STAR CITIZEN has found itself the subject of a Forbes article

#1

Well I guess if you raise over 300 million, with individual investments totalling many ten of thousands. I guess a well respected business magazine may go poking around.

May be an interesting read. Though a paraphrase of “Incompetence and mismanagement on a galactic scale” does not paint a rosey picture

3 Likes
#2

Yeah, I guess they bit off quite a chunk more than they could chew.
I hope they still manage to get something decent released eventually.
(Although I have to mention that the most recent Alpha is quite a lot of fun IMO so they have achieved some great stuff already. It is just… they should be further along by now. Switching engines halfway through development certainly didn’t do them any good).

#3

Yeah, but the switch was from Cryengine to Lumberyard, which is like i dunno at least 99% Cryengine, just with a different license

#4

And it did help a lot, especially with performance. Since then the alpha runs on my notebook again.
Still, it was what felt like three quarters of a year without new features in the alpha.
After that they added features and content again and if you are (like me) a very patient person (being a DCSW fan helps :smile: ) and hop in every month or two you always have something new to try out.
I personally am relatively happy with the game despite the long time it takes, and I want it to succeed.

But I stopped at 200 bucks of investment, over half a decade ago, so I am not really bothered if it fails. I got my money’s worth out of it. That’s probably not true for someone who spent 1000+ bucks on it.

And I share the sentiment about the fraud vs. incompetence thing btw. I have met Chris Roberts in person and I am pretty sure he believes what he says. I just doubt he can make it, even though SC has already shown some stuff working that others have called impossible.
I still hope I am wrong and they really manage to release it in the end.

#5

All I care about is Squadron 42. The aimless sandbox doesn’t appeal to me.

#6

Waiting for the next Sunk Cost Galaxy chapter to drop now…

Also, I’m sure the reaction from the SC community (a paragon of maturity, fairness, and well-reasoned discourse) will be as measured and even-handed as always.

1 Like
#7

If I’d have sunk as much money on SC as many have in that community, I’m sure my fuse wouldn’t be particularly long either.

1 Like
#8

I know a guy that sunk close to 10,000 $ in that game… and that was 2 years ago!

1 Like
#9

There is no way you can be anything but let down by spending that much on one game.

I haven’t spent that much in 30 years on all my hardware and software combined!

3 Likes
#10

With people spending huge sums of money, were they expecting a EVE online experience, where you could turn a real world profit by owning and trading ingame assets?

Eve was very popular for that and accounts had actual monetary value

1 Like
#11

Probably.
Although that’s kinda weird IMO. To me nothing looked like the game would develop toward that.

#12

We here have an exceptionally better perspective than most, in a sense I think.

Take a basic comparison to DCS, which is working towards global full battlefield simulation. For us, this hobby will be essentially a money pit - we will spend on modules we never get the time to fully experience. ED is provides us good details of progression, and we can all see the full dream is many years away. Perhaps beyond some of our lifetimes. We enjoy the product as is and continue to invest as a result - and set our own limits.

Star Citizen sounds far more ambitious, and I bet most of those users with large investments don’t have experience with this type of a project to say “enough is enough - this is off the rails” or “I have spent enough”. That is already a recipe for disaster, before we look at asset management of the developer or anything else.
Knowing how much work goes into DCS, and then looking at the vague concept of multiple massive ships and star systems…I’d say they bit off well more than they can chew. Perhaps a bit of naïveté towards what that ambition would actually take to produce?

1 Like
#13

Someone can feel free to correct me, but last I remember, all the ships people were paying for where suppose to be available for anyone to get in-game once it is actually out (probably never). That’s why i never really understood dropping real world money on them.

1 Like
#14

Yep, same here. I bought the Space BMW as part of the initial sale, picked up the Space Tundra because it was cheap, and have no desire to spend any more money, since everything else I’m supposed to be able to work my way up to. But hey, the Pay2Win model is becoming increasingly popular in pretty much every game genre (except maybe ours, thankfully), so may as well capitalize on it, right?

2 Likes
#15

I think we have to be careful when we ask why people spend say 10k on something when there are so many other things they could use that money on. If you have the means to do it, do it. If a person chooses to spend their money on a Porsche 911 GT3 and live in a dumpy apartment vs. owning a home then so be it. (As an example.) It’s their money…

2 Likes
#16

I have this that someone gave to me many years ago so I’d play once it was released :joy:

#17

Sure but at least they actually HAVE the Porsche in their hand, when the buy it.
Or the house.

Here there’s promises over promises.

1 Like
#18

Well true, but if the person spending the money isn’t upset by it why should we be?

#19

A lot of them are very, VERY upset about it. Hence all the complaints filed.

3 Likes
#20

I don’t see why it shouldn’t be discussed critically, without mischief though.

2 Likes