The Lack of Delivered Content

Realizer

[mod edit]

As for this rubbish, you are insinuating that CIG doesn't have track of their expenses simply because they aren't public to you? News flash, this is the same as any other private company. You obviously don't know what this "bookkeeping" thing is really all about. It's not just a little black book sitting on a table, it's massive amounts of data on pages that hold personal information to accounts paid, or received. All that information is private and would need to be scrubbed of any personal identifiers before releasing to the public like yourself.  

 Not only would that be a waste of funds and manpower, it's just not needed. Why? Because people like you only have their mouth breather opinion of how the world "should" work in your eyes. Not how it actually works for the rest of the business world. When you become competent in managing millions of dollars successfully, maybe you should put your name out there and offer CIG a hand. 

filmoret

@Realizer ; There you go again not reading the wiki.  Wing Commander released in 1990 and Wing Commander 2 released in 1991.  Wing Commander 3 was released 1994 right around the time when normal people had about 4mb of ram in their computers.

Realizer

 @filmoret Sigh there you go again thinking you have more info because you read a wiki you didn't understand, I lived it. Here's proof you didn't comprehend the wiki you "read".

Wing Commander is the eponymous first game in Chris Roberts' science fiction space simulation franchise Wing Commander by Origin Systems. The game was first released for the PC DOS on September 26, 1990 and was later ported to the Amiga, CD32 (256-color), Sega CD and the SNES, and re-released for the PC as Wing Commander I in 1994. An enhanced remake Super Wing Commander was made for the 3DO in 1994, later ported to the Macintosh.

Link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wing_Commander_(video_game)

Edit: Seriously, if you weren't playing the games at the time, stop pretending you have experience with said timeline. For the record the gateway 2000 from 1994 had 16 mb of ram for around $1500-2k I don't remember the exact price I paid, by late 1995 they had 32mb of ram.

Brenics

CrazKanuk said:

Brenics said:

Made perfect sense to me. Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.

Makes sense in what way? So you believe that all private companies should open their books to the public? Or just CIG, because people on the Internet said they're cheats? If everyone, great, people are more than welcome to white knight for complete transparency until the cows come home. In the end, it won't happen, nor should it. 

Why? Easy, there's a very broad perspective on the Internet. Some believe that paying someone moving expenses, or giving someone a company car to sign with you is excessive. Some believe paid lunches and cafeterias are excessive. Me? Well if you're hiring proven talent, if I had to pay for a boob job to sweeten the deal (that could be for a man or woman, btw) then I'd do it. 

On the second point, why do you not think that they are keeping financials? Why is it that you don't think they are being accountable? Or that they don't have a finance department? Do a quick search on Linkedin and you might be surprised to find that they actually have a finance deparmtnet. What?!? I know right? So why are people assuming that they don't have any financial accountability? They'd have the same as anyone else. 

Essentially, there's been nothing provided which amounts to anything. In a matter of a couple minutes I was able to find that they have people responsible for finances. Also, I make the assumption that those people are responsible, the same way that someone would be in any other organization. So why hold them to a different standard? If you were to tell me that 80% of privately-held companies open their books to the public for scrutiny, then I'd say, "Yes, you're right, they should do that." However, that's simply not the case. I'd be surprised if 1% of privately half companies opened their books to the public. So, yes, that's an asinine request. Yes, I compared it to someone walking into McDonald's and ordering a burger and asking to see their books. That's essentially what he's talking about. He feels that being a customer or backer entitles him to see the books for the company, yet it doesn't. 

First NO I think any company that started with Kick Starter should have an open book to money they received on the promise they stated they were going to make. 

Also why does a company that is making a space sim need this many companies all owned by same group of people?

1) Cloud Imperium Games Corp, West Hollywood, CA
2) Cloud Imperium Games LLC, West Hollywood, CA
3) Cloud Imperium Services, LLC West Hollywood, CA 
4) Cloud Imperium Games LLC, Santa Monica, CA
5) Cloud Imperium Games Texas LLC, West Hollywood, CA
6) Cloud Imperium Games Texas LLC, Austin, TX
7) Cloud Imperium Games UK Limited, UK
8) Foundry 42 Limited, UK
9) Foundry 42, Germany
10) Gemini 42 Entertainment LLC, West Hollywood, CA
11) Gemini 42 Productions LLC, Santa Monica, CA
12) Roberts Space Industries Corp, West Hollywood, CA
13) Roberts Space Industries International Limited, UK
14) Twin Brothers Production Inc, West Hollywood, CA
15) Twin Bros, Germany

Answer me that and i will shut the heck up about this game, but please make sure it is a logical answer. Because I see no reason for any company to do this! This makes the whole project look like something just to spread wealth around!

Vrika

Realizer said:

 @filmoret Sigh there you go again thinking you have more info because you read a wiki you didn't understand, I lived it. Here's proof you...

@Realizer ;

Wouldn't it be a lot easier to admit that you just made a mistake when you started writing about Wing Commander's release when you actually meant it's re-release as Wing Commander 1.

laserit

Brenics said:

CrazKanuk said:

Brenics said:

Made perfect sense to me. Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.

Makes sense in what way? So you believe that all private companies should open their books to the public? Or just CIG, because people on the Internet said they're cheats? If everyone, great, people are more than welcome to white knight for complete transparency until the cows come home. In the end, it won't happen, nor should it. 

Why? Easy, there's a very broad perspective on the Internet. Some believe that paying someone moving expenses, or giving someone a company car to sign with you is excessive. Some believe paid lunches and cafeterias are excessive. Me? Well if you're hiring proven talent, if I had to pay for a boob job to sweeten the deal (that could be for a man or woman, btw) then I'd do it. 

On the second point, why do you not think that they are keeping financials? Why is it that you don't think they are being accountable? Or that they don't have a finance department? Do a quick search on Linkedin and you might be surprised to find that they actually have a finance deparmtnet. What?!? I know right? So why are people assuming that they don't have any financial accountability? They'd have the same as anyone else. 

Essentially, there's been nothing provided which amounts to anything. In a matter of a couple minutes I was able to find that they have people responsible for finances. Also, I make the assumption that those people are responsible, the same way that someone would be in any other organization. So why hold them to a different standard? If you were to tell me that 80% of privately-held companies open their books to the public for scrutiny, then I'd say, "Yes, you're right, they should do that." However, that's simply not the case. I'd be surprised if 1% of privately half companies opened their books to the public. So, yes, that's an asinine request. Yes, I compared it to someone walking into McDonald's and ordering a burger and asking to see their books. That's essentially what he's talking about. He feels that being a customer or backer entitles him to see the books for the company, yet it doesn't. 

First NO I think any company that started with Kick Starter should have an open book to money they received on the promise they stated they were going to make. 

Also why does a company that is making a space sim need this many companies all owned by same group of people?

1) Cloud Imperium Games Corp, West Hollywood, CA
2) Cloud Imperium Games LLC, West Hollywood, CA
3) Cloud Imperium Services, LLC West Hollywood, CA 
4) Cloud Imperium Games LLC, Santa Monica, CA
5) Cloud Imperium Games Texas LLC, West Hollywood, CA
6) Cloud Imperium Games Texas LLC, Austin, TX
7) Cloud Imperium Games UK Limited, UK
8) Foundry 42 Limited, UK
9) Foundry 42, Germany
10) Gemini 42 Entertainment LLC, West Hollywood, CA
11) Gemini 42 Productions LLC, Santa Monica, CA
12) Roberts Space Industries Corp, West Hollywood, CA
13) Roberts Space Industries International Limited, UK
14) Twin Brothers Production Inc, West Hollywood, CA
15) Twin Bros, Germany

Answer me that and i will shut the heck up about this game, but please make sure it is a logical answer. Because I see no reason for any company to do this! This makes the whole project look like something just to spread wealth around!

For a credible answer to that Brenics, you would have to ask a CGA. There are many reasons why including tax incentives etc. etc.

Erillion

Also keep in mind that securing name rights might also be an issue, as some bozo could go ahead and form a new company called "Cloud Imperium Games something" just for the heck of it.


Have fun

frostymug

Heretique said:

Everything is speculation until the game is actually released as a whole. But I understand how some people view it.

John Romero, pretty much a giant that had hands with Doom, Commander Keen, Hexen, etc etc.

Then he made Daikatana...

----

We could possibly be looking at another Daikatana. Think that ushers some sympathy to the naysayers. Nobody wants another Daikatana, no one wanted the first one.



I think I scared myself.

That's the wrong kind of Coke for the rumors on this one...

TalulaRose

Realizer said:

TalulaRose said:

Realizer said:

Arglebargle said:

Too bad my internet  is being sucky right now.  (Thanks, Time Warner!)   Chris Roberts has carefully manicured his image, putting himself out as a 'Great Genious' game designer.  He's not.  Talked to a lot of people who worked with him in the past, and they neither like, nor respect him.

But saying he was unknown (especially in Space Gaming) is just wrong.   He's worked hard at building his undeserved reputation.   (This despite him having only 1/3 of the designer credit on Wing Commander, and sharing producer credit with Warren Spector.)

 That happens not everyone likes their boss, fans still got enjoyable experiences. That's what matters in the end.  Unfortunately the gaming industry isn't very fun for the average employee, that's something that needs to change. It happens in all forms of work though if we are being truly honest, grunt workers usually aren't the ones who are happy and prospering. Management is only happy if they think someone else won't pay them more. 

 For me it seems like Roberts is an (all about the project) kind of guy. You're either on board with him and his vision for a good playing experience, or you can find the door. As a backer this is the type of person/project I want my money going to. Because I know Roberts doesn't care about anything other than the game he's making right now. He's obsessive, and that makes for a good creative leader. Same goes for people like George Lucas, or a Steve Jobs type of person.

Same goes for people like George Lucas, or a Steve Jobs type of person.

What products have they not delivered that would have earned them such a high pedestal?

We are definitely in the realm of delusion now....feet firmly planted and taken root.

Comparisons in personality, a little too complex for you?

Unless you have known all these people personally and deal with them on a daily basis I have to ask how you can make any sort of comment on their personalities. I know, you watched some videos and now you are an expert.

That's a very high pedestal.

And for the record, didn't have a clue who Chris Roberts was before seeing posts on this site.

I think the statement "his fans know who he is" is closer to the truth.

CrazKanuk

Brenics said:

CrazKanuk said:

Brenics said:

Made perfect sense to me. Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.

Makes sense in what way? So you believe that all private companies should open their books to the public? Or just CIG, because people on the Internet said they're cheats? If everyone, great, people are more than welcome to white knight for complete transparency until the cows come home. In the end, it won't happen, nor should it. 

Why? Easy, there's a very broad perspective on the Internet. Some believe that paying someone moving expenses, or giving someone a company car to sign with you is excessive. Some believe paid lunches and cafeterias are excessive. Me? Well if you're hiring proven talent, if I had to pay for a boob job to sweeten the deal (that could be for a man or woman, btw) then I'd do it. 

On the second point, why do you not think that they are keeping financials? Why is it that you don't think they are being accountable? Or that they don't have a finance department? Do a quick search on Linkedin and you might be surprised to find that they actually have a finance deparmtnet. What?!? I know right? So why are people assuming that they don't have any financial accountability? They'd have the same as anyone else. 

Essentially, there's been nothing provided which amounts to anything. In a matter of a couple minutes I was able to find that they have people responsible for finances. Also, I make the assumption that those people are responsible, the same way that someone would be in any other organization. So why hold them to a different standard? If you were to tell me that 80% of privately-held companies open their books to the public for scrutiny, then I'd say, "Yes, you're right, they should do that." However, that's simply not the case. I'd be surprised if 1% of privately half companies opened their books to the public. So, yes, that's an asinine request. Yes, I compared it to someone walking into McDonald's and ordering a burger and asking to see their books. That's essentially what he's talking about. He feels that being a customer or backer entitles him to see the books for the company, yet it doesn't. 

First NO I think any company that started with Kick Starter should have an open book to money they received on the promise they stated they were going to make. 

Also why does a company that is making a space sim need this many companies all owned by same group of people?

1) Cloud Imperium Games Corp, West Hollywood, CA
2) Cloud Imperium Games LLC, West Hollywood, CA
3) Cloud Imperium Services, LLC West Hollywood, CA 
4) Cloud Imperium Games LLC, Santa Monica, CA
5) Cloud Imperium Games Texas LLC, West Hollywood, CA
6) Cloud Imperium Games Texas LLC, Austin, TX
7) Cloud Imperium Games UK Limited, UK
8) Foundry 42 Limited, UK
9) Foundry 42, Germany
10) Gemini 42 Entertainment LLC, West Hollywood, CA
11) Gemini 42 Productions LLC, Santa Monica, CA
12) Roberts Space Industries Corp, West Hollywood, CA
13) Roberts Space Industries International Limited, UK
14) Twin Brothers Production Inc, West Hollywood, CA
15) Twin Bros, Germany

Answer me that and i will shut the heck up about this game, but please make sure it is a logical answer. Because I see no reason for any company to do this! This makes the whole project look like something just to spread wealth around!

I don't know, but there is logical reasoning behind it. Same reason Sony has about a hundred or more subsidiaries 

Same goes for EA or any other large company. Even Google!! So if Google's doing it, then you know it's not shady because they have a mission to do no evil. 

vadio123

i see people so excited about 2.0! go real guys..... history show us whats kind exect from RSI

Burntvet

laserit said:

Brenics said:

CrazKanuk said:

Brenics said:

Made perfect sense to me. Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.

Makes sense in what way? So you believe that all private companies should open their books to the public? Or just CIG, because people on the Internet said they're cheats? If everyone, great, people are more than welcome to white knight for complete transparency until the cows come home. In the end, it won't happen, nor should it. 

Why? Easy, there's a very broad perspective on the Internet. Some believe that paying someone moving expenses, or giving someone a company car to sign with you is excessive. Some believe paid lunches and cafeterias are excessive. Me? Well if you're hiring proven talent, if I had to pay for a boob job to sweeten the deal (that could be for a man or woman, btw) then I'd do it. 

On the second point, why do you not think that they are keeping financials? Why is it that you don't think they are being accountable? Or that they don't have a finance department? Do a quick search on Linkedin and you might be surprised to find that they actually have a finance deparmtnet. What?!? I know right? So why are people assuming that they don't have any financial accountability? They'd have the same as anyone else. 

Essentially, there's been nothing provided which amounts to anything. In a matter of a couple minutes I was able to find that they have people responsible for finances. Also, I make the assumption that those people are responsible, the same way that someone would be in any other organization. So why hold them to a different standard? If you were to tell me that 80% of privately-held companies open their books to the public for scrutiny, then I'd say, "Yes, you're right, they should do that." However, that's simply not the case. I'd be surprised if 1% of privately half companies opened their books to the public. So, yes, that's an asinine request. Yes, I compared it to someone walking into McDonald's and ordering a burger and asking to see their books. That's essentially what he's talking about. He feels that being a customer or backer entitles him to see the books for the company, yet it doesn't. 

First NO I think any company that started with Kick Starter should have an open book to money they received on the promise they stated they were going to make. 

Also why does a company that is making a space sim need this many companies all owned by same group of people?

1) Cloud Imperium Games Corp, West Hollywood, CA
2) Cloud Imperium Games LLC, West Hollywood, CA
3) Cloud Imperium Services, LLC West Hollywood, CA 
4) Cloud Imperium Games LLC, Santa Monica, CA
5) Cloud Imperium Games Texas LLC, West Hollywood, CA
6) Cloud Imperium Games Texas LLC, Austin, TX
7) Cloud Imperium Games UK Limited, UK
8) Foundry 42 Limited, UK
9) Foundry 42, Germany
10) Gemini 42 Entertainment LLC, West Hollywood, CA
11) Gemini 42 Productions LLC, Santa Monica, CA
12) Roberts Space Industries Corp, West Hollywood, CA
13) Roberts Space Industries International Limited, UK
14) Twin Brothers Production Inc, West Hollywood, CA
15) Twin Bros, Germany

Answer me that and i will shut the heck up about this game, but please make sure it is a logical answer. Because I see no reason for any company to do this! This makes the whole project look like something just to spread wealth around!

For a credible answer to that Brenics, you would have to ask a CGA. There are many reasons why including tax incentives etc. etc.

That is true, but other reasons also include ways to pad the billing and de facto launder money to pay yourself more on the side.

Such practices are very common, which is why the mob uses them.

If you have 4 or 5 layers of stacked companies, it allows a "markup" which is in reality a skim off of revenue, at each juncture: by calling them management fees, transaction fees, revenue sharing, pre-paid royalties and others.

But since the same person or entities owns everything, each one of those slices is "gone" and is not looked for by the tax man or stockholders (or "crowdfunding donors" in this case). And it works, which is why such schemes have been around forever, but only when it is done with other people's money that you are trying to justify spending (i.e. for when you get sued or investigated later).


Not saying that is going on here, but there are just as many shady reasons to run a corporate structure like this, as legitimate ones.

Realizer

Vrika said:

Realizer said:

 @filmoret Sigh there you go again thinking you have more info because you read a wiki you didn't understand, I lived it. Here's proof you...

@Realizer ;

Wouldn't it be a lot easier to admit that you just made a mistake when you started writing about Wing Commander's release when you actually meant it's re-release as Wing Commander 1.

 No because I specifically said I started following the franchise in 1992, which is why it's only stating the truth that I said Wing Commander 1. Which is when it had it's more successful relaunch in 1994, this is when more players were coming on board and getting into the pc gaming hobby.  I did not play it in 1990, I would have said if I had.

 Many other friends of mine went out to upgrade their pc's when the special edition launched that had wing commander 1 and 2 as a package, as 3 was just about finished.  The relaunch was much more successful than the original launch, because not enough people had PCs before that. Doom had also just came out the year before, and people started to figure out pc gaming was the new thing in town.

barasawa

filmoret said:

Chris Roberts was so well known he didn't even have a wiki until 2006.  So 1 million people out of the 6 billion people on this planet makes a person known?  Now he has over 30 million people who know his name and its not because of wing commander.

LOTS of people know Chris Roberts. Just because some of the wiki obsessed newbs don't, doesn't mean he wasn't a well known figure. You just didn't hear about the Roberts brothers for a while after the mess with EA and the destruction of Origin. Makes you wonder if there was some kind of non-compete time period clause in their agreements or something.

Realizer

Burntvet said:

laserit said:

Brenics said:

CrazKanuk said:

Brenics said:

Made perfect sense to me. Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.

Makes sense in what way? So you believe that all private companies should open their books to the public? Or just CIG, because people on the Internet said they're cheats? If everyone, great, people are more than welcome to white knight for complete transparency until the cows come home. In the end, it won't happen, nor should it. 

Why? Easy, there's a very broad perspective on the Internet. Some believe that paying someone moving expenses, or giving someone a company car to sign with you is excessive. Some believe paid lunches and cafeterias are excessive. Me? Well if you're hiring proven talent, if I had to pay for a boob job to sweeten the deal (that could be for a man or woman, btw) then I'd do it. 

On the second point, why do you not think that they are keeping financials? Why is it that you don't think they are being accountable? Or that they don't have a finance department? Do a quick search on Linkedin and you might be surprised to find that they actually have a finance deparmtnet. What?!? I know right? So why are people assuming that they don't have any financial accountability? They'd have the same as anyone else. 

Essentially, there's been nothing provided which amounts to anything. In a matter of a couple minutes I was able to find that they have people responsible for finances. Also, I make the assumption that those people are responsible, the same way that someone would be in any other organization. So why hold them to a different standard? If you were to tell me that 80% of privately-held companies open their books to the public for scrutiny, then I'd say, "Yes, you're right, they should do that." However, that's simply not the case. I'd be surprised if 1% of privately half companies opened their books to the public. So, yes, that's an asinine request. Yes, I compared it to someone walking into McDonald's and ordering a burger and asking to see their books. That's essentially what he's talking about. He feels that being a customer or backer entitles him to see the books for the company, yet it doesn't. 

First NO I think any company that started with Kick Starter should have an open book to money they received on the promise they stated they were going to make. 

Also why does a company that is making a space sim need this many companies all owned by same group of people?

1) Cloud Imperium Games Corp, West Hollywood, CA
2) Cloud Imperium Games LLC, West Hollywood, CA
3) Cloud Imperium Services, LLC West Hollywood, CA 
4) Cloud Imperium Games LLC, Santa Monica, CA
5) Cloud Imperium Games Texas LLC, West Hollywood, CA
6) Cloud Imperium Games Texas LLC, Austin, TX
7) Cloud Imperium Games UK Limited, UK
8) Foundry 42 Limited, UK
9) Foundry 42, Germany
10) Gemini 42 Entertainment LLC, West Hollywood, CA
11) Gemini 42 Productions LLC, Santa Monica, CA
12) Roberts Space Industries Corp, West Hollywood, CA
13) Roberts Space Industries International Limited, UK
14) Twin Brothers Production Inc, West Hollywood, CA
15) Twin Bros, Germany

Answer me that and i will shut the heck up about this game, but please make sure it is a logical answer. Because I see no reason for any company to do this! This makes the whole project look like something just to spread wealth around!

For a credible answer to that Brenics, you would have to ask a CGA. There are many reasons why including tax incentives etc. etc.

That is true, but other reasons also include ways to pad the billing and de facto launder money to pay yourself more on the side.

Such practices are very common, which is why the mob uses them.

If you have 4 or 5 layers of stacked companies, it allows a "markup" which is in reality a skim off of revenue, at each juncture: by calling them management fees, transaction fees, revenue sharing, pre-paid royalties and others.

But since the same person or entities owns everything, each one of those slices is "gone" and is not looked for by the tax man or stockholders (or "crowdfunding donors" in this case). And it works, which is why such schemes have been around forever, but only when it is done with other people's money that you are trying to justify spending (i.e. for when you get sued or investigated later).


Not saying that is going on here, but there are just as many shady reasons to run a corporate structure like this, as legitimate ones.

 It's also why companies like Google, Yum Foods, Ford, and Luxotica; Activision-Bliazard and many others use the same structure. Not just "the mob" a term you only used to demonize a commonly used system by many other companies, that people do legit business with on a daily basis. Almost every major food company is owned by a holding company which normally controls many brands, even competing brands. Even Reebok, and Adidas are owned by the same company. 

 This is a normal thing that companies are doing all around on a daily basis welcome to 2015, if CIG were doing otherwise I would be concerned at the level of leadership they are employing. 

filmoret

CrazKanuk said:

Brenics said:

CrazKanuk said:

Brenics said:

Made perfect sense to me. Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.

Makes sense in what way? So you believe that all private companies should open their books to the public? Or just CIG, because people on the Internet said they're cheats? If everyone, great, people are more than welcome to white knight for complete transparency until the cows come home. In the end, it won't happen, nor should it. 

Why? Easy, there's a very broad perspective on the Internet. Some believe that paying someone moving expenses, or giving someone a company car to sign with you is excessive. Some believe paid lunches and cafeterias are excessive. Me? Well if you're hiring proven talent, if I had to pay for a boob job to sweeten the deal (that could be for a man or woman, btw) then I'd do it. 

On the second point, why do you not think that they are keeping financials? Why is it that you don't think they are being accountable? Or that they don't have a finance department? Do a quick search on Linkedin and you might be surprised to find that they actually have a finance deparmtnet. What?!? I know right? So why are people assuming that they don't have any financial accountability? They'd have the same as anyone else. 

Essentially, there's been nothing provided which amounts to anything. In a matter of a couple minutes I was able to find that they have people responsible for finances. Also, I make the assumption that those people are responsible, the same way that someone would be in any other organization. So why hold them to a different standard? If you were to tell me that 80% of privately-held companies open their books to the public for scrutiny, then I'd say, "Yes, you're right, they should do that." However, that's simply not the case. I'd be surprised if 1% of privately half companies opened their books to the public. So, yes, that's an asinine request. Yes, I compared it to someone walking into McDonald's and ordering a burger and asking to see their books. That's essentially what he's talking about. He feels that being a customer or backer entitles him to see the books for the company, yet it doesn't. 

First NO I think any company that started with Kick Starter should have an open book to money they received on the promise they stated they were going to make. 

Also why does a company that is making a space sim need this many companies all owned by same group of people?

1) Cloud Imperium Games Corp, West Hollywood, CA
2) Cloud Imperium Games LLC, West Hollywood, CA
3) Cloud Imperium Services, LLC West Hollywood, CA 
4) Cloud Imperium Games LLC, Santa Monica, CA
5) Cloud Imperium Games Texas LLC, West Hollywood, CA
6) Cloud Imperium Games Texas LLC, Austin, TX
7) Cloud Imperium Games UK Limited, UK
8) Foundry 42 Limited, UK
9) Foundry 42, Germany
10) Gemini 42 Entertainment LLC, West Hollywood, CA
11) Gemini 42 Productions LLC, Santa Monica, CA
12) Roberts Space Industries Corp, West Hollywood, CA
13) Roberts Space Industries International Limited, UK
14) Twin Brothers Production Inc, West Hollywood, CA
15) Twin Bros, Germany

Answer me that and i will shut the heck up about this game, but please make sure it is a logical answer. Because I see no reason for any company to do this! This makes the whole project look like something just to spread wealth around!

I don't know, but there is logical reasoning behind it. Same reason Sony has about a hundred or more subsidiaries 

Same goes for EA or any other large company. Even Google!! So if Google's doing it, then you know it's not shady because they have a mission to do no evil. 

Comparing multi billion dollar corporations with a multimillion dollar one is quite absurd.  Sony makes thousands of products a year.  EA makes about 100 games a year.  Meanwhile  this other company who has 15 subsidieries hasn't made 1 game in 5 years.

barasawa

TalulaRose said:

Unless you have known all these people personally and deal with them on a daily basis I have to ask how you can make any sort of comment on their personalities. I know, you watched some videos and now you are an expert.

That's a very high pedestal.

And for the record, didn't have a clue who Chris Roberts was before seeing posts on this site.

I think the statement "his fans know who he is" is closer to the truth.

Unless of course you've seen games that he's done in the past and enjoyed them, in which case you can probably expect to get at least that quality from a new game now. Still that doesn't say whether he kicks puppies and kittens for giggles, wears sandpaper undies, or anything, but we want good games and that kind of stuff is personal life details that are unimportant to good games. 
Chris Roberts hasn't gone on any bizarre psychotic rants, thrown fellow devs out windows, tried to sue himself, or perpetrated any other acts that would indicate he's somehow unfit for the job he has. 

It's true I question his business acumen, but not his programming ability or imaginative vision.

Whether people like it or not, it takes time to make games, and big games take even longer. Star Citizen is HUGE, and there are a lot of people on it, but you can only throw so many at a project before they start getting in each others way. At least they are showing progress, so it's not vaporware, it's just taking time. Relax and try to resist the calls of impatience, because ranting about it won't speed things up, though if you cause enough trouble, it can slow it down.

laserit

Burntvet said:

laserit said:

Brenics said:

CrazKanuk said:

Brenics said:

Made perfect sense to me. Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.

Makes sense in what way? So you believe that all private companies should open their books to the public? Or just CIG, because people on the Internet said they're cheats? If everyone, great, people are more than welcome to white knight for complete transparency until the cows come home. In the end, it won't happen, nor should it. 

Why? Easy, there's a very broad perspective on the Internet. Some believe that paying someone moving expenses, or giving someone a company car to sign with you is excessive. Some believe paid lunches and cafeterias are excessive. Me? Well if you're hiring proven talent, if I had to pay for a boob job to sweeten the deal (that could be for a man or woman, btw) then I'd do it. 

On the second point, why do you not think that they are keeping financials? Why is it that you don't think they are being accountable? Or that they don't have a finance department? Do a quick search on Linkedin and you might be surprised to find that they actually have a finance deparmtnet. What?!? I know right? So why are people assuming that they don't have any financial accountability? They'd have the same as anyone else. 

Essentially, there's been nothing provided which amounts to anything. In a matter of a couple minutes I was able to find that they have people responsible for finances. Also, I make the assumption that those people are responsible, the same way that someone would be in any other organization. So why hold them to a different standard? If you were to tell me that 80% of privately-held companies open their books to the public for scrutiny, then I'd say, "Yes, you're right, they should do that." However, that's simply not the case. I'd be surprised if 1% of privately half companies opened their books to the public. So, yes, that's an asinine request. Yes, I compared it to someone walking into McDonald's and ordering a burger and asking to see their books. That's essentially what he's talking about. He feels that being a customer or backer entitles him to see the books for the company, yet it doesn't. 

First NO I think any company that started with Kick Starter should have an open book to money they received on the promise they stated they were going to make. 

Also why does a company that is making a space sim need this many companies all owned by same group of people?

1) Cloud Imperium Games Corp, West Hollywood, CA
2) Cloud Imperium Games LLC, West Hollywood, CA
3) Cloud Imperium Services, LLC West Hollywood, CA 
4) Cloud Imperium Games LLC, Santa Monica, CA
5) Cloud Imperium Games Texas LLC, West Hollywood, CA
6) Cloud Imperium Games Texas LLC, Austin, TX
7) Cloud Imperium Games UK Limited, UK
8) Foundry 42 Limited, UK
9) Foundry 42, Germany
10) Gemini 42 Entertainment LLC, West Hollywood, CA
11) Gemini 42 Productions LLC, Santa Monica, CA
12) Roberts Space Industries Corp, West Hollywood, CA
13) Roberts Space Industries International Limited, UK
14) Twin Brothers Production Inc, West Hollywood, CA
15) Twin Bros, Germany

Answer me that and i will shut the heck up about this game, but please make sure it is a logical answer. Because I see no reason for any company to do this! This makes the whole project look like something just to spread wealth around!

For a credible answer to that Brenics, you would have to ask a CGA. There are many reasons why including tax incentives etc. etc.

That is true, but other reasons also include ways to pad the billing and de facto launder money to pay yourself more on the side.

Such practices are very common, which is why the mob uses them.

If you have 4 or 5 layers of stacked companies, it allows a "markup" which is in reality a skim off of revenue, at each juncture: by calling them management fees, transaction fees, revenue sharing, pre-paid royalties and others.

But since the same person or entities owns everything, each one of those slices is "gone" and is not looked for by the tax man or stockholders (or "crowdfunding donors" in this case). And it works, which is why such schemes have been around forever, but only when it is done with other people's money that you are trying to justify spending (i.e. for when you get sued or investigated later).


Not saying that is going on here, but there are just as many shady reasons to run a corporate structure like this, as legitimate ones.

As I said:

A  CGA is needed for a credible answer.

I'm billed from one, an average of 40k a year to save me around 200k a year in taxes legally. He also advises me on certain grants I might be eligible for. He's not my bookkeeper.

My business currently has 32 employees with about 8 mil a year in sales. Accounting gets way over my head in my business, let alone something like CIG.

Asm0deus

Thinking we will see more good stuff very soon.  There has been some speculation that PG planets and seamless landings or some such are not as far away as CR initially thought it would be.

I wonder how much has to be added for people to stop claiming there is no game and it's all one big scam.

K - Pensez-vous pouvoir faire venir au jeu une nouvelle population de joueurs avec de nouvelles fonctionnalités, comme le FPS ? S - Oui, absolument. Avec le baby PU qui arrive ce mois-ci ... K - Oh, vous annoncez une date ?

S - Nous en sommes tellement proches depuis ces dernières semaines, que oui, ça arrivera ce mois-ci. Et cet embryon d'univers est tellement unique qu'il va drainer de nouveaux joueurs à lui, ainsi que faire revenir d'anciens joueurs. La gestion des équipages participera aussi à l'engouement.

http://starcitizen.jeuxonline.info/actualite/49291/interview-sandi-gardiner-ben-lesnick-jeuxonline

Realizer

filmoret said:

CrazKanuk said:

Brenics said:

CrazKanuk said:

Brenics said:

Made perfect sense to me. Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.

Makes sense in what way? So you believe that all private companies should open their books to the public? Or just CIG, because people on the Internet said they're cheats? If everyone, great, people are more than welcome to white knight for complete transparency until the cows come home. In the end, it won't happen, nor should it. 

Why? Easy, there's a very broad perspective on the Internet. Some believe that paying someone moving expenses, or giving someone a company car to sign with you is excessive. Some believe paid lunches and cafeterias are excessive. Me? Well if you're hiring proven talent, if I had to pay for a boob job to sweeten the deal (that could be for a man or woman, btw) then I'd do it. 

On the second point, why do you not think that they are keeping financials? Why is it that you don't think they are being accountable? Or that they don't have a finance department? Do a quick search on Linkedin and you might be surprised to find that they actually have a finance deparmtnet. What?!? I know right? So why are people assuming that they don't have any financial accountability? They'd have the same as anyone else. 

Essentially, there's been nothing provided which amounts to anything. In a matter of a couple minutes I was able to find that they have people responsible for finances. Also, I make the assumption that those people are responsible, the same way that someone would be in any other organization. So why hold them to a different standard? If you were to tell me that 80% of privately-held companies open their books to the public for scrutiny, then I'd say, "Yes, you're right, they should do that." However, that's simply not the case. I'd be surprised if 1% of privately half companies opened their books to the public. So, yes, that's an asinine request. Yes, I compared it to someone walking into McDonald's and ordering a burger and asking to see their books. That's essentially what he's talking about. He feels that being a customer or backer entitles him to see the books for the company, yet it doesn't. 

First NO I think any company that started with Kick Starter should have an open book to money they received on the promise they stated they were going to make. 

Also why does a company that is making a space sim need this many companies all owned by same group of people?

1) Cloud Imperium Games Corp, West Hollywood, CA
2) Cloud Imperium Games LLC, West Hollywood, CA
3) Cloud Imperium Services, LLC West Hollywood, CA 
4) Cloud Imperium Games LLC, Santa Monica, CA
5) Cloud Imperium Games Texas LLC, West Hollywood, CA
6) Cloud Imperium Games Texas LLC, Austin, TX
7) Cloud Imperium Games UK Limited, UK
8) Foundry 42 Limited, UK
9) Foundry 42, Germany
10) Gemini 42 Entertainment LLC, West Hollywood, CA
11) Gemini 42 Productions LLC, Santa Monica, CA
12) Roberts Space Industries Corp, West Hollywood, CA
13) Roberts Space Industries International Limited, UK
14) Twin Brothers Production Inc, West Hollywood, CA
15) Twin Bros, Germany

Answer me that and i will shut the heck up about this game, but please make sure it is a logical answer. Because I see no reason for any company to do this! This makes the whole project look like something just to spread wealth around!

I don't know, but there is logical reasoning behind it. Same reason Sony has about a hundred or more subsidiaries 

Same goes for EA or any other large company. Even Google!! So if Google's doing it, then you know it's not shady because they have a mission to do no evil. 

Comparing multi billion dollar corporations with a multimillion dollar one is quite absurd.  Sony makes thousands of products a year.  EA makes about 100 games a year.  Meanwhile  this other company who has 15 subsidieries hasn't made 1 game in 5 years.

 So you think the amount of money a business deals with should determine how they structure, and why? There's tons of small business and private companies that deal with less money than CIG using the same laws to their advantage. It's called smart business. 

Realizer

TalulaRose said:

Realizer said:

TalulaRose said:

Realizer said:

Arglebargle said:

Too bad my internet  is being sucky right now.  (Thanks, Time Warner!)   Chris Roberts has carefully manicured his image, putting himself out as a 'Great Genious' game designer.  He's not.  Talked to a lot of people who worked with him in the past, and they neither like, nor respect him.

But saying he was unknown (especially in Space Gaming) is just wrong.   He's worked hard at building his undeserved reputation.   (This despite him having only 1/3 of the designer credit on Wing Commander, and sharing producer credit with Warren Spector.)

 That happens not everyone likes their boss, fans still got enjoyable experiences. That's what matters in the end.  Unfortunately the gaming industry isn't very fun for the average employee, that's something that needs to change. It happens in all forms of work though if we are being truly honest, grunt workers usually aren't the ones who are happy and prospering. Management is only happy if they think someone else won't pay them more. 

 For me it seems like Roberts is an (all about the project) kind of guy. You're either on board with him and his vision for a good playing experience, or you can find the door. As a backer this is the type of person/project I want my money going to. Because I know Roberts doesn't care about anything other than the game he's making right now. He's obsessive, and that makes for a good creative leader. Same goes for people like George Lucas, or a Steve Jobs type of person.

Same goes for people like George Lucas, or a Steve Jobs type of person.

What products have they not delivered that would have earned them such a high pedestal?

We are definitely in the realm of delusion now....feet firmly planted and taken root.

Comparisons in personality, a little too complex for you?

Unless you have known all these people personally and deal with them on a daily basis I have to ask how you can make any sort of comment on their personalities. I know, you watched some videos and now you are an expert.

That's a very high pedestal.

And for the record, didn't have a clue who Chris Roberts was before seeing posts on this site.

I think the statement "his fans know who he is" is closer to the truth.

 So you're saying you don't know the traits that make for a good creative leader, yet you're able to judge that Roberts is a "bad guy taking money from people"?

 Of course his fans know who he is, they are the people this game is aimed at. Word of mouth and awesome looking graphics are what's making it huge. Back before people used to get butthurt over things people said on the internet, the folks who didn't know about decent genre pushing games were called noobs.

BeansnBread

It is pretty funny that you're comparing him to Steve Jobs and George Lucas. It really shows how devoted you are to him. No matter what he actually is, the fantasy that he could be considered in their group at this point is fairly ludicrous.

Realizer

BeansnBread said:

It is pretty funny that you're comparing him to Steve Jobs and George Lucas. It really shows how devoted you are to him. No matter what he actually is, the fantasy that he could be considered in their group at this point is fairly ludicrous.

 I'm not saying they are of equal caliber, I'm saying they show similar traits when it comes to how their companies and creative works are handled. Think what you want, the guy is just a game designer that I happen to respect in an industry full of weirdos that have gone over the edge at one point or another. 

BeansnBread

I think the following is what made me think of him as a terrible leader:
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14979-Chairmans-Response-To-The-Escapist

After I read that, I interpreted it as an almost adolescent response in a situation where, because he is so central to the company, he needed to act like an adult. I just don't see the personality traits you do at all and am honestly surprised when people hold that opinion. But, people hold opinions for various reasons and you are certainly entitled to yours.

Realizer

BeansnBread said:

I think the following is what made me think of him as a terrible leader:
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14979-Chairmans-Response-To-The-Escapist

After I read that, I interpreted it as an almost adolescent response in a situation where, because he is so central to the company, he needed to act like an adult. I just don't see the personality traits you do at all and am honestly surprised when people hold that opinion. But, people hold opinions for various reasons and you are certainly entitled to yours.

 Emotions ran high in that letter indeed, it's also riddled with truth. Lack of eloquence aside, someone was gonna say it in one form or another. If you want to go back to Steve Jobs again, do some research on how difficult of a person he was to work with, yet there's no denying those traits helped him be the innovator he was. Same with Lucas another "difficult" person to work with according to those around him. Star Wars is badass though. 

 Again before you go saying I'm trying to make Roberts on the level of Jobs or Lucas, I'm not. Their accomplishments are far beyond what Roberts has done so far. That doesn't mean they can't share similar traits of personality.

 These aren't really tough concepts to understand in my opinion.  History is filled with random people who made themselves look silly when emotions ran high, yet they still managed to create something the world wanted.