Star Citizen just dinged to 100 million dollars

Crowdfunding efforts for Cloud Imperium‘s Star Citizen space sim have just crossed the $100,000,000 mark. Over a million gamers have contributed to the game, which began setting crowdfunding records way back in 2012.

The 2.0 alpha launched for all Citizens last night, along with the monthly studio report.

SHARE THIS ARTICLE
Code of Conduct | Edit Your Profile | Commenting FAQ | Badge Reclamation | Badge Key

LEAVE A COMMENT

545 Comments on "Star Citizen just dinged to 100 million dollars"

Subscribe to:
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most liked
Cleannternet
Guest
Cleannternet

Marelius SoMuchMass Thornz Ding!  April 2016 : 112M$ reached.  it looks like the more people playing free fly weeks, the more are convinced Desperate Soul is a very sad man with a handfull of very sad followers…
SC speak by itself even in its alpha state.
Oh by the way Valve is kicking out LOD out of Steam (DS version: people are really too bad, they give bad review so I remove it myself :)

PantsOwl
Guest
PantsOwl

captainzor 

I’d love to see where they have this part about refunds based
on a certain date and a 12-month if-we-miss-this-date window to deliver.
 It makes absolutely no sense for them to do that, and if they did,
then color me completely surprised.”
I will go one further and show you the original document/website, read the Charges & billing – fraction :
http://web.archive.org/web/20130929190326/https://robertsspaceindustries.com/tos

Thornz
Guest
Thornz

Wayshuba 
We all support Star Citizen and tell others by word of mouth so in a way we all work for Star Citizen the biggest unstoppable game ever in history.

captainzor
Guest
captainzor

Wayshuba captainzor Do you have a screenshot of this TOS prior to the current “US 1.2 released February 1st 2015” version?

I’d love to see where they have this part about refunds based on a certain date and a 12-month if-we-miss-this-date window to deliver.  It makes absolutely no sense for them to do that, and if they did, then color me completely surprised.

Everything I have seen/heard/read from the very first day of the KS campaign all of their estimates were covered under the “subject to change” caveat, as is and should be unbelievably obvious with regards to software development.

captainzor
Guest
captainzor

PantsOwl captainzor how do I mislead a point?  What was it again? Between you and Wayshuba it’s getting hard to keep track.  Alas, I feel the truth of your gripe comes out in your last quip: “Enjoy your time waiting”

See, it’s all about impatience.

You lose points, though, for asserting that I’m ranting/raving/emotionally attached.  It’s simply untrue.

MyCatIam
Guest
MyCatIam

100 Millions dollards isn’t too much for a project that shares a collective dream.

MyNameIsIllegal
Guest
MyNameIsIllegal

Wayshuba rioinsignia “Fact 5: They did not (that I am aware of) offer any form of written consent to those backers that it was okay with them if they take their sweet time and maybe release something by 2020. When a contract is changed, such as ToS, you HAVE to get the permission of all parties that it is agreed to. One party does not have the right, under law, to change the terms of any contract (which ToS are when raising funds), without the consent of the other party.”

They did. You had to accept new terms of service in order to continue playing the alpha earlier this year. Presumably also this would have been shown on the website as well, if you had logged in there first instead of in the launcher.

MyNameIsIllegal
Guest
MyNameIsIllegal

Wayshuba Thornz ” always love the defenders using the Derek wannabe’s or similar handles. Or automatically making the claims that handles are alts of previous detractors.”

If it looks like a duck, smells like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is probably a duck.

MyNameIsIllegal
Guest
MyNameIsIllegal

Wayshuba MyNameIsIllegal2 Anyone who has played SC since they made those changes DID consent to the new ToS. They popped a new acceptance screen with updated ToS in the launcher quite some time ago.

Regarding this:

“Too many people seem to overlook that were many promises made by CiG – promises used to raise a substantial amount of money. Whether you support the game or not, you must understand you cannot make false promises to solicit money and then think you can just ignore them.”

This happens all the time in development. I actually can’t remember the last time a project was finished according to initial deadlines. The only difference here is that everyone is seeing the internal deadlines, because this is open development. Anyone who doesn’t take that DRASTIC change in information flow into account is, quite frankly, analysing this whole situation incorrectly.

There is a difference between “overlooking promises” and understanding that those initial dates were simply optimistic assessments that you would normally never know about in the first place under a closed development model.

Wayshuba
Guest
Wayshuba

Thornz Says the Sockpuppet account that works for CiG and posts a blatant promotion telling people to buy, buy, buy the new $1200 and $2500 ships.

Wayshuba
Guest
Wayshuba

Thornz Now I get it. You are using an alias handle and work for CiG. Now all your comments make sense.

Wayshuba
Guest
Wayshuba

Thornz You should try reading alternate sites that had similar discussions about Uber. A lot of passionate people defending them even when it was pointed out about potential lawsuits.

Well guess what, they did have a lawsuit in the State of California and they lost. They also have pending suits at a Federal Level. Why, because law firms smell blood in the water and they went after them.

CiG risks a similar situation. If a class action firm sees them on the hook for tens of millions, that can be a nice pay day for the firm. Blood in the water. That is all I am saying.

Why no lawsuits yet? Because CiG still has fifteen days to deliver on that initial commitment. But I don’t think even the most stalwart supporter is going to tell anyone a final product of SQ42 is going to be delivered in the next fifteen days.

Wayshuba
Guest
Wayshuba

MyNameIsIllegal2 To clarify a few points:

1.) ToS, when charging money, are not changeable at will. You still need the consent of the other party when making changes, particularly when it comes to deliverables. In CiG’s case, that should have included an announcement sent to previous backers on ToS changes (i.e., moving the date out) and that they had until a certain time to request a refund or they will have been considered to have accepted the new terms.)

2.) The initial ToS included a contingency for missed deadlines. The game was promised in late 2014 with contingency period that it would be no later than late 2015. In addition, many articles could be linked where CR himself claims that all the funds raised above $65 million (I believe that was the number) only helped to ensure they would deliver the product when committed.

3.) This is the big kicker. In there own ToS, the put a penalty clause in for themselves (which they should have never done in the first place), that if they did not deliver the final product no later than late 2015, backers were entitled to a full refund. This is the big one. CiG should have never put this clause in to begin with because it is what has created this current exposure.

CiG is entitled to take all the time in the world to deliver this game if they think it will help them make the best game possible. However, when you are raising money from outside sources and provide certain commitments when raising those funds, you cannot arbitrarily change them. You must get the consent of all parties involved when you do.

Wayshuba
Guest
Wayshuba

Thornz Wayshuba Deflect and avoid – so common. Anyone who points out anything with CiG that doesn’t blindly support the love fest gets accused of being Derek.

How about this one. Tell me why, with the facts given above as they exist, that CiG is not currently at risk. Do you even understand how very serious Breach of Contract is in US law?

Wayshuba
Guest
Wayshuba

Thornz Wayshuba I always love the defenders using the Derek wannabe’s or similar handles. Or automatically making the claims that handles are alts of previous detractors. I am neither. In addition, no where in any of my posts did I attack the game itself.

All I have been saying is the facts as they are exist. You comment also exemplified what I was saying. Defenders keep pointing to other games missing release dates – which is perfectly acceptable AS LONG AS THEY DIDN”T COMMIT TO A DATE TO RAISE FUNDS. Which CiG did.

You miss the big point here. CiG committed, under contract, to deliver a game, with delays, no later than late 2015 or provide a refund. As time drags on, the exposure they have created for themselves to a potential lawsuit now becomes more and more a reality.

Thornz
Guest
Thornz

These ships will sell out SO fast.
Greetings Citizens!
Santa Lando here with some important ship-buying notifications.
To celebrate the holidays, we are selling a limited number of Idris-P AND Javelin, in batches, at six hour intervals.
The
Javelin will be sold in a total 200 allotment keeping in line with the
relative population growth and ship distribution since it’s last sale.
It will cost $2500.
The Idris-P will be sold in a total 120
allotment keeping in line with the relative population growth and ship
distribution since it’s last sale. It will cost $1250.
1ST BATCH: 12/16 @ 1200 PST (2000 UTC) 50 JAVELIN and 60 IDRIS-P
2ND BATCH: 12/16 @ 1800 PST (0200 UTC) 50 JAVELIN
3RD BATCH: 12/17 @ 0000 PST (0800 UTC) 50 JAVELIN and 60 IDRIS-P
4TH BATCH: 12/17 @ 0600 PST (1400 UTC) 50 JAVELIN
Of course, the Holiday Livestream will start tomorrow at 1100 PST (1900 UTC)
See you then!

Thornz
Guest
Thornz

Wayshuba 
Derek is real good, at no time did I see his lips move while you was talking.

Thornz
Guest
Thornz

theeknighthood 
Peanut cluster chocolate turtles are the best.

Thornz
Guest
Thornz

Wayshuba 
Well CIG is truly D00MED… 
So where is the lawyers and everything?
Lots of babbling and not seeing any action at all lawyer wise, which can only mean.. you are full of crap. Other wise you would have successfully sued CIG and THEN come here to rub it in. 

Since that is NOT the case you are just a Derek wanna be, which I don’t
know why anyone would want to be like that, but you kids are wired like that.

There is a ton of video games that give a release date then ended up with a very late release, don’t remember them getting sued. So why are you not chasing them for easy money? I mean, that is all it is about. How to scam and rip off a good company so you can be on easy street.

Keep trying, you amuse me. 
You have been SO amusing I need to get more popcorn.
Please continue… I want to hear more. 
Not often I get to talk to an alien from Bizarro World.

And… SEE YOU IN STAR CITIZEN!!!!!!!

Wayshuba
Guest
Wayshuba

captainzor Just for reference in what I have been posting in this thread, I have not been referencing Kickstarter. I have been referencing the Terms of Service from the RSI site prior to February 2015.

People keep thinking they are only on the hook for the few million raised on Kickstarter. Nope, they are currently on the hook by more than half the funds raised period. RsI ToS prior to Feb. 2015 committed to a late 2105 delivery (at most) or a refund if that date wasn’t hit. It is know as Breach of Contract which CiG, unless they deliver a final product in the next fifteen days, is in.
Of course, if this was challenged in court they will most likely argue that the Alpha 2.0 meets those obligations. But even that is a far stretch.

Wayshuba
Guest
Wayshuba

captainzor Wayshuba That letter means nothing. The ToS prior to Feb. 2015 is what matters. That is the contract and what would be used as court precedent.

They specifically stated they would deliver SQ42 as a finished product no later than late 2015 or all backers would be entitled to refunds. That is the Terms they set and raised a substantial amount of money on them. These are not soft, internal deadlines, that may or may not have been mentioned in forum posts or letters, these were hard deadlines committed in the ToS that almost $60 million was raised under. In addition, it was also committed that if they missed that extended deadline (late 2015), all backers would be entitled to refunds. That is as hard and legally binding as you can get in case law.

I have no doubt that CR has a grand vision with good intentions. But that is what the road to h*** is paved with. Good intentions and grand vision do not stand as excuses in a court of law for breaching contract.

Wayshuba
Guest
Wayshuba

captainzor PantsOwl You need to read up on contract law and see my post further down.

Breach of Contract is failure under law. CiG is currently in Breach of Contract for any backers prior to the ToS changes earlier this year.

Here is a definition for reference:

Breach of Contract
When any contract is made an agreement is formed between parties to carry out a service and payment for that service. If one of the parties fails to carry out their side of the agreement then the party can be said to be in breach of contract. Breach of contract can also occur if work carried out is defective or if one party makes the other aware that they will not be carrying out the agreed work.

Breaches of contract can also include non payment for a service or not paying on time, failure to deliver services or goods, and being late with services without a reasonable excuse. Terms and conditions are a fundamental part of a legally binding contract and any broken terms can lead to breach of contract.

Prior to Feb. 2015, those contractual terms were to deliver SQ42 by late 2014, but being that game development can vary, they were allowed an additional 12 months (so late 2015), or backers would be entitled to a full refund. Those were the terms they offered to those who funded them prior to Feb. 2015. They failed to deliver on those terms in both original time, extended time, and offering refunds to the almost $60 million they had raised to that point. That is Breach of Contract and that is why I have stated this project is now very high risk.

Wayshuba
Guest
Wayshuba

rioinsignia Wayshuba To make a more brief point of the facts:

Fact 1: Up until Feb. 2015, CiG raised money with a committed delivery of the final product for late 2014.

Fact 2: There was a stipulation that development times do vary and that it may take (at most) an additional 12 months beyond the originally committed date (meaning late 2015).

Fact 3: In their own ToS they offered complete refunds to those that backed them should they fail to deliver said product by the committed dates (which they committed to, the backers didn’t force them to deliver by a certain date).

Fact 4: They have missed their contractual obligation to all backers who committed funds for the project up until the Feb. 2015 changes.

Fact 5: They did not (that I am aware of) offer any form of written consent to those backers that it was okay with them if they take their sweet time and maybe release something by 2020. When a contract is changed, such as ToS, you HAVE to get the permission of all parties that it is agreed to. One party does not have the right, under law, to change the terms of any contract (which ToS are when raising funds), without the consent of the other party.

I understand CR’s vision has grown, and well as his ambition for the project, that is fine if people except it. But this does not alleviate CiG from contractual obligations.

To conclude, the reason it would be considered very high risk at this point is because the above exists right now there is now the potential of a lawsuit for “breach of contract”.

Wayshuba
Guest
Wayshuba

rioinsignia To add one other thing which I noted before in earlier threads, this is also why, in the Feb. 2015 ToS (so money raised from Feb. 2015 to present), the sneaked in a clause that no longer requires them to even deliver a game (which was very dubious in my opinion). They need only deliver your digital ship (the asset) and, may also deliver a game. (the and/or part of the deliverables).

That change, more than the dates was what raised my eyes. When CYA statements start making into the ToS that you may not deliver a game, you do have to ask why they would make that change themselves to begin with (when it wasn’t in the pre-Feb. 2015) ToS.

Wayshuba
Guest
Wayshuba

rioinsignia Wayshuba To answer sincerely, I mentioned “if” a lawsuit is brought. However, the point is that CiG is now exposed to such a lawsuit happening based upon the contractual ToS up until Feb. 2015.

That being said, raising a lot of money can sometimes work against you. Lawyers can smell money 2 million miles away (just look at all the lawsuits being filed against contracting companies like Uber even though no employee has brought claim).

And yes, it is very high risk, when one single lawsuit can suddenly grind the company to a halt when they are facing the potential of $60 million in refunds. That is the very definition of high risk.

This is most likely the reason for the release of the Alpha 2.0 – to at least have something to defend in court should such a circumstance arise.

There is nothing wrong with defending CiG and wanting them to produce what is promised. However, they did raise a lot of money under terms THEY COMMITTED TO, which is binding in a court of law (and no, a court will not allow a change of terms without written approval of all parties that were privy to the earlier terms or some other sort of confirmation that they accepted the new terms). They are now in violation of those terms for a substantial amount of the money they raised.

This is why I stated earlier, the longer this continues to drag out at this point, the more the risk increases that this scenario can happen. The scenario itself is not hypothetical – it happens all the time in the US when law firms can make a substantial fee for class actions.

MyNameIsIllegal2
Guest
MyNameIsIllegal2

Thornz MyNameIsIllegal Wayshuba I get the impression that TOS are only enforceable by the people who made them, particularly if they included a clause to allow them to change them at will (don’t know if they did, but it is pretty common).

Also, missed deadlines are pretty common in game development (and indeed IT in general), combined with the fact that CIG IS actually making progress, however slowly, likely makes it extremely difficult to build a case that wouldn’t get thrown out of court.

PantsOwl
Guest
PantsOwl

captainzor Either you are wilfully misleading the point I am making or you really do not comprehend it. Either way, wasted breath, I made my points and arguing with emotionally attached clowns is just not going to lead anywhere.
Enjoy your time waiting and ranting on about your second coming of christ.
flame on.

PantsOwl
Guest
PantsOwl

Thornz captainzor PantsOwl grow the fuck up man

rioinsignia
Guest
rioinsignia

Wayshuba “Just looking from a factual standpoint this game, at this point, is at a very high risk of failure.”
Ok…here’s a simple question: How is it at a “high risk of failure”?
The reason why I ask is that the rest of your post focuses on hyperthetical lawsuits.  Which may, or may not, be in existence.  But those lawsuits don’t actually have much relevance at all to the above quoted statement.   They have about as much relevance to the bit I quoted as if you had justified it with “….because I said so”.
In short, just because a lawsuit may exist, doesn’t automatically lead to a “high risk of failure”.
Which is why i ask, what justification do you have to suggest that there is in fact a “high risk of failure”?

Armsman
Guest
Armsman

rogerstim37  let’s see:
By Comparison: SWToR = 6 years to produce (and it’s the WoW clone of WoW clones – aside from cinematics integration no innovation

SC AND SQ42 (two games) – 3 years 1 month in development. Has a full testbed Alpha of the PU released to backers; had a Flight model testbed 18 months into development and delivers progress updates on a weekly basis. They also provide full studio development progress reports to everyone (Backers and non-Backers can see/read these) on a monthly basis

Also CIG has stated SQ 42 will be released in 2016 (albeit late 2016)

Sorry, I fail to see what more I as a Backer could be asking given what they have delivered (large scale Alpha WAS a promise made to Backers and was delivered on); and the information they provide about the overall project development on a regular basis.

Darkwalker75
Guest
Darkwalker75

PantsOwl Darkwalker75 
Did you back on day 1 or in 2013?
I backed on day 1 back in 2012 and have been following the game since then,

I really hate it when I have to repeat myself but it seems I must to get you to understand what I’m saying.

They moved to a new site in 2013, when they did you had to accept the new TOS for the new site.
The backers was informed about the change in the TOS, if you didn’t get that message that’s not CIG’s fault, that’s your fault.
I wish I still had the mail so I could show you, but I don’t as I never had any reason to save it after reading it.
But when they moved to the new site you had to accept the new TOS.
It was not changed retroactively, not for you or anyone else, because regardless of whether or not you did get such a message, you had to accept the new TOS when you signed up on the new site .
If you did not read it before accepting it, and assumed it was the same, then that is your fault not CIG’s, nor is it their fault that you didn’t get the message when it was sent out.

You will not get a refund on the grounds of changes in the TOS, because you have already accepted it.
You should have contacted them about that back when the new TOS went up, not 2 years later.

You can argue this until the universe dies, it will not change the fact that you are responsible when accepting the TOS regardless of whether or not you read it.
You may not remember it or might not want to admit it, but the fact that you argue this now suggests to me that you just accepted it without reading it.

Thornz
Guest
Thornz

MyNameIsIllegal Wayshuba Thornz 
“Breaching a contract != breaking the law.”
If so, then where is the lawsuit?
Why is there no lawsuit? There oodles of money involved.
SOMEBODY DO SOMETHING!!!!! Hire multiple lawyers and stuff…..

Also Breaking the Law, great song….

Thornz
Guest
Thornz

captainzor PantsOwl 
Don’t be talking about ” ACTUALLY failed” around PantsOwl, she is very sensitive about that. Bad childhood and all you know.

Thornz
Guest
Thornz

PantsOwl
Love
how u kids ‘assume’ people don’t know about the love between the Brits
and the Australians. ROFLMAO you’re all upset and cranky now.
Excellent…..would you like a tissue?

These forums are GREAT while I am work, hard to play Star Citizen since this PC will not do well.
SQ42
will be out and then the PU and with every move forward more and more
people will join Star Citizen. Maybe 15-20 years down the road someone
might make a better game then Star Citizen, but don’t see it happening
any time soon.
You and your kind will fade away into void from which you slithered out of.
SEE YOU IN STAR CITIZEN.

captainzor
Guest
captainzor

PantsOwl  Please do show us where they have ACTUALLY failed.

captainzor
Guest
captainzor

PantsOwl Dude.. lol.

If you think you’re not getting what you backed for, then you weren’t paying attention to what you backed.  You pledged for them to a) make what they wanted to make and b) include whatever pledge goes the community enables.

You are completely at your own fault for not understanding what CIG said they wanted to do.  The crowd enabled them to do so.  If you’re mad at anyone, be mad at the crowd.

From what I have seen CIG is perfectly willing to issue a refund if financial hardship is on the table or something.  If that’s the situation you’re in, then by all means, do what you can to pursue it and maybe think real hard about your disposable income going forward.

Otherwise… why the hell are you bent out of shape that you’re going to get a VASTLY expanded product over what they originally hoped to deliver for the EXACT same cash you already put down?  Makes sense, it does not.  ROOHOOHOOHEEHAW

PantsOwl
Guest
PantsOwl

Thornznz
For someone ”not concerned” you are very apt about raging about against any SC critics.
ps. sad that you think the term bollocks has anything to do with australians but seem quite presumptuous and ignorant to be fair.

Darkwalker75
Guest
Darkwalker75

PantsOwl captainzor 
If you thought you backed for a single player campaign, then you didn’t pay attention when you backed.

Real quick, Star Citizen is:
A rich universe focused on epic space adventure, trading and dogfighting in first person.
Single Player – Offline or Online(Drop in / Drop out co-op play)
Persistent Universe (hosted by US)
Mod-able multiplayer (hosted by YOU)
No Subscriptions
No Pay to Win

PantsOwl
Guest
PantsOwl

Darkwalker75 
”The backers”
Listen, I backed 2013, day 1. So to me, those changes are indeed retroactively and I was never asked if I am okay with it and neither are the terms I agreed with based on backer democracy. Those are terms between me and the company.
And since I wasnt okay with it, I asked for a refund.
And as I told you, I never received it.
So how am I wrong there ?

PantsOwl
Guest
PantsOwl

captainzor 
I am not out to ” destroy SC” or ‘bring it all down” .

I still hope the game will turn out great, honestly.

That
said, whats currently going on, is not what i backed and signed up for
in 2013. I am sorry, it just isn’t anymore and neither do they require
my funds in order to proceed in the direction they have evolved and
expanded the entire project.

I backed for the single
player campaign as I expect a MMO to take much longer than I am willing
to wait for with my money on the line. 

That simple.

And now I have sc fans telling me all sorts of things, from being a terrible person, childish, impatient, a liar, troll etc.

I am just asking for what I paid for and what was promised to me, in writing, by them. 
How am I not entitled to that very refund, it was part of the initial pitch.

PantsOwl
Guest
PantsOwl

captainzor 
”I dont care”
I understand that truly.
However, I do not understand how you can defend them withholding refunds from people, they themselves promised, upon not reaching their goals.
You know, if the TOS never had those refund terms to begin with, I would never be here voicing my gripes, because then, really, they would be in their right to take longer.

captainzor
Guest
captainzor

Wayshuba this is their obligation they created for themselves: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/the-pledge

Darkwalker75
Guest
Darkwalker75

PantsOwl Darkwalker75 Lethality 
And if you actually read my comment instead of just pretending I didn’t post anything, you would see that I agreed with you that the TOS has been changed.
However it was NOT changed retroactively as you claim, the backers was informed and agreed to it when they accepted it.

captainzor
Guest
captainzor

Wayshuba Thornz PantsOwl  If those aren’t alt accounts, fine, I apologize.

However, all I see from this critic crowd is the adherence to a strictly narrow acceptance of the portion of the Kickstarter that serves as fuel for your arguments.  Yes, they did give dates.  Yes, they did give deadlines.  Yes, they did attach these to very specific features and content goal posts.  Yes, yes, yes, they are guilty of missing these and many others.. HOWEVER and more importantly ALL of those dates were given with the caveat of “subject to change.”

If you cannot incorporate that one tiny detail into all your debating, then none of it is worth reading and it’s all conjecture.  I don’t CAAAAAAAAARE if they missed these dates because of the stretch goals getting knocked out (blame the crowd).  I don’t CAAAAAAAAAARE if the content design is taking longer because the engineering side of things has pushed it forward.  I don’t CAAAAAAAARE if people who didn’t bother to read the fine print when they pledged and didn’t pay attention to what they were doing get impatient and butthurt and suddenly want their money back and can’t get it.

CIG is INUNDATING the internet and the backers with WEEKLY progress updates to a level no other crowd funded project has on offer.  THAT, along with some day actually shipping the product, is the ONLY thing they are bound to do.  There is absolutely no legal obligation they have failed to meet thus far.

Believe me, I will be first in line asking for my refund if their communication dries up the way something like, oh I dunno, Landmark rings a bell?

Thornz
Guest
Thornz

PantsOwl 
“bollocks off” you Australians are hilarious….
The more popular Star Citizen has become the more trolls been trying to discredit it in every way under the sun.
So now you are here doing what again? 
Ya, the same stuff the past 1,000 trolls been doing.

Ever think I’m not concerned with trivial amounts of cash?
There is a lot of people not concerned. There was even a guy who spent over $30k in Star Citizen. Maybe you need to tell him RED ALERT ON CIG… and here is why…

Seriously, the Derek comedy fiscal was amusing because he did think he would get a lawyer and bring them down.
If you give people enough rope they will in time hang themselves. So why the big rush to think you can do it yourself. Sit back and the big CIG gets the bigger the fall, if they ever do.
You still have not told us what Star Citizen ship package you are interested in.
Well what do you want to be? Fighter, trader, explorer is very popular.
When you decide let us know.

MyNameIsIllegal
Guest
MyNameIsIllegal

Wayshuba Thornz Breaching a contract != breaking the law.

PantsOwl
Guest
PantsOwl

Thornz PantsOwl I felt compelled to post here after seeing so many people posting absolute nonsense in regards to actual happenings, your own camp is much more provocative than any critic of Sc i’ve seen here.
You are basically telling me to shut up because you do not like my opinion. How about you bollocks off.

Thornz
Guest
Thornz

PantsOwl
Don’t get your panties in a wade because I see a new account with 9 replies all attacking CIG.

If you got this proof then WHY you in the forums and not with Derek to sue CIG?
I mean he has some money and hates CIG with a passion. Why waste time here?
Your grievance is with CIG and should not be here to ‘TRY’ and convince people in the forums. Let your lawsuit do your talking.  If you even have one.

You and your buddies are like the big Amway salesmen. They want people to pay $100 a meal to tell you how they made all their money. 
Well, they make all their money selling a $10 meal for $100.

If you bring CIG down to ruin, then I will say OMG I’M SO SORRY..blah blah blah…but we both know CIG is not coming down.

It’s a VIDEO GAME…the 2 big companies that would love to see CIG go down is CCP and EA. Star Citizen is taking money and users fro playing their games. 
Derek was just a mistake is all. He will implode in time due to his stupidity, arrogance and greed.

Nuf said…

SEE YOU IN STAR CITIZEN.
If you need help picking out a ship package please let any of us know or just ask in the Star Citizen General Forums.. greatest people ever.

Wayshuba
Guest
Wayshuba

Thornz My gosh. What I posted was not an attack on anyone personally. You talk about when SQ42 releases and gloss completely over what I said. The ToS of which almost $60 million of the $100 million that has been funded stated the game would be delivered in 2014 with a contingency period of 12 months, bringing it to late 2015 or refunds would be issued.

It is now in that period that CiG is contractually obligated BY LAW to have delivered that final product. Sure, $40 million is under ToS for sometime by mid-2018 but the remainder is currently in violation of contract.

Can you not understand that, as of this moment, right now today, CiG is in violation of contract for around $60 million of their funding? Can you not understand just how much this puts the entire project in jeopardy should a class action suit be filed? Can you not understand that right now, as of today, the grounds already exist for such a suit?

That is all I was saying. I hope that CiG does in fact pull it off. But it is still at a tremendous risk right now.

PantsOwl
Guest
PantsOwl

Thornz PantsOwl I have posted and quoted both the origional TOS with the 12 month- after- release-date- refund clause and then ew TOs in comparison, as proof.

This is my account and is linked to my couple year old gmail/ google account, im not here to appeal to your brittle paranoia.

wpDiscuz