31–40 of 335 posts
Wrapping every purchase in a binding arbitration agreement is absurd. It completely defangs consumer protection laws.
https://starcitizentracker.github.io/
Since posting this always gets a lot of hatred from the koolaid drinkers, I’m going to pre-emptively suggest that, if you have a problem with something on the tracker, you should submit a correction. You should not attack me or the people who contributed to it.
Should they manage to match their own high expectations, the game will be played for years to come, like WoW, and it'd better have a good base then.
Crowdfunding can clearly serve a useful role as part of the modern mix of societal funding sources, but it's definitely still more wild west when it comes to uniformity of terms and regulations. It's not "investing" in the classic sense but it's also certainly not "donating" either, nor is it a preorder. "Backing" involves its own set of concerns and scale and rules should reflect that, and by design it primarily inv…
PACER only has federal court documents. Small claims court decisions probably don't end up anywhere. I doubt there is an "opinion" even written, just a judgement.
Meanwhile, No Mans Sky, the underdog-turn-most-hated-turn-underdog-again game is releasing full multiplayer free upgrade next week. They engineered a PR disaster for themselves but have been adding great features at a slow steady pace, which is exactly how it should be done.
How does it compare to Elite Dangerous?
NMS has base building and much better world exploration.
Both games are a grind until you come across a strategy that gives you a bunch of currency and then it's just a sandbox because you can buy everything (NMS less so because you sometimes have to find the thing to buy).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're not purchasing anything on Kickstarter though, you're making a donation.
Nope. I see that argument many times relating to crowd funding and it just isn't the case. When you pledge to a kickstarter, they're committing to providing the rewards stated for the money provided. The difference between that and a standard purchase is that the product generally doesn't exist yet, which is why there is a risks section attached to every campaign, so that backers are aware that the product could run…
I've dumped about a grand into Star Citizen over the course of 4 years. I've followed updates and developments with mild interest, and ever once and a while I jump back into it to see what's changed. It's always amazing to see the progress they have made, wither it be the engine tech or just the game play. Do I think it will come out in the next year or two? No, but I think it will. Development is on going and active…
When you say "expectations have been met", did you expect the game to take this long to develop? Looking at the original kickstarter from 2012 https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen?ref=na... it looks like the original ship date was Nov 2014, so it seems that at least some people's expectations aren't likely to have been met.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think they came to a point when they thought "This could be huge and mind blowing, and can't be done for a long time if we don't do it" and kept going. I myself went from a critic to someone shouting "Go ahead!"
However, in the process they seem to have fully embraced the waterfall method which seems to me to be the root cause of the problem. They could have delivered the original concept as an MVP and continued to build towards their long-term vision through patches and incremental updates, much like rockstar did with GTA V online. Instead they're working slowly towards shipping a gigantic monolith where all that's playable…