Fuzzy Math scares me

rodarin · April 2016

Drakmar said:

You are also missing the money that will come in from when SQ42 launches later this year, early 2017.

Even if 500k (I believe that figure is pretty low) purchase SQ42, that is another 22.5 million, I believe it will be more like 1 million copies.

If they are (allegedly) spending 3 mil a month then if they sell 500K copies they will not make enough money to cover expenses between now and when it actually does get released. So in essence if they dont make another dime from now until then once they tally all the sales numbers (500K copies) they would have less money after that summation than they do now.

I figure at the earliest Sept 2017 for SQ 42. Maybe even as late as Dec. And thats if they actually stay focused on it and dont try to 'prove' anything by multi tasking.

But I dont think they sell near that many because most backers and early guys are still going to get it for free. So the only ones who are going to buy it are guys who havent spent any money on this project at all, and after the past fw months (and coming months waiting for this to release) I doubt highly that confidence will be hat widespread.

Distopia · April 2016

rodarin said:

Drakmar said:

You are also missing the money that will come in from when SQ42 launches later this year, early 2017.

Even if 500k (I believe that figure is pretty low) purchase SQ42, that is another 22.5 million, I believe it will be more like 1 million copies.

If they are (allegedly) spending 3 mil a month then if they sell 500K copies they will not make enough money to cover expenses between now and when it actually does get released. So in essence if they dont make another dime from now until then once they tally all the sales numbers (500K copies) they would have less money after that summation than they do now.

I figure at the earliest Sept 2017 for SQ 42. Maybe even as late as Dec. And thats if they actually stay focused on it and dont try to 'prove' anything by multi tasking.

But I dont think they sell near that many because most backers and early guys are still going to get it for free. So the only ones who are going to buy it are guys who havent spent any money on this project at all, and after the past fw months (and coming months waiting for this to release) I doubt highly that confidence will be hat widespread.

I don't know it seems most of the other titles with big names behind them as well as/or genre's that are under represented in this day and age have sold quite well post release, Pillars of Eternity, Elite, being two good examples. Divinity:os being another. I don't see why this would be any different especially with the star power that would be on display within SQ42.

rodarin · April 2016

Distopia said:

rodarin said:

Drakmar said:

You are also missing the money that will come in from when SQ42 launches later this year, early 2017.

Even if 500k (I believe that figure is pretty low) purchase SQ42, that is another 22.5 million, I believe it will be more like 1 million copies.

If they are (allegedly) spending 3 mil a month then if they sell 500K copies they will not make enough money to cover expenses between now and when it actually does get released. So in essence if they dont make another dime from now until then once they tally all the sales numbers (500K copies) they would have less money after that summation than they do now.

I figure at the earliest Sept 2017 for SQ 42. Maybe even as late as Dec. And thats if they actually stay focused on it and dont try to 'prove' anything by multi tasking.

But I dont think they sell near that many because most backers and early guys are still going to get it for free. So the only ones who are going to buy it are guys who havent spent any money on this project at all, and after the past fw months (and coming months waiting for this to release) I doubt highly that confidence will be hat widespread.

I don't know it seems most of the other titles with big names behind them as well as/or genre's that are under represented in this day and age have sold quite well post release, Pillars of Eternity, Elite, being two good examples. Divinity:os being another. I don't see why this would be any different especially with the star power that would be on display within SQ42.

I would say it is going to depend greatly on exactly WHAT the game offers. Had it stayed the 'natural' lead in to the MMO and stayed a co-op where you could play with other people then maybe. But if its a hastily thrown together single player with a few has been names only geeks care about anymore then I am not so sure.

Voice acting is extremely over rated. I mean ESO had Kate Frigging Beckinsale for crying out loud and people really couldnt care less. Not to mention Wonder Woman and John Cleese (yeah you might have to be 40+ to truly appreciate both of them but theyre still big names from the 70s). Then Viktor, Alfred Molina and Malcolm Mcdowell who are also fairly big names and pretty contemporary. But again people really werent fawning all over them or making a big deal. Probably because they were supposed to be above the game. Generally if you have to sell the names of the people voice acting then the game probably isnt that good.

Drakmar · April 2016

rodarin said:

Drakmar said:

You are also missing the money that will come in from when SQ42 launches later this year, early 2017.

Even if 500k (I believe that figure is pretty low) purchase SQ42, that is another 22.5 million, I believe it will be more like 1 million copies.

If they are (allegedly) spending 3 mil a month then if they sell 500K copies they will not make enough money to cover expenses between now and when it actually does get released. So in essence if they dont make another dime from now until then once they tally all the sales numbers (500K copies) they would have less money after that summation than they do now.

I figure at the earliest Sept 2017 for SQ 42. Maybe even as late as Dec. And thats if they actually stay focused on it and dont try to 'prove' anything by multi tasking.

But I dont think they sell near that many because most backers and early guys are still going to get it for free. So the only ones who are going to buy it are guys who havent spent any money on this project at all, and after the past fw months (and coming months waiting for this to release) I doubt highly that confidence will be hat widespread.

What are you talking about they have money now, the only person who doesn't think so is DS and we all know he's nothing but a blow-hard with nothing better to do with his life than to try and derail the project with unfounded allegations, bold faced lies and a personal vendetta against CR because he hasn't had any success in his developmental life, where Chris has......

Distopia · April 2016

rodarin said:

Distopia said:

rodarin said:

Drakmar said:

You are also missing the money that will come in from when SQ42 launches later this year, early 2017.

Even if 500k (I believe that figure is pretty low) purchase SQ42, that is another 22.5 million, I believe it will be more like 1 million copies.

If they are (allegedly) spending 3 mil a month then if they sell 500K copies they will not make enough money to cover expenses between now and when it actually does get released. So in essence if they dont make another dime from now until then once they tally all the sales numbers (500K copies) they would have less money after that summation than they do now.

I figure at the earliest Sept 2017 for SQ 42. Maybe even as late as Dec. And thats if they actually stay focused on it and dont try to 'prove' anything by multi tasking.

But I dont think they sell near that many because most backers and early guys are still going to get it for free. So the only ones who are going to buy it are guys who havent spent any money on this project at all, and after the past fw months (and coming months waiting for this to release) I doubt highly that confidence will be hat widespread.

I don't know it seems most of the other titles with big names behind them as well as/or genre's that are under represented in this day and age have sold quite well post release, Pillars of Eternity, Elite, being two good examples. Divinity:os being another. I don't see why this would be any different especially with the star power that would be on display within SQ42.

I would say it is going to depend greatly on exactly WHAT the game offers. Had it stayed the 'natural' lead in to the MMO and stayed a co-op where you could play with other people then maybe. But if its a hastily thrown together single player with a few has been names only geeks care about anymore then I am not so sure.

Voice acting is extremely over rated. I mean ESO had Kate Frigging Beckinsale for crying out loud and people really couldnt care less. Not to mention Wonder Woman and John Cleese (yeah you might have to be 40+ to truly appreciate both of them but theyre still big names from the 70s). Then Viktor, Alfred Molina and Malcolm Mcdowell who are also fairly big names and pretty contemporary. But again people really werent fawning all over them or making a big deal. Probably because they were supposed to be above the game. Generally if you have to sell the names of the people voice acting then the game probably isnt that good.

All of that is true, yet I'd say the manner in which celebs effect a game like ESO would be quite different than how they effect a single-player game similar to the WC series. Which was largely grounded around cinematic appeal as much as it was about the game-play. I don't think selling games is what is hard in this day and age, still big names can make that easier, the hard part is keeping people happy moving forward from those sales.

DKLond · April 2016

SC actors aren't restricted to voice acting. In fact, it's a very sophisticated form of performance capture.

While I personally don't get too excited about big name actors - I think there's a good chance it will be good for immersion during the singleplayer campaign.

rodarin · April 2016

Drakmar said:

What are you talking about they have money now, the only person who doesn't think so is DS and we all know he's nothing but a blow-hard with nothing better to do with his life than to try and derail the project with unfounded allegations, bold faced lies and a personal vendetta against CR because he hasn't had any success in his developmental life, where Chris has......

Yeah they have some money now, point is they will spend more of it between now and when SQ 42 releases than they will bring in. And the sales from SQ 42 wont put it above what they will spend in that time.

If it costs them 3 mil a month and it takes them 17 more months to release SQ 42 (which would put its release End of Sept first of Oct 2017) that 51 million. If they sell 1 million boxes at 50 bucks that 50 million. Basic napkin math.

Now some people will claim you cant look at it that way but you can and you should. Thinking SQ 42 sales will be some windfall is a pipe dream. 1 million sold copies is equal to about what they bring (releasing absolutely nothing) in 17 month of 'donation' gathering.

Like I said they are going to make more selling ships and charging sub fees for developmental news than they ever will selling the actual game.

DKLond · April 2016

Yes, it's not like they picked studio locations based on tax exemption or anything like that

Let's just pretend we can know the exact expenditure based crap we pull out of the air.

Coman · April 2016

You should not forget that before the kickstarter, money was already invested into the game and company. We have no idea how much money that was. Might be 10k just to get the kickstarter going, or 10 million. At least I doubt we know this number. My guess is that enough money was invested to make sure a game could be developed. Unless they where planning of competly depending on kickstarter.

Burntvet · April 2016

Fuzzy game development promises and schemes scare me more.

Colt47 · April 2016

Drakmar said:

You are also missing the money that will come in from when SQ42 launches later this year, early 2017.

Even if 500k (I believe that figure is pretty low) purchase SQ42, that is another 22.5 million, I believe it will be more like 1 million copies.

The only issue is that a lot of people have already preordered the game via the kickstarter and the pledging. In fact, right now the company is trying to get more funding by raising the pledge costs in the hope that people swapping pledges around will pour more cash in to get what they want. They also have been cutting perks from the packages recently and have been making a lot of things that were once included separate purchases.

This is definitely a love project and not a make money project.

PottedPlant22 · April 2016

If they are receiving 3 million a month in revenue and they are spending that 3 million each month, they have a horrible business model and their CFO should be fired.

Drakmar · April 2016

rodarin said:

I figure at the earliest Sept 2017 for SQ 42. Maybe even as late as Dec. And thats if they actually stay focused on it and dont try to 'prove' anything by multi tasking.
I believe you are way off with the September 2017 date, the projected date was 2016, that said I don't believe it will be 15 months for SQ42 to be released but more like December 2016 - January 2017.

Erillion · April 2016

PottedPlant22 said:

If they are receiving 3 million a month in revenue and they are spending that 3 million each month, they have a horrible business model and their CFO should be fired.

Which part of "We will invest all pledged money back into the development of the game " was hard to understand for you?

Have fun

PottedPlant22 · April 2016

Erillion said:

PottedPlant22 said:

If they are receiving 3 million a month in revenue and they are spending that 3 million each month, they have a horrible business model and their CFO should be fired.

Which part of "We will invest all pledged money back into the development of the game " was hard to understand for you?

Have fun

You save money in a slush fund for when things go wrong. And from the looks of it, plenty has been going wrong with Star Citizen.

Have fun

rodarin · April 2016

Erillion said:

PottedPlant22 said:

If they are receiving 3 million a month in revenue and they are spending that 3 million each month, they have a horrible business model and their CFO should be fired.

Which part of "We will invest all pledged money back into the development of the game " was hard to understand for you?

Have fun

So coffee makers, doors, cars, murals, furniture (all high ticket priced versions) are going ot the development of the game? Thats just the stuff we know about. How many 'corporate' dinners, lunches catered events have been funded by backer money? Or travel expenses (and more than likely the best seats available if not chartered) rather than simple transportation?

Now of course you will all argue it was a 'business' expense. But if you have ever actually ran a real business you know you dont over spend just because you can, but then again most 'businesses' dont have other people giving you money free and clear to do with as you please.

Aethaeryn · April 2016

My concern would be that people will eventually, I assume, stop buying as many ships. One would think this would slow down. If it slows down too fast the the vision keeps growing without closing in on the minimal viable product features then all the great stuff will be 75% complete and they will have problems.

If the inflow slows at a manageable rate they could scale back and refocus.

DKLond · April 2016

Aethaeryn said:

My concern would be that people will eventually, I assume, stop buying as many ships. One would think this would slow down. If it slows down too fast the the vision keeps growing without closing in on the minimal viable product features then all the great stuff will be 75% complete and they will have problems.

If the inflow slows at a manageable rate they could scale back and refocus.

I think running out of funds or not being able to finish by the time they're out of money - is a valid concern for any large project - crowdfunded or otherwise.

But until we see any actual sign that's not pure speculation and "informed" guesses based on "ballpark" figures - maybe it's a bit premature to spell doom.

Not saying that's what you're doing - but it's what a lot of detractors are very fond of doing.

As long as they're hiring new people and EXPANDING the team - I'd say they'd have to be outright INSANE if they're also running out of cash.

I mean, just how little credit do they deserve?

Vrika · April 2016

Drakmar said:

You are also missing the money that will come in from when SQ42 launches later this year, early 2017.

Even if 500k (I believe that figure is pretty low) purchase SQ42, that is another 22.5 million, I believe it will be more like 1 million copies.

That's only if Squadron 42 launches this year or early 2017. So far RSI has estimated they'll launch it on 2014, 2015, 2016, and now the latest estimation looks like launch on 2017.

RSI might actually be right with their release date estimate this time, but after they've been wrong 3 times in a row, if their financial stability depends on launching Squadron 42 on time then they're screwed.

EDIT: To clarify, I don't think RSI financial stability depends on launching SQ42 on time. I'm arguing against adding SQ42 launch revenue to our estimations of RSI finances for 2016 or 2017. There's too high probability of SQ42 being late. /EDIT

Erillion · April 2016

Vrika said:

if their financial stability depends on launching Squadron 42 on time then they're screwed.

As they continue to bring in a few million $ per month via crowdfunding i would guess that - for now - their financial stability does NOT depend on SQ42 being "on time" (if "on time" means SOMETIME in 2016, most likely late in 2016, as announced on the SQ42 homepage).

Have fun

adamlotus75 · April 2016

Doesn't seem like a few million a month - it seemed to takes ages to go from 112m to 113m

DKLond · April 2016

adamlotus75 said:

Doesn't seem like a few million a month - it seemed to takes ages to go from 112m to 113m

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/funding-goals

It doesn't really matter what it "seems" like.

Last time it was below 2M was september of last year.

Erillion · April 2016

adamlotus75 said:

Doesn't seem like a few million a month - it seemed to takes ages to go from 112m to 113m

Maybe it "seems to take ages" to you ... but it did not. Just passed 113 M$. See also:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tMAP0fg-AKScI3S3VjrDW3OaLO4zgBA1RSYoQOQoNSI/edit?pli=1#gid=1694467207

Have fun

rodarin · April 2016

Well if you belive the chart then the only reason they got that milestone was the huge uptick due to the mining ship, which is hilarious since they dont have any crafting systems yet nor has there been a lot of talk about them. But hey why not sell a mining ship jpeg, because you dont really need to mine when the ship doesnt exist yet either.

But that, according to their numbers jolted them about 300K over 3 days above their 'normal 35K a day.

But once again money raised DOES NOT correlate to anything, nor do I think it will cause anything.

Right now counting the money they claim they raise is basically the only positive the pro camp can show people. And to me those numbers are also pretty dubious.

Either way keep tooting them and then when your minimally viable product releases be sure to show how many tens of millions were raised and compare it to the game they gave you.

spankybus · April 2016

The average calculated cost per month seems reasonable when you consider their current budget total and how much they raise each money. But let me play devil's advocate:

I do have concerns with incidentals, things you pay for once-ish. That Office is really posh for a custom, built-to-order office and would cost some serious cash anywhere. But in L.A. it would really be pricey. Could they have rented an existing office space of larger size (than what they had in Santa Montica) for less? Probably. But I understand the desire for a nice H.Q.'s building.

Lets be honest, this is a first in gaming history. CIG is making most of its revenue for a game they are making...before they finish making it. Sure they might earn some after, but they have to get there first. When places like Rockstar spend cash on fancy office items and/or infrastructure....that is because they're game is launched and profitable. They are spending profits.

How do you know how much of the money would have up front will be profit when you aren't don't making the game? Wouldn't the very nature of game development make this impossible to predict with any kind of accuracy; Especially when your game is trying so many new things?

Since we are all pretending to be CFO's here, lets say:

For the same of argument, can we agree on the following:

Monthly expenses: 3Mil
Monthly income : 2mil (this number is very volatile and can change from month to month)
Total Budget thus far: 113 Mil

With those numbers, it looks like this project could literally last forever. However, The annual income number changes monthly and the amount currently available of the 113 mil is unknown.

With that said, Does anyone have any ideas on the cost of other, one-time events that we haven't mentioned? Going back as far as 2013 since that is when they kickstarted this project IIRC. Or better yet, and maybe simpler for people to put forward as their own prediction; How much total budget do you think is currently available and why?

Ell mentioned the mo-cap shoot, and i'd completely forgot about that. That must have been millions for the actors alone. Brand new Office in LA, the Office in Frankfurt that they are in the process of expanding. The annual cost of booths and prizes at shows like GDC, E3 and CitizenCon (honestly not sure of which shows they frequent).

Why am I doing this? /shrug why not? I've theory-crafted everything else on this game lol why not this.

Howdy, Stranger!

Fuzzy Math scares me

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Fuzzy Math scares me

Comments