Star Citizen - Chris Roberts, lots of spaceship porn, lots of promises


#5610

I’m going to go ahead and be just fine with my assertion that if it isn’t a con it certainly has an astonishing number of similarities to one. I acknowledge that the remote possibility exists that even though it gives every outward appearance of being a con, it is in fact an earnestly utterly failed effort to use nearly infinite money to create a video game.


#5611

Clearly you have no clue what you’re talking about, if you think that’s all this is about.


#5612

It’s totally a con. And there’s ample evidence.


#5613

I actually think it didn’t start as a con any more than any other project that overpromises and underdelivers does. The egotists at the helm were sure they deserved the inflated salaries they were paying themselves and their closest friends - after all they were “visionaries”.

Initially selling jpegs was simply a way to raise more money for the development effort - but at that point:

  1. Their inflated salaries and self-worth depends on the continuation of the project.
  2. Which depends on selling jpegs
  3. Which depends on the project appearing to not be a complete disaster area.
  4. Which requires them to go beyond marketing into actual lying about the state of the project.

Did they ever reach the point where they realised they were running a con which would in the end serve only to enrich them at the expense of backers and never produce a worthwhile game? Maybe. But once you’ve been lying to people for years for what you think are good reasons in many ways it’s easier to carry on justifying it to yourself somehow than to stop.

Maybe I am just naive and this was a cynical moneymaking scheme from the beginning. Maybe the original plan was to raise a few hundred thousand to a few million, make a half hearted effort to slap a game together, and ride off into the sunset.


#5614

I agree with all of that. I have also written in several blogs that I don’t believe it started out as a con/scam. It just evolved into one at the point that they realized they had tapped into a bunch of gullible fools who would keep giving them money in exchange for lofty unattainable insurmountable goals.


#5615

Honestly, as someone who’s way outside this thing (don’t even own a PC gaming machine) but vaguely reading this thread, this is the way it seems to me, too. That’s why ‘it’s all a con’ didn’t really resonate with me. It may kind of fit the definition of one now, if you squint sideways at it, but it certainly didn’t start as one.


#5616

To call this a con is just belittles the accuser, a project gone wrong maybe, but a con ranks up there with the no moon landings stuff tin foil.

One thing for certain, if this succeeds and some of you are wrong, then the tarnish and stain will NEVER wear off, nothing you say will ever be relevant again.

Just make sure this horse is the right one.

I mostly see a passion for greatness foiled by the cruelty of reality, humanity has done worse


#5617

Yeah, uh-huh, OK :)


#5618

Yeah. You know who else got $190 million in donations for a game and didn’t produce anything?


#5619

Two sides, then?


#5620

It could be argued that no single person in history has contributed more to videogame design than you-know-who! For one thing, who would we have to shoot at??


#5621

What it has become now has to be called a con. This is how Ponzi schemes get started. Some guy really thinks he’s a genius who has some great way to make money. He gets investors. It turns out he’s not as smart as he believed, but instead of admitting to the investors he lost all their money, he pretends nothing is wrong and gets more investors.

Maybe Chris Roberts is delusional enough to still think it will all work out in the end, but that’s not unusual for conmen.


#5622

I think the weird financial crap and the gross personal enrichment is what puts it into “con” territory for me. If not for that, I would fully believe this is just the worst-managed project in the history of poorly-managed projects, but run by people genuinely trying.

That said, I think the developers working on this – like actually working, not just making hype videos or ship jpegs – are probably still doing it in earnest. The further up you go, the less I think that’s the case.


#5623

Yes. It’s a Ponzie scheme in some regard. That’s why they use new ship sales to refund old ship sales.


#5624

I am still a little surprised and very glad I didn’t get sucked into the vortex. I registered in the beginning and I think I made one small financial contribution? I recall being irritated when they started selling ships, but then put the whole thing in the “we’ll see” category both financially and emotionally. My recollection could be off. It has been a looooong time.


#5625

Oh you’re gonna LOVE this latest nonsense where they’re actually now threatening Evocati test backers with action if they don’t adhere to instructions.


#5626

Man it sounds like they have zero internal test infrastructure. I would imagine they would have coded clients that automate those steps since they are so regimented.


#5627

The video they pulled via DMCA is back up re-hosted elsewhere http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x69d2ql


#5628

Are the Evocati being paid for their boring QA work?

(it’s rhetorical)


#5629

Wow. 3 FPS? Wow. Impressive.