The Star Citizen Thread v5

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

MTBFritz

MTBFritz
Aint it kinda sad and very telling that whemever you bring in people with expertise and knowledge they eventually tend to bring up problems and inconsistencies in Star Citzen when its not being affected by being a fan?

Investigations into the flight model, engine capabilities, technical foundation, bug analyzis.....all these things uncover a rather ugly picture. And thats with next to NO information given by CiG itself.
 

Sunleader

Sunleader
If your done wth the Doomsday Scenarios.
Maybe you should take a minute and think about this Rationally.


They likeky took Loans BEFORE they Raised so much Money.

Kickstarter Projects are a Starting Point. Usually they are nowhere close to the actual Budget.
The Budget of the Game is usually a Loan which will be Paid back using the earnings from the Game when its Finished.

If they had a Stretch Goal worth the Step between 19 and 20 Million. So 1 Million for this Project to be added.
Its not unrealistic to assume that the Project actually Costs 2-3 Million.



I doubt anyone on SC assumed them to Raise 140 Million at this Point.
So Its fairly likely that the 70 Million of Goals got at least 30 Million on Loans alongside.
Maybe even more.

And here comes another thing.
If they back out of the Loan Contract they would have to Pay tremendous Fees.

So just keeping the Loan js often the less expensive Choice as you can then use the excess Money for an Longterm Investment that gives you a small interest without risks thus partially canceling out the Interest you pay on your Loan.

Having steady income streams is often a contract requirement for this.




So sorry to tell you.
But your Doomsday Scenarios of CIG being Bankrupt or something aint holding water.

But thanks for demonstrating how hostile and toxic people here are towards SC.
 

Tippis

Tippis
CmdrKull said:
Game in Dev vs complete released games. Debug mode is going to have a whole lot more overhead so that may be nothing to worry about. Honestly only time or CIG could tell.
Click to expand...

Well, other than BF1 at least, which would presumably be in debug mode too, and which still had median roundtrip times.

Sunleader said:
If your done wth the Doomsday Scenarios.
Maybe you should take a minute and think about this Rationally.

They likeky took Loans BEFORE they Raised so much Money.
Click to expand...
No. That would directly contradict what Ben is saying so that's not the likely scenario. As explained, it would also be a pretty bad scenario since that would mean their cost of capital would be horrendous. So your hypothesis does not hold water in relation to CIG's own claims.
 
Last edited:

Rolan

Rolan
CmdrKull said:
Game in Dev vs complete released games. Debug mode is going to have a whole lot more overhead so that may be nothing to worry about. Honestly only time or CIG could tell.

Does SM have any of the low-G zero-G scenarios yet? Or is it currently a regular shooter that happens to take place on a space station?
Click to expand...
I think both maps have zones with no gravity, I'm almost sure.
 

Dooguk

D
Sunleader said:
If your done wth the Doomsday Scenarios.
Maybe you should take a minute and think about this Rationally.


They likeky took Loans BEFORE they Raised so much Money.

Kickstarter Projects are a Starting Point. Usually they are nowhere close to the actual Budget.
The Budget of the Game is usually a Loan which will be Paid back using the earnings from the Game when its Finished.

If they had a Stretch Goal worth the Step between 19 and 20 Million. So 1 Million for this Project to be added.
Its not unrealistic to assume that the Project actually Costs 2-3 Million.



I doubt anyone on SC assumed them to Raise 140 Million at this Point.
So Its fairly likely that the 70 Million of Goals got at least 30 Million on Loans alongside.
Maybe even more.

And here comes another thing.
If they back out of the Loan Contract they would have to Pay tremendous Fees.

So just keeping the Loan js often the less expensive Choice as you can then use the excess Money for an Longterm Investment that gives you a small interest without risks thus partially canceling out the Interest you pay on your Loan.

Having steady income streams is often a contract requirement for this.




So sorry to tell you.
But your Doomsday Scenarios of CIG being Bankrupt or something aint holding water.

But thanks for demonstrating how hostile and toxic people here are towards SC.
Click to expand...

I don't know what is with the random capitalising of words in your walls of text, but I personally find them unreadable. Could you please change it?
 

ghcannon

G
I kind of agree with the whole "it's a beta" thing ... this time.

See, if they're using the serialization and web service call model that would power SC, it's alright that they haven't optimized their data.
They'll be doing that for quite a while and that's okay. I'd start worrying if that doesn't change in the coming year.
 

Zetta

Zetta
Sunleader said:
If your done wth the Doomsday Scenarios.
Maybe you should take a minute and think about this Rationally.


They likeky took Loans BEFORE they Raised so much Money.

Kickstarter Projects are a Starting Point. Usually they are nowhere close to the actual Budget.
The Budget of the Game is usually a Loan which will be Paid back using the earnings from the Game when its Finished.

If they had a Stretch Goal worth the Step between 19 and 20 Million. So 1 Million for this Project to be added.
Its not unrealistic to assume that the Project actually Costs 2-3 Million.



I doubt anyone on SC assumed them to Raise 140 Million at this Point.
So Its fairly likely that the 70 Million of Goals got at least 30 Million on Loans alongside.
Maybe even more.

And here comes another thing.
If they back out of the Loan Contract they would have to Pay tremendous Fees.

So just keeping the Loan js often the less expensive Choice as you can then use the excess Money for an Longterm Investment that gives you a small interest without risks thus partially canceling out the Interest you pay on your Loan.

Having steady income streams is often a contract requirement for this.




So sorry to tell you.
But your Doomsday Scenarios of CIG being Bankrupt or something aint holding water.

But thanks for demonstrating how hostile and toxic people here are towards SC.
Click to expand...

So instead of Star Citizen getting you more bang for your buck

cbs3aHj.jpg


It's now apparently getting you less bang for your buck.

These guys....
 

ianw

I
Zetta said:
So instead of Star Citizen getting you more bang for your buck

https://i.imgur.com/cbs3aHj.jpg

It's now apparently getting you less bang for your buck.

These guys....
Click to expand...

Some things they left off on the Direct PC model costs;

Setting up loads of new studios/offices
Ridiculously priced coffee machines and hipster furniture
Building several mocap studios

None of which afflict the established publisher model..

ETA - and a spacedoor - how could I forget about the spacedoor!?
 
Last edited:

Stigbob

Stigbob
Sunleader said:
If your done with the doomsday scenarios. Maybe you should take a minute and think about this rationally. They likeky took loans BEFORE they raised so much money. Kickstarter projects are a starting point. Usually they are nowhere close to the actual budget. The budget of the game is usually a loan which will be paid back using the earnings from the game when its finished. If they had a stretch goal worth the step between 19 and 20 million. So 1 million for this project to be added. Its not unrealistic to assume that the project actually costs 2-3 Million. I doubt anyone on SC assumed them to raise 140 million at this point. So its fairly likely that the 70 million of goals got at least 30 million on Loans alongside. Maybe even more.
Click to expand...

(I took the liberty of formatting your post) Why would they take loans out before knowing the scale of interest and what stretch goals would get hit, that makes no sense. Once they knew how much interest there was they'd raised a lot of money from backers and surely didn't really need loans. Unless money is running out.

Sunleader said:
And here comes another thing. If they back out of the loan contract they would have to pay tremendous fees. So just keeping the loan is often the less expensive choice as you can then use the excess money for an long-term investment that gives you a small interest without risks thus partially canceling out the Interest you pay on your loan. Having steady income streams is often a contract requirement for this.
Click to expand...

Which is why people don't take loans they don't need, as I explained above.

Sunleader said:
So sorry to tell you. But your doomsday scenarios of CIG being bankrupt or something aint holding water. But thanks for demonstrating how hostile and toxic people here are towards SC.
Click to expand...

The thing about struggling businesses is that they hide the fact that they are struggling, because if known that would put off customers and investors (see Enron). There's no toxicity here, people are wondering what's gone wrong because it's quite clear from the glacial progress and broken promises that Star Citizen is not the success people hoped it would be.
 

Insignificant_The_Galaxy_Cat

Banned
I
Stigbob said:
(I took the liberty of formatting your post) Why would they take loans out before knowing the scale of interest and what stretch goals would get hit, that makes no sense. Once they knew how much interest there was they'd raised a lot of money from backers and surely didn't really need loans. Unless money is running out.



Which is why people don't take loans they don't need, as I explained above.



The thing about struggling businesses is that they hide the fact that they are struggling, because if known that would put off customers and investors (see Enron). There's no toxicity here, people are wondering what's gone wrong because it's quite clear from the glacial progress and broken promises that Star Citizen is not the success people hoped it would be.
Click to expand...


Stop presenting that that oft-ignored by the true faithful thing called "facts" when discussing Star Citizen. It tends to get ignored or dismissed as "unimportant" or "being toxic" or some other such nonsense.

No, you would be MUCH better served just regurgitating the latest press release direct from CIG HQ, or posting up the latest ship sale video to prove that you are in fact "worthy" of discussing the sainted virtues of Star Citizen, and how it shines above all other games!
 

Tippis

Tippis
Stigbob said:
The thing about struggling businesses is that they hide the fact that they are struggling, because if known that would put off customers and investors (see Enron). There's no toxicity here, people are wondering what's gone wrong because it's quite clear from the glacial progress and broken promises that Star Citizen is not the success people hoped it would be.
Click to expand...

There's also the curious detail of the CR team communicating things, seemingly without understanding what they're saying.

I'm sure Ben just intended to offer some vague reassurance to excuse a practice that by all accounts shouldn't be necessary any more. In doing so, possibly by accident or by ignorance, he instead manages to paint a picture of a far more bleak and less well managed economic situation than what they're trying to convey with their public numbers.

You'd think that a well-run shop would keep their PR on message… :D
 

CmdrKull

C
@Sunleader, I'm afraid Stigbob is right. They had already started raising a decent amount of money, they hit their kickstarter goals quickly, and so the only reason for them to seek loans very early in the process would be if they'd already decided to make a different game than the one they had JUST kickstarted. That is dishonest at best, given that backers agreed to one thing and CIG was already planning a bait and switch. So let's give them the benefit of the doubt and say they didn't seek loans until the scope had expanded. By that point they'd taken ina lot of money but clearly we're spending it very fast on extravagance. They're not admitting to any financial woes, but many of us are skeptical because from the outside looking in, it's hard to understand what we see in any other context. That doesn't make us toxic (there are a few who I would say come across as toxic but in every case I think they are or were backers so disgruntled may be a better term)


Also guys come on... a little random capitalization doesn't invalidate an argument and shouldn't have such a dog-pile effect.
 

LeSabre

LeSabre
McGlashan said:
I wonder if they had a quiet word with Mr Parry after his (unintentional) special guest appearance in dsmart's blog over the holidays.
Click to expand...

I hope not, I enjoyed his posts and it was nice to finally validate myself as an "good artist" due to Bens Lumberyard branching diagram being on a par with my own artistic skills.

I finally could hold up that example of his work to all and proclaim that I was indeed as "mad skilled" in Microsoft paint as I had led myself to believe. It opens many doors and I've already been drafted by Peruvian artisans to commision a grand work of art entitled "Stickman leans awkwardly against lamp post", the final work will be placed on public display at the coveted Art museum in the most popular area of Peruviashire, you can't miss the building, it's a grand public forum with the legend "Gents" inscribed above the entrance.

:)
 

Insignificant_The_Galaxy_Cat

Banned
I
DoctorDanny said:
But... he's being positive about SC... Forum doctrine dictates that he should be ridiculed.
Click to expand...

Being "positive" about SC from a position of complete weakness tends to get people to point and laugh at the faltering attempts to find even a nugget of good news to spin about Star Citizen.

Though yeah, the random capitalization thing shouldn't have any baring on the legitimacy of the person posting.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom