D_Smart posted:

1) You have to send a proposal to MS for approval. It's not a design doc, but specific info on the game. MS and Sony have a form for this, complete with guidelines

2) If it gets approved, you're in and can now say you're "approved to publisher"

From that point on, you're on your own. Most of the stuff appears on a portal; including game setup, store page etc - all of which you have to do. Just like on Steam

When you want to start "pushing" builds via that portal for "release", that's when you have to go through cert. And it too is handled via a web portal; and a massive doc with guidelines.

When you are ready to go to cert, you have to make an inspection appointment via your MS account manager. On that day, they run through the game, and the cert steps. If anything (including an incorrectly sized store page image, localization etc) breaks cert, you get a massive report telling you what, how, and why.

You have to fix all of them - as per the report - before you can make another cert appointment

Rinse. Repeat.

And this is the same for boxed retail, as well as digital only games. And patch updates. No exceptions.

Nobody wants to keep going to the cert queue because it takes time when you have to back to the back of the bus. Which is why you have to go through every check, run the game etc - before going through cert

Even on Xbox Game Preview, there are also cert-like guidelines you must follow. You can't just shove a game into the system just because it is early access and expected to not work properly

ps: LOD Tactics on Xbox failed cert twice. Hilariously, one was for store page art, the other was for localization (setup, but not used).

Mirificus posted:

Ayn Marx posted:

Imagine being the poor fucker in CIG's QA department responsible for Microsoft TCR... *shivers*

MeLKoR posted:

DON'T YOU DARE TO EVER QUOTE ME AGAIN YOU RETARDED GIMMICK OR I'LL SKULLFUCK YOU IRL


_{Posted from iPhone. Location: outside your bedroom window.}

Tijuana Bibliophile posted:

Well lower average user spending might be good for them though? I mean if the cash keeps ticking in, having the burden shared among a larger tax base should make the whole thing less vulnerable. Am I missing something?

Ayn Marx posted:

CIG's QA department

Chalks posted:

It's basically a chart of their diminishing returns from backers. Back in Q2 2015 if they did some marketing, on average everyone would spend $67. Today, they do that same marketing and not only is their target audience smaller and harder to reach, they'll get less than a quarter of the payback and that's a long term trend.

A year from now, they'll be lucky if 5% of the people they convince to create an account on their website spend a single dollar on the game.

The well is running dry and CIG are completely dependant on the same tiny number of whale backers that they were feeding off 3 years ago - the same backers that are covered by the old TOS and are getting fed up and asking for refunds.

They desperately need to find a new market for their product which is why I find the console port theory so believable. Console ports are always a cash in and a new source of cash is the one thing they need more than anything at the moment.

JugbandDude posted:

I can't wait to play this life simulator in space: pander to people feelings in space, wash all my private parts in space, remember my wife's birthday in space, pay my taxes in space... the possibilities are endless.

I hope CR fleshes out traffic control soon. The possibility of being stuck in space traffic jam for hours is very exciting.

D_Smart posted:

They know this. Which is precisely why we saw all those creative ways they came up with in 2016 to raise new money.

Now comes the talk of consoles.

Chalks posted:

It's basically a chart of their diminishing returns from backers. Back in Q2 2015 if they did some marketing, on average everyone would spend $67. Today, they do that same marketing and not only is their target audience smaller and harder to reach, they'll get less than a quarter of the payback and that's a long term trend.

A year from now, they'll be lucky if 5% of the people they convince to create an account on their website spend a single dollar on the game.

The well is running dry and CIG are completely dependant on the same tiny number of whale backers that they were feeding off 3 years ago - the same backers that are covered by the old TOS and are getting fed up and asking for refunds.

They desperately need to find a new market for their product which is why I find the console port theory so believable. Console ports are always a cash in and a new source of cash is the one thing they need more than anything at the moment.

Chalks posted:

I wonder what the backer reaction will be when the saviour of pc gaming confirms that they're spending backer funds on a console port? Obviously they'll lie about it not compromising the fidelity of the game and say that it won't delay anything but what percentage of the backers will buy that and for how many will it be the final straw?

It's going to be a big revelation when they finally admit to it.

Chalks posted:

I wonder what the backer reaction will be when the saviour of pc gaming confirms that they're spending backer funds on a console port? Obviously they'll lie about it not compromising the fidelity of the game and say that it won't delay anything but what percentage of the backers will buy that and for how many will it be the final straw?

It's going to be a big revelation when they finally admit to it.

Chalks posted:

It's basically a chart of their diminishing returns from backers. Back in Q2 2015 if they did some marketing, on average everyone would spend $67. Today, they do that same marketing and not only is their target audience smaller and harder to reach, they'll get less than a quarter of the payback and that's a long term trend.

A year from now, they'll be lucky if 5% of the people they convince to create an account on their website spend a single dollar on the game.

The well is running dry and CIG are completely dependant on the same tiny number of whale backers that they were feeding off 3 years ago - the same backers that are covered by the old TOS and are getting fed up and asking for refunds.

They desperately need to find a new market for their product which is why I find the console port theory so believable. Console ports are always a cash in and a new source of cash is the one thing they need more than anything at the moment.

TrustmeImLegit posted:

Do you have any idea how high 5% capture is?

Beer4TheBeerGod posted:

Chris Roberts
King King
Match Day
Wizadore
Stryker's Run
Ultima V: Warriors of Destiny
Times of Lore
Bad Blood
Wing Commander
Wing Commander: The Secret Missions
Wing Commander: The Secret Missions 2: Crusade
Wing Commander II: Vengeance of the Kilrathi
Wing Commander II: Vengeance of the Kilrathi: Special Operations 1
Wing Commander II: Vengeance of the Kilrathi: Special Operations 2
Strike Commander
Strike Commander: Tactical Operations
Wing Commander: Privateer
Wing Commander: Armada
Wing Commander III: Heart of the Tiger
Wing Commander IV: The Price of Freedom
Starlancer
Conquest: Frontier Wars
Freelancer
Star Citizen

Derek Smart
Battlecruiser 3000AD
Battlecruiser 3000AD (v 2.0)
Battlecruiser Millennium
Battlecruiser Millenium: Gold Edition
Universal Combat
Universal Combat Gold
Universal Combat A World Apart
Universal Combat SE
Universal Combat CE
Universal Combat CE 2.0
Galactic Command Echo Squad
Galactic Command Echo Squad SE
Angle of Attack
All Aspect Warfare
Line of Defense Tactics
Line of Defense

I guess it's a fair criticism about Derek, but can't the same be said of Chris?

Sunswipe posted:

Again, the same is true of Chris.

... Chris and Derek are made for each other. They'll finally meet in person to settle this in mortal combat and end up loving.

Slow_Moe posted:

They're going to be very salty. SC being PC exclusive puts them in an elevated position where they can lord over all the console peasants and filthy casuals. With a console release, or at least announcement, that unique privilege is taken away.

Ayn Marx posted:

^ I was about to ask that. Why even discuss about whether or not this garbage will get a console port? There's nothing that can be ported to anything :v

TrustmeImLegit posted:

Do you have any idea how high 5% capture is?

Zzr posted:

But what do they port ? There is no game. Is the early acces of consoles paying too, so they can again scam some guys ?

Colostomy Bag posted:

How many life rafts would Lesnick consume? Not just body mass, but all WC paraphernalia.

D_Smart posted:

Nice try, clueless Sally. You guys have mastered revisionist history.

Fact. I never released BC3K. The publisher did.

Fact: As I never released BC3K - nor gave the publisher permission to do so, since my contract prevented it; gave me a massive amount of seed money - because 'Derek Smart was right'

Fact: All games are derivatives. Making different games in the same IP, is how you make money. In most forms of media; be it books, movies or games. But you would know that if 1) you were a gamer 2) not making a pointless jab

Fact: I have made more games than Chris Roberts; and I didn't scam - nor beg anyone - for money to make them.

Your turn.

D_Smart posted:

So Chris did an eye opening interview with a German magazine which I am having translated for a new blog I am going to be working on.

The shocking key takeaway is that

1) he has finally admitted that they don't have enough money to finish the game.

This after raising $140 million.

2) as my sources indicated and which I reported back in Oct, 3.0 didn't exist at the time when he was claiming it was coming before Dec 19th, 2016.

https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/5nzm2j/some_insight_on_financials_from_gamestar_interview/

So, I was right again, huh?

DigitalMocking posted:

Dear Moma:

Derek Smart doesn't need to make good games (he doesn't) to point out what a complete loving scam Star Citizen is. I feel a little bad for you, either you're aware of the bullshit because you're a paid shill or you honestly believe the poo poo CIG puts out. Either way, I just feel pity for you.

ManofManyAliases posted:

You know what, yeah - kind of. Microshit bought out Freelancer so that could be released, but at least kept him on to consult. Take Two couldn't wait to rid themselves of the title.

quote:

* To date, a substantial portion of the Company's revenues has been derived
from a limited number of products. For the year ended October 31, 1996, Advanced
Dungeons and Dragons: Iron & Blood and Ripper each sold more than 150,000 copies
and, with Battlecruiser 3000 A.D., accounted for 32.0%, 28.7.% and 14.2%,
respectively, of the Company's revenues.

TrustmeImLegit posted:

I'm just a fan honestly. Plus I plan on being a big time pirate and this is an infamously pvp friendly forum/org. Its not just goons who think B'tak is ridiculous.

Nonconsentual is the best form of pvp.

Chalks posted:

It's basically a chart of their diminishing returns from backers. Back in Q2 2015 if they did some marketing, on average everyone would spend $67. Today, they do that same marketing and not only is their target audience smaller and harder to reach, they'll get less than a quarter of the payback and that's a long term trend.

A year from now, they'll be lucky if 5% of the people they convince to create an account on their website spend a single dollar on the game.

The well is running dry and CIG are completely dependant on the same tiny number of whale backers that they were feeding off 3 years ago - the same backers that are covered by the old TOS and are getting fed up and asking for refunds.

They desperately need to find a new market for their product which is why I find the console port theory so believable. Console ports are always a cash in and a new source of cash is the one thing they need more than anything at the moment.

Mirificus posted: