Not having to be accountable for the money?
The Star Citizen Thread v 4
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
- Status
Oh come on.
The whole publisher and vision thing is just on of the many salesy soundbites CR likes to trott out when he's being non specific.
Unless of course you mean their vision was to find out what they can actually do once they get around to actually trying to do it and then claim that was "the vision" all along!
At least this time they can't blame the publisher, can they?
That all depends what your "vision" actually is. CIG continually move the goalposts into whatever area is currently most popular/lucrative so they can get more people to throw money at their marketing campaign. The one thing GIG do consistently is inconsistency.
If your vision is of making a really good game it's an awful position to be in, you cannot possibly please your entire customer base because you sold different people different promises at different times. If you try to please them all you'll produce a frankensteins monster of a game that excels at nothing, is average at a lot of things and is terrible at other things. Large chunks of the backers are not going to get what they bought.
If your vision is not having a publisher around to take a cut of the Scrooge McDuck pile of money then there's no problem at all.
Last edited:
Nope, but backers make great targets.
Oh, the large chunk of the backers are now the early backers not the latter backers?
After the changes to the scope happened? Hmmm?
Who is the minority here?!
Check the video with Irvin after he gave an interview post leaving CIG and you'll see he states exactly that about what was the vision, on, what it is being built today, was what CR wanted to build all along
He just didn't had the money to do it... until he did!
hahahha, amazing thing so much nothing to discuss that generates one of the biggest if not the biggest discussion on the whole Frontier Forums.
So changing the goalposts again I see. The discussion was about the activity recently. Please at least try to stay on topic.
Last edited:
Oh, the large chunk of the backers are now the early backers not the latter backers?
After the changes to the scope happened? Hmmm?
Who is the minority here?!
He said a large chunk, not the majority.
Also just because they're not the majority (by your speculation) it's ok for CIG to deliver another product than what was promised to them? And at a much much much later date to boot.
Check the video with Irvin after he gave an interview post leaving CIG and you'll see he states exactly that about what was the vision, on, what it is being built today, was what CR wanted to build all along
He just didn't had the money to do it... until he did!
Oh so he's going to build it? Better get a move on then
???? I responded about your claim of nothing to discuss vs how big and active the discussion of SC is on the ED forums, comparing to the ED discussions.
But this is irrelevant off-topic yeah.
The discussion was on the how dead the thread currently is. You changed it to how large the thread is. So yes you moved the goalposts for some unknown reason. Funny enough, you didn't actually address the point that there was nothing new to talk about.
And of course its the largest thread, all discussion is funneled into this thread, so all talk about a specific game goes into this. If you were to lump all the ED threads into a single one it would dwarf the SC by orders of magnitude. Its a poor comparison that had nothing to do with the current discussion.
If you look at the ED thread in the CIG forums, it is one of (if not the) largest in that forum. But again, its a pointless comparison.
Edit: Also as most of the talk is about how bad SC development is and how broken everything is, when its not just re linking CIG material. I don't think its size is something to brag about.
Last edited:
It wasn't any point sir, it was your opinion, that you are entitled to as i am to mine. O__o
Ian Phillips
Volunteer Moderator
Talk. About. The. Game.
No further warnings.
No further warnings.
Last edited:
By speculation, what SC is today when it comes to interest of backers, revealed itself on the record funding last year. The scope changes are already years old, the controversies with early backers on things as the FM are as old, but it keeps moving on.
Was it OK the changes to the scope, goals, releases in favor of the scope increase with more features and changes to other promised features from years ago, for the backers who were expecting them as promised and did not want them? Obviously not. I for myself, backed SC because of the changes of the scope, because of the vision running away from that original super-duper-realism hardcore originally promised, hear by, i'm not bothered by the direction, because i agree with it and like it.
But this doesn't change anything, SC will be its own game and not the game every one of us wants it to be (because we want different things), that yes, would make this game not ever going to be released trying to please everyone.
Last edited:
Not delivering on what you sold people effects the present and the future, it doesn't stop counting just because the game has been trapped in development hell and getting ever further from the initial release date.
How will you feel in two years if the scopes changed again and they are no longer making the game you want ?.
SC has to be the game(s) advertised to paying customers who have already bought it (even ones who bought it a few years ago). You can't take 113 million and fail to deliver on what you sold without consequence.
Look at ACM for an example of what happens when you stretch the truth in one advert. Now compare that with the sheer volume of changes, dropped features and conflicting information CIG has given out. SC doesn't just suffer from the engineering debt of concept sales its potentially got a much bigger problem with over-selling the game itself.
If it changes to be not the game i want anymore, then i'll move on, it happened before. You can bet i'm not going to be one of the backers/ex-backers complaining on forums and media or even attempt to refund my pledge, far i remember i have never refunded a KS, i know the risks.
They will certainly deliver what they promised to some extent, however, if you like it or not, that's a complete different story! It's like the discussions "oh they haven't delivered the FM as they promised", it's quite irrelevant because they DID deliver the FM, the discussions about the how realistic it is and how it plays, are nothing but details and very strongly opinion-based. Features changes, Cuts, Addictions happened on any KS i ever backed i can remember, so i'm not ingenuous or unrealistic to expect any developer to deliver what they envision when they describe what they are/want to create word-by-word.
No news for a while from CIG, every time this happens i fear a little more that they are struggling with something, with the recent beta 2.1 for ED, i am thinking they are leaping ahead in development compared to CIG. The flight model and graphics are so much smoother and easier to target and control.
Will CIG ever actually get on with this game in a reasonable time frame, and start to fix the present lags and mechanics before selling just more ships.
Will i ever be able to fly my ships in a smooth fun way in the PU, any news of sqd 42 yet, supposed to be released in 6-7 mths, which i can't see happening.
Will CIG ever actually get on with this game in a reasonable time frame, and start to fix the present lags and mechanics before selling just more ships.
Will i ever be able to fly my ships in a smooth fun way in the PU, any news of sqd 42 yet, supposed to be released in 6-7 mths, which i can't see happening.
Has CIG moved any of the numerous elements of the game they have worked on in a direction you do not agree with?
You seem to agree with everything they do.
You even defended them increasing the prices of ships among EVERYTHING else they have done or not done.
Just out of curiosity, could you name a few things that CIG could do that would make you "move on" from SC?
This is why I brought it up...last time there was dearth of information it was broken with cuts to scope and the drop of Star Marine as its own module.
Last edited:
We can hope, right?
If I see a SQ42 gameplay trailer, that will certainly give me plenty to chew on...and perhaps get excited about.
- Status