Rob Irving (Former Lead Designer of Star Citizen) interview - admits Escapists article is true

Adjuvant1

DKLond said:

Adjuvant1 said:

DKLond said:

Then you provided an answer that had little or nothing to do with my question.

It does.

Oh, so not only do you admit you can't answer my question - you choose to stick to it being a real answer anyway.

That makes a hell of a lot of sense, really

Guess that all depends how much you want the answer to your question. I showed you where to look, and that is all verifiable with state records. Honestly, I don't talk about quite a bit to which I've become privy, but I can't repeat it, here, without appropriate citation.

DKLond

Adjuvant1 said:

DKLond said:

Adjuvant1 said:

DKLond said:

Then you provided an answer that had little or nothing to do with my question.

It does.

Oh, so not only do you admit you can't answer my question - you choose to stick to it being a real answer anyway.

That makes a hell of a lot of sense, really

Guess that all depends how much you want the answer to your question. I showed you where to look, and that is all verifiable with state records. Honestly, I don't talk about quite a bit to which I've become privy, but I can't repeat it, here, without appropriate citation.

I don't want anything you're not willing to give. I don't expect much in that way.

As for giving me google.com if I ask for something specific in relation to a claim, that's not going to help me much either.

I like to see if people actually know what they're talking about - because that's how I know if their statements are worthy of attention.

Often, I don't go looking for "proof" - because I know it's all but impossible to prove anything. I usually do that only when I find the claim particularly out of touch with the reality I'm familiar with.

For some reason, I find many of the detractors of Star Citizen particularly ignorant when it comes to that which they elect to detract from. I say many, but I really mean most.

There are SOME that have concerns I can definitely recognise as valid and substantiated - but it's surprisingly rare.

Maybe it's just because reasonable people are less vocal when negative, I don't know.

Adjuvant1

DKLond said:

Adjuvant1 said:

DKLond said:

Adjuvant1 said:

DKLond said:

Then you provided an answer that had little or nothing to do with my question.

It does.

Oh, so not only do you admit you can't answer my question - you choose to stick to it being a real answer anyway.

That makes a hell of a lot of sense, really

Guess that all depends how much you want the answer to your question. I showed you where to look, and that is all verifiable with state records. Honestly, I don't talk about quite a bit to which I've become privy, but I can't repeat it, here, without appropriate citation.

I don't want anything you're not willing to give. I don't expect much in that way.

As for giving me google.com if I ask for something specific in relation to a claim, that's not going to help me much either.

I like to see if people actually know what they're talking about - because that's how I know if their statements are worthy of attention.

Often, I don't go looking for "proof" - because I know it's all but impossible to prove anything. I usually do that only when I find the claim particularly out of touch with the reality I'm familiar with.

For some reason, I find the detractors of Star Citizen particularly ignorant when it comes to that which they elect to detract from.

Aside from obviously subjective statements, as, "It's a shadester company", I always provide links how I get my information. These guys don't let me get away with anything (which is good practice), yet also, they don't exactly give me credit for my effort, because it's often inconvenient, and they bury it all in inanity and psychobabble.

DKLond

Adjuvant1 said:

DKLond said:

Adjuvant1 said:

DKLond said:

Adjuvant1 said:

DKLond said:

Then you provided an answer that had little or nothing to do with my question.

It does.

Oh, so not only do you admit you can't answer my question - you choose to stick to it being a real answer anyway.

That makes a hell of a lot of sense, really

Guess that all depends how much you want the answer to your question. I showed you where to look, and that is all verifiable with state records. Honestly, I don't talk about quite a bit to which I've become privy, but I can't repeat it, here, without appropriate citation.

I don't want anything you're not willing to give. I don't expect much in that way.

As for giving me google.com if I ask for something specific in relation to a claim, that's not going to help me much either.

I like to see if people actually know what they're talking about - because that's how I know if their statements are worthy of attention.

Often, I don't go looking for "proof" - because I know it's all but impossible to prove anything. I usually do that only when I find the claim particularly out of touch with the reality I'm familiar with.

For some reason, I find the detractors of Star Citizen particularly ignorant when it comes to that which they elect to detract from.

Aside from obviously subjective statements, as, "It's a shadester company", I always provide links how I get my information. These guys don't let me get away with anything (which is good practice), yet also, they don't exactly give me credit for my effort, because it's often inconvenient, and they bury it all in inanity and psychobabble.

If you usually provide links that don't actually substantiate the claims in question, then maybe you need to do better

From what I can see of that link you posted, it's a list of separate STUDIOS not companies - and there's absolutely no evidence that SC funds are being used for anything but SC. Not a single shred of evidence.

Maybe you could just link to the actual evidence - if you have it?

That would be a lot more useful and convincing.

Adjuvant1

DKLond said:

From what I can see of that link you posted, it's a list of separate STUDIOS not companies - and there's absolutely no evidence that SC funds are being used for anything but SC. Not a single shred of evidence.

Maybe you could just link to the actual evidence - if you have it?

That would be a lot more useful and convincing.

Nope. Can't. Sorry. Ask the guy who started this part of the conversation, or use what I handed you to look for yourself.

DKLond

Adjuvant1 said:

DKLond said:

From what I can see of that link you posted, it's a list of separate STUDIOS not companies - and there's absolutely no evidence that SC funds are being used for anything but SC. Not a single shred of evidence.

Maybe you could just link to the actual evidence - if you have it?

That would be a lot more useful and convincing.

Nope. Can't. Sorry. Ask the guy who started this part of the conversation, or use what I handed you to look for yourself.

Again, I already asked him. 

I looked and found nothing. If you actually know the evidence is there - I find it incredibly suspect that you refuse to point out where.

You feel me?

VorpalChicken28

There should be no need for 14 differant studioes to produce 1 game surely? 

DKLond

vorpal28 said:

There should be no need for 14 differant studioes to produce 1 game surely? 

Did you read what I said about their reasons?

There's no need to have 300+ people either. It just makes it faster and more efficient.

There's probably no need to have more than 10 ships - it just makes it more fun and interesting.

See that pattern?

It's not about what's NEEDED - it's about what they think will make for the best game in the best way - given their options and limitations.

I'm sure you have more experience with ambitious development like this, though, right?

Adjuvant1

vorpal28 said:

There should be no need for 14 differant studioes to produce 1 game surely? 

At least redundant ones in California.

DKLond

Adjuvant1 said:

vorpal28 said:

There should be no need for 14 differant studioes to produce 1 game surely? 

At least redundant ones in California.

What studios are active and redundant and what are they doing there that makes them redundant?

Distopia

vorpal28 said:

There should be no need for 14 differant studioes to produce 1 game surely? 

I really wish we could answer such questions, if so these threads would consist of one page. With at least most in agreement one way or the other.

WHile 14 sounds excessive, who knows really? Could all be based on as DK put it different studios to facilitate teams in their respective "homes" or a mix of that and infrastructure for on-line services, servers, regional CS etc.. Could be a bunch of sweat shops selling fake Nikes, who knows, the possibilities are endless.

Deathenger

vorpal28 said:

There should be no need for 14 differant studioes to produce 1 game surely? 

 There is if you want to hide large amounts of money salami slicing style.

Take a little slice of the salami here and there then hope nobody notices till its all gone. 

Arglebargle

DKLond said:

As for having STUDIOS around the world, it's one of the most talked about aspects of the project in COUNTLESS community videos.

Chris didn't want to force the top tier talent he was going for to be forced into relocation. He wanted the CryEngine people to be able to remain in Germany for the most part - and he wanted Foundry 42 (led by his brother) to remain in the UK for the most part, and so on.

They've had to adjust the original plan to some degree, but on the whole - the idea is that people do the best work when they work in close proximity to those relevant to their specific part of the project.

Trying to get 300+ top people from around the world to move to a single location - for years - is a nightmare and a LOT of people simply wouldn't want to do it - for one thing.

It's not rocket science, really.

I recall that originally, the work was going to be farmed out to different companies altogether.  Much was made of this, until the obvious problems started to crop up.  Leading to the present mighty big empire.   Where, apparently every decision has to be approved by Roberts, down to the bootlaces.  

But the previous ballyhooed modular structure is now gone, just another bad  money wasting decision. No wonder Irving got tired of it.  Not to mention the years to come.

DKLond

Arglebargle said:

DKLond said:

As for having STUDIOS around the world, it's one of the most talked about aspects of the project in COUNTLESS community videos.

Chris didn't want to force the top tier talent he was going for to be forced into relocation. He wanted the CryEngine people to be able to remain in Germany for the most part - and he wanted Foundry 42 (led by his brother) to remain in the UK for the most part, and so on.

They've had to adjust the original plan to some degree, but on the whole - the idea is that people do the best work when they work in close proximity to those relevant to their specific part of the project.

Trying to get 300+ top people from around the world to move to a single location - for years - is a nightmare and a LOT of people simply wouldn't want to do it - for one thing.

It's not rocket science, really.

I recall that originally, the work was going to be farmed out to different companies altogether.  Much was made of this, until the obvious problems started to crop up.  Leading to the present mighty big empire.   Where, apparently every decision has to be approved by Roberts, down to the bootlaces.  

But the previous ballyhooed modular structure is now gone, just another bad  money wasting decision. No wonder Irving got tired of it.  Not to mention the years to come.

I don't know what you're trying to say.

Some of the work WAS done by other companies, including ship combat AI and some FPS work. Oh, and the website.

As for the modular structure being gone, I have no idea what you mean here either. It's still very much a modular game - built from pieces they're creating one by one. They built the hangar as the first module to introduce ships, then they created Arena Commander as the foundation of ship combat and balancing - and they're using much of the work done by Illfonic for the FPS - even if plans didn't work out as they imagined initially. They're developing planetary landing technology and procedural generation technology on the side right now as well. Modular just like they always intended, even if everything wasn't set in stone from the outset - which never happens with ambitious games.

As for Chris Roberts having final say, I think that's pretty reasonable - seeing as how he made it all happen and is the guy in charge of the project. That's pretty much how being the top guy works in a lot of companies around the world, surprisingly.

Yes, he's very hands-on and unusually invested in all aspects of development, which just might be fantastic for the consumer in the end, but probably very frustrating as a developer trying to keep up with the vision.

That's life when you have a guy with a powerful vision who wants to change things for the better.

Bad? I don't see it really.

SEANMCAD

Is there any person at all in this thread who is saying anything such as 'SC is or has been on schedule'?

I mean from reading these pots I think its just assh5t critics arguing with assha5t critics and doing nothing other than keeping the word 'Star Citizen' in other peoples minds by keeping this thread active.

nicely done guys...its like free advertising.

TalulaRose

These posts are the reason I got a refund. If that's the advertising SC wants then more power to them.

SpottyGekko

SEANMCAD said:

Is there any person at all in this thread who is saying anything such as 'SC is or has been on schedule'?

I mean from reading these pots I think its just assh5t critics arguing with assha5t critics and doing nothing other than keeping the word 'Star Citizen' in other peoples minds by keeping this thread active.

nicely done guys...its like free advertising.

Agreed !

The SC forums are probably the most consistently active forums on this site !

Admittedly, 90% of the posts are made by the same 6 people, but it keeps SC on the front page...


I'm beginning to wonder if the both the critics and the defenders aren't being paid by GIG to keep the buzz going !  

GrumpyHobbit

dsmart said:

1) Don't involve me in your bullshit. Take the righteous beating you're already getting for being an ass-clown, like the little man that you are.

2) Keep making shit up. Nobody ever said anywhere that LOD was finished in Oct. Nice try.

Represent yourself man.

Don't let anyone tell you how to finish a game or promote yourself!

Fab job so far, keep it up.

DKLond

Somehow, I don't think a spiral of self-loathing, expressed as perpetually malign spreading of obvious falsehoods against that which you wanted to achieve, but never could, is a wise way to represent yourself.

BC3000AD turned out to be a massive failure that could have been made to work - if subject to a lesser and more realistic ego. So what? Get over it.

Do something productive instead of this slow and embarassing public self-destruction.

Adjuvant1

DKLond said:

Do something productive instead of this slow and embarassing public self-destruction.

He's not even addressing you. Why don't you settle down.

DKLond

dsmart said:

JohnP0100 said:

The legend is true...
If you say Derek Smart 3 times, he DOES APPEAR! AMIGAWD! 

heh yeah, this popped up in my Google Alerts feed when it first appeared. But seeing as I have curbed back on engaging Shitizens, I didn't post. Then, right on cue, they started with the mentioning of LOD and Derek Smart again. You know, right when they're up against the ropes like scared rats with nowhere to go. Sad thing is, those who have seen, played, own LOD - and SC - are laughing their asses off that these dimwits continue to compare a WORKING indie game with a $110M train-wreck of a tech demo.

It's a glorious thing to watch. The inevitable collapse is coming; and we will all remember these threads. Thing is, these anon clowns will once again scurry back into obscurity. We will be here: laughing our asses off.

"Those who have seen, played, and own LOD and SC."

Isn't that a pretty advanced way of saying "Mom and I"

Aren't you angry at mommy for supporting Star Citizen as well, though?

dsmart

Realizer said:

JohnP0100 said:

Realizer said:

I'll clarify for a third time for @JohnP0100 ;  in my opinion these former employees claiming to have had a bad experience during their time at CIG don't really accomplish anything unless they take legal action. So in the long run I'm saying most sane people who see these articles/videos don't really care. Sure the few of us vocal fans/anti fans sling verbal shit at each other, but the project continues to bring in around $3m a month. With that being the case, and as long as we have no proof or legal action being taken we are left with two options. 

Option one is to pledge and wait for the game to come out. Option two is to not pledge and wait for the game to come out. Either way there will still be over 1m+ people trying the game, probably more once a purchasable final product is available.

So I'll say again, I personally don't think these articles/threads accomplish anything. Non of these people are taking legal action, so the company will keep on going. So why don't you wait till the game comes out, then you can scream from the mountain tops about how bad it is?  

 It's very obvious though that @JohnP0100 isn't interested in logic, he just wants to use fallacy to validate his opinions as facts. Hence why he takes one word out of an argument and bases the entire position on it. That is flawed logic, and a terrible debate tactic. 

 If a lawsuit gets filed and verifiable proof comes out that laws are being broken at CIG we can have a real conversation about the future of the game, but until then these threads aren't going to stop the game from selling more ships. So why bother wasting the effort? 

So we went from you trying to dismiss the interview by saying things like 'Rob is intoxicated. Rob is getting paid for this.' to 'why is this poster posting this when it is clear that no one cares?'

What 'clarification'?  Oh you mean backtracking? Sorry,  but your posts on this says otherwise.

What 'logic'? Oh you mean ad hominem attacks?
Your post in this thread is all the proof i need for that too.

It says a lot that the most of the 'for-SC post' in this thread, has me replying on why not personally attack others is a good thing.

 No obviously my story didn't change, everything I said still stands on it's own merit, yes he looks intoxicated, yes he's seeking attention (that's the point of a video), and it still changes nothing from the facts that the game is still making $3 million per month. Also doesn't change the fact that no legal action has been pursued, and doesn't change the fact that anything you say won't change the the outcome of whatever SC is going to become. It might become a streaming pile of garbage, it might become a shining example of a game done right, we won't know till it's done, and nothing you say will change that fact. 

 So again unless you have some inside information that warrants pressing charges that no one else is aware of, you crying fowl does nothing. 
 
 I'd like to say thank you for being a great example of someone who can't argue the position, only fallacy. It's funny you should mention ad-hominem while you continue to employ non-sequitur arguments, with some correlation implies causation mixed in there also. 

You're right, everything you've said stands on its own merit because, well, there is no.

He's not intoxicated. Anyone who knows who he is, knows that's HOW he looks and acts! 

...and wow "seeking attention" is the point of the video?

This is the thing, you people simply have NO FREAKING CLUE. And even when the clue is right there, you all conveniently miss it.

Here read. This is from another thread and on Facebook:

Matt Barton has been doing “Matt Chat” for years. He’s probably the most widely respected video game historian in the world.
He’s written 4 (now 5 one is at the publisher) books on the subject. His viewers asked him to try the drink.
He usually reviews alcoholic beverages in his drinking horn. He has a PhD and he’s also a friend of mine.
The Japanese Drink Ramun or whatever the hell it was is a little joke, but not nearly as bad of a joke as Star Citizen is.
Matt and I had discussed previously (about January I believe) Rob Irving being interviewed and whether or not Irving was under an NDA.
Matt’s a little silly, but he isn’t an idiot. He’s interviewed most of the fathers and mothers of video gaming including Ralph Baer. He’s got more video game cred than anyone working on Star Citizen that’s for damn sure. I did give him a lot of hell about opening the bottle which was funny to watch.
It certainly would be interesting to see him interview Derek Smart.

And.... 

- the game is no longer making $3M per month. In fact, across both free fly events, and the last ship sale, their funding has flat-lined. Why? Because more and more people are seeing through the bullshit.

- there was no legal action because RSI/CIG have NO CASE and it WILL open them up to the #1 issue that EVERYONE wants to know about: HOW WAS THE MONEY SPENT AND WAS THERE ANY FRAUD AND/OR MALFEASANCE. Heck, they can't even sue me; and I'm considered easy fish for that, all things considered, seeing as I started this campaign of awareness back in July 2015.

SEANMCAD

SpottyGekko said:

SEANMCAD said:

Is there any person at all in this thread who is saying anything such as 'SC is or has been on schedule'?

I mean from reading these pots I think its just assh5t critics arguing with assha5t critics and doing nothing other than keeping the word 'Star Citizen' in other peoples minds by keeping this thread active.

nicely done guys...its like free advertising.

Agreed !

The SC forums are probably the most consistently active forums on this site !

Admittedly, 90% of the posts are made by the same 6 people, but it keeps SC on the front page...


I'm beginning to wonder if the both the critics and the defenders aren't being paid by GIG to keep the buzz going !  

they very well might be. The last time I looked into this game itself after not looking into it for a year was because of the Escapist article. 

Erillion

dsmart said:

Sad thing is, those who have seen, played, own LOD 

Line of Defense Steam Charts

http://steamcharts.com/app/266620#48h

"Those who have seen, played ....."  -->   All FOUR  of them ?   :-) 

Since April 2015 until January 2016 the average was 2-4 peak players  (seems like there was a spike with a Whooping !! 11 players in February 2016.

" The inevitable collapse is coming;" ---> Can you clarify which game you are taking about here ? Line of Defense or something else ?


Have fun

DKLond

Sure, the creator of Wing Commander has no video game cred compared to Matt Barton.

I hope his PhD isn't the "Smart" version of said accolade