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?
Seems a move to get the single player out the door faster, probably in an effort to establish market presence and name recognition for the multiplayer portion, since a larger playerbase would be needed to make that successful. As long as the packs, as they were sold are honored, I dont see a huge problem. The scummiest thing I could think of, is that its, in part, an effort to sell more packs before the 14th, for the people who want both, but have been on the fence, heck ive put serious consideration into buying a $45 pack now, so I can lock in both.
Have they bit off more than they can chew? Probably, Ive always viewed the game, the online portion specifically with some skepticism, but if the single player is at least as good as freelancer was, Id consider that money well spent. I hope they can at least manage that.
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.
Squadron 42 is the first part of a trilogy. There has been no mention of DLC, unless you group expansions in that category. As far as the crossovers for both, it's not entirely clear if there will be any tangible benefits to playing Sq42 prior to starting the persistent universe, aside from awards/titles/etc, so we'll have to wait and see.
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.
This game is still in alpha, who really knows what the final product will be? I'm still thinking something other then a one time purchase. I'm thinking DLC's, advanced addons, ship's, cash shop. I hope I'm wrong but why would a dev pass up all those extras in favor of a one time purchase? Maybe a S42 II, and III on down the line if the series takes off. Most RPG's coming out now have seasonal passes.
"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
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?
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).
They changed the date the game could be late (nov 2015) which was 12 months past the estimated delivery date to 18 months after the estimated delivery date. It was a clause saying they would refund your pledge package after that date if they failed to deliver.
Modifying your TOS to constantly move the goalposts because you can't keep your mouth shut and have no idea how game development works should be throwing up red flags.
When the 18 month date is coming up will they quietly modify it again to say 24 months? Or will Chris just tell everyone game is complete and all pledge promises delivered?
They've actually been, albeit slowly, expanding their return and unmelt policies. The most recent change are unmelt tokens (or whatever they call them).
They changed the date the game could be late (nov 2015) which was 12 months past the estimated delivery date to 18 months after the estimated delivery date. It was a clause saying they would refund your pledge package after that date if they failed to deliver.
Modifying your TOS to constantly move the goalposts because you can't keep your mouth shut and have no idea how game development works should be throwing up red flags.
When the 18 month date is coming up will they quietly modify it again to say 24 months? Or will Chris just tell everyone game is complete and all pledge promises delivered?
I would completely expect this to happen as the game development gets delayed. I don't see this as a problem for a couple of reasons.
This is an investment in a future product, not the stock market. Invest and keep the money there for a few months.
Pre-orders of games, have traditionally and only recently, not been refundable.
It wasn't a stealthy change, the ToS, in this context, has been changed twice. Once in 2013 to add the 12 month stipulation and then early in 2015 to add 6 months to that.
Now, I'm not entirely sure, because I'm not a lawyer, but I believe that the ToS you are held to depends on when you purchase a package. If that is the case then those backers who backed the game under the guise of the 2013 ToS can, at this time, get a refund using the ToS as a reason. It would also be the case that these new guidlines would only hold new backers to the new 18 month delay. If they then changed the ToS to reflect changes later down the line, those backers (at that time of the ToS change) would be held to the new ToS.
Additionally, they have been public, even mentioned by Chirs Roberts on one of the 10 for episodes that people have received refunds, it's just slow because their CS department is rather small. They've also expanded the processes for melting/unmelting ships (and maybe packages, not sure about that).
I can't see this as a stealth change, it's in a ToS to which you agree too whenever you make a new purchase, as well as a public document. That's the very definition of them making a declaration of the new ToS.
HOWEVER, I concede that this is my opinion on it and I'm not going to try to tell you that you are wrong.
Yea nice move to split the game right after a free week.
But now I understand why they didn't advertise the Collectors Edition of SQ42. I'll guess they will make the base game not upgradeable to CE and will sell you the CE in two weeks, so that all backers who already purchased the game want the CE too. (Whats 130$ for a nice CE if you have 500$+ in ships)
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it. The cake is a lie.
Yea nice move to split the game right after a free week.
But now I understand why they didn't advertise the Collectors Edition of SQ42. I'll guess they will make the base game not upgradeable to CE and will sell you the CE in two weeks, so that all backers who already purchased the game want the CE too. (Whats 130$ for a nice CE if you have 500$+ in ships)
They will throw in a ship concept that will have the whales and fans alike clamoring for it because it will be "exclusive" to the CE. Once the CE orders start dwindling then they will throw the ship up for sale as well saying it was so popular and because our fans asked for it you are now able to buy it as a standalone ship!
Queue white knights defending the decision and saying its for the better of the company or if you don't like it then just earn it in game!
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.
It's not really the game's split, although it's weird, as I have not followed everything on this game.
The more I read article's and such, I usually ignore comments that have pure stupidity in them, I just can't fathom that this game will be anywhere near what they want it to be.
With the money they've made, and continue to make, there isn't alot to show for it honestly.
The prices that they are asking for ships, yes I know they aren't needed, is outrageous. Also the amount of money people are throwing at them makes me leery, call it a hunch.
I'm not bashing anyone but there's too much of a red flag for me to go with this.
I hope it turns out well but I seriously have my doubts.
When they meet their social and financial obligation of releasing a playable game, they will be free to liquidate expensive equipment and locations they purchased to pay exorbitant bonuses, salaries, etc. That is, if there is no more profit to be had out of the game due to an underwhelming reception and backlash due to massive purchases.
Yepp, you are correct. Like the $20 million offices they have worldwide all paid by backers.
The games will be released but they will be bad, because they simply don't have the technical expertise to make them good. That is by now pretty obvious.
You can sell a shit game if you do the right marketing. Look at X:Rebirth for example.
I suppose you're someone deeply involved with game development and thus making these assertions from a position of authority? What I mean by involved is, you are actually partaking in a large-scale, high-end game development project.
If you are involved in a high-end, long-term game development project, I also would assume that, by making these claims, you are an employee of CIG, thus having the intimate knowledge of what they can/cannot do, in terms of technical expertise?
Yes, i am a C/C++ developer with more than 20 years of experience that has worked for many big names out there including 12 years for SONY.
Now i know you are going to come back with something like: "Anyone can say that on the internet" to which i would reply: "Then don't ask if you not going to believe it".
"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.
I am a KS day one Backer and i am reading their email newsletter but never heard of that split. The thing i don't do is go to the website and read every drivel they post, i have to endure that here already with Erillion copying it from there.
I got a question for you: What does the fact that this was known for a year have to do with what i said? Answer: They have been in financial trouble for a year now.
"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
"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
- Ask for funds to deliver Game A. - Ask for more funds to make Game A the best game of its type ever. Receive mega money. - Split now huge Game A into Game A and Game B. - Deliver Game A. It was the plan all along. Check the KS.
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?
That is what i said, they need to make more money. That is the only reason.
Why would they have to sit on it if they don't sell them separately. One has nothing to do with the other at all.
You continue to confuse your assertion that they need to make more money with my stating that a possibility is to earn more money. They are not the same thing.
- Ask for funds to deliver Game A. - Ask for more funds to make Game A the best game of its type ever. Receive mega money. - Split now huge Game A into Game A and Game B. - Deliver Game A. It was the plan all along. Check the KS.
You forgot:
Split Game B into 3 Episodes and every Episode into Chapters that get released slowly because you can't develop the full game in time since you are an incompetent, failure as a game developer and a business owner.
"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
You continue to confuse your assertion that they need to make more money with my stating that a possibility is to earn more money. They are not the same thing.
We both know they need more money. It's ok though that if you want to continue to be in denial. It's your life and money.
"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
You continue to confuse your assertion that they need to make more money with my stating that a possibility is to earn more money. They are not the same thing.
We both know they need more money. It's ok though that if you want to continue to be in denial. It's your life and money.
No we don't know it. You believe it. I don't know if they do one way or the other. That is the thing I don't claim to know. You do. I claim to not know.
When they meet their social and financial obligation of releasing a playable game, they will be free to liquidate expensive equipment and locations they purchased to pay exorbitant bonuses, salaries, etc. That is, if there is no more profit to be had out of the game due to an underwhelming reception and backlash due to massive purchases.
Yepp, you are correct. Like the $20 million offices they have worldwide all paid by backers.
The games will be released but they will be bad, because they simply don't have the technical expertise to make them good. That is by now pretty obvious.
You can sell a shit game if you do the right marketing. Look at X:Rebirth for example.
I suppose you're someone deeply involved with game development and thus making these assertions from a position of authority? What I mean by involved is, you are actually partaking in a large-scale, high-end game development project.
If you are involved in a high-end, long-term game development project, I also would assume that, by making these claims, you are an employee of CIG, thus having the intimate knowledge of what they can/cannot do, in terms of technical expertise?
Yes, i am a C/C++ developer with more than 20 years of experience that has worked for many big names out there including 12 years for SONY.
Now i know you are going to come back with something like: "Anyone can say that on the internet" to which i would reply: "Then don't ask if you not going to believe it".
All while completely ignoring the real meat of the post. Bravo, good sir, bravo.
I got a question for you: What does the fact that this was known for a year have to do with what i said? Answer: They have been in financial trouble for a year now.
Split Game B into 3 Episodes and every Episode into Chapters that get released slowly because you can't develop the full game in time since you are an incompetent, failure as a game developer and a business owner.
Where did they say it would be one game without expansions/parts? Are they not living up to the stretch goals of having {x} number of missions?
Comments
Have they bit off more than they can chew? Probably, Ive always viewed the game, the online portion specifically with some skepticism, but if the single player is at least as good as freelancer was, Id consider that money well spent. I hope they can at least manage that.
"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
Modifying your TOS to constantly move the goalposts because you can't keep your mouth shut and have no idea how game development works should be throwing up red flags.
When the 18 month date is coming up will they quietly modify it again to say 24 months? Or will Chris just tell everyone game is complete and all pledge promises delivered?
- This is an investment in a future product, not the stock market. Invest and keep the money there for a few months.
- Pre-orders of games, have traditionally and only recently, not been refundable.
- It wasn't a stealthy change, the ToS, in this context, has been changed twice. Once in 2013 to add the 12 month stipulation and then early in 2015 to add 6 months to that.
Now, I'm not entirely sure, because I'm not a lawyer, but I believe that the ToS you are held to depends on when you purchase a package. If that is the case then those backers who backed the game under the guise of the 2013 ToS can, at this time, get a refund using the ToS as a reason. It would also be the case that these new guidlines would only hold new backers to the new 18 month delay. If they then changed the ToS to reflect changes later down the line, those backers (at that time of the ToS change) would be held to the new ToS.Additionally, they have been public, even mentioned by Chirs Roberts on one of the 10 for episodes that people have received refunds, it's just slow because their CS department is rather small. They've also expanded the processes for melting/unmelting ships (and maybe packages, not sure about that).
I can't see this as a stealth change, it's in a ToS to which you agree too whenever you make a new purchase, as well as a public document. That's the very definition of them making a declaration of the new ToS.
HOWEVER, I concede that this is my opinion on it and I'm not going to try to tell you that you are wrong.
But now I understand why they didn't advertise the Collectors Edition of SQ42.
I'll guess they will make the base game not upgradeable to CE and will sell you the CE in two weeks, so that all backers who already purchased the game want the CE too. (Whats 130$ for a nice CE if you have 500$+ in ships)
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.
They will throw in a ship concept that will have the whales and fans alike clamoring for it because it will be "exclusive" to the CE. Once the CE orders start dwindling then they will throw the ship up for sale as well saying it was so popular and because our fans asked for it you are now able to buy it as a standalone ship!
Queue white knights defending the decision and saying its for the better of the company or if you don't like it then just earn it in game!
There will be a special reward for completing the SQ42 Storyline in the PU aswell, so people want to buy both.
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.
The more I read article's and such, I usually ignore comments that have pure stupidity in them, I just can't fathom that this game will be anywhere near what they want it to be.
With the money they've made, and continue to make, there isn't alot to show for it honestly.
The prices that they are asking for ships, yes I know they aren't needed, is outrageous. Also the amount of money people are throwing at them makes me leery, call it a hunch.
I'm not bashing anyone but there's too much of a red flag for me to go with this.
I hope it turns out well but I seriously have my doubts.
Again my opinion and gut feeling.
Now i know you are going to come back with something like: "Anyone can say that on the internet" to which i would reply: "Then don't ask if you not going to believe it".
"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
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
I am a KS day one Backer and i am reading their email newsletter but never heard of that split. The thing i don't do is go to the website and read every drivel they post, i have to endure that here already with Erillion copying it from there.
I got a question for you: What does the fact that this was known for a year have to do with what i said?
Answer: They have been in financial trouble for a year now.
"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
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
That is what i said, they need to make more money. That is the only reason.
Why would they have to sit on it if they don't sell them separately. One has nothing to do with the other at all.
"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
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
- Ask for more funds to make Game A the best game of its type ever. Receive mega money.
- Split now huge Game A into Game A and Game B.
- Deliver Game A. It was the plan all along. Check the KS.
They are not the same thing.
Split Game B into 3 Episodes and every Episode into Chapters that get released slowly because you can't develop the full game in time since you are an incompetent, failure as a game developer and a business owner.
"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
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
We both know they need more money. It's ok though that if you want to continue to be in denial. It's your life and money.
"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
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
You believe it.
I don't know if they do one way or the other.
That is the thing I don't claim to know.
You do.
I claim to not know.