Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

I dont think you can really ever call a game thats already made this type of money before release 'a flop'.

I mean, how does CiG Crowdfunding compare to the most profitable game of all time?
AA said "When SC eventually flops", I think that's the key. Theranos raised a lot of cash from investors, it certainly flopped. SC is similarly not a game yet, never mind 2.
 
Compared to the most profitable games of all time? SC revenues are barely a noticeable blip. Plus none of those spent nearly as much as CIG developing (and marketing) them. SC still has the overall history record for the most money wasted in a video game though.

The game itself has been already released (in early access) and it is extremely crappy and broken, so as such it is already a flop.

The only real success in this story is for the salaries, wages and share buy backs of the management team and owners, Chris Roberts, his family, and former partners, measured in many tens of millions overall (based on salaries stated in the UK filings for Erin Roberts), probably not too far from 3 figure millions overall for the lot of them.
Did you ever consider you might be envious of Chris Robber's success? Successful managent should earn good money.
 
Compared to the most profitable games of all time? SC revenues are barely a noticeable blip. Plus none of those spent nearly as much as CIG developing (and marketing) them. SC still has the overall history record for the most money wasted in a video game though.

The game itself has been already released (in early access) and it is extremely crappy and broken, so as such it is already a flop.

The only real success in this story is for the salaries, wages and share buy backs of the management team and owners, Chris Roberts, his family, and former partners, measured in many tens of millions overall (based on salaries stated in the UK filings for Erin Roberts), probably not too far from 3 figure millions overall for the lot of them.
Firstly, cheers for the list. To be clear it was a general 'at the pub over a beer' musing query rather than one with analysis on my part.

Secondly, looking at that list, a lot of those are from (i) established brands or (ii) multi-format releases. I personally just don't think a single format game which has 'sold' (in the loosest sense of the word mind) itself to 4 million folk and somehow cleared $500 million in backer funding (not investors (sidebar, this number genuinely worries me considering how most folk I know have maybe dumped £50 tops into it)) can be considered a flop
 
I dont think you can really ever call a game thats already made this type of money before release 'a flop'.

I mean, how does CiG Crowdfunding compare to the most profitable game of all time?

Maybe not a financial flop. Chris, his family, and friends have done very well out of it financially.

As a game though, its going to bellyflop like the fat kid in the class at the swimming pool.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
Firstly, cheers for the list. To be clear it was a general 'at the pub over a beer' musing query rather than one with analysis on my part.

Secondly, looking at that list, a lot of those are from (i) established brands or (ii) multi-format releases. I personally just don't think a single format game which has 'sold' (in the loosest sense of the word mind) itself to 4 million folk and somehow cleared $500 million in backer funding (not investors (sidebar, this number genuinely worries me considering how most folk I know have maybe dumped £50 tops into it)) can be considered a flop

The revenue, by itself, sadly does not tell the whole story I am afraid. If it did then Theranos (close to a billion investments) or Madoff (65 billions) could not be considered flops either.

By the way, in terms of actual paying people, the real figure is far from 4 millions. That 4 millions is just created accounts in their platform. But actual number of paying accounts is probably around the 1.5-1.7 million mark or so. At the end of 2020 it was around 1.2 million paying accounts as per one of the CIG Letter from the Chairman. And that is just the paying accounts. Given many players have multiple paying accounts (I had 2 at one point) the number of unique paying people is probably significantly lower.

The only success so far in SC is relative to the management team and owners (Chris Roberts, his family and former partners) wages and personal income (many multiples of tens of millions probably by now), all extracted from buyers in this project. Assuming regulators or lawsuits don´t recover that at some point. Everything else is indeed a flop.
 
Last edited:
Maybe not a financial flop. Chris, his family, and friends have done very well out of it financially.

As a game though, its going to bellyflop like the fat kid in the class at the swimming pool.
I think we're approaching this from different angles, I'm (mostly) looking at it from a financial perspective, and as CiG is a limited liability company (I believe), as long as their owners are making money, its doing well (even using methods we'd consider personally a bit suss to say the least).

That said, I personally think its a long time before CiG are going to be in danger of anything close to collapsing/flopping, and I'm sure come 2030 those of us still around we'll be on V23 of this thread, still using the same catchphrases and declaring that 'x will be the final nail in the coffin' at every morsel of information that drips out, and I'll be here, horrified, that they've cleared a billion in crowdfunding without still releasing Squadron 42.
 

CIG marketing?

Some push back though.
"The game's arguably 5% complete, tops. After 11 years thats simply not good enough."
Holy mother of fidelity, you know that saying '90% of game development is done in teh first year or so, the rest of development time is spent on the last 10%'
Going by that and 10 years = 5%, citizens has another 170 years before 90% is done and who knows how long the final 10% will take. Can't argue it's future proof though.

I completely disagree with your idea that Liz Holmes was working on anything "on good faith". What she was selling was a complete and total fantasy, and she knew it. Intentions and feelings have nothing to do with it. The cold stark reality was nothing she said could be done, she knew it and taking money on the "off chance" some miracle occurred and the solution presented itself is the very definition of a scam.
Remember when we were 5 years old and thought everything was possible? Chris Roberts and Elizabeth Holms sure don't, they never really grew out of that.
 
Crowdfunding is like equity - it's not profit. It's money what you have to make profit off. Crowdfunding just doesn't know on which side of the balance sheet it should appear. It's basically like "silly German money" - and that's why they hired Ortwin because he's got very good experience with letting cash drain off and disappear in different pockets.

That's all what "Star Citizen" is about: run a facade for gullible idiots who throw their money away and funnel it into the pockets of select few people.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
Crowdfunding is like equity - it's not profit. It's money what you have to make profit off. Crowdfunding just doesn't know on which side of the balance sheet it should appear. It's basically like "silly German money" - and that's why they hired Ortwin because he's got very good experience with letting cash drain off and disappear in different pockets.

That's all what "Star Citizen" is about: run a facade for gullible idiots who throw their money away and funnel it into the pockets of select few people.

True, just a small clarification: Crowdfunding revenues are generally recognized as deferred revenues, and as such they sit squarely on the liabilities side of the balance sheet, much like loans do. They need to be held on reserve for the eventual case the developer does not deliver and for as long as there is a possibility there are refund claims. You can not generate profits from those, or dividends for that matter, until you actually release a product and they then become realized revenues.

CIG stopped SC being 100% crowdfunded when they released it in early access. According to their own statements sometime around 2016 or so. The only elements that could still be considered crowdfunded today are non delivered concept ships and similar in game items.
 
Last edited:
I think we're approaching this from different angles, I'm (mostly) looking at it from a financial perspective, and as CiG is a limited liability company (I believe), as long as their owners are making money, its doing well (even using methods we'd consider personally a bit suss to say the least).

That said, I personally think its a long time before CiG are going to be in danger of anything close to collapsing/flopping, and I'm sure come 2030 those of us still around we'll be on V23 of this thread, still using the same catchphrases and declaring that 'x will be the final nail in the coffin' at every morsel of information that drips out, and I'll be here, horrified, that they've cleared a billion in crowdfunding without still releasing Squadron 42.

As a gamer, i'm looking at it from a gaming perspective.

But from a financial perspective, it can also be viewed as a flop. CIG said they would deliver a whole bunch of features for 65 million. They've failed to deliver on even a tenth of what they said they could do for 65 million with ten times as much. It could be viewed as having delivered 6.5 million worth of stuff based on what CIG said they could do it for (not for it would really cost).

Its like a builder saying he will build you a house, with 10 bedrooms, a huge kitchen, swimming pool, etc, for around 100,000 pounds, but instead keeps stringing you along until you've given them a million, by promising you it will be the best house in the world ever, and after more than 10 years, all you have is this...

1690989987852.jpeg
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
Oh yeah, you can. It's leveraging. Can even pay dividends if the company is profitable and there is no loss on the balance.
Not sure what you mean but happy to see some exemples. Unless you have in mind some specific exceptions, in general deferred revenue or loan / debt related funding (leveraging) can not be used at all to account for actual revenue, or profits.

 
Not sure what you mean but happy to see some exemples. Unless you have in mind some specific exceptions, in general deferred revenue or loan / debt related funding (leveraging) can not be used at all to account for actual revenue, or profits.

I take up a loan of §1000, open a shop and buy little Viajero figurines. Agony and many friends can't get enough of them and I am able to generate §5 per §1 of expense. I earn profit. I pay dividend on that profit.
Technically I need a bit of equity to pay a dividend in the first place, but you need equity for founding a company in general.
The liability doesn't matter. If I earn well, Agony is gonna gladly prolong that loan if I ask.
 
Back
Top Bottom