I heard CR use to sell cars. It would explain the preorder focus and the attention to car brochure like detail.
You heard wrong.
CR sold a car he owned on a car selling website. The website did NOT belong to him. He never was a car seller.
The usual suspects faked it so that it looked like CR is the owner of the car selling website.
By just changing the last number of the link these guys published, you could easily "prove" that the "Nuns Choir of the Lord" are also "in the car selling business". Because they also sold their car on that website. The last number is the transaction number.
... "PS - promise this will be your some day, xoxo, Roberts."
to be fair, it could very well turn out to be better than anything Electronic Arts has ever done. ... how about that idea?
Why step from one extreme to the other?....
because its been working that is why.
I dont know if SC has been working or not but I am telling you the non-publisher approach as been gangbusters crazy mega successful. It has literally made my gaming experience in this era the best ever in my 37 years of gaming. So as such, until there is massive failure I say lets give new ideas (instead of old bad ones) a chance.
more over, you do believe in market principles when it comes to entertainment products? if its not going to work people will not buy them. that is economics 101
meanwhile I am playing Empyrion - Galactic Survival thank you very much
I agree. Non-publisher approach sounds awesome. It IS awesome. Until someone comes and ruins it for everybody. Until people become unhappy and will never back a project again because of one giant 150 million dollar mishap, and game developers are forced to crawl back to publishers again.
SC seems like a perfect candidate, being the goliath crowd-funded project it is. And it hasn't delivered. And it's selling freaking 850$ ships that you call "donations" for a game that has 150 MILLION dollar budget you lowkey call "Not an AAA game"...
The problem with you market principles analog is actually the problem here. THERE IS NO PRODUCT. Yet people do buy this... That's what makes it ridiculous.
And I am so happy this non-publisher approach has worked for many. Crowd-funding has worked too, and some games have even came out of "pre-alpha" state that have funded like that. But it still has gotten to the point it has bad ring to it, because so many developers just abuse it.
ITEM SHOP ON STEROIDS. RIDICULOUS.
Completely unacceptable business-model in my eyes. Especially after having a look at Roberts history and trying to relate to it... there's not a smell of indie hobbyist. The guy's a wannabe hollywood producer, not an indie game dev.
... "PS - promise this will be your some day, xoxo, Roberts."
to be fair, it could very well turn out to be better than anything Electronic Arts has ever done. ... how about that idea?
Why step from one extreme to the other?....
because its been working that is why.
I dont know if SC has been working or not but I am telling you the non-publisher approach as been gangbusters crazy mega successful. It has literally made my gaming experience in this era the best ever in my 37 years of gaming. So as such, until there is massive failure I say lets give new ideas (instead of old bad ones) a chance.
more over, you do believe in market principles when it comes to entertainment products? if its not going to work people will not buy them. that is economics 101
meanwhile I am playing Empyrion - Galactic Survival thank you very much
I agree. Non-publisher approach sounds awesome. It IS awesome. Until someone comes and ruins it for everybody.....
I had to stop right there. SC is one fucking game, if they tank it not going to have much of an effect on the successes or future success of what is happening in the industry today.
pleeeaaaassse.
we cant go around micro-managing every developer in the industry in some anti-capitalist approach because we are afraid that one fucking game could ruin all of them because of the cost of a digital item
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Disclaimer Remember: we are offering this
pledge ship to help fund Star Citizen’s development. The funding
generated by sales such as this is what allows us to include deeper,
non-combat oriented features in the Star Citizen world. All ships will
be available for in-game credits in the final universe, and they are not
required to start the game. The goal is to make additional ships
available that give players a different experience rather than a
particular advantage when the final persistent universe launches.
- A Publisher would sell an 850$ ship for the sake of profit. - SC sells an 850$ ship to continue to fund their operations on the game dev.
Money goes back into the game dev, instead of it being considered profit, and that is obviously the point here, as SC has a dev team with one upkeep of millions every month.
If people prefer to be ignorant to that to just rage at the company who develops the game fine, but that doesn't change the core flaw in such comparison.
I don't see a difference, sure the "scheme" is different but it boils down to the same thing. Pubs will push milestones and fight bloat, while tacking on extra's like day one DLC, Lootboxes, gated content. The product typically ships in a window that's predictable. Do we lose some of the depth that constantly shifting milestones and increased funding provide, yes but as we've seen the goalposts consistently shift.
I also think that continual change orders and content bloat being regularly funded by additional add on's can be considered profit in the same vein. In one the product is stuck in a continually changing development cycle and exec's are enjoying that additional job security. ( When their add-on's are selling as in SC's case ) In the other the content is capped, done, and monetized - game ships and they move a portion of those profits to the next installment/game.
I just don't see a difference anymore ... at least with the much hated publisher cycle we knew we were getting a game before any money changed hands. /shrug
for the record i spent $35 not $161 million as previously claimed by some in this thread.
i also promise that should my $35 fail to realise its full potential in a released game despite the hundreds of hours of entertainment already returned from the pledge, i will pledge to future games i enjoy despite the mishap. If anyone wants me to spit shake on it i will, just pm me.
... "PS - promise this will be your some day, xoxo, Roberts."
to be fair, it could very well turn out to be better than anything Electronic Arts has ever done. ... how about that idea?
Why step from one extreme to the other?....
because its been working that is why.
I dont know if SC has been working or not but I am telling you the non-publisher approach as been gangbusters crazy mega successful. It has literally made my gaming experience in this era the best ever in my 37 years of gaming. So as such, until there is massive failure I say lets give new ideas (instead of old bad ones) a chance.
more over, you do believe in market principles when it comes to entertainment products? if its not going to work people will not buy them. that is economics 101
meanwhile I am playing Empyrion - Galactic Survival thank you very much
I agree. Non-publisher approach sounds awesome. It IS awesome. Until someone comes and ruins it for everybody.....
I had to stop right there. SC is one fucking game, if they tank it not going to have much of an effect on the successes or future success of what is happening in the industry today.
pleeeaaaassse.
we cant go around micro-managing every developer in the industry in some anti-capitalist approach because we are afraid that one fucking game could ruin all of them because of the cost of a digital item
Mate, just saying this is ridiculous. Stating your opinion is not micro-managing anything.
What they are doing, in my eyes, freaking stupid, and I'm surprised people are going along with it.
But if you come along saying "It's a donation", "Stop micromanaging", "You cant deny people to buy it"... WTF? It kind of says you're supporting their practices, doesn't it? And their practices is just cancer, plain.
Opinions should be heard, and stated. It would be great if this game would become a success. But being objective, what they're doing right now is plain stupid. Ridiculous.
At very least this Roberts guy is REAAALLLLY bad at managing money and time. Even if he has great team and an idea. Looking into what he's doing just really grinds my gears. And I don't understand why people, like yourself, support and protect this practice. To me it makes no sense.
And trust me, I'd like to see the sense in it. So far it just seems to me like people protecting this have invested some money in it, and doesn't want to admit that this project will most likely fail.
Mate, just saying this is ridiculous. Stating your opinion is not micro-managing anything.
What they are doing, in my eyes, freaking stupid, and I'm surprised people are going along with it.
But if you come along saying "It's a donation", "Stop micromanaging", "You cant deny people to buy it"... WTF? It kind of says you're supporting their practices, doesn't it? And their practices is just cancer, plain.
Opinions should be heard, and stated. It would be great if this game would become a success. But being objective, what they're doing right now is plain stupid. Ridiculous.
At very least this Roberts guy is REAAALLLLY bad at managing money and time. Even if he has great team and an idea. Looking into what he's doing just really grinds my gears. And I don't understand why people, like yourself, support and protect this practice. To me it makes no sense.
And trust me, I'd like to see the sense in it. So far it just seems to me like people protecting this have invested some money in it, and doesn't want to admit that this project will most likely fail.
Usually in the normal world a complaint suggests asking for a solution or suggesting of a solution.
I misunderstood you, I thought you where suggesting that this should not be happening. That you might want to make it not happen. Instead you where just complaining, which is fair enough.
Roberts is not bad at managing money, he is bad at managing PROJECTS.
I dont know why this is such a mystery to people, I picked up on this on subtleties in his body language, his choice of words and what his wife said YEARS ago that told me he is not good at project time estimation.
He is not good with time management. Thats is it, bottom line. He doesnt understand how long it takes to do some of these things he wants to do, but that is not a crime, its not a big deal, just people need to understand it and not have a hissy.
time would be better served attacking Electronic Arts in my opinion
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
And look forward to play Beta, the solo game and the multiplayer game.
You always project your view onto others. A common mistake.
I personally enjoy Star Citizen. Others do not. C'est la vie.
Have fun
That's nice to hear. However, we are talking about MMO, and specifically a 850$ ship that's being sold for that MMO. Also, thank you for specifying about that donation/funding disclaimer in your previous post. That's nice on their part, and somewhat changes my view on it.
Usually in the normal world a complaint suggests asking for a solution or suggesting of a solution.
I misunderstood you, I thought you where suggesting that this should not be happening. That you might want to make it not happen. Instead you where just complaining, which is fair enough.
Roberts is not bad at managing money, he is bad at managing PROJECTS.
I dont know why this is such a mystery to people, I picked up on this on subtleties in his body language, his choice of words and what his wife said YEARS ago that told me he is not good at project time estimation.
He is not good with time management. Thats is it, bottom line. He doesnt understand how long it takes to do some of these things he wants to do, but that is not a crime, its not a big deal, just people need to understand it and not have a hissy.
time would be better served attacking Electronic Arts in my opinion
You are right. He's genius with money. He can sell ideas.
But time = money. So I kind of disagree with you as well. If you literally spend millions every month paying for development on something, it becomes rather important if project take 2 years or 12.
I personally wouldn't trust 10$ to a person to manage a multi-million dollar project who is bad with time management.
And no, I wouldn't say it's whining either. More like... trying to understand how can people actually protect such a practice. And yes - voicing my opinion about how this seems utterly ridiculous to me. I haven't backed the project, and I wont. I'm not mad, or even worried about industries future, really.
But to me, it literally seems like Roberts just saw and opportunity to get some easy money, and is abusing the system that is non-publisher, crowd-funded gaming. And that does piss me off a little.
I see little hope for Star Citizen to be the grand project it might have been. I really liked the idea of it when I first read about it all those years ago, too.
I don't see a difference, sure the "scheme" is different but it boils down to the same thing. Pubs will push milestones and fight bloat, while tacking on extra's like day one DLC, Lootboxes, gated content. The product typically ships in a window that's predictable. Do we lose some of the depth that constantly shifting milestones and increased funding provide, yes but as we've seen the goalposts consistently shift.
I also think that continual change orders and content bloat being regularly funded by additional add on's can be considered profit in the same vein. In one the product is stuck in a continually changing development cycle and exec's are enjoying that additional job security. ( When their add-on's are selling as in SC's case ) In the other the content is capped, done, and monetized - game ships and they move a portion of those profits to the next installment/game.
I just don't see a difference anymore ... at least with the much hated publisher cycle we knew we were getting a game before any money changed hands. /shrug
If you don't see a difference I can't help you, it's the difference of getting money to put back into attempting to make a great game vs getting money for profit and fill coffers.
That's the reality of a game where you need to fund it by your players before they play it, it logically can't go the opposite way, only when you look for funding in publishers/investors and not to in the public.
I have a picture of a bridge to sell you. It isn't fully built yet, and we have nowhere to put it, but we promise we'll deliver. That's SC's business model in a nutshell. Pretty hilarious actually.
again,
1. its not a purchase its a donation. 2. frankly unless there is explicitly clear false information in the sales, then its up to the person to not buy it. you dont have to buy it and those consumers are not looking for you to be a justice projector
Generally donations don't give you anything back with certainty other than a receipt for tax purposes. Sometimes you get to win something. Generally when you get something with certainty in exchange for money that would be called a purchase.
In this particular case I think you get access to some content immediately, so it isn't just in exchange for future promises as in most crowd funding cases.
So, while it may technically be a donation by legal definition, it could easily be seen as more of a purchase of promised future content and provisional current content.
That's the way I would look at it if I was considering buying into it.
its a donation.
It's amazing how many fail to understand and / or accept this.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
And look forward to play Beta, the solo game and the multiplayer game.
You always project your view onto others. A common mistake.
I personally enjoy Star Citizen. Others do not. C'est la vie.
Have fun
That's nice to hear. However, we are talking about MMO, and specifically a 850$ ship that's being sold for that MMO. Also, thank you for specifying about that donation/funding disclaimer in your previous post. That's nice on their part, and somewhat changes my view on it.
Usually in the normal world a complaint suggests asking for a solution or suggesting of a solution.
I misunderstood you, I thought you where suggesting that this should not be happening. That you might want to make it not happen. Instead you where just complaining, which is fair enough.
Roberts is not bad at managing money, he is bad at managing PROJECTS.
I dont know why this is such a mystery to people, I picked up on this on subtleties in his body language, his choice of words and what his wife said YEARS ago that told me he is not good at project time estimation.
He is not good with time management. Thats is it, bottom line. He doesnt understand how long it takes to do some of these things he wants to do, but that is not a crime, its not a big deal, just people need to understand it and not have a hissy.
time would be better served attacking Electronic Arts in my opinion
You are right. He's genius with money. He can sell ideas.
But time = money. So I kind of disagree with you as well. If you literally spend millions
look its not hard. just say it with me 'Chris Roberts is not good at project management specifcally time management' yes you can walk back 'time is money' and then re-translate it to say 'chris Roberts is not good at money' but come on....give it a rest please. he just isnt good at project management. He VERY good an money management.
lets not over think this, some people, like roberts, are actually very good and crafty and nearly have a special talent for making money, which translates to 'good at money'
please...lets not to this...let it go...its project management he is bad at, but more importantly so the Fuck what, its not an international war crime
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
time would be better served attacking Electronic Arts in my opinion
You are right. He's genius with money. He can sell ideas.
But time = money. So I kind of disagree with you as well. If you literally spend millions
look its not hard. just say it with me 'Chris Roberts is not good at project management specifcally time management' yes you can walk back 'time is money' and then re-translate it to say 'chris Roberts is not good at money' but come on....give it a rest please. he just isnt good at project management. He VERY good an money management.
lets not over think this, some people, like roberts, are actually very good and crafty and nearly have a special talent for making money, which translates to 'good at money'
please...lets not to this...let it go...its project management he is bad at, but more importantly so the Fuck what, its not an international war crime
Quite frankly, You seem really close-minded and stubborn. So I'll "let it go", trust me. Also your views are kind of awkward and hypocritical at times. I'll also let that go. But I did get a better view on the matter. So thanks for the little conversation here.
So, they do state that it's a donation - or rather "funding". That changes the situation - so they are not selling pictures. They are just baiting donations with expensive pictures and promises of more to come. Makes it more
Also, Chris Roberts is shit with time, money and projects. Which would make any reasonable person seriously doubt about the chances of this projects success.
time would be better served attacking Electronic Arts in my opinion
You are right. He's genius with money. He can sell ideas.
But time = money. So I kind of disagree with you as well. If you literally spend millions
look its not hard. just say it with me 'Chris Roberts is not good at project management specifcally time management' yes you can walk back 'time is money' and then re-translate it to say 'chris Roberts is not good at money' but come on....give it a rest please. he just isnt good at project management. He VERY good an money management.
lets not over think this, some people, like roberts, are actually very good and crafty and nearly have a special talent for making money, which translates to 'good at money'
please...lets not to this...let it go...its project management he is bad at, but more importantly so the Fuck what, its not an international war crime
Quite frankly, You seem really close-minded and stubborn. So I'll "let it go", trust me. Also your views are kind of awkward and hypocritical at times. I'll also let that go. But I did get a better view on the matter. So thanks for the little conversation here.
So, they do state that it's a donation - or rather "funding". That changes the situation - so they are not selling pictures. They are just baiting donations with expensive pictures and promises of more to come. Makes it more
Also, Chris Roberts is shit with time, money and projects. Which would make any reasonable person seriously doubt about the chances of this projects success.
Good luck to all of you, Star Citizens.
yes but its not an international crime.
there is nothing wrong with super funding a game from your fans. there is horrifically wrong with being horrible at time management
best I can tell he is honest, he wants to do this project, he is working on the project he just has a horrible sense of time. You never knew someone like that?
why is it when it comes to indie even the smallest slightest personality flaw of the developer comes off to the community as if its a major earthquake set to destroy the entire gaming industry, meanwhile Electronic Arts pulls their shit year after year after year with a pass from the community.
Yes he is bad at time management.
thats it...that is all there is to it, simple as that. I think most of his fans know that already
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
However, we are talking about MMO, and specifically a 850$ ship that's being sold for that MMO.
You may be talking about an MMO, CIG is not. It is even in the FAQ.
"....Is Star Citizen an MMO?
No! Star Citizen will take the best of all possible worlds, ranging from
a permanent, persistent world similar to those found in MMOs
to an offline, single player campaign like those found in the Wing
Commander series. The game will include the option for private servers,
like Freelancer, and will offer plenty of opportunities for players who
are interested in modding the content. Unlike many games, none of these
aspects is an afterthought: they all combine to form the core of the
Star Citizen experience."
It is not an MMO. It is an instanced multiplayer game. There are many YOUTube videos about instancing in Star Citizen.
And that 850 $ ship is part of a pledge you can make to help fund the development of the project. You can also get it in game with in game money only after the game has launched. The only thing you HAVE to pay is a basic package. Which costs 54 EURO at the moment in my country. In the past you could get it for as low as 20 $.
So ... if you DO have the money and WANT to donate, go ahead and buy the ship and the pledge package. But it is entirely voluntary. And as Star Citizen is a twitch based game, it will also not make you better than others. If you cannot fly, you die .. not matter which ship you are in.
Hangar ready will see the price increase by $100 or thereabout. Flight ready will see the price increase again by another $100 or thereabout.
Get yours while it's cheap. This ship is the much hyped "game changer", do not miss out!!
Please change title... very misleading. I was all set to buy my $850 ship but in reality it is $1050 to be flight ready.
Stop getting my hopes up.
I'll wait for the Winter Sale-A-Thon and hopefully catch a "Buy 3 pixel ships for the Price of 2 sale"
will you really or do you find stretching the truth to be more ethical then selling overpriced virtual items?
There is no such thing as stretching truth. Something is either true or false.
lol..... ok so....
will you really do it or are do you consider lie by you to be more ethical then selling overpriced virtual items?
is that better?
meaning do you feel given a consumer the OPTION to buy or not buy a virtual item is more unethical than biting untrue sarcasm?
Where did I say they were unethical? Is your attempt to put those words in my mouth an example of this lying you mention? Im a fan of CR. I still have my original signed pre-order of Wing Commander and the hat that came with it. You defenders need to relax a bit. To quote Stg. Hulka " LIGHTEN UP FRANCIS"
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Hangar ready will see the price increase by $100 or thereabout. Flight ready will see the price increase again by another $100 or thereabout.
Get yours while it's cheap. This ship is the much hyped "game changer", do not miss out!!
Please change title... very misleading. I was all set to buy my $850 ship but in reality it is $1050 to be flight ready.
Stop getting my hopes up.
I'll wait for the Winter Sale-A-Thon and hopefully catch a "Buy 3 pixel ships for the Price of 2 sale"
will you really or do you find stretching the truth to be more ethical then selling overpriced virtual items?
There is no such thing as stretching truth. Something is either true or false.
lol..... ok so....
will you really do it or are do you consider lie by you to be more ethical then selling overpriced virtual items?
is that better?
meaning do you feel given a consumer the OPTION to buy or not buy a virtual item is more unethical than biting untrue sarcasm?
Where did I say they were unethical? Is your attempt to put those words in my mouth an example of this lying you mention? Im a fan of CR. I still have my original signed pre-order of Wing Commander and the hat that came with it. You defenders need to relax a bit. To quote Stg. Hulka " LIGHTEN UP FRANCIS"
fair enough, ironic how I dont even have the game
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Comments
CR sold a car he owned on a car selling website. The website did NOT belong to him. He never was a car seller.
The usual suspects faked it so that it looked like CR is the owner of the car selling website.
By just changing the last number of the link these guys published, you could easily "prove" that the "Nuns Choir of the Lord" are also "in the car selling business". Because they also sold their car on that website. The last number is the transaction number.
Have fun
SC seems like a perfect candidate, being the goliath crowd-funded project it is. And it hasn't delivered. And it's selling freaking 850$ ships that you call "donations" for a game that has 150 MILLION dollar budget you lowkey call "Not an AAA game"...
The problem with you market principles analog is actually the problem here. THERE IS NO PRODUCT. Yet people do buy this... That's what makes it ridiculous.
And I am so happy this non-publisher approach has worked for many. Crowd-funding has worked too, and some games have even came out of "pre-alpha" state that have funded like that. But it still has gotten to the point it has bad ring to it, because so many developers just abuse it.
ITEM SHOP ON STEROIDS.
RIDICULOUS.
Completely unacceptable business-model in my eyes.
Especially after having a look at Roberts history and trying to relate to it... there's not a smell of indie hobbyist. The guy's a wannabe hollywood producer, not an indie game dev.
pleeeaaaassse.
we cant go around micro-managing every developer in the industry in some anti-capitalist approach because we are afraid that one fucking game could ruin all of them because of the cost of a digital item
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Disclaimer
Remember: we are offering this pledge ship to help fund Star Citizen’s development. The funding generated by sales such as this is what allows us to include deeper, non-combat oriented features in the Star Citizen world. All ships will be available for in-game credits in the final universe, and they are not required to start the game. The goal is to make additional ships available that give players a different experience rather than a particular advantage when the final persistent universe launches.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Every time.
Have fun
I also think that continual change orders and content bloat being regularly funded by additional add on's can be considered profit in the same vein. In one the product is stuck in a continually changing development cycle and exec's are enjoying that additional job security. ( When their add-on's are selling as in SC's case ) In the other the content is capped, done, and monetized - game ships and they move a portion of those profits to the next installment/game.
I just don't see a difference anymore ... at least with the much hated publisher cycle we knew we were getting a game before any money changed hands. /shrug
i also promise that should my $35 fail to realise its full potential in a released game despite the hundreds of hours of entertainment already returned from the pledge, i will pledge to future games i enjoy despite the mishap. If anyone wants me to spit shake on it i will, just pm me.
Maybe to you.
But who are you to tell other people how to spend THEIR money ?
Have fun
Stating your opinion is not micro-managing anything.
What they are doing, in my eyes, freaking stupid, and I'm surprised people are going along with it.
But if you come along saying "It's a donation", "Stop micromanaging", "You cant deny people to buy it"...
WTF?
It kind of says you're supporting their practices, doesn't it?
And their practices is just cancer, plain.
Opinions should be heard, and stated. It would be great if this game would become a success.
But being objective, what they're doing right now is plain stupid. Ridiculous.
At very least this Roberts guy is REAAALLLLY bad at managing money and time. Even if he has great team and an idea. Looking into what he's doing just really grinds my gears. And I don't understand why people, like yourself, support and protect this practice. To me it makes no sense.
And trust me, I'd like to see the sense in it.
So far it just seems to me like people protecting this have invested some money in it, and doesn't want to admit that this project will most likely fail.
A lot of people already enjoy playing the Alpha.
And look forward to play Beta, the solo game and the multiplayer game.
You always project your view onto others. A common mistake.
I personally enjoy Star Citizen. Others do not. C'est la vie.
Have fun
I misunderstood you, I thought you where suggesting that this should not be happening. That you might want to make it not happen. Instead you where just complaining, which is fair enough.
Roberts is not bad at managing money, he is bad at managing PROJECTS.
I dont know why this is such a mystery to people, I picked up on this on subtleties in his body language, his choice of words and what his wife said YEARS ago that told me he is not good at project time estimation.
He is not good with time management. Thats is it, bottom line. He doesnt understand how long it takes to do some of these things he wants to do, but that is not a crime, its not a big deal, just people need to understand it and not have a hissy.
time would be better served attacking Electronic Arts in my opinion
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Which is your right.
Seems like a significant part of 1,893,301 other people do not share your point of view.
Have fun
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
ok so....
will you really do it or are do you consider lie by you to be more ethical then selling overpriced virtual items?
is that better?
meaning do you feel given a consumer the OPTION to buy or not buy a virtual item is more unethical than biting untrue sarcasm?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Also, thank you for specifying about that donation/funding disclaimer in your previous post. That's nice on their part, and somewhat changes my view on it.
You are right. He's genius with money. He can sell ideas.
But time = money. So I kind of disagree with you as well. If you literally spend millions every month paying for development on something, it becomes rather important if project take 2 years or 12.
I personally wouldn't trust 10$ to a person to manage a multi-million dollar project who is bad with time management.
And no, I wouldn't say it's whining either. More like... trying to understand how can people actually protect such a practice. And yes - voicing my opinion about how this seems utterly ridiculous to me.
I haven't backed the project, and I wont. I'm not mad, or even worried about industries future, really.
But to me, it literally seems like Roberts just saw and opportunity to get some easy money, and is abusing the system that is non-publisher, crowd-funded gaming. And that does piss me off a little.
I see little hope for Star Citizen to be the grand project it might have been. I really liked the idea of it when I first read about it all those years ago, too.
That's the reality of a game where you need to fund it by your players before they play it, it logically can't go the opposite way, only when you look for funding in publishers/investors and not to in the public.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
yes you can walk back 'time is money' and then re-translate it to say 'chris Roberts is not good at money' but come on....give it a rest please. he just isnt good at project management. He VERY good an money management.
lets not over think this, some people, like roberts, are actually very good and crafty and nearly have a special talent for making money, which translates to 'good at money'
please...lets not to this...let it go...its project management he is bad at, but more importantly so the Fuck what, its not an international war crime
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
But many player groups pool money for ship packages and then individual pilots get ships from that package.
I know people that told their buddies "give me the money when you have time, whatever you want to donate". But that is a player group, not CIG.
Have fun
You seem really close-minded and stubborn. So I'll "let it go", trust me.
Also your views are kind of awkward and hypocritical at times. I'll also let that go.
But I did get a better view on the matter. So thanks for the little conversation here.
So, they do state that it's a donation - or rather "funding".
That changes the situation - so they are not selling pictures.
They are just baiting donations with expensive pictures and promises of more to come.
Makes it more
Also, Chris Roberts is shit with time, money and projects.
Which would make any reasonable person seriously doubt about the chances of this projects success.
Good luck to all of you, Star Citizens.
there is nothing wrong with super funding a game from your fans.
there is horrifically wrong with being horrible at time management
best I can tell he is honest, he wants to do this project, he is working on the project he just has a horrible sense of time. You never knew someone like that?
why is it when it comes to indie even the smallest slightest personality flaw of the developer comes off to the community as if its a major earthquake set to destroy the entire gaming industry, meanwhile Electronic Arts pulls their shit year after year after year with a pass from the community.
Yes he is bad at time management.
thats it...that is all there is to it, simple as that. I think most of his fans know that already
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
"....Is Star Citizen an MMO?
No! Star Citizen will take the best of all possible worlds, ranging from a permanent, persistent world similar to those found in MMOs to an offline, single player campaign like those found in the Wing Commander series. The game will include the option for private servers, like Freelancer, and will offer plenty of opportunities for players who are interested in modding the content. Unlike many games, none of these aspects is an afterthought: they all combine to form the core of the Star Citizen experience."
It is not an MMO. It is an instanced multiplayer game. There are many YOUTube videos about instancing in Star Citizen.
And that 850 $ ship is part of a pledge you can make to help fund the development of the project. You can also get it in game with in game money only after the game has launched. The only thing you HAVE to pay is a basic package. Which costs 54 EURO at the moment in my country. In the past you could get it for as low as 20 $.
So ... if you DO have the money and WANT to donate, go ahead and buy the ship and the pledge package. But it is entirely voluntary. And as Star Citizen is a twitch based game, it will also not make you better than others. If you cannot fly, you die .. not matter which ship you are in.
Have fun
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Im a fan of CR. I still have my original signed pre-order of Wing Commander and the hat that came with it. You defenders need to relax a bit. To quote Stg. Hulka " LIGHTEN UP FRANCIS"
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me