The Star Citizen Thread v8

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

frostypaw

frostypaw
Snarfbuckle said:
I mean, Kingdom Come Deliverance has sold 1 million in two weeks and has been fairly quiet during production and is a fairly niche game. The drawback is of course for CIG that they run the risk of already filling the market before release and is an even MORE niche game.
Click to expand...

This sounds like an argument that's being made to suggest they're not going to sell any significant quantity of copies of Sq42 - is that what you meant to do?

If it's going to sell it needs to exceed CoD:IW by a wide margin graphically and gameplay/script wise as it looked very similar only less spectacular. People who didn't enjoy that won't touch it

With a few more years until release that's looking extremely unlikely sadly.
 

Rob At Work

R
Zyll Goliat said:
I didn´t know CIG doing dinner and tour with Chris Roberts – for Only $350 if you’ve backed enough https://www.pcinvasion.com/cig-holding-star-citizen-special-event-concierge-backers-charging/amp
(Not sure if this was posted before as this was taken from PC Invasion article posted On January 6, 2018)

"This evening CIG mailed Star Citizen Concierge backers to announce a special event which will take place on 4 May. Concierge backers are the die-hard backers who have pumped more than $1000 into the project so far.

This special event will include a tour of the L.A studio, a dinner and a sit-down with Chris Roberts and “key members of the dev team”. CIG will be filming the event which will be shown at a later date. Tickets for this event are going to be limited with only sixty being made available.

CIG will be charging $350 for this special event which I have to say is quite astonishing. You would think that with the 170+ million in the bank they could invite some of the really high paying backers for a free tour and a meet and greet. What is truly sad is that some backers will likely pay for the ticket and all the costs to get there."
Click to expand...

If this is genuine CR you won't actually get the dinner. It will be postponed at the last minute and you will be told how great it is going to be and here are the JPEGs to prove it. A promise will be made that the Chef is hard at work and it will be available in the near future. but for and extra $150 you can have a starter or Pudding its optional.. etc...
 
Last edited:

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
Rob At Work said:
If this is genuine CR you won't actually get the dinner. It will be postponed at the last minute and you will be told how great it is going to be and here are the JPEGs to prove it. A promise will be made that the Chef is hard at work and it will be available in the near future. but for and extra $150 you can have a starter or Pudding its optional.. etc...
Click to expand...

Maybe you can choose between the $50 and $100 seat claim licence in order to try and get a seat close to CR. Otherwise you might have to sit at a table far from the master.
 

Dooguk

D
The defendants (CIG) position in the Discovery pdf is summed up by a SA poster.

"Miss judge please throw away the case but if you do grant discovery dont let them look at our books oh god please"

[haha]
 

Thargon

Thargon
What does this document mean then? I thought this was Discovery? (I meant the intention to go to Discovery - which implies that the case is going ahead?)

Who raised this document (my armchair lawyering isn't advanced enough to know who produced this document).
 
Last edited:

Jonny Shiloh

Jonny Shiloh
Cosmo said:
Will we see the Discovery stuff this year?
Click to expand...

Given it's CIG, and you know what they're like with deadlines, probably not. In fact, I'd be amazed if they managed to get to court on the right day for the actual trial - "sorry your honour, we were re-factoring Legal Defence 2.0, Chris wasn't happy with the colour of the ribbon binding the documents together".
 

ianw

I
Thargon said:
What does this document mean then? I thought this was Discovery? Who raised this document (my armchair lawyering isn't advanced enough to know who produced this document).
Click to expand...

It looks like the respectiv sids setting out their arguments for when/if it moves forward to next stages including things in discovery and what should/shouldn't be included.

Crytek appear to have declined to state what they are looking to get in settlement.

And CIG's side keep referring to "if the motion to dismiss" is denied.

So it seems at the point this was written up there had been no decidion on the motion to dismiss.

ETA - you know who is apparently preparing a twitterstorm - and Montoya is almost certainly warming his vocal cords up and preparing his hats!!
 
Last edited:

Ian Skippy

Ian Skippy
Thargon said:
What does this document mean then? I thought this was Discovery? (I meant the intention to go to Discovery - which implies that the case is going ahead?)

Who raised this document (my armchair lawyering isn't advanced enough to know who produced this document).
Click to expand...

It basically is setting the stage for what happens after/if the MTD is dismissed. What it means in this case is that CIG really wanted a fixed settlement number from CT, but CT keeps their cards close to their chest. It suggests CT is confident about the MTD being thrown, is currently uninterested in settling and wants to get more details about the financials of CIG before a settlement is possible. It also suggests CIG is quite unhappy about it. That, plus a lot of posturing. CT plays the 'we know what we're doing' confident-shark role, and CIG plays the 'we are clueless about anything, why is this case even happening' poor victim role. Both seem to anticipate the MTD will be dismissed.
 

ianw

I
sleutelbos said:
It basically is setting the stage for what happens after/if the MTD is dismissed. What it means in this case is that CIG really wanted a fixed settlement number from CT, but CT keeps their cards close to their chest. It suggests CT is confident about the MTD being thrown, is currently uninterested in settling and wants to get more details about the financials of CIG before a settlement is possible. It also suggests CIG is quite unhappy about it. That, plus a lot of posturing. CT plays the 'we know what we're doing' confident-shark role, and CIG plays the 'we are clueless about anything, why is this case even happening' poor victim role. Both seem to anticipate the MTD will be dismissed.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

If you were genuinely confident that the case against you was meritless then you might think it a bad idea to enquire about a settlement amount precisely because it would make you look like you were bluffing knowing you have a weak hand.

Whereas if you're the plaintiff and you're asked what settlement figure you're after and you decline to name one preferring instead to go to independent mediation, discovery and trial it really does look like you believe you have a winning hand.

At this point it seems clear who really thinks they are in the driving seat and who doesn't - regardless of how it may turnout.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom