Op Ed

Ten Ton Hammer - Star Citizen's $2,500 Ship of Dreams.
"CIG claims that the ships price was ABOVE RETAIL to help FUND the $20 starter packs that were also of limited quantity. Basically, players "donating" $2,500 to the glorious cause were helping to fund starter packs that were half off of their $40 normal price tag. So basically, you give CIG $2,500 and they give you a ship, with no weapons or equipment (an empty hull), and at the same time you're helping them discount A VIRTUAL GOOD by HALF OFF. Even big box retailers are nicer than that. They don't say, "okay everyone buying these Skylander characters above retail will help us discount the physical starter kit to get more people addicted!" No, they just discount things, because they want them to sale.

CIG could just as easily went and discounted the package. The game is paid for now. There is no need for additional development resources. The game WILL NOT consumer the current budget, considering they just got in TWO DAYS what most game developers need to finish THEIR FULL PROJECTS START TO FINISH. They got basically the SAME AMOUNT they asked for to even make the game originally from their Kickstarter, this time without Kickstarter fees."

View : : :
20.
 
Re: Op Ed
Dec 2, 2014, 14:53
20.
Re: Op Ed Dec 2, 2014, 14:53
Dec 2, 2014, 14:53
 
Verno wrote on Dec 2, 2014, 11:22:
I don't understand why people keep throwing money at this game and I suspect they don't know the reason either.

because in space.. a moron and his money are still easily parted
Avatar 18283
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
2.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
12.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
3.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
4.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
8.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
11.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
13.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
14.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
   Re: Op Ed
18.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
 20.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
 Re: Op Ed
21.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
28.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
5.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
6.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
7.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
9.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
10.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
15.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
16.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
26.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
27.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
   Re: Op Ed
37.
Dec 3, 2014Dec 3 2014
39.
Dec 3, 2014Dec 3 2014
17.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
19.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
23.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
24.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
   Re: Op Ed
25.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
    Re: Op Ed
29.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
     Re: Op Ed
32.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
     Re: Op Ed
33.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
      Re: Op Ed
35.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
      Re: Op Ed
41.
Dec 3, 2014Dec 3 2014
      Re: Op Ed
38.
Dec 3, 2014Dec 3 2014
     Re: Op Ed
22.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
36.
Dec 3, 2014Dec 3 2014
30.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
31.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
34.
Dec 2, 2014Dec 2 2014
40.
Dec 3, 2014Dec 3 2014
42.
Dec 3, 2014Dec 3 2014
43.
Dec 4, 2014Dec 4 2014