Star Citizen Dev Asks For More Money

This isn't pre-ordering a game. This is backing either a start-up project, or an ongoing project. As a responsible backer (once again "small time venture capitalist") you'd want to check in once in a while, follow the project, and vote in cases where your input might be asked for. Or, you're just along for the ride. Besides that, provided the project keeps going well enough, you'll get what you back and more. There isn't a game on the planet that either didn't run over budget, over estimated time-frame, or didn't come out like shit because it was forced out too early by a publisher except for the companies with enough influence and common sense to say "it'll release WHEN IT'S DONE". (like id Software for example) Would you rather this was shoveled out unfinished? Go play something else while you wait, and be pleasantly surprised when it comes out better than initially planned. Or, if you're not comfortable with the risk, don't back it in the first place.

Like I said, you're not pre-ordering a game. You're helping fund a project that may or may not come out as expected. It's up to YOU to decide whether it's worth the risk to get the reward.
It's fraud when they willingly disregard what they sold initial backers. We did not vote on these changes.
 
It's fraud when they willingly disregard what they sold initial backers. We did not vote on these changes.

No, it isn't. Development times shift in every major project. Not just games either. Getting feedback from your ACTIVE community on possible changes in direction is perfectly valid. YOU may not have voiced your opinion, but that doesn't mean others did not. The project is still in progress, it's still being actively worked on by a lot of people with a lot of big names attached to it. So just because you didn't get your shiny new toy when you wanted it, doesn't mean you're being defrauded.

I am not an SC apologist in any sense of the word. I'm hopeful that it will turn out great. From what I've seen so far, I can tell that a lot of care is going into it. However, I'm well aware that it could spiral down into the proverbial toilets of game development. That's not what I think will happen, but it's a very real possibility however slim or not it may be.

What you're saying though is incorrect.
 
It's fraud when they willingly disregard what they sold initial backers. We did not vote on these changes.

How dare you not check in daily and don''t have an F5 macro set up to refresh the Paige. Only active obsessed members get to vote. It's not like they could set up an email blast to let everyone know to vote or anything? You'd think after 4 years you'd stay on top of it.
 
How dare you not check in daily and don''t have an F5 macro set up to refresh the Paige. Only active obsessed members get to vote. It's not like they could set up an email blast to let everyone know to vote or anything? You'd think after 4 years you'd stay on top of it.

If it matters as much to him as it appears, and he backed an unfinished project, then yes. If you're like me, put in what you were willing to, and hope it will turn out pretty well eventually, then no. But you don't see me crying over it either do you? Despite my understanding of backing projects, and one of my previous posts outlining what a responsible backer might be expected to do, I bought one ship, am not invested more than I feel I should be, and am pretty much along for the ride hoping for a good experience to form when it's ready.

The way he talks, it's like his life is on hold until this game is finished. In which case, yeah, maybe checking in more, participating in the forums, getting informed a bit more might pay off. Or simply not backing it in the first place if he's not the wagering type.

He's got every right to be disappointed if it's not turning out the way he speculated, but backing a project IS speculation, and he's yelling fraud when it's obvious work is still being done.

I don't think a lot of people grasp how crowdfunding realistically works, the possible risks involved, how development (of ANY type of product) works, how deadlines tend to creep in most large-scale projects, or even the history of game development. I don't expect everyone to know everything, hell things escape me too sometimes, but people should be realistic about things, and be as informed about something as they are serious about it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No, it isn't. Development times shift in every major project. Not just games either. Getting feedback from your ACTIVE community on possible changes in direction is perfectly valid. YOU may not have voiced your opinion, but that doesn't mean others did not. The project is still in progress, it's still being actively worked on by a lot of people with a lot of big names attached to it. So just because you didn't get your shiny new toy when you wanted it, doesn't mean you're being defrauded.

I am not an SC apologist in any sense of the word. I'm hopeful that it will turn out great. From what I've seen so far, I can tell that a lot of care is going into it. However, I'm well aware that it could spiral down into the proverbial toilets of game development. That's not what I think will happen, but it's a very real possibility however slim or not it may be.

What you're saying though is incorrect.
They are having serious difficulties releasing a single player game and they just put out an FPS mode that is subpar when compared to Halo 1. I wouldn't have minded if the times merely "shifted" and the game was released a year later than initially planned such as in early 2016. However, it now seems like it will be released in 2020 if the companies/shell network are able to survive that long. That is not a shift but a project that has totally gone off the rails.
 
They are having serious difficulties releasing a single player game and they just put out an FPS mode that is subpar when compared to Halo 1. I wouldn't have minded if the times merely "shifted" and the game was released a year later than initially planned such as in early 2016. However, it now seems like it will be released in 2020 if the companies/shell network are able to survive that long. That is not a shift but a project that has totally gone off the rails.

That's a valid perspective. I don't know how accurate your appraisal is, but from the last sets of footage I saw, and my brief check-in on a recent Alpha, it wasn't that bad. Even though I'm waiting more for SQ42, I'm actually following its development less. Since information is a bit more scarce on it, I'd rather wait than speculate on its progress. SC's progress is right out there for everyone to see, so I tend to watch that a bit more.

Not saying you shouldn't be disappointed if that's how you feel. I just don't think it's in the state where I'd try to call it fraud either. I guess we'll see. :D
 
The only thing I got out of this thread is the possibility that one day I can look forward to a highly entertaining and educational documentary concerning the largest and longest running crowd sourced development scam in gaming history.

I'd like Sacha Baron Cohen to play Chris Roberts. Haven't decided yet who should play Sandi... perhaps Sarah Silverman?
 
The only thing I got out of this thread is the possibility that one day I can look forward to a highly entertaining and educational documentary concerning the largest and longest running crowd sourced development scam in gaming history.

I'd like Sacha Baron Cohen to play Chris Roberts. Haven't decided yet who should play Sandi... perhaps Sarah Silverman?

Who better to play a wannabe actress, than a wannabe actress? Sandi would play herself - shrieking at Chris to get her in the same room with Gary Oldman and Gillian Anderson, and why its so important that she of all people be crowbarred into the production- "I NEED THIS, CHRIS"
 
If these backers invested in AMD/Nividia stock instead.....

I'm not going to disagree with you there. :D What they did invest in though is the dream of having a modern WingLancer game with an additional persistent universe. Elite is the only modern alternative right now, and while it's pretty cool, it in no way resembles the old PC Space Operas of the 90s and that's what these people want. I personally invested just what I thought the final product would be worth to me. Other people value this dream more, some less, some have given up on it, but I'm still optimistic. I usually am. There's plenty of time to be negative about something once it's proven to be something worth being negative about. In the meantime, I'll be optimistic, have 20% less hate in my life, and probably live longer. :p
 
I'm not going to disagree with you there. :D What they did invest in though is the dream of having a modern WingLancer game with an additional persistent universe. Elite is the only modern alternative right now, and while it's pretty cool, it in no way resembles the old PC Space Operas of the 90s and that's what these people want. I personally invested just what I thought the final product would be worth to me. Other people value this dream more, some less, some have given up on it, but I'm still optimistic. I usually am. There's plenty of time to be negative about something once it's proven to be something worth being negative about. In the meantime, I'll be optimistic, have 20% less hate in my life, and probably live longer. :p
That's probably the least jerk-like post ever.
 
get ready to crowdfund Chris Roberts' new books

"How to stretch goal your company out of business"
 
It's fraud when they willingly disregard what they sold initial backers. We did not vote on these changes.
Honestly, you should probably just get a refund and buy Squadron 42 whenever it comes out if it meets your standards. I really do think you have a valid complaint, so why keep your money in there for something you didn't want?
 
I'd REALLY like to know why some people seem soooooo adamant about wanting this game to fail or calling it a "scam" or saying it should somehow be finished by now.


GTA V
Fallout 4
Red Dead Redemption
Skyrim

Know what all of these games have in common?
None of them asked the player base for money in advanced to make them?
 
None of them asked the player base for money in advanced to make them?

Not sure what that has to do with people somehow expecting them to get this game finished before an experienced and fully staffed AAA studio could when they have to not only build the game but also the studio up to make the game and get it together as they go.

I was using those games as examples of how long it takes for large AAA studios to make an open world game so people will stop insisting that somehow star citizen, which is larger and more complicated, should somehow have been done and finished in under the time frame of those games.

Also asking for money isn't "demanding" it, no one forces you to donate. If people don't grasp the concept of game development and the roadblocks you can hit and how many things can change or you're too impatient to give them actual time to make it, do not donate, it's not hard.
 
I donated to the original kickstarter(?), and from what I gather I'm entitled to owing them another $60... or something. I'm not really sure. I loaded up the "game" and walked around an incredibly good looking space station then shot at some asteroids in space for a bit. yay?
 
None of them asked the player base for money in advanced to make them?

None of them were kickstarted. Are you aware of what it means to have had a kickstarter? Are you saying that Kickstarter shouldn't allow games to be kickstarted? Because that's what it sounds like you're saying, and to that I would definitely have to disagree.


As for this "vaporware", I'm playing Star Marine (the FPS module) right now. Well, my team is losing, so back to the fight.
 
I've been calling this game VAPORWARE since day one.
I will call it VAPORWARE once more today. See you guys in a few months when I get to call it VAPORWARE again.

(Some people get really pissed off when you call this game VAPORWARE)

Yea, because vaporware means there is no product to buy but SC has an actual working product you can buy now so calling it "vaporware" is a lie.
 
Not sure what that has to do with people somehow expecting them to get this game finished before an experienced and fully staffed AAA studio could when they have to not only build the game but also the studio up to make the game and get it together as they go.

I was using those games as examples of how long it takes for large AAA studios to make an open world game so people will stop insisting that somehow star citizen, which is larger and more complicated, should somehow have been done and finished in under the time frame of those games.

Also asking for money isn't "demanding" it, no one forces you to donate. If people don't grasp the concept of game development and the roadblocks you can hit and how many things can change or you're too impatient to give them actual time to make it, do not donate, it's not hard.

If someone tries making a game that's "larger and more complicated" than any of those examples from established AAA studios then maybe they should have started with a more realistic goal then.
 
The worst thing is that they have somehow managed to make the consumer feel like its THEIR fault if the game isn't good.

"If only you hadn't lost faith, and everyone tithed 10% of your income, the game would have been glorious... but greed was your sin. This is on you guys for not buying enough ships and evangelizing your friends."
 
Yea, because vaporware means there is no product to buy but SC has an actual working product you can buy now so calling it "vaporware" is a lie.

"Working product" might be a stretch. Seems more like endless incremental updates to tech demos and hangar simulators to give the appearance of work being done and progress happening, while years keep slipping by and targets are continually missed.

Nobody really knows if it's more than just busywork for the employees working on those modules. And maybe those employees believe their work will actually lead to and combine into a playable, cohesive game some day. Or maybe part of them senses it's all gotten to be too big a mess to ever come together and live up to expectations, but they'll keep riding the gravy train and collecting a paycheck as long as they can.
 
Last edited:
None of them were kickstarted. Are you aware of what it means to have had a kickstarter? Are you saying that Kickstarter shouldn't allow games to be kickstarted? Because that's what it sounds like you're saying, and to that I would definitely have to disagree.


As for this "vaporware", I'm playing Star Marine (the FPS module) right now. Well, my team is losing, so back to the fight.

September 30th, 2015:

They have the full game 70% done, the single player portion of the game (which is a AAA title all by itself) 90% done, and they have no debt. And no publisher to take 70% of the sales away from them.
 
70% done still sounds like a year or so away. It's that last 10 percent of nasty bugs and polishing that really slows things down. And nobody said if this was a public test server or a private server for the fps module testing? Do you have the entire area or just a small sand box?
 
70% done still sounds like a year or so away. It's that last 10 percent of nasty bugs and polishing that really slows things down. And nobody said if this was a public test server or a private server for the fps module testing? Do you have the entire area or just a small sand box?

Which would mean SC is, at worst, right around the corner, and SQ42 would already be out now. Neither of which is true.
 
Did you create an account for the sole purpose of pulling off that sick burn?





(y)(y)(y)

No, for that plus asking where my money is:

I'll bet you 2.5% of Wildace's household income that those dates don't hold.

I'd take the bet that SQ42 will be out before February. Effectively one month after Chris Roberts' expected finish date.

Can't remember the pw for my old account and don't have the email address anymore (or even remember what email address it was).
 
If someone tries making a game that's "larger and more complicated" than any of those examples from established AAA studios then maybe they should have started with a more realistic goal then.


That was the entire point of this game, it was meant to be the "ultimate" space sim game, Chris Roberts "dream" game.

That's kind of one of the reasons its gotten so much funding from people, it's a game people want, thus they throw money at it so they can make it.
 
That was the entire point of this game, it was meant to be the "ultimate" space sim game, Chris Roberts "dream" game.

And therein lies the game's biggest problem: it CR's dream game.

Giving Chris Roberts $150 million to make a videogame is like giving a 6 year old a million dollars to build a house.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top