November 18, 2015 at 6:36 pm #1779
Yes – and that’s just a small portion of the long term ramifications that it will have when it all collapses. All the warning signs are there.November 18, 2015 at 7:13 pm #1780notAmber dontwantitdisplayedParticipant
It’s all about context and I have never professed to speak for anyone, let alone everyone. But judging by the number of people asking for and getting refunds, or how are still waiting for their refunds, my guess is that I’m not alone in my assessment of this project.
I’m confused how you state WE, but then say you don’t speak for anyone.
In July, after I heard rumblings about the project being in trouble, I decided to do some research, talk to industry contacts etc. The picture was bleak; so I decided to write about it in order to bring awareness to what was going on. That first blog, Interstellar Citizens, was then picked up by the media.
Here you speak in the 1st person, you are doing research, WE aren’t doing research you are.. but then you say that WE crowd funded something, and that WE need to pay attention.
You also say,
To make things worse, in this past October’s CitizenCon event, Chris Roberts, despite previously going on the record as saying the game will be completed and delivered in 2016, stated that he was no longer giving backers delivery schedules for the project. And just like that, what little accountability for this $95m project was left, went out the window. It all translates to: “We’ve got your money, f*ck you very much, we don’t owe you shit”
How is this not speaking for somebody else? I am trying to understand the train of thoughts here, not call you out or anything. It’s hard to communicate solely through text, but I might be reading more into what you are typing, but given the words, WE and I, or Translates to, I have very little to go off.November 19, 2015 at 4:55 am #1782lir bigParticipant
“-Investors and backers will start requiring more transparency, which probably isn’t a bad thing, but too much could cause studios to burn a lot of time and money providing it”
Actually not. All it takes is put few livestream webcams and weekly reports, forum comunication and honesty.
No need for the whole “10 questions to xxxx” and other useless features (aka cit-game-etc-con) that show nothing, that cost huge money and that CIG is precisly doing.November 19, 2015 at 6:15 am #1783Some DudeParticipant
I think for folks who are kicking in a modest amount of money for a project, I would agree that some livestreams, weekly reports and forum updates would be sufficient. The Webcam idea might be a little too Orwellian for some, but hey you never know.
What I mean by “Investor and backers” are firms and individuals that have substantially more money involved in a game’s production and are expecting more than just a copy of the game, some chachkies and DLC i.e. a share in the profits. Typically these larger entities want to see financial reporting and production input that is normally kept private and it takes time and energy to secure these types of communications.November 19, 2015 at 11:32 am #1785
Most developers, especially indies, do frequent dev updates. They don’t spend so much time, effort and money on elaborate nonsense that CIG are doing because they think it goes towards “openness” (no, it’s bullshit).November 19, 2015 at 11:34 am #1787
This was a bona fide investor (not just a backer buying JPEG ships). Surprisingly, RSI/CIG agreed. He got his money back. This is a statement he posted in a forum and which I copied.November 19, 2015 at 2:52 pm #1790D ManParticipant
2.0 just announced. Just an FYI.November 19, 2015 at 3:24 pm #1791WormhatsWormhatParticipant
Can I ask why you just blocked me on twitter? We’ve gone back and forth a few times about SC and LOD, and it’s always been civil. I think you make some valid points that are (unfortunately for everybody) obfuscated by some of your more… impassioned… discourses. You made a comment about the number of players in an SC 2.0 instance, and I questioned the number of players in LOD. This was not a personal attack by a white knight. It was a valid, objective measure of the standards you hold others to and how it relates to the standards to which you hold yourself.
So, I ask again, why did you block me on twitter? It doesn’t seem to jive with your typical “I’m open to rational disagreements” narrative. Seems like you’re just blocking anybody that dissents.
- The topic ‘Star Citizen – Year Four’ is closed to new replies.