Star Citizen, Holiday Sale (aka Sale 2.0)

Turrican187

rpmcmurphy said:

Gdemami said:

rpmcmurphy said:

In an old comment Roberts said 60 something percent of backers only own a starter ship. For simplicity I'm using a 2/3rds, 1/3rd split.

There are ~850,000 ships in the UEE Fleet. If 2/3rds of them belong to people who have only bought a single $45 starter ship, that gives ~550,000 backers who have raised ~$24.5 million between them.

Which leaves a nutty ~$78.5 million raised from 300,000 ships, average value of each ship ~$260.

Assuming that the more "dedicated" backer has on average 5 ships each , that's 60,000 actual backers with an average of $1300 spent. Guesstimated total number of backers ~610,000.

---
Clearly a very rough guess but a sensible one based on acceptable averages. It's a shame that CIG aren't a bit more honest and a bit more open with their data.

Have fun

Fail math... 850.000 ships =/= 850.000 backers

You have got to be kidding me.

They were very successful to lure the one-Shippers into buying more ships in 2015.
my guestimate is around 300k at best - 80k are playing the "Alpha"

Erillion

My personal estimate is approximately half a million genuine backers. Number of ships = UEE fleet. Number of forum accounts = "Star Citizens" (which are not necessarily backers with paid pledge accounts). 

Have fun

filmoret

rpmcmurphy said:

Gdemami said:

rpmcmurphy said:

In an old comment Roberts said 60 something percent of backers only own a starter ship. For simplicity I'm using a 2/3rds, 1/3rd split.

There are ~850,000 ships in the UEE Fleet. If 2/3rds of them belong to people who have only bought a single $45 starter ship, that gives ~550,000 backers who have raised ~$24.5 million between them.

Which leaves a nutty ~$78.5 million raised from 300,000 ships, average value of each ship ~$260.

Assuming that the more "dedicated" backer has on average 5 ships each , that's 60,000 actual backers with an average of $1300 spent. Guesstimated total number of backers ~610,000.

---
Clearly a very rough guess but a sensible one based on acceptable averages. It's a shame that CIG aren't a bit more honest and a bit more open with their data.

Have fun

Fail math... 850.000 ships =/= 850.000 backers

You have got to be kidding me.

You have to present him with a common core math problem otherwise they don't understand.

jcrg99

Erillion said:

My personal estimate is approximately half a million genuine backers. 

I agree. And I think that backers that you refer are not equal to individuals (but accounts with pledge, sometimes, an individual have more than one). So, I guess something like 200/300k individuals in the SC population today.
And many of these backers that are mentioned, more than half I think, did not give a dime to the project (were gifted by a friend instead).

Brenics

Seems to me the few who are putting big money into this is having it go in the front door and coming out the back all nice and clean. Going to be interesting in 2016.

Nanfoodle

Feels like every part of the game is for sale. Even if the game releases what this say about the type of cash shop they plan to have? Will say this, always makes me laugh and I can always use more of that in my life. They just wont be getting my money this way lol

P.S. how long till they start selling planets for 50k?

Vonatar

Was an easy one for me. $36 on a starter pack. Upgraded for $0 to a Mustang Alpha. Anything else I can get in-game when and if it comes out.

On a sensible $1/hour analysis the amount people throw at this game is amazing. I have friends who have spent $2,000 and more on ships, hangars, buggies, fish tanks... I can't think of any games that held me for 2,000+ hours (save for maybe Everquest back in the day, over a 5 year period). SC may turn out to be good, but whether it has that kind of longevity for me very much remains to be seen.

rodarin

Vonatar said:

Was an easy one for me. $36 on a starter pack. Upgraded for $0 to a Mustang Alpha. Anything else I can get in-game when and if it comes out.

On a sensible $1/hour analysis the amount people throw at this game is amazing. I have friends who have spent $2,000 and more on ships, hangars, buggies, fish tanks... I can't think of any games that held me for 2,000+ hours (save for maybe Everquest back in the day, over a 5 year period). SC may turn out to be good, but whether it has that kind of longevity for me very much remains to be seen.

If you dont get 500+ hours out of most games then youre buying the wrong games.

I have about 1500 in Skyrim, 1500 in ARK, 3K or more in Lotro (and I havent played it in almost 6 months), 720 in Ascent, 2 or 3 hundred in Witcher 3, 300 or so in ESO and thats just what I have played this past year. (all hours not accumulated in 2015).

So this "dollar per hours' bullshit is just that, and just a way of peopel trying to justify spending obscene amounts of money on a cash grab (if not outright scam) project, that will (if it is ever released) be a cash grab after cash grab game.

Erillion

rodarin said:

So this "dollar per hours' bullshit is just that, and just a way of peopel trying to justify spending 

It is THEIR money. And THEY do not give a f-rog about what YOU think on how THEY spend THEIR money.

I would not spend 2000 $ on a game, but if someone did ... more power to THEM ! 

And within the next hours it will be 104 million dollar. So it is proven again and again ... the more SC is being talked about (by fans or those who are NOT fans), the better the crowdfunding works.

So keep those posts comin .... ;-)


Have fun 

jcrg99

Erillion said:

 
And within the next hours it will be 104 million dollar. So it is proven again and again ... the more SC is being talked about (by fans or those who are NOT fans), the better the crowdfunding works.

Better for who?

Daikuru

jcrg99 said:

Erillion said:

 
And within the next hours it will be 104 million dollar. So it is proven again and again ... the more SC is being talked about (by fans or those who are NOT fans), the better the crowdfunding works.

Better for who?

The Game.

Erillion

jcrg99 said:

Erillion said:

 
And within the next hours it will be 104 million dollar. So it is proven again and again ... the more SC is being talked about (by fans or those who are NOT fans), the better the crowdfunding works.

Better for who?

The key performance indicator for a crowdfunding campaign is the amount of money gathered.
That is irrespective of the genre or type of crowdfunding campaign. 

The more money, the better. 

More money to pay wages, more money for development, more money for quality testing, more money for polishing. 


Have fun 

Avanah

You seem to have it all wrong....
It's: Play then Pay, not the other way around.

Erillion

Avanah said:

You seem to have it all wrong....
It's: Play then Pay, not the other way around.

Not for crowdfunded games ....

Some excellent games like Wasteland 2 etc. would never have seen the light of the day without crowdfunding.


Have fun 

hfztt

Erillion said:

jcrg99 said:

Erillion said:

 
And within the next hours it will be 104 million dollar. So it is proven again and again ... the more SC is being talked about (by fans or those who are NOT fans), the better the crowdfunding works.

Better for who?

The key performance indicator for a crowdfunding campaign is the amount of money gathered.
That is irrespective of the genre or type of crowdfunding campaign. 

The more money, the better. 

More money to pay wages, more money for development, more money for quality testing, more money for polishing. 


Have fun 

Actually, I think the release of significant playable content is what is selling the game at this point. The 2.1 release dispelled a few concerns, and probably won over quite a few people.

At this point CIG running out of funds before the game is done the only major risk I see. Claiming at this point that they cannot technically make the game work seems... Meh! We are kinda past that one.

Brenics

Oh am sure the money (if really coming in, there is no real proof of that) coming in could be for other reasons than the game. Actually if it really is coming in there would be far other reasons for it other than a game that isn't made yet. Isn't that the real reason people keep talking about it? I mean really look what they have made so far. Did that really cost them 20m, 30m, 50m?

If this wasn't so serious it would really be hilarious.

Erillion

Brenics said:

Oh am sure the money (if really coming in, there is no real proof of that) coming in could be for other reasons than the game. Actually if it really is coming in there would be far other reasons for it other than a game that isn't made yet. Isn't that the real reason people keep talking about it? I mean really look what they have made so far. Did that really cost them 20m, 30m, 50m?

If this wasn't so serious it would really be hilarious.

http://rs405.pbsrc.com/albums/pp132/AXESMI59/tin-foil-hat.jpg~c200


Have fun 

Brenics

Erillion said:

Brenics said:

Oh am sure the money (if really coming in, there is no real proof of that) coming in could be for other reasons than the game. Actually if it really is coming in there would be far other reasons for it other than a game that isn't made yet. Isn't that the real reason people keep talking about it? I mean really look what they have made so far. Did that really cost them 20m, 30m, 50m?

If this wasn't so serious it would really be hilarious.

http://rs405.pbsrc.com/albums/pp132/AXESMI59/tin-foil-hat.jpg~c200


Have fun 

Nope that isn't proof either. Say what you like but you have no real proof. Being you are a person that only expects real proof on anything else said about SC, the one thing that can't be proven within a reasonable doubt is the actual money you keep saying they have made.

It is the only thing about this whole game, scam, whatever you want to call it, that you have no actual proof of it!

rodarin

hfztt said:

Actually, I think the release of significant playable content is what is selling the game at this point. The 2.1 release dispelled a few concerns, and probably won over quite a few people.

At this point CIG running out of funds before the game is done the only major risk I see. Claiming at this point that they cannot technically make the game work seems... Meh! We are kinda past that one.

Not really, they have 'raised' 25 million since Sept 1. (if you believe the google doc) if their expenses are 3 mil  a month (if you believe that figure) then they have a net of 13 million is that enough to improve the tech demo? I would certainly hope so. So even if they had ZERO funds on Sept 1 they have raised enough the past 4 months to make the tech demo semi playable but have in no way shape or form 'proven' they can make the game they have hyped the past 3 years.

Now, 'raising' 4 million a month will keep the lights on and people paid but is 1 million a month  going into the game going to finish it? I highly doubt it.

The tech demo or nothing able to be seen saw ANY improvement, significant or otherwise until Dec 12 when tech demo errrr Alpha 2.0 went live. So for all intents and purpose THAT date and THAT example is the starting point for anything tangible to be comapred to and defined by.

Honestly, improving THAT abortion shouldnt take ANY money, but for sake of keeping the white knights appeased lets call it a push. Up until Dec 12 they had raised (again according to the google doc) 100 million. How much was left at that point is anyones guess. But like I said even if it was zero they have still raised 4 million since then. More than enough to pay workers and get something out that resembles an 'update', which I suppose 2.1 and 2.2 are supposed to be.

This whole semi ponzi scheme is reliant on one thing and one thing alone, a CURRENT (and exorbitant) amount of cashing coming in day in and day out. One would think that is impossible but somehow they seem to do it. Whether that continues or not remains to be seen. But I am highly skeptical of a lot of things, not least of which is them supposedly bringing in 300-500K a day for the past week. 

Regardless of what you believe or dont believe things dont add up on any front. I have outlined those previously and dont need to do it again. But a synopsis is IF they have raised 105 million then what they have should be a lot better than peopel are seeing. If they havent then there is zero chance the game gets finished.

Erillion

Brenics said:

Erillion said:

Brenics said:

Oh am sure the money (if really coming in, there is no real proof of that) coming in could be for other reasons than the game. Actually if it really is coming in there would be far other reasons for it other than a game that isn't made yet. Isn't that the real reason people keep talking about it? I mean really look what they have made so far. Did that really cost them 20m, 30m, 50m?

If this wasn't so serious it would really be hilarious.

http://rs405.pbsrc.com/albums/pp132/AXESMI59/tin-foil-hat.jpg~c200


Have fun 

Nope that isn't proof either. Say what you like but you have no real proof. Being you are a person that only expects real proof on anything else said about SC, the one thing that can't be proven within a reasonable doubt is the actual money you keep saying they have made.

It is the only thing about this whole game, scam, whatever you want to call it, that you have no actual proof of it!

Ask the journalists that visited CIG studios if all they saw were empty rooms without programmers. 


Have fun 

Brenics

rodarin said:

hfztt said:

Actually, I think the release of significant playable content is what is selling the game at this point. The 2.1 release dispelled a few concerns, and probably won over quite a few people.

At this point CIG running out of funds before the game is done the only major risk I see. Claiming at this point that they cannot technically make the game work seems... Meh! We are kinda past that one.

Not really, they have 'raised' 25 million since Sept 1. (if you believe the google doc) if their expenses are 3 mil  a month (if you believe that figure) then they have a net of 13 million is that enough to improve the tech demo? I would certainly hope so. So even if they had ZERO funds on Sept 1 they have raised enough the past 4 months to make the tech demo semi playable but have in no way shape or form 'proven' they can make the game they have hyped the past 3 years.

Now, 'raising' 4 million a month will keep the lights on and people paid but is 1 million a month  going into the game going to finish it? I highly doubt it.

The tech demo or nothing able to be seen saw ANY improvement, significant or otherwise until Dec 12 when tech demo errrr Alpha 2.0 went live. So for all intents and purpose THAT date and THAT example is the starting point for anything tangible to be comapred to and defined by.

Honestly, improving THAT abortion shouldnt take ANY money, but for sake of keeping the white knights appeased lets call it a push. Up until Dec 12 they had raised (again according to the google doc) 100 million. How much was left at that point is anyones guess. But like I said even if it was zero they have still raised 4 million since then. More than enough to pay workers and get something out that resembles an 'update', which I suppose 2.1 and 2.2 are supposed to be.

This whole semi ponzi scheme is reliant on one thing and one thing alone, a CURRENT (and exorbitant) amount of cashing coming in day in and day out. One would think that is impossible but somehow they seem to do it. Whether that continues or not remains to be seen. But I am highly skeptical of a lot of things, not least of which is them supposedly bringing in 300-500K a day for the past week. 

Regardless of what you believe or dont believe things dont add up on any front. I have outlined those previously and dont need to do it again. But a synopsis is IF they have raised 105 million then what they have should be a lot better than peopel are seeing. If they havent then there is zero chance the game gets finished.

Well written, logical and too the point.

Herase

Brenics said:

Erillion said:

Brenics said:

Oh am sure the money (if really coming in, there is no real proof of that) coming in could be for other reasons than the game. Actually if it really is coming in there would be far other reasons for it other than a game that isn't made yet. Isn't that the real reason people keep talking about it? I mean really look what they have made so far. Did that really cost them 20m, 30m, 50m?

If this wasn't so serious it would really be hilarious.

http://rs405.pbsrc.com/albums/pp132/AXESMI59/tin-foil-hat.jpg~c200


Have fun 

Nope that isn't proof either. Say what you like but you have no real proof. Being you are a person that only expects real proof on anything else said about SC, the one thing that can't be proven within a reasonable doubt is the actual money you keep saying they have made.

It is the only thing about this whole game, scam, whatever you want to call it, that you have no actual proof of it!

Then how far would you say a genre defining game should be in 3 years?

Kefo

Brenics said:

rodarin said:

hfztt said:

Actually, I think the release of significant playable content is what is selling the game at this point. The 2.1 release dispelled a few concerns, and probably won over quite a few people.

At this point CIG running out of funds before the game is done the only major risk I see. Claiming at this point that they cannot technically make the game work seems... Meh! We are kinda past that one.

Not really, they have 'raised' 25 million since Sept 1. (if you believe the google doc) if their expenses are 3 mil  a month (if you believe that figure) then they have a net of 13 million is that enough to improve the tech demo? I would certainly hope so. So even if they had ZERO funds on Sept 1 they have raised enough the past 4 months to make the tech demo semi playable but have in no way shape or form 'proven' they can make the game they have hyped the past 3 years.

Now, 'raising' 4 million a month will keep the lights on and people paid but is 1 million a month  going into the game going to finish it? I highly doubt it.

The tech demo or nothing able to be seen saw ANY improvement, significant or otherwise until Dec 12 when tech demo errrr Alpha 2.0 went live. So for all intents and purpose THAT date and THAT example is the starting point for anything tangible to be comapred to and defined by.

Honestly, improving THAT abortion shouldnt take ANY money, but for sake of keeping the white knights appeased lets call it a push. Up until Dec 12 they had raised (again according to the google doc) 100 million. How much was left at that point is anyones guess. But like I said even if it was zero they have still raised 4 million since then. More than enough to pay workers and get something out that resembles an 'update', which I suppose 2.1 and 2.2 are supposed to be.

This whole semi ponzi scheme is reliant on one thing and one thing alone, a CURRENT (and exorbitant) amount of cashing coming in day in and day out. One would think that is impossible but somehow they seem to do it. Whether that continues or not remains to be seen. But I am highly skeptical of a lot of things, not least of which is them supposedly bringing in 300-500K a day for the past week. 

Regardless of what you believe or dont believe things dont add up on any front. I have outlined those previously and dont need to do it again. But a synopsis is IF they have raised 105 million then what they have should be a lot better than peopel are seeing. If they havent then there is zero chance the game gets finished.

Well written, logical and too the point.

Except the semi Ponzi scheme. Ponzi schemes at least the early people get paid out. I think we need to come up with a new term. Perhaps a Croberts scheme?

rodarin

Kefo said:

Except the semi Ponzi scheme. Ponzi schemes at least the early people get paid out. I think we need to come up with a new term. Perhaps a Croberts scheme?

Yea thats why "semi" They WERE refunding some people. Not sure if that would count as a 'pay out' or not. But I am sure people are getting money who probably never put anything into the game other than a made up title. That would definitely count as a 'pay out'.

Bottom line is (even for the most hardened supporter) there isnt enough money getting put INTO the game itself as their should be.

Turrican187

Like this guy?