Support NeoGAF

[hardcastlemccormick]

I think most gamers would be surprised to see what actual game development (or development of any software) looks like.

I think the extremely negative reaction to Star Citizen goes to show that gamers don't react well at all to seeing the sausage being made, in a very real way. In the same way to every leaked footage of a game being scrutinized as if it were a finished product. That there's money on the line just kind of underlines everyone's emotions about it.

 

[Jackpot]

The first thing I didn't like about it is when they started CitizenCon.

Spending loads of money just to stroke your ego is not a good way to invest the money. They didn't even have much to show every single Con that couldn't be just done in some simple video.

Ticket payers must have been particularly bemused to travel all that way just to be told the planned video walkthroughs had been cancelled.

 

[Costia]

I have less of an issue with them asking for funding and more of an issue with those willing to throw irresponsible amounts money into the project.

Is it unethical to market something aggressively and sell virtual goods that may not exist? Maybe, yes. But I think it's way worse to get pulled into the hype and not see through the bullshit.

Would you say the same about mobile games targeting "whales"?

 

[CopperPuppy]

I think most gamers would be surprised to see what actual game development (or development of any software) looks like.

I think the extremely negative reaction to Star Citizen goes to show that gamers don't react well at all to seeing the sausage being made, in a very real way. In the same way to every leaked footage of a game being scrutinized as if it were a finished product. That there's money on the line just kind of underlines everyone's emotions about it.

Pretty sure transparency isn't the issue.

 

[Trace]

Once it changed from an awesome space sim to an MMO, nope. Chris Roberts is in over his head and the whole thing is a cluster fuck of bad project management.

The fact that they continue to sell things that don't and probably won't ever exist is gross. Especially since they've yet to ship the original promise.

The fuck is this thread?

Like, receipts please. Squadron 42 and Star Citizen are different products and they're both being worked on.

 

[spindoctor]

So despite multiple folks corroborating that they got refunds, there are still those who are "sitting on fence"/"taking it with a pinch of salt" and whatever other euphemism they can come up with to avoid saying that it's a lie.

Wonderfully balanced approach to the situation I must say. Or should I say contradictory to the narrative you so desperately want to believe?

 

[elyetis]

While there is many things I'm not really happy about when it comes to how Star Citizen/SQ42 is handled, I wouldn't call any of it unethical. Sure they are partially founded on the back of "whales" with some of the crasiest ship price, but worst happen every day in the mobile market, so.. meh.

 

[Chev]

I think the extremely negative reaction to Star Citizen goes to show that gamers don't react well at all to seeing the sausage being made, in a very real way.

This doesn't really hold water since we're not seeing the sausage being made. German magazines get more information than backers for this project.

 

[Zambayoshi]

I think as far as ethics go:

1. It's unethical for RSI to have now hidden 'The Pledge' on its website (no visible link from front page) - https://robertsspaceindustries.com/the-pledge

2. It's unethical for RSI to have promised to treat the backers 'with the same respect' that it would show to a publisher, and then withhold all financial information except the 'funds raised' figure on the website

3. It's unethical for RSI to have promised to treat backers with respect rather than spend money on PR when there are delays or changes, and then turn around and let multiple deadlines slip, often with no reasons given.

4. It's unethical for RSI to have hired Chris Roberts' wife as VP of Marketing and to have given her a role in the game as an actor without disclosing to backers the hiring process or how much she is being paid.

5. It's unethical for Chris Roberts' brother Erin to be given a substantial increase in salary without disclosing to backers the process by which the increase was decided upon.

These are just some of the things that I'm aware of. If the backers were truly treated with the respect normally shown to publishers, I'm sure that there would be plenty of other available information on the project - not just from the development side of things, but from the business operation side of things.

 

[hardcastlemccormick]

This doesn't really hold water since we're not seeing the sausage being made. German magazines get more information than backers for this project.

Interesting, I didn't know this.

I still think you can look at the progress being made and think they have a lot longer to go than they do. (Lord knows that any sort of development doesn't really happen on the sort of progress scale that most people thing.)

I think selling ships in the game is a weird way to hype up your game, but it doesn't make me concerned ethically. In fact, I'd be more concerned if the game was finished and was extorting you for ship purchases.

 

[Moff]

I was never fine with the ships, which is why I never pledged/funded/preordered this. I will buy and play the single player when it's out and reviewed well.

 

[Tacklemacain]

There are probably a lot more people who spnet more money on some "stupide" free to play game, so i dont realy habe a problem if somebody decides to help a project they are passionate about.

 

[Sarcastic Poster]

I think as far as ethics go:

1. It's unethical for RSI to have now hidden 'The Pledge' on its website (no visible link from front page) - https://robertsspaceindustries.com/the-pledge

2. It's unethical for RSI to have promised to treat the backers 'with the same respect' that it would show to a publisher, and then withhold all financial information except the 'funds raised' figure on the website

3. It's unethical for RSI to have promised to treat backers with respect rather than spend money on PR when there are delays or changes, and then turn around and let multiple deadlines slip, often with no reasons given.

4. It's unethical for RSI to have hired Chris Roberts' wife as VP of Marketing and to have given her a role in the game as an actor without disclosing to backers the hiring process or how much she is being paid.

5. It's unethical for Chris Roberts' brother Erin to be given a substantial increase in salary without disclosing to backers the process by which the increase was decided upon.

These are just some of the things that I'm aware of. If the backers were truly treated with the respect normally shown to publishers, I'm sure that there would be plenty of other available information on the project - not just from the development side of things, but from the business operation side of things.

They both sound bad.

 

[mcrommert]

I got my refund for $400 CND a couple of months ago.

Ah your railing against the game starts to make more sense....you were in 400 deep

I spent either 35 or 45 on the game a while back...the scope is huge and it may fail...while i will be very dissapointed because there is nothing out there like this game...if it fails like many other AAA games, i won't be angry

 

[CHC]

I can't comment on the ethics of their "whaling" (selling super-pricey ships to early adopters), but I will say that as a casual observer, Star Citizen does not appear to be deceptive.

From what I understand, they never made hard promises about an absolutely finished game coming out at any point in the near future. It seems that their goal from the outset was always to have an ongoing and experimental development process that was funded by fans who enjoyed participating in that kind of thing, typically for rewards that would be most useful later. Considering they have given refunds (both large and small) to unhappy people, the whole thing look pretty above board from where I'm standing.

Again, not an expert on Star Citizen's development or anything, but I don't really see too many red flags. It's a massive ongoing development driven more by process than by outcome, and RSI has been pretty transparent about that.

 

[Kinyou]

Out of curiosity, how big is the budget compared to other AAA games? Does it reach GTA heights?

 

[gatti-man]

I have zero problem with a company offering digital products for sale at any price. It's a product, no one is forcing you to pay. I find paid loot boxes and gambling mechanics far far more offensive.

 

[Kibe]

Out of curiosity, how big is the budget compared to other AAA games? Does it reach GTA heights?

GTA 5 was reportedly 150 million to develop plus 100 million to market, something among those figures.

I think when all is said and done, Star Citizen will deliver and will be played for lots of years.

 

[ckaneo]

The problem with the game is that they keep adding things instead of finishing what they initially promised. Only someone blind or someone who payed into it can't see the problem there. They basically have unlimited funds and with no one to set proper deadlines as with any institution they will continue to bleed money and time. Is it a scam? Probably not, cause they do appear to working on the game. But they need a boss that actually knows the value of time and money. Not one with every reason to continue to expand and ask for more money.The money schemes they use are basically just donation variants. The people that buy those know that.

 

[Wulfram]

Bizarre, ridiculous, an illustration of the insanity of consumer culture and perhaps the impending doom of the capitalist system.

But not unethical, as far as I can see.

 

[hobozero]

When (I don't really entertain "if" anymore at this stage) the game is released, Iw ill be very interested to see how balance changes are implemented and received. People often get upset when an in-game item/weapon/ship is made less effective with balance patching - I cannot imagine what will happen when a ship someone has paid over $1,000 for is nerfed in any substantial way.

Maybe paid items will have some immunity to balance patching? Maybe to placate buyers they will always have to ensure that paid content is 'better' somehow than unlocked content? I'm sure that will go over well with the player base.

I can't think of any other example of a game where items sold for such sums would be subject to balance changes. Most expensive items for purchase in games are simply cosmetic.

 

[SmartBase]

Compared to something like Elite Dangerous with all of its paywalled cosmetics (none of which can be earned in-game) I think Star Citizen's model is relatively fair.

 

[staticneuron]

The problem with the game is that they keep adding things instead of finishing what they initially promised. Only someone blind or someone who payed into it can't see the problem there. They basically have unlimited funds and with no one to set proper deadlines as with any institution they will continue to bleed money and time. Is it a scam? Probably not, cause they do appear to working on the game. But they need a boss that actually knows the value of time and money. Not one with every reason to continue to expand and ask for more money.The money schemes they use are basically just donation variants. The people that buy those know that.

The last stretch goal was in 2014. They have not "added" any new content and only been delivering on what was promised for almost 2 and a half years.

That is what these threads about SC boil down to seemingly. Misinformed posters who are either doing it on accident or on purpose. Fear mongerers who get their inspiration from a guy who shall not be named. As in what happened with the last news thread, it seems as if this is a hobby for some people.

When (I don't really entertain "if" anymore at this stage) the game is released, Iw ill be very interested to see how balance changes are implemented and received. People often get upset when an in-game item/weapon/ship is made less effective with balance patching - I cannot imagine what will happen when a ship someone has paid over $1,000 for is nerfed in any substantial way.

Maybe paid items will have some immunity to balance patching? Maybe to placate buyers they will always have to ensure that paid content is 'better' somehow than unlocked content? I'm sure that will go over well with the player base.

I can't think of any other example of a game where items sold for such sums would be subject to balance changes. Most expensive items for purchase in games are simply cosmetic.

Balance is talked about constantly by players because many of the ships is flyable in the alpha BUT

THE COST OF THE SHIP HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH POWER.

Most if not all ships $200 and above are multicrew. There are two ships over $1000 and they are Carriers the smallest one being able to crew between 20 and 40 people.

The pay to win argument has been brought up before but does not apply because every ship can be earned in-game (so there is no difference between paid or earned) and every ship has its counter. Specialized ships dedicated to a role.

 

[KKRT00]

This doesn't really hold water since we're not seeing the sausage being made. German magazines get more information than backers for this project.

No they dont actually. A lot of backers that visited studio had the same access as media.
The thing is that you sign the NDA to see this content.

 

[Deadstar]

The game shouldn't be judged unless you played it. I've played it, it's fun. The ship fighting is great and the ground combat is getting better. So far I'm very happy with what I paid for the game.

 

[Jackpot]

The game shouldn't be judged unless you played it. I've played it, it's fun. The ship fighting is great and the ground combat is getting better. So far I'm very happy with what I paid for the game.

I played it. I found it highly unoptimised and some of the zero-G interiors very impressive, albeit devoid of any gamification, which is pretty much what I'd expect from an alpha.

Playing it also gave zero insight into the game's development and management issues. I don't really see how you would expect different.