[Megathread] Star Citizen

[MrAnderson]

This is just you projecting. Because you are so emotionally attached you think everyone else must be as well. What was it you said before? That you felt it was your duty to love the game...

Don't be mad at people because they like a game you don't. Maybe find another game to be enthusiastic about and go post in that thread instead of feeding of miserabilism for the sake of coping with the fact that this game is not for you anymore.

[kenn9530]

This is nonsensical. If one takes part in a Kickstarter the terms are laid out and the company receives money based on those terms.
Changing the deal after one has received monies is known as bait and switch. There is no expectation for a backer or customer to have to wait indefinitely because the company cannot get their affairs in order.

Try applying your logic elsewhere in the world and see how far it gets you.

It stated it in the kickstarter the risks and challenges that they would aim to make the game they wanted but would settle on a different version if the money was not enough.

There was also a vote to change the scope of the game that the community kept giving money until just before 2015 so the game grew larger over 2 years because the community wanted more. The community agreed to the change in the game so the origional terms in the kickstarter were not relevant anymore.

[1001]

Don't be mad at people because they like a game you don't. Maybe find another game to be enthusiastic about and go post in that thread instead of feeding of miserabilism for the sake of coping with the fact that this game is not for you anymore.

AKA "If you don't like it fuck off, we've got your money already so screw you...." that sounds about right for CIG and their company men.

[Katchii]

Don't be mad at people because they like a game you don't. Maybe find another game to be enthusiastic about and go post in that thread instead of feeding of miserabilism for the sake of coping with the fact that this game is not for you anymore.

Many people provided money based on promises, projections and a schedule that have been revamped, changed, delayed, etc.... meaning they backed because CIG said "X" and now they're saying "Y" ...... that's not OK.

So saying people should "do their homework" regarding their pledges..... they did (some at least) and the game is not living up to the expectations the developers set for themselves.

I'm not debating that game development is full of uncertainties, but that shouldn't allow for a free for all kind of thing where the company asking for money can just change things up, not deliver on promises, change what promises they make and then basically make no promises that the money people provide will even amount to the game they backed.

- - - Updated - - -

It stated it in the kickstarter the risks and challenges that they would aim to make the game they wanted but would settle on a different version if the money was not enough.

There was also a vote to change the scope of the game that the community kept giving money until just before 2015 so the game grew larger over 2 years because the community wanted more. The community agreed to the change in the game so the origional terms in the kickstarter were not relevant anymore.

The community, at large, yes....but not everybody. The "not everybody" part is what matters here.

[kenn9530]

The community, at large, yes....but not everybody. The "not everybody" part is what matters here.

kickstarter backers could get a refund if they wanted so if you were not happy then there would of been a time to claim your money back, if you waited too long then you would not of been following the game that much and it would be your fault if you were outside any refund requirements.

[MrAnderson]

Many people provided money based on promises, projections and a schedule that have been revamped, changed, delayed, etc.... meaning they backed because CIG said "X" and now they're saying "Y" ...... that's not OK.

So saying people should "do their homework" regarding their pledges..... they did (some at least) and the game is not living up to the expectations the developers set for themselves.

I'm not debating that game development is full of uncertainties, but that shouldn't allow for a free for all kind of thing where the company asking for money can just change things up, not deliver on promises, change what promises they make and then basically make no promises that the money people provide will even amount to the game they backed.

The community, at large, yes....but not everybody. The "not everybody" part is what matters here.

That's all true as it is irrelevant because all that matters in the grand scheme of things is the big picture. And the big picture showcases the grand majority of the backers supports CIG decision as the constant growth in funding and players show year after year.

Companies and products can only succeed for years on end and thrive by getting more things right than wrong. Doesn't matter how loud the disgruntled ones cry and rage as long they are a minority the company is going in the right path because it's factually proven that you can't please everyone.
That's what most haters fail to realise and get over with, they don't matter in the big picture and realising that makes them feel bad inside. It's text book pathological angry gamer behaviour:

Understanding the Angry Gamer

One thing I’ve noticed is that, within the gaming community, there are always the really angry gamers. Extremely vocal gamers who are vehemently angry with a developer about things. It is usually because of some design decision or implementation about the game that just rubbed some of the players the wrong way. And boy, do gamers love to hold grudges.



If you work on games, you too will probably see them at some point. Hopefully you won’t have to deal with them directly - that’s what community management is for. But it always helps to understand your player base, because it helps to translate the things they say into actual useful feedback.

The important thing to remember is that, first and foremost, angry gamers are, in actuality, deeply engaged fans of the game. They aren’t angry because they don’t care, they are angry because they love the game. They are deeply, deeply invested in it - to the point that they want to feel some measure of ownership of it. When they are not angry, they will happily try to engage with the developers and other fans of the game, they love the game so much that they will try to engage with it beyond the confines of the game itself - online message boards, chat rooms, blogs, streams, twitter, fan fiction, fan art, fan design, and so on. And when the developers solicit feedback, it’s like crack to an addict - they feel special, like they are part of something bigger than themselves.



It’s also why they feel so damn offended when things don’t go their way. It doesn’t matter what X is - it could be a design decision, it could be a plot decision, it could be bugs, it could be technology, it could be just about anything. But regardless of what X is, somebody is going to care very much about X and the decision the developers make regarding X will be the opposite of what this somebody wants. This is inevitable - some people will want X while others will abhor the very thought of X, and the developers will need to make a decision one way or the other, thereby causing anger from the disenfranchised. But it makes them feel terrible because they want what they think is best for the product, and it’s extremely frustrating when the developers are taking the clearly wrong choice.



When a player who is this invested in the game doesn’t get his or her way, it’s like a shock to the system. These players are now faced with an awful truth - they are not actually a part of the development process, no matter how many developer streams they watched or developer forum responses they got. They do not really have much ownership beyond being one customer among literally millions. They are not part of something larger than themselves, no matter how much they wish it were otherwise. And they may have to face the realization that there might not be the perfect game for them tailored to exactly their wants and desires, but someone else might get what they want instead.

Games man... they hit you right in the feelz.

[masterblaster0]

As was put forth earlier, because your sentiment towards Star Citizen is so emotionally charged, you believe it must also be true for those offering critiques.

Curiously, do you have a meme page for shills and/or whiteknights?

[Kyanion]

Don't be mad at people because they like a game you don't. Maybe find another game to be enthusiastic about and go post in that thread instead of feeding of miserabilism for the sake of coping with the fact that this game is not for you anymore.

Translation: Stop posting in this thread, I don't like it when you talk bad about my "game". Let me post some more financial information and call people haters.

- - - Updated - - -

AKA "If you don't like it fuck off, we've got your money already so screw you...." that sounds about right for CIG and their company men.

Basically. If they keep taking in so much money from the cash shop and outside investors then they should refund people who aren't pleased with the game taking 8+ years. But nahhhhh that'll never happen. They gonna keep kicking the can down the road. The game is coming. One day. Maybe your kids will get to play it after you die of old age while waiting.

- - - Updated - - -

It's text book pathological angry gamer behavior.

You do realize that many people in this thread that have different opinions than you aren't angry? Some of these posters have no financial horse in this race. We're talking in a forum about a video game in development. We aren't banging on the doors of CiG with pitchforks and signs. This is one of the main reasons this thread has been such a disaster, because you won't discuss the game in a civil manner. You just love to attack the other side by labeling them.

[Katchii]

kickstarter backers could get a refund if they wanted so if you were not happy then there would of been a time to claim your money back, if you waited too long then you would not of been following the game that much and it would be your fault if you were outside any refund requirements.

Fair enough. I still find it a little shitty that they can basically take your money and do whatever they want with it at this point because they have a catch all kind of statement in their funding verbiage.

But if people sign up for that at this point, it IS their problem for giving money if they don't agree with that, but that doesn't make CIG any less shitty in that aspect though to put that verbiage there.

- - - Updated - - -

That's all true as it is irrelevant because all that matters in the grand scheme of things is the big picture. And the big picture showcases the grand majority of the backers supports CIG decision as the constant growth in funding and players show year after year.

I think part of the problem there is that even CIG doesn't really know what EXACTLY that big picture is, or at least didn't for a long time. They may have a huge pie in the sky kind of idea of what they want the game to probably, some day, maybe, hopefully become but as development has gone on they've shown they are still trying to grapple with how exactly to get there. As shown in their ever changing patch plans with things moved, changed, pushed back, etc....

That's a problem, IMO.

Games man... they hit you right in the feelz.

Yes, they certainly do.

And I do honestly hope that SC and SQ42 do eventually get released as exactly the games they have been marketed to be. I'm just incredibly skeptical about it at this point.

[kenn9530]

snip

Most companies have a set refund policy with a timeframe, in the uk if you dont have an official refund policy you are not required to even give a refund but many still do it anyway. Pretty much every single company will do what they can to get money from thier playerbase.

SC is crowdfunded so you should of accepted any risks that would come along the project, if you do pledge money you should just accept that money is gone and play the finished product when its available.

[Katchii]

Most companies have a set refund policy with a timeframe, in the uk if you dont have an official refund policy you are not required to even give a refund but many still do it anyway. Pretty much every single company will do what they can to get money from thier playerbase.

SC is crowdfunded so you should of accepted any risks that would come along the project, if you do pledge money you should just accept that money is gone and play the finished product when its available.

I agree with what you're saying here, which is why I haven't given any money towards this game. My problem is the last part.....when will the final product be available? Because looking at the SC and SQ web pages, the devs still have no real idea when it MIGHT be ready with many core systems still not in place.

I'm not trying to debate the pros and cons of crowdfunding and how long it takes and all the pit falls and issues that come up during game development. I'm simply wanting to understand how after this amount of time and money that has been spent on the game, meaning they've been working for years and spent millions of dollars already and should therefore understand how quickly they can and can't do things, how a developer can still have so little idea of when the finished product will be available.

[1001]

kickstarter backers could get a refund if they wanted so if you were not happy then there would of been a time to claim your money back, if you waited too long then you would not of been following the game that much and it would be your fault if you were outside any refund requirements.

True as far as it goes but let us not forget that CIG were constantly telling people that things were just around the corner, that the next patch would fix X, that Star Marine was coming soon, that 3.0 was coming at the end of the year. Lots of people held on hoping to see these hyped features delivered and then refunds were shut down with no forewarning.

Most companies have a set refund policy with a timeframe, in the uk if you dont have an official refund policy you are not required to even give a refund but many still do it anyway. Pretty much every single company will do what they can to get money from thier playerbase.

Consumer law requires all companies to provide a refunds on goods. 14 days iirc with no reason needed whatsoever. Digital goods can be different if people agree to certain terms.

SC is crowdfunded so you should of accepted any risks that would come along the project, if you do pledge money you should just accept that money is gone and play the finished product when its available.

I don't like this explanation, crowdfunding should not be a ticket for companies to extract money, do as they please, cry off all responsibilites, delivery dates etc and for people to lose all their rights, expectations and even chance of delivery. If we are talking small crowdfunders, fair enough, expectations have to be appropriate. But when a company receives considerably more than anybody ever dreamed of, the rules change and expectations are reset.
We cannot say the risks involved in making a game for $50 million remain the same despite the company having now received $350 million. What might have felt like a bit of a gamble can no longer viewed as a gamble, at some point most people would feel is it assured that the company can now produce their game regardless of any mishaps.

[kenn9530]

snip

CiG has a refund policy anyway, but in the UK you are on entitled to one if the product is faulty but most of the time its just an unwanted item and the store could refuse but they generally dont anyway.

When you back a game you should do some research on the one who will be running the project so everyone should know what chris is like anyway, we are backing the project because noone else is doing anything even remotely similar and if it takes longer then you should just accept it, we would all still be waiting for a space game anyway so it really doesnt matter if it takes longer than some other long term projects.

All delivery dates were nul and void when the game was increased in size between the end of the kickstarter and just before the end of stretch goals just before 2015, so its expected to take much longer when the game was at least doubled in size and all the extra professions added, for the size of the game they are actually making the game is developing at more than a reasonable pace.

[Antipathy1018]

I would like to pop in and say that I have some. . . doubts about at least 1 part of that financial graph Mr. A keeps posting. That being the section between March 2020 to whatever current 1 they post, since Mr. A keeps posting an up to date graph each month. Given the economic state of the entire world due to Covid, how is it people have that much spare money to throw at SC? Especially May 2020 where by a rough estimate CiG pulled in 13 - 15 million.

The only things I can think of are that this game has super whales that can just crap money to give CiG, or a ton of normal people that can't work now, especially in the US, are being dumb as dirt. Kinda like how in April and May when the US stimulus checks went out and on twitter you saw idiots buying flat screen TVs, or getting tattoos instead or buying food, or paying rent or other bills.

[Rennadrel]

Complaining about that a CEO who has all the responsibility, the burden and the motivation to provide the best product possible of being a micro-manager is being obtuse and naive since that's a trait you'll find in many other Studio Lead Dev's and the most successful tech company CEO's.

I mean, the CEO's job is to manage the people directly underneath them. Usually supervisors, project managers, team leads. Ya know, the people who usually report back to the higher ups in management. In the case of CIG, the hierarchy should basically be only several people communicating with Chris on what the main goals and vision are, then they delegate from there to assign teams and certain people to specific tasks. Those people report back to their superiors who willl clarify with Chris on things. Managing people is a pain in the ass when you are dealing with hundreds of people.

[1001]

and if it takes longer then you should just accept it

To a degree.

All delivery dates were nul and void when the game was increased in size between the end of the kickstarter and just before the end of stretch goals just before 2015, so its expected to take much longer when the game was at least doubled in size and all the extra professions added

The original dates, sure. But then you forecast a new date, not remove them entirely. They only did this for 2 reasons, the first being they were so inept at hitting targets and the 2nd, to avoid being held to account. So now we have 3 things that show the idiocy of Star Citizen, a/ they expanded the game way beyond what they could manage in the 1st place, b/ they cannot achieve self-projected targets and c/ removal of targets altogether to avoid any accountability.

And let us not forget this gem



We are now 5 years past that date and people still haven't got what they originally paid for.

or the size of the game they are actually making the game is developing at more than a reasonable pace.

Lol no. Progress is absolutely glacial, especially when you factor in 600+ employees.

[Majestic12]

That's all true as it is irrelevant because all that matters in the grand scheme of things is the big picture. And the big picture showcases the grand majority of the backers supports CIG decision as the constant growth in funding and players show year after year.

See bolded part.

You have no data to support this so it is purely emotionally driven speculation. You have no idea what the majority of x amount of backers think.

[Verdugo]

I wonder if the next crowdfunding milestone is hiring Yandere dev.

[MrAnderson]

See bolded part.

You have no data to support this so it is purely emotionally driven speculation. You have no idea what the majority of x amount of backers think.

See pictures:





So you're implying that the continuous and regular stream of funding with funny middle fingers along the years and huge growth in the last 2 years is a sign that the majority of backers are dissatisfied is that it?

Tolkien would be proud.

[Elim Garak]

A sucker is always happy to part with their money