******Official Star Citizen / Squadron 42 Thread******

Soldato
OP
Joined
14 Jul 2003
Posts
14,492
There's definitely a very real risk of them running out of money before the game is finished, no doubt about that.

I'm a little concerned about Roberts tbh, he's got a bit of Molyneux about him. People like that with grand visions should stick to being creative director and they need a producer who is equally senior and can reign them in and concentrate on getting a finished product out the door....seems with CIG Roberts is king and expects to be surrounded by yes men.

But....despite this, the game does seem to be making good progress. I'm hopeful....and patient :)

Won't run out of money, personally more of a worry that is damaged by SQ42 being a flop. A lot hinges on its success, big name stars don't really mean much if gameplay is linear and dull.

Time will tell though.
 
Associate
Joined
4 Aug 2014
Posts
1,111
I purchased this a while ago and like the above poster I keep checking in every so often. I hope in 2017 I will feel I'm ready to properly jump in... and that my key is still useful!
 
Associate
Joined
4 Mar 2010
Posts
2,082
Money isnt an issue, not as far as developing Star Citizen at least. Beyond, yeah probably if we're talking about SC/SQ42 financing the entire creation of that game, 5-10yrs of support & whatnot, plus their next project... thats a lot to ask. If SC is a success, financing it will be a piece of cake.
The crowdfunding goal wasnt to build a game successful enough to fund a studio to be profitable enough to self-fund a 2nd title and launch them as a company, it was to build the best version of SC possible. So if they want to make Project #2, and im sure they do, i'd be happy with the possibility SC is so successful it funds a 2nd project entirely (esp if our contribution to this was recognised with discounted access etc), but really i'd be expecting that to be largely crowdfunded too, and why not.
I dont really know what the ToS say when pledging, but i doubt many view it as a contribution towards CIG, but as a contribution towards SC.


But theres plenty of sources of income for SC, and the existing sources are far from exhausted as it was oddly implied.
- August was the most successful month outside of the significant sale months, with nearly $4.5m raised (FWIW, those significant months are Oct, Nov & Dec ;)).
- We hit 1m citizens Oct 2015. We added another 0.5m in the 11mo that followed.
- In that 11mo timeframe, we've had 2.0 and other Mini-PU updates to help explain that spike.
- In whats left of 2016, and in 2017, we've got 3.0 which takes that mini PU and gives us a full-size system and planets we can fly down land on, and we're expecting Squadron 42. Theres absolutely no way we saturated the market on SC/SQ players getting to this point, because so many have been on the fence, waiting for something properly playable, or flat out waiting to see if its for real and achievable. As far as gamers are concerned, theres significantly more to come, we've barely dipped our toe in the water as far as what we have vs even a modest game would give you (i still dont class this current build as a 'game' but as a segment of one, its a very impressive tech demo still).

The next 3 months i'd be very surprised if we didnt see it hit $135, probably 140m, but this is not the community to be implying that because we've already pledged, we wont throw more money at it :D We could gain no new members and hit $130m by years end comfortably IMO ($10m in Q4).


In terms of future income sources:
- We've got single player campaign DLC already planned (2 additional 'episodes') and F42UK are moving straight onto that when they're done with SQ42/Ep1. I'd be surprised if most people who'd pledged already and have SQ42 wouldnt be the type to also buy its DLC in the future.

- We already have insignificant subscriptions, optional ways to contribute without getting anything divisive in return. Its not a fixed income from every player, but a trickle that'll add up.

- We already have 'microtransactions', they're all priced in UEC because you'll be able to buy it all in-game using game currency either using the website or in-game. They wont sell something for USD that UEC cant buy you in-game, but people will spend cash in order to buy them im sure, which leads on to...

- To balance the 'cash rich, time poor' with people who are 'cash poor, time rich' there will be the ability to buy UEC (its there now) to supplement your limited ability to earn it in-game yourself, but it'll be limited amounts over a certain time-period.
Hopefully it'll be done with an assessment of how much you've earned lately, so if you've earned say 1m UEC in the last week, and want to buy 50k UEC, *hopefully* the game will say GTFO you dont need assistance. I cant recall if this has been confirmed, but time will tell whether this route exists to maximise income or to support people with busy lives. Rockstar made $500m selling currency in GTA Online though.

- Depending on the success of the game, brand licensing could be a small or huge source of income, CIG have said before they regularly get requests but dont want to commit to anything yet (id imagine because the brand is worth far more if it becomes a huge success). They're already selling physical goods on a very small scale purely because people ask for it, but thats an area to exploit better in the future.

Those are the extra sources of income the game can use to survive beyond release, to support continued development. Im confident there's TWICE the amount of money out there between now and say 1mo after the games release, and that'll easily cover development. Beyond that, it all depends on what they've spent by then, and the sort of income the game is having.
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Mar 2003
Posts
4,651
Location
Nottingham
While I understand the need for a company to keep the funds coming in, I'm not sure that I like the idea that people who have already invested hundreds if not thousands into the game, would be particularly enthusiastic about having to pay for DLC.
 
Associate
Joined
7 Feb 2014
Posts
1,494
Location
Lancashire
While I understand the need for a company to keep the funds coming in, I'm not sure that I like the idea that people who have already invested hundreds if not thousands into the game, would be particularly enthusiastic about having to pay for DLC.

Episodes 2 and 3 are supposed to be full standalone games rather than dlc. Early backers get Episode 2 free as a stretch goal so will only have to pay extra for episode 3.
 
Associate
Joined
4 Mar 2010
Posts
2,082
While I understand the need for a company to keep the funds coming in, I'm not sure that I like the idea that people who have already invested hundreds if not thousands into the game, would be particularly enthusiastic about having to pay for DLC.

Anyone whos pledged more than about $120 can get those extra episodes for free if they really want... but if they chose to spend their funds on ships and not leave anything extra for other thing they want to own, then yeah they'll have to pay for them too. You pledge hundreds, you decide what those hundreds are spent on, nobody is stopping anyone from holding $20-30 back for something CIG will sell later on.

Chances are that there'll be a few things extra we'll want to buy, like additional accounts/characters, merchandise, and dlc too. I dont think that because someone chose to spend a lot on expensive items means they'd get carte blanche on other stuff they decided not to save funds for. I pledged an amount, and im trying to plan around that, i'll have to scale back somewhere because i dont really want to add more funds (cant afford to, would love to add more) so later on things will have to go to ensure i can buy things like the dlc and a couple of alt character slots.
If CIG want to make them free, fantastic, but i cant expect them to let me have it free because i spent all my money on optional extras i could get in-game, rather than save it for the stuff that'll cost me money im unhappy about paying.
 
Associate
Joined
4 Mar 2010
Posts
2,082
Nice video, great looking game for what's there but am going to hold off until its full release I think.

There might be a 10-day Free-Fly week announced in the next 48hrs as CitizenCon is almost upon us, they tend to be done at gaming events but this is a purely SC related event so they might feel they've done one recently enough and prefer to hold off until some time after alpha v2.6 goes live.

They tend to do 4-5 of these each year, which is pretty generous considering most early access titles prefer to have you commit money then try it.
 
Associate
Joined
19 Nov 2010
Posts
2,026
I've been lurking around this game for a while without committing. But if alpha 3 is as good as the recent Gamescom video makes it look, I'll probably throw a little money at it. Either way I'll definitely be watching the Citizen Con stream this weekend.
 
Associate
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
210
Location
Too close for comfort
I've been following SC since the first announcements, have spent money here and there as I really want to play it, and really like the direction it's taking. On poking through my account details on the RSI site I found the total I've spent displayed in big green numbers. Oh dear... I can only hope my Mrs never catches wind of it.

That said I'm debating melting some ships for a Polaris if I like the look of it!
 
Soldato
Joined
20 Dec 2004
Posts
15,834
Money isnt an issue, not as far as developing Star Citizen at least.

I'm not a SC basher, but I wouldn't confident of this. The costs of running an operation the size that CIG and it's subsidiary studios are huge, I'm sure they're burning through a significant portions of those millions every month.

This is a project that has gone from relatively 'indie' effort to a multinational development studio network, and by all accounts the people in charge don't have experience of this size operation and they've been figuring it out as they go along, and wasting a lot of those funds in the process.

They've done a great job of tapping a rich vein of wealthy, older space sim fans that are prepared to fund the game to date. I'm cautiously optimistic at the moment but there's still a lot of risk attached.
 
Back
Top Bottom