I didn't back the kickstarter because it was a pie in the sky plan from a guy that had nothing of consequence in a decade, obviously riding on nostalgia to pump people up. When they started to sell virtual ships, I was disgusted because I don't support that direction of monetization for gaming. Suckers lined up as usual. The money was made. I am sure he is giving himself a MASSIVE salary now. A fool and his money are easily parted.
The only way I would ever support such a product would be if they fully refunded all money towards digital ships, apologized for continuing the trend of monetizing inside games, produce a complete product, and get good reviews after hype dies down.
If they provided transparency a la form 10-K here in the US: providing an annual (and quarterly) breakdown of expenditures, assets, strengths, weaknesses, threats, opportunities, and a professional corporate profile like any publicly traded company earning over 10 mil in a year is required to do by law. In essence, I'd like to see them provide a periodic 'investor's relations' report (yes, I understand backers are not expecting to get money back: I should hope some backers are at least expecting something else).
What I've seen so far is no where near that. PR =/= fiscal / corporate transparency.
Is that too much to ask? :-)
Edit: by the way I don't consider myself a 'detractor', merely someone who has not pledged. I'd like to see this project succeed, if not for Chris & co then for the sake of all those with their money on the line.
"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
Speaking personally I dont want to play Daddy watches over developer simulator. Either give me a game to play or remove yourself from my consciousnesses, simple as that
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
If they provided transparency a la form 10-K here in the US: providing an annual (and quarterly) breakdown of expenditures, assets, strengths, weaknesses, threats, opportunities, and a professional corporate profile like any publicly traded company earning over 10 mil in a year is required to do by law. In essence, I'd like to see them provide a periodic 'investor's relations' report (yes, I understand backers are not expecting to get money back: I should hope some backers are at least expecting something else).
What I've seen so far is no where near that. PR =/= fiscal / corporate transparency.
Is that too much to ask? :-)
Edit: by the way I don't consider myself a 'detractor', merely someone who has not pledged. I'd like to see this project succeed, if not for Chris & co then for the sake of all those with their money on the line.
Honestly, I think if they believed that there would be value in something like that, they'd probably do it. However, when people are blowing up stories like a mural, a coffee machine, and a door (not just that, but a SUPPOSED $20,000 door, that I showed could be done for $500), how can the public handle any sort of transparency? Unfortunately, there isn't the level of intelligence, in general, to process and make sense out of it, let alone the attention span to actually read and take in any sort of transparency. They'll just wait for someone else to summarize the information in a form that aligns with their own agenda and go with that. Sad but true.
If they provided transparency a la form 10-K here in the US: providing an annual (and quarterly) breakdown of expenditures, assets, strengths, weaknesses, threats, opportunities, and a professional corporate profile like any publicly traded company earning over 10 mil in a year is required to do by law. In essence, I'd like to see them provide a periodic 'investor's relations' report (yes, I understand backers are not expecting to get money back: I should hope some backers are at least expecting something else).
What I've seen so far is no where near that. PR =/= fiscal / corporate transparency.
Is that too much to ask? :-)
Edit: by the way I don't consider myself a 'detractor', merely someone who has not pledged. I'd like to see this project succeed, if not for Chris & co then for the sake of all those with their money on the line.
Honestly, I think if they believed that there would be value in something like that, they'd probably do it. However, when people are blowing up stories like a mural, a coffee machine, and a door (not just that, but a SUPPOSED $20,000 door, that I showed could be done for $500), how can the public handle any sort of transparency? Unfortunately, there isn't the level of intelligence, in general, to process and make sense out of it, let alone the attention span to actually read and take in any sort of transparency. They'll just wait for someone else to summarize the information in a form that aligns with their own agenda and go with that. Sad but true.
ok a few things
1. worried about a coffee machine on a multi-million dollar project as a donator of what? $40? 2. exactly, and I want details here, exactly how is buying a $20,000 door a way to scam your donators? are they giving a kickback to the contractor? sorry but I fail to see the scam in that. Silly? yes, scam? hardly
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I fail to see how a 20,000 door or doors get a game made faster. Perhaps after the game releases they can go shopping. I look at other game companies and don't see spending like that. This is a new company still working on it's first launch buying more fluff then companies that have been around for a much longer time and have launched many games. It makes me question their management abilities. Perhaps that's what he means.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
The battle lines are drawn and for those who are on the vocal nay side won't be convinced otherwise. The divisions are as deep as North Vs. South or Roundheads and Cavaliers for my British friends.
I fail to see how a 20,000 door or doors get a game made faster. Perhaps after the game releases they can go shopping. I look at other game companies and don't see spending like that. This is a new company still working on it's first launch buying more fluff then companies that have been around for a much longer time and have launched many games. It makes me question their management abilities. Perhaps that's what he means.
that was not my question.
My question, (again) is how is a $20,000 a scam.
See a 'scam' and 'bad management choice' are not the same thing. So again my question is how does buying a $20,000 = scamming people out of their money? did he funnel the contract to his buddy or something?
I thought I was fairly clear the first time
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I fail to see how a 20,000 door or doors get a game made faster. Perhaps after the game releases they can go shopping. I look at other game companies and don't see spending like that. This is a new company still working on it's first launch buying more fluff then companies that have been around for a much longer time and have launched many games. It makes me question their management abilities. Perhaps that's what he means.
that was not my question.
My question, (again) is how is a $20,000 a scam.
See a 'scam' and 'bad management choice' are not the same thing. So again my question is how does buying a $20,000 = scamming people out of their money? did he funnel the contract to his buddy or something?
I thought I was fairly clear the first time
No one mentioned scam except you so no your post wasn't clear
I fail to see how a 20,000 door or doors get a game made faster. Perhaps after the game releases they can go shopping. I look at other game companies and don't see spending like that. This is a new company still working on it's first launch buying more fluff then companies that have been around for a much longer time and have launched many games. It makes me question their management abilities. Perhaps that's what he means.
that was not my question.
My question, (again) is how is a $20,000 a scam.
See a 'scam' and 'bad management choice' are not the same thing. So again my question is how does buying a $20,000 = scamming people out of their money? did he funnel the contract to his buddy or something?
I thought I was fairly clear the first time
No one mentioned scam except you so no your post wasn't clear
no my post was clear.
I said in my statement 'scam' so then the next person completely ignore that part and moved forward without reading what i said. me being wrong, off topic, or not in line with the previous comments has not shit to do with that problem I am afraid you are wrong
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I fail to see how a 20,000 door or doors get a game made faster. Perhaps after the game releases they can go shopping. I look at other game companies and don't see spending like that. This is a new company still working on it's first launch buying more fluff then companies that have been around for a much longer time and have launched many games. It makes me question their management abilities. Perhaps that's what he means.
that was not my question.
My question, (again) is how is a $20,000 a scam.
See a 'scam' and 'bad management choice' are not the same thing. So again my question is how does buying a $20,000 = scamming people out of their money? did he funnel the contract to his buddy or something?
I thought I was fairly clear the first time
No one mentioned scam except you so no your post wasn't clear
no my post was clear.
I said in my statement 'scam' so then the next person completely ignore that part and moved forward without reading what i said. me being wrong, off topic, or not in line with the previous comments has not shit to do with that problem I am afraid you are wrong
Well here's the thing. No one really cares if this is a scam or not in this context since we are t discussing a scam but rather them possibly spending money improperly. If you want to talk about scams go dig up an old thread or start a new one
I fail to see how a 20,000 door or doors get a game made faster. Perhaps after the game releases they can go shopping. I look at other game companies and don't see spending like that. This is a new company still working on it's first launch buying more fluff then companies that have been around for a much longer time and have launched many games. It makes me question their management abilities. Perhaps that's what he means.
that was not my question.
My question, (again) is how is a $20,000 a scam.
See a 'scam' and 'bad management choice' are not the same thing. So again my question is how does buying a $20,000 = scamming people out of their money? did he funnel the contract to his buddy or something?
I thought I was fairly clear the first time
No one mentioned scam except you so no your post wasn't clear
no my post was clear.
I said in my statement 'scam' so then the next person completely ignore that part and moved forward without reading what i said. me being wrong, off topic, or not in line with the previous comments has not shit to do with that problem I am afraid you are wrong
Well here's the thing. No one really cares if this is a scam or not in this context since we are t discussing a scam but rather them possibly spending money improperly. If you want to talk about scams go dig up an old thread or start a new one
ok...well that was a fuck ton harder then it needed to be but ok.
moving on
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I fail to see how a 20,000 door or doors get a game made faster. Perhaps after the game releases they can go shopping. I look at other game companies and don't see spending like that. This is a new company still working on it's first launch buying more fluff then companies that have been around for a much longer time and have launched many games. It makes me question their management abilities. Perhaps that's what he means.
Well, first of all, I showed with a YouTube video exactly how said door could be made for $500 or less. Secondly, it would give me confidence in the abilities of the Management team to endorse this type of thing. Creating an environment with healthy idea flow means creating an environment where people feel like their suggestions are valuable. Google understands this VERY well and probably have some of the most openly creative environments for learning and creating. CIG is no Google, but if you accept a factory mentality where you work 9-5 and do everything to the letter of the specification, and just punch out code, that doesn't work. Absolutely not. Never happening. You won't retain talent, you won't be able to secure new talent, and you won't solve any of the difficult problems you need solved. Unfortunately, as much as I've tried, your brain can't be trained to be creative between the hours of 9-5. So your expectation, with a creative company, is that the employee is always on-call for "ideas" and there might be 1am coding sessions because you think you've figured something out. Try getting a factory worker to come in at 1am, make some widgets, and then go home and go back to sleep. Completely different mentality.
RE: Not seeing other game companies spending like that..... How many have you really looked at? Have you seen Blizzard's offices? Ubisoft? Shoot! The Hex developers would have games of Magic in the corporate boardroom!! Why? Because inspiring people to give a fuck leads to greater creativity and motivation than simply cracking a whip.
I fail to see how a 20,000 door or doors get a game made faster. Perhaps after the game releases they can go shopping. I look at other game companies and don't see spending like that. This is a new company still working on it's first launch buying more fluff then companies that have been around for a much longer time and have launched many games. It makes me question their management abilities. Perhaps that's what he means.
Well, first of all, I showed with a YouTube video exactly how said door could be made for $500 or less. Secondly, it would give me confidence in the abilities of the Management team to endorse this type of thing. Creating an environment with healthy idea flow means creating an environment where people feel like their suggestions are valuable. Google understands this VERY well and probably have some of the most openly creative environments for learning and creating. CIG is no Google, but if you accept a factory mentality where you work 9-5 and do everything to the letter of the specification, and just punch out code, that doesn't work. Absolutely not. Never happening. You won't retain talent, you won't be able to secure new talent, and you won't solve any of the difficult problems you need solved. Unfortunately, as much as I've tried, your brain can't be trained to be creative between the hours of 9-5. So your expectation, with a creative company, is that the employee is always on-call for "ideas" and there might be 1am coding sessions because you think you've figured something out. Try getting a factory worker to come in at 1am, make some widgets, and then go home and go back to sleep. Completely different mentality.
RE: Not seeing other game companies spending like that..... How many have you really looked at? Have you seen Blizzard's offices? Ubisoft? Shoot! The Hex developers would have games of Magic in the corporate boardroom!! Why? Because inspiring people to give a fuck leads to greater creativity and motivation than simply cracking a whip.
I actually watched some game company tours posted on YouTube and compared their decorations, and I thinking a regular door would run no more then $200. Do they really need a sliding door to make a better game?
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
If they provided transparency a la form 10-K here in the US: providing an annual (and quarterly) breakdown of expenditures, assets, strengths, weaknesses, threats, opportunities, and a professional corporate profile like any publicly traded company earning over 10 mil in a year is required to do by law. In essence, I'd like to see them provide a periodic 'investor's relations' report (yes, I understand backers are not expecting to get money back: I should hope some backers are at least expecting something else).
What I've seen so far is no where near that. PR =/= fiscal / corporate transparency.
Is that too much to ask? :-)
Edit: by the way I don't consider myself a 'detractor', merely someone who has not pledged. I'd like to see this project succeed, if not for Chris & co then for the sake of all those with their money on the line.
Honestly, I think if they believed that there would be value in something like that, they'd probably do it. However, when people are blowing up stories like a mural, a coffee machine, and a door (not just that, but a SUPPOSED $20,000 door, that I showed could be done for $500), how can the public handle any sort of transparency? Unfortunately, there isn't the level of intelligence, in general, to process and make sense out of it, let alone the attention span to actually read and take in any sort of transparency. They'll just wait for someone else to summarize the information in a form that aligns with their own agenda and go with that. Sad but true.
Well then wouldn't transparency show that the door cost 500$ and then everyone would shut the f*** up wouldn't they?
Only a fool would go as far as calling this a scam. (Yeah, looking at you Mr. Smart.) I think they really do want to build this game to the best of their abilities. I have little confidence at this time in said ability to do so, though.
My predictions is that SQ42 with be a decent Wing Commander V and Star Citizen will be qualified failure that only hardcore fans will be playing 3 months after final release.
If they provided transparency a la form 10-K here in the US: providing an annual (and quarterly) breakdown of expenditures, assets, strengths, weaknesses, threats, opportunities, and a professional corporate profile like any publicly traded company earning over 10 mil in a year is required to do by law. In essence, I'd like to see them provide a periodic 'investor's relations' report (yes, I understand backers are not expecting to get money back: I should hope some backers are at least expecting something else).
What I've seen so far is no where near that. PR =/= fiscal / corporate transparency.
Is that too much to ask? :-)
Edit: by the way I don't consider myself a 'detractor', merely someone who has not pledged. I'd like to see this project succeed, if not for Chris & co then for the sake of all those with their money on the line.
They cannot do this because then people would realize they are indeed scamming and lying about a lot of things. Its a good idea and would help their PR 100x. But not if they are lying then it would only hurt.
I fail to see how a 20,000 door or doors get a game made faster. Perhaps after the game releases they can go shopping. I look at other game companies and don't see spending like that. This is a new company still working on it's first launch buying more fluff then companies that have been around for a much longer time and have launched many games. It makes me question their management abilities. Perhaps that's what he means.
Well, first of all, I showed with a YouTube video exactly how said door could be made for $500 or less. Secondly, it would give me confidence in the abilities of the Management team to endorse this type of thing. Creating an environment with healthy idea flow means creating an environment where people feel like their suggestions are valuable. Google understands this VERY well and probably have some of the most openly creative environments for learning and creating. CIG is no Google, but if you accept a factory mentality where you work 9-5 and do everything to the letter of the specification, and just punch out code, that doesn't work. Absolutely not. Never happening. You won't retain talent, you won't be able to secure new talent, and you won't solve any of the difficult problems you need solved. Unfortunately, as much as I've tried, your brain can't be trained to be creative between the hours of 9-5. So your expectation, with a creative company, is that the employee is always on-call for "ideas" and there might be 1am coding sessions because you think you've figured something out. Try getting a factory worker to come in at 1am, make some widgets, and then go home and go back to sleep. Completely different mentality.
RE: Not seeing other game companies spending like that..... How many have you really looked at? Have you seen Blizzard's offices? Ubisoft? Shoot! The Hex developers would have games of Magic in the corporate boardroom!! Why? Because inspiring people to give a fuck leads to greater creativity and motivation than simply cracking a whip.
I actually watched some game company tours posted on YouTube and compared their decorations, and I thinking a regular door would run no more then $200. Do they really need a sliding door to make a better game?
Yes, most definitely. If you can't understand why based on what I posted, then I'm sorry. However, the answer is yes. And if it was a $20,000 door, the answer would still be yes, to be honest. Go and do some research on recruiting talent and, worse, retaining them. If you think anyone who is ultra talented is going to stick around a company that makes them want to slit their wrists, you're fucking kidding yourself. So what? Throw more money at them? Yup, you could do that. Back to square one, a $20,000 door would seem pretty fucking cheap. If I could buy a $20,000 door and solve ONE person turning over, it would be worth it because the amount of training and learning, even for experts, in our product line would cost us well over $20,000 for a new developer.
I fail to see how a 20,000 door or doors get a game made faster. Perhaps after the game releases they can go shopping. I look at other game companies and don't see spending like that. This is a new company still working on it's first launch buying more fluff then companies that have been around for a much longer time and have launched many games. It makes me question their management abilities. Perhaps that's what he means.
Well, first of all, I showed with a YouTube video exactly how said door could be made for $500 or less. Secondly, it would give me confidence in the abilities of the Management team to endorse this type of thing. Creating an environment with healthy idea flow means creating an environment where people feel like their suggestions are valuable. Google understands this VERY well and probably have some of the most openly creative environments for learning and creating. CIG is no Google, but if you accept a factory mentality where you work 9-5 and do everything to the letter of the specification, and just punch out code, that doesn't work. Absolutely not. Never happening. You won't retain talent, you won't be able to secure new talent, and you won't solve any of the difficult problems you need solved. Unfortunately, as much as I've tried, your brain can't be trained to be creative between the hours of 9-5. So your expectation, with a creative company, is that the employee is always on-call for "ideas" and there might be 1am coding sessions because you think you've figured something out. Try getting a factory worker to come in at 1am, make some widgets, and then go home and go back to sleep. Completely different mentality.
RE: Not seeing other game companies spending like that..... How many have you really looked at? Have you seen Blizzard's offices? Ubisoft? Shoot! The Hex developers would have games of Magic in the corporate boardroom!! Why? Because inspiring people to give a fuck leads to greater creativity and motivation than simply cracking a whip.
Did blizzard or ubisoft when they first started out and secured funding start furnishing their offices with some of the crap you are saying before they put out a game and were making consistent money? Did google just pop out of the ground in a top of the line office with all the perks before they were able to make money consistently or did they ask investors for cash and then spend it on things that were not needed at the time.
Point is you don't spend money that backers or investors have given you to put into your offices aside from the basics until you have a product up and running and can support yourselves financially. Once your financial future is secure then you start pimping out the office
If they provided transparency a la form 10-K here in the US: providing an annual (and quarterly) breakdown of expenditures, assets, strengths, weaknesses, threats, opportunities, and a professional corporate profile like any publicly traded company earning over 10 mil in a year is required to do by law. In essence, I'd like to see them provide a periodic 'investor's relations' report (yes, I understand backers are not expecting to get money back: I should hope some backers are at least expecting something else).
What I've seen so far is no where near that. PR =/= fiscal / corporate transparency.
Is that too much to ask? :-)
Edit: by the way I don't consider myself a 'detractor', merely someone who has not pledged. I'd like to see this project succeed, if not for Chris & co then for the sake of all those with their money on the line.
Honestly, I think if they believed that there would be value in something like that, they'd probably do it. However, when people are blowing up stories like a mural, a coffee machine, and a door (not just that, but a SUPPOSED $20,000 door, that I showed could be done for $500), how can the public handle any sort of transparency? Unfortunately, there isn't the level of intelligence, in general, to process and make sense out of it, let alone the attention span to actually read and take in any sort of transparency. They'll just wait for someone else to summarize the information in a form that aligns with their own agenda and go with that. Sad but true.
Well then wouldn't transparency show that the door cost 500$ and then everyone would shut the f*** up wouldn't they?
See above where someone says that a $200 door would be sufficient. So, no, transparency wouldn't help I think the thread demonstrates that for itself, doesn't it? Also, go look at the other threads re: the gamescom presentation. Lesson? Some people will find something to invent regardless of what you do. So the real lesson here is that transparency doesn't work, as much as that pains me to say. There is plenty of evidence of that, including outside of SC. Take a look at any corwdfunded game and there is constant and continual criticism from people outside the game, without knowledge of the game or its development, which specifically attack areas that the company has chosen to be transparent with. Same goes here, CIG could have easily said "No you may not post anything re: our offices." but they didn't.
Again, even if they were transparent with ALLLLLLLLL their books, there might be 5% of the population equipped to understand anything in them. 5% of those people who actually give a fuck enough to interpret them, and maybe a handful of those who actually choose to share any sort of insight into it. So we're talking about the few feeding the many. So transparency means dick all, really. People will choose to believe what they want regardless of the level of transparency they are given.
All I did was to compare what this company was doing after looking at what others were doing and if I saw $20,000 or $500 sliding doors at the other gaming companies I would not have thought anything about it. But the other successful companies that produced AAA games didn't have as much stuff as SC does.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
If they provided transparency a la form 10-K here in the US: providing an annual (and quarterly) breakdown of expenditures, assets, strengths, weaknesses, threats, opportunities, and a professional corporate profile like any publicly traded company earning over 10 mil in a year is required to do by law. In essence, I'd like to see them provide a periodic 'investor's relations' report (yes, I understand backers are not expecting to get money back: I should hope some backers are at least expecting something else).
What I've seen so far is no where near that. PR =/= fiscal / corporate transparency.
Is that too much to ask? :-)
Edit: by the way I don't consider myself a 'detractor', merely someone who has not pledged. I'd like to see this project succeed, if not for Chris & co then for the sake of all those with their money on the line.
Honestly, I think if they believed that there would be value in something like that, they'd probably do it. However, when people are blowing up stories like a mural, a coffee machine, and a door (not just that, but a SUPPOSED $20,000 door, that I showed could be done for $500), how can the public handle any sort of transparency? Unfortunately, there isn't the level of intelligence, in general, to process and make sense out of it, let alone the attention span to actually read and take in any sort of transparency. They'll just wait for someone else to summarize the information in a form that aligns with their own agenda and go with that. Sad but true.
Well then wouldn't transparency show that the door cost 500$ and then everyone would shut the f*** up wouldn't they?
See above where someone says that a $200 door would be sufficient. So, no, transparency wouldn't help I think the thread demonstrates that for itself, doesn't it? Also, go look at the other threads re: the gamescom presentation. Lesson? Some people will find something to invent regardless of what you do. So the real lesson here is that transparency doesn't work, as much as that pains me to say. There is plenty of evidence of that, including outside of SC. Take a look at any corwdfunded game and there is constant and continual criticism from people outside the game, without knowledge of the game or its development, which specifically attack areas that the company has chosen to be transparent with. Same goes here, CIG could have easily said "No you may not post anything re: our offices." but they didn't.
Again, even if they were transparent with ALLLLLLLLL their books, there might be 5% of the population equipped to understand anything in them. 5% of those people who actually give a fuck enough to interpret them, and maybe a handful of those who actually choose to share any sort of insight into it. So we're talking about the few feeding the many. So transparency means dick all, really. People will choose to believe what they want regardless of the level of transparency they are given.
Well if you want people who have common sense and don't want to just throw money at a game without knowing facts. Then carry on... Right now you got people who have hopes and dreams and also trust and believe everything CIG says. You realize I would be a backer if they were more transparent? There is a lot of other people who would dish out some cash if they didn't think something was wrong with the situation. It doesn't take much just a little honesty goes a long way with smart people.
All I did was to compare what this company was doing after looking at what others were doing and if I saw $20,000 or $500 sliding doors at the other gaming companies I would not have thought anything about it. But the other successful companies that produced AAA games didn't have as much stuff as SC does.
The door is as much for visiting backers as it is for employees. CIG has backers coming in all the time and I imagine going through that door and seeing the other touches they put on the office make a huge difference to the experience of touring the office.
This arguing over a door is rediculous as there was never any proof that it cost this much, justl like there was never any proof that they paid $20k for the coffee machine in the caffeteria. More likely the coffee machine came with a contract they made with a catering company to provide it. Both of these "prices" came directly from Derek Smart with the express purpose of spreading FUD.
If they provided transparency a la form 10-K here in the US: providing an annual (and quarterly) breakdown of expenditures, assets, strengths, weaknesses, threats, opportunities, and a professional corporate profile like any publicly traded company earning over 10 mil in a year is required to do by law. In essence, I'd like to see them provide a periodic 'investor's relations' report (yes, I understand backers are not expecting to get money back: I should hope some backers are at least expecting something else).
What I've seen so far is no where near that. PR =/= fiscal / corporate transparency.
Is that too much to ask? :-)
Edit: by the way I don't consider myself a 'detractor', merely someone who has not pledged. I'd like to see this project succeed, if not for Chris & co then for the sake of all those with their money on the line.
Honestly, I think if they believed that there would be value in something like that, they'd probably do it. However, when people are blowing up stories like a mural, a coffee machine, and a door (not just that, but a SUPPOSED $20,000 door, that I showed could be done for $500), how can the public handle any sort of transparency? Unfortunately, there isn't the level of intelligence, in general, to process and make sense out of it, let alone the attention span to actually read and take in any sort of transparency. They'll just wait for someone else to summarize the information in a form that aligns with their own agenda and go with that. Sad but true.
Well then wouldn't transparency show that the door cost 500$ and then everyone would shut the f*** up wouldn't they?
See above where someone says that a $200 door would be sufficient. So, no, transparency wouldn't help I think the thread demonstrates that for itself, doesn't it? Also, go look at the other threads re: the gamescom presentation. Lesson? Some people will find something to invent regardless of what you do. So the real lesson here is that transparency doesn't work, as much as that pains me to say. There is plenty of evidence of that, including outside of SC. Take a look at any corwdfunded game and there is constant and continual criticism from people outside the game, without knowledge of the game or its development, which specifically attack areas that the company has chosen to be transparent with. Same goes here, CIG could have easily said "No you may not post anything re: our offices." but they didn't.
Again, even if they were transparent with ALLLLLLLLL their books, there might be 5% of the population equipped to understand anything in them. 5% of those people who actually give a fuck enough to interpret them, and maybe a handful of those who actually choose to share any sort of insight into it. So we're talking about the few feeding the many. So transparency means dick all, really. People will choose to believe what they want regardless of the level of transparency they are given.
Well if you want people who have common sense and don't want to just throw money at a game without knowing facts. Then carry on... Right now you got people who have hopes and dreams and also trust and believe everything CIG says. You realize I would be a backer if they were more transparent? There is a lot of other people who would dish out some cash if they didn't think something was wrong with the situation. It doesn't take much just a little honesty goes a long way with smart people.
Well crowdfunding projects aren't meant to be funded by people who need all the facts. It has to be funded a little on hopes and dreams and a little on faith. Why? There is risk associated with it. The idea is to get enough people to back you on faith so that you can change the minds of others.
I have absolutely no problem with people who would rather wait and see. In fact, I would consider myself one of those. I actually put more money into The Repopulation that I did SC. I actually consider myself to be quite risk averse, so I don't want to invest a ton of money up-front. I will back games up to $50 or so, but that's when the value begins to fall off for me (as an early backer). When it releases I will probably give more, but I'll wait until it's out and it's what I want before I do that.
Being that I'm kinda in the same boat as you, although I've tossed a couple dimes into the hat, I would disagree. I don't think that transparency makes others back it. Again, it comes down to how what they read is interpreted. Unfortunately the evidence points towards them not being able to handle that level of transparency. Even if they were 100% transparent, I'll bet there would be a great deal of people, including myself, who didn't back it. Why? Because we want something physical. I want to feel it, touch it, smell it. Transparency doesn't give me that, only a product does. If the product they deliver is great, it will sell. There is plenty of evidence to show this based on games owned on Steam versus the number of backers in the KS project. So I'd say that being transparent provides very limited value because ultimately they have the money they need and their biggest obstacle now is delivering an actual game that people can touch and play.
All I did was to compare what this company was doing after looking at what others were doing and if I saw $20,000 or $500 sliding doors at the other gaming companies I would not have thought anything about it. But the other successful companies that produced AAA games didn't have as much stuff as SC does.
There's so much unnecessary here. Honestly, there is no comparison.... If the SC community were to estimate, there is probably $20 billion worth of frills here.... /sarcasm
Comments
The only way I would ever support such a product would be if they fully refunded all money towards digital ships, apologized for continuing the trend of monetizing inside games, produce a complete product, and get good reviews after hype dies down.
What I've seen so far is no where near that. PR =/= fiscal / corporate transparency.
Is that too much to ask? :-)
Edit: by the way I don't consider myself a 'detractor', merely someone who has not pledged. I'd like to see this project succeed, if not for Chris & co then for the sake of all those with their money on the line.
"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
A game to play. period.
otherwise I am spending my attention elsewhere.
Speaking personally I dont want to play Daddy watches over developer simulator. Either give me a game to play or remove yourself from my consciousnesses, simple as that
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Honestly, I think if they believed that there would be value in something like that, they'd probably do it. However, when people are blowing up stories like a mural, a coffee machine, and a door (not just that, but a SUPPOSED $20,000 door, that I showed could be done for $500), how can the public handle any sort of transparency? Unfortunately, there isn't the level of intelligence, in general, to process and make sense out of it, let alone the attention span to actually read and take in any sort of transparency. They'll just wait for someone else to summarize the information in a form that aligns with their own agenda and go with that. Sad but true.
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
----------------
1. worried about a coffee machine on a multi-million dollar project as a donator of what? $40?
2. exactly, and I want details here, exactly how is buying a $20,000 door a way to scam your donators? are they giving a kickback to the contractor? sorry but I fail to see the scam in that. Silly? yes, scam? hardly
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
I self identify as a monkey.
My question, (again) is how is a $20,000 a scam.
See a 'scam' and 'bad management choice' are not the same thing. So again my question is how does buying a $20,000 = scamming people out of their money? did he funnel the contract to his buddy or something?
I thought I was fairly clear the first time
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I said in my statement 'scam' so then the next person completely ignore that part and moved forward without reading what i said. me being wrong, off topic, or not in line with the previous comments has not shit to do with that problem I am afraid you are wrong
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
moving on
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Well, first of all, I showed with a YouTube video exactly how said door could be made for $500 or less. Secondly, it would give me confidence in the abilities of the Management team to endorse this type of thing. Creating an environment with healthy idea flow means creating an environment where people feel like their suggestions are valuable. Google understands this VERY well and probably have some of the most openly creative environments for learning and creating. CIG is no Google, but if you accept a factory mentality where you work 9-5 and do everything to the letter of the specification, and just punch out code, that doesn't work. Absolutely not. Never happening. You won't retain talent, you won't be able to secure new talent, and you won't solve any of the difficult problems you need solved. Unfortunately, as much as I've tried, your brain can't be trained to be creative between the hours of 9-5. So your expectation, with a creative company, is that the employee is always on-call for "ideas" and there might be 1am coding sessions because you think you've figured something out. Try getting a factory worker to come in at 1am, make some widgets, and then go home and go back to sleep. Completely different mentality.
RE: Not seeing other game companies spending like that..... How many have you really looked at? Have you seen Blizzard's offices? Ubisoft? Shoot! The Hex developers would have games of Magic in the corporate boardroom!! Why? Because inspiring people to give a fuck leads to greater creativity and motivation than simply cracking a whip.
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
----------------
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
My predictions is that SQ42 with be a decent Wing Commander V and Star Citizen will be qualified failure that only hardcore fans will be playing 3 months after final release.
Yes, most definitely. If you can't understand why based on what I posted, then I'm sorry. However, the answer is yes. And if it was a $20,000 door, the answer would still be yes, to be honest. Go and do some research on recruiting talent and, worse, retaining them. If you think anyone who is ultra talented is going to stick around a company that makes them want to slit their wrists, you're fucking kidding yourself. So what? Throw more money at them? Yup, you could do that. Back to square one, a $20,000 door would seem pretty fucking cheap. If I could buy a $20,000 door and solve ONE person turning over, it would be worth it because the amount of training and learning, even for experts, in our product line would cost us well over $20,000 for a new developer.
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
----------------
Did blizzard or ubisoft when they first started out and secured funding start furnishing their offices with some of the crap you are saying before they put out a game and were making consistent money? Did google just pop out of the ground in a top of the line office with all the perks before they were able to make money consistently or did they ask investors for cash and then spend it on things that were not needed at the time.
Point is you don't spend money that backers or investors have given you to put into your offices aside from the basics until you have a product up and running and can support yourselves financially. Once your financial future is secure then you start pimping out the office
See above where someone says that a $200 door would be sufficient. So, no, transparency wouldn't help I think the thread demonstrates that for itself, doesn't it? Also, go look at the other threads re: the gamescom presentation. Lesson? Some people will find something to invent regardless of what you do. So the real lesson here is that transparency doesn't work, as much as that pains me to say. There is plenty of evidence of that, including outside of SC. Take a look at any corwdfunded game and there is constant and continual criticism from people outside the game, without knowledge of the game or its development, which specifically attack areas that the company has chosen to be transparent with. Same goes here, CIG could have easily said "No you may not post anything re: our offices." but they didn't.
Again, even if they were transparent with ALLLLLLLLL their books, there might be 5% of the population equipped to understand anything in them. 5% of those people who actually give a fuck enough to interpret them, and maybe a handful of those who actually choose to share any sort of insight into it. So we're talking about the few feeding the many. So transparency means dick all, really. People will choose to believe what they want regardless of the level of transparency they are given.
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
----------------
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
This arguing over a door is rediculous as there was never any proof that it cost this much, justl like there was never any proof that they paid $20k for the coffee machine in the caffeteria. More likely the coffee machine came with a contract they made with a catering company to provide it. Both of these "prices" came directly from Derek Smart with the express purpose of spreading FUD.
Anyone who believes that joker is a moron.
Well crowdfunding projects aren't meant to be funded by people who need all the facts. It has to be funded a little on hopes and dreams and a little on faith. Why? There is risk associated with it. The idea is to get enough people to back you on faith so that you can change the minds of others.
I have absolutely no problem with people who would rather wait and see. In fact, I would consider myself one of those. I actually put more money into The Repopulation that I did SC. I actually consider myself to be quite risk averse, so I don't want to invest a ton of money up-front. I will back games up to $50 or so, but that's when the value begins to fall off for me (as an early backer). When it releases I will probably give more, but I'll wait until it's out and it's what I want before I do that.
Being that I'm kinda in the same boat as you, although I've tossed a couple dimes into the hat, I would disagree. I don't think that transparency makes others back it. Again, it comes down to how what they read is interpreted. Unfortunately the evidence points towards them not being able to handle that level of transparency. Even if they were 100% transparent, I'll bet there would be a great deal of people, including myself, who didn't back it. Why? Because we want something physical. I want to feel it, touch it, smell it. Transparency doesn't give me that, only a product does. If the product they deliver is great, it will sell. There is plenty of evidence to show this based on games owned on Steam versus the number of backers in the KS project. So I'd say that being transparent provides very limited value because ultimately they have the money they need and their biggest obstacle now is delivering an actual game that people can touch and play.
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
----------------
Check it out http://www.ign.com/articles/2016/04/19/57-awesome-sights-from-inside-blizzards-office
There's so much unnecessary here. Honestly, there is no comparison.... If the SC community were to estimate, there is probably $20 billion worth of frills here.... /sarcasm
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
----------------