The Star Citizen Thread V10

Quite agree with that. I'm far less worried by ship customization monetization that ship sales.
Though, in the great tradition of putting cart before the horses, it'll probably again be released half cooked and on ships that'll have reworks later, multiple times maybe, once Chris' mood eventually changes, or when they'll find that some system doesn't work as expected, or SSOCS/whatever tech they come up with will make things done incompatible, or unforeseen consequences show themselves and everything will have to be reworked/refactored...

But... Sure they have tons of employees to keep busy... Sure they have tons of gullible money to throw in the fire... If Chris had to make a space program, it'll be managed like KSP in sandbox mode.
 
Saw this post earlier that links to Boredgamer claiming Crytek are taking a deal.

Haven't watched the video myself.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLUbD6zHArc
Sorry, had to click through it as couldn't keep interested for the full 10 mins.

Cliff notes take on BG's take: "IANAL but Crytek are bad and are at the end of the road. CI steamrollering them with the bond demand is the killing blow and they will settle."
I didn't catch anything where he specifically said "Crytek are copping a deal", but I was clicking through 30 sec chunks.
 
Sorry, had to click through it as couldn't keep interested for the full 10 mins.

Cliff notes take on BG's take: "IANAL but Crytek are bad and are at the end of the road. CI steamrollering them with the bond demand is the killing blow and they will settle."
I didn't catch anything where he specifically said "Crytek are copping a deal", but I was clicking through 30 sec chunks.
From what I gathered from that video the "Crytek is done...:" statement is pretty much a conclusion and opinion rather then fact. I guess we all will see what it is in due time
 
I think most magazines get published well before the nominal 'publication date' on the cover. At least, they seem to in the UK. They probably put a spurious date on them so people still think they are current until the next edition comes out.
 
I m not going to buy the Forbes edition. Never bought it before, not gonna start now due to SC. The only thing I d like to know if its a 1:1 print to the published article we know already or if that was kind of a sneak-peak and the actual article is bigger in scope and detail? Q for anybody who reads the mag anyway ;)
 
It's astonishing that an article on a video game can appear in the printed version of Forbes, yet the article be completely omitted in the Wikipedia page for the game. Star Citizen really is one of the most controversial "entertainment" projects out there.
Someone seems to have raised the Forbes article on the Wikipedia article talk page (here), but nothing has been done, probably because the article is locked so only registered Wikipedia contributors can edit it.

The Wikipedia article is a lot better than it used to be, see e.g. this version from 2016, which in little more than a regurgitation of CIG's hype. I suspect that people have got tired of trying to keep it up to date, given the effort the 'citizens' have put into removing anything remotely critical. The out-of-date but at least containing some negative comment current version is probably as good as its going to get.
 
I m not going to buy the Forbes edition. Never bought it before, not gonna start now due to SC. The only thing I d like to know if its a 1:1 print to the published article we know already or if that was kind of a sneak-peak and the actual article is bigger in scope and detail? Q for anybody who reads the mag anyway ;)
just sneak around some premium banking/financial office nearby sometime next week or such and you can read it for free :p
 
I m not going to buy the Forbes edition. Never bought it before, not gonna start now due to SC. The only thing I d like to know if its a 1:1 print to the published article we know already or if that was kind of a sneak-peak and the actual article is bigger in scope and detail? Q for anybody who reads the mag anyway ;)
Reading through it now. The issue is 114 pages, with the SC article starting on page 66.

Edit 1: It's 7 pages long, titled "Failure To Launch", with intro heading of "Chris Roberts has spent seven years and raised nearly $300 million - most of it from average gamers - building Star Citizen. It's on pace to be the most expensive video game ever made and - outside of cryptocurrency - the world's largest crowdfunding project. It's still not ready. It may never be."

Edit 2: it is practically identical to the website article, word for word, including the same images, etc.
 
Last edited:
Someone seems to have raised the Forbes article on the Wikipedia article talk page (here), but nothing has been done, probably because the article is locked so only registered Wikipedia contributors can edit it.

The Wikipedia article is a lot better than it used to be, see e.g. this version from 2016, which in little more than a regurgitation of CIG's hype. I suspect that people have got tired of trying to keep it up to date, given the effort the 'citizens' have put into removing anything remotely critical. The out-of-date but at least containing some negative comment current version is probably as good as its going to get.
lol...yeah I read that, quite amusing given that Forbes is already used as a legitimate source elsewhere. Personally wouldn't touch that article with a barge pole. While it would be amusing for about five minutes to see how quickly the link was 'deleted', I am aware of how especially lovely some of the super-fans are and how they especially love to..er make serving suggestions as to the limited life expectancy... of anyone that stands in front of the hype train to nowhere.
 
Reading through it now. The issue is 114 pages, with the SC article starting on page 66.

It's 7 pages long, titled "Failure To Launch", with intro heading of "Chris Roberts has spent seven years and raised nearly $300 million - most of it from average gamers - building Star Citizen. It's on pace to be the most expensive video game ever made and - outside of cryptocurrency - the world's largest crowdfunding project. It's still not ready. It may never be."
Everyone at CIG is "Phew... At least we didn't make on the cover of the magazine"
 
Reading through it now. The issue is 114 pages, with the SC article starting on page 66.

Edit 1: It's 7 pages long, titled "Failure To Launch", with intro heading of "Chris Roberts has spent seven years and raised nearly $300 million - most of it from average gamers - building Star Citizen. It's on pace to be the most expensive video game ever made and - outside of cryptocurrency - the world's largest crowdfunding project. It's still not ready. It may never be."

Edit 2: it is practically identical to the website article, word for word, including the same images, etc.
But weren't some backers sure that CIG were going to sue Forbes into not publishing it because its just a hit piece full of lies?
 
But weren't some backers sure that CIG were going to sue Forbes into not publishing it because its just a hit piece full of lies?
AFAIK that might still happen. A comment I recently read on a video regarding this topic the "plan" is to let Forbes release the article in order to have undeniable evidence for a legal slam-down possibly reaping MILLIONS :)
 
Top Bottom