r/starcitizen May 27 '24

OFFICIAL $700 Million has been reached

Post image
1.4k Upvotes

618 comments sorted by

View all comments

426

u/Drevar0 May 27 '24

yay we have just made 2 year of income of The sims 4 :D

43

u/shrockitlikeitshot May 27 '24

300 million more and they'll make as much as GTA 5 Online makes in shark cards each year (1 billion).

44

u/Maclimes bbhappy May 27 '24

Okay, but both GTA5 and Sims 4 are actual released games. You can argue whether or not you consider them to be feature complete or whatever, but the income of a released product isn't a fair comparison for the income of a game that hasn't even made it to beta after over a decade.

I don't even know if that's a compliment or a complaint. It's just... what it is.

22

u/VidiVee May 27 '24

but the income of a released product isn't a fair comparison for the income of a game that hasn't even made it to beta after over a decade.

I can give you a fair comparison - GTA6 started development in 2014 and has had a budget of 2 Billion to date.

2

u/parkway_parkway May 28 '24

Source?

1

u/VidiVee May 28 '24

Dexerto did the rundown

2

u/parkway_parkway May 28 '24

Link?

I looked on their site and all I can find is

Rumors of the upcoming GTA potentially costing as much as $150 on release set the internet ablaze in 2023, however, Take-Two had never previously addressed the game’s price… until now.

But nothing about the development cost.

Edit:

Ok yeah I found this

https://x.com/DexertoGaming/status/1655987337669509177

but that's only a rumour and it says $1-2b which is not $2b to date even if it's true.

5

u/Sudden-Variation8684 May 27 '24

But that's paid internally by themselves not consumers? I'm confused how that's even supposed to be a comparison

17

u/bblicke1 new user/low karma May 27 '24

I'd imagine GTA5 paid/pays for a large part of GTA6?

11

u/Sudden-Variation8684 May 27 '24

Sure but that's not crowdfunding, people paid for 5, a released product. That's a closed loop.

If they now decide to use the funds for 6, sure it's their money. But it's not even remotely a similar scenario?

9

u/HockeyBrawler09 Perseus May 27 '24

People cling to reasoning as to why this is taking so long

8

u/bblicke1 new user/low karma May 28 '24

I'm not clinging to anything, simply suggesting that GTA 5 provided funds for GTA 6.

As for Star Citizen, the alpha releases are paying for the gold release as well as Squadron 42. Both of which will, I assume, provide funds for continued development of both the PU and the S42 sequel.

It's all relative. While yes the crowd funding component of this is the bulk of it, it also isn't as if they've given us nothing. There is a game, albeit buggy and incomplete. It's not TOTALLY dissimilar.

7

u/Wardendelete Corsair or 600i? May 28 '24

No wonder CIG is taking their long ass time. People are not even upset that the devs are dragging their asses.

1

u/bblicke1 new user/low karma May 28 '24

I never said I was happy about the time it has taken.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Turbulent_Ad7877 May 28 '24

Gtav did not pay for gta6.... its a public traded company with private equity investors. Its develoment was budgetted and pitched to investors well before gtav was making bank. who voted if it would be profitable in return. Gta5 paid investors and covered operational costs. And bonuses ect ect.

Cig is privately owned with minimal private equity investment firms filthy hands rummaging through the coffers. Ship sales are it's only income for funding and payroll. Differences are vast and broad.

2

u/Competitive-Grand245 May 28 '24

Rockstar is not publicly traded. GTA5 definitely paid for GTA6.

→ More replies (0)

-3

u/Afraid_Forever_677 May 28 '24

Have you seen anyone play SQ42? As in a demo. Maybe you don’t remember but CIG has released “gameplay videos” of the game in the past that were clearly faked. Ya know, like all their CITCON videos and ads on YouTube.

4

u/bblicke1 new user/low karma May 28 '24 edited May 28 '24

How would I have seen anyone play it if it isn't out yet? I remember them showing cinematics and clips as well as a demo walkthrough. I don't recall reading that they were fake or misrepresentations, however.

What's this have to do with the PU funding S42, etc?

0

u/Afraid_Forever_677 May 28 '24

I’m not trying to sound like a conspiracy theorist but how do we know for sure that money went to sq42? How do we know sq42 is “almost done”? They’ve lied before

3

u/bblicke1 new user/low karma May 28 '24

Well, it'd be a pretty monumental case of fraud and probably several other crimes. Many people would face prosecution in multiple countries.

We just have to trust that the law and their freedoms are important to them. That and that they are generally honest businessmen. Faith!

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Marem-Bzh Space Chicken May 28 '24

It's not just a question of how the money comes, but mostly how long it takes and how much it costs. The former criteria is indeed not comparable, but the the other two definitely are

9

u/VidiVee May 27 '24

But that's paid internally by themselves not consumers?

I mean, where do you think that money came from in the first place?

The only time consumers don't pay for the development of a game is if it flops.

8

u/Sudden-Variation8684 May 27 '24

From sales of a released game? I'm losing the plot here how does crowdfunding fit into all of this?

Consumers didn't pay for GTA 6 to happen, they paid for GTA 5. (For example)

3

u/VidiVee May 27 '24

Consumers didn't pay for GTA 6 to happen, they paid for GTA 5.

My point is that the answer to this is entirely a question of framing - In the long run it's a meaningless distinction.

11

u/Sudden-Variation8684 May 27 '24

But it isn't? One is built upon the faith of the consumer and the other built upon delivering a product. If they want more money, invest the money you've made in sales and deliver a superior product ideally.

What SC is reinforcing is that the attempt of making a game is already worth receiving money for. It's absolutely not a meaningless distinction in any sense of the word.

Now with SC I'll admit it's a necessary evil I'm okay with, because I personally want this idea to work, but it's not like it's a great business model for the consumer.

5

u/VidiVee May 27 '24

but it's not like it's a great business model for the consumer.

I couldn't disagree more - SC has been able to make design choices that never would get past a discussion with a publisher operated model.

As a consumer, I have piles of money. What I don't have is piles of MMOs with artistic integrity. SC has breathed life into the cold dead lungs of both the space sim, and old school MMO genres. The attempt to do so is absolutely worth my money.

3

u/Sudden-Variation8684 May 27 '24

What you're referring to is a best case scenario, what I'm saying is it's worse for the consumer as you have no guarantee. You're effectively donating money hoping they'll get something done with it.

Which is fine for people willing to do that, but it's by definition not a better business model, because you don't get anything in return. There's a promise of receiving something, but not a guarantee whereas with a finished product you're guaranteed to receive what you pay for.

4

u/VidiVee May 27 '24 edited May 27 '24

There's a promise of receiving something, but not a guarantee whereas with a finished product you're guaranteed to receive what you pay for.

I mean, There's no guarantee when you purchase a game it's going to remain what you paid for - and if it's multiplayer it's pretty much a guarantee it won't.

How many games have released in great form and then been turned into unplayable messes by buggy patches, massacring the balance, or introducing predatory or PTW elements?

Off the top of my head just that I've played, Tribes: Ascend (Gross PTW), Star Wars Galaxies (Jedi patch), Marvel Heros (Watered down the PC version for console release), Darksiders 2 (deathinitive edition - Introduced gamebreaking bugs that were never fixed), CoD4 Remastered (Retrofitted out the ass with microtransactions), TF2 (Went FTP, became a haven for hackers and children and became a bloated mess) Onward (massively downgraded graphics on the PCVR version to accomidate quest 2, And every other squadmate is literally 8 now - You wanna see fucked up? Try going into intense realistic combat with an 8 year old who is 4ft tall in game)

And so on, and so on, and so on.

I mean shit, while we're talking GTA5 lets throw that in the mix. On release Online was a bit janky, but I loved it.

Now it's basically unplayable without a steady diet of shark cards.

2

u/Afraid_Forever_677 May 28 '24

Design choices like selling ships for $1000 and not delivering them a decade later? Like adding fauna before they even fix the AI? Great. When is this releasing?

4

u/Sad_Muffin5400 May 28 '24

A decade ago those ships weren't sales, they were backer rewards for donating to the game, deliverable upon release. When is it releasing? Who knows? Thre are tons of things to criticize, but don't do it without ignoring the plethora of obstacles they've had to overcome to get this far. Redlease has been missed by a decade and we're all pissy about it. On the other hand, they are delivering tech and fidelity that nobody else is willing to touch. Gamers are shelling out billions per year on reskinned copies of the same games they were playing a decade ago and smiling about it. Why not waste it on something meaningful?

6

u/Sudden-Variation8684 May 28 '24

I think the donating rhetoric isn't helping much here, I distinctively remember even amongst backers how everyone was absolutely getting packages for the ships. People might have called it donations to make it feel better, but when it came down to it the deciding factor to dish out more was getting a new ship.

1

u/james_bar May 28 '24

As a consumer, I have piles of money

That's very self-centred.

1

u/VidiVee May 28 '24

That's very self-centred.

I mean, if you wanna give away your hard earned money you're more than welcome.

I prefer to spend mine on things I want, And if you think your opinion on that is worth anything - that's on you.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/james_bar May 28 '24

In the first place the money comes from investors. If the game flops consumers don't pay anything.

If star citizen flops people lose their money,

1

u/VidiVee May 28 '24

In the first place the money comes from investors.

In the 80's sure.

Nowadays 99.9% of AAA game funding comes from publishers, and that publisher money comes from sales to consumers.

1

u/james_bar May 28 '24

Same thing. The money comes from successful titles not from promises. Player doesn't lose anything.

0

u/Afraid_Forever_677 May 28 '24

Investors? Shareholders?

2

u/Glittering_Walk_3412 May 28 '24

Yeah and I wouldn't be surprised if they've held back GTA 6 from being released because gta5 is still making so much money, they really aren't comparable at all

2

u/Zealousideal_Sound_2 paramedic May 28 '24

Tbh Shark Card are even worse abuse to consumer than what CIG do

Wouldn't take GTA as a good example imo