Roberts: We Won't Sell Star Citizen

A new episode of 10 for the Chairman on the Roberts Space Industries website answers further questions about development of Star Citizen, RSI's upcoming space combat remake. Also, there's more to the $41 Million funding announcement that we noted last night where Chris explains that they have no intention of selling out to a bigger company and disappointing their backers like some crowd-funded projects have:
Now to answer the myriad forum threads that popped up worrying about the possibility of Cloud Imperium being acquired by another, bigger company – don’t worry! We have no plans nor interest in following this path! We don’t need to go to anyone with deep pockets to make OUR dream a reality. To mass-produce hardware like the Rift, you need an outlay of hundreds of millions of dollars. Luckily our ships are digital so we have hardly any cost of goods, just the cost of developing the universe of Star Citizen and running servers that Star Citizen’s universe will be simulated on. Thanks to the generosity of the Star Citizen community we have these two things covered

And last but not least I’m having way to much fun building the universe of my dreams for everyone to adventure in! I’ve been down the big company acquisition route twice before and there’s a reason I am making Star Citizen totally independently!
View : : :
70 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  ] Older
70.
 
Re: Star Citizen
Apr 2, 2014, 16:04
70.
Re: Star Citizen Apr 2, 2014, 16:04
Apr 2, 2014, 16:04
 
Nom4d wrote on Apr 2, 2014, 15:52:
Darks wrote on Apr 2, 2014, 09:05:
Anyway, I’m not confident this game is going to be all he wants it to be. Soon enough the beta will be starting so we will all find out then.

Small heads up, the release of the DogFighting Module (DFM) is right around the corner, but in no way is that meant as a beta, it's an alpha build of a small part of the game, not feature complete (far from it). It's a way for CIG to test the dogfighting itself, the handling, balancing, the implementation of ships, netcode and everything else that's part of releasing extremely early unfinished work.

Thanks Nom4d for the info and setting expectations.
I'm a smoldering volcano of virility. At least, that's what I tell myself.
Avatar 22024
69.
 
Re: Star Citizen
Apr 2, 2014, 15:58
69.
Re: Star Citizen Apr 2, 2014, 15:58
Apr 2, 2014, 15:58
 
InBlack wrote on Apr 2, 2014, 03:48:
jdreyer wrote:
Personally, as a backer, I give Chris and his team the full benefit of the doubt. Until it enters Duke Nukem territory, I will just watch and wait.

Why are you baffled? Let me expalain my position. Both Tumbler and yourself have mentioned several times that you feel that you are 'part' of the development cycle/team. The information and feedback from the developers and the communication both ways is nothing short of amazing. Its like you guys cant see the forest from the trees. You guys talk about the involment with the fans, but thats not how things get done! If you had any knowledge of game development or indeed of any project management, this is NOT THE WAY you make a product! Not one that will ever leave the drawing board anyway. ALL and I mean ALL the information is coming from CR and his team. ALL is taken at face value. ALL is taken as fact. The inevitable delays, the inevitable bloat, everything is accepted as something thats just the way its gotta happen. Not to mention the huge piles of cash that people throw their way every time CR promises the moon!! People are already talking about Duke Nukem timelines as something that would be acceptable....Look I know you guys have a lot invested in this but if you take an objective look at the entire premise of the game, or rather project, as there is no game yet: That fans and backers take active part in designing the game they want...its too much, it cant happen. Not in any way or shape or fashion that would satisfy anyone.

I for one cant accept that. Not as a rational human being who is passionate about his hobby. It simply rubs me the wrong way. Even if CR means best, which Im sure that he believes he does, people are being taken for a ride. A ride that cant end well, and one that will sour Kickstarter and my favorite game genre (space sims) for good....

Occam's razor: If they're putting out massive amounts of info explaining what they're doing, then the most likely conclusion one can draw is that they are doing that. If it was some giant conspiracy, then there'd be some soul with a conscience on that 200 man team who would leak that it's all a scam, that nothing was being done, that it was a mess, that there were internal divisions on the team, etc. I say until we see otherwise, we take them at face-value. Honestly, I don't have a lot invested here, $20 or $30, I can't remember which. I just think it's illogical to be so negative on this project.
I'm a smoldering volcano of virility. At least, that's what I tell myself.
Avatar 22024
68.
 
Re: Star Citizen
Apr 2, 2014, 15:55
68.
Re: Star Citizen Apr 2, 2014, 15:55
Apr 2, 2014, 15:55
 
{PH}88fingers wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 18:59:
With the amount of studios and people now working on this game(and the subsequent amount of community communication and material they show), it's too funny seeing everyone here going on about 'scam'...


Everyone? Kindly list the "everyone" who has been calling this a scam.


but then again don't know why I'm surprised, seems like the norm to bash games around here.

Yep, nobody ever likes anything around here. WAAAAAAH BLUESNEWS IS SO TERRIBLE I NEED BLANKY!

If you guys hate games so much why keep coming to a gaming news site and posting hate over and over and over again

If you dislike the comments so much, why fucking post here?
Avatar 15604
67.
 
Re: Star Citizen
Apr 2, 2014, 15:52
67.
Re: Star Citizen Apr 2, 2014, 15:52
Apr 2, 2014, 15:52
 
Iurand wrote on Apr 2, 2014, 03:18:
jdreyer wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 18:38:
I do wonder though, if games like Project Eternity or Wasteland had open ended Kickstarters, how much money they could have pulled in.

Wasteland store

PoE store

Cool. Do we know how much Wasteland has made since the end of their KS? How much has PoE done (although I don't believe they were crowd funded)?
I'm a smoldering volcano of virility. At least, that's what I tell myself.
Avatar 22024
66.
 
Re: Star Citizen
Apr 2, 2014, 15:52
66.
Re: Star Citizen Apr 2, 2014, 15:52
Apr 2, 2014, 15:52
 
Darks wrote on Apr 2, 2014, 09:05:
Anyway, I’m not confident this game is going to be all he wants it to be. Soon enough the beta will be starting so we will all find out then.

Small heads up, the release of the DogFighting Module (DFM) is right around the corner, but in no way is that meant as a beta, it's an alpha build of a small part of the game, not feature complete (far from it). It's a way for CIG to test the dogfighting itself, the handling, balancing, the implementation of ships, netcode and everything else that's part of releasing extremely early unfinished work.
65.
 
Re: Star Citizen
Apr 2, 2014, 09:05
65.
Re: Star Citizen Apr 2, 2014, 09:05
Apr 2, 2014, 09:05
 
Julio wrote on Apr 2, 2014, 06:39:
Iurand wrote on Apr 2, 2014, 03:18:
Julio wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 20:59:
Here's my concerns for this game in particular (and I'm sure a lot of you won't agree)
1) Selling ships for cash i.e. pay to win

They all will be available in game for ingame money.

Julio wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 20:59:
2) The concept of "insurance" in a game
4) Having both a single player and an MMO game

What's wrong with that?

Julio wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 20:59:
5) Constant emails to sell more virtual things and raise more real money. Doesn't give a good impression.

Can you show me screen with all those emails?


This will probably spur a 'pay-to-win' vs not discussion but here goes. The people paying for a $1200 ship will start out with a huge advantage relative to the rest of the player base. Sure if someone who puts in the minimum investment grinds for years and years they may work their way up to that $1200 ship. In the meantime, they're cannon fodder for the $1200 guys. I guess someone has to be there for target practice.

Having to buy "insurance" as part of a game to me is too microtransaction focused for me. It's a game, not real life.

Having a single player and MMO all in one means it's quite unlikely that either will turn out to be a good game. Tradeoffs will have to be made, and one of them will suffer. Given the MMO will drive future revenue via microtransactions it will get more support than the single player game in development.

I don't keep all the emails I get on this game, I delete them after skimming. However, I've seen more than 20, and probably a lot more than that related to selling me virtual crap. "Ship X not available to buy past this date"; "Last chance to buy Ship Y" etc is the main focus of them. Subscribe to the site and you'll get plenty.

You said what I have felt all along. I’m in dismay at how many people are spending big dollars for a virtual ship that hasn’t even been tested yet. No one knows for sure just how that ship will perform or work out in the game. That’s like playing Marvel Universe and buying chars you haven’t played yet, then get in the game and find out just how much you really hate playing that class. I can’t fathom why people are spending high dollars on those ships that no one knows for sure how they will play.

I bought the minimal buy in for this game. I’ve know CR for many years. Met him through another friend who is also an owner of his own game company. I’ve had a few conversations with CR about the game and some aspects in the game that’s bothering me. The buying of ships for one. He told me all ships are available in game.

Meaning they can be obtained in the game while playing. And not having to spend any real money to get them. That was key for me.

That made me feel better about the game. But I still feel it may take forever to obtain one of those higher class ships.

Anyway, I’m not confident this game is going to be all he wants it to be. Soon enough the beta will be starting so we will all find out then.
Author of the Neverwinter Nights Eye of the Beholder Series of Mods.
Now integrated into Steams NWN: Enhanced Edition

http://www.moddb.com/mods/eye-of-the-beholder-ii-ledgend-of-darkmoon
Avatar 20498
64.
 
Re: Star Citizen
Apr 2, 2014, 08:56
64.
Re: Star Citizen Apr 2, 2014, 08:56
Apr 2, 2014, 08:56
 
I haven't given CR any of my money. Prices for the ships etc are just too damn high for someone who has a mortgage.

That being said, a common theme on this website is "games today are derivative" and "everything is a COD clone". Here we have a game that is at least trying something different. Now, it's being bashed for the scope of what they're trying to accomplish.

As a person with a job, I understand the concern over their business plan. However, it cheapens your position to be so vehemently against this game before even seeing it in action.
Avatar 57722
63.
 
Re: Star Citizen
Apr 2, 2014, 06:39
63.
Re: Star Citizen Apr 2, 2014, 06:39
Apr 2, 2014, 06:39
 
Iurand wrote on Apr 2, 2014, 03:18:
Julio wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 20:59:
Here's my concerns for this game in particular (and I'm sure a lot of you won't agree)
1) Selling ships for cash i.e. pay to win

They all will be available in game for ingame money.

Julio wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 20:59:
2) The concept of "insurance" in a game
4) Having both a single player and an MMO game

What's wrong with that?

Julio wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 20:59:
5) Constant emails to sell more virtual things and raise more real money. Doesn't give a good impression.

Can you show me screen with all those emails?


This will probably spur a 'pay-to-win' vs not discussion but here goes. The people paying for a $1200 ship will start out with a huge advantage relative to the rest of the player base. Sure if someone who puts in the minimum investment grinds for years and years they may work their way up to that $1200 ship. In the meantime, they're cannon fodder for the $1200 guys. I guess someone has to be there for target practice.

Having to buy "insurance" as part of a game to me is too microtransaction focused for me. It's a game, not real life.

Having a single player and MMO all in one means it's quite unlikely that either will turn out to be a good game. Tradeoffs will have to be made, and one of them will suffer. Given the MMO will drive future revenue via microtransactions it will get more support than the single player game in development.

I don't keep all the emails I get on this game, I delete them after skimming. However, I've seen more than 20, and probably a lot more than that related to selling me virtual crap. "Ship X not available to buy past this date"; "Last chance to buy Ship Y" etc is the main focus of them. Subscribe to the site and you'll get plenty.
62.
 
Re: Star Citizen
Apr 2, 2014, 03:48
62.
Re: Star Citizen Apr 2, 2014, 03:48
Apr 2, 2014, 03:48
 
jdreyer wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 18:38:
Mad Max RW wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 17:03:
Kosumo wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 16:37:
Can you list some of these games then for us n00bs?

Watch the first 30 seconds of every interview. Many are pretty green but there's a lot of veterans. A couple games that stuck out are Ghostbusters, Wing Commander, The Walking Dead. Some former Turbine, Blizzard, and Terminal Reality devs.

I don't get why people on Blue's are so incredibly biased against this particular game. If it fails it fails. So what?

Honestly, I'm a bit baffled myself. Probably because this is the biggest crowdfunded game in history and the obscene amounts of money have people worried that it will fail to live up to the promise, or even come out at all (they could blow it all, 38 Studios-style). I do wonder though, if games like Project Eternity or Wasteland had open ended Kickstarters, how much money they could have pulled in. I think the SC funding level is as much a function of its longevity as its popularity.

Personally, as a backer, I give Chris and his team the full benefit of the doubt. Until it enters Duke Nukem territory, I will just watch and wait.

Why are you baffled? Let me expalain my position. Both Tumbler and yourself have mentioned several times that you feel that you are 'part' of the development cycle/team. The information and feedback from the developers and the communication both ways is nothing short of amazing. Its like you guys cant see the forest from the trees. You guys talk about the involment with the fans, but thats not how things get done! If you had any knowledge of game development or indeed of any project management, this is NOT THE WAY you make a product! Not one that will ever leave the drawing board anyway. ALL and I mean ALL the information is coming from CR and his team. ALL is taken at face value. ALL is taken as fact. The inevitable delays, the inevitable bloat, everything is accepted as something thats just the way its gotta happen. Not to mention the huge piles of cash that people throw their way every time CR promises the moon!! People are already talking about Duke Nukem timelines as something that would be acceptable....Look I know you guys have a lot invested in this but if you take an objective look at the entire premise of the game, or rather project, as there is no game yet: That fans and backers take active part in designing the game they want...its too much, it cant happen. Not in any way or shape or fashion that would satisfy anyone.

I for one cant accept that. Not as a rational human being who is passionate about his hobby. It simply rubs me the wrong way. Even if CR means best, which Im sure that he believes he does, people are being taken for a ride. A ride that cant end well, and one that will sour Kickstarter and my favorite game genre (space sims) for good....

This comment was edited on Apr 2, 2014, 07:16.
I have a nifty blue line!
Avatar 46994
61.
 
Re: Star Citizen
Apr 2, 2014, 03:18
61.
Re: Star Citizen Apr 2, 2014, 03:18
Apr 2, 2014, 03:18
 
jdreyer wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 18:38:
I do wonder though, if games like Project Eternity or Wasteland had open ended Kickstarters, how much money they could have pulled in.

Wasteland store

PoE store

Julio wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 20:59:
Here's my concerns for this game in particular (and I'm sure a lot of you won't agree)
1) Selling ships for cash i.e. pay to win

They all will be available in game for ingame money.

Julio wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 20:59:
2) The concept of "insurance" in a game
4) Having both a single player and an MMO game

What's wrong with that?

Julio wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 20:59:
5) Constant emails to sell more virtual things and raise more real money. Doesn't give a good impression.

Can you show me screen with all those emails?

This comment was edited on Apr 2, 2014, 03:30.
60.
 
Re: Roberts: We Won't Sell Star Citizen
Apr 2, 2014, 02:20
60.
Re: Roberts: We Won't Sell Star Citizen Apr 2, 2014, 02:20
Apr 2, 2014, 02:20
 
Translation: I'm still waiting for the right offer so I can fly off to Belize once this whole thing crashes down as the scam it'll be.

Our ships are digital: We'll ream you for the glow ship of the month after we get all free submissions from suckers, errr contributing artists, and only say thanks for letting us keep the money from your idea. Building the universe of my dreams? I'm sitting back while coders code and artist design while I'll slap my name on it for some reason before they realize they don't need me.
59.
 
removed
Apr 2, 2014, 01:19
59.
removed Apr 2, 2014, 01:19
Apr 2, 2014, 01:19
 
* REMOVED *
This comment was deleted on Apr 2, 2014, 16:59.
58.
 
Re: Roberts: We Won't Sell Star Citizen
Apr 1, 2014, 23:55
58.
Re: Roberts: We Won't Sell Star Citizen Apr 1, 2014, 23:55
Apr 1, 2014, 23:55
 
dont post monthly report dude, remember nothing is being made, all coke and hookers dude, havent you been reading the comments
57.
 
Re: Roberts: We Won't Sell Star Citizen
Apr 1, 2014, 23:29
57.
Re: Roberts: We Won't Sell Star Citizen Apr 1, 2014, 23:29
Apr 1, 2014, 23:29
 
Huuuge monthly report for Star Citizen just came out: March 2014 report
Avatar 56211
56.
 
Re: Roberts: We Won't Sell Star Citizen
Apr 1, 2014, 22:33
56.
Re: Roberts: We Won't Sell Star Citizen Apr 1, 2014, 22:33
Apr 1, 2014, 22:33
 

Roberts: We Won't Sell Star Citizen

yea riiiiiiiight...
55.
 
Re: Star Citizen
Apr 1, 2014, 20:59
55.
Re: Star Citizen Apr 1, 2014, 20:59
Apr 1, 2014, 20:59
 
{PH}88fingers wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 18:59:
If you guys hate games so much why keep coming to a gaming news site and posting hate over and over and over again

I'm pretty sure most of us don't hate games. This game is pretty polarizing and either people love the concept or hate it.

Here's my concerns for this game in particular (and I'm sure a lot of you won't agree)
1) Selling ships for cash i.e. pay to win
2) The concept of "insurance" in a game
3) Over promising, and likely underdelivering
4) Having both a single player and an MMO game
5) Constant emails to sell more virtual things and raise more real money. Doesn't give a good impression.

I definitely like the space sim genre of games. However, pay-to-win MMOs are not my style of game. I think we've been through the pay-to-win vs not pay-to-win argument enough (to me it's paying to win, to those dropping money for virtual ships it's not).

I'm fine with some of you dropping thousands of dollars on this - but I hope this is not the direction that gaming in general is taking.

I'm not a microtransaction gamer, having some sort of taxi style meter down the road that charges as I play (which is not in this game yet that I know of) takes the fun out of games.
54.
 
Re: Star Citizen
Apr 1, 2014, 18:59
54.
Re: Star Citizen Apr 1, 2014, 18:59
Apr 1, 2014, 18:59
 
I'm as baffled... guess having the hate hard-ons for games is the way to go around here.

what is it, $35? for a chance at a great game, I'm also looking forward to seeing what comes of it.

With the amount of studios and people now working on this game(and the subsequent amount of community communication and material they show), it's too funny seeing everyone here going on about 'scam'... but then again don't know why I'm surprised, seems like the norm to bash games around here. If you guys hate games so much why keep coming to a gaming news site and posting hate over and over and over again
53.
 
Re: Star Citizen
Apr 1, 2014, 18:40
53.
Re: Star Citizen Apr 1, 2014, 18:40
Apr 1, 2014, 18:40
 
Mad Max RW wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 17:12:
If the whole thing is a scam we'll all find out sooner or later. Unless you have some evidence you just sound like a jackass.

I would say if it's a scam, it's the most elaborate scam in gaming history.
I'm a smoldering volcano of virility. At least, that's what I tell myself.
Avatar 22024
52.
 
Re: Star Citizen
Apr 1, 2014, 18:38
52.
Re: Star Citizen Apr 1, 2014, 18:38
Apr 1, 2014, 18:38
 
Mad Max RW wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 17:03:
Kosumo wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 16:37:
Can you list some of these games then for us n00bs?

Watch the first 30 seconds of every interview. Many are pretty green but there's a lot of veterans. A couple games that stuck out are Ghostbusters, Wing Commander, The Walking Dead. Some former Turbine, Blizzard, and Terminal Reality devs.

I don't get why people on Blue's are so incredibly biased against this particular game. If it fails it fails. So what?

Honestly, I'm a bit baffled myself. Probably because this is the biggest crowdfunded game in history and the obscene amounts of money have people worried that it will fail to live up to the promise, or even come out at all (they could blow it all, 38 Studios-style). I do wonder though, if games like Project Eternity or Wasteland had open ended Kickstarters, how much money they could have pulled in. I think the SC funding level is as much a function of its longevity as its popularity.

Personally, as a backer, I give Chris and his team the full benefit of the doubt. Until it enters Duke Nukem territory, I will just watch and wait.
I'm a smoldering volcano of virility. At least, that's what I tell myself.
Avatar 22024
51.
 
Re: Star Citizen
Apr 1, 2014, 18:38
51.
Re: Star Citizen Apr 1, 2014, 18:38
Apr 1, 2014, 18:38
 
We should be pissed if the DFM sucks. That should be the bread and butter of this game not all the other GTA in space bullshit. If the DFM sucks and continue to sucks Im way the fuck out..


Tumbler wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 17:42:
Comet wrote on Apr 1, 2014, 15:54:
I read some of the posts and I don't understand the negativism towards Star Citizen or Chris Roberts.

I think it has a lot to do with the complexity of what he wants to do.

The timeline that was originally laid out was nothing short of insane. The game they want to make is going to take between 3-4 years at a fully staffed dev studio that already works well together. (IE had a large catalog of games under their belt.)

Since it's an Online world that they want to create and let players have experiences in day in and day out the work load to bring that into reality is immense and we've seen dozens of company's do it. most fail, some fail and survive, and a few flourish.

The project is supposed to be a full fledge SP campaign ala wing commander games with the same scale and scope of a AAA action game. Like Crysis for example. That is normally a 2 year dev cycle at least. They also want to build a MMO hybrid online world. Doing both of those things inside 2 years was crazy. When 2012 ended and the real work began they had maybe 12 million? Not a lot, that is a year's budget for many large devs.

This put a lot of people on the defensive that this project was not able to reach it's goal. The thing people are still adjusting to is the increased funding the project got in 2013. All from fans. They ended 2013 with approx 38 million in total funds gathered. But they missed their target release for the dogfighting module. (we're hoping that is in 2 weeks or at least this month)

The way they got most of that 38 million was selling spaceships. Most of these ships don't exist in any real way. They are concept art. Some of them are ships you can walk around in with the Hangar module. (demo of your hangar with ships in it) These ships ranged in price from $30 - $1000+ and people were lining up to get the highest price ships.

That is bizarre to even me. The most I spent on a single ship was $250 but that came with a shit load of extra stuff, like a collectors edition of a game normally does. I spend $100 on a cutlass and eventually another $60 on an avenger. I also bought an Aurora just because. ($40) I've bought plenty of phyiscal stuff as well, shirts, mouse pads, a hoodie, and I have a subcription which kicks in $10 a month. I think the slow bleed over time has enabled them to get a lot more money out of fans than anyone expected. All along the way they've been improving their communication, they have a youtube show that airs each week, they have a star ship design compeition which airs each week and we have a special 10 min clip of CR himself answering questions.

It's easy to see why all this looks crazy from the outside but being on the inside it's one of the most exciting experiences I've ever been a part of.

I just spend more than $1000 on upgrading my pc finally, dragged my feet on that long as I dared. Still need a good joystick...won't I be pissed if the DFM sucks? Well...no. I'll have is this awesome gaming pc plus all the amazing memories so far! Truth be told if the game ends up sucking I can't say I regret any of this. It's more fun to dream and hope for this than stick with the AAA titles coming from the major players.

You can get involved for very little money, I think it's $35 to buy the starter ship and that also gets you into alpha / beta stuff so you'll have stuff to play very soon.
70 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  ] Older