This game will have to be really great for me to support it, or have a fair way of earning all these sold ships in game.
I usually end up being a collector, even if only minorly so, and if all these ships are behind a pricetag or no longer obtainable, I'd just get angry seeing what i can never have.
GrayImpact ... if you are a collector it will be nice to hear for you that none of the ships in Star Citizen are ONLY available for real life cash. Almost every ship in game will be available for in game money. By design decision there wont exist ships that you only get for real life money - several official statements exist for that.
Some rare large ships (like the Bengal carriers and maybe Vanduul kingships) are special cases ... they will NOT be available for money ... out of game or in game. There will only be a very limited number and getting them will be a huge effort.
Think: Burned out husk of a defeated Bengal carrier drifting through an old battlefield near the border between human and Vanduul space. You have to capture the system, bring in salvage and repair ships and crew, establish basic life support, repair the most basic functions and move the carrier back into dry dock in human space. All the time you have to fend of angry Vanduul, greedy pirates and resourceful competitors that let you do the hard work and then want to grab it from under your fingers via boarding assault or something like that.
There's a vast difference between a failure to fund a project and a failure to capture consumer interest.
Chris Robert's has failed categorically to maintain consumer confidence in his product, despite the funding he's achieved. People are simply getting fed up with him continually expanding the project and using this expansion as a means to prolong the development of the game.
*** snip ***
Strange that reality and your perception seem to be at odds. Several tenthousand new backers join Star Citizen every month. For the last 25 months. Tendency: "going up". And we are still speaking about the pre-feature-complete-Alpha-version.
697.713 backers in total at present ... lets make that a round 700.000 by the end of the year.
If that is "failure to capture consumer interest", I wonder what you consider a "success".
But hey ... who am I to question your own private version of reality ? Condemn SC all you want .....
When I see ships being sold for £100's it puts me off the game. No doubt I'll try it, but if I feel significantly disadvantaged when I start and feel the need to spend money on a ship just to compete then I'll just continue playing something else.
Originally posted by Smoey When I see ships being sold for £100's it puts me off the game. No doubt I'll try it, but if I feel significantly disadvantaged when I start and feel the need to spend money on a ship just to compete then I'll just continue playing something else.
As backers we have made some calculations based on official statements ... those ships you get in pledge packages for a few hundred dollars .... you can get them in game for in game money after launch for a very modest amount of playtime. No one forces you to give more than you want/can afford and supporting the project with a 30 $ starter pledge is perfectly fine if you like the idea of a crowdfunded community supported project like Star Citizen as a new way for the gaming industry.
A second starter ship ... takes approx. 7 hours of non hardcore gameplay (that means: not 100 % money earning missions 100 % of the time)
A single seater ship .. even the high end ones .... 20-30 hours of such gameplay
A medium sized multi-crew ship like the Constellation ..... 60 hours of non-hardcore gameplay ... That is approx. the level of pledge package you mentioned above (pledge package costs e.g. 275 $ ... and there is significantly more than a ship in a high end pledge package, if you like deco items and additional documentation)
A big multi-crew ship for organisations/guilds .... for the recommended number of players manning such a ship (=25) ... takes approx. 55 hours of such gameplay for every participating player to finance such a e.g. destroyer hull.
If you go for hardcore missioning, you could get them faster. Consider also that those backers with more than one ship still can fly only one ship at a time. And its a pilot skill based game. Even the best ship with the best equipment won't help if the pilot sucks. With 90 % of the economy being NPC based, early backers cannot capture the market in the early days of the game- so no danger there.
There are also regular test periods were you can try out (for FREE) ships other than the ones in the pledge package you have chosen. So even if you only go for an Aurora starter package, you had the opportunity to test Hornet fighters, M50 racers, Origin interceptors and explorers etc. I guess this trend will continue with new ships getting flight ready, including the multi-crew ships.
So ... IMHO there won't be much of a disadvantage for anyone joining the project with "only" starter packages. There is absolutely NO need game-wise to pay large amounts of money unless you really want to support that idea/project. That is also said by CIG in basically EVERY official announcement they make.
I haven't back this game yet but I will very soon. I have skimmed the thread but I am not going to read thru it entirely. This is my unsolicited and in all probability uwanted opinion. ;-)
I don't see the difference between this any of the other sorts of crowdfunding or early adopters packages. Roomy ship is no different than getting extra bank space etc, and bigger/faster ship can equate to being given a mount with bonuses (ie AA glider etc.) In every game in recent memory the more money you spent in backing the game (package) the bigger the bonuses are. After all when you throw a sum of money at something you expect something in return. Some of these games allow you you donate multiple times and upgrade. Imo is no different than RSI selling ships of various types. I can see how some people would have a problem with it especially if it gives advantages which most likely will to some extent. How much remains to be seen. I don't mind this myself because I appreciate the transparency of it. See a cool ship you are interested in, you can buy it. It has not been stuck in a RNG box and maybe after 500-600 dollars, if you are lucky, you "may" get it. Or maybe you won't. At least this is upfront and honest about the cost. I drive a Ford Focus irl. I don't care that someone else has a Lexus. My less expensive car does everything I need it to. The fact that someone else has a more expensive car affects me in no way at all. If I can still do everything I need to with my less expensive ship, I have no problem with someone who wants to drop a few hundred or more, or even have their own private fleet of ships.
I expect to pay for the game in some fashion. Game devs don't make games for free. In the end it must be paid for somehow. Will it be worth it in the end for me? Can't say yet but from everything I have read and watched I believe it will be.
Has their monetizing strategy paid off? Fuck yeah. I mean... double fuck yeah. I wouldn't be surprised if they are already "technically" posting a profit. They likely already have money they are using to fund their own lives in ways they haven't seen up till this point in their lives. And the game still needs to release. Was it a successful business model for them? A million times yes. Is it better for the average consumer overall? Let's wait and see what happens post release. If the game really is great enough to justify all this ridiculous spending on what is a completely uncompleted game, maybe the consumer wins. My prediction? Pain. Fortunately for the company, they already have everyone's money.
I'm a fan of CR's previous games and was very interested in this project but after the continual stretch goals and ship sales I'm quickly losing interest.
The game could have been launched by now and extra features added later on, instead of this interminable wait for extra content. Elite managed to ship already, why hasn't SC? To me the answer is 2 simple words, CASH GRAB!
I'm a fan of CR's previous games and was very interested in this project but after the continual stretch goals and ship sales I'm quickly losing interest.
The game could have been launched by now and extra features added later on, instead of this interminable wait for extra content. Elite managed to ship already, why hasn't SC? To me the answer is 2 simple words, CASH GRAB!
I'll pass on this one now.
If you want to know why Star Citizen did not go the way of Elite:Dangerous (with the comparatively early release) you may want to switch over to the E:D subsection of this forum and read some of the posts there. Put on some heat resistant clothing.
I backed both games and both ways have merit. However, I prefer the way Star Citizen is doing it.
In a way Star Citizen has "launched" already, with Arena Commander 1.0 and all of its game modes. Its not a feature complete game yet by far. But neither is E:D.
IMHO both games will be very good games once they are completed. Which IMHO will take 4-5 years each. One cannot cheat complexity. From having met some of the team personally during a convention (including Chris Roberts) it is my personal impression that MONEY is absolutely not the motivator for this team.
BTW Chris Roberts wanted to end the stretch goals half a year ago. The backers overwhelmingly demanded to continue with strech goals. Nevertheless, CR has now officially ended stretch goals at the end of 2014, without a new backer poll. So basically he did what the backers wanted - and got the flak for it. Whatever he decides, someone will always cry foul.
I'm sure when they offer ships for real world money when/if the game launches then it will be because of "backer demand" as well.
I would love nothing more then this game to be a huge massive success and really kick the industry in the teeth to start taking chances again and push out some new and awesome game ideas but I just have this nagging feeling in the back of my mind that this will not only set the games industry back but also the indie scene as well.
Hopefully I can eat my words in a few years time but guess just have to wait and see.
Comments
GrayImpact ... if you are a collector it will be nice to hear for you that none of the ships in Star Citizen are ONLY available for real life cash. Almost every ship in game will be available for in game money. By design decision there wont exist ships that you only get for real life money - several official statements exist for that.
Some rare large ships (like the Bengal carriers and maybe Vanduul kingships) are special cases ... they will NOT be available for money ... out of game or in game. There will only be a very limited number and getting them will be a huge effort.
Think: Burned out husk of a defeated Bengal carrier drifting through an old battlefield near the border between human and Vanduul space. You have to capture the system, bring in salvage and repair ships and crew, establish basic life support, repair the most basic functions and move the carrier back into dry dock in human space. All the time you have to fend of angry Vanduul, greedy pirates and resourceful competitors that let you do the hard work and then want to grab it from under your fingers via boarding assault or something like that.
Have fun
What has fueled your hatred for Scotish kings ? ;-)
Have fun
Strange that reality and your perception seem to be at odds. Several tenthousand new backers join Star Citizen every month. For the last 25 months. Tendency: "going up". And we are still speaking about the pre-feature-complete-Alpha-version.
697.713 backers in total at present ... lets make that a round 700.000 by the end of the year.
If that is "failure to capture consumer interest", I wonder what you consider a "success".
But hey ... who am I to question your own private version of reality ? Condemn SC all you want .....
Have fun
(\ /) ?
( . .)
c('')('')
As backers we have made some calculations based on official statements ... those ships you get in pledge packages for a few hundred dollars .... you can get them in game for in game money after launch for a very modest amount of playtime.
No one forces you to give more than you want/can afford and supporting the project with a 30 $ starter pledge is perfectly fine if you like the idea of a crowdfunded community supported project like Star Citizen as a new way for the gaming industry.
A second starter ship ... takes approx. 7 hours of non hardcore gameplay (that means: not 100 % money earning missions 100 % of the time)
A single seater ship .. even the high end ones .... 20-30 hours of such gameplay
A medium sized multi-crew ship like the Constellation ..... 60 hours of non-hardcore gameplay ... That is approx. the level of pledge package you mentioned above (pledge package costs e.g. 275 $ ... and there is significantly more than a ship in a high end pledge package, if you like deco items and additional documentation)
A big multi-crew ship for organisations/guilds .... for the recommended number of players manning such a ship (=25) ... takes approx. 55 hours of such gameplay for every participating player to finance such a e.g. destroyer hull.
If you go for hardcore missioning, you could get them faster. Consider also that those backers with more than one ship still can fly only one ship at a time. And its a pilot skill based game. Even the best ship with the best equipment won't help if the pilot sucks. With 90 % of the economy being NPC based, early backers cannot capture the market in the early days of the game- so no danger there.
There are also regular test periods were you can try out (for FREE) ships other than the ones in the pledge package you have chosen. So even if you only go for an Aurora starter package, you had the opportunity to test Hornet fighters, M50 racers, Origin interceptors and explorers etc. I guess this trend will continue with new ships getting flight ready, including the multi-crew ships.
So ... IMHO there won't be much of a disadvantage for anyone joining the project with "only" starter packages. There is absolutely NO need game-wise to pay large amounts of money unless you really want to support that idea/project. That is also said by CIG in basically EVERY official announcement they make.
Have fun
I haven't back this game yet but I will very soon. I have skimmed the thread but I am not going to read thru it entirely. This is my unsolicited and in all probability uwanted opinion. ;-)
I don't see the difference between this any of the other sorts of crowdfunding or early adopters packages. Roomy ship is no different than getting extra bank space etc, and bigger/faster ship can equate to being given a mount with bonuses (ie AA glider etc.) In every game in recent memory the more money you spent in backing the game (package) the bigger the bonuses are. After all when you throw a sum of money at something you expect something in return. Some of these games allow you you donate multiple times and upgrade. Imo is no different than RSI selling ships of various types. I can see how some people would have a problem with it especially if it gives advantages which most likely will to some extent. How much remains to be seen. I don't mind this myself because I appreciate the transparency of it. See a cool ship you are interested in, you can buy it. It has not been stuck in a RNG box and maybe after 500-600 dollars, if you are lucky, you "may" get it. Or maybe you won't. At least this is upfront and honest about the cost. I drive a Ford Focus irl. I don't care that someone else has a Lexus. My less expensive car does everything I need it to. The fact that someone else has a more expensive car affects me in no way at all. If I can still do everything I need to with my less expensive ship, I have no problem with someone who wants to drop a few hundred or more, or even have their own private fleet of ships.
I expect to pay for the game in some fashion. Game devs don't make games for free. In the end it must be paid for somehow. Will it be worth it in the end for me? Can't say yet but from everything I have read and watched I believe it will be.
Merry Christmas everyone.
I'm a fan of CR's previous games and was very interested in this project but after the continual stretch goals and ship sales I'm quickly losing interest.
The game could have been launched by now and extra features added later on, instead of this interminable wait for extra content. Elite managed to ship already, why hasn't SC? To me the answer is 2 simple words, CASH GRAB!
I'll pass on this one now.
68,046,171$ made
nope, nothing backfired here.
if that's a backfire, i'd gladly take it and make a game with it tho ^^
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
If you want to know why Star Citizen did not go the way of Elite:Dangerous (with the comparatively early release) you may want to switch over to the E:D subsection of this forum and read some of the posts there. Put on some heat resistant clothing.
I backed both games and both ways have merit. However, I prefer the way Star Citizen is doing it.
In a way Star Citizen has "launched" already, with Arena Commander 1.0 and all of its game modes. Its not a feature complete game yet by far. But neither is E:D.
IMHO both games will be very good games once they are completed. Which IMHO will take 4-5 years each. One cannot cheat complexity. From having met some of the team personally during a convention (including Chris Roberts) it is my personal impression that MONEY is absolutely not the motivator for this team.
BTW Chris Roberts wanted to end the stretch goals half a year ago. The backers overwhelmingly demanded to continue with strech goals. Nevertheless, CR has now officially ended stretch goals at the end of 2014, without a new backer poll. So basically he did what the backers wanted - and got the flak for it. Whatever he decides, someone will always cry foul.
Have fun
I'm sure when they offer ships for real world money when/if the game launches then it will be because of "backer demand" as well.
I would love nothing more then this game to be a huge massive success and really kick the industry in the teeth to start taking chances again and push out some new and awesome game ideas but I just have this nagging feeling in the back of my mind that this will not only set the games industry back but also the indie scene as well.
Hopefully I can eat my words in a few years time but guess just have to wait and see.