Star Citizen Backer Gets $2,500 Refund

[moosemaimer]

It's irritating how little actual content they've delivered, but as my total financial outlay on SC has remained $45, I'm not that upset. Really don't understand how people could have dropped thousands on something they knew they weren't going to see for years.

 

[Merlark]

I see it as a dick move by Star citizen to change the TOS but I understood why they did it. at this point they have invested tons of money into the company, studio's, technology help. I am not sure what it takes a month to keep the lights on for this company but its probably ALLOT.

That being said they have no plan to release the game the way they originally planned and the old TOS was going to allow possibly millions of dollars of backer money to be refunded if desired which would put CIG in a pretty awkward situation if they performed a move the community disliked and made them cough up the spent money back.

So I get it, but its still a very negative public move ontop of allot of other criticism which even as a long time backer and fan I think its justified. I think the product will get made but its not the product I supported for and invested in, will this new product be better than that? well thats the rub, the fact is most of the backers was hoping for a complete or nearly complete game after 3 years. here we are rolling way past that and while there is some cool stuff to show for it it is disappointing that its the fans very overwhelming support that ended up blind siding the project which many think is over ambition.

It's kinda hard to disagree with that at this point. But if your a fan you keep the faith and even if your not, its important to get critical so at the very least if you don't change the hearts and minds at CIG other crowd founders don't make the same mistake.

 

[HanFyren]

I just don't understand how anyone could sink that much money into it without knowing they'd be in it for the long haul.
I did enough research to know what I was getting before spending a measly 40$.

 

[Mikeybb]

It's irritating how little actual content they've delivered, but as my total financial outlay on SC has remained $45, I'm not that upset. Really don't understand how people could have dropped thousands on something they knew they weren't going to see for years.

If my initial pledge hadn't bounced off their servers like a glancing hit off a photon torpedo, I'd be in the same boat as you.
As things stand, I'm still waiting for a release and genuinely hoping to see a finished product (especially squadron 42 which, frankly, was the main thing that interested me).

This said, I doubt I'd have been seeking a refund.
Kickstarter and similar venues I view as a bet.
Lay down a stake of X in your accepted currency of choice, then if you are right get a game in Y amount of time.
If you are wrong, lose the cash.

I doubt I'd have got caught up in the excitement and 'raised' my bet on star citizen, but I'm a firm believer in no take backsies (Of course, this is unless the other party has demonstrably and with supporting evidence behaved in bad faith).
However, if there was the weight of a few thousand dollars hanging over my head, I can't be fully sure that I wouldn't be clamoring for recompense.

I guess the moral is

"Never ask what hot dogs are made of."

Huh.
I was sure it'd be "don't bet more than you're willing to lose."

 

[Gorrath]

What's the ETA for the game release nowadays? 2019, 2020? Will HL3 be released before it? Doesn't sound like the craziest thought.

As far as I have read, 2017-2018 with the first chapters of SQ42 released 2016-2017.

I have never put any money into this since I am loathe to back anything that doesn't actually exist but I do keep up with the game somewhat. I don't believe the game is a scam but I do believe it will never live up to what the developers really want or the players expect.

Balance issues are a problem in games 1/10th this complicated so I've no clue how post launch development will go. Even if the game comes out really for reals it's not going to end the nightmare.

 

[Cold Shiny]

Smart guy, I hope many more follow in his stead.

STOP BUYING PRODUCTS THAT DON'T EXIST YET.

 

[Floppertje]

Wow... So much hate here... I don't know where you people get your information but the game is fairly well on its way. Yes, it takes a long time, but so does every other game. You just don't hear about the other ones until they're halfway done. I'm playing it, I'm having a lot of fun and I'm looking forward to the updates.
Legally, yeah, he was in the right. They did promise to refund after 18 months when he backe. Of course I think he's kindof insane for having spent so much in the first place. It's kindof like gambling, if you're not prepared to lose it, don't use it for kickstarter.

 

[Denamic]

Smart guy, I hope many more follow in his stead.

STOP BUYING PRODUCTS THAT DON'T EXIST YET.

A pledge is not a purchase. It's an investment that doesn't guarantee a satisfying result, or even a result at all.

 

[The Enquirer]

What ever happened to that lawsuit against the Escapist? There was this big fuss then no one spoke of it again on either front. I get you can't talk about it until after but that seemed like ages ago.

 

[90sgamer]

Smart guy, I hope many more follow in his stead.

STOP BUYING PRODUCTS THAT DON'T EXIST YET.

A pledge is not a purchase. It's an investment that doesn't guarantee a satisfying result, or even a result at all.

Both angles are correct; however, as an investment, kickstarter is an incredibly poor investment. What's happening is that backers are not backing a game, they are backing a company. If the company makes a successful product using the backer's funds, then the company becomes viable. This is like selling stock, except with stock the "Backers" have ownership of the company and share in its success, whereas with kickstarter, Backers only get a single product and the founders of the company get a viable business they can continue to own privately. It's not exactly a balanced transaction.

IMO, anyone who kickstarts a company is an idiot.

 

[kekkres]

Smart guy, I hope many more follow in his stead.

STOP BUYING PRODUCTS THAT DON'T EXIST YET.

kickstarter is a donation service not a store.

 

[Laughing Man]

Most of what media sites write about Star Citizen is negative, so it's a smart move to update the terms of service for this exact reason. If people get the idea of getting back their money for whatever reason, they might start doing it in large waves, royally fucking over the project.

Is it? seems like a bit of a dick move to be honest, you paid for us to release this product in this time frame, we have altered the product by such a margin that it is no longer

a). the product you originally signed up for
b). ever going to release on the agreed upon date

so we're going to change the TOS removing the only thing that gave you any come back and then hold the game you paid for to ransom until you agree to them.

I am wondering if the statement about him not agreeing to those terms is a passing statement, as in when I bought in to this game I never agreed to THOSE terms I agreed to the terms originally posted. I.e he still clicked the I agree button to the new TOS because CIG being total dicks wouldn't let him play his game unless he did. Or if he really did stop playing totally so that he didn't have to click the 'i agree' button because if it's the former then CIG could be truly fucked, anyone who pledged before they updated the TOS could now ask for a refund and be entitled to it weather they agreed to the new TOS or not and I imagine they made a large amount of their cash during that initial period.

kickstarter is a donation service not a store.

and I think we can all agree that what is going on with SC has gone well beyond being a simple Kickstarter donation service.

 

[Sniper Team 4]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is the same game that the Escapist got into a legal fight with, right? After someone published an article that basically called this game a scam, and then we were flooded with die hard fans who jumped to its defense in ever little forum, right?

So...are they coming back again? Or was that a completely different game? All Kickstarters kind of seem like a bad idea to me, to be honest, which is why I won't back any of them. I have bought finished products from Kickstarters, but that's it.

 

[Floppertje]

Most of what media sites write about Star Citizen is negative, so it's a smart move to update the terms of service for this exact reason. If people get the idea of getting back their money for whatever reason, they might start doing it in large waves, royally fucking over the project.

Is it? seems like a bit of a dick move to be honest, you paid for us to release this product in this time frame, we have altered the product by such a margin that it is no longer

a). the product you originally signed up for
b). ever going to release on the agreed upon date

so we're going to change the TOS removing the only thing that gave you any come back and then hold the game you paid for to ransom until you agree to them.

I am wondering if the statement about him not agreeing to those terms is a passing statement, as in when I bought in to this game I never agreed to THOSE terms I agreed to the terms originally posted. I.e he still clicked the I agree button to the new TOS because CIG being total dicks wouldn't let him play his game unless he did. Or if he really did stop playing totally so that he didn't have to click the 'i agree' button because if it's the former then CIG could be truly fucked, anyone who pledged before they updated the TOS could now ask for a refund and be entitled to it weather they agreed to the new TOS or not and I imagine they made a large amount of their cash during that initial period.

kickstarter is a donation service not a store.

and I think we can all agree that what is going on with SC has gone well beyond being a simple Kickstarter donation service.

People always seem to forget that when they saw that they were going to WAY overshoot their original target fundraising by a factor of 10, they ASKED backers if they wanted to continue with stretch goals and expand the scope of the game, and the backers overwhelmingly said yes. You can't agree to that and then complain that the game is not reaching the original deadline.

 

[munx13]

Most of what media sites write about Star Citizen is negative, so it's a smart move to update the terms of service for this exact reason. If people get the idea of getting back their money for whatever reason, they might start doing it in large waves, royally fucking over the project.

Is it? seems like a bit of a dick move to be honest, you paid for us to release this product in this time frame, we have altered the product by such a margin that it is no longer

a). the product you originally signed up for
b). ever going to release on the agreed upon date

so we're going to change the TOS removing the only thing that gave you any come back and then hold the game you paid for to ransom until you agree to them.

I am wondering if the statement about him not agreeing to those terms is a passing statement, as in when I bought in to this game I never agreed to THOSE terms I agreed to the terms originally posted. I.e he still clicked the I agree button to the new TOS because CIG being total dicks wouldn't let him play his game unless he did. Or if he really did stop playing totally so that he didn't have to click the 'i agree' button because if it's the former then CIG could be truly fucked, anyone who pledged before they updated the TOS could now ask for a refund and be entitled to it weather they agreed to the new TOS or not and I imagine they made a large amount of their cash during that initial period.

kickstarter is a donation service not a store.

and I think we can all agree that what is going on with SC has gone well beyond being a simple Kickstarter donation service.

People always seem to forget that when they saw that they were going to WAY overshoot their original target fundraising by a factor of 10, they ASKED backers if they wanted to continue with stretch goals and expand the scope of the game, and the backers overwhelmingly said yes. You can't agree to that and then complain that the game is not reaching the original deadline.

Backers =/= single person. Its silly to assume that EVERYONE wanted to expand on the original plans.

 

[irish286]

Most of what media sites write about Star Citizen is negative, so it's a smart move to update the terms of service for this exact reason. If people get the idea of getting back their money for whatever reason, they might start doing it in large waves, royally fucking over the project.

Is it? seems like a bit of a dick move to be honest, you paid for us to release this product in this time frame, we have altered the product by such a margin that it is no longer

a). the product you originally signed up for
b). ever going to release on the agreed upon date

so we're going to change the TOS removing the only thing that gave you any come back and then hold the game you paid for to ransom until you agree to them.

I am wondering if the statement about him not agreeing to those terms is a passing statement, as in when I bought in to this game I never agreed to THOSE terms I agreed to the terms originally posted. I.e he still clicked the I agree button to the new TOS because CIG being total dicks wouldn't let him play his game unless he did. Or if he really did stop playing totally so that he didn't have to click the 'i agree' button because if it's the former then CIG could be truly fucked, anyone who pledged before they updated the TOS could now ask for a refund and be entitled to it weather they agreed to the new TOS or not and I imagine they made a large amount of their cash during that initial period.

kickstarter is a donation service not a store.

and I think we can all agree that what is going on with SC has gone well beyond being a simple Kickstarter donation service.

People always seem to forget that when they saw that they were going to WAY overshoot their original target fundraising by a factor of 10, they ASKED backers if they wanted to continue with stretch goals and expand the scope of the game, and the backers overwhelmingly said yes. You can't agree to that and then complain that the game is not reaching the original deadline.

Backers =/= single person. Its silly to assume that EVERYONE wanted to expand on the original plans.

And he had years to object. This 18 month thing people keep spewing doesn't mean what people think it does. If you actually read the section it says " However, you acknowledge and agree that delivery as of such date is not a firm promise and may be extended by RSI since unforeseen events may extend the development and/or production time." This means the estimated release date changes. The 18 month thing was meant to cover pledges for specific ships. The inclusion of the phrase "unearned portion of your Pledge" confirms this.

 

[Floppertje]

snip

Backers =/= single person. Its silly to assume that EVERYONE wanted to expand on the original plans.

true, not everyone did. But that works both ways. Like when you say "... the product evolves into something you don't want anymore. For many Star Citizen fans, the latter has become true, ...". Most of them agreed with the extra stretch goals, so they really don't have much of a right to complain. Honestly, since it's a crowdfunded game and it always had the ' stuff will change', I don't think you're entitled to a refund unless it's an obvious scam (and no, contrary to the escapists earlier articles, it isn't.)

 

[Ishigami]

First off all I have to say that I have the utmost respect for that guy. He stuck to his guns.

Next up of course I'm glad he had success. At least some fairness remains in the world.
I guess he never actually installed or updated the "game". Therefore, he never received the updated ToS and never agreed to it. Lucky him I suppose.

Then CiG: Of course they used a ToS update to swindle customer out of their right for refunds. Nobody really reads the ToS anyway.
I was always highly critical of their fund raising campaign. It was highly exploitive of consumer behaviour. Just another sign that CiG is not trustworthy.
It may have started out in honesty but once SC started to print serious money on promises corporate took over.

 

[Cap'nPipsqueak]

That guy was probably not the smartest dude to put so much money into the game.

The poor schmucks who funded Mighty Number Nine probably feel the same.