Josquin
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Is this part of the “extinction level event”, or am I missing something? The only thing going extinct so far are my brain cells while wading through this “commentary”.
[quote quote=2671]I think my comments have been pretty clear. Anyone reading my blogs, specifically The End Game one you cited, can see that most of what I said in there, is pretty much what has happened. Right down to the missive I posted on Twitter last week about being proven right that the game – as pitched – couldn’t be made. They have proven me right by continuing to not only chop promised features, but also by implementing (as per 2.2) features that are just fluff, which were never discussed nor planned etc. The fact of the matter is, the stunts (e.g. releasing a half-assed mPU 2.0 to show progress) they pulled in Q4/15, gave them a huge revenue boost which nobody (least of all me) was expecting. Compare that to the fact that the split (a prediction I made in Oct) of SC and SQ42 was pretty much flat and didn’t gain the revenue they thought they would. However, they still made money from it. Regardless, it’s all immaterial because at their estimated $3M per month burn rate, eventually they will have mass layoffs and/or the whole thing will collapse.[/quote]
I don’t agree that most of what you said is what actually happened. But I don’t want to get into a tit-for-tat argument about that — we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I think most people can read the posts & tweets for themselves and make up their own minds. Secondly, there is another possible outcome for the project besides mass layoffs & total collapse. And that is that they deliver enough of a game within the next year to establish a sustainable source of revenue — which will allow them to continue development on a long-term basis. People may disagree about the relative probabilities of these two alternative outcomes, but the question is still far from settled.
[quote quote=2673]Ok to put it simply : try removing the ‘Derek Smart component’ from the equation. I would honnestly be interested in what makes you think CIG is not on the fail path. [/quote]
My opinions on the subject have nothing to do with Derek, Chris Roberts, or anyone else. Frankly, when I see multi-page emotional diatribes on both sides of the issue, my brain automatically tunes out — I just can’t take them seriously. I try to form opinions based on facts that are not open to interpretation (as much as possible — if there aren’t enough facts, I defer judgment). I suspected the 90-day doomsday timeline from Derek was highly unlikely even back then — all one had to do was take into account that they were still pulling in backer money at a considerable rate and apply that fact to your analysis.
That said, I am on the fence as to the ultimate outcome of the project. I want it to succeed, but don’t know if CIG can sustain their funding long enough for it to have a chance.
[quote quote=2668]Now, he never said ‘CIG will fall by end of january’ nostradamus style. You are making it a prediction. He said in his opinion that would be surprising.[/quote]
To be fair, it’s true that it wasn’t a direct prediction (and Q1/2016 doesn’t mean end of January). But it was speculation based on faulty information and questionable assumptions.
[quote quote=2665]
Is that a reference to the prediction you made back in October about the entire project folding before end of Q1/2016? Technically you still have 4 weeks to be proven right about that…
why you don’t give us any link? -) [/quote]
Look towards the end of this lengthy blog post:
[quote]That said, anyone who regards me as an un-biased source for all things related to this train wreck, only have themselves to blame if I’m off about something. However – thus far – every single thing I’ve said and written – has YET to be disproved.[/quote]
Is that a reference to the prediction you made back in October about the entire project folding before end of Q1/2016? Technically you still have 4 weeks to be proven right about that…
