It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda. It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.
Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
Why are you concerned about that? It's not your money, it's their money. If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens. But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda. It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.
Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
Why are you concerned about that? It's not your money, it's their money. If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens. But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
There a difference between accountability and wanting them to open their books to the public. As much as I hate some of the thing CIG has done they have shown enough "accountability", via progress on the game, that you or even KS can't do anything or claim scam etc etc.
The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.
Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda. It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.
Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
Why are you concerned about that? It's not your money, it's their money. If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens. But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
There a difference between accountability and wanting them to open their books to the public. As much as I hate some of the thing CIG has done they have shown enough "accountability", via progress on the game, that you or even KS can't do anything or claim scam etc etc.
The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.
Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.
actually, for those donating to kickstarters, they ARE investors. They are investing into a game or product, similar to when the company seeks outside funding to publish/help fund a game/product
However, buying ships does not make one an investor but someone just buying a ship like buying a cash shop product. But for those who donated to Star Citizen's Kickstarter, they are all investors. Without that money, Star Citizen would be very different today.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda. It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.
Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
Why are you concerned about that? It's not your money, it's their money. If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens. But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
There a difference between accountability and wanting them to open their books to the public. As much as I hate some of the thing CIG has done they have shown enough "accountability", via progress on the game, that you or even KS can't do anything or claim scam etc etc.
The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.
Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.
I never asked them to open their books and showing progress at a glacial pace is not accountability. If they were delivering huge chunks of the game in steady updates then I could get behind the game is being made so there's your accountability statement but it's not.
Can I start a kickstarter and people just donate me 1 Million Dollars, and if they are feeling good donate me possibly 3 Million I will make sure it a life time lol...
Generally Speaking I lost my faith in Star Citizen its why I never backed above $30 in the game there has been too many changes from what the original game was made out to sound like and even free lancer didn't cost $150 million dollars to make not saying I like the other game made by Derrick either because it feels to Generic for me to even want to play based off everything I have seen but maybe he is right...
It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda. It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.
Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
Why are you concerned about that? It's not your money, it's their money. If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens. But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
There a difference between accountability and wanting them to open their books to the public. As much as I hate some of the thing CIG has done they have shown enough "accountability", via progress on the game, that you or even KS can't do anything or claim scam etc etc.
The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.
Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.
I never asked them to open their books and showing progress at a glacial pace is not accountability. If they were delivering huge chunks of the game in steady updates then I could get behind the game is being made so there's your accountability statement but it's not.
But it is, it's just not going as fast or how YOU want it to, but guess what that's too bad ask for refund.
Like I said most people say "accountability" when they want to know what they are doing with the money IE see the books. Not going to happen as unlike what scavenger is saying when you back a KS you are not an investors you don't get shares or reports on how the money you "invested", the proper word is "pledged", is doing etc yadada.
You pledge in the hopes a game you think looks interesting will work out and be created... that's it and that's all you're entitled to.
You don't get to tell them how to run their project or how to spend their money. If they decide the devs working on the game need rolls of toilet paper that costs 100$ a roll cause it's super duper uber soft for the bungholes that's their prerogative not yours and you have nothing to say about it.
Now it might be stupid, it might be irresponsible or incompetent but you have no right to tell them they HAVE to do different.
People and even articles use the term investment when talking about KS but it's not.
Can I start a kickstarter and people just donate me 1 Million Dollars, and if they are feeling good donate me possibly 3 Million I will make sure it a life time lol...
Generally Speaking I lost my faith in Star Citizen its why I never backed above $30 in the game there has been too many changes from what the original game was made out to sound like and even free lancer didn't cost $150 million dollars to make not saying I like the other game made by Derrick either because it feels to Generic for me to even want to play based off everything I have seen but maybe he is right...
It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda. It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.
Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
Why are you concerned about that? It's not your money, it's their money. If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens. But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
There a difference between accountability and wanting them to open their books to the public. As much as I hate some of the thing CIG has done they have shown enough "accountability", via progress on the game, that you or even KS can't do anything or claim scam etc etc.
The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.
Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.
I never asked them to open their books and showing progress at a glacial pace is not accountability. If they were delivering huge chunks of the game in steady updates then I could get behind the game is being made so there's your accountability statement but it's not.
But it is, it's just not going as fast or how YOU want it to, but guess what that's too bad ask for refund.
Like I said most people say "accountability" when they want to know what they are doing with the money IE see the books. Not going to happen as unlike what scavenger is saying when you back a KS you are not an investors you don't get shares or reports on how the money you "invested", the proper word is "pledged", is doing etc yadada.
You pledge in the hopes a game you think looks interesting will work out and be created... that's it and that's all you're entitled to.
You don't get to tell them how to run their project or how to spend their money. If they decide the devs working on the game need rolls of toilet paper that costs 100$ a roll cause it's super duper uber soft for the bungholes that's their prerogative not yours and you have nothing to say about it.
Now it might be stupid, it might be irresponsible or incompetent but you have no right to tell them they HAVE to do different.
People and even articles use the term investment when talking about KS but it's not.
Again not a backer (which im sure you will use in some argument against me lol but my alarm bells were going off with this project) but again not asking for them to open their books. I'm also not telling them how to spend their money so if they want to spend 100 dollars per roll of toilet paper then that should be made clear so backers, potential or otherwise, can make a informed decision if they should grow money at a project that likes to waste backer money.
Also technically we can see into the company's books in a limited capacity via the UK filings since you don't have the option to hide over there and we know that Erin is taking a massive salary of 190k GBP which seems a little in excess and makes you wonder what CR is paying himself and his wife per year.
And backers do have the power to tell them to do differently but it just means they stop opening their wallets and throwing cash at CR whenever he shows off a new "gameplay" video that is more then likely just marketing fluff meant to drive hype
It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda. It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.
Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
Why are you concerned about that? It's not your money, it's their money. If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens. But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
There a difference between accountability and wanting them to open their books to the public. As much as I hate some of the thing CIG has done they have shown enough "accountability", via progress on the game, that you or even KS can't do anything or claim scam etc etc.
The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.
Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.
I never asked them to open their books and showing progress at a glacial pace is not accountability. If they were delivering huge chunks of the game in steady updates then I could get behind the game is being made so there's your accountability statement but it's not.
But it is, it's just not going as fast or how YOU want it to, but guess what that's too bad ask for refund.
Like I said most people say "accountability" when they want to know what they are doing with the money IE see the books. Not going to happen as unlike what scavenger is saying when you back a KS you are not an investors you don't get shares or reports on how the money you "invested", the proper word is "pledged", is doing etc yadada.
You pledge in the hopes a game you think looks interesting will work out and be created... that's it and that's all you're entitled to.
You don't get to tell them how to run their project or how to spend their money. If they decide the devs working on the game need rolls of toilet paper that costs 100$ a roll cause it's super duper uber soft for the bungholes that's their prerogative not yours and you have nothing to say about it.
Now it might be stupid, it might be irresponsible or incompetent but you have no right to tell them they HAVE to do different.
People and even articles use the term investment when talking about KS but it's not.
Again not a backer (which im sure you will use in some argument against me lol but my alarm bells were going off with this project) but again not asking for them to open their books. I'm also not telling them how to spend their money so if they want to spend 100 dollars per roll of toilet paper then that should be made clear so backers, potential or otherwise, can make a informed decision if they should grow money at a project that likes to waste backer money.
Also technically we can see into the company's books in a limited capacity via the UK filings since you don't have the option to hide over there and we know that Erin is taking a massive salary of 190k GBP which seems a little in excess and makes you wonder what CR is paying himself and his wife per year.
And backers do have the power to tell them to do differently but it just means they stop opening their wallets and throwing cash at CR whenever he shows off a new "gameplay" video that is more then likely just marketing fluff meant to drive hype
Nothing personal against you here, I don't care how you spend your money or not. My replies is just me saying the extent of anyone authority, mine included, when pledging a game on KS is pretty much limited to asking for a refund.
Also when I say open the books I mean open the books, their UK filings have diddly to do with this. Open the books is opening the books to see how they spend or earn on XYZ. Which is essentially what you are asking for.
CIG does not have to tell you how much he pays his employees or himself or how much the yearly toilet paper cost is etc etc ad nauseam.
People putting projects on KS don't need to make anything clear other than the project they propose.
Instead of feeling entitled to tell someone running a project that they need to "make clear" what they are going to do with the money in terms of how much this and that will cost and how much they will pay for xyz people pledging should make themselves clear that any money pledged is lost and gone down the toilet regardless of if it fails or not or even if it succeeds and it's a totally different game.
People give money to a KS or games like CIG with the mindset that they are entitled to something like they are investors or shareholders far far too often.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda. It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.
Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
Why are you concerned about that? It's not your money, it's their money. If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens. But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
There a difference between accountability and wanting them to open their books to the public. As much as I hate some of the thing CIG has done they have shown enough "accountability", via progress on the game, that you or even KS can't do anything or claim scam etc etc.
The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.
Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.
I never asked them to open their books and showing progress at a glacial pace is not accountability. If they were delivering huge chunks of the game in steady updates then I could get behind the game is being made so there's your accountability statement but it's not.
But it is, it's just not going as fast or how YOU want it to, but guess what that's too bad ask for refund.
Like I said most people say "accountability" when they want to know what they are doing with the money IE see the books. Not going to happen as unlike what scavenger is saying when you back a KS you are not an investors you don't get shares or reports on how the money you "invested", the proper word is "pledged", is doing etc yadada.
You pledge in the hopes a game you think looks interesting will work out and be created... that's it and that's all you're entitled to.
You don't get to tell them how to run their project or how to spend their money. If they decide the devs working on the game need rolls of toilet paper that costs 100$ a roll cause it's super duper uber soft for the bungholes that's their prerogative not yours and you have nothing to say about it.
Now it might be stupid, it might be irresponsible or incompetent but you have no right to tell them they HAVE to do different.
People and even articles use the term investment when talking about KS but it's not.
Again not a backer (which im sure you will use in some argument against me lol but my alarm bells were going off with this project) but again not asking for them to open their books. I'm also not telling them how to spend their money so if they want to spend 100 dollars per roll of toilet paper then that should be made clear so backers, potential or otherwise, can make a informed decision if they should grow money at a project that likes to waste backer money.
Also technically we can see into the company's books in a limited capacity via the UK filings since you don't have the option to hide over there and we know that Erin is taking a massive salary of 190k GBP which seems a little in excess and makes you wonder what CR is paying himself and his wife per year.
And backers do have the power to tell them to do differently but it just means they stop opening their wallets and throwing cash at CR whenever he shows off a new "gameplay" video that is more then likely just marketing fluff meant to drive hype
Nothing personal against you here, I don't care how you spend your money or not. My replies is just me saying the extent of anyone authority, mine included, when pledging a game on KS is pretty much limited to asking for a refund.
Also when I say open the books I mean open the books, their UK filings have diddly to do with this. Open the books is opening the books to see how they spend or earn on XYZ. Which is essentially what you are asking for.
CIG does not have to tell you how much he pays his employees or himself or how much the yearly toilet paper cost is etc etc ad nauseam.
People putting projects on KS don't need to make anything clear other than the project they propose.
Instead of feeling entitled to tell someone running a project that they need to "make clear" what they are going to do with the money in terms of how much this and that will cost and how much they will pay for xyz people pledging should make themselves clear that any money pledged is lost and gone down the toilet regardless of if it fails or not or even if it succeeds and it's a totally different game.
People give money to a KS or games like CIG with the mindset that they are entitled to something like they are investors or shareholders far far too often.
I'm not sure how many times I have to say I'm not asking them to open the books before you understand that. It's really not that hard though for the most open game dev ever! to tell backers how the money is being used. Does that mean opening the books? No. Does that mean posting a cost breakdown of everything used in the office? No. Shit I'd be curious just to know what they spend on plane tickets flying back and forth between studios(and associated costs) when maybe no one has told CR what skype is?
And I've never argued about being an investor or not since I know how KS works and yeah the most you can do is ask for a refund which many would probably do or never have pledged in the first place if they knew what kind of waste of money CIG might be doing.
That wasn't my point about how much CR pays his employees but if he's paying his brother half a million a year to run 1 studio you should be stopping and asking yourself what kind of ridiculous salary he's paying himself and wife. And no I'm not saying he should be taking no salary but perhaps something a little more modest until they don't have to rely on presales of a game that isn't anywhere near complete.
... If a company needs crow funding to build their product then they are losers who could never secure real investors who would never give them money without meeting deadlines and milestones. EA and Ubi Soft don't crow fund their projects.. because their successful companies that are not managed by broke criminals.
Not defending CIG / CS / CR in any way (I've seen little but
vague 'promises' and horrible mismanagement from day 1), but there are plenty
of great games and successful studios that only exist in their current state because of crowd
funding.
Also, and to each their own, but I'd much rather play the likes of Divinity:
OS/2, Shadowrun: Returns/Dragonfall/Hong Kong, Wasteland 2, or the upcoming
BattleChasers:Nightwar or BattleTech game over any of the re-skinned, microtransaction
laden, 'successful' franchises that EA, Ubisoft, Activation, WB, etc. shovel out on a bi-annual
(if not annual) basis.
I'm not sure how many times I have to say I'm not asking them to open the books before you understand that. It's really not that hard though for the most open game dev ever! to tell backers how the money is being used. Does that mean opening the books? No. Does that mean posting a cost breakdown of everything used in the office? No. Shit I'd be curious just to know what they spend on plane tickets flying back and forth between studios(and associated costs) when maybe no one has told CR what skype is?
And I've never argued about being an investor or not since I know how KS works and yeah the most you can do is ask for a refund which many would probably do or never have pledged in the first place if they knew what kind of waste of money CIG might be doing.
That wasn't my point about how much CR pays his employees but if he's paying his brother half a million a year to run 1 studio you should be stopping and asking yourself what kind of ridiculous salary he's paying himself and wife. And no I'm not saying he should be taking no salary but perhaps something a little more modest until they don't have to rely on presales of a game that isn't anywhere near complete.
I'm not sure how many times I have to say I'm not asking them to open the books
Really?
Yet here you ask them,
to tell backers how the money is being used
which is essentially opening the books. That's what this term means. You are asking them to show the inner workings of the company even if you're not after a complete breakdown.
They are using the money to build the game.. What! Do you expect them to answer you saying they're using it on hoes n blow?
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda. It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.
Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
Why are you concerned about that? It's not your money, it's their money. If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens. But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
There a difference between accountability and wanting them to open their books to the public. As much as I hate some of the thing CIG has done they have shown enough "accountability", via progress on the game, that you or even KS can't do anything or claim scam etc etc.
The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.
Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.
actually, for those donating to kickstarters, they ARE investors. They are investing into a game or product, similar to when the company seeks outside funding to publish/help fund a game/product
However, buying ships does not make one an investor but someone just buying a ship like buying a cash shop product. But for those who donated to Star Citizen's Kickstarter, they are all investors. Without that money, Star Citizen would be very different today.
I don't think you understand what the word "investor" actually means. If there is no return as in you are not getting money back stock shares. You are not an investor. The word you are looking for is donor.
It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda. It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.
Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
Why are you concerned about that? It's not your money, it's their money. If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens. But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
There a difference between accountability and wanting them to open their books to the public. As much as I hate some of the thing CIG has done they have shown enough "accountability", via progress on the game, that you or even KS can't do anything or claim scam etc etc.
The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.
Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.
actually, for those donating to kickstarters, they ARE investors. They are investing into a game or product, similar to when the company seeks outside funding to publish/help fund a game/product
However, buying ships does not make one an investor but someone just buying a ship like buying a cash shop product. But for those who donated to Star Citizen's Kickstarter, they are all investors. Without that money, Star Citizen would be very different today.
I don't think you understand what the word "investor" actually means. If there is no return as in you are not getting money back stock shares. You are not an investor. The word you are looking for is donor.
Well hey, you are right.
"
in·ves·tor
inˈvestər/
noun
a person or organization that puts money into financial schemes, property, etc. with the expectation of achieving a profit.
"
So the correct word is Donor. So everyone is donating to help fund the game, but no one will get profits out of it that have put money in. So you are correct Thanks for the correction
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda. It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.
Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
Why are you concerned about that? It's not your money, it's their money. If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens. But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
There a difference between accountability and wanting them to open their books to the public. As much as I hate some of the thing CIG has done they have shown enough "accountability", via progress on the game, that you or even KS can't do anything or claim scam etc etc.
The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.
Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.
actually, for those donating to kickstarters, they ARE investors. They are investing into a game or product, similar to when the company seeks outside funding to publish/help fund a game/product
However, buying ships does not make one an investor but someone just buying a ship like buying a cash shop product. But for those who donated to Star Citizen's Kickstarter, they are all investors. Without that money, Star Citizen would be very different today.
I don't think you understand what the word "investor" actually means. If there is no return as in you are not getting money back stock shares. You are not an investor. The word you are looking for is donor.
Well hey, you are right.
"
in·ves·tor
inˈvestər/
noun
a person or organization that puts money into financial schemes, property, etc. with the expectation of achieving a profit.
"
So the correct word is Donor. So everyone is donating to help fund the game, but no one will get profits out of it that have put money in. So you are correct Thanks for the correction
IMPORTANT: Please keep all replies to my posts about GAMING. Please no negative or backhanded comments directed at me personally. If you are going to post a reply that includes how you feel about me, please don't bother replying & just ignore my post instead. I'm on this forum to talk about GAMING. Thank you.
It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda. It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.
Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
Why are you concerned about that? It's not your money, it's their money. If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens. But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
There a difference between accountability and wanting them to open their books to the public. As much as I hate some of the thing CIG has done they have shown enough "accountability", via progress on the game, that you or even KS can't do anything or claim scam etc etc.
The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.
Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.
actually, for those donating to kickstarters, they ARE investors. They are investing into a game or product, similar to when the company seeks outside funding to publish/help fund a game/product
However, buying ships does not make one an investor but someone just buying a ship like buying a cash shop product. But for those who donated to Star Citizen's Kickstarter, they are all investors. Without that money, Star Citizen would be very different today.
I don't think you understand what the word "investor" actually means. If there is no return as in you are not getting money back stock shares. You are not an investor. The word you are looking for is donor.
Well hey, you are right.
"
in·ves·tor
inˈvestər/
noun
a person or organization that puts money into financial schemes, property, etc. with the expectation of achieving a profit.
"
So the correct word is Donor. So everyone is donating to help fund the game, but no one will get profits out of it that have put money in. So you are correct Thanks for the correction
Donor isn't the right term either.
Donor is someone who gives away expecting to get no return, or something of only symbolic value in return.
Since RSI promises people the game, ships in game, etc. in exchange for the money given to them, the correct term is customer.
"customer 1. a person who buys goods or services from a shop or business"
Just look up the background on Derek Smart. Then decide if it's worth listening to that extremely toxic 'person' even when you find something that seems to backup what he spun.
For some reason he's got a hate on for Star Citizen, or maybe Chris Roberts. With DS it's hard to even know if there's a semi-valid reason for it, he is rather like a bouncing bottle of nitro.
With regards to Chris Roberts, yeah, he's had some problems, and I don't think he's all that good at management, but I haven't seen anything that makes me think this project is sunk, though I sure wish he's set solid milestones and stop with the feature-creep.
That's one thing about devs, especially ones really in love with a project. They want to do every cool thing they can think of. That's why a good manager pulls them back from the big jumps and sticks them to the decided up design, and only lets them add a bit that seems to be a good expenditure of resources, assuming you have the resources to expend. Come to think of it, Star Citizen has an INSANE amount of resources to spend on that project. I guess they've got some leeway in how they use it.
It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda. It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.
Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
Why are you concerned about that? It's not your money, it's their money. If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens. But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
There a difference between accountability and wanting them to open their books to the public. As much as I hate some of the thing CIG has done they have shown enough "accountability", via progress on the game, that you or even KS can't do anything or claim scam etc etc.
The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.
Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.
actually, for those donating to kickstarters, they ARE investors. They are investing into a game or product, similar to when the company seeks outside funding to publish/help fund a game/product
However, buying ships does not make one an investor but someone just buying a ship like buying a cash shop product. But for those who donated to Star Citizen's Kickstarter, they are all investors. Without that money, Star Citizen would be very different today.
I don't think you understand what the word "investor" actually means. If there is no return as in you are not getting money back stock shares. You are not an investor. The word you are looking for is donor.
Well hey, you are right.
"
in·ves·tor
inˈvestər/
noun
a person or organization that puts money into financial schemes, property, etc. with the expectation of achieving a profit.
"
So the correct word is Donor. So everyone is donating to help fund the game, but no one will get profits out of it that have put money in. So you are correct Thanks for the correction
Donor isn't the right term either.
Donor is someone who gives away expecting to get no return, or something of only symbolic value in return.
Since RSI promises people the game, ships in game, etc. in exchange for the money given to them, the correct term is customer.
"customer 1. a person who buys goods or services from a shop or business"
What do you call it if the game doesn't launch or launches as a broken mess that is left to rot and no further development? Or the developer runs with the money? I would say it's between donor and customer. After all, there are no guarantees with KS. How many KS haven't delivered after all.
It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda. It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.
Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
Why are you concerned about that? It's not your money, it's their money. If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens. But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
There a difference between accountability and wanting them to open their books to the public. As much as I hate some of the thing CIG has done they have shown enough "accountability", via progress on the game, that you or even KS can't do anything or claim scam etc etc.
The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.
Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.
actually, for those donating to kickstarters, they ARE investors. They are investing into a game or product, similar to when the company seeks outside funding to publish/help fund a game/product
However, buying ships does not make one an investor but someone just buying a ship like buying a cash shop product. But for those who donated to Star Citizen's Kickstarter, they are all investors. Without that money, Star Citizen would be very different today.
I don't think you understand what the word "investor" actually means. If there is no return as in you are not getting money back stock shares. You are not an investor. The word you are looking for is donor.
Well hey, you are right.
"
in·ves·tor
inˈvestər/
noun
a person or organization that puts money into financial schemes, property, etc. with the expectation of achieving a profit.
"
So the correct word is Donor. So everyone is donating to help fund the game, but no one will get profits out of it that have put money in. So you are correct Thanks for the correction
Donor isn't the right term either.
Donor is someone who gives away expecting to get no return, or something of only symbolic value in return.
Since RSI promises people the game, ships in game, etc. in exchange for the money given to them, the correct term is customer.
"customer 1. a person who buys goods or services from a shop or business"
Now that we got the idea that we are not investors..... I would say the proper terms are pledge and backer.
We pledge money without expecting any financial returns, but do "hope" the game will eventually be made and we may then benefit from some "backer" rewards.
Seems silly to go round and round the idea of using the proper words but if we use the correct terms and understand them we then can have a better mindset of what we can expect or not expect from give money to a KS campaign.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
I'm not sure how many times I have to say I'm not asking them to open the books before you understand that. It's really not that hard though for the most open game dev ever! to tell backers how the money is being used. Does that mean opening the books? No. Does that mean posting a cost breakdown of everything used in the office? No. Shit I'd be curious just to know what they spend on plane tickets flying back and forth between studios(and associated costs) when maybe no one has told CR what skype is?
And I've never argued about being an investor or not since I know how KS works and yeah the most you can do is ask for a refund which many would probably do or never have pledged in the first place if they knew what kind of waste of money CIG might be doing.
That wasn't my point about how much CR pays his employees but if he's paying his brother half a million a year to run 1 studio you should be stopping and asking yourself what kind of ridiculous salary he's paying himself and wife. And no I'm not saying he should be taking no salary but perhaps something a little more modest until they don't have to rely on presales of a game that isn't anywhere near complete.
I'm not sure how many times I have to say I'm not asking them to open the books
Really?
Yet here you ask them,
to tell backers how the money is being used
which is essentially opening the books. That's what this term means. You are asking them to show the inner workings of the company even if you're not after a complete breakdown.
They are using the money to build the game.. What! Do you expect them to answer you saying they're using it on hoes n blow?
It's amazing how you can make anything fit your argument when you take something said out of context eh? You want to have a real debate with me then don't selectively quote me. I like the way you word things and out back and forth so far but your last argument was weak and you know it.
It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda. It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.
Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
Why are you concerned about that? It's not your money, it's their money. If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens. But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
There a difference between accountability and wanting them to open their books to the public. As much as I hate some of the thing CIG has done they have shown enough "accountability", via progress on the game, that you or even KS can't do anything or claim scam etc etc.
The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.
Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.
actually, for those donating to kickstarters, they ARE investors. They are investing into a game or product, similar to when the company seeks outside funding to publish/help fund a game/product
However, buying ships does not make one an investor but someone just buying a ship like buying a cash shop product. But for those who donated to Star Citizen's Kickstarter, they are all investors. Without that money, Star Citizen would be very different today.
I don't think you understand what the word "investor" actually means. If there is no return as in you are not getting money back stock shares. You are not an investor. The word you are looking for is donor.
Well hey, you are right.
"
in·ves·tor
inˈvestər/
noun
a person or organization that puts money into financial schemes, property, etc. with the expectation of achieving a profit.
"
So the correct word is Donor. So everyone is donating to help fund the game, but no one will get profits out of it that have put money in. So you are correct Thanks for the correction
Donor isn't the right term either.
Donor is someone who gives away expecting to get no return, or something of only symbolic value in return.
Since RSI promises people the game, ships in game, etc. in exchange for the money given to them, the correct term is customer.
"customer 1. a person who buys goods or services from a shop or business"
Now that we got the idea that we are not investors..... I would say the proper terms are pledge and backer.
We pledge money without expecting any financial returns, but do "hope" the game will eventually be made and we may then benefit from some "backer" rewards.
Seems silly to go round and round the idea of using the proper words but if we use the correct terms and understand them we then can have a better mindset of what we can expect or not expect from give money to a KS campaign.
This stopped being a KS campaign when they switched to selling ships and game packages on their website. As soon as that took over from the end date of the KS campaign everyone after that point was a customer. Not a donor or someone who pledged but a customer. This is why CIG still has to give refunds because they know their TOS would never hold up to consumer protection laws if they tried to fight it.
Comments
The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.
Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
However, buying ships does not make one an investor but someone just buying a ship like buying a cash shop product. But for those who donated to Star Citizen's Kickstarter, they are all investors. Without that money, Star Citizen would be very different today.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
Generally Speaking I lost my faith in Star Citizen its why I never backed above $30 in the game there has been too many changes from what the original game was made out to sound like and even free lancer didn't cost $150 million dollars to make not saying I like the other game made by Derrick either because it feels to Generic for me to even want to play based off everything I have seen but maybe he is right...
Like I said most people say "accountability" when they want to know what they are doing with the money IE see the books. Not going to happen as unlike what scavenger is saying when you back a KS you are not an investors you don't get shares or reports on how the money you "invested", the proper word is "pledged", is doing etc yadada.
You pledge in the hopes a game you think looks interesting will work out and be created... that's it and that's all you're entitled to.
You don't get to tell them how to run their project or how to spend their money. If they decide the devs working on the game need rolls of toilet paper that costs 100$ a roll cause it's super duper uber soft for the bungholes that's their prerogative not yours and you have nothing to say about it.
Now it might be stupid, it might be irresponsible or incompetent but you have no right to tell them they HAVE to do different.
People and even articles use the term investment when talking about KS but it's not.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/investment
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investor
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
I self identify as a monkey.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Also technically we can see into the company's books in a limited capacity via the UK filings since you don't have the option to hide over there and we know that Erin is taking a massive salary of 190k GBP which seems a little in excess and makes you wonder what CR is paying himself and his wife per year.
And backers do have the power to tell them to do differently but it just means they stop opening their wallets and throwing cash at CR whenever he shows off a new "gameplay" video that is more then likely just marketing fluff meant to drive hype
Also when I say open the books I mean open the books, their UK filings have diddly to do with this. Open the books is opening the books to see how they spend or earn on XYZ. Which is essentially what you are asking for.
CIG does not have to tell you how much he pays his employees or himself or how much the yearly toilet paper cost is etc etc ad nauseam.
People putting projects on KS don't need to make anything clear other than the project they propose.
Instead of feeling entitled to tell someone running a project that they need to "make clear" what they are going to do with the money in terms of how much this and that will cost and how much they will pay for xyz people pledging should make themselves clear that any money pledged is lost and gone down the toilet regardless of if it fails or not or even if it succeeds and it's a totally different game.
People give money to a KS or games like CIG with the mindset that they are entitled to something like they are investors or shareholders far far too often.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
And I've never argued about being an investor or not since I know how KS works and yeah the most you can do is ask for a refund which many would probably do or never have pledged in the first place if they knew what kind of waste of money CIG might be doing.
That wasn't my point about how much CR pays his employees but if he's paying his brother half a million a year to run 1 studio you should be stopping and asking yourself what kind of ridiculous salary he's paying himself and wife. And no I'm not saying he should be taking no salary but perhaps something a little more modest until they don't have to rely on presales of a game that isn't anywhere near complete.
Not defending CIG / CS / CR in any way (I've seen little but vague 'promises' and horrible mismanagement from day 1), but there are plenty of great games and successful studios that only exist in their current state because of crowd funding.
Also, and to each their own, but I'd much rather play the likes of Divinity: OS/2, Shadowrun: Returns/Dragonfall/Hong Kong, Wasteland 2, or the upcoming BattleChasers:Nightwar or BattleTech game over any of the re-skinned, microtransaction laden, 'successful' franchises that EA, Ubisoft, Activation, WB, etc. shovel out on a bi-annual (if not annual) basis.
Really? Yet here you ask them, which is essentially opening the books. That's what this term means. You are asking them to show the inner workings of the company even if you're not after a complete breakdown.
They are using the money to build the game.. What! Do you expect them to answer you saying they're using it on hoes n blow?
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
"
- a person or organization that puts money into financial schemes, property, etc. with the expectation of achieving a profit.
"So the correct word is Donor. So everyone is donating to help fund the game, but no one will get profits out of it that have put money in. So you are correct
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
Donor is someone who gives away expecting to get no return, or something of only symbolic value in return.
Since RSI promises people the game, ships in game, etc. in exchange for the money given to them, the correct term is customer.
"customer
1. a person who buys goods or services from a shop or business"
Then decide if it's worth listening to that extremely toxic 'person' even when you find something that seems to backup what he spun.
For some reason he's got a hate on for Star Citizen, or maybe Chris Roberts. With DS it's hard to even know if there's a semi-valid reason for it, he is rather like a bouncing bottle of nitro.
With regards to Chris Roberts, yeah, he's had some problems, and I don't think he's all that good at management, but I haven't seen anything that makes me think this project is sunk, though I sure wish he's set solid milestones and stop with the feature-creep.
That's one thing about devs, especially ones really in love with a project. They want to do every cool thing they can think of. That's why a good manager pulls them back from the big jumps and sticks them to the decided up design, and only lets them add a bit that seems to be a good expenditure of resources, assuming you have the resources to expend.
Come to think of it, Star Citizen has an INSANE amount of resources to spend on that project.
I guess they've got some leeway in how they use it.
Lost my mind, now trying to lose yours...
that guy ain't right, never been. as simple.
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
We pledge money without expecting any financial returns, but do "hope" the game will eventually be made and we may then benefit from some "backer" rewards.
Seems silly to go round and round the idea of using the proper words but if we use the correct terms and understand them we then can have a better mindset of what we can expect or not expect from give money to a KS campaign.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.