Star Citizen Info Thread

For people who genuinely care about refunds and the legal aspect, here's a popular YT tech lawyer commenting on the Star Citizen debate:



Note I have no idea if this guy is as qualified as he sounds, but I've seen a few game-related videos from him, and he seems pretty knowledgeable about relevant laws and terms.

Though he's not saying anything that I didn't already assume was the case.

Yeah this is another one that leaves me wondering if and when we'll ever actually see a solo game from all this noise.

Carnifex said:

Yeah this is another one that leaves me wondering if and when we'll ever actually see a solo game from all this noise.

Click to expand...

Star Citizen will never be a solo game

That would be Squadron 42.

As with any game that's still in development, who knows if they will actually release it.

I'm pretty sure they're doing their best to make that happen, though.

No, my goalposts have not shifted. Darts have, though.

I'm sorry if I named the incorrect legal document pertaining to the new refund rules. It's all just bureaucracy. Doesn't matter where you agree to the new rules; to the new rules you'll agree.

Remember, that news was under a day old at the time. You heard it first here!

I see Dart's conduct with you as just grasping at straws, being pedantic, and he knows more than he's letting on. I'll bet he knows exactly what I'm talking about or he wouldn't be very well informed, at all.

Yes, DArt is the one shifting the goalposts from the changes in the refund policy, where ever the fine-print has been hidden, to unrelated issues involving yourself and you've bought right into it. Did you see how happy he was to get out of the argument with me and start ranting at you? Not one bit of information about the refund policy. It's misdirection! A slight-of-hand trick.

Whatever the TOS says, the new 2 week time-frame should be heeded. A precedent has been set by the court case.

https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/comments/8ynrel/i_lost_in_court/

Just remember - the sooner you refund the better you chances of success are.

Darth Tagnan said:

For people who genuinely care about refunds and the legal aspect, here's a popular YT tech lawyer commenting on the Star Citizen debate:

Note I have no idea if this guy is as qualified as he sounds, but I've seen a few game-related videos from him, and he seems pretty knowledgeable about relevant laws and terms.

Though he's not saying anything that I didn't already assume was the case.

Click to expand...

Ok, so, I watched this.

He says CIS doesn't have to ever give refunds, they don't even need to finish the game - only spend money on the "game cost" which includes anything they want to buy during business hours.

So, the situation is actually far worse than I thought? The scam is iron-clad?

Yeah, it is situations like this that really make you rethink the whole paying in advance philosophy these days for possible future games. I've only ran into a few lemons, but boy can they sting.

Carnifex said:

Yeah, it is situations like this that really make you rethink the whole paying in advance philosophy these days for possible future games. I've only ran into a few lemons, but boy can they sting.

Click to expand...

If you think you are paying in advance when you pledge for a crowdfunded project, you would definitely do well to rethink your philosophy.

But it’s not uncommon to fundamentally misunderstand the concept.

We’re all conditioned to Capitalism where we buy products, and we’re so used to marketing that we more or less assume that anything that doesn’t involve a guarantee is a scam.

Which is why I generally don’t recommend crowdfunding to people who’re challenged by the notion of a donation, or who would never function under the honor system. I can’t stand the thought of their entitled whining if something goes wrong or is delayed.

That said, I find that crowdfunding still holds a lot of promise, and I suspect that future generations will have an easier time understanding how it works, and why it can potentially result in more interesting games than when suits dictate the outcome.

But we’ll see

SirJames said:

Ok, so, I watched this.

He says CIS doesn't have to ever give refunds, they don't even need to finish the game - only spend money on the "game cost" which includes anything they want to buy during business hours.

So, the situation is actually far worse than I thought? The scam is iron-clad?

Click to expand...

Congratulations, now you’re beginning to actually understand the terms and what it means to pledge for a crowdfunded project or “scam”

The terms of the refund policy haven’t actually changed in years, but they’ve had to add a bunch of disclaimers for the particularly dense people out there.

Unfortunately, as your lies have demonstrated - additional clarification isn’t always enough for some people.

You can’t force people to read something before they complain about what it says

This reminds me of the Diablo 3 launch debacle. I forget the reasons involved, but Blizzard ended up having to offer people refunds (an offer I took them up on!).

Personally, I would like to see more court cases and ignorant people who can't read trying to make their case in such a public capacity.

Thankfully, judges and lawyers tend to be able to read and they should have a decent grasp of the law - unlike a large portion of the people on the Internet, including supposedly "established" gaming news sites, so it's a relatively efficient way to make people reflect a little about how the world works - and what you're doing when you're supporting a crowd-funded campaign.

That said, I'm sure it will take many projects and many people being educated about what words mean, before it truly sinks in what this is all about.

Not just for Star Citizen - but for all crowd-funded projects.

There's no denying SC is a special case - and I have no doubt it will help set quite a few things straight over the years.

But I'm a huge supporter of the non-publisher model, and I find it relatively easy to guage when to support something and when not to support something.

Of course, it's much easier for me because I actually understand that I'm taking a chance - and there's always going to be a very significant risk that things won't turn out exactly as I imagined they would.

As backers, we're essentially acting the publisher - but unlike publishers, we (thankfully) have very limited creative control over the project, and I'm supremely thankful that people can't just take their money back whenever it suits them, because it means the developers are relatively free to pursue their vision.

That's really beyond any ideal I would have dared imagine before Kickstarter became a thing. I'm more than happy to endure the occasional scam or example of my misplaced faith in something.

If there's even a chance at true art - I'm all over it.

Drithius said:

This reminds me of the Diablo 3 launch debacle. I forget the reasons involved, but Blizzard ended up having to offer people refunds (an offer I took them up on!).

Click to expand...

Only a bunch of little issues:

Some people didn't like online only.

Some people didn't like the real money AH.

There were login issues at launch for a few hours.

Rare items could roll better than Legendary by design.

Inferno difficulty was nearly impossible without using exploits.

I remember playing all weekend long for 10 hour or more sessions so It wasn't all bad.

Diablo 3 was ok at launch, but ended up being an excellent game. That said, I'm still pissed they removed the RMAH - as I considered it the best and most novel feature in the game.

Darth Tagnan said:

I'm still pissed they removed the RMAH - as I considered it the best and most novel feature in the game.

Click to expand...

The RMAH was actually a response to the massive third party item sales "problem" in Diablo2. Blizzard wanted some of the item sales money so they tried to control all of it. You can still find sites to trade your items, if you want. I don't know of any.

I'm sure much of the public outcry were old trade site operators and users. You must have seen gold farmers spamming MMO channels? Same thing.

I think item trade sites would have been far more useful for Diablo2 because Diablo3 drop rates are literally rigged to give you 100% chance at legendary early in the session and it goes down the longer you play. Sometimes while playing D3 its hard to see the game through all the addiction mechanics. :/

But it's easy to see where they're coming from. Some people play 20 hours a day, others just on the weekend for 2 or 3 hours. Blizzards always trying to balance these out. Weekly raid lockouts and things. They won't let you just grind the final raid all day until you're fully geared. Same with Diablo3 you can't just farm one boss. Anyone could see how much worse the loot is the second time you kill him. D3 is so sterile in that respect that I remember when they nerfed the coin drop from vases because it was too efficiant to just smash vases and ignore other gameplay. Bliz really wants you to play ALL the content and never grind one thing for long.

SirJames said:

The RMAH was actually a response to the massive third party item sales "problem" in Diablo2. Blizzard wanted some of the item sales money so they tried to control all of it. You can still find sites to trade your items, if you want. I don't know of any.

Click to expand...

Not exactly, according to Blizzard. It was not because they wanted the money - it was because they wanted a "safe and even" space for people to do what they would do anyway.

But it's easy to see where they're coming from. Some people play 20 hours a day, others just on the weekend for 2 or 3 hours. Blizzards always trying to balance these out. Weekly raid lockouts and things. They won't let you just grind the final raid all day until you're fully geared. Same with Diablo3 you can't just farm one boss. Anyone could see how much worse the loot is the second time you kill him. D3 is so sterile in that respect that I remember when they nerfed the coin drop from vases because it was too efficiant to just smash vases and ignore other gameplay. Bliz really wants you to play ALL the content and never grind one thing for long.

Click to expand...

D3 changed a lot - like most of Blizzard games do.

My primary problem with loot-driven games is that they always end up feeling like there's no point in grinding - beyond being able to grind more efficiently.

Warframe is a very good example of that.

However, if I would have been able to earn real money by being very efficient - that would have been a big incentive for me, because I would much, much rather play games that I enjoy than do any actual work.

Diablo 3 could have been the beginning of something beautiful in that way.

But it will come eventually. I have absolutely no doubt of that.

Darth Tagnan said:

Not exactly, according to Blizzard. It was not because they wanted the money - it was because they wanted a "safe and even" space for people to do what they would do anyway.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what I liked about it most. I've never "bought gold" but I might have if I trusted the site. I knew people who did, though, and never heard of anyone being ripped off. Not to encourage it! But I'd say the vast majority of those sites are trying to run legit businesses.

Darth Tagnan said:

My primary problem with loot-driven games is that they always end up feeling like there's no point in grinding - beyond being able to grind more efficiently.

Warframe is a very good example of that.

Click to expand...

I think Diablo3 is a good example of that because you don't change your moveset unless you get a new legendary modifier or set bonus focused on it, so you're just working on damage numbers while repeating the same rotation.

Warframe is quite different to D3 in that the damage on weapons doesn't vary that greatly but the gameplay on the weapons tries to. There's hitscan assault rifles, slow moving plasma or rocket shots, any FPS gameplay you can think of. However, they do take 3 days real time to build so being a noob in warframe can get pretty stale, even if it is a little better these days since they added a bunch of new noob weapons and changed the item progression with new rank requirements for everything.

I haven't been able to get back into Warframe in a while. There's plenty to get but I don't really need any of it. All my frames and weapons are 60/60 mod capacity already and any changes to the mod loadout will cause more headaches than its worth, imo.

Darth Tagnan said:

However, if I would have been able to earn real money by being very efficient - that would have been a big incentive for me, because I would much, much rather play games that I enjoy than do any actual work.

Diablo 3 could have been the beginning of something beautiful in that way.

But it will come eventually. I have absolutely no doubt of that.

Click to expand...

Nah, think about that a little longer. It would become real work VERY quickly! Remember, the "magic find" will work against you if you play too long. Item grinders would be spending most their day grinding at minimum hidden bonus.

I think Diablo3 is a good example of that because you don't change your moveset unless you get a new legendary modifier or set bonus focused on it, so you're just working on damage numbers while repeating the same rotation.

Click to expand...

Yeah, ultimately - Diablo 3 had its limitations. Too shallow in terms of mechanics - but the core gameplay is fantastic.

Warframe is quite different to D3 in that the damage on weapons doesn't vary that greatly but the gameplay on the weapons tries to. There's hitscan assault rifles, slow moving plasma or rocket shots, any FPS gameplay you can think of. However, they do take 3 days real time to build so being a noob in warframe can get pretty stale, even if it is a little better these days since they added a bunch of new noob weapons and changed the item progression with new rank requirements for everything.

Click to expand...

Oh, I love the mechanics of Warframe - and I like the identity of the weapons. My problem is the content - not the mechanics.

Of course, I also despise the pointless grind in Warframe - where you have to actually work for hours to get the "class" you prefer to play, though I know that's not their intended design. That's just how it works out for me.

I haven't been able to get back into Warframe in a while. There's plenty to get but I don't really need any of it. All my frames and weapons are 60/60 mod capacity already and any changes to the mod loadout will cause more headaches than its worth, imo.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I can easily sympathise with that.

Nah, think about that a little longer. It would become real work VERY quickly! Remember, the "magic find" will work against you if you play too long. Item grinders would be spending most their day grinding at minimum hidden bonus.

Click to expand...

You severely underestimate how lazy I am - and how much I enjoy sitting on my ass grinding for loot if I can tell myself there's a reason for it.

That said, Diablo 3 would only have been the first step. A sort of experiment, if you will.

But since I liked the core gameplay, the incentive of being able to earn real money would have worked better for me than pretty much any alternate "endgame" design.

At least, any endgame design that I've seen in games, so far.

That's not the same as the game being everlasting - or that I would never have tired of it.

But I'm very confident it would have lasted much, much longer if they'd kept the RMAH - and addressed the pathetic loot drop issues in other ways.

Pay-to-win? What’s that? That’s just your silly imagination getting worked up over nothing.

This seems to be the company line concerning RSI’s Star Citizen and the recent decision to remove the pre-launch real-money currency cap. While the community is in an uproar over the ability for players to stockpile huge amounts of currency before launch in order to gain a competitive advantage, the studio seems to think that this is much ado over nothing.

Last night, Chris Roberts followed up on a rather tone-deaf PR statement from this past week, downplaying the issue and pretty much denying that pay-to-win is a thing that could possibly affect the sheer joy that is Star Citizen. “This may be a foreign concept to gamers as the majority of games are about winning and losing,” he said, “but Star Citizen isn’t a normal game. It’s a First Person Universe that allows you to live a virtual life in a compelling futuristic setting. You win by having fun, and fun is different things to different people.

"There are two types of resource players have that they can contribute to Star Citizen to make it better: time and money. A player that has lots of time but only backed for the basic game helps out by playing the game, giving feedback, and assisting new players. On the flip side, if a player has a family and a demanding job and only has four hours to game a week but wants to spend some money to shortcut the time investment they would need to purchase a new ship, what’s wrong with that? They are helping fund the ongoing development and running costs of the game, which benefits everyone. The exact same ship can be earned through pure gameplay without having to spend any money and the backer that has plenty of time is likely to be better at dogfighting and FPS gameplay after playing more hours to earn the ship. I don’t want to penalize either type of backer; I want them both to have fun. People should not feel disadvantaged because they don’t have time, nor should they feel disadvantaged if they don’t have money. I want our tent to be large and encompass all types of players with varied skill sets, time, and money."

Hey, remember when you were going to be able to steal any ship?

No money cap with possibility to buy something that isn't cosmetics = pay2win.
Always was and always will be.

Don't get me wrong, I actually love this is happening with Star Citizen and I'm the game's backer. Lootboxes scandal became discussed by authorities only when a famous entity, Electronic Arts, degenerated it to an unacceptable level within Star Wars MMO.
Just as lootboxes went downhill from there and will hopefully become illegal everywhere (except in your neighborhood ), pay2win schemes which aren't gaming nor a game as you can't lose, need to be taxed by huge fees. Fees imposed by governments. The only way it actually happens is those same governments notice it and Star Citizen that's present in headlines monthly if not weekly, is a perfect candidate.

On the flip side, if a player has a family and a demanding job and only has four hours to game a week but wants to spend some money to shortcut the time investment they would need to purchase a new ship, what’s wrong with that?

Click to expand...

It makes for a lot of rich kids (and the, shall we say, young of mind) with no clue what they are doing flying around in expensive ships.

They are helping fund the ongoing development and running costs of the game, which benefits everyone.

Click to expand...

Especially everyone at RSI.

The exact same ship can be earned through pure gameplay without having to spend any money…

Click to expand...

Yeah, sure we can. We can play for months, getting familiar with the game, taking risks, recovering when our risks blow up in our faces, researching good ways to make in game cash, and finally purchase a nice, new ship. Then, as we take the ship into orbit, somebody else in the exact same ship radios over asking how to land on a planet.

To be fair, they already had this problem right at the start with different levels of giving resulting in different ships. I didn't care much, though, because we were going to be able to have private servers. Now it sounds like they are going to follow the Shroud of the Avatar business plan.

Zloth said:

I didn't care much, though, because we were going to be able to have private servers.

Click to expand...

I didn't care because the game was supposed to have singleplayer part where whales from phonegames are not invited. And now… Seems that ain't happening.

On the flip side, if a player has a family and a demanding job and only has four hours to game a week but wants to spend some money to shortcut the time investment they would need to purchase a new ship, what’s wrong with that?

Click to expand...

Who said this?
EVERYTHING is wrong with that. Instead of resigning that "demanding" job and playing a game, that person is sweating his arse only so to get fat paycheck and win by paying and not playing. The same whale is ruining the experience for actual players.
The time cut short by paying through microtransactions excuse because not enough of that same time is publishers' rotten PR. Instead of being stigmatized as plain bullshit when it appeared for the first time, took roots and refuses to die already.
Not wrong? I don't see any single right point about it and I call it scam - it ends by whales competing who'll spend more money on garbage just to be at some #1 spot. That's not playing a game, that's out of control wasting $. Just add interest promises and you got yourself another Ponzi scheme.