I concur with Babuinix that the TREND will be the same, no matter what data (Steam, Frontier) you use.
I do not concur with Babuinix assessment that the game is "dying". It has peaked early, like most multiplayer games do, but its far from "dying". IMHO it will follow the trend of many MMO's, with smaller new peaks appearing with every expansion.
A change to true avatar gameplay may have a more pronounced effect on the trend, but that needs a lot of additional back-end work on behalf of Frontier.
My theory is based on the lack of a sustained player increase and game mechanics that captivate the players to keep playing, updates sure add some peaks in player count but they fail to retain those and gain momentum. And that is without a space game to compete against, how do you think it will fare with other games coming into play like Star Citizen, NoManSky, Infinity: Battlescape, Everspace and the many others around the corner...
You don't need a primary vendor to analyse a big chunk of data. There's a big chunk of data in steam that provides enough data to access the decline of the game based on those numbers.
The post preceeding mine said that Steam is the primary vendor, that is the only point I was addressing.
I have no opinion about analysing data one way or the other.
My theory is based on the lack of a sustained player increase and game mechanics that captivate the players to keep playing, updates sure add some peaks in player count but they fail to retain those and gain momentum. And that is without a space game to compete against, how do you think it will fare with other games coming into play like Star Citizen, NoManSky, Infinity: Battlescape, Everspace and the many others around the corner...
It's a reasonable theory, but you are missing something very important here. Elite Dangerous, by design and having a better engine for its purposes, have the trend of always been ahead on features DONE (stable and playable) than Star Citizen ever will be capable to release to their players. Do you really think that people will abandon a game with more constant updates (meaningfull updates) in exchange of a MVP that will spend more 5 or 10 years to deliver stability, always including additional/missing features with big delays, probably breaking the existent features, making even people lose their expensive assets spend by real dollars for bugs, etc and will require a more powerful machine to play? I mean. You may be right and Elite Dangerous may be dying. But if Elite Dangerous dies, you should understand that Star Citizen would have died earlier, again, due the simple reality of one design/development and other. Due how one achieve more platforma and other don't. Star Citizen is the one that will die due competition my friend. Actually, SC as a game/project has been dead for years. Uta a project totally not feasible that wont resist to the realities of the marker. Its just alive due hopes, dreams and sunk cost falacy. And will stay as long as some whales be kept throwing money for nothing, until they finally wake up and notice that are always dreaming and behind even of indie developers which invested 100 times less money that was donated for Star Citizen.
First it must be said that Elite only took ground after Braben saw the sucess of Star Citizen campaign. So Elite is very much a reality because of Chris Roberts.
Second, Elite has not received ameaningfull update for 6 months now. Star Citizen keeps adding and adding stuff, from new ships to new gameplay items (fps weapons) to game play features. It already has the main mechanics besides Planetary Landing , said to be coming this year and we already saw proofs of the tech working. Were is Elite Multicrew demo? Usage of avatars walking around, FPS, EVA, atmospheric flight ? Shopping and interaction between real npcs? Nothing besides concept pictures.
You've been saying that Star Citizen is dying since 2014 lol, how's that going ? 117 millions and counting!
First it must be said that Elite only took ground after Braben saw the sucess of Star Citizen campaign. So Elite is very much a reality because of Chris Roberts.
Second, Elite has not received ameaningfull update for 6 months now. Star Citizen keeps adding and adding stuff, from new ships to new gameplay items (fps weapons) to game play features. It already has the main mechanics besides Planetary Landing , said to be coming this year and we already saw proofs of the tech working. Were is Elite Multicrew demo? Usage of avatars walking around, FPS, EVA, atmospheric flight ? Shopping and interaction between real npcs? Nothing besides concept pictures.
You've been saying that Star Citizen is dying since 2014 lol, how's that going ? 117 millions and counting!
First, you lied. Its well-know that ED Kickstarter was supposed to be made earlier than Star Citizen. Several months earlier actually. It just came after because the platform was available in UK after. As coming after and as Roberts presented his ideas with gameplay available (which today we know that was just to mislead the public to believe that they were more advanced that they really were and for that reason they could achieve the 2 year time period for release - if 5.5 million dolars were given) ED actually had difficulties to be funded. You can't be serious when you compared the updates that Elite received with the updates that SC received in the last 6 months. I am not going to waste my time on this, because its pretty much common sense that SC is ridiculously behind... and if you were at least 10% less biased that you are, you would have no way, but agree that SC, due their design decisions and constraints always will take longer to release their stuff and have the trend to be less popular in number of players due hardware/platform restrictions. And yes. Star Citizen have been dying since 2012... as a feasible game, as a competitive game, exactly because this issue of taking longer and by consequence getting stale amd losing ground for competitors that can be faster to release meaningful features that most of the space sim fans prefer, ganeplay features that goes way beyond of new clothes. The features that SC have "released" as you claim... none of them are in a completion status, are they? They are more categorized as features added to a tech demo, proof of concept, than in a functional/stable game. The features added to ED are a lot more and are at least 99% completed and stable. That is why, for example, they have a lot more people playing, ok? Please do not deny reality. You screwed in your pathetic analysis. Just admit and move on. Its not a shame to be wrong. Who knows. Maybe CIG can survive... barely... always selling 2000 dollar jpeg porn and dreams for a few enthusiasts? But forget this idea that SC is competitive because is not. SC is not able to kill anyone... others are able to kill SC easily. And that is why there is this strong appeal to sell concepts for a few for ridiculous prices. Because just a few are dreaming. I wonder for how much longer, considering so many other games realizing most of their dreams, ina completed status/faster, than SC ever will be capable of. SC has not a single finished and great feature completed. And look how long they are taking to fix even the most basic ones. So, please... dont be ridiculous.
First it must be said that Elite only took ground after Braben saw the sucess of Star Citizen campaign. So Elite is very much a reality because of Chris Roberts.
Second, Elite has not received ameaningfull update for 6 months now. Star Citizen keeps adding and adding stuff, from new ships to new gameplay items (fps weapons) to game play features. It already has the main mechanics besides Planetary Landing , said to be coming this year and we already saw proofs of the tech working. Were is Elite Multicrew demo? Usage of avatars walking around, FPS, EVA, atmospheric flight ? Shopping and interaction between real npcs? Nothing besides concept pictures.
You've been saying that Star Citizen is dying since 2014 lol, how's that going ? 117 millions and counting!
Someone on reddit said you're that zecumbe guy, is that true? Because like him you sound so desparate to put other games down to try and make you feel better about the one you support. Pretty sad tbh.
It's really funny that you consider the above a small patch but talk up the adding of a firearm as though it's major content for Star Citizen You talk up prototype testing as though it is in game or soon to be arriving but ignore all the cases where it is shown off a year or more before becoming a reality, you ignore that they haven't shown anything since the initial prototype video.
You talk about Elite jumping on the kickstarter wagon but ignore that CIG released their pupil to planet mockup 1 day after Elite's planetary landing expansion launched.
If you know anything about Frontier it's that they don't show off prototypes, they show off working tech, they show it off when it is close to release as opposed to showing it off a year or more before it's ready.
The problem here is that you see bias and copycat behaviour where you want to see it, while totally ignoring all of the opposing cases. You need to take a step back grasshopper.
Ahaha so a game which numbers keep increasing, money wise and player wise is dying... O.o okidoki.
You do realise that Star Citizen, a teeny alpha has had more refund requests than Elite Dangerous, a game that has been released for over 2 years. Perhaps you want to think about that for a minute.
Edit: To help you further your armchair analysis degree I've found this study of player retention rates, they use F2P MMOs as their example so bear in mind that the border to entry is even lower than somehting like Elite - https://www.superdataresearch.com/blog/understanding-mmo-retention/
You don't need a primary vendor to analyse a big chunk of data. There's a big chunk of data in steam that provides enough data to access the decline of the game based on those numbers.
The post preceeding mine said that Steam is the primary vendor, that is the only point I was addressing.
I have no opinion about analysing data one way or the other.
I'll leave that up to the armchair analysts.
How typical, when confronted with an argument you can't counter you resort to irony and mockery.
Steam is one of the 2 primary vendors for ED with more copies sold via its platform. 780K is a sample much bigger than one actually needed for ED's case.
One doesn't have to be an analyst to comprehend this. However, what one needs to exhibit is common sense and logical thinking.
Ahaha so a game which numbers keep increasing, money wise and player wise is dying... O.o okidoki.
You do realise that Star Citizen, a teeny alpha has had more refund requests than Elite Dangerous, a game that has been released for over 2 years. Perhaps you want to think about that for a minute.
Edit: To help you further your armchair analysis degree I've found this study of player retention rates, they use F2P MMOs as their example so bear in mind that the border to entry is even lower than somehting like Elite - https://www.superdataresearch.com/blog/understanding-mmo-retention/
You should look up the terms "Free to Play" and "Buy to Play" (in ED's and SC's case).
What you linked is totally out of context and therefore irrelevant.
First it must be said that Elite only took ground after Braben saw the sucess of Star Citizen campaign. So Elite is very much a reality because of Chris Roberts.
Second, Elite has not received ameaningfull update for 6 months now. Star Citizen keeps adding and adding stuff, from new ships to new gameplay items (fps weapons) to game play features. It already has the main mechanics besides Planetary Landing , said to be coming this year and we already saw proofs of the tech working. Were is Elite Multicrew demo? Usage of avatars walking around, FPS, EVA, atmospheric flight ? Shopping and interaction between real npcs? Nothing besides concept pictures.
You've been saying that Star Citizen is dying since 2014 lol, how's that going ? 117 millions and counting!
Did you seriously just say that? Elite hasn't had a meaningful update in 6 months? Meanwhile SC hasn't even added half the stuff that Elite already has. You see how illogical your statement was? I know we have high hopes for SC but you are acting like they have finished and they have not and we have no proof. Untill that actually happens you shouldn't really be saying half the stuff you just said.
How typical, when confronted with an argument you can't counter you resort to irony and mockery.
Steam is one of the 2 primary vendors for ED with more copies sold via its platform. 780K is a sample much bigger than one actually needed for ED's case.
One doesn't have to be an analyst to comprehend this. However, what one needs to exhibit is common sense and logical thinking.
That's some sweet, sweet irony coming from you Shodanas. Accusing others of things while being extremely controntational in virtually all of your posts when presented with a difference of opinion.
You clearly missed the point that in the time 780,000 copies had to be sold on Steam, Frontier only had to sell 180,000 copies via their own store.
You should look up the terms "Free to Play" and "Buy to Play" (in ED's and SC's case).
What you linked is totally out of context and therefore irrelevant.
Yah duh, no shit sherlock... you would know that if you read my post because I made a point about the article's analysis being based on F2P MMO.
Come back with some real proof that it is irrelevant rather than your simple desire to be argumentative. Retention rates are not determined by how much or how little you paid as an entry fee....
First it must be said that Elite only took ground after Braben saw the sucess of Star Citizen campaign. So Elite is very much a reality because of Chris Roberts.
EDIT- This post sounded more arrogant than I meant for it to be. Apologies for that. However, it is obvious that Frontier began development on E:D at roughly the same time Roberts and company started developing Star Citizen (if not slightly before).
Who needs facts when you have people like some of you here. SC hasn't proven anything yet, it is not even in early access and all the numbers getting thrown around say NOTHING about SC. SC as envisioned does not even exist (yet) and that is the ONLY quality you can judge the game by. Alpha played blablabla, pre ordered blablabla, ridiculous amount of cash grab stuff in the shop blablabla.
Just stop it, there is no game yet, stop acting like Jesus has returned, you've got some half baked modules being thrown around and some pixel art, I would not even call their stuff a game yet, pre pre pre alpha sounds about right. When it releases we can judge, everything else is speculation and wishful thinking. Unfortunately with the speed they are working at I would be seriously surprised if it launches somewhere before 2018, already having been surpassed quality and quantity wise by other titles by the time it actually hits the shelves.
being excited is ok, being realistic and honest is even better, don't be that fool.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
First it must be said that Elite only took ground after Braben saw the sucess of Star Citizen campaign. So Elite is very much a reality because of Chris Roberts.
I've got to agree with this. To believe that there wasn't something already underway for ED would be naive. It's not something done on a whim. Ask John Romero......... (sorry John! Love you!)
Nice link, but unfiortunately it prooves nothing. Facts: Elite was released 1984 a little before WingCommander. ED and SC were planned at the same time there is absolutly no proof which one and if one was the reason to kickstart the other.
If you think that a simple congrat letter from one producer to another is responsible for the whole project then please check your reality status again.
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it. The cake is a lie.
Which means what exactly? Using your logic, if I was to put up a link showing Braben talking about Star Citizen would that mean Star Citizen wouldn't have happened without Elite? I doubt you would agree with that, would you?
Anyhow, here's the funding tracker for the kickstarter, do you see a spike from when Roberts mentions it because I sure don't.
Elite has had a decent sized following over 3 games since 1984, it was in no way relying on Chris Roberts to make it successful.
SC has accomplished the largest, by a fucking landslide, crowd funding campaign ever seen.
In fact, that is not true. You can't compare the SC funding campaign which persisted after the usual 1 month of campaign that others made, with those who just shown their numbers related to that period. I mean, you can do whatever you want, but its just inaccurate, incorrect, unfair.
It's questionable that the attitude of the marketing team of CIG is healthy for the project too. Or genious. Others do not sell their in-game assets and do not push too hard to encourage personal investiment too high, because they seem more interested to keep the level of hype better managed and are willing to deliver value to their customer and fulfill to the levels of hype created. Take David Braben as an example. Since he refused to sell in-game items for expensive prices, when he actually could. And that attitude came from a man who survived for decades as a indie developer with good reputation. I wonder why.
CIG approach of selling expensive JPGE's and expensive in-game items, or mechanics that they have no idea of the feasibility of ever releasing that, is not commonly followed.
What I am trying to say is that. If all the devs were so irresponsible with the future of their projects/venture/reputation like CR, many would bring to their project so much money as SC have been gathering... Or at least, would bring a lot more money that they got... but in the end of the day, they would suffer and would ruin their project/company and reputation for good, just as has been the case of Star Citizen and it's becoming worst as the time passes, since they have no way, in any form or shape, in any acceptable time frame, to accomplish with all or even the majority of the promises and fulfill the level of hype that they created, challenges that they made against the game industry, etc., and, in fact, as more ridiculous that sound, CR even cashing more than 100m is putting at risk even, the possibility to be able to release the basic mechanics of this game (working and well received by the majority of the backers).
All that basically a reflex of an irresponsible marketing strategy. Focused on easy money, without caring with reputation, trust, or anything. So, these "credits" that you give them are exaggerated credits or not worthy.
It's like to give credits to any scammer which made more money than others more interested to make legit business. Do not deserve credits. Deserve to be used as an example of what you shouldn't make if you want to keep a healthy company/business, with good reputation and growing with more and more satisfied customers, in the long term. Something that obviously, scammers or incompetent CEOs are never interested, and that's why their companies usually die sooner rather than later.
Comments
I do not concur with Babuinix assessment that the game is "dying". It has peaked early, like most multiplayer games do, but its far from "dying". IMHO it will follow the trend of many MMO's, with smaller new peaks appearing with every expansion.
A change to true avatar gameplay may have a more pronounced effect on the trend, but that needs a lot of additional back-end work on behalf of Frontier.
Have fun
The post preceeding mine said that Steam is the primary vendor, that is the only point I was addressing.
I have no opinion about analysing data one way or the other.
I'll leave that up to the armchair analysts.
Do you really think that people will abandon a game with more constant updates (meaningfull updates) in exchange of a MVP that will spend more 5 or 10 years to deliver stability, always including additional/missing features with big delays, probably breaking the existent features, making even people lose their expensive assets spend by real dollars for bugs, etc and will require a more powerful machine to play?
I mean. You may be right and Elite Dangerous may be dying. But if Elite Dangerous dies, you should understand that Star Citizen would have died earlier, again, due the simple reality of one design/development and other. Due how one achieve more platforma and other don't.
Star Citizen is the one that will die due competition my friend. Actually, SC as a game/project has been dead for years. Uta a project totally not feasible that wont resist to the realities of the marker. Its just alive due hopes, dreams and sunk cost falacy. And will stay as long as some whales be kept throwing money for nothing, until they finally wake up and notice that are always dreaming and behind even of indie developers which invested 100 times less money that was donated for Star Citizen.
Second, Elite has not received ameaningfull update for 6 months now. Star Citizen keeps adding and adding stuff, from new ships to new gameplay items (fps weapons) to game play features. It already has the main mechanics besides Planetary Landing , said to be coming this year and we already saw proofs of the tech working. Were is Elite Multicrew demo? Usage of avatars walking around, FPS, EVA, atmospheric flight ? Shopping and interaction between real npcs? Nothing besides concept pictures.
You've been saying that Star Citizen is dying since 2014 lol, how's that going ?
117 millions and counting!
As coming after and as Roberts presented his ideas with gameplay available (which today we know that was just to mislead the public to believe that they were more advanced that they really were and for that reason they could achieve the 2 year time period for release - if 5.5 million dolars were given) ED actually had difficulties to be funded.
You can't be serious when you compared the updates that Elite received with the updates that SC received in the last 6 months. I am not going to waste my time on this, because its pretty much common sense that SC is ridiculously behind... and if you were at least 10% less biased that you are, you would have no way, but agree that SC, due their design decisions and constraints always will take longer to release their stuff and have the trend to be less popular in number of players due hardware/platform restrictions.
And yes. Star Citizen have been dying since 2012... as a feasible game, as a competitive game, exactly because this issue of taking longer and by consequence getting stale amd losing ground for competitors that can be faster to release meaningful features that most of the space sim fans prefer, ganeplay features that goes way beyond of new clothes.
The features that SC have "released" as you claim... none of them are in a completion status, are they? They are more categorized as features added to a tech demo, proof of concept, than in a functional/stable game. The features added to ED are a lot more and are at least 99% completed and stable.
That is why, for example, they have a lot more people playing, ok?
Please do not deny reality. You screwed in your pathetic analysis. Just admit and move on. Its not a shame to be wrong. Who knows. Maybe CIG can survive... barely... always selling 2000 dollar jpeg porn and dreams for a few enthusiasts? But forget this idea that SC is competitive because is not.
SC is not able to kill anyone... others are able to kill SC easily. And that is why there is this strong appeal to sell concepts for a few for ridiculous prices. Because just a few are dreaming. I wonder for how much longer, considering so many other games realizing most of their dreams, ina completed status/faster, than SC ever will be capable of.
SC has not a single finished and great feature completed. And look how long they are taking to fix even the most basic ones. So, please... dont be ridiculous.
Someone on reddit said you're that zecumbe guy, is that true? Because like him you sound so desparate to put other games down to try and make you feel better about the one you support. Pretty sad tbh.
Elite received a major update just 4 weeks ago, here are the patch notes to show the added content, features and bug fixes if you don't believe it was a pretty major - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/253924-1-6-and-The-Engineers-(2-1)-update-incoming
It's really funny that you consider the above a small patch but talk up the adding of a firearm as though it's major content for Star Citizen
You talk up prototype testing as though it is in game or soon to be arriving but ignore all the cases where it is shown off a year or more before becoming a reality, you ignore that they haven't shown anything since the initial prototype video.
You talk about Elite jumping on the kickstarter wagon but ignore that CIG released their pupil to planet mockup 1 day after Elite's planetary landing expansion launched.
If you know anything about Frontier it's that they don't show off prototypes, they show off working tech, they show it off when it is close to release as opposed to showing it off a year or more before it's ready.
The problem here is that you see bias and copycat behaviour where you want to see it, while totally ignoring all of the opposing cases. You need to take a step back grasshopper.
You do realise that Star Citizen, a teeny alpha has had more refund requests than Elite Dangerous, a game that has been released for over 2 years. Perhaps you want to think about that for a minute.
Edit: To help you further your armchair analysis degree I've found this study of player retention rates, they use F2P MMOs as their example so bear in mind that the border to entry is even lower than somehting like Elite - https://www.superdataresearch.com/blog/understanding-mmo-retention/
Steam is one of the 2 primary vendors for ED with more copies sold via its platform. 780K is a sample much bigger than one actually needed for ED's case.
One doesn't have to be an analyst to comprehend this. However, what one needs to exhibit is common sense and logical thinking.
What you linked is totally out of context and therefore irrelevant.
That's some sweet, sweet irony coming from you Shodanas. Accusing others of things while being extremely controntational in virtually all of your posts when presented with a difference of opinion.
You clearly missed the point that in the time 780,000 copies had to be sold on Steam, Frontier only had to sell 180,000 copies via their own store.
Now, which do you think is more likely?
Yah duh, no shit sherlock... you would know that if you read my post because I made a point about the article's analysis being based on F2P MMO.
Come back with some real proof that it is irrelevant rather than your simple desire to be argumentative. Retention rates are not determined by how much or how little you paid as an entry fee....
EDIT- This post sounded more arrogant than I meant for it to be. Apologies for that. However, it is obvious that Frontier began development on E:D at roughly the same time Roberts and company started developing Star Citizen (if not slightly before).
Just stop it, there is no game yet, stop acting like Jesus has returned, you've got some half baked modules being thrown around and some pixel art, I would not even call their stuff a game yet, pre pre pre alpha sounds about right. When it releases we can judge, everything else is speculation and wishful thinking. Unfortunately with the speed they are working at I would be seriously surprised if it launches somewhere before 2018, already having been surpassed quality and quantity wise by other titles by the time it actually hits the shelves.
being excited is ok, being realistic and honest is even better, don't be that fool.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
I've got to agree with this. To believe that there wasn't something already underway for ED would be naive. It's not something done on a whim. Ask John Romero......... (sorry John! Love you!)
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
----------------
Facts:
Elite was released 1984 a little before WingCommander.
ED and SC were planned at the same time there is absolutly no proof which one and if one was the reason to kickstart the other.
If you think that a simple congrat letter from one producer to another is responsible for the whole project then please check your reality status again.
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
The cake is a lie.
Which means what exactly?
Using your logic, if I was to put up a link showing Braben talking about Star Citizen would that mean Star Citizen wouldn't have happened without Elite? I doubt you would agree with that, would you?
Anyhow, here's the funding tracker for the kickstarter, do you see a spike from when Roberts mentions it because I sure don't.
Elite has had a decent sized following over 3 games since 1984, it was in no way relying on Chris Roberts to make it successful.
Anything but.
I mean, you can do whatever you want, but its just inaccurate, incorrect, unfair.
It's questionable that the attitude of the marketing team of CIG is healthy for the project too. Or genious. Others do not sell their in-game assets and do not push too hard to encourage personal investiment too high, because they seem more interested to keep the level of hype better managed and are willing to deliver value to their customer and fulfill to the levels of hype created. Take David Braben as an example. Since he refused to sell in-game items for expensive prices, when he actually could. And that attitude came from a man who survived for decades as a indie developer with good reputation. I wonder why.
CIG approach of selling expensive JPGE's and expensive in-game items, or mechanics that they have no idea of the feasibility of ever releasing that, is not commonly followed.
What I am trying to say is that. If all the devs were so irresponsible with the future of their projects/venture/reputation like CR, many would bring to their project so much money as SC have been gathering... Or at least, would bring a lot more money that they got... but in the end of the day, they would suffer and would ruin their project/company and reputation for good, just as has been the case of Star Citizen and it's becoming worst as the time passes, since they have no way, in any form or shape, in any acceptable time frame, to accomplish with all or even the majority of the promises and fulfill the level of hype that they created, challenges that they made against the game industry, etc., and, in fact, as more ridiculous that sound, CR even cashing more than 100m is putting at risk even, the possibility to be able to release the basic mechanics of this game (working and well received by the majority of the backers).
All that basically a reflex of an irresponsible marketing strategy. Focused on easy money, without caring with reputation, trust, or anything. So, these "credits" that you give them are exaggerated credits or not worthy.
It's like to give credits to any scammer which made more money than others more interested to make legit business. Do not deserve credits. Deserve to be used as an example of what you shouldn't make if you want to keep a healthy company/business, with good reputation and growing with more and more satisfied customers, in the long term. Something that obviously, scammers or incompetent CEOs are never interested, and that's why their companies usually die sooner rather than later.