Page 524 of 660 FirstFirst ... 519522523524525526529 ... LastLast
Results 7,846 to 7,860 of 9896

Thread: The Star Citizen Thread v8

  1. #7846
    Originally Posted by Thargon View Post (Source)
    Strangely, someone did the math in a previous video and worked out they are still making profit each year (outgoings of 1.2M USD approx per year, but incomings of about 9M a year?).
    That was a wages only low-ball though - this 1.2x factor is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay out. 2x at least. Then consider the actors/mocap/etc

    Honestly it's incredible to me it's still going. I think they're ok at the moment but their buffer must be down to near zero, it can't take much to tip things into a much more negative state - but I don't really see that as a bad thing. Something has to get the screws on them so they get this out. It'd be a massive shame to have all this work go to waste

  2. #7847
    Originally Posted by Thargon View Post (Source)
    Strangely, someone did the math in a previous video and worked out they are still making profit each year (outgoings of 1.2M USD approx per year, but incomings of about 9M a year?).
    Well, if they bought offices they could take a mortgage out of that and they have already shown multiple times how they have used monetary hedging to their advantage early on so I think they have a lot more in the bank but I also think at this point they are not getting a profit anymore.

  3. #7848
    Originally Posted by StuartGT View Post (Source)
    https://relay.sc/article/is-star-citizen-pay2win

    https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/8k0pmy/is_star_citizen_pay2win/
    wow...while I salute the authors effort to go into detail in order to explain his view on things that article made my head spin because IMO it simply went too far for a rather simple question. "P2W or not?" is a really easy question, it should have an easy answer. Of course providers try to muddy the waters by degrading or "softening" the concept until they hit tolerable levels but that doesnt change the fact in the end. We already established that multiple people will have multiple different views on P2W mostly based on the factors dominating their lives (family, job, physical capabilities, interests etc etc) so getting a common denominator will be next to impossible. We can rely on a majority vote tho which will entail most peoples view on this thing regardless how individuals see it.

    I personally have my own view on Star Citizen being very much P2W, I dont need to convince others of my view nor do I care how others try to "explain" it to me. The only thing that matters (mostly to CiG) is that I wont part with my money due to their marketing strategies

    While this author goes to great lengths in order to explain the term and how he sees it applied to Star Citizen I doubt very much that it ll change the view of anybody already following the project due to the above mentioned behavior pattern. So maybe it might be helpful to completely new people? I dont see how such people (folks who dont know anything about SC in the first place) would stumble across that article tho nor how much they would be able to benefit from it without prior knowledge. It rather hits me like a "poking piece" trying to force a reaction by discussing a very controversal topic in SC.

    P2W is universally viewed as negative. As a developer you either have to avoid mechanics that grant you that mark or you forget about all the "poor" people and focus on the ones willing to spend exorbitant amounts of money on pixels. Its a little like drug abuse IMO but its a world our kids grow up in and as they dont have the benefit of a memory of a world were great games were released IN FULL, OFFLINE and with NO EXTRA COSTS they will naturally be more tolerant to these marketing schemes. I usually hate to say it but I have to quote my grand parents who frequently muttered "things were better 30 years ago" which can be applied to almost anything in the world. Manners, empathy, quality of life, health, social violence you name it.

    In regards to computer games we get better ones, sure. As the technology advances allowing us far more complex and bigger games then we had 20 years ago. But at the same time the focus shifted from "making a game to make money" to "making money by making a game". The first one forced you to produce a superior product in order to beat the competition and claim the prize. The latter is focusing more on hot air and hype and provides the bare minimum instead. And Star Citizen just takes it to the extreme as we dont really know if they really are making a game at all. Without a doubt most of their focus and effort goes into marketing and hype. The current results underline that very clearly. And the sad part is CiG had all the options to hire the very best people for the job and create a superior product. Due to the leaderships focus right from the start tho most of the resources have been wasted or channeled into certain peoples pockets and were not used to make the game that was expected.

    Thats the ugly truth I will take away from Star Citizen in the end. The "game" never had a chance because in hindsight Chris Roberts never really aimed to make a game. His goal was to make money instead.

  4. #7849
    Originally Posted by TenakaFurey View Post (Source)
    Even if they were in debt, they'd probably be able to hang on for at least a couple of years, especially since they appear to have a steady income stream of $2-$3 million a month.

    If funding were to collapse, it'd be different. But CIG appear to have a core of true believers that don't object to giving them money.

    All they need is 5,000 backers giving them an average of $500 per month. In reality, they probably have more backers with a lower average.

    If true, the $9million figure tells is little we didn't know or suspect. It likely means refunding activity has been greater than we thought.

    What it does mean is that CIG very likely don't have the resources needed to properly fix the game and it's engine. But as they don't appear to be in any mind to even try, that observation is rather moot.
    The dangerous aspect here is that CiG and some of the mega whales are very much aware that its a sinking ship so they try to prolong the inevitable by performing intimate physical interaction on as many people they can. For that they will lie, cheat and promise you the blue from the sky just as long as you put in a few bucks which will lessen THEIR losses. Media coverage is not great at the moment but I think they made the most out of their early days, where the focus was the same as it is today.....certainly not making a game.

    Oh well its a spectacle I cannot affect but I can watch. These kind of trainwrecks have a certain kind of appeal that is fascinating and its totally free

  5. #7850
    Originally Posted by frostypaw View Post (Source)
    That was a wages only low-ball though - this 1.2x factor is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay out. 2x at least. Then consider the actors/mocap/etc ..
    A bit OT I know, but the 'rule of thumb' for the actual cost of an employee is roughly between 1.2 and 1.4 times their gross salary. This is a fairly normal model to use when costing. It covers the variable costs employees bring - such as costs of hiring, HR, health insurance, pensions, project equipment, training, project admin, lighting, heating and so on. Some models include office space upkeep, desks, chairs, and any associated rental, others don't.

    And I've started boring myself.....

    As an aside, I'm not sure I believe 'only the $9M left' number, but when have we ever let unknowable facts get in the way of a good debate...

  6. #7851
    I vaguely remember a 75% total costs multiplier on Foundry 42's financials from 2016.

    Wages were 10 million for 221 staff (45,250 / $65,000)
    Total costs for the year were 17.5 million, so 80,000 / $113,235

  7. #7852
    Originally Posted by Thargon View Post (Source)
    Strangely, someone did the math in a previous video and worked out they are still making profit each year (outgoings of 1.2M USD approx per year, but incomings of about 9M a year?).
    I wonder how did that person come to the conclusion when Foundry 42 alone needed 17.3 million pounds in 2016 and 9.15 million pounds during the first half of 2017, and they account for roughly a half of CIG's employees.

  8. #7853
    Originally Posted by VidarSnipes View Post (Source)
    I wonder how did that person come to the conclusion when Foundry 42 alone needed 17.3 million pounds in 2016 and 9.15 million pounds during the first half of 2017, and they account for roughly a half of CIG's employees.
    Was it 17.5 million or $17.5 million?

    I've just realised I've been thinking $17.5 million but spelling it out as pounds made me realise....UK government form would be priced in pounds.

    So...F42 alone would have cost $22.75 million all by itself.

    Or am I misremembering now and it was already adjusted to $17.5 million?

  9. #7854
    Originally Posted by TenakaFurey View Post (Source)
    Was it 17.5 million or $17.5 million?

    I've just realised I've been thinking $17.5 million but spelling it out as pounds made me realise....UK government form would be priced in pounds.

    So...F42 alone would have cost $22.75 million all by itself.

    Or am I misremembering now and it was already adjusted to $17.5 million?
    Pounds sterling.

  10. #7855
    Originally Posted by frostypaw View Post (Source)
    It'd be a massive shame to have all this work go to waste
    All what work?

    In all seriousness, for all that they appear to have spent, CIG haven't got a lot done.

    The engine isn't working and is functionally incomplete. After 6 years, they haven't got critical code modules in place. They don't even have the design work for some of these modules done. The mechanics and game loops are limited or non existent. The game content to date consists of a small fraction of one system out of 150 planned, with no sign that the procedural generation algorithms they need to create the basic systems is working.

    What they have is a polished tech demo, a number of in game assets such as ships, whose existing code will almost certainly be thrown away as the game evolves from Alpha to Beta to Gold and a set of highly scripted planned videos which seem to be using (at best) a highly customised and cut down version of the engine with all the bits that don't work cut out or (at worst) use a different engine entirely. Those videos certainly are not representative of the game, and never have been.

    It'll be a shame to see it die but we need to face reality....

    Unless CIG have been trolling us for years wrt the state of the game and engine, there isn't anything worth saving from SC should CIG collapse. Even the IP is dodgy as there's nothing that will come with it - no working engine, no viable code, little or no game design - and if you have to build everything up anyway, you may as well develop your own IP for free. CryTek should end up with the engine no matter what, but a big part of the problem is that the engine is broken so they won't get much out of it.

    CIG have produced very, very little. One just needs to compare the output of CIG with some of the smaller dev teams to realise that

  11. #7856
    That is a lot of speculation with absolutely no verifiable fact to back it up. DS has been shouting that the End Is Nigh since 2015... Im more curious about their plans with the core game engine and the several dead ends that they have reached (networking, physics being the major ones). Is there still anyone working on that, i didnt see any activity this year on these topics ?

  12. #7857
    Originally Posted by Zetta View Post (Source)
    Pounds sterling.
    OK...so F42 swallowed $23 million by itself in just one year.

    Ouch.

  13. #7858
    Originally Posted by Surefoot View Post (Source)
    That is a lot of speculation with absolutely no verifiable fact to back it up. DS has been shouting that the End Is Nigh since 2015... Im more curious about their plans with the core game engine and the several dead ends that they have reached (networking, physics being the major ones). Is there still anyone working on that, i didnt see any activity this year on these topics ?
    As of summer 2017, CIG had a grand total of 6....yes, six...networking engineers.

    Of these....3...yes, three...were working on what we collectively call the Netcode.

    And people wonder why it keeps getting delayed.

  14. #7859
    Originally Posted by TenakaFurey View Post (Source)
    As of summer 2017, CIG had a grand total of 6....yes, six...networking engineers.

    Of these....3...yes, three...were working on what we collectively call the Netcode.

    And people wonder why it keeps getting delayed.
    How do you know this, and what were the other three working on?

  15. #7860
    Originally Posted by Surefoot View Post (Source)
    That is a lot of speculation with absolutely no verifiable fact to back it up. DS has been shouting that the End Is Nigh since 2015... Im more curious about their plans with the core game engine and the several dead ends that they have reached (networking, physics being the major ones). Is there still anyone working on that, i didnt see any activity this year on these topics ?
    Reality is what everybody said - despite Robert trying to put on face at the end of 2017, there is no show of the game, no show of more speeded up development.

    Miracles don't happen, especially in large scale development. If it looks and is silent like dead duck, it is dead duck.