Whole point some backers are forgetting is a lot of us are worried this will destroy crowdfunding. Which smed who a lot of us don't trust, is one reason he took it down. Now CR is put in the smed catagory because he is not trusted by us gamers and a lot of devs. So just wanted to respond to a lot of you that is why we are concerned.
Um not trusted by you who is a gamer is not the same thing as not trusted by us gamers.
See that is a big problem you have. You keep trusting CR when a lot of devs have come out and said how he can't be trusted. No not DS, before you respond with his name. People that have worked closely with him back in Origin and later days. But that will be what you will understand very soon. Things are starting to fall apart.
Whole point some backers are forgetting is a lot of us are worried this will destroy crowdfunding. Which smed who a lot of us don't trust, is one reason he took it down. Now CR is put in the smed catagory because he is not trusted by us gamers and a lot of devs. So just wanted to respond to a lot of you that is why we are concerned.
Um not trusted by you who is a gamer is not the same thing as not trusted by us gamers.
See that is a big problem you have. You keep trusting CR when a lot of devs have come out and said how he can't be trusted. No not DS, before you respond with his name. People that have worked closely with him back in Origin and later days. But that will be what you will understand very soon. Things are starting to fall apart.
My point was you do not speak for all gamers. Your statement was an assertion that you do. This is where you seem to have the greatest issue. When you are speaking from a place of opinion or speculation or belief, own it by saying it is. It is your continued attempts to purport everything you state is a fact that makes you a bad source of information.
Whole point some backers are forgetting is a lot of us are worried this will destroy crowdfunding. Which smed who a lot of us don't trust, is one reason he took it down. Now CR is put in the smed catagory because he is not trusted by us gamers and a lot of devs. So just wanted to respond to a lot of you that is why we are concerned.
Um not trusted by you who is a gamer is not the same thing as not trusted by us gamers.
See that is a big problem you have. You keep trusting CR when a lot of devs have come out and said how he can't be trusted. No not DS, before you respond with his name. People that have worked closely with him back in Origin and later days. But that will be what you will understand very soon. Things are starting to fall apart.
You're acting as though it's more of a problem to believe CR than other developers. The most visible of the detractors being someone who is a competitor in the same industry. Maybe that is your problem.
The biggest issue is that people still think their own opinion should supplant those of others which only leads to a toxic posting environment, which only leads to what we generally get on this site is two camps forming where both are obviously right and the other is obviously wrong. But both sides actively make up facts or ignore them through either blatant ignorance or arguing semantics.
Looks like they're about ready to kick the Squadron 42 hype machine into high gear.
This split of the 2 products is needed to allow SQ42 to be marketed as a stand-alone single-player game. It was always intended to be a standalone, set in the same universe but a self-contained story.
There will probaly be a tie-in with something like including SC access or perks as a bonus when pre-ordering SQ42. That will rope-in a whole bunch of potential players who've been reluctant to back SC until now, because they're primarily interested in playing SQ42.
It was advertised as a game mode during the kick starter, not a separate game. To now push it off as a separate game is some crooked ass shit.
If you backed during the ks you still both. What's crooked?
Looks like they're about ready to kick the Squadron 42 hype machine into high gear.
This split of the 2 products is needed to allow SQ42 to be marketed as a stand-alone single-player game. It was always intended to be a standalone, set in the same universe but a self-contained story.
There will probaly be a tie-in with something like including SC access or perks as a bonus when pre-ordering SQ42. That will rope-in a whole bunch of potential players who've been reluctant to back SC until now, because they're primarily interested in playing SQ42.
It was advertised as a game mode during the kick starter, not a separate game. To now push it off as a separate game is some crooked ass shit.
If you backed during the ks you still both. What's crooked?
At your leisure, please explain why you conveniently left out the OTHER source i quoted, the one directly from the official Star Citizen homepage ? The one i quoted in addition to the link mentioned above.
I would be happy to... The official source was NOT a part of the post I quoted, it was from an entirely different post. This is your MO, you insinuate and imply and then when someone calls you on it you ask for proof you said something.
This is a perfect example of your tactic. When anyone posts something negative from a site other than CIG, you jump all over it and try and discredit the source by saying stuff like " Oh, one blogger writes something and you take it as fact" but when a blogger posts something that is positive, you quote it as a reliable source. Then when called on it you ask why I did not include your "OTHER source" that was NOT part of the post I was commenting on. Classic misdirection.
Fact: You made a post where you used a simple blogger as a source and did NOT include any official source in that post.
Fact: You have continually dismissed negative bloggers and other gaming sites for not being official sources
I hope you enjoyed how I "conveniently left out the OTHER source i quoted"
Have a great day!
"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
Looks like they're about ready to kick the Squadron 42 hype machine into high gear.
This split of the 2 products is needed to allow SQ42 to be marketed as a stand-alone single-player game. It was always intended to be a standalone, set in the same universe but a self-contained story.
There will probaly be a tie-in with something like including SC access or perks as a bonus when pre-ordering SQ42. That will rope-in a whole bunch of potential players who've been reluctant to back SC until now, because they're primarily interested in playing SQ42.
It was advertised as a game mode during the kick starter, not a separate game. To now push it off as a separate game is some crooked ass shit.
If you backed during the ks you still both. What's crooked?
They know that this crowdfunding well is drying up and the games they release will not bring in enough money to keep up the extreme spending they do with offices costing $20 million and 4 offices worldwide.
Most people that pledged so far will get everything they make for free so no additional money there.
It is pretty obvious why they are doing this now. They are in big financial trouble.
Again evidence or speculation.
Your'e entitled to your opinion but your opinion will not be accepted as fact, sorry.
Logical conclusion is: They are in financial trouble and that is why they now split the games to double dip.
How is that not obvious to you?
Can you give me ONE other reason why they are suddenly splitting the 2 games? JUST ONE OTHER REASON?
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling." - Michael Bitton Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about." - SEANMCAD
They know that this crowdfunding well is drying up and the games they release will not bring in enough money to keep up the extreme spending they do with offices costing $20 million and 4 offices worldwide.
Most people that pledged so far will get everything they make for free so no additional money there.
It is pretty obvious why they are doing this now. They are in big financial trouble.
You've missed all the posts where this information has been known since last year, this isn't a sudden change. As I stated if you have no interest in the game and only looking for negatives this info would be missed. Again this info has been known by followers of the game for a while now.
They know that this crowdfunding well is drying up and the games they release will not bring in enough money to keep up the extreme spending they do with offices costing $20 million and 4 offices worldwide.
Most people that pledged so far will get everything they make for free so no additional money there.
It is pretty obvious why they are doing this now. They are in big financial trouble.
Again evidence or speculation.
Your'e entitled to your opinion but your opinion will not be accepted as fact, sorry.
Logical conclusion is: They are in financial trouble and that is why they now split the games to double dip.
How is that not obvious to you?
Can you give me ONE other reason why they are suddenly splitting the 2 games? JUST ONE OTHER REASON?
MONEY my friend, that is the only reason.
To increase revenue. (which dose not by default infer a financial difficulty) To increase penetration into the single player market.
They know that this crowdfunding well is drying up and the games they release will not bring in enough money to keep up the extreme spending they do with offices costing $20 million and 4 offices worldwide.
Most people that pledged so far will get everything they make for free so no additional money there.
It is pretty obvious why they are doing this now. They are in big financial trouble.
Again evidence or speculation.
Your'e entitled to your opinion but your opinion will not be accepted as fact, sorry.
Logical conclusion is: They are in financial trouble and that is why they now split the games to double dip.
How is that not obvious to you?
Can you give me ONE other reason why they are suddenly splitting the 2 games? JUST ONE OTHER REASON?
MONEY my friend, that is the only reason.
To increase revenue. (which dose not by default infer a financial difficulty) To increase penetration into the single player market.
There are two for you.
Here is a possible third... One will be done way way before the other so why sit on it?
They know that this crowdfunding well is drying up and the games they release will not bring in enough money to keep up the extreme spending they do with offices costing $20 million and 4 offices worldwide.
Most people that pledged so far will get everything they make for free so no additional money there.
It is pretty obvious why they are doing this now. They are in big financial trouble.
Again evidence or speculation.
Your'e entitled to your opinion but your opinion will not be accepted as fact, sorry.
Logical conclusion is: They are in financial trouble and that is why they now split the games to double dip.
How is that not obvious to you?
Can you give me ONE other reason why they are suddenly splitting the 2 games? JUST ONE OTHER REASON?
MONEY my friend, that is the only reason.
It's a logical conclusion to you. It's also an assumption that they are having money issues. Squadron 42 is a full featured single player game so why not sell it seperately?
Squadron 42 will release before Star Citizen. Squadron 42 takes place before Star Citizen in the timeline. There, two good reasons to split it.
Money? Money is the driving force behind almost everything, diluting it down to money isn't any big shock.
I see this thread got descended upon by the usual flamebaiters and quickly went off topic.
Anyway, the split in purchase is fine with me. I'll not likely play Star Citizen for the same reasons I don't play EVE - that sort of pvp system doesn't appeal to me. I do want to play Squadron 42 at some point though.
Indeed.
I myself may or may not ever even play the PU.
I want another Wing Commander type game plain and simple.
Too much shady stuff going on. Changes to this and that suddenly + adding more and more to buy and not much to show for it.
This is just my point of view.
While I respect your PoV, I don't understand why you think it's shady to split two complete games into two purchases. And how much time would you need to consider something not sudden because this split has been known for months, we were just all waiting for the date (to which Valentines is such a perfectly ironic day to do it on)? Those that have purchased the package have both, it's only the new backers (post Feb 14) that will pay for two. There is nothing that old backers aren't getting.
Of course this was going to happen. Now they can release this game in the same scatter brain way that is was developed. They release Squadron 42 and then either cut the rest of the game down to a space sim or just ditch it completely. Then they can claim they did release the game since part of it was pushed to retail. I can't imagine how anyone can be stupid enough not to see what has been going on with this game in the past couple years. You have to have some serious brain damage not to be able to figure this out. They bit off more than they could chew, over promised and spent way too much money way too quickly with no clear idea of what kind of game they wanted. They wanted to make a single player RPG, a FPS, a MMORPG, and a space sim all rolled into one. What this is going to end up as is a fragmented mess and a lot of fanboy tears.
Too much shady stuff going on. Changes to this and that suddenly + adding more and more to buy and not much to show for it.
This is just my point of view.
While I respect your PoV, I don't understand why you think it's shady to split two complete games into two purchases. And how much time would you need to consider something not sudden because this split has been known for months, we were just all waiting for the date (to which Valentines is such a perfectly ironic day to do it on)? Those that have purchased the package have both, it's only the new backers (post Feb 14) that will pay for two. There is nothing that old backers aren't getting.
What about the shady change of the TOS without saying anything in order to suddenly give themselves more time before having to refund backer money?
I think the bigger issue at the moment is how they are handling the unmelt system, though I'm certain the decision on the unmelt system is very much related to making more money just as the split for pledging for SC vs Squadron 42 is about money making. Basically, all backers, instead of going through CS, get one unmelt token that allows them to use store credit to unmelt a previous package. Once that token is used up they have to use real money to unmelt a package. A new token is given out every quarter and if the previous one wasn't used up it gets wasted. Before this point people could unmelt multiple packages if they had spent upwards of x amount of dollars, but that doesn't seem to be the case anymore.
It's turned into a bit of a controversy over on the CiG forums, to be frank. Basically, even though we have put money into the system, we can't trade around in their system to customize our pledge rewards except through anniversary sales, and each time we do so we lose benefits that we further have to repurchase if they can even be repurchased. This includes backer benefits like LTI, digital and physical goods, etc. If we could unmelt older pledges than we wouldn't have to worry about losing old benefits as the game develops.
Too much shady stuff going on. Changes to this and that suddenly + adding more and more to buy and not much to show for it.
This is just my point of view.
While I respect your PoV, I don't understand why you think it's shady to split two complete games into two purchases. And how much time would you need to consider something not sudden because this split has been known for months, we were just all waiting for the date (to which Valentines is such a perfectly ironic day to do it on)? Those that have purchased the package have both, it's only the new backers (post Feb 14) that will pay for two. There is nothing that old backers aren't getting.
What about the shady change of the TOS without saying anything in order to suddenly give themselves more time before having to refund backer money?
What ToS change? ToS's and policies change all the time without people knowing. Sure you get a popup asking you to accept them but you'd have an extremely hard time making me or any other rational person on these forums that you actually read every ToS that comes across your desktop.
They've actually been, albeit slowly, expanding their return and unmelt policies. The most recent change are unmelt tokens (or whatever they call them).
Noted, I'm a backer, and yes I believe Star Citizen can change how things are developed, but I hope, I dearly hope they haven't bitten off more then they can chew
because if they have and they overall fail, we the gamers will be the ones that suffer, all this Derek Smart vs Chris Roberts bullshit is just a sideshow compared to what really matters
The Games !!!!!!
We all want the games, we all want what we hoped for and dreamed of,
Personally I think Chris Roberts can deliver, will it be what I want exactly, NO !!!!! but it will be fairly close from what I am seeing...............
Something we do need to remember is that all this chatter, all this positive and very negative feedback affects the outcome of the development, decisions, design choices etc...... they are paying attention to the fallout from all of it............
Besides, I have been playing MMO's now for 20 years, 20 years of sub's to various gaming companies at roughly $20 a month after exchange rate differences (aussie dollar sigh!) ......... afew hundred on Star Citizen is nothing when compared to that.............
just let them develop the damn game and move on...........
(now I will go back to my hermit hole and observe the fallout from my limited venturing onto a public forum :P hehe)
Too much shady stuff going on. Changes to this and that suddenly + adding more and more to buy and not much to show for it.
This is just my point of view.
While I respect your PoV, I don't understand why you think it's shady to split two complete games into two purchases. And how much time would you need to consider something not sudden because this split has been known for months, we were just all waiting for the date (to which Valentines is such a perfectly ironic day to do it on)? Those that have purchased the package have both, it's only the new backers (post Feb 14) that will pay for two. There is nothing that old backers aren't getting.
What about the shady change of the TOS without saying anything in order to suddenly give themselves more time before having to refund backer money?
While it's very weird, people are still able to get refunds, tbh not sure what the point was or what it actually achieved . Just have to wait few extra days to get it.
If they changed it so no one can ever ask for a refund I would be all over it. Example, TOS said you can have refunds then without warning you're not allowed refunds, that's shady ass shit right there.
Overall, for me anyway, I wouldn't see that as a reason to call an entire project shady. Again that's just me.
To those who say backers get both so it doesn't matter. By separating it into two games, if you're interested in both games that's two sets of DLC's to pay for and two sets of upgrades. So will future ships purchased in one have to be purchased again for the other one? Probably.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
To those who say backers get both so it doesn't matter. By separating it into two games, if you're interested in both games that's two sets of DLC's to pay for and two sets of upgrades. So will future ships purchased in one have to be purchased again for the other one? Probably.
There are no ships to purchase in S42 it's a story driven campaign game like the old Wing Commanders.
So one game mode (Star Marine) is apparently already in the PU and another game mode (SQ42) is now its own thing that you have to buy separately.
And Chris Roberts is annoyed that people that are paying him have the audacity to ask where is the product that was promised.
I always thought Star Citizen will turn into a Greek Tragedy. Boy was I wrong. It is an SNL Skit comedy! ROFL!
It shows what PvP games are really all about, and no, it's not about more realism and immersion. It's about cowards hiding behind a screen to they can bully other defenseless players without any risk of direct retaliation like there would be if they acted like asshats in "real life". -Jean-Luc_Picard
Life itself is a game. So why shouldn't your game be ruined? - justmemyselfandi
Comments
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!
Your statement was an assertion that you do.
This is where you seem to have the greatest issue.
When you are speaking from a place of opinion or speculation or belief, own it by saying it is.
It is your continued attempts to purport everything you state is a fact that makes you a bad source of information.
The biggest issue is that people still think their own opinion should supplant those of others which only leads to a toxic posting environment, which only leads to what we generally get on this site is two camps forming where both are obviously right and the other is obviously wrong. But both sides actively make up facts or ignore them through either blatant ignorance or arguing semantics.
This is a perfect example of your tactic. When anyone posts something negative from a site other than CIG, you jump all over it and try and discredit the source by saying stuff like " Oh, one blogger writes something and you take it as fact" but when a blogger posts something that is positive, you quote it as a reliable source. Then when called on it you ask why I did not include your "OTHER source" that was NOT part of the post I was commenting on. Classic misdirection.
Fact: You made a post where you used a simple blogger as a source and did NOT include any official source in that post.
Fact: You have continually dismissed negative bloggers and other gaming sites for not being official sources
I hope you enjoyed how I "conveniently left out the OTHER source i quoted"
Have a great day!
Logical conclusion is: They are in financial trouble and that is why they now split the games to double dip.
How is that not obvious to you?
Can you give me ONE other reason why they are suddenly splitting the 2 games? JUST ONE OTHER REASON?
MONEY my friend, that is the only reason.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling."
- Michael Bitton
Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about."
- SEANMCAD
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
To increase penetration into the single player market.
There are two for you.
One will be done way way before the other so why sit on it?
Squadron 42 will release before Star Citizen. Squadron 42 takes place before Star Citizen in the timeline. There, two good reasons to split it.
Money? Money is the driving force behind almost everything, diluting it down to money isn't any big shock.
I myself may or may not ever even play the PU.
I want another Wing Commander type game plain and simple.
Too much shady stuff going on. Changes to this and that suddenly + adding more and more to buy and not much to show for it.
This is just my point of view.
Your statement covers this game, and all the discussion about it. Just LOL.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
It's turned into a bit of a controversy over on the CiG forums, to be frank. Basically, even though we have put money into the system, we can't trade around in their system to customize our pledge rewards except through anniversary sales, and each time we do so we lose benefits that we further have to repurchase if they can even be repurchased. This includes backer benefits like LTI, digital and physical goods, etc. If we could unmelt older pledges than we wouldn't have to worry about losing old benefits as the game develops.
They've actually been, albeit slowly, expanding their return and unmelt policies. The most recent change are unmelt tokens (or whatever they call them).
because if they have and they overall fail, we the gamers will be the ones that suffer, all this Derek Smart vs Chris Roberts bullshit is just a sideshow compared to what really matters
The Games !!!!!!
We all want the games, we all want what we hoped for and dreamed of,
Personally I think Chris Roberts can deliver, will it be what I want exactly, NO !!!!! but it will be fairly close from what I am seeing...............
Something we do need to remember is that all this chatter, all this positive and very negative feedback affects the outcome of the development, decisions, design choices etc...... they are paying attention to the fallout from all of it............
Besides, I have been playing MMO's now for 20 years, 20 years of sub's to various gaming companies at roughly $20 a month after exchange rate differences (aussie dollar sigh!) ......... afew hundred on Star Citizen is nothing when compared to that.............
just let them develop the damn game and move on...........
(now I will go back to my hermit hole and observe the fallout from my limited venturing onto a public forum :P hehe)
Marcus Reid
"Could'a, Would'a, Should'a"
If they changed it so no one can ever ask for a refund I would be all over it. Example, TOS said you can have refunds then without warning you're not allowed refunds, that's shady ass shit right there.
Overall, for me anyway, I wouldn't see that as a reason to call an entire project shady. Again that's just me.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
And Chris Roberts is annoyed that people that are paying him have the audacity to ask where is the product that was promised.
I always thought Star Citizen will turn into a Greek Tragedy. Boy was I wrong. It is an SNL Skit comedy! ROFL!
It shows what PvP games are really all about, and no, it's not about more realism and immersion. It's about cowards hiding behind a screen to they can bully other defenseless players without any risk of direct retaliation like there would be if they acted like asshats in "real life". -Jean-Luc_Picard
Life itself is a game. So why shouldn't your game be ruined? - justmemyselfandi