False.
Repeating their nonsense doesn't make it true
It's not false. It can't be false. It's how I felt and how it appeared to me at the time. You don't get to tell me how I felt.
False.
Interstellar Citizens blog contained a contextual post about LoD and Elite Dangerous as a comparison to what SC was trying to achieve and why I stated they would fail. I was right. That aside from the fact that the point being made there was that you wouldn't ask a baker to opine on brain surgery; even though you don't need to be a cook to know that the food tastes like shit.
It's not false. You spend a lot of words describing your game. To me at the time it was like reading an advert for LOD.
False.
There was nothing to "ban". They refunded me, thus closing my account. That's what happens with everyone who had their accounts closed.
Semantics. They closed your account because they thought you were using their platform to publicise your game. I agreed with that assessment.
Of course it's irrelevant when you fail to make the point. How convenient.
The point is that I've seen you crying about this before now, how they refunded you because you'd broken their ToS but you'd never posted on their forums. It's irrelevant if you had or not. You used the fact that SC was blowing up in an attempt to sell copies of LOD. That's how it looked to me. That's how it looked to CIG.
I can only 
at that particular bit of nonsense. What exactly did they "build"? And how did I "gain"?
The built an incredibly popular game concept and monetised pre orders on a scale never seen before. They built a large community of excited space game nerds. They built interest and excitement for what they were planning.
I should have said 'attempted to gain' perhaps, as the blog was little more than an advert for LOD. You, attempting to grab yourself some of the vast riches pouring into CIGs coffers by showing the vast number of people interested in SC that your game was an alternative.
That's how I saw it. Others too. Seemed very obvious to me to be honest.
"someone like yourself"? You don't know anything about me. And there is no "success". Outside of your fanboi bubble, the project is widely regarded an abysmal FAILURE of epic proportions.
I know you're a game developer who makes space games. Someone who's struggled to create a significant fan base, similar to the one giving Chris all of their disposable income. The success I talk about is funding. Money. Goodwill. Excitement. A community. The game may be taking its time but to suggest that SC isn't a huge success is monumental idiocy. Building a company that's worth over 450 million dollars and with an income of 30+ million dollars a year in just a few years seems like a successful venture to me.
False
David and I go way back, and we even chat from time to time. Again, keep pulling straws and clutching your pearls; eventually - if you're lucky - something will stick.
Also, I didn't back ED because it wasn't his first attempt, and I didn't think he'd pull it off that time. Though he did end up scaling back promises - as I said would happen - he did end up releasing a hugely successful game. And he did it with about $11m (of which less than $2m came from crowd-funding). And that game is leap years ahead of anything a $225m train-wreck will ever produce.
Not false. You called both Chris and David dinosaurs with very little chance of succeeding with their new games. Can't be arsed getting a link but we both know what I'm talking about.
If memory serves you said they were out of touch with gaming after being away for so long.
I guess you were horribly wrong on both counts. The pair of them have done ok with their new space games I reckon...
