[Megathread] Star Citizen

[Deleted]

i said i wont post until 4.0 lol

but latest news are hilarious

1. CIG started denying refunds claiming this abortion called 3.0 is the minimum viable product delivered.
2. star citizen white knights, making perjury in fake DMCA claims, are trying to DMCA take down 3.0 video leaks claiming that material is their own. hahaha

the desperation is at an all time high

i predict total collapse by january 2018.

[KyrtF]

You're cherry picking your words

And you are quoting a definition that refers to a physical prototype.

"Computer game developers use tech demos to rouse and maintain interest to titles still in development (because game engines are usually ready before the art is finished) and to ensure functionality by early testing. Short segments using finished game engines may be presented as game demos." From the Tech Demo link. No change in the definition. Only saying when it's used. What they show in their ATV segments are closer to tech demos than what they have on stage or on the floor of the conventions, and certainly not what is playable, which as you so kindly pointed out earlier, was the First playable stage.

See...you CAN use the scroll button.

Are CIG using these releases to rouse and maintain interest"? Yes
Are CIG using these releases to provide early testing? Yes.
Are they using these releases to test and showvase the "groundbreaking" technologies they'be developed? Yes.

Tech demos

And yes....This is pre Alpha. But wait...you seem to be getting confused. Do you think a tech demo for a computer game only exists as a specific phase of development?

Really? You think a Tech Demo can only exist as part of the proof of concept phase?

That would be wrong...a tech demo of computer software can exist in ANY phase of computer development. Right now CIG are pushing out tech demos of the pre-Alpha and using it to showcase their work, to generate and maintain interest and to conduct testing.

[masterhorus8]

1. CIG started denying refunds claiming this abortion called 3.0 is the minimum viable product delivered.

Knee-jerk reaction much?



At the bottom of the refund emails: "We consider each request on a case by case basis and will work with you to find the best solution. Given the focus on the release of Star Citizen Alpha 3.0 right now, it will be a few weeks before we can give this request the detailed attention requires."

CIG is just adding to the bottom what it has been since they switched from Kickstarter (that's what the timeframe is being referenced). They're just letting people know that they are busy at the moment and that the refund process will take longer.

This is what happens when you listen to a certain someone.

[Onvious]

Im not sure but people simply donate money to star citizen right? For their donation they have access to game so asking refund for donation isn't bit weird? I mean I gave 45dollar years ago but I didn't care much

[Majestic12]

Knee-jerk reaction much?



At the bottom of the refund emails: "We consider each request on a case by case basis and will work with you to find the best solution. Given the focus on the release of Star Citizen Alpha 3.0 right now, it will be a few weeks before we can give this request the detailed attention requires."

CIG is just adding to the bottom what it has been since they switched from Kickstarter (that's what the timeframe is being referenced). They're just letting people know that they are busy at the moment and that the refund process will take longer.

This is what happens when you listen to a certain someone.

CIG do refunds but honestly it depends on when you backed. A long-time backer has a much higher chance to get theirs because the scope did change quite a bit and nobody has denied that.

I will also say (slightly in defense of CIG) that it's a bit of a grey line when somebody who spends 120+ hours playing SC then refunds the full amount. It's borderline theft if you've played that much and get a full refund. I still think that due to the scope/TOS change they should be warranted a full refund, but if it weren't for those things I would support partial refunds or no refunds at all.

Pretty easy to make a refund case when CIG blatantly removed the financial disclosure part of the TOS and basically wrote "You will agree not to sue us". But that only applies if you backed before they did that, otherwise they have the leverage.

[masterhorus8]

CIG do refunds but honestly it depends on when you backed. A long-time backer has a much higher chance to get theirs because the scope did change quite a bit and nobody has denied that.

I will also say (slightly in defense of CIG) that it's a bit of a grey line when somebody who spends 120+ hours playing SC then refunds the full amount. It's borderline theft if you've played that much and get a full refund. I still think that due to the scope/TOS change they should be warranted a full refund, but if it weren't for those things I would support partial refunds or no refunds at all.

Pretty easy to make a refund case when CIG blatantly removed the financial disclosure part of the TOS and basically wrote "You will agree not to sue us". But that only applies if you backed before they did that, otherwise they have the leverage.

Yeah, but to flat out say that "CIG is now denying refunds because 3.0 is out" was what I was addressing. The answer being "no, they're not denying anything more than usual, just taking longer due to being busy."

EDIT: Also, what financial disclosure was ever on the ToS? Source? Because this is the full change and I do not see anything regarding what you mentioned (but my legalese is a bit rough).

EDIT 2: Do you happen to mean the Financial Accountability? If so, then yeah, it got a bit murkier for newer buyers (limited more so to what you were saying), but anyone that had purchased prior to the change are still held to the old ToS, as stated in the update.

[Wilian]

when somebody who spends 120+ hours playing SC then refunds the full amount. It's borderline theft if you've played that much and get a full refund.

That implies there's a -game- to play.

[Edge-]

That implies there's a -game- to play.

Or that alpha testers aren't providing a free service (well, they're paying to be able to provide this free service) to CIG by testing the unfinished pieces of their game and reporting bugs/generating metrics/providing feedback.

It's a strange argument to make when you present it in proper context and not as if they're playing the final game.

[Mahourai]

The documentary on the development of this game is gonna be sick.

[Puupi]

The documentary on the development of this game is gonna be sick.

Where is the kickstarter for that for us to chime in?

[MrAnderson]

Where is the kickstarter for that for us to chime in?

It's already part of the kickstarter goals to make the documentary, CIG has been filming since they started the project. We've seen parts of it last citizencon.

[Deleted]

starting today there are no more refunds from CIG

money fountain problems ?

https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/

they claim delivery with 3.0 hahaha nice one.

Like really, these are not new refund requests, but ones from almost a month ago, after having been answered to by CS, had them jump through the hoops of identifying themselves (providing ID), and giving them current PayPal address for depositing the funds, then BLAM, nope we changed our minds, you are no longer entitled to your refund.

[Majestic12]

Yeah, but to flat out say that "CIG is now denying refunds because 3.0 is out" was what I was addressing. The answer being "no, they're not denying anything more than usual, just taking longer due to being busy."

EDIT: Also, what financial disclosure was ever on the ToS? Source? Because this is the full change and I do not see anything regarding what you mentioned (but my legalese is a bit rough).

EDIT 2: Do you happen to mean the Financial Accountability? If so, then yeah, it got a bit murkier for newer buyers (limited more so to what you were saying), but anyone that had purchased prior to the change are still held to the old ToS, as stated in the update.

Yeah that's the one. My concern with it is that CIG at one point felt that it was appropriate (for a crowdfunding project) to put that in there in the first place but when the time came, postponed it and ultimately backed down on it entirely.

It was originally a genuine and thoughtful thing. That they then felt the need to remove it to me says that they were either 1. Never serious in the first place (misled us) or 2. That they were serious but don't want us to see something. Could show Chris' mismanagement/priority/whatever that would spill negative light on him. It's anybody's guess really, but to me there was no good reason for doing that. It just tells me they have incentive to hide something.

[Deleted]

let's relax and laugh a bit

Old McCrobberts had a game ELELE
And in that game he had some bugs ELELE
With a jpeg here and a demo there
Some refunds
No refunds
Never any refunds
Old McCrobberts went to jail HEHEHEHEHE

Please post productively and don't troll. Infracted. -Edge

[Mahourai]

It's already part of the kickstarter goals to make the documentary, CIG has been filming since they started the project. We've seen parts of it last citizencon.

I don't mean a CIG-produced one, although it may eventually be made out of footage they release. I mean like an actual, unbiased look at how the development of this game went down.

[Odeezee]

it's amazing how people take so much time out of their day to hate on something that they claim to not like yet they could just step away and move on with their lives. very sad.

anyway, great news for those of us looking forward to 3.0 coming out! 3.0 with Evocati just another step closer; PTU then live release of Alpha 3.0! the game looks amazing from what i have seen so far i will share some of the videos i have seen, though keep in mind these videos are not indicative of actual gameplay as they are used for bug-reporting purposes.



very promising! looking forward to actually getting my hands on this update.

[KyrtF]

it's amazing how people take so much time out of their day to hate on something that they claim to not like yet they could just step away and move on with their lives. very sad.

Sad? You think it takes a lot of time or effort to reply to these posts? To read them?

SC isn't that important and reading a few posts isn't difficult.

Perhaps you could explain why it seems virtually forbidden to speak ill of the game and criticise its development? Why pointing out any of the flaws seems to be justification to be called a "hater"

Because contrary to your assertion, I support Star Citizen. I would love for Star Citizen to come out and meet all its promises.

I simply have severe reservations about CIGs ability to deliver the game.

There is literally nothing they have produced that tells me they have the skill or experience or money to make these games work.

Pointing out the reasons why this is so seems to be more than enough to label me a "hater". Devotees of Star Citizen never seem to be able to point out where I am wrong...I am just a "hater" and therefore somehow unworthy of a response.

anyway, great news for those of us looking forward to 3.0 coming out! 3.0 with Evocati just another step closer; PTU then live release of Alpha 3.0! the game looks amazing from what i have seen so far i will share some of the videos i have seen, though keep in mind these videos are not indicative of actual gameplay as they are used for bug-reporting purposes.

Yes...we've all seen the leaked videos. I frankly don't see the point of the Evocati program as a proper professional QA program should be catching these bugs in house before the public has a chance to see them.

CIG took the time and effort to add a digital watermark scheme that is easily bypassed by turning the graphics mode down. They didn't stop the leaks...they merely changed the narrative from "Golly...that's buggy" to "Golly...that's buggy AND it looks awful".

As it is, I've seen the GC17 demo. Star Citizen didn't have good graphics there for the most part. That too is an area of concern. The best looking thing about the game so far are the planets, then the ships then the character models....those look very 2010.

As it is, those leaked videos are showing that CIG haven't even fixed basic issues such as their physics grid (I'm assuming the problems are with the grid and not with their physics engine). This would be yet another core system of the game that still needs work.

Because it isn't the fact that the game is buggy that is so concerning. No...its a preAlpha tech demo. I expect bugs.

Its first of all, the lack of progress in the development of the game
Its second, the way CIG treats its backers
Third, Chris Roberts history as a developer.

To put it bluntly....
the game is taking too long to produce an Alpha. Its been over six years now and the first playable is nowhere in sight. Star Citizen still has issues with its game engine, CIG is openly admitting it is still developing it, its flight model needs a vast amount of work, the netcode is effectively MIA and CR still doesn't seem to have locked down the basics such as how many players per server or instance.

Any competent developer would have had all this and more effectively locked down years ago. They would need to to avoid all the issues CIG are experiencing.

That CIG hasn't carried out such basic foundational work is a huge red flag. Its something which is causing them to extend the development time, something which increases costs.

There is a reason why best practise is to build the base first...it makes the entire development so much cheaper, quicker and more reliable.

CIG aren't doing that, this is a big reason why work is dragging and costs have soared, and the best response I've gotten is "Star Citizen isn't doing normal".

Chris Roberts once boasted that he could run his company on one fifth the profits of a traditional developer because he didn't have to shate money and profits with a publisher. That statement only works if his costs aren't higher.

3.0 appears to be a demo that is fun...but hugely buggy. Its good that it is fun but the bugs also indicate that the game has a lot of core, fundamental issues that need fixing. Issues that would have been avoided under a "normal" development process.

As it is, CIG are progressing the game. 3.0 is to be welcomed. But CIG are producing this game at one fifth the speed and at ten times the cost that would be expected from other teams.

This despite their $110 million spend and 400 people.

I believe nonetheless that Star Citizen can be made and can live up to its promise. So long as the money holds out.

I think we all have read the recent article which puts the typical development cost at about $13,000 per developer per month. That includes the dev, licenses and equipment so he can work, entitlements such as pension costs and the like.

If we use the undershoot of $10,000 per month instead....300 devs would require a bill of $3 million a month. CIG hasn't raised $3 million a month for quite some time.

How long can their money hold out if these figures are anywhere near accurate? Of course, maybe they are underpaying their devs even more than I assume...but that also implies less experienced less productive staff and so longer development times.

How accurate are these figures? Take F42. $15 million in one year and say a team of 100. That's $150,000 per person per year or about $12,500 a month.

Essentially...the pathway to success in this game appears very narrow. Development is much slower than it has any right to be, costs are much higher.

I believe I can explain why....Chris Roberts.

Because of Chris Roberts, years of work were tossed.

He originally planned a WC successor...and it seems doubtful he carried out any sort of feasibility study for the MMO he has changed the game into.
There has been feature creep and bloat because of him.
Chris Roberts made the choice of engine.
Chris Roberts is prioritising development he can hype over development of core systems.
Chris Roberts didn't keep third parties up to speed on the game engine ensuring their work needed to be redone
Chris Roberts made pretty much the same mistake within CIG...engine changes are forcing CIG to rework a lot of game assets and systems

And more. Simply going by what is reported and what is shown, CIG has a poor manager.

Am I a SC "hater"? No. But it is becoming increasingly evident that CIG are having issues and seem very unlikely to have the funding available to complete the game as promised.

The information we have suggests a spend to date of about $110 million. The amount raised is $160 million...not counting outside investors, loans or refunds leaving a buffer of $50million. At $3 million a month, that's about $500k more than they raise, so enough for 100 months of development if funding efforts remain as they are....which seems not impossible but unlikely.

That $50million buffer also has to pay for publication, hosting and marketing costs for two games. Its already inadequate for that task unless CIG don't plan on marketing it.

Is Star Citizen marked for greatness? More and more, its looking more akin to Daikatana or DNF than Deus Ex or the Witcher series.

And thats really disappointing.

[Deleted]

there is definitevly something big going on

suddenly , in the past 72 hours, there are tons of denied refunds stories

ofc some maybe are fake, but also there were fake refund stories even before

huge increase in refund topics posted by lots of 1 year old reddit account, for sure something is happening

i don't see any reason other than CIG are finally low on funds, makes sense if you look at their funding graph, 40% of their income comes in the last 2 months of the year

if Citizen Con and November+december 2017 are low on funding they may fall in Q1 2018

======================================

second post

Star Citizen is a fascinating world indeed

Can I... can I tell you a secret?

Hold on to your panties though because this is going to blow you away.

Are you ready?


Ok. Here we go:

The backers don’t actually play games.

They don’t even play Star Citizen when it iterates out.

The game they’re in is a meta social game, and they’re already playing it.

Star Citizen coming out would actually hurt the game they’re currently winning at and enjoying.

They won’t gravitate to another game because they don’t actually want to play the game.

What will eventually happen though is people will get bored. The ELE as it happens may just be the simple fact that they no longer want to spend money on lies. Once their buddies leave their discord’s, and the role play dries up, and there are too many holes in the lore, and the reality of the game solidifies, it comes apart.

I don’t have links to my blog, but I’ll say it again:

Star Citizen coming out and being developed will kill Star Citizen.

It’s fuel is the dreams and fantasies of 40-something’s who are fighting to rekindle a lost art they fondly recall from their youth. CR came in at almost the perfect time to capitalize on this midlife crisis group. Instead of buying their own Porsche’s they’re blowing their money on space ships.

The guys on reddit aren’t funding anything. They’ve already spent their meager amount of money and CIG can collect no more from them. Their defense also isn’t helping anything because the guys funding it ignore them too.

The mmo is happening right now. Once they win it, the money goes away. They won’t invest in another game either. This is the childhood memory game, and soon the midlife crisis will end.

As they get closer to leaving crisis, they’re going to want their money back, too. They’ll probably pay for lawyers as well because they have money to burn from successful and lucrative careers.

The other side of them are the people waiting for it to come out. 3.0 is “that turning point”. The group who isn’t role playing is waiting in the shadows for when their new Eve Online appears. They’ve been lead, oh so wrongly, to believe 3.0 is “that product”.

People are wondering “why stop refunds now? Why before unveiling 3.0 and their biggest achievement??? They’re spoiling their best, possibly last, big opportunity!!”

And I feel you’re only getting half the picture. The other half is what the evocati fuckers have, and are likely filling up their mail with problems. 3.0 is hosed, and it’s bad, and it looks like and plays like a joke of a game; not something a multinational company has been working on 24/7 for over 5 years.

This “stop the refunds now!” is a preemptive play to kill the silent majority of big money whales, waiting in the shadows, who have been paying all along, buying all the stuff, no doubt being fed lies about 3.0 in different methods of communication. Either special forums, private one on one email with their preferred employees, etc.

So really, there’s two fantasy groups who are huge benefactors who need to be stopped before they pull their money out.

1: The fantasy role players playing the game right now (and are almost done with it)

2: The silent majority led to believe 3.0 is where things get real and they can join in to the huge Eve-like mmo universe with a custom character and awesome fleet

Both groups represent huge $$$. Both are about to tucker on out or get real pissed.

Anyhow that’s my hot take. I’m sending this scoop to pixelemonade right now!

[1001]

there is definitevly something big going on

suddenly , in the past 72 hours, there are tons of denied refunds stories

ofc some maybe are fake, but also there were fake refund stories even before

huge increase in refund topics posted by lots of 1 year old reddit account, for sure something is happening

i don't see any reason other than CIG are finally low on funds, makes sense if you look at their funding graph, 40% of their income comes in the last 2 months of the year

They probably are getting low on funds, saw a post on mmorpg.com saying that from start to the end of 2017 they will have spent at least $120M if using the $120,000 per employee per year number that most studios use. InXile's CEO said that was a number he used in 2000 and is more likely 20% - 30% lower than current figures, using 25% would put the number at something like $190M...

[masterhorus8]

They probably are getting low on funds, saw a post on mmorpg.com saying that from start to the end of 2017 they will have spent at least $120M if using the $120,000 per employee per year number that most studios use. InXile's CEO said that was a number he used in 2000 and the costs these days are more likely 20% - 30% higher, using 25% would put the number at something like $190M...

Was that $120M based on $120,000 x number of current employees x number of years? Or did it take into account the growth?

Not to mention, math is hard apparently? 25% increase of 120m would be 150m, not 190m.