They never said they needed $100 million. That is what we the backers funded them. I guess you don't understand how crowdfunding works or you wouldn't be asking about it.
Yet somehow they need more money. I think you are the one who needs a little understanding here.
And where are you getting they need more money from? The fact they are not just giving everything away for free? Wanna play then pay like everyone else or wait for a free weekend event. These companies exist to make a profit not cater to every moocher on the planet. Ask Turbine and Daybreak where that gets you.
Anyone have a grasp of what the 66 day mocap shoot might have cost them? Costs for renting the studios, cost for each SECOND of mocap work? Cost of the major actors and actresses? Anyone got a handle on how much money the various modular developers got paid? Before Roberts got his nose rubbed in the fact that it was not a particularly wise development model. And I am absolutely sure that Roberts salary is commensurate with his ego. Sandi's too, I'd bet.
One thing Roberts is really good at is being profligate in spending. That and unrealistic goals that he holds on to for far too long.
A long and bumpy road....
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Nope, they have always stated that SQ42 was to be the standalone, single player version. While the PU was online. They even made separate definitions in the backer levels, saying that you also get SQ42. Why would they make that distinction if it was all the same game?
From the original kickstarter:
Real quick, Star Citizen is:
A rich universe focused on epic space adventure, trading and dogfighting in first person.
Single Player – Offline or Online(Drop in / Drop out co-op play)
then they go on to describe the single player experience:
Squadron 42 - A Wing Commander style single player mode, playable OFFLINE if
you want
If Star Citizen IS Single player and SQ42 is a single player MODE of Star Citizen, then it was not implied to be a separate, stand alone game. No where in the original kickstarter does it say or imply that it was to be a separate game.
While I agree it was a different mode for the game, the original version as described was "implied" to be a lobby where you went into STAR CITIZEN and then picked what you wanted to do, online play or stand alone and later FPS was added. Just like call of duty has a single player mode and an online mode but it was the same game.
If you are trying to say it was always a separate, stand alone MODE of Star Citizen then I agree with you 100% but if you are saying it was pitched as a completely separate game then no, you are mistaken.
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
@Talonsin personally, after following the game's progress for the last couple of years, Sq42 has always seemed as an entirely different game, sure they take place in the same universe, but a different time in the universe timeline.
Also, to those original backers, they get Sq42 with their packages as well as anyone up to Valentines day. So they aren't short changing or not living up to their kickstarter. This whole issue reeks of people searching really hard to complain about something.
If you aren't a backer then the kickstarter campaign doesn't apply to you (why should you care?).
If you are a backer, you should already have the two bundled, no harm.
If you don't plan on backing, then why do you care? (again, no harm)
Nope, they have always stated that SQ42 was to be the standalone, single player version. While the PU was online. They even made separate definitions in the backer levels, saying that you also get SQ42. Why would they make that distinction if it was all the same game?
From the original kickstarter:
Real quick, Star Citizen is:
A rich universe focused on epic space adventure, trading and dogfighting in first person.
Single Player – Offline or Online(Drop in / Drop out co-op play)
then they go on to describe the single player experience:
Squadron 42 - A Wing Commander style single player mode, playable OFFLINE if
you want
If Star Citizen IS Single player and SQ42 is a single player MODE of Star Citizen, then it was not implied to be a separate, stand alone game. No where in the original kickstarter does it say or imply that it was to be a separate game.
While I agree it was a different mode for the game, the original version as described was "implied" to be a lobby where you went into STAR CITIZEN and then picked what you wanted to do, online play or stand alone and later FPS was added. Just like call of duty has a single player mode and an online mode but it was the same game.
If you are trying to say it was always a separate, stand alone MODE of Star Citizen then I agree with you 100% but if you are saying it was pitched as a completely separate game then no, you are mistaken.
I think the problem with this hairspilting in a desperate attempt to keep the OP title valid is: 1. it goes against ones objective if ones objective is to educate SC fans on the faults of SC because instead it only makes one look like a hairspilter, a troll or unintelligent which is counter to the objective unless of course the objective it to make ones self look like a moron, a troll and insite the SC playerbase (not saying you specifcally here just trying to explain). 2. it would be better to just create a new thread without this bizzare wording so that people do not get distracted into something that isnt even the point.
OR
maybe a better way to put it is 'its best to re-evaulate what ones core objective is and decide if this is really the best way to achieve that goal'
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
They never said they needed $100 million. That is what we the backers funded them. I guess you don't understand how crowdfunding works or you wouldn't be asking about it.
Yet somehow they need more money. I think you are the one who needs a little understanding here.
And where are you getting they need more money from? The fact they are not just giving everything away for free? Wanna play then pay like everyone else or wait for a free weekend event. These companies exist to make a profit not cater to every moocher on the planet. Ask Turbine and Daybreak where that gets you.
LOL I cant believe you just said that. Man you really got something over your eyes there. We aren't talking about an actual game you know its just an idea of a game and its not just making a profit. I'm smart enough to pay for something instead of the idea that might one day become something after I put a few thousand dollars into it first. The real moocher is CRI who has gotten a ton of free money and given nothing in return for it. Time to wake up. its like a bad investment you put 100k into something and the investor comes says you need to put another 20k or you will lose the 100k. Eventually you just accept the fact that you never shoulda invested. But since you already got 100k into it and don't want to lose it you go ahead and put another 20k into it then defend it with your life.
And where are you getting they need more money from? The fact they are not just giving everything away for free? Wanna play then pay like everyone else or wait for a free weekend event. These companies exist to make a profit not cater to every moocher on the planet. Ask Turbine and Daybreak where that gets you.
LOL I cant believe you just said that. Man you really got something over your eyes there. We aren't talking about an actual game you know its just an idea of a game and its not just making a profit. I'm smart enough to pay for something instead of the idea that might one day become something after I put a few thousand dollars into it first. The real moocher is CRI who has gotten a ton of free money and given nothing in return for it. Time to wake up. its like a bad investment you put 100k into something and the investor comes says you need to put another 20k or you will lose the 100k. Eventually you just accept the fact that you never shoulda invested. But since you already got 100k into it and don't want to lose it you go ahead and put another 20k into it then defend it with your life.
I would say that there is something people have and can play, in the Arena Commander, and an limited experience on the mPU. It's still in alpha, friend, meaning the intent is testing and implementation of the base systems and engineering. I'm not really sure what you expect to have in an Alpha.
Nothing that you have provided gives anyone any certainty that CIG is having money problems.
You believe it's a bad investment, many, many, many others do not. Why are you acting like it's skin off your back that they don't agree with your unsubstantiated claim and opinion?
10k$ per month/per developer is correct, an employee costs you way more than just the paycheck. Contractors used to be a little more expensive but can be cancelled on a shorter notice.
Is this another cash grab by the company? Seems like they have enough cash already to make both games. Anyway, I thought both games were supposed to come together..... so confused.
Proud MMORPG.com member since March 2004! Make PvE GREAT Again!
Is this another cash grab by the company? Seems like they have enough cash already to make both games. Anyway, I thought both games were supposed to come together..... so confused.
Both games were included in the backers packages but I don't believe the releases were ever confirmed as tied together.
Game developers are just human beings who happen to make games for a living. If you want to hold us up to higher standards of conduct, then go ahead ...but don't be surprised if we don't uphold them.
Exhibit A: Why people aren't ready for transparent development.
It's an unfortunate reality that if nothing else has come out of SC, it's the people are incapable of dealing with transparency. I think the thought was that with the prevalence of Alphas and Betas that people understood, generally, how the process works, but SC is a great indication that they are clueless.
I dont agree that this game is a good example of "transparent development". If it was, we would have much more info on what happened with the FPS module that illfonic made and they used as a demo for most of 2015? In all honestly, I dont see much of a difference between this games transparency and most other games.
I think there is a big difference between a good example of transparency and a good example of development. CIG has shown great transparency, but a lot of really, really bad decisions. That being said, they really didn't have to be this open, scars and all. I don't think that anyone is trying to argue that CIG is an example of a great development effort. There are plenty of issues. However, cutting SM might be a sign that they're actually committed to releasing something. Now if they could order in some pizzas and start crunching on SQ42, I think that's their best bet. Especially if they are laying down timelines, it's time to focus on what is important to deliver right now. I guess we'll see what comes in the next couple months.
Instead of reading through 16 pages (I've read quite a few, though, and know the story)...people are upset on the principle that they've not bought into the game previously, and still have time to do so and get both? Less than $1/month back when CIG started this would have been all it takes to get both...and we've still not reached the deadline yet. These must be all the kids these days that get trophies and gold stars for showing up.
Instead of reading through 16 pages (I've read quite a few, though, and know the story)...people are upset on the principle that they've not bought into the game previously, and still have time to do so and get both? Less than $1/month back when CIG started this would have been all it takes to get both...and we've still not reached the deadline yet. These must be all the kids these days that get trophies and gold stars for showing up.
You have an exact date that was posted? Just says October in the forums and the twitch video doesn't exist
Oh...my... Erillion is aware of a few events surrounding retcons? Run away from here, Erillion! You're being red-pilled by osmosis! You'll never be able to remain hypnotized! Flee!
So instead of playing Elite Dangerous, people would rather put more money into this project and defend CRI no matter what they do. Hate to burst your bubble but Elite Dangerous has already delivered what CRI is attempting and failing.
So instead of playing Elite Dangerous, people would rather put more money into this project and defend CRI no matter what they do. Hate to burst your bubble but Elite Dangerous has already delivered what CRI is attempting and failing.
Many of us do both.
I play E:D (including Horizons) on a regular basis. EVE Online too. I look forward to "No Mans Sky".
>>> but Elite Dangerous has already delivered what CRI is attempting and failing.>>> Being an early E:D backer myself i would NOT agree with that. Details on that we can discuss in the mmorpg.com E:D subforum, where you find relevant posts (e.g. from me). It is important to say that i think in a few years E:D and SC will have the same depth. But Frontier and CIG follow different paths on the way to that goal (Frontier has an incremental strategy).
You have an exact date that was posted? Just says October in the forums and the twitch video doesn't exist
13th Oct - just mouseover the month (like it's working here)
If that's the case then wasn't Derek Smarts blog posted October 5? Did Erillion just shoot himself in the foot by providing evidence to support Derek? Looks like your bonus is in danger Erillion!
You have an exact date that was posted? Just says October in the forums and the twitch video doesn't exist
13th Oct - just mouseover the month (like it's working here)
If that's the case then wasn't Derek Smarts blog posted October 5? Did Erillion just shoot himself in the foot by providing evidence to support Derek? Looks like your bonus is in danger Erillion!
Are you referring to THIS passage from his November 4th blog ?
"Which is precisely why I believe that the push to ship episode one of
Squadron 42 in some shape or form, is the new focus for 2016. It is a
stand-alone game which they hope to sell. And that explains why they
have now decided to sell it separately." (followed by a link to SC game package descriptions)
Lets not forget that The Smarty simply did not understand that "Star Citizen Digital Download" and "Squadron 42 Digital Download" were separated in the pledge package descriptions years before he made his blog and declared it as "
...have now decided to ...".
So instead of playing Elite Dangerous, people would rather put more money into this project and defend CRI no matter what they do. Hate to burst your bubble but Elite Dangerous has already delivered what CRI is attempting and failing.
I think Elite Dangerous is a great game AND I think the project management is better and I think they are doing everything better than SC. If I was to compare the two companies together I would look at Frontier first.
I would NOT however call CRI 'faling' that is being biased and unfair. They only 'fail' when the project is closed and finished.
See it is possible to be a critic of CRI and also not be a ***** about it as the same time, its not a requirement
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Comments
Anyone have a grasp of what the 66 day mocap shoot might have cost them? Costs for renting the studios, cost for each SECOND of mocap work? Cost of the major actors and actresses? Anyone got a handle on how much money the various modular developers got paid? Before Roberts got his nose rubbed in the fact that it was not a particularly wise development model. And I am absolutely sure that Roberts salary is commensurate with his ego. Sandi's too, I'd bet.
One thing Roberts is really good at is being profligate in spending. That and unrealistic goals that he holds on to for far too long.
A long and bumpy road....
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
From the original kickstarter:
Real quick, Star Citizen is:
- A rich universe focused on epic space adventure, trading and dogfighting in first person.
- Single Player – Offline or Online(Drop in / Drop out co-op play)
then they go on to describe the single player experience:If Star Citizen IS Single player and SQ42 is a single player MODE of Star Citizen, then it was not implied to be a separate, stand alone game. No where in the original kickstarter does it say or imply that it was to be a separate game.
While I agree it was a different mode for the game, the original version as described was "implied" to be a lobby where you went into STAR CITIZEN and then picked what you wanted to do, online play or stand alone and later FPS was added. Just like call of duty has a single player mode and an online mode but it was the same game.
If you are trying to say it was always a separate, stand alone MODE of Star Citizen then I agree with you 100% but if you are saying it was pitched as a completely separate game then no, you are mistaken.
Also, to those original backers, they get Sq42 with their packages as well as anyone up to Valentines day. So they aren't short changing or not living up to their kickstarter. This whole issue reeks of people searching really hard to complain about something.
If you aren't a backer then the kickstarter campaign doesn't apply to you (why should you care?).
If you are a backer, you should already have the two bundled, no harm.
If you don't plan on backing, then why do you care? (again, no harm)
1. it goes against ones objective if ones objective is to educate SC fans on the faults of SC because instead it only makes one look like a hairspilter, a troll or unintelligent which is counter to the objective unless of course the objective it to make ones self look like a moron, a troll and insite the SC playerbase (not saying you specifcally here just trying to explain).
2. it would be better to just create a new thread without this bizzare wording so that people do not get distracted into something that isnt even the point.
OR
maybe a better way to put it is 'its best to re-evaulate what ones core objective is and decide if this is really the best way to achieve that goal'
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
LOL I cant believe you just said that. Man you really got something over your eyes there. We aren't talking about an actual game you know its just an idea of a game and its not just making a profit. I'm smart enough to pay for something instead of the idea that might one day become something after I put a few thousand dollars into it first. The real moocher is CRI who has gotten a ton of free money and given nothing in return for it. Time to wake up. its like a bad investment you put 100k into something and the investor comes says you need to put another 20k or you will lose the 100k. Eventually you just accept the fact that you never shoulda invested. But since you already got 100k into it and don't want to lose it you go ahead and put another 20k into it then defend it with your life.
Nothing that you have provided gives anyone any certainty that CIG is having money problems.
You believe it's a bad investment, many, many, many others do not. Why are you acting like it's skin off your back that they don't agree with your unsubstantiated claim and opinion?
Contractors used to be a little more expensive but can be cancelled on a shorter notice.
I guess there are more than 260 people working for CIG ATM, it was 250+ in june 2014 as of
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link//13961-Cloud-Imperium-Games-Adds-Another-Gaming-Veteran-To-Star-Citizen-Development-Lineup
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
The cake is a lie.
Proud MMORPG.com member since March 2004! Make PvE GREAT Again!
Then they hinted at it in Dec.
Now they've actually done it.
Fine. I wrote another blog today: Star Citizen - The Shafting
Game developers are just human beings who happen to make games for a living.
If you want to hold us up to higher standards of conduct, then go ahead
...but don't be surprised if we don't uphold them.
I think there is a big difference between a good example of transparency and a good example of development. CIG has shown great transparency, but a lot of really, really bad decisions. That being said, they really didn't have to be this open, scars and all. I don't think that anyone is trying to argue that CIG is an example of a great development effort. There are plenty of issues. However, cutting SM might be a sign that they're actually committed to releasing something. Now if they could order in some pizzas and start crunching on SQ42, I think that's their best bet. Especially if they are laying down timelines, it's time to focus on what is important to deliver right now. I guess we'll see what comes in the next couple months.
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
----------------
Backers and people who actually keep track with SC and SQ42 new this already.
Not hard .. CIG ANNOUNCED IT in October.
https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/289653/should-sq42-and-the-mmo-pu-be-split-and-sell-separately
"...At 2:25ish CR mentions possibly splitting them apart for non backers ...."
Not quite a clairvoyant yet, I'm afraid ....
Have fun
PS:
Just heard that the Twitch stream is no longer active, so I put it down here
http://www.twitch.tv/starcitizen/v/20068257
You have an exact date that was posted? Just says October in the forums and the twitch video doesn't exist
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
The cake is a lie.
So instead of playing Elite Dangerous, people would rather put more money into this project and defend CRI no matter what they do. Hate to burst your bubble but Elite Dangerous has already delivered what CRI is attempting and failing.
"Which is precisely why I believe that the push to ship episode one of Squadron 42 in some shape or form, is the new focus for 2016. It is a stand-alone game which they hope to sell. And that explains why they have now decided to sell it separately." (followed by a link to SC game package descriptions)
Lets not forget that The Smarty simply did not understand that "Star Citizen Digital Download" and "Squadron 42 Digital Download" were separated in the pledge package descriptions years before he made his blog and declared it as " ...have now decided to ...".
Have fun
I would NOT however call CRI 'faling' that is being biased and unfair. They only 'fail' when the project is closed and finished.
See it is possible to be a critic of CRI and also not be a ***** about it as the same time, its not a requirement
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me