|
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 Xbox Game Preview https://support.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-one/console/xbox-update-preview-faq http://www.theverge.com/2016/8/16/12503242/microsoft-xbox-game-preview-windows-10-features http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/06/xbox-game-preview-brings-early-access-to-xbox-one-adds-free-demo-options/ http://www.windowscentral.com/microsofts-xbox-game-preview-program-expands-windows-10-everspace
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 19:54 |
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 09:48 |
|
Please don't doxx its just hateful and weird.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 19:55 |
|
Ayn Marx posted:Imagine being the poor fucker in CIG's QA department responsible for Microsoft TCR... *shivers* Yeah. Fun times
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 19:55 |
|
MeLKoR posted:DON'T YOU DARE TO EVER QUOTE ME AGAIN YOU RETARDED GIMMICK OR I'LL SKULLFUCK YOU IRL Prickly. Maybe don't be wrong so often then.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 19:55 |
|
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? 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.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 19:56 |
|
Ayn Marx posted:CIG's QA department Hahaha
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 19:57 |
|
Did that Cymeliieielieon feller seriously post that MS or Sony will "100%" pay for a port of SQ42? Guy has to be along con. No way that someone is that delusional.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 19:58 |
|
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. 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.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:00 |
|
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 plan to be space police, responding to fender benders for hours as thousands of NPCs and players queue up to land on a space stations 8 docking bays. My npc boss will be so lifelike he'll be all "Just don't go be a loose cannon out there!" And I'll wave my hands and say, "I won't sir! All my cannons have been tied down securely!" And then we'll have an npc/player laugh because he's so real and I really have cannons strapped down in my fidelity cruiser that he doesn't know about. They're to protect me from the possible Metal Gear situation that may result in the unfortunate consequences of piracy.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:01 |
|
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. 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.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:05 |
|
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. Do you have any idea how high 5% capture is?
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:09 |
|
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? 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.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:10 |
|
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? Which is why they've kept it quiet. Now that I've spilled the beans - and for which there's probably a witch hunt going on right now at CIG/RSI - we have to wait and see what they do. Not to forget the fact that for them to even do a console port of anything, they would need to remain in business as a going concern because it's not going to fund itself to get on the console. They still need the money from backers.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:11 |
|
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. But what do they port ? There is no game. Is the early acces of consoles paying too, so they can again scam some guys ?
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:13 |
|
Since the vast majority of the SQ42 PC audience has already pledged for the game and no new money will come through that pipeline, I'm looking forward to CIG announcing that it will come out on consoles first so that hopefully they can entice people who've already paid for it to buy it again and piss off more of their backers.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:15 |
|
TrustmeImLegit posted:Do you have any idea how high 5% capture is? It's the other way around. 5% of users of a game that post in its official forum is a high %.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:15 |
|
^ 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
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:16 |
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:Chris Roberts 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.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:17 |
|
Sunswipe posted:Again, the same is true of Chris. I would pledge exorbitant amounts of money to see this.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:18 |
|
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. There's some interesting tapdancing to do vis a vis the sale of ingame items for real money. Sony at least likes to push stuff through their own store. 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 Lack of anything else, and terrible low effort trolls?
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:18 |
|
TrustmeImLegit posted:Do you have any idea how high 5% capture is? lol, read it again. I'm not saying they'll get a 5% capture rate. I'm saying 5% of their capture rate will spend any money at all. It used to be 100% - in fact, on average, it used to be over 100% since so many people would spend more than the base $50. Their capture rate will be super low simply because the market is so tapped, but no matter how much of that market they manage to reach and how much money they throw at the problem, their cash flow is on a downward spiral kept afloat entirely on the backs of extremely over invested whales. 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 ? Delay SQ42 until the end of 2017 and cut back on everything they can afford to in order to get it to run on a console. They'll probably fail to achieve that, but I'm looking forward to seeing them try. Chalks fucked around with this message at 20:22 on Jan 16, 2017 |
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:19 |
|
Colostomy Bag posted:How many life rafts would Lesnick consume? Not just body mass, but all WC paraphernalia. To be fair, there was still room for Jack - and that was only a door.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:19 |
|
D_Smart posted:Nice try, clueless Sally. You guys have mastered revisionist history. More titles =/= more games. And as for scam ... reinstate my key that I paid for. No? Tag: you're it.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:21 |
|
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. Sources. Ok let's play this game: Don't specifically name your source. Just tell me what your source does for a living. If you don't reply with something specific within 5 minutes, you're making poo poo up again.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:22 |
|
DigitalMocking posted:Dear Moma: I don't get paid by CIG.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:23 |
|
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. Pucker up and brace for impact. This is going to hurt lots.... My bank account, and their SEC financials* - which included my game that helped them go public - state otherwise. quote:* To date, a substantial portion of the Company's revenues has been derived D_Smart fucked around with this message at 20:25 on Jan 16, 2017 |
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:23 |
|
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. pvp = penis, vigina play?
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:24 |
|
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. The longitudinal comparison showed an increment in average spending for accounts of all ages, so I now think the correct interpretation of that graph is a combination of a large initial outlay from the earliest purchasers (2013 and prior), combined with a steady increase in spending for accounts of all ages as more time/sales go by. So newer accounts have lower values mostly because they haven't had as much time to spend money. As for new whales, the "UNBORN" line in a contingency table provides an imperfect estimate of new backer dollars: So for instance, out of 103,589 accounts established between June 2016 and January 2017, 4 of them are now Wing Commanders, 19 are Space Marshals, etc. This works out to something like $1-5 million worth of funding from new accounts, depending on your assumptions. The new accounts are about 90% Civilians whereas the overall population is about 75% Civilians, so that may indicate something about the number of free accounts. The question of how many whales there actually are, and just how much they are in for, is still not satisfactorily answered, but it was my main motivation for starting to look at this stuff in the first place.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:24 |
|
That will do whale, that will do.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:24 |
|
ManofManyAliases posted:Sources. Ok let's play this game: Don't specifically name your source. Just tell me what your source does for a living. If you don't reply with something specific within 5 minutes, you're making poo poo up again. You don't think that would narrow things right down for the witch hunt?
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:27 |
|
ManofManyAliases posted:I don't get paid by CIG. You mean they don't pay their moderators on their own forum ? That's cheap ; you should have chosen to stream the tech demo, at least you'd get a salary.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:27 |
|
ManofManyAliases posted:Sources. Ok let's play this game: Don't specifically name your source. Just tell me what your source does for a living. If you don't reply with something specific within 5 minutes, you're making poo poo up again. Lol. Nobody (except you) is getting paid to monitor this thread in real time.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:32 |
|
Chalks posted:This is really interesting, thanks for posting it. Average spend per user is particularly interesting, although I guess the statistics are very diluted by free fly events. Even if a free fly user bothered to click on the forums to create an account (which doesn't happen all that often, hence the spikes in UEE/forums account ratios) I wouldn't tell be able to tell if that account was a freeloader -- all I'd be able to see is that they have the default title of Civilian, and an enlist date that occurs in a free fly period. So no, I don't do any adjustment for that. Since the data set isn't ideal by any stretch of the imagination, I prefer to report the numbers as they are, keep the assumptions of the analysis relatively simple, and let people figure their own adjustments to the estimates if they disagree with particular assumptions.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:32 |
|
ManofManyAliases posted:I would pledge exorbitant amounts of money to see this. Given your history that's a very low bar.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:36 |
|
ManofManyAliases posted:Sources. Ok let's play this game: Don't specifically name your source. Just tell me what your source does for a living. If you don't reply with something specific within 5 minutes, you're making poo poo up again. Dereks source works at CIG Heavy Industries on the jpeg machines.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:38 |
|
D_Smart posted:Pucker up and brace for impact. This is going to hurt lots.... Funny, in your own words your company was bleeding money (both yours and others that were given to you), enhancing just how desperate you were to sell off the rights to BC3000 and 2 other games. No wonder why - Take Two bled money and needed to recoup what they could. 618k is not chump change after all. "My company, 3000AD, has been operating at a loss since it's inception in 1992. All my money, that of my mother's and indeed development funding and expenses from three publishers were sunk into this game.... To this day, I have people working for me part-time without ever having received more than expense payments and knowing fully well that we were probably investing in wasted time...." Sigh. Who cares if Take Two made 15% of it's profits from your title in one year. They still bled capital for each year you didn't release it. But, how does this relate to SC? I just don't understand how - coming from where you did - you have any authority to say what CIG does with their crowd-funded money (hint: you don't). ManofManyAliases fucked around with this message at 20:43 on Jan 16, 2017 |
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:39 |
|
Contingency posted:How feasible would it be to use the "last active" forum field as a proxy for refund date? People not logging on before requesting a refund through Zendesk would skew the refund date more to the past, but it'd serve as a rough guideline. Would be interesting to see a quarterly breakdown that can be tied to events (Star Marine cancellation, DS ELE prediction posts, post-sale remorse, etc.). Using that field is a possibility, though it has some problems of its own -- for instance, it turns out that there are certain anomalous accounts where just looking at them causes their last active date to be updated. If you filter those oddballs out, then yes, you could look at that field and it might provide some insight into when account closures occurred, if they occurred prior to all of the forum snapshots I have available for analysis. (If the account closures occurred between a pair of snapshots, then we already know roughly when they happened). Looking at account closures vs account age would also be interesting.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:39 |
|
Galarox posted:Dereks source works at CIG Heavy Industries on the jpeg machines.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:40 |
|
Hav posted:The Expanse is close, but there's a resurgence in science fiction, so I wouldn't be surprised. Space above and Beyond was killed before it's time, IMO. The Expanse is good (i loved the first books better then the last ones) but its 0.22 Nielsen rating (0.7 M viewer) is nothing, not even a glimpse, compared to Game of Thrones 4.3 with 7.8 M views. There might be a resurgence of Sci-Fi among our circles of spergs, but its not a widespread tendency in entertainment.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:42 |
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 09:48 |
|
Chalks posted:It shows that new backers are spending substantially less than their predecessors did. It shows the average backer spending $17 when the cheapest ship costs 3 times that. I don't know what it's showing but that can't be right.
|
# ? Jan 16, 2017 20:42 |