• DebatableRaccoon
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    So you’re saying there was mismanagement and feature creep which led to a delay of 8 years?

      • DebatableRaccoon
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        How’s it a strawman? Development delays are typically in the tune of months after the given date, not nearly a decade. From what I can see, they massively moved the goalposts and at the last I heard, they were ignoring or denying requests for refunds despite not having delivered what was promised to paying clients. Accusations of mismanagement are nothing compared to the fraud it could be argued to be in a courtroom. Just sayin’

        • Guido Mancipioni@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          It’s a straw man because that’s not at all what was said, and you’re misrepresenting things to make your point easier. That’s the very definition of a straw man.

          They haven’t moved any goal posts. They haven’t been screwing anybody or failing to meet any promises, and have in fact been rather transparent about goals and expectations while NOT making hard commitments on timelines because of the revolutionary nature of the technology they are trying to develop. People backed a very ambitious dream BECAUSE it was ambitious, but the developer promised that they would take the time to do it right by delivering that dream rather than rush out some bullshit like traditional publishers have been doing for years.

          One thing I’ve found is people are REALLY bad at reading comprehension or failing entirely to pay attention to things that are plainly communicated. There’s years and years of consistent messaging, and from day 1 they’ve been very up front about what expectations should be. Refunds won’t be given and fraud doesn’t exist when you pledge to back a development project that is doing exactly what they said they would do.

          This isn’t a game you purchase off the shelf, it was a crowd funded project that has from the beginning been very clear about everything you should expect. People are just terrible at actually listening.

          There hasn’t been mismanagement. There hasn’t been feature creep. People have gotten exactly what they paid for. They contributed to a project in development, and were given access to play a game they helped fund while it’s being developed. It’s not CIGs fault those people didn’t know what they were donating funds for despite them being told exactly what they were paying for. You can see the trail of communications saying exactly that since the Kickstarter.

          The game exists. The game is playable. They are regularly delivering patch after patch and moving steadily towards not one but two products that are well within the design and scope as originally billed.

          They are absolutely delivering, and the people who say otherwise either have an agenda, or haven’t been paying attention.

          Jus sayin’

          • DebatableRaccoon
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            That sounds like some mighty fine Kool-Aid. You keep sipping; sounds like it’s doing your fragile ego wonders.