Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

I also didn't invest in EEStor or Bitconnect.

Those forums desperately tried to shut down criticism from "outsiders" as well.
Thing is...you're not really an outsider on this forum and nobody is trying to shut you up either. We may occasionally turn a deaf ear when you go off on another great scam crusade...but I for one kinda admire your strange obsession with SC...you're like the antithesis of Joe Blobbers ;)
 
Last edited:
Do you have it installed and have you given it a go recently?
Pug
Just because there is something resembling a game there, doesn’t mean it’s not a scam. It just means that he Roberts Clan is thinking long term. Why take the money and run, and face potential prosecution, when you can create an elaborate Hollywood Accounting scheme, via a web of dozens of shell companies, and siphon away tens of millions quite legally?

That’s the issue here. Chris Roberts paid themselves nearly half a million dollars last year, to be a director of the UK shell company alone. The only reason we know this is because irs the only company required, by law, to divulge this information publicly. We also know that Chris also sold off almost 5 million of dollars of “His” CIG-UK stock to Calders as part of their $46+ million deal.

Who knows what legal shenanigans are going on in other countries that don’t have similar corporate transparency laws.

What we’re seeing isn’t what approaching half a billion dollars of game development should bring. What we’re seeing is the foundation of a long con. That’s how long con work: the mark is shown something that appears to be real, but it turns out to be a facade, a fake, an illusion. Whether it is an office full of workers given fake work, an oil well that pumps from a tank buried beneath it, trucks moving goods from one warehouse to another, or lavish conventions that celebrate the supposed achievements of the con artist.

In this case, the illusion is created by the hundreds of artists employed by CIG to produce 4K textures... of the soles of boots. Slick CGI short films shown at Citizen Con. Game assets that never appear in game, because it has to be redone. This is all work that actual game development studios save for last phase of develoment, after the game foundations are in place, because high quality game art is expensive to produce, so it should ideally be done once. Not every time they redo a game mechanic.
 
Last edited:
He's was an early days investor in Star Citizen who backed out due to what he saw as immoral behaviour behind the scenes. Hence his opinions on the matter have some weight.
I know who he is, I just don’t know the guy, so it feels weird is I have to adres him personally just because someone here said so, you know
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
No it is Actually a product, it is tangible, it is available, it can be downloaded and played to a degree.
Pug
That does not really mean much though. I am pretty sure that Lehman Brother´s infamous mortgage-backed securities brought actual real wealth to some of their investors "to a degree", no doubt. And many of those investors were probably blisfully unaware of the risk involved. The product(s) in the end basically turned out to be so crap that it even brought down the whole company though.
 
Last edited:
Personally I don't think SC is set up to be a scam. I do think they're trying to make a game. (Even though I also think they are very much set up to get out of dodge with all the money if it all falls apart, and have merrily siphoned off as much as they can from the funds fountain to date).

I did occur to me the other day though that:

Them trying to make the game is an issue:

Most fans don't think of it that way. And why would you? But it struck me that Chris's genuine earnest desire to enact his mad plans is very much part of the problem. The physics system that now sits in neutered absurdity, fighting itself in the background. The 3rd-person unified avatars that fight the devs to the extent that they sidestep them with shader effects in first person. Chris's personal delvings into the physics grid system that still kills EVAing fools and spits out unwary vehicles with abandon (amongst its many other recalcitrant issues). On an on. His ideas clash against game-making reality, but still on he ploughs. Forever believing that the 'everything game' can be made, if he just keeps demanding that it be so. If he keeps going, doubling down on every grand promise. If he just gets the boots right...

Addendum: Building a World:

I think there's this take home from SC-watching over the years. Seeing the many facets of Chris's plan. And it's that: He thinks if he builds a 'working world', then fun, and gameplay, and emergent cinema, will spring from it. It's been written through all of his early days talk of 'not cheating'. It's present in his latter-day desire for toilet gameplay. It's evident in his fastidious attention to assets, and giant systemic follies that track trace gases. And it's clearly not working... as both the game, and the devs themselves, renege against his vainglorious, formless masterplan.

But hey. Maybe the second life guys will get a film set to act in. Maybe gaming events will occasionally align. Maybe something will come from it.

But history seems to dictate that most of it'll burn to the ground instead. Maybe some magic Visigoths will rebuild something in its ashes instead? ;)
 
Last edited:
No it is Actually a product, it is tangible, it is available, it can be downloaded and played to a degree.
…and that degree does not actually correspond to the product in question.

I know who he is, I just don’t know the guy, so it feels weird is I have to adres him personally just because someone here said so, you know
How is that any weirder than how you address other people in the thread, often to make sweeping claims or snide remarks about them for no intelligent or cogent reason? It really seems like it would be far less weird to do so than what your usual play is.

I know, but I didn’t really care for authority arguments
Sure you do. You're just very picky about what opinions you accept as authoritative.
 
…and that degree does not actually correspond to the product in question.


How is that any weirder than how you address other people in the thread, often to make sweeping claims or snide remarks about them for no intelligent or cogent reason? It really seems like it would be far less weird to do so than what your usual play is.


Sure you do. You're just very picky about what opinions you accept as authoritative.
😂😂
 
Top Bottom