The Star Citizen Thread v8

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Chris also said he paid himself a year's back salary for development on the kickstarter pitch video, out of kickstarter funds.
I remember at some point in 2013 "Star Citizen" (the IP) got sold by "Chris Roberts" (the private person) to "Cloud Imperium Games" for three million dollars.

Of course, this is just another case of a fraudulent Kickstarter, because it means the company ("CIG") advertising "Star Citizen" on Kickstarter didn't even own the IP it asked money for while pretending it does.

Being deceived by Chris Roberts we essentially backed the wrong company, which not only didn't own a WIP gameplay implementation, it also didn't own the IP itself. It was an empty shell to collect money with smoke & mirrors.

So there are now two documents in this court case, one from each company, and both of them make Chris Robert's claim that RSI had been working on this thing for over a year prior to pitching it on kickstarter look like a lie. How important that is or how significant that is depends on your point of view I suppose, but where this gets nasty for Chris is if the accounting that Skadden Arp will without question be getting their hands on shows that Chris Roberts did in fact pay himself a wage for a year's work that he didn't do.
That's mostly important for previous Kickstarter backers, who bought in in 2012, expecting to get to play that WIP gameplay shown in the pitch video. It's not important for people who bought in in 2014 and beyond, because why should they care? It doesn't matter for them.
 
I remember at some point in 2013 "Star Citizen" (the IP) got sold by "Chris Roberts" (the private person) to "Cloud Imperium Games" for three million dollars.

Of course, this is just another case of a fraudulent Kickstarter, because it means the company ("CIG") advertising "Star Citizen" on Kickstarter didn't even own the IP it asked money for while pretending it does.

Being deceived by Chris Roberts we essentially backed the wrong company, which not only didn't own a WIP gameplay implementation, it also didn't own the IP itself. It was an empty shell to collect money with smoke & mirrors.


That's mostly important for previous Kickstarter backers, who bought in in 2012, expecting to get to play that WIP gameplay shown in the pitch video. It's not important for people who bought in in 2014 and beyond, because why should they care? It doesn't matter for them.

The $3m was a hot topic in 2016, it was indeed taken out of the company. I've had conversations about that with different folks and I'm pretty certain it's been discussed on twitter and SA.

The $1dollar shares that the execs sold back for vast fortunes was the other example of large scale cash leaving the company, albeit via a legit mechanism. That's all public, anyone can look that up.

The company they created recently in the uk for licensing remains a mystery.

As for 2014 customers not caring about the original pitch - that wasn't my point. The guarantee of financial transparency which was removed is what I'm pointing to.

That guarantee added value to sales by way of confidence. Removing it devalues the sale and removes confidence.

The original pitch, original investors, the original terms of service and the original devs are all gone.

Their relationship with Crytek is also gone.

It has failed catastrophically and the idealogical component propping it up via ship sales, land sales, tank sales and soon we'll see property sales - is the single most interesting thing in all of this.
 
I bet he wished he’d licensed it and not sold - for $3M per annum :D

You remember how Lucasfilm made the vast majority of their Star Wars profits by licensing out the images of the millenium falcon, x-wings etc to toy companies in the 70s and 80s?

CIG registered 'CIG Licensing' very recently.

The only companies needing a license would be the Foundrys in UK and Germany.

Great way to hide cash from an impending lawsuit discovery!
 
Has there been any word from the Avocados about how 3.1 performs yet?

NDAs?

You remember how Lucasfilm made the vast majority of their Star Wars profits by licensing out the images of the millenium falcon, x-wings etc to toy companies in the 70s and 80s?

CIG registered 'CIG Licensing' very recently.

The only companies needing a license would be the Foundrys in UK and Germany.

Great way to hide cash from an impending lawsuit discovery!

That's interesting..... CIG, the only gaming company with more shells than a beach :D
 
Has there been any word from the Avocados about how 3.1 performs yet?

Why would it perform significantly better? And if it did, why would that matter, considering how much of the project has yet to be designed and implemented, likely making optimizations at this point much less relevant?
 
If its reduced interest or simply nothing to report I can only speculate.

The only Avocado that I know personally hasn't bothered installing, and simply seems to have lost interest since he got the results of me and my mates testing some weeks ago.

Lets say that there was some money involved :D
 
I saw some other thread on reddit I think where an SC streamer was lamenting the fact that they didn't have photo id or a passport or anything and were thus somehow barred from testing 3.1 I didn't really pay much heed to it, but it might be a more draconian approach to leak tracing?
 
I saw some other thread on reddit I think where an SC streamer was lamenting the fact that they didn't have photo id or a passport or anything and were thus somehow barred from testing 3.1 I didn't really pay much heed to it, but it might be a more draconian approach to leak tracing?

It's truly bizzare.

If your software is so totally turbo broken that you need need to take draconian measures to stop people leaking how bad it is.

But then when it comes out of "Evocati" and it's still turbo broken - how does that even work?

It's beyond parody at this point and it looks like it's only going to go further beyond...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why would it perform significantly better? And if it did, why would that matter, considering how much of the project has yet to be designed and implemented, likely making optimizations at this point much less relevant?

Because performance improvements were supposed to be the meat of what 3.1 had to offer. That was rowed back slightly when they delayed bind culling (again), but it was also claimed (in a desperate bid to mitigate the fans' disappointment) that it was ok because they had found substantial improvements by other means. These are improvements that Roberts claimed would only take "a few more weeks" when they declared the borderline unplayable 3.0 ready for prime time at the end of last year.

It's nothing to do with "optimization" at this point, the catastrophic performance is the result of missing and broken core architecture. That's why it matters, because if they can't get a handle on it now there's no point even thinking about weighing it down with even more junk like AI and all the other un-designed and un-implemented features.

Do I expect there to be significant improvements? Hahaha, no.
 
Last edited:
I bet he wished he’d licensed it and not sold - for $3M per annum :D

Maybe he heard the rumours and wasn't confident enough to risk a licensing deal depending on future earnings!

I've seen contarcts stat stipulate that anything you think of whilst you're in the employ of acompany belongs to that company.

I guess Chris was just fortunate when he was negotiating with himself and managed to get that clause omitted.

Lucky break I guess!
 
The only Avocado that I know personally hasn't bothered installing, and simply seems to have lost interest since he got the results of me and my mates testing some weeks ago.

Lets say that there was some money involved :D

Honestly can´t blame that dude as I also lost the interest long time ago especially now when we know that basically nothing special is going to be in 3.2......surely I will tried out when it goes out for public/peasants like myself but I don´t expect anything anymore from CIG.....
 
Last edited:
It's truly bizzare.

If your software is so totally turbo broken that you need need to take draconian measures to stop people leaking how bad it is.

But then when it comes out of "Evocati" and it's still turbo broken - how does that even work?

It's beyond parody at this point and it looks like it's only going to go further beyond...

I remember thinking along similar lines when initially confronted with the hugely underwhelming shovelware that was 3.0 - "what, you're saying this has been through internal QA and Evocati/Tier 1 testing, and it's still this broken??"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Has there been any word from the Avocados about how 3.1 performs yet?

Well there is this jpeg from 3.1
https://imgur.com/7AQ0FVy

7AQ0FVy
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom