(200 -14) (200 -15) (250 official + 100 Off The Record Stealth Sale -16) = 750+ Javelins in backer hands. 350 Predicted for the Holiday livestream for a grand total of 1200 Javelin (700 in 2016)

[Chimaera]

[Jon1812]

The original OP's post dealt with CIG being purposefully deceptive in order to milk money from the backers and the ships being devalued as a side effect. We answered his concerns and explained that changes were needed to the ship sales, in order to accommodate the amount of new backers and changes to the game.

Then this became a discussion about whether or not we can criticize CIG. We can. They have raised much more than the 100 Million needed to build the game. Changing how things are done at this point is not exactly in line with what they said they would do. Changes to the game are one thing, changes to the way backers can back the game aren't necessary.
It isn't necessary to force the backers to provide new cash, to get ships that are on sale. I personally will give them a pass on that, because they have given us backers plenty of chances to upgrade our ships and packages without paying new money. It gives them a little more breathing room as far as funding goes. I'm ok with that.
 

However, I understand if others are not. 
Yes, this is an alpha, but making changes after they reached their fundraising goal, that force their supporters to put new money if they want to acquire ships on sale...I can understand why people might be upset. It is very cash grabby. 

The OP's point is not one I agree with, but I do think Cincinnatus is right that people have a right to complain about the Warbonds. We are not investors, but we did help fund their game. I understand that people would be unhappy.

That said, this is a completely new conversation. As we have diverted from the OP, maybe we should move this elsewhere.  

[GeraldEvans]

2 minutes ago, Jon1812 said:

They have raised much more than the 100 Million needed to build the game.

Where is this a fixed number, given the massive change in scope and fidelity?

[Jon1812]

1 minute ago, GeraldEvans said:

Where is this a fixed number, given the massive change in scope and fidelity?

Chris Roberts gave the 100 Million figure when discussing the expanded scope. 

[GeraldEvans]

Was this before or after the Illfonic disaster?

[Jon1812]

10 minutes ago, GeraldEvans said:

Was this before or after the Illfonic disaster?

I don't believe that any set back cost them 37+ million. Also, I believe it was after Illfonic.

Chris deals with fears about Star Marine in this episode of TFTC. 18:30 if the link doesn't start there.

 

[Juntau]

Where is the video of CR stating that with more money they will be able to build a "better" game experience and that all funds raised were being funnel back into development? 

Also, you are correct to say that people can honestly disagree with the way CIG is handling their business, but the assertions made in this post have been that of  malfeasance and a conscious effort to mislead consumers. While you may not agree with the way they have handled ship Sales, I feel that assertions of this kind may be a bit over the top.

[Jon1812]

22 minutes ago, Juntau said:

Where is the video of CR stating that with more money they will be able to build a "better" game experience and that all funds raised were being funnel back into development? 

Also, you are correct to say that people can honestly disagree with the way CIG is handling their business, but the assertions made in this post have been that of  malfeasance and a conscious effort to mislead consumers. While you may not agree with the way they have handled ship Sales, I feel that assertions of this kind may be a bit over the top.

 

 

 

It is listed on the funding page.
"As a crowd funded project, Star Citizen's scope is based directly on the support provided by our backers. Money pledged goes directly to the game's development."

I do agree that assertions of deception and malfeasance are incorrect.  

[Snakebyte]

As I posted in the Javelin thread, there is a valid reason additional Javelins can appear on the market and it doesn't mean CIG has released more. Buyers choose to pay with PayPal and don't finish the transaction. The ship is removed from sale until the PayPal payment times out, at which point it is added back to the sale queue. I don't know if CIG can choose when to make the released ships available, but they are still against the original number.

[Trophias]

[Chimaera]

4 hours ago, Jon1812 said:

Chris Roberts gave the 100 Million figure when discussing the expanded scope. 

This figure was stated before they had fully acquired the Crytech guys, and before they had expanded the scope of the planetary side of things. People seem to forget that, when the "on rails entry sequence" was demo'd and CIG had said planetside would take a back seat to space stuff, there was a huge clamour for more planetary stuff. The stretch goal for "researching procedural generation" was a late one added because of the level of interest in how space and planets would operate, and with their breakthrough happening after the $100m mark, the game's size and scope expanded to a level where that number was pretty much incorrect. Chris's commentary was based off of the original way they wanted to build the game, but with the procedural breakthrough, that obviously changed and now we are getting things ADDED to the planetary side of things that we never had on the table before.

 

[Gremlich]

It must be secret because I didn't get a personal email, text or call letting me know. Oh, you mean I could have seen the sale on the open and unencrypted CIG website?

Man, this is something that moron Derek Smart would concoct. And this "debate" on the one side is similar to one with Derek.

 

4 hours ago, GeraldEvans said:

Was this before or after the Illfonic disaster?

Course correction, not a disaster. Words matter.

[Switch]

Topic has run its course, closing.