Star Citizen Discussions v7

In the latest public appearance Lando explained that the game was finished, and he must be talking about it is complete and ready for release. So that is good news if true. Therefor I will wait with big eyes, open mouth and wallet ready to when this master piece goes gold.

Of course there is also the possibility that it's not finish and it was all a dream speach again.
 
In the latest public appearance Lando explained that the game was finished, and he must be talking about it is complete and ready for release. So that is good news if true. Therefor I will wait with big eyes, open mouth and wallet ready to when this master piece goes gold.

Of course there is also the possibility that it's not finish and it was all a dream speach again.

I thought someone posted that the clip was wildly out of context. They posted a link of their own but it was missing because of copyright violations? I’ll dig for a minute and see if I can find and quote the post but it makes more sense, honestly, than for him to be saying it’s almost done at THIS stage. There’s no rolling that sort of thing back after all.
 
Last edited:
Found it.
Ok that makes sense, but the quote was "it is almost finish" but I digress.


Ok I listed to some of it and it's just the same same . Never done before, blah blah blah. To me they don't know what they are doing, because they just got an excuse for every failure. However this never done before get really old really fast now.
 
Last edited:
Ok that makes sense, but the quote was "it is almost finish" but I digress.


Ok I listed to some of it and it's just the same same . Never done before, blah blah blah. To me they don't know what they are doing, because they just got an excuse for every failure. However this never done before get really old really fast now.

Because of my boo-boo, i ended up listening to most of the talk. There were actually some interesting bits in it. A bit too much self-congratulations, but of course, 2 community managers there, naturally they are going to talk things up. The time for patting each other on the back though is when they release a game, not before.

I am wondering though, they got a decent slice of the airtime on that stream, and got to heavily promote SC in the process (with the obligatory video showing how wonderful SC already is, using footage that is not representative of the actual game... sandworm anyone?).... and i have to wonder, did they have to pay to be part of that? And if so, how much? Because that is backers money, which is not going to funding the development of the game.
 
Ok that makes sense, but the quote was "it is almost finish" but I digress.


Ok I listed to some of it and it's just the same same . Never done before, blah blah blah. To me they don't know what they are doing, because they just got an excuse for every failure. However this never done before get really old really fast now.

Almost Finnish?
1272x920design_01.jpg
 
Because of my boo-boo, i ended up listening to most of the talk. There were actually some interesting bits in it. A bit too much self-congratulations, but of course, 2 community managers there, naturally they are going to talk things up. The time for patting each other on the back though is when they release a game, not before.

I am wondering though, they got a decent slice of the airtime on that stream, and got to heavily promote SC in the process (with the obligatory video showing how wonderful SC already is, using footage that is not representative of the actual game... sandworm anyone?).... and i have to wonder, did they have to pay to be part of that? And if so, how much? Because that is backers money, which is not going to funding the development of the game.

It did not give a true representation regarding the status of the game, not one bit, unless they used a secret Dev build.
The commercial bombastic everything is wonderful was toe curling to say it at least, and the "we are doing something no one has done before", the usual icing on top of a pile of hippo dung.

I'm honestly asking, what is it that no one has done before?

A space sim? done before
A space sim with FPS? done before
A space sim with FPS and a store for underpants? well don't think that is even attempted before, so that must be it.
A space sim with FPS and walk inside you ship? done before
A space sim with sandworms? done before....bigtime
A space sim with a huge money sucking fundraising department? Nope I don't believe that is done before.

The fidelity, that's it, no one has done a space sim with CR's fidelity...... [where is it]

Because of my boo-boo, i ended up listening to most of the talk. There were actually some interesting bits in it. A bit too much self-congratulations, but of course, 2 community managers there, naturally they are going to talk things up. The time for patting each other on the back though is when they release a game, not before.

I am wondering though, they got a decent slice of the airtime on that stream, and got to heavily promote SC in the process (with the obligatory video showing how wonderful SC already is, using footage that is not representative of the actual game... sandworm anyone?).... and i have to wonder, did they have to pay to be part of that? And if so, how much? Because that is backers money, which is not going to funding the development of the game.

It did not give a true representation regarding the status of the game, not one bit, unless they used a secret Dev build.
The commercial bombastic everything is wonderful was toe curling to say it at least, and the "we are doing something no one has done before", the usual icing on top of a pile of hippo dung.

I'm honestly asking, what is it that no one has done before?

A space sim? done before
A space sim with FPS? done before
A space sim with FPS and a store for underpants? well don't think that is even attempted before, so that must be it.
A space sim with FPS and walk inside you ship? done before
A space sim with sandworms? done before....bigtime
A space sim with a huge money sucking fundraising department? Nope I don't believe that is done before.

The fidelity, that's it, no one has done a space sim with CR's fidelity...... [where is it]
 
As for money required to finish game is hard to predict because SC internals are not known that well.

But they will need considerable money to keep servers running and continue development.

I just don't see how.

Neither do I.

Not without either massive cuts or efficiency savings.

The problem is two fold.

First....CIG appears to have a monthly spend of about $3 million. Even allowing that "The 400" contains a higher ratio of artists and other staff to devs doesn't affect the bill that much...they still require PCs and software licenses, buildings still require rent and power, they still have pension rights and more. It may even be worse...a lot of devs seem to say a big bottleneck is art and artists are in demand.

Unfortunately for CIG, the average month of fundraising takes in less than $3 million and that's been true for some time. Meaning, CIG are eating into their reserve. They'll perhaps be able to cut staff in Germany once their engine is complete....but theiŕ engine isn't AND they need decent networking and server and AI specialists.

The second part of the problem is that they have raised an impressive $160 million and more and climbing...but their financials and other information suggest a total spend approaching $110 million. That gives CIG a reserve of $50 million, less refunds.

As any dev will tell you, game development is expensive. ESPECIALLY developing an AAA game. That $50 million sounds like a lot of money. But in terms of AAA game development?

It has to cover the monthly fund raising shortfall for at least three or four years. Currently, that seems to be about 0.5 - 0.75 million a month.

If that were just the only output, it might get by.

BUT...it also has to pay for marketing...also has to pay to publish the game...also has to pay hosting and maintenance costs.

Now.....SC could get buy with a minimal marketing campaign and rely on press interest and word of mouth. However, it has already had those in spades over the past few years. Anyone those aspects could reach who is likely to pay likely already has done so. CIG need sales, they need new blood and they need more people to pay into the game...meaning they need a marketing campaign that reaches beyond magazine articles and word of mouth. That requires money.

It could opt for a low key publication...but they've already made promises, they need the marketing and it'll cost money to do so regardless.

And hosting is expensive. However, they might be able to work out a deal with Amazon to reduce their costs. But a single universe where everyone is present and which handles instances of up to 1000 players? There are ways in which the data can be optimised. But that will still require pretty hefty server hardware, strong networking links with certain bandwidth requirements and decent netcode and server meshing technologies. Technologies which CIG do not appear to have even started to develop. Nor do they seem to have even considered intercontinental lag or other problems

And that isn't forgetting the impact on the users end systems. How much bandwith will an EUs PC require?

In short, all of this requires money. Bit if we assume the best case scenario that CIG needs to set aside just $15 million for marketing and hosting, has a current buffer of $50 million and needs to cover a shortfall of 0.5 million a month, it still has sufficient reserve for nearly 6 years.

But being blunt, CIG could spend that reserve on marketing alone and without knowing what their actual requirements are...which will require knowing what their net and server code can do...CIG can't really plan on how much they need for hosting. A game optimised to run on three servers and require 1 network link will be far cheaper than a game which requires 100 servers and 30 links.

And it doesn't appear likely that CIG can voluntarily reduce its spending by cutting costs. Getting rid of staff will simply cut the monthly bill but at the expense of duration. Removing a development site will simply cut power and rent costs. Hiring out to third parties is dangerous until the game engine is finalised.

The bright spot is that there is nothing on CIGs feature list that is new or impossible. Much if not all of what they promise can be done....assuming players PCs and network links are strong enough. If CIG simply connected the modules they have now and expanded it into a single system, they'd have a decent beginning.

It wouldn't be the game we were promised, but barring something drastic or news that the financial analysis is wrong because the devs are literally code monkeys workings for peanuts, the game we were promised seems dead.

If only because CIG doesn't have the money it needs to fund development AND market the game AND publish the game AND host the game.
 
Neither do I.

Not without either massive cuts or efficiency savings.

The problem is two fold.

First....CIG appears to have a monthly spend of about $3 million. Even allowing that "The 400" contains a higher ratio of artists and other staff to devs doesn't affect the bill that much...they still require PCs and software licenses, buildings still require rent and power, they still have pension rights and more. It may even be worse...a lot of devs seem to say a big bottleneck is art and artists are in demand.

Unfortunately for CIG, the average month of fundraising takes in less than $3 million and that's been true for some time. Meaning, CIG are eating into their reserve. They'll perhaps be able to cut staff in Germany once their engine is complete....but theiŕ engine isn't AND they need decent networking and server and AI specialists.

The second part of the problem is that they have raised an impressive $160 million and more and climbing...but their financials and other information suggest a total spend approaching $110 million. That gives CIG a reserve of $50 million, less refunds.

As any dev will tell you, game development is expensive. ESPECIALLY developing an AAA game. That $50 million sounds like a lot of money. But in terms of AAA game development?

Just using the typical $10,000 per employee per man month would mean they have consumed $152 million to date, a monthly cost of $4.3 million, but if this article is more realistic they are actually closer to having spent $202 million with monthly costs of 5.7 million (based on 430 staff).
 
I think when CIG says "never done before" they mean "ultimate game", or game for dreamers who dream about game to do everything.

Yes, it is fallacy on this idea alone, but that's how many SC backers treat that project.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
A couple issues when eyeballing CIG finances.

First and foremost that any assumptions considering the funding tracker a decent estimate of CIG´s income is flawed to start with. That "figure" has never been publicly audited by any independent third party and we have no idea what it does or doesnt include, or if there are elements in it that go beyond backer funding. CIG is probably showing us whatever they want to show us. Without any independent control whatsoever.

Second, estimates tend to asume staff levels at around 400+ these days (not including contractors). That is also not clear cut. Given usual average costs of developers including overheads etc there is also a very reasonable chance that CIG may have started downsizing in one way or another, more or less gradually, some time ago and that the actual staff numbers today is way below that number.
 
Last edited:
Just using the typical $10,000 per employee per man month would mean they have consumed $152 million to date, a monthly cost of $4.3 million, but if this article is more realistic they are actually closer to having spent $202 million with monthly costs of 5.7 million (based on 430 staff).

1 thing i do not understand.... OK so making games is expensive, i get that....

but i think a lot of the time the money is spend badly.... ie, when i play a game, do I REALLY need to have kiefer Sutherland or kevin spacy or Gary Oldman doing the voice acting? I am certain there are 100s of capable voice actors who would charge far less, and would it really lower the game sales if it didnt have a holywood cast. (it is one of the great things about Elite D, the people doing the voices are FD employees, family of FD employees and random fans as i understand it!.

and the other thing.... why are software houses in such expensive places? California, and in the case of Frontier Cambridge.

outside of london Cambridge is one of the most expensive places to own property in the UK . Given the nature of software development i would have thought this is the sort of industry which would be perfectly suited to places like Wales where land prices are often practically zero.......

and Wales is blessed with such natural beauty, i know I for one if i could get a fair paid job would happily live there (esp when you factor in the cost of living is far reduced for the employee as well).

I guess i must be missing something, but to me that is 2 ways to cut a sizeable chunk off monthly outgoings.

(on the other hand... numbers of devs quoted..... really its meaningless without more info..... FTEs are what matter...... Most companies (albeit CIG are probably not relevant here) work on more than 1 project........ so if a company says 200 staff are working on product A... this can very well be true........ but, what percentage of their time is on it?

I assume those numbers will include marketing folk, who probably market product B and C from that company.
The art guys could well work on Art for more than 1 project.
the networking guys the same etc etc etc.

then you have part timers.. in my office there are 15 people, only 8 of them are full time, the rest range from 50% hrs, through to 87% (which is me)

hence, number of FTEs (Full Time Equivalents) working on a project is really a more informative number imo.
 
Last edited:

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
With regards to Cambridge, I thought direct access to labor and resources given the university hub and the overall local tech network that spawns from it were the main premises. With regards to Los Angeles, I must admit I am at a loss.
 
Just using the typical $10,000 per employee per man month would mean they have consumed $152 million to date, a monthly cost of $4.3 million, but if this article is more realistic they are actually closer to having spent $202 million with monthly costs of 5.7 million (based on 430 staff).

Yes....but I suspect not all of those 400 odd workers are developers. They'd be artists and sound engineers and the like. Nor have CIG always had 400 odd employees. Their monthly bills woyld jave been much less early on, and their fundraising more successful.
 
A couple issues when eyeballing CIG finances.

First and foremost that any assumptions considering the funding tracker a decent estimate of CIG´s income is flawed to start with. That "figure" has never been publicly audited by any independent third party and we have no idea what it does or doesnt include, or if there are elements in it that go beyond backer funding. CIG is probably showing us whatever they want to show us. Without any independent control whatsoever.

Second, estimates tend to asume staff levels at around 400+ these days (not including contractors). That is also not clear cut. Given usual average costs of developers including overheads etc there is also a very reasonable chance that CIG may have started downsizing in one way or another, more or less gradually, some time ago and that the actual staff numbers today is way below that number.

I fully agree that everything should only be taken as a guesstimate. However it is the best guess we can make because it is based on numbers that CIG have released as well as being based on numbers that numerous studios agree to making use of. It's not like it's a complete fantasy figure pulled from where the sun doesn't shine ;)

They might well have made layoffs but there's a few people who seem to track that sort of stuff and it's been quiet on that front, without contradicting numbers one can only use what is available but it is certainly worth keeping in mind that it is a guesstimate and nothing more.

Yes....but I suspect not all of those 400 odd workers are developers. They'd be artists and sound engineers and the like. Nor have CIG always had 400 odd employees. Their monthly bills woyld jave been much less early on, and their fundraising more successful.

It doesn't matter if they're all developers or not, that's just the figure used to get ballpark development costs based on number of employees.

The number of employees for each of the last 5 years
  • 2012 10
  • 2013: 48
  • 2014: 161
  • 2015: 258
  • 2016: 363
  • 2017: 428
  • Total 1268 * $10,000 per man month (typical figure used in the industry) * 12 = $152 Million
  • However, according to this article it is probably closer to $13,500 per month so 1268 * $13,500 * 12 = $205 million.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comm...squadron_42_will_not_make_it_in_this/dodwdjv/
 
Last edited:
(Snip)

and the other thing.... why are software houses in such expensive places? California, and in the case of Frontier Cambridge.

outside of london Cambridge is one of the most expensive places to own property in the UK . Given the nature of software development i would have thought this is the sort of industry which would be perfectly suited to places like Wales where land prices are often practically zero.......
(Snip)

Land prices in some parts of Wales might be practically zero, but the number of trained staff in those areas is also zero, and the chances of attracting staff there the same. Parts of Wales such as Cardiff or Swansea, which do have high-tech companies, have land prices which are not practically zero.

David Braben and Ian Bell met whilst studying at Jesus in Cambridge; when creating Elite, they worked closely with Acornsoft, part of Acorn, which was heavily influenced by the university (Hauser, Hopper, and others did degrees or doctrates at the university - an exception is Chris Curry, who did not). Acorn begat other companies, such as ARM, and these companies attract others.

Braben remained in Cambridge, and would have developed contacts there. It was therefore a good place to start a company. And once a company starts, it becomes very hard to move - especially for SMEs - as key staff are rooted in an area (it is somewhat easier for larger companies).

Basically, a place such as Cambridge has a rich ecosystem of companies, most of which owe some historic direct or indirect allegiance to the university. It then becomes a self-fulfilling cycle: you set up in Cambridge because there are a load of skilled people in the city. This is particularly vital in certain sections of the tech industry where trained staff are in short supply. In some case, entire teams move from company to company (as has happened with CIG). The chances of getting them to move to somewhere else is remote; they can just get jobs in the area without moving.
 
My major problem with all the attempts to prove that CIG are without funds is that they still appear to be operating.

SC and the debate around it are a prime example for the post-factual age where people selectively stitch together informations to prove a point. So yeah, in this case I think the formula

*Cash the company made as stated in real time on the official website* minus *a theory-crafted amount of money the company must have invested so far in production means and workforce* = *amount of money the company has left*

is pretty dodgy, or more like methodologically untenable.

Regarding this it is funny to realize how the opposed sides in the big Star Citizen conflict rely on theorycrafting by using media the company releases. Who is controlling the narrative here?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom