Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Joao

Real Name Joao   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname Comet
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Jun 12, 2007, 15:42
Total Comments 78 (Suspect)
User ID 40334
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >


News Comments > Quantum Break PC Plans; Xbox Players Unhappy
26. Re: Quantum Break PC Plans; Xbox Players Unhappy Feb 12, 2016, 14:52 Comet
 
I own a Xbox One Ps4 and PC. The reason why some fans are upset is simple to understand. Their not upset with Microsoft. Their upset with themselves.
Let's face it. The reason why many of us, including myself have bought consoles is because of their exclusive titles. The truth is, we the consumers have made a big mistake by showing companies that we value content over a device capacity. So console makers, often invest more in content than in, for instance, making a more powerful console.

As an example. If you look back at console history, back in the PS2 days for instance, a console on release could compete with the high-end PC of the time. Eventually the PC would catch up, but still if you wanted a powerful gaming machine, a PS2 was a better value.
If you look at the newest consoles, on release date, people were already building $500 PCs that could compete and surpass consoles. Now in 2016, consoles continue to cost $400, but you can build $500 PC's that are more powerful.

Now that doesn't mean PC gamers in general invest on $500 PC's. People often buy a more expensive gaming PC because they are willing to pay for added immersion FPS and so on.
But still, console makers buy hardware at a far lower price than consumers do. So if a PC gamer can build a gaming PC for $500 that can compete and surpass a console, console makers could build a console with similar performance at an even lower cost and still be profitable. Specially considering all the extra services they sell. Such as subscriptions to play online.

But console makers soon learned that if they make some great games for their consoles, they can sell more devices without risking investment on more expensive hardware. And they even make more profit since the game sales already cover the production cost. It's a win-win.

So the issue here, is that when Microsoft decides to release one of their games on both systems, some people realize that their console value was just a false perception.
That in truth, if all the great console games were on PC, they would probably not buy a console. These subset of people that bough consoles to play their exclusives and not necessarily because they like the ease of use and console experience, get frustrated.

It's just that. As I mentioned at the start I own a Xbox One, PS4 and PC. The reason why I bought consoles was precisely because of exclusives. But I always knew my consoles were not as valuable as my PC. I just accept that, and enjoy the great console exclusives because above all I like to play games. Not get in platform wars.
Besides, many of these games would never exist, if Sony for instance, didn't have to make them to sell consoles.

I played Rise of The Tomb Raider on my PC because it offered a better experience. I played Halo on Xbox because it was exclusive and the only place to play it. I will play Quantum on PC. But for instance, I rather play FIFA on my console due to the bigger console community in that game and above all because in a game like Fifa I rather play with a game controller and know that the person on the other side is also using a game controller. I know there will be great Xbox One only exclusives much like I will enjoy the great VR experiences on PC or other exclusive games like for instance, the recent XCOM 2.
I never saw PC gamers get upset when PC exclusives go to consoles.
Why? They already made a choice to sacrifice console exclusives and in turn get better experience in most games and a vast number of other titles only available on PC.
In my case, I chose to waste lots of money on this addictive hobby and bought both consoles and a good PC.

I just came to the conclusion years ago that I couldn't get what I wanted without buying all the systems. If I didn't have money to spend I would just go for my personal preference. In my case PC. For others might be one of the consoles.

This comment was edited on Feb 12, 2016, 14:58.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > CIG Demands Escapist Retraction; Threatens Lawsuit
137. Re: CIG Demands Escapist Retraction; Threatens Lawsuit Oct 5, 2015, 17:34 Comet
 
Just to show that without evidence it is really one person word vs another.
Thomas Hennessy, CIGs Videographer, commented on the latest controversy in a recent podcast interview

https://soundcloud.com/imperialnewsnetwork/innside-cig-thomas-hennessy/s-t5oor

Basically he states:
"Controversy sells either its true or not. It is sad. People are working hard and its almost like a personal attack...I would say this... If SC is a scam it is one of the worst scams ever. Because we are actually building a game. If it was really a scam why would open all these offices, hire all these people, doing all this work...It is unfortunate that sometimes headlines and controversy sells, but its not.."

Hear the interview yourselves and form your own opinions.
One thing is clear... The employees interviewed by the Escapist don't represent all other CIG employees.

How can we be sure of anything without evidence?

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > CIG Demands Escapist Retraction; Threatens Lawsuit
132. Re: CIG Demands Escapist Retraction; Threatens Lawsuit Oct 5, 2015, 17:07 Comet
 

So after reading some of the comments here I really don't understand some people.

- If CIG doesn't do anything to protect their reputation, its because they have something to hide.
- If CIG does do something, its because they have something to hide and are trying to censor the press.

What the hell?

All of the sudden we have thousands of armchair CEO's predicting how much money CIG already spent with literally no information to back their claims.

So much so, that they even completely ignore the fact that they have opened a new studio in Germany and they are hiring more people. And for some reason none of them stop for a second to consider that in order to open or rent an office they would need to prove to the real state company or the bank that they are able to comply with their financial obligations.

Look. I don't know if CIG is running out of money or not.
It is pointless to make grand predictions of success of failure without actual data to corroborate our claims.

The only thing we know is that, CIG has pushed their expected release date due to supposed development challenges.
But then again, its not like its the first game having its release date pushed for one or more years.

With that said, I'm not defending CIG. I am concerned.
My reasoning is that by the end of this year they need to have something more meaningful to show. That is, if they are planning to release some kind of game in 2016 or 2017. That wouldn't surprise me since most AAA games do take about 4-5 years to develop. But I understand the frustration of some people that expected a game in 2015 instead of 2016. I'm one of them by the way.

But release schedule changes don't necessarily mean the project is going to fail. After all most of the recent great games all suffered release delays. GTA V, Witcher 3 and so on.

Look. Evidence is what we need. Not speculation.
Right now what we have is employees in one side defending CIG and some other employees criticizing CIG.

What we do have now, is CIG apparently willing to go to court with The Escapist to clear their name.
Meanwhile, we are still waiting for a reaction from The Escapist as well as evidence from other CIG critics.

Worst of all is reading comments from some people accusing CIG for using backer money on lawsuits. So how will CIG defend themselves and prove they are innocent of the accusations being thrown at them? Is there anyway to do it other than by legal means?

Some of you claim to have all the facts.
For instance, stating the FACT that some ex CIG employees have made some serious accusations.
But how some are dismissing the FACT that some OTHER CIG employees have shared their opinions in defense of CIG.

Or dismissing the fact that although some claim CIG is running out of money, no one was able to leak a document proving that they are indeed running out of money.

Or stating the FACT that CIG has built their own mo-cap studio but not stating the FACT that they know nothing about the cost of said studio, if they were able to get a return on investment on it or not. Again yet another armchair CEO.

And you people that simply dismiss any kind of critical line of thinking towards CIG, you are as bad as these armchair CEOs.
They gave you a 2015 roadmap and missed almost every single point in it. Of course some people are concerned. And just ignoring it and have faith that CIG will deliver doesn't solve anything.

Derek is right in one thing. Accountability.

CIG needs to be accountable. But at the same time CIG doesn't need unfunded accusations thrown at them.

Don't believe in anything unless there is evidence.
I won't believe in the project success unless they can show me major progress.

At the same time, I won't believe that CIG has misused project funds or is running out of money unless there is EVIDENCE.

Stop reacting to this as if it is a political game.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Escapist Defends Star Citizen Sources
117. Re: Escapist Defends Star Citizen Sources Oct 5, 2015, 14:52 Comet
 
nin wrote on Oct 5, 2015, 08:45:
I fail to understand why people choose to believe in what a person says without any proof to back it up.

I don't give a fuck about the narcissist, but the lack of progress and an actual product is all people need to have doubt on the products success.


Definitely. That's my line of thinking as well.
It is one thing to be concerned/skeptic or whatever regarding the project. It is another to accuse CIG of committing a crime.

By the end of this year, CIG needs to have something more substantial to show. The game has been in development for 3 years.

I do understand and agree that some people expected the game to be released sooner rather then later.
But I also prefer a delayed game than a rushed one. Even if it takes a couple more years to release. After all most AAA games these days do take 4-5 years to make.

But obviously if no progress is shown people will get concerned.
I think people are willing to wait for a good product as long as they can show they're progressing at a good pace.

And that is the issue right now. Many of the components suffered delays.
So yes, I share the same opinion. I expect more results.
But I'm also willing to give them a chance to do it right as long as they can show decent progress.

What I won't do is accuse them of something without proof.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Escapist Defends Star Citizen Sources
114. Re: Escapist Defends Star Citizen Sources Oct 5, 2015, 02:57 Comet
 
Unbeliveble.

Loads of comments with nothing more than opinions with little to no documentation.

I fail to understand why people choose to believe in what a person says without any proof to back it up.

The only thing I see is people predicting failure because CIG missed the release schedule. Or predicting success because they have loads of money.

As if it was possible to predict success or failure without a closer look at the company.

AC Unity was released in an extremely poor state and no one was able to predict its failure. So much so that the game actually sold well due to its pre orders.

And then we have people analysing what Derek or CIG have written.
What is there to analyse if no one posts actual evidence?

One example of how easily people are deceived. Does anyone here knows how people found out that Sandi is Chris wife?
Because Sandi was introduced to one of Chris friends in the initial campaign livestream. It wasnt a question of being a secret. They simply wanted to keep their personal life private. In fact Chris has never shown any of his children pictures.

This was 3 years ago. Why is this so relevant now? Why didn't people complain back then?

Did they want to keep it a secret or did they wanted to keep it private?
Why is it then that people don't have an issue with Erin Roberts. He is Chris brother and was given a top level position in the company. He,unlike Sandi, wasn't even there from the start. Yet somehow few people have issues with Erin.

Someone here claims Sandi funded her movie with company money.
So can you please share with us the expense report stating that X amount of dollars have been spent in the production of Sandi's short?

And regarding delays or lack of content.
Sure, we expect more. I wont wait for ever. But can I really predict failure? Based on what experience? Why is it that it is acceptable if GTA V takes 5 years to develop and we claim SC will fail in its 3rd development year?

As for Derek. The best he could do in one of his replies to someone asking for irrefutable evidence that Sandi is not qualified for her position was : "She does not. Stop it"

So I'll ask again. Where is the evidence Derek? Post the documentation you have proving Sandi has lied regarding her credentials. So far you only accuse people abd show no evidence.

I obviously won't support a developer that is commiting a crime. But without evidence it is one person word vs the other.

I don't get it. Is it that hard to scan documents and post it for everyone to see?
So many conspiracy theories for what?

I will support anyone that can show me irrefutable evidence. As simple as that.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Escapist Defends Star Citizen Sources
88. Re: Escapist Defends Star Citizen Sources Oct 4, 2015, 13:26 Comet
 
Kxmode wrote on Oct 4, 2015, 00:12:
Evidence: "Sunny's Diner: The Star Citizen Podcast" interview with Sandi, skip to 17:00. Sandi claims to have a degree in International Business from the UCLA Anderson School of Management and also a degree in Marine Biology from Australia. Derek paid a lot to have a private investigation done and found neither of Sandi's claims to be true. It would not surprise me if CIG is trying to get that mp3 deleted from the hwcdn.libsyn.com servers (good luck with that). They've been busy for the past few months deleting just about anything that has any proof of wrongdoing.

So, where is the University response? Where is the letter from the University stating that Sandi doesn't have such credentials?

Why is it that you take Derek word for granted and dismiss Sandi claims?
Can you please share the letter or document confirming Sandi is lying?


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Escapist Defends Star Citizen Sources
86. Re: Escapist Defends Star Citizen Sources Oct 4, 2015, 13:15 Comet
 
Eirikrautha wrote on Oct 4, 2015, 10:59:

So much concern trolling. Let's deal with "facts" then, shall we?

Don't get me wrong, but have you even read my post? I'm not even defending CIG.
Imagine if someone you knew posted online that you've been lying about your qualifications. Do you understand the seriousness of that accusation? Do you understand that if you falsify your CV you can go to jail?

Some people have claimed that

- CIG is running out of money
- Sandi is a racist and has falsified her credentials, has no right to be in the position she is and so on.
- CIG has wasted project funds for personal gain

These are some pretty serious accusations.
We are all free to question the way CIG is managing the project much like we can question the way a sports trainer manages a sports team. But accusing them of committing a crime?

Such accusations need to be backed by proof. Where is that proof?
Can you point me to it?

It is one thing what you just posted. And that is your opinion. A valid one. I respect that and even share some of your views.
But you're not accusing CIG of committing a crime but rather that they have missed their initial release schedule and you disagree with certain decisions they have made.
Nothing wrong with that.

But that is a long way from the accusations being made.

The topic of this discussion is "Escapist Defends Star Citizen Sources".

I have no idea who is right regarding this. Perhaps there is indeed something wrong in CIG.
But so far we have no documents to prove that.

CIG has sent a letter to Escapist requesting them to retract from the article up until they (The Escapist) has been able to determine the veracity and source of such accusations.

The update has been posted on the Chairman response article at RSI.

I really don't know who is right or wrong but obviously no one should make such serious accusations without proof.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Escapist Defends Star Citizen Sources
78. Re: Escapist Defends Star Citizen Sources Oct 4, 2015, 04:24 Comet
 
Kxmode wrote on Oct 4, 2015, 00:12:

Evidence: "Sunny's Diner: The Star Citizen Podcast" interview with Sandi, skip to 17:00. Sandi claims to have a degree in International Business from the UCLA Anderson School of Management and also a degree in Marine Biology from Australia. Derek paid a lot to have a private investigation done and found neither of Sandi's claims to be true. It would not surprise me if CIG is trying to get that mp3 deleted from the hwcdn.libsyn.com servers (good luck with that). They've been busy for the past few months deleting just about anything that has any proof of wrongdoing.

And have you considered that perhaps Derek is lying?
In this case for instance the evidence is a document from these institutions confirming that she hasn't taken these degrees.
You have no evidence. You only have Derek word.
But why believe in one side and not the other? Derek may have the best intentions but we really don't know if his information is viable or not.

Stop being a politic trowing accusations and post the evidence. Post the documents that support your accusations. Take CIG to court.
3 months since Derek posted his first article. And we still only have his claims but no documents.

I'm not taking sides. I just want to make a an informed decision. And so far I have one side making serious accusations and in the other side CIG employees openly defending and supporting their company and considering it unfair the campain that some people have launched against Sandi.

So one side or the other is lying.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Escapist Defends Star Citizen Sources
66. Re: Escapist Defends Star Citizen Sources Oct 3, 2015, 21:54 Comet
 
dsmart wrote on Oct 3, 2015, 18:47:

uhm no, she has not. And my guess is that you don't know anything that I don't.

What she posted on Twitter is a Dean's letter from an undergraduate study. And we think it's fake. The investigation into that one is on-going. More soon.

Hi Derek,

A couple of things.
First, 3 months since your first blog post.
I've read all your blogs and we had time to exchange opinions there.
I respect your opinion, but it is still only an opinion. And your arguments, as valid as they may be to you, are still speculation.

You have made several accusations but we, the public, still haven't seen actual documents to support your claims and an actual lawsuit that would determine if your right or not.

What I hope you understand, is that so far what we have is your word vs CIG word. What we have is CIG developers on one side defending the project and some ex CIG employers criticizing it.
You've been investigating and you have made several points in your blog, but what about leaked documents that prove the project is running out of money?
What about documents that prove Sandi is doing a bad marketing job?

If you have any evidence that proves Sandi did something that damages SC than release it.

Words like, "We think it's fake" is precisely the problem with your argument. More speculation.

And finally Derek. Here we are at Bluesnews.com. You are a very active person online. But the issue here is that you are making some very strong accusations and the opposing side can't invest resources to respond to your comments on the several online websites you visit.
So, yet again, we have your perspective. That again, is only that.

Your last blog post looks just like a politician post trying to get support for his campaign.

So be responsible, stop the politics and just post the freaking evidence or go to court NOW.

Let me be a bit more clear.
When you ACTUALLY have evidence that what Sandi has posted is fake, post about it. But not before.
Given who you are, What you just did is extremely irresponsible.
Youre accusing someone of faking her credentials and you STILL have no evidence.

IF someone had ever accused me of posting a false CV without evidence of falsehood you can be sure I would take him to court.
As you know faking your CV is a criminal offence. So obviously, I would need to clear my name.

So Derek. Are you absolutely sure Sandi has faked her credentials?

This comment was edited on Oct 3, 2015, 22:03.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Escapist Defends Star Citizen Sources
42. Re: Escapist Defends Star Citizen Sources Oct 3, 2015, 10:33 Comet
 
As usual loads of speculation from both sides.
TL:DR, but if you're looking for a relatively balanced opinion here goes.

Question: Would there be this much speculation on this project if it wasn't the most crowdfunded project of all time? Probably not.

The key thing here is that the public doesn't really know what is going on.

One thing is clear. If you only listen to one side of the argument you end up having a one sided view of the issue. So people should look for the evidence. Stick to the facts.

For instance. The Escapist sources have shared the opinion of some disgruntled employees. But in response, we now have CIG employees openly defending the project.

Why should we give more attention to disgruntled employees than happy ones?

I would like to point out that The Escapist did their job by informing the people. But as with any investigation so to speak, this is an ongoing process.

People like Derek Smart have made some very serious accusations. Perhaps they are all real, but until this day, we still haven't seen anything concrete. Where is all the evidence?

I mean, where are the documents some claim to have proving that CR used the project funds for personal gain?
Think about it. We're having a public debate here. We have people making some major claims, but up until this day, the only thing we've seen is...comments.

The basic requirement of any accusation is proof.

Here we are at Bluesnews and some of you are hardcore extremist fans of SC and CR. Others are very critical and any negative news regarding the project only serves to reinforce your also extremist view.

I supported this project. I hope it succeeds, but I'm not blind. If CIG has messed up and someone committed a crime or mismanaged the project I want them to be accountable.
But if their only "mistake" is having to push the release date because of the nature of game development, then is there really a reason to generate so much fuss?

I've been in the Derek Smart blog getting his opinions and trying to understand his point of view. But I've also been checking the CIG side.

As an example. Derek Smart correctly points out some changes in the CIG TOS, but then again it is also true that TOS changes are normal in any project. Perhaps we are more aware of these changes on a public funded project like this, but still it is quite usual.

Regarding some accusations towards Chris Roberts wife Sandi, some could rightly question why is it that his wife is involved in the project. They could question her credentials. But due to this Sandi has posted her credentials and in case some of you don't know, she has indeed some pretty good marketing credentials.
Also, lets not forget, she was involved in the project from the start. Even if she was just helping her husband, she did want to get involved. And what about Erin Roberts? He worked with Chris in several past projects. But he is Chris Roberts brother. Why not question why he is part of the project and head of Foundry 42?
The truth is it is irrelevant. If they are good professionals that should be good enough. Given that Sandi has already posted her credentials, that issue should be clear now.

I urge you people to reread the accusations and defenses from both sides and stick to the evidence.

These are the facts so far:

- Some employees were unhappy with how the project is/was being managed and they were either fired or left.
- Some employees are happy with the way the project is being managed and either continue working on it or due to their own personal preferences or because their work was done, moved to other projects
- The TOS has changed over time but that is also normal in any project. But at the same time, if people disagree they can contact CIG and they will deal with the request since by law, when a TOS is changed, people have the right to refuse accepting the new terms and cancelling their contract with the company.
- Up until this day we have no documentation proving mismanagement or use of project funds for personal gain.
- Up until this day no documentation has been leaked proving the project is running out of money. Former CIG employees making these accusations, could have at least made the effort of leaking these documents. After all, according to Derek Smart some of them were leaking information while still working at CIG.

So what do we have up until this day? Speculation.
We have a bunch of people acting like politicians and accusing each other without presenting ANY SORT OF DOCUMENTATION to back their claims.

I'll leave you guys one question.
Do you all really want to side with CIG or the critics without actual evidence?

Thing is these people need to step up and show what they have or shut up and leave the devs alone to do their work.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > More Derek Smart vs. Star Citizen
111. Re: More Derek Smart vs. Star Citizen Aug 24, 2015, 20:17 Comet
 
We can all argue how they missed their initial schedule. How some wanted a simpler game. How some people think the amount of money raised is insane. Or how some feel they will never achieve their goal and so on and on.

But shouldn't people at least look at the facts?

Now many of you here haven't followed SC development from the start, so before jumping into conclusions and getting into heated arguments please just read some of the following facts regarding SC crowdfunded campaign.

- When the initial crowdfunding drive finished, CIG did what every crowdfunded project such as Torment, Broken Age, Pillars Of Eternity had done. And that is they thanked the community and allowed people to continue to donate money. They made an important poll where they asked the community if they should keep the "raised money" ticker up or not.
You can read the post and drive your own conclusions : https://goo.gl/R7x9Xt

- Then they sent an email to every backer and the letter contents are posted in the following article
https://goo.gl/xk5vnp

In "The Pledge" they reaffirm their promise and point out the risks. "There may be delays and there may be changes; we recognize that such things are inevitable and would be lying to you if we claimed otherwise. "

Keep in mind that at this point in time they had no idea if they were going to raise $80+ Million. They didn't even had $10 Million.

So what happened next? Simple. People continued to invest on the project to unlock stretch goals. But the question here is. Did CIG ask the community if they should go on with new stretch goals after the $20+ Million milestone, the at the time expected cost for the initial vision?
And the answer is, they did.
https://goo.gl/Xl2ELw

Out of 20000+ people 88% voted yes. Back in the day, this was a considerable number at the time and you can confirm this yourself. The total number of backers on Kickstarter was 34000. Even if on the RSI website they had another 30000 totaling about 60000 backers at the time, any statistics student will point out that 20000 people is a pretty good sample out of a total 60000.

The fact is this. This is a crowdfunded project. It is not my individual opinion that is relevant. What is relevant is what the majority wants. And back in 2013, people wanted them to aim higher.

Keep this in mind. They didn't ask this questions when they reached $50 Million. They addressed the community on all this decisions right from the start. Decisions were made more than 2 years ago. And every initial supporter had the opportunity to voice their opinion.
And although some like Derek Smart are unhappy with the project, he for instance fails to mention that he is only ONE individual in the crowd. And the crowd was quite clear back then.
This is not my interpretation. The numbers corroborate this.

Regarding the 2014 release date. Did they ever assured backers that they would release in 2014? Answer is NO. That date was always a tentative date. And by the way. That expected date was for Squadron 42. Not SC MMO.

So these are the facts.
- No one was promised a 2014 release date.
- The crowd decided to give more and more money to build a larger scale game
- CIG was clear when it came to the vision they had and the risks
- Above all CIG has kept the most important promise of all. And that is, hiring 200+ developers to build SC. That is after all why people backed more than $85 Million in the project up until now.

Accountability. Being responsible for your own actions.
If some of these backers goal was to get a full game in 2014 or even 2015, why the hell did they support a crowdfunding campaign when most evidence shows that these game development projects are rarely released on "expected release dates"?

Think about the ridicule nature of the discussions. No one doubts CIG is building the game since after all they have hired hundreds of people.
The biggest complaint is just that people want the game now or expected it to be in a more finished state by now...
So what? Weren't you aware this could happen?

In the end of the day, isn't the fact that they have raised a big company with more than 200+ people to build SC the most relevant information?

One last point regarding Derek Smart, interest in the community.
Read the letter the lawyers sent to CIG : https://goo.gl/Xl2ELw
In it they demand CIG to provide :
"A refund for all those who backed the campaign on Kickstarter or your own website, and
who are now requesting a refund"

Great idea. So if all of the sudden in panic 500.000 people decide to request for a refund what happens to the people hired by CIG? What happens to all the contractors, the services CIG is paying such as Google Cloud and so on?
This isn't a video game. People invested/donated money to build a company. Profit comes AFTER they release the product.

Think about it. CIG can never allow a refund policy that can basically open the doors for a bankruptcy. If Derek Smart and his lawyers are interested in the greater good then they will remove that demand.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen FPS Development Moves In-House
16. Re: Star Citizen FPS Development Moves In-House Aug 18, 2015, 15:21 Comet
 
So Illfonic states their work on Star Marine is almost complete and due to that they laid off 3 employees that were working on that project. Of course the other 3 employees that were laid off are irrelevant. Perhaps those other 3 employees were working on an unknown project that got cancelled. But does it matter? Of course not. What really matters is speculation surrounding Star Citizen.

CGBot, VoidAlpha, The Imaginarium.

You know what this three other companies have in common?
They worked on SC. They finished their work and moved on.

We can speculate all we want, but in the end of the day Illfonic has stated that they are nearing the end of their work on Star Marine. We may not be experts in game development but anyone that follows games knows that development companies start scaling down and moving people when they are close to releasing a game.

You may not believe Illfonic. Perhaps they are just hiding the reality of how poor Star Marine development went.
Then again, why would they fire 3 other people, with no relation to SC? Why don't we speculate about that?


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Multi-Crew Shown
102. Re: Star Citizen Multi-Crew Shown Aug 9, 2015, 12:14 Comet
 
grudgebearer wrote on Aug 9, 2015, 10:59:

I have to wonder, are you being intentionally obtuse at this point? Chris Roberts has pulled in $86 million from wealthy adults with larger amounts of disposable income, not 15 year old begging for Auroras for Christmas. If the mainstream gaming community as a whole enjoyed space sims, there would be tons of them, and we'd have a handful of decent games and a bunch of shitty clones; that's not the case though because whether you choose to realize it, it's a niche genre.

The mainstream enjoys good games. No matter what they are.
Space sims included. The problem with the industry is that when you're investing millions to build a product, you prefer to play safe, so you avoid investing in types of games that you aren't sure will be successful. So you repeat the formulas that you are sure will work. The result is COD style games over and over again.
That doesn't mean publishers don't innovate.

Once someone proves that there is interest in a certain style of game they start investing on that.

For instance, GTA success has lead to other similar games like Saints Row, Just Cause and so on.

As an example that people do like space sims, is No Man's Sky.
In fact No Man's Sky is in many ways a modern version of Elite.
SC crowdfunding launched in October 2012. No Man's Sky was announced one year later. In November 2013.

No matter what you think about Star Citizen, only one thing matters. "Is it a good game or not?".
SC may fail, but if someone makes a great AAA space sim, people will buy it.

And yes. People do miss the large scale AAA space sim games of the past.
Actually, people love the idea of being the captain of a ship, or being the hotshot space pilot in Star Wars or whatever.

If you really think it is just
grudgebearer wrote on Aug 9, 2015, 10:59:

I have to wonder, are you being intentionally obtuse at this point? Chris Roberts has pulled in $86 million from wealthy adults with larger amounts of disposable income, not 15 year old begging for Auroras for Christmas. If the mainstream gaming community as a whole enjoyed space sims, there would be tons of them, and we'd have a handful of decent games and a bunch of shitty clones; that's not the case though because whether you choose to realize it, it's a niche genre.

The mainstream enjoys good games. No matter what they are.
Space sims included. The problem with the industry is that when you're investing millions to build a product, you prefer to play safe, so you avoid investing in types of games that you aren't sure will be successful. So you repeat the formulas that you are sure will work. The result is COD style games over and over again.
That doesn't mean publishers don't innovate.

Once someone proves that there is interest in a certain style of game they start investing on that.

For instance, GTA success has lead to other similar games like Saints Row, Just Cause and so on.

As an example that people do like space sims, is No Man's Sky.
In fact No Man's Sky is in many ways a modern version of Elite.
SC crowdfunding launched in October 2012. No Man's Sky was announced one year later. In November 2013.

No matter what you think about Star Citizen, only one thing matters. "Is it a good game or not?".
SC may fail, but if someone makes a great AAA space sim, people will buy it.

And yes. People do miss the large scale AAA space sim games of the past.
Actually, people love the idea of being the captain of a ship, or being the hotshot space pilot in Star Wars. Or the space explorer seeking out new lifeforms and new civilizations Star Trek style.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen FPS May Come Next Month
90. Re: Star Citizen FPS May Come Next Month Jul 20, 2015, 16:45 Comet
 
panbient wrote on Jul 20, 2015, 16:16:
Comet wrote on Jul 20, 2015, 15:58:
Is CIG any different from other AAA developers?

Yes. Yes they really are. Mainly because they have the budget but no publisher oversight. And while there's a substantial group of gamers who automatically believe that removing the suits from the equation will result in some kind of gaming utopia we're all seeing the results (or lack thereof).

I can't think of any dissenting comment I've read that didn't think the ideas were cool, or that standard delays would ruin things - what people are concerned with is their ability to realistically deliver what's been advertised.

Could they have made a great single player space opera? Probably (pretty freaking certain to be honest).
Could they have made a great multiplayer combat space shooter? Probably.
Could they have made a great persistent open universe game? Maybe.

Could they make it all and let you be anything all at the same time? Probably not.

Actually, they do have oversight. The same kind of oversight in fact.
Microsoft invested $90 Million in Halo MMO before cancelling it.

How does a publisher enforce its position? By not sending more funds unless results are shown.

Exactly the same thing happens with crowdfunding. In fact it is happening right now. I'm not defending CIG. Much like publishers We are all investors. We all want to see results.

You and I assumed the risk. You and I are both waiting to see more results. The crowd supported this vision. Why did you support SC instead of smaller space sim projects?

Right now CIG isn't getting as much funds as they did when they showed their progress at the start of the year. Same as what happens with publishers. The developers show their progress and publishers send them more money.

Right now, people want to see more results. They may come during Gamescom or they may not come at all. If they don't come, CIG won't be able to raise more funds and will have to work with what they have.
The pressure is the same if not higher. Because not only do they have to convince the crowd but they also have to face the public pressure a developer under a publisher deal doesn't suffer.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen FPS May Come Next Month
80. Re: Star Citizen FPS May Come Next Month Jul 20, 2015, 16:26 Comet
 
Slytat wrote on Jul 20, 2015, 16:04:
http://pastebin.com/mSM29KZs

Proof that these guys only care about your money.

TB said something to the effect of (and this is not verbatim) Developers should not be happy to hold on to your money if you are not happy with what they are selling.

If guys like Zor et al want to keep lapping up CR's deception laced fetid urine, that is of course their choice, for those who rightly feel deceived (the deception having been proved over and over and over and over again in 'The Chairman's' own words FFS), then they should be entitled to a 'no questions asked' refund.

For those who want a refund, and are being brushed off by CIG, contact your CC company.

I respect the rights of those people who want to blindly support this project, it's your money. Conversely, you should respect the rights of the people who want to get off the bus after it has missed every f**king stop on it's route.

Seems like he is yet another investor that doesn't know what crowdfunding is.

Slytat, please read my comment with an open mind before posting.

What is the difference between funding and buying?

When you fund something, that something is built with your money.
When you buy something, that something was built with some other investor money.

You can't build anything without money. So what you do is, you spend your own money to build it. And if you can't do it yourself, you seek investors.
There is a reason why investors help fund certain projects but don't invest on others. And the reason is......They can't get their money back.

That money was spent building the product. That is why it is crowdfunding and not crowdbuying.

Still if you don't accept the above argument please check Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crowdfunding

Crowdfunding is the practice of funding a project or venture by raising monetary contributions from a large number of people, typically via the internet.[1]

Raising monetary contributions. Not buying.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen FPS May Come Next Month
74. Re: Star Citizen FPS May Come Next Month Jul 20, 2015, 15:58 Comet
 
As usual I still don't understand why some people post comments filled with incorrect information yet are so sure they are right.
If you really want to be informed instead of just posting emotional nonsense, read this. If not, there is no point in exchanging opinions with someone that doesn't even take the time to check his/her information.

Unfortunately due to Bluesnews URL limitations had to remove some of the links.

- Regarding some claims that FPS was not part of the initial plan :
Check the archived version of RSI web page from October 2012.
Information in "Star Citizen Project" page

While you will probably spend a majority of time in the cockpit there will be first-person mechanics built into the game. When you are flying on some of the bigger ships (transports, carriers, etc.), you will be able to wander the halls of the ship while a friend pilots, jump on a turret if you get attacked, even repel attempted boarders if needed.

For many, this was one of the big reasons why they supported the project. Now it may not have been why YOU supported the project. But different people have different motivations.

- Regarding delays or how the project scope changed.
I backed this game back in 2012. Two things I knew from the start
  • Only 25% of crowdfunded projects are released on time : http://www.appsblogger.com/behind-kickstarter-crowdfunding-stats/

  • The success of any funding effort greatly depends not on one person but in the combined effort of the crowd. This is not a game ONLY for me. It is a game for every backer. Some prefer a particular type of game. Others have different preferences. But in the end everyone is an investor


  • So when people say. Why are they doing this or that? Because of the people that have supported them. This game has $85 Million in funding because of the crowd.
    It was the COMMUNITY that decided that they should continue with stretch goals. It was the community that chose to go for a AAA budget game.
    Check the $46 Million letter for the Chairman article where CIG requests feedback on the matter to the community.
    Crowdfunding is a community effort. If the majority prefer one thing over the other, that is the path to take even if you don't like it.

    - CIG has been open from the start. Their pledge has been on their website since the initial campaign. You can read it yourself. In it they clearly states:

    There may be delays and there may be changes; we recognize that such things are inevitable and would be lying to you if we claimed otherwise. But when this happens, we will treat you with the respect you deserve rather than spending your money on public relations. When we need to change a mechanic or alter something you believe should be in the game, we will tell you exactly why.

    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/the-pledge

    - Almost all of the bigger crowdfunded projects suffered big delays. And most publisher funded projects suffer similar delays:

    Pillars of Eternity - Delayed and people had similar skepticism. Now it is among the list of best RPGs
    Broken Age - Delayed. And similar concerns
    Divinity Origial Sin : Delayed.

    Recent publisher funded games that suffered delays. GTA V, Witcher 3, Batman Arkham Knight, The Division, Uncharted 4 and so many others.

    - Forget the $20 Million game. This is now a $80 Million one.
    It is for all intentions equivalent in funding to big AAA games.
    It is IMPOSSIBLE to do a big AAA game in just 2 or 3 years. Most AAA games these days take 4-5 years to make and cost more than $20 Million to make. Don't take my word for it. Check Kotaku article on the cost of big video games.
    Or Polygon article on the "The State Of Games".
    Or "Solving the AAA crisis" on Gameindustry.biz

    To sum up. If you are unwilling to accept delays, If you are unwilling to actually read what they promised from the start, If you are unwilling to accept that in crowdfunding, the interest of the many out-weight the interests of the few, then

    Why did you support the effort in the first place?

    And one last question. Is CIG any different from other AAA developers?
    300+ employees with several industry veterans working on the project.
    Big partners like Behavior, CGBot, The Imaginarium and so on working on the project.

    This comment was edited on Jul 20, 2015, 16:04.
     
    Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
     
    News Comments > CDPR on Witcher 3 Graphics Downgrades
    32. Re: CDPR on Witcher 3 Graphics Downgrades May 21, 2015, 10:59 Comet
     
    GTA V looks great but I disagree with your opinion regarding lightning and shaders because of the following :

    Check this video of The Witcher 3. Ultra settings 4K
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rt_9r9NLHPs

    And GTA 5 : Ultra 4k

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IM9EcdSx4j4


    I think this example clearly shows how impressive The Witcher 3 is. Huge amounts of vegetation, trees, particle effects, physics, animation and so on. The GTA V lighting system has a much smaller color pallet. For instance look at The Witcher 3 environments at night and GTA V.

    But again the following video will change your opinion. In GTA V for instance HDR is far less "accurate" so to speak.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APFy5G7vueA

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLRDsMwS4Vs

    And this next one should really help drive the point :

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOSG-JyPz4w (PS4 footage by the way)
     
    Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
     
    News Comments > CDPR on Witcher 3 Graphics Downgrades
    30. Re: CDPR on Witcher 3 Graphics Downgrades May 21, 2015, 10:45 Comet
     
    First of all. I'm biased. CDR has always provided top notch service and value to their consumers. And as far as The Witcher 3 it is indeed a masterpiece. Downgraded graphics or not.

    Perhaps if it was another company I would be criticizing them for the downgraded graphics but the thing is I do think it's a bit unfair comparing The Witcher 3 downgrade to say, Watchdogs downgrade.

    The key difference in my eyes is this. Watchdogs downgrade resulted in a game that really didn't impress in the graphics department when compared to other similar games at the time.

    But The Witcher 3 still impresses even after the downgrade. As an example. GTA IV was already technically better in many areas than Watchdogs. For instance, the dynamic lightning system.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGRsrFdwb2c

    As for The Witcher 3, considering that it has become a open world game, there is nothing in the market that is as impressive. Not only are they rendering a much bigger environment with an impressive draw distance, but the world is far more interactive than other similar games.

    One example.
    Dragon Age Inquisition is really great. I love the environment detail. But much like a COD map, it is a lot more static. For instance trees, clothes, hair all behave to wind in Witcher 3 and are static in Dragon Age Inquisition.
    The physics system in The Witcher 3 is a lot better than many other similar games.
    Also the character animation system is superior to other games. People move and react a lot more realistic than other games as recent as Dragon Age. Lots and lots of performance capture in The Witcher 3. Also character poly count is on par or above recent RPGs. Clothing has far more layers of detail than recent RPGs.
    And don't forget. Unlike other recent games, they have a real day/night cycle that is impressive.

    My point is. Downgrade or not, The Witcher 3 graphics are still above others making it one of the best looking RPGs of recent times. The same could not be said of Watchdogs.

     
    Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
     
    News Comments > Morning Crowdfunding Roundup
    7. Re: Morning Crowdfunding Roundup May 14, 2015, 16:55 Comet
     
    Crowdfunding hasn't wanned. Quite the contrary.
    But if you do a crowdfunding project and fail, don't expect to get support next time.
    But if you do a good job it becomes a valid platform.
    The new Pebble Time crowdfunding was far more successful than the first one. In fact, there are far bigger and ambitious projects now than a few years back when crowdfunding got popular.

    One thing is clear. It is not going away.

     
    Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
     
    News Comments > Assassin's Creed: Syndicate?
    8. Re: Assassin's Creed: Syndicate? May 9, 2015, 05:21 Comet
     
    I bought almost every AC game and enjoyed mnost of them.
    Nut one thing I didnt enjoy was the performance and bugs that often broke the game.
    In AC Black Flag for instance I lost my savegames. The cloud save feature was broken and it deleted my most recent progress.
    Im a legit consumer and was forced to download a pirated version of the game to use some savegames I found online. No alternative here as the Ubisoft support was everything but helpful.

    I pre ordered AC Unity and even though the game was filled with bugs I patiently waited to see if they could solve the game problems.
    They solved many bugs but even to this day the game is broken.
    I use SLI and there are several bugs that completely spoil the fun.

    So yet again we have a new AC game, just one year after the complete disaster that was Unity
    Yes sure, Ubisoft wont make the same mistake again. This will probably be the most stable game.
    It will probably look good, be fun and all that.
    But excited or anxious to see what they have like I did for past games?
    Not one bit.
    Im completely burned out.

    Will I skip AC if its a great game? Probably. There are many other games
    play and quite frankly I still feel that they need to learn a lesson.
    No not just because of Unity. Watchdogs was another game I bought that not only failed to reach expectations but also had some bugs, more specifically stuttering that spoiled the fun.
    Far Cry 4 is the only AAA game that saved Ubisoft last year.

    Oh well. If the game is really that good, there are always other ways of playing it to avoid bugs that break your savegames

    This comment was edited on May 9, 2015, 06:29.
     
    Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
     
    78 Comments. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
    < Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >


    footer

    Blue's News logo