Soooooooooooooooo…
When is this game going to be done?
- runs away-
I reckon 2023 at this point. Maybe.
Timex
3847
The reddit post is literally Derek Smart.
Again, you can believe what you want, but the author of the article isn’t really some kind of serious business journalist who covers corporate law or financial matters.
“Can a project so ambitious and glorious ever truly be said to be finished?”
–Chris Roberts, 2019, as he is drawn and quartered by furious redditors
Surely not the Chris Roberts believers. The sunk cost fallacy is too strong at this point.
No, not at all. I’ve seen so many red flags on this project from its inception that I highly doubt it will ever be anything close to what was promised, if it ever sees the light of day properly.
I don’t need more skepticism. But I think a little bit of it would benefit the project supporters/believers - either to push the devs when they need to be pushed, or to deal with frustration when their dream is unfulfilled - which, for me, at this point, is a certainty.
DeepT
3851
On a related note, why is it so easy to accept bad things about CIG? I read the initial article, and thought that this saga was finally in its conclusion. Yet if the article had a been positive, like Star Citizen is done, I would have taken the stance, “Ill believe it when I see it” rather than the quick acceptance of the negative story.
For me, it’s easier to accept bad things about CIG because of all the red flags I’ve seen so far. And it’s the reasonable thing to do, really.
kedaha
3853
You know that you’re essentially using an ad-hominem against anyone who may possibly comment on this? UK Corporate Law Experts are hardly going to post on it, and a ‘serious business journalist’ is a term that means fuck all. What quantifies as serious? Who decides who qualifies? Does the guy who does drop tests on Forbes count? I mean it’s Forbes and Forbes is serious business!
triggercut called you on your bullshit and - as usual - you used torturous logic and far too many words to try explain why you didn’t in fact have egg on your face. Though you most certainly did.
I was once involved in an economics discussion around the fairly basic effects quantitative easing had on an economy with regard to inflation. This gentleman had 30 years of experience in finance, had studied Economics at a prestigious University, and earned more in a year than I have in the last 10. He was also entirely wrong and quickly resorted to “I have 30 years of experience I know what I’m talking about”. Unfortunately, every single macroeconomic textbook and several hundred research papers stated that he was wrong.
However, in your world he’s right up until the point an ‘expert’ with ‘serious credentials’ says he is.
Teiman
3855
Where is McAffee now? he can help finish this game.
The biggest hurdle by far is creating 100 solar systems. They’re about to roll out their procedural tech to the Alpha, but in order to remain true to their original vision they need bespoke content in each system which could include landing zones, landmarks, unique stellar phenomenon, etc. Previously they were contracting Behaviour Interactive to create the art assets for their landing zones, but they have recently brought that pipeline in-house through new hires.
I think the creation of landing zones and landmarks will be the “critical path” of Star Citizen’s release, and it will be dependent on the speed with which that team can deliver while still maintaining a high quality bar.
Is this true? The document states that all intellectual property rights and all title, interest, and materials with respect to the video game Star Citizen are excluded as collateral.
Some people read that part as meaning that the Star Citizen IP and all material related to the distribution of the IP is excluded, not the game itself or its assets. In other words, the name “Star Citizen” is excluded, not the present implementation of the game (nor its assets). The rest of the document seems to imply something like that.
I’m not sure if that’s the correct assumption, but since the document mentions sublicensing the game to CIG while the loan agreement applies (which means the license is at least temporarily assigned to the bank), it seems to be the proper interpretation.
Then again, IANAL, and who knows the full terms of the agreement. Maybe it’s nothing like that at all. Let’s hope we never find out what it really means (by which I mean, I hope there is no default and the loan is properly paid back without issues).
Where in the rest of the document does it imply that “Excluded Collateral” only includes IP, and where in the document is it stated that Star Citizen (not Squadron 42) is being sublicensed to CIG? I apologize for spending so much time talking about this loan, but I would like to have a good understanding of where the other side is coming from.
From my experience with loan documents, when in doubt, err on the side of the bank.
There’s only one place in which “excluded collateral” is defined, but there are numerous references in the document to “game” and “game assets” as part of the collateral. If the assets for Squadron 42 and Star Citizen are shared, it seems to me like they’re part of the collateral, which, as far as Star Citizen goes, leaves only the IP rights.
As for where it mentions sublicensing the Game to CIG, it’s item 23.1 of the public document. It reads:
The Chargee hereby grants to the Chargor an exclusive license, revocable only in accordance with clause 23.2, to develop, produce, exploit and otherwise deal with the Game.
It doesn’t make any sense to have such a clause if the Game (which we assume is Squadron 42) isn’t now effectively owned by the bank, does it?
Timex
3864
This wouldn’t really be a reasonable assumption.
If I mod Half Life, my mod shares Half Life’s assets. But those assets still exist as a severable package. Owning the rights to my mod does not mean you now own Half Life assets.
Without seeing more detail, it’s kind of impossible to know the actual terms of the loan, but I do not believe your assumption here is valid.
