NO to rules :) YES to banning dickheads and closing inappropriate topics
[CONCERN] What if he was right?
- Thread starter D3Mark
- Start date
Tortilla the Hun
Grand Admiral
As a frequenter and member, for a number of years, of The Escapist I feel compelled to (hopefully) clear the air on some things regarding recent articles and at least offer my view on these matters, so take it as you will.
The article published just yesterday morning (9:00 AM PST) sparked quite of a bit of controversy with the concerns voiced by the sources. That's a bit of an understatement, actually, considering just how many eyes it caught. Even Forbes published an article weighing in on the whole thing. Of course, as I'm sure many of you have read, Chris Roberts himself posted his response on the matter. Today another article was published on The Escapist in hopes of answering some questions on the credibility of the claims that were made in the original article.
As much as I'd appreciate you giving them each a fair read to at least see a few sides of the matter, I understand if you don't feel particularly inclined to read any of them.
When I initially read that Escapist article, I felt exactly as some of you may have felt. That it was baseless, inflammatory, one-sided, and needlessly hostile. Why would they feel the need to do that? What was their ulterior motive? It wasn't until after I took some time to think that I went back to it to give it a second read. Then a third. Then I realized it wasn't at all what I initially thought.
It's very important to note that at no point was there an attempt to disguise the fact that the concerns raised were no more than allegations. It wasn't hidden knowledge that some of the sources were ex-employees. None of the claims were touted as fact, and no hard evidence was published because no hard evidence was offered. The lack of evidence, however, is not grounds for immediate dismissal.
Nine individuals contacted Lizzy Finnegan, author of the article, with troubling claims. Seven of these individuals were vetted, confirmed as employees both former and current, over the course of the five days before the article was published. The two who could not be confirmed were not quoted or used as sources. Not one of their sources was Derek Smart. It was not by any means rushed nor a knee-jerk reaction.
Unfortunately that last statement could not be said for Chris Roberts's response. He had 24 hours to present his response and address the concerns that (at the time) were yet to be published. Ample time, especially considering the response he pulled together in the few hours after the article was published.
It's honestly a bit troubling that Roberts's response has been lauded by some here. Especially when the first half came across as unprofessional mudslinging and blatant attacks on the author rather than simply addressing the concerns that were presented. He did eventually get around to doing just that, but not before angrily pointing fingers and essentially claiming the article was little more than a platform for Derek Smart. He spent far too many keystrokes doing what he could in attempt to undermine and discredit Finnegan and The Escapist as a whole.
This I can understand. It was clearly an emotional response and he's only human. I can sympathize with that. However, it would have been far more mature and professional to take some time and consider exactly how he addressed the article. That being said, I'm glad he put it out there for all to see. It's just unfortunate that it displays his off the cuff response to an online article of an established publication. It was bad form, pure and simple.
To wrap up my opinion on the whole thing, I just want to say that while criticism can at first seem harsh, cutting, and baseless, we must take care not to cast them aside as 'attacks' but actually give them some real consideration. Now I'm not saying Derek Smart is right. I'm not even prepared to entertain the possibility that he may be right. But there are certainly concerns and questions that need answers. Not least of which the allegations that have been raised against CIG. Our aversion to recognize the possibilities can't be stronger than our need to recognize the possibilities, however improbable they may be.
The article published just yesterday morning (9:00 AM PST) sparked quite of a bit of controversy with the concerns voiced by the sources. That's a bit of an understatement, actually, considering just how many eyes it caught. Even Forbes published an article weighing in on the whole thing. Of course, as I'm sure many of you have read, Chris Roberts himself posted his response on the matter. Today another article was published on The Escapist in hopes of answering some questions on the credibility of the claims that were made in the original article.
As much as I'd appreciate you giving them each a fair read to at least see a few sides of the matter, I understand if you don't feel particularly inclined to read any of them.
When I initially read that Escapist article, I felt exactly as some of you may have felt. That it was baseless, inflammatory, one-sided, and needlessly hostile. Why would they feel the need to do that? What was their ulterior motive? It wasn't until after I took some time to think that I went back to it to give it a second read. Then a third. Then I realized it wasn't at all what I initially thought.
It's very important to note that at no point was there an attempt to disguise the fact that the concerns raised were no more than allegations. It wasn't hidden knowledge that some of the sources were ex-employees. None of the claims were touted as fact, and no hard evidence was published because no hard evidence was offered. The lack of evidence, however, is not grounds for immediate dismissal.
Nine individuals contacted Lizzy Finnegan, author of the article, with troubling claims. Seven of these individuals were vetted, confirmed as employees both former and current, over the course of the five days before the article was published. The two who could not be confirmed were not quoted or used as sources. Not one of their sources was Derek Smart. It was not by any means rushed nor a knee-jerk reaction.
Unfortunately that last statement could not be said for Chris Roberts's response. He had 24 hours to present his response and address the concerns that (at the time) were yet to be published. Ample time, especially considering the response he pulled together in the few hours after the article was published.
It's honestly a bit troubling that Roberts's response has been lauded by some here. Especially when the first half came across as unprofessional mudslinging and blatant attacks on the author rather than simply addressing the concerns that were presented. He did eventually get around to doing just that, but not before angrily pointing fingers and essentially claiming the article was little more than a platform for Derek Smart. He spent far too many keystrokes doing what he could in attempt to undermine and discredit Finnegan and The Escapist as a whole.
This I can understand. It was clearly an emotional response and he's only human. I can sympathize with that. However, it would have been far more mature and professional to take some time and consider exactly how he addressed the article. That being said, I'm glad he put it out there for all to see. It's just unfortunate that it displays his off the cuff response to an online article of an established publication. It was bad form, pure and simple.
To wrap up my opinion on the whole thing, I just want to say that while criticism can at first seem harsh, cutting, and baseless, we must take care not to cast them aside as 'attacks' but actually give them some real consideration. Now I'm not saying Derek Smart is right. I'm not even prepared to entertain the possibility that he may be right. But there are certainly concerns and questions that need answers. Not least of which the allegations that have been raised against CIG. Our aversion to recognize the possibilities can't be stronger than our need to recognize the possibilities, however improbable they may be.
This is a load of bullshit. Just because Finnegan claimed so, doesn't make it true.
In this sense I can get 7 anonymous witnesses, former CIG employees, that will claim that they were offered cash compensation from the Escapist AND Derek Smart to go on record saying all that garbage against CIG. I will also claim that I had Skype conversations with them. Unfortunately my integrity as a journalist(because I decided to call myself one) and the Code of Ethics will not allow me to ever reveal those sources. I will also post an entire article repeating how true all of the above are and that I'm a good journalist.
If you work in a toxic environment, where harassment, racism and attacks occur on a regular basis, you go to the authorities, not to the press to repeat (word for word actually) some lunatics (Derek Smart's) claims. Also if you are suffering through all of the above, you quit, unlike the 2 sources that are still employed there. Unless they are serving some external agenda or lack self respect and ethics.
Chris Roberts attacked Lizzy Finnegan because she is supposed to be a #GamerGator, fighting for ethics in game journalism, however she showed and acted the exact opposite.
24 hours may be enough time for jack bauer to curb stomp some minorities, but hardly 'ample time' for writing a well balanced and thought out response.
The escapist was parroting dinkle sharts bullshit, it doesn't matter if they were citing him or not. I think CR was very patient spelling out exactly how each 'accusation' was bullshit.
Can we please just put this thread to rest?
Tortilla the Hun
Grand Admiral
You are aware of the importance of anonymity here, are you not? NDA agreements are very serious paperwork with very serious consequences. And surely you are aware of the perception many hold towards whistleblowers?
Say Finnegan, if she were to adhere to your view of journalistic integrity, revealed the identity of each of sources that asked to remain anonymous. She loses any integrity right then and there, becomes entirely shunned by any publication with any credibility, and can say goodbye to any hopes for finding work in journalism.
Then what about those sources? Any working within CIG is guaranteed to be fired on the spot, along with facing the same fines, court fees, and the vilification of employers in the industry. A horrible possibility, yes, but that doesn't make it any less possible.
And as I said, the concerns brought up are not to be touted as fact. Allegation being the key word in all of this.
If he could pump out that response within just a few hours, he could very well have done it professionally and maturely without slinging mud or the accusations. His response was not one of patience but of indignation.
I am very well aware of NDA agreements. So these employees violated their NDA agreements and revealed harmful information about the company if all this is true. Then these people don't have any credibility. If they cannot honor their own signature how can someone trust their word?
Also I am aware of the perception towards whistle blowers. And I am fully aware of what I say when I say this. They should not be employed by anyone. They are the lowest life on earth and even worms shouldn't feast on them after death. When you bring someone in your business, your home and you offer them employment, and then they quit and talk shit about the hand that fed them, they need to be put down.
Anonymity and poor journalism as exhibited here must seize. Besides the fact that you hide obvious illegal practices behind a veil of "information and service for the public" (such practices being defamation) it can be used as a damaging instrument for anyone with a pen and an agenda. As it has happened many many many times in the past. I welcome Lizzy Finnegan to start a legal process against CIG for racism, fraud, etc against CIG using her sources. If she considers them valid and true then she should be fine with it. Let the justice system judge and punish CIG. Or does she know that those sources might be lying? In such case why did she risk the damage to a company's and individual person's names by publishing those in the first place?
I'm also very well aware that no NDA agreement is above national legislation. If there were valid accusations against the employer, they cannot be taken to court or fined. Instead they can claim a pretty big compensation from CIG.
Another fact is that even an infant can understand that what CR said about funding is true. How would they know about the financial situation of the company?
I was directing a company of 280 employees for a good 4 years. It was a manufacturing business of energy production (mostly photovoltaic panels) and energy efficient products. The only people that had access to financial data was the CEO, me as Director and the Accounting department. However even accounting didn't have a perfectly clear picture of what is going on as finances were mostly handled by an outside firm, just to avoid leakage of such information. Divide and conquer. I'm sure Roberts has more experience in this than me to make things even more airtight. Not to mention that no sane or experienced businessman will keep such large amounts of cash in a bank account somewhere. They always go into some sort of short term investment or other plan to increase their value.
When someone offers you an obvious lie as information, you don't post it and hope for the best. You dismiss them as an unreliable source.
Tortilla the Hun
Grand Admiral
I really could've done without all the sarcasm and snark. But you do raise some good points and brought some insight to this discussion regarding finances. I was hoping to have a discussion primarily on the perceived lack of ethics in the article. Did Lizzy Finnegan jump the gun on publishing her piece? Very probably. But she, and more importantly the managing editor, felt there was reason enough to move forward with this. I can't say absolutely, without a doubt that the sources and information coming through are wholly reliable. But I will say that The Escapist has never once struck me as the kind of publication to not only allow but promote falsified information and blatant lies from any of their contributors.
Something else I was hoping to discuss was Chris Roberts's reaction to the whole thing. It just didn't strike me as something one would expect from someone in his position.
I'm just getting this sense of hostility, not towards me but a community I've been a part of for years (so I guess it does sorta feel like me in a sense), and that any wrongdoing is entirely on one side of the fence because of some belief that Chris Roberts can do no wrong.
I'm not out for blood, I'm not looking to tear down the dream. I'm as invested in this project as many people here are. I'm rooting for this thing to succeed, I want this the be exactly the experience every one is hoping it to be.
I just feel that Chris Roberts could've handled his response better.
But if that's not something anyone wants to discuss, or if people are gonna keep shitting on something that I've been a part of and still support, then I'm just going to keep my mouth shut.
Wolf Lord Caldersson
Salt Miner
My take is this. The sources were never truely confirmed. The sources were ex employees who might have a grudgr against cig. They claims that were stated had no evidence. The journalist has harassed Sandi before on twitter. 24 hours is nothing in timewise. Lets say they sent it at 1400pm. By the time it got opened and escalatex to CR it was probably arounf quiting time, if it even made it to him. CR comes in at 0900 does his meeting of the day ends at 1000. Performs his his daily routine/walkaround its 1100. Takes lunch its 1200. Comes to work foes his fucking job for 2 hours its 1400.
There is a common way to hit someone with a 24 hour timestamp and give them mo tome to respond. I have done this and had it done to me. I have sent reports to leadership with a 24 hour timestamp for dissapproval/approval and sent it a few hours before closing. They dont have time to respind so i get the choice. By the time the article was published CR had to respond and did it in a emotional way a farcry from his usual calm writing. Not only that they attacked his wife. Thats enough to make any husband go into a emotional state.
There is a common way to hit someone with a 24 hour timestamp and give them mo tome to respond. I have done this and had it done to me. I have sent reports to leadership with a 24 hour timestamp for dissapproval/approval and sent it a few hours before closing. They dont have time to respind so i get the choice. By the time the article was published CR had to respond and did it in a emotional way a farcry from his usual calm writing. Not only that they attacked his wife. Thats enough to make any husband go into a emotional state.
https://www.change.org/p/sue-derek-smart-for-defamation-against-star-citizen?source_location=petitions_share_skip
support the change and silence him and his madness!
support the change and silence him and his madness!
Hey all, haven't logged into the forums in a while and this was the top thread. To the original question, it doesn't matter if he's right or wrong. The important thing is that we all stick together and support the vision of Star Citizen. I just got done reading a biography of Elon Musk, and he had a super similar case in 2008, when his company Tesla was on the ropes. An employee spoke out (anonymously) to valleywag about how Tesla was almost out of money and all of the "pledges" (preorders) were just a con. Tesla *was* almost out of money, but it was the support of people who believed in his vision of the electric car that kept it going. After the article was published, virtually no one requested a refund, because they trusted Elon Musk and his vision of a consumer desirable electric car. Believe in the dream, and convince others to do so, and everything will work out.
I appreciate the effort btw, but this is counter productive. Let CIG handle this if they need to, fans doing stuff like this is just going to hurt their case.
WarrenPeace
Space Marshal
The problem is that she had entirely anonymous sources. We have to take everything we say on faith, because there is no person that we can go to for confirmation. That, combined with past articles that show she is already biased on the topic of Star Citizen, undermine a LOT of her credibility.If, as she claims, Star Citizen is a terrible place to work and going to ultimately crash and burn, wouldn't there be more people willing to talk about it on a public basis?
OK, so just be ready, it took a while to put this together. It is really long but the article was really confusing and I thought this would clear upp a few things. If you feel this is too long, I don't blame you.
I went to do this because people where saying these are totally valid source and they are stating facts/allegations and not conjecture/opinion. I said bullshit and upon looking at this, the majority of what the anonymous sources say are not allegations but opinions. Opinions about a previous or current employer. Something that the employer themselves cannot refute nor should discuss because they are themselves under very strick regulation not to do so because it is against the law and unethical.
I went to do this because people where saying these are totally valid source and they are stating facts/allegations and not conjecture/opinion. I said bullshit and upon looking at this, the majority of what the anonymous sources say are not allegations but opinions. Opinions about a previous or current employer. Something that the employer themselves cannot refute nor should discuss because they are themselves under very strick regulation not to do so because it is against the law and unethical.
Allegation 1 serious
Hostile work environment
Sandi Gardiner
UnattributeD
Several sources
-being an employee of Cloud Imperium Games meant subjecting yourself to public insults, screaming, profanity, racism, and stress so powerful that some people would become physically ill.
-multiple complaints have been taken to the Human Resource department against Gardiner, with little assistance on the matter
-"We aren't hiring her. We aren't hiring a black girl."
CS1
- "they may be over 40, which makes them a protected class and harder to fire."
CS4
-"She would write emails with so much profanity. She would call people stupid, retard, faggot. Accuse men of not having balls. And she was incredibly hostile to other female employees,"
These are serious allegations however as GamerGate and the general gaming community indicates, that the gaming industry doesn’t have a professional culture. Is this shocking? No. Does it negate its importance? No. However painting it as something that is somehow unique to CIG is not appropriate. The unprofessional aspect of the gaming industry promotes this and as one source said it is why they like the industry. This is most likely the result of a high stress, small scale operation without a solid corporate culture. It is important though and if the more serious allegations are real, then this should be followed up on with the properly authorities.
CS3
- "I realized it was affecting my health, my home life. I needed to get out. So I left. I had no job lined up. I just had to get out. I looked at my situation, I had enough in savings, so I left,"
- "I couldn't take it. It was by far the most toxic environment I have ever worked in. No one had clear direction about how to do their jobs well. No one was empowered to do their jobs well. Everything was second guessed, and the default reaction to everything was blame and yelling and emails with all capital letters and curse words."
- "There were two things you were told, when you were hired. One, you don't talk about [Roberts and Gardiner] being married, to anyone. Ever. And two, you don't make Sandi mad."
- it wasn't uncommon practice to round up four or five people to review an email intended for Roberts, to make sure there was nothing potentially upsetting in the wording.
- "His immediate response to everything was to insult people, and accuse everyone of being idiots,"
- He couldn't control his temper, and had no problem making a public scene of it."
From these quotes, this individual doesn’t seem like they were having a good time. Sometimes work sucks especially if you aren’t competent. This doesn’t mean that there is any fault on the side of CIG or the employee or does it mean that the individual’s experience is indicative of every one at the office. From his opinion comments throughout the article of which there are many, this person doesn’t seem like they had a very good grasp of the project. They may have said these things but in my opinion, they shouldn’t really be working for CIG. It may sound harsh but not everyone is cut out for that industry.
Hostile work environment
Sandi Gardiner
UnattributeD
Several sources
-being an employee of Cloud Imperium Games meant subjecting yourself to public insults, screaming, profanity, racism, and stress so powerful that some people would become physically ill.
-multiple complaints have been taken to the Human Resource department against Gardiner, with little assistance on the matter
-"We aren't hiring her. We aren't hiring a black girl."
CS1
- "they may be over 40, which makes them a protected class and harder to fire."
CS4
-"She would write emails with so much profanity. She would call people stupid, retard, faggot. Accuse men of not having balls. And she was incredibly hostile to other female employees,"
These are serious allegations however as GamerGate and the general gaming community indicates, that the gaming industry doesn’t have a professional culture. Is this shocking? No. Does it negate its importance? No. However painting it as something that is somehow unique to CIG is not appropriate. The unprofessional aspect of the gaming industry promotes this and as one source said it is why they like the industry. This is most likely the result of a high stress, small scale operation without a solid corporate culture. It is important though and if the more serious allegations are real, then this should be followed up on with the properly authorities.
CS3
- "I realized it was affecting my health, my home life. I needed to get out. So I left. I had no job lined up. I just had to get out. I looked at my situation, I had enough in savings, so I left,"
- "I couldn't take it. It was by far the most toxic environment I have ever worked in. No one had clear direction about how to do their jobs well. No one was empowered to do their jobs well. Everything was second guessed, and the default reaction to everything was blame and yelling and emails with all capital letters and curse words."
- "There were two things you were told, when you were hired. One, you don't talk about [Roberts and Gardiner] being married, to anyone. Ever. And two, you don't make Sandi mad."
- it wasn't uncommon practice to round up four or five people to review an email intended for Roberts, to make sure there was nothing potentially upsetting in the wording.
- "His immediate response to everything was to insult people, and accuse everyone of being idiots,"
- He couldn't control his temper, and had no problem making a public scene of it."
From these quotes, this individual doesn’t seem like they were having a good time. Sometimes work sucks especially if you aren’t competent. This doesn’t mean that there is any fault on the side of CIG or the employee or does it mean that the individual’s experience is indicative of every one at the office. From his opinion comments throughout the article of which there are many, this person doesn’t seem like they had a very good grasp of the project. They may have said these things but in my opinion, they shouldn’t really be working for CIG. It may sound harsh but not everyone is cut out for that industry.
Allegation 2 Serious
Embezzlement
Several sources
-the Pacific Palisades mansion that Chris Roberts shares with Sandi Gardiner is being paid for with funds from the company, along with the couple's personal vehicles and personal vacations.
So are they supposed to sleep on the street? I assume that they are receiving a salary for creating this game and if they are not, I would actually find that shocking. This isn’t a charity. We are paying Chris Roberts to deliver a highly technical product and he should be paid accordingly. Are they not supposed to spend the money they have? Also, Chris has residual income so if he isn’t being paid by the game which would surprise me why is he not able to spend his royalties. These personal item should not immediately imply embezzlement but this is what the article is trying to paint.
Several sources
-several videos were filmed using company resources and employees, both in Cloud Imperium Games' offices and in the couple's home.
CIG films things all of the time. This isn’t news. You can see videos nearly every day. This is the community content that is being paid for by Subscribers that subscribers were asking for. Is this supposed to mean anything? This is a further example of something that I and many backers would consider legitimate trying to be portrayed as embezzlement.
CS5
-out of the country on vacation or auditioning for movie or television roles, allegedly paid for with company money, but would post images of the office - taken by another employee - to make it appear as though she was at work.
There are 2 issues. Company money or auditioning and whatever vacation. This would be controversial however when making such claims it is important to see who is saying this. Reviewing the opinion comments, he seems like he has an axe to grind and I would discount it as in the least an embellishment. Again, these people aren’t poor and have the right to use their money. This does not mean embezzlement. For the photos, I’m sorry but if this is the case, so the fuck what. I don’t care how they see fit to communicate with the community. That is not my call and I won’t backseat quarterback someone’s decision when I don’t have all the facts, even if I have all the fact. This doesn’t seem like anything other than Sandy doing what she thinks is best for the image of the company. Good or bad, this is her job.
Embezzlement
Several sources
-the Pacific Palisades mansion that Chris Roberts shares with Sandi Gardiner is being paid for with funds from the company, along with the couple's personal vehicles and personal vacations.
So are they supposed to sleep on the street? I assume that they are receiving a salary for creating this game and if they are not, I would actually find that shocking. This isn’t a charity. We are paying Chris Roberts to deliver a highly technical product and he should be paid accordingly. Are they not supposed to spend the money they have? Also, Chris has residual income so if he isn’t being paid by the game which would surprise me why is he not able to spend his royalties. These personal item should not immediately imply embezzlement but this is what the article is trying to paint.
Several sources
-several videos were filmed using company resources and employees, both in Cloud Imperium Games' offices and in the couple's home.
CIG films things all of the time. This isn’t news. You can see videos nearly every day. This is the community content that is being paid for by Subscribers that subscribers were asking for. Is this supposed to mean anything? This is a further example of something that I and many backers would consider legitimate trying to be portrayed as embezzlement.
CS5
-out of the country on vacation or auditioning for movie or television roles, allegedly paid for with company money, but would post images of the office - taken by another employee - to make it appear as though she was at work.
There are 2 issues. Company money or auditioning and whatever vacation. This would be controversial however when making such claims it is important to see who is saying this. Reviewing the opinion comments, he seems like he has an axe to grind and I would discount it as in the least an embellishment. Again, these people aren’t poor and have the right to use their money. This does not mean embezzlement. For the photos, I’m sorry but if this is the case, so the fuck what. I don’t care how they see fit to communicate with the community. That is not my call and I won’t backseat quarterback someone’s decision when I don’t have all the facts, even if I have all the fact. This doesn’t seem like anything other than Sandy doing what she thinks is best for the image of the company. Good or bad, this is her job.
Allegation 3 Serious
Mismanagement
Several sources
-the company has already used the majority of its funding
-employees allegation a number that several employees have stated is "common knowledge"
-the company has less than $8 million of what was raised from the crowdfunding efforts left
CS2
"They've spent $82 million dollars,
Yeah, sure. This is something that has been indicated by Derek Smart. This is serious but this information hasn’t been verified by anyone. Anonymous source don’t count especially if they are relying on office gossip and are otherwise unemployed by said company. This doesn’t mean it isn’t true but one can look at the company in general to see if this rings true. What is indicated by the majority? Is it 82 million spent? That doesn’t seem correct since it would mean that the company is very nearly insolvent. By the indication that they are still in operation and still hiring and having events, I would say that as the case may be, the implication that the studio is insolvent seems meaningless until something more tangible appears. This is a serious allegations but it rests on word from “anonymous ex-employees” we cannot verify and shouldshow they had access to such information. “Common knowledge” in an organization does not indicate fact. It is rumor and gossip. CS2 indicates this as a fact, how does he know this? We can’t verify. If he had some form of documentation this really would help.
Unattributed
-Complete portions of the game have been stripped down and entirely redone, utilizing extra time and resources
This has been revealed by CIG when they said they scraped some of the features of the game because they didn’t work or weren’t fun. It is not news to the CIG Community but they made no mention of CIG’s admission either. Apparently, this is normal in the gaming industry but may shock people unfamiliar on the subject. This seems necessary if you are trying to do something new.
Unattributed
-It has been indicated that nearly the entire character development team in the UK office quit within a four month period - including global character lead Andy Matthew, Senior Character Artist Seth Nash, and several character designers - and that Star Citizen currently does not have any full character builds complete.
The personnel stuff again. CIG can’t comment on. Although, it would be interesting and would give credence to the piece if these people had been tracked down for comment. As far as the character builds, we know we have one and we have also seen many indication designs for characters. If there is no need to create a build right now, why keep people around. Also, this would indicate that character development for Squadron 42 isn’t happening? Also, I have seen many different characters in Area 18, they don’t do much but they are there.
Unattributed
- Sources have also indicated that the Austin office is, in fact, closing
- This is allegedly being done in the form of gradual layoffs, despite the fact that the office was guaranteed by CIG as the $11 million stretch goal.
This office seems to actually be hiring according to the jobs posts on CIGs website. This could have been readily verified.
CS7
Cloud Imperium Games Montreal entered into a joint venture partnership with Turbulent to continue to develop and sell the crowdfunding platform that was built for Star Citizen to other companies - and that backer money was being used for this project.
So, we pay Chris Roberts to develop a game and subsidiary functionality like the website and the community hub which is being developed by Turbulent. Is this functionality supposed to be provided for free to every client that Turbulent has? Is Turbulent not able to capitalize on their work with other clients? Chris Roberts said in his reply that the SC received a discount for the work done by Turbulent, this actually seems like a good partnership that is both win-win.
Mismanagement
Several sources
-the company has already used the majority of its funding
-employees allegation a number that several employees have stated is "common knowledge"
-the company has less than $8 million of what was raised from the crowdfunding efforts left
CS2
"They've spent $82 million dollars,
Yeah, sure. This is something that has been indicated by Derek Smart. This is serious but this information hasn’t been verified by anyone. Anonymous source don’t count especially if they are relying on office gossip and are otherwise unemployed by said company. This doesn’t mean it isn’t true but one can look at the company in general to see if this rings true. What is indicated by the majority? Is it 82 million spent? That doesn’t seem correct since it would mean that the company is very nearly insolvent. By the indication that they are still in operation and still hiring and having events, I would say that as the case may be, the implication that the studio is insolvent seems meaningless until something more tangible appears. This is a serious allegations but it rests on word from “anonymous ex-employees” we cannot verify and shouldshow they had access to such information. “Common knowledge” in an organization does not indicate fact. It is rumor and gossip. CS2 indicates this as a fact, how does he know this? We can’t verify. If he had some form of documentation this really would help.
Unattributed
-Complete portions of the game have been stripped down and entirely redone, utilizing extra time and resources
This has been revealed by CIG when they said they scraped some of the features of the game because they didn’t work or weren’t fun. It is not news to the CIG Community but they made no mention of CIG’s admission either. Apparently, this is normal in the gaming industry but may shock people unfamiliar on the subject. This seems necessary if you are trying to do something new.
Unattributed
-It has been indicated that nearly the entire character development team in the UK office quit within a four month period - including global character lead Andy Matthew, Senior Character Artist Seth Nash, and several character designers - and that Star Citizen currently does not have any full character builds complete.
The personnel stuff again. CIG can’t comment on. Although, it would be interesting and would give credence to the piece if these people had been tracked down for comment. As far as the character builds, we know we have one and we have also seen many indication designs for characters. If there is no need to create a build right now, why keep people around. Also, this would indicate that character development for Squadron 42 isn’t happening? Also, I have seen many different characters in Area 18, they don’t do much but they are there.
Unattributed
- Sources have also indicated that the Austin office is, in fact, closing
- This is allegedly being done in the form of gradual layoffs, despite the fact that the office was guaranteed by CIG as the $11 million stretch goal.
This office seems to actually be hiring according to the jobs posts on CIGs website. This could have been readily verified.
CS7
Cloud Imperium Games Montreal entered into a joint venture partnership with Turbulent to continue to develop and sell the crowdfunding platform that was built for Star Citizen to other companies - and that backer money was being used for this project.
So, we pay Chris Roberts to develop a game and subsidiary functionality like the website and the community hub which is being developed by Turbulent. Is this functionality supposed to be provided for free to every client that Turbulent has? Is Turbulent not able to capitalize on their work with other clients? Chris Roberts said in his reply that the SC received a discount for the work done by Turbulent, this actually seems like a good partnership that is both win-win.
Last edited:
Opinions
I have an opinion too. The difference is that my name is behind it and I am perfectly happy to discuss opinions. You are entitled to yours bur that shouldn’t prevent us from a good discussion.
several sources but not much has been created to show for it
-I would disagree, I’m playing arena commander and seen art that blows my mind and have been involved in a great community because of it. From the material that is released, the development of the FPS and multicrew looks amazing and I can’t wait to play. This information is verifiable through the many videos and content provided by CIG.
Most sources Most of the sources feel this is the reason for continued fundraising through the website - to "extend the dream" for as long as possible
-This does nothing and is meaningless to me. The continued fundraising effort is just that. Get more money for making the game. Money will eventually dry-up and at that point I will be worried because people don’t care about the game anymore. This is a project that requires money, I don’t fault CIG for getting as much as they can so they can actually deliver the project. This isn't a studio project that if they go over budget the head office can just send a big pile of cash. This is community sponsored project and we are putting our money onto a project we believe. If you super believe in the project you put more.
several sources They also feel this is the motivation behind the inflated pricing on digital products that, at this moment, allegedly don't exist.
-Inflated? You are not buying ships. You are sponsoring a game. CIG gives us ships to entice this so they can collect funds for the project. They attach value to a “ship” so they can validate a AAA budget. Someone inside CIG should be really crystal clear about this.
Some sources "more about the campaign and less about the actual game,"
-Well, if you are in the Santa Monica office where all of the community content is being created it might seem like that. Compared to other game projects, I would assume that the fundraising campaign is extremely important aspect of the entire work flow at CIG.
3 employees quit voluntarily they felt they were spending more time creating material for cons and fundraising than creating any material for gameplay.
-Again, what are you expecting from this? This is a video game with a huge amount of community content created at the same time. Maybe you’re not supposed to be doing the video gamy things. Maybe people got jobs there thinking they were going to be the next video game superstar right out of college and were stuck doing renders and such. I can speculate too.
unatributed "the value he puts on people is how much they agree with him. The more you say yes, the better you do."
-*Facepalm* really! The guys is putting on a project. A project that nearly a million of backers have put cold hard cash on and you want to disagree with him. Not saying that he’s Jesus or anything but this is your boss correct. He tells you want to do, yes? Again, this is easy to say when CIG and Chris Roberts can’t really comment on. You don’t know who it is or refute them. I wouldn’t expect everyone at the company to have a say in the game or voice their opinions about this that or the other. My feeling is that if they do, they do at their own peril. If we want to hear your opinion about a game, why don’t you put a kickstarter on and see how easy it is. I have worked at companies with very Alpha personalities and this is what makes something happen. Star Citizen would not be happening if Chris Roberts asked for everyone’s opinion. As backers and more so as employees, you join the vision of the person in charge. In this case, this is Chris Roberts. He seems to me like he has the necessary amount of self-involvement and passion to carry on this project to the end.
unatributed "Follow the money."
-This is super nebujous and magic joujou. You add much importance to everything you say. I’m sorry but this is not, not a movie. You are absurd.
Unatributed "irresponsible spending."
-Right and if we look at your finances, could we find such “irresponsible spending” you speak of as well?
Unatributed [referring to work being done] and often with minimal or no reward.
-Says you. Again, we don’t know who this is or if they have view of the entire project. Disregarded.
Unatributed "They're charging more for packages than for the game itself. That's pretty unorthodox,"
-This sentence is confusing and indicates that the person doesn’t have a minimal grasp of the CIG strategy in getting funded. Maybe if there is a fault to be found at CIG it is in explaining to their employees the marketing plan. Maybe it is taken for granted but maybe some employees don’t care and this is the result.
CS1 "$90 million for what he's pitching, even with a competent leadership, you couldn't do,"
-This is why the fundraising is still ongoing. The concept of this game is bigger than anyone has even seen. Really. So yeah, maybe it can’t be done with $90 million but I bet he’ll get pretty close. Also, if you’re shooting yourself in the foot before the race of your life, maybe it’s not a race you should be in.
: ) All due respect.
CS1 "The thing you have to remember about Chris Roberts is that, before this, he hadn't made a game in 12 years. He has no concept of what can and can't be done today with that amount of money, or for a game like this. Chris Roberts hadn't made a game in 12 years, and he was actively ignoring the input of people who have been in and a part of the industry that entire time."
-Ok, that’s a really good point. I would also grant you that his lack of putting out a game in 12 years can put him at a disadvantage. However, I bet all of the people around him might help. If he is ignoring certain people for telling him something can’t be done, that is actually how you get a project moving forward. You’re not gonna move forward when people are telling you, you can’t. Something might be hard but this is what we are asking of his. We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.
CS1 "With Star Citizen, the metric is how much money you've made, not what you've done with that money,"
I have an opinion too. The difference is that my name is behind it and I am perfectly happy to discuss opinions. You are entitled to yours bur that shouldn’t prevent us from a good discussion.
several sources but not much has been created to show for it
-I would disagree, I’m playing arena commander and seen art that blows my mind and have been involved in a great community because of it. From the material that is released, the development of the FPS and multicrew looks amazing and I can’t wait to play. This information is verifiable through the many videos and content provided by CIG.
Most sources Most of the sources feel this is the reason for continued fundraising through the website - to "extend the dream" for as long as possible
-This does nothing and is meaningless to me. The continued fundraising effort is just that. Get more money for making the game. Money will eventually dry-up and at that point I will be worried because people don’t care about the game anymore. This is a project that requires money, I don’t fault CIG for getting as much as they can so they can actually deliver the project. This isn't a studio project that if they go over budget the head office can just send a big pile of cash. This is community sponsored project and we are putting our money onto a project we believe. If you super believe in the project you put more.
several sources They also feel this is the motivation behind the inflated pricing on digital products that, at this moment, allegedly don't exist.
-Inflated? You are not buying ships. You are sponsoring a game. CIG gives us ships to entice this so they can collect funds for the project. They attach value to a “ship” so they can validate a AAA budget. Someone inside CIG should be really crystal clear about this.
Some sources "more about the campaign and less about the actual game,"
-Well, if you are in the Santa Monica office where all of the community content is being created it might seem like that. Compared to other game projects, I would assume that the fundraising campaign is extremely important aspect of the entire work flow at CIG.
3 employees quit voluntarily they felt they were spending more time creating material for cons and fundraising than creating any material for gameplay.
-Again, what are you expecting from this? This is a video game with a huge amount of community content created at the same time. Maybe you’re not supposed to be doing the video gamy things. Maybe people got jobs there thinking they were going to be the next video game superstar right out of college and were stuck doing renders and such. I can speculate too.
unatributed "the value he puts on people is how much they agree with him. The more you say yes, the better you do."
-*Facepalm* really! The guys is putting on a project. A project that nearly a million of backers have put cold hard cash on and you want to disagree with him. Not saying that he’s Jesus or anything but this is your boss correct. He tells you want to do, yes? Again, this is easy to say when CIG and Chris Roberts can’t really comment on. You don’t know who it is or refute them. I wouldn’t expect everyone at the company to have a say in the game or voice their opinions about this that or the other. My feeling is that if they do, they do at their own peril. If we want to hear your opinion about a game, why don’t you put a kickstarter on and see how easy it is. I have worked at companies with very Alpha personalities and this is what makes something happen. Star Citizen would not be happening if Chris Roberts asked for everyone’s opinion. As backers and more so as employees, you join the vision of the person in charge. In this case, this is Chris Roberts. He seems to me like he has the necessary amount of self-involvement and passion to carry on this project to the end.
unatributed "Follow the money."
-This is super nebujous and magic joujou. You add much importance to everything you say. I’m sorry but this is not, not a movie. You are absurd.
Unatributed "irresponsible spending."
-Right and if we look at your finances, could we find such “irresponsible spending” you speak of as well?
Unatributed [referring to work being done] and often with minimal or no reward.
-Says you. Again, we don’t know who this is or if they have view of the entire project. Disregarded.
Unatributed "They're charging more for packages than for the game itself. That's pretty unorthodox,"
-This sentence is confusing and indicates that the person doesn’t have a minimal grasp of the CIG strategy in getting funded. Maybe if there is a fault to be found at CIG it is in explaining to their employees the marketing plan. Maybe it is taken for granted but maybe some employees don’t care and this is the result.
CS1 "$90 million for what he's pitching, even with a competent leadership, you couldn't do,"
-This is why the fundraising is still ongoing. The concept of this game is bigger than anyone has even seen. Really. So yeah, maybe it can’t be done with $90 million but I bet he’ll get pretty close. Also, if you’re shooting yourself in the foot before the race of your life, maybe it’s not a race you should be in.
: ) All due respect.
CS1 "The thing you have to remember about Chris Roberts is that, before this, he hadn't made a game in 12 years. He has no concept of what can and can't be done today with that amount of money, or for a game like this. Chris Roberts hadn't made a game in 12 years, and he was actively ignoring the input of people who have been in and a part of the industry that entire time."
-Ok, that’s a really good point. I would also grant you that his lack of putting out a game in 12 years can put him at a disadvantage. However, I bet all of the people around him might help. If he is ignoring certain people for telling him something can’t be done, that is actually how you get a project moving forward. You’re not gonna move forward when people are telling you, you can’t. Something might be hard but this is what we are asking of his. We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.
CS1 "With Star Citizen, the metric is how much money you've made, not what you've done with that money,"
Last edited:
CS2 "He doesn't set out in the morning to screw anybody over. He's just incredibly arrogant,"
-So is this a good this or a bad thing for someone directing a project?
CS2 "Chris Roberts thinks he's George Lucas. He thinks he's a genius,"
-What does this have to do with anything? Is this a personal attack from a Anonymous Source. Shock and dismay. This is why journalistic integrity is important this does nothing material to the piece. Plus George Lucas isn’t even George Lucas. Have you heard him in interviews. Oh yeah and Midichlorians and Jar-Jar. : )
CS2 "He's a fraud, pure and simple. If he was just a salesman, or he worked in marketing, or he was answering to a producer, he would do well. But the emperor wears no clothes. Anybody who has worked with him will tell you the same thing. The difference is that lots of people have a dream, but only some can communicate it. I don't think he's sinister, or a bad person. He's Donald Trump. He thinks that if he wants to do something, he can. Because he's Chris Roberts."
-Personal attack number 2 from anonymous source 2. Tops. Too bad, CIG can’t comment on your personal character since it’s unethical.
CS2 "The thing I noticed when I started was that we were making commercials. We weren't making a game," CS2 said. "It was all about what was on the screen behind [Roberts] during the presentation."
-Yes, sorry for you to find out after you no longer work there but you were working for a company with a high degree of community contact. This is required for the vast amount of money necessary to create the game.
CS2 "You pick up a book, and what's the first thing you do? You read the back. The back is the best part of the book, because you can project what your experience is going to be. And usually the book isn't as good as what you imagine it will be,"
-I completely understand now. If you are saying that the game will never come close to what people are expecting, that is a possibility and every backer is responsible for that. There are going to be people that went it is finished they don’t like it. If that’s a possibility, maybe you shouldn’t put money into the game. This is where personal responsibility comes in. As for me, the content that I have seen in Arena Commander and the other modules have completely blown me away.
CS2 "With [Roberts], it would be, like, 'look at these beautiful renders of characters, and of this spaceship.' But none of it was real. He shows some artwork, and then people project what their experience is going to be. Like the back of a book."
-Right, you are in the video game industry, correct?
CS2 "Fans would come into the studio, and I wanted to be like 'Dude, run. Take your money and run.' I felt like I was part of a con,"
-If this is what you are thinking when you see the people paying for your paycheck, I’m glad you are no longer working there.
CS2 "This could really severely damage crowdfunding, at least for games. Who's going to want to do that again? People will look at everything and think 'but what if it's another Star Citizen?'"
-Well it is either Star Citizen or My Little Pony. But I see what you are saying something that sounds somewhat important being an expert in crowdfunding. Your concern is noted.
CS2 "Games are made like houses. You want to make the foundation first and the wallpaper last. With Chris Roberts, everything is the wallpaper,"
-I’ll have to take your word this is how you make a video game happens.
CS2 "I think there will be a game. But it will be a shell of what was promised."
-Okay, sure. It’s a possibility. Or maybe a lot of people will enjoy playing it.
CS3 "It was like the Eye of Sauron. You never wanted to say anything in an email or a meeting that would bring the Eye of Sauron on you.
-This may require personal development on your part in how to deliver and discuss difficult topics.
CS3 "Personally, I felt like the company was understaffed for what they were trying to do,"
-It is possible. I can’t really expect that a labor force is ready on demand at Chris Roberts door waiting to work. Growing a company this fast is not easy and yet he is holding it together and dealing with major issues on his part. This is where as an employee you could have done your part on the project.
CS3 "Building these spaceships - every ship is equivalent of a game level. They're supposed to be something where you can examine the entire outside, and then go inside and walk around the entire inside. And that's a huge amount of work. And they had just a handful of people working on this."
-Work is hard.
CS3 "A lot of people would be like "Where's the game? When is this going to turn into a game?" CS3 added. "It was all about making pretty spaceships and brochures and commercials and hiring big name Hollywood actors to do voice-overs for the commercials. We were never working on a game."
-Yes, maybe the company is involved in a massive engine build in the meantime, they developed Arena Commander, the Social module and from what we can see an FSP module and multicrew from the demos we have seen.
CS3 "You have to ask 'at what point are you taking advantage of someone?' There's a certain responsibility."
-I would actually have to throw this back at the writer. This has no meaning in the piece. If you have an opinion, the writer should make it since it is her OpEd rather than use quotes from anonymous sources.
CS3 "Like, I felt like we should have gone to their homes and made sure their kids were eating and dressed. It starts to feel like a gambling addiction after a certain point. It was hard not to feel guilty."
CS3 "I'm guessing something will come out,"
-Confirmed!
CS3 "What format or who will publish it, I don't know. I think it's unlikely that CIG will put something out. They will be bought, or some angel investor will come in. I just really don't see them coming out with anything as they are. They need to be bailed out."
-Perfect, another great project for the Federal Reserve! This is the reason fundraising is still happening towards the community. It is so that they don’t have to go into the studio system. I’m sorry but this means very little.
-So is this a good this or a bad thing for someone directing a project?
CS2 "Chris Roberts thinks he's George Lucas. He thinks he's a genius,"
-What does this have to do with anything? Is this a personal attack from a Anonymous Source. Shock and dismay. This is why journalistic integrity is important this does nothing material to the piece. Plus George Lucas isn’t even George Lucas. Have you heard him in interviews. Oh yeah and Midichlorians and Jar-Jar. : )
CS2 "He's a fraud, pure and simple. If he was just a salesman, or he worked in marketing, or he was answering to a producer, he would do well. But the emperor wears no clothes. Anybody who has worked with him will tell you the same thing. The difference is that lots of people have a dream, but only some can communicate it. I don't think he's sinister, or a bad person. He's Donald Trump. He thinks that if he wants to do something, he can. Because he's Chris Roberts."
-Personal attack number 2 from anonymous source 2. Tops. Too bad, CIG can’t comment on your personal character since it’s unethical.
CS2 "The thing I noticed when I started was that we were making commercials. We weren't making a game," CS2 said. "It was all about what was on the screen behind [Roberts] during the presentation."
-Yes, sorry for you to find out after you no longer work there but you were working for a company with a high degree of community contact. This is required for the vast amount of money necessary to create the game.
CS2 "You pick up a book, and what's the first thing you do? You read the back. The back is the best part of the book, because you can project what your experience is going to be. And usually the book isn't as good as what you imagine it will be,"
-I completely understand now. If you are saying that the game will never come close to what people are expecting, that is a possibility and every backer is responsible for that. There are going to be people that went it is finished they don’t like it. If that’s a possibility, maybe you shouldn’t put money into the game. This is where personal responsibility comes in. As for me, the content that I have seen in Arena Commander and the other modules have completely blown me away.
CS2 "With [Roberts], it would be, like, 'look at these beautiful renders of characters, and of this spaceship.' But none of it was real. He shows some artwork, and then people project what their experience is going to be. Like the back of a book."
-Right, you are in the video game industry, correct?
CS2 "Fans would come into the studio, and I wanted to be like 'Dude, run. Take your money and run.' I felt like I was part of a con,"
-If this is what you are thinking when you see the people paying for your paycheck, I’m glad you are no longer working there.
CS2 "This could really severely damage crowdfunding, at least for games. Who's going to want to do that again? People will look at everything and think 'but what if it's another Star Citizen?'"
-Well it is either Star Citizen or My Little Pony. But I see what you are saying something that sounds somewhat important being an expert in crowdfunding. Your concern is noted.
CS2 "Games are made like houses. You want to make the foundation first and the wallpaper last. With Chris Roberts, everything is the wallpaper,"
-I’ll have to take your word this is how you make a video game happens.
CS2 "I think there will be a game. But it will be a shell of what was promised."
-Okay, sure. It’s a possibility. Or maybe a lot of people will enjoy playing it.
CS3 "It was like the Eye of Sauron. You never wanted to say anything in an email or a meeting that would bring the Eye of Sauron on you.
-This may require personal development on your part in how to deliver and discuss difficult topics.
CS3 "Personally, I felt like the company was understaffed for what they were trying to do,"
-It is possible. I can’t really expect that a labor force is ready on demand at Chris Roberts door waiting to work. Growing a company this fast is not easy and yet he is holding it together and dealing with major issues on his part. This is where as an employee you could have done your part on the project.
CS3 "Building these spaceships - every ship is equivalent of a game level. They're supposed to be something where you can examine the entire outside, and then go inside and walk around the entire inside. And that's a huge amount of work. And they had just a handful of people working on this."
-Work is hard.
CS3 "A lot of people would be like "Where's the game? When is this going to turn into a game?" CS3 added. "It was all about making pretty spaceships and brochures and commercials and hiring big name Hollywood actors to do voice-overs for the commercials. We were never working on a game."
-Yes, maybe the company is involved in a massive engine build in the meantime, they developed Arena Commander, the Social module and from what we can see an FSP module and multicrew from the demos we have seen.
CS3 "You have to ask 'at what point are you taking advantage of someone?' There's a certain responsibility."
-I would actually have to throw this back at the writer. This has no meaning in the piece. If you have an opinion, the writer should make it since it is her OpEd rather than use quotes from anonymous sources.
CS3 "Like, I felt like we should have gone to their homes and made sure their kids were eating and dressed. It starts to feel like a gambling addiction after a certain point. It was hard not to feel guilty."
CS3 "I'm guessing something will come out,"
-Confirmed!
CS3 "What format or who will publish it, I don't know. I think it's unlikely that CIG will put something out. They will be bought, or some angel investor will come in. I just really don't see them coming out with anything as they are. They need to be bailed out."
-Perfect, another great project for the Federal Reserve! This is the reason fundraising is still happening towards the community. It is so that they don’t have to go into the studio system. I’m sorry but this means very little.
Last edited:
CS4 "Sandi is very jealous. She has to be the queen bee at the company. Whenever I was around her, I felt like I was in the presence of a cobra who, at that moment, might not have been inclined to strike but was completely willing to. You don't get on her bad side,"
-Well, I would have to assume this is your boss and she has the right to demand a certain respect from the people under her.
CS4 "Games are not a professional environment by default, by their nature,"
-OMG, I was just saying that.
CS4 "That's one of the great things about working on a game. But there are certain levels of unprofessionalism that you don't go beyond. Chris and Sandi made it part of their job to go beyond those levels."
-So are you for or against discrimination? Maybe just a little bit is ok, right.
CS4 "It wasn't about making a game. it was about a flashy demo for Gamescom, or PAX, or the next commercial."
-Right, if you are working in the same office as Sandi Gardner and the majority of the community team, your job is problably(yeah, I saw the typo and I thought why not) going to involve a certain amount of “flashy demo for gamescon, or PAX or the next commercial.”
CS4 "We were always building towards the next event," CS4 stated. "It wasn't about making a game. it was about a flashy demo for Gamescom, or PAX, or the next commercial. It never felt like they were trying to make a game, as much as digital spaceships to sell."
-You already said this. Look up!
CS5 "This isn't going to make the game better. This is throwing away money because, deep down, Chris Roberts wants to make movies,"
-Are you a confidant? Oh we don’t know cause he’s anonymous. Why is this here?
CS5 "He failed in Hollywood, but he never made peace with that."
-That’s a lie! He made tons of moneys from Hollywood but I would guess not much satisfaction. His movies weren’t really good except for a few here and there but you don’t go pissing on Michael Bay. His movies suck, really bad and they are still considered successes.
CS5 "There won't be a game. It's not going to happen. But then again, I am a pessimist,"
-But CS3 tots said “something will come out”, I’m so confused.
CS5 "The entire production process is circular. You spend six months proving that what you said wouldn't work won't work. There is no progress happening."
-I'm thinking you weren't burdened with an overabundance of schooling. I’m just being salty cause this is taking so long and I’ve already dealt with this above. I can’t believe you're still reading this by the way. Tops!
CS6 "The firings are both saving and costing money,"
-Hmmm. I think this debate is missing a extra person.
CS6 "The money is running out and they're cutting wherever they can - but they're cutting people, not frills. Chris Roberts wants a certain game - practically a movie - and doesn't want to compromise on anything but staff. "He's letting go people (sic) necessary to complete the game, but then wants to hire a professional linguist to create three brand new alien languages. He's making this entire project impossible,"
-Thank you for your input.
-Well, I would have to assume this is your boss and she has the right to demand a certain respect from the people under her.
CS4 "Games are not a professional environment by default, by their nature,"
-OMG, I was just saying that.
CS4 "That's one of the great things about working on a game. But there are certain levels of unprofessionalism that you don't go beyond. Chris and Sandi made it part of their job to go beyond those levels."
-So are you for or against discrimination? Maybe just a little bit is ok, right.
CS4 "It wasn't about making a game. it was about a flashy demo for Gamescom, or PAX, or the next commercial."
-Right, if you are working in the same office as Sandi Gardner and the majority of the community team, your job is problably(yeah, I saw the typo and I thought why not) going to involve a certain amount of “flashy demo for gamescon, or PAX or the next commercial.”
CS4 "We were always building towards the next event," CS4 stated. "It wasn't about making a game. it was about a flashy demo for Gamescom, or PAX, or the next commercial. It never felt like they were trying to make a game, as much as digital spaceships to sell."
-You already said this. Look up!
CS5 "This isn't going to make the game better. This is throwing away money because, deep down, Chris Roberts wants to make movies,"
-Are you a confidant? Oh we don’t know cause he’s anonymous. Why is this here?
CS5 "He failed in Hollywood, but he never made peace with that."
-That’s a lie! He made tons of moneys from Hollywood but I would guess not much satisfaction. His movies weren’t really good except for a few here and there but you don’t go pissing on Michael Bay. His movies suck, really bad and they are still considered successes.
CS5 "There won't be a game. It's not going to happen. But then again, I am a pessimist,"
-But CS3 tots said “something will come out”, I’m so confused.
CS5 "The entire production process is circular. You spend six months proving that what you said wouldn't work won't work. There is no progress happening."
-I'm thinking you weren't burdened with an overabundance of schooling. I’m just being salty cause this is taking so long and I’ve already dealt with this above. I can’t believe you're still reading this by the way. Tops!
CS6 "The firings are both saving and costing money,"
-Hmmm. I think this debate is missing a extra person.
CS6 "The money is running out and they're cutting wherever they can - but they're cutting people, not frills. Chris Roberts wants a certain game - practically a movie - and doesn't want to compromise on anything but staff. "He's letting go people (sic) necessary to complete the game, but then wants to hire a professional linguist to create three brand new alien languages. He's making this entire project impossible,"
-Thank you for your input.
Last edited:
Anonymity is very important in certain circumstances however it is the responsibility of the journalist to determine this. If Lizzy was contacted by ex employees and her editors didn't do there utmost to prevent from this piece being shown, it is very sad for lizzy because she looks extremely unprofessional and shame on her editors.
Using anonymous sources in journalism isn't done lightly and is in fact very controvertial in that profession. It is in fact only done under extreme conditions unless you're in politics and have an agenda, this doesn't mean it is ethical or professional. Like life threating situation of if the people feel threatened. It shouldn't be used as a soap box for people who at face value is very clear that they have a conflict of interest. Lizzy could have used the information to write another pice with these interviews as backup material until factual corroboration could be found. Voicing opinions and vague allegations and inuendos about a previous employer that cannot respond is not ethical journalism in my view.
Lizzy wrote the piece unfortunately and she deserves to be called out on it. This is not to be meanies. Why? because this is directly affecting people that are named and cannot necessarily respond in kind and causing harm to said people. CIG, Chris Roberts and Sandi Gardner. They are being very personal and are essentially implying a hostile work place, embezzelment and mismanagement. Reading the quotes only, it is very clear to me that this was a hatchet job and nothing more that an attack piece.
Not trying to be contrarian and I do want to discuss this as thoughful people. It is a sensitive subject though.
Last edited: