› ›

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links

The Lack of Delivered Content

12357…16

Comments

  • TalonsinTalonsin Member EpicPosts: 3,619
    Arkade99 said:
    So Chris had two choices: 1) Stick with original goals and failing to deliver on stretch goal after stretch goals which would anger those who wanted and funded said stretch goals...or.... 2)  Develop towards what the fans wanted and subsequently funded.  This would obviously change the scale/scope of the project requiring more development for a more complicated project than originally planned.
    He had a 3rd option: don't include stretch goals that would increase the scope and cost of the game. But that wouldn't have kept the money rolling in.

    It's interesting that they only needed 500k to make the game, but needed another 92.5 mil for the stretch goals. Seems reasonable.
    Are you serious? Keep the project the same at $500,000 and $100,000,000?

    That's completely absurd.  Just imagine the outrage if they did that.  People would be saying "these guys are crooks and frauds not changing the goals after raising 200x more since their initial Kickstarter goal."
    You are absolutely right!  With 100 million there is no reason to pledge any sort of respect or assurances to your customers.  With 100 million there is no need to pledge something as foolish as this:

    "We, the Developer, intend to treat you with the same respect we would give a publisher. You will receive regular updates about the progress of the game.  We will do a show and tell for each major milestone"

    I can see this being an issue with only 500k but come on...  100 million means they dont have to do anything!
    "Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game."  - SEANMCAD

  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Vrika said:
    pingo said:
    When you have over 200+ people working every single day, full time, that cost is massive. Per month operation cost is probably around 200-300,000k. 
    How did you reach that number?

    I think something like 2 millions/month would be closer to truth.
    maybe office costs? IDK, but your number is closer to overall monthly costs for sure, salaries & office included.

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • SlothnChunkSlothnChunk Member UncommonPosts: 788
    Shaigh said:
    laserit said:
    What ever happened to all those allegations made by the Escapist?  They appear to have faded away.  The last thing I remember was an invitation to the blog to take a tour.
    Didn't they say that they accepted? Did this tour take place? and if so what were their findings?

    Or was this all tabloid fodder in the first place?
    Cloud imperium games sent a mail where they were threatening to sue the escapists if they didn't apologize to Ms Gardiner, made a public apology regarding the whole thing and start an investigation regarding the publication.

    The escapist didn't apologize, and CIG have yet to sue the escapists.
    The Escapist's editor at the time said they "stand by its coverage of Star Citizen and intends to continue to investigate the developing story."

    Not a peep from them since.  It was all bogus.  If their 'sources' and 'investigations' were legitimate they would have published them as vindication.
  • SlothnChunkSlothnChunk Member UncommonPosts: 788
    Talonsin said:
    Arkade99 said:
    So Chris had two choices: 1) Stick with original goals and failing to deliver on stretch goal after stretch goals which would anger those who wanted and funded said stretch goals...or.... 2)  Develop towards what the fans wanted and subsequently funded.  This would obviously change the scale/scope of the project requiring more development for a more complicated project than originally planned.
    He had a 3rd option: don't include stretch goals that would increase the scope and cost of the game. But that wouldn't have kept the money rolling in.

    It's interesting that they only needed 500k to make the game, but needed another 92.5 mil for the stretch goals. Seems reasonable.
    Are you serious? Keep the project the same at $500,000 and $100,000,000?

    That's completely absurd.  Just imagine the outrage if they did that.  People would be saying "these guys are crooks and frauds not changing the goals after raising 200x more since their initial Kickstarter goal."
    You are absolutely right!  With 100 million there is no reason to pledge any sort of respect or assurances to your customers.  With 100 million there is no need to pledge something as foolish as this:

    "We, the Developer, intend to treat you with the same respect we would give a publisher. You will receive regular updates about the progress of the game.  We will do a show and tell for each major milestone"

    I can see this being an issue with only 500k but come on...  100 million means they dont have to do anything!
    Well, you can argue their goals changed as the funding increased.  But you can't argue the part of the pledge you just quoted has been broken.  They've stuck to that aspect of the pledge.
  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 7,591
    Shaigh said:
    laserit said:
    Octagon7711 said:
    What ever happened to all those allegations made by the Escapist?  They appear to have faded away.  The last thing I remember was an invitation to the blog to take a tour.
    Didn't they say that they accepted? Did this tour take place? and if so what were their findings?

    Or was this all tabloid fodder in the first place?
    Cloud imperium games sent a mail where they were threatening to sue the escapists if they didn't apologize to Ms Gardiner, made a public apology regarding the whole thing and start an investigation regarding the publication.

    The escapist didn't apologize, and CIG have yet to sue the escapists.
    How many times has the National Enquirer been legally threatened? Now how many times have they been sued in comparison.

    Now look at all the crap they write and say about the rich, famous and powerful.

    It's just business as usual in the tabloid world.

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • DocBrodyDocBrody Member UncommonPosts: 1,926
    edited November 2015
    Talonsin said:

    You are absolutely right!  With 100 million there is no reason to pledge any sort of respect or assurances to your customers.  With 100 million there is no need to pledge something as foolish as this:

    "We, the Developer, intend to treat you with the same respect we would give a publisher. You will receive regular updates about the progress of the game.  We will do a show and tell for each major milestone"

    I can see this being an issue with only 500k but come on...  100 million means they dont have to do anything!
    what the hell do you know how studios are treating publishers? Are you a game developer working for a publisher, then go list your credentials and tell us your name so we can verify if your opinion has ANY weight whatsoever.

    this sure as hell looks like monthly and weekly reports a publisher would read, don´t you think?

    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15043-Monthly-Studio-Report
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15045-Weekly-Development-Update
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15036-Weekly-Development-Update
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15031-Star-Citizen-Alpha-20
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15024-Development-Update
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15017-Development-Update-Star-Citizen-Alpha-20-Star-Marine
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15007-Letter-From-The-Chairman
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14995-Monthly-Studio-Report
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14997-Star-Marine-Status-Update  

    and that´s just from the last 2 months. BUDDY.

    Anyway, you´re just making noise about a whole lot of clown requests no one actually gives a damn about. 98% of SC backers probably don´t even read the available reports. 

    Now please, go buy an EA game and have fun with it.

    60$ for Star Wars Battlefront and the 50$ Battlefront Season pass will make you happy and you don´t need to worry about how many people worked on it, or when they started, or when the employees go to the toilet,  and how many studios EA burned to the ground, now being on their third iteration of Battlefront that actually made it to a release!

    Finally, glorious Star Wars instanced PVP without a single player campaign, yay! Buy it today, only 110 $ for Basegame+ season pass!

    Only 8 years of development through 3 different studios! BARGAIN ! EPIC WIN!
    That´ll teach Star Citizen how it´s done the right way!

  • SlothnChunkSlothnChunk Member UncommonPosts: 788
    edited November 2015
    DocBrody said:
    Talonsin said:

    You are absolutely right!  With 100 million there is no reason to pledge any sort of respect or assurances to your customers.  With 100 million there is no need to pledge something as foolish as this:

    "We, the Developer, intend to treat you with the same respect we would give a publisher. You will receive regular updates about the progress of the game.  We will do a show and tell for each major milestone"

    I can see this being an issue with only 500k but come on...  100 million means they dont have to do anything!
    what the hell do you know how studios are treating publishers? Are you a game developer working for a publisher, then go list your credentials and tell us your name so we can verify if your opinion has ANY weight whatsoever.

    this sure as hell looks like monthly and weekly reports a publisher would read, don´t you think?

    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15043-Monthly-Studio-Report
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15045-Weekly-Development-Update
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15036-Weekly-Development-Update
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15031-Star-Citizen-Alpha-20
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15024-Development-Update
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15017-Development-Update-Star-Citizen-Alpha-20-Star-Marine
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15007-Letter-From-The-Chairman
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14995-Monthly-Studio-Report
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14997-Star-Marine-Status-Update  

    and that´s just from the last 2 months. BUDDY.

    Anyway, you´re just making noise about a whole lot of clown requests no one actually gives a damn about. 98% of SC backers probably don´t even read the available reports. 

    Now please, go buy an EA game and have fun with it.

    60$ for Star Wars Battlefront and the 50$ Battlefront Season pass will make you happy and you don´t need to worry about how many people worked on it, or when they started, or when the employees go to the toilet,  and how many studios EA burned to the ground, now being on their third iteration of Battlefront that actually made it to a release!

    Finally, glorious Star Wars instanced PVP without a single player campaign, yay! Buy it today, only 110 $ for Basegame+ season pass!

    Only 8 years of development through 3 different studios! BARGAIN ! EPIC WIN!
    That´ll teach Star Citizen how it´s done the right way!

    Exactly.  I don't get the criticism since they've delivered consistently on that part of the pledge. 

    Again, the part of the pledge that was changed was the scope/scale.  The initial pledge based on the successful Kickstarter stated "You, the tens of thousands of pledgers, have allowed us to cut out the big publisher and build the game on our own terms."

    They hit ONE MILLION backers in mid-October!   http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/star-citizen-hits-one-million-backers/

    So of course a pledge based on an initial tens of thousands would be augmented as the project grew in scope scale.

  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    DocBrody said:
    Talonsin said:

    You are absolutely right!  With 100 million there is no reason to pledge any sort of respect or assurances to your customers.  With 100 million there is no need to pledge something as foolish as this:

    "We, the Developer, intend to treat you with the same respect we would give a publisher. You will receive regular updates about the progress of the game.  We will do a show and tell for each major milestone"

    I can see this being an issue with only 500k but come on...  100 million means they dont have to do anything!
    what the hell do you know how studios treat publishers? Are you a game developer working for a publisher, then go list your credentials and tell us your name so we can verify.

    this sure as hell looks like a monthly and weekly reports a publisher would read, don´t you think?

    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15043-Monthly-Studio-Report
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15045-Weekly-Development-Update
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15036-Weekly-Development-Update
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15031-Star-Citizen-Alpha-20
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15024-Development-Update
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15017-Development-Update-Star-Citizen-Alpha-20-Star-Marine
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15007-Letter-From-The-Chairman
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14995-Monthly-Studio-Report
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14997-Star-Marine-Status-Update  

    and that´s just from the last 2 months

    Anyway, you´re just making noise about a whole lot of clown requests no one actually gives a damn about. 98% of SC backers probably don´t even read the available reports. 

    now go buy an EA game and have fun with it,

    60$ for Battlefront and the 50$ Battlefront Season pass will make you happy and you don´t need to worry about how many people worked on it, or when they started, or when the employees go to the toilet,  and how many studios EA burned to the ground, now being on their third iteration of Battlefront that actually made it to a release!

    Finally, glorious Star Wars instanced PVP without a single player campaign, yay! Buy it today, only 110 $
    game+ season pass! Only 8 years of development through 3 different studios! BARGAIN !

    Mind showing us your credentals as a game dev who deals with publishers on a regular basis? Seems only fair since you seem to require it for anyone posting a negative but don't offer any up for yourself when you post things.

    And no I don't think those links you put up would satisfy any publisher on any level, but I don't have any experience with that so thats just my opinion.
  • SlothnChunkSlothnChunk Member UncommonPosts: 788
    Kefo said:
    DocBrody said:
    Talonsin said:

    You are absolutely right!  With 100 million there is no reason to pledge any sort of respect or assurances to your customers.  With 100 million there is no need to pledge something as foolish as this:

    "We, the Developer, intend to treat you with the same respect we would give a publisher. You will receive regular updates about the progress of the game.  We will do a show and tell for each major milestone"

    I can see this being an issue with only 500k but come on...  100 million means they dont have to do anything!
    what the hell do you know how studios treat publishers? Are you a game developer working for a publisher, then go list your credentials and tell us your name so we can verify.

    this sure as hell looks like a monthly and weekly reports a publisher would read, don´t you think?

    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15043-Monthly-Studio-Report
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15045-Weekly-Development-Update
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15036-Weekly-Development-Update
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15031-Star-Citizen-Alpha-20
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15024-Development-Update
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15017-Development-Update-Star-Citizen-Alpha-20-Star-Marine
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15007-Letter-From-The-Chairman
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14995-Monthly-Studio-Report
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14997-Star-Marine-Status-Update  

    and that´s just from the last 2 months

    Anyway, you´re just making noise about a whole lot of clown requests no one actually gives a damn about. 98% of SC backers probably don´t even read the available reports. 

    now go buy an EA game and have fun with it,

    60$ for Battlefront and the 50$ Battlefront Season pass will make you happy and you don´t need to worry about how many people worked on it, or when they started, or when the employees go to the toilet,  and how many studios EA burned to the ground, now being on their third iteration of Battlefront that actually made it to a release!

    Finally, glorious Star Wars instanced PVP without a single player campaign, yay! Buy it today, only 110 $
    game+ season pass! Only 8 years of development through 3 different studios! BARGAIN !

    Mind showing us your credentals as a game dev who deals with publishers on a regular basis? Seems only fair since you seem to require it for anyone posting a negative but don't offer any up for yourself when you post things.

    And no I don't think those links you put up would satisfy any publisher on any level, but I don't have any experience with that so thats just my opinion.
    They promised to be open and transparent during development which they've proven to be.  How have they not?

    The criticism is just bizarre based on the facts (the links are all there).
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    Kefo said:
    DocBrody said:
    what the hell do you know how studios treat publishers? Are you a game developer working for a publisher, then go list your credentials and tell us your name so we can verify.

    this sure as hell looks like a monthly and weekly reports a publisher would read, don´t you think?

    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15043-Monthly-Studio-Report
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15045-Weekly-Development-Update
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15036-Weekly-Development-Update
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15031-Star-Citizen-Alpha-20
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15024-Development-Update
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15017-Development-Update-Star-Citizen-Alpha-20-Star-Marine
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15007-Letter-From-The-Chairman
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14995-Monthly-Studio-Report
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14997-Star-Marine-Status-Update  

    and that´s just from the last 2 months

    Anyway, you´re just making noise about a whole lot of clown requests no one actually gives a damn about. 98% of SC backers probably don´t even read the available reports. 

    now go buy an EA game and have fun with it,

    60$ for Battlefront and the 50$ Battlefront Season pass will make you happy and you don´t need to worry about how many people worked on it, or when they started, or when the employees go to the toilet,  and how many studios EA burned to the ground, now being on their third iteration of Battlefront that actually made it to a release!

    Finally, glorious Star Wars instanced PVP without a single player campaign, yay! Buy it today, only 110 $
    game+ season pass! Only 8 years of development through 3 different studios! BARGAIN !

    Mind showing us your credentals as a game dev who deals with publishers on a regular basis? Seems only fair since you seem to require it for anyone posting a negative but don't offer any up for yourself when you post things.

    And no I don't think those links you put up would satisfy any publisher on any level, but I don't have any experience with that so thats just my opinion.
    They promised to be open and transparent during development which they've proven to be.  How have they not?

    The criticism is just bizarre based on the facts (the links are all there).
    Thats not what DocBrody was ranting about. He put up those links as an example of what a publisher would read from a dev studio after blasting someone for posting a negative comment and then asking for credentials.

    I simply asked for his credentials since he seems quite sure those links would be what a dev would hand a publisher. If he is unwilling or unable to put up what he asks other people for in order to post an opinion then perhaps he should keep his foot out of his mouth.

    Also imo I would say they are being only somewhat transparent with their backers. Sure they post weekly and monthly updates but I seriously doubt if we were a publisher that is what they would send us.
  • SlothnChunkSlothnChunk Member UncommonPosts: 788
    edited November 2015
    Kefo said:
    Kefo said:
    DocBrody said:
    what the hell do you know how studios treat publishers? Are you a game developer working for a publisher, then go list your credentials and tell us your name so we can verify.

    this sure as hell looks like a monthly and weekly reports a publisher would read, don´t you think?

    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15043-Monthly-Studio-Report
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15045-Weekly-Development-Update
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15036-Weekly-Development-Update
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15031-Star-Citizen-Alpha-20
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15024-Development-Update
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15017-Development-Update-Star-Citizen-Alpha-20-Star-Marine
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15007-Letter-From-The-Chairman
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14995-Monthly-Studio-Report
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14997-Star-Marine-Status-Update  

    and that´s just from the last 2 months

    Anyway, you´re just making noise about a whole lot of clown requests no one actually gives a damn about. 98% of SC backers probably don´t even read the available reports. 

    now go buy an EA game and have fun with it,

    60$ for Battlefront and the 50$ Battlefront Season pass will make you happy and you don´t need to worry about how many people worked on it, or when they started, or when the employees go to the toilet,  and how many studios EA burned to the ground, now being on their third iteration of Battlefront that actually made it to a release!

    Finally, glorious Star Wars instanced PVP without a single player campaign, yay! Buy it today, only 110 $
    game+ season pass! Only 8 years of development through 3 different studios! BARGAIN !

    Mind showing us your credentals as a game dev who deals with publishers on a regular basis? Seems only fair since you seem to require it for anyone posting a negative but don't offer any up for yourself when you post things.

    And no I don't think those links you put up would satisfy any publisher on any level, but I don't have any experience with that so thats just my opinion.
    They promised to be open and transparent during development which they've proven to be.  How have they not?

    The criticism is just bizarre based on the facts (the links are all there).
    Thats not what DocBrody was ranting about. He put up those links as an example of what a publisher would read from a dev studio after blasting someone for posting a negative comment and then asking for credentials.

    I simply asked for his credentials since he seems quite sure those links would be what a dev would hand a publisher. If he is unwilling or unable to put up what he asks other people for in order to post an opinion then perhaps he should keep his foot out of his mouth.

    Also imo I would say they are being only somewhat transparent with their backers. Sure they post weekly and monthly updates but I seriously doubt if we were a publisher that is what they would send us.
    Well in this case the developer reports to the backers on progress instead of the normal publishers.

    But it's all subjective and more importantly theoretical when it comes to SC.  It been a good decade since major publishers stopped funding space-sim products.
  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342
    SlothnChunk said:
    Well in this case the developer reports to the backers on progress instead of the normal publishers.
    When you report to your investor, you show the account books.
  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Gdemami said:
    SlothnChunk said:
    Well in this case the developer reports to the backers on progress instead of the normal publishers.
    When you report to your investor, you show the account books.

    Not necessarily. You might show some numbers and some graphs with lines going up, and some graphs with lines going down. The assumption that an investor wants to see your books is a fallacy. If an investor walked in and was checking your books every month, you rest assured, there are plenty of problems on one of those sides. An investor does plenty of due diligence prior to investing and it's a trust relationship, and looking at someone's books every month with a fine-toothed comb doesn't give the company warm and fuzzies. Same thing if you're a plumber and the client is standing over your shoulder the whole time you're working, asking why you're doing what you're doing. 

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342
    CrazKanuk said:
    Not necessarily. You might show some numbers and some graphs with lines going up, and some graphs with lines going down. The assumption that an investor wants to see your books is a fallacy. If an investor walked in and was checking your books every month, you rest assured, there are plenty of problems on one of those sides. An investor does plenty of due diligence prior to investing and it's a trust relationship, and looking at someone's books every month with a fine-toothed comb doesn't give the company warm and fuzzies. Same thing if you're a plumber and the client is standing over your shoulder the whole time you're working, asking why you're doing what you're doing. 
    Yeah, the investor just walks in, throw very fat envelope on the table and says: " See you in 5 years guys!"

    Sorry, but your post is just hilariously naive...
  • SlothnChunkSlothnChunk Member UncommonPosts: 788
    Gdemami said:
    SlothnChunk said:
    Well in this case the developer reports to the backers on progress instead of the normal publishers.
    When you report to your investor, you show the account books.
    No they don't.  Where do you guys come up with this nonsense?  Publishers don't demand developers 'open their books'.
  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Rhoklaw said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    Gdemami said:
    SlothnChunk said:
    Well in this case the developer reports to the backers on progress instead of the normal publishers.
    When you report to your investor, you show the account books.

    Same thing if you're a plumber and the client is standing over your shoulder the whole time you're working, asking why you're doing what you're doing. 
    Actually, this is the very reason I take my wife's car to the shop to get it fixed, because people do in fact scam customers out of money. If you trust everyone you meet because you are just a nice person, you'll soon learn just how miserable and out of touch you are in today's society. We live in a very cutthroat era and everyone is all about themselves and no one else. Trust and honesty is a rare commodity in today's world.

    I feel sorry for your mechanic if you're hanging out, watching what they're doing and constantly asking questions. 

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342
    No they don't.  Where do you guys come up with this nonsense?  Publishers don't demand developers 'open their books'.
    Oversee how your money are spent is nonsense?

    Can you elaborate on that one because you seem to live in some different world than the rest of the people who actualy do care what happens with their money.


  • hfztthfztt Member RarePosts: 1,401
    Gdemami said:
    No they don't.  Where do you guys come up with this nonsense?  Publishers don't demand developers 'open their books'.
    Oversee how your money are spent is nonsense?

    Can you elaborate on that one because you seem to live in some different world than the rest of the people who actualy do care what happens with their money.

    Well, depnds on how the contract is to be honest. If the studio is being paid to deliver a fixed feature set at a fixed price, noone will care much about the studio finanses unless some really red lights are blinking. On the other hand if the publisher invested in the product with an eye on later profit sharing, they will be very much focused on the money.

    This case is more comparable to the first case though, to be fair.

    That said, CiG could escape a lot of negative talk by just giving a few simple numbers to us about projected finish date and burn rate of money. Why they dont is what is slightly worrying.
    Free to play is currently broken
  • SlothnChunkSlothnChunk Member UncommonPosts: 788
    edited November 2015
    Gdemami said:
    No they don't.  Where do you guys come up with this nonsense?  Publishers don't demand developers 'open their books'.
    Oversee how your money are spent is nonsense?

    Can you elaborate on that one because you seem to live in some different world than the rest of the people who actualy do care what happens with their money.


    Developers show the publishers progress on whatever they are working on as part of the deal.  They show they are meeting milestones and the game is progressing.

    That's the extent of the publisher/developer relationship. They don't 'open their books'.  The developers don't show them their accounting or spending practices as a studio.  How the developers spend salaries, benefits, cost for facilities, what they spend on a coke machine, etc. aren't part of the publisher/developer relationship.

    So it's complete nonsense to say developers 'open their books' to publishers.  It's simply factually wrong.
  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342
    Developers show the publishers progress on whatever they are working on as part of the deal.  They show they are meeting milestones and the game is progressing.

    That's the extent of the publisher/developer relationship. They don't 'open their books'.  The developers don't show them their accounting or spending practices as a studio.  How the developers spend salaries, benefits, cost for facilities, what they spend on a coke machine, etc. aren't part of the publisher/developer relationship.

    So it's complete nonsense to say developers 'open their books' to publishers.  It's simply factually wrong.
    You only repeat what you said already without answering my question: How is overseeing your money a nonsense?
  • SlothnChunkSlothnChunk Member UncommonPosts: 788
    Gdemami said:
    Developers show the publishers progress on whatever they are working on as part of the deal.  They show they are meeting milestones and the game is progressing.

    That's the extent of the publisher/developer relationship. They don't 'open their books'.  The developers don't show them their accounting or spending practices as a studio.  How the developers spend salaries, benefits, cost for facilities, what they spend on a coke machine, etc. aren't part of the publisher/developer relationship.

    So it's complete nonsense to say developers 'open their books' to publishers.  It's simply factually wrong.
    You only repeat what you said already without answering my question: How is overseeing your money a nonsense?
    How is that relevant for game development?  Publishers don't 'oversee' all financial decisions a developer makes.  You specifically said 'open the books' which is complete and total nonsense.  Again, that's not how the developer/publisher relationship works in game development.
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    Gdemami said:
    No they don't.  Where do you guys come up with this nonsense?  Publishers don't demand developers 'open their books'.
    Oversee how your money are spent is nonsense?

    Can you elaborate on that one because you seem to live in some different world than the rest of the people who actualy do care what happens with their money.


    Developers show the publishers progress on whatever they are working on as part of the deal.  They show they are meeting milestones and the game is progressing.

    That's the extent of the publisher/developer relationship. They don't 'open their books'.  The developers don't show them their accounting or spending practices as a studio.  How the developers spend salaries, benefits, cost for facilities, what they spend on a coke machine, etc. aren't part of the publisher/developer relationship.

    So it's complete nonsense to say developers 'open their books' to publishers.  It's simply factually wrong.
    So say you were a publisher and you gave a game studio 200 million to develop a game, or hell even 5 million. They are constantly behind on milestones, promised dates and now they are coming to you asking for more money. You're just going to write them a cheque and wish them well?
  • SlothnChunkSlothnChunk Member UncommonPosts: 788
    Kefo said:
    Gdemami said:
    No they don't.  Where do you guys come up with this nonsense?  Publishers don't demand developers 'open their books'.
    Oversee how your money are spent is nonsense?

    Can you elaborate on that one because you seem to live in some different world than the rest of the people who actualy do care what happens with their money.


    Developers show the publishers progress on whatever they are working on as part of the deal.  They show they are meeting milestones and the game is progressing.

    That's the extent of the publisher/developer relationship. They don't 'open their books'.  The developers don't show them their accounting or spending practices as a studio.  How the developers spend salaries, benefits, cost for facilities, what they spend on a coke machine, etc. aren't part of the publisher/developer relationship.

    So it's complete nonsense to say developers 'open their books' to publishers.  It's simply factually wrong.
    So say you were a publisher and you gave a game studio 200 million to develop a game, or hell even 5 million. They are constantly behind on milestones, promised dates and now they are coming to you asking for more money. You're just going to write them a cheque and wish them well?
    Very good that's exactly my point.  You repeated exactly what I've said.

    But that's not 'opening the books' which in accounting means seeing all financials down to how much you spend on things like electricity and refreshments.  So to say 'opening the books' is part of the developer/publisher relationship is completely and totally false.
  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342
    edited November 2015
    hfztt said:
    Well, depnds on how the contract is to be honest. If the studio is being paid to deliver a fixed feature set at a fixed price, noone will care much about the studio finanses unless some really red lights are blinking. On the other hand if the publisher invested in the product with an eye on later profit sharing, they will be very much focused on the money.

    This case is more comparable to the first case though, to be fair.

    That said, CiG could escape a lot of negative talk by just giving a few simple numbers to us about projected finish date and burn rate of money. Why they dont is what is slightly worrying.
    See, despite there is plethora of progression reports on SC, you want to see how they are spending their money.

    Progress presentation will not tell you how fast is the studio burning the money. You want to see account books to avoid: "Oh, sorry we have nothing to show, we run out of money 6 months ago."

    Game progress presentation is just that - product presentation, and being it work in progress, it is rather intangible.



    CIG has no reason to show their financials. Pledging or buying a product shouldn't entitle you to poke your nose how someone is running their business, wouldn't you agree?
  • SlothnChunkSlothnChunk Member UncommonPosts: 788
    edited November 2015
    Gdemami said:
    hfztt said:
    Well, depnds on how the contract is to be honest. If the studio is being paid to deliver a fixed feature set at a fixed price, noone will care much about the studio finanses unless some really red lights are blinking. On the other hand if the publisher invested in the product with an eye on later profit sharing, they will be very much focused on the money.

    This case is more comparable to the first case though, to be fair.

    That said, CiG could escape a lot of negative talk by just giving a few simple numbers to us about projected finish date and burn rate of money. Why they dont is what is slightly worrying.
    Progress presentation will not tell you how fast is the studio burning the money. You want to see account books to avoid: "Oh, sorry we have nothing to show, we run out of money 6 months ago."

    Game progress presentation is just that - product presentation, and being it work in progress, it is rather intangible.


    Well, CIG has no reason to show their financials. Pledging or buying a product shouldn't entitle you to poke your nose how someone is running their business, wouldn't you agree?
    Developers shut down all the time during the middle of game development.  That's because independent developers DO NOT 'open their books' to publishers.  Publishers are merely financiers not shareholders.

    You keep repeating nonsense like it will somehow become fact.

    And, no, just because you buy a product gives you no 'entitlement to poke' around the finances of a company.  Again, where in the hell do you get this stuff?
This discussion has been closed.