The Star Citizen Thread v 3.0

[tooterfish]

People already do parodies about Roberts himself, like the one did with Smart, editing voice samples to the fitting result. I didn't saw take-downs.

I'm sorry, are you arguing that Chris Roberts is some kind of a champion for free speech here?

You missed the fact that he, and his partner, sent empty legal threats to try to bully the Escapist into taking down their critical articles?

Or the fact that they have now banned multiple people from their own forums for making posts vaguely critical of Star Citizen?

Or that they've banned multiple people from their forums for making critical posts on entirely unrelated forums? (Note: they refused to take action against a member of their community who committed sexual harassment against another member because "he didn't use our forum to do it". What's the takeaway message there... it's okay to sexually harass people, but don't you dare speak badly about our video game?).

 

[Monk]

But they still have Mass

And therefore, importantly, exhibit inertia under force.

 

[Neo-ST]

^^Of course, that's what we all mean when we say "weight".
The twitchy movement of ships doesn't show they have mass and the corresponding inertia, that's the point.

 

[Monk]

^^Of course, that's what we all mean when we say "weight".
The twitchy movement of ships doesn't show they have mass and the corresponding inertia, that's the point.

But semantics are fun

So, in terms of the engine...is the twitchy behavior because the thrusters are so powerful that they overcome inertia instantly or the game doesn't factor it in?

 

[MaxLexandre]

I'm sorry, are you arguing that Chris Roberts is some kind of a champion for free speech here?

You missed the fact that he, and his partner, sent empty legal threats to try to bully the Escapist into taking down their critical articles?

Or the fact that they have now banned multiple people from their own forums for making posts vaguely critical of Star Citizen?

Or that they've banned multiple people from their forums for making critical posts on entirely unrelated forums? (Note: they refused to take action against a member of their community who committed sexual harassment against another member because "he didn't use our forum to do it". What's the takeaway message there... it's okay to sexually harass people, but don't you dare speak badly about our video game?).

Okay let's put something clear, what the Escapists posted wasn't any parody. It was and yes, claims of supposed ex-employees about their former company, where they accused the company of actual >CRIMES<, i would be surprise was if the company didn't react to it, seeing the huge drama and propagation that article had.

The people banned from the forums from making vaguely critical posts about the game? I mean i'm not into that, but jesus just open the forum, you'll find aggressive criticism towards everything, from the time its taking, bugs, AC (flight model discussion just mentioned by Neo some posts adobe), etc... I don't engage on the community because i don't like the fights people get into because they have different views of one matter. You should also be aware that you Can't (as obvious) talk about the company on the game forums, this is something you simply can't do, i know that there is people getting banned because they tried to engage in The Escapists posts, Smart blogs as well, on the forums, but that involves directly discussion of internal CIG matters that can be only discussed on the Reddit (as it's not official).

The last point i won't comment because i'm a lurker of the forum, not a active member of it, but are you really bringing a specific case to justify the whole thing? I'm confused.

 

[jcrg99]

I think if i remember she posted some emails you sent her (All on Caps if i recall correctly), i don't remember any of the contents.

You got something out of context, I see. It was me who publicized that email along the entire story. Fanboys made sure to make my comments disappear from where I posted them, except that email. So, they got the end of the story, to pretent that I yelled to CIG for no reason. Even that some of the reasons were stated in the own email. Still, it was totally ignored. Because you know... that's your whole agenda right? That's your "job". You guys are all in the same page. Getting things out of the context and making CIG to appear the victim... always.

One example of the "copy/paste" comments is the one you frequently use: The 2014 release date for the KS and the scope increase. It's such a live in the past and keep hitting on it constantly, we all know the 2014 got dropped, the game currently being developed has a big scope increase (as the FPS) from the Kickstarter. As there is no such thing as time machines what thing CIG can do is move forward, as i said some posts back on the thread, all they can do to who isn't happy about that, and not willing to wait, is give them Refunds, and we clearly know, if you ask for a Refund being a KS backer based on that, you will get it.

There are reports of refunds been denied. Specially for great amounts of money. That's why more people are signing to a class lawsuit to come.

It's not vague, it is how it is, every story has 2 sides, and you only see/tell one,

I am going to quote yourself:
"I think if i remember she posted some emails you sent her (All on Caps if i recall correctly), i don't remember any of the contents."

So, here's YOU again, accusing others of doing what you do. You take your own convenient conclusion, which matches with your wishes, without not knowing the whole story. That was convenient. Double standards.

it is dramatizing because of that, you take this approach to X point/situation, see the possible worse case scenario and that's it. I can exemplify this with some claims i saw recently on a video about this, when the person claims "if you check CIG jobs site you see that some positions are open for almost 1 year, this point towards the company running out of money and the jobs being just a way to tell that they are hiring, when they aren't.", that comment made me poker face, on all big companies, like Blizzard, the jobs take sometimes over 1 year to fill, not because the company is a "scam" or going bankrupt, but because quality people are not easy to find on the industry and the company is not willing to hire anyone who applies, so that is one example to show how a X fact can be put on several ways depending of the view you want to transmit.

First. The point in that video is valid. As they are not a matter of fact, as the author explained that it wasn't, but anyway, all things put together raises suspicious, while could be just difficulties to hire talents (which I disagree of such statement, specially for the offers not filed in such long time), there is also companies who create offers that are simply to pretend that are in good shape, or just to grab resumes for the future, and not really hiring anyone in that moment. Just HR standard approach/business approach. If you don't know that, you are naive. Go talk with people with work with HR, or tactics to make up things to attract investors. So, you were quickly to make a poker face, as your opinion was a fact. It's not. It could be one or another. And the only one stated that as a fact, its you, not the author of that video.

That been said, what the hell are you talking about here. You are trying to give examples of how I state things, bringing to the table things that other people told? You failed, both on your claim against the guy, or trying to put on me, a "flaw" that would be in other person, not me, and that is not a flaw at all... its just, again, your flaw of how you interpret the things, or quickly assume that you have the fact, when all that you have its your own speculation.

 

[jcrg99]

You should also be aware that you Can't (as obvious) talk about the company on the game forums

FALSE!

The FTC recommends to the consumers if you have an issue with the crowdfunding campaign, even in a worst case scenario that you think that they are an actual scam, that you go further and comment where the crowdfunding driving is going on, "to alert other consumers".

CIG has been working not under the "private company" premise. They built a crowdfunding platform. They are crowdfunding. So, they can't simply get all the benefits of the crowdfunding and ignoring the responsibilities.

They can't deny a right that is given to the consumer, by the consumer entity protection in United States, when related to crowdfunding projects. An entity which oversees and regulates anything were a consumer is involved. Or do you think that the FTC would ask for consumer to make something illegal against a company?

In the moment that they ban people without an actual proof of actual offenses, harassment or anything against other people - not the company (because YES, calling them a SCAM is OK, according with FTC, because the consumer can have his opinion and should share with others, so others pay attention) - they have no acceptable reason to ban people, preventing them to exercise a right that they have.

In the day that CIG stop to call its business crowdfunding, then we can talk about been a privilege to speak in their forums. Before that, NO! It's a right! And CIG have been disrespecting. Don't worry! They will be hold accountable for that too.

 

[tooterfish]

The last point i won't comment because i'm a lurker of the forum, not a active member of it, but are you really bringing a specific case to justify the whole thing? I'm confused.

Just google wulf knight, there must be pictures of him and his pathetic little todger all over the internet by now, I don't particularly want to find them again. His excuse was apparently that he's a naturist, so it isn't weird for him to send pictures of his genitals to a strange woman's email.

As for the bannings, as an example the guy who runs Beyond the Horizon Radio, a station exclusively about Star Citizen, was banned for being critical. He has since asked for and gotten a refund , and oh... in an interesting tidbit Sandi Gardiner is allegedly cyberstalking him around other forums even after his banning. Classy.

Honestly though, if you read the letters from Roberts and Freyermuth and still think "yup, this is totally normal", then I'm clearly not going to change your mind am I?

 

[MaxLexandre]

You got something out of context, I see. It was me who publicized that email along the entire story. Fanboys made sure to make my comments disappear from where I posted them, except that email. So, they got the end of the story, to pretent that I yelled to CIG for no reason. Even that some of the reasons were stated in the own email. Still, it was totally ignored. Because you know... that's your whole agenda right? That's your "job". You guys are all in the same page. Getting things out of the context and making CIG to appear the victim... always.


There are reports of refunds been denied. Specially for great amounts of money. That's why more people are signing to a class lawsuit to come.



I am going to quote yourself:
"I think if i remember she posted some emails you sent her (All on Caps if i recall correctly), i don't remember any of the contents."

So, here's YOU again, accusing others of doing what you do. You take your own convenient conclusion, which matches with your wishes, without not knowing the whole story. That was convenient. Double standards.


First. The point in that video is valid. As they are not a matter of fact, as the author explained that it wasn't, but anyway, all things put together raises suspicious, while could be just difficulties to hire talents (which I disagree of such statement, specially for the offers not filed in such long time), there is also companies who create offers that are simply to pretend that are in good shape, or just to grab resumes for the future, and not really hiring anyone in that moment. Just HR standard approach/business approach. If you don't know that, you are naive. Go talk with people with work with HR, or tactics to make up things to attract investors. So, you were quickly to make a poker face, as your opinion was a fact. It's not. It could be one or another. And the only one stated that as a fact, its you, not the author of that video.

That been said, what the hell are you talking about here. You are trying to give examples of how I state things, bringing to the table things that other people brings? You failed, both on your claim against the guy, or trying to put on me, a "flaw" that would be in other person, not me, and that is not a flaw at all... its just, again, your flaw of how you interpret the things, or quickly assume that you have the fact, and all that you have its speculation.

I don't know if it was out of context or not, i wasn't any interested into following that drama. ~~ Did i, made any conclusion? You're on assumptions, i only had told i heard about you due that, i wasn't interested into that, neither into take any conclusion due it, i'm greatly confused by the point you're trying to make when i had already discussed with you for months before that.

They have the right to refuse refunds on several occasions, if i backed the game on March this year, and asked for a refund today, they could refuse it unless you give a valid reason to do so. You have 14 days from buy date to refund, then you have the, if you are a older backer, refund based on the failure to deliver the game into the (2014) release date, and you have the TOS that defines upon first 12, then 18 months. If you backed before the TOS was updated to 18 months, you can request (and they have to give it) based on the 12, if you backed AFTER they updated the TOS to 18 months, you have to wait. Don't come with "it's the law" things because it isn't.


But you exactly on the point, understanding a fact to your own appeal of it, ignoring the other possibilities. And the fact is that CIG IS Hiring, only last week we were introduced 4 new developers on Germany, and far revealed, their headcount keeps increasing every month, and far stated on Citizencon, it's still ongoing. I prefer take the fact they are hiring (not just pretending) and the team actually grown to far said 270 employees, than "suspicious" about on why some of their positions are not filled for a long time.

 

[MaxLexandre]

FALSE!

The FTC recommends to the consumers if you have an issue with the crowdfunding campaign, even in a worst case scenario that you think that they are an actual scam, that you go further and comment where the crowdfunding driving is going on, "to alert other consumers".

CIG has been working not under the "private company" premise. They built a crowdfunding platform. They are crowdfunding. So, they can't simply get all the benefits of the crowdfunding and ignoring the responsibilities.

They can't deny a right that is given to the consumer, by the consumer entity protection in United States, when related to crowdfunding projects. An entity which oversees and regulates anything were a consumer is involved. Or do you think that the FTC would ask for consumer to make something illegal against a company?

In the moment that they ban people without an actual proof of actual offenses, harassment or anything against other people - not the company (because YES, calling them a SCAM is OK, according with FTC, because the consumer can have his opinion and should share with others, so others pay attention) - they have no acceptable reason to ban people, preventing them to exercise a right that they have.

In the day that CIG stop to call its business crowdfunding, then we can talk about been a privilege to speak in their forums. Before that, NO! It's a right! And CIG have been disrespecting. Don't worry! They will be hold accountable for that too.

What the hell are you on about?! Independent of Crowdfunding or not, companies will NOT allow you to discuss the company internal affairs, specially the HR matters, on its official forums. There's not any law that says "You are Crowdfunded, you have to allow it.". Even with that, CIG on the forums still makes public statements about some concerns and discussions that happen on the forums. Side of that, we're entitled to everything that has to do with the product they promised us, we Backed for Star Citizen, we didn't Backed for Cloud Imperium Games.

 

[jcrg99]

They have the right to refuse refunds on several occasions, if i backed the game on March this year, and asked for a refund today, they could refuse it unless you give a valid reason to do so.

Well... technically you are right (you have to give a reason), but in practice, everyone can get their refunds. The CEO of the company publicized that he would give to people the money if they ask him back. That he does not want to fight with people. He made that in an interview, to pretend, to the press (means publicity, advertising, convincing people to pledge, to trust that in a bad situation, or losing trust, that hero will give yourmoney back). So yes. It became an obligation, with any backer who pledge. He is not a random user in the internet. He is the CEO of the company, making a public statement. Or he refund, or he is just false advertising... again.

Don't make me bring what FTC told about that again. Which you conveniently ignored. Please?

and you have the TOS that defines upon first 12, then 18 months.

Clueless man. Does not know that their TOS means nothing, in the moment that it can be categorized as deceptive, specially the mentioned clause.

- - - Updated - - -

What the hell are you on about?! Independent of Crowdfunding or not, companies will NOT allow you to discuss the company internal affairs, specially the HR matters, on its official forums. There's not any law that says "You are Crowdfunded, you have to allow it.". Even with that, CIG on the forums still makes public statements about some concerns and discussions that happen on the forums. Side of that, we're entitled to everything that has to do with the product they promised us, we Backed for Star Citizen, we didn't Backed for Cloud Imperium Games.

Indeed. There is no law. Its just what FTC is telling to the consumers to make. You know. The entity who protects consumer in United States, who oversees and regulates these matters? Are you not telling me that the entity who oversees any consumer matters in United States, for any kind business, including crowdfunding, is wrong... and you are right, aren't you?
The FTC also stated that the companies that crowdfunded a project are not allowed to spend any dime funded that not in the project itself. And you are telling me that people have no right to question that? lol

we Backed for Star Citizen, we didn't Backed for Cloud Imperium Games.

So why the cash of the backers have been maintained as cash reserves? Because as you claimed, we didn't backed CIG, but SC, so, we have no responsibility of having our money, to keep the company. That is something that they should make with their money, like selling a mansion to make that money as the cash reserves of the company, not the backers money. Specially because, kept in cash reserves and only working according a revenue, that means that the money donated means nothing to accelerate the development, but instead, just to keep the company, for who knows what else they will do with that company in the future.

So, if what you said is correct, and we backed Star Citizen, not CIG, you have this issue now to solve my friend


As well as the marketing. Well... no backers dime should be spend on any marketing campaign, any trade show, anything unrelated to develop the game, if we are all backers only of Star Citizen and not of Cloud Imperium Games.
Heh! You are trying to escape of "one trap" and falling in another worst

 

[MaxLexandre]

Well... technically you are right, but in practice, everyone can get their refunds. The CEO of the company publicized that he would give to people the money if they ask him back. That he does not want to fight with people. He made that in an interview, to pretend, to the press (means publicity, advertising, convincing people to pledge, to trust that in a bad situation, or losing trust, that hero will give yourmoney back). So yes. It became an obligation, with any backer who pledge. He is not a random user in the internet. He is the CEO of the company, making a public statement. Or he refund, or he is just false advertising... again.

Don't make me bring what FTC told about that again. Which you conveniently ignored. Please?


Clueless man. Does not know that their TOS means nothing, in the moment that it was categorized as deceptive.

- - - Updated - - -



Indeed. There is no law. Its just what FTC is telling to the consumers to make. You know. The entity who protects consumer in United States, who oversees and regulates these matters? Are you not telling me that the entity who oversees any consumer matters in United States, for any kind business, including crowdfunding, is wrong... and you are right, aren't you?

What said or not doesn't matter, what matters is the LAW, what is written, and the TOS you accepted when you registered / backed the project. If you backed the game you have to accept the what is their policy. If the TOS mean nothing, tell me, how could steam refuse refunds during so many years? And even now, they are accepting, but only based on 14 days or 2hours of gameplay? If it wasn't for their TOS? Crowdfunding has no specific rules here, specially if people like you, defend you were not investing on project, yet, buying the product they were announcing.

The FTC issues a recommendation, that works as a guideline, not an obligation.

 

[jcrg99]

What said or not doesn't matter, what matters is the LAW, what is written, and the TOS you accepted when you registered / backed the project. If you backed the game you have to accept the what is their policy. If the TOS mean nothing, tell me, how could steam refuse refunds during so many years? And even now, they are accepting, but only based on 14 days or 2hours of gameplay? If it wasn't for their TOS? Crowdfunding has no specific rules here, specially if people like you, defend you were not investing on project, yet, buying the product they were announcing.

The FTC issues a recommendation, that works as a guideline, not an obligation.

FTC does not matter. What matters is what Chris Roberts says. And he can say whatever he wants, because he is never would be accountable for that. He can make a public statement, an advertising, and then, contradict that in a TOS, in a disclaimer, and no issue could ever happen for him. He can change the deal in whatever way that he wants, as more he pleases, removing rights of consumers that "signed a TOS", and that's totally ok.

Ok! I just missed something here very important! That's why you never convinced me of anything and told me how ignorant I am, since you brought all those concrete facts and still denied, making you think that you were talking with a brick wall!
Sorry man! I didn't know. Now I understand.

Chris Roberts is the President of United States!!!

He was elected and eliminated FTC, now he and the white-knights regulates and oversees consumer issues of anyone trading with the Yankees!

Thanks to let us all know. I am truly ashamed of been stubborn in the past. Can you forgive me? I was just not aware of such news.

 

[MaxLexandre]

FTC does not matter. What matters is what Chris Roberts says! Chris Roberts is the President of United States. He was elected and eliminated FTC, now he and the white-knights regulates and oversees consumer issues of anyone trading with the Yankees!

Thanks to let us all know.

As said on this matter: "The FTC issues a recommendation, that works as a guideline, not an obligation."

It's like going as deep as possible to trying to justify something, over-estimating the importance of the recommendations FTC makes (on US case, where i live we have our own FTC), worked myself on a development studio (not for games however), the reality is not really the one you have on your head of how "well behaved" companies are on this kind of things. Crowdfunding most importance is the transparency between its projects and its backers, and on CIG case, that is happening, on the point that really matters, the product they promised and are currently developing.

FTC Issues Recommendation: Recycle the paper you use on the office! CIG doesn't: "OMG! Call FTC, they need to Investigate this!"

I'll be worried when this drama is actually backed up with actual evidence, because currently i feel i'm on X-Files movie.
Anyway, i'm off to play Star Citizen PTU 1.3 just finishing downloading. o/

 

[jcrg99]

As said on this matter: "The FTC issues a recommendation, that works as a guideline, not an obligation."

It's like going as deep as possible to trying to justify something, over-estimating the importance of the recommendations FTC makes (on US case, where i live we have our own FTC), worked myself on a development studio (not for games however), the reality is not really the one you have on your head of how "well behaved" companies are on this kind of things. Crowdfunding most importance is the transparency between its projects and its backers, and on CIG case, that is happening, on the only point that really matters, the product they promised and are currently developing.

Anyway, i'm off to play Star Citizen PTU 1.3 just finishing downloading. o/

If FTC states that the consumer should go to the crowdfunding platform and alert other consumers if they think that there is wrong doing, and the company refuses to accept that, how difficult for you to see that the company is disrespecting the FTC, who oversees and regulates consumer protection laws in United States?

I mean... they are the bosses man. Stop to claim that Roberts is. It's embarrassing.

 

[MaxLexandre]

Don't you have any single simple logic in your brain?

If FTC states that the consumer should go to the crowdfunding platform and alert other consumers if they think that there is wrong doing, and the company refuses to accept that, how difficult for you to see that the company is disrespecting the FTC, who oversees and regulates consumer protection laws in United States?

I mean... they are the bosses man. Stop to claim that Roberts is. Go there bury your heads in the sand. That's all that you have been doing this whole time, since you came here to try to troll me.

I'll be worried when this drama is actually backed up with actual evidence, because currently i feel i'm on X-Files movie.

 

[jcrg99]

I'll be worried when this drama is actually backed up with actual evidence, because currently i feel i'm on X-Files movie.

http://www.crowdfundinsider.com/2015/06/69362-federal-trade-commission-on-crowdfunding-scams/

"The FTC advises backers that if you learn about a crowdfunding scam:
1-) File a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission.
2-) File a complaint with your state Attorney General.
3-) Warn other consumers — comment on the creator’s profile on the crowdfunding site.
"

 

[Mr.Nowak]

I think collectively we should be past the scam debate. How is the PTU looking for the one's that got it already?

 

[adoredtv]

http://www.crowdfundinsider.com/2015/06/69362-federal-trade-commission-on-crowdfunding-scams/

"The FTC advises backers that if you learn about a crowdfunding scam:
1-) File a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission.
2-) File a complaint with your state Attorney General.
3-) Warn other consumers — comment on the creator’s profile on the crowdfunding site.
"

Have you done 1 and 2?

 

[jcrg99]

Have you done 1 and 2?

I know from many people who did it Number 1. Number 2 I am not sure. Number 3 too. Many people are doing number 3, or tried. But number 3 have been disrespected by the company, since they not just threat people who do that in their own website, or less than that, less than raising suspicious of "scam"/"long con" or consumer laws broken, but just criticism to the game or asking legit questions, but also going further and trying to remove people's right (protected by FTC) even outside of their forums, as we already know.

I mean. They are not just abusive. They are extremely abusive. Apparently, like some of you guys think, Roberts also thinks that is the President of United States.