I'm a musician, so I know all too well how many ridiculous things I have to buy and resell for a loss later when they are replaced or no longer needed. Every live musician essentially does this.
I think if I remain a 'SC hopeful' I will use this question as a litmus test. 'do you believe vanity products and over priced pleasure items exist outside of digital virtual good and if so please provide examples'
I am shocked to what level these folks will go to attack
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
From what I have read, the ships you buy can be blown up and never recovered. If thats true, this is even more funny. I get you will say boats can be broken as well but the difference is the point of the game is to blow up peoples ships. Thats not the goal of boats in the real world.
I do not think that is accurate no.
I am all on the side of 'several thousand dollar virtual ships are silly' but then suggesting that there is basically no such thing as a vanity product is just being silly.
why is it impossible for critics of SC to not be the least bit polarized.
There are some things about the SC project that I think are silly and some I am rock on about, polarized is just foolish
Ships that dont have insurance will be lost when they blow up. As one poster put it, dont fly what you dont want to lose.
If this is true, you can count on nerd rage being brought to a whole new level.
Ya I did some reading on it. If you say spend 1k RL money on a ship, you will have 1k worth of insurance in game. Once that runs out, if your ship blows up, say bye to the ship. You can buy more insurance in game but that only covers the base ship, not the upgrades. Each ship will have a production time so even if your ship is insured you wont get it back right away.
What I would like to know, is if you log off, can your ship be blown up? Like the spaceport its parked at? So if you stop playing for a few months and your insurance lapse, can you lose everything you own in game?
Ships that dont have insurance will be lost when they blow up. As one poster put it, dont fly what you dont want to lose.
I still think that is incorrect. In that you can recover them from in game activities.
Never the less in case you didnt know buying these virtual ships is more of a donation. The ships themselves will become fairly easy for new players to get once the game is released.
Your assuming that they make ships fairly easy to get. For all we know they could take months to grind out a new 1 seater fighter with the intention of pushing you towards the cash shop to avoid the grind.
a lot of assumptions going on.
assume what CR said is mostly true OR make up something completely opposite of what CR said and randomly it more likely for reasons.
Mind pointing me to where CR said it will be easy to get ships in game or are you just making assumptions as well?
One of the reasons for the hate could be because another game - Elite Dangerous - is really progressing well.
This is because performance is a relative concept.
I'm funding both games. However, I buy stuff from the ED online that I don't need at all. This is because I want to continue to fund the great job that the ED devs are doing. I want to keep them gainfully employed so that ED, one of my favourite games, continues to improve in a big way each year. Everything is going in the right direction as far as ED is concerned.
Consequently, I have paid the ED devs £100 more than I've needed to.
In contrast, I've only funded SC to the tune of £20 because, unlike ED, I haven't yet seen something for my money.
Ships that dont have insurance will be lost when they blow up. As one poster put it, dont fly what you dont want to lose.
I still think that is incorrect. In that you can recover them from in game activities.
Never the less in case you didnt know buying these virtual ships is more of a donation. The ships themselves will become fairly easy for new players to get once the game is released.
Your assuming that they make ships fairly easy to get. For all we know they could take months to grind out a new 1 seater fighter with the intention of pushing you towards the cash shop to avoid the grind.
a lot of assumptions going on.
assume what CR said is mostly true OR make up something completely opposite of what CR said and randomly it more likely for reasons.
Mind pointing me to where CR said it will be easy to get ships in game or are you just making assumptions as well?
Depends on the ship we are talking about. Auroras, Mustangs, Avengers, and other single seat ships are fairly inexpensive ships to get in the game according to what has been said. MISC Freelancers, Cutlass, and military fighters make up the mid range, while the ships that will be the lengthy ones to get are the Constellation and other multicrew ships. Trying to put a time table on how long it will take to get each ship this early is kind of like throwing darts at a dart board, though. I'm not sure what you are asking for as there are a lot of places where they talked about the ships on the official forum. As for Chris Roberts, he did say that getting a ship isn't hard, but that has to remain in the context of the kind of ship we are talking about.
The big question that you seem interested in is the golden question everyone would love to know the answer to both in the official forum and otherwise. How hard is it to earn currency in the game? No one knows yet.
I don't live in the US, I don't know what 401k is.
But I know human traders are now losing more on the stock market than they win.
Your chance of winning in a casino is higher than on the stock market, I read an article about it.
My dad was a trader, back when humans still had a chance. An actual trader for a bank, not some hobby trader.
401k is an investment instrument in which investor just puts in money each month but a fund manager takes care of the rest (aka mutual funds)
In other words are you talking about people who buy stocks or are you talking about the ENTIRE stock market? mutual funds, retirements plans etc.
You left out the most important part that a 401K is a retirement plan so generally this is a long term investment that is tax free that is meant to sit in the bank and accumulate(or lose) money based on how risky a portfolio you want.
Ships that dont have insurance will be lost when they blow up. As one poster put it, dont fly what you dont want to lose.
I still think that is incorrect. In that you can recover them from in game activities.
Never the less in case you didnt know buying these virtual ships is more of a donation. The ships themselves will become fairly easy for new players to get once the game is released.
Your assuming that they make ships fairly easy to get. For all we know they could take months to grind out a new 1 seater fighter with the intention of pushing you towards the cash shop to avoid the grind.
a lot of assumptions going on.
assume what CR said is mostly true OR make up something completely opposite of what CR said and randomly it more likely for reasons.
Mind pointing me to where CR said it will be easy to get ships in game or are you just making assumptions as well?
Depends on the ship we are talking about. Auroras, Mustangs, Avengers, and other single seat ships are fairly inexpensive ships to get in the game according to what has been said. MISC Freelancers, Cutlass, and military fighters make up the mid range, while the ships that will be the lengthy ones to get are the Constellation and other multicrew ships. Trying to put a time table on how long it will take to get each ship this early is kind of like throwing darts at a dart board, though. I'm not sure what you are asking for as there are a lot of places where they talked about the ships on the official forum. As for Chris Roberts, he did say that getting a ship isn't hard, but that has to remain in the context of the kind of ship we are talking about.
The big question that you seem interested in is the golden question everyone would love to know the answer to both in the official forum and otherwise. How hard is it to earn currency in the game? No one knows yet.
What I was trying to get across is I don't believe there is any official word as to how easy or hard or tedious(thanks Distopia) a ship will be to get in game. From what I remember there have only been guesses made as to how long it will take based on the conversion rate of real cash to UEC but that is not a good indicator.
And lets all be honest here Chris Roberts is notorious for saying one thing and actually meaning another so until, and if, the game releases the time to get a ship is all just debate which I am fine with.
What I was trying to get across is I don't believe there is any official word as to how easy or hard or tedious(thanks Distopia) a ship will be to get in game. From what I remember there have only been guesses made as to how long it will take based on the conversion rate of real cash to UEC but that is not a good indicator.
And lets all be honest here Chris Roberts is notorious for saying one thing and actually meaning another so until, and if, the game releases the time to get a ship is all just debate which I am fine with.
I dont follow closely but for the most part the only thing I am aware of CR being inconsitent with is release dates.
To presuppose he lies about everything because one doesnt like him is setting one up for a hard time.
The concern has been 'is this pay to win buy buying ships' He went into detail (not great but detail) on how its not the case.
Now two options 1. assume everything he said on that subject is a lie or 2. assume at least it is the intention.
any reason why you think it should be a lie and as a result make up something based on absolutly nothing at all?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Virtual goods typically have an increasing sales value. I bet you didnt know that.
I would love to hear how you are reselling your virtual Star Citizen ships for a profit. What I know about this game, is that there's no opportunity to resell those things for real life money. Are we wrong?
I just love how everyone took my point to be about value... people spend this kind of money on things that are literally sent down the toilet a few hours later... deserts, beverages, entree's. etc... It has nothing to do with value, it's all about ego boosting..
I understood your point but the "who's laughing now" part? It's still us laughing at the $20K handbags, $50K rings and $2500 spaceships. Or do you think the conspicuous consumers have the upper hand and shouldn't be laughed at?
Here's the thing, in percentages what these folks are spending, isn't much different than what we are on our frivolous endeavors.. To them it was no more expensive than me taking my wife out for The force awakens and drinks afterward + taxi rides to and fro...
as a side note as a gamer myself I spend considerably less money then my non-gaming friends on items that at least in my mind seem silly
Multiple motorcycles and then sell at a loss later expensive vacations. Homes with rooms that never get used. Large expensive trucks that can haul a house but is never used to haul anything. Boats that are used maybe 3 or 4 times a year.
I'm a musician, so I know all too well how many ridiculous things I have to buy and resell for a loss later when they are replaced or no longer needed. Every live musician essentially does this.
Sure, but none of that is like SC at all.
See, when you buy your equipment, someone created a business, bought the materials, participated in a supply chain, found retail distributors, paid for labor AND THEN asked you for money.
SC asks your for money first, not just for what you're buying, but also to help pay for other people who will want the same product for free later on. This is why it's a dangerous and f-d up financial model. Crowd funding is being exploited, I'm all for getting away from horrible publishers (EA), I've supported various games, and I'm glad I did, but SC is running a Ponzi scheme. They're selling product that doesn't exist to pay for other product that doesn't exist.
People are welcome to spend money however they see fit, but when someone spends $20k on a handbag they're doing it specifically because they know they're purchasing a status symbol to show off, and are under no impression that they're that they're doing some noble deed in supporting a business.
See, when you buy your equipment, someone created a business, bought the materials, participated in a supply chain, found retail distributors, paid for labor AND THEN asked you for money.
SC asks your for money first, not just for what you're buying, but also to help pay for other people who will want the same product for free later on. This is why it's a dangerous and f-d up financial model. Crowd funding is being exploited, I'm all for getting away from horrible publishers (EA), I've supported various games, and I'm glad I did, but SC is running a Ponzi scheme. They're selling product that doesn't exist to pay for other product that doesn't exist.
People are welcome to spend money however they see fit, but when someone spends $20k on a handbag they're doing it specifically because they know they're purchasing a status symbol to show off, and are under no impression that they're that they're doing some noble deed in supporting a business.
yes...this is true for every single kickstarter and early access game ever created.
More over, if you follow this project at all you know that people are buying these ships NOT for vanity, NOT as an investment and NOT even for fun but for donation.
They all pretty much understand that when the game goes live most of these ships will not give players an advantage
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
What I was trying to get across is I don't believe there is any official word as to how easy or hard or tedious(thanks Distopia) a ship will be to get in game. From what I remember there have only been guesses made as to how long it will take based on the conversion rate of real cash to UEC but that is not a good indicator.
And lets all be honest here Chris Roberts is notorious for saying one thing and actually meaning another so until, and if, the game releases the time to get a ship is all just debate which I am fine with.
I dont follow closely but for the most part the only thing I am aware of CR being inconsitent with is release dates.
To presuppose he lies about everything because one doesnt like him is setting one up for a hard time.
The concern has been 'is this pay to win buy buying ships' He went into detail (not great but detail) on how its not the case.
Now two options 1. assume everything he said on that subject is a lie or 2. assume at least it is the intention.
any reason why you think it should be a lie and as a result make up something based on absolutly nothing at all?
Please point out where I said he lies about everything. I'll wait....
Can't find it? Good. Moving on.
Chris can say this isn't pay to win all he wants but there have been numerous discussions on how this is/can be pay to win with the good rebuttals thrown in. I won't go into that debate on this thread because it generally devolves into a flame war and gets locked or heavily moderated.
Tell me this though. They have already created one of the best cash shops in gaming by getting people to buy ships for a game that isn't complete yet, some of those ships are still only a concept. What's to stop them from putting roadblocks in the game to encourage people to go to the in game cash shop to buy UEC for real cash to get a ship faster? or just keep ship sales also as a option?
To assume everything Chris Roberts says should be taken as true is just as bad as assuming everything he says is a lie.
What I was trying to get across is I don't believe there is any official word as to how easy or hard or tedious(thanks Distopia) a ship will be to get in game. From what I remember there have only been guesses made as to how long it will take based on the conversion rate of real cash to UEC but that is not a good indicator.
And lets all be honest here Chris Roberts is notorious for saying one thing and actually meaning another so until, and if, the game releases the time to get a ship is all just debate which I am fine with.
I dont follow closely but for the most part the only thing I am aware of CR being inconsitent with is release dates.
To presuppose he lies about everything because one doesnt like him is setting one up for a hard time.
The concern has been 'is this pay to win buy buying ships' He went into detail (not great but detail) on how its not the case.
Now two options 1. assume everything he said on that subject is a lie or 2. assume at least it is the intention.
any reason why you think it should be a lie and as a result make up something based on absolutly nothing at all?
Please point out where I said he lies about everything. I'll wait....
Can't find it? Good. Moving on.
Chris can say this isn't pay to win all he wants but there have been numerous discussions on how this is/can be pay to win with the good rebuttals thrown in. I won't go into that debate on this thread because it generally devolves into a flame war and gets locked or heavily moderated.
Tell me this though. They have already created one of the best cash shops in gaming by getting people to buy ships for a game that isn't complete yet, some of those ships are still only a concept. What's to stop them from putting roadblocks in the game to encourage people to go to the in game cash shop to buy UEC for real cash to get a ship faster? or just keep ship sales also as a option?
To assume everything Chris Roberts says should be taken as true is just as bad as assuming everything he says is a lie.
I have no idea if he lies or not, that isnt even the point. I think you might have completely misunderstood me.
You base your judgements on the future based on
A. your dreamy wish or B. evidence you have before you although limited.
So the only evidence we have thus far is CR saying that it will not be a pay to win model 'by mistake' of allowing players to buy ships. So with that being the ONLY evidence on the table at the moment why would you think its the exact opposite and instead just randomly make up something?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
See, when you buy your equipment, someone created a business, bought the materials, participated in a supply chain, found retail distributors, paid for labor AND THEN asked you for money.
SC asks your for money first, not just for what you're buying, but also to help pay for other people who will want the same product for free later on. This is why it's a dangerous and f-d up financial model. Crowd funding is being exploited, I'm all for getting away from horrible publishers (EA), I've supported various games, and I'm glad I did, but SC is running a Ponzi scheme. They're selling product that doesn't exist to pay for other product that doesn't exist.
People are welcome to spend money however they see fit, but when someone spends $20k on a handbag they're doing it specifically because they know they're purchasing a status symbol to show off, and are under no impression that they're that they're doing some noble deed in supporting a business.
you know its entirely possible to hate SC or even be highly suspicious of it and also not pretend like viurtal space ships for donation or for vanity is the only place in the known universe where this happens and its a lot easier to.
dont people spend tons of money on vanity products where 100% of the procedes go to charity?
wouldnt it be easier to just drop this and say you still dont like or trust SC? I would be ok with that.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
See, when you buy your equipment, someone created a business, bought the materials, participated in a supply chain, found retail distributors, paid for labor AND THEN asked you for money.
SC asks your for money first, not just for what you're buying, but also to help pay for other people who will want the same product for free later on. This is why it's a dangerous and f-d up financial model. Crowd funding is being exploited, I'm all for getting away from horrible publishers (EA), I've supported various games, and I'm glad I did, but SC is running a Ponzi scheme. They're selling product that doesn't exist to pay for other product that doesn't exist.
People are welcome to spend money however they see fit, but when someone spends $20k on a handbag they're doing it specifically because they know they're purchasing a status symbol to show off, and are under no impression that they're that they're doing some noble deed in supporting a business.
yes...this is true for every single kickstarter and early access game ever created.
More over, if you follow this project at all you know that people are buying these ships NOT for vanity, NOT as an investment and NOT even for fun but for donation.
They all pretty much understand that when the game goes live most of these ships will not give players an advantage
Would these people still be throwing all this "donation" money at CIG if there was no ships attached to it?
Buying these ships will give players an advantage over people who haven't bought one. As soon as the game goes live they will have skipped a large part of the process to acquire these ships normally. They get to skip all the crap that is involved in working your way up to the ship of your dreams.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling." - Michael Bitton Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about." - SEANMCAD
What I was trying to get across is I don't believe there is any official word as to how easy or hard or tedious(thanks Distopia) a ship will be to get in game. From what I remember there have only been guesses made as to how long it will take based on the conversion rate of real cash to UEC but that is not a good indicator.
And lets all be honest here Chris Roberts is notorious for saying one thing and actually meaning another so until, and if, the game releases the time to get a ship is all just debate which I am fine with.
I dont follow closely but for the most part the only thing I am aware of CR being inconsitent with is release dates.
To presuppose he lies about everything because one doesnt like him is setting one up for a hard time.
The concern has been 'is this pay to win buy buying ships' He went into detail (not great but detail) on how its not the case.
Now two options 1. assume everything he said on that subject is a lie or 2. assume at least it is the intention.
any reason why you think it should be a lie and as a result make up something based on absolutly nothing at all?
Please point out where I said he lies about everything. I'll wait....
Can't find it? Good. Moving on.
Chris can say this isn't pay to win all he wants but there have been numerous discussions on how this is/can be pay to win with the good rebuttals thrown in. I won't go into that debate on this thread because it generally devolves into a flame war and gets locked or heavily moderated.
Tell me this though. They have already created one of the best cash shops in gaming by getting people to buy ships for a game that isn't complete yet, some of those ships are still only a concept. What's to stop them from putting roadblocks in the game to encourage people to go to the in game cash shop to buy UEC for real cash to get a ship faster? or just keep ship sales also as a option?
To assume everything Chris Roberts says should be taken as true is just as bad as assuming everything he says is a lie.
I have no idea if he lies or not, that isnt even the point. I think you might have completely misunderstood me.
You base your judgements on the future based on
A. your dreamy wish or B. evidence you have before you although limited.
So the only evidence we have thus far is CR saying that it will not be a pay to win model 'by mistake' of allowing players to buy ships. So with that being the ONLY evidence on the table at the moment why would you think its the exact opposite and instead just randomly make up something?
See my other post before this one for my answer.
And if he lies or not was the point since you based your entire argument around it when responding to me.
Virtual goods typically have an increasing sales value. I bet you didnt know that.
I would love to hear how you are reselling your virtual Star Citizen ships for a profit. What I know about this game, is that there's no opportunity to resell those things for real life money. Are we wrong?
I just love how everyone took my point to be about value... people spend this kind of money on things that are literally sent down the toilet a few hours later... deserts, beverages, entree's. etc... It has nothing to do with value, it's all about ego boosting..
I understood your point but the "who's laughing now" part? It's still us laughing at the $20K handbags, $50K rings and $2500 spaceships. Or do you think the conspicuous consumers have the upper hand and shouldn't be laughed at?
Here's the thing, in percentages what these folks are spending, isn't much different than what we are on our frivolous endeavors.. To them it was no more expensive than me taking my wife out for The force awakens and drinks afterward + taxi rides to and fro...
as a side note as a gamer myself I spend considerably less money then my non-gaming friends on items that at least in my mind seem silly
Multiple motorcycles and then sell at a loss later expensive vacations. Homes with rooms that never get used. Large expensive trucks that can haul a house but is never used to haul anything. Boats that are used maybe 3 or 4 times a year.
I'm a musician, so I know all too well how many ridiculous things I have to buy and resell for a loss later when they are replaced or no longer needed. Every live musician essentially does this.
Sure, but none of that is like SC at all.
See, when you buy your equipment, someone created a business, bought the materials, participated in a supply chain, found retail distributors, paid for labor AND THEN asked you for money.
SC asks your for money first, not just for what you're buying, but also to help pay for other people who will want the same product for free later on. This is why it's a dangerous and f-d up financial model. Crowd funding is being exploited, I'm all for getting away from horrible publishers (EA), I've supported various games, and I'm glad I did, but SC is running a Ponzi scheme. They're selling product that doesn't exist to pay for other product that doesn't exist.
People are welcome to spend money however they see fit, but when someone spends $20k on a handbag they're doing it specifically because they know they're purchasing a status symbol to show off, and are under no impression that they're that they're doing some noble deed in supporting a business.
Sure as I wasn't making a comparison to SC there, it was simply a realization that I spend money on crap I really don't need all the time just to achieve a certain sound on one song or even a few minutes in one song...
I view this as more like buying expensive delicacies or something like that, yet at least they're buying something (ships) they can use and show off in some manner later on. Much more money is spent on things that are gone two seconds later. Hence why it doesn't surprise me in the least bit. Nor elicit much reaction at all from me, certainly not going to laugh at someone who has much more luxury in their life than myself..
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
And if he lies or not was the point since you based your entire argument around it when responding to me.
no him liying was not the point nor the suggestion it was merely an example of possible reasons.
You are being deliberately difficult and I am going to have to try and move away from that.
I have been known to be difficult. I have also been known to cut through the bullshit and call people on their crap as well.
so are you saying I am a liar when I say my point was to use that as an option of possiblites and NOT suggesting he did or did not lie I have no idea.
you are saying I am being dishonest in saying that, that I actually said something else? is that what you are tell me here?
Take my meaning as you will but you seem awfully wound up.
why would you want me to take your meaning in a way that is different then you mean? I am asking for clarification will be you please clarify before we get to far off topic? I will take non-clarification to mean you think I am a liar
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Comments
But I know human traders are now losing more on the stock market than they win.
Your chance of winning in a casino is higher than on the stock market, I read an article about it.
My dad was a trader, back when humans still had a chance. An actual trader for a bank, not some hobby trader.
'do you believe vanity products and over priced pleasure items exist outside of digital virtual good and if so please provide examples'
I am shocked to what level these folks will go to attack
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
In other words are you talking about people who buy stocks or are you talking about the ENTIRE stock market? mutual funds, retirements plans etc.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
What I would like to know, is if you log off, can your ship be blown up? Like the spaceport its parked at? So if you stop playing for a few months and your insurance lapse, can you lose everything you own in game?
Mind pointing me to where CR said it will be easy to get ships in game or are you just making assumptions as well?
This is because performance is a relative concept.
I'm funding both games. However, I buy stuff from the ED online that I don't need at all. This is because I want to continue to fund the great job that the ED devs are doing. I want to keep them gainfully employed so that ED, one of my favourite games, continues to improve in a big way each year. Everything is going in the right direction as far as ED is concerned.
Consequently, I have paid the ED devs £100 more than I've needed to.
In contrast, I've only funded SC to the tune of £20 because, unlike ED, I haven't yet seen something for my money.
Performance is a relative concept.
The big question that you seem interested in is the golden question everyone would love to know the answer to both in the official forum and otherwise. How hard is it to earn currency in the game? No one knows yet.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
You left out the most important part that a 401K is a retirement plan so generally this is a long term investment that is tax free that is meant to sit in the bank and accumulate(or lose) money based on how risky a portfolio you want.
And lets all be honest here Chris Roberts is notorious for saying one thing and actually meaning another so until, and if, the game releases the time to get a ship is all just debate which I am fine with.
To presuppose he lies about everything because one doesnt like him is setting one up for a hard time.
The concern has been 'is this pay to win buy buying ships' He went into detail (not great but detail) on how its not the case.
Now two options
1. assume everything he said on that subject is a lie
or
2. assume at least it is the intention.
any reason why you think it should be a lie and as a result make up something based on absolutly nothing at all?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Sure, but none of that is like SC at all.
See, when you buy your equipment, someone created a business, bought the materials, participated in a supply chain, found retail distributors, paid for labor AND THEN asked you for money.
SC asks your for money first, not just for what you're buying, but also to help pay for other people who will want the same product for free later on. This is why it's a dangerous and f-d up financial model. Crowd funding is being exploited, I'm all for getting away from horrible publishers (EA), I've supported various games, and I'm glad I did, but SC is running a Ponzi scheme. They're selling product that doesn't exist to pay for other product that doesn't exist.
People are welcome to spend money however they see fit, but when someone spends $20k on a handbag they're doing it specifically because they know they're purchasing a status symbol to show off, and are under no impression that they're that they're doing some noble deed in supporting a business.
More over, if you follow this project at all you know that people are buying these ships NOT for vanity, NOT as an investment and NOT even for fun but for donation.
They all pretty much understand that when the game goes live most of these ships will not give players an advantage
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Can't find it? Good. Moving on.
Chris can say this isn't pay to win all he wants but there have been numerous discussions on how this is/can be pay to win with the good rebuttals thrown in. I won't go into that debate on this thread because it generally devolves into a flame war and gets locked or heavily moderated.
To assume everything Chris Roberts says should be taken as true is just as bad as assuming everything he says is a lie.
You base your judgements on the future based on
A. your dreamy wish
or
B. evidence you have before you although limited.
So the only evidence we have thus far is CR saying that it will not be a pay to win model 'by mistake' of allowing players to buy ships. So with that being the ONLY evidence on the table at the moment why would you think its the exact opposite and instead just randomly make up something?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
you know its entirely possible to hate SC or even be highly suspicious of it and also not pretend like viurtal space ships for donation or for vanity is the only place in the known universe where this happens and its a lot easier to.
dont people spend tons of money on vanity products where 100% of the procedes go to charity?
wouldnt it be easier to just drop this and say you still dont like or trust SC? I would be ok with that.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Would these people still be throwing all this "donation" money at CIG if there was no ships attached to it?
Buying these ships will give players an advantage over people who haven't bought one. As soon as the game goes live they will have skipped a large part of the process to acquire these ships normally. They get to skip all the crap that is involved in working your way up to the ship of your dreams.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling."
- Michael Bitton
Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about."
- SEANMCAD
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
And if he lies or not was the point since you based your entire argument around it when responding to me.
You are being deliberately difficult and I am going to have to try and move away from that.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I view this as more like buying expensive delicacies or something like that, yet at least they're buying something (ships) they can use and show off in some manner later on. Much more money is spent on things that are gone two seconds later. Hence why it doesn't surprise me in the least bit. Nor elicit much reaction at all from me, certainly not going to laugh at someone who has much more luxury in their life than myself..
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
you are saying I am being dishonest in saying that, that I actually said something else? is that what you are tell me here?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I am asking for clarification will be you please clarify before we get to far off topic? I will take non-clarification to mean you think I am a liar
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me