This is the best comment on that video by : Danakar "Quicksilver" Endeel
"You can trace this back to 1990 where Derek Smart was mucking around with his Battlecruiser game and trying to find a publisher when Chris Roberts stole the stage with Wing Commander. But instead of taking it in stride and improve upon his own game Derek sent nasty messages to Origin demanding to stop publishing Wing Commander or he would sue them for 'stealing his ideas'.
Fast forward to 2012. Derek Smart is once again mucking around with Line of Defense (which should have been out in Summer 2012 already) and Chris Roberts takes the stage with the Star Citizen Kickstarter project.
So yeah, that likely pushed Derek over the edge as history was going to repeat itself. He even backed on the last day of Kickstarter with $250 thinking it would give him a legal foothold in the company. But his plans failed when CIG refunded his pledge as per the Kickstarter ToS and it turned him into a raging howler monkey.
And after nearly a year of constant online harassment, stalking, libel and doxxing during his FUD-campaign the only thing mister fake-PhD Derek Smart achieved was getting banned from multiple forums, shadowbanned from Reddit for creating a hatesub, a 24 hour suspension on Twitter and his own 'game' pulled from Steam. :P
His selfproclaimed 'industry reach' is that of an old man yelling at clouds."
You are reaching with your Derek Smart hate. Smart wasn't the only person fed up with CIGs antics. There had been plenty of posts all over the net regarding CIGs peddling of ships. It was a constant stream of ship art sales with nothing to show for it. As a concerned pledger of the project, Smart simply expressed the same concern many other pledgers had been having regarding the project and he gave voice to the thousands of people who had been saying the same things he eventually gave voice to and clamoring for a bit of "transparency and accountability."
The shame with you pro-CIG people, is that instead of attacking the message you decided to attack the messenger. This gave you a convenient excuse to make it about Smart instead of making it about the issue at hand. All you hear about with you pro-CIG folk is "Derek Smart." You are all obsessed with the man and little do you realize that your obsession with the man has made him bigger, and given him a greater platform, by which to do exactly that which you are attempting to deny him. This is not, and has never been, about Derek Smart.
You have to admit that video which contains footage from gameplay is impressive. They have come a long way it seems and still have a long way to go. I am in no way a fanboy and Erillion will tell you when it comes to logical criticizing then I am on the front lines asking questions and taking names. Derek Smart is not a good model for any argument against CIG. Considering the guy has shot himself in the foot so many times IDK how he is even walking around. Self proclaimed CIG prophet who has predicted about 100 things that haven't come true and a lot of them are clearly bullcrap. There are many things yet to be seen about CIG and yes it would help if they were a little more transparent.
I believe what I see and we are at that stage where we just have to wait and see what happens because all the theory crafting has been presented and noone has come out a clear victor. But the door does swing both ways where some people criticize everything CIG does and other people defend everything they do.
Not sure if it was intentional or not, but the "door" mention was awesome.
You are reaching with your Derek Smart hate. Smart wasn't the only person fed up with CIGs antics. There had been plenty of posts all over the net regarding CIGs peddling of ships. It was a constant stream of ship art sales with nothing to show for it. As a concerned pledger of the project, Smart simply expressed the same concern many other pledgers had been having regarding the project and he gave voice to the thousands of people who had been saying the same things he eventually gave voice to and clamoring for a bit of "transparency and accountability."
The shame with you pro-CIG people, is that instead of attacking the message you decided to attack the messenger. This gave you a convenient excuse to make it about Smart instead of making it about the issue at hand. All you hear about with you pro-CIG folk is "Derek Smart." You are all obsessed with the man and little do you realize that your obsession with the man has made him bigger, and given him a greater platform, by which to do exactly that which you are attempting to deny him. This is not, and has never been, about Derek Smart.
You have to admit that video which contains footage from gameplay is impressive. They have come a long way it seems and still have a long way to go. I am in no way a fanboy and Erillion will tell you when it comes to logical criticizing then I am on the front lines asking questions and taking names. Derek Smart is not a good model for any argument against CIG. Considering the guy has shot himself in the foot so many times IDK how he is even walking around. Self proclaimed CIG prophet who has predicted about 100 things that haven't come true and a lot of them are clearly bullcrap. There are many things yet to be seen about CIG and yes it would help if they were a little more transparent.
I believe what I see and we are at that stage where we just have to wait and see what happens because all the theory crafting has been presented and noone has come out a clear victor. But the door does swing both ways where some people criticize everything CIG does and other people defend everything they do.
I will admit it does look impressive. But my position regarding this topic has never been against the game. I am, and have never been, a game basher. I am for all games and I support those players who are enjoying a game, regardless of the game or my own game play preferences. My position on this matter has always been about "transparency and accountability." And I adopted this position out of due regard and my concern for the MMORPG genre as it pertains to crowd funding.
To be honest, even without having provided full disclosure in regard to transparency and accountability, it is my sincere belief that this whole incident did go along way toward putting CIG on notice that any type of foul play will not be tolerated. As such, I want to believe that it did a lot of good in many ways. As for the game, I wish it well and will certainly give it some play time when it is finally released. It will be a huge step forward and an epic accomplishment for the MMORPG genre if it is released as stated, or even if it comes anywhere close to its intended goal.
... all the theory crafting has been presented and noone has come out a clear victor. ...
I dunno so much...
Given the seriousness of some of the allegations (fraud, impropriety, financial misconduct, etc.) and threats (FTC investigations, private lawsuits, etc.) that were made against CIG, I'd say it's a decisive victory to see them still conducting "business as usual", without having given an inch...
... all the theory crafting has been presented and noone has come out a clear victor. ...
I dunno so much...
Given the seriousness of some of the allegations (fraud, impropriety, financial misconduct, etc.) and threats (FTC investigations, private lawsuits, etc.) that were made against CIG, I'd say it's a decisive victory to see them still conducting "business as usual", without having given an inch...
and what exactly what 'given in an inch' look like? a cookie? refunds?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
You can not claim yourself not to be a "fanboy" or a "whiteknight" and yet argue every point made by the "fanboys" and "whiteknights" ad nauseum. The narrator of the video briefly mentions the legit concerns that many critics have about CIG in regard to Star Citizen, yet he doesn't go into detail about them and instead choses to "whiteknight" the arguments made by the 'fanboys" and the "whiteknights."
The main concern that most critics have about CIG in regard to Star Citizen revolve around "transparency and accountability" as it pertains to the 100+ thousand dollars that gamers have provided to CIG to develop this game. In return, these gamers should have been given a good faith showing of how those funds have been allocated. There is no reason why this information should not be provided if the allocation of resources is "above board."
CIG brought this upon themselves due to their flagrant and stubborn refusal to be "transparent and accountable" and present a good faith showing to those as to how these fund were being allocated to those who have blessed them with these enormous amounts of funds. All that was being requested was a simple showing of "transparency and accountability." Surely they have competent accountants keeping accurate financial records.
A brief ledger depicting the allocation of funds should not have been too hard to produce. The fact they so vehemently refused to provide one created an unnecessary flag. And the immature and uninformed manner with which Roberts decided to respond throughout the entire fiasco certainly did not help and only served to stoke the embers and contribute to their own damage.
CIG only has themselves to blame.
You miss the point. The point is that there are completely valid points, but that they are rarely argued, instead people opting for obscure and outlandish theories, coffee machines, and doors.
Secondly, it's quite possible that CIG is the only company, now and in history, who is privately owned and yet has people marching on their lawn with pitchforks demanding accountability and transparency. That's a pretty lofty assumption, I know, but I can literally not think of a single instance past or present where a company has received so much information. Here's what it boils down to. When a door becomes a major concern of those who are "concerned" about the project, why in the world would you open your books? I applaud them. Murca doesn't give in to terrorist demands!
Honestly? It's about as logical as someone asking you to provide a detailed log of your purchases. Actually, that's not bad. If a bank asked me to provide them with a detailed log of all of my purchases before giving me a loan, I'd probably tell them to sod off. Why should a private company have any similar responsibility. On top of that, it isn't even their community at large who has a problem, so they are, effectively, being accountable to their customers (the ones who aren't asking for that information and would rather them tell those people requesting it to shove it up their asses). So roger than on the accountability.
While I agree with your sentiment, in general, I have to take issue with the bank loan example.
A credit check is the bank looking into your own management of your money. And they don't ask so much as condition the loan on the information they gain from that check.
The closer comparison to crowd funding is and always has been an investor comparison. Color the funds in whatever light you like, crowd funding directly replaced publisher funding. It's a very dangerous road to head down, replacing one investment source with another that releases the ones using the money from that same level of accountability.
Do you really believe that it's of benefit to CIG to release these numbers? Do you really believe, assuming you've seen some of the hilarious conspiracy theories posted on here, that transparency is something that would benefit them?
Of course I really believe that transparency and accountability would benefit them. I mean, who in their right mind wouldn't believe so. Unless they have something to hide, why wouldn't it? If nothing else, transparency and accountability would enhance good will about the company among the gaming populace and would most certainly inspire many who have not pledged, to pledge, and for those who have pledged, to pledge even more. This is the reason why companies provide a prospectus when attempting to sell stock in their companies. There is nothing like trust. Without it, you have nothing. Transparency and accountability inspires trust.
... all the theory crafting has been presented and noone has come out a clear victor. ...
I dunno so much...
Given the seriousness of some of the allegations (fraud, impropriety, financial misconduct, etc.) and threats (FTC investigations, private lawsuits, etc.) that were made against CIG, I'd say it's a decisive victory to see them still conducting "business as usual", without having given an inch...
At this point I dont think we will ever truly know. They have no obligation to say what they have done with any of the money. But many people have said the 64 bit space is a feat that costs 30 million alone. And we know CIG has claimed to have solved such a feat and yes it should cost them 30 million to do that, maybe even more. But you know CIG can silence the fraud claims by doing 1 thing. Revealing their financial records. Because they refuse to do this they will always have people who don't believe they have been honest.
Do you really believe that it's of benefit to CIG to release these numbers? Do you really believe, assuming you've seen some of the hilarious conspiracy theories posted on here, that transparency is something that would benefit them?
Of course I really believe that transparency and accountability would benefit them. I mean, who in their right mind wouldn't believe so. Unless they have something to hide, why wouldn't it? If nothing else, transparency and accountability would enhance good will about the company among the gaming player base and would most certainly inspire many who have not pledged, to pledge, and for those who have pledged, to pledge even more. There is nothing like trust. Without it, you have nothing. Transparency and accountability inspires trust.
I agree, in a perfect world where the Internet was mature and could assess information and come to logical conclusions, transparency works. However, in the current state of the Internet, it's essentially giving a box of ammunition to a toddler with a gun. Even with removing the Internet, there must, obviously, be some reason why companies aren't completely transparent with their books. Maybe you're right, I don't know, but I'd tend to side with the vast majority (99.99%) of companies who, for whatever reason, don't open their books to the public.
You can not claim yourself not to be a "fanboy" or a "whiteknight" and yet argue every point made by the "fanboys" and "whiteknights" ad nauseum. The narrator of the video briefly mentions the legit concerns that many critics have about CIG in regard to Star Citizen, yet he doesn't go into detail about them and instead choses to "whiteknight" the arguments made by the 'fanboys" and the "whiteknights."
The main concern that most critics have about CIG in regard to Star Citizen revolve around "transparency and accountability" as it pertains to the 100+ thousand dollars that gamers have provided to CIG to develop this game. In return, these gamers should have been given a good faith showing of how those funds have been allocated. There is no reason why this information should not be provided if the allocation of resources is "above board."
CIG brought this upon themselves due to their flagrant and stubborn refusal to be "transparent and accountable" and present a good faith showing to those as to how these fund were being allocated to those who have blessed them with these enormous amounts of funds. All that was being requested was a simple showing of "transparency and accountability." Surely they have competent accountants keeping accurate financial records.
A brief ledger depicting the allocation of funds should not have been too hard to produce. The fact they so vehemently refused to provide one created an unnecessary flag. And the immature and uninformed manner with which Roberts decided to respond throughout the entire fiasco certainly did not help and only served to stoke the embers and contribute to their own damage.
CIG only has themselves to blame.
You miss the point. The point is that there are completely valid points, but that they are rarely argued, instead people opting for obscure and outlandish theories, coffee machines, and doors.
Secondly, it's quite possible that CIG is the only company, now and in history, who is privately owned and yet has people marching on their lawn with pitchforks demanding accountability and transparency. That's a pretty lofty assumption, I know, but I can literally not think of a single instance past or present where a company has received so much information. Here's what it boils down to. When a door becomes a major concern of those who are "concerned" about the project, why in the world would you open your books? I applaud them. Murca doesn't give in to terrorist demands!
Honestly? It's about as logical as someone asking you to provide a detailed log of your purchases. Actually, that's not bad. If a bank asked me to provide them with a detailed log of all of my purchases before giving me a loan, I'd probably tell them to sod off. Why should a private company have any similar responsibility. On top of that, it isn't even their community at large who has a problem, so they are, effectively, being accountable to their customers (the ones who aren't asking for that information and would rather them tell those people requesting it to shove it up their asses). So roger than on the accountability.
While I agree with your sentiment, in general, I have to take issue with the bank loan example.
A credit check is the bank looking into your own management of your money. And they don't ask so much as condition the loan on the information they gain from that check.
The closer comparison to crowd funding is and always has been an investor comparison. Color the funds in whatever light you like, crowd funding directly replaced publisher funding. It's a very dangerous road to head down, replacing one investment source with another that releases the ones using the money from that same level of accountability.
Ok, how about you asking your buddy for $10 bucks and then he says "Sure!" And then the following week he asks to see detailed documentation of your spending history for the past month. For the record, it was never intended to be taken seriously. Regardless of what analogy is used, the fact of the matter is that there is no benefit to them opening their books.
... all the theory crafting has been presented and noone has come out a clear victor. ...
I dunno so much...
Given the seriousness of some of the allegations (fraud, impropriety, financial misconduct, etc.) and threats (FTC investigations, private lawsuits, etc.) that were made against CIG, I'd say it's a decisive victory to see them still conducting "business as usual", without having given an inch...
and what exactly what 'given in an inch' look like? a cookie? refunds?
IIRC, the chief demand of the "dissidents" was that CIG publish a detailed account of all financial transactions made by the company. No such revelation was made, neither in detail nor even in abstract or abbreviated form.
As for the ludicrous list of demands presented by the Derek Smart Side-Show, those were obviously never taken seriously by anyone. Probably not even by DS himself...
If anyone had any REAL evidence of misconduct, what made them decide to just sit on it after all that smoke and noise ?
Do you really believe that it's of benefit to CIG to release these numbers? Do you really believe, assuming you've seen some of the hilarious conspiracy theories posted on here, that transparency is something that would benefit them?
Of course I really believe that transparency and accountability would benefit them. I mean, who in their right mind wouldn't believe so. Unless they have something to hide, why wouldn't it? If nothing else, transparency and accountability would enhance good will about the company among the gaming player base and would most certainly inspire many who have not pledged, to pledge, and for those who have pledged, to pledge even more. There is nothing like trust. Without it, you have nothing. Transparency and accountability inspires trust.
I agree, in a perfect world where the Internet was mature and could assess information and come to logical conclusions, transparency works. However, in the current state of the Internet, it's essentially giving a box of ammunition to a toddler with a gun. Even with removing the Internet, there must, obviously, be some reason why companies aren't completely transparent with their books. Maybe you're right, I don't know, but I'd tend to side with the vast majority (99.99%) of companies who, for whatever reason, don't open their books to the public.
Most companies that aspire to obtain funds from the public do open their books to the public. It is called a prospectus. Only in the MMORPG world, with these crowd funding ventures, is a company allowed to ask for money without having to provide a sound foundation by which to acquire those funds. As such, this industry is ripe for scamming. This will no doubt change, and that change will be expedited when one of these major ventures are found to be a scam. Unfortunately, this will also hurt the industry and possibly set it back for many years, if not decades. That is why the gaming population should take issues of transparency and accountability seriously. All of us who love the MMORPG industry should set the standard to ensure its ultimate success and viability going into the future.
Do you really believe that it's of benefit to CIG to release these numbers? Do you really believe, assuming you've seen some of the hilarious conspiracy theories posted on here, that transparency is something that would benefit them?
Of course I really believe that transparency and accountability would benefit them. I mean, who in their right mind wouldn't believe so. Unless they have something to hide, why wouldn't it? If nothing else, transparency and accountability would enhance good will about the company among the gaming player base and would most certainly inspire many who have not pledged, to pledge, and for those who have pledged, to pledge even more. There is nothing like trust. Without it, you have nothing. Transparency and accountability inspires trust.
I agree, in a perfect world where the Internet was mature and could assess information and come to logical conclusions, transparency works. However, in the current state of the Internet, it's essentially giving a box of ammunition to a toddler with a gun. Even with removing the Internet, there must, obviously, be some reason why companies aren't completely transparent with their books. Maybe you're right, I don't know, but I'd tend to side with the vast majority (99.99%) of companies who, for whatever reason, don't open their books to the public.
Most companies that aspire to obtain funds from the public do open their books to the public. It is called a prospectus. Only in the MMORPG world, with these crowd funding ventures, is a company allowed to ask for money without having to provide a sound foundation by which to acquire those funds. As such, this industry is ripe for scamming. This will no doubt change, and that change will be expedited when one of these major ventures are found to be a scam. Unfortunately, this will also hurt the industry and possibly set it back for many years, if not decades. That is why the gaming population should take issues of transparency and accountability seriously. All of us who love the MMORPG industry should set the standard to ensure its ultimate success and viability going into the future.
They don't need a detailed explanation of their inner workings. No company gives every single detail about their workings even to shareholders. They do however give a yearly account of what money was spent and what department took that money and how much money is left over and how much money was made. The fact that they have refused to release financials is a big red flag and gives them way too much room to take advantage. If they were honest then they have abosutely nothing to lose. You put CIG in a position where they are not accountable and they clearly are not going to be. At least Blizzard is accountable and all other major gaming companies are also accountable. CIG has zero accountability and probably never will. So if they are doing this with the little power that they have what will they do when they get the game running and start making billions?
Do you really believe that it's of benefit to CIG to release these numbers? Do you really believe, assuming you've seen some of the hilarious conspiracy theories posted on here, that transparency is something that would benefit them?
Of course I really believe that transparency and accountability would benefit them. I mean, who in their right mind wouldn't believe so. Unless they have something to hide, why wouldn't it? If nothing else, transparency and accountability would enhance good will about the company among the gaming player base and would most certainly inspire many who have not pledged, to pledge, and for those who have pledged, to pledge even more. There is nothing like trust. Without it, you have nothing. Transparency and accountability inspires trust.
I agree, in a perfect world where the Internet was mature and could assess information and come to logical conclusions, transparency works. However, in the current state of the Internet, it's essentially giving a box of ammunition to a toddler with a gun. Even with removing the Internet, there must, obviously, be some reason why companies aren't completely transparent with their books. Maybe you're right, I don't know, but I'd tend to side with the vast majority (99.99%) of companies who, for whatever reason, don't open their books to the public.
Most companies that aspire to obtain funds from the public do open their books to the public. It is called a prospectus. Only in the MMORPG world, with these crowd funding ventures, is a company allowed to ask for money without having to provide a sound foundation by which to acquire those funds. As such, this industry is ripe for scamming. This will no doubt change, and that change will be expedited when one of these major ventures are found to be a scam. Unfortunately, this will also hurt the industry and possibly set it back for many years, if not decades. That is why the gaming population should take issues of transparency and accountability seriously. All of us who love the MMORPG industry should set the standard to ensure its ultimate success and viability going into the future.
Just to be completely clear, this isn't a game industry issue, this is a crowdfunding issue. On top of that, there are consumer protection agencies in place (like the FTC) who are well aware of crowdfunding. However, considering it too a whole 6 years before the FTC filed their first case against a crowdfunded company, I think that the FTC likely has much bigger fish to fry. As of last year, based on my understanding, someone requested any files regarding CIG from the FTC, and the FTC responded that they had no current files on CIG.
So, overall, I can appreciate the idea that SC is a big deal, but there seems to be a whole lot of "The sky is falling!" talk and very little actually logic that's taken into consideration in many cases.
Just to be fair, a prospectus is specifically related to investments, which crowdfunding is not. It's a pledge, which is giving money in good faith that something will be completed. However, if you went to CIG with $10 million, I'm sure they would provide you with a prospectus.
.... Because they refuse to do this they will always have people who don't believe they have been honest.
Regardless of what CIG do, they will always "have people who don't believe they have been honest".
It's very obvious that many of the participants in SC discussions have already made up their minds regarding the guilt of CIG. They will only accept one verdict, anything else will be rejected as a lie, a cover-up, corporate shenanigans, evidence of the Illuminati, etc.
The criticism will never end, regardless of the outcome of the project.
No matter how good the final product, the serial-critics will dismiss it as "nowhere near what they should have done with $113M budget..."
.... Because they refuse to do this they will always have people who don't believe they have been honest.
Regardless of what CIG do, they will always "have people who don't believe they have been honest".
It's very obvious that many of the participants in SC discussions have already made up their minds regarding the guilt of CIG. They will only accept one verdict, anything else will be rejected as a lie, a cover-up, corporate shenanigans, evidence of the Illuminati, etc.
The criticism will never end, regardless of the outcome of the project.
No matter how good the final product, the serial-critics will dismiss it as "nowhere near what they should have done with $113M budget..."
Is this the "even if its a crap product and doesn't deliver what was promised we will say its amazing and any criticism is unwarranted" defense.
Yes, there is nothing to fear.. those who think SC is a joke are just "haters" and can't see the precious... precious...
I'm sorry what are we talking about?
Oh yeah, this "argument" is nothing more than a collection of logical fallacy - specifically: fallacy fallacy and a tu quoque, with a healthy does of special pleading and burden of proof.
Or, put simply - if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck - it's probably a duck.
.... Because they refuse to do this they will always have people who don't believe they have been honest.
Regardless of what CIG do, they will always "have people who don't believe they have been honest".
It's very obvious that many of the participants in SC discussions have already made up their minds regarding the guilt of CIG. They will only accept one verdict, anything else will be rejected as a lie, a cover-up, corporate shenanigans, evidence of the Illuminati, etc.
The criticism will never end, regardless of the outcome of the project.
No matter how good the final product, the serial-critics will dismiss it as "nowhere near what they should have done with $113M budget..."
Is this the "even if its a crap product and doesn't deliver what was promised we will say its amazing and any criticism is unwarranted" defense.
Ah, I see you're already working on a suitable line of attack just in case SC is not actually a complete and utter failure ?
The hardliners on both sides of the spectrum will hold their positions at all costs, regardless of which way reality swings. The old arguments will just be adapted to fit the new reality.
The rest of us will either play the game or not, depending on our personal evaluations of the quality and content at the time of launch.
I dont think they are dishonest, I just think they are not competent. and when I say 'they' I really mean the project management of Chris Roberts.
Actually I think thinking they are planning on this is actually giving them more credit then I am when you think about it.
How is Roberts not competent? He has proven himself to be a capable, competent developer period. The majority of info of wrong doing from CSI comes from DS and his "inside sources" which many times have been proven to just be straight up lies and slander.
Just judging Roberts on his career, he is totally capable of producing a game on this scale. While judging DS from his career he knows little of what a good game is, let alone how to market or make one successful.
Just not too sure why people question Roberts management ability when he has decades proving he can do it fine.
Comments
Not sure if it was intentional or not, but the "door" mention was awesome.
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
----------------
I will admit it does look impressive. But my position regarding this topic has never been against the game. I am, and have never been, a game basher. I am for all games and I support those players who are enjoying a game, regardless of the game or my own game play preferences. My position on this matter has always been about "transparency and accountability." And I adopted this position out of due regard and my concern for the MMORPG genre as it pertains to crowd funding.
To be honest, even without having provided full disclosure in regard to transparency and accountability, it is my sincere belief that this whole incident did go along way toward putting CIG on notice that any type of foul play will not be tolerated. As such, I want to believe that it did a lot of good in many ways. As for the game, I wish it well and will certainly give it some play time when it is finally released. It will be a huge step forward and an epic accomplishment for the MMORPG genre if it is released as stated, or even if it comes anywhere close to its intended goal.
Given the seriousness of some of the allegations (fraud, impropriety, financial misconduct, etc.) and threats (FTC investigations, private lawsuits, etc.) that were made against CIG, I'd say it's a decisive victory to see them still conducting "business as usual", without having given an inch...
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
A credit check is the bank looking into your own management of your money. And they don't ask so much as condition the loan on the information they gain from that check.
The closer comparison to crowd funding is and always has been an investor comparison. Color the funds in whatever light you like, crowd funding directly replaced publisher funding. It's a very dangerous road to head down, replacing one investment source with another that releases the ones using the money from that same level of accountability.
Of course I really believe that transparency and accountability would benefit them. I mean, who in their right mind wouldn't believe so. Unless they have something to hide, why wouldn't it? If nothing else, transparency and accountability would enhance good will about the company among the gaming populace and would most certainly inspire many who have not pledged, to pledge, and for those who have pledged, to pledge even more. This is the reason why companies provide a prospectus when attempting to sell stock in their companies. There is nothing like trust. Without it, you have nothing. Transparency and accountability inspires trust.
I agree, in a perfect world where the Internet was mature and could assess information and come to logical conclusions, transparency works. However, in the current state of the Internet, it's essentially giving a box of ammunition to a toddler with a gun. Even with removing the Internet, there must, obviously, be some reason why companies aren't completely transparent with their books. Maybe you're right, I don't know, but I'd tend to side with the vast majority (99.99%) of companies who, for whatever reason, don't open their books to the public.
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
----------------
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
----------------
As for the ludicrous list of demands presented by the Derek Smart Side-Show, those were obviously never taken seriously by anyone. Probably not even by DS himself...
If anyone had any REAL evidence of misconduct, what made them decide to just sit on it after all that smoke and noise ?
Well, there is a 50% chance that the game will be released and will be up to all expectation and promises and 50% chance it will not.
Only time holds the truth and facts here.
New players can get a welcome package and old/returning players can also get a welcome back package and 7 days free subscription time! Just click here to use my referral invitation
Most companies that aspire to obtain funds from the public do open their books to the public. It is called a prospectus. Only in the MMORPG world, with these crowd funding ventures, is a company allowed to ask for money without having to provide a sound foundation by which to acquire those funds. As such, this industry is ripe for scamming. This will no doubt change, and that change will be expedited when one of these major ventures are found to be a scam. Unfortunately, this will also hurt the industry and possibly set it back for many years, if not decades. That is why the gaming population should take issues of transparency and accountability seriously. All of us who love the MMORPG industry should set the standard to ensure its ultimate success and viability going into the future.
Just to be completely clear, this isn't a game industry issue, this is a crowdfunding issue. On top of that, there are consumer protection agencies in place (like the FTC) who are well aware of crowdfunding. However, considering it too a whole 6 years before the FTC filed their first case against a crowdfunded company, I think that the FTC likely has much bigger fish to fry. As of last year, based on my understanding, someone requested any files regarding CIG from the FTC, and the FTC responded that they had no current files on CIG.
So, overall, I can appreciate the idea that SC is a big deal, but there seems to be a whole lot of "The sky is falling!" talk and very little actually logic that's taken into consideration in many cases.
Just to be fair, a prospectus is specifically related to investments, which crowdfunding is not. It's a pledge, which is giving money in good faith that something will be completed. However, if you went to CIG with $10 million, I'm sure they would provide you with a prospectus.
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
----------------
It's very obvious that many of the participants in SC discussions have already made up their minds regarding the guilt of CIG. They will only accept one verdict, anything else will be rejected as a lie, a cover-up, corporate shenanigans, evidence of the Illuminati, etc.
The criticism will never end, regardless of the outcome of the project.
No matter how good the final product, the serial-critics will dismiss it as "nowhere near what they should have done with $113M budget..."
I'm sorry what are we talking about?
Oh yeah, this "argument" is nothing more than a collection of logical fallacy - specifically: fallacy fallacy and a tu quoque, with a healthy does of special pleading and burden of proof.
Or, put simply - if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck - it's probably a duck.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
The hardliners on both sides of the spectrum will hold their positions at all costs, regardless of which way reality swings. The old arguments will just be adapted to fit the new reality.
The rest of us will either play the game or not, depending on our personal evaluations of the quality and content at the time of launch.
Actually I think thinking they are planning on this is actually giving them more credit then I am when you think about it.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Just judging Roberts on his career, he is totally capable of producing a game on this scale. While judging DS from his career he knows little of what a good game is, let alone how to market or make one successful.
Just not too sure why people question Roberts management ability when he has decades proving he can do it fine.