Support NeoGAF

[Spuck-uk]

As a fan of Star Citizen and Chris Roberts work in general I enjoy success articles like this, mostly because I can revel in the salt of some of the detractors.

When the only 'success' the project has had is in fundraising, I guess you take what you can get.

I do feel sorry for the 'true believers' , but moreso for the original backers who wanted a, very feasible, new wing commander/freelancer sort of game. The original goal was doable, perhaps not with Roberts in charge.

I feel worst for my mate at Foundry 42 who has been doing crazy amounts of overtime, only to see art assets tossed due to poor management. He should at least have a killer showreel when this all unfurls.

 

[Spuck-uk]

I still don't know where all the money came from. I had never heard of the people behind this game (Chris Roberts, etc) until I heard about this game. Also, space sims aren't historically top selling video games. So when I hear how much this game has made in crowdfunding, I'm always a little baffled.

On the topic of feature creep, I think there is merit in taking some of the money from a crowdfunding campaign and using it on development costs, while pocketing the rest as preorder money. I'd rather developers do that than make a game beyond even their own ambitions.

Chris Roberts had some success back in the 90s, and a lot of people have nostalgia for that. Add in sunk cost fallacy and you kinda start to see why people are so defensive about this project. They really, really want it to be everything it's promised to be, which is fair enough.

On the flipside this means they absolutely won't take any criticism of the games development at all, as demonstrated by this thread.

 

[Spuck-uk]

Last 10 pages of RubberJohnneys post history is him shitposting and dogpiling the same tired bullshit.



Star Citizen might very well be in trouble, but for the love of fuck give it a fucking rest. It's obnoxious to have you come in and drive home the exact same tired points over and over again. The project might be failing, it might not. Who knows. You've made your case. We get it.

People are attacking him over and over again for posting facts, he's more than entitled to defend himself.

 

[Burny]

On the flipside this means they absolutely won't take any criticism of the games development at all, as demonstrated by this thread.

Which is a huge issue in and of itself, as a working feedback loop could help prevent some things. As long as any criticism and negativism is deflected however, problems will fly under the radar. In a way, the utter backlash att Hello Games is quiet a bit more healthy for NMS as a project, than what Star Citizen believers are doing. Hello Games can either buckle up and start living up or they will fail fast. As it turns out, they surprisingly did redeem the game a bit and appear to continue improving on it.

In Star Citizen land however, contract work done at Illfonic is thrown out of the window (Star marine debacle...) and hardly anyone calls out Chris Roberts & management for flushing backer money down the drain. Meanwhile, the cash counter over at CIGs site passes 140$ Mio. and people are celebrate the err... achievement.

 

[SmartBase]

This isn't R&D, this is Project Management. As someone who manages large, complex projects for a living the response you just gave would never fly in any of our meetings. The very core of successfully managing projects is determining who does what by when. By removing the "when", they've essentially given up any semblance of respectable PMing.

This would be my first criticism of how the whole thing has been run, funny how this post didn't get a reply.

 

[SnowTeeth]

Star Citizen: impossible, criminal and unredeemable.

 

[KKRT00]

This would be my first criticism of how the whole thing has been run, funny how this post didn't get a reply.

But it did get replies.

---

In Star Citizen land however, contract work done at Illfonic is thrown out of the window (Star marine debacle...) and hardly anyone calls out Chris Roberts & management for flushing backer money down the drain. Meanwhile, the cash counter over at CIGs site passes 140$ Mio. and people are celebrate the err... achievement.

And what should they do with Illfonic work? Do you think that they decision they made to hire them was bad? You really predicted that they would be unable to met standards?

Unless you think that CIG should be clairvoyance and should never make mistakes

---

Which is a huge issue in and of itself, as a working feedback loop could help prevent some things. As long as any criticism and negativism is deflected however, problems will fly under the radar. In a way, the utter backlash att Hello Games is quiet a bit more healthy for NMS as a project, than what Star Citizen believers are doing. Hello Games can either buckle up and start living up or they will fail fast. As it turns out, they surprisingly did redeem the game a bit and appear to continue improving on it.

There is a lot of criticism for different aspects of the game, both here in SC thread and on reddit and on SC forums.
There is also difference between criticism and crusade.

 

[SmartBase]

But it did.

---

And what should they do with Illfonic work? Do you think that they decision they made to hire them was bad? You really predicted that they would be unable to met standards?

---


There is a lot of criticism for different aspect of the game, both here in SC thread and on reddit and on SC forums.
There is also difference between criticism and crusade.

My ctrl+F skills clearly need some work. Oh well.

 

[bj00rn_]

Chris Roberts had some success back in the 90s, and a lot of people have nostalgia for that. Add in sunk cost fallacy and you kinda start to see why people are so defensive about this project. They really, really want it to be everything it's promised to be, which is fair enough.

On the flipside this means they absolutely won't take any criticism of the games development at all, as demonstrated by this thread.

The amount of condescending rhetoric in one single post is almost impressive..

I think it should be possible to discuss entertainment and have an opinion or particular interest without having to be psychoanalyzed.

 

[Burny]

And what should they do with Illfonic work? Do you think that they decision they made to hire them was bad? You really predicted that they would be unable to met standards?

Unless you think that CIG should be clairvoyance and should never make mistakes

Seeing as they tout how oh-so open their development is, announcing the fallout when it happened would've been nice, rather than quietly hushing it up for a while, just like the absence of Star Marine (SM was "weeks, not months or years away", only to disappear for about a year). Doing an open "lesson's learned" would've been even nicer, explaining the reasons that led to Illfonic's work being unusable and explaining what they could've done on their side to prevent this wasting of funds - with hindsight of course - and what they actively do to prevent it as best they can in the future when working with contractors.

Simply things PM ought to do, when they realize a bunch of money was flushed down the drain and want to do their best to prevent it from occurring again.

 

[Chumley]

The amount of condescending rhetoric in one single post is almost impressive..

I think it should be possible to discuss entertainment and have an opinion or particular interest without having to be psychoanalyzed.

It's impossible not to when people become vehemently angry at any criticism put towards the development and state of the game (not that it happens all that often on GAF), and a certain number of said people are spending hundreds of dollars on it. They're investing hugely in the future of it without even wanting to see any monetary return.

 

[atpbx]

It has not been looking better. 2.6 is a janky broken mess and just getting what's there in a polished and finished state would take half a year at least. This thing is getting feature creeped into oblivion and I feel bad for everyone pumping huge amounts of money into something that will clearly never come.

No it isn't, and it's disingenuous and incorrect to suggest otherwise.

NO new features have been announced for over two years now.


Star Citizen is the victim of what Adolf Hitler described as "a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.""

That is there are people who have bought the assertion that there are 300 professional games developers (not hobby developers, not indies, not small time no marks) but proven industry professionals with a track record of success working on a game they don't believe they can complete under the direction of a clueless megalomaniac who has either no money or lots of money depending on which moron you are listening to.

And the ONLY people that can see this shining truth is a handful of brave sceptics who aren't afraid to tell us all how it is and Derek fucking Smart who has never been right about anything ever.

People back CIG because they believe the guys there are going to give it their best shot at making the game they say will deliver, it "failing" or not is impossible because that's the beauty of crowd funding, it's already sold $141 million worth of software/digital assets, its more successful than the first Gears of War already, it WILL break $160 million this year (probably finish near $170 million).
It doesn't matter it's 5 people propping them up or 1.7 million people, they have that money, it's theirs accept it's front loaded rather than back loaded.

Whether you, or anyone else who doesn't believe in the project choose to buy the game at any point is irrelevant, it's already a massively succcessful game like it or not.

 

[Paradicia]

How long has this game been in development? It seems to me like it's turned into a hideous Frankenstein-like monster because of all the unnecessary funding. I remember watching a demonstration of a sand map a few months ago with a friend and the whole demo spazzed out at the end. It was hilarious and also embarrassing for a project with so much funding.

 

[atpbx]

How long has this game been in development? It seems to me like it's turned into a hideous Frankenstein-like monster because of all the unnecessary funding. I remember watching a demonstration of a sand map a few months ago with a friend and the whole demo spazzed out at the end. It was hilarious and also embarrassing for a project with so much funding.

4 and a bit years, about on par for a big budget game from scratch.

 

[glaurung]

Speaking as a backer (not an insane amount, not just coins either), I truthfully expect this game to fade from my consciousness by the time it gets anywhere near a playable release. And this has to be their endgame as well: riding the hype wave and hoping that most people dismiss the amount of money they spent 5 or god-knows-how-many years ago.

Worst case scenario: I might play the single player game when and if it ever gets released.

 

[Jebusman]

No it isn't, and it's disingenuous and incorrect to suggest otherwise.

NO new features have been announced for over two years now.


Star Citizen is the victim of what Adolf Hitler described as "a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.""

That is there are people who have bought the assertion that there are 300 professional games developers (not hobby developers, not indies, not small time no marks) but proven industry professionals with a track record of success working on a game they don't believe they can complete under the direction of a clueless megalomaniac who has either no money or lots of money depending on which moron you are listening to.

And the ONLY people that can see this shining truth is a handful of brave sceptics who aren't afraid to tell us all how it is and Derek fucking Smart who has never been right about anything ever.

People back CIG because they believe the guys there are going to give it their best shot at making the game they say will deliver, it "failing" or not is impossible because that's the beauty of crowd funding, it's already sold $141 million worth of software/digital assets, its more successful than the first Gears of War already, it WILL break $160 million this year (probably finish near $170 million).
It doesn't matter it's 5 people propping them up or 1.7 million people, they have that money, it's theirs accept it's front loaded rather than back loaded.

Whether you, or anyone else who doesn't believe in the project choose to buy the game at any point is irrelevant, it's already a massively succcessful game like it or not.

I want to point out that if anytime you feel the need to quote Hitler of all people in defense of something, maybe you should take a step back, and think about what you're writing.

Like, you could be 140% right about everything, and then I see you quoting Hitler and it's like "Ok, nope, I'm out".

I don't feel you're right about everything though, since you seem to be hellbent on not being able look at the project with anything but pure reverence (or at the very least, a weird defense for the "Fuck you got your money" line of thinking), or even understand the idea that no amount of "professionalism" in their staff can stop a poorly managed project from going astray, which is what SC has always felt like from the outside looking in. There are genuine reasons to be skeptical and criticize how this entire thing has gone down, and yet we still have people in here trying to argue that it's the "realities of game development" when you have others in game development sitting there and thinking "No we typically don't try and spend 4.5 years of development with nearly nothing to show for it".

"More successful than the first Gears of War" is also maybe the strangest metric to use as a comparison, and I'm not sure in even what context you're referring to here.

 

[Chumley]

No it isn't, and it's disingenuous and incorrect to suggest otherwise.

NO new features have been announced for over two years now.


Star Citizen is the victim of what Adolf Hitler described as "a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.""

That is there are people who have bought the assertion that there are 300 professional games developers (not hobby developers, not indies, not small time no marks) but proven industry professionals with a track record of success working on a game they don't believe they can complete under the direction of a clueless megalomaniac who has either no money or lots of money depending on which moron you are listening to.

And the ONLY people that can see this shining truth is a handful of brave sceptics who aren't afraid to tell us all how it is and Derek fucking Smart who has never been right about anything ever.

People back CIG because they believe the guys there are going to give it their best shot at making the game they say will deliver, it "failing" or not is impossible because that's the beauty of crowd funding, it's already sold $141 million worth of software/digital assets, its more successful than the first Gears of War already, it WILL break $160 million this year (probably finish near $170 million).
It doesn't matter it's 5 people propping them up or 1.7 million people, they have that money, it's theirs accept it's front loaded rather than back loaded.

Whether you, or anyone else who doesn't believe in the project choose to buy the game at any point is irrelevant, it's already a massively succcessful game like it or not.

"They already got your money" and Hitler quotes. Okay.

 

[glaurung]

Whenever an online argument devolves into mentioning Hitler, that argument is effectively over. Godwin's law.

 

[Militaratus]

Millions for development, but not 1 cent for PS4 porting.

Yeah I know the game director's feelings about consoles in general, but if Elite: Dangerous can be ported to PS4 then surely they can find some way to port it as well. Hell, at least try it with as a PSVR demo calling it The Star Citizen Experience.

 

[Lalalandia]

Is there a generally accepted 3rd party history of the project so far?

The passions around this game are pretty high as can be seen even on this page with it's Hitler quoting as a defence antics but I would like to read something authoritative from someone who isn't Chris Roberts or Derek Smart.

As for the pooh poohing feature creep complaints, saying it hasn't grown in two years is kind of ridiculous as in the years prior to that it grew from a Freelancer style game into All-Of-The-Games with it's planet landing, FPS having, rendered interiors, multi-crew, etc, etc it grew so much by then the only features left to creep are a 4X game mode or a tetris clone.

I do hope something comes out of this as the last thing I want is for Derek Smart to somehow come off as a wise old hand rather than a man who has shipped broken and unfinished code for three decades now

 

[Jackpot]

Is there a generally accepted 3rd party history of the project so far?

The passions around this game are pretty high as can be seen even on this page with it's Hitler quoting as a defence antics but I would like to read something authoritative from someone who isn't Chris Roberts or Derek Smart.

There was an indepth multi-part Kotaku article that covered the studio and development history.

 

[Lalalandia]

There was an indepth multi-part Kotaku article that covered the studio and development history.

Cheers! And for anyone else the link is here http://www.kotaku.co.uk/tag/inside-star-citizen/

 

[dumbo]

Millions for development, but not 1 cent for PS4 porting.

Yeah I know the game director's feelings about consoles in general, but if Elite: Dangerous can be ported to PS4 then surely they can find some way to port it as well. Hell, at least try it with as a PSVR demo calling it The Star Citizen Experience.

A large part of the hype of SC built from the fact that it was "saving PC gaming", despite the fact that PC gaming was actually doing *very* nicely. Porting SC to console would be rather hypocritical, and lead to amusing headlines/memes.

However, there were rumours that CIG were recipients of Xbox Scorpio devkits, and that they would try to raise money by putting squadron 42 onto the console under the 'early access' program.

 

[Spuck-uk]

How long has this game been in development? It seems to me like it's turned into a hideous Frankenstein-like monster because of all the unnecessary funding. I remember watching a demonstration of a sand map a few months ago with a friend and the whole demo spazzed out at the end. It was hilarious and also embarrassing for a project with so much funding.

It's been in development since 2011https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Citizen#Development

 

[Spuck-uk]

Is there a generally accepted 3rd party history of the project so far?

The passions around this game are pretty high as can be seen even on this page with it's Hitler quoting as a defence antics but I would like to read something authoritative from someone who isn't Chris Roberts or Derek Smart.

As for the pooh poohing feature creep complaints, saying it hasn't grown in two years is kind of ridiculous as in the years prior to that it grew from a Freelancer style game into All-Of-The-Games with it's planet landing, FPS having, rendered interiors, multi-crew, etc, etc it grew so much by then the only features left to creep are a 4X game mode or a tetris clone.

I do hope something comes out of this as the last thing I want is for Derek Smart to somehow come off as a wise old hand rather than a man who has shipped broken and unfinished code for three decades now

Hey I'm critical of the project and I STILL think Derek Smart is an idiot. If the project succeeds or fails it has nothing to do with him.

http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2016/09/23/inside-the-troubled-development-of-star-citizen The defense squad will spit the dummy over this, but it's a third party article using cited sources, from a site with no connection to Smart or Roberts, if this helps.

 

[Lothars]

Chris Roberts had some success back in the 90s, and a lot of people have nostalgia for that. Add in sunk cost fallacy and you kinda start to see why people are so defensive about this project. They really, really want it to be everything it's promised to be, which is fair enough.

On the flipside this means they absolutely won't take any criticism of the games development at all, as demonstrated by this thread.

The difference is the criticisms posted have been largely bullshit with nothing to back it up. That's the common thing in Star citizen threads.

The kotaku article isn't a bad article but I also don't think it's the be all and end all.

 

[Grief.exe]

It's been in development since 2011https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Citizen#Development

It's my understanding that the development prior to the Kickstarter was a tiny team getting design documents and the trailer ready for the fundraising campaign.

Development didn't truly began until 2013.

 

[Spuck-uk]

It's my understanding that the development prior to the Kickstarter was a tiny team getting design documents and the trailer ready for the fundraising campaign.

Development didn't truly began until 2013.

Yeah, you know that working on design docs, demos etc is still development, right? You can always edit the wikipedia article if you can show good reason otherwise.

 

[Grief.exe]

Yeah, you know that working on design docs, demos etc is still development, right? You can always edit the wikipedia article if you can show good reason otherwise.

That's being reductive, there's a difference between a few people getting some demo footage and design documents together and 250+ people in full production.

The game has been in various forms of development for 6 years, but full production is likely closer to 3-3.5 (significant ramp up time for hiring/training post Kickstarter).

 

[~Cross~]

It's my understanding that the development prior to the Kickstarter was a tiny team getting design documents and the trailer ready for the fundraising campaign.

Development didn't truly began until 2013.

https://www.themittani.com/features/exclusive-interview-star-citizens-chris-roberts

You have stated that you expect to have an Alpha up and going in about 12 months, with a beta roughly 10 months after that and then launch. For a game of this size and scope, do you think you can really be done in the next two years?

Really it is all about constant iteration from launch. The whole idea is to be constantly updating. It isn’t like the old days where you had to have everything and the kitchen sink in at launch because you weren’t going to come back to it for awhile. We’re already one year in - another two years puts us at 3 total which is ideal. Any more and things would begin to get stale.

This was chris after the kickstarter. An example of what I mentioned before, that the 2011 date was there to bring confidence to the scheme. Now the 2011 date is detrimental and people will find excuses to make "the actual start of development" to be 2013.

Mind you, Chris was still going on about releasing SQ42 at the end of 2014 in late 2013.

 

[Spuck-uk]

The game has been in various forms of development for 6 years, but full production is likely closer to 3-3.5 (significant ramp up time for hiring/training post Kickstarter).

Agreed, and this is true of other large projects, like WoW taking six years of development from docs to release.

The difference here is, from everything available, they are nowhere near a release.

 

[Pureauthor]

No it isn't, and it's disingenuous and incorrect to suggest otherwise.

NO new features have been announced for over two years now.


Star Citizen is the victim of what Adolf Hitler described as "a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.""

That is there are people who have bought the assertion that there are 300 professional games developers (not hobby developers, not indies, not small time no marks) but proven industry professionals with a track record of success working on a game they don't believe they can complete under the direction of a clueless megalomaniac who has either no money or lots of money depending on which moron you are listening to.

And the ONLY people that can see this shining truth is a handful of brave sceptics who aren't afraid to tell us all how it is and Derek fucking Smart who has never been right about anything ever.

People back CIG because they believe the guys there are going to give it their best shot at making the game they say will deliver, it "failing" or not is impossible because that's the beauty of crowd funding, it's already sold $141 million worth of software/digital assets, its more successful than the first Gears of War already, it WILL break $160 million this year (probably finish near $170 million).
It doesn't matter it's 5 people propping them up or 1.7 million people, they have that money, it's theirs accept it's front loaded rather than back loaded.

Whether you, or anyone else who doesn't believe in the project choose to buy the game at any point is irrelevant, it's already a massively succcessful game like it or not.

I have relatively little beef in this argument, but the majority of sites/forums I've frequented has Star Citizen development being 'troubled' at best, or a complete laughingstock at worst. It's not a 'handful' of people who think this project has problems.

 

[PandaShake]

With the latest 2.6 patch, there are more bugs than ever. Simple things like the cursor is now off centered from things you're selecting if you're playing above certian resolutions like 16:9. Graphics and detail wise, it's incredible. A players UI is visible in their helmet reflection. The alpha is rough and the community is looking forward to patch 3.0 with planet landings, but I don't think it will make it this year. Many features were cut from 2.6 to be included in 3.0 which will further push schedule.

 

[CSJ]

With the latest 2.6 patch, there are more bugs than ever. Simple things like the cursor is now off centered from things you're selecting if you're playing above certian resolutions like 16:9. Graphics and detail wise, it's incredible. A players UI is visible in their helmet reflection. The alpha is rough and the community is looking forward to patch 3.0 with planet landings, but I don't think it will make it this year. Many features were cut from 2.6 to be included in 3.0 which will further push schedule.

I cant imagine how much extra time it's taking giving constant iterations of playable builds to keep people happy. Even if it's a slice of content, it's not as simple as giving people a build they're working on. I'd imagine it's the same reason demos are a thing of the past for many.

I guess without it though things would not be the same.

 

[KKRT00]

I cant imagine how much extra time it's taking giving constant iterations of playable builds to keep people happy. Even if it's a slice of content, it's not as simple as giving people a build they're working on. I'd imagine it's the same reason demos are a thing of the past for many.

I guess without it though things would not be the same.

Its heavy burden, but they need it. Without feedback and global performance metrics it would be much worse.

 

[dumbo]

I cant imagine how much extra time it's taking giving constant iterations of playable builds to keep people happy.

Huh? They don't have constant iterations of playable builds (partly because they still don't have a working patch system).

 

[SnowTeeth]

It's taking way too long to make this impossible game. Throw Chris Roberts in jail and chuck away the key. C'mon gang, let's get him!

 

[Effect]

Huh? They don't have constant iterations of playable builds (partly because they still don't have a working patch system).

It still blows my mind that after all this time they still don't have that. Why more people aren't upset about that is even crazier.

 

[Grief.exe]

It still blows my mind that after all this time they still don't have that. Why more people aren't upset about that is even crazier.

My assumption is they have to fork off the playable build they release from the main development build months prior to release, then grind out arbitrary changes to that specific fork until it's in a playable state.

Working out a patch for that specific version would be a complete waste of development resources as that build is extremely far removed from the main development branch.

The decision to provide playable builds at every milestone was low key the biggest misstep of the campaign.

 

[alternade]

This game is never coming out. $141 million and no timeline for release? Sounds like the greatest gaming scam of all time.

 

[WalTech]

No it isn't, and it's disingenuous and incorrect to suggest otherwise.

NO new features have been announced for over two years now.


Star Citizen is the victim of what Adolf Hitler described as "a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.""

That is there are people who have bought the assertion that there are 300 professional games developers (not hobby developers, not indies, not small time no marks) but proven industry professionals with a track record of success working on a game they don't believe they can complete under the direction of a clueless megalomaniac who has either no money or lots of money depending on which moron you are listening to.

And the ONLY people that can see this shining truth is a handful of brave sceptics who aren't afraid to tell us all how it is and Derek fucking Smart who has never been right about anything ever.

People back CIG because they believe the guys there are going to give it their best shot at making the game they say will deliver, it "failing" or not is impossible because that's the beauty of crowd funding, it's already sold $141 million worth of software/digital assets, its more successful than the first Gears of War already, it WILL break $160 million this year (probably finish near $170 million).
It doesn't matter it's 5 people propping them up or 1.7 million people, they have that money, it's theirs accept it's front loaded rather than back loaded.

Whether you, or anyone else who doesn't believe in the project choose to buy the game at any point is irrelevant, it's already a massively succcessful game like it or not.

I don't believe Star Citizen is successful. Not yet.

They sold more than $141 million of ships and in-game assets, that is true. However, this is not profit, it's liability. If they fail to deliver those assets (the game proper), then they are potentially on the hook for every cent. If you sell someone goods and then fail to deliver those goods, they are entitled to a refund if you can pay them back. Right now lots of people are seemingly getting refunds, but probably not enough to put a dent in their magnificent pile of money. However, if CIG comes to the realization that they cannot deliver the game(s) at the promised scope and they let everyone know that then the $141 million dollars will become an albatross around their necks because those goods were already sold and widespread refunds will be owed.

Gears of War RELEASED and is a successful game. Star Citizen has yet to release, and if/when they do, if the game is good and sells beyond the people already invested in it, THEN we can consider it a success.

 

[Grief.exe]

I don't believe Star Citizen is successful. Not yet.

They sold more than $141 million of ships and in-game assets, that is true. However, this is not profit, it's liability. If they fail to deliver those assets (the game proper), then they are potentially on the hook for every cent. If you sell someone goods and then fail to deliver those goods, they are entitled to a refund if you can pay them back. Right now lots of people are seemingly getting refunds, but probably not enough to put a dent in their magnificent pile of money. However, if CIG comes to the realization that they cannot deliver the game(s) at the promised scope and they let everyone know that then the $141 million dollars will become an albatross around their necks because those goods were already sold and widespread refunds will be owed.

Gears of War RELEASED and is a successful game. Star Citizen has yet to release, and if/when they do, if the game is good and sells beyond the people already invested in it, THEN we can consider it a success.

There's no legal requirement for CIG to give refunds and consumers have no legal rights to expect gooda delivered. They donated money with the expectation of receiving a product, but there is no way to enforce that outcome.

Currently, refunds are given as a PR move rather than for legal reasons.

 

[dumbo]

My assumption is they have to fork off the playable build they release from the main development build months prior to release, then grind out arbitrary changes to that specific fork until it's in a playable state.

No, nothing so complicated. Their update system literally cannot patch files, it can only replace them. Changing 1 byte in a 10GB archive requires re-downloading the entire 10GB archive.

 

[chillybright]

No, nothing so complicated. Their update system literally cannot patch files, it can only replace them. Changing 1 byte in a 10GB archive requires re-downloading the entire 10GB archive.

So they reinvented Unity?

 

[joecanada]

Millions for development, but not 1 cent for PS4 porting.

Yeah I know the game director's feelings about consoles in general, but if Elite: Dangerous can be ported to PS4 then surely they can find some way to port it as well. Hell, at least try it with as a PSVR demo calling it The Star Citizen Experience.

how many millions though? my biggest problem is I feel for a kickstarter they should have a budget breakdown like

x: money for development of assets
y: money for salaries
z: money for marketing
a: money for Chris Roberts lambo lol

I'm just kidding about a, but then as I write this I realize this is why kickstarter is NOT an investment. If you were an investor you would demand to know these things, when you are a backer, you just gave away your money on a "promise" so that's what it is.

 

[Cat in the Hat]

No it isn't, and it's disingenuous and incorrect to suggest otherwise.

NO new features have been announced for over two years now.


Star Citizen is the victim of what Adolf Hitler described as "a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.""

That is there are people who have bought the assertion that there are 300 professional games developers (not hobby developers, not indies, not small time no marks) but proven industry professionals with a track record of success working on a game they don't believe they can complete under the direction of a clueless megalomaniac who has either no money or lots of money depending on which moron you are listening to.

And the ONLY people that can see this shining truth is a handful of brave sceptics who aren't afraid to tell us all how it is and Derek fucking Smart who has never been right about anything ever.

People back CIG because they believe the guys there are going to give it their best shot at making the game they say will deliver, it "failing" or not is impossible because that's the beauty of crowd funding, it's already sold $141 million worth of software/digital assets, its more successful than the first Gears of War already, it WILL break $160 million this year (probably finish near $170 million).
It doesn't matter it's 5 people propping them up or 1.7 million people, they have that money, it's theirs accept it's front loaded rather than back loaded.

Whether you, or anyone else who doesn't believe in the project choose to buy the game at any point is irrelevant, it's already a massively succcessful game like it or not.

Haha your quoting Hitler!

 

[WalTech]

There's no legal requirement for CIG to give refunds and consumers have no legal rights to expect gooda delivered. They donated money with the expectation of receiving a product, but there is no way to enforce that outcome.

Currently, refunds are given as a PR move rather than for legal reasons.

I don't believe they are donations. They're sales and are taxed as such, and therefore they will be subject to the local rules and regulations of whatever country/state/province they're done in. Most places view selling something that doesn't materialize as grounds for a refund, and I think that if CIG fails to deliver that they'll find that out the hard way.

Claiming that they're giving people refunds as a PR move may be correct, but only in the sense that going to court with a customer looks very bad from an outside perspective and will probably amount to more money than the refund itself. It'll be extremely interesting to see it contested in a court if it ever comes to that, because I don't know of any other similar precedent.

 

[Grief.exe]

No, nothing so complicated. Their update system literally cannot patch files, it can only replace them. Changing 1 byte in a 10GB archive requires re-downloading the entire 10GB archive.

Oh I understand, I'm just putting forward why they aren't motivated to put any work into fixing these issues. The entire process is a waste of development resources. Wil likely overhaul patching process when closer to launch and patching is relevant.

how many millions though? my biggest problem is I feel for a kickstarter they should have a budget breakdown like

x: money for development of assets
y: money for salaries
z: money for marketing
a: money for Chris Roberts lambo lol

I'm just kidding about a, but then as I write this I realize this is why kickstarter is NOT an investment. If you were an investor you would demand to know these things, when you are a backer, you just gave away your money on a "promise" so that's what it is.

Frequently, These campaigns will include a pie chart that demonstrates where a percentage of the funding goes.

I don't believe they are donations. They're sales and are taxed as such, and therefore they will be subject to the local rules and regulations of whatever country/state/province they're done in. Most places view selling something that doesn't materialize as grounds for a refund, and I think that if CIG fails to deliver that they'll find that out the hard way.

Claiming that they're giving people refunds as a PR move may be correct, but only in the sense that going to court with a customer looks very bad from an outside perspective and will probably amount to more money than the refund itself. It'll be extremely interesting to see it contested in a court if it ever comes to that, because I don't know of any other similar precedent.

It's definitely a gray area right now, but if you read the TOS on the various sites it shows that you do not have the expectation of goods or services when you give your donation.

This money is taxed as it's still revenue for the company, but that doesn't effect your legal rights in this regard.

I don't see a way to legally enforce completion of a project anyways.

 

[WalTech]

It's definitely a gray area right now, but if you read the TOS on the various sites it shows that you do not have the expectation of goods or services when you give your donation.

This money is taxed as it's still revenue for the company, but that doesn't effect your legal rights in this regard.

I don't see a way to legally enforce completion of a project anyways.

I think we have a fundamental disagreement about what constitutes a sale. I believe that they are for-profit company that is selling a product that has not yet been delivered and that the people who have "pledged" their money have in fact purchased a product that must be delivered in future for their transaction to be complete. The fact that they collect sales tax and Value Added Tax on their products is an indication to me that they're not donations and aren't considered as such by the governments they're dealing with, but you're right. It is a grey area and hasn't been challenged in court yet.

I believe that if it ever comes to a challenge that CIG knows they can't win, and that's why they are still willing to dole out refunds when asked.

 

[Lorcain]

They should just go 100% laser focus on the single player SQ42 and get that out. Let the revenue and good word of mouth (assuming it's good) from the SP bring in more revenue for the giant scoped MMO they're trying to create.