Star Citizen Nears $150 Million in Funding, Release Date Postponed Indefinitely

Chris Roberts’ ongoing, crowdfunded space simulator Star Citizen has ballooned into a massive project. It has now raised over $148 million in funding (thanks, NYTimes), and now more people are wondering if the game will ever see a full release.

The game’s Kickstarter was launched back in 2013 with the goal of $2 million in funding, to which he just made by raising $2.1 million – the rest came from donations on Roberts’ website, after which all subsequent funding has come as well.

To be clear, a release window was originally set for the following year, 2014, only to see the game be delayed as far as 2016. Now, the game has no release date, but Roberts is being completely open with the game’s development, having made their internal development schedule entirely public.

Despite having no release date, a playable alpha for the game is currently available to anyone who invests in the game – for at least a $45 pledge. Roberts originally had plans as far back as 2012 for the game, and wanted to launch a crowdfunding campaign for the game with a goal of $500,000. As popularity and investors accumulated, the scope and budget of the project rapidly expanded.

Many detractors of the project have pointed to its feature creep, impossible scale, A-list celebrity cast for its single player campaign (which can’t be cheap), and more. Since its original funding, Star Citizen has been split into three projects: Star Citizen, Squadron 42, and Star Marine.

While Star Citizen is the MMO chunk of the behemoth project, Squadron 42 is the single-player campaign, and finally Star Marine is a first-person shooter spinoff set within the same fictional universe.

If you’re looking to read more about the current state of the game or financially back it, head on over to the Roberts Space Industries website.

Brandon Orselli

About

Big Papa Overlord at Niche Gamer. Italian. Dad. Outlaw fighting for a better game industry. I also write about music, food, & beer. Also an IT guy.

  • Mauricio Quintero

    Elite BTFO

  • NoobSmoke

    You would literally have to be stupid to put any amount of money towards this.

  • Ephrain Estrella

    BTFO?

  • catazxy

    Its fine, I would wait until 2025 if I have to, its not like I don’t have a mountain of games to play in the meantime, as long they release the game the backers were promised.

  • Uncle Ocelot

    This just gets better and better.

  • Audie Bakerson

    That’s 750 million jawbreakers. Eddy wishes he could have pulled this off.

  • SOMEGUY7893 .

    Actually not really, it’s so big now it’s impossible for him to just run off with your money and get away with it. It’s still a bad idea if you don’t have a shit ton of extra money though.

  • Tarrasque

    There’s always suicide.

  • Some furf

    But they CAN run out of money to make this bloated, disorganised mess and end up hastily cobbling together a broken, incomplete disaster of a final product just to meet their obligations before closing the company entirely.

  • Espio419

    This thing has been one hell of a ponzi scheme.

  • 2501

    This game just keeps on giving.

  • No_Good_Names_Ever

    How is this thing still getting money?

  • Mr0303

    Maybe when this implodes people will finally see the flaws with crowdfunding, but then again I highly doubt it.

  • That is one heck of a misleading title. It’s not wrong, but the tone it gives off is found nowhere in the article. It might work better if something like “no release date currently planned” was put there instead.

  • Alex Drake

    impossible? Hahahahaha in your dreams. A fraction of that money can buy him a new identity and then he’s off to the bahamas

  • It’s a nice throwback to the start-up bubble days: software projects that would be given millions and millions by investors for years on end in hopes that they one day generate a profit, and then they just never do and completely die when people aren’t paying into the scheme anymore.

  • sanic

    I’m sure this will release the same day as the 3DS and vita versions of mighty number 9.

  • I look forward to the day when I can buy this 150 Million game for $9,99 during a Steam Sale

  • Cy

    So, is there still anyone out there that thinks this isn’t a scam, or are we done defending Roberts because he makes us feel good about being a PC gamer?

  • Verus

    how, by actually releasing?

  • G6E Beast

    Elite space courier
    Euro truck simulator space edition

  • G6E Beast

    Purely open development
    See for yourself dummy

  • G6E Beast

    I’m guessing single player for Christmas

  • G6E Beast

    Maybe when it doesn’t people will see that you can trust people sometimes

  • G6E Beast

    Where’s your proof?

  • Mr0303

    You can trust people, just not crowdfunding projects.

  • G6E Beast

    I look forward to the day where you stroke my shaft, tickle my balls and take my sweet man gravy in your mouth

  • G6E Beast

    I’ve been watching this one very closely

    It’s a very open development

    I reckon squadron 42 is at Christmas and the beta starts then too

  • Dewey Defeats Truman

    I look forward to the day where it’s in the BTA of a humble bundle.

  • doog

    Just because they have open development doesn’t mean it will ever be finished or be any fun. Also open development almost has no benefits as long as SC fans refuse to call out the feature creep and failures to deliverer on any sort of meaningful time frame.

  • Sdspecter

    I find these articles kinda misleading. There is no release date scheduled for the persistent universe. But the game listed as Star Citizen under the original kickstarter page is described as follows (copied from kickstarter):

    Real quick, Star Citizen is:

    A rich universe focused on epic space adventure, trading and dogfighting in first person.

    Single Player – Offline or Online(Drop in / Drop out co-op play)

    Persistent Universe (hosted by US)

    Mod-able multiplayer (hosted by YOU)

    No Subscriptions

    No Pay to Win

    This is now named Squadron 42, and is set for release end of this year. This is reminiscent of Roberts original game Wing Commander.

    Star Citizen is now described as the persistent universe, multiplayer portion, in the same universe. That is a work in progress with no defined release date.

    Finally, Star Marine is a module inside of Star Citizen, just like Arena Commander. Both of which are playable right now.

    So while the article is correct there is not definitive date set for the release of Star Citizen, that isn’t the whole story.

  • G6E Beast

    How long did GTAV,RDR2 and The Witcher 3 take? I guess he could’ve been done in a year but then you’d have Elite:space courier or one man’s lie

  • G6E Beast

    That’s not to mention they were trying to netcode cryengine before lumberyard hit

    Or how they paid people to make the fps module which they had to remake as it was utter garbage

  • PenguinPlayer

    I will be amazed if this is ever available for me to buy at all.

  • Neojames82

    “How long did GTAV,RDR2 and The Witcher 3 take?”

    Certainly not as long as this is going to take and not nearly is going to be as good as either of those titles.

  • Neojames82

    They’re never going to release the game that was promised.

  • Mr0303

    Doesn’t matter. The whole crowdfunding system has major issues.

  • SOMEGUY7893 .

    Yeah sure. It’s fun to pretend.

  • JoeSislack

    If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck.

  • fnd

    Which Christmas, the second coming of Lord Jesus Christ :D?

  • BlueLight

    Blow, the, fuck, out.

  • G6E Beast

    Based on what?

  • BlueLight

    Ouch, someone call the fire department. We got someone so burned, that their house burned down.

  • G6E Beast

    So no proof just an old saying

  • BlueLight

    Star citizen has been the Persistent universe, multiplayer portion, in the same universe, portion for a long while. I’m not sure how anything you’ve said solves the problem you’ve pointed out.

  • G6E Beast

    Lol this year

  • BlueLight

    It always makes me cringe when people bring up Star citizen, and how great it will be. I don’t mind hoping but don’t treat the project likes it’s not dodgy as fuck.

  • BlueLight

    Like twitter?

  • BlueLight

    Didn’t this game have 2 or 3 release dates which it has blow past?

  • Neojames82

    Based on how long it has been taking to be made. I can also look to Duke Nukem Forever to show what a long term development cycle with no set deadline ends up turning out a shitty game.

  • Neojames82

    Yup.

  • G6E Beast

    Duke nukem would’ve been amazing had it came out before the world grew up , it was the same as dn3d

    Duke was dated

  • Neojames82

    I’m pretty thankful that I never give any sort of money to this game. Granted, I had some hope for this game as well being awesome but as the years dragged on with no real progress I turned pretty cynical. Other KS gaming projects that turned out to be either no shows or terrible over the years has only made me even more pessimistic.

    Sure, there are good KS, a few I’ve even gave to and turned out pretty good. But I’m definitely more cautious when it comes to any gaming project nowadays. And this one…yeah I’m not really feeling anything positive from it. I mean, how much more fucking money do they need?! At some point man, you have to cut the damn cord and focus more on the game and stick to certain aspects and not just keep piling up the money and add unless shit.

    JUST FINISH THE FUCKING GAME!!!

  • Ephrain Estrella

    Ah, thank you.

  • Fenrir007

    Even Speedwagon is skeptical.

  • Vanni127

    nigga, just cause you wasted your money like a moron, don’t get mad that others were actually smart.

  • Crizzyeyes

    How’s that 1000 dollar spaceship for a game that isn’t released treating you?
    Have you realized that the developers can (and have) make more money than they would by actually releasing the game yet?

  • G6E Beast

    You have a few issues

    1. My ship is $70 and before release i plan on buying another identical ship and a $150 ship, the expensive one for me and the other 2 for my npcs that I’ll keep forever

    2. I’m not sure there’s even a $1000 ship, I’m sure there’s more expensive ones

    3. You are poor at writing replies with your hodgepodge writing style, go back to Elite:Space courier

  • braneman

    The star citizen anti-fanboys are the worst thing about the entire game, I want it to come out just so they will shut the hell up. If its good? Then perfect I expect to rub it in their faces exactly as much as they are whiny and smug about the game. If it’s not then they can finally move on with their lives, probably, I wouldn’t put it past them to hang onto the rotting corpse of the “150 million dollar failure” until the day they die.

  • tccboss

    This game is never going to be released.

  • sdrawkcab gnitirw

    Why do those guys do this to themselves?
    When has a project like this ever worked out?
    The crash, oh my god the crash is gonna be so good.

  • Joe_Blober

    Click bait article as indefin,itely means… no release date provided yet… not it is never coming…. indeed:
    Kickstarter for Stra Citizen end up on Nov. 2012 with a team of 12 and 6M$

    By end of 2017 it will be 5 years of development and slow team growth.
    Amazing job done so far. SQ42 Chapter 1 (solo) is expected by mid-2018. So for new comers, this is like tomorrow.
    Star Citizen (MMO) receive bigger patch every quarter or so. Expect Beta end of 2018, currently in Alpha.
    Great project with a great team and +500.000 backers.

  • Joe_Blober

    Do you realise that nobody is forced to pledge more than 35$? Do you realise that AAA games can not be made without money and 150M$ is not even enough for an MMO?
    Kickstarter for Stra Citizen end up on Nov. 2012 with a team of 12 and 6M$

    By end of 2017 it will be 5 years of development and slow team growth.
    Amazing job done so far. SQ42 Chapter 1 (solo) is expected by
    mid-2018. So for new comers, this is like tomorrow.
    Star Citizen (MMO) receive bigger patch every quarter or so. Expect Beta end of 2018, currently in Alpha.
    Great project with a great team and +500.000 backers.

  • Joe_Blober

    I look forward the day some stop shooting non sense comments… okay it will never happen :)

  • Joe_Blober

    Sure +500.000 backers all stupid but you :) This is coming in a matter of quarters. CIG is financially healthy. Keep your prophecies of Doom. You wont stop it :)

  • Joe_Blober

    CIG do have at leats a year and half of cash ahaead and full line of credit. Possibility of running out of cash by end of 2018 is not an option. And pledges keep coming by around 2M$ per month and SQ42 Chapter 1 expected by mid-2018.
    Schedule release to be provided in 2017.

  • Joe_Blober

    SC is about people. Seniors devlopers (Chirs Roberts and his seniors team) and backers. This is not average crowfunded project… and it is coming.

  • Joe_Blober

    This is coming and in very good time. SQ42 Chapter 1 by mid-2018. Keep expecting a Doom… it wont happen :)

  • Joe_Blober

    It is already released… per modules and job done is amazing.
    Kickstarter for Stra Citizen end up on Nov. 2012 with a team of 12 and 6M$

    By end of 2017 it will be 5 years of development and slow team growth.
    Amazing job done so far. SQ42 Chapter 1 (solo) is expected by mid-2018. So for new comers, this is like tomorrow.
    Star Citizen (MMO) receive bigger patch every quarter or so. Expect Beta end of 2018, currently in Alpha.
    Great project with a great team and +500.000 backers.

  • Joe_Blober

    Correct… It is even better. 2x AAA for the price of one. best deal ever.

  • Lee Walter

    Smells of click baiting……

  • BeakieHelmet

    Star Marine isn’t a separate game, it’s just the FPS matchmaking minigame.

    If you count Star Marine as a separate game, then so is Arena Commander, which means that of the 4 projects 2 have been completed.

    Plus “No release date” is a little misleading… The Alpha 3.0 open universe with landable planets and all that jazz is due for release in July. The final game has no release date, sure, but the stepping stones towards it do.

  • Only for $150M, Baby!

  • Are our Eyes Real?

    Bringing Duke Nukem as an example that long development cycles equals bad games is not fair. Duke Nukem Forever didn’t fail because it took 10 years, it failed because it changed teams over and over and over.

  • BeakieHelmet

    There are 1k and 1.5k ships, the Idris and the Javelin.

    They just require like 15 people to actually use effectively so y’know, not a good investment for normal people.

    Beyond the paying money for digital starships thing, I mean.

  • GuyGuysonEsquire

    I expect lots of fun when this releases.
    No, I’m not talking about the game.

  • Andrew Krasy
  • Andrew Krasy

    Oh, so you are just an idiot.

    Thanks for clarification.

  • Andrew Krasy

    A fool and his money.

  • RichardGristle

    I’m going to have to buy a palette of popcorn from Costco before release week.

  • RichardGristle

    I hope that came with Vaseline.

  • RichardGristle

    Duke Nukem Forever will be awesome… s-seriously!

  • dope_danny

    Gotta respect a hustle so strong the rubes actually go above and beyond to defend it on a level equal with actual cult indoctrination dependancy. Hello Games wishes they could scam this strong.

  • CoarseHock

    “Eat shit, millions of flies can’t be wrong.” [Passive aggressive smilie face]

  • Feniks

    Wow Star Citizen is reaching “Greece will pay back it’s debts” tier.

  • Feniks

    Well for 150 million dollars I’ll seriously consider it.

  • G6E Beast

    So you have nothing to say

  • G6E Beast

    Weak comment for a dumb kid begging for attention

    Daddy left you because you’re pathetic

  • G6E Beast

    I’m expecting beta and squadron 42 around Christmas

  • Rokhaiil

    …were actually smart, Derek Smart…

  • Uncle Ocelot

    Looks like there are a couple of shills in the comment section, go take your buyer’s remorse elsewhere.

  • Colt Machina

    aaah can’t wait till whole pyramid scheme flops and their cult followers feel dumbfounded. either way i say this is biggest scam in vidya history.

  • Michael Richardson

    There’s nothing wrong with crowdfunding. Investments aren’t always successful. This is the nature of the beast.

    If you want to protect yourself, don’t give your money to projects that don’t seem realistic or aren’t well-documented in terms of where they’re putting the money.

  • Tufao

    Gamers usually are fooled. But man… Star Citizen backers, specially the ones still supporting broke the guiness book of records of foolish.
    And their blindness is outstanding. They keep paying more for a project deep on a hole of failures, but keep applauding and prizing the devs, who continue to walk in the same direction, istead actually beem effective.
    Just now, they are start to hype people to buy another 270 dollars JPEG, for a game that should be released three years ago and grow from there, which was their actual promisse for years, when still denying feature creep.
    Now, they totally jeopardize their entire design and their ability to ever accomplishing with their original promisses, just to tey to catch up with ED or NMS or ME:A, CoD:IW. Its truly pathetic. These guys who buy the business/marketing idea of a former tickle-porn actress deserve a statue of foolishness.They ruined the whole thing because egos. This is a massive fail today and will continue to be. If not colpasing, will just be as a sort of Scientology. Serious for the few who believe, incredibly pathetic and nonsense for the rest of the planet.

  • Jumanji Joe

    Spoken like a true cultist.

  • Jumanji Joe

    Scam Citizen really makes me consider starting my own cult. There’s no shortage of people willing to throw money at stupid causes.

  • Kiryu

    The world is covered by mostly 2 things,water and idiots.

  • Neojames82

    I’ll agree with you on one point, they kept changing the engines and that was part of its downfall. But that was with the initial development team and pretty much the same team was rehired by 2K games so no, the team really didn’t change.

    You can place most of the blame on George Broussard for being an extremely incisive bastard that got a free ride for too many years without anyone checking in him and his team.

    I have no love for “Bitchford” from Gearbox either, but I’m pretty sure 2K said that they had to finish SOME sort of game.

    So yeah, it wasn’t “just” the 10 years as to why DNF sucked balls, but it was for sure a major part of its failure.

  • Neojames82

    Keep thinking that way, buddy.

  • Neojames82

    Umm, no, NONONONO, it was NOT the same as DN3D, that was the problem.

  • Neojames82

    You really sound like a fucking bot or shill for the company.

  • Tufao

    To be fair. There are just very few backers still supporting this mess at this point. The numbers that they try to show is just another false advertising.

  • Tufao

    So… Chris Roberts was lying then? He told that 20m was enough to realize all his dreams for this game.
    Besides. It has been 6 years. Chris Roberts started and promoted that worked for an year before 2012. That was directly with the objective of making people to believe that he could deliver in the two-year time period. Or are you saying that it was a lie too?

  • Kiryu

    Still but he is another guy that conned people out of their money to the point he can retire for the rest of his life.It keeps on repeating an gamers don’t learn.

  • Tufao

    Well… your solution is not really the best one considering that It’s hard when the project is actually well-documented but it’s just false advertised, as was the case of this one.

  • Tufao

    Pledges keep coming from a few nuts while the rest keeps disappointed. It’s all about keeping a show, not to deliver the game. Thanks to people that loves to pay for and praise incompetence.

  • Michael Richardson

    This one didn’t seem realistic to me, which is one reason I didn’t give them money. So it worked out fine for me.

    Even the best risk minimization strategies come with the possibility of bad shit still happening, of course. Want to not get run over by a car? Walk on the sidewalk whenever possible, look both ways before crossing a road, etc. Of course, this strategy doesn’t work 100% of the time, but that doesn’t mean it’s not sound advice.

    If you don’t want to crowdfund, then that’s your business. Acting like the only alternative to not getting ripped off is just not crowdfunding at all is in poor taste, though, akin to those conservative people who advise abstinence as a form of protection against STDs. I’ve crowdfunded multiple projects over the years and have never gotten fully burned.

  • le master trole

    :^)

    (le smiley with carat nose)

  • le master trole

    those saudi oil princes must be getting impatient by now

  • le master trole

    the most retarded consumer base ever

  • le master trole

    0.02 rupees were deposited into your account

  • le master trole

    I believe he might even >do it for free

  • Mike Hunt

    Found the guy who “invested” in several $1.5k ships

  • Mike Hunt

    I got access to it for free with a promotional scheme with my old GPU. I still have buyer’s remorse over even that.

  • Mike Hunt

    he “invested” in multiple thousand dollar ships.

  • ShootySpaceGame

    A quick and simple summary of the steps necessary to get a refund for this “game”:

    1) Create an offline copy of your hangar log and other account details.

    2) Calculate the expected refund amount. Subscriptions, tickets to events and shipped physical items are not refundable. Notice that if you have received any gifts, CIG will refund you only up to the amount you have spent yourself.

    3) Request a full refund via email. Be polite but firm. Include your RSI account name and the expected refund amount, and give them a reasonable deadline (two weeks is fine).

    4) You may receive an email asking you to reconsider. There’s no need to argue your position, simple “I would like to proceed with my refund” will do.

    5) That’s it.

    They can NOT deny your refund. Good luck everyone.

  • But it’s still in active development.

  • Tufao

    That’s not the approach that will make the crowdfunding grow and/or do not end in a big disaster as it grows.

    Just “buyer beware” is hardly enough. And that’s why the consumer authorities are jumping in, specially to clarify that consumer laws apply.

    You should listen this FTC section (including people of famous crowdfunding platforms). Pay more attention to what the FTC authorities talk about:

    https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/audio-video/video/fintech-series-crowdfunding-peer-peer-payments-part-2

    There is a video and a transcription if you prefer.

  • Forgotten One

    …and haters, don’t forget them

  • nopecat

    A couple clarifications since i see this mistake made in almost all articles regarding Crowd funding. Language is important:

    1. You don’t invest into Star Ctiizen, Definition of an investment: “Money committed or property acquired for future income.” There is no future income, you are not an investor in StarCitizen, RSI or CIG.

    2. You are a customer. You buy a pre-order and digital item. You pay tax on these items (depending on your country). You have the right to a refund at any time. If you need help getting a refund a good place to start is the refund group on reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/

  • 2501

    “This is coming and in very good time. SQ42 Chapter 1 by mid-2020.”

    Fixed that for you.

  • BeakieHelmet

    Whoa now, where are these numbers coming from? The kickstarter ended in November 2012, they spent the next year building their initial team and laying groundwork, 2014 was a lot of background work getting cryengine to do what they need, 2015 was spent getting the ship physics to work for the most part, 2016 was the first year of real content and then this year we have a pretty impressive tech demo.

    They’ve had four and a half years of development, not six, and not all of that was spent on actual development at the start. They basically took a year of prep time, and that bit them in the ass when they had to re-do a lot that they had contracted out during that time, like Star Marine.

  • 2501
  • NuclearKangaroo

    there are many successful crowdfunding projects tough

  • BlueLight

    okay?… How does that change the situation? Should i trust a developer that missed 3 release dates more, because their still in active development? Did anyone think they were not in active development?

  • Tufao

    Actually you are wrong. They didn’t start the development yet. They only will start after 4.0. Or who knows. Maybe not. Maybe they have to rewrite evertyhing then, and all the previous dev wouldn’t count too. But hopefully, by then we can start to count, and that would be something like 2019 as the start… because this, because that, because…
    /facepalm

  • Tufao

    They are not open. They just deliver marketing to people and updates that by now seems to be the usual tactic of filing an entire body full of lies with a skin of true. By the way, all this have been done because they are PAID for that, additional dollars, beyond the usual funding for the game development.

    The fact that you “reckon Squadron 42 at Christmas and beta by then” clearly demonstrates that you really have not following this “open” development too well.

    Maybe too focused on the next JPEG sale or bad jokes of their shows?

  • Tufao

    Actively milking backers you mean.

  • Klaus Reims

    The article can’t even get the basic facts straight. Clickbait.

  • Tufao

    What basic facts?

  • nopecat

    Bottom of the SQ42 page says 2017

    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/squadron42

  • nopecat

    At the Bottom of the SQ42 page it says 2017

    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/squadron42

  • nopecat

    But the bottom of the SQ42 page says 2017

    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/squadron42

  • nopecat

    Why do you lie? Bottom of the SQ42 page says 2017

    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/squadron42

  • ShootySpaceGame

    How many ships are you in for commando?

  • BlueLight

    Ah, argument from popular opinion. I mean, it’s not like large amount of people could be wrong, even when something smells rotten. I’d also like to remind people that humans tend to answer obviously wrong, if the group is doing the same thing.

    Lets take a second here a breath. Joe, you haven’t made an argument why these 500k are still justified in their backing of the project. So a project having 500k backers is pointless in deciding if a project is good. There are secondary factors from the 500k backers which could effect the quality of the project and thus reasoning for buying it, but the number on it’s own does not make a compelling argument. Nor does it shield it from criticism.

    Also for the love of god, please stop sounding like a drone. There is a reason why people say this game has created a cult. You’re not helping it.

  • BlueLight

    @Joe_Blober:disqus I know that Star Citizen isn’t an average crowd funded project. On average, i’d say those get finished. :^)

  • BlueLight

    Sure he could. He could create companys to off his company services, and to slow siphon off funds. Then he declares bankruptcy. He no longer needs to finish star citizen, and has a boat load of cash.

  • G6E Beast

    DN3D was a lame childish game same as DN F

    We grew up dude

  • Mr0303

    Not really – it’s still a crowdfunding campaign with all the flaws of that.

  • Mr0303

    Oh, there’s plenty wrong with crowdfunding.

    Backers take all the risks and have 0 control over the project. The devs on the other hand reap all the benefits of non accountable funds and free publicity.

    Not only that, but there is absolutely no benefit in pre-purchasing a game like so. Often times a physical copy after the dev has acquired a publisher will be much cheaper than the Kickstarter equivalent pledge (if it existed at all at the time).

    So no matter how careful the potential backer is (even following all the advice written above), there are no protections or safeguards for him, which could inevitably lead to disaster.

  • Jedensuscg

    All you haters are just tools that know NOTHING at all about game development. You do realize it took almost ten years to make Wow? And well over five years and more money then Star Citizen has raised so far to make GTAV… And those were from established studios who didn’t have to spend over a year just building a full scale development team. You know all AAA studios develop their games in secret for YEARS before they even make mention of it. So in the grand scheme of things, and considering the scope of the planned game, SC is right on track. The only thing to be considered pandering was Chris Roberts way to generous release windows.

  • Mr0303

    So? Does this somehow negate all the issues with crowdfunding?

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    What is it about games about space exploration that always turn into over budgeted bombs?

  • nopecat

    Space! The final Frontier….

  • TheOnceAndFutureKing

    These are the never ending crowdfunded scams of the starshit enterprise

  • NuclearKangaroo

    no, but it proves there are also benefits with crowdfunding

    its just another way to fund game development, since you cannot always get a good publisher

  • Neojames82

    “We grew up dude”

    Love when people said they “grew up”…whenever I read that, it means that they are some sort of snobbish tight asshole, which you probably are. Lame and childish game?! Umm no, it was one of the corner stones of FPS.

  • Mr0303

    So if your position is that it benefits the developer, then I absolutely agree. The developers get all the benefits from crowdfunding. With the current system they don’t really need to put an effort to find a publisher – if the Kickstarter is successful it is quite likely that they’ll pick one.

  • G. H.

    The prototype of the Fig.co business model.

  • G. H.

    In isn’t an investment if there is no potential for higher return of funds. It is a pre-order that has gotten completely out of control. This will only get worse with the new unaccredited investors rules.

  • braneman

    I think the cult is called “anti-fanboys” and they seem to shout louder than any Star Citizen supporter I’ve seen. You think you guys are going to start protesting outside their offices or apply for a tax exempt status first?

  • streetdaddy

    Even if the game never goes gold, I’ve gotten far more than my money’s worth from watching the game dev journey and giving the maker of one of my all time favourite games a chance to try and realise his dream. All for the measly sum of what, $40? Seriously, how poor are you people?

  • Fear Me I Am Free

    Do people really think this is still going to come out? Seems like they scammed a bunch of people and are now pissing away the money. This is like Tim Schafer on steroids.

  • Fear Me I Am Free

    Star Citizen backers.

  • Joe_Blober

    So what?

    For Readers Nopecat is an Anti-SC troll jumping on every SC article to shoot some scam and vaporware. What he try to sy in his comment is that SQ42 is still planned in 2017 on official site.

    Great. Then he will say CIG lie because it will be pusched a bit more… because what backers want is quality not release on a date just because it is on a site. What I said is this, it is not a lie but an expectation: But Nopecat like to twist things.

    Qoote: “By end of 2017 it will be 5 years of development and slow team growth.
    Amazing job done so far. SQ42 Chapter 1 (solo) is expected by
    mid-2018. So for new comers, this is like tomorrow.”

  • Joe_Blober

    Quote:” ssomething smell rotten”

    Find again you and a very few guy smell things when +500.000 and growing smell something… the point is you pretend to be right. fine. Keep your rotten smell if you want. It wont stop the train man :)

    Why should I provide an argument beside that 500K people and GROWING are wrong while your point is just to say: it smell rotten”… and tbhnhey are wrong because they are many :) what an argument man!

    Really stop acting like a drone. Sound like an haters cult.

  • Joe_Blober

    People pre-ordering games have the same risk. IT can be total crap. People in crowfunding should never participate higher than what they can affor or more than the basic package price.

    CIG did gather such amount because we can see what they dekiver and this done by seniors guys you always deliver… but yes crwofunding have flaw… because this is a human activity.

  • Palonto

    Wow, the smart goon squad is out in full force. I think it is cute how they rush in and defend their master. Almost Cult like. I think it’s more disturbing seeing people spend so much time on hating a game than fans who love the game.

    Any way, him loosing another Alt account on Reddit must have stung.

  • Joe_Blober

    To Readers, what Andrew Krazt want to say with a boat picture is creating obfuscation and say: “‘Scam, Vaporware”.

    Antri-SC trolls did already shoot everyrhing possible about Chris Roberts: “he bought a boat, an island in Pacific, a resort in some exotic area….” al of course with backers money. What you see in video are just Jpges… this is a scam, there is no game in developement… hte 428 team is a scam… and so on, :)

    The most fun is that around July, backers will be able to walk on surface of moon/planet… something that was impossible a year ago as per the same trolls… and SQ42 Chapter 1 is coming in the next coming 12 months….

    By the way Backers can play/test three different modules (Arena Commander, Star Marine, Persistent Universe) all scam… backers brain have been washed out by CR’s magic wand :)

    All fubar, all not being real :)

  • Joe_Blober

    Star Citizen is not a cause… this is just a game and the only guy able to deliver is CR and his team. Not because he is God… but because he always deliver while Publishers are only interested by spending 50M$ to develop a game and keep the 100M$ as profit.

    Backers are the real winner, not CR.

  • Joe_Blober

    Ahhh Tufao… welcome man.

    To Readers. Here is Tuao’s theory:
    10.000 wales (his word) have provided most of the 148M$ :)

    Without surprise, Tufao as well as some well known trolls, have been FiRED years ago by CIG for being toxic, as well as of many forum…
    Meanwhile, we are closer from SQ42 relase that ever…. (count 12 months from now)

  • Joe_Blober

    To Readers: How to recognize a Tufao rantin? Wall of text.

    You can copy/paste this text since the last 4 years.

    Scam, vaporware, Jpges… already 4 years back.

    Lies and obfuscation. End of kickstarter was Nov. 2012 (tteam of 12 and 6M$) hence 5 full years in Nov 2017.

    And here have a look about numbers. Those able to understand them can clearly see the increase of team together with pledges…. try to make a AAA with 12 guys :)

    NUMBERS:
    – Employees count:

    2012 Nov. end of Kickstarter: Team of 12
    2013: 48 (Austin: 34 – LA: 14)
    2014: 161 (Austin: 55 – LA: 38 – Manchester: 68)
    2015: 258 (Austin: 57 – LA: 41 – Manchester: 132 – Frankfurt: 28)
    2016: 363 (Austin: 54 – LA: 64 – Manchester: 191 – Frankfurt: 54)
    2017: 428 (April)

    – Pledges chart:

    2012 end of Kickstarter: goal was 2M$. They got 6M$…
    2012: 7M$
    2013: 35M$
    2014: 68M$
    2015: 104M$
    2016: 140M$
    2017: 148M$ (April)

    – Citizens count (not he Backers count which is estimated to +500.000 individual)

    2012: 103.000
    2013: 340.000
    2014: 705.000
    2015: 1.150.000
    2016: 1.700.000
    2017: 1.796.000 (April)

    In short everything is fine.

  • Joe_Blober

    Yes sure. Tufao’s theory is that 10.000 whales have pledged 148M$…… and growing… :)

  • Joe_Blober

    Great. NAd this is now 3 years and half that a few troll are talking about FTC… and FTC did answer to a backer:” we have not doing any investigation about CIG”….

    :We all know you hate SC Community for being Banned form it because of you toxic level.. How long it is since CIG did banned you for harrassing team?

    You can call FTC about that :) Good luck

  • Joe_Blober

    Backers will be able to walk on moon/planet size surface around July…. wxhta a mass of Jpges is it supposed to be. :)

  • Joe_Blober

    Backers can participate to the development for as low as 35$. Everyhting else is free ingame…. try harder.

  • Joe_Blober

    That anti-SC trolls are going tojump on comments section and spread their prohecies of Doom, proven false every seingle year. Scam, vaporware, Jpges, Con… keep up men… You like so much try to destroy rather than built something.

    Haters are sad people with mostly terrible IRL experience but well, human kind is made also of them…

  • Joe_Blober

    Unless the quality is not there and it needs another quarter or two… backers do not care about a firm release date. This good for EA, not crowfunding

  • Joe_Blober

    Pretty low level troll but if that make you happy and thinù this is 1% believable by ramdom Readers… keep going :)

    50.000$ of new pledges… per day during a week with No events except showing ATV’s which do provide precise visual insight on what team are working on for next aptch (around July) and SQ42 Chapter 1….
    This is coming and not in years but a bit more every day. Next 12 months= + 24M$ and 100.000 thousands of new backers. That is reality not “this is the ennnnnnd……” fiction from anti-SC trolls :)

  • Mr0303

    “People pre-ordering games have the same risk.” – you can cancel your preorder, but you can’t revoke your pledge.

    “People in crowfunding should never participate higher than what they can affor or more than the basic package price.” – in my view people shouldn’t crowdfund at all until the system is changed.

    “but yes crwofunding have flaw… because this is a human activity.” – that’s just avoiding the issue and this doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be criticised.

  • Mr0303

    I think that the proper advice we should give to people is explain the issues with crowdfunding in general. Once they understand them, they’d free to waste their money.

    Your car example assumes that there is nothing wrong with the cars in question and that the drivers aren’t drunk or out to kill you, which is not sound advice when dealing with Kickstarter.

    Using your sex example this would be the equivalent of people not using a human slave prostitution ring – sure, you may not get STDs, but the whole system has problems.

  • Joe_Blober

    Quote:”but yes crowfunding have flaw… because this is a human activity.” –
    that’s just avoiding the issue and this doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be
    criticised.”

    Well if you want to remove all risk from all human activities…. this is called Communism. One voice (which is “supposed” to be the voice of citizens… but is not most of the time because ten choose for millions), one project…. or capitalism with “investors”. You take risk you win… or lose. Capitalism with rules protecting consumers are of course great, but you can’t ever have zero risk. Even with crowfunding, what happen if 30M$ are spent… but so badly spent that at the end you have a broken product or no product… you can sue but your money is gone.

    This is why you have no game crowfunding that reach level of SC.

    Because of Who initiated the project. And CR and his brother ALWAYS (not a cult but facts) deliver…. zero risk? no… but none in term on zero product. Delays? yes as the amount of pledges expand, the project as well.
    Is the result going to please everyone? No. In fact no way. the more people, the more divergente views… but at least with CR you will have something memorable (the good way). Guarantee.

  • Joe_Blober

    No CR did not lied… But you lie.
    Not 6 years but 5 on Nov. 2017
    Second project scope changed with backers approval… except your own and this is why you troll SC section since 4 years and have been banned form CIG, the first nab in CIG historat, congrats! for being toxic toward staff and COmmunity.

  • ShootySpaceGame

    Where does Smart come up in this article or the comments? You’re just bringing him up out of nowhere lmao.

  • Palonto

    Hahahahaha you are so funny. Just read the comments. They are all copy’s of his word salads.

  • Mr0303

    “Well if you want to remove all risk from all human activities…. this is called ” Communism.” – for one thing this is not communism and I never suggested that I want to remove risk from human activities. I’m just pointing out how flawed is the entire crowdfunding system. Ironically crowdfunding is closer to communism where the people fund your project rather than you using your own capital and business skills to do so.

    “but you can’t ever have zero risk.” – again I never suggested that. The issues with Kickstarter are so many that the risk is unreasonable to take, especially given that there is no gain at the end other than a product you might like.

    I am not talking about Star Citizen, but rather crowdfunding in general. You keep bringing it in to white knight for it, but I honestly don’t care.

    ” Guarantee.” – you can’t guarantee anything with such projects.

  • ShootySpaceGame

    Everyone on the outside knows this game is a money pit even if they’ve never heard of Derek Smart. It’s just self-evident. If you think all of the people in these comments are avid readers of his blog than you vastly overestimate his popularity.

  • SevTheBear

    Let’s hope it’s worth the wait

  • Palonto

    1. Sure mate, quoting his blog = not reading is blogs right got it.

    2. You got evidence to back your claims? Dont think so.

    Go and spin your did somewhere else I got a good site for you.

  • Shattno

    Dude, you wouldn’t recognise communism if it fucked you up the ass with a coke bottle.

  • Shattno

    You contradict yourself. Yes wow took a long time to develop and gtav cost a lot, yet these guys, who are less experienced, claim to be able to make a similar game faster and for less money. If that’s not a red flag, I don’t know what is.

  • Joe_Blober

    “gaurantee” 100%… no it is not possible, but 99.99% that the ending will be benefit to backres, yes… based on who is driving it.
    Give the budget to some one I wont name to not make him advertising, and you can be 99.99% sure he will f;;;k up backers at large :)

    You are not wrong far to be but so far, talking about SC, there is no way backers can expect such game if CR is not making it. As simple as that.

  • Neojames82

    Funny how you didn’t deny the allegations that he bought all those things with the backer money.

  • Joe_Blober

    Thanks for your poetry. It is fun that people will strong certainty use often object in sexual activities… well. Use coke bottle as you wish man :)

  • Joe_Blober

    The sum of erxperience between CR, his brother and all seniors developers at CIG his at least equal to the biggest studio.

  • Neojames82

    Your poor grammar and sentence structure alone ruins a lot of your credibility in my eyes. It makes me believe you are some sort of forgien counter troll/shill for CIG and not even a legit backer of the game.

  • Shattno

    It’s fun that certain people can’t write coherently. (I have no idea what you are trying to say.)

  • Joe_Blober

    Quote from Shattno:”Dude, you wouldn’t recognise communism if it fucked you up the ass with a coke bottle.”

    I replied to your words man… Pain is even make you blind to your own words you write just 2 hours ago? :)

  • Joe_Blober

    That will happen. Same for all games on Steam from Ubisoft, EA and others publishers. Yours 9.99$ will be welcome :)

  • Shattno

    Of course I understand it was a reply. I was referring to your abysmal grammar, it makes it nearly impossible to understand what you are writing.

    “people will strong certainty use often object in sexual activities”
    What does that even mean?

  • Joe_Blober

    Okay I got it. You use sexual wording because you have a hard time understing a typing error “will” instead of “with”. Comment edited.
    .
    I have no time to waste trying to explain anything as my grammar is to opaque for you….. and you prefer to avoid the subject about the fact you associate someone talking about comunism with ” bottle in the ass”…

    Please show to Readers how your exemplary grammar do make this thread interesting :)

  • Mr0303

    “there is no way backers can expect such game if CR is not making it.” – yes, there is – multiple Kickstarter projects proved that statement wrong already. Look at Mighty No. 9.

  • Joe_Blober

    Facts is a successor to Wing Commander have never been made in 20 years… and CR is doing it since 4 years.
    So in theory thousands of developers could make it… but only one is doing it = CR

  • Shattno

    Wow. All I’m saying is I have a hard time reading your comments because your grammar is all over the place, but it’s fine, this is shitposting on the internet, not writing a PhD thesis.

    And I don’t “associate someone talking about comunism with ” bottle in the ass””.
    The “coke bottle up the ass” thing is a fairly common saying, but you could exchange it for “hit you over the head with a frying pan” if that’s more to you liking.

    My point was that your description of communism was inaccurate and oversimplified, and I tried to convey that with a joke but it clearly flew over your head. Whatever.

  • Joe_Blober

    Thanks so much Shattno for your clear exlplanation. May be I am the only one to have missed the point between:
    – bottle in the ass
    – a joke
    – a point made to formulate that a description of communism was inaccurate and oversimplified

    Next time… may be try to avoid joke… at least when you see me around :)
    Some people are good at telling joke, some are hard to get them or both.

  • Joe_Blober

    Thanks for fixing something which does not need it.

    An official schedule release is going to be provided by CIG later in 2017. Readers will have an official answer not for two guys exchanging smiles on a comment thread :)

  • Jedensuscg

    But they have hired the talent to do so, including hiring many Crytek developers, experienced developers from other studios, opening three fully studios, and developing the tech needed as they go along. So many studios barely want to innovate any more because it’s too “risky”, and gamers bitch that we get the same Call of Duty every year, or copy paste Wow wannabes and even MA:Andromeda was just a rehash of every other open world game that has come out in the last 5 years. And a company wants to genuinely try something new, has the money to do it, and has shown the desire to do so as well and people expect them, no wait from these comments people WANT them to fail. WTF. If it was a scam would they have 300+ full time employees in three studios? That is a lot of paychecks, a lot more than most scammers would be willing to fork out if they never intended to finish something. I have played the Alpha and what is available is impressive even with the faults in it. I only bought the minimum $35 ship back in 2013, which is a single movie night with my wife and there is no guarantee the movie will even be enjoyable. Now Spending $1,000 might seem WAAAAY to much for me and you, but to some people a grand is their version of $35 bucks. Whatever, it’s their money and if it helps my measly $35 investment pan out, I thank them, not belittle them.
    Am I upset the game is plagued with delays, ya, but I’m also excited at the expanded scope, especially the jobs system. Now I have yet to play Star Marine (the FPS aspect is not really my cup of tea).

  • Joe_Blober

    Anti-SC are mainly guys who have IRL trouble with $…. :)

    35$ (even 5$ in fact) is enough to become backer. One of the +500.000 backers who already joined this project and keep coming by thousands every months… Or are you joining Tufao with his theory of “10.000 whales pledging up to 148M$”? :) Even better, I quote him from his latest comment: “They didn’t start the development yet”…

    This guy is very entertaining while we backers are playing/testing 3 modules and close to walk on moon/planet (something that was impossible ar per the same troll) around July….

    Give us more please :)

  • 2501

    I don’t expect it to be the end, i expect it to be a mess of epic proportions. A game with this level of ambition and lack of coherency is never going to be released on schedule. Roberts is a dreamer, not a game developer.

  • Joe_Blober

    Why do you want me to deny? Do you think that pretending that CR is part of an alien conspiracy or an Illuminati member need to be denied? The fact for average Readers, that you say such total non sense does show you as you are: a hater doing its daily hating job.

    Keep hating man if that make you feel good, but do not expect average Readers to follow you :) Indeed new bacekrs are coming every day despitye not having a fully release game. You can’t stop the train man :)

  • Joe_Blober

    Nice try. Do you feel okay with your own reasoning?:
    – poor grammar = not a legit backer

    Are you serious or is it just what you have to shoot as an “argumentation”? :)

    Do you realsie that Readers passing by will read ours two comments and have a clear vision of who is trolling? The best grammar we may throw in won’t compensate a twisted reasoning man… :)

  • Shattno

    It’s an idiom. It goes by the pattern “You wouldn’t know (X) if it (did something horrible to you)”.
    The coke bottle thing is from veep http://flavorwire.com/582347/the-50-best-insults-from-veep-season-5/6 (point 29)

  • Joe_Blober

    Your call 2501. You can expect what ever you want. You see it based on comments from some who have an official agenda against anything CR can do vs articles on internet which are closer from click bait than journalism and backers who have a partial vision.

    In short, I disagree with you. The project is fully under control and coherent.
    Still 12 months to come and I think every body of the three above category will be able to tune down their words.

  • Joe_Blober

    Thanks for the link.

  • Mr0303

    Not an argument and completely irrelevant to the discussion. I told you many times – I don’t care about Roberts or Star Citizen, but even then the situation is analogous to MN9.

  • Tufao

    And you lie… again…Project scope changed with backers approval BECAUSE Roberts told that more money would make the game coming faster. And stretch goals wouldn’t delay the game fully functional released, things would come later.

  • Tufao

    Walking on planets is not impossible. There are games doing that for decades now. But with the proposed level of fidelity and the constraints of been an MMO for millions to play, thousands in an instance, plus all mechanics proposed, the expansion to planets simply jeopardized all that, their ability to ever complete all that was promised and lead to people, for example, to spend 2500 dollars in one single capital ship.
    Walking on moons, in a tech demo that never will realize all these things is not really impossible. But just that is not what Star Citizen was meant to be and should be released three years ago (oh well… that was a lie too, a bait).
    They just are doing these thinga to approach to NMS, ED, specially considering that they can’t ever release the promissed game with the promised mechanics and 100 systems on launch.

  • Joe_Blober

    Fine… in that case why not asking NicheGamer to open a thread about crowfunding… because the article is about Star Citizen :)

  • Joe_Blober

    You have prove of nothing except your own reading about events that every body but you read it differently.
    Your understanding of event is by no mean a proof… :)

  • Tufao

    #notacult

  • Joe_Blober

    For Readers who can and want to read numbers that provide light about why and how SC evolved since end of Kickstarter Nov. 2012:

    Everything Tufao said aresituations… he read from his own angle, I.E. what do you expect from a guy banned (the first ban in CIG history) 4 years ago and running to every SC article to shoot scam, vaporware and Jpges… :)

    – Employees count:
    2012 Nov. end of Kickstarter: team of 12
    2013: 48 (Austin: 34 – LA: 14)
    2014: 161 (Austin: 55 – LA: 38 – Manchester: 68)
    2015: 258 (Austin: 57 – LA: 41 – Manchester: 132 – Frankfurt: 28)
    2016: 363 (Austin: 54 – LA: 64 – Manchester: 191 – Frankfurt: 54)
    2017: 428 (April)

    – Pledges chart:
    2012 end of Kickstarter: goal was 2M$. They got 6M$…
    2012: 7M$
    2013: 35M$
    2014: 68M$
    2015: 104M$
    2016: 140M$
    2017: 148M$ (April)

    In short everything is fine and coming in the enxt quarters.

  • Joe_Blober

    I am not part of any cult, on internet or IRL. But if I should be part of one I will choose the cult of those who built something and not those who enjoy destroying.
    Meanwhile thousands of new backers are joining SC Community every week. Sounds like toxicity is the most shared ambition on this planet :)

    The train is usntoppable not because I say so but because the project is coming to fruition.
    Keep trying Tufao… this is entertaining :)

  • Mr0303

    Star Citizen is one of the poster projects for crowdfunding and thus has the issues I mentioned attached to it.

  • Keystone

    “Really stop acting like a drone. Sounds like an haters cult.”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

  • Zanard Bell

    I’m enjoying the shitposting in this article. Didn’t know Star Citizen could generate that much hate.

  • Zanard Bell

    Their ongoing mission: to scam strange rubes, and idiot civilizations…

  • Marc-Antoine Guillette

    false, to make the trailer and everything the yhad to start working on the project one entire year early

  • Marc-Antoine Guillette

    he never made a single game and barely know how to use a pa

  • Marc-Antoine Guillette

    read about sunk cost fallacy

  • Marc-Antoine Guillette

    money is not infinite

  • Marc-Antoine Guillette

    crowdfunding doesn’t mean they can do what they want and not give anything, there are laws now to protect backers of a scam and they will likely be sued

  • JCTXS

    this case is a very good example of bad crowdfunding. As you stated, the backers took the risk and have 0 control to where they aren’t even getting what they wanted originally.

  • You would care if it was coming to PS4. ;)

  • Mr0303

    Not really. This is not the type of game I like. Try again, fanboy.

  • NuclearKangaroo

    as a customer, its hard for me to argue i dont benefit from the existence of games like FTL, Undertale and Valdis Story, which i really enjoy

    sometimes publishers simply will not pick up your game, i mean a couple of years back youd have had a hard time convincing anyone CRPGs are worth a damn, but now they are having a slight resurgence thanks to kickstarter, it was proven there was a demand there that publishers did not see

    its true backers have little guarantee their games will be released properly, you are at the whim of the devs, and this is one aspect crowdfunding must seriously improve, however to argue its an irredeemable model is plain wrong, and many good games have come out of it that probably wouldnt have seen the light of day otherwise

  • No need to be salt you Sony fanboy. I am not interested in the game either as I hate MMOs.

  • Mr0303

    “its hard for me to argue i dont benefit from the existence of games like FTL, Undertale and Valdis Story, which i really enjoy” – you may argue that you benefit from the existence of said games, but this doesn’t mean you benefited from the crowdfunding campaign.

    “however to argue its an irredeemable model is plain wrong” – I think that in its current form there is not incentive to give money to any project. If you are at the mercy of the devs, then it’s not a good system.

    “many good games have come out of it that probably wouldnt have seen the light of day otherwise” – “probably” is a weasel word and you know it. Every good game could’ve been released without crowdfunding.

  • NuclearKangaroo

    “you may argue that you benefit from the existence of said games, but this doesn’t mean you benefited from the crowdfunding campaign.”

    most of those games wouldnt exist, atleast not in their current form, had it not been for their crowdfunding campaigns

    “I think that in its current form there is not incentive to give money to any project. If you are at the mercy of the devs, then it’s not a good system.”

    the incentive is to get the game made

    “”probably” is a weasel word and you know it. Every good game could’ve been released without crowdfunding.”

    Obsidian were going through some very rough times before their PoE campaign, i dont believe they had the cash to spare to get the game made, is also very absurd to argue the devs of FTL simply had 200k dollars lying around, and we know FOR A FACT that Undertale’s scope was much smaller before its successful KS campaign, Shovel Knight’s dev also barely managed to finish their game, despite their very successful KS campaign, how do you expect me to believe they couldve released the game without the crowdfunding campaign?

  • Mr0303

    “most of those games wouldnt exist, atleast not in their current form, had it not been for their crowdfunding campaigns” – how can you possibly know that?

    “the incentive is to get the game made” – that’s not an incentive considering that the game may not be to your liking at all for whatever reason.

    “how do you expect me to believe they couldve released the game without the crowdfunding campaign?” – for one thing you don’t know the finances of the developer, what money they have in store and how much they use on a given project. There are also multiple ways to obtain finances for a project – the traditional publishing route is one way and another would be taking a loan. Of course why do the latter and take the risk and responsibility for the success of your project on yourself when you can do so with other people’s money?

  • Clayton Weaver

    As a hobbyist game dev, the minute they announced the game fracturing into three games I knew it was screwed. It’s difficult enough to finish one project from beginning to end, but making it so you are having three ideas floating around in your head, you might as well be trying to shoot lightning out of your ass because that would be more possible than finishing three games at once.

  • nopecat

    It’s not expected mid 2018. According to the Official game homepage it is expected in 2017. I think the developers know better than you Mr.Blobber.

    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/squadron42

    I will ignore the rest of your unintelligible babbling because people can clearly see you are a nut job.

  • NuclearKangaroo

    “how can you possibly know that?”

    simply by looking at the evidence

    https://www.kotaku.com.au/2015/07/how-kickstarter-saved-obsidian/

    (pardon the shitaku link)

    https://www.gamespot.com/articles/shovel-knight-devs-went-five-months-without-pay-ga/1100-6421540/

    at the very least here we have two games that almost certainly couldve not been developed without kickstarter, the devs simply did not have the resources for it

    “that’s not an incentive considering that the game may not be to your liking at all for whatever reason.”

    then why the fuck are you backing it? i mean it sure is hard to predict the quality of a product, but if you like the idea, you throw money at it cuz you want to see the product finished

    “for one thing you don’t know the finances of the developer, what money they have in store and how much they use on a given project. There are also multiple ways to obtain finances for a project – the traditional publishing route is one way and another would be taking a loan. Of course why do the latter and take the risk and responsibility for the success of your project on yourself when you can do so with other people’s money?”

    well i provided a couple of links that describe the financial situation of two of these devs

    do you seriously expect the bank to give you a 4 million loan just like that? besides a kickstarter can help you be sure about the public interest in your product, because sometimes publishers are right, and some products are simply not in high demand, but sometimes they are wrong and a good way to see that is via crowdfunding, if enough people are willing to give you millions just to have your game made, then you can be sure theres a market for it

  • Mr0303

    So for the two citations you provided it’s the devs saying that they couldn’t do this without crowdfunding, so all you have is their word on it. Not to mention that Yacht Club didn’t actually say that they couldn’t have done this without KS.

    “then why the fuck are you backing it?” – that’s the point – you don’t.

    “i mean it sure is hard to predict the quality of a product, but if you
    like the idea, you throw money at it cuz you want to see the product
    finished” – and again – there is no incentive to do that considering you can judge the product once it’s already out.

    “well i provided a couple of links that describe the financial situation of two of these devs” – both of those links were simply their word on it. Sure, they can be telling the truth, but you can’t know for sure.

    “do you seriously expect the bank to give you a 4 million loan just like that?” – there are multiple banks, so they can take multiple loans (also why 4 million – that seems quite a high price for a game). They can also use their savings, mortgage their houses and so on and so forth. The point is that there are other perfectly reasonable ways to obtain money other that crowdfunding.

    Yes, the KS campaign is used as a marketing boost. Publishers have realised that and this is why they are putting games that they are publishing on there to “prove interest” and save money on marketing (not to mention get some unaccountable finances). Also most of the games that get in the millions already have a proven market – they are usually from big name developers and are spiritual successors/direct sequels.

  • Scruffy, the Janitor

    I backed this game. It was a mistake. Luckily it was only $20. This game is never gonna be released and if it is, it will be another No Man’s Sky. It was a sham.

  • NuclearKangaroo

    “So for the two citations you provided it’s the devs saying that they couldn’t do this without crowdfunding, so all you have is their word on it. Not to mention that Yacht Club didn’t actually say that they couldn’t have done this without KS.”

    ok what more proof do you expect? who else, besides the dev, knows about the financial situation of their company?, their stories add up too, yacht club shared info about how the money was spent, and microsoft did cancel an obsidian RPG

    “that’s the point – you don’t.”

    but what if i want the game to get made?

    “and again – there is no incentive to do that considering you can judge the product once it’s already out.”

    well thats certainly what i do, but the product wont get made if nobody supports it, so there is an incentive

    “both of those links were simply their word on it. Sure, they can be telling the truth, but you can’t know for sure.”

    yeah well, like i said, their stories are convincing, they shared some extra details that do give them legitimacy

    “there are multiple banks, so they can take multiple loans (also why 4 million – that seems quite a high price for a game). They can also use their savings, mortgage their houses and so on and so forth. The point is that there are other perfectly reasonable ways to obtain money other that crowdfunding.”

    4 million is what obsidian got for Pillars of Eternity and even that is pocket changed compared to what AAA studios get

    i dont see how you consider possibly bankrupting yourself and mortgaging your home, “reasonably”

    i mean you expect the dev to go bankrupt or worse, end up hopelessly indebt just to release one game, can you tell me with all due honestly that normal people get bankrupt for supporting a game on KS?

    your proposal also has other issues, if the dev underestimates their developing time, like 90% of KS devs do, they can end up in some deep shit, with a game yet unreleased and still unable to pay their loans

    “Yes, the KS campaign is used as a marketing boost. Publishers have realised that and this is why they are putting games that they are publishing on there to “prove interest” and save money on marketing (not to mention get some unaccountable finances). Also most of the games that get in the millions already have a proven market – they are usually from big name developers and are spiritual successors/direct sequels.”

    and yet being a spiritual successor does not guarantee success, just look at The Evil Within, the failure of Mighty No 9 also arguably proves capcom was right when they decided not to support Keiji Inafune

    i consider that, getting a publisher or not after a successful KS campaign is irrelevant, because the objective of the KS campaign was accomplished, the game will get developed

  • Mr0303

    “who else, besides the dev, knows about the financial situation of their company?” – nobody and that’s my point. You can’t possibly know their financial situation and whether they need crowdfunding.

    “but what if i want the game to get made?” – you are free to spend your money however you wish, but giving to a KS campaign doesn’t guarantee anything other than the fact that the team you are giving to will produce a game.

    “well thats certainly what i do, but the product wont get made if nobody supports it” – that’s not true. There were plenty of games released way before crowdfunding is a thing.

    “like i said, their stories are convincing, they shared some extra details that do give them legitimacy” – that’s you trusting them. I personally don’t trust people on their word alone, especially when money is involved.

    “4 million is what obsidian got for Pillars of Eternity and even that is pocket changed compared to what AAA studios get” – so? Then they won’t make AAA games. I don’t see the issue here. Indie games were a thing before crowdfunding and they’ve worked with much smaller budgets.

    “i dont see how you consider possibly bankrupting yourself and mortgaging your home, “reasonably”” – this is called taking a financial risk. If they are smart about it they won’t go bankrupt.

    “can you tell me with all due honestly that normal people get bankrupt for supporting a game on KS?” – no, where have I suggested that? This doesn’t mean that the risk should be on the backers. The creators should take responsibility for their project.

    “your proposal also has other issues, if the dev underestimates their
    developing time, like 90% of KS devs do, they can end up in some deep
    shit, with a game yet unreleased and still unable to pay their loans” – well, though! This is how business works. How many great studios were closed because a game underperformed?

    “and yet being a spiritual successor does not guarantee success, just
    look at The Evil Within, the failure of Mighty No 9 also arguably proves
    capcom was right when they decided not to support Keiji Inafune” – and yet MN9 had an incredibly successful KS campaign. Doesn’t that tell you something? Perhaps that nostalgia is easily abused and that crowdfunding gives people the illusion that they can revive their once favourite franchise.

    “i consider that, getting a publisher or not after a successful KS
    campaign is irrelevant, because the objective of the KS campaign was
    accomplished, the game will get developed” – it is relevant since the publisher can dictate to the dev what should and shouldn’t be in the game, how the DLC will be handled and so on. Not to mention KS campaigns that already have a publisher from the get-go.

  • Kiryu

    This is the biggest scam ever,you have to be stupid to not notice it.

  • Joe_Blober

    Thanks for the link but I already shared it in the past with some of yours buddies :)

  • Joe_Blober

    Pretty low level. You must try harder if you want to stand out from the crowd of Anti-SC trolls :)

  • Joe_Blober

    Thanks for rushing in open door. Beside 10 trolls and alts, nobody see this project as a scam.
    The more free week-end, with Alpha modules, not a game right?, bring thousands more backers and on average 2M$ per month. A project predicted by a famous clown to collapse in… 2015

    This is coming and troll will switch to a new target. In the emantime we can have fun with them, jumping everywhere at every ATV’s… :)

  • NuclearKangaroo

    “nobody and that’s my point. You can’t possibly know their financial situation and whether they need crowdfunding.”

    ok then basically it doesnt matter what anybody says, you will only say “but what if they are lying”

    their stories add up

    “you are free to spend your money however you wish, but giving to a KS campaign doesn’t guarantee anything other than the fact that the team you are giving to will produce a game.”

    actually more like they’ll TRY, but thats kinda the point, some people are willing to take that risk if the pitch is good

    “that’s not true. There were plenty of games released way before crowdfunding is a thing.”

    and there were also many that got cancelled, and many devs that were closed down

    in the end, the inescapable reality, is that we have more games with crowdfunding than without it, that alone implies the system can useful

    “that’s you trusting them. I personally don’t trust people on their word alone, especially when money is involved.”

    yeah well theres not much to gain from lying well after the campaign is over

    besides like i said, its not their word alone, yacht club broken down how the money was spent, Obsidian mentioned they hit rough times after Microsoft cancelled their game and they had to layoff staff

    https://www.giantbomb.com/articles/report-obsidian-hit-with-layoffs-unannounced-proje/1100-4033/

    its hard to imagine their financial situation was amazing at that time

    there is enough circumstantial evidence to give some legitimacy to their claims

    “so? Then they won’t make AAA games. I don’t see the issue here. Indie games were a thing before crowdfunding and they’ve worked with much smaller budgets.”

    you asked “also why 4 million – that seems quite a high price for a game”, i explained why 4 million and i mentioned how thats actually not a lot

    “this is called taking a financial risk. If they are smart about it they won’t go bankrupt.”

    “no, where have I suggested that? This doesn’t mean that the risk should be on the backers. The creators should take responsibility for their project.”

    one party risks extra money, the other risks their entire livelihood and their homes, dont you believe you are perhaps asking devs to take unreasonable risks?

    besides id argue those devs that chose to take the crowdfunding route were smart about it, they gathered a budget and were also able to measure customer demand at the same time

    “well, though! This is how business works. How many great studios were closed because a game underperformed?”

    and how is this good?, i believe more than a couple of people wouldve preferred to still have Troika around

    “and yet MN9 had an incredibly successful KS campaign. Doesn’t that tell you something? Perhaps that nostalgia is easily abused and that crowdfunding gives people the illusion that they can revive their once favourite franchise.”

    i have never denied crowdfunding can be abused, but it can also provide great games, MN9 was a failure but most people were satisfied with Pillars of Eternity, Divinity Original Sin, Shadowrun (or atleast the sequels), Shovel Knight, FTL, Valdis Story, etc

    “it is relevant since the publisher can dictate to the dev what should and shouldn’t be in the game, how the DLC will be handled and so on. Not to mention KS campaigns that already have a publisher from the get-go.”

    as long as they keep their promises to backers, its alright, as for KS campaigns with publishers already, like i said, as long as the game gets made, its fine

  • Joe_Blober

    Great! You got 2x AAA for a quarter of the price. Lucky man… This is coming… 5 years on Nov. 2017 starting from scratch with 12 guyes and 6M$.
    SQ42 Chapter 1 schedule release is coming later this year. Trust me, the sham is to follow those who wake up in the morning to hate and destroy. Let troll hate… this is their way of life :)

  • Joe_Blober

    You can say whatever you Nopecat.. I expect it to be mid-2018. If CIG can do it for end 2017 great. In the meantime they will provide a schedule of release for SQ42 Chapter 1.
    The date on web site is not engraved in stone and will evolve as required by development. 2017 today… mid-2018 tomorrow :)

    You know it but as usual you try your troll Anti-SC trick to shoot: “look they lied.. it is delayed!” … except that in such AAA project a delay is not the end… but his called ongoing developement.

  • Mr0303

    “ok then basically it doesnt matter what anybody says, you will only say “but “what if they are lying”” – yes. That’s the point. There is no way of knowing if they are lying or not.

    “in the end, the inescapable reality, is that we have more games with
    crowdfunding than without it, that alone implies the system can useful” – there is no way of knowing that – those games could’ve been created without crowdfunding. Also it is useful for the developers, but not the backers who have 0 control over the projects.

    “one party risks extra money, the other risks their entire livelihood and
    their homes, dont you believe you are perhaps asking devs to take
    unreasonable risks?” – well devs reap the rewards of the game and this is why they should be the ones taking the risks. Plus as I said they could always approach publishers or find other methods. It’s called being a good businessman.

  • Faux

    The money thing doesn’t seem strange to me – world of Warcraft was developed on a $200 million dollar budget. GTA V was $265. $150 million is a lot for crowdfunding, but not for corporate funding of games generally.

    The actual development time doesn’t seem strange to me. Development times vary wildly from game to game, but in general games with new gameplay features or technology modifications tend to take longer – 6-9 years is not uncommon for complex new games, though call of duty can generate a new version in a year or two. GTA V was a mix of assets and game design components from previous GTA games and that took 5 years to develop. The idea that I’m not going to see this game until 2019 (which is what I personally expect) doesn’t bother me.

    The issue for me has been the dishonesty. There are a lot of good marketing reasons to keep up a brace face and pretend like schedules aren’t slipping, but when the game is crowdfunded the players want to be treated with respect. That hasn’t always happened.

    The new trend toward complete transparency is a good one. I can watch as their schedule progress (or regresses) weekly based on the issues they face. I’m intrigued by how they plan on fixing the netcode issues – if they can’t then I think this will all end up being a very fancy, very empty universe. But if they can then the game will be something special. I’m content to sit back and wait, given that my expectations are measured against other, similar delivered games.

  • Meittimies

    Church of Scientology got a serious contender from this one.

  • NuclearKangaroo

    “yes. That’s the point. There is no way of knowing if they are lying or not.”

    theres no way to know they are lying either, and like i said, theres some circumstantial evidence in their favor

    “there is no way of knowing that – those games could’ve been created without crowdfunding. Also it is useful for the developers, but not the backers who have 0 control over the projects.”

    some of these games literally failed when pitched to publishers, if you think a dev is going to mortage their house to fund their game, thats just absurd

    the system is also useful for customers who get new games to play and the lucky backers of successful kickstarters

    “well devs reap the rewards of the game and this is why they should be the ones taking the risks. Plus as I said they could always approach publishers or find other methods. It’s called being a good businessman.”

    so if your games doesnt fail you get to keep working, if you fail, you lose your company and your house, how is that a reasonable risk? seriously under this structure is it surprising many good old studios shut down and their workers split? very few people is going to risk so much for so little, most will simply choose to work somewhere else

    i dont see how having your customers fund your game is not being a good businessman, they made a good pitch, they reached to their customers directly, they delivered a good product and made a profit, sounds like good business to me

    “this is the nature of the free market.”

    and kickstarter is not capitalism? besides for many of these old games, the market barely got to choose anything, some of those old devs were screwed by terrible publisher decisions, Troika is a prime example

    “the point is that even massively successful campaigns can flop, which perfectly exemplifies the issues with the system. As for the good games there is not guarantee that the wouldn’t be made without it.”

    likewise even the most modest campaigns can release good games, like Undertale, a game WE KNOW had a much smaller scope originally

    we have the devs themselves telling you they couldnt have made the game otherwise, we have devs like Obsidian laying off people just before their KS, theres strong evidence to claim these games couldnt be made otherwise, and very little evidence pointing towards the opposite direction

    “it’s not fine with me – if they already have a publisher then they don’t need crowdfunding.”

    like a said crowdfunding can also be used to measure demand, which makes working with the publisher much easier

  • Mr0303

    “theres no way to know they are lying either, and like i said, theres some circumstantial evidence in their favor” – in those particular cases, sure, but not in general. You can’t prove that they are lying, but the issue is that you can’t know their finances and thus their “need” for crowdfunding.

    “some of these games literally failed when pitched to publishers, if you
    think a dev is going to mortage their house to fund their game, thats
    just absurd” – then they won’t do said project – it’s up to them, but it should be their money on the line rather than random strangers’. When you are risking your own capital you’d be much more motivated to deliver.

    “the system is also useful for customers who get new games to play and the lucky backers of successful kickstarters” – with or without crowdfunding there would be plenty new games to play. I also fail to see what makes backers of successful Kickstarters lucky. How lucky were the people who backed Mighty No 9?

    “so if your games doesnt fail you get to keep working, if you fail, you
    lose your company and your house, how is that a reasonable risk?” – it reasonable because the reward is great as well – you could earn millions if your project is successful. This happens to top software businesses all the time – they are either super successful or they fail.

    “very few people is going to risk so much for so little, most will simply choose to work somewhere else” – the potential reward is far from small, but of course they are free to choose another profession if they wish.

    “i dont see how having your customers fund your game is not being a good
    businessman, they made a good pitch, they reached to their customers
    directly, they delivered a good product and made a profit, sounds like
    good business to me” – I do agree that the system is absolutely beneficial for developers and this is exactly why they are using it and I don’t blame them for that. The issue is on the backer side who get no guarantees, control over the project or protections, which is why I’m against crowdfunding.

    “and kickstarter is not capitalism?” – where have I suggested that? It
    obviously is. I just don’t like the system and how easily it can be
    exploited. Big Pharma is capitalism, but I don’t have to like it and
    it’s not immune from criticism.

    “we have the devs themselves telling you they couldnt have made the game otherwise” – again – I don’t have to take their word for it. They have financial interest to tell you exactly that.

    “besides for many of these old games, the market barely got to choose anything” – I’m not 100% sure what you are trying to say here, but if it is that before crowdfunding there was a smaller variety of games out there this is blatantly false. Most of the projects on KS emulate something that existed in the past.

    “theres strong evidence to claim these games couldnt be made otherwise,
    and very little evidence pointing towards the opposite direction” – I can give you examples of the opposite – games that we know could’ve been made without crowdfunding that do it. The recently announced project Rap Rabbit – it already has a publisher and is backed by PlayStation. For me this is a clear case that the game would’ve been made regardless of the result of the campaign.

    “like a said crowdfunding can also be used to measure demand, which makes working with the publisher much easier” – if you are already working with a publisher, then your game doesn’t need the funds. Using crowdfunding as a survey kind of invalidates the whole “game wouldn’t be made without it” reasoning. Not to mention that it becomes just another tool for the publishers to manipulate the consumer.

  • NuclearKangaroo

    “in those particular cases, sure, but not in general. You can’t prove that they are lying, but the issue is that you can’t know their finances and thus their “need” for crowdfunding.”

    i dont know their finances but a company that is forced to layoff personal is unlikely to be fine

    likewise people with jobs and disposable income are unlike to have all those thousands of dollars lying around that they end up raising in their kickstarter

    “then they won’t do said project – it’s up to them, but it should be their money on the line rather than random strangers’. When you are risking your own capital you’d be much more motivated to deliver.”

    and its ok when that stranger is a publisher? what if the dev is already in debt

    you cannot expect developers to mortgage the homes of their families to develop a video game, is completely irrational

    “with or without crowdfunding there would be plenty new games to play. I also fail to see what makes backers of successful Kickstarters lucky. How lucky were the people who backed Mighty No 9?”

    would i rather have plenty or more than plenty? more

    i wouldnt call MN9 “successful”, PoE, DoS, FTL, Shovel Knight, hell even Yooka Laylee, those are successful, judging by the customer reception

    “it reasonable because the reward is great as well – you could earn millions if your project is successful. This happens to top software businesses all the time – they are either super successful or they fail.”

    are you aware of how the game industry works? most games dont make “millions” plenty of games are merely reasonably successful, they generate enough income to keep the company running, so you are asking devs to bet their homes on the possibility that their games might be profitable and perhaps the EXTREMELY small chance that itll be actually a smash hit

    i mean just look at Frozenbyte, they developed Trine 1 and 2, two reasonably successful games, yet all it took was Trine 3 to be a failure and that seems to have completely fucked them up, just look at their lastest game, Has-Been Heroes, and compare that to the Trine series, its clear they no longer have the resources to develop games like Trine, atleast for the moment

    now at work Frozenbyte will face bankruptcy if their games keep failing, but according to you, devs should ideally develop games under the threat of being evicted from their homes, alongside their families, it is simply irrational, and i wouldnt blame anyone leaving the game industry if they had to work like that

    “the potential reward is far from small, but of course they are free to choose another profession if they wish.”

    and how does this benefit the industry in any way whatsoever? how does it benefit the free market to have less choices when it comes to games?

    “I do agree that the system is absolutely beneficial for developers and this is exactly why they are using it and I don’t blame them for that. The issue is on the backer side who get no guarantees, control over the project or protections, which is why I’m against crowdfunding.”

    then being “a good businessman” is also good sometimes? you have to be a good business man to get funding from a publisher, but you cannot be a good businessman if you get funding from your customers

    “where have I suggested that? It
    obviously is. I just don’t like the system and how easily it can be
    exploited. Big Pharma is capitalism, but I don’t have to like it and
    it’s not immune from criticism.”

    well you argue that the devs having less choices to fund their projects is ok because “this is the nature of the free market.”, but when kickstarter introduces an alternative, its not ok

    the system is not perfect but nobody is forcing anybody to fund anything

    “again – I don’t have to take their word for it. They have financial interest to tell you exactly that.”

    if you dont take their word for it, look at the evidence they have presented

    “I’m not 100% sure what you are trying to say here, but if it is that before crowdfunding there was a smaller variety of games out there this is blatantly false. Most of the projects on KS emulate something that existed in the past.”

    what im trying to say is that, in the case of say, Vampire: The Masquerade – Bloodlines, the game got completely fucked over by the publisher and its business practices, the fact such game because a cult classic years later proves there was a market for it

    “I can give you examples of the opposite – games that we know could’ve been made without crowdfunding that do it. The recently announced project Rap Rabbit – it already has a publisher and is backed by PlayStation. For me this is a clear case that the game would’ve been made regardless of the result of the campaign.”

    ok how does Rap Rabbit having a publisher proves, for instance, that Pillars of Eternity couldve been developed without one, of that Shovel Knight couldve, etc

    just because Rap Rabbit has a publisher, it doesnt mean every single KS project has one, or that every single one of them can find one

    “if you are already working with a publisher, then your game doesn’t need the funds. Using crowdfunding as a survey kind of invalidates the whole “game wouldn’t be made without it” reasoning. Not to mention that it becomes just another tool for the publishers to manipulate the consumer.”

    the game could still get made, but perhaps not with the same scope or polish, this is also an important distinction you fail to address, because like i mentioned previously, games such as Undertale, originally has a much smaller scope, so who knows, maybe it couldve been developed without KS, but its almost certain that the resulting game wouldve been much smaller and less ambitious

  • Mr0303

    “i dont know their finances but a company that is forced to layoff personal is unlikely to be fine” – actually companies resize all the time depending on the project size. This is quite common in the software industry.

    “and its ok when that stranger is a publisher?” – yes, because a publisher can hold the dev accountable for the finances, while the backers can not.

    “what if the dev is already in debt” – well that’s their problem isn’t it? Why should you support a company that is already in debt? Part of the KS money will likely go to pay said debt and not into the project. How is that a good thing?

    “you cannot expect developers to mortgage the homes of their families to develop a video game, is completely irrational” – stop being hung up on the mortgage comment. Developers are paid way above and average salary. They do have savings and the money to finance a project. If this makes it better they can mortgage their villa or 3rd apartment.

    “would i rather have plenty or more than plenty? more” – you are again working under the assumption that those games wouldn’t be created otherwise.

    “i wouldnt call MN9 “successful”” – its KS campaign was successful whether you admit it or not. It’s the 5th most funded video game project on KS.

    “are you aware of how the game industry works? most games dont make “millions” plenty of games are merely reasonably successful” – I am aware and this is why devs could consider how much they should invest in a project rather than asking money from backers from something with a huge scope that they can rarely deliver.

    “but according to you, devs should ideally develop games under the threat of being evicted
    from their homes” – no according to me devs should risk their own money
    on the project, so please stop with the bleeding heart eviction
    narrative.

    “and how does this benefit the industry in any way whatsoever? how does
    it benefit the free market to have less choices when it comes to games?” – well you can not force people to work on something they don’t like. If they are not passionate about video games then they shouldn’t be in the industry.

    “then being “a good businessman” is also good sometimes? you have to be a
    good business man to get funding from a publisher, but you cannot be a
    good businessman if you get funding from your customers” – yes, because you actually have to have something to show to the publisher, while with crowdfunding you can sell it with a little more than an idea and some concept art. You also have to negotiate how much the publisher is going to fund and what are the expected sales. If you want an example look no further than Tim Schafer – publishers got tired of his money wasting ways and yet he made an extremely successful KS. He then proved that he’s not a good businessman with his mismanagement of the funds.

    “well you argue that the devs having less choices to fund their projects
    is ok because “this is the nature of the free market.”, but when
    kickstarter introduces an alternative, its not ok” – no, I’m arguing that KS is flawed and backers shouldn’t use it.

    “the system is not perfect but nobody is forcing anybody to fund anything” – so does this mean that I can’t criticize it?

    “ok how does Rap Rabbit having a publisher proves, for instance, that Pillars of Eternity couldve been developed without one” – it doesn’t but it clearly demonstrates that games can get a publisher even before going for the crowdfunding option, which means that they don’t really need it.

    “just because Rap Rabbit has a publisher, it doesnt mean every single KS
    project has one, or that every single one of them can find onejust because Rap Rabbit has a publisher, it doesnt mean every single KS
    project has one, or that every single one of them can find one” – are you being purposefully obtuse here? I’ve never suggested that. I gave you a clear recent example where crowdfunding is being exploited rather than being vitally needed for the project to demonstrate the issues with the system.

    “the game could still get made, but perhaps not with the same scope or polish” – if they have a publisher the scope of the project is more or less fixed since the publisher is funding the lion share of the project – the KS campaign is just there for marketing, which I don’t find acceptable.

  • NuclearKangaroo

    “actually companies resize all the time depending on the project size. This is quite common in the software industry.”

    however it can also be a sign that things are not good, it gives credibility to Obsidian’s claims

    “yes, because a publisher can hold the dev accountable for the finances, while the backers can not.”

    then crowdfunding is not the problem, accountability is, which is something i agree should be improved

    “well that’s their problem isn’t it? Why should you support a company that is already in debt? Part of the KS money will likely go to pay said debt and not into the project. How is that a good thing?”

    because with KS a company might not need to get indebted with a loan in order to work

    “stop being hung up on the mortgage comment. Developers are paid way above and average salary. They do have savings and the money to finance a project. If this makes it better they can mortgage their villa or 3rd apartment.”

    i hung up on it because that was one of your proposed solutions, because bankruptcy is apparently way better than asking people for help

    “you are again working under the assumption that those games wouldn’t be created otherwise.”

    when the devs themselves tell me they couldnt make it otherwise and when i have no reason to believe they’d mortgage their homes for a 4 million loan to develop, i think its very safe to assume those game wouldnt exist

    “its KS campaign was successful whether you admit it or not. It’s the 5th most funded video game project on KS.”

    the campaign mightve been successful but the game wasnt, thats what i meant, why do you keep conveniently forgetting all the successful KS games that delivered a product that people enjoyed?

    “I am aware and this is why devs could consider how much they should invest in a project rather than asking money from backers from something with a huge scope that they can rarely deliver.”

    then we go back to the point that had it not been for KS, many games wouldnt exist in their current form or at all, since many devs may choose not to risk their company and houses on it

    “no according to me devs should risk their own money
    on the project, so please stop with the bleeding heart eviction
    narrative.”

    thats what YOU proposed

    “well you can not force people to work on something they don’t like. If they are not passionate about video games then they shouldn’t be in the industry.”

    but you are claiming people should stop doing/supporting crowdfunding campaigns, despite the fact its something people want to do

    you cant always live off passion, of someone is forced to choose between video games and feeding their family, if they choose the latter is not because of a “lack of passion”

    finally, passion or not, we are objectively worse off with less games

    “yes, because you actually have to have something to show to the publisher, while with crowdfunding you can sell it with a little more than an idea and some concept art. You also have to negotiate how much the publisher is going to fund and what are the expected sales. If you want an example look no further than Tim Schafer – publishers got tired of his money wasting ways and yet he made an extremely successful KS. He then proved that he’s not a good businessman with his mismanagement of the funds.”

    if he managed to convince publishers before he is, according to you a good businessman

    getting kickstarter funds still requires a good pitch and many idea only KS campaigns have failed

    “no, I’m arguing that KS is flawed and backers shouldn’t use it.”

    well like you said, you cannot force people to do things they dont like, if they want to back KS campaigns, so be it

    “so does this mean that I can’t criticize it?”

    i never said that, i said that, instead of trying to get rid of it, why not seek to fix it? provide some accountability

    “it doesn’t but it clearly demonstrates that games can get a publisher even before going for the crowdfunding option, which means that they don’t really need it.”

    what if seeking a publisher fails? what if the publisher asks to change too many things? what if the publisher cancels the game mid-development?, which is exactly what Obsidian experienced

    “are you being purposefully obtuse here? I’ve never suggested that. I gave you a clear recent example where crowdfunding is being exploited rather than being vitally needed for the project to demonstrate the issues with the system.”

    you said this right after saying every KS game should seek a publisher first, not every game can get a publisher, not every dev has the size to seek a publisher, and a publisher and negatively affect the development of a game

    “if they have a publisher the scope of the project is more or less fixed since the publisher is funding the lion share of the project – the KS campaign is just there for marketing, which I don’t find acceptable.”

    is a possibility, but im still not sure

  • Mr0303

    “then crowdfunding is not the problem, accountability is, which is something i agree should be improved” – that accountability issue is part of crowdfunding in its current form.

    “because with KS a company might not need to get indebted with a loan in order to work” – you are avoiding the question. Why should you support a company that is already in debt with crowdfunding?

    “i hung up on it because that was one of your proposed solutions, because
    bankruptcy is apparently way better than asking people for help” – if they are confident in their project and it succeeds then they won’t go bankrupt. It’s just a risk they take when investing their own money.

    “when the devs themselves tell me they couldnt make it otherwise and when
    i have no reason to believe they’d mortgage their homes for a 4 million
    loan to develop, i think its very safe to assume those game wouldnt
    exist” – and your assumption would be wrong. They could always make a game that doesn’t cost 4 million.

    “the campaign mightve been successful but the game wasnt, thats what i
    meant, why do you keep conveniently forgetting all the successful KS
    games that delivered a product that people enjoyed?” – it doesn’t matter how successful the game was post launch you explicitly said “backers of successful Kickstarters”. From a normal customer’s perspective it doesn’t matter if the game was kickstarted or not. I’m not forgetting the good games, but to point out where the problems are with crowdfunding I have to look at the high profile bad ones.

    “thats what YOU proposed” – I also proposed taking a loan or going to a publisher, but those aren’t very useful for your appeals to emotion, are they?

    “but you are claiming people should stop doing/supporting crowdfunding
    campaigns, despite the fact its something people want to do” – so? Some people want to be murderers. I can argue that they shouldn’t do it.

    “you cant always live off passion, of someone is forced to choose between
    video games and feeding their family, if they choose the latter is not
    because of a “lack of passion”” – yeah, video games are a very risky business. If you are not OK with that and need absolute financial stability then you shouldn’t work there.

    “finally, passion or not, we are objectively worse off with less games” – there is nothing objective about that. It was the abundance of shitty games that caused the video game crash.

    “if he managed to convince publishers before he is, according to you a good businessman” – I explicitly said that publishers dropped him when he proved that he wasn’t one.

    “well like you said, you cannot force people to do things they dont like, if they want to back KS campaigns, so be it” – sure, but I’ll point out every time exactly why they shouldn’t do it.

    “i never said that, i said that, instead of trying to get rid of it, why not seek to fix it? provide some accountability” – I suppose we agree on that part, but in its current form I’d rather it didn’t exist. Whether it can be fixed is a different matter altogether, but I don’t think developers would go for it if they were held responsible by the backers.

    “what if seeking a publisher fails? what if the publisher asks to change
    too many things? what if the publisher cancels the game
    mid-development?, which is exactly what Obsidian experienced” – your what-ifs are not relevant to the concrete example I provided, which proves that there are games the exploit crowdfunding despite already having the finances.

    “you said this right after saying every KS game should seek a publisher
    first, not every game can get a publisher, not every dev has the size to
    seek a publisher, and a publisher and negatively affect the development
    of a game” – where have I said that “every KS game should seek a publisher
    first” – please cite the exact words that I used.

  • Harbinger73

    In January 2015 Chris Roberts himself put the number of employees working on the project worldwide at over 300 whilst live on stage at Pax South:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iS9ZJe2V4VY&feature=youtu.be&t=790

    The upper value is muffled but the lower value is definitely 300.

    Official figures for February 2015 made public at Citizencon 2015 later that state that there were just 205 employees in February 2015:

    http://i.imgur.com/RlGRTBJ.png

    Either they let 100+ employees go within the space of a month or the more likely scenario is they simply omit external contractors from these totals to support the argument that people like to make that they were in fact spending less money on staff remuneration in the early days.

    BTW: I’m honoured that you added me to your list of “trolls”. I’d rather be labelled a “troll” than a sheep (such as yourself) who believes every piece of propaganda coming out of CIG and rushes to their defence whenever it’s integrity is challenged.

  • Joe_Blober

    The list of numbers are as precise as possible. I won’t argue about diference from one slide to the others, the goal is to compare: Dates vs Pledges vs team numbers.
    That provide an idea about how CIG evolved since Nov. 2012…. for those really looking to understand current situation.

    Better than shooting 6 or 7 years of developement… and omitting to provide numbers that do show no company on Earth would have provided AAA with such ressources trend.
    But who care right cause it is just a scam on top of Jpges? :)

    Meanwhile we are coming closer quarter after quarter of major patch for SC and a schedule release for Squadron 42 Chapter 1.

    Backers are there to built something… and this is unstoppable :)

  • Harbinger73

    “But who care right cause it is just a scam on top of Jpges? :)”

    Either you believe that or you’re trying to put words into my mouth. Which is it?

  • Tommy Meliet

    holy shit, how much are they paying you?

  • Tommy Meliet

    what are these 428 people actually doing?

    Its literally impossible for that many devs to be working on a game simultaneously.

  • Joe_Blober

    Quote:”Its literally impossible for that many devs to be working on a game simultaneously”

    This is Gold :) its like you said “It is impossible for 10.00 Ford’emloyee to work on the same car simultaneously”…. This is called division of labor, each one working on a piece based on competence.

    Terrible low level troll but so fun for Readers… :)

  • Joe_Blober

    Tommy clearly you missed the main point: in crowfunding backers are paying devs… :)

  • Joe_Blober

    Thanks Kiryu. At least I learned something. On Earth there are two things Water and idiots. Who care about trying to be provide well considered reply…

    I Tell you a secret. There are more than two :)

    But being a troll yourself (you did write scam and more in this comment section) Readers do not expect much from you. Keep thinking as you: black or white. Hot or cold. Your IRL experience is going to be a festival of disenchantment…. :)

  • Joe_Blober

    You should not expect a result on a precise date whatever the amount. With 50M$ more that wont speed up release. Of course you could here 300 more but fire them after 2 years? That not how it should work for a long term MMO. Better have a smaller but robust team.

    Looking at numbers, those in capacity to read and more important, understand them can see CIG by no mean worked at full speed during 5 years but only 2 years and half at best. No even talking about creating full pipelines for creation of ships and huge game engine rework. SQ42 Chapter 1 schedue release will be provided later this year. everything is fine… no need to rush for Christmas :)

    – Employees count:

    2012 Nov. end of Kickstarter: Chris Roberts and around 10 people 🙂
    2013: 48 (Austin: 34 – LA: 14)
    2014: 161 (Austin: 55 – LA: 38 – Manchester: 68)
    2015: 258 (Austin: 57 – LA: 41 – Manchester: 132 – Frankfurt: 28)
    2016: 363 (Austin: 54 – LA: 64 – Manchester: 191 – Frankfurt: 54)
    2017: 428 (April)

    – Pledges chart:

    2012 end of Kickstarter: goal was 2M$. They got 6M$…
    2012: 7M$
    2013: 35M$
    2014: 68M$
    2015: 104M$
    2016: 140M$
    2017: 148M$ (April)

  • Joe_Blober

    I love that one: “those conservative people who advise abstinence as the only viable form of protection against STDs”
    This is so true. But funnier is guys like Tufao and few trolls are not selling abstinence but they want people to act like they think it must be done and nothing else. Following the same idea, that would give: “You have to practise only missionary position everything else is forbidden”

    That why guy like Tufao get banned from CIG 4 years ago, the first in CIG history! Just because he was toxic with staff and community to implement realistic immersion: Forbidden usage of Teamspeak if people was not in the same nebula… and so on… since he is banned, his Precious game become suddendly a scam, vaporware and Jpges… a sad guy… but there are indeed very few and most important, the developement is coming to fruition a bit more every quarter.

  • Joe_Blober

    You should change of job man. Dividing tasks as never been the beginning of the end but a well known strategy to improve usage of ressources. Mr Taylor did it already a long time ago.

    It is indeed the best move, as well as switching to Lumberyard and Vulkan.

    SQ42 is going to be released in three Chapters, hence before Star Citizen (MMO). Schedule of release later this year. This not the end but the beginning man.
    Both games sharing assets from each others. Each providing funds to each others (sales + pledges) with a unified team working under one direction.

    About trying to shoot lightning out of your ass… in case you do not known, this is not the purposes of CIG and backers pledging 2M$ on average every month despite the project being screwed up according to some well known genius shooting their prophecies of Doom.. since 2015….

  • Joe_Blober

    Quote: “id anyone think they were not in active development?” Beside a few trolls… no

    CIG is receiving on average 2M$ of new pledges every single month despite having no special events. Facts is that people not aware of SC do jump in and even more will come at time of SQ42 Chapter 1 release (expected mi-2018 as per my own vision of current situation)… which is amazing fro a company starting with a team of 12 in Nov. 2012 and 6M$

  • Joe_Blober

    And for those still not aware about the Smart clown… he is an indie dev who is at open war againt Chris Robert since two decades. Pretty incompetent dev who always (and I mean always) fu…. up gamers with unplayable crap, while CR gathered 148M$ (nd growing) based on his past acclaimed Wing Commander series.
    Some trolls (around 10 + alts) are rushing every SC article to copy/paste the clown ranting. That is the short explanation but in all seriousness, the guy is in need of psychological counselling :)

  • Joe_Blober

    Read about: sctrollsdump.wordpress.

  • nopecat

    I am not saying anything. CIG is saying 2017 on the GAME HOMEPAGE: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/squadron42

  • NuclearKangaroo

    “that accountability issue is part of crowdfunding in its current form.”

    again, that implies the system should be improved, not discarded

    “you are avoiding the question. Why should you support a company that is already in debt with crowdfunding?”

    thats because i consider the question irrelevant, you probably should support a company indebt via crowdfunding, but crowdfunding can help a company not get in debt in the first place, thats the point i was trying to make, that asking for loans isnt a magical solution that will solve everything

    “if they are confident in their project and it succeeds then they won’t go bankrupt. It’s just a risk they take when investing their own money.”

    there is such think as an unreasonable risk, and betting your house on a game is exactly that

    having confidence in your product means jackshit when theres no market for it, and a crowdfunding campaign can atleast give you an indication of the demand for your product, the campaign it on itself gives you confidence the product can be successful, confidence based on ACTUAL EVIDENCE

    “and your assumption would be wrong. They could always make a game that doesn’t cost 4 million.”

    and it mostly likely wouldnt be the same game that was made with 4 million dollars, it would probably be smaller and much less ambitious

    “it doesn’t matter how successful the game was post launch you explicitly said “backers of successful Kickstarters”. From a normal customer’s perspective it doesn’t matter if the game was kickstarted or not. I’m not forgetting the good games, but to point out where the problems are with crowdfunding I have to look at the high profile bad ones.”

    and by successful kickstarters i meant games that delivered on their promise of a quality product, talking about backers of unsuccessful kickstarter campaigns is pointless, because they dont lose anything, if a KS campaign fails, no money is lost

    sure to a customer it doesnt matter how the game was made, only that it was made, but it probably could not have been made without KS

    cherry picking high profile failure means you might not get a proper representation of the state of kickstarter

    “I also proposed taking a loan or going to a publisher, but those aren’t very useful for your appeals to emotion, are they?”

    and i already pointed out the limitations of that

    – Loan: the bank needs to know whether you can pay back or not, so not everyone can ask for a 4 million dollar loan or some shit like that, smaller teams in particular may not be able to secure a sizeable loan without relying on yoru absurd strategy of mortgaging their homes

    – Publisher: not every publisher will take into consideration your project, specially if again, your have a small dev team, others will ask for changes that may compromise your vision

    pointing out the absurdity of your proposal is not an appeal to emotion

    “so? Some people want to be murderers. I can argue that they shouldn’t do it.”

    murdering is illegal (and no, making murder illegal is not an appeal to emotion either) supporting crowdfunding campaigns is not, how the hell do you even put both of those things in the same bag? geez

    “yeah, video games are a very risky business. If you are not OK with that and need absolute financial stability then you shouldn’t work there.”

    why you have a bit of security? dont you think more people would be willing to work in the industry if theres more security and therefore more games will get made? doesnt that benefit us in the end?

    “there is nothing objective about that. It was the abundance of shitty games that caused the video game crash.”

    why is there not a crash now then? there are far more shitty games now than ever were during the 80s i can assure you that

    thats because there are more good video games too, more products always benefit the end user, its an objective fact

    “I explicitly said that publishers dropped him when he proved that he wasn’t one.”

    after he secured funding for his games multiple times, and then secured funding from his KS campaign

    according to you, he is one hell of a business man

    “sure, but I’ll point out every time exactly why they shouldn’t do it.”

    sure, and if people respect your right to say whatever you want, then you should respect their right to support what they please

    “I suppose we agree on that part, but in its current form I’d rather it didn’t exist. Whether it can be fixed is a different matter altogether, but I don’t think developers would go for it if they were held responsible by the backers.”

    i think many still would, and like i said, im all for improving them model, but i cannot claim it should be discarded, because it already proved its value as a valid alternative way of funding your games, with plenty of successful games released

    “your what-ifs are not relevant to the concrete example I provided, which proves that there are games the exploit crowdfunding despite already having the finances.”

    and is Obsidian not a concrete example? is Troika not a concrete example

    both forms of funding have problems, which is why its important they both remain valid alternatives, so devs have something to fall on should either of them fail

    “where have I said that “every KS game should seek a publisher
    first” – please cite the exact words that I used.”

    it was the implication, you said:

    “it doesn’t but it clearly demonstrates that games can get a publisher even before going for the crowdfunding option, which means that they don’t really need it.”

    it that not implying every game should get a publisher first? otherwise please clarify what you were trying to say

  • Mr0303

    “again, that implies the system should be improved, not discarded” – no, it doesn’t imply that. It just says what the problem is. The solution is up to discussion.

    “thats because i consider the question irrelevant” – oh, how nice of you. So does this mean I can randomly ignore points that you raise, based on what I consider relevant? I’ll keep that in mind.

    “asking for loans isnt a magical solution that will solve everything” – neither is crowdfunding.

    “there is such think as an unreasonable risk, and betting your house on a game is exactly that” – so they won’t bet their house – just their own money. Simple as that.

    “and a crowdfunding campaign can atleast give you an indication of the demand for your product” – multiple other things can be an indication of the market you are targeting like the attention your game gets on websites when announced, the views and likes on the trailer and comparing your game with similar games and how they sold – you know ACTUAL EVIDENCE.

    “and it mostly likely wouldnt be the same game that was made with 4
    million dollars, it would probably be smaller and much less ambitious” – so? Defining the scope the project is part of the development.

    “talking about backers of unsuccessful kickstarter campaigns is
    pointless, because they dont lose anything, if a KS campaign fails, no
    money is lost” – what? Are you serious? Backers lose their pledge on a bad product.

    “but it probably could not have been made without KS” – probably is a weasel word.

    “cherry picking high profile failure means you might not get a proper representation of the state of kickstarter” – it’s not cherry picking. Pointing out the issues with the most successful KS campaigns clearly shows the issues, because of the popularity of said project.

    “and i already pointed out the limitations of that” – and devs could work with those limitations. One of the issues with crowdfunding is that there are no limitations on the devs.

    “the bank needs to know whether you can pay back or not” – imagine that! How horrible!

    “not every publisher will take into consideration your project” – so you go to ones that do or self publish.

    “pointing out the absurdity of your proposal is not an appeal to emotion” – I proposed that they used their own funds, but you cherry picked the mortgage statement and constructed the homeless family narrative. It was absolutely an appeal to emotion.

    “murdering is illegal (and no, making murder illegal is not an appeal to
    emotion either) supporting crowdfunding campaigns is not, how the hell
    do you even put both of those things in the same bag? geez” – the legality of it doesn’t matter. I gave an example to illustrate how just because some people want to do something doesn’t prevent me from being criticised. If you want another legal example here’s one that hopefully won’t trigger you – Some people want to be wear pants on their heads (perfectly legal). I can argue that they shouldn’t do it. Better?

    “why is there not a crash now then? there are far more shitty games now than ever were during the 80s i can assure you that” – for one, you can’t assure me of that and that’s not relevant. The point is that the “more games is always better” statement is not true and the crash is a counter example.

    “thats because there are more good video games too” – Sturgeon’s law.

    “more products always benefit the end user, its an objective fact” – you stating that doesn’t make it so.

    “according to you, he is one hell of a business man” – I told you multiple times that according to me he’s not and explicitly stated why (publishers dropped him), so I would appreciate it if you do not speak on my behalf.

    ” then you should respect their right to support what they please” – I respect their right to do so, but I do not respect their decision to do so.

    “it that not implying every game should get a publisher first? otherwise please clarify what you were trying to say” – where did you see the word “every” in my statement? What I’m saying is that games that already have a publisher when they hit KS don’t really need KS. I can not state it more explicitly – if you still can’t understand it, then the problem is with you.

  • Clayton Weaver

    Yeah, me and all the other game developers who have pointed out that this is an over ambitious project riddled with delays and the chance of release coming to fruition getting smaller and smaller; need a new job. No game, off the top of my head, has had this kind of shaky development cycle and end up releasing a game that wasn’t a let down.

    You stated changing to Lumberyard and Vulkan were a good thing. That is where even more of the doubt came from. They changed to an engine that is in beta form instead of going with a solid and tested engine like Unreal. Then picked an API that nVidia said in 2016 was more complex and maintenance burdened than OpenGL.

    You can be blindly optimistic all you want. I’ll stick to my skepticism.

    $146 million…well you what they say about fools and their money.

  • Joe_Blober

    Your wording give one big alarm in my head: either your are trolling and not a game dev or you are just terribly average at your hobby man… well nwhy not as long it does not pay your bills :)

    Calling Lumberyard a beta versus Unreal… or not understanding the benefit of Vulkan versus DX12, you missed all basics.
    Keep skepticism. You are alone…Since 5 days, CIG passed the 150M$ and growing.
    This team is good because they achieve hard stuff that can not be handle by hobby man :)
    And if you are looking how pro are doing, just have a look to this link : https://www.diffchecker.com/DumLsPCF which sum up the latest 3.0 Production Schedule Report update.
    Clearly, things are out of control :)

  • Clayton Weaver

    I said Lumberyard was in beta versus Unreal not being in beta. I had forgot that Roberts said they were making use of Amazon features which makes the other engines useless to him.

    Vulkan’s benefit versus DX12 is only that it supports Windows 7 and 8. Even Roberts stated when announcing the switch that the APIs were very similar. id Software’s game engine programmer even stated in an interview that they only switched to Vulkan for Windows 7 and 8 support. Most of the gamedev communities I’m part of just view Vulkan to be just OpenGL5.

    It’s interesting that you say I’m the only skeptic, but while researching Star Citizen I stumbled upon a post two month back by you that links to a WP site trying to combat a much more vocal skeptic. I’d say the games press are also skeptical too since SC got Wired.com’s Vaporware award in 2016.

    My skepticism comes from Roberts himself. Mine started when the story broke about how part of his team said a feature couldn’t be done, how he made them prove it couldn’t be done and worked on it for four months. Then stated that it was in the game now. That means he wasted resources for four months then turned around and wasted more resources to have a new team to work however long it took to get it implemented the second time. The $150M just makes the saying about fools and their money seem more appropriate here.

    It pains me to say that because I loved his previous games. I still love playing Starlancer, when I can get it to run without crashing after the first two missions (good old Windows Vista). I know where some skepticism comes from: SC claimed release in 2014, then got moved to 2016, and as of now is TBD. While S42 claimed release in 2015, now claims release in 2017, but with the previous delays on SC some doubt it.

    If he makes all three games then great because it means I get three new Roberts games to add to my collection. If for whatever reason they don’t come out, I still have some of his other games I can play.

  • Joe_Blober

    Got it. But CR is not alone and he is working with seniors talented people, including his brother to whom Chris asked to take the lead on Prod. That is at least a good sign about what ever happend in the past or how we can read it.
    Chris have also way more ressources than he ever dreamed about.

    And about wasted ressources, we have no insight about what have been done, not done, how much it costs and so on. Everything perfect? For sure no but ending a project without low ressources visibility (time or money), on a 5 to 7 years project (solo + MMO) with a budget changing all the time… that could drop anytime as well.. I would say good luck to take the right decision about tech pipelines, assets quality, game engine tweak and so on… And CR did made a choice.

    What CR is doing is creating the base of a tremendous game engine + pipelines focused on quality.
    I hear those saying “why not deliver something in 2015 then swith to incremental update?” That is a good question. That mean we would have the 2015 engine and pipeline, a not so big game… and CIG would have to then create what they have done today. The sum of effort would be the same and I will hear: waste of ressources. why not doing it day one with so much pledges. Double edges sword. People are Never happy :)

    CR approach is based on pledges level. You can discuss the choice and disagree, fine, but to me, I much prefer to wait more and get what they show in ATV’s. And this si coming. CIG is not going to disappear magically duringthe next year…

    You know that legally speaking, they could have delivered SQ42 with whatever “okay” level of quality, rushed mission and stuff… and run with remaining cash. CR did choose the not so easy way and so far, I am pleased about what I see.

    About time of release, you know why numbers are so important. It is on my blog. By the way it is not to fight skeptic but give to Readers a vison of what a single guy with an agenda is trying to do (you know who I am referring to). The guy ounds very smart when you read it… but was not enough smart to apply his own advices to himself… during 2 decades… lies about everyhting (he earned 200M$, then 100M$, contact FTC then did not..). Him and a few followers. Creating havoc is his single objectives. Terribly sad but true.

    Nothing to do with your type of behavior Clayton :)

    See you in the verse :)

  • Clayton Weaver

    A friend saw our discussion and noted my skepticism. So as a way of easing my skepticism he linked me to this video:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1n2OBm6hIc

  • NuclearKangaroo

    “no, it doesn’t imply that. It just says what the problem is. The solution is up to discussion.”

    if -for the sake of argument- the accountability problem is addressed, would you still have a reason to discard the model?

    thats why i said it implies that

    “oh, how nice of you. So does this mean I can randomly ignore points that you raise, based on what I consider relevant? I’ll keep that in mind.”

    ok, if i answer the question what does it add to the discussion?

    if you want my answer its no, you probably shouldnt support it, but at no point i meant to imply you should, what i meant to say is that, crowdfunding can help a company avoid being indebt in the first place, once you get indebted, things get much harder

    i didnt want to address the question because now you will quote this part of my comment and we will go on a pointless tangent

    “neither is crowdfunding.”

    thats true, but it helps to have an extra tool for funding your game

    “so they won’t bet their house – just their own money. Simple as that.”

    money they may not have

    “multiple other things can be an indication of the market you are targeting like the attention your game gets on websites when announced, the views and likes on the trailer and comparing your game with similar games and how they sold – you know ACTUAL EVIDENCE.”

    is any of that a stronger indication than customer putting their money where their mouth is?

    talk is cheap, customers can give all the likes and views they wish to a certain game, doesnt mean theyll buy it

    and while comparing your game to others in the same genre is valid, it has its own set of issues, sometimes games sell due to name recognition regardless of the genre or even quality of the game, also in some cases devs are trying to revive a genre that has not seen major releases in years, such as CRPGs before PoE and DOS were released

    “so? Defining the scope the project is part of the development.”

    if the end product is inferior, how does that benefit us?

    “what? Are you serious? Backers lose their pledge on a bad product.”

    ok you seriously dont understand what im saying, if a kickstarter CAMPAIGN fails to reach its goal, no money exchanges hands, backers lose nothing

    now if a kickstarter PRODUCT fails backers do lose their money on a shitty product

    if a kickstarter PRODUCT succeeds, everyone is happy

    so in reality in 2 out of 3 scenarios, backers either win or do not get affected negatively

    “probably is a weasel word.”

    yeah i could use the words almost certainly, since the dev claimed so and their stories add up, but you dont want to believe it

    just because something isnt certain doesnt mean its not probable, not all possibilities are equally likely and to ignore all the evidence surrounding them is mental defeatism

    “it’s not cherry picking. Pointing out the issues with the most successful KS campaigns clearly shows the issues, because of the popularity of said project.”

    and what does pointing out the advantages of the most successful campaigns prove then?

    if you truly are not cherrypicking then you must consider successful campaigns as well in your analysis, as well as the response from backers and devs

    “and devs could work with those limitations. One of the issues with crowdfunding is that there are no limitations on the devs.”

    if the dev has more freedom to work then one should expect higher quality product, if we assume the dev knows what he is doing

    “imagine that! How horrible!”

    yeah well if it means a game i want might not get made or a company i like goes under, then yes its horrible

    “so you go to ones that do or self publish.”

    how the hell are you going to self-publish without money

    “I proposed that they used their own funds, but you cherry picked the mortgage statement and constructed the homeless family narrative. It was absolutely an appeal to emotion.”

    it was not an appeal of emotion i pointed out the absurdity of mortgaging one’s own home for a video game, and the obvious implication that it affects people living in that house

    “the legality of it doesn’t matter. I gave an example to illustrate how just because some people want to do something doesn’t prevent me from being criticised. If you want another legal example here’s one that hopefully won’t trigger you – Some people want to be wear pants on their heads (perfectly legal). I can argue that they shouldn’t do it. Better?”

    oh but it does matter, because the freedom to do what you please has limitations, usually your freedom ends where other’s rights begins

    and since backing some crap on kickstarter threaten’s nobody’s rights, they can do it every day of the week if they please and you cannot do anything about it

    “for one, you can’t assure me of that and that’s not relevant. The point is that the “more games is always better” statement is not true and the crash is a counter example.”

    yes i can, its pretty easy actually

    the atari 2600 had around 565 games

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Atari_2600_games

    you just have to count all the shitty games on metacritic

    http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/score/metascore/all/all/filtered?sort=desc&view=condensed&page=141

    and if the total is greater than 565 then beyond any reasonable doubt, there are more shitty games today

    and what do you know? i counted 974 games with a score less than 50 on metacritic, granted not all of those games released recently, but then again, neither does metacritic score every game ever released, so the number of shitty games might be higher

    and if that statement is true, if there are indeed more shitty games nowadays and theres no crash, then clearly having a ton of shitty games is not a problem nowadays, atleast not one that outweights the benefits of potentially having more good games

    so yes, more games is always better, theres no scenario today in which 100 extra shitty games would make things noticeably worse, while having atleast one of those games become great is a net gain

    “Sturgeon’s law.”

    so? i can always ignore the bad stuff, its not hard

    “you stating that doesn’t make it so.”

    in what universe having more offer is bad for the customer?

    “I told you multiple times that according to me he’s not and explicitly stated why (publishers dropped him), so I would appreciate it if you do not speak on my behalf.”

    did he secure funding or not?

    “where did you see the word “every” in my statement? What I’m saying is that games that already have a publisher when they hit KS don’t really need KS. I can not state it more explicitly – if you still can’t understand it, then the problem is with you.”

    i did not see the words “some” or “a few” either, was i supposed to assume this was not a general statement despite the fact you never even hinted that?

    and what about those games that cannot get a publisher?

  • Mr0303

    “if -for the sake of argument- the accountability problem is addressed, would you still have a reason to discard the model?” – perhaps. Depends how the new model works. You are working under the assumption that the system can be changed in such a manner, which I don’t really think is possible.

    “if you want my answer its no” – was that so hard? This means that people in financial trouble are less likely to deliver a proper project via Kickstarter. That was my point that discredits the question that you posed of “what if they are already in debt?”. A developer being in financial trouble is not a good reason to back their project.

    “thats true, but it helps to have an extra tool for funding your game” – sure, but as we established its easily exploitable.

    “money they may not have” – then they should acquire some.

    “talk is cheap, customers can give all the likes and views they wish to a certain game, doesnt mean theyll buy it” – and crowdfunding just gets the super fans who are willing to prepay the game on faith alone. It doesn’t show how the wider demographic will receive the game. Even the most successful KS campaigns have around 70K backers.

    “and while comparing your game to others in the same genre is valid, it
    has its own set of issues, sometimes games sell due to name recognition
    regardless of the genre or even quality of the game, also in some cases
    devs are trying to revive a genre that has not seen major releases in
    years, such as CRPGs before PoE and DOS were released” – developers who have brains should account for all of that.

    “if the end product is inferior, how does that benefit us?” – a project with a smaller scope doesn’t mean that it’s inferior. Look at No Man’s Sky – the scope of the game is enormous and yet its quality is crap.

    “ok you seriously dont understand what im saying, if a kickstarter
    CAMPAIGN fails to reach its goal, no money exchanges hands, backers lose
    nothing” – OK, now I see what you were trying to say.

    “so in reality in 2 out of 3 scenarios, backers either win or do not get affected negatively” – if we apply the same logic to people who don’t back the game then they don’t get the negative outcome at all. It either doesn’t get created, it’s a bad game and you don’t buy it or it’s a good game and you do. Without any of the risks of crowdfunding.

    “just because something isnt certain doesnt mean its not probable, not
    all possibilities are equally likely and to ignore all the evidence
    surrounding them is mental defeatism” – I’m just pointing out that you can’t say with absolute certainty that a game wouldn’t have existed without KS since there is no way of knowing that, which always puts the underlying question of whether KS is necessary for a given project. Also there isn’t always “evidence” available for you to analyse.

    “yeah well if it means a game i want might not get made or a company i like goes under, then yes its horrible” – that’s not a valid response to what I said. The bank wanting to know if you can pay back is perfectly reasonable.

    “how the hell are you going to self-publish without money” – where did I say that the process of self publishing doesn’t require money? The implication is that the do have the money to do that.

    “it was not an appeal of emotion i pointed out the absurdity of
    mortgaging one’s own home for a video game, and the obvious implication
    that it affects people living in that house” – it was an appeal to emotion since the people living in that house have nothing to do with the discussion. You tried to humanise a method I suggesting of obtaining funds and gave it a sob story, despite me never suggesting that the house a dev should mortgage is the one he or his imaginary family the he may or may not have is the one he’s living in. People can own more than one property you know.

    “oh but it does matter, because the freedom to do what you please has
    limitations, usually your freedom ends where other’s rights begins” – the point is essentially the same so care to address my legal example?

    “and since backing some crap on kickstarter threaten’s nobody’s rights,
    they can do it every day of the week if they please and you cannot do
    anything about it” – I can criticise it, which is what I was saying in the first place. It doesn’t matter if it threatens anybody’s rights. A criminal could threaten somebody’s rights and I can’t do anything about it – I’m not the police and this is why the legality of my example didn’t matter.

    “and what do you know? i counted 974 games with a score less than 50 on
    metacritic, granted not all of those games released recently, but then
    again, neither does metacritic score every game ever released, so the
    number of shitty games might be higher” – do I really need to explain proportionality to you? I suppose I do. The Atari 2600 sold 30 million. The Metacritic link you provided has game since the PS2 era. The PS2 alone sold 155 million. If we all add all the other platforms it just shows that the market today is much bigger. If you wanted to be intellectually honest you’d looked at the leading platform of today – the PS4 (which is nearing 60 million units sold). According to Metacritic there are about 50 games with a score under 50. Do you start to see the problem of how you can’t explicitly state that there are more bad games today?

    “so yes, more games is always better, theres no scenario today in which
    100 extra shitty games would make things noticeably worse, while having
    atleast one of those games become great is a net gain” – how about I generate a scenario for you? What if all 100 of those games are from the same genre as the good one? This would mean that the good one will be drown out by them and the negative perception of all the bad ones will affect its sales.

    “so? i can always ignore the bad stuff, its not hard” – perhaps you can, but do you honestly think that the average customer is super informed about every game that comes out?

    “in what universe having more offer is bad for the customer?” – when there’s more on offer the average customer is more likely to pick something of a lower quality. See the example I provided above.

    “did he secure funding or not?” – he secured funding for his KS campaign, which I explicitly stated doesn’t make him a good businessman in my view. The only AAA game he got funding to was Brutal Legend and he mismanaged the project and ran out of money. Since then his games involving a publisher have been smaller in scope and resources until he got into the KS racket.

    “i did not see the words “some” or “a few” either, was i supposed to
    assume this was not a general statement despite the fact you never even
    hinted that?” – yes, you should’ve assumed that because of the context. Below is my statement:

    “”ok how does Rap Rabbit having a publisher proves, for instance, that
    Pillars of Eternity couldve been developed without one” – it doesn’t but
    it clearly demonstrates that games can get a publisher even before
    going for the crowdfunding option, which means that they don’t really
    need it.”

    I clearly said that PoE may or may not need a publisher and then said that games which do get one before going to KS don’t really need the funding. Since I excluded PoE from the following statement it implies that not all games follow that path.

    “and what about those games that cannot get a publisher?” – self publish. Plenty of indies do it – in fact it’s the definition of an indie dev.

  • Clayton Weaver
  • NuclearKangaroo

    “perhaps. Depends how the new model works. You are working under the assumption that the system can be changed in such a manner, which I don’t really think is possible.”

    oh i think there are certain ways to protect backers in this situation

    perhaps some sort of facilitation for class action lawsuit against dishonest KS projects

    “was that so hard? This means that people in financial trouble are less likely to deliver a proper project via Kickstarter. That was my point that discredits the question that you posed of “what if they are already in debt?”. A developer being in financial trouble is not a good reason to back their project.”

    like i said i never argued you should back one and this is a pointless tangent

    “sure, but as we established its easily exploitable.”

    certainly, but its no less valid, just like DLC is easily exploitable, doesnt mean DLC as a concept is bad

    “then they should acquire some.”

    well gee, why dont we all do that? just acquire money, its so easy i dont understand why people waste their time working at all

    “and crowdfunding just gets the super fans who are willing to prepay the game on faith alone. It doesn’t show how the wider demographic will receive the game. Even the most successful KS campaigns have around 70K backers.”

    if 70k people are willing to pay for the CONCEPT of a game, then its pretty reasonable to assume plenty of people will want to pay for the actual game, assuming its good

    “developers who have brains should account for all of that.”

    ok, how do you account for that? i mean if you want to create a CRPG, considering the genre had been dead for years, what evidence do you have the project has future?

    KS proved soundly that the genre had enough followers to be profitable, its niche for sure but the customers are there, and its unlikely that any other market research tool wouldve been as effective as KS for reaching that conclusion, considering not even big publishers believed the genre had future

    “a project with a smaller scope doesn’t mean that it’s inferior. Look at No Man’s Sky – the scope of the game is enormous and yet its quality is crap.”

    would No Man’s Sky be better if it was smaller? if instead of a billion planets it had only thousands? if instead of multiple ships it only had one? if instead of multiple materials it only had a few?

    make no mistake, a smaller scope doesnt necessarily mean the game will have a better focus, the problem with no man sky is that it was wide as an ocean and deep as a puddle, its issue could hardly be addressed by making it wide as a puddle and deep as a puddle

    i really cant imagine Undertale being better as a 2 hour long game, or Shovel Knight without playable bosses, new game+, etc

    “if we apply the same logic to people who don’t back the game then they don’t get the negative outcome at all. It either doesn’t get created, it’s a bad game and you don’t buy it or it’s a good game and you do. Without any of the risks of crowdfunding.”

    there is one negative outcome tough, a game you might want wont get made or it will have a much smaller scope

    “I’m just pointing out that you can’t say with absolute certainty that a game wouldn’t have existed without KS since there is no way of knowing that, which always puts the underlying question of whether KS is necessary for a given project. Also there isn’t always “evidence” available for you to analyse.”

    certainly its a possibility, but one that is very unlikely in certain cases

    “that’s not a valid response to what I said. The bank wanting to know if you can pay back is perfectly reasonable.”

    and im not talking about the bank, im talking about devs with good ideas and talent, or good games under their belt not having more opportunities to succeed

    “where did I say that the process of self publishing doesn’t require money? The implication is that the do have the money to do that.”

    yeah and what if you dont have it? whats so bad about pitching a game to your customers?

    “it was an appeal to emotion since the people living in that house have nothing to do with the discussion. You tried to humanise a method I suggesting of obtaining funds and gave it a sob story, despite me never suggesting that the house a dev should mortgage is the one he or his imaginary family the he may or may not have is the one he’s living in. People can own more than one property you know.”

    my point was that an absurd solution such as mortgaging your house has consequences to more people than just the dev, so its not a matter of “passion” as you poorly described, again, pointing out the implications of your solutions and pointing out it affects more than one person is not an appeal to emotion, but an appeal to reason

    “the point is essentially the same so care to address my legal example?

    I can criticise it, which is what I was saying in the first place. It doesn’t matter if it threatens anybody’s rights. A criminal could threaten somebody’s rights and I can’t do anything about it – I’m not the police and this is why the legality of my example didn’t matter.””

    whats there to address? niggas can wear pants on their heads all they want, sure you can criticize it, but to claim its immoral or that it should be prohibited is silly

    also there is such thing as self-defense, just saying

    “do I really need to explain proportionality to you? I suppose I do. The Atari 2600 sold 30 million. The Metacritic link you provided has game since the PS2 era. The PS2 alone sold 155 million. If we all add all the other platforms it just shows that the market today is much bigger. If you wanted to be intellectually honest you’d looked at the leading platform of today – the PS4 (which is nearing 60 million units sold). According to Metacritic there are about 50 games with a score under 50. Do you start to see the problem of how you can’t explicitly state that there are more bad games today?”

    ok so what is the problem exactly? the number of bad games or the proportion of bad games? cuz they are two different things and only now you are talking about proportions

    how about we look at the scores for 2016

    http://www.metacritic.com/feature/best-videogames-of-2016

    see how the platforms with more games usually also get tons of good games?

    it doesnt matter if you get a thousand shitty games, as long as the 1% of them as good, you are looking at 10 good games, you can easily ignore the rest

    “how about I generate a scenario for you? What if all 100 of those games are from the same genre as the good one? This would mean that the good one will be drown out by them and the negative perception of all the bad ones will affect its sales.”

    funny thing, Dont Starve thrives while belonging to a genre full of unfinished pieces of shit, survival games

    its Klei’s most successful game, despite the fact their other games belong to genres with better pedigree

    if anything, your scenario would only make the good game sell more, less competition

    “perhaps you can, but do you honestly think that the average customer is super informed about every game that comes out?”

    actually yes, most customers dont give a shit about what new early access crap hits steam, they really only care about what games their favorite e-celeb recommends or some shit like that

    hell in the case of steam, you pretty much have to be a complete moron to buy a bad game by mistake, the games shown to you on the front page are tailored to your preferences, they rarely include games with mixed user reviews or worse and there are even curators recommending shit

    you need to go out of your way and dive into the garbage pile and find some terrible game

    “when there’s more on offer the average customer is more likely to pick something of a lower quality. See the example I provided above.”

    granted he is even aware that product exist, most shitty games dont have any publicity, and what little they get is usually bad

    “he secured funding for his KS campaign, which I explicitly stated doesn’t make him a good businessman in my view. The only AAA game he got funding to was Brutal Legend and he mismanaged the project and ran out of money. Since then his games involving a publisher have been smaller in scope and resources until he got into the KS racket.”

    he actually led 3 successful crowdfunding campaigns and even co-created his own crowdfunding platform, which has already received major projects such as Pillars of Eternity 2, Wasteland 3 and a new game by Jullian Gollop

    is he still not a successful businessman?

    “I clearly said that PoE may or may not need a publisher and then said that games which do get one before going to KS don’t really need the funding. Since I excluded PoE from the following statement it implies that not all games follow that path.”

    it could also mean that every game should try to seek a publisher before going through kickstarter

    not ill be fair to you, upon reading you statement again, it seems its not impossible that you were only talking about a few games, i wont do the disservice of putting words in your mouth so ill take your word for it

    fine, but games that already have a publisher can still benefit from crowdfunding, it is perhaps not the best approach, but it still has benefits, and if anything, shouldnt that give backers a bigger reassurance that the project will get developed?

    “self publish. Plenty of indies do it – in fact it’s the definition of an indie dev.”

    not always an option, already explained, sometimes theres no cash, it could lead to a smaller scope, etc

  • Mr0303

    “perhaps some sort of facilitation for class action lawsuit against dishonest KS projects” – I don’t think this would work, since I doubt most backers would bother.

    “like i said i never argued you should back one and this is a pointless tangent” – no, it wasn’t pointless. As I said a developer being in trouble is not a good reason to back their project. It is an important point since you constantly bring Obsidian as an example.

    “certainly, but its no less valid, just like DLC is easily exploitable, doesnt mean DLC as a concept is bad” – yes, but just like KS most of the time DLC is bad and people should be weary of it. If a system us exploitable more often than not it will be exploited.

    “well gee, why dont we all do that? just acquire money, its so easy i dont understand why people waste their time working at all” – I never suggested that it’s easy and working is the way to do it.

    “if 70k people are willing to pay for the CONCEPT of a game, then its
    pretty reasonable to assume plenty of people will want to pay for the
    actual game, assuming its good” – that’s two assumptions in a single statement – not a great start to base your business predictions on. Some of the bigger KS projects like MN9 and Yooka-Laylee weren’t exactly best sellers when they hit the stores.

    “ok, how do you account for that? i mean if you want to create a CRPG,
    considering the genre had been dead for years, what evidence do you have
    the project has future?” – analyse the sales of the last similar game in the genre and base you predictions on that – most of the people who played it aren’t dead.

    “would No Man’s Sky be better if it was smaller? if instead of a billion
    planets it had only thousands? if instead of multiple ships it only had
    one? if instead of multiple materials it only had a few?” – it may have been better if it was smaller – instead of simulating an entire universe have a thousand planets and a bit more variety in the gameplay. The large scope doesn’t always help the game. Some developers become more creative when they work under limitations.

    “there is one negative outcome tough, a game you might want wont get made or it will have a much smaller scope” – I don’t count those as negative outcomes. A painting you might have liked not being drawn is not a negative outcome since you can’t say for certain if you’d have liked it. I’ve already addressed the scope issue.

    “and im not talking about the bank, im talking about devs with good ideas
    and talent, or good games under their belt not having more
    opportunities to succeed” – then you are changing the subject. You know perfectly well that I said “How horrible!” in reference to the bank having reasonable demands on its loans. Please be intellectually honest.

    “yeah and what if you dont have it? whats so bad about pitching a game to your customers?” – this is not pitching a game to your customers, this is taking advantage of them and KS as a whole. Just to be clear – I’m not judging developers for using crowdfunding – I’m saying that the system is easily exploitable and that there are always other options to get your game out there.

    “my point was that an absurd solution such as mortgaging your house has
    consequences to more people than just the dev, so its not a matter of
    “passion” as you poorly described, again, pointing out the implications
    of your solutions and pointing out it affects more than one person is
    not an appeal to emotion, but an appeal to reason” – as I said before – you invented the whole family narrative. You assumed that the dev will mortgage the house he and his imaginary family live in. This is why it was an appeal to emotion. You have no idea how many people it will effect, but if it affected more, especially his poor family makes a perfectly reasonable business move sound absurd.

    “sure you can criticize it, but to claim its immoral or that it should be prohibited is silly” – I never suggested that crowdfunding was immoral or that it should be prohibited. Just that I wish it didn’t exist.

    “ok so what is the problem exactly? the number of bad games or the
    proportion of bad games? cuz they are two different things and only now
    you are talking about proportions” – the problem is that you claim that there are more shitty games today, which you can’t possibly know. Your initial example used platforms that are dead and thus their games weren’t relevant. Yes and the proportion is important. Your claim was that more games is always a good thing, but if most of those become crap it could negatively affect the market like with the crash, which is why I used it as an example.

    “it doesnt matter if you get a thousand shitty games, as long as the 1%
    of them as good, you are looking at 10 good games, you can easily ignore
    the rest” – you are assuming you can always find out which are the good ones and the rest can be easily ignored. If the 10 games in question are competing with a 1000 bad ones the latter will inevitably affect their sales.

    “if anything, your scenario would only make the good game sell more, less competition” – that’s simply not true. If somebody already played 10 bad survival games and he was faced with a decision whether to buy another one he’s less likely to do so since he can’t be certain of the quality of the product.

    “they really only care about what games their favorite e-celeb recommends or some shit like that” – that doesn’t imply that they are super informed.

    “hell in the case of steam, you pretty much have to be a complete moron
    to buy a bad game by mistake, the games shown to you on the front page
    are tailored to your preferences, they rarely include games with mixed
    user reviews or worse and there are even curators recommending shit” – so they are trusting the system rather than being informed themselves.

    “you need to go out of your way and dive into the garbage pile and find some terrible game” – not really. How about when you go in a store and have a pile of games in front of you. You need to buy one for a birthday gift. The vast majority of people won’t know if what they are picking up is any good. This is why I used the average customer as an example.

    “is he still not a successful businessman?” – he is successful, but he’s a good con-man and not a good businessman in my view. How many times do I have to repeat that?

    “fine, but games that already have a publisher can still benefit from
    crowdfunding, it is perhaps not the best approach, but it still has
    benefits, and if anything, shouldnt that give backers a bigger
    reassurance that the project will get developed?” – oh, they absolutely benefit. As I stated multiple times already developers only get benefits from crowdfunding and have 0 drawbacks. This is why major publishers are starting to exploit the system. The issue is that if they already have a publisher the project will get developed no matter what are the results of the crowdfunding and thus they don’t need it.

    “it could also mean that every game should try to seek a publisher before going through kickstarter” – no, it couldn’t. If that was the case I would’ve said that PoE could find a publisher, which I didn’t do. As I said – this was an issue with your comprehension of what I said.

    ” i wont do the disservice of putting words in your mouth so ill take your word for it” – oh how very generous of you after you did that multiple times in the previous posts and didn’t take my word for it (again multiple times) and I had to explicitly defend my own statements of being misrepresented. Thanks, I guess.

    “not always an option, already explained, sometimes theres no cash, it could lead to a smaller scope, etc” – and I already explained how “smaller scope” is not a good argument and in my view it is always an option. The requirements to release a game on Steam are quite minimal so you don’t really need all that much money to make a game.

  • wffk

    Who cares? I think 1k is ok for me… so far.

  • wffk

    u are sick man. can u just stop? walk away. If I wnt to throw my money away then u can´t stop me!

  • NuclearKangaroo

    “I don’t think this would work, since I doubt most backers would bother.”

    you dont need most backers, you only need to make punitive lawsuits easier to make

    “no, it wasn’t pointless. As I said a developer being in trouble is not a good reason to back their project. It is an important point since you constantly bring Obsidian as an example.”

    being in trouble is not the same as being indebted, and obsidian did nothing to prove they were not worthy of the money handed to them with their KS campaign

    “yes, but just like KS most of the time DLC is bad and people should be weary of it. If a system us exploitable more often than not it will be exploited.”

    i dont know if this “more often than not” is supported by actual statistics, but like i said, just like DLC the system aint bad on principle, except for certain aspects that need improving

    “I never suggested that it’s easy and working is the way to do it.”

    i dont think most people’s job can allow them to earn 4 million dollars in a month, so theres that

    “that’s two assumptions in a single statement – not a great start to base your business predictions on. Some of the bigger KS projects like MN9 and Yooka-Laylee weren’t exactly best sellers when they hit the stores.”

    and plenty of others were, besides, YL didnt do bad compared to other 3D platformers, atleast on PC

    MN9 was just trash, it doesnt matter if there is demand if the product in question cannot satisfy it

    “analyse the sales of the last similar game in the genre and base you predictions on that – most of the people who played it aren’t dead.”

    if the last similar game was released like 10 years ago, how is that supposed to be an accurate representation of the current demand on the market?

    “it may have been better if it was smaller – instead of simulating an entire universe have a thousand planets and a bit more variety in the gameplay. The large scope doesn’t always help the game. Some developers become more creative when they work under limitations.”

    heres the problem with your reasoning, you are assuming a smaller scope will lead to more polished game mechanics, however the end result may also be a smaller scope with equally unpolished gameplay mechanics, in short, a complete net loss

    a dev first needs resources before they can even THINK about reallocating these resources towards polishing the basic gameplay

    “I don’t count those as negative outcomes. A painting you might have liked not being drawn is not a negative outcome since you can’t say for certain if you’d have liked it. I’ve already addressed the scope issue.”

    so for instance if a show you like gets cancelled its not a negative outcome because you might not have liked the rest of the episodes?

    you were presented with a pitch, you liked it, you had the chance to support it to get the game made, you didnt because you thought everyone else would do it, it didnt happen and the game you wanted to see made, didnt get made, is that not negative?

    “then you are changing the subject. You know perfectly well that I said “How horrible!” in reference to the bank having reasonable demands on its loans. Please be intellectually honest.”

    well gee if you know perfectly well what im saying why do you even bother to speak with me?

    im the one who made the statement, im the one who gets to decide what i meant with it, not you, if you find something that contradicts my statement feel free to point it out and call me a hypocrite

    now that is being intellectually honest, not satisfying whatever fan fiction you wrote about me in your head

    “this is not pitching a game to your customers, this is taking advantage of them and KS as a whole. Just to be clear – I’m not judging developers for using crowdfunding – I’m saying that the system is easily exploitable and that there are always other options to get your game out there.”

    being funded via KS is not taking advantage of yoru customers or KS, is the whole point of the platform

    “as I said before – you invented the whole family narrative.”

    so devs dont have families? of course, what a completely unrealistic and
    insane assumption

    You assumed that the dev will mortgage the house he and his imaginary family live in. This is why it was an appeal to emotion. You have no idea how many people it will effect, but if it affected more, especially his poor family makes a perfectly reasonable business move sound absurd.”

    i only assumed that the thing you proposed would happen, you cannot
    blame me if your idea is bad

    did you not suggest the dev should mortgage his house? yes or no?

    “the problem is that you claim that there are more shitty games today, which you can’t possibly know.”

    yes i can, and i showed you how, if there are more shitty games today than the amount of games ever released for the atari 2600, then its literally impossible to argue that the atari had more bad games, and atleast according to metacritic, this is true

    “Your initial example used platforms that are dead and thus their games weren’t relevant. ”

    now this is a more reasonable point, however when you consider the library of games on PC, it loses all value since PC does die

    “Yes and the proportion is important.”

    its important now apparently, it wasnt when you brought this point, quantity and proportion are two different things, had you said the PROPORTION of bad games was higher bad then your argument mightve held some more water

    “Your claim was that more games is always a good thing, but if most of those become crap it could negatively affect the market like with the crash, which is why I used it as an example.”

    and what if the market doesnt give a shit? back then it was a big deal, with no way to keep customers informed in any way, these days, not so much

    “you are assuming you can always find out which are the good ones and the rest can be easily ignored. If the 10 games in question are competing with a 1000 bad ones the latter will inevitably affect their sales.”

    thats not how the market works, if i make a good burger it wont sell less just because 9 other people make shitty burgers, thats not how it works, if anything it makes my product more attractive

    (yes is a food analogy, whatever)

    “that’s simply not true. If somebody already played 10 bad survival games and he was faced with a decision whether to buy another one he’s less likely to do so since he can’t be certain of the quality of the product.”

    then why was Dont Starve so successful? it had a lower score than Mark of the Ninja and Invisible Inc, both from Klei too

    Mark of the Ninja and Invisible Inc were both stealth games, and i think there are many people out there who played 10 good stealth games, then why did these games not sell as much as Dont Starve? i mean MotN was sold FOR A DOLLAR on humble bundle and it still did not sell as much and DS, which sold 4 million, or 6 million if you count dont starve together?

    “that doesn’t imply that they are super informed.”

    they dont need to be, but as long as they are not misled into buying shitty games, which was the case back in the crash, then the chances of it happening are almost nil

    “so they are trusting the system rather than being informed themselves.”

    why do you use google instead of checking every IP individually until you find a site you like?

    besides you are assuming the system isnt a good source of information as well

    “not really. How about when you go in a store and have a pile of games in front of you. You need to buy one for a birthday gift. The vast majority of people won’t know if what they are picking up is any good. This is why I used the average customer as an example.”

    here the thing, tell me how many games on your store page have a mixed user reception or worse

    if the average consumer doesnt find these games bad, why should the average consumer worry his average consumer friend wont like em?

    besides wouldnt you want to gift your friend something thats either on his wishlist or something youve already played and know is good? see how you need to go out of your way to find something bad?

    “he is successful, but he’s a good con-man and not a good businessman in my view. How many times do I have to repeat that?”

    how convenient everyone who is successful but i dont like is not a good businessman, is a con artist

    “oh, they absolutely benefit. As I stated multiple times already developers only get benefits from crowdfunding and have 0 drawbacks. This is why major publishers are starting to exploit the system. The issue is that if they already have a publisher the project will get developed no matter what are the results of the crowdfunding and thus they don’t need it.”

    you didnt answer the question, shouldnt that give backers a bigger
    reassurance that the project will get developed?

    “oh how very generous of you after you did that multiple times in the previous posts and didn’t take my word for it (again multiple times) and I had to explicitly defend my own statements of being misrepresented. Thanks, I guess.”

    you are welcome, too bad i dont have that luxury without being accused of being “intellectually dishonest” or of pushing an “appeal to emotion”

    “and I already explained how “smaller scope” is not a good argument and in my view it is always an option. The requirements to release a game on Steam are quite minimal so you don’t really need all that much money to make a game.”

    and i already explained the flaws in your scope reasoning

    and while you dont need much to publish something on steam, the reality of the situation is that you often need resources to make anything worthwhile in any reasonable amount of time

  • Mr0303

    “you dont need most backers, you only need to make punitive lawsuits easier to make” – I don’t know about that. Changing legislation may be a lot harder than altering how crowdfunding works.

    “being in trouble is not the same as being indebted” – I never said that it was. I said that the dev being in financial trouble is not a good argument for funding their project.

    “i dont know if this “more often than not” is supported by actual
    statistics, but like i said, just like DLC the system aint bad on
    principle, except for certain aspects that need improving” – no, its not statistics – it means that if a system can be exploited, it will. DLC is a perfect example – it’s been terribly abused to the point where it carries bad stigma and birthed terrible practices like day-1 DLC, true ending DLC, cut content, season passes and microtransactions.

    “i dont think most people’s job can allow them to earn 4 million dollars in a month” – nobody says that they have to earn that money in a month and there are multiple people on the team who can all invest in the project. Also again – not all projects require that colossal amount of money.

    “MN9 was just trash, it doesnt matter if there is demand if the product in question cannot satisfy it” – that’s part of my point – since you don’t know the final quality of the product you the KS numbers aren’t an actual representation of success on the market.

    “if the last similar game was released like 10 years ago, how is that
    supposed to be an accurate representation of the current demand on the
    market?” – where did you get “accurate representation” from my statement? I said those numbers are useful to make an informed prediction. Of course devs have to scale it down. Do I honestly have to explain every step of the process?

    “heres the problem with your reasoning, you are assuming a smaller
    scope will lead to more polished game mechanics, however the end result
    may also be a smaller scope with equally unpolished gameplay mechanics,
    in short, a complete net loss

    a dev first needs resources before they can even THINK about reallocating these resources towards polishing the basic gameplay” – the problem with your reasoning is that you assume that scope doesn’t affect polish. There is such a thing in software development called feature creep – you add more functionality to the program while ignoring what’s already there. Not only that, but the bigger the game is, the more there is to polish. As for the second statement – that means that the devs are incompetent – the base gameplay is the most crucial feature of any game and they have to get it right before thinking of adding more content.

    “so for instance if a show you like gets cancelled its not a negative
    outcome because you might not have liked the rest of the episodes?” – a show that you’ve never seen being cancelled is not a loss. A show that’s already on air is a finalised product, a game on KS is not.

    “you were presented with a pitch, you liked it, you had the chance to
    support it to get the game made, you didnt because you thought everyone
    else would do it, it didnt happen and the game you wanted to see made,
    didnt get made, is that not negative?” – no, it’s not. You liking the concept is not the same as you liking the final game.

    “well gee if you know perfectly well what im saying why do you even bother to speak with me?” – can you even read? I said that YOU know perfectly well what I’M saying. That’s me giving you the benefit of the doubt. I guess I shouldn’t have done that and assumed that you are not comprehending what I was suggesting by my “How horrible!” statement, which shows your complete inability to link statements to context. Fear not – I’ll keep that in mind in the future. As for the why do I even bother to speak with you – I’m beginning to wonder that myself. You are proving it to be an exercise in futility.

    “im the one who made the statement, im the one who gets to decide what i
    meant with it, not you, if you find something that contradicts my
    statement feel free to point it out and call me a hypocrite” – will do. I sarcastically said “How horrible!” in regards to the bank wanting a guarantee that you’ll be able to pay them their money back, to which you replied “yeah well if it means a game i want might not get made or a company i like goes under, then yes its horrible” implying that the bank wanting a guarantee is horrible because a game you may want won’t be created. Then I specifically pointed out that this is not a valid response to what I said, to which you replied that “and im not talking about the bank”. So in your response to my statement about the bank you said that its demands are horrible, yet a couple of post later you state that your statement is not about the bank. So you are either being intellectually dishonest or talking about something completely unrelated to what I said, which I must say is pretty dumb.

    “being funded via KS is not taking advantage of yoru customers or KS, is the whole point of the platform” – I agree – taking advantage of your fanbase is the whole point of the platform.

    “so devs dont have families? of course, what a completely unrealistic and
    insane assumption” – some do, some don’t. You chose to invent one for sympathy points.

    “i only assumed that the thing you proposed would happen, you cannot
    blame me if your idea is bad” – mortgaging a property you own is a way of getting funds. Your assumptions were based on your ludicrous narrative of the dev doing so with the home he and his imaginary family lives – something I never suggested.

    “did you not suggest the dev should mortgage his house? yes or no?” – it is pretty obvious that I did, but considering your reading and comprehension skills I suppose I have to state it explicitly – yes.

    “now this is a more reasonable point, however when you consider the library of games on PC, it loses all value since PC does die” – why would I consider comparing a console to PC? The markets are quite different. As I suggested if you wanted to be honest about it you should’ve compared the Atari 2600 to the PS4 – the lead platform of this generation. Also what the hell does “since PC does die” mean?

    “its important now apparently, it wasnt when you brought this point,
    quantity and proportion are two different things, had you said the
    PROPORTION of bad games was higher bad then your argument mightve held some more water” – I’m sorry I assumed that you were smart enough to realise that the proportion is always relevant to the discussion (not to mention that I had to point that out when you started with the “more bad games today” statements). This is why I brought the crash as an example in the first place to counter the statement that “more games are always better”. It was implied that if the extra games are bad ones it could lead to a disaster. So just to make it clear – if the extra created games are bad, it increases the PROPORTION of bad games, which was the case with the crash, which means that more games are not always a good thing. Hopefully that’s explicit enough for you.

    “and what if the market doesnt give a shit?” – “but what if it doesn’t happen” is not an argument. The whole point is that more games are always a good thing is not true.

    “thats not how the market works, if i make a good burger it wont sell
    less just because 9 other people make shitty burgers, thats not how it
    works, if anything it makes my product more attractive” – a customer not local to the area comes on that street. The chances of him visiting your place are 1 in 10, which is lower than if there were just two restaurants there.

    “then why was Dont Starve so successful? it had a lower score than Mark of the Ninja and Invisible Inc, both from Klei too” – apples and oranges, different markets, luck and so on and so forth.

    “why do you use google instead of checking every IP individually until you find a site you like?” – Google provides a list of relevant sites. It doesn’t say anything about the quality of the content, so actually you do have to check every single one out before deciding how good they are.

    “besides you are assuming the system isnt a good source of information as well” – it really isn’t and it should be questioned.

    “here the thing, tell me how many games on your store page have a mixed user reception or worse

    if the average consumer doesnt find these games bad, why should the
    average consumer worry his average consumer friend wont like em?” – if your argument here is that most games in store are average, so the average customer shouldn’t worry about picking up a bad one, then that doesn’t really relate to what I’m saying in any way. With potentially more bad games in store the customer is more likely to pick up a bad one.

    “besides wouldnt you want to gift your friend something thats either on
    his wishlist or something youve already played and know is good? see how
    you need to go out of your way to find something bad?” – he may not have a wishlist and you may like different genres of games. Hardly going out of your way.

    “how convenient everyone who is successful but i dont like is not a good businessman, is a con artist” – now you are just straw manning my position. There are plenty of successful businessmen who I don’t like, like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, but they have the ability to run their companies well and manage resources, which is not the case with Schafer, who preys on the gullibility of his fans, which is a typical con artist behaviour. Any other logical fallacies you want to throw at me while you are at it?

    “you didnt answer the question, shouldnt that give backers a bigger
    reassurance that the project will get developed?” – I did answer the question, but considering your reading comprehension I’ll quote myself from the very bit you responded to – “the project will get developed no matter what are the results of the crowdfunding”. Backers should know that the project will get developed with or without crowdfunding when a publisher is involved from the start.

    “you are welcome, too bad i dont have that luxury without being accused
    of being “intellectually dishonest” or of pushing an “appeal to emotion”” – the difference is that I’m analysing what you said word for word and you were putting words into my mouth.

    “and i already explained the flaws in your scope reasoning” – you really didn’t.

    “and while you dont need much to publish something on steam, the reality
    of the situation is that you often need resources to make anything
    worthwhile in any reasonable amount of time” – sure, but those resources are not that much in the first place.

  • akumaburn

    There has definitely been walking on planets before.. but walking on 1/8th scale planets.. not so much… a single SC planet is larger than any other game’s maps combined. Heck I ran an experiment with my friend to check whether they are actually simulating the distance between objects and it turns out that they are.. He found me in space, with NO reference point, when i was 250,000Km away by me telling him what direction I saw his ship’s lasers fire in.

  • Jeigh Neither

    What are you talking about? You’re clearly the one with the syntax issues in that conversation. Not to mention being obviously so butt-hurt that you probably need a maxi-pad… no… a tampon; you seem like a ass-tampon kind guy…bropax

  • Jeigh Neither

    Wrong. A simple Google search reveals that there are MANY mmo titles that have been produced for a tenth of that cost.

  • Joe_Blober

    Show me one MMO with tech/scope developed by CIG… So comparison sounds a bit hard :)

  • Jeigh Neither

    I can’t find the original comment but you said nothing about a scope being involed in your original comment but they don’t cost 150 million haha, you are a cultist!

  • Joe_Blober

    Fine… and?

  • Joe_Blober

    As usual we have at least one troll spreading his hate around in comment section like ShootySpaceGame crying for refund :)

    Beside the fact refund is absolutely not a straight journey and not an obligation at all from CIG, lets Haters hate as they are good only at that.

    The more CIG provide insight with current work done (see ATV’s below) on developement of this game, the more haters become crazy :)

    Meanwhile, CIG receive on average 2M$ of pledges every month.

    In short. Great project, with a great team, fully under control with +500.000 backers and growing every single day.

    here is the latest ATV’s: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKRX0ZwzXqk

    We backers have seen prophecies of Doom (with even very precise dates…) every single year since a certain incompetent indie developer declared war against his intimate ennemy Chris Roberts. A two decades hater campaign focusing to try to hurt CR through SC Community. He failed as usual :)

    We got so much lies and attempt to offuscate readers I even made a blog (sctrollsdump.wordpress) about it, listing all lies and obfuscation. All 100% proven false!

    The team count increase by 40 more in the last 6 months… and not because some are leaving (normal turnover in industry is around 5 to 7%)

    For Readers interested in numbers that explain from where SC is coming from just have a look below. To summarize, everything is fine. Squadron 42 Chapter 1 will get a schedule release later this year (release expected mid-2018 so 5 years and half a year for a AAA starting from scratch… not bad) and Star Citizen (MMO) is receiving huge patch (full moon/planet with seemless landing and walking… in 4 K if you Graphic Card can handle it) by July this year and of course much more following.

    New backers are coming by thousands every month bringing on average 2 M$ of new pledges…CIG was supposed to collapse in 2015 according to a well informed clown :)

    – Employees count:
    Nov. 2012 end of Kickstarter: Chris Roberts and around 10 people
    2013: 48 (Austin: 34 – LA: 14)
    2014: 161 (Austin: 55 – LA: 38 – Manchester: 68)
    2015: 258 (Austin: 57 – LA: 41 – Manchester: 132 – Frankfurt: 28)
    2016: 363 (Austin: 54 – LA: 64 – Manchester: 191 – Frankfurt: 54)
    2017: 428 (April)

    – Pledges chart:
    2012 end of Kickstarter on Nov.: goal was 2M$. They got 6M$…
    2012: 7M$
    2013: 35M$
    2014: 68M$
    2015: 104M$
    2016: 140M$
    2017: 150M$ (May)

    – Citizens count (not the Backers count which is estimated to +500.000 individual)
    2012: 103.000
    2013: 340.000
    2014: 705.000
    2015: 1.150.000
    2016: 1.700.000
    2017: 1.811.000 (May)

    NOTE: Troll coming 3… 2… 1 : go ShootySpaceGame, Tufao… :)

  • NopeChris

    Borat just got schooled.

  • Harbinger73

    Strange that he continues to push the official figures to this day when white knighting on every SC article he can find huh?

    It’s almost like he wants people to believe they’ve not had hundreds of people working on this mess for years and their spending has been frugal rather than wasteful.