The Star Citizen Thread v 4

[Zargor]

I don't see any issues. Ship specifications are subject to change during the course of the development. This already happened before. E.g. during the first concept sales Banu MM was planned to have a crew if two, now it is planned for a crew of 8.

Yeah, because it's perfectly normal to lose a seat without anyone noticing and without telling it to the people up to the moment it gets delivered into the hangar and right after making a sale of the wrong concept and without anyone knowing what happened. This is incompetence.

 

[Cotic]

I don't see any issues. Ship specifications are subject to change during the course of the development. This already happened before. E.g. during the first concept sales Banu MM was planned to have a crew if two, now it is planned for a crew of 8.

Hmm I completely disagree that it's acceptable, that sounds suspiciously like apologist babble.

Going from a crew of 2 to 8 means your buddy can still fly with you, even better you can now have a few mates and/or a few NPCs within your ship as you see fit. Going from a crew of 2 to 1 means your buddy doesn't get to fly with you any more...

CIG should really do a better job at communicating these changes instead of trying to justify them after the fact. But then, no doubt anyone that complains will just get labelled a toxic diink.

 

[ianw]

I don't see any issues. Ship specifications are subject to change during the course of the development. This already happened before. E.g. during the first concept sales Banu MM was planned to have a crew if two, now it is planned for a crew of 8.

If they weren't selling ships it would be fine.

But they are selling a product - or at least allowing people to believe they are buying a product based on that product's advertised specifications. Forget all the pledge rubbish - like it or not people are handing their cash over for something in return - and CIG knows this full well.

This is just one of the very real problems they face with selling stuff like that.

 

[Aleksej]

Hmm I completely disagree that it's acceptable, that sounds suspiciously like apologist babble.

Going from a crew of 2 to 8 means your buddy can still fly with you, even better you can now have a few mates and/or a few NPCs within your ship as you see fit. Going from a crew of 2 to 1 means your buddy doesn't get to fly with you any more...

CIG should really do a better job at communicating these changes instead of trying to justify them after the fact. But then, no doubt anyone that complains will just get labelled a toxic diink.

And I completely disagree with that. I was specifically getting ships that were expected to have small crews, so that I would not have to hire lots of NPCs as crew members, or fly alone.

If they weren't selling ships it would be fine.

But they are selling a product - or at least allowing people to believe they are buying a product based on that product's advertised specifications. Forget all the pledge rubbish - like it or not people are handing their cash over for something in return - and CIG knows this full well.

This is just one of the very real problems they face with selling stuff like that.

If a backer does not like a package/ship there is an option to melt it for store credit.

 

[ianw]

If a backer does not like a package/ship there is an option to melt it for store credit.

Well that doesn't really work - especially with all the melt token nonsense.

They spend ages creating that ship matrix with all the specs then toss it out the window when they feel like it.

So someone who buys a 2 seat ship which then becomes a one seat ship can "melt it" and get something else that they didn't want else they'd have got it in the first place.

And what happens when that other thing turns into something they don't like because "we forgot" or "dev reasons".

It's nonsense - they make these things and they should make them as advertised at least.

As I said it wouldn't be an issue if they aren't selling these things - but they are.

 

[Aleksej]

Well that doesn't really work - especially with all the melt token nonsense.

They spend ages creating that ship matrix with all the specs then toss it out the window when they feel like it.

So someone who buys a 2 seat ship which then becomes a one seat ship can "melt it" and get something else that they didn't want else they'd have got it in the first place.

And what happens when that other thing turns into something they don't like because "we forgot" or "dev reasons".

It's nonsense - they make these things and they should make them as advertised at least.

As I said it wouldn't be an issue if they aren't selling these things - but they are.

The option to un-melt a ship is there as well.

Also no one is forced to buy any ship, and the warning that ship specifications are subjected to changes are there when you buy it. I.e. if you want to buy a ship with fully defined specifications you have to wait until the ship is fully implemented.

 

[Zargor]

The option to un-melt a ship is there as well.

Also no one is forced to buy any ship, and the warning that ship specifications are subjected to changes are there when you buy it. I.e. if you want to buy a ship with fully defined specifications you have to wait until the ship is fully implemented.

Or, CIG could avoid selling ships before they hit hangar. Just a thought.

 

[ianw]

The option to un-melt a ship is there as well.

Also no one is forced to buy any ship, and the warning that ship specifications are subjected to changes are there when you buy it. I.e. if you want to buy a ship with fully defined specifications you have to wait until the ship is fully implemented.

So why sell them before they are fully implemented - what's the point in in publishing any specs for them if they're going to change?

Why not just sell people store credit that they can use to buy stuff when it's ready instead of selling shiny things that you are then going to change?

Those are rhetorical questions btw - I'm pretty sure the answer is obvious.

 

[Aleksej]

So why sell them before they are fully implemented - what's the point in in publishing any specs for them if they're going to change?

Why not just sell people store credit that they can use to buy stuff when it's ready instead of selling shiny things that you are then going to change?

Those are rhetorical questions btw - I'm pretty sure the answer is obvious.

They sell ships to get funding for the development. They call it concept sales, and probably for a good reason. A lot of things might change on the path from a concept to implementation, which I think is obvious.

 

[ianw]

They sell ships to get funding for the development. They call it concept sales, and probably for a good reason. A lot of things might change on the path from a concept to implementation, which I think is obvious.

I disagree.

I think it's disingenuous to sell things based of hyping up the spec - which they know full well people pore over and compare imagining what role they will use it for - and then call it a "concept sale".

Which is tantamount to saying "It might change and if it does and you don't like - tough - we told you".

They make the concept then they change it - it's not as if there are external forces at play here.

 

[Marc Alexander]

Or, CIG could avoid selling ships before they hit hangar. Just a thought.

edit: I would ask you to consider the development process (<<I'd better spell it out, that was sarcastic)


unforced edit for others: you can swing excuses for ship concepts changing anyway you like. But in the case of CIG they appear to be morally bankrupt. These are major development changes to jpegs of ships that have sold for real money

 

[MaxLexandre]

You can find any excuses to attack CIG for doing this changes, but here's this:

Note: Ship specifications are subject to change.

...subject to change.


When the game isn't balanced at all, they have to say on every ship's page that their specs are not final, so when specs change, they do and that's it, it falls once again upon... #GameDevelopment
Then you can simply use the Melt functionality backers can use and get the full credit, if you don't want that ship for whatever change it might had faced.

 

[Zargor]

You can find any excuses to attack CIG for doing this changes, but here's this:

http://i.imgur.com/icewr7i.png


Note: Ship specifications are subject to change.

...subject to change.


When the game isn't balanced at all, they have to say on every ship's page that their specs are not final, so when specs change, they do and that's it, it falls once again upon... #GameDevelopment
Then you can simply use the Melt functionality backers can use and get the full credit, if you don't want that ship for whatever change it might had faced.

Yes, they change it so subtly that nobody notices until you have it before your eyes. What next, single seater Idris? You bought a mining ship? No sorry, it's an Aviary now. That Reclaimer? No no we meant Reclammer, it's for space fishing.

Sorry but once you sell digital products with VAT and all then the excuse does not hold, you are not delivering on a promise and a footnote disclaimer will not save you in a court of law. There are strong consumer protection laws in many countries and selling a product and delivering something else is fraudulent and subject to refund in the best case. If CIG wants to go this way it's up to them but they will have lots of fun and no ToS change will cover their bottoms as they are not over the law.

EDIT: Truth is, they are cutting stuff. Less crew, less polygons, no Star Marine, no Coop, no Private Servers, no Tuning. The list is getting longer with every week.

 

[MaxLexandre]

##
Yes, they change so subtly that nobody notices until you have it before your eyes. What next, single seater Idris? You bought a mining ship? No sorry, it's an Aviary now. That Reclaimer? No no we meant Reclammer, it's for space fishing.

It's not an excuse, it's there. It's said the specs are not final and that's in stone, they don't claim they are final of what will be delivered. By law, legally, all you can do is complain about something you agreed with when you bought the ship.


For people who wish to find alternatives instead of complain about it, they can:

1) Melt the ship and get another one that fits them more

2) Upgrade the Ship to another one that fits them more


Both options are there, for any backer to use, that are perfect for this kind of situations, where you can get your credit back if you don't want your ship anymore.
You can find all the excuses you want, if you do not want to face something like this then wait the ship to be added to the game before make a decision and don't buy into the concept stage, they're not forcing you to do so!

 

[Rolan]

less polygons

That's a joke no?

 

[jdbleam]

CIG has always maintained that you should trust the description of the concept rather than the specs page. Some ships have gotten larger and some have changed in other ways. Yesterday on an interview Ben stated that the Sabre was not really a stealth ship despite the description saying it was built from the ground up for stealth. Within hours of the video coming out he retracted the statement in his clumsy way. I'm more disappointed with the Khartu-AL going from six guns to two. That really doesn't spell "bane of the UEE navy to me."

No, I'm not Zecumbe. Although I have followed this thread since it's 2nd iteration I have not posted until recently. I do post in the ED thread over on the CIG forums. I was a subscriber for 20 months but dropped it after the whole 1 unmelt token every quarter thing. With the way things change, you should have one unmelt per ship you have bought. The way it is now....disappointed.

 

[MaxLexandre]

And that is why is at your own risk to buy the ship during the concept stage is way more prominent to changes than it would ever be after the ship is added to the actual game, because a ship concept is still a concept.

The point of the fact ended on, it's on all ships page about the Specs open to changes, and those specs define everything from size to functionality and power. When you bought a concept, you had agree with it because it wasn't claimed they were final. So it all falls into the melt functionality if the ship changes over something we don't want anymore.

There are ships pretty much nerfed, while others, like the Freelancer pretty much gotten better, for the backers who own it.

 

[Zargor]

It's not an excuse, it's there. It's said the specs are not final and that's in stone, they don't claim they are final of what will be delivered. By law, legally, all you can do is complain about something you agreed with when you bought the ship.


For people who wish to find alternatives instead of complain about it, they can:

1) Melt the ship and get another one that fits them more

2) Upgrade the Ship to another one that fits them more


Both options are there, for any backer to use, that are perfect for this kind of situations, where you can get your credit back if you don't want your ship anymore.
You can find all the excuses you want, if you do not want to face something like this then wait the ship to be added to the game before make a decision and don't buy into the concept stage, they're not forcing you to do so!

How about

3) Give people a refund

Also, apparently even discussing this will grant you a ban:

This is why these things get discussed here or elsewhere and not on CIG forums.

 

[MaxLexandre]

How about

3) Give people a refund

Also, apparently even discussing this will grant you a ban:

http://i.imgur.com/2mpfDGf.png

This is why these things get discussed here or elsewhere and not on CIG forums.

If you want for a refund then ask for a refund.

Or are the backers supposed to get refunds against their will because they changed something on a ship??!

Don't make me laugh.

 

[Zargor]

If you want for a refund then ask for a refund.

Or are the backers supposed to get refunds against their will because they changed something on a ship??!

Don't make me laugh.

I don't think you understand, CIG is denying people refunds on the grounds that substantial amount of the product was already delivered. If they just refunded those that wanted it would be fine but they don't, they actively try to discourage and intimidate people in order to avoid issuing them.