Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

There was a common saying when I was young...'Don't bite the hand that feeds you'.

Ci¬G have been biting hands every month for the last 10 years with every version of every roadmap and gotten away with it...or so they thought. Foolishly apportioning blame or responsibility back on to their backers for repeated company wide mismanagement wasn't a great idea...especially since existing backers have been showing ever increasing cynicism and discontentment over the last year or two to start with. Community managers are supposed to read the general mood of the community and advise the marketing and company management what's happening...seems like that's being mismanaged as well :)

This blatant shift in focus to remind backers that they're paying...apparently exclusively...for the creation of the idiot Roberts vanity project rather than the multiplayer game that utilises the ships they're buying from the store is an even bigger mistake.

The one line I did notice from the blog post that everyone seems to be missing or glossing over is that it's focus and intent was entirely on not deterring potential new money and fresh backers through viewing an increasingly negative commentary on the development. We, as existing backers aren't Ci¬G's focus...they want new blood and new money so seem more intent on subduing rebellious disent amongst the current rank and file backers. The entire blog post was simply a crass reminder that they've already spent our financial commitment so we should just shut up and appear grateful.
It's been 10 years of easy money - maybe they feel entitled to it by now.
 
Remarkably they finally have, obvious as this has been to those watching from the sidelines.

They don't want to lose their COVID momentum, plenty of folks bought into the escapism SC offers I think.
The Covid momentum? The one where audiences were looking to buy entertainment for their extended stays at home. They squandered that just like any other opportunity to deliver.
 
Goodness me!

I don't visit "Spectrum" very often because it always seemed rather one-sided in its praise (not an observation that exclusively applies to "Spectrum" of course) but having seen posts here I took a look.

Some very, very crotchety people! I can completely understand their ire, as the Magnificent Mr Mole said, "don't bite the hand that feeds you" - but I think perhaps that I was more concerned for the backers themselves. If a long-term project can't determine what it will be able to achieve (with an allowance for unexpected delays and mishaps) for a time window of only 90-180 days then (gasp!) they have serious problems.
 
Another thing i'm loving is how people are getting annoyed at CIG for prioritizing SQ42 and leaving SC in the lurch. Most backers didn't give money for SQ42 and are therefore a huge majority. Of course they want the focus on SC.

But also, we have no real understanding of what the real state of SQ42 is either and how long CIG will keep the focus on it. How many more months or years will backers have to wait for the game they backed to get the focus?
Funnily enough Squandron (thanks, happytrees) was the reason I backed in 2012. Spiritual successor to Wing Commander on a modern (a decade ago) engine? Yes, please! Sadly I've been on this ride long enough to see plenty of SC/S42 focus flip flops depending on how CIG thought it would best serve its development (or lack of development) narrative. Which one they claim to be "prioritizing" is as meaningless as that time Roberts claimed their next development focus was going to be on VR.
 
Time to Gear Up baby!


Are they now going to recycle JT and XT over and over?

Still, anything to distract from the current outrage.

Guess there will be a ship sale coming soon.
 
Back
Top Bottom