Chris Roberts Back in your wallet - STAR CITIZEN

[Falconeer]

As for refund requests working the other way: per the ToS, we’re not required to offer them. We do try and work with backers who are facing hardships, but the hard truth is that the money is by necessity being spent to develop a game

So, the interesting angle here is that Ben Lesnick said in that letter that refunds are not available (save for arbitrary special cases) because they have already spent the money.

Now, granted, if you dumped 10k+ in this game you are either an idiot or a rich idiot, but at this point how many will start thinking: "you know what? I could use 10k if they give it back to me. There are so many things I could do with 10k right now!"

For the rich & idiot reasons I mentioned above I don't think this will happen, but I wouldn't be surprised if all of a sudden some started to feel like jumping ship, especially considering that the consequence of that would be in many cases a new car, a new down payment for an apartment, a nice holiday, or paying off a debt that has been haunting them for a while.

[schild]

I'm of split feelings on this, and this is what it looks like:

1. If you spent $10k on this shit, fuck you, you don't deserve your money.
2. If you spent, let's say - $300 (based on the most expensive CE/LE's I've seen before) - and are just sick and tired of waiting on the game... then you just deserve the refund, because you're a regular if a little fanatical, consumer.

That said, I'm really hoping this whole company goes into a blackbox, takes the money, shuts literally everything down, and disappears like it never happened. What an amazing heist.

They won't do that though, because they're stupid and likely amazingly pussified.

[Jeff Kelly]

As someone who at one point paid a shitton of money for a lifetime subscription to Hellgate: London shouldn't you be more empathetic to others in similar situations?

[Jeff Kelly]

As for refund requests working the other way: per the ToS, we’re not required to offer them. We do try and work with backers who are facing hardships, but the hard truth is that the money is by necessity being spent to develop a game

So, the interesting angle here is that Ben Lesnick said in that letter that refunds are not available (save for arbitrary special cases) because they have already spent the money.

This is not how this works and Mr. Lesnick knows that. So the fact that he claims the opposite should make anyone wary. "You can't ask for refunds because we've already spent your money" (on hookers and blow probably) is not something you'd say if you still believe that you'll eventually delier a finished product.

[Falconeer]

As for refund requests working the other way: per the ToS, we’re not required to offer them. We do try and work with backers who are facing hardships, but the hard truth is that the money is by necessity being spent to develop a game

So, the interesting angle here is that Ben Lesnick said in that letter that refunds are not available (save for arbitrary special cases) because they have already spent the money.

This is not how this works and Mr. Lesnick knows that. So the fact that he claims the opposite should make anyone wary. "You can't ask for refunds because we've already spent your money" (on hookers and blow probably) is not something you'd say if you still believe that you'll eventually delier a finished product.

Exactly. That's why I think that line is a DISASTER from a PR and also a legal standpoint. I am surprised not enough people have jumped for his neck yet after reading that ridiculous line.

[KallDrexx]

I find it amazing that someone went "You know how to fix out Serek Dmart problem?  Let's give him his money back!  He's toxic and will surely go away if he just gets a refund.  And then let's publicly blog about how we are giving him and only him a refund because that will help matters".

[Khaldun]

Geez, guys, Abagadro already told you why they're giving the refund--it undercuts Serek's legal standing to bring any kind of suit. They're not doing it as a general p.r. move to show that they have a benevolent policy towards dissatisfied customers.

[Yegolev]

That said, I'm really hoping this whole company goes into a blackbox, takes the money, shuts literally everything down, and disappears like it never happened. What an amazing heist.

They won't do that though, because they're stupid and likely amazingly pussified.

You are correct, of course, but I believe they won't shut it down because most people do not turn off the money hose until it is too late.

Also +2 for making a post that reads like something I'd write (Predator comparison).

[Khaldun]

I think this is a basic problem with most con games--when a con artist hits a really rich source, they have a hard time getting out while the getting's good. There's always a few smart people who see it coming and run for it before they're left having their pictures taken in a line-up or being named in a lawsuit, but I think that maybe has happened already with Star Citizen, judging from these recent departures.

[Paelos]

I think Chris Roberts should be buried under a pile of lawsuits until he eventually perishes, and then the funeral home sells him a virtual coffin for $50,000 before they chuck him unceremoniously into the ocean.

[jakonovski]

SC can't disappear because Roberts has a name and there's hundreds of employees with a paper trail. It'll go on until it can't.

[Yegolev]

Or until someone named Christo Roberto applies for citizenship in Costa Rica.

[Malakili]

The refunds thing is interesting.  It strikes me that they are abandoning the notion that these are donations altogether if they are refunding based on things not being delivered by now, even if they are doing it arbitrarily.  That actually does seem to open them up them up to legal trouble.

[Der Helm]

Can it even be a donation if they sell you virtual stuff for thousands of dollars ? Does it matter ? I also do not understand how they can claim a "no refunds" policy. I thought that stuff was settled ages ago.

[Malakili]

That sort of stuff happens all the time.  Some not-for-profit says, donate $25 to us and get this free travel mug (or whatever). They'll have some merchandise someone else donated (the travel mugs), and now they'll sweeten the pot for your monetary donation by offering it to you if you donate.  That's sort of how I view these kickstarter pledge level things.

Of course, the big, glaring difference is that this a very much FOR-profit situation.

[Hutch]

I guess that makes Smart the Predator, cuz he ain't breeding.

Huh.

This just got a level deeper than I expected.

edited for quote

[Paelos]

That sort of stuff happens all the time.  Some not-for-profit says, donate $25 to us and get this free travel mug (or whatever). They'll have some merchandise someone else donated (the travel mugs), and now they'll sweeten the pot for your monetary donation by offering it to you if you donate.  That's sort of how I view these kickstarter pledge level things.

Of course, the big, glaring difference is that this a very much FOR-profit situation.

Well the big question for me is if what they are doing falls under the FTC rules of deceptive advertising. If you can prove they had no reasonable intent of ever producing the items as they advertised them, then you'd win.

As for refunds, if they are in California, they have a 30 day return policy at the state level.

[Malakili]

It's frankly kind of odd that we have this new kind of emerging economy based around "supporting" via donation for profit companies in the first place. The idea of kickstarter/indie-go-go/patreon, etc makes sense for small projects, not for profits and so forth.  But when it gets bigger, I don't like the model much.

When it comes to Star Citizen I totally agree that they are effectively just selling things.  But wrapping it in this "donate" language complicates things.

[Paelos]

The model is horrible, regardless of size. It's a scammers paradise with almost no real legal recourse until it gets so bloated the lawyers see $$$

[IainC]

The model is horrible, regardless of size. It's a scammers paradise with almost no real legal recourse until it gets so bloated the lawyers see $$$

yeah, eventually the FTC is going to have to weigh in to say exactly what a backer is. Are they a customer and therefore protected by trading laws? Are they investors and therefore entitled to equity in the product? Are they simply making a charitable donation?

[Paelos]

Even if the group was non-profit, which they aren't, even non-profits are subject to refunds is the conditions of the gifts aren't met. A recent example was Garth Brooks suing and winning a case where a non-profit hospital didn't live up to the conditions of the gift

If you can make the case that you fully expected certain conditions in return for your donation, and the advertising led you to reasonably believe your gift would include those conditions, then I think the case is a slam-dunk.

Here's the legal bits from the EULA:

For the avoidance of doubt, in consideration of RSI’s good faith efforts to develop, produce, and deliver the Game with the funds raised, you agree that any Pledge amounts applied against the Pledge Item Cost and the Game Cost shall be non-refundable regardless of whether or not RSI is able to complete and deliver the Game and/or the pledge items. In the unlikely event that RSI is not able to deliver the Game and/or the pledge items, RSI agrees to post an audited cost accounting on the Website to fully explain the use of the amounts paid for Pledge Item Cost and the Game Cost.  In consideration of the promises by RSI hereunder, you agree that you shall irrevocably waive any claim for refund of any Pledge that has been used for the Game Cost and Pledge Item Cost in accordance with the above.

My question is how clear is that in the ads? I'm thinking REALLY REALLY NOT. Oh and I would love to see them follow through on the audited cost accounting of this clusterfuck.

[Sky]

Star Citizen didn't ruin anyone's lives, anymore than heroin or gambling. Personal responsibility, some people just don't have it and it's a matter of time.

I don't even feel bad for the folks who bid the low levels on KS for the plain old game, KS itself is a gamble.

I applaud what Roberts is doing, fleecing gullible people is the American Way. Ironically, suing them to add to his own bank account as Dmart is doing, also the American Way. So it's win/win, really (except for the suckers who got fleeced, but again...American Way, the system doesn't work without suckers).

[schild]

As someone who at one point paid a shitton of money for a lifetime subscription to Hellgate: London shouldn't you be more empathetic to others in similar situations?

No, because they under-delivered and I treated them like shit til I got a refund. But at least they delivered something for me to even be upset with.

Also, I said $300 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[HaemishM]

Can both sides lose a lawsuit? I'm having trouble deciding who is the lesser of two evils in this case.

I think it's pretty clear. One side is robbing people blind and the other is a narcissistic ranting fuckstick who provides endless amounts of rage-tainment for the masses. I know who I'm rooting for! 

[schild]

Smart isn't even entertaining. He just needed to be coddled by his mother less. If anything, he's depressing.

[Velorath]

That sort of stuff happens all the time.  Some not-for-profit says, donate $25 to us and get this free travel mug (or whatever). They'll have some merchandise someone else donated (the travel mugs), and now they'll sweeten the pot for your monetary donation by offering it to you if you donate.  That's sort of how I view these kickstarter pledge level things.

Of course, the big, glaring difference is that this a very much FOR-profit situation.

The other glaring difference is that they don't actually have the travel mug ready and offer only the faintest indication on when you might be getting it (unless you donated during the Kickstarter in which case they've already gone past the date they listed).

[Samprimary]

Smart has the sort of impulse control and obsessiveness and mood regulation issues that usually keep anyone from getting to do shit like he did at one point because it inevitably torpedoes your personal and business relations quickly. But usually way earlier in a cycle. So he's sort of an outlier in the sense that he managed to do anything he actually did while having so many fundamental personality problems. I guess that's kind of a compliment?

[Falconeer]

This just in 

[Ironwood]

Almost everyone involved in this really needs to grow up.

[rk47]

Almost everyone involved in this really needs to grow up.

Shhh, here you can have my pop corn.
Sit down, it's gonna git gud.

[DraconianOne]

You know whose input we're missing?  Bloodworth's.  What's the story there - did he get banned or just pissed off that no-one was taking SC seriously?

[Falconeer]

Last time he posted here was 4 months ago, explaining us in detail why everything was going according to plan.

So the approach of making it a mini-game is completely appropriate. In AC right now, you can leave your ship and see an early version, likely to be updated when the FPS portion is released. Its all rolls back into itself.

I think part of the issue is comprehension. Not many are used to seeing something like a game made, and all the iterations and components being worked and reworked. With each bit of information ( and there is nearly a constant stream ) many treat it as if its the typical "4 months to release" info dump. The damage model is a great example of iteration, and wholly confused commenters. When the first iteration is treated as "the finial" one and the second, and quite possibly not even last method is vastly different. Most people I suspect are not accustomed to seeing the guts of development, even SC for all its transparency, its still sanitized and compiled. Many are simply used to normal patterns of information in the few months leading up-to launch, so every bit of info that the media cares to share ( witch seems to mostly be focused on the money, Not really CIGS' fault, the details and info about subsystems are available ) becomes the next "Final" version in many viewers minds.

Im genuinely sorry if I contributed to annoy him. But I still think his stance on SC was ridiculous.

[Paelos]

DMart is really obsessed with setting things ablaze. Might want to look at his childhood and possible open arson cases.

[Lucas]

 

https://twitter.com/dsmart/status/621648637106495488

[Mithas]

He's gone full