Chris Roberts new project... Star Citizen

[muppetts]

Star Cit has $175 million, I think (top off my head) GTA V was 150 with marketing and a 1000 person team (SC has about 400 I think), plus GTA took 5 years and had motion capture as well.

I get you cannot compare like for like but GTA V was a AAA release with 1000 crew on it + marketing and was/is huge, plus was released on multiple platforms.

Even as a rough example the question needs to be asked, what the hell is all the money being used on because with more than half the staff of GTA it's not people!

[segmentationfault]

Even as a rough example the question needs to be asked, what the hell is all the money being used on because with more than half the staff of GTA it's not people!

But do we know how much money CIG has spent so far..?

Thinking how much money and time was spent to make GTA V is more surprising to me. GTA V feels just a further iteration from GTA IV. They already had a development company and staff available so no money or time had to spend establish/find those either.

[muppetts]

No the main dev team was 200, the other 800 + was 3rd party developers they employed into the team but anyway, for sure the comparison is not like for like but there is enough to look at, especially as GTA budget included multi platform, marketing and 60% more staff.

+ No your right we do not know how much they have spent as they will not say....however the entire GTA project was completed in 5 years, scope and size of assets is considerable and they finished. SC is still pushing very very hard to raise funds and not in a subtle way, wanna buy a tank? They have more than the GTA team had in resources and they have no multi platform or mass AAA marketing, so the question is, why are they so far out (lets be honest here they are not finishing in 2018, they won't even BETA in 2018, maybe Christmas 2019 for release).

The answer of course is massive feature creep, totally out of control feature avalanche! For every new feature, you increase dev time and you increase blockers and bugs.

If you are still 2 years away from releasing a game you published (not us Chris R) would be done in 2014/15, why are you making Tanks, why are you trying to shoehorn players land buys, why are you not saying 'Right finish space section with stations, launch, polish bug crush, then work on additional features such as FPS, Tanks, land grabs, face scanning/lip syncing (FFS), more sectors, more planets etc.

I was huge supporter and I gave allot of slack but this development is in full tail spin and even the most generous would have to be skeptical, I certainly am not too proud to say I got allot wrong but I can see now!

[segmentationfault]

It is also good to remember that not all the years are equal - Star Citizen at TwitchCon 2017

The answer of course is massive feature creep, totally out of control feature avalanche! For every new feature, you increase dev time and you increase blockers and bugs.

Well, some people would prefer them making much more simpler game but I, for one, am more than happy they are working on something enormous and ambitious.

[Chips]

It's also fair to point out that GTA probably had infrastructure to start with, whereas Chris Robert's team will have needed to obtain buildings, computers and so on. True, GTA will have ongoing costs of updating and maintaining (renting) various places, but things like desks, chairs, monitors, and blah blah are unlikely to cost as much per year as for a company having to obtain all that first time.

[raess2013]

It's also fair to point out that GTA probably had infrastructure to start with, whereas Chris Robert's team will have needed to obtain buildings, computers and so on. True, GTA will have ongoing costs of updating and maintaining (renting) various places, but things like desks, chairs, monitors, and blah blah are unlikely to cost as much per year as for a company having to obtain all that first time.

although you normally don't buy these things, you lease/take a loan for it. This highly depends on what is better for you regarding tax and stuff, but normally you not investing millions in office furniture and stuff without knowing if you going to need them half a year down the road.

I think they are financially safe, they just made 35 millions last year, 36 millions the year before.

if you take into account, that the European wages are roughly the half of those paid in the US (according to a survey from 2014 on Gamasutra and the financial report from foundry 42 Manchester) they have quite a bit in the war chest.

[Morkonan]

...I think they are financially safe, they just made 35 millions last year, 36 millions the year before.

if you take into account, that the European wages are roughly the half of those paid in the US (according to a survey from 2014 on Gamasutra and the financial report from foundry 42 Manchester) they have quite a bit in the war chest.

Chips is right in that they had up-front costs. But, compared to their ongoing dev costs, those aren't too significant. I imagine they "eased into" them, leasing/renting until they established exactly what it was that they needed.

But, I don't imagine they went to auctions buying large lots of used office furniture... Not with capital like that, they didn't.

I've always wondered how devs that are in a situation like this actually manage to stay in business. They have no saleable product and no income stream. Well, unless they're RSI and can sell "promises" instead of "products."

[pjknibbs]

I've always wondered how devs that are in a situation like this actually manage to stay in business.

They generally don't--once they've burned through the capital they go bust, so it's just a matter of how much they're spending versus how much money they have. See also: Ion Storm.

[Redvers Ganderpoke]

Star Cit has $175 million,!

Where is this info from? As far as I can see they don't publish the accounts of the US Holding co. (They don't have to if it's a US private co.) The UK ones you can see for 2016 but they don't show anything too interesting.

[X2-Illuminatus]

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/funding-goals

FUNDS RAISED
$ 176,968,436

STAR CITIZENS
1,971,962

[Redvers Ganderpoke]

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/funding-goals

FUNDS RAISED
$ 176,968,436

STAR CITIZENS
1,971,962

It was the "has" bit that fooled me. It should be they "had" $176m - I assume they have spent some of it since it was raised.

[Golden_Gonads]

It was the "has" bit that fooled me. It should be they "had" $176m - I assume they have spent some of it since it was raised.

Ahhh, but they've taken on loans and almost certainly taken on private funding as well.

I'll take the opportunity now to repeat what I've said before - I would have jumped at the chance to have invested in this game, but to buy cheats (which is all the ships/tanks/land/whatever they sell are) is utterly daft. Yes yes, they want to stay free of a publisher who would have held them to some kind of schedule and may have actually kept Roberts on track, but... GYAHHH!!! Some companies NEED the structure a publisher brings. They can't be trusted out in the wild on their own.

I backed pre-kickstarter for the minimum amount and I don't exactly regret it, I believe I'll get a game (Or games) at some point. Not the game I backed (I backed a solo Wing Commander type game along with a multiplayer Privateer/Freelancer space combat/trade sim, not a life experience do everything game), but a game nonetheless. Obviously, neither am I happy. The cash grabbing, the delays, the feature creep, all have killed interest in the game for me.

[raess2013]

It was the "has" bit that fooled me. It should be they "had" $176m - I assume they have spent some of it since it was raised.

Ahhh, but they've taken on loans and almost certainly taken on private funding as well.

I'll take the opportunity now to repeat what I've said before - I would have jumped at the chance to have invested in this game, but to buy cheats (which is all the ships/tanks/land/whatever they sell are) is utterly daft. Yes yes, they want to stay free of a publisher who would have held them to some kind of schedule and may have actually kept Roberts on track, but... GYAHHH!!! Some companies NEED the structure a publisher brings. They can't be trusted out in the wild on their own.

I backed pre-kickstarter for the minimum amount and I don't exactly regret it, I believe I'll get a game (Or games) at some point. Not the game I backed (I backed a solo Wing Commander type game along with a multiplayer Privateer/Freelancer space combat/trade sim, not a life experience do everything game), but a game nonetheless. Obviously, neither am I happy. The cash grabbing, the delays, the feature creep, all have killed interest in the game for me.

It hasn't just killed the interest in the game for you, it made you sour. I can't understand why people are always so emotional about it. It is just a game in development.

The only reason they are making so much money is because of their scope. They try to do something special and let us take part in it.

If you think that the development of SC is troubled you should read blood sweat and pixels from Jason Schreier. It puts everything into perspective.
It's just game development on a large scale and no publisher would have been able to change that without outright killing the project.

[muppetts]

So I thought I would look at 3.0, DL'd, went to landing pad, tried to get onto ship, it turned to wireframe and I fell through the dock floor into eternity, loaded up again, went to ship, got on board, got stuck on ladder, reload, got on ship, fell through ship, reload, walked to ship, got stuck on door to pad, reload, got to ship, go on ship......and turned to wireframe and Then I fell through the floor, went AHHHHHH and removed.

[Tycow]

I can't understand why people are always so emotional about it. It is just a game in development.

I'd flip that statement... I can't understand why people rabidly defend this project...

Don't get me wrong - I like the idea and scope of SC, however the implementation so far leaves something to be desired (and that's an understatement).

Gotta sell those ship jpegs somehow I guess...

[Morkonan]

I wanted to revisit something...

It's also fair to point out that GTA probably had infrastructure to start with,..

Just pulling this out as a general theme when comparing AAA franchise titles to Star Citizen as an example.

GTA knew where it was going.

"It" knew what the theme was going to be, knew the primary sort of gameplay the player was going to engage in, knew how the player would interact with the environment and also had several previous test-beds it could draw on for improvements and additions. It also had a plan for new features and, having the knowledge gained from previous development, already had a handle on how to shoehorn things together.

SC had an "idea."

None of the archaic, but revolutionary at the time, gameplay mechanics of previous games would be remarkable and the "experience" of implementing them would be practically worthless, if even anyone remembered. In short - All they can draw on from previous examples is creating a game that generates the same enthusiasm in players, perhaps marginally capitalizing on some general themes that fans enjoyed.

But... Star Citizen is now nothing at all like "Wing Commander," the original inspiration. It's "Elite" on steroids or much more like "Privateer" in theme. That's not a bad thing, really, since those are also great games.

The point is that they started out with an idea, added a much larger element to it, and are now continuing to "supersize" all the way, much like they did with the original idea.

"Make it biggerer!"

From an outsider, that's what I hear them saying with all the additions. Why? That's the phrase that got them so much attention, so, in their possible minds, that's what has given them some "success." If that is true, why not just "make it biggerer," right? That's what the public wants and they want to make a game people want to play.

But, in the quest to "Make it Biggerer," they seemed to have abandoned the idea that their goal is to actually make a game that is worthy of being released. Why?

People continue to buy into the process and they continue to reward them.

"Look at the cute monkey! It's throwing poo! Give it a peanut, it's so cute! Oh, look, it's throwing poo again! Isn't that just hilarious? Give it another peanut!"

The game will get released when, in the next budget review, they realize that they're going to run out of money and that continued primary development is no longer sustainable. Until then, they will continue to throw poo until people stop rewarding them.

[Chips]

Chris Roberts was behind Freelancer, which was (at original launch) an influence on the design of SC. A lot of what Chris wanted for FL was in SC.

Freelancer itself was late, overbudget, and Chris left as Digital Anvil were bought out by Microsoft - who allegedly "pushed" Freelancer out before it was ready and without a lot of the features originally stated.

I like Robert's enthusiasm, but he is too emotionally invested and unable to say where a line gets drawn. That, had it not been for the supposedly EVIL Microsoft, would have killed Freelancer. It very nearly did.

It may kill Star Citizen, but I believe something will get released at some point. I hope it lives up to all promised, but I'm emotionally detached from this It's done when it's done. Until then I'll play some Hearts of Iron 4, wait for Mount and Blade 2 - and check out a few other titles of interest in the interim

[raess2013]

I can't understand why people are always so emotional about it. It is just a game in development.

I'd flip that statement... I can't understand why people rabidly defend this project...

Don't get me wrong - I like the idea and scope of SC, however the implementation so far leaves something to be desired (and that's an understatement).

Gotta sell those ship jpegs somehow I guess...

There is nothing to defend. They are making ~35 million a year from roughly 1 million backers so it seems the customers are still satisfied.
That they need to make money to sustain the business is a no brainer. 475 employees want to get paid.

There are no mass leavings, no studios closing or reports about people don't get paid like crytek.
There are collaborations with industry leading companies like Intel who even launched their optane SSDs through SC, though. There are Amazon, AMD and many more; companies that did their due diligence before working with CIG for sure.

I don't need to defend an alpha either, it's not a released game and looking at Spellforce 3 and Rebirth at launch I find it a little bit hilarious to attack them over the state of an alpha where massive bugs and glitches are to be expected.

I can only defend something that needs defending, that is in danger but SC isn't in danger. I like discussions though and we are in a forum.

I am a fan and backer, additionally very interested in game development so I educate myself on the topic. It helps a lot to put things into perspective. SC isn't so special regarding their development. Compared to Uncharted 4, Diablo 3, Destiny etc. they are doing well and we are talking about a start up compared to established studios here.
Maybe that's the problem, there is nothing to compare the project too, because 99% of game development happens behind closed doors.

I can only give the advice that someone who wants a finished product should wait for release and people who have doubts should stay away from the project too. There is no one forcing you to get on this long ride.

Speaking of releases: I bought Rebirth and couldn't finish the first mission due to game breaking bugs. Spellforce crashed until the latest patch and Elex doesn't want to start on my desktop anymore.
Glad that I have a beefy laptop where the game runs without a problem so I can continue the story...

That are things that are far more concerning than an ambitious project with a buggy alpha.

[Tycow]

My statement regarding "rabidly defending" wasn't aimed at you directly, but thanks for providing that response.

There is nothing to defend. They are making ~35 million a year from roughly 1 million backers so it seems the customers are still satisfied.
That they need to make money to sustain the business is a no brainer. 475 employees want to get paid.

There are no mass leavings, no studios closing or reports about people don't get paid like crytek.
There are collaborations with industry leading companies like Intel who even launched their optane SSDs through SC, though. There are Amazon, AMD and many more; companies that did their due diligence before working with CIG for sure.

I don't need to defend an alpha either, it's not a released game and looking at Spellforce 3 and Rebirth at launch I find it a little bit hilarious to attack them over the state of an alpha where massive bugs and glitches are to be expected.

Customers are satisfied? Sweeping statement is sweeping. I'm a customer... I'm not satisfied with how SC is being developed. Judging from the posts on r/StarCitizen_Refunds, others are not happy to the point of getting their money back. We cannot escape the fact that the game is 3 years overdue (originally due for release in 2014 - date was revised to 2017, and still no release). The alpha, if a true reflection of the current state of the game, shows that a final release is nowhere near ready. As far as I know, there isn't even a revised release date available (although how much weight you could put on it is questionable at this stage).

I'm not even sure how to address your middle point - of course other companies will have done due diligence checks, however I'm sure companies that were associated with Barings Bank or Enron did the same...

I see your point regarding other games, but this isn't the "BUGGY GAMES HERE" thread, it's the Star Citizen discussion - the state of X Rebirth and Spellforce are irrelevant.

Boiling down to it, and because I don't want to get into a long and protracted argument: I am a space game fan, of course I want to see SC succeed. I've backed SC (at a low level that gives me an Aurora and SQ42 access), and I've got one of the limited golden tickets from GDC 2012 but I'm keeping a realistic view of what information is available to Joe Public. Based on what I've seen so far, I'm not expecting the final result to end up anything like the game that was described back then.

I can only give the advice that someone who wants a finished product should wait for release and people who have doubts should stay away from the project too. There is no one forcing you to get on this long ride.

Probably the best bit of advice you can give, really.

[Morkonan]

...It may kill Star Citizen, but I believe something will get released at some point. I hope it lives up to all promised, but I'm emotionally detached from this It's done when it's done. Until then I'll play some Hearts of Iron 4, wait for Mount and Blade 2 - and check out a few other titles of interest in the interim

A good attitude to have. But, if you're waiting for Bannerlord, you may need to adopt similar stoicism... I've stopped checking and don't bother with their dev updates anymore. It will come when it comes.

PS - Every damn year I see HoI-IV with all the DLC go on sale and think to myself, "Now's the time" only to forget to get it... It goes on sale often enough that I should have it five-times-over, already. But, now, it's the principle of the thing, like hunting some big jabberwocky that I can only feel satisfied in bagging if I catch it in its lair... "HOI-IV, I'm coming for you in the Steam Summer Sale!" (I'll probably forget, again...)