for the truth of its contents without having to bring any attention to who wrote it. DSmart just happens to be quite knowledgeable on the subject and is able to articulately present it from and informed point of view.
Regarding the refund, this absolutely does look very bad on CIG. DSmart is not only a customer, but he is a customer who contributed his won money in good faith and is demanding to be provided information regarding funds that he contributed for a product that is not being delivered as initially presented to backers. Respectfully demanding to be informed about the progress of a vested interest are not grounds to arbitrarily customer. Doing so is not only unprofessional, but quite telling regarding CIG's state of mind in this matter, and it is quite obvious in this instance that CIGs state of mind at this point is quite unhealthy.
I really dont see how this legitimizes anything that industry troll Derek has said, it simply shows that CIG gives refunds. Honestly no business wants a hostile customer anyway, much easier to just refund them and get them the fuck out of the business.
We really need to stop stroking this idiots ego, he is a horrible game developer, has 0 credibility in the industry and if he knew a god damn thing about what a "good game" was his portfolio wouldnt be filled with shit.
I applaud CIG for both refunding and for sending that message.
As an outside observer whose simply waiting to pick the game up when it's finished, this doesn't look good for CIG. By unwillingly refunding his pledge and terminating his status as a contributor they've eliminated any right he had to complain, and taken his ability to speak on behalf of dissatisfied and worried backers. It's a move that's only purpose is to try to invalidate his past and future claims, in other words, they're just silencing his criticism.
Whether or not there is any truth to Derek's claims doesn't matter to me, this is a negative for CIG in my book.
This.
All of these posters bringing up DSmarts past history is just a deflecting tactic in an attempt to dismiss his credibility. The fact of the matter is that this matter stands on its own. The name authoring the information does not invalidate the information brought forth if we can all read the information and see it for the truth of its contents without having to bring any attention to who wrote it. DSmart just happens to be quite knowledgeable on the subject and is able to articulately present it from and informed point of view.
Regarding the refund, this absolutely looks bad on CIG. DSmart is not only a customer, but he is a customer who is demanding to be provided information regarding funds that he contributed for a product that is not being delivered as sold to backers. Respectfully demanding to be informed about the progress of a vested interest are not grounds to arbitrarily customer. Doing so is not only unprofessional, but quite telling regarding CIG's state of mind in this matter, and it is quite obvious in this instance that CIGs state of mind at this point is quite unhealthy.
I applaud CIG for both refunding and for sending that message.
As an outside observer whose simply waiting to pick the game up when it's finished, this doesn't look good for CIG. By unwillingly refunding his pledge and terminating his status as a contributor they've eliminated any right he had to complain, and taken his ability to speak on behalf of dissatisfied and worried backers. It's a move that's only purpose is to try to invalidate his past and future claims, in other words, they're just silencing his criticism.
Whether or not there is any truth to Derek's claims doesn't matter to me, this is a negative for CIG in my book.
This.
All of these posters bringing up DSmarts past history is just a deflecting tactic in an attempt to dismiss his credibility. The fact of the matter is that this matter stands on its own. The name authoring the information does not invalidate the information brought forth if we can all read the information and see it for the truth of its contents without having to bring any attention to who wrote it. DSmart just happens to be quite knowledgeable on the subject and is able to articulately present it from and informed point of view.
Regarding the refund, this absolutely looks bad on CIG. DSmart is not only a customer, but he is a customer who is demanding to be provided information regarding funds that he contributed for a product that is not being delivered as sold to backers. Respectfully demanding to be informed about the progress of a vested interest are not grounds to arbitrarily customer. Doing so is not only unprofessional, but quite telling regarding CIG's state of mind in this matter, and it is quite obvious in this instance that CIGs state of mind at this point is quite unhealthy.
Derek asked for a refund. CIG gave it to him.
That is in direct contradiction with what CIG themselves admit here ...
I asked for a refund a week ago, and got a confirmation earlier today from them (after 2 emails only) that they would gladly refund the 200$+ I gave them. I wasn't rude or anything: just plain explained that I didn't believe in the project anymore and felt like the idea I originally pledged my money for wasn't the same anymore.
5-10 days and the money will be back on my card: the guy who took care of my case ast CIG (Patrick) was very nice and respectful of my opinion/view on the project and (unfortunate) lack of faith in it anymore.
Overall very please with them at least finally accepting to give refunds to people who don't believe in their project anymore, which wasn't the case months ago (no refund at all from what I remember from countless people who tried before....).
Makes me wonder what they'll do if that 30% from the linked poll actually requests their refunds too. Well, if it's only the people from the poll it won't be so bad, but if an actual 30% of their backers asks for a refund I imagine that's going to hurt.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
All of these posters bringing up DSmarts past history is just a deflecting tactic in an attempt to dismiss his credibility. The fact of the matter is that this matter stands on its own. The name authoring the information does not invalidate the information brought forth if we can all read the information and see it for the truth of its contents without having to bring any attention to who wrote it. DSmart just happens to be quite knowledgeable on the subject and is able to articulately present it from and informed point of view.
Regarding the refund, this absolutely does look very bad on CIG. DSmart is not only a customer, but he is a customer who contributed his won money in good faith and is demanding to be provided information regarding funds that he contributed for a product that is not being delivered as initially presented to backers. Respectfully demanding to be informed about the progress of a vested interest are not grounds to arbitrarily customer. Doing so is not only unprofessional, but quite telling regarding CIG's state of mind in this matter, and it is quite obvious in this instance that CIGs state of mind at this point is quite unhealthy.
His history does all the dismissing on it's own... I get it he speaks the line you wanna hear, that doesn't change who this guy is...
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
All of these posters bringing up DSmarts past history is just a deflecting tactic in an attempt to dismiss his credibility. The fact of the matter is that this matter stands on its own. The name authoring the information does not invalidate the information brought forth if we can all read the information and see it for the truth of its contents without having to bring any attention to who wrote it. DSmart just happens to be quite knowledgeable on the subject and is able to articulately present it from and informed point of view.
Regarding the refund, this absolutely does look very bad on CIG. DSmart is not only a customer, but he is a customer who contributed his won money in good faith and is demanding to be provided information regarding funds that he contributed for a product that is not being delivered as initially presented to backers. Respectfully demanding to be informed about the progress of a vested interest are not grounds to arbitrarily customer. Doing so is not only unprofessional, but quite telling regarding CIG's state of mind in this matter, and it is quite obvious in this instance that CIGs state of mind at this point is quite unhealthy.
His history does all the dismissing on it's own...
So nothing this man says should ever be believed. Even if he says hot water is hot and cold water is cold? By that logic, no one ever should be given a second chance in life. The truth is in the pudding. He is asking for accountability.
All of these posters bringing up DSmarts past history is just a deflecting tactic in an attempt to dismiss his credibility. The fact of the matter is that this matter stands on its own. The name authoring the information does not invalidate the information brought forth if we can all read the information and see it for the truth of its contents without having to bring any attention to who wrote it. DSmart just happens to be quite knowledgeable on the subject and is able to articulately present it from and informed point of view.
Regarding the refund, this absolutely does look very bad on CIG. DSmart is not only a customer, but he is a customer who contributed his won money in good faith and is demanding to be provided information regarding funds that he contributed for a product that is not being delivered as initially presented to backers. Respectfully demanding to be informed about the progress of a vested interest are not grounds to arbitrarily customer. Doing so is not only unprofessional, but quite telling regarding CIG's state of mind in this matter, and it is quite obvious in this instance that CIGs state of mind at this point is quite unhealthy.
His history does all the dismissing on it's own...
So nothing this man says should ever be believed. Even if he says hot water is hot and cold water is cold? By that logic, no one ever should be given a second chance in life.
You can believe what you want to believe, yet when it's someones self admitted nature to cause a stir just to do it, yes their credibility should definitely come into question, when they cause a stir.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I don't know who the guy is, and I really don't care. I am a backer of this game, I have a little over $200 backed into this game. And for about a year now , I have really been questioning this game, when I started seeing ship after ship being sold when they have millions and millions to make the game i was like when is enough , enough ?
Also what worried me, is some of the stretch goals, ohh if you donate one million more we will invent a new language, or a new planet, or a new ship
I am like WTF ? 1 million dollars for a small group of people to do a week to a months work, that will probably cost you $10,000-25,000 .. Now I am thinking someone is filling up their pockets , and also all delays.
I think anyone asking them to explain where all our money and time is asking a valid question, even if the guy is an attention whore.
I think for the future of crowd funding, it is important that developers are accountable when they receive this kind of money , and they need to put out quality games, or we will be stuck with EA like companies controlling what we play.
All of these posters bringing up DSmarts past history is just a deflecting tactic in an attempt to dismiss his credibility. The fact of the matter is that this matter stands on its own. The name authoring the information does not invalidate the information brought forth if we can all read the information and see it for the truth of its contents without having to bring any attention to who wrote it. DSmart just happens to be quite knowledgeable on the subject and is able to articulately present it from and informed point of view.
Regarding the refund, this absolutely does look very bad on CIG. DSmart is not only a customer, but he is a customer who contributed his won money in good faith and is demanding to be provided information regarding funds that he contributed for a product that is not being delivered as initially presented to backers. Respectfully demanding to be informed about the progress of a vested interest are not grounds to arbitrarily customer. Doing so is not only unprofessional, but quite telling regarding CIG's state of mind in this matter, and it is quite obvious in this instance that CIGs state of mind at this point is quite unhealthy.
His history does all the dismissing on it's own...
So nothing this man says should ever be believed. Even if he says hot water is hot and cold water is cold? By that logic, no one ever should be given a second chance in life.
You can believe what you want to believe, yet when it's someones self admitted nature to cause a stir just to do it, yes their credibility should definitely come into question, when they cause a stir.
... or we can read the information that the person provides and independently evaluate that information based on the objective truthfulness of the information. A blanket disregard of all information provided by an entity, based on the veracity of information that entity has brought up in the past, is not a very intelligent way to go through life. In this particular situation all this entity is requesting is a bit of accountability. This is his business. As a contributor he has a vested interest in the product as it was presented to him when he decided to give them money. As a customer he is entitled to an answer. If they aren't doing anything wrong, why are they refusing to provide one to him?
" I'm kind of confused by your link... did you get refunded out of the blue without you requesting it? or did you request a refund? "
It is as yet unanswered, hopefully he clarifies.
CIG admitted it in the link provided. It is implied. Please read carefully. Also, if you read DSmarts statements in the same link, he speaks of having involuntarily received a refund.
All of these posters bringing up DSmarts past history is just a deflecting tactic in an attempt to dismiss his credibility. The fact of the matter is that this matter stands on its own. The name authoring the information does not invalidate the information brought forth if we can all read the information and see it for the truth of its contents without having to bring any attention to who wrote it. DSmart just happens to be quite knowledgeable on the subject and is able to articulately present it from and informed point of view.
Regarding the refund, this absolutely does look very bad on CIG. DSmart is not only a customer, but he is a customer who contributed his won money in good faith and is demanding to be provided information regarding funds that he contributed for a product that is not being delivered as initially presented to backers. Respectfully demanding to be informed about the progress of a vested interest are not grounds to arbitrarily customer. Doing so is not only unprofessional, but quite telling regarding CIG's state of mind in this matter, and it is quite obvious in this instance that CIGs state of mind at this point is quite unhealthy.
His history does all the dismissing on it's own...
So nothing this man says should ever be believed. Even if he says hot water is hot and cold water is cold? By that logic, no one ever should be given a second chance in life.
You can believe what you want to believe, yet when it's someones self admitted nature to cause a stir just to do it, yes their credibility should definitely come into question, when they cause a stir.
... or we can read the information that the person provides and independently evaluate that information based on the objective truthfulness of the information. A blanket disregard of all information provided by an entity, based on the veracity of information that entity has brought up in the past, is not a very intelligent way to go through life. In this particular situation all this entity is requesting is a bit of accountability. This is his business. As a contributor he has a vested interest in the product as it was presented to him when he decided to give them money. As a customer he is entitled to an answer. If they aren't doing anything wrong, why are they refusing to provide one to him?
I hold no position on the SC debacle, I don't follow it, nor have I backed it, I just take issue with taking someone like Derek Smart too seriously without at least giving his background a thought. Whether there is truth in what he says or not is irrelevant to me, any truth there will come in due time, long before someone like me would get monetarily involved in such a product.
Yet Derek Smart knows as well as anyone that a studio is rarely going to give anything that could be used as ammunition against their actual product, footage that is incomplete or unrepresentative of the final vision is just that. I make no claims to know what is going on behind the scenes at CIG, all I understand is that if it's not ready to show, it's not ready to show... That's a part of any creative work. So I find conclusions based on lack of evidence, to be just as if not more so of an unintelligent way to go through life.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I will make this it's own post as it's a complete digression back to where you started...
Derek Smart has a reputation, that's on him, to try and twist that around as a fault of others is quite ridiculous. It's the equivalent of crying wolf, you can't consistently troll, incite, make statements like "I do it just to cause the sh*tstorm that follows", and not expect that to come back on you, if, (that's a big if) ...you're trying to be real.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Originally posted by Rusque Derek Smart: "Show the game or give back money."CIG: *Hands back money*Everyone else: So..... wat happen?Erillion: "Have fun"
hahaha, Thanks that made my day.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
All of these posters bringing up DSmarts past history is just a deflecting tactic in an attempt to dismiss his credibility. The fact of the matter is that this matter stands on its own. The name authoring the information does not invalidate the information brought forth if we can all read the information and see it for the truth of its contents without having to bring any attention to who wrote it. DSmart just happens to be quite knowledgeable on the subject and is able to articulately present it from and informed point of view.
Regarding the refund, this absolutely does look very bad on CIG. DSmart is not only a customer, but he is a customer who contributed his won money in good faith and is demanding to be provided information regarding funds that he contributed for a product that is not being delivered as initially presented to backers. Respectfully demanding to be informed about the progress of a vested interest are not grounds to arbitrarily customer. Doing so is not only unprofessional, but quite telling regarding CIG's state of mind in this matter, and it is quite obvious in this instance that CIGs state of mind at this point is quite unhealthy.
His history does all the dismissing on it's own...
So nothing this man says should ever be believed. Even if he says hot water is hot and cold water is cold? By that logic, no one ever should be given a second chance in life.
You can believe what you want to believe, yet when it's someones self admitted nature to cause a stir just to do it, yes their credibility should definitely come into question, when they cause a stir.
... or we can read the information that the person provides and independently evaluate that information based on the objective truthfulness of the information. A blanket disregard of all information provided by an entity, based on the veracity of information that entity has brought up in the past, is not a very intelligent way to go through life. In this particular situation all this entity is requesting is a bit of accountability. This is his business. As a contributor he has a vested interest in the product as it was presented to him when he decided to give them money. As a customer he is entitled to an answer. If they aren't doing anything wrong, why are they refusing to provide one to him?
I hold no position on the SC debacle, I don't follow it, nor have I backed it, I just take issue with taking someone like Derek Smart too seriously without at least giving his background a thought. Whether there is truth in what he says or not is irrelevant to me, any truth there will come in due time, long before someone like me would get monetarily involved in such a product.
Yet Derek Smart knows as well as anyone that a studio is rarely going to give anything that could be used as ammunition against their actual product, footage that is incomplete or unrepresentative of the final vision is just that. I make no claims to know what is going on behind the scenes at CIG, all I understand is that if it's not ready to show, it's not ready to show... That's a part of any creative work. So I find conclusions based on lack of evidence, to be just as if not more so of an unintelligent way to go through life.
We are all entitled to your own opinions and beliefs. In this regard I am electing to trust the message and not the messenger. All the message is asking for is a little accountability. I see no harm in that. Particularly in light of the fact that this company has been "given" upwards of $85 MILLION DOLLARS to provide a product. That is a blessing that can not be taken for granted. They should be ready to have a response to ALL reasonable demands/requests posed by their backers.
I am a gamer. And as a gamer I don't like what I am seeing because the MMO industry is bigger than CIG. I would hate for it to be irreparably damaged because of the haphazard manner in which this company has decided to treat tis backers. The only reason that this has gotten to where it is, is because there are questions being posed that CiG has either refused to answer, or has no answers for, and they are being shady about it. All that is being requested is for a bit of transparency. All of this other mess is just a distraction that serves to muddy the waters. There should be no harm in a request for transparency. You will never go wrong by asking questions and you should always be weary of those refusing you the right to have answers about matters that have the potential to impact you in a negative way.
" I'm kind of confused by your link... did you get refunded out of the blue without you requesting it? or did you request a refund? "
It is as yet unanswered, hopefully he clarifies.
It doesnt need to be clarified. It was plain as day due to the word " preemptively " ( not sure why they added a hyphen ) which implies BEFORE any action on Smarts part to request a refund.
To me that says they are trying to take his voice and any possible action he could have taken out of play. Now that this has caused them to offer refunds I hope any that do not like the way the game is or isnt being made get a refund.
I hold no position on the SC debacle, I don't follow it, nor have I backed it, I just take issue with taking someone like Derek Smart too seriously without at least giving his background a thought. Whether there is truth in what he says or not is irrelevant to me, any truth there will come in due time, long before someone like me would get monetarily involved in such a product.
Yet Derek Smart knows as well as anyone that a studio is rarely going to give anything that could be used as ammunition against their actual product, footage that is incomplete or unrepresentative of the final vision is just that. I make no claims to know what is going on behind the scenes at CIG, all I understand is that if it's not ready to show, it's not ready to show... That's a part of any creative work. So I find conclusions based on lack of evidence, to be just as if not more so of an unintelligent way to go through life.
We are all entitled to your own opinions and beliefs. In this regard I am electing to trust the message and not the messenger. All the message is asking for is a little accountability. I see no harm in that. Particularly in light of the fact that this company has been "given" upwards of $85 MILLION DOLLARS to provide a product. That is a blessing that can not be taken for granted. They should be ready to have a response to ALL reasonable demands/requests posed by their backers.
I am a gamer. And as a gamer I don't like what I am seeing because the MMO industry is bigger than CIG. I would hate for it to be irreparably damaged because of the haphazard manner in which this company has decided to treat tis backers. The only reason that this has gotten to where it is, is because there are questions being posed that CiG has either refused to answer, or has no answers for, and they are being shady about it. All that is being requested is for a bit of transparency. All of this other mess is just a distraction that serves to muddy the waters. There should be no harm in a request for transparency. You will never go wrong by asking questions and you should always be weary of those refusing you the right to have answers about matters that have the potential to impact you in a negative way.
No one has said it's bad to ask questions, questions are rarely a problem, I'm sure many have questions in regard to SC's progress... yet how this has transpired is a lot more than asking questions, people take such an opportunity to push agendas. Using such incidents as verifiable proof that something is afoot. There have been a number of conclusions put forth based on DS's original statements along those lines. Now they're being made in regard to CIG's decision to refund him...
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I hold no position on the SC debacle, I don't follow it, nor have I backed it, I just take issue with taking someone like Derek Smart too seriously without at least giving his background a thought. Whether there is truth in what he says or not is irrelevant to me, any truth there will come in due time, long before someone like me would get monetarily involved in such a product.
Yet Derek Smart knows as well as anyone that a studio is rarely going to give anything that could be used as ammunition against their actual product, footage that is incomplete or unrepresentative of the final vision is just that. I make no claims to know what is going on behind the scenes at CIG, all I understand is that if it's not ready to show, it's not ready to show... That's a part of any creative work. So I find conclusions based on lack of evidence, to be just as if not more so of an unintelligent way to go through life.
We are all entitled to your own opinions and beliefs. In this regard I am electing to trust the message and not the messenger. All the message is asking for is a little accountability. I see no harm in that. Particularly in light of the fact that this company has been "given" upwards of $85 MILLION DOLLARS to provide a product. That is a blessing that can not be taken for granted. They should be ready to have a response to ALL reasonable demands/requests posed by their backers.
I am a gamer. And as a gamer I don't like what I am seeing because the MMO industry is bigger than CIG. I would hate for it to be irreparably damaged because of the haphazard manner in which this company has decided to treat tis backers. The only reason that this has gotten to where it is, is because there are questions being posed that CiG has either refused to answer, or has no answers for, and they are being shady about it. All that is being requested is for a bit of transparency. All of this other mess is just a distraction that serves to muddy the waters. There should be no harm in a request for transparency. You will never go wrong by asking questions and you should always be weary of those refusing you the right to have answers about matters that have the potential to impact you in a negative way.
No one has said it's bad to ask questions, questions are rarely a problem, I'm sure many have questions in regard to SC's progress... yet how this has transpired is a lot more than asking questions, people take such an opportunity to push agendas. Using such incidents as verifiable proof that something is afoot. There have been a number of conclusions put forth based on DS's original statements along those lines. Now they're being made in regard to CIG's decision to refund him...
In his statement he posted a short list of eight demands that would satisfy most, if not all, of the concerns most backers may have in an effort to gain a bit of good faith transparency. The only action of importance is to make an effort to answer some of those demands. Everything else is irrelevant and will go away if those demands are met in good faith. That is the only thing that matters.
Derek Smart has a track record for tearing down other people's work and general anti-social behavior. It's important to remember that and not accidentally give people like him a clean slate in your mind when you judge their actions.
Publicly issuing demands and trying to control the behavior of other people is not acceptable. And that's what he did. This person has never been successful in the gaming business and yet somehow he is still a known name. The only way people like that stay relevant is by appealing to the basest instinct of game fans and attacking other people's work.
This kind of behavior is something everyone can do without, and to think that this reflects poorly on Chris Roberts rather than Derek Smart is to be willfully blind.
Derek Smart has a track record for tearing down other people's work and general anti-social behavior. It's important to remember that and not accidentally give people like him a clean slate in your mind when you judge their actions.
Publicly issuing demands and trying to control the behavior of other people is not acceptable. And that's what he did. This person has never been successful in the gaming business and yet somehow he is still a known name. The only way people like that stay relevant is by appealing to the basest instinct of game fans and attacking other people's work.
This kind of behavior is something everyone can do without, and to think that this reflects poorly on Chris Roberts rather than Derek Smart is to be willfully blind.
As much as some of you want to make this about DSmart it is not about him. I am sure many of us share and support his point of view. If it makes you feel better replace his name with John Doe. The message rings true and all it is demanding is for a bit of transparency and accountability, and there is no harm in that request.
Comments
*EDIT* Apparently, Derek Smart *asked* for a refund.
Derek Smart's refund request approved
Can't complain about getting what you asked for !
P.S. Thanks to Laserit for correcting me. You da rockstar Chihuahua!
This.
All of these posters bringing up DSmarts past history is just a deflecting tactic in an attempt to dismiss his credibility. The fact of the matter is that this matter stands on its own. The name authoring the information does not invalidate the information brought forth if we can all read the information and see it for the truth of its contents without having to bring any attention to who wrote it. DSmart just happens to be quite knowledgeable on the subject and is able to articulately present it from and informed point of view.
Regarding the refund, this absolutely does look very bad on CIG. DSmart is not only a customer, but he is a customer who contributed his won money in good faith and is demanding to be provided information regarding funds that he contributed for a product that is not being delivered as initially presented to backers. Respectfully demanding to be informed about the progress of a vested interest are not grounds to arbitrarily customer. Doing so is not only unprofessional, but quite telling regarding CIG's state of mind in this matter, and it is quite obvious in this instance that CIGs state of mind at this point is quite unhealthy.
I really dont see how this legitimizes anything that industry troll Derek has said, it simply shows that CIG gives refunds. Honestly no business wants a hostile customer anyway, much easier to just refund them and get them the fuck out of the business.
We really need to stop stroking this idiots ego, he is a horrible game developer, has 0 credibility in the industry and if he knew a god damn thing about what a "good game" was his portfolio wouldnt be filled with shit.
Derek asked for a refund. CIG gave it to him.
That is in direct contradiction with what CIG themselves admit here ...
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/436635/page/1
That said, now they need to expedite a refund to everyone else that requests one.
Makes me wonder what they'll do if that 30% from the linked poll actually requests their refunds too. Well, if it's only the people from the poll it won't be so bad, but if an actual 30% of their backers asks for a refund I imagine that's going to hurt.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/
You were right the first time. Read the link. It is a direct admission by CIG that they unilaterally refunded his contribution.
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/436635/page/7
His history does all the dismissing on it's own... I get it he speaks the line you wanna hear, that doesn't change who this guy is...
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
So nothing this man says should ever be believed. Even if he says hot water is hot and cold water is cold? By that logic, no one ever should be given a second chance in life. The truth is in the pudding. He is asking for accountability.
You can believe what you want to believe, yet when it's someones self admitted nature to cause a stir just to do it, yes their credibility should definitely come into question, when they cause a stir.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I don't know who the guy is, and I really don't care. I am a backer of this game, I have a little over $200 backed into this game. And for about a year now , I have really been questioning this game, when I started seeing ship after ship being sold when they have millions and millions to make the game i was like when is enough , enough ?
Also what worried me, is some of the stretch goals, ohh if you donate one million more we will invent a new language, or a new planet, or a new ship
I am like WTF ? 1 million dollars for a small group of people to do a week to a months work, that will probably cost you $10,000-25,000 .. Now I am thinking someone is filling up their pockets , and also all delays.
I think anyone asking them to explain where all our money and time is asking a valid question, even if the guy is an attention whore.
I think for the future of crowd funding, it is important that developers are accountable when they receive this kind of money , and they need to put out quality games, or we will be stuck with EA like companies controlling what we play.
... or we can read the information that the person provides and independently evaluate that information based on the objective truthfulness of the information. A blanket disregard of all information provided by an entity, based on the veracity of information that entity has brought up in the past, is not a very intelligent way to go through life. In this particular situation all this entity is requesting is a bit of accountability. This is his business. As a contributor he has a vested interest in the product as it was presented to him when he decided to give them money. As a customer he is entitled to an answer. If they aren't doing anything wrong, why are they refusing to provide one to him?
Oh that's so not true.
I do believe more clarification is needed. The only direct admission by CIG I read, was of Giving Mr Smart a refund.
This is what I politely asked Mr Smart in the other thread shortly after his post.
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/436635/page/8
" I'm kind of confused by your link... did you get refunded out of the blue without you requesting it? or did you request a refund? "
It is as yet unanswered, hopefully he clarifies.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
CIG admitted it in the link provided. It is implied. Please read carefully. Also, if you read DSmarts statements in the same link, he speaks of having involuntarily received a refund.
I hold no position on the SC debacle, I don't follow it, nor have I backed it, I just take issue with taking someone like Derek Smart too seriously without at least giving his background a thought. Whether there is truth in what he says or not is irrelevant to me, any truth there will come in due time, long before someone like me would get monetarily involved in such a product.
Yet Derek Smart knows as well as anyone that a studio is rarely going to give anything that could be used as ammunition against their actual product, footage that is incomplete or unrepresentative of the final vision is just that. I make no claims to know what is going on behind the scenes at CIG, all I understand is that if it's not ready to show, it's not ready to show... That's a part of any creative work. So I find conclusions based on lack of evidence, to be just as if not more so of an unintelligent way to go through life.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I will make this it's own post as it's a complete digression back to where you started...
Derek Smart has a reputation, that's on him, to try and twist that around as a fault of others is quite ridiculous. It's the equivalent of crying wolf, you can't consistently troll, incite, make statements like "I do it just to cause the sh*tstorm that follows", and not expect that to come back on you, if, (that's a big if) ...you're trying to be real.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
hahaha, Thanks that made my day.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
We are all entitled to your own opinions and beliefs. In this regard I am electing to trust the message and not the messenger. All the message is asking for is a little accountability. I see no harm in that. Particularly in light of the fact that this company has been "given" upwards of $85 MILLION DOLLARS to provide a product. That is a blessing that can not be taken for granted. They should be ready to have a response to ALL reasonable demands/requests posed by their backers.
I am a gamer. And as a gamer I don't like what I am seeing because the MMO industry is bigger than CIG. I would hate for it to be irreparably damaged because of the haphazard manner in which this company has decided to treat tis backers. The only reason that this has gotten to where it is, is because there are questions being posed that CiG has either refused to answer, or has no answers for, and they are being shady about it. All that is being requested is for a bit of transparency. All of this other mess is just a distraction that serves to muddy the waters. There should be no harm in a request for transparency. You will never go wrong by asking questions and you should always be weary of those refusing you the right to have answers about matters that have the potential to impact you in a negative way.
It doesnt need to be clarified. It was plain as day due to the word " preemptively " ( not sure why they added a hyphen ) which implies BEFORE any action on Smarts part to request a refund.
To me that says they are trying to take his voice and any possible action he could have taken out of play. Now that this has caused them to offer refunds I hope any that do not like the way the game is or isnt being made get a refund.
No one has said it's bad to ask questions, questions are rarely a problem, I'm sure many have questions in regard to SC's progress... yet how this has transpired is a lot more than asking questions, people take such an opportunity to push agendas. Using such incidents as verifiable proof that something is afoot. There have been a number of conclusions put forth based on DS's original statements along those lines. Now they're being made in regard to CIG's decision to refund him...
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
In his statement he posted a short list of eight demands that would satisfy most, if not all, of the concerns most backers may have in an effort to gain a bit of good faith transparency. The only action of importance is to make an effort to answer some of those demands. Everything else is irrelevant and will go away if those demands are met in good faith. That is the only thing that matters.
Derek Smart has a track record for tearing down other people's work and general anti-social behavior. It's important to remember that and not accidentally give people like him a clean slate in your mind when you judge their actions.
Publicly issuing demands and trying to control the behavior of other people is not acceptable. And that's what he did. This person has never been successful in the gaming business and yet somehow he is still a known name. The only way people like that stay relevant is by appealing to the basest instinct of game fans and attacking other people's work.
This kind of behavior is something everyone can do without, and to think that this reflects poorly on Chris Roberts rather than Derek Smart is to be willfully blind.
As much as some of you want to make this about DSmart it is not about him. I am sure many of us share and support his point of view. If it makes you feel better replace his name with John Doe. The message rings true and all it is demanding is for a bit of transparency and accountability, and there is no harm in that request.