Howdy, Stranger!

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

How Star Citizen Is Destroying Gaming

12346»

Comments

  • olepiolepi Member EpicPosts: 3,053
    edited October 27
    MaxBacon said:
    Vrika said:
    If CIG follows the contract in their attempt to create the game and fail, they won't be held legally responsible because it's one of the alternatives covered by the contract. CIG's lack of legal responsibility in that situation wouldn't be caused by lack of contract, but by how the contract takes that potential situation into account.

    100% this. This is how crowdfunded projects go.  If someone wants to talk holding a company accountable if a project fails, they really need to prove stuff like the funds gotten not being used for development and/or that there has no been a legit attempt at the delivery of the product.




    Or that there was some internal email showing they KNEW that the promised date or content was not possible, and continued to use it as a fundraising point.  

    For Star Citizen-  I think anyone who bought in after they started the Free Fly events has very little they can complain about.  They had the opportunity to see what actually existed in game before making their purchase.  


    Right there is the corrosive effect SC is having. People are not "purchasing" anything, there is no product for sale. The game does not exist, nobody can buy it. People can pledge money towards development of the game, but nobody can purchase it.

    CIG has corrupted the terms, leading customers to think there is a game that they can purchase. There is a legal difference between selling a product and collecting donations towards a development effort. If CIG was actually selling a product they might be held liable for false claims about what the product is. Instead, everything they "promise" is just a goal to try for.

    From their ToS:
    RSI is conducting a crowdfunding campaign to support the development of the Game and the related RSI Services. You do not purchase anything, you make a pledge towards the development of the Game and the other RSI Services. 

    You agree that any unearned portion of your Pledge Funds shall not be refundable until and unless RSI has ceased development and failed to deliver 
    Lilly_Lamb

    ------------
    2024: 47 years on the Net.


  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,846
    edited October 27
    olepi said:
    Right there is the corrosive effect SC is having.

    SC is an early access game, you buy what it is today, and that continues to update as it develops. Just like a steam early access game.

  • olepiolepi Member EpicPosts: 3,053
    edited October 27
    MaxBacon said:
    olepi said:
    Right there is the corrosive effect SC is having.

    SC is an early access game, that continues to update as it develops. Just like a steam early access game. 


    If you want to blame someone go blame Steam, incredibly toxic stunts keep happening on their early access program, rug-pulls, outright scam attempts, etc... properly abusing a system that's meant to let players play a game as it develops.
    Read my earlier post, and the ToS from CIG. Nobody is purchasing anything. 

    From Steam: By purchasing, you will gain immediate access to download and play the game in its current form and as it evolves. You will keep access to the game when it moves from Early Access into fully released. Early Access games qualify for refunds the same as other purchases - playtime and date of purchase are both considered.

    CIG makes it clear that pledging to the effort does not entitle you to a game. And you do not get a refund if no game is released. That is not early access.
    Lilly_Lamb

    ------------
    2024: 47 years on the Net.


  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,846
    edited October 27
    olepi said:
    Read my earlier post, and the ToS from CIG. Nobody is purchasing anything. 

    Ok let me explain...


    What you do is a pledge, you are entitled to the PLEDGE ITEMS.
    • The access to the game is a pledge item.
    • A ship you buy is a pledge item.
    • If the ship is not in-game yet, that's an example of a liability to deliver that pledge item to you.
    • SQ42 is a pledge item, another delivery liablity they have.


    Got it? Same as a purchase only that they don't want to call it a purchase, but technically... no difference.
    Vrika
  • olepiolepi Member EpicPosts: 3,053
    MaxBacon said:
    olepi said:
    Read my earlier post, and the ToS from CIG. Nobody is purchasing anything. 

    Ok let me explain...


    What you do is a pledge, you are entitled to the PLEDGE ITEMS.
    • The access to the game is a pledge item.
    • A ship you buy is a pledge item.
    • If the ship is not in-game yet, that's an example of a liability to deliver that pledge item to you.
    • SQ42 is a pledge item, another delivery liablity they have.


    Got it? Same as a purchase only that they don't want to call it a purchase, but technically... no difference.
    Yes, I get it. CIG is not selling anything, they explicitly say nobody is purchasing anything.
    MaxBaconLilly_Lamb

    ------------
    2024: 47 years on the Net.


  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 24,420
    MaxBacon said:
    Ok let me explain...


    What you do is a pledge, you are entitled to the PLEDGE ITEMS.
    • The access to the game is a pledge item.
    • A ship you buy is a pledge item.
    • If the ship is not in-game yet, that's an example of a liability to deliver that pledge item to you.
    • SQ42 is a pledge item, another delivery liablity they have.


    Got it? Same as a purchase only that they don't want to call it a purchase, but technically... no difference.
    Max did not mention that apart from all the pledges you have to swear the the Oath Of Allegiance to CIG.
    KidRisk
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,846
    olepi said:
    Yes, I get it. CIG is not selling anything, they explicitly say nobody is purchasing anything.

    You make a pledge and are entitled to the pledge items = You make a purchase and are entitled to the purchased items.


    They can call it a pledge, they can call it a blood sacrifice, you go in, pay your sales tax, are entitled to the items part of it, and the game access is the main one.
  • BabuinixBabuinix Member EpicPosts: 4,462
    Kyleran said:
    Yeah, I know you didn't but the Rabbit and Max did and they won't even show their faces around these parts anymore.

    Besides, from what is going around in this recent Inside Gaming story
    Anyone with a clue about anything can tell that article is a load of nothing. The same rehashed nonsense just like all the other hit-piece attempts along the years :D

    That you and other gamers still eat that shit up joyfully and burp these posts with a sense of enlightenment just shows how deluded and out of touch they are with gaming industry and it's development. The chatty gaming crowd that knows nothing but still want to participate in the debate to feel included.  :D
    olepi said:
    Star Citizen reminds of that; it's DACware, designed to show specific features but not a fully functional and sellable product.
    Yet for 10+ years many gamers have kept buying, playing and enjoying Star Citizen alpha build and to this day there's no other game in the genre from any other company that compares B)

    Just keep morphing your cynicism into something meaningful guys, I'm sure you still have it in ya :D


  • WargfootWargfoot Member EpicPosts: 1,458
    Oh really ?

    And what exactly is the repercussion for SC of still not releasing the actual, final game, despite drowing in funding and working at it for ages, if you claim that there would be one ?!?!?

    If you're a shareholder then yes, they cant lie. If its crowdfunding, they perfectly can. Thats the problem with crowdfunding.


    Well of course there are consequences. It's called consumer fraud and in most civilised societies it is not only frowned upon, it is illegal.

    Do not confuse missed objectives with (knowing) lies to the consumers. If you do, I would advise keeping away from territories that have actual consumer protection laws in place to prevent businesses scamming or defrauding people.
    Yup.

    Some folks believe that getting Crowdfunding money means the company can do anything they want, including lying to get it.   I am amazed that we have gotten to this point where people do not understand even the basics.
    For anyone who makes that claim: Take that person to a restaurant.  Have him place an order.  When he gets something entirely different three days later ask him to pay for it.

    You'll see an oddly rational response at that point.




  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 24,420
    Wargfoot said:
    Oh really ?

    And what exactly is the repercussion for SC of still not releasing the actual, final game, despite drowing in funding and working at it for ages, if you claim that there would be one ?!?!?

    If you're a shareholder then yes, they cant lie. If its crowdfunding, they perfectly can. Thats the problem with crowdfunding.


    Well of course there are consequences. It's called consumer fraud and in most civilised societies it is not only frowned upon, it is illegal.

    Do not confuse missed objectives with (knowing) lies to the consumers. If you do, I would advise keeping away from territories that have actual consumer protection laws in place to prevent businesses scamming or defrauding people.
    Yup.

    Some folks believe that getting Crowdfunding money means the company can do anything they want, including lying to get it.   I am amazed that we have gotten to this point where people do not understand even the basics.
    For anyone who makes that claim: Take that person to a restaurant.  Have him place an order.  When he gets something entirely different three days later ask him to pay for it.

    You'll see an oddly rational response at that point.
    Nice analogy but this is gaming development, come back to him in three years and see if he is still alive to make a response. :)
    Lilly_Lamb
  • ArglebargleArglebargle Member EpicPosts: 3,480
    edited October 29
    MaxBacon said:
    olepi said:
    Read my earlier post, and the ToS from CIG. Nobody is purchasing anything. 

    Ok let me explain...


    What you do is a pledge, you are entitled to the PLEDGE ITEMS.
    • The access to the game is a pledge item.
    • A ship you buy is a pledge item.
    • If the ship is not in-game yet, that's an example of a liability to deliver that pledge item to you.
    • SQ42 is a pledge item, another delivery liablity they have.


    Got it? Same as a purchase only that they don't want to call it a purchase, but technically... no difference.

    You are correct in this.  The 'donations' are taxed as sales, which means, however they may be described in ToS, they are legally regarded as a sale.  And the switch to early access is a smart move by CIG. 

    If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.

  • ArglebargleArglebargle Member EpicPosts: 3,480
    Babuinix said:
    Kyleran said:
    Yeah, I know you didn't but the Rabbit and Max did and they won't even show their faces around these parts anymore.

    Besides, from what is going around in this recent Inside Gaming story
    Anyone with a clue about anything can tell that article is a load of nothing. The same rehashed nonsense just like all the other hit-piece attempts along the years :D

    ....
    The same tales of  incompetent management rife with micromanaging, feature creep, and redos.  If you look at the Jennison letter, it points out the same troublesome incompetence that the Inside Gaming story reports on.  You think it's been a decade of lies, but there's this trail of damning evidence, bolstered by 100s of CIG's own video froth, that the big brass can't get out of their own way. 

    As always though, their marketing is stellar....


    If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.

  • BabuinixBabuinix Member EpicPosts: 4,462
    edited October 30
    The same tales of  incompetent management rife with micromanaging, feature creep, and redos.
    That could be well said of any other studio's big production... B)

    Same with every other mundane stuff anyone tries to spin as flaws. The "crunch", "layoffs" or the "Jenner leeter" aka low skill artist failing to comply with the quality bar needed for the game at hand lol

    The question is, will that Chris Roberts grudge bias you have go away when Squadron 42 comes out as a major hit or will it get stronger? B)
    Post edited by Babuinix on
  • ArglebargleArglebargle Member EpicPosts: 3,480
    Babuinix said:
    The same tales of  incompetent management rife with micromanaging, feature creep, and redos.
    That could be well said of any other studio's big production... B)

    Same with every other mundane stuff anyone tries to spin as flaws. The "crunch", "layoffs" or the "Jenner leeter" aka low skill artist failing to comply with the quality bar needed for the game at hand lol

    The question is, will that Chris Roberts grudge bias you have go away when Squadron 42 comes out as a major hit or will it get stronger? B)
    'Other terrible developers and games did this.  See, we're okay!'


    Don't think I will have to worry about it.  Nothing in Roberts background says he can deliver without a boss.  I expect Squadron 42 will be buggy and late.  And probably not that innovative.  As for Roberts, he's still the same yahoo he's always been.

    But if they do deliver I'll fess up.

    If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.

  • WargfootWargfoot Member EpicPosts: 1,458
    I was playing a mobile game on my phone at the bus depot this morning.
    Chris Roberts came and knocked my phone out of my hand and broke it.

    Chris Roberts destroyed gaming.
    KidRiskKyleranriningear
  • BabuinixBabuinix Member EpicPosts: 4,462
    Babuinix said:
    The same tales of  incompetent management rife with micromanaging, feature creep, and redos.
    That could be well said of any other studio's big production... B)

    Same with every other mundane stuff anyone tries to spin as flaws. The "crunch", "layoffs" or the "Jenner leeter" aka low skill artist failing to comply with the quality bar needed for the game at hand lol

    The question is, will that Chris Roberts grudge bias you have go away when Squadron 42 comes out as a major hit or will it get stronger? B)
    'Other terrible developers and games did this.  See, we're okay!'
    By that standard all the big studios are horrible and I'm sure you don't play any of their games out of principle  :D
  • AdamantineAdamantine Member RarePosts: 5,094
    Considering how many (countless really) compamies yes, have lied to their crowd funders, and have happily gotten away with that just fine, I'm really baffled people just dont know about that.

Sign In or Register to comment.