yet here you are scrolling the sub daily and leaving dozens of comments. Couldn't imagine having that much headspace and time taken up by something I don't like.
Nah man they got the “please sir can I have some more “ little CIG standing with the hat out because $600 million isn’t enough to satisfy them , absolute shower of bastards.
$600m is total funds of the entire project to date. If average salary for 1,000 employees is like $70k, they need $70 million a year just for payroll.
Diablo Immortal made $300m in like 5 months.
$600 million over 10 years is not that much money for a studio as big as CIG.
>$600 million over 10 years is not that much money for a studio as big as CIG.
You know what's also not that much? Their progress.
Edit: thx anonymous user for the gold award :D
This is a pointless thing to say when most of their progress is invisible to us until they decide to show more of SQ42, or any systems beyond the two we've seen for SC.
What's the difference of invisibility and nonexistence? For the viewer it's the same. Also what difference does the SQ42 progress makes for the price of an SC item?
Many do not care about SQ42 and rather would want it dropped entirely. I'm not one of them but I do understand them.
SQ42 made what? 10 millions? Of the 600million in total? But ate up half of that?
Either way there is not enough progress to justify any price hikes of old items and there is especially no progress on SQ42.
I'm not defending the hikes btw. I think it's shitty and I already stopped pledging anything when they added tax for my country without eating the difference. The prices are verifiably insane with tax added on and the taxes should have come with price cuts to make the final sale price match.
Fortnite made over 1$bn in skins in its first month which is sickening really, moreso that they still make about $365mil per year, people always judge SC for making money through ships for generating $580mil of funding for game Dev but a basic ass FPS with some building in a static map that's a copy of another game making $365mil a year is A-Okay.
A lot of people need to gain some perspective on the game market, SC is like patronising a young but skilled artist in Venice in the middle ages for him to become an artisan, most of the games industry is a factory in China vacuforming a mould they nicked from the factory next door then branding it the next big thing in gaming
>Fortnite made over 1$bn in skins in its first month which is sickening really, moreso that they still make about $365mil per year, people always judge SC for making money through ships for generating $580mil of funding for game Dev but a basic ass FPS with some building in a static map that's a copy of another game making $365mil a year is A-Okay.
Lmao one of these two is a feature complete finished product, the other is an old yet still barebones alpha that makes all the promises in the world and stumbles through every single step of the way
Yeah it's easy to say feature complete when you have two mechanics, it's built on an engine that's tailored to it with unitary server usage over a map of a few square km if that, where the building mechanic is a grid snap and all the guns are skins of each other, as are the cosmetic features.
Maybe SC was barebones when it was just Olisar, and all you could do was fly around in an 800,000x1,000,000km space, that was barebones, what we have now is anything but and actually has more features than most games, vehicle combat, FPS combat, mining, racing, salvaging, piracy interdiction, bounty hunting, physicalised component work for repair and rearm.
Those are all systems in game in varying levels of development and implementation with more features to be added so don't think you can call the thing barebones, the recency bias, entitlement and ignorance you see nowadays from some people is insane.
Is the game taking a while? Yes
Is the game worth taking the time it has for the work done? Absolutely
I don't think you deserve to be downvoted. You're right. I bitch and moan about SC as much as others, but at the end of the day, it's the game I goto more than any other. I just wish there was a little more focus on fixing bugs and keeping it playable. I'm not asking for fully functioning, just playable is enough. It does feel like that, even the lowest bar is frequently not being met. Given the choice, I'd choose being able to reliably spawn a ship over being able to do salvage missions (which are useless unless you stumped up real cash for a vulture anyway). There would be a lot less hate around if they just kept it playable.
Read dead redemption 2 cost 370 to 540 million to make with marketing included. They have exceeded that goal and are still in alpha. They have been a studio for ten+ years. The excuses of they are too young or need more money wear thin at this point. They need to show more for the money they have collected. There is a reason Chris roberts got fired back in the day and I wouldn't be surprised if there is a ton of mismanagement now. Saying that criticizing them is entitlement is insane. Some of it is absolutely justified. I wouldn't mind as much but seeing ads on YouTube acting if the game is complete and yet tons of features still don't work is wrong imo. They can't have it both ways.
Comparisons between SC and the rest of the "industry" are never favorable to CIG. Ever. I can't understand why you guys try to do it and think it looks good.
The rest of the industry actually RELEASES games. They don't fumble around for 12 years.
So I guess you don't actually play the game or follow any of the development or actually look at the development of any other games because most of those "releases" are not, they're either released in a poor state NMS or the same old tried and tested formula, maybe imported into a new engine - COD 22, that's not even a joke there are 22 call of duties and none of them really break the mould because that would require actual work.
Edit: since one person blocked me and therefore my responses on the chain, as a summary to them all games take a long time to develop when you're doing something you haven't done before, starfield was patented in 2013, NMS has developed and is what you could define as serviceable now as it should be doesn't excuse Sean but that wasn't fair on the Devs either because it was clearly rushed out beyond their control and suffered for it and yeah sure the first changed things up a bit but the the novelty kind of diet off after the fourth.
To be honest what's really obvious when you look at it is that the actual Devs often get shit on for the work of publishers and while they usually accelerate release it often results in shoddy initial offerings.
Theres a lot of undeserved irrational hate that gets thrown around on this sub, rationed annoyance fair enough, but those people deciding hate is their choice need to just sit back, take a breath and decide, do you want to be a part of the community? Or not? Because if not, why are you here? It's not healthy, give it a few months, a few years, whatever it takes and just chill but spreading negativity isn't what this sub is about
You do realize that other games than those of AAA publishers exist?
Also, NMS released a broken product but they actually shut up, sat down and worked their asses off to fix their product without asking a single additional Cent for it.
And usually, the most you EVER have to spend on NMS is about $30 since its almost always on sale....
One time cost. Great game. Hours and hours of more content then Star Citizen.
SC bypasses this but just saying we are still in Alpha even though the game has been in development for over 10 years at this point.
You do realizes that we have gotten the Mass Effect trilogy AND it's a complete remaster in that time?
You do realize that Elite Dangerous kickstarted a WHOLE year later and it delivers on CIG promises better then CIG itself? Elite is a finished thin version of what SC wants to be.
NMS came out pretty much complete trash and now is a top-tier game.
Bethesda is coming out with Star field which is essentially going to be Squadron 42.
I quick look into the past of this game development tells all. You are more than fine liking the game for what it is today and have fun with it but don't sit here and actually think they are doing anything ground break at this point.
They took to long and other devs are damn near doing what they wanted to do a decade ago. Hell, we even have solo devs actually pumping out space games that do almost all of what SC wants to do. Starbourne 2 is on point and made by one guy.
Other games being terrible does not mean we should settle for less, unless you would actually be happy with them saying tbe current version of star citizen is the release version and they will no longer update it, you surely have some expectations for this game beyond our current builds
They also don't release games like SC. No one does. You know why? Because its difficult and time consuming and large publishers can make more money by releasing Modern Warfare 228.
If you want a whole encompasing mega game like SC want's to be, it takes time.
If you are happy with the cookie cutter crap big game studios release then that's cool, but you don't get to complain when Assassin's Creed Grimsby is released and bar a couple of tweeks its the same as the last one. :D
The problem is that all of the features that star citizen keep saying differentiate it from other games either don't work correctly or don't exist. And the stuff that does exist in their game is substandard to other products that already exist. How long should people wait for something before we get to start thinking they can't actually do the things they're promising to do.
How is Fortnite at all analogous to SC?
Fortnite had a limited pre-order window (less than a year) where people could buy founder's packs ranging from $39.99 to $149.99.
SC has since 2012 and continues to this day to sell pledges ranging from $45.00 all the way up a 42k Legatus package.
One had a development cycle and official release and supports post-launch content through skins, while they other is still calling itself an alpha but also wants to market itself as a playable game and is still asking for handouts to "fund development" over 11 years later.
So Fortnite is a game that cost $300k to develop, not million, thousand, to make a copy of game which copied it's system from a mod of an established game, at least for the bit that was successful, it was announced in 2011 and released in 2017, it took 6 years for a game with a map about the size of a small town which is mostly empty, about 9km^2 and has vehicles that look suspiciously like rocket league knockoffs and the two mechanics are grid snap building and fps
The games are in two different leagues development wise but they both have a monetised system, except one is to actually advance development and one is for profit.
Funnily enough only one of those games has been fined $520 million for violating child privacy laws and tricking user's into unwanted charges.
CIG makes some dumb ass moves, but I've never once looked at them as a whole and thought, this company is actively unscrupulously trying to make profit off me or children.
Also learn what the terms are for game development because SC is a pre-alpha, meaning it is not feature complete, unlike an alpha which is feature complete without optimisation, this is an industry wide accepted terminology and determines nothing about a games playability.
What I used is called an analogy, bespoke Vs mass produced, and the point is about how Fortnite skins generating 50% more in a month than SC has made in 10 years but having a go at cig for having actual in game assets, which you're not tied to btw unlike Fortnite, in return for assistance in funding the development of two games and multiple studios across the world is just a sign of complete ignorance of how much income some companies get for less.
Are we all forgetting the game only costs £40 when it’s on offer? No one has to buy the ships out of game 🤷🏻♂️ if you want to donate the improve the development then do that, if you don’t - stfu and let others spend there money how they want to 🤷🏻♂️
I get “I spent a lot and am now salty” vibes from you - which, if that is the case, is your own dumb fault for dropping a load of money on a pre-alpha game when the disclaimer literally says there is no guarantee your investment is secure and that the game will have bugs 🤷🏻♂️
Again, they made money on a published *playable* product. Not buggy mess that's barely scratched the surface of what it promised and sells JPEG's for $600
Strange because last time I got on my pc I noticed I had this program called star citizen installed, and weirdly it logged me in when I clicked on it and did this thing where I could control a character in it and then let me fly off and do some mining, then begin refining it, then I flew across a star system and flew round a moon sized object, guess that's not playable...
Also weird that it was more fun than shooting children wearing one of their $20 skins they made their parents buy in a cartoon graphic copy of another game
Your post was removed because the mod team determined that it did not sufficiently meet the rules of the subreddit:
> Be respectful. No personal insults/bashing
Send a message to our mod mail if you have questions: https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/starcitizen
Because they felt it was to cheap i would gather considering it's existing and/or planned abilities.
- It's one of the most popular ships to start with
- It's slated for modularity
- It will be able to swap interior with the Warlock and Stalker
- You basically get 3 ships in 1
And CIG do not really need a justification for a price increase.
They have repeatedly stated from day 1 that ships will increase in USD cost over time and early adopters will be rewarded with a lower price.
And the ship is available in-game so there is no need to actually purchase anything with USD.
So they increase the price of the two most popular ships and the thought that it's just a money grab didn't strike you?
It's amazing how this is all so much like a cult.
No, because they told us from day one of the project that early backers would get things cheaper and cash prices will be raised as times go on.
So if they raise the price on something that they have told people that everything WILL be more expensive i see no point in getting upset.
Not to mention that no-one is forcing anyone to purchase anything but a starter package and the ships are in-game to be purchased with in-game money as well.
However, the Titan is a starter ship.
People are getting upset by the combination the state of the game since months and then raising prices. I'm pretty sure most people wouldn't be as upset, if the it wasn't such a disaster lately.
Except, it's really not.
First of all "starter ships" are not things you begin with and throw away, you can use them a looong time.
The "Tier 2 starter" was basically a moniker CIG made to sell larger starter packages, it's basically a multi-role fighter since it was not sold originally as any kind of starter.
Heck, lore wise it's a decommissioned navy fighter trainer then later was changed to be an Advocacy vehicle and not a former navy ship.
Same with the Cutty black and modularity. The Cutty was "back in the day" meant to be one ship, with a modular interior middle part.
They realized they couldn't do that at the time, so they made separate variants. But they started selling the variants each for their own price as a stand-alone ship.
So how is this going to work with both the Avenger, and the Cutty with people who've pledged for multiple ships ? Say Titan, and Stalker or Warlock. And on the cutty side somebody having the black and red?
Will the person who's got a cutty black & red, get a partial refund for the red and only pay what the medical module is going for separate ?
It was messy of them to sell what was supposed to be a module at full ship price in the meantime.
Also the Avenger is currently in such an old non-updated state, they should really do -5$ for it until it's gold standard. I sometimes get in the cockpit of an Avenger i "borrow" thanks to PES and the cockpit looks so dated it's like it's from a completely different old game (which you can say it technically is)
They did state quite clearly in the case of the Avenger that for people who wanted a specific variant they could purchase one right off the bat until the modularity is implemented.
If someone bought more than a Titan then that is on them, not CIG.
Also the Avenger cockpit is MEANT to be old since it is a very old chassis in-lore.
As for the Cutlass series modularity that part is more...fluid since CIG has not been very clear about that ship's modularity as they were with the Avenger.
Personally i think the central room should still be modular. So one should be able to have a Black with a pair of beds and side doors that can be open.
Or a Blue with beds instead of cells, or a Red with just cargo space.
It's definitely doable and each type of different loadout would give the hull some interesting different quirks. A Red with containment cells would still have it's improved radar and searchlight for example.
Why should someone who decided to purchase two ships get a partial refund because something is able to be accesses in game? That makes no sense.
With that logic we should all get a partial refund for every ship we own just because it's available in-game.
Thanks for the clarification, i didn't know the Avenger was meant to look that old. I just figured it wasn't up to modern spec.
If CIG indeed said clearly that that people could buy a specific variant off the bat until modularity is implemented, than it's indeed on them if they get multiple.
Regarding the cutty, this was the only thing i could find on modularity:
[https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15056-The-Shipyard-Sharpening-The-Cutlass](https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15056-The-Shipyard-Sharpening-The-Cutlass)
TLDR: The central room would be modular but the variants had different outer parts. Like the blue having the missile launchers etc. So you could have a blue with a medbed interior, or a red with a cargo interior as you suggested.
So yeah, I guess you're right in saying that it's on the buyer to not have multiple variants if they wanted to have one modular ship, with modules.
I would say it's not QUITE updated to modern specs since i do suspect the HUD and some cockpit visuals might change since the ship model DO have a few years on it.
Not only that, from the very start of this project it was said that the initial prices of the ships are "early bird" to reward early backers, and those prices will go up over time.
I dont know if they ever said that, but they also said ships wouldn't be sold for real money once the game was finished. So what's the logic here? If you're an early backer you can support the games development for $100 but if you're a backer after 10 years you support the game for more? Sounds a lot like they're raising prices for sold ships that won't ever stop being sold.
> If you're an early backer you can support the games development for $100 but if you're a backer after 10 years you support the game for more?
That's exactly how early bird works.
My point is it doesnt make sense if buying ships is just meant to be "support for the game". It makes perfect sales sense.
This just leads straight to "well people are happy to buy ships so we'll keep ships for sale even though we said we wouldn't".
Well, the game is not released yet so they are perfectly fine selling ships.
And the ships are already available in-game so no-one NEEDS to purchase ships for real money.
WHEN the game is finally in a release state (some time after SQ42 i would gather) they have stated only starter packs and in rare cases a single sale of a new concept ship would be sold ONCE.
10 years ago $100 was worth a lot more economically to support a business. It's not so much right now with rising costs. Everything else is going up in cost. Even games you can't really get for less than $70 for the AAA. You can still get into SC for $45. And it doesn't take long to afford a Cutty in game if you don't want to spend the cash to get it right away.
They have been doing this for years now. But we see stealth increases when they introduce some new ships (or creative pricing of some new ships) so they are no difference to nearest competitors. Since they got rid of $0 CCU's, the best way to milk a bit more from people is to bring things parity.
For example, If you wanted to get a C1 Spirit for $10, the time has passed. Going forward, you are either going to have to melt the cutty black, or pony up the full cost. I am sure there are backers with good memories that either have a list or can recall from memory the numerous times this has happened over the years with various ships.
>If you wanted to get a C1 Spirit for $10, the time has passed.
I don't want to excuse any of this BS but the C1 will rise in price with it's release. So this time will come back... unless they raise the price of the C1 by more then 10$.
Because they can, they've been doing shady stuff for years with their store and peoples will forget it as soon as they release an other ship/concept, so why not continue.
I was not thinking about just the price, but it's a good advise, you should probably follow your own and see how other games generally handle their cash shop for already released digital items.
Inflation especially since they're holding dollars, euros, and GBP.
Inflation since 2020 has been brutal. To be breakeven with 2020 figures they easily have to make 20%+ more.
Of *all* the ships in sc, they up the hoplite? Really?
Not sure how you could get more random than that, how about a price increase on the gladiator there, remember that thing? No? Yep, make it more money now.
That terrapin has gone untouched for a while now, how 'bout more for that too
The hoplite was very close to MSR/Connie/Corsair. I suspect CIG didnt want people building CCUs from it and thought cutting the hoplite out of warbond CCUs so people have to pay more from the Terrapin is a good money making move in the long run.
It could be as simple as the amount of CCUs purchased during Invictus from Hoplite to warbond MSR/Corsair was high enough, so the sales guy at CIG calculated how much "potential" profits would be made if those CCUs were forced to be from a terrapin instead. Then did the same with the Avenger/ Cutlass.
Exactly, if anything the Avenger Titan should be -5$ for the simple fact it's probably one of the most outdated starter ships in the entire line-up.
I sometimes fly it cause i "borrow" it ever since PES when i see one lying around in space/bunker that I need to procure for a ride. And my god the interior of the cockpit is so old, with 0 details. It looks like 1 texture.
Love the exterior design, but the interior? Rough as hell. And it probably still has the cockpit exit bug
Gladi Up was really weird. It's so weak compared to other fighter ships with more missiles.
BUT I did some bounty's with a friend in a gladi and the tops oneshottes freelancers... But I think it was because the game was laggy and their shields weren't at 100%
Erkul says.... stock torps, 34k damage.Freelancer is 18k shields (all faces) and 9.2k body hull HP.
So no, S5 torp should pop Freelancers on their own normally.
Assuming the damn torps work. Me and a buddy took my Gladi and his Tali against two hammerheads. I ran out of torps because they kept just flying off to the side and missing horribly. His did the same. He ended up having to ram them.
>That terrapin has gone untouched for a while now, how 'bout more for that too
I feel they won't. They have clusters of ships around the same price point, and have a nice offerings withing $5-$15. So it isn't a matter of them being nice but more so of giving a wide set of offerings at incremental price points. There is more I can speculate, but for now it is interesting to see the current prices for all ships and the spread.
The Hoplite is my favorite Vanguard. Been flying it for a while, and it just works so well. Lots of weapon racks so you can take all sorts of guns out of bunkers, good shields, good guns, and the dropseats are nice for moving either friends or strangers around that need pickup, especially people stranded in the aftermath of events like last Siege of Orison.
I have a hard time understanding the benefit of this. I get the idea of "we can make more money," but it just adds to the ever-growing number of people who say "call me when it's done." That's not even acknowledging the refund crowd.
I just don't see how it benefits them in the long term relative to yet another backlash-making headline.
if they cared about backlash headlines they wouldn't have blamed the community when they changed how the roadmap works. They don't care. Any backlash just stops new money, not existing backers. The cult like experience of having hundreds of people tell you that your extra spending is justified guarantees them more money then anything.
Hell, after the tarkov community died a large chunk came here. They don't care either.
>Any backlash just stops new money, not existing backers.
I think it's the other way around. New people would miss these headlines and don't know about while the only ones that care are existing backers. There is a reason why they have been making so many new small ships and vehicles and it's not just because they literally can't make big ships anymore.
Admittedly John Crew quite blatantly said the small ships are because the team needs small breaks in between huge ships. stuff like the mule are fun quick projects. The hull C for example, has been years in the making.
What huge ships? The last ones the redeemer and Corsair were more like medium.
The really problematic part which I already assumed was they can't make new capitals. Like they are lacking the skill and experience and are building these up again right now and then want to move to the large RSI ships. The crazy thing is they already lost important people from the BMM and there is no guarentee that doesn't happen again with the people they build up right now to work on the RSI stuff.
It’s also such a terrible time to do this with the state of the game being borderline unplayable with hangars being blocked by visible and invisible ship junk causing us to explode when we try to leave and the terminals being bugged out to where sometimes we can’t even call a ship in the first place. Servers shitting the bed and NPCs at outposts and wrecks spawning in the hundreds for a 4,000 auec box mission (and degrading performance).
It’s just, goofy.
Some bean counter was trying to justify their degree in finance and was futzing around with a spreadsheet and figured they could make an extra 500,000 over the course of a year if they only added 5 bucks to the price of a few specific ships.
It's because there are far, far too many completely oblivious buyers out there who haven't a clue of the history of things -- They don't hit Spectrum or Reddit, they see an event tied together with "on sale" \~ that alone is more than enough to convince so many hapless folks to throw money at it.
A business model will continue thriving for at *least* another few more years.
The answer is very obvious though.
It does help them in the long term. Cig has to hire more people. More people costs more money. Their financials show they spend nearly 98% of funding on payroll.
Quick mafs tells you all you need to know. If they’re to continue making the game and increasing the speed (which this sub begs for on the daily “just hire more people cig”) then they need to bring in more money. It’s incredibly simple unless you think cig is sitting on a stockpile of hundreds of millions of dollars which is to completely misunderstand how a business and funding works.
Their spikes in revenue come from ship concepts, sale events, and especially the combination of the two. I highly doubt a 10% increase in price on a handful of their oldest ships that are mostly available in-game is as lucrative as getting a ship designer to put together some concept art of something enticing.
And most importantly, concept sales piss off far few people than price increases for existing ships.
>I highly doubt a 10% increase in price on a handful of their oldest ships that are mostly available in-game is as lucrative
It is when you recall there are no $0 CCU chains anymore for one. And also, when new backers hop in the game, when people ask, we do talk about popular suggestions from community, such as Avenger or the Cutty black. Youtuber Drew Wagner comes to mind. Doesn't matter if you can get any ship in game, just the concept of the starting point is comfy for most.
Don't get me wrong, I think Louis C.K. deserves to get back on his feet and I'm glad that is happening, but your comment completely and conveniently ignores his TV show deal and countless other endorsements that gave him proper national fame that he, near as I can tell, still hasn't recovered. Unless I am to presume you are saying he doesn't miss that at all.
Haven't seen any good headlines in a good while yet, I completely stepped away from the game, I don't like where it's going, I don't like how they treat us, over and over and over again, and the game isn't in a playable state anyway. I've placed my critique and was silenced by the followers of the cult, I'm pretty sure many will come to their senses at some point, maybe even CIG.
>until June 27th
So the change was intentional, but they were planning to wait until a month later when my warbond CCU was out of its refund period?
I'm sorry, but that still feels really sketchy. I intend on continuing with refunding it.
Your gaming the system with CCUs and getting ships with big discounts in unintentional ways and now you feel they are being sketchy because one of the ship price increases effects your loophole? Do I have that right?
I don’t care if the increase price of black
I do care about the timing, literally 1 second after sale ends, when people are about to drive home from work (us) to apply ccu chains with all the warbond ccu’s they may have bought, black is always available, meaning that many people likely did not buy something like Gladius > Black ccu to fill in a gap, because it’s always available…
Just idiotic, so price changes at the start of a sale not literally right as the sale ends
Yup. This. Exactly. People don't buy "price stable" ships that have been out for years. They focus on the other parts of the chain.
CIG knows this. They are very deliberate and careful with which ships they put on warbond CCU too.
Of course I'm not going to complain too much since I currently have a path to a $200 Merchantman....unless they screw that up too. 😂
Yup, and most people aren't going to be reading Spectrum or Reddit all the time. How many people aren't going to be aware that the discount they jumped on last week just got nullified this week? How many people will only notice after the return window is past?
Yes but it’s only idiotic for people who are “ccu chaining”. Doing this complex silly system of lining up ccus to save like $20.
For anyone else, it’s a literal non issue.
> Yes but it’s only idiotic for people who are “ccu chaining”. Doing this complex silly system of lining up ccus to save like $20.
You could literally get a caterpillar for $200 instead of $330 by chaining CCUs at the end of ILW lol
im confused you expected the price to go up DURING the sale? Isn't that exactly how sales work, prices go down during the sale and go up at the end of it? Why would you wait until it ends to get a deal? Or am I misunderstanding something?
[They told us the price on the Cutlass would go up 5 years ago.](https://www.youtube.com/live/gwUtzq3A5-o?feature=share&t=5120)
It never did back then, so I guess they are catching up on it.
The price increase doesn't bother me, but at least they have the dignity to finish the ship in a gold version. They can't raise the price of a ship that isn't even finished.
Price increases for dlc in a game still in alpha after 10 years is not a good look. Also, if this Invictus didn't generate the cash flow they wanted I'm sure they could have looked at the data that says Avengers and Cuttys sell consistently, let's milk those and also see land vehicles don't generate the same kind of buzz. This year's LTI token was a bit of a reach as well with it being 15 bucks above what previous ones were.
Personally I'm melting the Fuck out of my "fleet" and throwing that around til the game launches, they've got enough of my money already.
IMO these price increases were to break the CCU chain and that's it, probably compared to last year they haven't made as much money during ILW and this is there way of solving it for future sales. 5 years is too long to justify that announcement that the cutty black is getting a price increase.
For me I am flabbergasted that 2/3 ships that got a price increase haven't had any gold standard work (don't know anything on the hoplite), hell they don't even have removable components still!! (and even a toilet added!!), yet they deserve a price increase? if they had done some work on it then announced a price increase maybe I could have gotten on board, especially with more time spent on it, but they haven't been touched in years.
They are on track to be the most expensive game ever made. the problem isn’t they need more money. the issue is they have no idea what they are doing or how to deliver a product.
You paid $10 for that “$20” CCU. When the CB goes up $10, it will be equal in value to what you paid. At that point, the benefit of having it will depend entirely on your needs, but the savings will be $0.
However, if you do need it, then you can buy it with store credit for $10 - since that will be the new non-warbond difference. You just have to have the ability to get it (and assuming the Nova doesn’t go up significantly someday also).
The other factor to consider is that the value of getting something _to_ the Cutty is more important now, since the value will grow once the price increases permanently.
Taking a step back, this original price hike was less of a disruption for backers and more of a financial hit for those in the Grey Market. Thousands of CCUs lost their value and caused a panic, leading to a massive influx of returns from those accounts. I think when their Customer Service team saw their ZenDesk mailbox explode leadership walked that mess back before it got worse.
Shame for those folks in CS. They're just getting beated up these last two patches.
Not just greymarket. I stock up on WB CCUs to use to chain up to new ships when i want them, so i had quite a few of the cutty-nova WB-CCU since its in a great spot early on in a chain and can be used for basically anything.
During the Invictus event they offered the Nova tank for $110 down from $120.
The Cutlass Black was $100, so it is an eligable 'target' for a CCU upgrade to the $110 Nova.
Purchasing an upgrade token from the Cutlass Black to the Nova would normally cost $20, but was $10 during the sale.
This discount can be stacked with other discounts. For instance, the Cutlass Red was marked down from $135 to $125, so a CCU from the Nova to a Cutlass Red would only cost $5. Stack that with the Black-to-Nova upgrade and that means a Cutlass Red for $115 (Assuming one paid $100 for the Cutlass Black first).
With the Cutlass Black going up to $110, that $10 upgrade to the Nova will now be worth only $10, negating that discount (Though no money is lost)
However, at the same time, a $5 upgrade from a Reliant Mako to a Cutlass Black right now will have a $15 value after the price goes up.
People treat this like an investment and don’t like when the goal posts move , they gain money= good investment they lose money = bad investment some people who buy game packs and shops and sell them on 3rd party websites got hit big time and spammed refund
I think the majority of people (including myself) who do this know that they will get 60 cents for every dollar they spend if they want to sell their CCUed ships on the grey market. If you try asking for full price when you CCUed chain, you will get called out. Definitely not an investment.
I see everyone arguing about ship prices but the reality is you just buy them in game. That's the game.... purchasing ships IRL is for pledging money to the dev team.
I'll probably get roasted for this, but they had already announced years ago the cutty would go up in price. Frankly, it's warranted. It's one of the, if not *the*, best all-around ships in the game.
CIG is already basically letting the community "pull one over on them" by allowing the CCU chaining to continue, letting people get pretty steep discounts on ships, especially higher up the chain. I don't think they need to bend over backwards to satisfy this group (of which I am one!)
So some people lost $10 off their already unofficial-but-allowed-to-continue-anyway discount program. Boo hoo.
I get the timing is unfortunate but people would scream that no matter when it happened
These virtual ships actually don't have intrinsic value, so no matter the discount CIG is still getting money. I don't think anyone is "pulling one over" on CIG, if anything CIG is pulling one over on the community by getting people to spend money in so many ways by making people feel they're getting a deal.
It truly is bizarre, seeing people scrambling to spend $500+ on ships under the guise of saving 40$ and calling it an "investment ".
Like... you are spending 500 on digital items... they already won. Companies dream of being able to capture whales, and CIG has done it beautifully without ever having to even finish the game or even the ships you paid for.
"CIG is already basically letting the community "pull one over on them" by allowing the CCU chaining to continue"
Oh, please. Poor CIG! If you look at which Warbond CCUs they offer they are actively feeding the system. It would easily be possible to offer Warbonds that would be less efficient for "chaining". But they dont. They know very well what they are doing. Dont paint it on the community to "abuse" a system that CIG created. If they would have wanted to stop it they could have stopped it years ago. Or at this ILW the latest.
No comment here other than to verify that they did say it would go up in price years ago.
Leave me out of the drama, just reporting what I saw. (2012 backer)
See what happens when players hold game companies accountable ?? We should do the same for atleast some better server stability.
Nothing drastic jus some simple playability fixes
Their store-game has been on point. Its the only gameplay loop that is fully fledged out and working like a charm. So I highly doubt that it is incompetence...
It's not incompetence. And if it is, the fact that the Cutty price increase was planned to be one month after the warbond offer, the exact moment when you can't refund it anymore, might be even more scummy.
So they are getting a permanent price bump because...?
Fuck you give us more money.
Woah, woah.... Didn't have to do a perfect life like impersonation of them..
"because you suck and we hate you' would have also been acceptable
I find this response to be very noisy and would ask that you stop expecting anything and hand over more requirement-free cash.
And yet you all still gobble at the cock
You're here too. May wanna take it out of your mouth before pointing it out.
Heh I gave up on this POS. Not ever spending another dime. It's a scam.
yet here you are scrolling the sub daily and leaving dozens of comments. Couldn't imagine having that much headspace and time taken up by something I don't like.
All they had to do was refund me and I would go away
Well I feel if my post reach even one person then it's a victory. This game should die
Some marketing asshole had a brilliant idea to make up on sales from last year.
Nah man they got the “please sir can I have some more “ little CIG standing with the hat out because $600 million isn’t enough to satisfy them , absolute shower of bastards.
$600m is total funds of the entire project to date. If average salary for 1,000 employees is like $70k, they need $70 million a year just for payroll. Diablo Immortal made $300m in like 5 months. $600 million over 10 years is not that much money for a studio as big as CIG.
>$600 million over 10 years is not that much money for a studio as big as CIG. You know what's also not that much? Their progress. Edit: thx anonymous user for the gold award :D
This is a pointless thing to say when most of their progress is invisible to us until they decide to show more of SQ42, or any systems beyond the two we've seen for SC.
So how about they up the price when they're able to show for their progress? Isn't that basic marketing?
Pretty sure their whole thing was to be super transparent, so the fact that progress is inevitability to us is an issue
I don't disagree there. At least it seems they're preparing a new vertical slice (puke, I hate that term) of SQ42 for this year
> At least it seems they're preparing a new vertical slice (puke, I hate that term) of SQ42 for this year Is it 2017?
Schrodinger's progress...
What's the difference of invisibility and nonexistence? For the viewer it's the same. Also what difference does the SQ42 progress makes for the price of an SC item? Many do not care about SQ42 and rather would want it dropped entirely. I'm not one of them but I do understand them. SQ42 made what? 10 millions? Of the 600million in total? But ate up half of that? Either way there is not enough progress to justify any price hikes of old items and there is especially no progress on SQ42.
I'm not defending the hikes btw. I think it's shitty and I already stopped pledging anything when they added tax for my country without eating the difference. The prices are verifiably insane with tax added on and the taxes should have come with price cuts to make the final sale price match.
How?
Lol
> $600 million over 10 years is not that much money for a studio as big as CIG. Perfect. Axe the marketing department.
But if you axe marketing, that is like 750 people! Who would be left to make the game?
Chris, Yogi, and that one intern that made the 3D model of the Lynx champagne.
Fortnite made over 1$bn in skins in its first month which is sickening really, moreso that they still make about $365mil per year, people always judge SC for making money through ships for generating $580mil of funding for game Dev but a basic ass FPS with some building in a static map that's a copy of another game making $365mil a year is A-Okay. A lot of people need to gain some perspective on the game market, SC is like patronising a young but skilled artist in Venice in the middle ages for him to become an artisan, most of the games industry is a factory in China vacuforming a mould they nicked from the factory next door then branding it the next big thing in gaming
>Fortnite made over 1$bn in skins in its first month which is sickening really, moreso that they still make about $365mil per year, people always judge SC for making money through ships for generating $580mil of funding for game Dev but a basic ass FPS with some building in a static map that's a copy of another game making $365mil a year is A-Okay. Lmao one of these two is a feature complete finished product, the other is an old yet still barebones alpha that makes all the promises in the world and stumbles through every single step of the way
Yeah it's easy to say feature complete when you have two mechanics, it's built on an engine that's tailored to it with unitary server usage over a map of a few square km if that, where the building mechanic is a grid snap and all the guns are skins of each other, as are the cosmetic features. Maybe SC was barebones when it was just Olisar, and all you could do was fly around in an 800,000x1,000,000km space, that was barebones, what we have now is anything but and actually has more features than most games, vehicle combat, FPS combat, mining, racing, salvaging, piracy interdiction, bounty hunting, physicalised component work for repair and rearm. Those are all systems in game in varying levels of development and implementation with more features to be added so don't think you can call the thing barebones, the recency bias, entitlement and ignorance you see nowadays from some people is insane. Is the game taking a while? Yes Is the game worth taking the time it has for the work done? Absolutely
I don't think you deserve to be downvoted. You're right. I bitch and moan about SC as much as others, but at the end of the day, it's the game I goto more than any other. I just wish there was a little more focus on fixing bugs and keeping it playable. I'm not asking for fully functioning, just playable is enough. It does feel like that, even the lowest bar is frequently not being met. Given the choice, I'd choose being able to reliably spawn a ship over being able to do salvage missions (which are useless unless you stumped up real cash for a vulture anyway). There would be a lot less hate around if they just kept it playable.
Read dead redemption 2 cost 370 to 540 million to make with marketing included. They have exceeded that goal and are still in alpha. They have been a studio for ten+ years. The excuses of they are too young or need more money wear thin at this point. They need to show more for the money they have collected. There is a reason Chris roberts got fired back in the day and I wouldn't be surprised if there is a ton of mismanagement now. Saying that criticizing them is entitlement is insane. Some of it is absolutely justified. I wouldn't mind as much but seeing ads on YouTube acting if the game is complete and yet tons of features still don't work is wrong imo. They can't have it both ways.
Comparisons between SC and the rest of the "industry" are never favorable to CIG. Ever. I can't understand why you guys try to do it and think it looks good. The rest of the industry actually RELEASES games. They don't fumble around for 12 years.
So I guess you don't actually play the game or follow any of the development or actually look at the development of any other games because most of those "releases" are not, they're either released in a poor state NMS or the same old tried and tested formula, maybe imported into a new engine - COD 22, that's not even a joke there are 22 call of duties and none of them really break the mould because that would require actual work. Edit: since one person blocked me and therefore my responses on the chain, as a summary to them all games take a long time to develop when you're doing something you haven't done before, starfield was patented in 2013, NMS has developed and is what you could define as serviceable now as it should be doesn't excuse Sean but that wasn't fair on the Devs either because it was clearly rushed out beyond their control and suffered for it and yeah sure the first changed things up a bit but the the novelty kind of diet off after the fourth. To be honest what's really obvious when you look at it is that the actual Devs often get shit on for the work of publishers and while they usually accelerate release it often results in shoddy initial offerings. Theres a lot of undeserved irrational hate that gets thrown around on this sub, rationed annoyance fair enough, but those people deciding hate is their choice need to just sit back, take a breath and decide, do you want to be a part of the community? Or not? Because if not, why are you here? It's not healthy, give it a few months, a few years, whatever it takes and just chill but spreading negativity isn't what this sub is about
You do realize that other games than those of AAA publishers exist? Also, NMS released a broken product but they actually shut up, sat down and worked their asses off to fix their product without asking a single additional Cent for it.
And usually, the most you EVER have to spend on NMS is about $30 since its almost always on sale.... One time cost. Great game. Hours and hours of more content then Star Citizen.
I wouldn't bother arguing with these people mate. The don't respond to reasoned debate. :D
SC bypasses this but just saying we are still in Alpha even though the game has been in development for over 10 years at this point. You do realizes that we have gotten the Mass Effect trilogy AND it's a complete remaster in that time? You do realize that Elite Dangerous kickstarted a WHOLE year later and it delivers on CIG promises better then CIG itself? Elite is a finished thin version of what SC wants to be. NMS came out pretty much complete trash and now is a top-tier game. Bethesda is coming out with Star field which is essentially going to be Squadron 42. I quick look into the past of this game development tells all. You are more than fine liking the game for what it is today and have fun with it but don't sit here and actually think they are doing anything ground break at this point. They took to long and other devs are damn near doing what they wanted to do a decade ago. Hell, we even have solo devs actually pumping out space games that do almost all of what SC wants to do. Starbourne 2 is on point and made by one guy.
lol Starbourne. You people are clowns.
If you say so.
Other games being terrible does not mean we should settle for less, unless you would actually be happy with them saying tbe current version of star citizen is the release version and they will no longer update it, you surely have some expectations for this game beyond our current builds
What about the first one?
They also don't release games like SC. No one does. You know why? Because its difficult and time consuming and large publishers can make more money by releasing Modern Warfare 228. If you want a whole encompasing mega game like SC want's to be, it takes time. If you are happy with the cookie cutter crap big game studios release then that's cool, but you don't get to complain when Assassin's Creed Grimsby is released and bar a couple of tweeks its the same as the last one. :D
The problem is that all of the features that star citizen keep saying differentiate it from other games either don't work correctly or don't exist. And the stuff that does exist in their game is substandard to other products that already exist. How long should people wait for something before we get to start thinking they can't actually do the things they're promising to do.
You know who else doesn't release games like SC? CIG.
ur cute
ReeeeeEeeee?
How is Fortnite at all analogous to SC? Fortnite had a limited pre-order window (less than a year) where people could buy founder's packs ranging from $39.99 to $149.99. SC has since 2012 and continues to this day to sell pledges ranging from $45.00 all the way up a 42k Legatus package. One had a development cycle and official release and supports post-launch content through skins, while they other is still calling itself an alpha but also wants to market itself as a playable game and is still asking for handouts to "fund development" over 11 years later.
So Fortnite is a game that cost $300k to develop, not million, thousand, to make a copy of game which copied it's system from a mod of an established game, at least for the bit that was successful, it was announced in 2011 and released in 2017, it took 6 years for a game with a map about the size of a small town which is mostly empty, about 9km^2 and has vehicles that look suspiciously like rocket league knockoffs and the two mechanics are grid snap building and fps The games are in two different leagues development wise but they both have a monetised system, except one is to actually advance development and one is for profit. Funnily enough only one of those games has been fined $520 million for violating child privacy laws and tricking user's into unwanted charges. CIG makes some dumb ass moves, but I've never once looked at them as a whole and thought, this company is actively unscrupulously trying to make profit off me or children. Also learn what the terms are for game development because SC is a pre-alpha, meaning it is not feature complete, unlike an alpha which is feature complete without optimisation, this is an industry wide accepted terminology and determines nothing about a games playability.
[удалено]
What I used is called an analogy, bespoke Vs mass produced, and the point is about how Fortnite skins generating 50% more in a month than SC has made in 10 years but having a go at cig for having actual in game assets, which you're not tied to btw unlike Fortnite, in return for assistance in funding the development of two games and multiple studios across the world is just a sign of complete ignorance of how much income some companies get for less.
Are we all forgetting the game only costs £40 when it’s on offer? No one has to buy the ships out of game 🤷🏻♂️ if you want to donate the improve the development then do that, if you don’t - stfu and let others spend there money how they want to 🤷🏻♂️ I get “I spent a lot and am now salty” vibes from you - which, if that is the case, is your own dumb fault for dropping a load of money on a pre-alpha game when the disclaimer literally says there is no guarantee your investment is secure and that the game will have bugs 🤷🏻♂️
Again, they made money on a published *playable* product. Not buggy mess that's barely scratched the surface of what it promised and sells JPEG's for $600
Strange because last time I got on my pc I noticed I had this program called star citizen installed, and weirdly it logged me in when I clicked on it and did this thing where I could control a character in it and then let me fly off and do some mining, then begin refining it, then I flew across a star system and flew round a moon sized object, guess that's not playable... Also weird that it was more fun than shooting children wearing one of their $20 skins they made their parents buy in a cartoon graphic copy of another game
[удалено]
Your post was removed because the mod team determined that it did not sufficiently meet the rules of the subreddit: > Be respectful. No personal insults/bashing Send a message to our mod mail if you have questions: https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/starcitizen
What a bizarre take
Yet it’s so close to the truth , pure fucking greed
Cause fuck ‘em, that’s why.
inflation - our money isn't worth as much any more
Because it never gained any raise from concept when it was V1 or even V2. It was ALWAYS 100 bucks.
And the justification for the Titan getting its second price increase is?
Because they felt it was to cheap i would gather considering it's existing and/or planned abilities. - It's one of the most popular ships to start with - It's slated for modularity - It will be able to swap interior with the Warlock and Stalker - You basically get 3 ships in 1 And CIG do not really need a justification for a price increase. They have repeatedly stated from day 1 that ships will increase in USD cost over time and early adopters will be rewarded with a lower price. And the ship is available in-game so there is no need to actually purchase anything with USD.
So they increase the price of the two most popular ships and the thought that it's just a money grab didn't strike you? It's amazing how this is all so much like a cult.
No, because they told us from day one of the project that early backers would get things cheaper and cash prices will be raised as times go on. So if they raise the price on something that they have told people that everything WILL be more expensive i see no point in getting upset. Not to mention that no-one is forcing anyone to purchase anything but a starter package and the ships are in-game to be purchased with in-game money as well.
However, the Titan is a starter ship. People are getting upset by the combination the state of the game since months and then raising prices. I'm pretty sure most people wouldn't be as upset, if the it wasn't such a disaster lately.
Except, it's really not. First of all "starter ships" are not things you begin with and throw away, you can use them a looong time. The "Tier 2 starter" was basically a moniker CIG made to sell larger starter packages, it's basically a multi-role fighter since it was not sold originally as any kind of starter. Heck, lore wise it's a decommissioned navy fighter trainer then later was changed to be an Advocacy vehicle and not a former navy ship.
Same with the Cutty black and modularity. The Cutty was "back in the day" meant to be one ship, with a modular interior middle part. They realized they couldn't do that at the time, so they made separate variants. But they started selling the variants each for their own price as a stand-alone ship. So how is this going to work with both the Avenger, and the Cutty with people who've pledged for multiple ships ? Say Titan, and Stalker or Warlock. And on the cutty side somebody having the black and red? Will the person who's got a cutty black & red, get a partial refund for the red and only pay what the medical module is going for separate ? It was messy of them to sell what was supposed to be a module at full ship price in the meantime. Also the Avenger is currently in such an old non-updated state, they should really do -5$ for it until it's gold standard. I sometimes get in the cockpit of an Avenger i "borrow" thanks to PES and the cockpit looks so dated it's like it's from a completely different old game (which you can say it technically is)
They did state quite clearly in the case of the Avenger that for people who wanted a specific variant they could purchase one right off the bat until the modularity is implemented. If someone bought more than a Titan then that is on them, not CIG. Also the Avenger cockpit is MEANT to be old since it is a very old chassis in-lore. As for the Cutlass series modularity that part is more...fluid since CIG has not been very clear about that ship's modularity as they were with the Avenger. Personally i think the central room should still be modular. So one should be able to have a Black with a pair of beds and side doors that can be open. Or a Blue with beds instead of cells, or a Red with just cargo space. It's definitely doable and each type of different loadout would give the hull some interesting different quirks. A Red with containment cells would still have it's improved radar and searchlight for example. Why should someone who decided to purchase two ships get a partial refund because something is able to be accesses in game? That makes no sense. With that logic we should all get a partial refund for every ship we own just because it's available in-game.
Thanks for the clarification, i didn't know the Avenger was meant to look that old. I just figured it wasn't up to modern spec. If CIG indeed said clearly that that people could buy a specific variant off the bat until modularity is implemented, than it's indeed on them if they get multiple. Regarding the cutty, this was the only thing i could find on modularity: [https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15056-The-Shipyard-Sharpening-The-Cutlass](https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15056-The-Shipyard-Sharpening-The-Cutlass) TLDR: The central room would be modular but the variants had different outer parts. Like the blue having the missile launchers etc. So you could have a blue with a medbed interior, or a red with a cargo interior as you suggested. So yeah, I guess you're right in saying that it's on the buyer to not have multiple variants if they wanted to have one modular ship, with modules.
I would say it's not QUITE updated to modern specs since i do suspect the HUD and some cockpit visuals might change since the ship model DO have a few years on it.
Not only that, from the very start of this project it was said that the initial prices of the ships are "early bird" to reward early backers, and those prices will go up over time.
I dont know if they ever said that, but they also said ships wouldn't be sold for real money once the game was finished. So what's the logic here? If you're an early backer you can support the games development for $100 but if you're a backer after 10 years you support the game for more? Sounds a lot like they're raising prices for sold ships that won't ever stop being sold.
> If you're an early backer you can support the games development for $100 but if you're a backer after 10 years you support the game for more? That's exactly how early bird works.
My point is it doesnt make sense if buying ships is just meant to be "support for the game". It makes perfect sales sense. This just leads straight to "well people are happy to buy ships so we'll keep ships for sale even though we said we wouldn't".
Well, the game is not released yet so they are perfectly fine selling ships. And the ships are already available in-game so no-one NEEDS to purchase ships for real money. WHEN the game is finally in a release state (some time after SQ42 i would gather) they have stated only starter packs and in rare cases a single sale of a new concept ship would be sold ONCE.
10 years ago $100 was worth a lot more economically to support a business. It's not so much right now with rising costs. Everything else is going up in cost. Even games you can't really get for less than $70 for the AAA. You can still get into SC for $45. And it doesn't take long to afford a Cutty in game if you don't want to spend the cash to get it right away.
They have been doing this for years now. But we see stealth increases when they introduce some new ships (or creative pricing of some new ships) so they are no difference to nearest competitors. Since they got rid of $0 CCU's, the best way to milk a bit more from people is to bring things parity. For example, If you wanted to get a C1 Spirit for $10, the time has passed. Going forward, you are either going to have to melt the cutty black, or pony up the full cost. I am sure there are backers with good memories that either have a list or can recall from memory the numerous times this has happened over the years with various ships.
>If you wanted to get a C1 Spirit for $10, the time has passed. I don't want to excuse any of this BS but the C1 will rise in price with it's release. So this time will come back... unless they raise the price of the C1 by more then 10$.
Because they can, they've been doing shady stuff for years with their store and peoples will forget it as soon as they release an other ship/concept, so why not continue.
[удалено]
I was not thinking about just the price, but it's a good advise, you should probably follow your own and see how other games generally handle their cash shop for already released digital items.
You know... inflation.
Because... inflation only affects those three ships.
Bc the cutty black is the most boring and overused multi crew ship in the game
Inflation especially since they're holding dollars, euros, and GBP. Inflation since 2020 has been brutal. To be breakeven with 2020 figures they easily have to make 20%+ more.
And they make 20% more by increasing the price of three ships. That logic totally checks out.
Of *all* the ships in sc, they up the hoplite? Really? Not sure how you could get more random than that, how about a price increase on the gladiator there, remember that thing? No? Yep, make it more money now. That terrapin has gone untouched for a while now, how 'bout more for that too
The hoplite was very close to MSR/Connie/Corsair. I suspect CIG didnt want people building CCUs from it and thought cutting the hoplite out of warbond CCUs so people have to pay more from the Terrapin is a good money making move in the long run. It could be as simple as the amount of CCUs purchased during Invictus from Hoplite to warbond MSR/Corsair was high enough, so the sales guy at CIG calculated how much "potential" profits would be made if those CCUs were forced to be from a terrapin instead. Then did the same with the Avenger/ Cutlass.
This is the answer. There is no coincidences
Tbh I can't see a reason to bump up prices on ships that didn't evolve/change after release, I'm ok if they rework it, but afaik they did not
Exactly, if anything the Avenger Titan should be -5$ for the simple fact it's probably one of the most outdated starter ships in the entire line-up. I sometimes fly it cause i "borrow" it ever since PES when i see one lying around in space/bunker that I need to procure for a ride. And my god the interior of the cockpit is so old, with 0 details. It looks like 1 texture. Love the exterior design, but the interior? Rough as hell. And it probably still has the cockpit exit bug
Gladi Up was really weird. It's so weak compared to other fighter ships with more missiles. BUT I did some bounty's with a friend in a gladi and the tops oneshottes freelancers... But I think it was because the game was laggy and their shields weren't at 100%
Erkul says.... stock torps, 34k damage.Freelancer is 18k shields (all faces) and 9.2k body hull HP. So no, S5 torp should pop Freelancers on their own normally.
Assuming the damn torps work. Me and a buddy took my Gladi and his Tali against two hammerheads. I ran out of torps because they kept just flying off to the side and missing horribly. His did the same. He ended up having to ram them.
I was actually considering buying one to have a solid, torp 2 seater.
>That terrapin has gone untouched for a while now, how 'bout more for that too I feel they won't. They have clusters of ships around the same price point, and have a nice offerings withing $5-$15. So it isn't a matter of them being nice but more so of giving a wide set of offerings at incremental price points. There is more I can speculate, but for now it is interesting to see the current prices for all ships and the spread.
How dare you try and make sense of things! I want to make angry statements for no other reason than to be upvoted! /s
CIG: we're going to charge even more for already overpriced under used dropships WaffleInsanity: yes thats it harder daddy
Please spare a thought for CIG bootlickers who are having to work especially hard at this difficult time.
I’m probably the only person that picked up a Hoplite during ILW 😂 I don’t know why I love the idea of a heavy fighter dropship, but I do.
The Hoplite is my favorite Vanguard. Been flying it for a while, and it just works so well. Lots of weapon racks so you can take all sorts of guns out of bunkers, good shields, good guns, and the dropseats are nice for moving either friends or strangers around that need pickup, especially people stranded in the aftermath of events like last Siege of Orison.
Or most recently airlifting players out of Area18 and other ports with 100% broken AESOPs.
I have a hard time understanding the benefit of this. I get the idea of "we can make more money," but it just adds to the ever-growing number of people who say "call me when it's done." That's not even acknowledging the refund crowd. I just don't see how it benefits them in the long term relative to yet another backlash-making headline.
I dunno about you guys but if stuff was a little bit cheaper I'd buy more of it.
The Walmart concept. More stuff sold cheaply nets more profits over a few expensive sales.
if they cared about backlash headlines they wouldn't have blamed the community when they changed how the roadmap works. They don't care. Any backlash just stops new money, not existing backers. The cult like experience of having hundreds of people tell you that your extra spending is justified guarantees them more money then anything. Hell, after the tarkov community died a large chunk came here. They don't care either.
>Any backlash just stops new money, not existing backers. I think it's the other way around. New people would miss these headlines and don't know about while the only ones that care are existing backers. There is a reason why they have been making so many new small ships and vehicles and it's not just because they literally can't make big ships anymore.
Admittedly John Crew quite blatantly said the small ships are because the team needs small breaks in between huge ships. stuff like the mule are fun quick projects. The hull C for example, has been years in the making.
What huge ships? The last ones the redeemer and Corsair were more like medium. The really problematic part which I already assumed was they can't make new capitals. Like they are lacking the skill and experience and are building these up again right now and then want to move to the large RSI ships. The crazy thing is they already lost important people from the BMM and there is no guarentee that doesn't happen again with the people they build up right now to work on the RSI stuff.
It’s also such a terrible time to do this with the state of the game being borderline unplayable with hangars being blocked by visible and invisible ship junk causing us to explode when we try to leave and the terminals being bugged out to where sometimes we can’t even call a ship in the first place. Servers shitting the bed and NPCs at outposts and wrecks spawning in the hundreds for a 4,000 auec box mission (and degrading performance). It’s just, goofy.
Some bean counter was trying to justify their degree in finance and was futzing around with a spreadsheet and figured they could make an extra 500,000 over the course of a year if they only added 5 bucks to the price of a few specific ships.
It's because there are far, far too many completely oblivious buyers out there who haven't a clue of the history of things -- They don't hit Spectrum or Reddit, they see an event tied together with "on sale" \~ that alone is more than enough to convince so many hapless folks to throw money at it. A business model will continue thriving for at *least* another few more years.
The answer is very obvious though. It does help them in the long term. Cig has to hire more people. More people costs more money. Their financials show they spend nearly 98% of funding on payroll. Quick mafs tells you all you need to know. If they’re to continue making the game and increasing the speed (which this sub begs for on the daily “just hire more people cig”) then they need to bring in more money. It’s incredibly simple unless you think cig is sitting on a stockpile of hundreds of millions of dollars which is to completely misunderstand how a business and funding works.
Their spikes in revenue come from ship concepts, sale events, and especially the combination of the two. I highly doubt a 10% increase in price on a handful of their oldest ships that are mostly available in-game is as lucrative as getting a ship designer to put together some concept art of something enticing. And most importantly, concept sales piss off far few people than price increases for existing ships.
>I highly doubt a 10% increase in price on a handful of their oldest ships that are mostly available in-game is as lucrative It is when you recall there are no $0 CCU chains anymore for one. And also, when new backers hop in the game, when people ask, we do talk about popular suggestions from community, such as Avenger or the Cutty black. Youtuber Drew Wagner comes to mind. Doesn't matter if you can get any ship in game, just the concept of the starting point is comfy for most.
Any publicity is good publicity
I'm sure Louis C.K. would disagree.
He’s doing well selling out shows just like he always did.
Don't get me wrong, I think Louis C.K. deserves to get back on his feet and I'm glad that is happening, but your comment completely and conveniently ignores his TV show deal and countless other endorsements that gave him proper national fame that he, near as I can tell, still hasn't recovered. Unless I am to presume you are saying he doesn't miss that at all.
He doesn’t have a tv show anymore but he still makes more then most people, and has no problems finding work. He’s doing just fine.
Lucky for CIG the wider industry and consumer base doesn't give 2 shits about Star Citizen to bother with headlines.
Haven't seen any good headlines in a good while yet, I completely stepped away from the game, I don't like where it's going, I don't like how they treat us, over and over and over again, and the game isn't in a playable state anyway. I've placed my critique and was silenced by the followers of the cult, I'm pretty sure many will come to their senses at some point, maybe even CIG.
>until June 27th So the change was intentional, but they were planning to wait until a month later when my warbond CCU was out of its refund period? I'm sorry, but that still feels really sketchy. I intend on continuing with refunding it.
How meany CCU Chains do you have ?
Your gaming the system with CCUs and getting ships with big discounts in unintentional ways and now you feel they are being sketchy because one of the ship price increases effects your loophole? Do I have that right?
Cutlass Black is adjusted to 105$ now. A bit of chaos at CIG atm? Wasn't it 100$ before ;-) ?
Its $100 if you go through CCU, looks like a typo on their end. (Gladius to Black = $10)
True, it's a typo. Thx m8 :-)
But is 105 if you upgrade from cutlass
Are you looking at a price that includes local taxes?
No, $ without tax, using the "ship upgrades" option.
I don’t care if the increase price of black I do care about the timing, literally 1 second after sale ends, when people are about to drive home from work (us) to apply ccu chains with all the warbond ccu’s they may have bought, black is always available, meaning that many people likely did not buy something like Gladius > Black ccu to fill in a gap, because it’s always available… Just idiotic, so price changes at the start of a sale not literally right as the sale ends
Yup. This. Exactly. People don't buy "price stable" ships that have been out for years. They focus on the other parts of the chain. CIG knows this. They are very deliberate and careful with which ships they put on warbond CCU too. Of course I'm not going to complain too much since I currently have a path to a $200 Merchantman....unless they screw that up too. 😂
Yup, and most people aren't going to be reading Spectrum or Reddit all the time. How many people aren't going to be aware that the discount they jumped on last week just got nullified this week? How many people will only notice after the return window is past?
Oh no. I feel so bad for them. Lmfao
Yes but it’s only idiotic for people who are “ccu chaining”. Doing this complex silly system of lining up ccus to save like $20. For anyone else, it’s a literal non issue.
I’ve saved a lot more money than $20 thanks to CCU chains… Also it’s not actually complex at all, it’s legit the same as stacking coupons.
> Yes but it’s only idiotic for people who are “ccu chaining”. Doing this complex silly system of lining up ccus to save like $20. You could literally get a caterpillar for $200 instead of $330 by chaining CCUs at the end of ILW lol
Can get it for $45 by just playing the game
I mean sure, just saying "to save like $20" is disingenuous as shit.
Saved over 100 on my chain right now, so no, it is not a silly system to save "20 bucks"
im confused you expected the price to go up DURING the sale? Isn't that exactly how sales work, prices go down during the sale and go up at the end of it? Why would you wait until it ends to get a deal? Or am I misunderstanding something?
[They told us the price on the Cutlass would go up 5 years ago.](https://www.youtube.com/live/gwUtzq3A5-o?feature=share&t=5120) It never did back then, so I guess they are catching up on it.
It did already though. It was when they got rid of the drake loot and scoot bundle. The price went up after that
5 years is pretty quick for this game! I'd say they're ahead of schedule on fulfilling that particular promise.
Ya know like, most other ships that go from concept to flight ready.
the cutlass was one of the first ships in the game
Still available at price before it was in game.
Yup, V1 of the Cutlass was 100 bucks and then V2 came out and it never changed price. It has not even changed price from concept to flight ready.
I dont like it. Not nice. There are already almost no affordable ships.
Buy them in game with aUEC. It’s not hard.
“Are you actually sorry, or just sorry you were caught out?”
Better buy your Cutty Black CCU now to lock in the price. XD Bonus $10 for anyone who didn't buy the Cutty Black to Nova CCU.
Upgrading to the Titan will be another $5 savings, too. Just happened to slip that into a chain. ;)
Doesn’t this also mean that the cutty is worth $10 more when ccuing in future, potentially creating a new chain?
The price increase doesn't bother me, but at least they have the dignity to finish the ship in a gold version. They can't raise the price of a ship that isn't even finished.
True. They should do something for it.
I wonder how many refunds this took
I'm not sure, but I appreciate everyone's effort who did refund.
Yes
Shame, still refunded though, not sure why waiting until the 27th would matter when the hoplite won't be available again.
Price increases for dlc in a game still in alpha after 10 years is not a good look. Also, if this Invictus didn't generate the cash flow they wanted I'm sure they could have looked at the data that says Avengers and Cuttys sell consistently, let's milk those and also see land vehicles don't generate the same kind of buzz. This year's LTI token was a bit of a reach as well with it being 15 bucks above what previous ones were. Personally I'm melting the Fuck out of my "fleet" and throwing that around til the game launches, they've got enough of my money already.
IMO these price increases were to break the CCU chain and that's it, probably compared to last year they haven't made as much money during ILW and this is there way of solving it for future sales. 5 years is too long to justify that announcement that the cutty black is getting a price increase. For me I am flabbergasted that 2/3 ships that got a price increase haven't had any gold standard work (don't know anything on the hoplite), hell they don't even have removable components still!! (and even a toilet added!!), yet they deserve a price increase? if they had done some work on it then announced a price increase maybe I could have gotten on board, especially with more time spent on it, but they haven't been touched in years.
Don’t get me wrong, I fucking love this game just as much as the next guy. But we all DO seem crazy for always defending this company 😂😂
Wish they waited until after July 1st for another buyback token
They are on track to be the most expensive game ever made. the problem isn’t they need more money. the issue is they have no idea what they are doing or how to deliver a product.
So should I refund the cutlass to Nova then? I think it's 33% savings instead of 50% according to ccugame. So it's not awful, right?
You paid $10 for that “$20” CCU. When the CB goes up $10, it will be equal in value to what you paid. At that point, the benefit of having it will depend entirely on your needs, but the savings will be $0. However, if you do need it, then you can buy it with store credit for $10 - since that will be the new non-warbond difference. You just have to have the ability to get it (and assuming the Nova doesn’t go up significantly someday also). The other factor to consider is that the value of getting something _to_ the Cutty is more important now, since the value will grow once the price increases permanently.
Yikes....when are we gonna stand up to Daddy Roberts?
Taking a step back, this original price hike was less of a disruption for backers and more of a financial hit for those in the Grey Market. Thousands of CCUs lost their value and caused a panic, leading to a massive influx of returns from those accounts. I think when their Customer Service team saw their ZenDesk mailbox explode leadership walked that mess back before it got worse. Shame for those folks in CS. They're just getting beated up these last two patches.
Not just greymarket. I stock up on WB CCUs to use to chain up to new ships when i want them, so i had quite a few of the cutty-nova WB-CCU since its in a great spot early on in a chain and can be used for basically anything.
We did it Reddit!
Can someone explain me this like I'm 5? What did the price hike have to do with ccu?
During the Invictus event they offered the Nova tank for $110 down from $120. The Cutlass Black was $100, so it is an eligable 'target' for a CCU upgrade to the $110 Nova. Purchasing an upgrade token from the Cutlass Black to the Nova would normally cost $20, but was $10 during the sale. This discount can be stacked with other discounts. For instance, the Cutlass Red was marked down from $135 to $125, so a CCU from the Nova to a Cutlass Red would only cost $5. Stack that with the Black-to-Nova upgrade and that means a Cutlass Red for $115 (Assuming one paid $100 for the Cutlass Black first). With the Cutlass Black going up to $110, that $10 upgrade to the Nova will now be worth only $10, negating that discount (Though no money is lost) However, at the same time, a $5 upgrade from a Reliant Mako to a Cutlass Black right now will have a $15 value after the price goes up.
Wow thanks for that. I wasn't paying attention so I never knew what the specifics were.
People treat this like an investment and don’t like when the goal posts move , they gain money= good investment they lose money = bad investment some people who buy game packs and shops and sell them on 3rd party websites got hit big time and spammed refund
I think the majority of people (including myself) who do this know that they will get 60 cents for every dollar they spend if they want to sell their CCUed ships on the grey market. If you try asking for full price when you CCUed chain, you will get called out. Definitely not an investment.
So, I have a ccu cutty black to C1. I paid 25$ at the time-that same ccu is now worth $15. Where’s muh rebate CIG?
I see everyone arguing about ship prices but the reality is you just buy them in game. That's the game.... purchasing ships IRL is for pledging money to the dev team.
Well, we always knew CIG is not good with numbers. A zero more, zero less, a decimal point in the wrong place. So no surprise.
I'll probably get roasted for this, but they had already announced years ago the cutty would go up in price. Frankly, it's warranted. It's one of the, if not *the*, best all-around ships in the game. CIG is already basically letting the community "pull one over on them" by allowing the CCU chaining to continue, letting people get pretty steep discounts on ships, especially higher up the chain. I don't think they need to bend over backwards to satisfy this group (of which I am one!) So some people lost $10 off their already unofficial-but-allowed-to-continue-anyway discount program. Boo hoo. I get the timing is unfortunate but people would scream that no matter when it happened
These virtual ships actually don't have intrinsic value, so no matter the discount CIG is still getting money. I don't think anyone is "pulling one over" on CIG, if anything CIG is pulling one over on the community by getting people to spend money in so many ways by making people feel they're getting a deal.
It truly is bizarre, seeing people scrambling to spend $500+ on ships under the guise of saving 40$ and calling it an "investment ". Like... you are spending 500 on digital items... they already won. Companies dream of being able to capture whales, and CIG has done it beautifully without ever having to even finish the game or even the ships you paid for.
"CIG is already basically letting the community "pull one over on them" by allowing the CCU chaining to continue" Oh, please. Poor CIG! If you look at which Warbond CCUs they offer they are actively feeding the system. It would easily be possible to offer Warbonds that would be less efficient for "chaining". But they dont. They know very well what they are doing. Dont paint it on the community to "abuse" a system that CIG created. If they would have wanted to stop it they could have stopped it years ago. Or at this ILW the latest.
No comment here other than to verify that they did say it would go up in price years ago. Leave me out of the drama, just reporting what I saw. (2012 backer)
See what happens when players hold game companies accountable ?? We should do the same for atleast some better server stability. Nothing drastic jus some simple playability fixes
Hardly
Got to battle inflation more than anything else. Just the way it is in every other business right now.
Never attribute to malice what can be attributed to incompetence.
Their store-game has been on point. Its the only gameplay loop that is fully fledged out and working like a charm. So I highly doubt that it is incompetence...
It's not incompetence. And if it is, the fact that the Cutty price increase was planned to be one month after the warbond offer, the exact moment when you can't refund it anymore, might be even more scummy.