Author Topic: Star Citizen General BS  (Read 1046825 times)

Wiggleitjiggle

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #1035 on: September 06, 2017, 07:39:43 AM »
For you to continue believe a tracker put out by someone that has been being called on lies since 2012.... is truly stupid. You have 0 reason to trust CIG since they started breaking promises, you know 5 years ago, yet you do.

dsmart

  • Supreme Cmdr
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4915
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #1036 on: September 06, 2017, 08:14:50 AM »
Star Citizen is the only odd ball one here, for more than 1 reason, but I am not worried about that project.  I might start to get a little worried when they reach year 8 from when the kickstarter ended, if they have not released one of the games, So late 2020 early 2021.

:vince:

Quote
Anyways, Kickstarter/crowdfund have been a great thing for PC gaming.
 

Not really. The number of crowdfunded games is minuscule compared to those that weren't. No, it hasn't made a single dent to the PC game numbers.

Quote
If anything it has only changed to the point where people are just going to crowd fund games from already trusted developers with a good history of releasing good games whether those games were crowdfunded or not, at least for the big amount of money funded games.

No it's not. Have you been keeping track of how many projects from mainstream devs which never got funded?

Did you read my post from earlier in this thread where I posted various analysis from ICO about videogame crowd-funding trends?

Quote
Without the crowdfunded games, I fear we would be left with the massive amount of garbage that the AAA market (which is easily 95% of AAA gaming) has been shoveling out for more than a decade, where they put creativity and innovation into the trunk, or with the massive amount of indie games where 95% of them are garbage, and even then the good ones have a low production values.


Wrong again. Going by the huge popularity of triple A games, even going by the numbers of those that faltered recently such as COD:IW, ME:A, the number of those games continues to do well because fans stick with what they know and want to play. And for devs/pubs, sequels or copies are always a safe bet.

If gamers weren't buying those games, devs/pubs won't be making them. So  clearly the minority think they are garbage. And minority opinions don't pay the bills.

The reason that most indie games are not up to par is because of the low barrier to entry in developing and publishing games. When you reduce that bar, that's what you get. Then game development is no longer an exclusive club. It's no different from any other form of creative media such as books, movies, or music.

As an example, since I started out, I knew that the type of games that I wanted to make, weren't going to appeal to a lot of people. So, just like flight sims from back in the day, I carved out a niche market for my games, stuck with it, and almost 30 years later, aside from the short detour to do an RTS (Line Of Defense Tactics) which did surprisingly well, I have stuck with those same games because my install base kept buying them. And over the years, that install base grew. It's the same reason that the DCS flight sims are the de facto standard today, because that market is dead, but there are core simmers like myself who still support it.

Quote
The Crowdfunding games give a way for developers to be more into the AA market, where they can make great games with creativity and innovation in the drivers seat and have a much higher production value than indie games.

No it wasn't and didn't. It also contradicts your early statement. It was just an alternate form of funding for developing games. Whether those games turned out good or bad - or great - is largely irrelevant because financial expense is never the correct metric for judging the quality of a released product. This is evident by the apparent flops of multi-million Dollar games.
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: 4915
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #1037 on: September 06, 2017, 08:15:13 AM »
First of all I only have $60 into this, and won't be spending anymore I never spend more than $60 for any crowdfunded game.

That's a wise decision

Quote
I have seen extremely less ambitious games that were developed by more seasoned teams that took 7+ years to develop and were still excellent games when they released.

Such as?

Quote
So with these games being far more ambitious is the reason why I do not expect the game for at least 8 years for one of them to release.


OK then.

Quote
Some bumbs, scrapes, and bruises, and people making assumptions of their own do not scare me at all.  Anybody who didn't expect any bumbs, bruises, and scrapes along the way and funded these games did so in great ignorance.

They're not assumptions. They're opinions, and others are based on fact.

And yes, literally every single game development is riddled with challenges. And nobody is saying that Star Citizen can't or doesn't have those. That argument is a non-starter; as is the argument about it's "visual fidelity". NONE of those two issues are ever a topic for discussion because there is nothing to argue about there. Regardless of the fact that as to the visual fidelity, it already looks aged, compared to other recent and upcoming games, as well as the fact that their own foolish decision to focus on visual fidelity instead of engine capability, is why the game has been rife with performance issues that we've yet to see the worst (GC2017 was only the tip of the iceberg) of.

So now, what the on-going discourse is about, centers around very basic and straightforward FACTUAL things:


1) Arbitrarily increasing the scope of the original project that was pitched in 2012, thus invariably dooming it.

And before you say "Oh the community voted for that", don't - because they didn't. And IF they had, it was still up to Croberts to know where to stop. He didn't, because money was coming in as a result.

2) Removing and/or sidelining promised features which were already paid for through backer funding

e.g. private servers, VR, ability for friends to visit your hangar, and the list goes on.

3) Consistently and systematically lying to backers - about pretty much, everything - while under the guise of "open development"

e.g. the 3.0 dev schedule (which has turned out to be confirmed as fiction) , the port to LumberYard which was in planning for over a year, but never disclosed until YE 2016; and then they lied about it. Not to mention the Star Marine debacle, the state of SQ42, the original game that most people backed in 2012

And the BIG one: knowing that SQ42 wasn't going to be shown because it wasn't ready, and knowing that they didn't actually have planetary tech working in the game engine, they went ahead and lied about literally every aspect of the project between AUG-OCT 2016 anyway. Then when they got busted (by me, as I was the first to proclaim that it was all R&D bullshit because of what sources told me) using an R&D demo being passed off as "in-game 3.0", they somehow managed to trot out a "The Road To CitizenCon" video, which conveniently precluded the events they were busted for. Because yeah, if you were upfront about something, the best course of action is to make a video proving that you lied ahead of telling those lies.

And to add insult to injury, in furtherance of those very same lies, Croberts went on stage and LIED about the status of the much anticipated 3.0.

And that was during and after raising over $5M as result of those very same events which, a year later at GC2017, have been confirmed to be lies much worse than we previously thought.

5) Using specially created R&D demos, passing them off as actual game features and/or mechanics - until they got busted doing it. Then the one time they actually came to a show to get around that, the world saw during GC2017 that the emperor had no knickers after all.

There's a very long list of this because it has been going on since 2014. Start here.

6) Going back on promises made to backers, including the shameful rescission of rights backers once had in the original ToS. The same ToS which was based on a shallow "The Pledge" which they have routinely and disgracefully defaulted on - repeatedly.

7) The on-going tactics to rip off backers, while continuing to raise money to fund a train-wreck and line their pockets, when in fact the game - as overscoped back in Nov 2014, was already fully funded to the tune of $65M. And yet, even after being late, this November will be +3 years and almost +$95M later with the game NOWHERE near Beta status and NO vertical slice. Meanwhile, SQ42 is still MIA, though it was coming in 2015.

Then there was that time when Croberts claimed that 2.0 was "substantial" enough to refuse refunds. I said it was bullshit. Some guy tested it with State authorities. And they agreed with me.

8) The continued promotion of a game they know - with certainty - cannot be built as pitched in Nov 2014, but still raising money (while taking out loans, investor money etc - and lying about or not disclosing it to backers) under the pretext of building said game. Which, going by past actions, the lies, obfuscation and deception will only come to light after the fact, and when it's too late for backers to do anything.


As I wrote in my recent GC2017 article, if another publisher or dev was doing even 10% of the above, there would be an uproar. Not to mention that a publisher backed project would have been CANCELED by now - without question. And that's why, at this point, only the hardcore backers who refuse to accept the fact that i) they've been scammed ii) they're making a group of people rich iii) the game will never be a reality, are the ones carrying the torch, even as the rest of gaming continues to laugh.

Quote
Besides, even with Alpha 2.6 I already had a great amount of fun out of it.

Don't regret spending the money 1 bit, and currently have no worries at all.  Ask me again in 3+ years how I feel.

That's a perfectly OK stance because it's your money and you have the right to do as you wish with it. However, making excuses for the state and status of the project, while ignoring the larger picture and the missteps therein, is irresponsible, shallow, and disingenuous.
« Last Edit: September 06, 2017, 09:23:34 AM by dsmart »
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.

helimoth

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #1038 on: September 06, 2017, 08:25:12 AM »
Serendipity strikes me as the kind of person that when hearing a nuclear warning siren, seeing hundreds of people running for cover, government emergency warnings playing on every TV channel and witnessing the sight of the nuke flying overhead would still demand to hear from somebody that witnessed the nuke itself being launched - preferably written confirmation from the person that launched it. At this point you're either being deliberately obtuse or you're frankly a bit of a special person and would do better on a kids forum rather than an adult forum like this.
« Last Edit: September 06, 2017, 08:28:20 AM by helimoth »

Serendipity

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #1039 on: September 06, 2017, 08:34:04 AM »
For you to continue believe a tracker put out by someone that has been being called on lies since 2012.... is truly stupid. You have 0 reason to trust CIG since they started breaking promises, you know 5 years ago, yet you do.

Oh yeah, they're probably lying about the level of funding and paying their 400 staff and the rent on 5 studios all over the world with monopoly money. Maybe magic beans is currency enough? Baked beans? Perhaps they haven't raised a single dollar and just get everyone to work for free for years and years?

Serendipity strikes me as the kind of person that when hearing a nuclear warning siren, seeing hundreds of people running for cover, government emergency warnings playing on every TV channel and witnessing the sight of the nuke flying overhead would still demand to hear from somebody that witnessed the nuke itself being launched - preferably written confirmation from the person that launched it. At this point you're either being deliberately obtuse or you're frankly a bit of a special person and would do better on a kids forum rather than an adult forum like this.

You can extrapolate assumptions about the financial aspect of the company all you like but I prefer knowledge over guesswork. They're paying 400 staff. They can't do that if they have don't have money. When staff start leaving for not having wages paid then I'll start to believe they have no money. Whilst staff are getting paid and offices getting expanded I'm happy ignoring the so called 'nuke' flying overhead and pointing and laughing at all the chicken littles running around screaming about the sky falling.

Motto

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1023
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #1040 on: September 06, 2017, 08:47:44 AM »
Yes, they are paying staff and stuff. We're not saying they didn't collect any money at all, we're just saying that the 160m claim is false. There's a difference.

helimoth

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #1041 on: September 06, 2017, 09:00:52 AM »
You can extrapolate assumptions about the financial aspect of the company all you like but I prefer knowledge over guesswork.

We do too. Chris has perfect information of all of this yet prefers to not share it, despite assuring backers at the start that they'd be treated no differently to publishers :D. Meanwhile clues are springing up all around, one of the most recent being the loan where he leveraged his entire company (and $156m worth of backer trust and faith) on a single, tiny loan - locking them out from any loans in the mean time - on funds they would be due to receive in due course anyway. Why the desperation, croberts? :D I thought your company finances were healthy.  :shrug:

And how do you know staff are being paid anyway? I could throw it all back on you that everything you are saying is based upon assumptions. Fact remains until croberts decides to come clean and open up the books from scrutiny (which he will be forced to eventually whether by hook or by crook) the speculation will continue and to anyone with even a modicum of critical-thinking ability, things don't look good at all for croberts.

I just hope they are gentle on him in prison and don't try to fit an idris in to his hangar.  :gary:

Motto

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1023
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #1042 on: September 06, 2017, 10:44:26 AM »
Did you know there's a chocolate teapot in close orbit around the sun?

I know about that chocolate teapot. Chris told me about it and sold me a picture of a teacup that I can use to visit it.

No? Nothing? No kudo's for this brilliant rebuttal? You guys... c'mon now. You know I live for this stuff, but I can't do without confirmation.

ecg

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #1043 on: September 06, 2017, 12:26:24 PM »

helimoth

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #1044 on: September 06, 2017, 12:47:18 PM »

StanTheMan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #1045 on: September 06, 2017, 04:39:39 PM »
First of all I only have $60 into this, and won't be spending anymore I never spend more than $60 for any crowdfunded game.

That's a wise decision

Quote
I have seen extremely less ambitious games that were developed by more seasoned teams that took 7+ years to develop and were still excellent games when they released.

Such as?

Quote
So with these games being far more ambitious is the reason why I do not expect the game for at least 8 years for one of them to release.


OK then.

Quote
Some bumbs, scrapes, and bruises, and people making assumptions of their own do not scare me at all.  Anybody who didn't expect any bumbs, bruises, and scrapes along the way and funded these games did so in great ignorance.

They're not assumptions. They're opinions, and others are based on fact.

And yes, literally every single game development is riddled with challenges. And nobody is saying that Star Citizen can't or doesn't have those. That argument is a non-starter; as is the argument about it's "visual fidelity". NONE of those two issues are ever a topic for discussion because there is nothing to argue about there. Regardless of the fact that as to the visual fidelity, it already looks aged, compared to other recent and upcoming games, as well as the fact that their own foolish decision to focus on visual fidelity instead of engine capability, is why the game has been rife with performance issues that we've yet to see the worst (GC2017 was only the tip of the iceberg) of.

So now, what the on-going discourse is about, centers around very basic and straightforward FACTUAL things:


1) Arbitrarily increasing the scope of the original project that was pitched in 2012, thus invariably dooming it.

And before you say "Oh the community voted for that", don't - because they didn't. And IF they had, it was still up to Croberts to know where to stop. He didn't, because money was coming in as a result.

2) Removing and/or sidelining promised features which were already paid for through backer funding

e.g. private servers, VR, ability for friends to visit your hangar, and the list goes on.

3) Consistently and systematically lying to backers - about pretty much, everything - while under the guise of "open development"

e.g. the 3.0 dev schedule (which has turned out to be confirmed as fiction) , the port to LumberYard which was in planning for over a year, but never disclosed until YE 2016; and then they lied about it. Not to mention the Star Marine debacle, the state of SQ42, the original game that most people backed in 2012

And the BIG one: knowing that SQ42 wasn't going to be shown because it wasn't ready, and knowing that they didn't actually have planetary tech working in the game engine, they went ahead and lied about literally every aspect of the project between AUG-OCT 2016 anyway. Then when they got busted (by me, as I was the first to proclaim that it was all R&D bullshit because of what sources told me) using an R&D demo being passed off as "in-game 3.0", they somehow managed to trot out a "The Road To CitizenCon" video, which conveniently precluded the events they were busted for. Because yeah, if you were upfront about something, the best course of action is to make a video proving that you lied ahead of telling those lies.

And to add insult to injury, in furtherance of those very same lies, Croberts went on stage and LIED about the status of the much anticipated 3.0.

And that was during and after raising over $5M as result of those very same events which, a year later at GC2017, have been confirmed to be lies much worse than we previously thought.

5) Using specially created R&D demos, passing them off as actual game features and/or mechanics - until they got busted doing it. Then the one time they actually came to a show to get around that, the world saw during GC2017 that the emperor had no knickers after all.

There's a very long list of this because it has been going on since 2014. Start here.

6) Going back on promises made to backers, including the shameful rescission of rights backers once had in the original ToS. The same ToS which was based on a shallow "The Pledge" which they have routinely and disgracefully defaulted on - repeatedly.

7) The on-going tactics to rip off backers, while continuing to raise money to fund a train-wreck and line their pockets, when in fact the game - as overscoped back in Nov 2014, was already fully funded to the tune of $65M. And yet, even after being late, this November will be +3 years and almost +$95M later with the game NOWHERE near Beta status and NO vertical slice. Meanwhile, SQ42 is still MIA, though it was coming in 2015.

Then there was that time when Croberts claimed that 2.0 was "substantial" enough to refuse refunds. I said it was bullshit. Some guy tested it with State authorities. And they agreed with me.

8) The continued promotion of a game they know - with certainty - cannot be built as pitched in Nov 2014, but still raising money (while taking out loans, investor money etc - and lying about or not disclosing it to backers) under the pretext of building said game. Which, going by past actions, the lies, obfuscation and deception will only come to light after the fact, and when it's too late for backers to do anything.


As I wrote in my recent GC2017 article, if another publisher or dev was doing even 10% of the above, there would be an uproar. Not to mention that a publisher backed project would have been CANCELED by now - without question. And that's why, at this point, only the hardcore backers who refuse to accept the fact that i) they've been scammed ii) they're making a group of people rich iii) the game will never be a reality, are the ones carrying the torch, even as the rest of gaming continues to laugh.

Quote
Besides, even with Alpha 2.6 I already had a great amount of fun out of it.

Don't regret spending the money 1 bit, and currently have no worries at all.  Ask me again in 3+ years how I feel.

That's a perfectly OK stance because it's your money and you have the right to do as you wish with it. However, making excuses for the state and status of the project, while ignoring the larger picture and the missteps therein, is irresponsible, shallow, and disingenuous.

Whilst paying yourself and your family massive salaries and benefits.

StanTheMan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #1046 on: September 06, 2017, 04:46:36 PM »
Quote
You can extrapolate assumptions about the financial aspect of the company all you like but I prefer knowledge over guesswork. They're paying 400 staff. They can't do that if they have don't have money. When staff start leaving for not having wages paid then I'll start to believe they have no money. Whilst staff are getting paid and offices getting expanded I'm happy ignoring the so called 'nuke' flying overhead and pointing and laughing at all the chicken littles running around screaming about the sky falling.

I am a recruitment consultant with over 20 years in the industry.  This has included 3 years working internally with a global technology company where at any one time I had responsibility for sourcing several hundred skilled professionals and a recruitment budget of over $million.

What you are saying is BULLSHIT.

A company can be publically HIRING TENS OF THOUSANDS of people one minute and a minute later LAYING OFF TENS OF THOUSANDS of people.

AND the only people that know about that change are A FEW SENIOR PEOPLE AT THE VERY TOP OF THE COMPANY and some of their advisors, bankers etc.
« Last Edit: September 06, 2017, 04:51:12 PM by StanTheMan »

Aya Reiko

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #1047 on: September 06, 2017, 10:30:20 PM »
Fact remains until croberts decides to come clean and open up the books from scrutiny (which he will be forced to eventually whether by hook or by crook) the speculation will continue and to anyone with even a modicum of critical-thinking ability, things don't look good at all for croberts.
You know, I'm a $65 backer from the KS drive (and nothing beyond that since), so instead of demanding a refund, I could demand the accounting books instead. 

Moeis

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 91
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #1048 on: September 06, 2017, 10:30:52 PM »
First of all I only have $60 into this, and won't be spending anymore I never spend more than $60 for any crowdfunded game.

That's a wise decision

Quote
I have seen extremely less ambitious games that were developed by more seasoned teams that took 7+ years to develop and were still excellent games when they released.

Such as?

Quote
So with these games being far more ambitious is the reason why I do not expect the game for at least 8 years for one of them to release.


OK then.

Quote
Some bumbs, scrapes, and bruises, and people making assumptions of their own do not scare me at all.  Anybody who didn't expect any bumbs, bruises, and scrapes along the way and funded these games did so in great ignorance.

They're not assumptions. They're opinions, and others are based on fact.

And yes, literally every single game development is riddled with challenges. And nobody is saying that Star Citizen can't or doesn't have those. That argument is a non-starter; as is the argument about it's "visual fidelity". NONE of those two issues are ever a topic for discussion because there is nothing to argue about there. Regardless of the fact that as to the visual fidelity, it already looks aged, compared to other recent and upcoming games, as well as the fact that their own foolish decision to focus on visual fidelity instead of engine capability, is why the game has been rife with performance issues that we've yet to see the worst (GC2017 was only the tip of the iceberg) of.

So now, what the on-going discourse is about, centers around very basic and straightforward FACTUAL things:


1) Arbitrarily increasing the scope of the original project that was pitched in 2012, thus invariably dooming it.

And before you say "Oh the community voted for that", don't - because they didn't. And IF they had, it was still up to Croberts to know where to stop. He didn't, because money was coming in as a result.

2) Removing and/or sidelining promised features which were already paid for through backer funding

e.g. private servers, VR, ability for friends to visit your hangar, and the list goes on.

3) Consistently and systematically lying to backers - about pretty much, everything - while under the guise of "open development"

e.g. the 3.0 dev schedule (which has turned out to be confirmed as fiction) , the port to LumberYard which was in planning for over a year, but never disclosed until YE 2016; and then they lied about it. Not to mention the Star Marine debacle, the state of SQ42, the original game that most people backed in 2012

And the BIG one: knowing that SQ42 wasn't going to be shown because it wasn't ready, and knowing that they didn't actually have planetary tech working in the game engine, they went ahead and lied about literally every aspect of the project between AUG-OCT 2016 anyway. Then when they got busted (by me, as I was the first to proclaim that it was all R&D bullshit because of what sources told me) using an R&D demo being passed off as "in-game 3.0", they somehow managed to trot out a "The Road To CitizenCon" video, which conveniently precluded the events they were busted for. Because yeah, if you were upfront about something, the best course of action is to make a video proving that you lied ahead of telling those lies.

And to add insult to injury, in furtherance of those very same lies, Croberts went on stage and LIED about the status of the much anticipated 3.0.

And that was during and after raising over $5M as result of those very same events which, a year later at GC2017, have been confirmed to be lies much worse than we previously thought.

5) Using specially created R&D demos, passing them off as actual game features and/or mechanics - until they got busted doing it. Then the one time they actually came to a show to get around that, the world saw during GC2017 that the emperor had no knickers after all.

There's a very long list of this because it has been going on since 2014. Start here.

6) Going back on promises made to backers, including the shameful rescission of rights backers once had in the original ToS. The same ToS which was based on a shallow "The Pledge" which they have routinely and disgracefully defaulted on - repeatedly.

7) The on-going tactics to rip off backers, while continuing to raise money to fund a train-wreck and line their pockets, when in fact the game - as overscoped back in Nov 2014, was already fully funded to the tune of $65M. And yet, even after being late, this November will be +3 years and almost +$95M later with the game NOWHERE near Beta status and NO vertical slice. Meanwhile, SQ42 is still MIA, though it was coming in 2015.

Then there was that time when Croberts claimed that 2.0 was "substantial" enough to refuse refunds. I said it was bullshit. Some guy tested it with State authorities. And they agreed with me.

8) The continued promotion of a game they know - with certainty - cannot be built as pitched in Nov 2014, but still raising money (while taking out loans, investor money etc - and lying about or not disclosing it to backers) under the pretext of building said game. Which, going by past actions, the lies, obfuscation and deception will only come to light after the fact, and when it's too late for backers to do anything.


As I wrote in my recent GC2017 article, if another publisher or dev was doing even 10% of the above, there would be an uproar. Not to mention that a publisher backed project would have been CANCELED by now - without question. And that's why, at this point, only the hardcore backers who refuse to accept the fact that i) they've been scammed ii) they're making a group of people rich iii) the game will never be a reality, are the ones carrying the torch, even as the rest of gaming continues to laugh.

Quote
Besides, even with Alpha 2.6 I already had a great amount of fun out of it.

Don't regret spending the money 1 bit, and currently have no worries at all.  Ask me again in 3+ years how I feel.

That's a perfectly OK stance because it's your money and you have the right to do as you wish with it. However, making excuses for the state and status of the project, while ignoring the larger picture and the missteps therein, is irresponsible, shallow, and disingenuous.

Dragon Age Origins was a 7 year development cycle for an example.

Since 2013, everything that has been happening as far as the negativity, as far as Chris Roberts perfectionism mentality and management style and its effects on the game, and you even getting eventually involved with saying something about the game are all things I expected.  I was basically expecting Freelancer all over again, but this time the difference is they would get a lot more money and continued money stream.  Chances are not everything promised will make it into the game, I do expect the final outcome to be in a same type of situation as Freelancer, as in the game will still be massively fun but won't ever fully realize the full vision.  I predicted all of this because of history and saw no reason why it wouldn't repeat itself in some way.
Everyone else I know who helped fund this felt the same way, we are all old gamer's that love the space combat sim genre, so we know about Chris Roberts, Erin (Eric? I always get those 2 names mixed up) Roberts, and you.

The only thing I didn't predict is when you did get involved, I didn't think it would become what looks like a huge crusade.

Also I really do not think the "rest of gaming" are really laughing as much as you think they are.  If anything, the rest of gaming for the most part just don't care about it, don't know what to think about it, or just watching it.  Then are there are the 2 extremes that as far as I can tell are just a very tiny group of loud people on either side of all of this.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2017, 11:32:14 PM by Moeis »

Moeis

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 91
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #1049 on: September 06, 2017, 10:43:37 PM »
Star Citizen is the only odd ball one here, for more than 1 reason, but I am not worried about that project.  I might start to get a little worried when they reach year 8 from when the kickstarter ended, if they have not released one of the games, So late 2020 early 2021.

:vince:

Quote
Anyways, Kickstarter/crowdfund have been a great thing for PC gaming.
 

Not really. The number of crowdfunded games is minuscule compared to those that weren't. No, it hasn't made a single dent to the PC game numbers.

Quote
If anything it has only changed to the point where people are just going to crowd fund games from already trusted developers with a good history of releasing good games whether those games were crowdfunded or not, at least for the big amount of money funded games.

No it's not. Have you been keeping track of how many projects from mainstream devs which never got funded?

Did you read my post from earlier in this thread where I posted various analysis from ICO about videogame crowd-funding trends?

Quote
Without the crowdfunded games, I fear we would be left with the massive amount of garbage that the AAA market (which is easily 95% of AAA gaming) has been shoveling out for more than a decade, where they put creativity and innovation into the trunk, or with the massive amount of indie games where 95% of them are garbage, and even then the good ones have a low production values.


Wrong again. Going by the huge popularity of triple A games, even going by the numbers of those that faltered recently such as COD:IW, ME:A, the number of those games continues to do well because fans stick with what they know and want to play. And for devs/pubs, sequels or copies are always a safe bet.

If gamers weren't buying those games, devs/pubs won't be making them. So  clearly the minority think they are garbage. And minority opinions don't pay the bills.

The reason that most indie games are not up to par is because of the low barrier to entry in developing and publishing games. When you reduce that bar, that's what you get. Then game development is no longer an exclusive club. It's no different from any other form of creative media such as books, movies, or music.

As an example, since I started out, I knew that the type of games that I wanted to make, weren't going to appeal to a lot of people. So, just like flight sims from back in the day, I carved out a niche market for my games, stuck with it, and almost 30 years later, aside from the short detour to do an RTS (Line Of Defense Tactics) which did surprisingly well, I have stuck with those same games because my install base kept buying them. And over the years, that install base grew. It's the same reason that the DCS flight sims are the de facto standard today, because that market is dead, but there are core simmers like myself who still support it.

Quote
The Crowdfunding games give a way for developers to be more into the AA market, where they can make great games with creativity and innovation in the drivers seat and have a much higher production value than indie games.

No it wasn't and didn't. It also contradicts your early statement. It was just an alternate form of funding for developing games. Whether those games turned out good or bad - or great - is largely irrelevant because financial expense is never the correct metric for judging the quality of a released product. This is evident by the apparent flops of multi-million Dollar games.

What crowdfunding did was give the consumer an even bigger voice for showing that there is still a market for certain kind of games that the market has largely forgot about.  And as a result, crowdfunded or not, we have been seeing more and more developers take on developing those kinds of games since that time.

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk