...and Star Citizen isn't a "tall poppy", no matter what.... that guy says. ...
Yes it is.
$113M tall, in fact.
It's even in the Guinness Book of World Records. Now that's "tall" !
If only games were measured by the amount of crowdfunding they took in.
A "tall poppy" is simply something that sticks out above the rest. It carries no other connotations.
Star Citizen sticks out above the rest precisely because it attracted an astronomical sum of crowdfunding money.
If Camelot Unchained or Pantheon had been the game that broke crowdfunding records, this discussion would be in a different forum, but the attacks would be just as relentless...
What attacks?
Let's review: this thread was started by someone with a clear agenda of discrediting anyone that dares raise a voice against his precious project. Burden of proof is on the person making the argument.
This is also a massive red herring, and non-sequitur. Forget that no, we wouldn't be having this conversation about a different game because a host of parameters would be entirely different, this is entirely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. We are talking about Star Citizen, and the OP's claim.
I assert that no, Star Citizen is not a "tall poppy"; it still hasn't proven the capability to do anything aside from bring a dozen or so players together on a test map with gorgeous graphics and real-to-life Newtonian physics. This doesn't make it a MMO, and even if we were just looking at it from a cash perspective it doesn't "stick[] out above the rest" because no one in the video game industry has raised money in this way before.
The OP and you are inventing goalposts for a sport that doesn't exist.
Crowdfunding, if you recall, almost always involves a set window of time; a beginning and an end between which funds are accepted from the public.
Since we are zeroing in on number of crowd funded dollars as a measure of success, where are Star Citizen's competitors that it "sticks out" above with crowd funding on a private, non-Kickstarter site and indeterminate delivery date?
Is that really a contest you'd be proud of winning?
Nothing Star Citizen has shown so far makes it a "tall poppy"; in essence, it's a tech demo.
I know you would like to change reality, but no amount of arguing is going to change it.
The runaway success of the SC crowdfunding campaign has even been reported in non-gaming media. It's a phenomenon that has been noted far and wide.
Star Citizen is not only a "tall poppy", it's the TALLEST poppy, otherwise it would not be in the Guinness Book of World Records !
Feel free to approach the Guinness Book people and present your objections. Perhaps they'll listen...
I think you watched a different video, because it clearly said, there is nothing wrong with sharing your criticism, be it negative or positive, but there is a problem with those who go above and beyond, those who make it their goal to smear and drag the game down.
If you see yourself as a critic then thread isn't about you, continuing criticizing the game be it negative or positive, this video shouldn't offend you in anyway, that's unless you see yourself as someone the Ops video mentions?
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.
If you really wanted to be fair you wouldn't be attempting to make a differentiation between "investing" and "pledging." In this case that would just be looked at as in a play on word semantics since whether you want to readily admit it or not, the premise is the same. The only difference is whereas in a stock purchase the contributor is expecting financial gain in return, in this case the contributor is expecting a game in return.
What you are doing is making some type of correlation between "donating" and "pledging." The contributors in this instance are not providing a "donation" without an expectation of return. They are "pledging" with a clear expectation of getting a return for that "pledge." That is more accurately deemed an "investment," not a pledge. And if you don't believe that, then watch as all hell breaks loose if no game is released, or even yet, if a shabby game is released that is not consistent with the amount of money "pledged" on this project.
You should probably tell Jump Rope For Heart or any of these other fund raisers, because they're obviously using the word "pledge" wrong. It actually says right on their envelopes to "Seal your pledges in this envelope"
I'll give them the heads up that you'll be contacting them.
To be fair, the word pledge is used in nearly any case where a good-faith donation is made to a cause with the expectation that someone collecting that pledge is going to do something, like skip for some amount of time. Just think of any cause in your area where there is some sort of physical event attached and google it. I'll bet they use the word pledges.
If you have a problem with the wording used then contact Kickstarter and talk to them about it. Honestly, regardless what I say it's not going to change your perspective. However, regardless of your perspective, it's not going to change the fact that it's not recognized as an investment. I might suggest working closely with the FTC to ensure that the policies surrounding crowdfunding are reflected as such.
Your Chart is completely wrong in so many ways and it has been pointed out many times before.
Here is an actually relevant and accurate chart:
I love that chart !
Always nice to see the development time of a MMO being compared to that of single-player games. It puts into perspective just how well SC is doing in actual fact !
Not only are CIG producing a single-player game, but also a complete MMO in addition to that, and all of it in slightly more time than it takes other companies to produce just a single-player game ! Wow !
It's also amusing to see the claim that the chart is "accurate", given that it includes "Starfield", a project about which no "accurate" information is available at all, other than that it has been registered as a trademark...
I love these forums !
While being somewhat dyslexic, I'm pretty sure, at the bottom of the chart is:
*PROJECT UNANNOUNCED, DATES SPECULATIVE
and the star is linked to Starfield, meaning that they don't have real info about it, and say so.
Just thought I'd point it out before you dislocate your arm patting yourself on the back after discovering some crazy conspiracy. And for the most part the times and details seem pretty spot on in regards of the games listed (excepting Starfield which is Theoryware...)
“Nevertheless, the human brain, which survives by hoping from one second to another, will always endeavor to put off the moment of truth. Moist” ― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
It's actually really good to question a project that's raised over 100 million dollars but has not produced a real product in 4 years and still has no definite completion date.
In almost no other industry but video games would this be remotely acceptable.
Absolutely !
However, in MMORPG's it's happened quite often. It's not even unusual anymore. Won't be the first time and definitely won't be the last time...
The difference is that they're funding the development from regular people. This is the first time a game of this budget has done this (and very well might be the last time).
I would expect them to attempt to be as efficient as possible with the money and continuously prove to investors that their hard-earned money is being put to good use.
They have 5 offices around the world. That takes a bit of money for upkeep. Is it necessary? Is it the most efficient use of money?
I'd like to see a room full of devs with dark-cricles under their eyes after putting in a 10-hour shift with a bunch of broken Styrofoam coffee cups from coffee made from the cheapest generic coffee available.
You don't want to get the impression that these guys are throwing parties with the money. Some people are getting that impression.
All that being said, it's up to the funders to hold them accountable. If they're content with speeches and promises, then that's all Roberts is obligated to provide.
I think you should have led that with 'ah I see your point 4 years is not unreasonable...however..'
I think 4 years is very unreasonable. But it's not unprecedented.
The big difference here is they are already at 4 years, and the funding is not coming from the company itself or an investment company. It is coming from hard-working people.
4 years is average
not 'unprecedented' its average
I think I found that on wikipedia not sure...but average
I do think it's unreasonable, for any game but especially for this one. It shouldn't take that long to make a game, especially when it's being funded by regular people.
"How do you know they are hard-working people lol? What does it matter anyway? "
LOL indeed. If you can't see the difference between a corporation funding a project that can just declare bankruptcy if things go wrong and thousands of people funding it, well, what can I say.
That being said, these funders do seem to care little for how their money is spent.
What should have been a project with heavy oversight and strict deadlines has become basically a farce with zero oversight, no deadlines, and no accountability. Mainly because the funders decided to spend their energy defending the game on forums rather than demanding accountability for their money.
It's not unprecedented, or unreasonable. No one can say what's reasonable for a project that's never been attempted before, no matter how it's funded.
Once again, random people pretending to have insight on what goes on in the company. "Zero oversight, no deadlines, and no accountability" Just like the video in the OP said. You really think they don't have internal oversight or deadlines at their company? Really? What is it that people expect? They miss a deadline so they just shut the whole thing down and do refunds? What a joke.
CIGs only real responsibility is to eventually deliver a product. How they do that is not the business of backers, they are not actual investors.
"CIGs only real responsibility is to eventually deliver a product.
How they do that is not the business of backers, they are not actual
investors."
Yeah, this is the problem. Backers would have to assert some authority and demand accountability. Instead they're spending all their efforts defending anything Roberts does.
As for "trusting" Roberts, Erillion, I don't think it's a good idea to hand ANYONE 100 million dollars and "trust them" to do what they should with it.
He can continue "trying" to "eventually" deliver a game. Some day. Maybe.
Or you and the other backers could actually get on his ass to do it.
Technically, he never has to deliver a game. He could die of old age while the game is still being "produced".
On his tombstone they could etch the coolest sounding stretch goal ever.
As for "trusting" Roberts, Erillion, I don't think it's a good idea to hand ANYONE 100 million dollars and "trust them" to do what they should with it.
He can continue "trying" to "eventually" deliver a game. Some day. Maybe.
Or you and the other backers could actually get on his ass to do it.
Technically, he never has to deliver a game. He could die of old age while the game is still being "produced".
On his tombstone they could etch the coolest sounding stretch goal ever.
I can only give you my personal impression after having met Chris Roberts and other SC team members at a convention:
"Technically" he wants to deliver this game with all his heart and spirit, more than anyone of us here.
On his tombstone will most likely be etched: "Here lies "Dread Pirate Roberts". Yarr !"
Furthermore I can only give you my personal opinion about how long the development of Star Citizen should be:
"Its done when its done - when the product matches the vision". I basically do not care when this is. I have plenty of other games to play until then.
Like I have said more than once. The hard line critics of SC give CR more credit then I do. He is not a mastermind of evil. He is like a kid who says yes to everything without a full understanding of how long it takes. The later is not evil, its just bad project management.
What SC project SHOULD do is come out and say this:
'We are going silent for a year, no communications, no vblogs, no show cases, no 10 for the chairman. Some of you who like to play 'dev communication simulator' will find this frustrating but we are going dark. At the end of that year we will have something you can actually play with and hopefully if we are lucky a complete game. In the meantime you can play a real game of this 'genre' which is Elite Dangerous, or if you are more into 'hype simulators' you can play the cartoon version of SC set in the universe of The Jettisons which is none other than No Mans Sky'
thanks
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I think you watched a different video, because it clearly said, there is nothing wrong with sharing your criticism, be it negative or positive, but there is a problem with those who go above and beyond, those who make it their goal to smear and drag the game down.
If you see yourself as a critic then thread isn't about you, continuing criticizing the game be it negative or positive, this video shouldn't offend you in anyway, that's unless you see yourself as someone the Ops video mentions?
My post is directed to @Babuinix, not 'mr. top hats and champagne' who, as I mentioned before, is hard for me to take seriously.
Your riposte is just another variation of the 'nothing to hide' argument, by the way, which @Erillion deftly addressed in his Snowden quote.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
...and Star Citizen isn't a "tall poppy", no matter what.... that guy says. ...
Yes it is.
$113M tall, in fact.
It's even in the Guinness Book of World Records. Now that's "tall" !
If only games were measured by the amount of crowdfunding they took in.
A "tall poppy" is simply something that sticks out above the rest. It carries no other connotations.
Star Citizen sticks out above the rest precisely because it attracted an astronomical sum of crowdfunding money.
If Camelot Unchained or Pantheon had been the game that broke crowdfunding records, this discussion would be in a different forum, but the attacks would be just as relentless...
What attacks?
Let's review: this thread was started by someone with a clear agenda of discrediting anyone that dares raise a voice against his precious project. Burden of proof is on the person making the argument.
This is also a massive red herring, and non-sequitur. Forget that no, we wouldn't be having this conversation about a different game because a host of parameters would be entirely different, this is entirely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. We are talking about Star Citizen, and the OP's claim.
I assert that no, Star Citizen is not a "tall poppy"; it still hasn't proven the capability to do anything aside from bring a dozen or so players together on a test map with gorgeous graphics and real-to-life Newtonian physics. This doesn't make it a MMO, and even if we were just looking at it from a cash perspective it doesn't "stick[] out above the rest" because no one in the video game industry has raised money in this way before.
The OP and you are inventing goalposts for a sport that doesn't exist.
Crowdfunding, if you recall, almost always involves a set window of time; a beginning and an end between which funds are accepted from the public.
Since we are zeroing in on number of crowd funded dollars as a measure of success, where are Star Citizen's competitors that it "sticks out" above with crowd funding on a private, non-Kickstarter site and indeterminate delivery date?
Is that really a contest you'd be proud of winning?
Nothing Star Citizen has shown so far makes it a "tall poppy"; in essence, it's a tech demo.
I know you would like to change reality, but no amount of arguing is going to change it.
The runaway success of the SC crowdfunding campaign has even been reported in non-gaming media. It's a phenomenon that has been noted far and wide.
Star Citizen is not only a "tall poppy", it's the TALLEST poppy, otherwise it would not be in the Guinness Book of World Records !
Feel free to approach the Guinness Book people and present your objections. Perhaps they'll listen...
I think we are speaking two different languages.
I'm not interested in changing reality, or proving anything to GWR.
Our conversation might be summarized by the following:
"This painting is incomplete; only one corner has a few strokes on it"
"But it has the biggest frame ever! It won a world record for having the largest frame! No other painting comes close"
"It's better to judge a painting by other means... it's composition, whom it addresses and in what manner... this painting is mostly just a blank canvas!"
"You're only criticizing it because it has the largest frame ever!"
...and I'm still waiting to hear back how the amount of money WoW has collected to date fits in with your worldview.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
general comment: and to be fair if you do have the largest KS in history one cant expect the turn around of output to be the same as a small indie project. I am not saying they are not taking to long or not milking the cow for all its worth but I am saying some level of perspective is only being fair which incidentally usually (but not alway) puts you on the higher ground than your opponent rather than walling at the same level as he.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I think you watched a different video, because it clearly said, there is nothing wrong with sharing your criticism, be it negative or positive, but there is a problem with those who go above and beyond, those who make it their goal to smear and drag the game down.
If you see yourself as a critic then thread isn't about you, continuing criticizing the game be it negative or positive, this video shouldn't offend you in anyway, that's unless you see yourself as someone the Ops video mentions?
But then the video clearly makes it look like any form of criticism is baseless trolling. Then debunks the criticism with invalid arguments.
Like I have said more than once. The hard line critics of SC give CR more credit then I do. He is not a mastermind of evil. He is like a kid who says yes to everything without a full understanding of how long it takes. The later is not evil, its just bad project management.
What SC project SHOULD do is come out and say this:
'We are going silent for a year, no communications, no vblogs, no show cases, no 10 for the chairman. Some of you who like to play 'dev communication simulator' will find this frustrating but we are going dark. At the end of that year we will have something you can actually play with and hopefully if we are lucky a complete game. In the meantime you can play a real game of this 'genre' which is Elite Dangerous, or if you are more into 'hype simulators' you can play the cartoon version of SC set in the universe of The Jettisons which is none other than No Mans Sky'
thanks
FYI, I'm not saying Roberts is an evil mastermind. I am saying he's human.
Give anyone 100 million to use at their discretion with the only stipulation that they make a video game "eventually", with backers like Erillion who literally do not even seem to care if it ever actually gets made or even how he spends the money, and how do you think most people will use it?
If he's "like a kid", it's even worse. Kids are fundamentally incapable of using money responsibly.
As for your quotation suggestion, I'd much rather see them give themselves hard deadlines. I want to see evidence of hard work and efficient use of money.
Cutting off any kind of communication doesn't do anything to ensure progress is being made.
I think you watched a different video, because it clearly said, there is nothing wrong with sharing your criticism, be it negative or positive, but there is a problem with those who go above and beyond, those who make it their goal to smear and drag the game down.
If you see yourself as a critic then thread isn't about you, continuing criticizing the game be it negative or positive, this video shouldn't offend you in anyway, that's unless you see yourself as someone the Ops video mentions?
But then the video clearly makes it look like any form of criticism is baseless trolling. Then debunks the criticism with invalid arguments.
I'm sorry you felt that way. What I took out of it is what I've seen time and time again here, which is people going outside what would normally be considered logical thinking. Things like dwelling on a door, a coffee machine, a painting. Things like outlandish claims of money laundering, mass speculation about working conditions, claims of malfeasance.
If people want to talk about things like technical challenges, I think there could be some interesting debate, but that's rarely the central theme to most/any of these threads.
Like I have said more than once. The hard line critics of SC give CR more credit then I do. He is not a mastermind of evil. He is like a kid who says yes to everything without a full understanding of how long it takes. The later is not evil, its just bad project management.
What SC project SHOULD do is come out and say this:
'We are going silent for a year, no communications, no vblogs, no show cases, no 10 for the chairman. Some of you who like to play 'dev communication simulator' will find this frustrating but we are going dark. At the end of that year we will have something you can actually play with and hopefully if we are lucky a complete game. In the meantime you can play a real game of this 'genre' which is Elite Dangerous, or if you are more into 'hype simulators' you can play the cartoon version of SC set in the universe of The Jettisons which is none other than No Mans Sky'
thanks
FYI, I'm not saying Roberts is an evil mastermind. I am saying he's human.
Give anyone 100 million to use at their discretion with the only stipulation that they make a video game "eventually", with backers like Erillion who literally do not even seem to care if it ever actually gets made or even how he spends the money, and how do you think most people will use it?
If he's "like a kid", it's even worse. Kids are fundamentally incapable of using money responsibly.
As for your quotation suggestion, I'd much rather see them give themselves hard deadlines. I want to see evidence of hard work and efficient use of money.
Cutting off any kind of communication doesn't do anything to ensure progress is being made.
you are giving him more credit in being smarter and a better planner than I am.
I dont care if you want to call that 'evil master mind' or 'scooby do'
Option 1: its all planned to take the money
Option 2: not enough discipline to fully understand the scope of his project
what you call option 1 and option 2 I dont give a fuck
and cutting off communication is what needs to happen and people who want to jerk off to 'communication simulator' should just find a different project to follow and not donate to
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I think you watched a different video, because it clearly said, there is nothing wrong with sharing your criticism, be it negative or positive, but there is a problem with those who go above and beyond, those who make it their goal to smear and drag the game down.
If you see yourself as a critic then thread isn't about you, continuing criticizing the game be it negative or positive, this video shouldn't offend you in anyway, that's unless you see yourself as someone the Ops video mentions?
But then the video clearly makes it look like any form of criticism is baseless trolling. Then debunks the criticism with invalid arguments.
I'm sorry you felt that way. What I took out of it is what I've seen time and time again here, which is people going outside what would normally be considered logical thinking. Things like dwelling on a door, a coffee machine, a painting. Things like outlandish claims of money laundering, mass speculation about working conditions, claims of malfeasance.
If people want to talk about things like technical challenges, I think there could be some interesting debate, but that's rarely the central theme to most/any of these threads.
But to make a video saying how stupidly harsh some people are towards this game. Then to deny all criticism just shows he is the opposite. Yes he said there is nothing wrong with sharing critism but then made a video and didn't name one valid criticism without debunking it.
So this thread was created by SC supporters to attack someone else who has a different opinion than them......hmmm
...and yet the mods on this unbiased forum do nothing about it. Sound like a pretty clear case of baiting and trolling:
"Posting excessive negative comments or baiting others to respond in a negative manner is considered trolling on the MMORPG.com forums."
Now imagine a SC critic would do exactly the same. I have read these forums for 2 years and i have seen threads like that closed and people get banned.
Carry on Commandos!
- The creator of this thread posted a video regarding SC. He did not comment on said video.
- Please point us towards excessive negative, bait or troll posts in this thread.
- Keep telling yourself that what DS does is expressing a different opinion.
A bit more and you people are going to put a halo around his head and present him as a saint.
So this thread was created by SC supporters to attack someone else who has a different opinion than them......hmmm
...and yet the mods on this unbiased forum do nothing about it. Sound like a pretty clear case of baiting and trolling:
"Posting excessive negative comments or baiting others to respond in a negative manner is considered trolling on the MMORPG.com forums."
Now imagine a SC critic would do exactly the same. I have read these forums for 2 years and i have seen threads like that closed and people get banned.
Carry on Commandos!
- The creator of this thread posted a video regarding SC. He did not comment on said video.
- Please point us towards excessive negative, bait or troll posts in this thread.
- Keep telling yourself that what DS does is expressing a different opinion.
A bit more and you people are going to put a halo around his head and present him as a saint.
@Babuinix may not have commented on the video (the creator of which I am familiar with and find to be... pompous and self-absorbed on a good day, almost purposefully so which is why I have a hard time taking the video seriously) in his OP, but he did continue on in this thread with a series of other posts and media, all with the same general thrust of "SC critics are obsessive, and SC is a tall poppy".
This thread was never about the OP's video, it was a thinly disguised attempt at discrediting SC critics; this is a sure-fire way to stir up a storm in a teacup, and in that regard this thread was very successful. I found the overall tone of the OP to be rather provocative in subsequent posts as well, and perhaps I'm guilty of dancing to that tango.
Whether or not anything of value was added to what's already been said, I am doubtful.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
"and cutting off communication is what needs to happen and people who want to jerk off to 'communication simulator' should just find a different project to follow and not donate to"
This is ridiculous but also ironic, as it represents the type of gamer I would hope never gets involved in crowdfunding projects and would just wait for release (ie just find a different project to follow and not donate). This along with those wanting to see 'hard deadlines' adhered to. Crowdfunding definitely isn't for everyone.
As someone who remembers the dismal time period when corporate publishers were the sole gate keepers of game development, rushing releases before the developers were ready, etc I love the fact that crowdfunding allows indie developers the time they need to realize their vision without those corporate shackles. I also appreciate the transparency SC gives us backers because I've been burned when communication went from sporadic to completely black until the devs pulled the plug and went on to sell the unfinish game anyway (Spacebase DF9). Transparency is huge as far as my confidence level goes with crowdfunding projects.
I think you watched a different video, because it clearly said, there is nothing wrong with sharing your criticism, be it negative or positive, but there is a problem with those who go above and beyond, those who make it their goal to smear and drag the game down.
If you see yourself as a critic then thread isn't about you, continuing criticizing the game be it negative or positive, this video shouldn't offend you in anyway, that's unless you see yourself as someone the Ops video mentions?
But then the video clearly makes it look like any form of criticism is baseless trolling. Then debunks the criticism with invalid arguments.
I'm sorry you felt that way. What I took out of it is what I've seen time and time again here, which is people going outside what would normally be considered logical thinking. Things like dwelling on a door, a coffee machine, a painting. Things like outlandish claims of money laundering, mass speculation about working conditions, claims of malfeasance.
If people want to talk about things like technical challenges, I think there could be some interesting debate, but that's rarely the central theme to most/any of these threads.
But to make a video saying how stupidly harsh some people are towards this game. Then to deny all criticism just shows he is the opposite. Yes he said there is nothing wrong with sharing critism but then made a video and didn't name one valid criticism without debunking it.
I thought he actually did. I think it was a very quick, though, and they were criticisms which were already resolved. I think could have sworn there were one or two, though.
Comments
This thread, shit stirring fanboi or bored troll?
The runaway success of the SC crowdfunding campaign has even been reported in non-gaming media. It's a phenomenon that has been noted far and wide.
Star Citizen is not only a "tall poppy", it's the TALLEST poppy, otherwise it would not be in the Guinness Book of World Records !
Feel free to approach the Guinness Book people and present your objections. Perhaps they'll listen...
If you see yourself as a critic then thread isn't about you, continuing criticizing the game be it negative or positive, this video shouldn't offend you in anyway, that's unless you see yourself as someone the Ops video mentions?
You should probably tell Jump Rope For Heart or any of these other fund raisers, because they're obviously using the word "pledge" wrong. It actually says right on their envelopes to "Seal your pledges in this envelope"
I'll give them the heads up that you'll be contacting them.
To be fair, the word pledge is used in nearly any case where a good-faith donation is made to a cause with the expectation that someone collecting that pledge is going to do something, like skip for some amount of time. Just think of any cause in your area where there is some sort of physical event attached and google it. I'll bet they use the word pledges.
If you have a problem with the wording used then contact Kickstarter and talk to them about it. Honestly, regardless what I say it's not going to change your perspective. However, regardless of your perspective, it's not going to change the fact that it's not recognized as an investment. I might suggest working closely with the FTC to ensure that the policies surrounding crowdfunding are reflected as such.
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
----------------
*PROJECT UNANNOUNCED, DATES SPECULATIVE
and the star is linked to Starfield, meaning that they don't have real info about it, and say so.
Just thought I'd point it out before you dislocate your arm patting yourself on the back after discovering some crazy conspiracy. And for the most part the times and details seem pretty spot on in regards of the games listed (excepting Starfield which is Theoryware...)
― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
Frank 'Spankybus' Mignone
www.spankybus.com
-3d Artist & Compositor
-Writer
-Professional Amature
Yeah, this is the problem. Backers would have to assert some authority and demand accountability. Instead they're spending all their efforts defending anything Roberts does.
As for "trusting" Roberts, Erillion, I don't think it's a good idea to hand ANYONE 100 million dollars and "trust them" to do what they should with it.
He can continue "trying" to "eventually" deliver a game. Some day. Maybe.
Or you and the other backers could actually get on his ass to do it.
Technically, he never has to deliver a game. He could die of old age while the game is still being "produced".
On his tombstone they could etch the coolest sounding stretch goal ever.
I can only give you my personal impression after having met Chris Roberts and other SC team members at a convention:
"Technically" he wants to deliver this game with all his heart and spirit, more than anyone of us here.
On his tombstone will most likely be etched: "Here lies "Dread Pirate Roberts". Yarr !"
Furthermore I can only give you my personal opinion about how long the development of Star Citizen should be:
"Its done when its done - when the product matches the vision".
I basically do not care when this is. I have plenty of other games to play until then.
Have fun
What SC project SHOULD do is come out and say this:
'We are going silent for a year, no communications, no vblogs, no show cases, no 10 for the chairman. Some of you who like to play 'dev communication simulator' will find this frustrating but we are going dark. At the end of that year we will have something you can actually play with and hopefully if we are lucky a complete game. In the meantime you can play a real game of this 'genre' which is Elite Dangerous, or if you are more into 'hype simulators' you can play the cartoon version of SC set in the universe of The Jettisons which is none other than No Mans Sky'
thanks
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Your riposte is just another variation of the 'nothing to hide' argument, by the way, which @Erillion deftly addressed in his Snowden quote.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
I'm not interested in changing reality, or proving anything to GWR.
Our conversation might be summarized by the following:
"This painting is incomplete; only one corner has a few strokes on it"
"But it has the biggest frame ever! It won a world record for having the largest frame! No other painting comes close"
"It's better to judge a painting by other means... it's composition, whom it addresses and in what manner... this painting is mostly just a blank canvas!"
"You're only criticizing it because it has the largest frame ever!"
...and I'm still waiting to hear back how the amount of money WoW has collected to date fits in with your worldview.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
If they DO release a product - no matter if people like it or not - they have no reason to publish any financial data.
Have fun
Your truth, my truth, THE truth. Everything gets filtered through our respective (and SELECTIVE) perception filters.
Have fun
Give anyone 100 million to use at their discretion with the only stipulation that they make a video game "eventually", with backers like Erillion who literally do not even seem to care if it ever actually gets made or even how he spends the money, and how do you think most people will use it?
If he's "like a kid", it's even worse. Kids are fundamentally incapable of using money responsibly.
As for your quotation suggestion, I'd much rather see them give themselves hard deadlines. I want to see evidence of hard work and efficient use of money.
Cutting off any kind of communication doesn't do anything to ensure progress is being made.
I'm sorry you felt that way. What I took out of it is what I've seen time and time again here, which is people going outside what would normally be considered logical thinking. Things like dwelling on a door, a coffee machine, a painting. Things like outlandish claims of money laundering, mass speculation about working conditions, claims of malfeasance.
If people want to talk about things like technical challenges, I think there could be some interesting debate, but that's rarely the central theme to most/any of these threads.
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 dont care if you want to call that 'evil master mind' or 'scooby do'
Option 1: its all planned to take the money
Option 2: not enough discipline to fully understand the scope of his project
what you call option 1 and option 2 I dont give a fuck
and cutting off communication is what needs to happen and people who want to jerk off to 'communication simulator' should just find a different project to follow and not donate to
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I care very much if the game gets made or not.
I do NOT care how LONG it takes until the product matches the vision. They should not launch the game before that happens in my opinion.
Have fun
- Please point us towards excessive negative, bait or troll posts in this thread.
- Keep telling yourself that what DS does is expressing a different opinion.
A bit more and you people are going to put a halo around his head and present him as a saint.
It's very much a case of 'stirring the pot', as @Little-Boot and @spankybus noted.
This thread was never about the OP's video, it was a thinly disguised attempt at discrediting SC critics; this is a sure-fire way to stir up a storm in a teacup, and in that regard this thread was very successful. I found the overall tone of the OP to be rather provocative in subsequent posts as well, and perhaps I'm guilty of dancing to that tango.
Whether or not anything of value was added to what's already been said, I am doubtful.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
This is ridiculous but also ironic, as it represents the type of gamer I would hope never gets involved in crowdfunding projects and would just wait for release (ie just find a different project to follow and not donate). This along with those wanting to see 'hard deadlines' adhered to. Crowdfunding definitely isn't for everyone.
As someone who remembers the dismal time period when corporate publishers were the sole gate keepers of game development, rushing releases before the developers were ready, etc I love the fact that crowdfunding allows indie developers the time they need to realize their vision without those corporate shackles. I also appreciate the transparency SC gives us backers because I've been burned when communication went from sporadic to completely black until the devs pulled the plug and went on to sell the unfinish game anyway (Spacebase DF9). Transparency is huge as far as my confidence level goes with crowdfunding projects.
I thought he actually did. I think it was a very quick, though, and they were criticisms which were already resolved. I think could have sworn there were one or two, though.
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
----------------