|
Do i ever wake up from being unconscious? like from not eating and drinking, even though i ate annd drank something 10min earlier?
|
On December 18 2013 06:37 seraphdd wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2013 06:30 mainerd wrote:On December 18 2013 06:15 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 06:10 mainerd wrote:On December 18 2013 05:56 seraphdd wrote:
Saying it is in alpha does not matter when you charge 30$ for it.
Alpha is not like a universal term either. Every game development cycle has different definitions for the term.
This whole trend of releasing games unfinished and calling them alpha is not cool.
Honestly at this point it's pretty obvious the dev team needed more money to finish the game or just plain scammed a shit ton of people with the massive hype train. True, I forgot about all those full featured games that went straight from Alpha to Release, skipping other development stages. TBH going from an in-house development build to an alpha is probably a total waste of time, they should skip that stage too. Sarcasm aside, you can always wait for the retail release of the game, and spare us your frustration over the price of an alpha release that no one is forcing you to buy. I don't think anyone would mind. How did you get from me saying alpha has different definitions to full features games come out with out beta? My point is that they aren't sugar coating their release, have warned users both outside and in game that features are missing, and have labeled it unmistakably as a product far from retail release. If you are dissatisfied with its current state, no need to worry, check back after further development and give it an assessment then. That Rocket and his dev team aren't proceeding on a schedule you would prefer shouldn't lead you to start accusing them of a scam. It's not my schedule. THEY RELEASED IT FOR MONEY. The only possible reason for doing that is to make money. They could have just released some beta keys if they needed more testers. That would be the right thing to do. Have you been playing or watching the game? It is seriously looking like the arma engine has limitations that they can't over come in order to make a good game like this or they lack the knowledge to do so.
The Arma engine is fine, in fact the DayZ mod was a great game and while it had a few quirks and bugs, it only became unplayable due to rampant server-wide hacking. A big part of the development of the standalone has been to change a lot of the stuff like item management from client side to server side.
I have been playing, and it feels a lot like the DayZ mod, as far as survivor interactions go. Yes, loot spawning is limited and zombies are practically non existent. Welcome to day 2 of alpha release. You don't have to spend your money; save it and pay more later, or don't buy it ever, it makes no difference to me. Calling it a scam, though, is really jumping the gun, way more so than the release they have put out there for people to play.
|
On December 18 2013 06:52 seraphdd wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2013 06:48 hugman wrote:On December 18 2013 06:22 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 06:05 hugman wrote:
Did you not see the massive disclaimer before you bought it? How many ways are there to say it's not finished? I did not buy it yet. The reason I came here was to get information on the game. The massive disclaimer? Come on! The game had so much hype do you really think they did not know what they were doing when they put it up on steam? Look man, this release is intended for the people who truly don't mind the state the game is in now, the people who didn't hesitate for a second to buy it even though it's $30, the people who were sitting for hours spamming emoticons in rocket's twitch chat even when he wasn't streaming. They're aware that most people would be disappointed which is why they don't want most people to buy it yet. It's not their intention to get people swept up in the hype, but it's impossible to prevent as well. Why not give up some beta keys for these loyal customers? Why because they would rather make millions of dollars off naive people chomping at the bit for a polished dayz experience.
Why is everyone buying it naive? Most people I've talked to are happy with their purchase, they knew what to expect.
As for why it's for sale and not in closed testing, well it's probably because it can be. People have shown they're willing and eager to buy into projects early. Also, selling something isn't evil. It's a business, they have to make money. You may not like what they're selling but at least they're being honest about it.
|
On December 18 2013 06:52 seraphdd wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2013 06:48 hugman wrote:On December 18 2013 06:22 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 06:05 hugman wrote:
Did you not see the massive disclaimer before you bought it? How many ways are there to say it's not finished? I did not buy it yet. The reason I came here was to get information on the game. The massive disclaimer? Come on! The game had so much hype do you really think they did not know what they were doing when they put it up on steam? Look man, this release is intended for the people who truly don't mind the state the game is in now, the people who didn't hesitate for a second to buy it even though it's $30, the people who were sitting for hours spamming emoticons in rocket's twitch chat even when he wasn't streaming. They're aware that most people would be disappointed which is why they don't want most people to buy it yet. It's not their intention to get people swept up in the hype, but it's impossible to prevent as well. Why not give up some beta keys for these loyal customers? Why because they would rather make millions of dollars off naive people chomping at the bit for a polished dayz experience.
they aren't misrepresenting it as polished, though, as multiple people have noted. you seem to have a real issue with the idea of funding something that'll go on to make more money, but kickstarter and the idea behind kickstarter is founded on the idea of fans sacrificing to make games that are unlikely to succeed happen. people experienced with dayz know what they're getting into, and those who aren't are really only set back by steam not refunding games very often if they're so put-out by buying a game in alpha that says very clearly what it is.
one thing I agree with you on is the unfortunate gray area between releasing a game for $30 to recoup costs and continue development and releasing a game in a nebulous barely-functional version for profit. it's a weird paradigm, but it works, and I'm not convinced that the dayz dev team is going to be the next big example of misplaced faith with this model.
|
On December 18 2013 06:51 Varanice wrote:
If I buy the Alpha now, I assume I will not have to buy the full game later, correct?
Yes if you buy early access then you get the full game and beta, its cheaper to buy now then on the release.
|
Is there a way to kill your character other than when you're unconscious? I'm stuck under a building and can't escape.
Nevermind. I managed to open a ground floor door and turbo vaulted out of it.
|
On December 18 2013 07:03 BliptiX wrote:
Is there a way to kill your character other than when you're unconscious? I'm stuck under a building and can't escape.
Keep some rotten fruit handy :p
|
On December 18 2013 05:31 seraphdd wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2013 05:26 mainerd wrote:On December 18 2013 05:08 Derrida wrote:
worth $30? Short answer: Totally. Longer answer: It depends what you want out of a game. DayZ is a savage garden, and depending on what parts of gaming you enjoy, you may hate it. Also, it's in alpha, so it doesn't really resemble what it has the potential to be. My friend told me the price would be bumped up for beta, and then again for release, but I am not 100% sure of that. I bought it regardless, the DayZ Arma 2 mod gave me some of the most memorable gaming experiences ever. It's kind of funny you mention dayz being so hardcore for people as the reason not to buy, but fail to mention the total lack of polish and lack of basic features. For example having 1 rifle in the game and the map is a copy paste from the mod. Sorry I am being so angry in this thread but after 2 years all we get is a game with less features and some bloom effects added for graphics.
The two biggest problems in the mod were difficulty joining servers/performance and hacking. Joining servers is easy as pie and the performance seems pretty good. No hacking noticed yet.
There is more than 1 rifle in the game I have already had a mosin and a M4a1. False.
The map is not just a copy paste it has been expanded and IMO improved upon greatly- i.e less vast spaces of nothing.
The inventory system is a lot better and the new equipment show promise for months to come.
Rocket could not have been more clear about what to expect yet some people still complain.
|
On December 18 2013 06:51 seraphdd wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2013 06:43 ZasZ. wrote:On December 18 2013 06:20 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 06:11 teddyoojo wrote:
i just see it like a kickstarter, but instead u also get to alpha test it so wheres ur damn problem lmao THAT IS THE PROBLEM. Wtf happened to the good ole days where we paid money only for a finished game(yes finished is subjective but w.e). To be honest I think kickstarters are the biggest scam as well so that is not helping here. Yeah instead of having investors fund the game that the devs have to pay back let's just give them free money. Yeah. What kick starter has really turned into a good game anyways? Even if one does it still is fucked they get free money and don't pay back the people who paid them to make the game. Kickstarter is still in its infancy, but there have already been more than a handful of quality games that have come from it. FTL comes to mind at the top of that list. If you think you might get scammed by game developers, just wait to buy the game until it is complete. It's pretty simple. No one is forcing you to buy into the alpha, and the only reason you are upset is because other people are willing to take that risk. There are tangible benefits to crowd funding video games, the most obvious and notable of which is the fact that the only games that can get funded that way are games people actually want to play. Look at Star Citizen. They've raised over 30 million dollars by crowd funding, because there is a huge demand for a high fidelity, immersive, space sim and Chris Roberts is the best there has ever been in that genre. People are lining up to pay thousands of dollars to fund that game, although it helps that there are in-game benefits for doing so. Could Star Citizen suck? Sure it could, although with the people behind it and what we've seen so far, I doubt it will be completely awful. But it could certainly fall below expectations, and I would hope that all of the people that invested money in it (me included) went in knowing that they may be flushing money down the toilet, but without us, the game wouldn't have happened at all. Early Access is similar territory and equally dangerous. I've seen a lot of games lately that release for money on early access, and the game isn't really playable yet. I don't agree with that business model, but it is up to the consumer to do some research as to the product they are buying, what is promised to come in the future, and how soon that might come along. There's really no excuse for buying an alpha (like DayZ) that is clearly advertised as an alpha, and then complaining about having bought an unfinished product. If the game is not to your standards yet, then wait to buy it. I respect you backed up your points with evidence, however, star citizen is exactly my point. The devs don't put up their own money but ask for consumers money. Not only that but when the devs make millions off the game they don't have to pay back the people who financed the whole game. How is that fair and not a scam? Would this fly? Hey guys I am building a really cool car I need 3 million for a new factory. When I make 1 billion dollars off it I don't have to pay any money back to you.
Yes, that is the entire fucking point of crowdsourcing, if you haven't noticed.
I get that you don't like the basic idea of people being investors for whatever unknown reason. But, again, nobody is being scammed here. Nobody is being promised something that they won't get. Nobody is being told that the game is finished (or, hell, even playable). Nobody is lying. What is your problem?
|
On December 18 2013 07:09 Conti wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2013 06:51 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 06:43 ZasZ. wrote:On December 18 2013 06:20 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 06:11 teddyoojo wrote:
i just see it like a kickstarter, but instead u also get to alpha test it so wheres ur damn problem lmao THAT IS THE PROBLEM. Wtf happened to the good ole days where we paid money only for a finished game(yes finished is subjective but w.e). To be honest I think kickstarters are the biggest scam as well so that is not helping here. Yeah instead of having investors fund the game that the devs have to pay back let's just give them free money. Yeah. What kick starter has really turned into a good game anyways? Even if one does it still is fucked they get free money and don't pay back the people who paid them to make the game. Kickstarter is still in its infancy, but there have already been more than a handful of quality games that have come from it. FTL comes to mind at the top of that list. If you think you might get scammed by game developers, just wait to buy the game until it is complete. It's pretty simple. No one is forcing you to buy into the alpha, and the only reason you are upset is because other people are willing to take that risk. There are tangible benefits to crowd funding video games, the most obvious and notable of which is the fact that the only games that can get funded that way are games people actually want to play. Look at Star Citizen. They've raised over 30 million dollars by crowd funding, because there is a huge demand for a high fidelity, immersive, space sim and Chris Roberts is the best there has ever been in that genre. People are lining up to pay thousands of dollars to fund that game, although it helps that there are in-game benefits for doing so. Could Star Citizen suck? Sure it could, although with the people behind it and what we've seen so far, I doubt it will be completely awful. But it could certainly fall below expectations, and I would hope that all of the people that invested money in it (me included) went in knowing that they may be flushing money down the toilet, but without us, the game wouldn't have happened at all. Early Access is similar territory and equally dangerous. I've seen a lot of games lately that release for money on early access, and the game isn't really playable yet. I don't agree with that business model, but it is up to the consumer to do some research as to the product they are buying, what is promised to come in the future, and how soon that might come along. There's really no excuse for buying an alpha (like DayZ) that is clearly advertised as an alpha, and then complaining about having bought an unfinished product. If the game is not to your standards yet, then wait to buy it. I respect you backed up your points with evidence, however, star citizen is exactly my point. The devs don't put up their own money but ask for consumers money. Not only that but when the devs make millions off the game they don't have to pay back the people who financed the whole game. How is that fair and not a scam? Would this fly? Hey guys I am building a really cool car I need 3 million for a new factory. When I make 1 billion dollars off it I don't have to pay any money back to you. Yes, that is the entire fucking point of crowdsourcing, if you haven't noticed. I get that you don't like the basic idea of people being investors for whatever unknown reason. But, again, nobody is being scammed here. Nobody is being promised something that they won't get. Nobody is being told that the game is finished (or, hell, even playable). Nobody is lying. What is your problem?
Additionally the alpha IMO is already better than a game like Nether which is in beta for 30$.
|
Next patch notes out
+ Show Spoiler +Current Changelog
Current Status:
Closed Test IN PROGRESS
Experimental Branch Test
Released on Stable
Fixed:
Drinking directly from wells now works
headwear descriptions updated
pants descriptions updated
increased battery drain by flashlight
bandaging cannot fix broken leg now
server browser shows internet tab as selected out of the box
fixed modifier messages, one message type per stage
Workshop: lowered moto helmets spawn probability. removed old proxies, replaced with memory points
Reduced level at which player becomes permanently unconscious
Increased rate players recover from shock damage
Internet set to default tab for multiplayer server browsing
improved responsiveness when side-stepping from left to right/right to left
disabled head movement for unconscious states
adjusted head bob for select animations
Various security related measures
Tweaked the tenement buildings (small and big) for spawns on the roof
improved transitions for restrained player
Removed old proxies and replaced them with memory points and new loot spawn in sheds
enabled step blending with raised rifle for better responsiveness
Roadway LOD issue fixed that caused floating loot for some buildings
New:
Temporary status indicators for state of player in the inventory screen (thirsty, sickness, hunger, etc...)
force feed other players
Rain updated - it should better correspond with the rest of scene by adding the refraction effect
New variations for main menu (Unarmed) added
Greeting animations for all stances to be replaced (Now with left hand to avoid issues when holding items)
Magnum hand IK
Opening cans with sharp tools
Dot crosshair
Damaging knife, screwdriver and bayonet used for opening cans
Loot array (with respective type of meat) added to animals configs and new types of meat added to food configs (ANIMALS DISABLED)
Central Server:
fixed performance issues on character creation and saving
fixed character creation record override
increased server response time and performance
Also you guys should stop shitposting.
|
Guys just leave this seraphdd alone he is clearly trolling/angry about something. Read thrugh all of his posts in this topic, and you will see the patern... Stop discussing stuff, it's pointless. I've just reprted him for trolling.
There is so much info already that everyone can make up their own mind.
|
Also people have started hacking in the standalone already, godmode and teleporting as far as i know right now :/
|
On December 18 2013 07:35 Jochan wrote:
Guys just leave this seraphdd alone he is clearly trolling/angry about something. Read thrugh all of his posts in this topic, and you will see the patern... Stop discussing stuff, it's pointless. I've just reprted him for trolling.
There is so much info already that everyone can make up their own mind.
I came here looking for information on the current state of the game. No one could give it to me so I looked other places. All I am doing is reporting on what I see wrong with the current state of the game. I am sorry my opinion is different then yours. Yes I am angry. After waiting forever for this game we get a downgrade from the mod. The fact the vanilla server I play on is still packed with people supports this.
|
On December 18 2013 07:09 Conti wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2013 06:51 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 06:43 ZasZ. wrote:On December 18 2013 06:20 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 06:11 teddyoojo wrote:
i just see it like a kickstarter, but instead u also get to alpha test it so wheres ur damn problem lmao THAT IS THE PROBLEM. Wtf happened to the good ole days where we paid money only for a finished game(yes finished is subjective but w.e). To be honest I think kickstarters are the biggest scam as well so that is not helping here. Yeah instead of having investors fund the game that the devs have to pay back let's just give them free money. Yeah. What kick starter has really turned into a good game anyways? Even if one does it still is fucked they get free money and don't pay back the people who paid them to make the game. Kickstarter is still in its infancy, but there have already been more than a handful of quality games that have come from it. FTL comes to mind at the top of that list. If you think you might get scammed by game developers, just wait to buy the game until it is complete. It's pretty simple. No one is forcing you to buy into the alpha, and the only reason you are upset is because other people are willing to take that risk. There are tangible benefits to crowd funding video games, the most obvious and notable of which is the fact that the only games that can get funded that way are games people actually want to play. Look at Star Citizen. They've raised over 30 million dollars by crowd funding, because there is a huge demand for a high fidelity, immersive, space sim and Chris Roberts is the best there has ever been in that genre. People are lining up to pay thousands of dollars to fund that game, although it helps that there are in-game benefits for doing so. Could Star Citizen suck? Sure it could, although with the people behind it and what we've seen so far, I doubt it will be completely awful. But it could certainly fall below expectations, and I would hope that all of the people that invested money in it (me included) went in knowing that they may be flushing money down the toilet, but without us, the game wouldn't have happened at all. Early Access is similar territory and equally dangerous. I've seen a lot of games lately that release for money on early access, and the game isn't really playable yet. I don't agree with that business model, but it is up to the consumer to do some research as to the product they are buying, what is promised to come in the future, and how soon that might come along. There's really no excuse for buying an alpha (like DayZ) that is clearly advertised as an alpha, and then complaining about having bought an unfinished product. If the game is not to your standards yet, then wait to buy it. I respect you backed up your points with evidence, however, star citizen is exactly my point. The devs don't put up their own money but ask for consumers money. Not only that but when the devs make millions off the game they don't have to pay back the people who financed the whole game. How is that fair and not a scam? Would this fly? Hey guys I am building a really cool car I need 3 million for a new factory. When I make 1 billion dollars off it I don't have to pay any money back to you. Yes, that is the entire fucking point of crowdsourcing, if you haven't noticed. I get that you don't like the basic idea of people being investors for whatever unknown reason. But, again, nobody is being scammed here. Nobody is being promised something that they won't get. Nobody is being told that the game is finished (or, hell, even playable). Nobody is lying. What is your problem?
The entire point of crowdsoucing is to scam people? Must be since you are saying I am right about it and I am indeed saying that is a scam.
"I get that you don't like the basic idea of people being investors for whatever unknown reason."
You should probably google the term investor. A real investor risks money to make money in return. See in a kick starter or w.e you want to call it the consumer is just risking money but not making any in return. Therefor scam.
|
On December 18 2013 07:50 seraphdd wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2013 07:09 Conti wrote:On December 18 2013 06:51 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 06:43 ZasZ. wrote:On December 18 2013 06:20 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 06:11 teddyoojo wrote:
i just see it like a kickstarter, but instead u also get to alpha test it so wheres ur damn problem lmao THAT IS THE PROBLEM. Wtf happened to the good ole days where we paid money only for a finished game(yes finished is subjective but w.e). To be honest I think kickstarters are the biggest scam as well so that is not helping here. Yeah instead of having investors fund the game that the devs have to pay back let's just give them free money. Yeah. What kick starter has really turned into a good game anyways? Even if one does it still is fucked they get free money and don't pay back the people who paid them to make the game. Kickstarter is still in its infancy, but there have already been more than a handful of quality games that have come from it. FTL comes to mind at the top of that list. If you think you might get scammed by game developers, just wait to buy the game until it is complete. It's pretty simple. No one is forcing you to buy into the alpha, and the only reason you are upset is because other people are willing to take that risk. There are tangible benefits to crowd funding video games, the most obvious and notable of which is the fact that the only games that can get funded that way are games people actually want to play. Look at Star Citizen. They've raised over 30 million dollars by crowd funding, because there is a huge demand for a high fidelity, immersive, space sim and Chris Roberts is the best there has ever been in that genre. People are lining up to pay thousands of dollars to fund that game, although it helps that there are in-game benefits for doing so. Could Star Citizen suck? Sure it could, although with the people behind it and what we've seen so far, I doubt it will be completely awful. But it could certainly fall below expectations, and I would hope that all of the people that invested money in it (me included) went in knowing that they may be flushing money down the toilet, but without us, the game wouldn't have happened at all. Early Access is similar territory and equally dangerous. I've seen a lot of games lately that release for money on early access, and the game isn't really playable yet. I don't agree with that business model, but it is up to the consumer to do some research as to the product they are buying, what is promised to come in the future, and how soon that might come along. There's really no excuse for buying an alpha (like DayZ) that is clearly advertised as an alpha, and then complaining about having bought an unfinished product. If the game is not to your standards yet, then wait to buy it. I respect you backed up your points with evidence, however, star citizen is exactly my point. The devs don't put up their own money but ask for consumers money. Not only that but when the devs make millions off the game they don't have to pay back the people who financed the whole game. How is that fair and not a scam? Would this fly? Hey guys I am building a really cool car I need 3 million for a new factory. When I make 1 billion dollars off it I don't have to pay any money back to you. Yes, that is the entire fucking point of crowdsourcing, if you haven't noticed. I get that you don't like the basic idea of people being investors for whatever unknown reason. But, again, nobody is being scammed here. Nobody is being promised something that they won't get. Nobody is being told that the game is finished (or, hell, even playable). Nobody is lying. What is your problem? The entire point of crowdsoucing is to scam people? Must be since you are saying I am right about it and I am indeed saying that is a scam. "I get that you don't like the basic idea of people being investors for whatever unknown reason." You should probably google the term investor. A real investor risks money to make money in return. See in a kick starter or w.e you want to call it the consumer is just risking money but not making any in return. Therefor scam.
In crowdsourcing the customer invests money and gets the promised product in return.
If he does not get the promised product, and it was never intended by the producers to make the product, then it is a scam.
In this case, the customers invest money and already get something in return: The alpha version of the game. The promised product is the finished game.
I'm tempted to explain this with hand puppets just in case, but this'll have to do.
|
On December 18 2013 07:55 Conti wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2013 07:50 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 07:09 Conti wrote:On December 18 2013 06:51 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 06:43 ZasZ. wrote:On December 18 2013 06:20 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 06:11 teddyoojo wrote:
i just see it like a kickstarter, but instead u also get to alpha test it so wheres ur damn problem lmao THAT IS THE PROBLEM. Wtf happened to the good ole days where we paid money only for a finished game(yes finished is subjective but w.e). To be honest I think kickstarters are the biggest scam as well so that is not helping here. Yeah instead of having investors fund the game that the devs have to pay back let's just give them free money. Yeah. What kick starter has really turned into a good game anyways? Even if one does it still is fucked they get free money and don't pay back the people who paid them to make the game. Kickstarter is still in its infancy, but there have already been more than a handful of quality games that have come from it. FTL comes to mind at the top of that list. If you think you might get scammed by game developers, just wait to buy the game until it is complete. It's pretty simple. No one is forcing you to buy into the alpha, and the only reason you are upset is because other people are willing to take that risk. There are tangible benefits to crowd funding video games, the most obvious and notable of which is the fact that the only games that can get funded that way are games people actually want to play. Look at Star Citizen. They've raised over 30 million dollars by crowd funding, because there is a huge demand for a high fidelity, immersive, space sim and Chris Roberts is the best there has ever been in that genre. People are lining up to pay thousands of dollars to fund that game, although it helps that there are in-game benefits for doing so. Could Star Citizen suck? Sure it could, although with the people behind it and what we've seen so far, I doubt it will be completely awful. But it could certainly fall below expectations, and I would hope that all of the people that invested money in it (me included) went in knowing that they may be flushing money down the toilet, but without us, the game wouldn't have happened at all. Early Access is similar territory and equally dangerous. I've seen a lot of games lately that release for money on early access, and the game isn't really playable yet. I don't agree with that business model, but it is up to the consumer to do some research as to the product they are buying, what is promised to come in the future, and how soon that might come along. There's really no excuse for buying an alpha (like DayZ) that is clearly advertised as an alpha, and then complaining about having bought an unfinished product. If the game is not to your standards yet, then wait to buy it. I respect you backed up your points with evidence, however, star citizen is exactly my point. The devs don't put up their own money but ask for consumers money. Not only that but when the devs make millions off the game they don't have to pay back the people who financed the whole game. How is that fair and not a scam? Would this fly? Hey guys I am building a really cool car I need 3 million for a new factory. When I make 1 billion dollars off it I don't have to pay any money back to you. Yes, that is the entire fucking point of crowdsourcing, if you haven't noticed. I get that you don't like the basic idea of people being investors for whatever unknown reason. But, again, nobody is being scammed here. Nobody is being promised something that they won't get. Nobody is being told that the game is finished (or, hell, even playable). Nobody is lying. What is your problem? The entire point of crowdsoucing is to scam people? Must be since you are saying I am right about it and I am indeed saying that is a scam. "I get that you don't like the basic idea of people being investors for whatever unknown reason." You should probably google the term investor. A real investor risks money to make money in return. See in a kick starter or w.e you want to call it the consumer is just risking money but not making any in return. Therefor scam. In crowdsourcing the customer invests money and gets the promised product in return. If he does not get the promised product, and it was never intended by the producers to make the product, then it is a scam. In this case, the customers invest money and already get something in return: The alpha version of the game. The promised product is the finished game. I'm tempted to explain this with hand puppets just in case, but this'll have to do.
Why did you just explain to me what the premise behind a kickstarter is? I know what a kick starter is. Telling me the premise does not make it less of a scam.
I told you to look up what an investor is since you said "I get that you don't like the basic idea of people being investors for whatever unknown reason."
Why you explained to me what a kick starter is as a response to that I still do not know. Here I will help you out with a definition. An investor is a person who allocates capital with the expectation of a financial return.
You are not going to change my view on kickstarting being a scam. I don't even know why it offends you.
|
On December 18 2013 08:24 seraphdd wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2013 07:55 Conti wrote:On December 18 2013 07:50 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 07:09 Conti wrote:On December 18 2013 06:51 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 06:43 ZasZ. wrote:On December 18 2013 06:20 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 06:11 teddyoojo wrote:
i just see it like a kickstarter, but instead u also get to alpha test it so wheres ur damn problem lmao THAT IS THE PROBLEM. Wtf happened to the good ole days where we paid money only for a finished game(yes finished is subjective but w.e). To be honest I think kickstarters are the biggest scam as well so that is not helping here. Yeah instead of having investors fund the game that the devs have to pay back let's just give them free money. Yeah. What kick starter has really turned into a good game anyways? Even if one does it still is fucked they get free money and don't pay back the people who paid them to make the game. Kickstarter is still in its infancy, but there have already been more than a handful of quality games that have come from it. FTL comes to mind at the top of that list. If you think you might get scammed by game developers, just wait to buy the game until it is complete. It's pretty simple. No one is forcing you to buy into the alpha, and the only reason you are upset is because other people are willing to take that risk. There are tangible benefits to crowd funding video games, the most obvious and notable of which is the fact that the only games that can get funded that way are games people actually want to play. Look at Star Citizen. They've raised over 30 million dollars by crowd funding, because there is a huge demand for a high fidelity, immersive, space sim and Chris Roberts is the best there has ever been in that genre. People are lining up to pay thousands of dollars to fund that game, although it helps that there are in-game benefits for doing so. Could Star Citizen suck? Sure it could, although with the people behind it and what we've seen so far, I doubt it will be completely awful. But it could certainly fall below expectations, and I would hope that all of the people that invested money in it (me included) went in knowing that they may be flushing money down the toilet, but without us, the game wouldn't have happened at all. Early Access is similar territory and equally dangerous. I've seen a lot of games lately that release for money on early access, and the game isn't really playable yet. I don't agree with that business model, but it is up to the consumer to do some research as to the product they are buying, what is promised to come in the future, and how soon that might come along. There's really no excuse for buying an alpha (like DayZ) that is clearly advertised as an alpha, and then complaining about having bought an unfinished product. If the game is not to your standards yet, then wait to buy it. I respect you backed up your points with evidence, however, star citizen is exactly my point. The devs don't put up their own money but ask for consumers money. Not only that but when the devs make millions off the game they don't have to pay back the people who financed the whole game. How is that fair and not a scam? Would this fly? Hey guys I am building a really cool car I need 3 million for a new factory. When I make 1 billion dollars off it I don't have to pay any money back to you. Yes, that is the entire fucking point of crowdsourcing, if you haven't noticed. I get that you don't like the basic idea of people being investors for whatever unknown reason. But, again, nobody is being scammed here. Nobody is being promised something that they won't get. Nobody is being told that the game is finished (or, hell, even playable). Nobody is lying. What is your problem? The entire point of crowdsoucing is to scam people? Must be since you are saying I am right about it and I am indeed saying that is a scam. "I get that you don't like the basic idea of people being investors for whatever unknown reason." You should probably google the term investor. A real investor risks money to make money in return. See in a kick starter or w.e you want to call it the consumer is just risking money but not making any in return. Therefor scam. In crowdsourcing the customer invests money and gets the promised product in return. If he does not get the promised product, and it was never intended by the producers to make the product, then it is a scam. In this case, the customers invest money and already get something in return: The alpha version of the game. The promised product is the finished game. I'm tempted to explain this with hand puppets just in case, but this'll have to do. Why did you just explain to me what the premise behind a kickstarter is? I know what a kick starter is. Telling me the premise does not make it less of a scam. I told you to look up what an investor is since you said "I get that you don't like the basic idea of people being investors for whatever unknown reason." Why you explained to me what a kick starter is as a response to that I still do not know. Here I will help you out with a definition. An investor is a person who allocates capital with the expectation of a financial return. You are not going to change my view on kickstarting being a scam. I don't even know why it offends you.
*sigh*
Its not a scam because there is no deception.
|
On December 18 2013 08:29 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2013 08:24 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 07:55 Conti wrote:On December 18 2013 07:50 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 07:09 Conti wrote:On December 18 2013 06:51 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 06:43 ZasZ. wrote:On December 18 2013 06:20 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 06:11 teddyoojo wrote:
i just see it like a kickstarter, but instead u also get to alpha test it so wheres ur damn problem lmao THAT IS THE PROBLEM. Wtf happened to the good ole days where we paid money only for a finished game(yes finished is subjective but w.e). To be honest I think kickstarters are the biggest scam as well so that is not helping here. Yeah instead of having investors fund the game that the devs have to pay back let's just give them free money. Yeah. What kick starter has really turned into a good game anyways? Even if one does it still is fucked they get free money and don't pay back the people who paid them to make the game. Kickstarter is still in its infancy, but there have already been more than a handful of quality games that have come from it. FTL comes to mind at the top of that list. If you think you might get scammed by game developers, just wait to buy the game until it is complete. It's pretty simple. No one is forcing you to buy into the alpha, and the only reason you are upset is because other people are willing to take that risk. There are tangible benefits to crowd funding video games, the most obvious and notable of which is the fact that the only games that can get funded that way are games people actually want to play. Look at Star Citizen. They've raised over 30 million dollars by crowd funding, because there is a huge demand for a high fidelity, immersive, space sim and Chris Roberts is the best there has ever been in that genre. People are lining up to pay thousands of dollars to fund that game, although it helps that there are in-game benefits for doing so. Could Star Citizen suck? Sure it could, although with the people behind it and what we've seen so far, I doubt it will be completely awful. But it could certainly fall below expectations, and I would hope that all of the people that invested money in it (me included) went in knowing that they may be flushing money down the toilet, but without us, the game wouldn't have happened at all. Early Access is similar territory and equally dangerous. I've seen a lot of games lately that release for money on early access, and the game isn't really playable yet. I don't agree with that business model, but it is up to the consumer to do some research as to the product they are buying, what is promised to come in the future, and how soon that might come along. There's really no excuse for buying an alpha (like DayZ) that is clearly advertised as an alpha, and then complaining about having bought an unfinished product. If the game is not to your standards yet, then wait to buy it. I respect you backed up your points with evidence, however, star citizen is exactly my point. The devs don't put up their own money but ask for consumers money. Not only that but when the devs make millions off the game they don't have to pay back the people who financed the whole game. How is that fair and not a scam? Would this fly? Hey guys I am building a really cool car I need 3 million for a new factory. When I make 1 billion dollars off it I don't have to pay any money back to you. Yes, that is the entire fucking point of crowdsourcing, if you haven't noticed. I get that you don't like the basic idea of people being investors for whatever unknown reason. But, again, nobody is being scammed here. Nobody is being promised something that they won't get. Nobody is being told that the game is finished (or, hell, even playable). Nobody is lying. What is your problem? The entire point of crowdsoucing is to scam people? Must be since you are saying I am right about it and I am indeed saying that is a scam. "I get that you don't like the basic idea of people being investors for whatever unknown reason." You should probably google the term investor. A real investor risks money to make money in return. See in a kick starter or w.e you want to call it the consumer is just risking money but not making any in return. Therefor scam. In crowdsourcing the customer invests money and gets the promised product in return. If he does not get the promised product, and it was never intended by the producers to make the product, then it is a scam. In this case, the customers invest money and already get something in return: The alpha version of the game. The promised product is the finished game. I'm tempted to explain this with hand puppets just in case, but this'll have to do. Why did you just explain to me what the premise behind a kickstarter is? I know what a kick starter is. Telling me the premise does not make it less of a scam. I told you to look up what an investor is since you said "I get that you don't like the basic idea of people being investors for whatever unknown reason." Why you explained to me what a kick starter is as a response to that I still do not know. Here I will help you out with a definition. An investor is a person who allocates capital with the expectation of a financial return. You are not going to change my view on kickstarting being a scam. I don't even know why it offends you. *sigh* Its not a scam because there is no deception.
Yeah the little warning that it is alpha makes it okay. I am sure most people bought it thinking zombies are basically turned off in a ZOMBIE survival game.
I guess deception is subjective here.
|
On December 18 2013 08:35 seraphdd wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2013 08:29 Jockmcplop wrote:On December 18 2013 08:24 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 07:55 Conti wrote:On December 18 2013 07:50 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 07:09 Conti wrote:On December 18 2013 06:51 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 06:43 ZasZ. wrote:On December 18 2013 06:20 seraphdd wrote:On December 18 2013 06:11 teddyoojo wrote:
i just see it like a kickstarter, but instead u also get to alpha test it so wheres ur damn problem lmao THAT IS THE PROBLEM. Wtf happened to the good ole days where we paid money only for a finished game(yes finished is subjective but w.e). To be honest I think kickstarters are the biggest scam as well so that is not helping here. Yeah instead of having investors fund the game that the devs have to pay back let's just give them free money. Yeah. What kick starter has really turned into a good game anyways? Even if one does it still is fucked they get free money and don't pay back the people who paid them to make the game. Kickstarter is still in its infancy, but there have already been more than a handful of quality games that have come from it. FTL comes to mind at the top of that list. If you think you might get scammed by game developers, just wait to buy the game until it is complete. It's pretty simple. No one is forcing you to buy into the alpha, and the only reason you are upset is because other people are willing to take that risk. There are tangible benefits to crowd funding video games, the most obvious and notable of which is the fact that the only games that can get funded that way are games people actually want to play. Look at Star Citizen. They've raised over 30 million dollars by crowd funding, because there is a huge demand for a high fidelity, immersive, space sim and Chris Roberts is the best there has ever been in that genre. People are lining up to pay thousands of dollars to fund that game, although it helps that there are in-game benefits for doing so. Could Star Citizen suck? Sure it could, although with the people behind it and what we've seen so far, I doubt it will be completely awful. But it could certainly fall below expectations, and I would hope that all of the people that invested money in it (me included) went in knowing that they may be flushing money down the toilet, but without us, the game wouldn't have happened at all. Early Access is similar territory and equally dangerous. I've seen a lot of games lately that release for money on early access, and the game isn't really playable yet. I don't agree with that business model, but it is up to the consumer to do some research as to the product they are buying, what is promised to come in the future, and how soon that might come along. There's really no excuse for buying an alpha (like DayZ) that is clearly advertised as an alpha, and then complaining about having bought an unfinished product. If the game is not to your standards yet, then wait to buy it. I respect you backed up your points with evidence, however, star citizen is exactly my point. The devs don't put up their own money but ask for consumers money. Not only that but when the devs make millions off the game they don't have to pay back the people who financed the whole game. How is that fair and not a scam? Would this fly? Hey guys I am building a really cool car I need 3 million for a new factory. When I make 1 billion dollars off it I don't have to pay any money back to you. Yes, that is the entire fucking point of crowdsourcing, if you haven't noticed. I get that you don't like the basic idea of people being investors for whatever unknown reason. But, again, nobody is being scammed here. Nobody is being promised something that they won't get. Nobody is being told that the game is finished (or, hell, even playable). Nobody is lying. What is your problem? The entire point of crowdsoucing is to scam people? Must be since you are saying I am right about it and I am indeed saying that is a scam. "I get that you don't like the basic idea of people being investors for whatever unknown reason." You should probably google the term investor. A real investor risks money to make money in return. See in a kick starter or w.e you want to call it the consumer is just risking money but not making any in return. Therefor scam. In crowdsourcing the customer invests money and gets the promised product in return. If he does not get the promised product, and it was never intended by the producers to make the product, then it is a scam. In this case, the customers invest money and already get something in return: The alpha version of the game. The promised product is the finished game. I'm tempted to explain this with hand puppets just in case, but this'll have to do. Why did you just explain to me what the premise behind a kickstarter is? I know what a kick starter is. Telling me the premise does not make it less of a scam. I told you to look up what an investor is since you said "I get that you don't like the basic idea of people being investors for whatever unknown reason." Why you explained to me what a kick starter is as a response to that I still do not know. Here I will help you out with a definition. An investor is a person who allocates capital with the expectation of a financial return. You are not going to change my view on kickstarting being a scam. I don't even know why it offends you. *sigh* Its not a scam because there is no deception. Yeah the little warning that it is alpha makes it okay. I am sure most people bought it thinking zombies are basically turned off in a ZOMBIE survival game. I guess deception is subjective here.
Yes, that's precisely what makes it okay.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
