Originally Posted by Insomnlac
"10 For the Chairman" is produced as a way of giving back to subscribers. Subscribers came about because people kept emailing support and asking for ways to continue donating on a monthly basis. They were unable to because they already had the ships they wanted. They started putting out Jump Point magazine early, a hardbound jump point at cost, extra concept art/ingame shots, other goodies, and now the 10FTC.
Are you calling my post misinformation or are you introducing your own post? I don't see what the difference is between what you are saying here and what I said originally. Chris Roberts is accepting additional money from his community to produce a video called "10 Questions for the Chairman." I find it questionable behavior at best, regardless of whether people asked if they could send in money. He still has a choice about whether he accepts their money for things like this. Personally, I would think after $40,000,000 he might do these things without additional funding as a way of thanking his community.
I think he has created a sort-of cult-like following among many of his contributors and is freely taking their money without much if any restraint. Again, it doesn't take that long to make a "10 Questions" video, and as for the other materials, well, perhaps the interest on whatever is left of that $40,000,000 could go towards that. Interest on $40,000,000 is about 1.6 million per year.
Once the game hit fully funded status(~$23 million) he ran a poll
and asked the community if he should stop taking money. 88% of the 20,000+ who voted asked for him to continue taking money and providing stretch goals. The actual people who are funding this game spoke.
As for your "actively hoovering" comment....no. Show me where he has actively
asked for more money after the initial crowd-funding campaign. All he is been doing is announcing stretch goals. He's already said he has more than enough money to make a great game.
Really? This is one of those cases where you're damned if you do, damned if you don't. If every million dollar stretch goal past the original funding was some big massive thing, people would complain about feature creep. Too small and people gripe and moan about them being pointless. What you don't choose to understand, is that each million isn't going just into a single stretch goal. The stretch goal is just a perk. The money goes to a myriad of things including more hires, further fleshing out already announced features, speeding up the process. In nearly every Letter announcing a new stretch goal hit, it has this at the bottom:
"Remember that our stretch goals are examples, ways of showing you how we are improving the game with the additional funding and ways to thank you for your early support. The full impact of each additional dollar is actually felt across the board: the project currently employs over 200 people. As a result, every dollar allows us to support this large team and helps improve Star Citizen in both scope and scale."
Also, Chris has stated that he doesn't want big stretch goals anymore because it would push the release of the game out too far. Some of the big ones he has offered after the game was fully funded, he has said won't be ready until sometime after the game is released.
I think you are misunderstanding or misstating the purpose of the poll, which is not
about whether or not to continue to accept money, but whether or not to continue to display a counter showing funds raised. Here is the title of the poll:
What should we do with the crowdfunding counter after we reach our goal?
Here is what he says in the letter introducing the poll:
Some Citizens have asked if $21 million will mark the end of the funding campaign and the stretch goal unlocks. The answer is no: For a couple of key reasons
Finally there is one very important element – the more funds we can raise in the pre-launch phase, the more we can invest in additional content (more ships, characters etc.) and perhaps more importantly we can apply greater number of resources to the various tasks to ensure we deliver the full functionality sooner rather than later.
Star Citizen Packages will remain available as we continue to spread the word and build this community. A bigger community means a healthier universe population when the persistent universe goes live.
The poll is about continuing to display the counter, not whether to continue to accept money. He openly states in the letter preceding the poll that they will continue to accept money.
As for "actively hoovering" up additional funds, I consider actively promoting buying packages and buying into stretch goals to be actively taking additional funds.
My points about this are the following:
- I question his tactics in generating a following of contributors with their own identity "Star Citizens" ... I think it's a manipulative tactic that isn't new to crowd-funding
- I think accepting money without apparent restraint is irresponsible
- And more generally:
- I think crowd-funders deserve more than just a digital copy of a product for providing the start-up capital for a project that, like in the case of Oculus Rift, may well end up making a billion dollars or some other huge amount of money
- I think crowd-funders should have more of the same rights as investors, and should at a minimum be given disclosure documents that detail where their money is being spent and how
- As clearly indicated in the case of Oculus Rift, I think crowd-funders should be asking many more questions about how their money is being spent, rather than just blithely supporting something, and should expect more for the enormous contribution they are making towards enriching a group of people ... as was the case in Oculus Rift, and as will likely be the case in Star Citizen.Edited by Robertdt - 3/29/14 at 12:32pm