Star Citizen Thread v6

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
There's no way in a million years backers will accept 3.0 as an MVP.

I dunno. They're on record for saying how what they've received is better than any AAA product. I look forward to the videos of them swallowing that turd with streams of tears coming down their faces all while mouthing "Better than anything I've had before!" [haha]
 
Hi
Does anyone know......

So I *just* missed out on getting part 2 of squadron 42 in my pledge level back in the day and no one gets the 3rd part.

on the store at the moment the stand alone S42 package is $54. does this come with the entire S42 or just the 1st part that i am getting anyway.

I am contemplating getting a refund... mainly because i just dont want to play a cockpit game not in VR any more. my pledge level is not much (cant remember exact amount but its the 300i level with maybe 3 months insurance, SC and S42 episode 1) but its not really about the money its about letting the devs know vr is important. (and what is the point in paying even $80 - at a guess - if i am never going to play the game?)

IF the SC stand alone package for $54 is the complete S42 and not just the 1st chapter, it makes even more sense. I bought SC mostly for S42 and if the standalone package costs less and comes with more than i am getting then its a no brainer.

thanks
 
Hi
Does anyone know......

So I *just* missed out on getting part 2 of squadron 42 in my pledge level back in the day and no one gets the 3rd part.

on the store at the moment the stand alone S42 package is $54. does this come with the entire S42 or just the 1st part that i am getting anyway.

I am contemplating getting a refund... mainly because i just dont want to play a cockpit game not in VR any more. my pledge level is not much (cant remember exact amount but its the 300i level with maybe 3 months insurance, SC and S42 episode 1) but its not really about the money its about letting the devs know vr is important. (and what is the point in paying even $80 - at a guess - if i am never going to play the game?)

IF the SC stand alone package for $54 is the complete S42 and not just the 1st chapter, it makes even more sense. I bought SC mostly for S42 and if the standalone package costs less and comes with more than i am getting then its a no brainer.

thanks

As I understand it, no one gets SQ42 with all the chapters, and VR is a no go in SC, they need to redo a lot to make that happen.

Better off to get a refund and return when they actually got something you can evaluate and then buy as a complete product.
 
Last edited:
As I understand it, no one gets SQ42 with all the chapters, and VR is a no go in SC, they need to redo a lot to make that happen.

Better off to get a refund and return when they actually got something you can evaluate and then buy as a complete product.

This is an age of pre-orders which is pretty ridiculous. I rarely pre-order or (Kickstarter) back anything. Let me see the finished product and reviews first :)
 
This is an age of pre-orders which is pretty ridiculous. I rarely pre-order or (Kickstarter) back anything. Let me see the finished product and reviews first :)

Before SC i did that often, now not so much, only if I trust the company, and those can be counted on one finger.

CD project RED :D
 
I do not think the presentation of the independence premise was contradictory at all, especially early on once Chris Roberts decided to continue beyond initial Kickstarter / crowdfund on his own platform and considered he had enough funding not to need investors/publishers.



Fair enough, but to be frank the premise of independence from investors/publishers and how it has been exploited to sell the idea of Star Citizen across the board (LFTC, press interviews etc) is well documented and can be easily checked with a cursory search out there.

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14184-Letter-From-The-Chairman
"It’s not being developed like a normal game and it’s not being funded like a normal game. I’ve had to toss aside a lot of my knowledge from the old way of developing and embrace a completely new world. There is no publisher. There is no venture capitalist wanting a massive return in three years. There is no need to cram the game onto a disc and hope we got it all right. Star Citizen is not the type of game that will be played for a few weeks, then put on a shelf to gather dust. Instead of building a game in secrecy we can be fully open with you as a community who have made this game possible. We can involve the future player base in the creative feedback loop as we develop and iterate core systems. As a group we are all involved and united in our quest to make the best game possible."

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/13783-Letter-From-The-Chairman-41-Million
"And last but not least I’m having way to much fun building the universe of my dreams for everyone to adventure in! I’ve been down the big company acquisition route twice before and there’s a reason I am making Star Citizen totally independently!... We don’t need to go to anyone with deep pockets to make OUR dream a reality"

http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2016/09/23/inside-the-troubled-development-of-star-citizen
"Those investors Roberts had been hoping to court with a small Kickstarter success and simple prototype? He didn’t need them any more.
“I think it’s for the betterment... not for them, but for the project,” Roberts told me. Without private investors, he explains, “there's no a 'I need my return on the money, I need you to get [the game] out so I can sell my stake' or 'We need you to sell to EA or someone'.”
Looking at it another way, however, Star Citizen has lots of private investors. Over 1,500,000 of them, at the time of writing. They might not be expecting to make money, but they are expecting a game."


http://archive.is/M0mHV#selection-2387.1-2387.301
"We are taking this approach to fund-raising for several reasons," said Roberts. "For one, this route takes the traditional game publisher out of the mix and enables us to take the millions of dollars normally used by publishers for a triple-A title and plow them right back into developing the game."

Etc etc


This independence premise and creative freedom mantra, only consulting with the player base, and whereby all the crowdfund money goes back to the project fourfold etc has been repeated in one form or another by CR/CIG multiple times either directly or to the press, and has since become a flagship of the idea of this project over which you will find many a testimony over at the CIG forums or reddit where backers amplify this message and confirm this is precisely one of the main reasons why they backed the game or keep pledging, especially when comparing it with other games. And it is hence a key selling point of the product.

If all of a sudden Chris Roberts had decided to revert to external investors or publishers, I would expect at the very least Chris Roberts to let all those backers know.

Thank you, that is the kind of stuff I am looking for, an argument well based on actual sources, not hearsay or other vague forms of reasoning. So the funding strategy actually shifted when the company received more income. How Roberts sells this pure crowdfunding approach as collective solidarity between gamers and a somehow 'democratic' approach to software development is spectacular. But even more then that, this has an anti-capitalist vibe to it: money-focused investors who don't care about the actual product vs. people who invest money because they care about the product. Quite ridiculous as the this rhetoric was used to build a company and to make a game that is a simplified model of capitalism in space.
 
I dunno. They're on record for saying how what they've received is better than any AAA product. I look forward to the videos of them swallowing that turd with streams of tears coming down their faces all while mouthing "Better than anything I've had before!" [haha]

10 might. The other 999,990 will chase CR up a tree and set fire to it.

Bring Marshnallows.
 
....There's no way in a million years backers will accept 3.0 as an MVP...

Based on what's been seen I agree it would be difficult for CIG to claim 3.0 was MVP, but I suspect they'd love to be able to. I also doubt it's going to matter what the backers will or won't accept, depending how this saga ends.

In a worst case scenario CIG, and I don't think they are there just yet, will push out whatever they have to hand, claim it as 'the product you donated to' and weather any resulting storms from behind corporate walls.

Well, either that or they'll simply fold, and play point-the-blame game. This sounds more plausible in terms of doing the minimal damage to egos and reputations, aka 'it would have been perfect but for [insert reasons]'

I'm certainly not hoping they fail, far from it, it's just that most evidence to date gives little room for optomism It's such a pity. It would have been lovely by now to have another open universe, well, open solar system, to bumble around in and 'do stuff'. I like ED a lot and NMS well enough, but another such game would be very welcome.
 
Last edited:
Mad Mike, just refund it.

If they will make it, they will make it and you will be able to pick it up later. No worth losing money at the moment.

Agreed. I asked for a refund after the latest GamesCom debacle. While I still very much want to play this game, and have every intention of buying it again once there IS a game to buy. They're now almost three years past their promised release date with not even a basic game loop to show for it.

You should be warned, though. Trying to get a refund from CiG reminds me a bit of this:

[video=youtube;oh8PFs0LTKc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oh8PFs0LTKc[/video]
 
There's no way in a million years backers will accept 3.0 as an MVP.

There are people who are advertising the current buggy tech-demo PU as "better as many released AAA games already" so if 3.0 really represents the MVP you better believe he ll get away with it.

According to Chris Roberts in his latest interview terms like alpha, beta and all those things are labels at best. CiG doesnt do these, they use "equivalents" instead. Probably trying to sell his own tech-demo as "more advanced then betas in other companies" and the MVP will be the equivalent to an "early access" game. I guess the absolute best we can expect from 3.0 is the showfloor content we watched over 3 days meaning no missions, no cargo, no professions, probably no space, just a moon level or two, a buggy and ships, no space station etc etc. The Roberts demo on the last day is a completely different beast.

Mostly Vaporware Product.

oh wow thats a good one, I ll use that from now on :)


does this come with the entire S42 or just the 1st part that i am getting anyway.

The SQ42 purchase on the store only entitles you to the first release of the "game". I didnt know about chapter 2 but I guess its a seperate sale. All other chapters will be handled like DLC




Rumors about a TOS change are at the current time as good as TheAgent predictions/reports. Very probable but hardly "reliable facts". I ll remember them in case they become reality tho. CiG has a history or fulfilling bad predictions. Do you ever think CiG will go so far as to observe the rumor mill here and on other sites and when certain predictions are made (either by DS, TheAgent or other forum members) try anything to change the result so they can call these people out and call them "liars"? :D
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
You're probably wrong in thinking that the first part of SQ42 is going to be. At all.

You don´t think there is going to be at the very least a teeny tiny vertical slice demo or mini mission of some kind this year?
 
Last edited:
Hi
Does anyone know......

So I *just* missed out on getting part 2 of squadron 42 in my pledge level back in the day and no one gets the 3rd part.

on the store at the moment the stand alone S42 package is $54. does this come with the entire S42 or just the 1st part that i am getting anyway.

I am contemplating getting a refund... mainly because i just dont want to play a cockpit game not in VR any more. my pledge level is not much (cant remember exact amount but its the 300i level with maybe 3 months insurance, SC and S42 episode 1) but its not really about the money its about letting the devs know vr is important. (and what is the point in paying even $80 - at a guess - if i am never going to play the game?)

IF the SC stand alone package for $54 is the complete S42 and not just the 1st chapter, it makes even more sense. I bought SC mostly for S42 and if the standalone package costs less and comes with more than i am getting then its a no brainer.

thanks

Just remember, eventually the game will go on sale, so forget about paying full price anyway. You've already waited so long. No harm in waiting a year or two after release to grab it in a sale.
 
You don´t think there is going to be at the very least a teeny tiny vertical slide demo or mini mission of some kind this year?

But they don't want to show anything in advance, it will spoil it... or at least that is what i've been told.

Besides, they have only grey box and white boxed it... they still need to go through the rest of the rainbow yet.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom