Overclock.net › Forums › Video Games › PC Gaming › Do you think buying into Star Citizen is wise?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Do you think buying into Star Citizen is wise? - Page 3

post #21 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by F1Seb View Post

You are a very very negative person. Even though you wont admit it I guarantee that if anybody gives you a new idea to ponder the 1st thing you do is look at all the negatives before you even try to think of any positive outcomes. You mentioned that you don't think it's fair if he makes money from the game and the original "investors" just get the game. Well the 1st thing you need to realize is this:

1. It's not your money (unless you decided to fund the project, which it doesn't sound like you did)
2. As somebody who already pointed it out, you calling the people who are helping crowdfund the project as investors is wrong. Just because you try to twist the definition to fit your reasoning doesn't make it right. So you need to get your terminology correct:

invest:
to put (money) to use, by purchase or expenditure, in something offering potential profitable returns, as interest, income, or appreciation in value.

This is not what is happening at Star Citizen, people are not getting stock, people are not purchasing property, people are not expecting financial gain. This is a simple transfer of digital goods. The goods being the video game. That's it. Nothing else. When you're buying food from a restaurant you're purchasing goods, you're not investing in it, when you buy a blu-ray player from Sony, you're not investing in Sony, you're just buying the product. This is exactly what is happening with Star Citizen. You're being offered digital goods, and you're paying for them.

If you're following the project, which you're obviously not, you could see where the money that is still being accrued goes to. Chris has been hiring and will continue to hire more people for his team. He has also hired other companies to help with the development of other aspects of the game as well. Or such that's what Chris Roberts is saying, nobody other than him really knows where this money is going, nobody knows if this game will actually come out, or if he'll "cash out" and run away to some tropical haven with all the cash. The good thing is, that with the way the content is being released we can see the progress happening. Not just some screenshots here and there, or CGI made videos, those of us who have purchased this game get the opportunity to be able to see this game as it progresses through every single step of it's development. That's our return. That's what we're paying for. For people like me I think it's worth it. No other video game company has ever done it, nobody touches the games made by AAA studios like EA, Blizzard, etc. until Alpha or Beta the earliest.

Now as far as you likening this to some kind of cult and comparing Chris Roberts to some evangelical leader......can't help you there. That isn't even the 1st or the 100th thought that would come into my head while watching those segments. Why you can't see that as a simple Q and A session, I just don't know.



You know what makes your points less convincing? The fact that they start off with personal attacks about me; a transparent and fallacious approach to making an argument. Perhaps in pursuing your degree in Message Board Psychology you neglected to study basic informal logic, so let me clarify something for you:

Quote:

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument.


The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html



As for the rest of your points, they were already addressed in the post to which you responded. I already explained why crowd-funders are investors in every sense but how they are currently compensated. It should also be noted that crowd-funders serve to replace traditional investors, which is the entire point. Instead of having to depend on traditional investors like a large publisher to provide development funds, crowd-funders instead fill that role ... the only difference is that they are not financially compensated. If you want to argue that the money invested / spent / donated / given by crowd-funders to these projects are serving the same purpose that traditional investorment funds do (i.e., provide the initial funds necessary for a project to be developed), go ahead.

And you're also wrong in that this is a simple exchange of goods for capital. Crowd-funders are investing in the POSSIBILITY of a product. The product does not exist yet in its promised form, and may not ever be developed. If the Kickstarter project is not developed (which does happen), they do not get reimbursed, and this is considered part of the arrangement up front. This risk is also characteristic of an investment, rather than a purchase.

Finally, if you can't see how creating a compelling movement of sorts, giving followers a type of identity (Star Citizens), and asking them to donate money to the cause is evangelistic, I'm not sure what to tell you.

And the reason I don't see "10 Questions for the Chairman" as a "simple Q & A" is because it's not: Chris Roberts states in the video that extra funds were donated by "Star Citizens" for him to make this video ... why his followers have to pay him something over and above the $40,000,000 they have already given him so that he will answer 10 questions on Youtube is part of why I am skeptical about some of his actions.
Edited by Robertdt - 3/25/14 at 6:52pm
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k @ 4.7 ghz 1.34V Asus Sabertooth Z77 MSI Twin Frozr III 7950  Gskill Trident X 2400mhz 16gb 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 840 Pro SSD Swiftech H220x Windows 7 64 Bit Qnix QX2710 Evolution II 27" 2560x1440p  
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Corsair Vengeance K70 Corsair TX 750W  Antec P280 Gigabyte M6980X 
AudioAudioAudio
Sound Blaster ZXR  Audioengine A5+ Audioengine S8 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k @ 4.7 ghz 1.34V Asus Sabertooth Z77 MSI Twin Frozr III 7950  Gskill Trident X 2400mhz 16gb 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 840 Pro SSD Swiftech H220x Windows 7 64 Bit Qnix QX2710 Evolution II 27" 2560x1440p  
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Corsair Vengeance K70 Corsair TX 750W  Antec P280 Gigabyte M6980X 
AudioAudioAudio
Sound Blaster ZXR  Audioengine A5+ Audioengine S8 
  hide details  
Reply
post #22 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robertdt View Post

You know what makes your points less convincing? The fact that they start off with and are focused on personal attacks about me; a transparent and fallacious approach to making an argument. Perhaps in pursuing your degree in Message Board Psychology you neglected to study basic informal logic, so let me clarify something for you:
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html



As for the rest of your points, they were already addressed in the post to which you responded. I already explained why crowd-funders are investors in every sense but how they are currently compensated. It should also be noted that crowd-funders serve to replace traditional investors, which is the entire point. Instead of having to depend on traditional investors like a large publisher to provide development funds, crowd-funders instead fill that role ... the only difference is that they are not financially compensated. If you want to argue that the money invested / spent / donated / given by crowd-funders to these projects are serving the same purpose that traditional investorment funds do (i.e., provide the initial funds necessary for a project to be developed), go ahead.

And you're also wrong in that this is a simple exchange of goods for capital. Crowd-funders are investing in the POSSIBILITY of a product. The product does not exist yet in its promised form, and may not ever be developed. If the Kickstarter project is not developed (which does happen), they do not get reimbursed, and this is considered part of the arrangement up front. This risk is also characteristic of an investment, rather than a purchase.

Finally, if you can't see how creating a compelling movement of sorts, giving followers a type of identity (Star Citizens), and asking them to donate money to the cause is evangelistic, I'm not sure what to tell you.

And the reason I don't see "10 Questions for the Chairman" as a "simple Q & A" is because it's not: Chris Roberts states in the video that extra funds were donated by "Star Citizens" for him to make this video ... why his followers have to pay him something over and above the $40,000,000 they have already given him so that he will answer 10 questions on Youtube is part of why I am skeptical about some of his actions.

It's not a personal attack so don't flatter yourself. And once again you didn't explain how giving money to the Star Citizen project is an investment, you just don't understand the meaning or actually you're refusing the hear what the actual meaning is and you're just going on and on believing that you're right even though you're completely wrong. There is no grey area, you don't get to change the words to make it right in your sense. People know what a crowdfunded project is. People know that there is no financial return. People know that they're either going to get a game or they wont. All of the facts which you are purposely ignoring have been presented in the fine print from day one when this project launched through Kickstarter. The people who put money into it know what the risks are.

You're obviously going to not change your way of thinking even though you're completely wrong but I have hope. So for the last time:
This is not an investment, Chris Roberts never presented this as buying into his company, or buying stock in his company, or getting any financial incentives if this game becomes a success. This is simply a trade for goods. We give him money, he gives us a video game. That's what this was presented to us as, and this is what they're driving towards. Once everything is said and done and this game is released than we will have reached the final stage of trading our money for his company's video game. If you can't understand this, then there is nothing else to be added to this except that you're knowingly refusing reason.
post #23 of 41
Calling someone "a very very negative person who ...look(s) at all the negatives before you even try to think of any positive outcomes" is a personal attack.

And I'm not going to explain at length for a third time why I consider Kickstarter-based crowd-funding to be a form of investment. There is already a defined form of investment (as in, for a financial stake in the company and / or product) crowd-funding called equity crowdfunding that is similar to what I'm describing, but it looks as though the law is either restrictive or not well-defined as this stage. I am not saying it is presented to you as an investment. I understand that you are not promised financial rewards if Chris Roberts makes a lot of money off of the product you helped finance. What I am saying is that however it is presented, it functionally serves the role of investment funding and should be compensated better than it currently is.


One more time, here are the differences between crowd-funding and investing. The only functional difference is that crowd-funders are compensated differently.



Traditional investment:


- Contribution of capital provides initiatory funding for the development of a product

- The product may or may not be developed, this is a risk assumed by the investor

- The investor is compensated for providing the initial funds and taking the risk described above by a proportional stake in the profits generated from the product / the company; if the product is not developed, the investor receives nothing in remuneration.




Crowd-funding:


1. Contribution of capital provides initiatory funding for the development of a product

2. The product may or may not be developed, this is the risk assumed by the crowd-funder

3. The crowd-funder is compensated for providing the initial funds and taking the risk described above by receiving a (usually digital) copy of the product; if the product is not developed, the crowd-funder receives nothing in remuneration.
Edited by Robertdt - 3/25/14 at 7:43pm
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k @ 4.7 ghz 1.34V Asus Sabertooth Z77 MSI Twin Frozr III 7950  Gskill Trident X 2400mhz 16gb 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 840 Pro SSD Swiftech H220x Windows 7 64 Bit Qnix QX2710 Evolution II 27" 2560x1440p  
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Corsair Vengeance K70 Corsair TX 750W  Antec P280 Gigabyte M6980X 
AudioAudioAudio
Sound Blaster ZXR  Audioengine A5+ Audioengine S8 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k @ 4.7 ghz 1.34V Asus Sabertooth Z77 MSI Twin Frozr III 7950  Gskill Trident X 2400mhz 16gb 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 840 Pro SSD Swiftech H220x Windows 7 64 Bit Qnix QX2710 Evolution II 27" 2560x1440p  
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Corsair Vengeance K70 Corsair TX 750W  Antec P280 Gigabyte M6980X 
AudioAudioAudio
Sound Blaster ZXR  Audioengine A5+ Audioengine S8 
  hide details  
Reply
post #24 of 41
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robertdt View Post

Calling someone "a very very negative person who ...look(s) at all the negatives before you even try to think of any positive outcomes" is a personal attack.

And I'm not going to explain at length for a third time why I consider Kickstarter-based crowd-funding to be a form of investment. There is already a defined form of investment (as in, for a financial stake in the company and / or product) crowd-funding called equity crowdfunding that is similar to what I'm describing, but it looks as though the law is either restrictive or not well-defined as this stage. I am not saying it is presented to you as an investment. I understand that you are not promised financial rewards if Chris Roberts makes a lot of money off of the product you helped finance. What I am saying is that however it is presented, it functionally serves the role of investment funding and should be compensated better than it currently is.


One more time, here are the differences between crowd-funding and investing. The only functional difference is that crowd-funders are compensated differently.



Traditional investment:


- Contribution of capital provides initiatory funding for the development of a product

- The product may or may not be developed, this is a risk assumed by the investor

- The investor is compensated for providing the initial funds and taking the risk described above by a proportional stake in the profits generated from the product / the company; if the product is not developed, the investor receives nothing in remuneration.




Crowd-funding:


1. Contribution of capital provides initiatory funding for the development of a product

2. The product may or may not be developed, this is the risk assumed by the crowd-funder

3. The crowd-funder is compensated for providing the initial funds and taking the risk described above by receiving a (usually digital) copy of the product; if the product is not developed, the crowd-funder receives nothing in remuneration.

Quote:
Originally Posted by F1Seb View Post

It's not a personal attack so don't flatter yourself. And once again you didn't explain how giving money to the Star Citizen project is an investment, you just don't understand the meaning or actually you're refusing the hear what the actual meaning is and you're just going on and on believing that you're right even though you're completely wrong. There is no grey area, you don't get to change the words to make it right in your sense. People know what a crowdfunded project is. People know that there is no financial return. People know that they're either going to get a game or they wont. All of the facts which you are purposely ignoring have been presented in the fine print from day one when this project launched through Kickstarter. The people who put money into it know what the risks are.

You're obviously going to not change your way of thinking even though you're completely wrong but I have hope. So for the last time:
This is not an investment, Chris Roberts never presented this as buying into his company, or buying stock in his company, or getting any financial incentives if this game becomes a success. This is simply a trade for goods. We give him money, he gives us a video game. That's what this was presented to us as, and this is what they're driving towards. Once everything is said and done and this game is released than we will have reached the final stage of trading our money for his company's video game. If you can't understand this, then there is nothing else to be added to this except that you're knowingly refusing reason.

you know you guys are fighting over a ******* video game right? You are having a heated argument over the concept of flying a space ship and going PEW PEW at other spaceships.
Zen
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-6600k Gigabyte Z170XP-SLI RX 480 4GB 24 GB DDR4 2133MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 850 evo OCZ Vertex 4 Crucial MX 500 256GB WD Black 3 TB 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Seagate 1 TB H60 Windows 10 Asus mx27a 
MonitorKeyboardPowerMouse
hp 2009 m Corsair MR Brown Antec Earthwatts 650 Razer Naga 
Audio
Soundblaster Omni 
  hide details  
Reply
Zen
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-6600k Gigabyte Z170XP-SLI RX 480 4GB 24 GB DDR4 2133MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 850 evo OCZ Vertex 4 Crucial MX 500 256GB WD Black 3 TB 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Seagate 1 TB H60 Windows 10 Asus mx27a 
MonitorKeyboardPowerMouse
hp 2009 m Corsair MR Brown Antec Earthwatts 650 Razer Naga 
Audio
Soundblaster Omni 
  hide details  
Reply
post #25 of 41
Yeah this topic has gone outa topic..
post #26 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thready View Post


you know you guys are fighting over a ******* video game right? You are having a heated argument over the concept of flying a space ship and going PEW PEW at other spaceships.

Actually the discussion (which is about crowd-funding, not the particulars of the space sim game) is consistent with the OP question.
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k @ 4.7 ghz 1.34V Asus Sabertooth Z77 MSI Twin Frozr III 7950  Gskill Trident X 2400mhz 16gb 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 840 Pro SSD Swiftech H220x Windows 7 64 Bit Qnix QX2710 Evolution II 27" 2560x1440p  
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Corsair Vengeance K70 Corsair TX 750W  Antec P280 Gigabyte M6980X 
AudioAudioAudio
Sound Blaster ZXR  Audioengine A5+ Audioengine S8 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k @ 4.7 ghz 1.34V Asus Sabertooth Z77 MSI Twin Frozr III 7950  Gskill Trident X 2400mhz 16gb 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 840 Pro SSD Swiftech H220x Windows 7 64 Bit Qnix QX2710 Evolution II 27" 2560x1440p  
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Corsair Vengeance K70 Corsair TX 750W  Antec P280 Gigabyte M6980X 
AudioAudioAudio
Sound Blaster ZXR  Audioengine A5+ Audioengine S8 
  hide details  
Reply
post #27 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by istudy92 View Post

Yeah this topic has gone outa topic..

+1

biggrin.gif
post #28 of 41
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robertdt View Post

Actually the discussion (which is about crowd-funding, not the particulars of the space sim game) is consistent with the OP question.

Oh well then my bad. That is a totally legitimate reason to cut throats. Continue good sir.
Zen
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-6600k Gigabyte Z170XP-SLI RX 480 4GB 24 GB DDR4 2133MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 850 evo OCZ Vertex 4 Crucial MX 500 256GB WD Black 3 TB 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Seagate 1 TB H60 Windows 10 Asus mx27a 
MonitorKeyboardPowerMouse
hp 2009 m Corsair MR Brown Antec Earthwatts 650 Razer Naga 
Audio
Soundblaster Omni 
  hide details  
Reply
Zen
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-6600k Gigabyte Z170XP-SLI RX 480 4GB 24 GB DDR4 2133MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 850 evo OCZ Vertex 4 Crucial MX 500 256GB WD Black 3 TB 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Seagate 1 TB H60 Windows 10 Asus mx27a 
MonitorKeyboardPowerMouse
hp 2009 m Corsair MR Brown Antec Earthwatts 650 Razer Naga 
Audio
Soundblaster Omni 
  hide details  
Reply
post #29 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thready View Post

Oh well then my bad. That is a totally legitimate reason to cut throats. Continue good sir.

I think you're being very melodramatic ... this was a relatively respectful discussion about crowd-funding and how it is being implemented in Star Citizen ... and is consistent with the OP about buying into games early like this, sales tactics, and social pressure resulting from the sort of $40,000,000 crowd-funded "movement" that has become the development of Star Citizen.
Quote:

All I hear from people I know is that Star Citizen is going to be the next big thing in gaming. I think the concept is good but I am not buying into a game until I see the finished product. I guess I am a bad gamer for not buying a game midway through development. They keep trying to talk me into buying a package but these are the same people who get excited by anything with a good sales pitch. I remember when they all preordered Diablo 3 (by the way why would someone preorder a digital download?) and remember how that turned out? I would rather wait until a game comes out before buying it. I do not buy concepts. What if you buy the $150 package and end up hating it? Walking around a hangar is not a playable version of the game in my opinion.

Edited by Robertdt - 3/26/14 at 5:20pm
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k @ 4.7 ghz 1.34V Asus Sabertooth Z77 MSI Twin Frozr III 7950  Gskill Trident X 2400mhz 16gb 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 840 Pro SSD Swiftech H220x Windows 7 64 Bit Qnix QX2710 Evolution II 27" 2560x1440p  
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Corsair Vengeance K70 Corsair TX 750W  Antec P280 Gigabyte M6980X 
AudioAudioAudio
Sound Blaster ZXR  Audioengine A5+ Audioengine S8 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k @ 4.7 ghz 1.34V Asus Sabertooth Z77 MSI Twin Frozr III 7950  Gskill Trident X 2400mhz 16gb 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 840 Pro SSD Swiftech H220x Windows 7 64 Bit Qnix QX2710 Evolution II 27" 2560x1440p  
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Corsair Vengeance K70 Corsair TX 750W  Antec P280 Gigabyte M6980X 
AudioAudioAudio
Sound Blaster ZXR  Audioengine A5+ Audioengine S8 
  hide details  
Reply
post #30 of 41
And here i thought for sure i was gonna see someone point to the "invested" Oculus rift that gained the OR(and only the OR team) team billions.


I think you should wait for the game to come out, unless you want to be "part of the movement". There is probably just as much enjoyment to be had being involved with the "movement" as there is with the actual game itself.

Pursuing a dream is typically more engaging and memorable than actually achieving the dream itself.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PC Gaming
Overclock.net › Forums › Video Games › PC Gaming › Do you think buying into Star Citizen is wise?