Just on the subject of costs for games, think of GTA V and how much content it has and the cost of that game: $265 million. And then match that up with the scope of Star Citizen and the estimated development money so far... and then compare that to the fact that CIG isn't a company thats been around, nor do we know how long the development team has worked together... Rockstar has been a developmental force in the industry, CIG has never actually released a game and Chris Roberts' past games are not even a factor since he is not the entirety of the development team.
I'm not trying to be negative at all but its very VERY hard to conceive a game costing less than GTA V and having MORE than it.
To be fair, GTA V spent $150 million of that on marketing. I don't doubt that CIG has sunk a significant amount of money into their own marketing (as I pointed out upthread, they have run at least a season of 2 shows promoting the game) but almost no game spends that kind of money on marketing, let alone one without a publisher. CIG is still tens of millions of dollars behind their competitors, but not hundreds of millions.
Just on the subject of costs for games, think of GTA V and how much content it has and the cost of that game: $265 million. And then match that up with the scope of Star Citizen and the estimated development money so far... and then compare that to the fact that CIG isn't a company thats been around, nor do we know how long the development team has worked together... Rockstar has been a developmental force in the industry, CIG has never actually released a game and Chris Roberts' past games are not even a factor since he is not the entirety of the development team.
I'm not trying to be negative at all but its very VERY hard to conceive a game costing less than GTA V and having MORE than it.
To be fair, GTA V spent $150 million of that on marketing. I don't doubt that CIG has sunk a significant amount of money into their own marketing (as I pointed out upthread, they have run at least a season of 2 shows promoting the game) but almost no game spends that kind of money on marketing, let alone one without a publisher. CIG is still tens of millions of dollars behind their competitors, but not hundreds of millions.
Just on the subject of costs for games, think of GTA V and how much content it has and the cost of that game: $265 million. And then match that up with the scope of Star Citizen and the estimated development money so far... and then compare that to the fact that CIG isn't a company thats been around, nor do we know how long the development team has worked together... Rockstar has been a developmental force in the industry, CIG has never actually released a game and Chris Roberts' past games are not even a factor since he is not the entirety of the development team.
I'm not trying to be negative at all but its very VERY hard to conceive a game costing less than GTA V and having MORE than it.
To be fair, GTA V spent $150 million of that on marketing. I don't doubt that CIG has sunk a significant amount of money into their own marketing (as I pointed out upthread, they have run at least a season of 2 shows promoting the game) but almost no game spends that kind of money on marketing, let alone one without a publisher. CIG is still tens of millions of dollars behind their competitors, but not hundreds of millions.
Thats true, I had forgotten to add that caveat. But $100 million for a game like GTA which is a relatively large game but still a limited scope and they didn't use Hollywood actors and the Hollywood standard for CGI mocap, Andy Serkis who probably commands a large payout. I'm just curious how they're fitting all that in and making a persistent gamespace. It just doesn't make a lot of sense budgetwise to me, that what was promised could be developed and paid for, even if they broke $100 million, it still is far beyond the scope of any AAA game developed and I can't reconcile the budget.
It worries me is all.
Just on the subject of costs for games, think of GTA V and how much content it has and the cost of that game: $265 million. And then match that up with the scope of Star Citizen and the estimated development money so far... and then compare that to the fact that CIG isn't a company thats been around, nor do we know how long the development team has worked together... Rockstar has been a developmental force in the industry, CIG has never actually released a game and Chris Roberts' past games are not even a factor since he is not the entirety of the development team.
I'm not trying to be negative at all but its very VERY hard to conceive a game costing less than GTA V and having MORE than it.
To be fair, GTA V spent $150 million of that on marketing. I don't doubt that CIG has sunk a significant amount of money into their own marketing (as I pointed out upthread, they have run at least a season of 2 shows promoting the game) but almost no game spends that kind of money on marketing, let alone one without a publisher. CIG is still tens of millions of dollars behind their competitors, but not hundreds of millions.
Thats true, I had forgotten to add that caveat. But $100 million for a game like GTA which is a relatively large game but still a limited scope and they didn't use Hollywood actors and the Hollywood standard for CGI mocap, Andy Serkis who probably commands a large payout. I'm just curious how they're fitting all that in and making a persistent gamespace. It just doesn't make a lot of sense budgetwise to me, that what was promised could be developed and paid for, even if they broke $100 million, it still is far beyond the scope of any AAA game developed and I can't reconcile the budget.
It worries me is all.
The main thing I have noticed about space games is that they only really need to make the assets in the game (ships, stations, asteroids etc...) the maps themselves are just open space with a very pretty background. GTAV has a massive open world and that costs a lot to make.
Is there any clear indication of what they do and do not count as 'main funding'? I assumed the $90 million was them posting the balance from the bottom of their Accounts & Billing spreadsheet; the pledge sheet says it only counts money going towards the game development, but the subscriber page says that in addition to funding Around the Verse it also funds "the development and release of subscriber-exclusive perks and merchandise!" It doesn't take a liberal reading of 'game development' to assume that money associated with developing exclusive bits of the game would factor in there. And if not, it's unusual for Star Citizen (which trumpets the amount they have made) to not disclose the amount of money raised or number of subscribers.
@Imperioratorex Caprae: I'm worried as well. This just tends to get into a messy discussion, so I like to be clear.
They might just be following the adage, "better a bird in hand than two in the bush."
What they've essentially said at this point is that they're using the current structure like pre-orders, with people able to buy the game early and get special access to ships and other materials. I disagree with the idea of pre-payment without a clear idea of the end product in general, and I think it's especially egregious to keep offering sales of hundreds of dollars worth of ships, but it doesn't inherently mean that the extended public funding is a sign of trouble.
Absorbing this money is IMO not a good practise, either for a business or for the industry in general to make acceptable, but it's not dishonest in and of itself. It's open to all the interpretations that you offer, but it could just be that they like money in their wallets with committed customers, as opposed to empty wallets and potential customers.
If it was just the game, I wouldn't be quite so upset. Pre-Orders are a thing, of course.
Its the ships their offering, that will supposedly go away at release. It reeks of pay to win (Or 'pay to experience everything,' since many of these ships are likely to require an absurd amount of time investment, at the least), and the claim to remove them can have the affect of making people buy them now, while they can. It possible, of course, that greed or need isn't the cause of this practice, but ask yourself (The reader, not just you Thunderous Cacophony) this - If this was an EA game, would this practice make you nervous?
Corralis said:
AccursedTheory said:
Corralis said:
AccursedTheory said:
Tharaxis said:
AccursedTheory said:
Tharaxis said:
AccursedTheory said:
To people who may know more then me:
On their website, stretch goals ended at 65 million dollars. Their 27 million above that now. Have they offered more for that 27 million, or is it pure bank for them?
This is another disturbing thing - According to what I'm reading, everything they were offering was supposed to be delivered at the, quite frankly, bargain bin price of 65 million dollars. Unless theres something I don't know.
It was stated that doing endless stretch goals was pointless since they kept on being broken through by the backers, that they would instead cease adding further stretch goals and that any additional monies would just be generally folded back into making the game better (for whatever value of "better" may be).
See, I do find that disturbing. Because if the money isn't being given to a specific goal, that means either one or some or all of the following is true:
1. Cloud Imperium really did fuck up their budgeting, and they desperately need this money to get everything they've already promised done.
2. Cloud Imperium wants your money, now, and this is no longer a crowd funding project, but simply the greatest money making scheme devised in gaming since DLC.
3. The current shop is simply a 'pay to win' system that has the audacity to exist before the game is even playable.
I would say it implies none of the above, and your conspiracy theories are pretty much without merit.
All it means is that the budget is ultimately going towards the game, which is where it's supposed to go in the first place. I mean if I went and said "oh well that's just cream on the top now" then you would have decried THAT and said "oh well that shows that they're just screwing customers out of their cash". Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Eventually a project has to stop adding new features and has to say "okay, well, we can now look to improving our current set of features to flesh them out further than we intended, and/or to go into further development post-release". Would you prefer that extra money WASN'T going towards the game? I don't really understand your logic.
I would prefer that if they have everything they need, they shut down the crowd funding system and get on with it. Like the majority of similar projects do.
If they have all the money they need, then keeping the shop open just to get more people involved is a financially dumb move, since the game is essentially 15+ dollars off right now. The only reason it is financially viable to keep it open is to sell ships, or 'free' products to produce, which they've told us wont be available when the game comes out (To buy, that is). To me, that's a very suspicious business model. 'Buy now, before there's a solid idea of whats going on, AND because all of this is a limited time offer.'
As for it going to the game, well, HOW? The game promised was a space sim with a massive universe, several different game play types, and of a quality (Audio and graphically) so amazing it would melt your computer and give you a joy boner. They talked extensively about how they were making a game that wasn't aimed at the lowest system, and would be mind blowing.
When that's your starting point, what could that 27 million possibly go towards? To use your wording, they were offering cream from the beginning. What possible cranny could they jam more cream into?
I would love for Star Citizen to come out and deliver on every promise. I would overjoyed to be forced to build a new PC to play it. But I can't find a single thing about the process right now that doesn't at least make me nervous. And, if your curious, I felt this way long before the Escapist articles brought these questions to the forefront.
Tharaxis said:
A good example of the above is lets say at the 65 million dollar mark the acting would be motion capture, but now with the additional budget they can enhance that with full performance capture and all the extra tech that has been built around facial animation - enhancing what would have been normal mocap and turning it into something more impressive.
Note, I am only using the above as an example, I have no idea at what point performance capture was chosen over motion capture or whether motion capture was ever the original idea at all It is merely for the purposes of illustration.
OK well I was going to stay quiet but I have to say something here.
What you have said above is remarkable, you think that when all the stretch goals ended at the 65 million mark they should have closed down the fund raising? Are you serious? That would have cost CIG $27 million and counting, doesn't seem like the best buisness strategy to me.
Also (and this is just a simple correction), you state that the original promise was a space sim with a massive universe, that is incorrect, the original promise was for a space sim with about 12 systems.
Now the original game was supposed to be fully funded at the 22 million mark, that was the point that they could make the original design of the game. So what have they added since then? Let's list them shall we?
Facial Capture system
Additional Alien ship
Public transportation system
Enhanced alpha
Enhanced capital ship systems
Additional Alien ship
Additional starter ship
Enhanced mission design for Squadron 42
6 Additional ships
6 additional systems
R&D into procedural Generation
Better Website
Better in-game interface (mobiglass)
Additional ship
Towel???
New suit of armor for all players
New map room for hanger
Weird artifact for players
Updated scanning software
Engine tuning kit for all players
New ship commercial
Space plant
Alien languages
Web-based universe map (currently online)
Mining drone
Independant Arbitrator's guild
More detailed AI
New ballistic gattling gun for all players
New liquid cooling system for ships
Additional ship
10,000 UEC for all players
Additional ship x5
Pets
Enhanced ship modularity (that's the big one)
And that's all after you got...
100 extra systems, full capital ship support, Oculus Rift support, second chapter of Squadron 42 for free, profesional motion capture, enhanced boarding options, increased ship customization, tablet companion, celebrity voice actors, 4th alien race, professional modding tools, expanded squadron 42, ship boarding, full FPS moddule, more community videos, professional sound studio, full orchastra score, command and control centre on Capital Ships, space station management and salvage mechanic role ability.
And none of the above was in the original design of the game pitched on kickstarter.
So when people complain about the game being delayed, just take a look at that list (which isn't even close to everything they have added, just the big things) and tell me you still think they should have finished the game in 2014.
You know, you could have just quoted me from earlier in the thread. I had that full list posted already (I didn't add the digital stuff though, since most of its trivial trash that has little financial input).
And they offered the massive universe (100 systems) at the 6mil mark. Which was part of the initial kickstarter (Plus their internal crowd funding system, which I can't recall what it was called at the time). Just for reference.
And mocap was at 10 million. I know you didn't ask that, but someone else was talking about it and my answer, which I pulled from memory, was way the hell off. Seems like a good time to correct myself.
As for the 27 million... of course its good business. They've made 27 million dollars off of assets that aren't available yet, and which don't actually cost them anything to make (As pretty much all the ships available were payed for already). But that's not really what my point was, is it? Cloud Imperium has kept their funding wide open, which is not how most crowd funding is done, and have absorbed 27 million dollars from backers with no specific goal. One option is that they need it, which means they planned poorly, and that's bad. The other is they don't, and their milking people for money and the game is going to be the most amazing game ever conceived of to date, with a budget that couldn't get a CoD based shooter off the ground.
Or it could be that other option, where this is a colossal wreck.
OK seriously dude, you need to stop talking cause your facts are way off. The original kickstarter was for 2 million which means that the 100 systems was not in the kickstarter.
The ships were payed for by the initial amount, or by several of the stretch goals, most of which were way above $150k (1 mil for many, and while most of those arn't single seater, how much more expensive can they be?). And there's something sort of weird about making a ship a stretch goal, so you buy ships to unlock it, so it gets made, and then you buy THAT ship to unlock the next one...
Corralis said:
Chris made a massive post when the crowd funding goal reached 65 million. In it he stated that they could continue coming up with new stretch goals but he didn't want to keep adding more stuff to the game and wanted to knuckle down and just get everything promised up to that point in the game and working.
Then he should stop sucking peoples wallets dry. If he's actually said 'Hey, we don't need any money no more,' which I don't doubt, then why aren't you suspicious that he's still selling ships? Wasn't the whole point to give an incentive beyond expanding the game to get money to expand the game? Why is it still called 'funding,' when funding is officially over - Its raw profit at this point, isn't it? Pure selling and buying?
Corralis said:
I know 'other' crowd-funded projects would stop asking for money but as we all know, Star Citizen is not like any other crowd-funded project.
I think that's the point most people here who are questioning Star Citizen are making. But why is Star Citizen special? Why can it get away with things that other crowd sourced games would get questioned for by everyone, and practices that would make your blood literally boil out of your veins if someone like Activision or EA tried it?
Corralis said:
Are they milking people for more money? If that's your opinion the that's fine but if people are willing to give them more money then I don't see the problem. When they release a new ship's concept sale they are only doing those for ships that have already been announced with the stretch goals, they aren't adding in stuff that they haven't told anyone about with the possible exception of the Vanduul ships (the Scythe being for kickstarter backers only and the Glaive being purchaseable if you completed Arena Commander's 18 waves). Also I think we have now had all the ships from the stretch goals announced and sold so that basically ends now.
Is there any clear indication of what they do and do not count as 'main funding'? I assumed the $90 million was them posting the balance from the bottom of their Accounts & Billing spreadsheet; the pledge sheet says it only counts money going towards the game development, but the subscriber page says that in addition to funding Around the Verse it also funds "the development and release of subscriber-exclusive perks and merchandise!" It doesn't take a liberal reading of 'game development' to assume that money associated with developing exclusive bits of the game would factor in there. And if not, it's unusual for Star Citizen (which trumpets the amount they have made) to not disclose the amount of money raised or number of subscribers.
@Imperioratorex Caprae: I'm worried as well. This just tends to get into a messy discussion, so I like to be clear.
Well no clear indication but I beleieve the words 'subscribers contribute *additonal* funding specifically for the additional community programs to be produced' (exact wording may differ). The subscriber exclusive perks and merchandise would be the monthly Jump Point magazine as well as subscriber flair items for the hanger module. The subscriber money does not go into the main funding total and you're right, there is no where that says exactly how much money the subscribers have raised but it's somewhere between $10 and $20 per month per subscriber althoguh we don't know how many of those there are either.
The main thing I have noticed about space games is that they only really need to make the assets in the game (ships, stations, asteroids etc...) the maps themselves are just open space with a very pretty background. GTAV has a massive open world and that costs a lot to make.
Its not the visual content that worries me, its the backend claims, the steep physics and also the persistent world as well as the proposed realtime reconciliation of the inside of ships while they're travelling or fighting. There's a lot of content promised that would take a LOT of development to realize. Space itself is not empty as well and if they're going for a fully realized conceptualization of space, they're not making anything like we've ever played before. They could skip out on filling space with the things we know exist there and that would save money... but there's a lot promised in scope.
Its very hard for me to believe anyone who promises game content anymore and when I analyze the previous games released, their budgets and scope and compare it to SC, I am not confident in a fledgling studio fulfilling all those promises. I'm not saying the game is going to be horrible, but I'm not quite sure it can be everything its promised and that is going to hurt a lot of people if it ends up that way. The odds are not with CIG on this.
I pride myself on being a positive person, but even I have my limits and when I encounter something that throws up red flags, its very hard for me to put aside the doubts those red flags raise. And Star Citizen in promise really raises a lot of those red flags.
On their website, stretch goals ended at 65 million dollars. Their 27 million above that now. Have they offered more for that 27 million, or is it pure bank for them?
This is another disturbing thing - According to what I'm reading, everything they were offering was supposed to be delivered at the, quite frankly, bargain bin price of 65 million dollars. Unless theres something I don't know.
It was stated that doing endless stretch goals was pointless since they kept on being broken through by the backers, that they would instead cease adding further stretch goals and that any additional monies would just be generally folded back into making the game better (for whatever value of "better" may be).
See, I do find that disturbing. Because if the money isn't being given to a specific goal, that means either one or some or all of the following is true:
1. Cloud Imperium really did fuck up their budgeting, and they desperately need this money to get everything they've already promised done.
2. Cloud Imperium wants your money, now, and this is no longer a crowd funding project, but simply the greatest money making scheme devised in gaming since DLC.
3. The current shop is simply a 'pay to win' system that has the audacity to exist before the game is even playable.
I would say it implies none of the above, and your conspiracy theories are pretty much without merit.
All it means is that the budget is ultimately going towards the game, which is where it's supposed to go in the first place. I mean if I went and said "oh well that's just cream on the top now" then you would have decried THAT and said "oh well that shows that they're just screwing customers out of their cash". Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Eventually a project has to stop adding new features and has to say "okay, well, we can now look to improving our current set of features to flesh them out further than we intended, and/or to go into further development post-release". Would you prefer that extra money WASN'T going towards the game? I don't really understand your logic.
I would prefer that if they have everything they need, they shut down the crowd funding system and get on with it. Like the majority of similar projects do.
If they have all the money they need, then keeping the shop open just to get more people involved is a financially dumb move, since the game is essentially 15+ dollars off right now. The only reason it is financially viable to keep it open is to sell ships, or 'free' products to produce, which they've told us wont be available when the game comes out (To buy, that is). To me, that's a very suspicious business model. 'Buy now, before there's a solid idea of whats going on, AND because all of this is a limited time offer.'
As for it going to the game, well, HOW? The game promised was a space sim with a massive universe, several different game play types, and of a quality (Audio and graphically) so amazing it would melt your computer and give you a joy boner. They talked extensively about how they were making a game that wasn't aimed at the lowest system, and would be mind blowing.
When that's your starting point, what could that 27 million possibly go towards? To use your wording, they were offering cream from the beginning. What possible cranny could they jam more cream into?
I would love for Star Citizen to come out and deliver on every promise. I would overjoyed to be forced to build a new PC to play it. But I can't find a single thing about the process right now that doesn't at least make me nervous. And, if your curious, I felt this way long before the Escapist articles brought these questions to the forefront.
Tharaxis said:
A good example of the above is lets say at the 65 million dollar mark the acting would be motion capture, but now with the additional budget they can enhance that with full performance capture and all the extra tech that has been built around facial animation - enhancing what would have been normal mocap and turning it into something more impressive.
Note, I am only using the above as an example, I have no idea at what point performance capture was chosen over motion capture or whether motion capture was ever the original idea at all It is merely for the purposes of illustration.
OK well I was going to stay quiet but I have to say something here.
What you have said above is remarkable, you think that when all the stretch goals ended at the 65 million mark they should have closed down the fund raising? Are you serious? That would have cost CIG $27 million and counting, doesn't seem like the best buisness strategy to me.
Also (and this is just a simple correction), you state that the original promise was a space sim with a massive universe, that is incorrect, the original promise was for a space sim with about 12 systems.
Now the original game was supposed to be fully funded at the 22 million mark, that was the point that they could make the original design of the game. So what have they added since then? Let's list them shall we?
Facial Capture system
Additional Alien ship
Public transportation system
Enhanced alpha
Enhanced capital ship systems
Additional Alien ship
Additional starter ship
Enhanced mission design for Squadron 42
6 Additional ships
6 additional systems
R&D into procedural Generation
Better Website
Better in-game interface (mobiglass)
Additional ship
Towel???
New suit of armor for all players
New map room for hanger
Weird artifact for players
Updated scanning software
Engine tuning kit for all players
New ship commercial
Space plant
Alien languages
Web-based universe map (currently online)
Mining drone
Independant Arbitrator's guild
More detailed AI
New ballistic gattling gun for all players
New liquid cooling system for ships
Additional ship
10,000 UEC for all players
Additional ship x5
Pets
Enhanced ship modularity (that's the big one)
And that's all after you got...
100 extra systems, full capital ship support, Oculus Rift support, second chapter of Squadron 42 for free, profesional motion capture, enhanced boarding options, increased ship customization, tablet companion, celebrity voice actors, 4th alien race, professional modding tools, expanded squadron 42, ship boarding, full FPS moddule, more community videos, professional sound studio, full orchastra score, command and control centre on Capital Ships, space station management and salvage mechanic role ability.
And none of the above was in the original design of the game pitched on kickstarter.
So when people complain about the game being delayed, just take a look at that list (which isn't even close to everything they have added, just the big things) and tell me you still think they should have finished the game in 2014.
You know, you could have just quoted me from earlier in the thread. I had that full list posted already (I didn't add the digital stuff though, since most of its trivial trash that has little financial input).
And they offered the massive universe (100 systems) at the 6mil mark. Which was part of the initial kickstarter (Plus their internal crowd funding system, which I can't recall what it was called at the time). Just for reference.
And mocap was at 10 million. I know you didn't ask that, but someone else was talking about it and my answer, which I pulled from memory, was way the hell off. Seems like a good time to correct myself.
As for the 27 million... of course its good business. They've made 27 million dollars off of assets that aren't available yet, and which don't actually cost them anything to make (As pretty much all the ships available were payed for already). But that's not really what my point was, is it? Cloud Imperium has kept their funding wide open, which is not how most crowd funding is done, and have absorbed 27 million dollars from backers with no specific goal. One option is that they need it, which means they planned poorly, and that's bad. The other is they don't, and their milking people for money and the game is going to be the most amazing game ever conceived of to date, with a budget that couldn't get a CoD based shooter off the ground.
Or it could be that other option, where this is a colossal wreck.
OK seriously dude, you need to stop talking cause your facts are way off. The original kickstarter was for 2 million which means that the 100 systems was not in the kickstarter.
You're both off; the original campaign raised 6 million (2 million on Kickstarter) but the goal was $500,000. They said that the $500,000 was just to 'validate' the game in the eyes of investors, though I can't for the life of me imagine any investor who would take such a low goal as an appropriate benchmark for a game that would cost a great deal more to finish development even in it's limited state, especially when they had unequivocally said that they didn't want to involve a real publisher. Since then, those investors have disappeared into the fog as CIG decided they didn't need them.
OK just because the kickstarter campaign raised just short of 6 million, it doesn't mean that the original project design included all of the stretch goals and therefore, this massive universe you believe was promised during the original campaign wasn't. The scope of the game was increased and that means it will take longer to make. Some people (not saying you) don't seem to get that.
The original Star Citizen game is as follows:
A rich universe focused on epic space adventure, trading and dogfighting in first person.
Single Player ? Offline or Online(Drop in / Drop out co-op play)
Persistent Universe (hosted by US)
Mod-able multiplayer (hosted by YOU)
No Subscriptions
No Pay to Win
That's it.
Your point about the ships is confusing but not quite accurate. Yes the stretch goal may have stated a new ship when an aditional million dollars was reached but that doesn't mean that the entire million was to be spent on just that ship. In fact they had to repeat this several times in the early stages of funding. So the ships are not actually funded until they are released as concept's (it is confusing though).
Then he should stop sucking peoples wallets dry. If he's actually said 'Hey, we don't need any money no more,' which I don't doubt, then why aren't you suspicious that he's still selling ships? Wasn't the whole point to give an incentive beyond expanding the game to get money to expand the game? Why is it still called 'funding,' when funding is officially over - Its raw profit at this point, isn't it? Pure selling and buying?
Again why would he stop taking people's money if they want to give it to him and let's be real here, Chris is not forcing people to give him money, they are doing it willingly.
I think that's the point most people here who are questioning Star Citizen are making. But why is Star Citizen special? Why can it get away with things that other crowd sourced games would get questioned for by everyone, and practices that would make your blood literally boil out of your veins if someone like Activision or EA tried it?
I think the big thing here is that if Activision or EA did it then people would question why they actually need money in the first place, they are making enough as it is. Make no mistake here, CIG are an indie studio, just because they have grown to that of a AAA company does not make them any different to any other indie company.
Oh, so the ship shop is closing? That legitimately would ease my mind considerably.
I'm sorry, but even before the Escapist did that article a bit ago I pretty much abandoned hope for SC. That much money and that much time with so little to show didn't bode well. Then the Escapist did the article which made me think, "Hm, maybe I was right" and now this.
And when I say I'm sorry, I genuinely mean it. If SC were to release a finished game with all the features they are trying to or saying they'll put in it, it would be really incredible. Quite possibly game of the decade. I don't want to think about it going down in a slow, smoky fireball tumbling ponderously with achingly slow speed but unstoppable in force. I want to see Roberts come out next year in an explosion of energetic triumph and go, "BAM, there you go, fuckers. You though we were done. Well here it is!" Unfortunately, I don't think that'll happen.
I know its an overdone example, but the Witcher series. For a tenth of the budget.
Yes, lower wages in Poland and all that. Another big major point? Not based in real life.
How expensive do you think it is to pay a concept artist for a week to draw up some designs for a city, and a level designer for a month to design the real layout of and gameplay around that city?
How expensive do you think it is to actually fly a team of developers out to a real city - paying their normal wages the whole time their there in addition to the costs of going there - and THEN pay them to do the above? AFAIK, the game also included real life music in it for its radio stations, rather than a ton of made up music. That shit be expensive to license yo!
Lets not pretend GTAV is the epitome of efficient development here. As much as people are ragging on CIG for wasting money, I'd be willing to bet a fair bit of that happened in GTA V as well.
According to the GTAV team, the hardest part of the game was in the creation and design of their open world, based on Los Angeles from memory. Star Citizen, as far as we've been shown, doesn't really have to worry about this, as the whole planetside open world thing is procedural generation that may or may not be implemented after launch. Before then, the open world is space [No content to create, its empty. Asteroid fields and such can be procedurally generated, planets are literally just coloured big balls with some animations for clouds and shit], and planetside is refined into smaller landing areas, more akin to traditional closed mission design in games that is much cheaper and easier to achieve than a large open world.
Honestly, any sort of speculation here is... kinda pointless, as we know very little about the development of most games, and where that funding all disappears to. Game publishers tend not to disclose that info. Whilst yes, Star Citizen has hired some big name voice actors, and purchased a Mocap studio, other games have spent money on real life talent that probably wasn't cheap.
Huge games can be made for little money (Witcher 2, 3), or for a ton of money (GTA, Destiny). Where Star Citizen will end up sitting on this is likely in the upper area, but we don't really know exactly where it is or will end up ATM.
You're both off; the original campaign raised 6 million (2 million on Kickstarter) but the goal was $500,000. They said that the $500,000 was just to 'validate' the game in the eyes of investors, though I can't for the life of me imagine any investor who would take such a low goal as an appropriate benchmark for a game that would cost a great deal more to finish development even in it's limited state, especially when they had unequivocally said that they didn't want to involve a real publisher. Since then, those investors have disappeared into the fog as CIG decided they didn't need them.
I specifically said 6 mil MARK. As in the stretch goal.
I consider everything that was funded in the initial package to be part of the 'promised game.' I can understand if someone looks at it differently.
I guess I should have done a better job clarifying it.
As for the initial low number, I suspect the original funding, kickstarter and on their own site, was less to do with getting money (Since I believe they had 20mil-ish from the investor at that point) or 'validating' the game, and more to do with free press. 500k was just the 'in the absurdly unlikely case we get embarrassed' number so they could claim funding fast, and even then, its a Freelancer/Wing Commander game. There was no way it WOULDN'T get funded.
It's also not uncommon for kickstarters to shoot low to begin with. It lets people gather and feel like their making a huge difference to begin with, and the more goals you can 'unlock' the more intriguing it seems, and the more hype you can generate, which in turn drives the kickstarter up. A good example would be Battletech, which I wont link because advertising is wrong: Merc mode was just unlocked at 1.85 mil (With there being 8 previous unlocks to it), and regular campaign at 1 mil. However, I will eat my socks (The big, bulky, Army winter ones that have soaked up a decade of sweat, too) if HBS (The Creators) didn't damn well know they were going to at least get 1.85mil, and aren't 85% certain they are going to get their 2.5mil goal. Its just part of the game, which in itself is kind of sad, but it is what it is.
Nah, your not crap. The quotes were just starting to get heavy.
I'm going to refrain from responding at this time, because I think we're at the point, or a post or two away from the point, where the conversation is just going to start looping into itself and we're going to start repeating ourselves (And we are at the point on several subjects where we're simply going to disagree). I'm going to give it a day or two to let other people in here, and maybe that'll loosen the soil up a bit between us, or introduce something else to argue about. Also, I have a 250 pound stack of books in front of my heater so I can't turn it on and my fingers are killing me on these long post.
I'll keep my eye on the thread and any additional post from you. I don't think we're done jousting yet.
Captcha: Aluminum foil. Just what a Cloud Imperium conspiracy theorist needs!
Nah, your not crap. The quotes were just starting to get heavy.
I'm going to refrain from responding at this time, because I think we're at the point, or a post or two away from the point, where the conversation is just going to start looping into itself and we're going to start repeating ourselves (And we are at the point on several subjects where we're simply going to disagree). I'm going to give it a day or two to let other people in here, and maybe that'll loosen the soil up a bit between us, or introduce something else to argue about. Also, I have a 250 pound stack of books in front of my heater so I can't turn it on and my fingers are killing me on these long post.
I'll keep my eye on the thread and any additional post from you. I don't think we're done jousting yet.
Captcha: Aluminum foil. Just what a Cloud Imperium conspiracy theorist needs![/quote]
Yea, I agree I didn't even want to post again at all on this forum but there was just too much inaccurate information flying around and I hate when I see that.
I will end with this though, I have total faith that this game will get finished (whether it's by Chris Roberts or someone else frankly doesn't bother me) so I'll see you in the 'Verse' (if you decide to buy it that is).
[EDIT] Told you my forum editing skills were crap, I'm really not trying to do this.
Look at all these spiteful people, grumbling to Mr. Wilson about how SC *has* to be a lie, angrily shaking their fists in the air, hoping that if they mumble enough about it, it will finally become true.
Meanwhile I'm playing it and wondering what the fuck are you talking about. I can't hear you over the sound of my engines.
I think what most people are reasonably worried about is; what exactly are you playing? Which parts of aaaall the things that are promised are you playing? What has tens of millions of dollars of development costs have bought you, out of everything it's promised us.
Yeah, we don't know how much money is left, but you know what we do know? We know that Chris Roberts has a history of mismanaging projects. And we know that he has, before SC, not worked in the games industry in a long time. Those are cold, hard facts. So excuse me if I don't trust his word when he says that he is not mismanaging this project.
Yeah, we don't know how much money is left, but you know what we do know? We know that Chris Roberts has a history of mismanaging projects. And we know that he has, before SC, not worked in the games industry in a long time. Those are cold, hard facts. So excuse me if I don't trust his word when he says that he is not mismanaging this project.
Frankly, this whole thing is starting to look like Broken Age all over again, except broken age was much less ambitious.
Well known and respected developer with a game record going back about 20 years? check.
Raised a ton of money through crowdfunding, far more then original goals? check.
Game release delayed significantly? check.
Game ultimately disappointing after increased funding and delays? True for Broken Age, pending on Star Citizen.....
There's also the fact Broken age was an old school adventure game while Star Citizen wants to be an entirely new type of game altogether and Double Fine had other games under it's belt before working on Broken Age, while CIG is a new company.
I can't be the first one to see the parallels here.
Yeah, we don't know how much money is left, but you know what we do know? We know that Chris Roberts has a history of mismanaging projects. And we know that he has, before SC, not worked in the games industry in a long time. Those are cold, hard facts. So excuse me if I don't trust his word when he says that he is not mismanaging this project.
Frankly, this whole thing is starting to look like Broken Age all over again, except broken age was much less ambitious.
Well known and respected developer with a game record going back about 20 years? check.
Raised a ton of money through crowdfunding, far more then original goals? check.
Game release delayed significantly? check.
Game ultimately disappointing after increased funding and delays? True for Broken Age, pending on Star Citizen.....
There's also the fact Broken age was an old school adventure game while Star Citizen wants to be an entirely new type of game altogether and Double Fine had other games under it's belt before working on Broken Age, while CIG is a new company.
I can't be the first one to see the parallels here.
Do you guys tear other Indie developers apart before they have released their first game or is CIG special in some way?
I just don't get why people have a problem with the game being delayed. It's being made better because we gave it so much money, why is that a bad thing?
Yeah, we don't know how much money is left, but you know what we do know? We know that Chris Roberts has a history of mismanaging projects. And we know that he has, before SC, not worked in the games industry in a long time. Those are cold, hard facts. So excuse me if I don't trust his word when he says that he is not mismanaging this project.
Frankly, this whole thing is starting to look like Broken Age all over again, except broken age was much less ambitious.
Well known and respected developer with a game record going back about 20 years? check.
Raised a ton of money through crowdfunding, far more then original goals? check.
Game release delayed significantly? check.
Game ultimately disappointing after increased funding and delays? True for Broken Age, pending on Star Citizen.....
There's also the fact Broken age was an old school adventure game while Star Citizen wants to be an entirely new type of game altogether and Double Fine had other games under it's belt before working on Broken Age, while CIG is a new company.
I can't be the first one to see the parallels here.
Do you guys tear other Indie developers apart before they have released their first game or is CIG special in some way?
I just don't get why people have a problem with the game being delayed. It's being made better because we gave it so much money, why is that a bad thing?
Well, most indies don't have a AAA budget and are promising the largest scale super-space simulator MMO ever created.
So yeah, CIG are a bit special comparatively. That said, I don't think that they're really that special compared to other indies. If you've been keeping an eye on other crowdfunded projects, the backers have always been rather critical and observant of how they're going. Look at everything surrounding Mighty No. 9.
People being incredibly critical and watchdog-y about how the crowdfunded project isn't unique to Star Citizen, though I think people are comparatively more harsh because it's trying to be so big and revolutionary.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
