You'd have to admit they are more open than the average developer and miles more open then say Bethesda.
I'll give you that but there are also examples of companies that did it well like Red5. During beta they posted a lot on the forums and had weekly videos and updates. They also ran many polls of the beta testers asking for what they wanted.
While I agree there is a lot of information coming out of CIG, I could not honestly say they are doing it "better" that I have ever seen and I can not say they are a model of transparency. Star Marine is a good example. Something happened, most of us can agree, we just dont agree about what. Lots of theories like:
1. They are running out of money and need to move to pushing SQ42 to earn more 2. illfonic screwed up because they were not being supervised by CIG very well 3. The current build of the PU doesnt work with the version of the FPS and it needs reworked to make it in
Just the fact we have heard all these different theories and no real word from CIG is enough to prove we dont have real transparency.
While I agree I would like a detailed answer in regards to this specific set of events, I am certain they would be misinterpreted and twisted by parties of all sides until their meanings, unless painfully clearly defined, would be rendered pointless.
You think a large portion are making 80k a year+benefits?
I think if people were really being offered this amount, you'd see.. something different. Sorry, I can't agree. At all. No way.
If you think their burn rate is smaller, then their money will last much longer ... contrary to what some posters here seem to fear ;-)
BTW the average yearly salary for programmers in the US is 72k a year (link for that has been posted numerous times in this forum already).
Have fun
What proportion of the (x) employees are programmers, erillion. I don't need an answer, it's rhetorical.
What position is being filled is seemingly unimportant. It appears, the number is derived from the total cost of the process divided by the total work months of all employed to calculate a per employee monthly average figure.
They are now betting the farm on SQ42. If that game is great, they will get money to spend on the PU. If it's not great, they will close down in under 2 months. Without money they won't be able to operate.
W.r.t. to money ... see posts above ... burn rate vs income is fine, even in slow months.
(Unless you believe the "Funds raised" number on the homepage is fake .... keep in mind that they once in the past had a controller check the numbers for the Guiness Book of records (Guiness Book standard procedure) --> CIG is the crowdfunding world record holder)
You think a large portion are making 80k a year+benefits?
I think if people were really being offered this amount, you'd see.. something different. Sorry, I can't agree. At all. No way.
If you think their burn rate is smaller, then their money will last much longer ... contrary to what some posters here seem to fear ;-)
BTW the average yearly salary for programmers in the US is 72k a year (link for that has been posted numerous times in this forum already).
Have fun
What proportion of the (x) employees are programmers, erillion. I don't need an answer, it's rhetorical.
What position is being filled is seemingly unimportant. It appears, the number is derived from the total cost of the process divided by the total work months of all employed to calculate a per employee monthly average figure.
Well, this "burn rate", to which people refer and are arguing, isn't part of my position. The interest on 50mil + current income is enough to keep the project going, whatever you think it costs.
They are now betting the farm on SQ42. If that game is great, they will get money to spend on the PU. If it's not great, they will close down in under 2 months. Without money they won't be able to operate.
I doubt things are so dire. If you have evidence to support your claim by all means please share it with us.
That it is a move to monetize on SQ42 I would bet as well.
You think a large portion are making 80k a year+benefits?
I think if people were really being offered this amount, you'd see.. something different. Sorry, I can't agree. At all. No way.
If you think their burn rate is smaller, then their money will last much longer ... contrary to what some posters here seem to fear ;-)
BTW the average yearly salary for programmers in the US is 72k a year (link for that has been posted numerous times in this forum already).
Have fun
What proportion of the (x) employees are programmers, erillion. I don't need an answer, it's rhetorical.
What position is being filled is seemingly unimportant. It appears, the number is derived from the total cost of the process divided by the total work months of all employed to calculate a per employee monthly average figure.
Well, this "burn rate", to which people refer and are arguing, isn't part of my position. The interest on 50mil + current income is enough to keep the project going, whatever you think it costs.
Yah, with the amount of capital they have even just working on the interest is a ton of cash.
W.r.t. to money ... see posts above ... burn rate vs income is fine, even in slow months.
(Unless you believe the "Funds raised" number on the homepage is fake .... keep in mind that they once in the past had a controller check the numbers for the Guiness Book of records (Guiness Book standard procedure) --> CIG is the crowdfunding world record holder)
Have fun
You must have missed the memo regarding Chris Roberts using some of the money to fund his wife's acting career.
You think a large portion are making 80k a year+benefits?
I think if people were really being offered this amount, you'd see.. something different. Sorry, I can't agree. At all. No way.
If you think their burn rate is smaller, then their money will last much longer ... contrary to what some posters here seem to fear ;-)
BTW the average yearly salary for programmers in the US is 72k a year (link for that has been posted numerous times in this forum already).
Have fun
What proportion of the (x) employees are programmers, erillion. I don't need an answer, it's rhetorical.
What position is being filled is seemingly unimportant. It appears, the number is derived from the total cost of the process divided by the total work months of all employed to calculate a per employee monthly average figure.
Well, this "burn rate", to which people refer and are arguing, isn't part of my position. The interest on 50mil + current income is enough to keep the project going, whatever you think it costs.
Yah, with the amount of capital they have even just working on the interest is a ton of cash.
Well, it's a fair amount, and then "investments" in property, as the UK studio for example.. who owns that? (rhetorical). It will appreciate in value. Whenever they decide to close it, unless for some reason property value in the UK plummets (which admittedly can happen), it will probably sell for a profit. Come on, add up these numbers. I'm not pushing this further right now. If people can't see what I'm saying, there's no use.
People quoting kickstarter campaign are pulling at straws. The game is no longer using Kickstart. Those who helped Kickstart game get both. Everyone who funds up to Feb 16 (or whatever the date is), get both.
People getting on board after that have to buy them individually. They have not gone back on their word in any way regarding this. If you have funded it up to this point, you get both. If not, you have up to above date to get both for $45 or whatever.
Well, it's a fair amount, and then "investments" in property, as the UK studio for example.. who owns that? (rhetorical). It will appreciate in value. Whenever they decide to close it, unless for some reason property value in the UK plummets (which admittedly can happen), it will probably sell for a profit. Come on, add up these numbers. I'm not pushing this further right now. If people can't see what I'm saying, there's no use.
There's not even a product yet. Whatever.
To remind you ....
Their UK studio is RENTED. It belongs to someone else. You got the links in another thread. Please read them again.
They "invested" in the UK ... paying rent, hiring people, buying stuff etc..... they have NOT build a new studio building or topped up the old one (you have been shown the Google Map pictures, street view etc.)
People quoting kickstarter campaign are pulling at straws. The game is no longer using Kickstart. Those who helped Kickstart game get both. Everyone who funds up to Feb 16 (or whatever the date is), get both.
People getting on board after that have to buy them individually. They have not gone back on their word in any way regarding this. If you have funded it up to this point, you get both. If not, you have up to above date to get both for $45 or whatever.
Stupid drama is stupid.
Why am I funding a game in it's entirety before it's even a "thing" yet? Do we have a release date?
I'll preorder and hand over Gamestop my $5 to reserve my copy but give them money when the product isn't even a reality yet, hummm...nah.
Well, it's a fair amount, and then "investments" in property, as the UK studio for example.. who owns that? (rhetorical). It will appreciate in value. Whenever they decide to close it, unless for some reason property value in the UK plummets (which admittedly can happen), it will probably sell for a profit. Come on, add up these numbers. I'm not pushing this further right now. If people can't see what I'm saying, there's no use.
There's not even a product yet. Whatever.
To remind you ....
Their UK studio is RENTED. It belongs to someone else. You got the links in another thread. Please read them again.
They "invested" in the UK ... paying rent, hiring people, buying stuff etc..... they have NOT build a new studio building or topped up the old one (you have been shown the Google Map pictures, street view etc.)
Feel free to check out these verifiable facts.
Have fun
ahh true. I had forgotten. I even linked to that uk.gov page myself previously.
Yes it does. His summary was about their fiscal stability even in lieu of a released product. So glad you are on board with that.
But Thourne, this "fiscal stability" is based on the x-10s of millions of dollars plus x-10s of millions in property in Robert's pockets. Do you see my side of the argument? All that capitol still exists... and there's no product.
Yes it does. His summary was about their fiscal stability even in lieu of a released product. So glad you are on board with that.
But Thourne, this "fiscal stability" is based on the x-10s of millions of dollars plus x-10s of millions in property in Robert's pockets. Do you see my side of the argument? All that capitol still exists... and there's no product.
The point in the end being they are fiscally stable correct? If you are agreeing to that then you are agreeing to that.
They suddenly decided Star Citizen and Squadron 42 are now two separate games, although for years they claimed you are getting all with your preorder/backing ( and people preordered thinking they are getting both. )
I dont know how much more can they bitchslap their poor backers.
It wasn't sudden. S42 wasn't meant to be a longterm part of the backer packages. Just like LTI wasn't a longterm feature.
Comments
BTW the average yearly salary for programmers in the US is 72k a year (link for that has been posted numerous times in this forum already).
Have fun
It appears, the number is derived from the total cost of the process divided by the total work months of all employed to calculate a per employee monthly average figure.
https://cloudimperiumgames.com/jobs
Just to give you an idea. For EXACT numbers you may have to write to CIG.
Have fun
(Unless you believe the "Funds raised" number on the homepage is fake .... keep in mind that they once in the past had a controller check the numbers for the Guiness Book of records (Guiness Book standard procedure) --> CIG is the crowdfunding world record holder)
Have fun
48k - 65.5 K a year for game developers.
That it is a move to monetize on SQ42 I would bet as well.
You must have missed the memo regarding Chris Roberts using some of the money to fund his wife's acting career.
Have fun
Well atleast it doesn't bother you at all....
There's not even a product yet. Whatever.
People getting on board after that have to buy them individually. They have not gone back on their word in any way regarding this. If you have funded it up to this point, you get both. If not, you have up to above date to get both for $45 or whatever.
Stupid drama is stupid.
His summary was about their fiscal stability even in lieu of a released product.
So glad you are on board with that.
Their UK studio is RENTED. It belongs to someone else. You got the links in another thread. Please read them again.
They "invested" in the UK ... paying rent, hiring people, buying stuff etc..... they have NOT build a new studio building or topped up the old one (you have been shown the Google Map pictures, street view etc.)
Feel free to check out these verifiable facts.
Have fun
I'll preorder and hand over Gamestop my $5 to reserve my copy but give them money when the product isn't even a reality yet, hummm...nah.
Sorry I just don't "back" or "pledge" games.
I had forgotten.
I even linked to that uk.gov page myself previously.
If you are agreeing to that then you are agreeing to that.