LOL funny how many different things are said about SC and videos of exactly what I stated. But for sake of an argument I will say ok you must be right. But still one thing everyone does agree on there is no game.
Yep you're partially right in that statement if you're saying that after only 2 and half years of actual development they have yet to launch a pieced together AAA class mmo. Can you name a company that has?
LOL man you really are dense. I said working alpha, all the games I been involved in from Ultima Online beta right thru to today. 2 years would be nothing to have an actual alpha working to login and play. But you want to jump right to AAA. No wonder you can't see thru CR's BS!
Oh and working AAA game or close to it, 5 years easy! Even more so with 90m to work with, I seen companies do it with a lot less.
5s often early - mid beta, but for this particular argument you need to add at least 2 years too mmo to compensate for the 2 that isn't fair for SC so it's like 11 to 2 or something. Some things just arnt worth arguing about
"He knows if they need to get more money (which I'd guess they will need
at some point) he's going to have a tougher time getting it in the face
of all of this."
This is a very good point. This is probably the main hope that Derek Smart has, that he can play spoiler and screw over someone he envies.
A very few people keep referring to Derek Smart and his supporters. Is there any evidence that anyone supports Derek Smart at all? It sounds a bit silly. But much like the other unexamined claims made by the Derek Smart charlatan, most people give it a free pass.
What is there to support? Sounds like someone wants to jump in front of a parade and hope it materializes behind him.
The Escapist for its part is in the hotseat now. They have doubled down on their "story" and are hoping the bluster will cover their unprofessionalism. It might, but only because the people they targeted are being nice to them about it.
Well he definitely has "supporters" , one only needs to look at his twitter for evidence of that. Whether they are really just egging him on to see what he'll say next, or actually believe he's genuine is the other side of that coin. The rest of your point I think is spot on though.
All we can hope is that something positive comes out of this whether it be stricter policy from kickstarter involving game projects. Or simply people figuring out that some men just want to watch the world burn, and they don't always have your best interest at hand even when their words pretend to.
I'm sure in the heat of the moment Roberts figured that if he could show the Escapist that Derek has it out for him, that maybe they wouldn't run with the story. He underestimated their need for those drama induced webpage clicks though.
Which just shows more of the issue between game-development and kickstarting, or really any kind of business that can see rapid transitions involving time honoring contracts.. which can usually be altered in a real investor/invested relationship, because it's usually between the reps of two or more parties, when there are thousands of voices, how does any needed change get done? That would never work without a popular vote like process.
Or you could just you know meet the original goal and then use the xtra $ to make paid DLC/xpcs free or lower cost to backers an voila same end less drama it aint rocket science. EDIT worked pretty well for Elite I think.
I thought it was obvious I wasn't talking on this exact scenario there, as that wouldn't be a needed change.
Still I wouldn't say what was done with Elite was a good thing either, if I did view it that way I'd have bought it. They released a skeletal game and are now charging full price of another game to expand on it. Nah, not for me.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Which just shows more of the issue between game-development and kickstarting, or really any kind of business that can see rapid transitions involving time honoring contracts.. which can usually be altered in a real investor/invested relationship, because it's usually between the reps of two or more parties, when there are thousands of voices, how does any needed change get done? That would never work without a popular vote like process.
Or you could just you know meet the original goal and then use the xtra $ to make paid DLC/xpcs free or lower cost to backers an voila same end less drama it aint rocket science. EDIT worked pretty well for Elite I think.
I thought it was obvious I wasn't talking on this exact scenario there, as that wouldn't be a needed change.
Still I wouldn't say what was done with Elite was a good thing either, if I did view it that way I'd have bought it. They released a skeletal game and are now charging full price of another game to expand on it. Nah, not for me.
This is in regards to the original KS backers. Every single one of them dontated for exactly that and would likely have been just as happy. The drama didn't kick in until the what some paid for changed. It's only been increasing ever since.
Which just shows more of the issue between game-development and kickstarting, or really any kind of business that can see rapid transitions involving time honoring contracts.. which can usually be altered in a real investor/invested relationship, because it's usually between the reps of two or more parties, when there are thousands of voices, how does any needed change get done? That would never work without a popular vote like process.
Or you could just you know meet the original goal and then use the xtra $ to make paid DLC/xpcs free or lower cost to backers an voila same end less drama it aint rocket science. EDIT worked pretty well for Elite I think.
I thought it was obvious I wasn't talking on this exact scenario there, as that wouldn't be a needed change.
Still I wouldn't say what was done with Elite was a good thing either, if I did view it that way I'd have bought it. They released a skeletal game and are now charging full price of another game to expand on it. Nah, not for me.
Elite did exactly the right thing. They made a game, now they add to that game and ask for more money.
SC did exactly the wrong thing. They made commercials, brochures and really buggy Alpha demos to get more money from backers.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling." - Michael Bitton Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about." - SEANMCAD
Or you could just you know meet the original goal and then use the xtra $ to make paid DLC/xpcs free or lower cost to backers an voila same end less drama it aint rocket science. EDIT worked pretty well for Elite I think.
That doesn't work when you are talking about completely different scales for the engine. All that's needed is to offer refunds to people that funded the original scope and didn't want the increase of scope and delay of release.
I thought it was obvious I wasn't talking on this exact scenario there, as that wouldn't be a needed change.
Still I wouldn't say what was done with Elite was a good thing either, if I did view it that way I'd have bought it. They released a skeletal game and are now charging full price of another game to expand on it. Nah, not for me.
This is in regards to the original KS backers. Every single one of them dontated for exactly that and would likely have been just as happy. The drama didn't kick in until the what some paid for changed. It's only been increasing ever since.
I get that, but it's also in regard to kickstarting in general, and how it differs from what you'd call typical contractual scenarios. Which is what I was speaking toward. In the end this is really about what is appropriate or not for a studio using crowd sourced funds. As well as what's appropriate as far as expectations go as a backer.
That's the big picture that will come form all of this.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I thought it was obvious I wasn't talking on this exact scenario there, as that wouldn't be a needed change.
Still I wouldn't say what was done with Elite was a good thing either, if I did view it that way I'd have bought it. They released a skeletal game and are now charging full price of another game to expand on it. Nah, not for me.
This is in regards to the original KS backers. Every single one of them dontated for exactly that and would likely have been just as happy. The drama didn't kick in until the what some paid for changed. It's only been increasing ever since.
I get that, but it's also in regard to kickstarting in general, and how it differs from what you'd call typical contractual scenarios. Which is what I was speaking toward. In the end this is really about what is appropriate or not for a studio using crowd sourced funds. As well as what's appropriate as far as expectations go as a backer.
That's the big picture that will come form all of this.
The big picture is likely an over-reaction knee jerk once legislation gets added in resposnce to something instead of organically. And it's becoming ever more likely. Any time an industry can't police itself and needs help it's rarely fun for anyone.
Which just shows more of the issue between game-development and kickstarting, or really any kind of business that can see rapid transitions involving time honoring contracts.. which can usually be altered in a real investor/invested relationship, because it's usually between the reps of two or more parties, when there are thousands of voices, how does any needed change get done? That would never work without a popular vote like process.
Or you could just you know meet the original goal and then use the xtra $ to make paid DLC/xpcs free or lower cost to backers an voila same end less drama it aint rocket science. EDIT worked pretty well for Elite I think.
I thought it was obvious I wasn't talking on this exact scenario there, as that wouldn't be a needed change.
Still I wouldn't say what was done with Elite was a good thing either, if I did view it that way I'd have bought it. They released a skeletal game and are now charging full price of another game to expand on it. Nah, not for me.
Elite did exactly the right thing. They made a game, now they add to that game and ask for more money.
SC did exactly the wrong thing. They made commercials, brochures and really buggy Alpha demos to get more money from backers.
People already paid for a game in Elite's case, now they're paying for it again... I wouldn't call that exactly the right thing. They also ran into problems meeting their backer goals. Again not teh right thing in making monetized promises they couldn't fill.
IN SC's case they did some folks wrong in regard to those who didn't want the project to expand, they've only done everyone else wrong if they never release a game.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
, brochures and really buggy Alpha demos to get more money from backers.
People already paid for a game in Elite's case, now they're paying for it again... I wouldn't call that exactly the right thing. They also ran into problems meeting their backer goals. Again not teh right thing in making monetized promises they couldn't fill.
IN SC's case they did some folks wrong in regard to those who didn't want the project to expand, they've only done everyone else wrong if they never release a game.
Just curious, I honestly don't know. Do the originally backers in ELITE pay full price or anything for the 1st few xpcs, DLC's whatever they use. Assuming they pay full didn't ELITE raise a crap ton less $ that would make it harder to put xtra towards those things that wasn't a factor for SC?
The big picture is likely an over-reaction knee jerk once legislation gets added in resposnce to something instead of organically. And it's becoming ever more likely. Any time an industry can't police itself and needs help it's rarely fun for anyone.
A good point, I'm not against crowd funding, nor exactly for it in cases liek SC, it's just too big a project to rely on such a shaky foundation in funding.. It needs a much stronger ongoing backbone to ensure success.
But you're right I see no good coming of legislation jumping in mid chorus, it needs to be a part of the foundation.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
People already paid for a game in Elite's case, now they're paying for it again... I wouldn't call that exactly the right thing. They also ran into problems meeting their backer goals. Again not teh right thing in making monetized promises they couldn't fill.
IN SC's case they did some folks wrong in regard to those who didn't want the project to expand, they've only done everyone else wrong if they never release a game.
Just curious, I honestly don't know. Do the originally backers in ELITE pay full price or anything for the 1st few xpcs, DLC's whatever they use. Assuming they pay full didn't ELITE raise a crap ton less $ that would make it harder to put xtra towards those things that wasn't a factor for SC?
I'm not sure either, I was strictly referring to the retail version being barren and having to pay more to get the rest. As far as failing backer goals I was referring to the offline version.
The rest I do not know.
I just find it a bad example to use as it was. A good example would be DIvinty OS, Wasteland 2, POE, etc.. as games that were handled right
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The big picture is likely an over-reaction knee jerk once legislation gets added in resposnce to something instead of organically. And it's becoming ever more likely. Any time an industry can't police itself and needs help it's rarely fun for anyone.
A good point, I'm not against crowd funding, nor exactly for it in cases liek SC, it's just too big a project to rely on such a shaky foundation in funding.. It needs a much stronger ongoing backbone to ensure success.
But your right I see no good coming of legislation jumping in mid chorus, it needs to be a part of the foundation.
For a long time gaming has existed in a bubble(in regards to industry specific regulation), when issues with flooded markets of cheap games(Purina Dog Chow was a game dev at one time) the market more or less revolted and it was small enough it mattered. And it self corrected. In mid/late 2000's alot of devs/pubs had became over leveraged doing much the same but faster but 08 hit and the credit to pay Peter from Paul went away and the side of the road became full of corpses of those who lived on other peoples money. Another correction/contraction not self genereated market was much larger preventing self correction. I don't see anything on the horizon to generate a correction and the issues with KC/CF will likely be the vector for a pretty significant reg overhaul relatively soon(FTC's already looking at it)l as it spans much more than gaming. And gaming will likely be revenue heavy enough absent a correction to be worthy of attention all it's own at the worse time possible with which hunt regulation. Exacerbated if it's experiencing it's own CF issues at the same time That will be so much fun.
Load of BS tbh, in that letter, they claim they did not have a chance to refute certain allegations, as they were not listed as one of the bullet points, yet those allegations are in fact clearly listed as a bullet point.
-Allegations of a “toxic” work environment, including ignored Human Resources complaints against Sandi Gardiner (including accusations of discriminatory hiring processes, vulgarity and personal insults during both public disagreements and email exchanges).
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
There's an update on the official site with a five-page legal document that's been sent to The Escapist. That's the official RSI site it's an update to the letter from the Chairman that was sent
Load of BS tbh, in that letter, they claim they did not have a chance to refute certain allegations, as they were not listed as one of the bullet points, yet those allegations are in fact clearly listed as a bullet point.
-Allegations of a “toxic” work environment, including ignored Human Resources complaints against Sandi Gardiner (including accusations of discriminatory hiring processes, vulgarity and personal insults during both public disagreements and email exchanges).
Awful letter. Sounds like Roberts got an earful from his wife for not defending her honour in the previous rebuttal and now he's trying to make up for it.
The man should have kept a lid on that letter as he was told. Just another rash knee-jerky response.
I hate to nitpick but maybe some fact checking on their end would be helpful. When they say "the author and his colleagues" it makes me think they never bothered to look at Lizzy's profile and see a woman's face staring back at them.
Comments
5s often early - mid beta, but for this particular argument you need to add at least 2 years too mmo to compensate for the 2 that isn't fair for SC so it's like 11 to 2 or something. Some things just arnt worth arguing about
All we can hope is that something positive comes out of this whether it be stricter policy from kickstarter involving game projects. Or simply people figuring out that some men just want to watch the world burn, and they don't always have your best interest at hand even when their words pretend to.
I'm sure in the heat of the moment Roberts figured that if he could show the Escapist that Derek has it out for him, that maybe they wouldn't run with the story. He underestimated their need for those drama induced webpage clicks though.
Still I wouldn't say what was done with Elite was a good thing either, if I did view it that way I'd have bought it. They released a skeletal game and are now charging full price of another game to expand on it. Nah, not for me.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Elite did exactly the right thing. They made a game, now they add to that game and ask for more money.
SC did exactly the wrong thing. They made commercials, brochures and really buggy Alpha demos to get more money from backers.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling."
- Michael Bitton
Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about."
- SEANMCAD
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
That's the big picture that will come form all of this.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
IN SC's case they did some folks wrong in regard to those who didn't want the project to expand, they've only done everyone else wrong if they never release a game.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
But you're right I see no good coming of legislation jumping in mid chorus, it needs to be a part of the foundation.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The rest I do not know.
I just find it a bad example to use as it was. A good example would be DIvinty OS, Wasteland 2, POE, etc.. as games that were handled right
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
For a long time gaming has existed in a bubble(in regards to industry specific regulation), when issues with flooded markets of cheap games(Purina Dog Chow was a game dev at one time) the market more or less revolted and it was small enough it mattered. And it self corrected. In mid/late 2000's alot of devs/pubs had became over leveraged doing much the same but faster but 08 hit and the credit to pay Peter from Paul went away and the side of the road became full of corpses of those who lived on other peoples money. Another correction/contraction not self genereated market was much larger preventing self correction. I don't see anything on the horizon to generate a correction and the issues with KC/CF will likely be the vector for a pretty significant reg overhaul relatively soon(FTC's already looking at it)l as it spans much more than gaming. And gaming will likely be revenue heavy enough absent a correction to be worthy of attention all it's own at the worse time possible with which hunt regulation. Exacerbated if it's experiencing it's own CF issues at the same time That will be so much fun.
This story was 'shopped around' at other publications.
Guys, it's going to get a lot deeper than this, btw.
And, well, it looks like Derek Smart (due to his ego again) outed himself as knowing about this...
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
-Allegations of a “toxic” work environment, including ignored Human Resources complaints against Sandi Gardiner (including accusations of discriminatory hiring processes, vulgarity and personal insults during both public disagreements and email exchanges).
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
I've been duped by Chris Roberts.
The man should have kept a lid on that letter as he was told. Just another rash knee-jerky response.