I've always felt Win 8 to be the hostile territory. Win 11 comes close, too.
Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
Win11 is still "engage and terminate on sight" to me, I keep a fully loaded Win10 installer stick on hand everywhere I go for surprise encounters.
Not likely, we're all playing Helldivers 2
Not likely, we're all playing Helldivers 2
Stupid sexy released games!
I instantly hated Win11 when I updated from Win10...but it's kinda grown on me since then. My PC and assorted bits seem to like it too.
Tried going back to a Win10 UI in Win11 a while back and I hated it
Last edited:
Server Meshing (SM)Oh boy here we go
Letter From the Chairman - Roberts Space Industries | Follow the development of Star Citizen and Squadron 42
Roberts Space Industries is the official go-to website for all news about Star Citizen and Squadron 42. It also hosts the online store for game items and merch, as well as all the community tools used by our fans.robertsspaceindustries.com
Sadomasochism (SM)
Just a 'happy accident', or by design? In either case, this seems an apposite happenstance, as both involve pain.
Aka a nice wad of cash and an NDA, and a slow canter off into the sunset.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Morph discusses the investor return news in his stream today:
Source: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2096201683
There is discussion on the topic at the start of the stream, with Space Tomato. And then at around the 2 hour mark a bit more.
Some take aways from his views:
Something also discussed over at GuardFreq is that it could also be possible that the investors may have already obtained some returns from ongoing sales through the US entities. I think few investors would wait over 6 years with zero returns of any kind. So that would potentiall reduce the estimated 120+ mill debt accordingly (or not, it may be in addition to the buy back options, who knows). But that would also mean that money from players has not gone to the development of the game. It would also be in conflict with CIG´s financial "blog" as there is no signs in there of cash flows going to investors. Hiding that from players would not be nice.
There is discussion on the topic at the start of the stream, with Space Tomato. And then at around the 2 hour mark a bit more.
Some take aways from his views:
- He is going to seek expert advice on the news
- Sensitive subject, and he may need time to think about it before it can be misrepresented or sensationalized
- It may not be as extreme as it looks
- He highlights that the auditors mention the lack of info on the investors related liability for CIG in the financials (other than Note 28)
- He mentions the estimated liability ballpark, ~120m etc. Mentions that CIG does not have money to pay now.
- He acknowledges that CIG must be under a certain amount of pressure from the investors, hence lots of sales and rush to release
- He suggests, under that premise, aiming for SQ42 release end of this year would make sense.
- Says this is somehting CIG knew back in 2018. Not a surprise for them. They knew. Now we know why SQ42 was announced as feature locked last year, and polish this year etc.
- Thinks it makes sense for investors not rushing to get their money back just yet as there is not much money for CIG to pay
- But there is a ticking bomb. CIG under pressure from investors to release something to satisfy returns.
- He would not be surprised if CIG decided to put the Bengal on sale
- This should have been obvious (to us) at the very beginning when the investment was announced. We only see that now clearly.
- This reconfirms to him his speculation that CitizenCon will have an actual SQ42 release date announcement. They have to. Investors will be much happier with a date.
- CIG has a real deadline. Not necessarily bad. You can iterate for ever otherwise.
- His worry is that this could incentivize CIG to ship things not finished (
)
Something also discussed over at GuardFreq is that it could also be possible that the investors may have already obtained some returns from ongoing sales through the US entities. I think few investors would wait over 6 years with zero returns of any kind. So that would potentiall reduce the estimated 120+ mill debt accordingly (or not, it may be in addition to the buy back options, who knows). But that would also mean that money from players has not gone to the development of the game. It would also be in conflict with CIG´s financial "blog" as there is no signs in there of cash flows going to investors. Hiding that from players would not be nice.
Last edited:
They did get $5m in 2020, declared in the blog. (And a tiny slice of the $1m dividend). Nothing declared since though, and if those are their only returns on ~$64m over the last ~6yrs that does seem like small fry...
(I do wonder if that's why they have the 3-yr-prior-revenue accumulator on their put option though? To catch up if there's been lean years etc?)
I can't wait for all these people's reactions when Robbers drags the rabbit out the hat and - surprise, surprise - it's just a turd.
Not nice but not illegal. Players don't have any say. Backer dont have any say.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Yeah, but their "blog" is... just a "blog". They could have cash flows to investors hidden in any of the main cost categories. Especially in the "Other Game Dev Costs" or "Publishing" etc. Who knows. As mentioned if this was the case it would also mean CIG would have deliberately hidden from players information about money not going to development for several years.
Usually you pack in clauses that grant you more control for free. Which you then exercise to get your dues and fire excess and incompetent leadership.
If you receive meagre returns and you're not in control but Coffers and his partner Hortwin who use "hollywood accounting" to tweak the numbers in their favour you won't get more with a "catchup" clause. You're at Coffers and Hortwin's mercy and that is not a good position.
Apologies, there is a perfectly fine English name for Hortwin: Hoardwin.
Makes sense.
(I guess I was thinking of it in terms of a 'last ditch exit policy'. Plan Z rather than A B or C
)It will be interesting to see whether there are any board changes revealed down the pipe. (I don't really trust CIG or companies house to update in a timely manner, unless there was some major share change which bumped Chris below 50% share holdings or whatever).
Guys in the MassivelyOP article are also speculating that PricewaterCoopers may have been appointed as an investor stipulation etc. Which makes sense. (Can't imagine CIG wanted the extra scrutiny).
At this point I'm just intrigued to see whether CIG go all-out on marketing for any 2025 SQ42 offerings. (If the Calders were in 'Plan Z' mode, seeing all that money being fired down a potential black hole, and not into their pockets, might make them hopping mad? And see them pull any other levers available?)
Dunno. Just speculation that they're in a grumpy place and ready to pull the lever. (If I'd had CR selling me a line for nearly 6 years I reckon I would be
)
Last edited:
The change of auditor may indeed point to some influence governed by other interest. They usually get appointed at AGM in but it depends on type of company really.Makes sense.
(I guess I was thinking of it in terms of a 'last ditch exit policy'. Plan Z rather than A B or C
It will be interesting to see whether there are any board changes revealed down the pipe. (I don't really trust CIG or companies house to update in a timely manner, unless there was some major share change which bumped Chris below 50% share holdings or whatever).
Guys in the MassivelyOP article are also speculating that PricewaterCoopers may have been appointed as an investor stipulation etc. Which makes sense. (Can't imagine CIG wanted the extra scrutiny).
At this point I'm just intrigued to see whether CIG go all-out on marketing for any 2025 SQ42 offerings. (If the Calders were in 'Plan Z' mode, seeing all that money being fired down a potential black hole, and not into their pockets, might make them hopping mad? And see them pull any other levers they available?)
Dunno. Just speculation that they're in a grumpy place and ready to pull the lever. (If I'd had CR selling me a line for nearly 6 years I reckon I would be
We did see it. The faithful refused to listen to us and called us FUDsters.
Isn't it great not having a publisher push you to make a release?
Also, the bit about how investors might have already got some money from sales kind of makes it worse. The more investors have already got, it means that CIG have less cash available since they still can't pay the lesser amount.
Makes sense.
(I guess I was thinking of it in terms of a 'last ditch exit policy'. Plan Z rather than A B or C
It will be interesting to see whether there are any board changes revealed down the pipe. (I don't really trust CIG or companies house to update in a timely manner, unless there was some major share change which bumped Chris below 50% share holdings or whatever).
Guys in the MassivelyOP article are also speculating that PricewaterCoopers may have been appointed as an investor stipulation etc. Which makes sense. (Can't imagine CIG wanted the extra scrutiny).
At this point I'm just intrigued to see whether CIG go all-out on marketing for any 2025 SQ42 offerings. (If the Calders were in 'Plan Z' mode, seeing all that money being fired down a potential black hole, and not into their pockets, might make them hopping mad? And see them pull any other levers available?)
Dunno. Just speculation that they're in a grumpy place and ready to pull the lever. (If I'd had CR selling me a line for nearly 6 years I reckon I would be
Imagine if Calders had a clause that allowed them to remove CR as the chairman.
Special Thanks: Chris Roberts
That would be hilarious.
More likely:
Special Thanks: Chris Roberts. Without his help this game could of been released years ago
So, copied from the Freelancer credits, then.