Spuck-uk
Banned
You seem to take any criticism of the game, of which there are many valid ones, extremely personally.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Star Citizen Alpha 2.0 | The 'Verse Awakens
- Thread starter Raticus79
- Start date
You seem to take any criticism of the game, of which there are many valid ones, extremely personally.
Zalusithix
Member
Cabbagehead
Member
What are those "many valid" criticisms? do tell.
Because more times then not, said criticisms have been and continue to be put forth. Isn't usaully from place of concern or legitimate invested displeasure (more times then not). So many of those criticisms have no bases to form anything that is tangible or has been debunked before and or explained to said individuals. Many a times over the past four to five-ish years now. Most of these "criticism" fit within a certain ad-nauseam based category. Half of them are conjunctions and other seem to ignore already provided information. Some are just basic misunderstandings, though for whatever a the themes seems to ultimately plays against the notion. The the ones that drive by post for whatever reason have an agenda.
That contradiction the perceived label that Neogaf has it's pulse on game industry and game development itself overall (that's only perceived). Both traditional and non-traditional. But that doesn't seem to be the case, when something that's out of the norm with this much money, this many developers, that is beholden to it's community/backers. Then you add that it doesn't have a publisher and is still alive making a game. A game that's in active development and has only been in full on development for 3 years, with last being the fourth. But that's gets ignored but the same folks with be totally fine, when other studios do it and give them a pass on how long they took or are taking. It's double standards, when those type of folks come around these parts.
Not with questions or a real inquiry or any real compliant. It's usually just bunk trolling. CIG doesn't hide very many things. It would be far shadier if they weren't community facing.
You don't come into a game's community thread. Talking about how "Anthem or whatever else looks better then this. Hahahahaa" or "Hahahaha, When this game ever release" its childish and it undermines that there are TWO games being made not just one. So at it's core it's not a discussion starter. Its just gas-lighting.
Aztechnology
Member
I got the Kue because I like silver. But that's the standard model? I figured it was the other way around.
Rephin
Member
Aztechnology
Member
Oh ok... Another users interaction about the no confused me.
Starbuck2907
Member
If I buy a few of the Nox's, does the LTI still transfer over to upgrades?
I thought they had changed the upgrade process recently and wanted to ask.
I have many ships. Am I able to share these with the GAF group without being in-game when the game launches later?
I thought they had changed the upgrade process recently and wanted to ask.
I have many ships. Am I able to share these with the GAF group without being in-game when the game launches later?
anothertech
Member
Seriously sad to see you go manThanks everyone - the community has been far more understanding than I could hope for.
Thanks again
On your first question, yes, so long as you upgrade (CCU) the Nox with LTI to a ship of a higher cost and pay the difference, that new ship will have LTI. That's why CIG sold that pack with 5 Nox'es, they know people are going to use some of them as "LTI tokens". Note that not all ships are for sale all the time, although most should be during special sales in the second half of this year.
On your second question, my understanding is that you will eventually be able to give "use" rights to other players to use your ships, but not sure if they will be able to access your ships when you're offline. Someone else here may know. In any case, it's not in the game yet so no one really knows how it's actually going to work.
So, that loan thing? It is actually real, but as usual Derek Smart has no idea how finances actually work so is spinning this as some sort of proof that SC is failing.
Original Reddit Thread.
Coutts & Co. is the bank of the rich and powerful of the UK, and this includes the Royal Family. Being accepted as a client requires you to have at least £1,000,000 in investable assets, not including real estate. If CIG was really in any sort of financial dire straits, or even doing well but without the proper amount of assets, Coutts & Co. would not have extended the loan. That they did actually shows (once again Smart putting his foot in his own mouth via incomprehension) that CIG is in good financial standing.
As to needing a loan itself, big businesses take out loans all the time for various reasons. Here's an article from 2015 on Apple taking out a $6.5 million loan due to needing some cashflow in the US.
Original Reddit Thread.
Coutts & Co. is the bank of the rich and powerful of the UK, and this includes the Royal Family. Being accepted as a client requires you to have at least £1,000,000 in investable assets, not including real estate. If CIG was really in any sort of financial dire straits, or even doing well but without the proper amount of assets, Coutts & Co. would not have extended the loan. That they did actually shows (once again Smart putting his foot in his own mouth via incomprehension) that CIG is in good financial standing.
As to needing a loan itself, big businesses take out loans all the time for various reasons. Here's an article from 2015 on Apple taking out a $6.5 million loan due to needing some cashflow in the US.
Derek Smart, wow. Talk about a blast from the past. I remember when he was all over SC. Seems like it was only a couple of years ago.
So Gamescom's event is on the 25th of August and CitizenCon is on the 27th of October, right? I'm planning my vacations for the rest of the year and I might as well make sure I'm free on those days. I miss our little Twitch gatherings. That's right, Twitch. I really like Discord, but fuck using it for / when watching streams. Although I guess having an ultrawide takes care of that now. Based #ultrawidemasterrace.
So Gamescom's event is on the 25th of August and CitizenCon is on the 27th of October, right? I'm planning my vacations for the rest of the year and I might as well make sure I'm free on those days. I miss our little Twitch gatherings. That's right, Twitch. I really like Discord, but fuck using it for / when watching streams. Although I guess having an ultrawide takes care of that now. Based #ultrawidemasterrace.
Same. Twitch is better for watching streams and hanging, for those of us with only on screen.
Starbuck2907
Member
The loan does not bother me at all. Many times in business taking a loan makes more sense than spending your own money. This post from Reddit gives one example.
LOL.
Zalusithix
Member
Nah, I'm pretty sure we'll be solidly in Spectrum by then. Only thing really lacking right now is the mobile app compared to our use of Discord. Also given the Amazon/Lumberyard/AWS integration, I imagine it's only a matter of time before they integrate stuff like Twitch livestreams into Spectrum.
RubberJohnny
Banned
This example is nothing like what CIG have done! The equivalent would be putting up your house and all your assets for that loan.
If something negative happens they can't respond or delay their payoff date with little impact, the bank owns the game and gives CIG/RSI permission to continue to develop and sell it. This is revoked if CIG/RSI goes 60 days without paying their loan.
You're confusing a charge for a mortgage. A charge is when you agree to inform the creditor when you want to sell, take a second charge or when you are neglecting the property. It's a condition that you agree to take care of the assets in your company, and that they get informed over any struggle you may encounter. You still are the legal owner of the property however, and you won't lose the property if you can't pay off the loan. The creditor can only sue you for misuse of the property and then the court can decide that you need to liquidize assets to repay the creditor.
RubberJohnny
Banned
Agreements like this are literally called "mortgaging the company"
Seems like I first though that the assets were considered as a floating charge, but they are cited as a fixed charge and under mortgage. Still, it means that if CIG would go bankrupt, they have the first rights to manage the property and pay off the debts owned. We do not know how big this loan even is. Is it bigger than all the fixed assets currently owned? Then there's a case to worry about, but now we don't know if that is the case.
RubberJohnny
Banned
Nope, the assets are held as collateral - the bank already own the game, and have given CIG a license to continue to develop it (page 16, section 24) - this gets revoked if they're 60 days late on a payment. They have the IP, copyright, the code, the licensing, distribution, etc already. The bank would attempt to resell this stuff if CIG went under.
I mean I think making a small loan where literally everything you own is at risk if you miss a payment seems dumber, a lot of risk for little gain. They can't take out any more loans or financing because they've already given everything with a negative pledge clause.
I think this is a loan to keep their head above water until they can launch SQ42, but the problem with that is that CIG are terrible at estimates, often missing them by years. If they've taken a loan on the basis they can get SQ42 out by early 2018 and then miss it significantly, they, and backers, could lose everything.
crazysapertonight
Member
So? Is there anything that could hint at CIG problems?
RubberJohnny
Banned
'Banks don't lend to failing businesses' is perhaps the dumbest argument I've ever read. It takes you two seconds to think of a million counter examples.
They're basically operating on a knife edge from this point on, if they have more delays or a disappointing stretch of ship sales it's all over.
They're basically operating on a knife edge from this point on, if they have more delays or a disappointing stretch of ship sales it's all over.
It's not an argument and I specifically wrote Coutts, not banks. I don't care to continue this barely undergrad-level conversation in finance so I'm checking out.
Krisprolls
Banned
Now that this huge vaporware scam is finally ending like everybody knew it would, please spend time to reflect how dumb it was to throw hundreds of dollars on virtual goods with no proof that the game itself would be released.
If you want to throw money at people, there are thousands of good causes in the world you can throw it to instead of crooks and scammers.
If you want to throw money at people, there are thousands of good causes in the world you can throw it to instead of crooks and scammers.
I mean, how can you say in good conscience that there's no proof that the game would be released? They put out playable segments of the game several times and made weekly updates. Even if it ends up being vaporware this is the most detailed and realistic vaporware ever.
FreezerGeezer
Member
Do not bite, waste of time.
crazysapertonight
Member
Can you explain this post, please?
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=241767156&postcount=212
This should be bannable for the sheer amount of condescending lip on display alone
RubberJohnny
Banned
That says they can't put up assets in collateral to Coutts that are already put up under collateral to Natwest for their original loan (which isn't paid off), it's just legalese to say "you can't promise the same assets to two different banks". I.e they don't own anything anymore either way, it's all owned by banks now.
If you read section 5.12, you'll see all the IP is put up as collateral. The top level summary also notes that all the companies assets are included.
crazysapertonight
Member
So. basically, there is nothing new... IP was under the loan for along time.
Dictator93
Member
It's over, period. CIG lost their last ace, and that's the end of their Star Citizen hopes and dreams.
It's not hyperbole, it's not fanboy drivel. It is LITERALLY it for SC. CIG has nothing left, nothing they can reveal at Gamescom would fix the hole now created. There is no reason left for any one, hardcore or casual, to substantively invest in SC. Except if they want to play Squadron 42. Which will also come to consoles at some point.
The age of CIG is done.
It's not hyperbole, it's not fanboy drivel. It is LITERALLY it for SC. CIG has nothing left, nothing they can reveal at Gamescom would fix the hole now created. There is no reason left for any one, hardcore or casual, to substantively invest in SC. Except if they want to play Squadron 42. Which will also come to consoles at some point.
The age of CIG is done.
Sounds to me like this loan is only putting up S42 as the collateral, and Star Citizen itself is excluded?
Is it a desperation move to acquire enough money to launch S42 and hopefully get enough cash flow to keep SC development going?
Hard to say without more details about the loan.
But to me it feels like some part of history is repeating.
Chris Roberts left Origin in 1996 (where he made Wing Commander) and started Digital Anvil to build an extremely ambitious space game called Freelancer.
Microsoft got wind of this, liked what they saw, and made a deal to throw a ton of money at Digital Anvil to fund Freelancer.
Unfortunately, Freelancer development slipped bigtime, and eventually Microsoft ended up buying the whole company in 2000.
Chris Roberts left (or was fired depending on who you believe), and DA shipped a single player game called Starlancer (set in the same universe), which received middling reviews (metacritic 78).
Freelancer was drastically cut back in scope, and Digital Anvil finally shipped it in 2003, to good but not outstanding reviews (metacritic 83)
Any of this sound vaguely similar?
RubberJohnny
Banned
No, now everything is up for sale - studios, code, art assets, music, distribution rights, engine. It implies they're getting more desperate or their financials are getting worse, as they had to give a lot less to Natwest for their line of credit two years ago.
RubberJohnny
Banned
Hitting news sites now
I do wonder what the "more concrete reporting on the financials" that we'd need to be able to make a thread is, when an official government Companies House listing of the whole thing between the bank and the company isn't considered enough.
I do wonder what the "more concrete reporting on the financials" that we'd need to be able to make a thread is, when an official government Companies House listing of the whole thing between the bank and the company isn't considered enough.
joey_bone_bomb
Member
Are you done shitposting yet?
Eh not really, because he didn't "dig up a 10 year old thread" but rather a thread. It being 10 years old has no bearing when you can check anyone's thread creation history at the click of a button. RubberJohnny has only made 15 threads till date and the very last one says "My opinion is more important, therefore requires its own thread". It took me 2 clicks and 5 seconds to find that.
I've seen far more indepth and actually creepy "DetectiveGAF" posts. This one is nothing, if anything it's the exact opposite of it as the person barely even spent time looking into the context of the thread and whether that thread was about RubberJohnny's own opinion or not.
this headline is so wrong
he is right with the anti Star Citizen spree, trough
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
I have to really read the documents but having the IP itself as collateral is worrisome. You'd think CIG would have enough hard assets between their studios around the world to be able to leverage a loan of this amount separate of the IP like a normal studio.
I appreciate your tenacity, but you're asking for a ban bringing this into the OT so quickly after your thread got locked.
Also, that news story is literally the same thing you posted in your thread. I mean the source is literally your fucking thread. I feel like you're not taking the mod's "cool off" comment to heart. Give it a day or so, let someone with actual banking/financial experience give us their take rather than the hot takes from both sides of the argument here who I gather are not arguing in the best of faith.
RubberJohnny
Banned
I was posting in here before without issue and then broke the discussion out into a new thread. I don't think there's a problem continuing to discuss it in here.
The source wasn't the problem though? It was the replies getting rowdy. Companies House isn't a banned source, it's an official government one.
Nope - the bank now owns everything to do with SC, they merely give CIG a license to continue developing it.
TheVoidDragon
Member
I really don't understand what this is saying. Section 4 and 5 do say that the bank would own the rights to the game, but then on page 17 under the definition of collateral it says it means that which is mentioned in clause 4 and 5 (which i'm assuming means section 4 and 5 of the document, where it says they'd own it), other than those in the excluded collateral section....and the excluded section says the IP and rights aren't included. Can anyone explain those? Don't they contradict each other?
Yes, but if you think this thread isn't going to just devolve to that level of discussion immediately bringing it back up again I don't know what to tell you.
I mean the source sort of was the problem. It was people looking at this, and giving hot takes without anyone being able to accurately describe what exactly is going on. Why should we take your exact word on what this means? What level of credentials do you bring to make the definitive statement?
RubberJohnny
Banned
I guess I'm misguided for expecting people to read up before giving their hot take then? The documents are right there.
I've yet to see an explanation why they took out a loan for the entire game and all studio assets as collateral, that isn't "they're in financial trouble".
Similar threads
- Locked