Want to have Cutter AND Corvette?why do this?
Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
I do want SQ42 to release, just to see if after all these years of tweaking the mess hall scene and endless mocap reshoots, whether CIG are actually capable of making a good game. Or whether it will be a combination of Wing Commander the Movie and Dragon's Lair.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
I would pay to see that!
Fortunately, you don't have to!
Someone on YT comments challenged me over a claim that even in SC releases its going to be an unfinished unpolished mess, saying we can't know that.
I mean, how do you even respond to that except vaguely gesturing at the entire development of the game?
I mean, how do you even respond to that except vaguely gesturing at the entire development of the game?
Exactly. But the credits I pumped into getting to that didn't cost anything more than the base game price in real money, and I actually enjoy playing a real game that I did spend my real money on in the first instance.why do this?
What about Monkey Joe and the 11 Emerald Parrots?why do this?
Maybe Chris has a secret build with 98 more star systems and no bugs, just needs to add server meshing and we're good.
Rich Tyrer already said that it's going to release unfinished.
He didn't say unpolished though. Unfinished is a given regardless of what Rich says. They haven't delivered on 1/10th of what they sold to backers to date, so its not like they are going to deliver the other 90% in a year or two.
It will more than likely have a poorer script than Wing Commander the Movie, and possess even more on-rails gameplay than Dragon's Lair, and look worse than either.
Ryan Reynolds Says Netflix Is Taking a Big Swing With 'Dragon's Lair' Live-Action Adaptation [Exclusive]
"It really intersects in a unique way with technology that I've never been privy to in the entertainment industry."
collider.com
Still a live project afaik.
GuardFrequency's take on the 2022 financials:
Source: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2092126364?t=00h56m00s
Tony the lawyer says:
- The agreement with the Calders is so weird CIG refused to show it to the new accountants (PwC)
- PwC are saying they can't verify Note 28 at all. The numbers, anything.
- If a public company tried to do that the SEC would be crawling all over them. There would be shareholder lawsuits and everything would come crashing down.
- Says he went digging. And that a prior investor (not the Calders) [Erloch Ltd] had a full buyback + 6% option for Jan-March 2024. Which he sees more as a loan than an investment. But doesn't allow for claims on assets / foreclosing etc.
- Tony suspects the contract wasn't shown because it either allows them to convert their equity into a debt, or to replace board members (who could then vote to make that happen).
- 2025 sees the Calders turn come up. Plus they get a piece of the last 3yrs revenue too. To the tune of around £52mil, from just the CIG UK branch. Likely mirrored on the US one. More than $100mil could be owed from Jan 1st 2025 etc.
- Suspects the filings were late because CIG were getting a waiver from the first investment group - Erloch Ltd (Ortwin's film buddies). So they could show the accountants that 2024 wasn't a problem. And 2025 is next year, so 'not relevant' currently...
- Isn't surprised at the scenario they've got themselves into. Is surprised they're playing 'hide the ball' with their own accountants.
- Accountant's qualification is basically saying 'we have no idea if they're telling the truth or not' on the projected repayment numbers in Note 28 etc. (Maybe the repayment numbers were added to stop the qualified opinion from being even worse).
- Big question mark over why the prior accountants didn't spot any of this for years.
- The takeaway is that: The Calders have a $100m+ gun to CIG's head, and they can pull the trigger on Jan 1st. And we only just heard about it.
- There's no reason to hide this from the accountants unless the assumptions (returns can only be taken from profit, no changes to the board, no existential threat), or the numbers, are wrong. IE either lying by omission or commission.
- Other negatives touched on briefly: A historical error in the filings. Not possible to see how they're moving money between the entities any more.
Tony the lawyer says:
- The agreement with the Calders is so weird CIG refused to show it to the new accountants (PwC)
- PwC are saying they can't verify Note 28 at all. The numbers, anything.
- If a public company tried to do that the SEC would be crawling all over them. There would be shareholder lawsuits and everything would come crashing down.
- Says he went digging. And that a prior investor (not the Calders) [Erloch Ltd] had a full buyback + 6% option for Jan-March 2024. Which he sees more as a loan than an investment. But doesn't allow for claims on assets / foreclosing etc.
- Tony suspects the contract wasn't shown because it either allows them to convert their equity into a debt, or to replace board members (who could then vote to make that happen).
- 2025 sees the Calders turn come up. Plus they get a piece of the last 3yrs revenue too. To the tune of around £52mil, from just the CIG UK branch. Likely mirrored on the US one. More than $100mil could be owed from Jan 1st 2025 etc.
- Suspects the filings were late because CIG were getting a waiver from the first investment group - Erloch Ltd (Ortwin's film buddies). So they could show the accountants that 2024 wasn't a problem. And 2025 is next year, so 'not relevant' currently...
- Isn't surprised at the scenario they've got themselves into. Is surprised they're playing 'hide the ball' with their own accountants.
- Accountant's qualification is basically saying 'we have no idea if they're telling the truth or not' on the projected repayment numbers in Note 28 etc. (Maybe the repayment numbers were added to stop the qualified opinion from being even worse).
- Big question mark over why the prior accountants didn't spot any of this for years.
- The takeaway is that: The Calders have a $100m+ gun to CIG's head, and they can pull the trigger on Jan 1st. And we only just heard about it.
- There's no reason to hide this from the accountants unless the assumptions (returns can only be taken from profit, no changes to the board, no existential threat), or the numbers, are wrong. IE either lying by omission or commission.
- Other negatives touched on briefly: A historical error in the filings. Not possible to see how they're moving money between the entities any more.
It makes total sense that the smaller 2024 put is for one of the smaller companies which initially bought in. (Perhaps he means Infatrade rather than Erloch though? Eli Klein, who represented them on the board, was an old friend of Chris & Ortwin, and was seen as a broker for the deal at the time I believe.)
Ryan Reynolds Says Netflix Is Taking a Big Swing With 'Dragon's Lair' Live-Action Adaptation [Exclusive]
"It really intersects in a unique way with technology that I've never been privy to in the entertainment industry."
Still a live project afaik.
Surely they could just take a stream of someone playing the game and then use AI to replace it with realistic looking scenery and characters....oh lol I nearly choked myself laughing writing that!
You'd deny yourself the chance of seeing Ryan Reynolds play Dirk? That has win written all over it! And Anja Taylor-Joy would be an excellent Daphne.
Overdrive Initiative missions (at least this group) arent too bad. Not really soloable, but not hard either.
Do like it forces people to group up. Asked in general chat if anyone was running the missions and ended up grouped up with a random org. Got the full space dad experience. Still need to do that last / 5th one.
Do like it forces people to group up. Asked in general chat if anyone was running the missions and ended up grouped up with a random org. Got the full space dad experience. Still need to do that last / 5th one.
I'd absolutely love to see Genuine Robert's cinematic vision of accessing a mainframe 
Just listening to this over morning coffee.
Its clear that CIG don't want PwC to see the actual agreement. That it would be as damning as hell.
![[VR] Merkir](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/141/141091.jpg?1553527154){kind=avatar}
Extraordinary that a company wouldn't disclose the commercial terms of an agreement to their own accountants, who must keep such information confidential anyway. The only conclusion I can come to is that disclosing it would have severely affected their public financial statements and reveal a potential future commercial disaster, and a PR nightmare. CRobbers would avoid that at all costs. And now the recent staff reductions make more sense, to build a war chest for Calder obligations down the track.