Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

This is what people really believe they're getting when they invest in Star Citizen

1235789

Comments

  • randomtrandomt Member UncommonPosts: 1,220
    Adjuvant1 said:
    Video compiled over years of advertisement and backer presentation.
    .

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_advertising



    A super-fan makes a what is star citizen video and you cry fraud? CiG has nothing to do with this, and you sound like you are sore.. But the game still has years of development to go. We just happen to get to access it very early in the process. Most games are still in secret, unannounced development at this stage.


  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    edited February 2016
    Distopia said:

    Distopia said:
    Distopia said:
    It's crazy to me at this point to see two people... one person that is upset about the condition of the project and one person that defends the condition of the project. Both believe that because they think it's an investment, that there are no ways to recoup their costs - legally. It's disturbing to say the least.
    I didn't say there is no way to get your money back in regard to crowdfunding, I said in the case of real investment there are plenty of cases of that. I said there are as of yet a lot of unknowns (how it would play out in actual litigation) in regard to crowdfunding. BTW where did I defend the state of the project?
    What? There are unknowns? Did you invent them? Whatever. I don't know where you defended the state of the project.
    Can you show me cases of legit crowdfunded products that failed, that through a court of law owed everyone their money? If not that would be an unknown, as when it comes down to it, until that happens there is no precedent for what would happen. You might have people making chargebacks to their banks and CC companies, but that is not the same thing as the law ruling on such a case. 
    My argument is that because no one on the supreme court (any court according to you) has not ruled on it, then current law applies. Where do you get your opinion from? You invented it to support your point of view. 

    COURTS DON'T HAVE TO RULE ON IT IF ACCEPTED LAWS ARE ALREADY IN PLACE.
    I didn't invent it, it hasn't happened; at least that I'm aware of. What you're saying is you can't commit fraud and scam people. Yes that is illegal, you're breaking laws in doing so. I am not disputing that in the least bit. However, what laws are in place to cover litigation of a legitimate cancellation/failure? one in which all effort was given, funds used properly etc..etc..etc..? None that I'm aware of, as no act of malice was committed. 

    SO the question becomes is it a criminal act to start a kickstarter that can fail? Should Crowdfunded games be held liable in the case of project failure... or..... like in the real world is that simply bad luck on the draw, some projects fail, some people lose their money in an investment...? Such a case is inevitable down the road, that's what will set a precedent. WHo knows maybe it will be SC..

    Just fyi, even though he who shall not be named had been all gung-ho about filing through the ftc, it would appear that as of September of last year nothing had been done. Instead he opts to have his minions do the work for him. Why? Probably because there's nothing illegal..... Yet

    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
    ----------------

  • Adjuvant1Adjuvant1 Member RarePosts: 2,100
    edited February 2016
    randomt said:
    Adjuvant1 said:
    Video compiled over years of advertisement and backer presentation.
    .

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_advertising



    A super-fan makes a what is star citizen video and you cry fraud? CiG has nothing to do with this, and you sound like you are sore.. But the game still has years of development to go. We just happen to get to access it very early in the process. Most games are still in secret, unannounced development at this stage.


    A super fan does a great job compiling footage used to demonstrate a game, yes, and the demonstration is a project model which can't possibly be achieved in the time frame set by the ceo. I mean, really, throw the stretch goals and evolution out, the one system with a handful of ships and in-depth fps action/combat should at least be the quality of "the game implied" in those original videos by now. Orrr.... are you going to say something otherwise.

    So, should SQ42 be out by now? It shouldn't be affected by "increased scope" or stretch goals. Do you think Roberts really thought it would be available mid 2014? Why would he have said that? If things take wildly longer than quoted, what do you call that? SQ42 might release this time next year. That's 2.8 years after the anticipated release of this game mode... oops, I meant "product"... with nothing to change from this original vision...



    Look, Roberts lied. Deal with it. You're defending a liar. By the time all this, which people believe it will be with space roles, economy, multiple systems, alien races, compelling ai, the original backers will be more interested in tapioca pudding day and shuffleboard, not Star Citizen.

    edit: Also, if it seems I'm repeating myself, since I seem to have to say this daily, I'm doing it for your benefit, not mine. I'd just as soon type the whole thing once and link to it, but since you can't be bothered to read the rest of the context, I doubt you'd trouble yourself with a link.
  • LacedOpiumLacedOpium Member EpicPosts: 2,327
    edited February 2016

    The claim by some in the SC camp of deceptively describing the money payed to SC as a "pledge" needs to be put to rest once and for all.  One can't put price points on different variations of an item ranging from basic to elite, and have people buy those items based on the basis of basic to elite status, and expect those purchase dollars to be deemed a "pledge."  A "pledge" indicates that the priority is that of "giving," and though a person may receive compensation for the generosity of giving,  the compensation for giving is a secondary after-thought thereby rendering the contribution a "pledge." Once varying price ranges of value are placed on that compensatory item (Ie., escalating ship quality), the compensation then becomes the priority thereby rendering the transaction a "purchase."

    As it pertains to SC and ships, a perfect example of a pledge would have been SC offering the same ship to everyone "pledging," but allowing people to "pledge" any amount of money from the goodness of their hearts.  This is not unlike a non-profit TV network asking for donations of any amount, but everyone donating would receive the same item of compensation (Ie., a classic movie dvd set) regardless of the amount donated.  Or a church asking for donations from viewers of any amount, but everyone donating would receive the same bible.  These are deemed "pledges" because the priority is one of "giving."  The bibles are simply a compensatory item offered by the church to people donating as an expression of appreciation for their generosity.  Once the compensatory being received is assigned varying price points in quality, the compensatory item is then assigned a higher intrinsic value than the act of giving, rendering the transaction a "purchase" and not a "pledge."  

    Again, in the case of SC, if everyone had been given the same ship irrespective of the amount contributed, then those funds contributed could very well been deemed a "pledge."   Assigning prices to ships based on varying qualities that can be used in the game to receive escalating levels of advantage, and having people buy those ships based on those varying qualities that will grant players an escalation of advantage depending on the amount payed is what is commonly known as a "purchase," not a "pledge." One can play with the words all they want until their face turns blue, but the result will always be the same.
    Post edited by LacedOpium on
  • tinuelletinuelle Member UncommonPosts: 363
    Adjuvant1 said:

    edit: Also, if it seems I'm repeating myself, since I seem to have to say this daily, I'm doing it for your benefit, not mine. I'd just as soon type the whole thing once and link to it, but since you can't be bothered to read the rest of the context, I doubt you'd trouble yourself with a link.
    Oh man bro! You doing it for me!!!!?? Oh thank you.....thank you.....oh the kindness you feel for me and my 45 bucks.........oh I dont know what I should have done without you...
    But joking aside, if you do it for me go Get someone to pledge shitloads of cash so my 45 bucks will be worthwhile! Pretty sugaredcake with stuffing please! Oh you would do that for me wouldnt you? Oh please, oh please!

    image
  • Adjuvant1Adjuvant1 Member RarePosts: 2,100
    tinuelle said:
    Adjuvant1 said:

    edit: Also, if it seems I'm repeating myself, since I seem to have to say this daily, I'm doing it for your benefit, not mine. I'd just as soon type the whole thing once and link to it, but since you can't be bothered to read the rest of the context, I doubt you'd trouble yourself with a link.
    Oh man bro! You doing it for me!!!!?? Oh thank you.....thank you.....oh the kindness you feel for me and my 45 bucks.........oh I dont know what I should have done without you...
    But joking aside, if you do it for me go Get someone to pledge shitloads of cash so my 45 bucks will be worthwhile! Pretty sugaredcake with stuffing please! Oh you would do that for me wouldnt you? Oh please, oh please!
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escalation_of_commitment

    If CIG can't do it with tens of millions past the stretch goals, they can't do it with tens of millions more. I don't understand there is one past 65m at Enhanced Ship Modularity, so if that doesn't suit them, you're out of luck.


  • muffins89muffins89 Member UncommonPosts: 1,585

    Chris Roberts.  Destined to be the downfall of......well,  everything gaming. 

  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,328
    muffins89 said:

    Chris Roberts.  Destined to be the downfall of......well,  everything gaming. 

    DOOM DOOM    I tell ya     REPENT YOU SINNERS !

    httpwwwthepomoblogcomimagesdoomjpg

    Now, that would be an idea. A bunch of Doomsayers as a player org in Star Citizen, predicting the imminent end of the world by flooding the chat channels as humanity tries to attack the Vanduul ... and fails. 


    Have fun

  • tinuelletinuelle Member UncommonPosts: 363
    Adjuvant1 said:
    tinuelle said:
    Adjuvant1 said:

    edit: Also, if it seems I'm repeating myself, since I seem to have to say this daily, I'm doing it for your benefit, not mine. I'd just as soon type the whole thing once and link to it, but since you can't be bothered to read the rest of the context, I doubt you'd trouble yourself with a link.
    Oh man bro! You doing it for me!!!!?? Oh thank you.....thank you.....oh the kindness you feel for me and my 45 bucks.........oh I dont know what I should have done without you...
    But joking aside, if you do it for me go Get someone to pledge shitloads of cash so my 45 bucks will be worthwhile! Pretty sugaredcake with stuffing please! Oh you would do that for me wouldnt you? Oh please, oh please!
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escalation_of_commitment

    If CIG can't do it with tens of millions past the stretch goals, they can't do it with tens of millions more. I don't understand there is one past 65m at Enhanced Ship Modularity, so if that doesn't suit them, you're out of luck.


    EPIC fail or EPIC win, I'm all in!!!!

    I'm gonna Get my 45 bucks of fun either if its through enjoyful gaming or me going full retard over me not thinking its worth 45 bucks!

    Hell, if i had to subscribe to be a part of this trainjourney (or trainwreck depending on the eyes), I would have done it. Good enough, until now its been a F2P experience for all believers and trolls.
    Haha..... Just reading through all this fanbois and trollbois writing is epic fun, I've had my entertainment far beyond the 45 bucks yet, and the shit isnt Even released.

    Hahaha, but be sure I still want my epic game, or I'll go full locotard!!!! :)

    I hope you have pledged Bro, Else if you are going locotard wont really seem truely sincere

    image
  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,254
    Distopia said:
    I didn't invent it, it hasn't happened; at least that I'm aware of. What you're saying is you can't commit fraud and scam people. Yes that is illegal, you're breaking laws in doing so. I am not disputing that in the least bit. However, what laws are in place to cover litigation of a legitimate cancellation/failure? one in which all effort was given, funds used properly etc..etc..etc..? None that I'm aware of, as no act of malice was committed. 

    SO the question becomes is it a criminal act to start a kickstarter that can fail? Should Crowdfunded games be held liable in the case of project failure... or..... like in the real world is that simply bad luck on the draw, some projects fail, some people lose their money in an investment...? Such a case is inevitable down the road, that's what will set a precedent. WHo knows maybe it will be SC..
    Once a company spends all the money, suing becomes pointless. Especially when there are up to a million clients. You keep getting stuck on the legality of them receiving funds and failing to deliver. The laws are already in place. People can already sue them for their money because their agreed upon product wasn't delivered at the agreed upon time. They can already call their credit card company and get a chargeback. And you are correct, once the company spends all the money and closes down, the purchasers are "out of luck."

    In other words, you don't need a court to interpret laws that have been in existence and been interpreted for decades, if not centuries. Pretending that because no court has ruled on a Kickstarter either way means that there is some grey area is just your fantasy. The laws are already there and people are already getting their money back legally.
  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,183
    edited February 2016
    Distopia said:
    I didn't invent it, it hasn't happened; at least that I'm aware of. What you're saying is you can't commit fraud and scam people. Yes that is illegal, you're breaking laws in doing so. I am not disputing that in the least bit. However, what laws are in place to cover litigation of a legitimate cancellation/failure? one in which all effort was given, funds used properly etc..etc..etc..? None that I'm aware of, as no act of malice was committed. 

    SO the question becomes is it a criminal act to start a kickstarter that can fail? Should Crowdfunded games be held liable in the case of project failure... or..... like in the real world is that simply bad luck on the draw, some projects fail, some people lose their money in an investment...? Such a case is inevitable down the road, that's what will set a precedent. WHo knows maybe it will be SC..
    Once a company spends all the money, suing becomes pointless. Especially when there are up to a million clients. You keep getting stuck on the legality of them receiving funds and failing to deliver. The laws are already in place. People can already sue them for their money because their agreed upon product wasn't delivered at the agreed upon time. They can already call their credit card company and get a chargeback. And you are correct, once the company spends all the money and closes down, the purchasers are "out of luck."

    In other words, you don't need a court to interpret laws that have been in existence and been interpreted for decades, if not centuries. Pretending that because no court has ruled on a Kickstarter either way means that there is some grey area is just your fantasy. The laws are already there and people are already getting their money back legally.
    And that is my point, they can be sued, or even brought in on criminal charges... that would be litigation, that doesn't mean they'd lose though.. That is essentially my entire point. WHen such a case happens we'll see how it goes. As of now the only cases I've heard of have been actual scams, or misuse of funds. There's no reason to ask the question I eluded to in those cases as it wasn't a kickstarter it was an act of fraud.

    ANyway, thanks for keeping it civil bean.

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,254
    edited February 2016
    Distopia said:
    And that is my point, they can be sued... that would be litigation, that doesn't mean they'd lose the suit though.. That is essentially my entire point. WHen such a case happens we'll see how it goes. 
    Oh yes, it does mean that they would lose. The law is clear. Also, you don't need someone to be fraudulent to sue. Criminality isn't required.
  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,183
    Distopia said:
    And that is my point, they can be sued... that would be litigation, that doesn't mean they'd lose the suit though.. That is essentially my entire point. WHen such a case happens we'll see how it goes. 
    Oh yes, it does mean that they would lose. The law is clear.
    I take it that means you view it as breaking those laws to fail in delivering a crowdfunded game under any circumstance. Like I said we'll see if and when it ever comes to that. 

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • MaurgrimMaurgrim Member RarePosts: 1,331
    edited February 2016
    I really loved the idea of this game for years I havent pledged anything or bought any ships.
    But this "project" has gone to far, for me it has got to be the biggest laughing stock in gaming history, I'm 100% sure the game will be released but not even close to the massive feature list that has been promised over the years.

    It's really sad It would have been an awesome game.
  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,254
    Distopia said:
    Distopia said:
    And that is my point, they can be sued... that would be litigation, that doesn't mean they'd lose the suit though.. That is essentially my entire point. WHen such a case happens we'll see how it goes. 
    Oh yes, it does mean that they would lose. The law is clear.
    I take it that means you view it as breaking those laws to fail in delivering a crowdfunded game under any circumstance. Like I said we'll see if and when it ever comes to that. 
    I have no idea about "any" circumstances. In a case like this where there was an agreed upon product to be delivered by an agreed upon time, then the consumer is in the clear right and a judgement would be for them. It would only become criminal if the company in question decided not to pay or if there was some evidence that they were willfully deceiving their customers to raise money.
  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,183
    Maurgrim said:
    I really loved the idea of this game for years I havent pledged anything or bought any ships.
    But this "game" has gone to far, for me it has gone to be the biggest laughingstock in gaming history, I'm 100% sure the game will be released but not even close to the massive feature list that has been promised over the years.

    It's really sad It would have been an awesome game.
    I really don't think it's the feature list itself that is the problem. I think it's more in how many moving parts they want to implement. A good example being the Helmet shown off in the videos above, things like that are completely unneeded. It IMO would do nothing but confound the issues they've been having getting everything working together. All for someone to look at it once or twice think "ouhhh shiny" then never think about it again.. If they're going that far with a helmet, it makes me wonder how far they're going with other useless bells that really do nothing to improve actual gameplay...

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,183
    edited February 2016
    Distopia said:
    Distopia said:
    And that is my point, they can be sued... that would be litigation, that doesn't mean they'd lose the suit though.. That is essentially my entire point. WHen such a case happens we'll see how it goes. 
    Oh yes, it does mean that they would lose. The law is clear.
    I take it that means you view it as breaking those laws to fail in delivering a crowdfunded game under any circumstance. Like I said we'll see if and when it ever comes to that. 
    I have no idea about "any" circumstances. In a case like this where there was an agreed upon product to be delivered by an agreed upon time, then the consumer is in the clear right and a judgement would be for them. It would only become criminal if the company in question decided not to pay or if there was some evidence that they were willfully deceiving their customers to raise money.
    You may have missed my original edit for this first exchange of the day (I was slow in making the edit as I just woke up lol): 

    "As of now the only cases I've heard of have been actual scams, or misuse of funds. There's no reason to ask the question I eluded to in those cases as it wasn't a kickstarter it was an act of fraud." that was what I meant by circumstance. 

    You say the "law is clear"... but law in many cases is nothing more than precedent when it comes to things like this. All it takes is one circumstance to set a new precedent. That's where those questions:

     "is it a criminal act to start a kickstarter that can fail? Should Crowdfunded games be held liable in the case of project failure... or..... like in the real world is that simply bad luck on the draw, IE some projects fail, some people lose their money in an investment.." 

    Come into play. 

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,183
    Anyway I think we've gone over this enough for one thread.. :)

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,254
    edited February 2016
    Distopia said:
    You may have missed my original edit for this first exchange of the day (I was slow in making the edit as I just woke up lol): 

    "As of now the only cases I've heard of have been actual scams, or misuse of funds. There's no reason to ask the question I eluded to in those cases as it wasn't a kickstarter it was an act of fraud." that was what I meant by circumstance. 

    You say the "law is clear"... but law in many cases is nothing more than precedent when it comes to things like this. All it takes is one circumstance to set a new precedent. That's where those questions:

     "is it a criminal act to start a kickstarter that can fail? Should Crowdfunded games be held liable in the case of project failure... or..... like in the real world is that simply bad luck on the draw, IE some projects fail, some people lose their money in an investment.." 

    Come into play. 
    Yes, companies (all companies) should be held liable if people purchase things from them that are not delivered. The problem is that almost all "failed" companies don't have any more funds to return (or too little to matter). When companies go into bankruptcy, a trustee usually handles the remaining assets and ideally doles out the remaining funds to the people they owe money to in as fair a way as possible. That is exactly why, if someone is upset about not getting the agreed upon product by the agreed upon time, they should get their funds back now before it's too late. 

    And the "precedent" is clear. It likely goes all the way back through common law. Kings were probably ruling on matters like this. "I gave him stuff and he didn't give me stuff." Then the other guy says, "I couldn't give him stuff because I don't have enough stuff." Chop off his head!

    The questions you are asking (should a company be held liable for project failure, is it criminal to start a company) have already been answered. Just because the funding model is different, it doesn't change the fact that the company is liable for delivering the product in a timely manner. The price, product and time were agreed upon by both parties. 

    I'm not even clear on what you are arguing anymore. I think that you believe that a law suit is required to change current laws because current laws are not sufficient. The problem with that is that the system is already working. We are talking about current, working law. That is why I view your stance as being outlandish. You act like they NEED to change precedent in this case when they have already decided precedent long ago. You think that the funding model changes the responsibility of a company. It just doesn't.
  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Distopia said:
    Distopia said:
    And that is my point, they can be sued... that would be litigation, that doesn't mean they'd lose the suit though.. That is essentially my entire point. WHen such a case happens we'll see how it goes. 
    Oh yes, it does mean that they would lose. The law is clear.
    I take it that means you view it as breaking those laws to fail in delivering a crowdfunded game under any circumstance. Like I said we'll see if and when it ever comes to that. 
    I have no idea about "any" circumstances. In a case like this where there was an agreed upon product to be delivered by an agreed upon time, then the consumer is in the clear right and a judgement would be for them. It would only become criminal if the company in question decided not to pay or if there was some evidence that they were willfully deceiving their customers to raise money.

    Well! Sounds like an open and shut case! NOT!!!!!

    The problem is that there is not an agreed upon product. There is a proposed product. That's it! They don't even have to deliver anything. All they need to do is show that they attempted to deliver the product. Where you ever came up with the idea that there was an agreed upon product and an agreed upon timeline is hilarious. It's almost like you think that this isn't something covered in the agreement when you pledge. Shoot, if the loophole was that massive, do you really believe that SOME people would not have already jump in? However, no lawsuits filed..... You should file one. I mean it sounds like you've got it all figured out. 

    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
    ----------------

  • GrumpyHobbitGrumpyHobbit Member RarePosts: 1,220
    In a case like this where there was an agreed upon product to be delivered by an agreed upon time, then the consumer is in the clear right and a judgement would be for them.
    I bought a ship really early on for £25 or something. When I did it the game was trying to reach something like 5 million.

    I was 'buying a product with an expected delivery date'....but....

    The game design is now to include all the stretch goals past 5 million, now well past 100 million. 

    Is it reasonable for me to expect the product I paid for and complain that it has not been delivered?

    Fuck no!

    Additional features and of course the timescale of the project understandably elongated is just something I accept as part and parcel of the process. 

    I really think anyone who doesn't get why it is unreasonable to throw the toys out of the pram now should just shut up and stay out of the journey. 
  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,254
    edited February 2016
    CrazKanuk said:

    Well! Sounds like an open and shut case! NOT!!!!!

    The problem is that there is not an agreed upon product. There is a proposed product. That's it! They don't even have to deliver anything. All they need to do is show that they attempted to deliver the product. Where you ever came up with the idea that there was an agreed upon product and an agreed upon timeline is hilarious. It's almost like you think that this isn't something covered in the agreement when you pledge. Shoot, if the loophole was that massive, do you really believe that SOME people would not have already jump in? However, no lawsuits filed..... You should file one. I mean it sounds like you've got it all figured out. 
    Yes, there was an agreed upon product.

    Pledge $40 or more

     2,010 backers

    MERCENARY: A digital copy of the finished game for your PC with your RSI Aurora spaceship ready to fly + 1,000 Galactic Credits + Exclusive access to the Alpha and Beta + White Citizen's Card (physical reward)

    Estimated delivery:Nov 2014
    Ships to:Anywhere in the world
  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,183
    Distopia said:
    You may have missed my original edit for this first exchange of the day (I was slow in making the edit as I just woke up lol): 

    "As of now the only cases I've heard of have been actual scams, or misuse of funds. There's no reason to ask the question I eluded to in those cases as it wasn't a kickstarter it was an act of fraud." that was what I meant by circumstance. 

    You say the "law is clear"... but law in many cases is nothing more than precedent when it comes to things like this. All it takes is one circumstance to set a new precedent. That's where those questions:

     "is it a criminal act to start a kickstarter that can fail? Should Crowdfunded games be held liable in the case of project failure... or..... like in the real world is that simply bad luck on the draw, IE some projects fail, some people lose their money in an investment.." 

    Come into play. 
    Yes, companies (all companies) should be held liable if people purchase things from them that are not delivered. The problem is that almost all "failed" companies don't have any more funds to return. That is exactly why, if someone is upset about not getting the agreed upon product by the agreed upon time, they should get their funds back now before it's too late. 

    And the "precedent" is clear. It likely goes all the way back through common law. Kings were probably ruling on matter like this. "I gave him stuff and he didn't give me stuff." Then the other guy says, "I couldn't give him stuff because I don't have enough stuff." Chop off his head!

    The questions you are asking (should a company be held liable for project failure, is it criminal to start a company) have already been answered. Just because the funding model is different, it doesn't change the fact that the company is liable for delivering the product in a timely manner. The price, product and time were agreed upon by both parties. 

    I'm not even clear on what you are arguing anymore. I think that you believe that a law suit is required to change current laws because current laws are not sufficient. The problem with that is that the system is already working. We are talking about current, working law. That is why I view your stance as being outlandish. You act like they NEED to change precedent in this case when they have already decided precedent long ago. You think that the funding model changes the responsibility of a company. It just doesn't.
    Think is a strong word I'm just more or less brainstorming, as I find the subject interesting. Think would imply I believe there needs to be legislature, rather than believe new legislature is a possibility even if unlikely. Cases go differently than we expect all of the time.

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • GrumpyHobbitGrumpyHobbit Member RarePosts: 1,220
    edited February 2016
    CrazKanuk said:

    Well! Sounds like an open and shut case! NOT!!!!!

    The problem is that there is not an agreed upon product. There is a proposed product. That's it! They don't even have to deliver anything. All they need to do is show that they attempted to deliver the product. Where you ever came up with the idea that there was an agreed upon product and an agreed upon timeline is hilarious. It's almost like you think that this isn't something covered in the agreement when you pledge. Shoot, if the loophole was that massive, do you really believe that SOME people would not have already jump in? However, no lawsuits filed..... You should file one. I mean it sounds like you've got it all figured out. 
    Yes, there was an agree upon product.

    Pledge $40 or more

     2,010 backers

    MERCENARY: A digital copy of the finished game for your PC with your RSI Aurora spaceship ready to fly + 1,000 Galactic Credits + Exclusive access to the Alpha and Beta + White Citizen's Card (physical reward)

    Estimated delivery:Nov 2014
    Ships to:Anywhere in the world
    Estimated delivery......

    Also 


    Finished game....
  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,254
    In a case like this where there was an agreed upon product to be delivered by an agreed upon time, then the consumer is in the clear right and a judgement would be for them.
    I bought a ship really early on for £25 or something. When I did it the game was trying to reach something like 5 million.

    I was 'buying a product with an expected delivery date'....but....

    The game design is now to include all the stretch goals past 5 million, now well past 100 million. 

    Is it reasonable for me to expect the product I paid for and complain that it has not been delivered?

    Fuck no!

    Additional features and of course the timescale of the project understandably elongated is just something I accept as part and parcel of the process. 

    I really think anyone who doesn't get why it is unreasonable to throw the toys out of the pram now should just shut up and stay out of the journey. 
    Fuck yes! If they change the product you paid for and it bothers you, you have every right to get your money back. If it doesn't bother you, then you can choose to stick it out. It's completely up to each consumer. But once they changed the product and the dates after having agreed to different terms, the consumer has every right to compensation.
This discussion has been closed.