Wonder how much going with the Crytek engine has affected development.
Startups fail all the time, even big ones. It won't even make the mainstream news unless there was actual fraud.
Just imagine the sort of press that CIG going bankrupt would bring about, not just in the gaming media, which would be dominated by it pretty much, but the mainstream media as well. It would be a massive story that would go on for months. Lawsuits, court cases, government investigations. The list goes on. It's pretty hard to see the very idea of crowdfunding not copping some serious PR damage as a result
But where did the 150 million go?
Parties, cars and big mansions?So.... Where'd all that crowdfunding money go then?
.Assuming the loan is going to Foundry 42 like some suggest it looks like hedging against incoming Brexit-related costs since they hold most of their cash in the US. In any case I doubt Coutts would just give out a loan to a failing company but what do I know.
400 employees. Go with average 60k/y salary. Throw in office, hr, medical, whatever expenses and each employee is going to cost 80k+ per year. Throw in big name actors, mocap, etc and you will be burning through 30+ million a year easy. Them running out of the 150mil now seems about right without a scam.
But where did the 150 million go?
Yeah, but scam implies intent. Star Citizen might fail but they seem to be actually working on it with a huge team (or even several teams). They didn't just take the money and run. They didn't just create some 3 minute fake gameplay vid to make it seem like they are developing something while taking the money and running. For better or worse, scale & feature creep, possible management issues and all, they have something they are trying to create with the money. Thus it's not a scam. It's not a project that's necessarily the wisest target of buying digital space ships that cost hundreds of real life dollars for, but that doesn't make it a scam.Well, Kickstarter kinda allows scams. If the backed project fails to fulfill is promises, which is the completed game in this case, it has to do whatever it can to compensate, but it is not required to, especially after spending the money.
Chris Roberts has been working in the industry for more than thirty years. And he's most well known for the Wing Commander series. Him and his team aren't newbies working on their first project, they're quite experienced and add people to the team experienced with other tasks.I see the comparisons in dev time to Witcher 2 and GTA 4. I get why they can be unfair comparisons, bit how many ambitious games of this scale has Chris Roberts done before SC?
Because going too ambitious is a problem. Witcher 3 and GTA 4 are sequels of games smaller in scale but still as ambitious as the sequels. What game did Roberts make before SC that would give him that experience?
This.
- Star Citizen's status is questionable at best
- Star Citizen fanboys are rabidly defensive and will respond the same way whether it's nothing or a precursor to Chapter 11
Following that line of thought and the general narrative of the thread (Star Citizen unfinished pipedream), what would be those afforementioned assets that this bank could predatorily offer a loan for? Assets, where upon default would be worth more than the original loan itself? Studios properties? Unfinished 3d assets?Banks give loans to failing companies all the time as long as they think the assets they'd get upon default are worth more than the loan itself
Say what you will about No Man's Sky, at least it came out.
You have to be very dumb to spend thousands of dollars on digital goods that have a chance of never being useful.
But Star Citizen is specifically excluded from the loan, according to the doc the OP linked to.
Believe.and S42 is this year.
Talking of scam is bs since they didn't cash 150mil and went to go to a cruise and lambo shopping.
Crossing Eden said:Chris Roberts has been working in the industry for more than thirty years.
No, they really don't.I wonder what you think about Shenmue 3 naysayers. Because both projects work the same way.
You realize crowdfunding exists out of the context of video games yes? And that there have been a ton of successfully kickstarted games that came out with no controversies and good reception? More so than failed ones. If anything, if we keep getting more stories like this, more stereotypes about crowdfunding will arise...also why the complaint about season passes? You say that as if developers have a LONG running history of failing to release season pass content instead of the opposite where it's normalized for them to release that content after the initial release date. Hell even facing calling remakes and remasters a scam has no basis in reality when there are so many successful remakes and remasters to the point that people actively ask for them.Game developers are some of the best scammers in the world fam. I never cease to be amazed when I see GAF posters talking about "double" or "triple dipping" and buying the same game multiple times with minimal improvements. Or people who spend upwards of 100 dollars(canadian dollars) on digital items in online-only console games. I mean it's one thing if they mail you some collectors edition trinkets, but its another thing to spend real money on fictional items. Or how about season passes? you're trusting that a game developer will actually follow through with DLC through the "season", and if they don't?
People have built careers and made millions of dollars by simply trying to get people to trust them. I think if we keep getting more stories like this, mighty no.9, that Parappa the rapper spiritual successor, people will eventually see crowdfunding as a joke and look back at it like "why was this ever a thing? it's unethical to allow people to give you thousands of dollars for a product that doesn't exist"
Dude that thread is from 10 years ago and goes against people who think like that...I think it's hypocritical for him to make this its own thread when he himself has made threads like this My opinion is more important and therefore requires its own thread.
For folks saying this was obvious.
Your crystal ball gazing astounds me. In future it would be helpful if you could start a thread before the fact so folks are aware of your pontifications. Thank you for your cooperation.
No, they really don't.
Yeah, but scam implies intent. Star Citizen might fail but they seem to be actually working on it with a huge team (or even several teams). They didn't just take the money and run. They didn't just create some 3 minute fake gameplay vid to make it seem like they are developing something while taking the money and running. For better or worse, scale & feature creep, possible management issues and all, they have something they are trying to create with the money. Thus it's not a scam. It's not a project that's necessarily the wisest target of buying digital space ships that cost hundreds of real life dollars for, but that doesn't make it a scam.
Some people really want this game to fail evidently...
The Witcher 3 took $81 million and 3 years. Grand Theft Auto V took around 4 1/2 years.
Elite Dangerous and SC were announced around the same time, yet ED came out in 2014 and continues to be updated.
It's almost as if they set themselves realistic goals and stuck to them or something.
Following that line of thought and the general narrative of the thread (Star Citizen unfinished pipedream), what would be those afforementioned assets that this bank could predatorily offer a loan for? Assets, where upon default would be worth more than the original loan itself? Studios properties? Unfinished 3d assets?
I am not seeing the profit in what we have laid out for us in the form of a predatory loan. Rather, I think them seeking profit from the successful release for a verz popular video game seema more likely. But then again, Perhaps I do not have the lobes though.
For folks saying this was obvious.
Your crystal ball gazing astounds me. In future it would be helpful if you could start a thread before the fact so folks are aware of your pontifications. Thank you for your cooperation.
Neither of those were games trying to push the boundaries of PC graphics or immersion, though.
There's a difference between skepticism about an ambitious project and ignoring all of the updates that they've released, in one instance ITT, literally calling a lengthy update video that showed the features they're working on in depth, and calling the whole project a scam. :/Its not about wanting them to fail. People should at least be sceptical at this stage surely?
You dont want more people spending thousands of dollars on ships in a game that may never come out or be released unfinished.
I'll be glad to buy the game when it comes out if its good, but we should be realistic about its prospects and not encourage hype before there are reviews.
Wonder how much going with the Crytek engine has affected development.
I'm in the UK and had a business here - loans are absolutely normal for growing a business, but banking the whole company assets on a loan is a very ballsey move. It means, quite literally, the bank owns the game now. It might be a good thing as it could cause them to have shipping deadlines.
By the way, people SHOULD be asking questions rather than blindly throwing thousands of dollars at ships.