Some Star Citizen Refunds

Some requests for refunds from Star Citizen backers are being granted by Cloud Imperium Games, reports Polygon, noting a recent a recent survey suggested there were a surprising number of customers looking to get their money back (including quotes from our own KXmode about his refund). They spoke about this during a conversation with Chris Roberts. "We don't publicize it, but when people reach out to us and talk to us in a rational manner, in most cases we've refunded them," Roberts says. "We don't want people to be part of the project if they're not happy." There are no public announcements or guarantees attached to this reimbursement policy, which remains completely at the company's discretion, as they are not obligated to make refunds.

The article recaps the slipped delivery dates for the space simulation as the scope of the game's design has grown along with its crowdfunded budget, discussing how this has has contributed to whatever degree of discontent this all represents. Here's more:

A spokesperson for Cloud Imperium said that a total of 1,269 refunds have so far been given out, with 93 refunds since the beginning of July. Roberts declined to say what percentage of refund applications are granted.

"If there are cases where people are really upset, or facing personal hardships, on a case by case basis we take a look and we refund," he said. "We don't want to keep people around. We don't want to fight with them."
View : : :
90 Replies. 5 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  ] Older
90.
 
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds
Aug 25, 2015, 16:38
Kxmode
 
90.
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 25, 2015, 16:38
Aug 25, 2015, 16:38
 Kxmode
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Aug 24, 2015, 14:19:
I don't like the business model but I accept it as a necessary evil. Were it EA or Ubisoft, which do have the money for such a project, I wouldn't have any tolerance for it.

......

What will be interesting is how funding is handled after release, as the introduction of subscriptions or F2P mechanics is not acceptable. I'm okay with them continuing to sell ship bundles for new users and new concept ships and expansions; I'm not okay with mandatory subscriptions and am opposed to the policy of allowing people to buy in-game credit (which is currently the case).

red words mean serious business.
"Listen, Peter... with great horsepower comes... the sickest drifts..." - source
Avatar 18786
89.
 
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds
Aug 25, 2015, 04:15
89.
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 25, 2015, 04:15
Aug 25, 2015, 04:15
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Aug 24, 2015, 14:19:
I don't like the business model but I accept it as a necessary evil. Were it EA or Ubisoft, which do have the money for such a project, I wouldn't have any tolerance for it.

......

What will be interesting is how funding is handled after release, as the introduction of subscriptions or F2P mechanics is not acceptable. I'm okay with them continuing to sell ship bundles for new users and new concept ships and expansions; I'm not okay with mandatory subscriptions and am opposed to the policy of allowing people to buy in-game credit (which is currently the case).

I sorry that you think that there could ever be necessary evil - any evil is evil and if you can see it but choose to do nothing about it you are letting evil into your life.

Since you are prepared to allow the 'necessary evil' to hopefully get what you want, Star Citizen/SQ42, your oppersion to the selling of in game cash once the game goes live (which is totally agaist any kind of fair play) is of little concern.

You are happy to support the game although you can see some of the funding mode is far from pure (the fact that some people will start with so much more than others will in it self be a large turn off to many would be new players) dispite Chris saying that it is all good and the way it should be.

So many thing wrong with this game/scam as I have seen even you point out on other forums that it is amazing that you still come out to bat for it.

I don't think anyone is waiting to say "I told you so", I think most of use are just keen to see it stop and for others to be informed before they pay heaps of money for internet spaceships for a game that is still not out.
88.
 
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds
Aug 25, 2015, 01:01
88.
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 25, 2015, 01:01
Aug 25, 2015, 01:01
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Aug 24, 2015, 19:45:
Because you certainly don't seem to understand what hypocrisy is.

I know exactly what it is. You can try to rationalize it any way you want, but in the end, you are just trying to rationalize YOUR hypocrisy.
Currently setting a record for most edited posts, 1 reply at a time.
87.
 
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds
Aug 24, 2015, 23:17
87.
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 24, 2015, 23:17
Aug 24, 2015, 23:17
 
I fail to see how a publisher/developer having their own financing or notimpacts the fact that the RSI is paying for development of a game by selling in game assets for real world dollars, before they've even produced the playable product.

If you think that is a valid business model, then it's should be ok in your mind for any company to employ it, but you give CIG a pass, and chastise EA or Ubisoft for it. Hence, you are a hypocrite.

Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishfull thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms.
-Robert Heinlein
Avatar 17580
86.
 
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds
Aug 24, 2015, 19:45
86.
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 24, 2015, 19:45
Aug 24, 2015, 19:45
 
Dacron wrote on Aug 24, 2015, 15:01:
So accepting something from company A is okay, but the same thing from company B is NOT okay.
Absolutely, yes.

If EA decided to fund the next Battlefield game on Kickstarter, charging large amounts for in-game vehicles, maps and other content then I would be outraged because they have the financial resources to fund it themselves. It would simply be a way for them to avoid any liability, as if the game is crap or never released then gamers have no recourse.

If on the other hand an indie developer decides to do the same thing because it wouldn't have been funded any other way then I support that. People know the risks going in and it's not a large publisher with shareholders only interested in making money at the expense of gamers, like EA.

Do you really not understand my position? Because you certainly don't seem to understand what hypocrisy is. Large publisher that could fund it themselves = bad; indie developer that can't get funding any other way = fine. That's an intellectually consistent position.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
85.
 
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds
Aug 24, 2015, 15:01
85.
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 24, 2015, 15:01
Aug 24, 2015, 15:01
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Aug 24, 2015, 14:19:
It's not hypocritical - it's a logically consistent position. Star Citizen is a game I want to play but it would never have been made any other way. Either I accept a less than ideal business model or I boycott it. I don't like the business model but I accept it as a necessary evil. Were it EA or Ubisoft, which do have the money for such a project, I wouldn't have any tolerance for it.

On the plus side the funding model has allowed the game to become much larger and more ambitious than anyone thought was possible. What will be interesting is how funding is handled after release, as the introduction of subscriptions or F2P mechanics is not acceptable. I'm okay with them continuing to sell ship bundles for new users and new concept ships and expansions; I'm not okay with mandatory subscriptions and am opposed to the policy of allowing people to buy in-game credit (which is currently the case).

If pretending that I'm brainwashed makes you feel better then go ahead, it's no skin off my back.

So accepting something from company A is okay, but the same thing from company B is NOT okay.

How isn't that hypocritical? You can try to rationalize it with any excuse (corporations, full funded publicly traded publisher etc...), but that statement IS hypocritical.

It is NOT acceptable from B, but it is okay from A. That is a hypocritical statement, regardless of your rationalization.
Currently setting a record for most edited posts, 1 reply at a time.
84.
 
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds
Aug 24, 2015, 14:19
84.
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 24, 2015, 14:19
Aug 24, 2015, 14:19
 
grudgebearer wrote on Aug 24, 2015, 07:19:
How staggeringly honest, and completely hypocritical of you. It's terrible when EA does it, but brilliant and awesome when CIG does it; you really are brainwashed.
It's not hypocritical - it's a logically consistent position. Star Citizen is a game I want to play but it would never have been made any other way. Either I accept a less than ideal business model or I boycott it. I don't like the business model but I accept it as a necessary evil. Were it EA or Ubisoft, which do have the money for such a project, I wouldn't have any tolerance for it.

On the plus side the funding model has allowed the game to become much larger and more ambitious than anyone thought was possible. What will be interesting is how funding is handled after release, as the introduction of subscriptions or F2P mechanics is not acceptable. I'm okay with them continuing to sell ship bundles for new users and new concept ships and expansions; I'm not okay with mandatory subscriptions and am opposed to the policy of allowing people to buy in-game credit (which is currently the case).

If pretending that I'm brainwashed makes you feel better then go ahead, it's no skin off my back.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
83.
 
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds
Aug 24, 2015, 07:19
83.
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 24, 2015, 07:19
Aug 24, 2015, 07:19
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Aug 23, 2015, 21:25:
Of course the new ships are responsible for CIG's income - that's their business model. It's not a secret. But adding new ships isn't greed any more than the initial pitch was - the game would not have been funded any other way.

Were this coming from a publisher like EA or Ubisoft I'd be absolutely on your side but this is a game that literally wouldn't have been made any other way. If your argument is that this game shouldn't have been made then you're entitled to that opinion but the reality is that nearly a million people felt otherwise and have supported the project, while many others will buy it once it's released. That justifies its existence.

How staggeringly honest, and completely hypocritical of you. It's terrible when EA does it, but brilliant and awesome when CIG does it; you really are brainwashed.
Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishfull thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms.
-Robert Heinlein
Avatar 17580
82.
 
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds
Aug 23, 2015, 21:25
82.
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 23, 2015, 21:25
Aug 23, 2015, 21:25
 
Kosumo wrote on Aug 23, 2015, 02:25:
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 09:34:
Kosumo wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 04:23:
Fidelity does not equal great gameplay.
I didn't suggest otherwise.

Yes you did, otherwise what did you mean by this?

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 03:10:
We're all well aware of the delays. What matters is whether the end game is decent and that looks to be the case now more than ever. Go back and watch the original pitch then watch the Gamescom demo - the fidelity is far beyond what was originally shown.

Because the 'gameplay*' in the kickstarter video looks better still than the 'gameplay*' in that Gamescom demo.
Two different things. The fidelity has increased AND the depth of gameplay has increased - it's just easier to see the difference when it comes to fidelity.

Kosumo wrote on Aug 23, 2015, 02:25:
If that is true, and it's what the backers want then why don't people just fund him more money without get spaceships in return?
Because, as I very clearly pointed out, the selling of spaceships has always been how the game has been funded. Continuing that isn't a deviation - it's perfectly consistent.

Kosumo wrote on Aug 23, 2015, 02:25:
I bet if there where not always a new better internet spaceship FOR SALE, then the money would stop. Ergo, adding new ships (which have made some old one subpar from what I've heard) is total GREED.
Of course the new ships are responsible for CIG's income - that's their business model. It's not a secret. But adding new ships isn't greed any more than the initial pitch was - the game would not have been funded any other way.

Were this coming from a publisher like EA or Ubisoft I'd be absolutely on your side but this is a game that literally wouldn't have been made any other way. If your argument is that this game shouldn't have been made then you're entitled to that opinion but the reality is that nearly a million people felt otherwise and have supported the project, while many others will buy it once it's released. That justifies its existence.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
81.
 
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds
Aug 23, 2015, 21:15
81.
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 23, 2015, 21:15
Aug 23, 2015, 21:15
 
panbient wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 09:41:
Like an engine + chassis but without a body? Sounds entirely drive-able, definitely not street legal, but totally drive-able, and likely the first 2 of 3 major elements to be addressed.
Please. Look at what's usually added last - seats, electrics, wheels, doors, etc. Definitely not drivable.

panbient wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 09:41:
And still nothing about Squadron 42, you know, the actual spiritual successor to Wing Commander that got so many people hyped in the very first place. And is there evidence or not, you completely flip flop between the start and the finish. Is there actual evidence coming or will it be MIA?
We haven't seen any footage from S42 to avoid spoiling the story but the leak earlier this year revealed a huge amount of the assets being worked on that hadn't been shown to backers.

panbient wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 09:41:
Don't forget, HL2, or GTA5, or Doom4 or whatever are being made by groups of people who've got a history of delivering. They're also not first attempts, and they're not trying to shoot for a target that no one has hit before and beyond the scope of anything else in the entire industry. Think about that. People who are essentially doing the same thing over again still have a hard time getting it right.
CR has a well-established and critically acclaimed history in the industry, as have many of the people working for him. It's more difficult for a project like this because they needed the funding before they could hire the people necessary but we know that.

panbient wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 09:41:
Gee. I wonder if Id being absorbed by Zenimax / Bethesda had anything to do with the length of development. Oh! Development has been entirely restarted by Bethesda as of 2011.
Gee, I wonder if the game raising $87m and having to build the studio from the ground up has anything to do with the development length of SC. But no, we can't mention that because it doesn't suit your argument.

panbient wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 09:41:
Decent? DECENT?!?! Decent does not sound like a valid adjective for what has been routinely quoted as the Best Damn Space Sim Ever! Fidelity is worthless if the underlying framework can barely support it. It's like those douchebags who get a Ferrari body on top of a Honda Civic chassis. Sure it 'looks' like a Ferrari... but it's not a Ferrari.
Dude, take a chill pill.

"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
80.
 
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds
Aug 23, 2015, 02:25
80.
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 23, 2015, 02:25
Aug 23, 2015, 02:25
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 09:34:
Kosumo wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 04:23:
Fidelity does not equal great gameplay.
I didn't suggest otherwise.

Yes you did, otherwise what did you mean by this?

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 03:10:
We're all well aware of the delays. What matters is whether the end game is decent and that looks to be the case now more than ever. Go back and watch the original pitch then watch the Gamescom demo - the fidelity is far beyond what was originally shown.

Because the 'gameplay*' in the kickstarter video looks better still than the 'gameplay*' in that Gamescom demo.

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 09:34:
The game was always based around selling 'internet spaceships', continuing that is perfectly in-line with the original pitch on Kickstarter. Accepting more money to make the game better isn't 'being greedy', it's what most backers want.

If that is true, and it's what the backers want then why don't people just fund him more money without get spaceships in return?

I bet if there where not always a new better internet spaceship FOR SALE, then the money would stop. Ergo, adding new ships (which have made some old one subpar from what I've heard) is total GREED.

You say fidelity a lot, like Chris as brainwashed you. It's his buzzword and also his excuse.

panbient wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 09:41:
Decent? DECENT?!?! Decent does not sound like a valid adjective for what has been routinely quoted as the Best Damn Space Sim Ever! Fidelity is worthless if the underlying framework can barely support it. It's like those douchebags who get a Ferrari body on top of a Honda Civic chassis. Sure it 'looks' like a Ferrari... but it's not a Ferrari.

Totally %100 right, well put panbient

*by gameplay, I mean the video showing Chris vision - I know it was moreso just a prerendered trailer, where as the Gamescon demo was at best a tech demo that looked very rought gameplay wise.
79.
 
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds
Aug 23, 2015, 01:59
79.
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 23, 2015, 01:59
Aug 23, 2015, 01:59
 
Oh no, someone is gonna get breached

"I'm breached, breached as bro"

"Bro, Your totally breached"

Incrimiating Video
78.
 
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds
Aug 22, 2015, 10:50
78.
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 22, 2015, 10:50
Aug 22, 2015, 10:50
 
panbient wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 09:41:

And still nothing about Squadron 42, you know, the actual spiritual successor to Wing Commander that got so many people hyped in the very first place. And is there evidence or not, you completely flip flop between the start and the finish. Is there actual evidence coming or will it be MIA?

Well... they did announce something. That it will take far longer and be released episodically.

Squadron 42 episodic

Cause I think giving you the whole Squadron 42 as just an alpha may not work as well because it's a story so it needs to be fairly polished as far as that goes, so one of our thoughts is to take Squadron 42 and sort of release it episodically before the game is fully finished where you play the first "X" number of missions, that are nice and well done and polished, and then the next "X" number of missions a month later and so on until you're done with Squadron 42 which would lead you on to the beta of the Persistent Universe.

lol.

This comment was edited on Aug 22, 2015, 11:03.
Currently setting a record for most edited posts, 1 reply at a time.
77.
 
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds
Aug 22, 2015, 10:45
77.
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 22, 2015, 10:45
Aug 22, 2015, 10:45
 
Task wrote on Aug 21, 2015, 10:32:
Ah, this again. Another 70+ comment thread maybe?

Still hoping to plop down 50 bucks when its done - mainly SP or being a space hermit in MP. Pretty amazing that people spent thousands, but then again there are people that spend that much on trashy F2P Mobile games in a month. Then again I know what's it like to be gipped having crowdfunded the bare-minimum game known as MWO (and there are people that are defending that game til its last breath, as they spent thousands).

I imagine an MMO like this, as high fidelity as it is, will take 6 years minimum, 8 years max (like some other big MMOs). I can wait, plenty of other things to play in the mean time.

DING DING DING. We have a winner!
“We’ve arranged a society on science and technology in which nobody understands anything about science and technology, and this combustible mixture of ignorance and power sooner or later is going to blow up in our faces." Carl Sagan
Avatar 58135
76.
 
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds
Aug 22, 2015, 10:20
Bub
76.
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 22, 2015, 10:20
Aug 22, 2015, 10:20
Bub
 
Crowdfunding is turning out to be the Eureka moment for shysters and film-flam men of all stripes.

With crowdfunding and the just as nefariously open to shearing the clueless "Early Access" all you need is a little bit of media savvy, a few good CGI people to produce a nice teaser every so often, and a buggy partly developed game to rake in some serious cash.

Currently in one early access game I play there a number of bugs to some really basic core items in game. The producer has said that either they have no clue on how to fix them, or that it would require a complete re-write or changing engines, neither of which they will do. Instead the developer starts work on some wonky feature creep feature that maybe 2 people asked for, but most could care less about. The developer pins it as the games future, and focuses on developing that while ignoring from there on out the core game bugs.

Star Citizen was pitched as an all in one Universe where you could go from fighter pilot to walking around a station, to an FPS, together with a persistent seamless RPG/MMO world. That quickly went by the wayside and now they are pitching separate "modules" for each type of environment and play. They went from seamless to separate stand alone packages pretty fast, so in that sense they will never deliver the original game people donated money for.

What is really entertaining and worth all the popcorn I have stocked up, is the ongoing drama as these hucksters continue these money making operations, while fan boys froth at the mouth to defend them.
==================================================
Bubb Stubbley
... I miss BBS..
"There is a sucker born every minute." - PT Barnum
==================================================
Avatar 58208
75.
 
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds
Aug 22, 2015, 09:41
75.
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 22, 2015, 09:41
Aug 22, 2015, 09:41
 
Because I'm super duper bored this morning...

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 03:10:
Any game that's part way into development is a 'buggy unplayable mess of a demo'. It's still missing core functionality. Heck, try driving a car that's only two-thirds complete.

Like an engine + chassis but without a body? Sounds entirely drive-able, definitely not street legal, but totally drive-able, and likely the first 2 of 3 major elements to be addressed. In video game terms - the engine (again), and the fundamental mechanics of the various systems the product needs to support, and virtually nothing to look at. No bells, no whistles, nothing shiny or pretty yet, because it has no real big picture value if the underlying elements aren't solid. That's not to say it doesn't have value from a marketing / fund raising standpoint but that's a whole other can of worms.

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 03:10:
What we do have, though, is evidence of much more substantial content coming - the social module, large maps, multi-crew and first-person combat. At the end of the year we should have a much better idea of where the project stands, as we'll have either had the social module, SM and AC2.0 or they'll be MIA.

And still nothing about Squadron 42, you know, the actual spiritual successor to Wing Commander that got so many people hyped in the very first place. And is there evidence or not, you completely flip flop between the start and the finish. Is there actual evidence coming or will it be MIA?

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 03:10:
Don't forget, Half-Life 2 took five years to develop.

Don't forget, HL2, or GTA5, or Doom4 or whatever are being made by groups of people who've got a history of delivering. They're also not first attempts, and they're not trying to shoot for a target that no one has hit before and beyond the scope of anything else in the entire industry. Think about that. People who are essentially doing the same thing over again still have a hard time getting it right.

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 03:10:
The scope of the project has expanded since the original pitch and now the only sensible comparison for development time is that of other AAA games and MMOs - they generally take at least fours years, usually five.

Again they're generally made by people who have a proven track record of delivering products. While I don't doubt the people hired by CIG have talent and ability Chris Roberts' own track record is a valid point of concern.

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 03:10:
Doom 4 was announced back in 2007 - it's taken eight years and they haven't released anything more than a trailer.

Gee. I wonder if Id being absorbed by Zenimax / Bethesda had anything to do with the length of development. Oh! Development has been entirely restarted by Bethesda as of 2011.

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 03:10:
We're all well aware of the delays. What matters is whether the end game is decent and that looks to be the case now more than ever. Go back and watch the original pitch then watch the Gamescom demo - the fidelity is far beyond what was originally shown.

Decent? DECENT?!?! Decent does not sound like a valid adjective for what has been routinely quoted as the Best Damn Space Sim Ever! Fidelity is worthless if the underlying framework can barely support it. It's like those douchebags who get a Ferrari body on top of a Honda Civic chassis. Sure it 'looks' like a Ferrari... but it's not a Ferrari.
74.
 
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds
Aug 22, 2015, 09:34
Kxmode
 
74.
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 22, 2015, 09:34
Aug 22, 2015, 09:34
 Kxmode
 
harlock wrote on Aug 21, 2015, 23:46:
he said the same thing, its a dig, you see

word. Cool
"Listen, Peter... with great horsepower comes... the sickest drifts..." - source
Avatar 18786
73.
 
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds
Aug 22, 2015, 09:34
73.
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 22, 2015, 09:34
Aug 22, 2015, 09:34
 
Kosumo wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 04:23:
Fidelity does not equal great gameplay.
I didn't suggest otherwise.

Kosumo wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 04:23:
When you say Half-life 2 or Doom 4 or whatever else took x amount of time, what you should keep in mind is that to the best of my mind, none of those games had been taking money, large amounts of money form people before they knew what the end product was going to be. They where companies that took on the risk themselves. They where free to do as they pleased.
Absolutely, but those games were able to get funding from a traditional publisher - Star Citizen wasn't. Everyone that has pledged has done so knowing the risks. Could it all go tits up? Absolutely, but I'm happy to gamble on it as it's my favourite genre and Chris Roberts is responsible for making some of my favourite games.

Kosumo wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 04:23:
With Chris Roberts, he made statements about what he was going to make and when it was going to be released, and took peoples money (sometimes many times the price of a AAA game). Not only did he not release it anytime close to when he had said, he changed what he was going to make.
Aside from the delays he has only expanded what was originally planned and did so based because of backers supporting those stretch goals. That doesn't mean everyone will be happy but they never will be.

Kosumo wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 04:23:
To this day he has failed to deliver on many of the thing he said.

To top all that off, he has a long track record of not delivering on what he said he will.
Aside from the delays there's nothing about the game that hasn't delivered. There are subjective criticisms - like the control system, the role of ships, etc - but the game hasn't had features removed.

Kosumo wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 04:23:
You have even admitted that the way he as been selling internet spaceships is a neccercy evil - it not neccesery, he could have had a go at making good on his promises when he was at the ~$20 million mark but no, he's greedy and wanted more money which has not in anyway help him focus on making a good game (you know the it's the gameplay that makes a great game/BDSSE, not the graphics).
The game was always based around selling 'internet spaceships', continuing that is perfectly in-line with the original pitch on Kickstarter. Accepting more money to make the game better isn't 'being greedy', it's what most backers want.

Kosumo wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 04:23:
He has mismanaged this form day one. And that is why no publisher would even give him two cents.
I doubt anyone could have done better given the circumstances. The project has become a victim of its own success. However, as long as the final game delivers most people will accept it.

Kosumo wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 04:23:
He is pissing away other peoples money. That's pretty scummy in my book. ymmv
That's your opinion. From my perspective I support the direction of the game, even if I dislike the delays.

El Pit wrote on Aug 22, 2015, 07:00:
What point are you trying to make, theyarecomingforyou?

That the game including all stretch goals will take 20+ years
Yes, that was obviously the point I was making. Wall
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
72.
 
New Module: Star Refunds
Aug 22, 2015, 07:00
El Pit
 
72.
New Module: Star Refunds Aug 22, 2015, 07:00
Aug 22, 2015, 07:00
 El Pit
 
What point are you trying to make, theyarecomingforyou?

That the game including all stretch goals will take 20+ years, because that is as long as it takes if you add production time for an egoshooter, an MMO, a space combat simulator, and a sort of successor to Klingon Commander? Or that it would take just 7 or 8 years if several studios (LOTS OF COST) have to work on different parts which would make putting the game together a pure nightmare? Everything you do is actually (unwillingly) criticising the production process of Star Citizen.

Whatever. No discussion will shut up the so-called "haters", only a released and good game will. And it should better include all modules, and all of them should be great, because that is what they are selling: the idea of the game to rule them all. For under $100m. Good luck with that.
"There is no right life in the wrong one." (Theodor W. Adorno, philosopher)
"Only a Sith deals in absolutes." (Obi-Wan Kenobi, Jedi)
Founder, president, and only member of the official "Grumpy Old Gamers Club". Please do not apply.
71.
 
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds
Aug 22, 2015, 04:23
71.
Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 22, 2015, 04:23
Aug 22, 2015, 04:23
 
Fidelity does not equal great gameplay.

When you say Half-life 2 or Doom 4 or whatever else took x amount of time, what you should keep in mind is that to the best of my mind, none of those games had been taking money, large amounts of money form people before they knew what the end product was going to be. They where companies that took on the risk themselves. They where free to do as they pleased.

With Chris Roberts, he made statements about what he was going to make and when it was going to be released, and took peoples money (sometimes many times the price of a AAA game). Not only did he not release it anytime close to when he had said, he changed what he was going to make.

To this day he has failed to deliver on many of the thing he said.

To top all that off, he has a long track record of not delivering on what he said he will.

You have even admitted that the way he as been selling internet spaceships is a neccercy evil - it not neccesery, he could have had a go at making good on his promises when he was at the ~$20 million mark but no, he's greedy and wanted more money which has not in anyway help him focus on making a good game (you know the it's the gameplay that makes a great game/BDSSE, not the graphics).

He has mismanaged this form day one. And that is why no publisher would even give him two cents.

But hey, if you believe him about how it's all going to super duper great and believe there is 'evidence of much more substantial content coming' (where is that evidence?) then full you space boots with faith in the man but don't be surprised when other call him a lair cos that is what he has done time and again.

He is pissing away other peoples money. That's pretty scummy in my book. ymmv
90 Replies. 5 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  ] Older