Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Analysis of 'Backer' Demands
Warley
Member UncommonPosts: 508
As backers of this project, here is our list of demands: (Curious, who appointed Derek Smart the ambassador for all the Star Citizen backers?)
1. disclose the full detailed (private jet travel? we want to see it) P&L accounting (money in off-shore bank accounts? we want to know about them) for every crowd-funded dime that has been raised and spent on this project. Allow an independent forensics accountant, hired by backers, to come and do an audit. This is standard practice in developer-publisher relationships. So you know how that works.
Derek Smart, who owns a competing company and competing project, would like to know all the financial details of another company. I bet it'd be nice to know the details of a company with a competing project; that has most probably signed NDA's with various workers; and would have a lot to gain in knowing these type of details of a competitor.
I'd to remind everyone here. There's no developer-publisher relationship here. This is a crowdfunding game and everyone knew before 'pledging' (edit) their money that the release of the project isn't guaranteed.
Derek Smart (at the time, before his refund) pledging(edit) $250 to the project doesn't constitute a developer-publisher relationship.
2. disclose the true state of the project in terms of what is expected to be delivered, and when. Allow an independent Executive Producer, hired by backers, to come and do a project review in order to get an accurate picture of the game state, so we know when it is likely to see the light of day – if ever
It'd floor me if Derek Smart didn't throw his name into the hat of executive producers, then proceed to lobby for himself to be that hired executive producer. As bad as Alganon was, that game was helmed and developed by someone else before Derek Smart came on board to 'evaluate it'. So, it appears that he has a history of unseating people once they've developed a project to release or near release state. This here sounds like an attempt at a hostile takeover. Derek Smart appears to have a history of that.
3. disclose the true timeline for the project’s completion. As per the above.
Now he's playing on people's ignorance when it comes to software development. Even the best minds in the game development industry that has had tons of experience developming MMORPG's can't give you a 'real timeline' for the development of an MMO. That's simply impossible. Derek Smart knows this and I'm willing to bet his goal here is to get CIG to shoot themselves in the foot so he have more ammo down the line knowing that a project of Star Citizen's current scope will probably have more delays.
4. setup a page offering refunds to all those who REQUEST it. The TOS is going to be the first thing attacked in any lawsuit. It is not likely to survive a legal challenge. Plus, the FTC will trump all that crap anyway, so there is that.
This is coming from a guy that has a history of throwing out lawyer and lawsuit threats at anyone that dare criticize him or his games. This is also coming from someone that doesn't understand fair use; the difference between parody and liable; and is a self-admitted troll.
Research Derek Smart and Desk Top Commander. Derek Smart and Line of Defense Tactics, Steam abuse, etc.
5. admit, in no uncertain terms, and apologize that the scope of the project has changed since the original $2.1m kickstarter crowd-funding campaign
Well, first, I think it was implied, by the announcement of additional features, content, etc that the original game that was crowdfunding was going to have an expanded scope after the initial $2.1 million was surpassed substantially. I mean, what were the developers suppose to do? Pocket all the money they had and create a game on a $2.1 budget? Who's falling for this nonsense?
6. halt all further crowd-funding activities until a sizable part of the game – as originally pitched in 2012 – has been delivered to backers who have paid for it. In other words, STOP selling virtual items and taking money for vaporware
First, here's another attempt at banking on people's ignorance. Once CIG went ahead with a game in bigger scope, and has developed technology towards that bigger scope game, simply scaling it down will take substantial resources and time. Derek Smart KNOWS THIS. He's developed software (although buggy with horrible UX) for over two decades. My educated guess here is that he is being HIGHLY DISHONEST ON PURPOSE.
Plus, does anyone take the idea that a competitor to someone else's project has the right to demand their competitor to do something because that competitor 'donated' $250 to the project seriously? Plus, Derek Smart has absolutely ZERO PROOF that the game is vaporware, but yet he's a competitor calling it vaporware.
7. address the nepotism issues associated with the hiring of unqualified family members to head key parts of this crowd-funded project. In this regard, explain the benefits of a) promoting your brother to an Executive Producer position, as opposed to hiring someone (like the departed Alex Mayberry) who has the experience to match the job. Also what new benefits (pay raise, shares etc) he now has access to, for going into that position b) hiring someone, allegedly your wife, to a position that she is seemingly not qualified to hold. And why a more experienced executive wasn’t put in this position. Especially since that dept has people, with more experience and qualifications to do the job. Instead, they get to answer to her; and naturally, she gets paid more, as per the position.
1. Who is Erin Roberts? He's a gaming industry vet that has had numerous roles on SHIPPED, some critically acclaimed, titles for over two decades. Some of these titles, including the AAA ones, he has been the producer of. It took two seconds to Google this information. I bet Derek Smart is banking on people to be lazy, which it appears most have.
http://www.mobygames.com/developer/sheet/view/developerId,23689/
2. So, who is Sandi Gardiner, the 'alleged wife', as Derek Smart puts it (you know something's up when Derek Smart is using alleged, or ignorance, to make an argument to begin with)? Well, again, the wife thing is 'alleged', as far as I know and as far as Derek Smart knows, but what he fails to mention is that she's been a part of the crowdfunding of Star Citizen for a long time. The Guinness Book of World Records recognizes her as the following: "Is in the Guinness Book of Records 2015 for co-creating the most successful crowd funded project ever." And, that position is VP of Marketing...
Basically, his argument here is:
if(employee.familytoleader == true){ /* Ignore credentials and accomplishes and move to next potential hire /* next(); }
Source: http://www.dereksmart.org/2015/07/interstellar-discourse/
Comments
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
I'm no Derek Smart fan, but I stopped reading after you replaced consumer purchase/investment with "donation."
The FTC does not consider crowdfunding pledges to be "donations." Neither should you.
Perhaps you should get clearer picture:
http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/DanRogers/20150309/238279/Understanding_Your_Kickstarter_Liabilities.php
Having linked that, of course a pledge isn't a donation. A pledge is a promise to donate later in most cases. So, on legal grounds, it may not be 'labeled' a donation, but let's be real. Backers aren't investors.
A firsthand taste of what Derek Smart is like: "since I'm the only person on the planet capable of completely destroying their dev nonsense with regard to the game," he said. "In other words, I'm voted most likely to cause trouble." - Derek Smart Source: http://www.pcgamer.com/derek-smart-star-citizen/ Please, use your brain people.
Yes, he's the only dev in the world because people like this aren't nearly as great as Derek Smart:
https://www.linkedin.com/pub/sean-tracy/10/662/944
https://www.linkedin.com/pub/mark-abent/3a/71b/5b9
https://www.linkedin.com/pub/john-pritchett/0/949/920
https://www.linkedin.com/pub/tom-davies/12/96a/83
Four of the many programmers currently working at Cloud Imperium Games... Their thin resumes is a laundry list of multiplayer games, actually being on the Crytek team, EA, etc.
Derek Smart, and all his hits including his well known and highly popular Galactic Commander (http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/496/view/forums/forum/1056/General-Discussion.html), is here to show the above amateur devs what a real MMO dev is.
Yes, I don't care about the the 'game' Star Citizen, in terms of 'playing the game'. I've been upfront about that several times now. However, the subject of Star Citizen and Derek Smart's blog posts about it were made public. I took an interest in this particular topic since I'm interested in crowdfunding, MMO's, and I've even had firsthand experiences of how Derek Smart acts.
So, please, by all means have your shill-o-meter raised without actually taking a look at my account, it's age, posting history, etc.
The best way to expose someone is poking holes in their arguments. So, by all means, if you have issues with any of my arguments poke holes in them. Attacking someone personally instead of their argument is signs that you yourself have a weak position.
LOL, coming from the guy who is trying to "personally attack" Derek Smart.. You made that point pretty clear
The conclusion of my analysis of the OP's analysis of 'Backer Demands' is that the OP can't even do an analysis to understand the issues some may have. If the OP would have listen to the DSmart interview posted 1-2 days ago on this same site he would comprehend the issue.
Then, by all means, address my comments about his posts where he's speaking for all backers. Address my comments and point out their flaws and holes. Calling me a shill is really an ad hominem, one of the first clear signs that someone has a weak position.
Are you going to address my original post in this thread? Why are people not addressing my original post? Because, you guys know I'm right? That's the only explanation here.
Well, considering you haven't read any of my points you'd miss the fact that Derek Smart (and this PROVEN WITH SOME RESEARCH THAT YOU CAN EASILY DO) doesn't know wtf he's talking about or is possibly being dishonest. Erin Roberts, for example, has been the producer on NUMEROUS AAA released titles. But, Derek Smart basically says he isn't qualified because he's Chris Roberts's brother?
That's probably the BIGGEST hole in Derek Smart's 'demands' and credibility.
Other glaring holes, like equating a people 'pledging' money to a project to a developer-publishing relation... come on. What kind of moron can take him seriously after that? And, that was in his first demand.
Furthermore, demanding an 'independent executive producer', when the person himself (Derek Smart) boasts about being the first and oldest indie developer doesn't make you skeptical of him and his points?
However, let's get down to his point. Please point to the points you agree with so we can discuss them. That way we're tackling each point. I'll provide my opinion based upon a professional level understanding and experience in both game development and large project development.
So, please, let's have this discussion.
Actually DSmart said in his interview he wasn't speaking for ALL backers in his interview around the 39:30 mark.
http://www.mmorpg.com/gameon.cfm/cast/99
How about this:
"They want me not as a backer, as that weakens any legal action that I initiate or become a part of, since I'm the only person on the planet capable of completely destroying their dev nonsense with regard to the game," he said. "In other words, I'm voted most likely to cause trouble." - Derek Smart
http://www.pcgamer.com/derek-smart-star-citizen/
Doesn;t know or being dishonest about what... he's literally compiled a list of questions backers on the forums want answers for.
You're an idiot.
Will anyone address my original post or my points I made in regard to Derek Smart's demands?
Seriously, are you guys all going to continue to dodge that?
All I hear here, over and over is, Chris Roberts is bad and anyone that disagrees with Derek Smart's demands is a fanboy, an idiot, or a shill.
NOT ONE PERSON will or can address my arguments. So, all I can do is chalk you guys up to either being too lazy to form your own opinions or trolling.
Look at his post history, in his own words he doesn't care about the game and is not a backer. Problem is he is desperate to defend a game he cares nothing for.
It's actually embarrassing and cringe worthy that he actually thinks we believe a word he is saying. Whether you support SC or not this guy is a laugh a minute.
Posts history in the last 24 hours from someone who has no interest lol. Now he is actually getting angry lmfao.
Joker.
Where am I defending the Star Citizen game itself? I'm addressing Derek Smart's demands of CIG. Why won't you actually address my arguments against Derek Smart's demands? Pick one.
address your first post with what... your first post's arguments are based purely around the fact you think it's for his own gain to further himself, find out insider information, get himself a job and smear the company.
The fact is his list of "demands" were compiled from other threads on the forums... questions that backers wanted answers for.
THe fact is, kickstarter needs to re-evaluate the way they do things, it's not donating at all, it's a way for some people to do shady business without having accountability to investors or publishers. The fact is, anyone who pledged money in kickstarter is infact an investor in a company that should be traded publicly and the fact that they are so unwilling to release any documentation or adhere to any of the demands just shows how underhanded they are being about the whole thing.
People haved pledged in excess of $10,000+ for ships n such, now thats not a donation... thats literally buying penny shares in a company, the only difference being that they can hide behind kickstarter with no accountability.
I'll have a guess why you can't get what you are looking for, it's because you are actually boring. A repeatative record is the best way to describe your posts.
You actually forget what you have posted in the past, I feel embarrassed for you.
He's right, they gave him his money back when he didn't request a refund, as he didn't break any ToS and posted on HIS blog, yet will stonewall others that may want money back per their own thread.
Conflict of interests aside, let's begin:
That's my analysis of his motives, yes. This is based upon his history and even personal experience. Now, let's take in consideration that Derek Smart is a 'competitor' with a 'competing product' and his first demand:
"Allow an independent forensics accountant, hired by backers, to come and do an audit. This is standard practice in developer-publisher relationships."
This seems to imply that the backers will gain knowledge of these details. This will give him an incredible amount of information for his own competing product. This is a major conflict of interest, and a big red flag.
Furthermore, he is absolutely smearing the company. He's claiming stuff like vaporware, the company doesn't have the ability to create the game, they don't have people capable of creating the game. Have you taken a moment to look at their team? Do a search on LinkedIn.com. Check out the programmers alone, their past experience, their released games. With a little research, you can make a reasonable argument that Derek Smart is smearing the team.
After listening to the initial moments of the podcast, and based upon personal experience, you can already tell that the podcast is about Derek Smart (and how he knows it all). He knows it all so much that his game, Line of Defense, is 3 years over due and has mostly negative reviews on Steam.
Please post links to these threads and provide an explanation of why his list of demands, most especially the one about 'family', are completely legitimate. But, once I review those be honest and review Erin Roberts's credential or the fact that Sandi Gardiner (who is credited by Guinness Book of World Records as being a co-owner of the biggest crowdfunded project ever) don't deserve their positions of Executive Producer (Erin) and VP of Marketing (Sandi). From someone that understands and has experience in the industry, they sure as hell fit the positions.
But, please, post links so I can poke holes in anything you think supports your objection to my original post and arguments.
What does Kickstarter have to do with my original post? Why are you constantly withdrawing to a red herring? Kickstarter isn't meant to be an investment platform, it's meant to be a pledge platform to get projects funding. If it's turned into an investment platform that will COMPLETELY destroy the spirit and what Kickstarter was meant to be.
Just because you think things 'should be' doesn't mean they should be or are. If I wanted to 'invest' in a company I'd look at several options that provide me real returns. If I want to pledge to an idea that I know may or may not succeed, because I like that idea, I'll head to Kickstarter or other crowdfunding resources.
This is one of the most incredibly bad arguments against Kickstarter for a number of reasons. Everyone going into Kickstarter or partaking in other crowdfunding avenues needs to know the difference between a pledge and an investment.
People that pledge $10k+ are most likely the same people that if they wanted to invest in a company to gain stock or shares would do so via other avenues that are bountiful. This is an incredibly weak argument that is and has been THOROUGHLY debunked by industry veterans, including myself, in arguments with people that simply don't understand wtf they're talking about.
But, please, by all means find these people that have plunked down $10k ready to argue and support your side. I can promise you the people (most) that can throw that kind of money around on a ship in a game are the same people that throw a lot more of that around when they're looking to 'invest' and make money.
People that pledge $10k+ are most likely the same people that if they wanted to invest in a company to gain stock or shares would do so via other avenues that are bountiful. AND expect a return on investment THAT is why they invest, bit since this is SIMPLY a good faith donation they are willing to throw 10K away WITH NO return on investment (product.)
Just stop.
Why am I not surprised that you're posting another ad hominem?
Is this not smearing?
in response to your long winded whining post again earlier on my comment.
i'm not proving you with anything, from an outsider what i see is a company producing a fund generator sim not a space sim... all that gets released is more ships for sale and everything else gets pushed back or delayed indefinitely.
the fact that you're so passionate about this really begs to wonder what your motives are.
either way, you're a sad sad person.
I have exactly $47,521 invested between 3 startups in which i'm an official shareholder.
They are products i'd like to see happen, they are products i believe in and they are products that outside of my initial investment i'll be lucky to see more come of it.
it didn't stop me from investing, although my portfolio is somewhat larger than those 3 investments.. not anything huge.. but bigger of which i expect to make a return on, and have lost a size-able amount of money also over the years.
It's not a good faith donation at all, it's money people are investing into a product they believe in and want to see into fruition and should be granted shares in the company and expect a certain level of accountability from the company for use of their money.