It reminds me of what we used to call "DACware". DAC is the Design Automation Conference, an annual trade show where software developers of CAD software for chip design show off their wares and prospective customers come to see demos of it.
We used to sweat over the software to make sure it would run the demo we wanted in time for DAC, and there was a date certain it had to work. At least enough to show the demo. We had to be careful during the demo to not go off script, since the software wasn't fully tested and there was no telling what would happen. A crash during the demo to Intel, for example, might ruin millions in sales. Pressure was intense.
Of course we couldn't actually sell that version since it was demo quality only. We did have to eventually create the real version and sell it. The biggest single software deal I was part of was $100 million to a single major chip company.
Star Citizen reminds of that; it's DACware, designed to show specific features but not a fully functional and sellable product. For them it is CitzenCon, not DAC, but it is the same idea. Except, Star Citizen never follows up with the production version. It's all DACware all the time.
I read that also about the funding. Not sure if this is going anywhere but may be 4 years from now we will still be reading funding drying up and game still not launched. It will be groundhog day.
I read that also about the funding. Not sure if this is going anywhere but may be 4 years from now we will still be reading funding drying up and game still not launched. It will be groundhog day.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Listening to the regrets of these 'donors' you can come to the conclusion that this is destructive in so many ways.
Dumb decisions are the responsibility of those that make them. If $25K isn't a trivial amount in comparison to your overall wealth you shouldn't be spending that much on a crowdfunded game that may never be.
Do people own their “dumb decisions”? Sure
Do companies ALSO have a responsibility to be truthful? Yes.
Both are true.
People should own their dumb decisions at any rate.
The responsibility of those crowdfunded is to make a good faith effort at getting whatever it is done. That isn't much of a truth to be risking more that you can afford to lose outright on.
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.
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.
This is stunning. That you think thats true.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
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.
CIG makes it quite clear that any money you give them is a "pledge" towards the effort of making a game. They expressly say that it does not entitle you to a game and if they fail to produce a game you do not get your money back. You are not purchasing anything, they are not selling anything. There is no inherent contract.
Therefore they cannot be held legally liable if they fail to produce a game. There is no fraud involved. It might get a little tricky if they officially said "we're quitting and keeping the money". All they need to do is keep developing even at a small scale.
And I think they are actually working on a game. They are trying. It is not a lie, not a scam. Their senior management seems to be totally incompetent but that is not the same as a scam.
What is damaging to the game industry is that they are normalizing this behavior, making it seem ok to be a decade late with no release date in sight. But they are still aggressively marketing the game and people talk as if it was an actual game. Some even claim it has released. This is corrosive of the truth.
CIG makes it quite clear that any money you give them is a "pledge" towards the effort of making a game. They expressly say that it does not entitle you to a game and if they fail to produce a game you do not get your money back. You are not purchasing anything, they are not selling anything. There is no inherent contract.
Therefore they cannot be held legally liable if they fail to produce a game. There is no fraud involved. It might get a little tricky if they officially said "we're quitting and keeping the money". All they need to do is keep developing even at a small scale.
And I think they are actually working on a game. They are trying. It is not a lie, not a scam. Their senior management seems to be totally incompetent but that is not the same as a scam.
What is damaging to the game industry is that they are normalizing this behavior, making it seem ok to be a decade late with no release date in sight. But they are still aggressively marketing the game and people talk as if it was an actual game. Some even claim it has released. This is corrosive of the truth.
Wrong.
There is a contract that CIG uses those money to produce a game. They can fulfill their obligations either through: a) delivery of promised game, or b) spending all the money on developing the game but failing to release it
It's more complex than a lot of the usual contracts because it has alternatives and CIG must fulfill only one of them, but there's no rule that contracts would need to be simple.
CIG makes it quite clear that any money you give them is a "pledge" towards the effort of making a game. They expressly say that it does not entitle you to a game and if they fail to produce a game you do not get your money back. You are not purchasing anything, they are not selling anything. There is no inherent contract.
Therefore they cannot be held legally liable if they fail to produce a game. There is no fraud involved. It might get a little tricky if they officially said "we're quitting and keeping the money". All they need to do is keep developing even at a small scale.
And I think they are actually working on a game. They are trying. It is not a lie, not a scam. Their senior management seems to be totally incompetent but that is not the same as a scam.
What is damaging to the game industry is that they are normalizing this behavior, making it seem ok to be a decade late with no release date in sight. But they are still aggressively marketing the game and people talk as if it was an actual game. Some even claim it has released. This is corrosive of the truth.
Wrong.
There is a contract that CIG uses those money to produce a game. They can fulfill their obligations either through: a) delivery of promised game, or b) spending all the money on developing the game but failing to release it
It's more complex than a lot of the usual contracts because it has alternatives and CIG must fulfill only one of them, but there's no rule that contracts would need to be simple.
"It might get a little tricky if they officially said "we're quitting and keeping the money". All they need to do is keep developing even at a small scale."
Did you read that part of my post? If they stopped now and just kept the money it might be a problem. If they keep even one developer working on the game they have no problem.
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.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
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.
As crowdfunding comes with its disclaimers, but it's no wild west anything goes obviously.
The "red lines" pretty much includes money funded not being used for developing the pitched product, and actual no intention and/or a legit attempt at delivering the product in the first place.
CIG makes it quite clear that any money you give them is a "pledge" towards the effort of making a game. They expressly say that it does not entitle you to a game and if they fail to produce a game you do not get your money back. You are not purchasing anything, they are not selling anything. There is no inherent contract.
Therefore they cannot be held legally liable if they fail to produce a game. There is no fraud involved. It might get a little tricky if they officially said "we're quitting and keeping the money". All they need to do is keep developing even at a small scale.
And I think they are actually working on a game. They are trying. It is not a lie, not a scam. Their senior management seems to be totally incompetent but that is not the same as a scam.
What is damaging to the game industry is that they are normalizing this behavior, making it seem ok to be a decade late with no release date in sight. But they are still aggressively marketing the game and people talk as if it was an actual game. Some even claim it has released. This is corrosive of the truth.
Wrong.
There is a contract that CIG uses those money to produce a game. They can fulfill their obligations either through: a) delivery of promised game, or b) spending all the money on developing the game but failing to release it
It's more complex than a lot of the usual contracts because it has alternatives and CIG must fulfill only one of them, but there's no rule that contracts would need to be simple.
"It might get a little tricky if they officially said "we're quitting and keeping the money". All they need to do is keep developing even at a small scale."
Did you read that part of my post? If they stopped now and just kept the money it might be a problem. If they keep even one developer working on the game they have no problem.
I meant that there is a contract. When you claim that there is no inherent contract, that is wrong, there is one. It's just a bit more complicated than usual because there's more than one alternative on how CIG can fulfill it.
But it is a contract.
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.
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.
This might come as a shock to you, but kickstarter is NOT a pre-order platform.
If a developer actually uses the money to fund the development of the pitched project and conducts a legit attempt at its delivery and still fails to do so... That's life.
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.
As crowdfunding comes with its disclaimers, but it's no wild west anything goes obviously.
The "red lines" pretty much includes money funded not being used for developing the pitched product, and actual no intention and/or a legit attempt at delivering the product in the first place.
Which is not relevant to this project, if you want to go make those accusations at projects like Chronicles of Elyria. Where the dev went as far as effectively pretending the game is still being worked on to dodge accountability.
Hi Max. It might be helpful if you went back to the start of this conversation which I copied below. What I posted always has and always WILL be true.
Far too many people believe that companies have ZERO responsibility to be truthful. That could not be further from the truth. A company cannot knowingly LIE to get money. That is called fraud. Whether any company has committed such is a different discussion. But there is ZERO ambiguity about companies NOT being able to knowingly LIE to raise cash.
CIG makes it quite clear that any money you give them is a "pledge" towards the effort of making a game. They expressly say that it does not entitle you to a game and if they fail to produce a game you do not get your money back. You are not purchasing anything, they are not selling anything. There is no inherent contract.
Therefore they cannot be held legally liable if they fail to produce a game. There is no fraud involved. It might get a little tricky if they officially said "we're quitting and keeping the money". All they need to do is keep developing even at a small scale.
And I think they are actually working on a game. They are trying. It is not a lie, not a scam. Their senior management seems to be totally incompetent but that is not the same as a scam.
What is damaging to the game industry is that they are normalizing this behavior, making it seem ok to be a decade late with no release date in sight. But they are still aggressively marketing the game and people talk as if it was an actual game. Some even claim it has released. This is corrosive of the truth.
Wrong.
There is a contract that CIG uses those money to produce a game. They can fulfill their obligations either through: a) delivery of promised game, or b) spending all the money on developing the game but failing to release it
It's more complex than a lot of the usual contracts because it has alternatives and CIG must fulfill only one of them, but there's no rule that contracts would need to be simple.
"It might get a little tricky if they officially said "we're quitting and keeping the money". All they need to do is keep developing even at a small scale."
Did you read that part of my post? If they stopped now and just kept the money it might be a problem. If they keep even one developer working on the game they have no problem.
I meant that there is a contract. When you claim that there is no inherent contract, that is wrong, there is one. It's just a bit more complicated than usual because there's more than one alternative on how CIG can fulfill it.
But it is a contract.
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.
Ok, I agree. What I meant was there is an inherent contract when someone is selling something and somebody is buying it. This can lead to claims of fraud if what is being sold is misrepresented.
CIG doesn't have that inherent contract. They aren't selling anything, they plainly say the money is a pledge towards the development. They are not committed to making a product and if no product is made nobody gets their money back.
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.
This might come as a shock to you, but kickstarter is NOT a pre-order platform.
Keep your strawman, I am not interested. Nowhere in this part of the conversation was it about pre-ordering or Kickstarter. What Slapshot and I mentioned was about companies in general lying to their customers, since one of the posters seemed to have problems understanding the basics.
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.
End of the day this being irrelevant for current SC as it is sold as early access, you buy in as is.
Far too many people believe that companies have ZERO responsibility to be truthful. That could not be further from the truth. A company cannot knowingly LIE to get money. That is called fraud. Whether any company has committed such is a different discussion. But there is ZERO ambiguity about companies NOT being able to knowingly LIE to raise cash.
They can't yeah.
There are giant dramas about this because people tend to argue argue any changes a game goes through in dev, including the 101 delays, constitute fraud.
Which is why we end up on the context of crowdfunding, buying a product still to be made. Different story for a pre-order or a released product.
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.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
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.
I tend to remember people that Star Citizen has for a long time now changed to sell itself as early access. Akin to steam early access, buying "as is", everything else sits on top of that. At this point it's about making informed decisions, when I buy early access games I'm rather aware it's a russian roullete if that game will ever fullfill its roadmaps.
Comments
We used to sweat over the software to make sure it would run the demo we wanted in time for DAC, and there was a date certain it had to work. At least enough to show the demo. We had to be careful during the demo to not go off script, since the software wasn't fully tested and there was no telling what would happen. A crash during the demo to Intel, for example, might ruin millions in sales. Pressure was intense.
Of course we couldn't actually sell that version since it was demo quality only. We did have to eventually create the real version and sell it. The biggest single software deal I was part of was $100 million to a single major chip company.
Star Citizen reminds of that; it's DACware, designed to show specific features but not a fully functional and sellable product. For them it is CitzenCon, not DAC, but it is the same idea. Except, Star Citizen never follows up with the production version. It's all DACware all the time.
Design Automation Conference
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
People should own their dumb decisions at any rate.
Now there is a difference between lying and being wrong. One can be wrong. One cannot lie.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
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.
Therefore they cannot be held legally liable if they fail to produce a game. There is no fraud involved. It might get a little tricky if they officially said "we're quitting and keeping the money". All they need to do is keep developing even at a small scale.
And I think they are actually working on a game. They are trying. It is not a lie, not a scam. Their senior management seems to be totally incompetent but that is not the same as a scam.
What is damaging to the game industry is that they are normalizing this behavior, making it seem ok to be a decade late with no release date in sight. But they are still aggressively marketing the game and people talk as if it was an actual game. Some even claim it has released. This is corrosive of the truth.
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.
There is a contract that CIG uses those money to produce a game. They can fulfill their obligations either through:
a) delivery of promised game, or
b) spending all the money on developing the game but failing to release it
It's more complex than a lot of the usual contracts because it has alternatives and CIG must fulfill only one of them, but there's no rule that contracts would need to be simple.
Did you read that part of my post? If they stopped now and just kept the money it might be a problem. If they keep even one developer working on the game they have no problem.
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.
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.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
As crowdfunding comes with its disclaimers, but it's no wild west anything goes obviously.
The "red lines" pretty much includes money funded not being used for developing the pitched product, and actual no intention and/or a legit attempt at delivering the product in the first place.
But it is a contract.
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.
This might come as a shock to you, but kickstarter is NOT a pre-order platform.
If a developer actually uses the money to fund the development of the pitched project and conducts a legit attempt at its delivery and still fails to do so... That's life.
Hi Max. It might be helpful if you went back to the start of this conversation which I copied below. What I posted always has and always WILL be true.
Far too many people believe that companies have ZERO responsibility to be truthful. That could not be further from the truth. A company cannot knowingly LIE to get money. That is called fraud. Whether any company has committed such is a different discussion. But there is ZERO ambiguity about companies NOT being able to knowingly LIE to raise cash.
Slapshot1188 said:
It still amazes me that people do not understand this simple, basic concept which exists in pretty much every society.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
CIG doesn't have that inherent contract. They aren't selling anything, they plainly say the money is a pledge towards the development. They are not committed to making a product and if no product is made nobody gets their money back.
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.
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.
End of the day this being irrelevant for current SC as it is sold as early access, you buy in as is.
They can't yeah.
There are giant dramas about this because people tend to argue argue any changes a game goes through in dev, including the 101 delays, constitute fraud.
Which is why we end up on the context of crowdfunding, buying a product still to be made. Different story for a pre-order or a released product.
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.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018