dereksmart.org - says all, but thanks for the try.
You really showed them with your intelligent, fact filled rebuttals.
You really don't help SC fans cases with that comment
Well, to use DS as a source to base her argue, is really dubious, that just proves that she has no trustworthy and objectiveley sources and solid evidences to make her credible.
This article biased, as is the autor. There is not one link in this article, which proves her assumptions.
You guys dont do yourself a favour, if you use such suspicious and obviously doubtful article to discredit CR, CIG or the fans (im not a fan nor i am a backer, just to make it clear).
Its 3:40am so I'm tired but mind pointing to where she uses Derek Smart as a source?
She links to posts in the SC community to show exactly what she is talking about. When she is talking about micro transactions she is stating a fact about CR having a bad track record and backs it up with a link.
I'm not sure you actually read the article or clicked the links she provided. I'm going to go pass out so feel free to actually read the article this time and then come back so we can have a real discussion.
First part, yes she doesn't mention him that ill agree on.
And her proof isn't exactly iron clad, she links a post to person who talks about about SC being a cult, ?? in what way is that got to do with the game, another is a person asking why SC doesn't have a publisher, fair to ask, but there's a obvious answer and it's a topic that can't go anywhere, so it was closed. The other is of a reddit moderator, no connection to CIG, outing a person who has been absolutely destructive in the community, they had two full posts worth of offences.
Anyway her whole argument in the section is CIG bans or stops whoever criticise the game.
Why are these still open if every negative criticism is not allowed?
and as for the track record she linked one to the movie, which got a below average score, not a failure, but not great and the second to the freelancer games wiki, not sure why, but just typing it in google you can see it got 9.2 on IGN and 4/5 on metrics, which is in no way a failure, kind of raises the question why dod she leave that out? So what can we take from this? Movies wise, he's not great, but game wise he knows what he's doing, and luckily enough he's making a game right now not a movie.
At the end of this all it's clear she has an agenda, she does make an attempt at the end to say she doesn't, but when you lie in you own piece to make an argument, pick very specific cases (only 2 I might add) and ignore the rest and admit your just "poking the bear again", it's clear you're not trying to bring shit to light or show whats really going on.
Go there and test. Anyone can do that. Start to make objective questions in that forums and see what will happen. Act like a consumer who signed a deal with a company and just want that the company follow through his deal, instead a fan. Besides, her whole argument was not just about CIG censorship tactics, so, your last paragraph was a little bit ironic. You were the one who analysed her arguments in a very superficial way to fit in your agenda. For example, the practices of CIG offending/bullying consumers in public, without doubt with fair reasons to be disappointed or with the right to demand answers and responsibility of CIG to their words and deal? Why did you skip this part to pretend that was just about forum rules?
And by the way... yes... Freelancer failed. Even Chris Roberts acknowleged that. He didn't hide his surprise of having "Freelancer fans" as his backers now. As his movie career tanked. That by itself, would not be indication that SC could fail, but raises red flags, specially when you see he did not following through his own lessons learned.
First part, yes she doesn't mention him that ill agree on.
And her proof isn't exactly iron clad, she links a post to person who talks about about SC being a cult, ?? in what way is that got to do with the game, another is a person asking why SC doesn't have a publisher, fair to ask, but there's a obvious answer and it's a topic that can't go anywhere, so it was closed. The other is of a reddit moderator, no connection to CIG, outing a person who has been absolutely destructive in the community, they had two full posts worth of offences.
Anyway her whole argument in the section is CIG bans or stops whoever criticise the game.
Why are these still open if every negative criticism is not allowed?
and as for the track record she linked one to the movie, which got a below average score, not a failure, but not great and the second to the freelancer games wiki, not sure why, but just typing it in google you can see it got 9.2 on IGN and 4/5 on metrics, which is in no way a failure, kind of raises the question why dod she leave that out? So what can we take from this? Movies wise, he's not great, but game wise he knows what he's doing, and luckily enough he's making a game right now not a movie.
At the end of this all it's clear she has an agenda, she does make an attempt at the end to say she doesn't, but when you lie in you own piece to make an argument, pick very specific cases (only 2 I might add) and ignore the rest and admit your just "poking the bear again", it's clear you're not trying to bring shit to light or show whats really going on.
Go there and test. Anyone can do that. Start to make objective questions in that forums and see what will happen. Act like a consumer who signed a deal with a company and just want that the company follow through his deal, instead a fan. Besides, her whole argument was not just about CIG censorship tactics, so, your last paragraph was a little bit ironic. You were the one who analysed her arguments in a very superficial way to fit in your agenda. For example, the practices of CIG offending/bullying consumers in public, without doubt with fair reasons to be disappointed or with the right to demand answers and responsibility of CIG to their words and deal? Why did you skip this part to pretend that was just about forum rules?
And by the way... yes... Freelancer failed. Even Chris Roberts acknowleged that. He didn't hide his surprise of having "Freelancer fans" as his backers now. As his movie career tanked. That by itself, would not be indication that SC could fail, but raises red flags, specially when you see he did not following through his own lessons learned.
Why do i need to post? I can see for myself, the forum acts like any other gaming forum. Also i'm not a consumer i'm looking at this as a gamer, and please don't pretend this is to benefit the consumers, because at this point it clear this article and many on here goal isn't to help. If you want to help then stop "poking the bear", also give feedback about the ACTUAL alpha and stop trying to find reasons why fans or CR or CIG are crazy or what ever. What find weird is ever time some links a thread or something as proof that you can't say what you want to, the person seems to start their post by insulting someone, making their point then insulting some more at the end. These aren't great examples if you want to make a point or help.
Well first, he's not a consumer, even says so in the top of the reddit post and If a persons only purpose is to spam forums and tell people their opinions mean nothing while insulting anyone who disagrees with him, I wouldn't call what was done bullying or offending, he got exposed as someone being destructive for no real purpose. So no, I didn't look at it superficially, because there was nothing to look into imho, but even if they where exposed as bullying their consumers, it would still fall under what i said above, trying to get rid of those who criticise the game.
Not really, him saying he thinks it's a failure while fans think otherwise, doesn't change and make it a failure, as I said 9.2 on IGN and 4/5 on metrics. Any artist will think their best work is a failure even if hundreds, thousands or millions love it, it's just the typical thought process of creative minds.
How in anyway is creating subpar movie a red flag, this has no connection to creating a game. They operate in completely different ways. What is this lesson learned, I don't understand?.
First part, yes she doesn't mention him that ill agree on.
And her proof isn't exactly iron clad, she links a post to person who talks about about SC being a cult, ?? in what way is that got to do with the game, another is a person asking why SC doesn't have a publisher, fair to ask, but there's a obvious answer and it's a topic that can't go anywhere, so it was closed. The other is of a reddit moderator, no connection to CIG, outing a person who has been absolutely destructive in the community, they had two full posts worth of offences.
Anyway her whole argument in the section is CIG bans or stops whoever criticise the game.
Why are these still open if every negative criticism is not allowed?
and as for the track record she linked one to the movie, which got a below average score, not a failure, but not great and the second to the freelancer games wiki, not sure why, but just typing it in google you can see it got 9.2 on IGN and 4/5 on metrics, which is in no way a failure, kind of raises the question why dod she leave that out? So what can we take from this? Movies wise, he's not great, but game wise he knows what he's doing, and luckily enough he's making a game right now not a movie.
At the end of this all it's clear she has an agenda, she does make an attempt at the end to say she doesn't, but when you lie in you own piece to make an argument, pick very specific cases (only 2 I might add) and ignore the rest and admit your just "poking the bear again", it's clear you're not trying to bring shit to light or show whats really going on.
Well thanks for admitting that she never used DS as a source it is appreciated
Now to be fair I never said her proof is iron clad for most of it. I do agree some of her proof can be a bit weak at times but things like this https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/302006/ship-updates the forum poll was winning at yes and it was closed for not having following rules even though the discussion was going well.
Regarding the Reddit post banditloaf is Ben which is why he has the CIG symbol beside his name. Regardless if the person was destructive or not you don't go and publicly shame someone. You ban and move on. The people cheering in the subsequent posts about the public shaming just serves to reinforce the image that SC fans can be nuts. Imagine in school the principal puts you on stage in front of the school and publicly shamed you for something. Pretty sure the reaction wouldn't be cheering and someone would be losing their job. And yes I know the school example is extreme but just saying for a example.
The freelancer wiki if you scroll down will explain that his game studio never actually finished the game and in fact his studio never released a single game in 4 years of operation. Chris needed to sell to Microsoft for the game to even get finished and this was after they put more money into the game, added more development time and cut out all the unrealistic things Chris had said would be in the game.
Her article is not the best I will agree but like I said it does bring up some good points. You just need to cut through everyone's bullshit to pick out the good points.
"I’m going to be honest, I hate writing about Star Citizen. Every time I do the creeps come out of the woodwork to attack in any way they can, including psychotic conspiracy theories that we are all one man." <- link to dereksmart.org
I really think Vanessa is DS, the whole article is full of DS BS speech.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
"I’m going to be honest, I hate writing about Star Citizen. Every time I do the creeps come out of the woodwork to attack in any way they can, including psychotic conspiracy theories that we are all one man." <- link to dereksmart.org
I really think Vanessa is DS, the whole article is full of DS BS speech.
And I think your wife is Madonna
We are always in a race what our intelligence can do for us and what our intelligence does to us.
All I care about is that they get Squadron 42 shipped and it kicks ass.
Serious question...' What if and it is quite probable that Squadron 42 is good,but what if it is only 1-2 weeks of game play? Would you consider it worth all this wait and money as showing a good effort by the team?
How much quality game play out of Squadron 42 will be acceptable?Obviously if you just like to pvp 24/7 i guess it will hold some water but if your like me and want constant content gaming for more than a year,it would not be good enough.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Haters on these boards must be really desperate to "prove" their points. Only someone completely deprived of valid arguments and proof clings to such libels like this "article" in order to sanction his beliefs.
But as i wrote in an earlier post, keep providing us with comedy moments.
Haters on these boards must be really desperate to "prove" their points. Only someone completely deprived of valid arguments and proof clings to such libels like this "article" in order to sanction his beliefs.
But as i wrote in an earlier post, keep providing us with comedy moments.
You mean the following logic isn't sound?
Any other game: Releases a trailer and the game will obviously be released.
SC: Releases a public Alpha. Tens of Thousands of people playing. Game doesn't exist.
Haters on these boards must be really desperate to "prove" their points. Only someone completely deprived of valid arguments and proof clings to such libels like this "article" in order to sanction his beliefs.
But as i wrote in an earlier post, keep providing us with comedy moments.
You mean the following logic isn't sound?
Any other game: Releases a trailer and the game will obviously be released.
SC: Releases a public Alpha. Tens of Thousands of people playing. Game doesn't exist.
I've seen games die in alpha and beta before so it's a small percentage of a chance lol
Haters on these boards must be really desperate to "prove" their points. Only someone completely deprived of valid arguments and proof clings to such libels like this "article" in order to sanction his beliefs.
But as i wrote in an earlier post, keep providing us with comedy moments.
Anyone is a consumer. You probably are trying to say that he did not buy the game yet... yet. Once again, everyone is a consumer and there is no such thing of a company going against consumers or non-consumers, unless been in an actual court of law. Not in private, not in public. Companies don't do that. If they do, they are or retards or have no clue about what professionalism is.
"Also i'm not a consumer i'm looking at this as a gamer"
Wait. What? The fact that you look to this as a "gamer" does not mean that you are not a consumer. What kind of twisted reality you are living?
"and please don't pretend this is to benefit the consumers" Ah! So, creating addiction on frustrated people and then exploring it to insane levels, is what is good for the consumers. But putting some reason in the mind of a craziness act where consumers now pay more and more for no good services provided, by continuous failed promises and statements, and televangelism, is what is "good for the consumers" in your reality, I guess.
Haters on these boards must be really desperate to "prove" their points. Only someone completely deprived of valid arguments and proof clings to such libels like this "article" in order to sanction his beliefs.
But as i wrote in an earlier post, keep providing us with comedy moments.
Didn't read the article did you?
I did and left a comment as well. It was a good read, put a smile on my face.
Haters on these boards must be really desperate to "prove" their points. Only someone completely deprived of valid arguments and proof clings to such libels like this "article" in order to sanction his beliefs.
But as i wrote in an earlier post, keep providing us with comedy moments.
Didn't read the article did you?
I did and left a comment as well. It was a good read, put a smile on my face.
There were some good parts in there although we are more than likely talking about completely different points :pleased:
"I’m going to be honest, I hate writing about Star Citizen. Every time I do the creeps come out of the woodwork to attack in any way they can, including psychotic conspiracy theories that we are all one man." <- link to dereksmart.org
I really think Vanessa is DS, the whole article is full of DS BS speech.
*Blogger makes joke about SC fans accusing everyone who criticizes CS of being Derek Smart*
*SC fans proceed to cite it as proof that blogger is really Derek Smart*
I think SC fans need to take a deep breath and realize that clicking on a click bait article and writing a super-angry response in the comments is exactly what the author was hoping you would do.
All I care about is that they get Squadron 42 shipped and it kicks ass.
Serious question...' What if and it is quite probable that Squadron 42 is good,but what if it is only 1-2 weeks of game play? Would you consider it worth all this wait and money as showing a good effort by the team?
How much quality game play out of Squadron 42 will be acceptable?Obviously if you just like to pvp 24/7 i guess it will hold some water but if your like me and want constant content gaming for more than a year,it would not be good enough.
Well.. my pledge included Squadron 42 and the 1st mission disc. I think it cost me somewhere around $50, same as most games but in this instance I got the game, the first expansion and the potential of the full Star Citizen game. If I have FUN with Squadron 42 for a few weeks.. and then another week or so with the expansion I will totally consider it worthwhile. All I want is a chance to relive my WingCommander days. Other folks want different things.
I think if you were fair you would agree that expecting an entire year's worth of content from a single player game for $50 is not realistic. Name one single player game that has "more than a year" worth of content at release. That's just an unreasonable expectation.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
"I’m going to be honest, I hate writing about Star Citizen. Every time I do the creeps come out of the woodwork to attack in any way they can, including psychotic conspiracy theories that we are all one man." <- link to dereksmart.org
I really think Vanessa is DS, the whole article is full of DS BS speech.
*Blogger makes joke about SC fans accusing everyone who criticizes CS of being Derek Smart*
*SC fans proceed to cite it as proof that blogger is really Derek Smart*
I think SC fans need to take a deep breath and realize that clicking on a click bait article and writing a super-angry response in the comments is exactly what the author was hoping you would do.
I agree. People in general are just too damn attached to their games nowadays. If you don't like Star Citizen (or game XYZ) that's OK. Hate CR for some reason? That's OK too! I do not feel compelled to convince you that you are wrong.
When the game releases, if it's fun.. it will be a success. If it sucks, it won't.
No forum arguing is gonna change that.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
All I care about is that they get Squadron 42 shipped and it kicks ass.
Serious question...' What if and it is quite probable that Squadron 42 is good,but what if it is only 1-2 weeks of game play? Would you consider it worth all this wait and money as showing a good effort by the team?
How much quality game play out of Squadron 42 will be acceptable?Obviously if you just like to pvp 24/7 i guess it will hold some water but if your like me and want constant content gaming for more than a year,it would not be good enough.
Well.. my pledge included Squadron 42 and the 1st mission disc. I think it cost me somewhere around $50, same as most games but in this instance I got the game, the first expansion and the potential of the full Star Citizen game. If I have FUN with Squadron 42 for a few weeks.. and then another week or so with the expansion I will totally consider it worthwhile. All I want is a chance to relive my WingCommander days. Other folks want different things.
I think if you were fair you would agree that expecting an entire year's worth of content from a single player game for $50 is not realistic. Name one single player game that has "more than a year" worth of content at release. That's just an unreasonable expectation.
Fair enough. Setting the expectations right, Squadron 42 will be a great game. His release is not that impossible. Maybe the sequences will be harder to come out, impacted by the losses of money and reputation due the pursuit of the holy grail... at any cost.
When the game releases, if it's fun.. it will be a success. If it sucks, it won't.
No forum arguing is gonna change that.
Been fun is not enough to make a game a success (specially when it's fun just for a few people or not fun enough as people expected).
And that will depend pretty much, of the history of the company along the years, spread to the world, told by the followers and press (which includes how long since the public started the hype machine and what was the focus involving Star Citizen along such years), plus, whatever be the status of the game industry in the moment that they trigger what is going to be called "public release". That's what will dictate Star Citizen success or failure (in public's perception, backers' perception, which, in the long term means a grow, a new era for the genre, a true reborn, otherwise means just survival and a sooner death to their business, implications for the genre and crowdfunding).
Some fans and Roberts seem to believe that the first part of this formula, which has been the biggest problem of CIG (to make it positive instead exponentially negative) will have no influence. They are wrong. And when they figure out will be just the time for lessons learned, not remedies. It will be too late for remedies, unfortunately.
But I agree, no argue is going to change the end results at this point. It could, in the earlier days. Now is more like watching and learning from the experience, to everyone involved... which includes the arguing too... it's also part of the learning.
Slapshot1188 said:I agree. People in general are just too damn attached to their games nowadays. If you don't like Star Citizen (or game XYZ) that's OK. Hate CR for some reason? That's OK too! I do not feel compelled to convince you that you are wrong.
When the game releases, if it's fun.. it will be a success. If it sucks, it won't.
No forum arguing is gonna change that.
You are completely missing the point of this forum. A place to rant for people who has nothing better to do with their time.
And of course, the satisfaction to say: 'see I told you' and rubbing it to someone else's face.
Pretty sure the comments are enough to prove to anyone who isn't a white knight or cultist that they should stay far away from this game. The mental retardation going on in the comments section of that article is hilarious but also frightening.
Pretty sure the comments are enough to prove to anyone who isn't a white knight or cultist that they should stay far away from this game. The mental retardation going on in the comments section of that article is hilarious but also frightening.
So is the fact that they have 'raised' nearly a million bucks (according to the googlespreadsheers basedon their own numbers) since they posted the livestream video of him fumblefucking around with his computer for 15 minutes ultimately crashing out of the game (for a third and final time)
Somewhere between 6-12 months ago, I was worried that this was all a big ponzi scheme and that CR was gonna vanish to a tropical paradise with everyone's money.
Now I'm certain that they're actually attempting to make a ship-able product and my concern has shifted to CR being completely unable to deliver on his promises. Someone at his company needs to be assigned to muzzling that guy when gets talking. I believe he has vastly over-promised on the feature set.
Also, there are some really shady things going on with their web site and forums that push a PR image that may not be accurate. They may allow a few token "negative" forum threads to stay alive over there, but this article is dead accurate on them squashing the majority of negative criticisms. Not to mention the forced poll rule which can be easily manipulated internally to reflect whatever the company wants the message to be.
I find comments like this amazing. If they ever go to court over this business do you think this would hold up?
"We are not "Buying" ships...we are pledging money to help fund the
game.....the ship is a nice thankyou for pledging money to star citizen
to help make the BDSSE...
If you can't afford to give CIG £100
donation to help fund the game....go for one of the lower pledge
amounts....there are different pledge levels to suit all those that want
to help fund the best game in history!!! "
Comments
Besides, her whole argument was not just about CIG censorship tactics, so, your last paragraph was a little bit ironic. You were the one who analysed her arguments in a very superficial way to fit in your agenda. For example, the practices of CIG offending/bullying consumers in public, without doubt with fair reasons to be disappointed or with the right to demand answers and responsibility of CIG to their words and deal? Why did you skip this part to pretend that was just about forum rules?
And by the way... yes... Freelancer failed. Even Chris Roberts acknowleged that. He didn't hide his surprise of having "Freelancer fans" as his backers now.
As his movie career tanked. That by itself, would not be indication that SC could fail, but raises red flags, specially when you see he did not following through his own lessons learned.
Well first, he's not a consumer, even says so in the top of the reddit post and If a persons only purpose is to spam forums and tell people their opinions mean nothing while insulting anyone who disagrees with him, I wouldn't call what was done bullying or offending, he got exposed as someone being destructive for no real purpose. So no, I didn't look at it superficially, because there was nothing to look into imho, but even if they where exposed as bullying their consumers, it would still fall under what i said above, trying to get rid of those who criticise the game.
Not really, him saying he thinks it's a failure while fans think otherwise, doesn't change and make it a failure, as I said 9.2 on IGN and 4/5 on metrics. Any artist will think their best work is a failure even if hundreds, thousands or millions love it, it's just the typical thought process of creative minds.
How in anyway is creating subpar movie a red flag, this has no connection to creating a game. They operate in completely different ways. What is this lesson learned, I don't understand?.
Now to be fair I never said her proof is iron clad for most of it. I do agree some of her proof can be a bit weak at times but things like this https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/302006/ship-updates the forum poll was winning at yes and it was closed for not having following rules even though the discussion was going well.
Regarding the Reddit post banditloaf is Ben which is why he has the CIG symbol beside his name. Regardless if the person was destructive or not you don't go and publicly shame someone. You ban and move on. The people cheering in the subsequent posts about the public shaming just serves to reinforce the image that SC fans can be nuts. Imagine in school the principal puts you on stage in front of the school and publicly shamed you for something. Pretty sure the reaction wouldn't be cheering and someone would be losing their job. And yes I know the school example is extreme but just saying for a example.
The freelancer wiki if you scroll down will explain that his game studio never actually finished the game and in fact his studio never released a single game in 4 years of operation. Chris needed to sell to Microsoft for the game to even get finished and this was after they put more money into the game, added more development time and cut out all the unrealistic things Chris had said would be in the game.
Her article is not the best I will agree but like I said it does bring up some good points. You just need to cut through everyone's bullshit to pick out the good points.
I really think Vanessa is DS, the whole article is full of DS BS speech.
- Albert Einstein
What if and it is quite probable that Squadron 42 is good,but what if it is only 1-2 weeks of game play?
Would you consider it worth all this wait and money as showing a good effort by the team?
How much quality game play out of Squadron 42 will be acceptable?Obviously if you just like to pvp 24/7 i guess it will hold some water but if your like me and want constant content gaming for more than a year,it would not be good enough.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
But as i wrote in an earlier post, keep providing us with comedy moments.
You mean the following logic isn't sound?
Any other game: Releases a trailer and the game will obviously be released.
SC: Releases a public Alpha. Tens of Thousands of people playing. Game doesn't exist.
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
----------------
"Also i'm not a consumer i'm looking at this as a gamer"
Wait. What? The fact that you look to this as a "gamer" does not mean that you are not a consumer. What kind of twisted reality you are living?
"and please don't pretend this is to benefit the consumers"
Ah! So, creating addiction on frustrated people and then exploring it to insane levels, is what is good for the consumers. But putting some reason in the mind of a craziness act where consumers now pay more and more for no good services provided, by continuous failed promises and statements, and televangelism, is what is "good for the consumers" in your reality, I guess.
*SC fans proceed to cite it as proof that blogger is really Derek Smart*
I think SC fans need to take a deep breath and realize that clicking on a click bait article and writing a super-angry response in the comments is exactly what the author was hoping you would do.
I think if you were fair you would agree that expecting an entire year's worth of content from a single player game for $50 is not realistic. Name one single player game that has "more than a year" worth of content at release. That's just an unreasonable expectation.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
When the game releases, if it's fun.. it will be a success. If it sucks, it won't.
No forum arguing is gonna change that.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
And that will depend pretty much, of the history of the company along the years, spread to the world, told by the followers and press (which includes how long since the public started the hype machine and what was the focus involving Star Citizen along such years), plus, whatever be the status of the game industry in the moment that they trigger what is going to be called "public release". That's what will dictate Star Citizen success or failure (in public's perception, backers' perception, which, in the long term means a grow, a new era for the genre, a true reborn, otherwise means just survival and a sooner death to their business, implications for the genre and crowdfunding).
Some fans and Roberts seem to believe that the first part of this formula, which has been the biggest problem of CIG (to make it positive instead exponentially negative) will have no influence. They are wrong. And when they figure out will be just the time for lessons learned, not remedies. It will be too late for remedies, unfortunately.
But I agree, no argue is going to change the end results at this point. It could, in the earlier days. Now is more like watching and learning from the experience, to everyone involved... which includes the arguing too... it's also part of the learning.
Enjoy/Have Fun.
And of course, the satisfaction to say: 'see I told you' and rubbing it to someone else's face.
Now I'm certain that they're actually attempting to make a ship-able product and my concern has shifted to CR being completely unable to deliver on his promises. Someone at his company needs to be assigned to muzzling that guy when gets talking. I believe he has vastly over-promised on the feature set.
Also, there are some really shady things going on with their web site and forums that push a PR image that may not be accurate. They may allow a few token "negative" forum threads to stay alive over there, but this article is dead accurate on them squashing the majority of negative criticisms. Not to mention the forced poll rule which can be easily manipulated internally to reflect whatever the company wants the message to be.
"We are not "Buying" ships...we are pledging money to help fund the game.....the ship is a nice thankyou for pledging money to star citizen to help make the BDSSE...
If you can't afford to give CIG £100 donation to help fund the game....go for one of the lower pledge amounts....there are different pledge levels to suit all those that want to help fund the best game in history!!! "
Star Citizen – The Extinction Level Event
4/13/15 > ELE has been updated look for 16-04-13.
http://www.dereksmart.org/2016/04/star-citizen-the-ele/
Enjoy and know the truth always comes to light!