Author Topic: Backers v CIG/RSI  (Read 11741 times)

Backer42

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 196
  • Refundian
Re: Backers v CIG/RSI
« Reply #15 on: July 21, 2018, 03:26:56 PM »
u
Assuming they knew with full range of opinions. I do have sympathy for anyone just now getting disgruntled and seeking out dissenting opinions. I got my refund shortly before 3.0 dropped because I believed Derek when he said they would stop refunds based off of CR's own words. However, before I got pissed at CIG I rarely ventured beyond the RSI website and was not a part of reddit. So you got a guy that his cult friend talks him into the game, skews the facts and history and he gets pumped like everyone else who got a refund only to find out a NO REFUNDS.

Now you could argue that there is enough negative press out there that something should have at least tipped him off to the fact that not all is well in CIG land, but no, I am not going to withdraw sympathy from people because they were "late to the refund party". The cultizens ya, fuck them, but the backer that got excited bought a cool, but expensive ship then finds out just what a shit show it really is after the refund door closed I do very much feel sorry for.
I only found out about refunds in 2015, because Chris Roberts published his "letter to the Escapist" on his own website and I decided to read it as a whole (which obviously nobody else except Derek did), then did some research on names I never heard of before. The so-called "game journalism" completely failed in properly inform me. Until then I executed a hands-off approach, so I didn't care much about what happened during development, except occasionally viewing the RSI forum and one or two videos per year.  If I had less time on my hands bothering with "that old Kickstarter" in 2015, I could have ended up in 2017 easily, also if I only had followed the fake news the media published about Star Citizen. (You notice, that these guys turn on Star Citizen now, not three years ago, in fact the Escapist article has been pulled.)

It wasn't until doing throughly research when I found out, that almost nobody of the original 2012/2013 team was around anymore and the entire concept has changed into something completely different. Until then I was assuming that Squadron 42 was on its track and has been delayed a bit. I'm still certain, that the supposed "backer polls" about scope changes never actually happened and have been retroactively faked to rectify what Chris Roberts wanted to do anyway. I didn't even know about those polls until 2015.

Just because someone reading daily in a forum thread behind a paywall is well informed doesn't mean everyone is. It was Chris Roberts himself, who directed me to the refund route, because nothing on the carefully filtered RSI forum pointed to the possibility of refunds and does not even today. Me getting in my refund early was happy accident. Also the whole ToS shenigans got completely past me. I never read them (thankfully EU law doesn't require me to forward every ToS document to my lawyer for investigation like the US does.)

Then there is doing due diligence.   Young people are in school/college etc and specifically doing (or should be doing) research on various topics on a regular basis.   We should expect them to apply these skills on their gaming hobby.
Actually consumers are not expected to do due diligence. That is the core of all modern age consumer protection laws, that the consumer doesn't have to employ full time specialists for background-checking every company he does business with. Instead the law skews the balance heavily towards the consumer, so companies employing people full time, who figure out how to rip off consumers, don't get the complete advantage over somebody who has a day job and might spend five to ten minutes per day with personal business decisions.

Gambling laws exist, so companies carefully crafting money traps (again with professional psychologists using their skills to harm people instead of healing them) don't get to ruin too many people's lives. (Lootboxes might become illegal in Europe.) That's I why refrain from dissing people who spent over $1000 on Star Citizen, that might have happened to me, if the stars had aligned a little bit differently. I'm also certain that many of those loud "fans" engaged in the reddits and every comment section are mostly just fakes by CIG to prevent the few actual backers to talk to each other unhindered. I'm not ready to throw everyone under the bus, just because shills pretending being backers make everyone who spent money on SC look like toxic haters.

helimoth

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
Re: Backers v CIG/RSI
« Reply #16 on: July 21, 2018, 03:35:08 PM »
...

you're acting like they are falling for some carefully orchestrated master plan. it became as clear as day years ago what was going on; this is a really bad con. and anyway this is laughing at people spending too much on a computer game when it's obvious the publisher of the game is going to mishandle it completely - not some cruelty. Derek Smart being right was the last straw; if they don't understand now then they deserve to make the lols richer by way of their losing funds to the exit scam.

Backer42

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 196
  • Refundian
Re: Backers v CIG/RSI
« Reply #17 on: July 21, 2018, 04:01:33 PM »
you're acting like they are falling for some carefully orchestrated master plan.
Which it was from the beginning, as court documents now show. With proper information I would have never backed the Kickstarter.

The only reason I'm still involved following this to the end is to learn as much possible about my mistake, which under different conditions might have lost me a substantial amount of money.

Quote
it became as clear as day years ago what was going on; this is a really bad con. and anyway this is laughing at people spending too much on a computer game when it's obvious the publisher of the game is going to mishandle it completely - not some cruelty. Derek Smart being right was the last straw; if they don't understand now then they deserve to make the lols richer by way of their losing funds to the exit scam.
I think people happy about all this don't realize, that all these vocal "backers" are just as fake and smoke and mirrors as anything else CIG produced. That includes the ones trying to get a refund and failing to discourage real backers, which are very few (tens of thousands, not millions). Yes, I even consider that the small claims guy being just a another CIG mole who's duty was to behave as dumb as possible to create a court ruling in favor of CIG under controlled conditions.

You will notice that once CIG goes defunct, all these reddit and twitter "backers" will vanish over night - because most of them have never existed outside the Internet. Once someone pulls the plug on the comment section spam machine, it will go completely silent. Then and only then we might talk to some real backers, who missed their escape pod. These backers can't talk to each other in those public places, because the shill-to-backer-ratio is over 10:1 (just like the NPC-to-player ratio in SC  :grin: ).

You might just laughing at another Potemkin village built by CIG.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2018, 04:07:24 PM by Backer42 »

DemonInvestor

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
Re: Backers v CIG/RSI
« Reply #18 on: July 21, 2018, 06:01:00 PM »

Sorry but any analysis not looking into which parties are involved as it's first point and which contract they actually signed, is not worth anyones time.
We've seen different trade partners/intermediaries (kickstarter, then RSI Ltd. - anyone else?), and maybe even a whole corp of companies involved. All under changing terms of services - where one might argue about which is applicable for every contract. Not even mentioning that buyers have bought/pledged something from different countries - involving therefore different governmental authorities who might rule under different laws upon said case.
And reading aloud Service clauses to an audience, without going into the legality of said clauses is again wasted time. Or a lot of companies would (like SouthParks Apple) have a lot of "fun".

And even while i think that he's right about CIG not owning anyone anything - why should they when you seemingly pledge to RSI Ltd. through their Homepage ? - i still think his analysis has the lowest quality a legal analysis can have. Damn i've written better ones in the few courses i had in university.

Again i'm happy that i never bought into SC and therefore the whole thing is really just a hobbyistic interest if my prescience stays true and they never deliver what they promised and how legalities look in such cases.

dsmart

  • Supreme Cmdr
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4591
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: Backers v CIG/RSI
« Reply #19 on: July 22, 2018, 01:39:29 PM »
It's all nonsense. The reality is that the remaining backers enabled CIG to scam them out of their money. Now that it's obvious refunds have ended, they're all suddenly acting shocked. It's almost as if they weren't paying attention all these years that I have been blowing the alarm. Especially over this ToS fiasco that I KNEW was coming - and said so.

Notice how, following this court case, the Shillizens are out in force making videos about how it's totally not a scam, CIG isn't a bank etc. While Shitizens are rejoicing that CIG did this.

Those ass-clowns saying that CIG isn't a bank, and that you should get a refund within 14 days, are conveniently ignoring the fact that legacy backers who were MISLED into thinking a game was coming, no longer have that 14 day option.
Star Citizen isn't a game. It's a TV show about a bunch of characters making a game. It's basically "This is Spinal Tap" - except people think the band is real.

Backer42

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 196
  • Refundian
Re: Backers v CIG/RSI
« Reply #20 on: July 22, 2018, 04:21:22 PM »
The reality is that the remaining backers enabled CIG to scam them out of their money. Now that it's obvious refunds have ended, they're all suddenly acting shocked. It's almost as if they weren't paying attention all these years that I have been blowing the alarm. Especially over this ToS fiasco that I KNEW was coming - and said so.
I think you're overestimating the reach of your messages. I think half of the people, who spent money on CIG still don't know that refunds were a thing.

Quote
Notice how, following this court case, the Shillizens are out in force making videos about how it's totally not a scam, CIG isn't a bank etc. While Shitizens are rejoicing that CIG did this.
Yes, and I don't rule out the possibility, that this court case has been created and lost intentionally and all those shills pretending to be backers are just part of smoke and mirrors. We don't make videos, just because we were Star Citizen backers. But people producing videos on Star Citizen exclusively are highly suspicious. I don't think any of those ever spent money on CIG, it's more likely, that they are part of the scam machine and collect reimbursement from CIG. So in that case they would be not backers at all, they just pretend to be to encourage others to spend money on CIG. It's viral marketing 101.

It's all about making it look bigger than it is to rectify spending large amounts of money. Nobody would spend $ 100 to 1000 on DLC on a project one tenth of the size of Star Citizen. SC as a whole is a big fat fake.

That's why my bet is on once the thing implodes there will be almost nobody left to laugh at, because thousands over thousands of shills will immediately disappear into the void, because they never existed as Star Citizen backers in the first place. Except the few poor souls at https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen/comments.

Bubba

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 90
Re: Backers v CIG/RSI
« Reply #21 on: July 22, 2018, 05:29:57 PM »
This case was definitely not manufactured. If it were, it would have been thrown out with prejudice. Yes, when it implodes, there will be screaming. Some will loudly blame Dr. Smart, the media, CryTek, and anyone but CR.
But the shifting tide has already reduced their numbers. I think Dr. Smart is right on his observation that, by courting and promoting toxic fans in the "good days", they've developed a cadre of haters for the "bad days"

Those who will go after the sleazebags who made these empty promises built on shady business arrangements (assuming for a minute that is the case) will have to have some smarts about them, and therefore have already set their wheels on motion.

Penny579

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 57
Re: Backers v CIG/RSI
« Reply #22 on: July 22, 2018, 10:57:56 PM »
in first principles, I think no one should get a refund.

You kickstart a project, you trust someone to give your project a red hot go.   You don't get to ask for a refund because the project is failing, late or the person you have supported turns out incompetent.  Neither are you entitled to a refund when your own personal circle stances change, loss of faith, going broke, got sick whatever.  It's not sale its a reward for help financing a project.

I think its a bit lame to be running off now looking for some consumer protection.

Penny579

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 57
Re: Backers v CIG/RSI
« Reply #23 on: July 22, 2018, 11:41:27 PM »
That being said,

They pre-sold SQ42 and advertised it as coming out in 2015, they did not say will attempt to make a game in 2015, there is high a risk of the product not being delivered.  They did not indicate if that more funding would delay delivery with the project being forever remade to 'higher' standards.  Even now you can get to the checkout on their store page right now and the only warning you that this product is not almost in your hands is  "! Squadron 42 is currently under development" in small faded font.

CIG have to face up they pre-sold a product, counted it as revenue paid tax on it and got loans against it, but did not deliver the product. Only through miraculous and dubious legal measures have they managed to avoid this bitting them on the ass, well at least in the US. 

forgetting the law It's morally bankrupt to pitch an updated version of wing commander, use that funding and half a decade on somewhat related FPS / MMO and then deny refunds to people who are complaining the money they pledged is being used on a completely different project.

Yet still CIG almost seam injured and shocked anyone would want their money back.  They claim its tiny minority of people wanting a refund yet gone to huge lengths to deny refunds.

Motto

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1014
Re: Backers v CIG/RSI
« Reply #24 on: July 23, 2018, 01:31:45 AM »
I disagree. When somebody asks me to sponsor him for something new, like building a game, and he specifically states what kind of game and promises full financial disclosure, I expect him to honour that. After giving him that money, I learn he's not building / able to build the game he sold me, he doesn't provide financial disclosure and it turns out he's honouring himself and close relatives huge salaries. Fine, but can I have my money back please? That was not our deal.

dsmart

  • Supreme Cmdr
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4591
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: Backers v CIG/RSI
« Reply #25 on: July 23, 2018, 03:54:32 AM »
This case was definitely not manufactured. If it were, it would have been thrown out with prejudice. Yes, when it implodes, there will be screaming. Some will loudly blame Dr. Smart, the media, CryTek, and anyone but CR.
But the shifting tide has already reduced their numbers. I think Dr. Smart is right on his observation that, by courting and promoting toxic fans in the "good days", they've developed a cadre of haters for the "bad days"

Those who will go after the sleazebags who made these empty promises built on shady business arrangements (assuming for a minute that is the case) will have to have some smarts about them, and therefore have already set their wheels on motion.

Yeah. And that's what is going on atm. Most of the toxic "fans" from the old days who have finally come to their senses are the ones now being toxic from the other side of the fence. It's amazing.
Star Citizen isn't a game. It's a TV show about a bunch of characters making a game. It's basically "This is Spinal Tap" - except people think the band is real.

dsmart

  • Supreme Cmdr
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4591
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: Backers v CIG/RSI
« Reply #26 on: July 23, 2018, 03:57:16 AM »
in first principles, I think no one should get a refund.

You kickstart a project, you trust someone to give your project a red hot go.   You don't get to ask for a refund because the project is failing, late or the person you have supported turns out incompetent.  Neither are you entitled to a refund when your own personal circle stances change, loss of faith, going broke, got sick whatever.  It's not sale its a reward for help financing a project.

I think its a bit lame to be running off now looking for some consumer protection.

True. Except for the fact that :

1) The project had a specific release date; which came and went

2) Numerous times, the govt has said that if you take crowd-funded money and made promises, you should keep them

3) Crowd-funding a video game isn't early access. It's a promise to deliver a product by a date certain

Star Citizen isn't a game. It's a TV show about a bunch of characters making a game. It's basically "This is Spinal Tap" - except people think the band is real.

dsmart

  • Supreme Cmdr
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4591
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: Backers v CIG/RSI
« Reply #27 on: July 23, 2018, 03:57:59 AM »
I disagree. When somebody asks me to sponsor him for something new, like building a game, and he specifically states what kind of game and promises full financial disclosure, I expect him to honour that. After giving him that money, I learn he's not building / able to build the game he sold me, he doesn't provide financial disclosure and it turns out he's honouring himself and close relatives huge salaries. Fine, but can I have my money back please? That was not our deal.

Exactly. And the makings of a scam started the minute they started walking back those very same promises via TOS changes.
Star Citizen isn't a game. It's a TV show about a bunch of characters making a game. It's basically "This is Spinal Tap" - except people think the band is real.

N0mad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 545
Re: Backers v CIG/RSI
« Reply #28 on: July 23, 2018, 04:29:26 AM »
I disagree. When somebody asks me to sponsor him for something new, like building a game, and he specifically states what kind of game and promises full financial disclosure, I expect him to honour that. After giving him that money, I learn he's not building / able to build the game he sold me, he doesn't provide financial disclosure and it turns out he's honouring himself and close relatives huge salaries. Fine, but can I have my money back please? That was not our deal.

All of this is obvious but I keep having to remind myself about the big picture here: it's that all this, all the criticism, the haters, the scam accusations, all the bad PR; would all go away if CIG released the game as promised.  Or, I would even accept a fully featured and fully playable reduce version of the full game, maybe just as a single player game  (you'd think CR would have learnt that from the Freelancer game).

All they have released is a broken tech demo. Rather than make steady progress on the Core tech (networking / physics) and gameplay features, they have a slow development of extraneous features: ships / armour / clothes / graphical updates / art assets. There's a reason for this though: the core tech is hard and having come so far with an unsuitable engine already they can't make it work without breaking everything they've already made, so it's much easier to show progress by doing the easy stuff, and the easy stuff is often visual so they have something to show off.

The day they knew that it wasn't possible to get the technology to work, but instead decided to pretend they could rather than being honest and downsizing their ambitions, was the day it became a scam. That's why Derek's first blog about how it couldn't be made as originally promised angered Chris Roberts so much: it's because Chris knew Derek was right.

helimoth

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
Re: Backers v CIG/RSI
« Reply #29 on: July 23, 2018, 06:35:28 AM »
The only thing that is stopping the whole house of cards from tumbling down at this point is the fact that CIG haven't had to, yet, open up the books. The moment the backers are produced that smoking gun - the CIG finances - then the majority will accept the project is doomed and will want to try recoup whatever cash is left.

I think one of the most ironic things about this entire litany of errors that has come to be known as the development of Star Citizen is how this all started as an experiment in to how well could a studio unhampered by restraints imposed by a publisher produce an AAA game and how open and transparent such a studio could be and yet has turned in to the showcasing of one of the least transparent, most inefficient studios in recent history.

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk