5 ms·
Why? There is a lot of uncertainty in this kind of highly ambitious projects, but the money is used to pay skilled people to build something that could be grea
by stephc_int13 4y ago
Why?
There is a lot of uncertainty in this kind of highly ambitious projects, but the money is used to pay skilled people to build something that could be great.
What is wrong with that? This is some kind of gambling, but nobody is forced, and I expect that most of the backers are aware that they are not getting the money back.
I find it much more objectionable to see people sinking money into crypto or NFTs, as the work output of those is simply no-existent.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- smoldesu 4y agoBecause without them, they get their release date pushed back 8 years?
- stephc_int13 4y agoDoes it matter? I can understand that people are upset by such a delay, but this is a cool experiment, I am glad that it could be attempted. Not the typical game development process, for sure, and it could fail to deliver, but there are many games made "by the book" if this is what you are looking for.
- smoldesu 4y agoThey're welcome to experiment however they want, but Star Citizen was pitched as a game, not a science project. Their ambition was an afterthought, once they saw how much money they received in their initial round of funding. They deliberately deceived investors by pitching one thing and building another. If you aren't offended by this, I'm glad. It's still deception, and it still erodes my trust in them as developers.
- Akronymus 4y ago> They deliberately deceived investors I don't think deliberately is fitting for that. Horribly mismanaged and feature creeped, sure. Deliberately misled, no.