1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Star Citizen sells 'Concept Motorcycles' at $36 and $48

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, May 13, 2019.

  1. The Laughing Ma

    The Laughing Ma Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,787
    Likes Received:
    419
    GPU:
    WC 980GTX
    [​IMG]

    LOL better hurray wouldn't want this digital product to suddenly not be IN STOCK.

    Oh well if the guys selling the snake oil tell you it isn't snake oil it MUST mean it's true. Looks like an MTX smells like an MTX must be an MTX, the big question is when the game.... sorry IF the game releases in a full state and they sold this 'pledge' product on their store front would it still be a 'pledge' or would it be, as EVERY other game calls it a micro transaction?

    I've also watched at least a dozen or so games go through early access, getting the funding they needed and release a full and complete game by selling the game... yeah just the game, not the game plus $10,000+ dollars of MTX alongside it.

    How does a 'game' that reached it's own claimed backing goals by not just a little bit but by a metric butt load still need people to buy stupidly overpriced 'pledges' to fund the game? They said they had the funding on their own website sometime over a year ago so why all this cloak and dagger dodgy underhanded artificial scarcity bs on overpriced tat?


    But f*ck me seriously go get that bike before it goes out of stock....
     
    Last edited: May 14, 2019
    airbud7 and chispy like this.
  2. WalterDasTrevas

    WalterDasTrevas Member Guru

    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    40
    GPU:
    Gigabyte GTX970 oc
    Light years defines space and time.
    When I look at a star, I'm looking at the past. If I travel to the star, I'm moving into the future. ;)
    So both are right.
    But the game already exists and can be played (if it's good or bad, it's another question).
    In this perspective both are wrong, because the game is not in the past nor in the future, but in the present. ;P
     
    Last edited: May 14, 2019
    XenthorX and gx-x like this.
  3. WalterDasTrevas

    WalterDasTrevas Member Guru

    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    40
    GPU:
    Gigabyte GTX970 oc
    I would never spend so much money on a game, but really? "If it can not be lost, it has no value"?
    It's just the opposite.
    We are talking about digital entertainment, not sculptures, paintings or stamps, so if the guy pays $ 30 in a vehicle that can not be stolen or destroyed, the vehicle he bought has much more value, since the player will not be deprived of their investment, I repeat, in digital entertainment.
    I do not like this system because it takes away the emotional factor of losing something important, but the goal is to get around with a cool vehicle, and not get worried every time you decide to use the vehicle.
    There are several ways to define "value," and everything will depend on the context, from the perspective of who is buying.
     
  4. Loobyluggs

    Loobyluggs Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,866
    Likes Received:
    344
    GPU:
    EVGA 1070 FTW
    Kind of what I said t'other day with regards to value.

    Anyone who has studied even basic economics knows that it is the study of scarcity - if something has all the value of CTRL+C CTRL+V, then, really the value is how much it costs for someone to do that. I would even go so far as to say you could automate that process as part of the programming.

    It can get (near) infinitely reductive of course, as you could say there is a market rate for someone to hit the keys on the keyboard to automate the process, but, it is a race to 'zero cost' in all respects.

    I doubt, quite strongly, the scarcity is being factored - what would absolutely work as a better mechanic, that even the most ham-fisted game designer would figure out is this:

    Make a item (ship, wallet, earrings doesn't matter what) destructible and rare, so, to obtain it requires a game-loop by a player and shazam! you got an incentivized game mechanic!

    And, if you make it destructible and rare, or even, unique, with an increase in difficulty searching/finding/obtaining item; people will play the game more. Demand for gameplay goes up, not down.

    Why? because the items have value!

    If a company just artificially injects items into the game - they have no value other than subjective value.

    So yes, you are right.
     

  5. Loobyluggs

    Loobyluggs Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,866
    Likes Received:
    344
    GPU:
    EVGA 1070 FTW
    My apps - I didn't see this prior to posting the above response.

    Sadly, this is not true. It's the opposite of what (I think) you are saying. I did clarify subjective value, not intrinsic.

    Just because you say something has value, does not mean it actually does; much like a developer making a statement that "this" is the value of a 'thing'. If the 'thing' cannot be destroyed, then it is infinite and therefore its value is subjective.

    Hence the above poster who clearly and accurately identified it as 'artificial scarcity'.
     
  6. WalterDasTrevas

    WalterDasTrevas Member Guru

    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    40
    GPU:
    Gigabyte GTX970 oc
    There is no objective truth in digital consumer goods.
    You are mixing things up to try to force a subjective opinion based on "real world" economics, but in an individualistic context, and yet, digital consumption is a contemporary reality.
    There is no objective truth for passion, and games are based on passion,so the opinion of an economist is absolutely disposable within that context.
    It seems that you feel a self-affirming need to contradict opposing subjective opinions when, within the context discussed, your opinion is also subjective, after all, we are not talking about economics as a Science, but passion.
     
    Last edited: May 14, 2019
  7. Loobyluggs

    Loobyluggs Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,866
    Likes Received:
    344
    GPU:
    EVGA 1070 FTW
    Can it be destroyed *virtually? No. Therefore it is not scarce, therefore any value is subjective, *virtually.

    Simply speaking, if the individual perceives value in it, then it has value to them, but; if the person selling the thing is the one who sets the price then they are artificially creating scarcity.

    "The Laughing Ma" is correct in that context.

    If I may remark, you are straw-manning my position, then attacking it, and so I will not defend a position you are imagining.

    Sorry.

    *that is about as much rope as I can give you.
     
  8. WalterDasTrevas

    WalterDasTrevas Member Guru

    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    40
    GPU:
    Gigabyte GTX970 oc
    I did not attack you, I just realized that your criticism about the "non-existent real value" of the objects is personal, subjective, and you are trying to "win" by arguing in a situation where there is no reason to want victory, and even those who made donations, did knowing that something could go wrong and the project could take longer than expected.
    But who is playing, is gaining entertainment, and you will not gain anything by criticizing this players, this is only to feed your ego.
    Everything is subjective, we are talking about video games, not exact sciences.
    Something that is real in my life (happiness enjoying digital entertainment), has real value in my life.
    You accused another user of being "fallacious," when in fact you are trying to force your personal, subjective view, as if it were an objective truth, into a totally subjective context.
    As I said, games are "passion", and you try to exponentiate your opinion using an incompatible context, it is also just an opinion.
    But once, I did not attack you, I just interpreted your posts.
     
  9. Loobyluggs

    Loobyluggs Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,866
    Likes Received:
    344
    GPU:
    EVGA 1070 FTW
    I never said you were attacking me, but the straw-man you have imagined of me.

    Your 'realization' is therefore nothing, as is the rest of your post, because it is in your mind and I will not argue someone else's imagination and interpretation of my points.

    Stay on point and I will reply.
     
  10. tsunami231

    tsunami231 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,289
    Likes Received:
    279
    GPU:
    EVGA 1070Ti Black
    well can think of this FFBE mobile game is pretty much selling new character/unit for 69.99$ which contains a ticket to get the character/unit. that other wise has 2% chance of getting a rainbow crystal that could contain the unit, and 1% chance within that 2% that actual unit drops threw gacha system.

    Imo the lootbox/Cash shop microtranstation stuff has got out hand. to point the goverments are trying to control it now.
     
    chispy likes this.

  11. XenthorX

    XenthorX Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,495
    Likes Received:
    488
    GPU:
    EVGA XCUltra 2080Ti
    All this for the purple rainbow mega-star limited edition Crystal skin for left hand armor piece of level 47.
     
    chispy likes this.
  12. Frances

    Frances Active Member

    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    5
    GPU:
    EVGA 980Ti
    Are you being paid to defend this company/game? Nothing you said prevents Star Citizen from being a scam. Also, your last sentence is quite chilling. You are saying we have no right to discuss this publicly, only complain to authorities? What dystopia are you hoping we live in? If we think something is a scam we'll discuss it. The truth will eventually come out, and if it's not a scam as so many here are claiming it isn't, then you don't have anything to worry about.

    Don't kill the discussion because you don't like what's being discussed.
     
  13. Denial

    Denial Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    12,110
    Likes Received:
    1,251
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080Ti
    I don't agree with what he said but I find it amusing that you ask him what dystopia he thinks we live in right after you effectively McCarthy him.
     
  14. Astyanax

    Astyanax Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,787
    Likes Received:
    438
    GPU:
    GTX 1080ti
    its not a scam just because you want it to be one.

    Get lives.
     
  15. The Laughing Ma

    The Laughing Ma Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,787
    Likes Received:
    419
    GPU:
    WC 980GTX
    How much they selling that for and more importantly is it in stock?
     
    XenthorX likes this.

  16. Frances

    Frances Active Member

    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    5
    GPU:
    EVGA 980Ti
    It's dystopic to silence those who discuss topics you don't agree with. That's pretty much the whole basis of modern censorship. Example: Label all debates that you can't win as hate speech and then associate it with actual hate groups.

    A company that is raking in cash for a game that has a dubious past and an uncertain future is most definitely paying people to comment on social media. They are literally guarding their revenue stream, much smaller companies do it for all sorts of reasons. Are you so naive that you think this website isn't a prime target for paid influencers?

    His argument was that Star Citizen isn't a scam because their website said it wasn't a scam and that we shouldn't be complaining about it on these forums nor should articles be written about how it might be a scam but rather contact the authorities. This is exactly what a paid influencer would say. Anyone with genuine interest in Star Citizen would want to read and discuss whether it was legitimate. A person who genuinely believes in the company could share their own personal experiences with the product or company and someone who was undecided could share their concerns and possibly find answers to their questions. On the opposite end the guy who thinks it's a scam for whatever reason could tell us why he thinks that way. It's beneficial for all consumers to discuss this.

    The only entity that has a logical reason for not wanting the issue discussed is the company in question. Stuff like this directly impacts their bottom line. A guy who wants to silence a discussion falls in this camp. I don't mean to be rude but are you that simple that you couldn't understand my point, or do you believe paid influencers are a fairy tale? It wouldn't surprise me that you'd be in Denial, I guess it was the first thing you told us.
     
  17. Denial

    Denial Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    12,110
    Likes Received:
    1,251
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080Ti
    Isn't that kind of like labeling all people that you can't win a debate with as shills then spend half a post associating them with the company based on some faulty logic and no real evidence?

    Why would a paid influencer say contact the authorities? Why wouldn't they just say "it's not a scam, stop posting about it" like tons of other people have without adding "but if you think its a scam contact the authorities"?

    Do you think the guys that don't add in "contact the authorities" get paid more by Chris Roberts? Is there shill tiers depending on how far you're willing to go? Maybe he needs to donate $1000 to CIG in order to access the ability to buy the higher level, $27,000 shill package where he can shill for them without suggesting people actively press legal action against the company..

    Or, realistically, maybe he just doesn't know how to formulate arguments well. Maybe he's tired of seeing completely fabricated numbers, reasons, etc being brought by people that don't even own the game. Maybe he's tired of all the flamebait that goes on in threads that's not even about the game being a scam - to the point where discussing the alpha in the actual game thread itself is difficult. Maybe he's "donated" thousands of dollars to the game and he's upset that people are in these threads saying he needs to get his "head checked" - implying that he has brain damage. Maybe a million other reasons that have nothing to do with him being a shill.

    You suggest that I'm simple but you're unable to infer that I understood your point from my previous post?..

    I don't think paid influencers are a fairy tale but I do think it's amusing that you can call him one based on a single forum post, right before you ask him what dystopia he thinks we're living in.. Which is all I was saying. Honestly remove the first sentence of your last post and I pretty much agree with the rest. I think the discussions are good but I do think the facts should be moderated to some degree. People fabricate numbers about the game all the time. For example in the other thread, Chris Roberts home value grew 40% over the course of the thread - with people saying it's $7M by the end. If I was to argue with people in the AMD subforum that AMD GPUs are a scam based on numbers that are 40% off I'd probably be banned.. but for some reason no one cares that people just make numbers up in Star Citizen threads. Then they sit here and pretend like it's a real discussion and anyone who lashes out about that practice (logically or illogically) must be a shill.

    Also @Hilbert Hagedoorn - can we get a profit sharing system going, where every time someone references my username in an argument I get .0000000000000001% of ad revenue? I feel like I'd have a few pennies by now. ;D
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2019
    fantaskarsef and airbud7 like this.
  18. airbud7

    airbud7 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,874
    Likes Received:
    3,314
    GPU:
    pny gtx 1060 xlr8
    With the user name Denial? .....Denied!...:p
     
    fantaskarsef and Denial like this.
  19. Frances

    Frances Active Member

    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    5
    GPU:
    EVGA 980Ti
    You must not have read his post or mine. He made no points to debate, he literally only said Star Citizen can not be a scam because they said on their website it's not a scam. Why would you just insert that claim into a question as a fact? Are you unable to show that I'm not able to debate him? It's like a prosecutor opening a murder case by asking the suspect, "What time did you kill your wife?" You are so desperate to try to make me look hypocritical that you are making stuff up and knocking down straw men.

    So here you are declaring my logic as faulty but not even bothering to explain how. Again, you skipped a step. It's very simple, all consumers benefit from the discussion of Star Citizen's merit. The company in question would want to mitigate all negative discussion. You missed the point about "contacting the authorities," it was about his claim that it is wrong to be discussing any misdeeds by Chris Roberts and the company. It wouldn't matter who he said to contact instead of discussing it publicly. He could've suggested we confess to our priests instead of talking about it. The whole and only point was that his goal was to prevent the conversation from taking place and making us feel "guilty" for not doing the right thing(which was contacting the authorities.) Your whole focus has shifted onto this to either distract from the whole point of this dialogue or because you are that simple and believe that this is now the discussion. My dialog with you is centered on your very incorrect assumption that I was "Mccarthying" that other guy. Which is to say I had no evidence for my claim. When I showed you the very easy to follow logic, you declared it faulty and never bothered to explain how. Instead you supplanted a valid response with ramblings consisting of strawmen and various other illogical statements.

    So because other possibilities exist, it couldn't be the one that makes the most sense(the one I suggested)? That's not how determinations are made. The plausibility is weighed for each scenario in consideration of available information and the one that makes the most sense is chosen.Your argument here boils down to "because you could be wrong then you are definitely wrong," which is illogical. I'll add a possibility to your mix of scenarios. If his cat could've walked on his keyboard and typed out that message, does that mean that my more evidence based scenario is incorrect? No, because humans make value based judgments. You are floundering and trying to stick to your original position even if that means you must saturate the post with illogical babbling. It's sad.

    It's completely possible that your simple. You haven't shown that you've understood my points at all or you've shown that you do but you won't acknowledge them because you are too arrogant to admit you were wrong in your original response to me. It's a matter of subjectivity but I'd say either scenario renders you a simple person. It's quite entertaining.

    If the arguments presented here are full of incorrect numbers and figures, then it should be advantageous to those who support Star Citizen. If you are so concerned about facts that are presented in the discussion, then my suggestion is stop making things up and presenting them as facts. You'll look less hypocritical that way.
     
  20. Denial

    Denial Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    12,110
    Likes Received:
    1,251
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080Ti
    If you don't see how calling him a shill isn't the same as your modern propaganda analogy then I don't know what tell you. "I don't know he's a shill but I WEIGHED THE PLAUSIBILITY so I'm going to call him a shill" "I don't know he's a racist but his speech sounds racist so I'm going to call him a racist" "I don't know he's a communist but I WEIGHED THE PLAUSIBILITY and it's only logical that he's a commie so I called him a communist"

    Then you state he must think we're living in a dystopia.. but I'm the one making stuff up and knocking down strawmen? You literally said he said something he didn't say at all.. but okie dokie.

    Yeah spreading falsehoods is definitely advantageous - that's why we love libel right? https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/03/largest-study-ever-fake-news-mit-twitter/55510

    Edit:

    Oh boy: https://forums.guru3d.com/threads/lets-talk-flat-earth.416076/page-10#post-5460055

    You're a flat earther? Now I understand..

    You see, I "weighed the plausibility for each scenario in consideration of available information" and I find it highly plausible that you're paid by the flat earth foundation to attack this company, game and it's users. I made this determination because the planets in game are rendered as spherical objects and you believe they are flat. What kind of flat Earth dystopia are you hoping we live in?

    Just kidding but now that I know you're a flat earther you're on ignore and I won't be reading whatever response you have or replying to it. I'm just too simple to understand that the globe model is unraveling.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2019

Share This Page