I have no interest in Star Citizen, but this whole Derek Smart thing... initially I was wondering what was going on at CIG; now I see very VERY clearly Derek Smart is instigating way beyond the scope of anything that could possibly be happening.
Those "journalists" should be embarrassed. Even though I have only read a column or two, I will never view that site as any sort of journalistic integrity whatsoever. What a sham they are.
As much as I found the concept of SC interesting if brought to fruition, I never gave a cent simply because I am apprehensive on the whole KS thing. I won't bother saying why, just my personal opinion and little point in debating KS's values/flaws here. Though, it's hard to deny that the possible rumours, if true, about CR's misallocation of funds can be anything but negative to our (gaming) community. If true, then how many more will prey on those willing to 'invest' in a dream, only to be able to get away with "take the money and run" scheme if no safeguards are placed in KS or anywhere else as protection. If false, then to what extent will future devs ask for money for virtual promises, or the lengths some will take to defame, slander, and attempt to derail future devs in trying to create something unique?! Last I checked, this wasn't politics. Or maybe it is because where there's a lot of money, there's always envy, hate, blind faith, devotion. Or maybe it's more like religion. Christian televangelists ask for donations for your salvation and buy personal jets and mansions to help with the spreading of faith... Interesting notion, no? Is it really so dissimilar? Who knows?
Ever thought that it might be the other way round Axilow? Anyone can post those 'reviews' on Glassdoor.
Sedryn, seriously you have to admit that things are not right with Star Citizen. The've done 75% of sod all in 3-4 years.
As an ex-dev, if I gave up work today and devoted my full time to CryEngine I wold have an FPS up and running in under 6 months as it gives you all the tools to do so. in a year it might even be worth playing. Instead we have got:
A flying game that plays like a twitch shooter A hangar with models of ships in An area that you can walk around in THAT IS THE SAME AREA MADE FOR ONE OF THEIR VIDS AGES AGO A corridor shooter on the way (currently malfuntioning, with no AI players only real ones - i.e. a basic empty shooter map)
Still to do:
Build HUNDREDS OF PLANETS - maps, sounds, graphics, npcs, stories, products, economies Cities Stations Deep professions Economies Interesting persistent stories Ships (they still have loads of even these to do) Squadron 42 - a whole single player game with AAA cast and cinematics etc etc etc
Ever thought that it might be the other way round Axilow? Anyone can post those 'reviews' on Glassdoor.
Sedryn, seriously you have to admit that things are not right with Star Citizen. The've done 75% of sod all in 3-4 years.
As an ex-dev, if I gave up work today and devoted my full time to CryEngine I wold have an FPS up and running in under 6 months as it gives you all the tools to do so. in a year it might even be worth playing. Instead we have got:
A flying game that plays like a twitch shooter A hangar with models of ships in An area that you can walk around in THAT IS THE SAME AREA MADE FOR ONE OF THEIR VIDS AGES AGO A corridor shooter on the way (currently malfuntioning, with no AI players only real ones - i.e. a basic empty shooter map)
Still to do:
Build HUNDREDS OF PLANETS - maps, sounds, graphics, npcs, stories, products, economies Cities Stations Deep professions Economies Interesting persistent stories Ships (they still have loads of even these to do) Squadron 42 - a whole single player game with AAA cast and cinematics etc etc etc
Its fricking miles away from OK right now.
You do know the date the reviews were posted is listed in the posting? You do know you can see these reviews are in some cases weeks old? You do realize you'd have known this if you ACTUALLY clicked the link right?
You do know that the story could have been primed for weeks?
The article says they spoke with their sources, i think its likely someone then posted material on GlassDoor to troll CIG.
I don't know, seems like an awful lot of work to preemptively post anon rage posts for several days alongside Derek's blog post about people getting fired and CIG being evil warlords, just to write a really crazy story about a racist lady calling people penises in company emails that nobody with a working "Print Screen" button received...
But then again, Trump is running for President of the USA so I'm almost willing to believe anything right now.
But no seriously am I the only one who can't wait for Derek's next twitlonger? It's going to be glorious.
You do know that the story could have been primed for weeks?
The article says they spoke with their sources, i think its likely someone then posted material on GlassDoor to troll CIG.
Has anyone bothered to look at sites with an actual verification process(I'm too lazy)? If management was even close to reported it will show up elsewhere. If it's isolated to sites with no verification well...
A lot of mudslinging. Do we know the sources were the Glassdoor reviews, or is this supposition spread as fact on the internet? If the sources were the Glassdoor reviews, do we know whether or not they were verified by the journalist of the original article?
I have no idea myself, because The Escapist is protecting its sources. I have never really read The Escapist and I am not familiar with the author, so I have no idea as to the quality of their journalism or the extent of their fact checking and verification processes.
If anyone else does, please share; but until then I have no idea what is true and what is not; what is unsubstantiated click-bait, and what is genuine reporting of (possibly unreliable) sources.
A lot of mudslinging. Do we know the sources were the Glassdoor reviews, or is this supposition spread as fact on the internet? If the sources were the Glassdoor reviews, do we know whether or not they were verified by the journalist of the original article?
I have no idea myself, because The Escapist is protecting its sources. I have never really read The Escapist and I am not familiar with the author, so I have no idea as to the quality of their journalism or the extent of their fact checking and verification processes.
If anyone else does, please share; but until then I have no idea what is true and what is not; what is unsubstantiated click-bait, and what is genuine reporting of (possibly unreliable) sources.
This guy articulates nicely why Lizzy's article is really just a steaming pile of shit:
Gotta say that this article adds nothing, it is just one person's biased opinions (yes he calls himself a critic of SC, but the conflict of interest becomes apparent as his post progresses).
A lot of mudslinging. Do we know the sources were the Glassdoor reviews, or is this supposition spread as fact on the internet? If the sources were the Glassdoor reviews, do we know whether or not they were verified by the journalist of the original article?
I have no idea myself, because The Escapist is protecting its sources. I have never really read The Escapist and I am not familiar with the author, so I have no idea as to the quality of their journalism or the extent of their fact checking and verification processes.
If anyone else does, please share; but until then I have no idea what is true and what is not; what is unsubstantiated click-bait, and what is genuine reporting of (possibly unreliable) sources.
This guy articulates nicely why Lizzy's article is really just a steaming pile of shit:
...Like Watergate? I know the scope is very different but the premise is the same.
Journalists should be there to protect and inform the public. lately all we've had is journalists being a platform for hype in this industry which has worked against the public in a major way. Has allowed predatory practices to become the standard while helping to fuel the hype train. This tide is hopefully turning and it could be a reminder that gaming journalism is either all (essentially) advertisement - or something more.
As we creep into territory of devs begging for money from us, the community, to the tune of 100 Million which is a higher amount than the GDP of some nations we are waaaay past 'Nintendo power' magazine and we need some quick adaptation. Journalists SHOULD have been there asking hard questions all along since it was their readers they were helping to advertise to with all the glowing articles and fluffy bunny reporting of CIG and SC...
But I digress-
Without protecting anon sources, we will have no sources.
When citing an anon source and taking on a 100 Million Dollar behemoth that has become a bit of a cult - A website and Journalist are HIGHLY scrutinizing and vetting these sources. This article could clearly be shown to be causing real monetary damages to CIg and massively knew this before it was published. Its been run through legal, edited, re-edited, cut and all the 'i''s dotted and 't's crossed. With information so damning you dont just "make shit up".
CIG has a right to go through legal means if they think they have a case and the article would be redacted and i'm sure money would exchange hands.
Its how it works.
-Now- We also FINALLY have real confirmation that the VP of marketing is ,in fact, CR's wife . Seems that was 100% spot on and is now confirmed. So that 'rumor' has been put to rest.
Balls in CIG's court. problem is, they know that the article is true. So they deflect and try to personally attack DS who has fuck all to do with this article.
At least 3 other websites have come forth saying they had received emails for YEARS stating the same shit and for whatever reason never reported it- Smoke and fire baby.
If there is any untruth here or liability CR's attorneys would be all over it. Lets see what happens, shall we?
Turns out all of the "Anon sources" that reached out to the Escapists were Glassdoor Australia reviews.
Great googly moogly I'm going to need fucking medical attention if this shit storm gets any more hilarious. I'm about to laugh myself into a stroke.
Crazy isn't it
Pretty damning stuff. This escapist story is really growing some legs of its own. I think that some reporter just might have a little bit of explaining to do.
If one could try to analyzed the current situation regarding the beloved SC, CR and CIG, and their current predicament where they're being sieged by 'allegations' by some individuals.
Lets review some facts:
SC, crowd funding starts on Oct 2012, ongoing. Latest figure over $90 millions.
Current project status Oct 2015: No release date. No Beta release. Rumored to be 2017.
From these 2 facts alone, one could understand why certain individuals may be 'upset'. If one as a developer/designer has acceesed to millions of funds and he could determine the project goals, deliverables, contents, he could say that he is in a dreamland. That said, if that same person fails consistently in deliveries of the promised that he had made (not others), where he has full controls of resource and projects, it would be an 'understatement' to say that the whole project is in 'trouble'.
Some things that some people need to realize:
If one say that the project has enough fund to be able deliver the promise (crowd funding goals achieved).
Why would the same project sell future feature to something that has not been released? (Ships).
Company only does this if it is in financial trouble, and they need more funds to deliver the primary product. I would not say, that they do this to squeze easy money out of fans. Nope. They will do this after the product is released. Why? 1. It will prolong the hype and interest of the product (why do this if you have no product and the hype is high? makes no sense, business wise. It will increase the responsibility, because now you have more things u need to accomplish and yet you have no product ready in the market) 2. To create another source of revenue from the same product (notice the trends, DLCs, expansion, and sequel).
A lot of mudslinging. Do we know the sources were the Glassdoor reviews, or is this supposition spread as fact on the internet? If the sources were the Glassdoor reviews, do we know whether or not they were verified by the journalist of the original article?
I have no idea myself, because The Escapist is protecting its sources. I have never really read The Escapist and I am not familiar with the author, so I have no idea as to the quality of their journalism or the extent of their fact checking and verification processes.
If anyone else does, please share; but until then I have no idea what is true and what is not; what is unsubstantiated click-bait, and what is genuine reporting of (possibly unreliable) sources.
This guy articulates nicely why Lizzy's article is really just a steaming pile of shit:
Gotta say that this article adds nothing, it is just one person's biased opinions (yes he calls himself a critic of SC, but the conflict of interest becomes apparent as his post progresses).
It's not that it changes anything per se but it saved me the trouble of having to write something similar here myself. Pretty much every point he makes is valid. His critique is a hell-of-a-lot more solid than the article it's deconstructing.
I mean that it adds nothing in terms of it being just another exercise in mudslinging in ignorance of the facts, which is thrown into the mix and adds no clarity to the situation. It certainly does not answer any of the enquiries in my post above; the answers to which would serve to provide some legitimate basis upon which we could reach an informed opinion.
An answer to these two questions would add clarity rather than creating yet more unfounded noise:
Do we know the sources were the Glassdoor reviews, or is this supposition spread as fact on the internet?
If the sources were the Glassdoor reviews, do we know whether or not they were verified by the journalist of the original article?
I would add that "yes/no" answers are not necessarily needed to these questions. It may be that The Escapist is known for an absence of journalistic integrity (GamerGate); or that multiple parts of the Glassdoor reviews are quoted verbatim, which would be a smoking gun.
It is difficult when journalists protect their sources- it is often necessary or whistle-blowers would never blow whistles- but in this instance you have to wonder if they are truly protecting their sources, or simply hiding unsubstantiated sources.
If one could try to analyzed the current situation regarding the beloved SC, CR and CIG, and their current predicament where they're being sieged by 'allegations' by some individuals.
Lets review some facts:
SC, crowd funding starts on Oct 2012, ongoing. Latest figure over $90 millions.
Current project status Oct 2015: No release date. No Beta release. Rumored to be 2017.
From these 2 facts alone, one could understand why certain individuals may be 'upset'. If one as a developer/designer has acceesed to millions of funds and he could determine the project goals, deliverables, contents, he could say that he is in a dreamland. That said, if that same person fails consistently in deliveries of the promised that he had made (not others), where he has full controls of resource and projects, it would be an 'understatement' to say that the whole project is in 'trouble'.
Some things that some people need to realize:
If one say that the project has enough fund to be able deliver the promise (crowd funding goals achieved).
Why would the same project sell future feature to something that has not been released? (Ships).
Company only does this if it is in financial trouble, and they need more funds to deliver the primary product. I would not say, that they do this to squeze easy money out of fans. Nope. They will do this after the product is released. Why? 1. It will prolong the hype and interest of the product (why do this if you have no product and the hype is high? makes no sense, business wise. It will increase the responsibility, because now you have more things u need to accomplish and yet you have no product ready in the market) 2. To create another source of revenue from the same product (notice the trends, DLCs, expansion, and sequel).
You make some fantastic points.
If the coffers are getting low and they are selling ships now to produce ships sold long ago- We are into 'ponzi scheme' territory.
The problem with many is the same thing that happens with problem gamblers or folks who get caught up in a con. Once you're in so deep you will lie to yourself- Just one more hand of card and I could be back to good- Just another $1000 to the Nigerian who said I would get 10 Million since ive already given him $20K.
I have no affiliation with the Escapist or Star Citizen so I decided to make a video saying why I'm disgusted with the "Faux-Journalism" and lack of credible source checking.
In short: If your going to be on a website like the Escapist, that has as much reach for the gaming audience, you need to be fact checking your sources and not using what is essentially the "Wikipedia for Corporate Reviews" as your source of information.
In case anyone is unaware, the Escapist article lifted their "Anonymous Sources" from the site "Glassdoor.com".
A lot of mudslinging. Do we know the sources were the Glassdoor reviews, or is this supposition spread as fact on the internet? If the sources were the Glassdoor reviews, do we know whether or not they were verified by the journalist of the original article?
I have no idea myself, because The Escapist is protecting its sources. I have never really read The Escapist and I am not familiar with the author, so I have no idea as to the quality of their journalism or the extent of their fact checking and verification processes.
If anyone else does, please share; but until then I have no idea what is true and what is not; what is unsubstantiated click-bait, and what is genuine reporting of (possibly unreliable) sources.
This guy articulates nicely why Lizzy's article is really just a steaming pile of shit:
...Like Watergate? I know the scope is very different but the premise is the same.
Journalists should be there to protect and inform the public. lately all we've had is journalists being a platform for hype in this industry which has worked against the public in a major way. Has allowed predatory practices to become the standard while helping to fuel the hype train. This tide is hopefully turning and it could be a reminder that gaming journalism is either all (essentially) advertisement - or something more.
As we creep into territory of devs begging for money from us, the community, to the tune of 100 Million which is a higher amount than the GDP of some nations we are waaaay past 'Nintendo power' magazine and we need some quick adaptation. Journalists SHOULD have been there asking hard questions all along since it was their readers they were helping to advertise to with all the glowing articles and fluffy bunny reporting of CIG and SC...
But I digress-
Without protecting anon sources, we will have no sources.
When citing an anon source and taking on a 100 Million Dollar behemoth that has become a bit of a cult - A website and Journalist are HIGHLY scrutinizing and vetting these sources. This article could clearly be shown to be causing real monetary damages to CIg and massively knew this before it was published. Its been run through legal, edited, re-edited, cut and all the 'i''s dotted and 't's crossed. With information so damning you dont just "make shit up".
CIG has a right to go through legal means if they think they have a case and the article would be redacted and i'm sure money would exchange hands.
Its how it works.
-Now- We also FINALLY have real confirmation that the VP of marketing is ,in fact, CR's wife . Seems that was 100% spot on and is now confirmed. So that 'rumor' has been put to rest.
Balls in CIG's court. problem is, they know that the article is true. So they deflect and try to personally attack DS who has fuck all to do with this article.
At least 3 other websites have come forth saying they had received emails for YEARS stating the same shit and for whatever reason never reported it- Smoke and fire baby.
If there is any untruth here or liability CR's attorneys would be all over it. Lets see what happens, shall we?
While I think you make some interesting points, I think this redditor's point is that the article is garbage not journalism. I support journalism but I'm less supportive of this type of shoddy reporting. Anyone who can objectively read Lizzy's article is going to find all the flawed reasoning this redditor details.
While I suppose the ball is in CIG's court as you say, it really sucks that they're stuck having to expend resources in order to defend against what increasingly appears to be shameless slander. If there is truth in that article it's buried under a mountain of horseshit. I would have preferred the truth without the horseshit myself.
-But you know what? Everything you just said is logical and I appreciate that you dont like the way the article was written. I appreciate you are being cautious and not a rabid defender.
If this is just 'made up accusations' however, it will cost little to no resources since CIG already retains an attorney for these purposes and others. If this is a reporter who merely took some BS from glassdoor - CIG will have no problem proving this and will not only vindicate themselves but also reap a monetary settlement they could use towards the game.
It may appear to be shameless slander but first the information must be challenged to prove slander. Nobody is challenging the information that im aware of (granted its early to know) which is mypoint- Its in CIGs hands... because the rumors are (and have been) flying and the tempo is getting faster and faster and all they do is attack DS and spin- Which doesnt look good.
CIG needs to push the issue legally now and we will then get to the bottom of everything (which is why they wont push the issue beyond bullshit responses which is PR spin)
Who says it is faux-journalism? Maybe what they posted is correct, maybe Roberts is ripping everyone off. We are not talking about some small amount of money here but over 90 million dollars. If this was an actual business he would have stockholders to account to, well he has donors to his project to answer to.
A lot of mudslinging. Do we know the sources were the Glassdoor reviews, or is this supposition spread as fact on the internet? If the sources were the Glassdoor reviews, do we know whether or not they were verified by the journalist of the original article?
I have no idea myself, because The Escapist is protecting its sources. I have never really read The Escapist and I am not familiar with the author, so I have no idea as to the quality of their journalism or the extent of their fact checking and verification processes.
If anyone else does, please share; but until then I have no idea what is true and what is not; what is unsubstantiated click-bait, and what is genuine reporting of (possibly unreliable) sources.
This guy articulates nicely why Lizzy's article is really just a steaming pile of shit:
...Like Watergate? I know the scope is very different but the premise is the same.
Journalists should be there to protect and inform the public. lately all we've had is journalists being a platform for hype in this industry which has worked against the public in a major way. Has allowed predatory practices to become the standard while helping to fuel the hype train. This tide is hopefully turning and it could be a reminder that gaming journalism is either all (essentially) advertisement - or something more.
As we creep into territory of devs begging for money from us, the community, to the tune of 100 Million which is a higher amount than the GDP of some nations we are waaaay past 'Nintendo power' magazine and we need some quick adaptation. Journalists SHOULD have been there asking hard questions all along since it was their readers they were helping to advertise to with all the glowing articles and fluffy bunny reporting of CIG and SC...
But I digress-
Without protecting anon sources, we will have no sources.
When citing an anon source and taking on a 100 Million Dollar behemoth that has become a bit of a cult - A website and Journalist are HIGHLY scrutinizing and vetting these sources. This article could clearly be shown to be causing real monetary damages to CIg and massively knew this before it was published. Its been run through legal, edited, re-edited, cut and all the 'i''s dotted and 't's crossed. With information so damning you dont just "make shit up".
CIG has a right to go through legal means if they think they have a case and the article would be redacted and i'm sure money would exchange hands.
Its how it works.
-Now- We also FINALLY have real confirmation that the VP of marketing is ,in fact, CR's wife . Seems that was 100% spot on and is now confirmed. So that 'rumor' has been put to rest.
Balls in CIG's court. problem is, they know that the article is true. So they deflect and try to personally attack DS who has fuck all to do with this article.
At least 3 other websites have come forth saying they had received emails for YEARS stating the same shit and for whatever reason never reported it- Smoke and fire baby.
If there is any untruth here or liability CR's attorneys would be all over it. Lets see what happens, shall we?
While I think you make some interesting points, I think this redditor's point is that the article is garbage not journalism. I support journalism but I'm less supportive of this type of shoddy reporting. Anyone who can objectively read Lizzy's article is going to find all the flawed reasoning this redditor details.
While I suppose the ball is in CIG's court as you say, it really sucks that they're stuck having to expend resources in order to defend against what increasingly appears to be shameless slander. If there is truth in that article it's buried under a mountain of horseshit. I would have preferred the truth without the horseshit myself.
Personally I just think it's healthy in the era of crowdfunding that has little no consumer protections that the potential exists at all. In the end game play will out, good/bad/ugly, but in the interim asking for $ with nothing more than promises will ALWAYS genreate controversy, thats a healthy thing in my view. Other than the high school level drama genretaed by both CIG and it's detractors(which has been childish and un-profesional by all involved) I see nothing wrong with a company *gasp* actually having to justify when/how/what for 90+Mil. Sure as the sun rises and it was a game being developed under a traditional publisher they would be answering many of the same questions, in detail and by line item, to the ones signing the paystub.
Comments
Those "journalists" should be embarrassed. Even though I have only read a column or two, I will never view that site as any sort of journalistic integrity whatsoever. What a sham they are.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
A ship for sale !!! go figure,what a surprise.
Guess what will show up in your email the next time?c'mon i bet you can guess?
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I won't bother saying why, just my personal opinion and little point in debating KS's values/flaws here.
Though, it's hard to deny that the possible rumours, if true, about CR's misallocation of funds can be anything but negative to our (gaming) community.
If true, then how many more will prey on those willing to 'invest' in a dream, only to be able to get away with "take the money and run" scheme if no safeguards are placed in KS or anywhere else as protection.
If false, then to what extent will future devs ask for money for virtual promises, or the lengths some will take to defame, slander, and attempt to derail future devs in trying to create something unique?!
Last I checked, this wasn't politics. Or maybe it is because where there's a lot of money, there's always envy, hate, blind faith, devotion.
Or maybe it's more like religion. Christian televangelists ask for donations for your salvation and buy personal jets and mansions to help with the spreading of faith...
Interesting notion, no? Is it really so dissimilar? Who knows?
Enjoy the rest of your day.
https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/3n6lum/escapist_anonymous_sources_uncovered/?sort=new
Turns out all of the "Anon sources" that reached out to the Escapists were Glassdoor Australia reviews.
Great googly moogly I'm going to need fucking medical attention if this shit storm gets any more hilarious. I'm about to laugh myself into a stroke.
Sigh, Ive seen soap operas with less drama, from all involved on both sides it's like kindergarden.
Sedryn, seriously you have to admit that things are not right with Star Citizen. The've done 75% of sod all in 3-4 years.
As an ex-dev, if I gave up work today and devoted my full time to CryEngine I wold have an FPS up and running in under 6 months as it gives you all the tools to do so. in a year it might even be worth playing. Instead we have got:
A flying game that plays like a twitch shooter
A hangar with models of ships in
An area that you can walk around in THAT IS THE SAME AREA MADE FOR ONE OF THEIR VIDS AGES AGO
A corridor shooter on the way (currently malfuntioning, with no AI players only real ones - i.e. a basic empty shooter map)
Still to do:
Build HUNDREDS OF PLANETS - maps, sounds, graphics, npcs, stories, products, economies
Cities
Stations
Deep professions
Economies
Interesting persistent stories
Ships (they still have loads of even these to do)
Squadron 42 - a whole single player game with AAA cast and cinematics
etc etc etc
Its fricking miles away from OK right now.
Popcorn?
The article says they spoke with their sources, i think its likely someone then posted material on GlassDoor to troll CIG.
But then again, Trump is running for President of the USA so I'm almost willing to believe anything right now.
But no seriously am I the only one who can't wait for Derek's next twitlonger? It's going to be glorious.
Has anyone bothered to look at sites with an actual verification process(I'm too lazy)? If management was even close to reported it will show up elsewhere. If it's isolated to sites with no verification well...
https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/3n6lum/escapist_anonymous_sources_uncovered/
On Glassdoor anyone can write a review and have it published without proof of working for the company.
I have no idea myself, because The Escapist is protecting its sources. I have never really read The Escapist and I am not familiar with the author, so I have no idea as to the quality of their journalism or the extent of their fact checking and verification processes.
If anyone else does, please share; but until then I have no idea what is true and what is not; what is unsubstantiated click-bait, and what is genuine reporting of (possibly unreliable) sources.
...Like Watergate? I know the scope is very different but the premise is the same.
Journalists should be there to protect and inform the public. lately all we've had is journalists being a platform for hype in this industry which has worked against the public in a major way. Has allowed predatory practices to become the standard while helping to fuel the hype train. This tide is hopefully turning and it could be a reminder that gaming journalism is either all (essentially) advertisement - or something more.
As we creep into territory of devs begging for money from us, the community, to the tune of 100 Million which is a higher amount than the GDP of some nations we are waaaay past 'Nintendo power' magazine and we need some quick adaptation. Journalists SHOULD have been there asking hard questions all along since it was their readers they were helping to advertise to with all the glowing articles and fluffy bunny reporting of CIG and SC...
But I digress-
Without protecting anon sources, we will have no sources.
When citing an anon source and taking on a 100 Million Dollar behemoth that has become a bit of a cult - A website and Journalist are HIGHLY scrutinizing and vetting these sources. This article could clearly be shown to be causing real monetary damages to CIg and massively knew this before it was published. Its been run through legal, edited, re-edited, cut and all the 'i''s dotted and 't's crossed. With information so damning you dont just "make shit up".
CIG has a right to go through legal means if they think they have a case and the article would be redacted and i'm sure money would exchange hands.
Its how it works.
-Now- We also FINALLY have real confirmation that the VP of marketing is ,in fact, CR's wife . Seems that was 100% spot on and is now confirmed. So that 'rumor' has been put to rest.
Balls in CIG's court. problem is, they know that the article is true. So they deflect and try to personally attack DS who has fuck all to do with this article.
At least 3 other websites have come forth saying they had received emails for YEARS stating the same shit and for whatever reason never reported it- Smoke and fire baby.
If there is any untruth here or liability CR's attorneys would be all over it. Lets see what happens, shall we?
Pretty damning stuff. This escapist story is really growing some legs of its own. I think that some reporter just might have a little bit of explaining to do.
Can people really be that dumb?
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Lets review some facts:
From these 2 facts alone, one could understand why certain individuals may be 'upset'. If one as a developer/designer has acceesed to millions of funds and he could determine the project goals, deliverables, contents, he could say that he is in a dreamland. That said, if that same person fails consistently in deliveries of the promised that he had made (not others), where he has full controls of resource and projects, it would be an 'understatement' to say that the whole project is in 'trouble'.
Some things that some people need to realize:
Company only does this if it is in financial trouble, and they need more funds to deliver the primary product. I would not say, that they do this to squeze easy money out of fans. Nope. They will do this after the product is released. Why? 1. It will prolong the hype and interest of the product (why do this if you have no product and the hype is high? makes no sense, business wise. It will increase the responsibility, because now you have more things u need to accomplish and yet you have no product ready in the market) 2. To create another source of revenue from the same product (notice the trends, DLCs, expansion, and sequel).
An answer to these two questions would add clarity rather than creating yet more unfounded noise:
- Do we know the sources were the Glassdoor reviews, or is this supposition spread as fact on the internet?
- If the sources were the Glassdoor reviews, do we know whether or not they were verified by the journalist of the original article?
I would add that "yes/no" answers are not necessarily needed to these questions. It may be that The Escapist is known for an absence of journalistic integrity (GamerGate); or that multiple parts of the Glassdoor reviews are quoted verbatim, which would be a smoking gun.It is difficult when journalists protect their sources- it is often necessary or whistle-blowers would never blow whistles- but in this instance you have to wonder if they are truly protecting their sources, or simply hiding unsubstantiated sources.
If the coffers are getting low and they are selling ships now to produce ships sold long ago- We are into 'ponzi scheme' territory.
The problem with many is the same thing that happens with problem gamblers or folks who get caught up in a con. Once you're in so deep you will lie to yourself- Just one more hand of card and I could be back to good- Just another $1000 to the Nigerian who said I would get 10 Million since ive already given him $20K.
I have no affiliation with the Escapist or Star Citizen so I decided to make a video saying why I'm disgusted with the "Faux-Journalism" and lack of credible source checking.
In short: If your going to be on a website like the Escapist, that has as much reach for the gaming audience, you need to be fact checking your sources and not using what is essentially the "Wikipedia for Corporate Reviews" as your source of information.
In case anyone is unaware, the Escapist article lifted their "Anonymous Sources" from the site "Glassdoor.com".
More on that here: https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/3n6lum/escapist_anonymous_sources_uncovered/
If this is just 'made up accusations' however, it will cost little to no resources since CIG already retains an attorney for these purposes and others. If this is a reporter who merely took some BS from glassdoor - CIG will have no problem proving this and will not only vindicate themselves but also reap a monetary settlement they could use towards the game.
It may appear to be shameless slander but first the information must be challenged to prove slander. Nobody is challenging the information that im aware of (granted its early to know) which is mypoint- Its in CIGs hands... because the rumors are (and have been) flying and the tempo is getting faster and faster and all they do is attack DS and spin- Which doesnt look good.
CIG needs to push the issue legally now and we will then get to the bottom of everything (which is why they wont push the issue beyond bullshit responses which is PR spin)
Personally I just think it's healthy in the era of crowdfunding that has little no consumer protections that the potential exists at all. In the end game play will out, good/bad/ugly, but in the interim asking for $ with nothing more than promises will ALWAYS genreate controversy, thats a healthy thing in my view. Other than the high school level drama genretaed by both CIG and it's detractors(which has been childish and un-profesional by all involved) I see nothing wrong with a company *gasp* actually having to justify when/how/what for 90+Mil. Sure as the sun rises and it was a game being developed under a traditional publisher they would be answering many of the same questions, in detail and by line item, to the ones signing the paystub.