Star Citizen: Big MoMA's House

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > The Goodmine > Star Citizen: Big MoMA's House

«‹›6665 »

CHICKEN SHOES: Oct 4, 2002; Slippery Tilde

hey i found a tl;dr version of the new tos:

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:05

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 14, 2024 01:48

Justin Tyme: Feb 22, 2011

So they pretty much give users who agree to that TOS carte blanche to do a chargeback since they guarantee that you're gonna get a non-delivery of goods or goods that aren't what they were advertised to be :lol:

digital goods are goods all the same, CIG, you stupid fucks, enjoy your chargebacks

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:08

EminusSleepus: Sep 28, 2015

Justin Tyme posted:

So they pretty much give users who agree to that TOS carte blanche to do a chargeback since they guarantee that you're gonna get a non-delivery of goods or goods that aren't what they were advertised to be

digital goods are goods all the same, CIG, you stupid fucks, enjoy your chargebacks

Since when does a dream become a digital goods?

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:17

G0RF: Mar 19, 2015; Some galactic defender you are, Space Cadet.

11:59 PM

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:22

Jobbo_Fett: Mar 7, 2014; Slava Ukrayini; Clapping Larry

Tijuana Bibliophile posted:

Star Citizen is hosed; discuss

We've already had several problems with things that the engine thought would never move, but that we've now built ships out of.
:siren:

ABANDON SHIP! ALL HANDS ON DECK, ABANDON SHIP!

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:23

Lime Tonics: Nov 7, 2015; by FactsAreUseless

Just posting patch notes again,

Updates and Fixes

Star Systems:

Fixed an issue where ships were spawning in the landing pad at Port Olisar.
Added missing Item Manufacturer Logos to the purchase window when buying an item.
Fixed an issue where a floor texture in Selfland Hangar would disappear when viewed from a certain distance.

Ships:

Fixed an issue where the Mustang Gamma and Omega had the wrong paint color.
Fixed an issue an issue where the Mustang Gamma and Delta where red boxes were showing up instead of the proper ship component.
Fixed an issue with the ladder being twisted after being deployed from the Mustang Gamma and Delta.
Fixed an issue where the cockpit control screen was offset in the Mustang Omega.
Fixed an issue where the textures appeared black on the Mustang Omega.

that is all the patch notes, seriously.

ptu 2.4.0u is live to all. Good luck getting past error codes and playing as a set of feet.

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:24

Justin Tyme: Feb 22, 2011

Did they not fix the performance

Star Citizen is like Crysis in that it's a demanding game for the time, but instead of it simply being very graphic intensive like Crysis, it just requires quantum computing to brute force their lovely spaghetti shortcutted to hell code.

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:28

G0RF: Mar 19, 2015; Some galactic defender you are, Space Cadet.

Reposting this Effort Post from March in light of the new ToS for 2.4.

"CIG is Widening the Doors and Blocking the Exits"

G0RF posted:

One of the biggest unknowns right now is CIG's cash position. We've heard they're flush with cash (EightAce) and that they're nearly out (Derek).

We have no line of sight into this matter-- only gossip, and the gossip is contrary.

What we do have-- imperfect as it is-- is a possible means of gauging revenue via their Stretch Goals tracker. And we've watched that pretty closely for a long time-- trying to make guesses about any emerging trends, wondering when we might see capitulation, curious about whether splitting their IP into two sellable assets would be accretive or destructive.

We've also made guesses, Beer most specifically I think, about monthly overhead costs for the entire operation(s). It's hard to believe it's less than $100k a day (~$3M a month).

Recent sales have been lackluster to alarming. Demand refuses to be sustained over the durations of past glory sales. Even without elective spending on $15,000 coffee machines, upgraded international airfare, and new MoCap shoots (already rumored to be running at 12x their original budget) -- CIG may be entering a time of relative famine.

This is why the question of "How much cash do they have?" is especially interesting. Because if they're running on empty, then a bankruptcy or distressed sale is potentially right around the corner. If they're fat with some unknown investor cash, then some shortfall months don't really matter.

We are seeing more and more circumstantial evidence that CIG is widening the doors and blocking the exits. Refunds are denied as a matter of policy when once they were accommodated quickly. The change -- which had no official explanation beyond "sorry no more refunds read your ToS" -- suggests some degree of concern about husbanding cash.

Now-- we also know that, as of the beginning of the year, CIG had NO ROADMAP at all for PTU development. None. They admitted as much on AtV-- happily, in fact. As if that was entirely commonplace as opposed to a warning sign. It IS commonplace at CIG but atypical elsewhere. Then we heard rumors (from Derek and EightAce) that they'd devised their new development priorities after a big confab with senior management. And the order of the day? Making in game asset sales a reality ASAP. Yet back ended by what? Earnable credits? Or actual credit cards (as with their web based means of selling).

Now-- looking at the "unmelt" token policy in particular, it too is very telling. CIG claimed that, for technical reasons, they had to greatly limit the supply and not allow them to be accrued over time. What this really means is quite obvious-- if they granted backers easy means to melt/unmelt they would be potentially damaging the sale of new ships to those same backers.

They are giving more and more signs that they need to restrict their users and plan to continue doing so. What makes matters worse for the backers is that, over the last half of last year, they effectively poisoned the gray market as an outside means of true liquidity. Formerly exclusive ships might've commanded a high price on the traders market- but CIG reintroduced many and thus flooded supply and destroyed demand. Similar gambits took place with LTI.

What is very telling in all of this is that it is so bloody ad hoc. They are making things up as they go-- everywhere-- and this tells us probably that all their thinking is tactical (if that). It's in response to changing conditions on the ground.

If capitulation is really here, and cash is really low, then we are going to see more and more obvious signs of it from a panicked CIG. And if the gambits they devise over panicked meetings don't work, then we will start seeing telltale signs of cash panics. Major cost cutting / office shut downs / layoffs.

All that said-- we still do not know what their cash situation is. To hear Chris and Erin talk, they haven't a care in the world's they e got time to spare. There is not sword ranging over their heads.

Sorry this was rambly but I'm in a hurry and on a phone. This is just meant to help you understand why these little signs-- like stores EVERYWHERE in game as the latest reveal-- might be telling us something. "Alpha UEC" is telling us something (because it will not be permanent).

It seems like they're telling us -- and backers -- quite a bit. And it's good news for people that like bad news.

G0RF fucked around with this message at 05:42 on Jun 11, 2016

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:30

Fat Shat Sings: Jan 24, 2016

I'm loving this new TOS.

"1.1) gently caress you
1.1A) gently caress You

2) gently caress You

3) No Really, gently caress YOU

4) You ain't getting poo poo

5) EVEN IF YOU DID GET poo poo gently caress YOU BUT YOU AINT GETTING poo poo"

Where's my loving wallet? I need to buy a space motorcycle that best case wouldn't even be in the game until 2019.

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:37

Tokyo Sexwale: Jul 30, 2003

time has never been more ripe for Completionist + Javelin!

Let's get some dipshits in here to defend this nonsense :getin:

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:39

ManofManyAliases: Mar 21, 2016; ToastOfManySmarts

Can't post for 3 hours!

Fat Shat Sings posted:

I'm loving this new TOS.

"1.1) gently caress you
1.1A) gently caress You

2) gently caress You

3) No Really, gently caress YOU

4) You ain't getting poo poo

5) EVEN IF YOU DID GET poo poo gently caress YOU BUT YOU AINT GETTING poo poo"

Where's my loving wallet? I need to buy a space motorcycle that best case wouldn't even be in the game until 2019.

The Dragonfly will likely be flyable this year. The Drake pipeline has been completed so we're going to see the Caterpillar this year as well.

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:40

Lime Tonics: Nov 7, 2015; by FactsAreUseless

http://imgur.com/a/Ov1Tt

Someone on reddit made this, I take no credit.

It is a handy TOS changes guide.

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:40

Eldragon: Feb 22, 2003

Added to the new TOS

quote:

Except as set forth herein, as the operator of an independent, unaffiliated web site, you will have sole editorial control over your fansite, except that you represent and warrant to RSI that your fansite will not post material that is illegal or infringes on the rights of third parties or harms the reputation of any of the RSI Services, or RSI, or its officers or employees. If at any time you post such material, RSI may terminate the license set forth in this Section. Your ownership of the fansite excludes the RSI Fansite Content, the RSI Marks and any derivative works based upon, or including the RSI Fansite Content and/or RSI Marks. The fansite is not a �Joint Work� as that term is defined in the United States Copyright Act, Title 17 United States Code (�U.S.C.�), and is not otherwise a joint, collective or collaborative work under any other applicable laws.

You agree to include RSI�s trademark, copyright or other proprietary rights notices, as provided on the Website, when displaying any RSI Content, RSI Fansite Content, or RSI Marks, and agree to comply with any usage guidelines that may be provided by RSI from time to time. You shall not remove or alter any identifying information or copyright management information conveyed in connection with copies of RSI Fansite Content or RSI Marks, including in digital form; nor challenge RSI�s or its licensors� ownership of the RSI Fansite Content or RSI Marks, nor use or adopt any trademarks that might be confusingly similar to such RSI Marks.

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:45

G0RF: Mar 19, 2015; Some galactic defender you are, Space Cadet.

This seems to me an especially provocative move on CIG's part. The terms of the TOS are rapacious as they are insulting. Putting aside the legal prerogatives asserted, this must also be read as a message. And that message stands as a damning mockery of "The Pledge".

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/the-pledge

Chris Roberts: The Pledge posted:

You�ve pledged your money to earn your Citizenship.

Now it�s our turn.

We, the Star Citizen team at Cloud Imperium, hereby promise to deliver the game you expect. You, the tens of thousands of pledgers, have allowed us to cut out the big publisher and build the game on our terms. To let us focus on quality free of the pressure to deliver by a certain financial quarter. To nurture a new original IP. To put fun ahead of shareholder profits.

We, the Developer, intend to treat you with the same respect we would give a publisher. You will receive regular updates about the progress of the game. We will do a show and tell for each major milestone. Your voice will be heard and represented in our development docs and our feature wish list. You will see art and video and learn about how we intend to implement gameplay mechanics well before the rest of the world. The website will be updated and the community will be maintained. Though the limitations of technology may slow us, we will always do the best for you: if it breaks, we will fix it.

There may be delays and there may be changes; we recognize that such things are inevitable and would be lying to you if we claimed otherwise. But when this happens, we will treat you with the respect you deserve rather than spending your money on public relations. When we need to change a mechanic or alter something you believe should be in the game, we will tell you exactly why.

Your support over the past month has been incredible. You�ve done your part, and we will now do our utmost to live up to your expectations. We will build you the game you are dreaming about.

Signed,
Chris Roberts and the Cloud Imperium Team

G0RF fucked around with this message at 06:29 on Jun 11, 2016

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:46

Fat Shat Sings: Jan 24, 2016

ManofManyAliases posted:

The Dragonfly will likely be flyable this year. The Drake pipeline has been completed so we're going to see the Caterpillar this year as well.

Excuse you, but this is provably false.

CIG has said months ago that they had reached the point where all the ships to be in the PU had been released (vanguard or something) and any ship after that would not actually be in the PU.

Where's the space news van? The space mining ship?

All of the concepts and ships since the vanguard aren't even going to be in whatever ends up being the minimum viable product. "Best Case" is that Squadron 42 releases late this year or next year, and then they take another year to make an actual persistent universe and then they start trying to make any of the 50 interlocking mechanics or ships that have been sold, and admitted to not be in the game yet, by CIG themselves.

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:47

EminusSleepus: Sep 28, 2015

Fat Shat Sings posted:

Excuse you, but this is provably false.

CIG has said months ago that they had reached the point where all the ships to be in the PU had been released (vanguard or something) and any ship after that would not actually be in the PU.

Where's the space news van? The space mining ship?

All of the concepts and ships since the vanguard aren't even going to be in whatever ends up being the minimum viable product. "Best Case" is that Squadron 42 releases late this year or next year, and then they take another year to make an actual persistent universe and then they start trying to make any of the 50 interlocking mechanics or ships that have been sold, and admitted to not be in the game yet, by CIG themselves.

Don't underestimate the greed of Croberts, it know no bounds

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:49

Tokyo Sexwale: Jul 30, 2003

EminusSleepus posted:

Don't underestimate the greed of Croberts, it know no bounds

see the new ToS for more information

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:50

SelenicMartian: Sep 14, 2013; Sometimes it's not the bomb that's retarded.

AP posted:

Meanwhile at CIG.

https://twitter.com/SandiGardiner/status/741376034495307776

Ah, this is the wall they'll be put up against.

Ok, just Ben.

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:52

Lime Tonics: Nov 7, 2015; by FactsAreUseless

Just want to say this is the best part of the new TOS.

paarp

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:52

Justin Tyme: Feb 22, 2011

Fat Shat Sings posted:

Excuse you, but this is provably false.

CIG has said months ago that they had reached the point where all the ships to be in the PU had been released (vanguard or something) and any ship after that would not actually be in the PU.

Where's the space news van? The space mining ship?

All of the concepts and ships since the vanguard aren't even going to be in whatever ends up being the minimum viable product. "Best Case" is that Squadron 42 releases late this year or next year, and then they take another year to make an actual persistent universe and then they start trying to make any of the 50 interlocking mechanics or ships that have been sold, and admitted to not be in the game yet, by CIG themselves.

actually what CIG meant was the only ships in the PU will be single-seat with no new gameplay systems at all

the dragonfly will be fast-tracked because it adds nothing but another small combat ship

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:56

Fat Shat Sings: Jan 24, 2016

No, Seriously MoMA.

CIG themselves said they weren't actually putting any of the ships into the PU after the Vanguard. All the additions since then enter the queue of technical debt to be added at a later date.

"MINIMUM VIABLE PRODUCT"

Do you not want backers to spend much time thinking about the fact that they have been given a product of this quality while they are being sold things years in advance now. Things CIG has no idea how to make. Things CIG has no actual plan for implementing. Things that have proven to change for reasons CIG don't even understand. Things that wouldn't even work with the game engine they have now?

Time is CIGs biggest enemy and they won't be able to sell poo poo 3 years in advance for a game that's 4 years behind for very much longer. So they need some kind of actual tangible product sometime soon. I think everyone has given CIG more than it's fair share of time to do something, anything, other than a crysis mod.

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:56

Justin Tyme: Feb 22, 2011

SelenicMartian posted:

Ah, this is the wall they'll be put up against.

Ok, just Ben.

Ben already accidentally leaned on the wall, that's how the ring broke

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:56

Tank Boy Ken: Aug 24, 2012; J4G for life; Fallen Rib

Mr Fronts posted:

Then I'm ~~siding~~ sliding in t-pose with the law on this one.

Fixed that!

# ? Jun 11, 2016 05:58

Beer4TheBeerGod: Aug 23, 2004; Exciting Lemon

ManofManyAliases posted:

The Dragonfly will likely be flyable this year. The Drake pipeline has been completed so we're going to see the Caterpillar this year as well.

Oh we are? What's your source?

# ? Jun 11, 2016 06:01

Darkpriest667: Feb 2, 2015; I'm sorry I impugned
your cocksmanship.

ManofManyAliases posted:

The Dragonfly will likely be flyable this year. The Drake pipeline has been completed so we're going to see the Caterpillar this year as well.

You do loving realize that it's only June and the fact that it will take you 6 months to get 2 of the 50,000 ships you people have sold to even be in the engine and work is pathetic. What does that lower the list of non flyable ships to 30? 25? At this rate it will only take 8 more years to get those ships in the game.

# ? Jun 11, 2016 06:03

lazorexplosion: Mar 19, 2016

quote:

Tying all these new features together and making them truly possible is our first iteration of server-side Persistence � our first persistent server databases! With this we can begin storing information about in-game characters, items, currency and reputation so they can be recalled between game play sessions.

Years in development and they're acting excited that they only just implemented server databases instead instead of that actually being loving embarrassing. :psyduck:

# ? Jun 11, 2016 06:03

Tank Boy Ken: Aug 24, 2012; J4G for life; Fallen Rib

Jobbo_Fett posted:

We've already had several problems with things that the engine thought would never move, but that we've now built ships out of.

ABANDON SHIP! ALL HANDS ON DECK, ABANDON SHIP!

This. Why not use the most basic vehicle class to build space ships. Using static objects to create space ships is asking for trouble (usually).

Also: MuppetOfManyAnuses has no opiniono on SC and claims to know nothing about things happening. But the Caterringpillar is coming this year. Did you agree to a new ToS, which forbade you to use your brain?

# ? Jun 11, 2016 06:09

lazorexplosion: Mar 19, 2016

MoMA you excited to be clicking your agreement to waiving any remaining vestiges of the pretense that CIG has to deliver anything in exchange for your thousands of dollars? That doesn't make you feel anything?

# ? Jun 11, 2016 06:11

G0RF: Mar 19, 2015; Some galactic defender you are, Space Cadet.

ManofManyAliases posted:

The Dragonfly will likely be flyable this year. The Drake pipeline has been completed so we're going to see the Caterpillar this year as well.

This is the best meta-troll I have seen in ages!
:sandance:

# ? Jun 11, 2016 06:13

JainDoh: Nov 5, 2002

he voted with his wallet

# ? Jun 11, 2016 06:15

Stick100: Mar 18, 2003

Lime Tonics posted:

Just want to say this is the best part of the new TOS.

paarp

Well at least we know what MOMA was doing the last couple of days and why he couldn't post. I think it's also funny that he had been running semi legal arguments in here, I think they informed the new TOS. I guess GOONS are still running SC development.

For the CIG internet sleuths watching, HI!, I don't have any SC accounts so you don't need to try to match me to any accounts in your system. You must have a platinum account to read this message.

# ? Jun 11, 2016 06:17

flyboi: Oct 13, 2005; agg stop posting; College Slice

Lime Tonics posted:

Just want to say this is the best part of the new TOS.

paarp

OH MY GOD SHIELD MY EYES MOMA TOLD ME JUST BY HAVING THIS LOAD FROM THE INTERNET I'M ALREADY CLICKWRAPPED INTO THE NEW TOS

# ? Jun 11, 2016 06:17

A Neurotic Jew: Feb 17, 2012; by exmarx

imagine hating consumers so much that you wrote this ToS.

Just imagine.

# ? Jun 11, 2016 06:17

Tortolia: Dec 29, 2005; Hindustan Electronics Employee of the Month, July 2008; Grimey Drawer

Oh man, a new, gently caress you TOS. Gonna be an amazing weekend when Derek wakes up.

Good idea guys! Push a gently caress you to all your customers late on Friday before E3 to drown out the news!

:munch:

# ? Jun 11, 2016 06:19

EminusSleepus: Sep 28, 2015

Jason Sextro posted:

see the new ToS for more information

that is why I posted to never underestimate the greed of croberts

# ? Jun 11, 2016 06:23

Stick100: Mar 18, 2003

Tortolia posted:

Oh man, a new, gently caress you TOS. Gonna be an amazing weekend when Derek wakes up.

Good idea guys! Push a gently caress you to all your customers late on Friday before E3 to drown out the news!

Yeah I guess it's about the best they could do to bury it. Thinking about this, this is really bad they just changed their agreement from you will have the game in 2014, to you will have the game whenever we want to give it to you. That's the equivalent of giving up and realizing you have no ability to predict development or deliver.

If this had happened during a slow time it would def. get a story on Kotaku/Giant Bomb with something like a headline of "CIG has officially given up on delivering product but will gladly take you money still."

Stick100 fucked around with this message at 06:30 on Jun 11, 2016

# ? Jun 11, 2016 06:26

Jobbo_Fett: Mar 7, 2014; Slava Ukrayini; Clapping Larry

peter gabriel posted:

If you are reading this, support drone, I am sorry

# ? Jun 11, 2016 06:28

flyboi: Oct 13, 2005; agg stop posting; College Slice

But seriously though I'm gonna GORF post for a second although not as long as a GORF post.

The new TOS should be insulting to backers because of a few reasons. The omission of a defined release date. Yes "I don't understand game development" or whatever argument shitizens have but this sends a message that should be clear as day to backers. When the project was first created and subsequently hobbled down the path we are today Chris Roberts and CIG had accountability for their actions and a goal in mind. The new TOS removes any requirement for financials to be released when the project fails which should be alarming to anyone as it means they no longer feel that backers are worthy of accountability on their actions.

The other really bad impression this TOS leaves is that the omission of any sort of release date means that CIG themselves feel this project isn't viable. If their goals and game design were viable they would back their product and have an idea how long it would take to meet and exceed the proposed game and features.

This has been a long con in the sense that throughout this year they've been changing narrative which has been setting them up for this new TOS. We were first told irritably that Star Marine was never happening and already exists although what "FPS" exists is still missing major features shown to have existed within Star Marine. Chris also introduced to the phrase Minimum Viable Product and the hinting of new engine requirements to meet design goals. If you really want to read between the lines of what they've been narrating and with the new TOS Star Citizen as proposed on their funding goals is never happening. By setting up the narrative that they intend to release a "Minimum Viable Product" and changing the language of the TOS they're implying that these funding goals are no longer part of the project scope and may be abandoned or "changed" as time goes on.

My prediction? SQ42 chapter 1 will happen whenever, they'll continue with these bullshit "patches" on the PTU and eventually do a hand wave and proclaim the PTU is complete, bugs and all. CIG is setting up everything so they can get the shittiest turd out the door to meet legal expectations while keeping all the cash these idiots are shoveling to them.

# ? Jun 11, 2016 06:29

a whole buncha crows: May 8, 2003; WHEN WE DON'T KNOW WHO TO HATE, WE HATE OURSELVES.-SA USER NATION (AKA ME!)

oh shiiiiiiiittt

# ? Jun 11, 2016 06:30

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 14, 2024 01:48

Tokyo Sexwale: Jul 30, 2003

Stick100 posted:

Yeah I guess it's about the best they could do to bury it. Thinking about this, this is really bad they just changed their agreement from you will have the game in 2014, to you will have the game whenever we want to give it to you. That's the equivalent of giving up and realizing you have no ability to predict development or deliver.

If this had happened during a slow time it would def. get a story on Kotaku/Giant Bomb with something like a headline of "CIG has officially given up on delivering product but will gladly take you money still."

The best time for them to release this monument to contempt for your customers was probably on a Friday evening, absolutely.

How can this be anything but an admission that A) there is no game and B) you can't have your money?

# ? Jun 11, 2016 06:31

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > The Goodmine > Star Citizen: Big MoMA's House

«‹›6665 »