And the campaign will continue via paypal,on frontiers website,when this KS campaign ends!

_________________

awesome stuff! just upped my pledge

_________________
____________________________
c64-2sids, A1000, A1200T-060@50(finally working!),A4000-CSMKIII
! My Master Miggies- Amiga 1000 & AmigaOne X1000 !
mancave-ramblings
X1000 I BELIEVE

@klx300r

Great!!! Bring in the macheads :)

_________________

...and we are over the £1.25m! Hurrah!

£140,000 to go till the Mac version. Could it happen? I'd never have believed it a few weeks ago.

Chris

Who backs £500 to £5000?!

_________________
www.loriano.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

@TheDaddy

Folks who are 10-100 times wealthier than I.

Plaz

@Plaz

So you get a "space station" or a "star" named after yourself for £500 or £3000?
For something that does NOT exist?! Really?
What a bargain!

Last edited by TheDaddy on 02-Jan-2013 at 10:14 PM.

_________________
www.loriano.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

@TheDaddy

As a commoner, I find that level of spending on recreation stunning also. But I hold no grudge on how they choose to spend what they've earned. It also says that you should also consider a kickstart project of your own. :)

Plaz

Quote:

TheDaddy wrote: @Plaz So you get a "space station" or a "star" named after yourself for £500 or £3000? For something that does NOT exist?! Really? What a bargain!

I know an average guy that spent $5,000 to watch a Rolling Stone concert at floor level because he was a big fan so I suppose it's all relative (sheesh at least a game like Elite you can get many many hours of entertainment out of)

_________________
____________________________
c64-2sids, A1000, A1200T-060@50(finally working!),A4000-CSMKIII
! My Master Miggies- Amiga 1000 & AmigaOne X1000 !
mancave-ramblings
X1000 I BELIEVE

The KickStarter is currently at £1,271,561, so over target by £20K+.

Stretch goals are OSX version £1.4m and 10 extra ships £1.5m.

_________________
Time to give up now I think

10 ships for 250,000 quid? That sounds like a bargain!

Sarcasm aside, I hope the game meets your expectations peeps. it would be nice to see another contender in the steadily (re)growing space category. However slim I consider that to be.

Hopefully it won't blow it's budget implementing a multiplayer element that nobody asked for anyway.

Were it not for that, I'd probably like to have played it. I had to fire up Frontier on an emulator after the game was announced and I liked watching the planets revolve as you speed towards them. Or using the last drop of fuel to slow your movement so you wouldn't smash into the world you were aiming for after trying desperately to outrun a pursuer by playing the biggest game of chicken you can.

Watching the clips, it looks more like it's trying to be Eve Online and less like the game I was enjoying which is a shame. I'll still keep my eye out should it ever see the light of day. I've got a hat to eat remember?

_________________
"Anyone with a modicum of reasonableness may realize that it is like comparing the ride in the world to descend the stairs to catch the milk in the house."

Google Translate

@SpaceDruid

As a natural skeptic I'm guessing there's a better than 50% chance that I've wasted my wages here. But I decided to take a chance since I loved the old Traveller/Elite and never found a suitable successor. I hope the day comes that you have that hat sandwich and actually enjoy it. :)

Plaz

@klx300r

>>I know an average guy that spent $5,000 to watch a Rolling Stone concert at floor level because he was a big fan

Madness! Pure and simple. Economic downturn? Where?
I am massive Pink Floyd fan, I have been to few of their concerts (Rome, Salerno etc...) but I just bought a "normal" ticket.

>>so I suppose it's all relative (sheesh at least a game like Elite you can get many many hours of entertainment out of)

Yes if you paid £29.99 for it or it was free like many games, I sometimes play TF2, it's a free game and I get many hours of fun out of it but spending anything like £150-5000 on a game that is not even ready yet? £3000 for a star to be named after yourself? I'd understand if the star was a REAL one, you know, up in the sky but in a game?

Is it just me? Have people lost their marbles?

When the game comes out, I'll read the reviews, if good I might buy it.

Last edited by TheDaddy on 03-Jan-2013 at 07:42 AM.

_________________
www.loriano.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

Quote:

Is it just me? Have people lost their marbles?

I guess they're the same sort of people as those who pay over the odds to continue to support their niche platform on a hobby basis.

_________________
Time to give up now I think

A fullprice game these days are priced between 20-50 euros on release.

So pledging around that range makes sense for people that really want a certain
type of game/been waiting for a sequel.

For example I would love to see a new Homeworld game. Played all the 3 versions and loved
them immensly.

I assume the "marbles" comment is directed towards the 2000++ euro pledges, which I could agree with from MY personal view.
Tho, 2000 euros might be too much for me, but seem like pocketchange for others (income changes perspective).
For example I have customers that spend on one weekend more than I could make in a year working.

Last edited by Overflow on 03-Jan-2013 at 01:31 PM.

@SpaceDruid Quote:

10 ships for 250,000 quid? That sounds like a bargain!

Remember that typically 50% of the pledged money can't be used for development, because it goes to Kickstarter fees, taxes, creating & posting physical stuff like mugs & models, etc.

And then remember that these ships are FAR more complex than anything seen in Frontier. They have internal structure, where each cargo container will be stored, so that holes in walls can let cargo fall out realistically, and so that (in future expansions) you can walk around the ship if you want (and I guess explore derelict ships). Not to mention all the customisation options, which will actually affect how each ships looks (e.g. passenger cabins will apparently add windows to the side of the ship, e.g. all the different thruster options). Not to mention they can be damaged in many ways, all of which have to be modelled.

So, is £12,500 too much for the man-hours needed to create one ship? I don't have experience of these things, but I doubt it is too excessive. Although I am sure they are erring on the side of caution, so they don't over-promise. It seems they can't please you - if they under-promise you criticise them of being wasteful, and if they over-promise you criticise them of adding unnecessary complexity (to paraphrase you). I can see why some say you have a thing against David Braben...

Quote:

Hopefully it won't blow it's budget implementing a multiplayer element that nobody asked for anyway.

I want multiplayer, as do I think 95% of the pledgers. Otherwise we could just play Frontier on an emulator, or it's prettier open-source remake (Pioneer). Plus they've nearly finished the (peer-to-peer + server) multiplayer technology, going by what has been said.

Quote:

Watching the clips, it looks more like it's trying to be Eve Online and less like the game I was enjoying which is a shame.

Remember those clips are pre-alpha "tech demos" often with place-holder (or unfinished) assets. You need to read the FAQ & replies in the "Comments" sections to get a better idea what they are aiming for. Which (as far as I can tell) is: Frontier but multiplayer & fixing the not-so-fun ship vs ship "jousting". It's (or will be) Newtonian physics of Frontier, but with "fly-by-wire" to make ship fights feel more like the original Elite (*presumably* their thrusters are a lot more powerful than in Frontier, so easier to overcome inertia & momentum). I believe you will be able to disable the fly-by-wire system if you wish (so that e.g. you can be moving in one direction while shooting in another).

@TheDaddy Quote:

So you get a "space station" or a "star" named after yourself for £500 or £3000? For something that does NOT exist?! Really? What a bargain!

Think of them as "luxuries" - things that people don't really need, but which help keep the world's economy going by providing them a reason to spend their high salaries. Without luxuries the world's economy would collapse (recessions are basically caused by people not buying luxuries, because due to a lack of confidence in their jobs, which then means there is less money available to pay jobs, etc etc).

Last edited by ChrisH on 03-Jan-2013 at 02:56 PM.
Last edited by ChrisH on 03-Jan-2013 at 02:54 PM.

_________________
Author of the PortablE programming language.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue...

Quote:

Overflow wrote: A fullprice game these days are priced between 20-50 euros on release. So pledging around that range makes sense for people that really want a certain type of game/been waiting for a sequel...

+ 1

_________________
____________________________
c64-2sids, A1000, A1200T-060@50(finally working!),A4000-CSMKIII
! My Master Miggies- Amiga 1000 & AmigaOne X1000 !
mancave-ramblings
X1000 I BELIEVE

@amigacooke

>>Quote:

I guess they're the same sort of people as those who pay over the odds to continue to support their niche platform on a hobby basis.

Well I think that is a bit different. We're talking about a game from a well known software house which, I am sure, has more solid finance than the above niche platform.
Consequently those people who support that niche platform are prepared to bite the bullet so the said platform doesn't die out.

Also £3000, really? For something that does NOT exist?
You say people have bought AmigaOne X1000 for £1600...fine but it's a computer, not a freaking name in a virtual world.

Granted people do whatever they like with their money, but give me this at least...it's weird and has no sense. £3000! Ha!

Last edited by TheDaddy on 03-Jan-2013 at 03:29 PM.

_________________
www.loriano.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

@ChrisH

Quote:

Think of them as "luxuries" - things that people don't really need, but which help keep the world's economy going by providing them a reason to spend their high salaries. Without luxuries the world's economy would collapse (recessions are basically caused by people not buying luxuries, because due to a lack of confidence in their jobs, which then means there is less money available to pay jobs, etc etc).

Nonsense.
Who says so? Without luxuries the world's economy would collapse? Really? In which society?
Never heard of that before.
Recessions are caused by people not buying luxuries? What?
Recessions are caused by fat cats and corporations speculating on people's lives. Banks borrowing and lending money they don't have...Please...

As I said people (very rich people in this case or people who have more money than sense) can do whatever they like with their cash but I find it astonighing not acknowledging that giving £3000 away to get your name in a game is an absurdity.

_________________
www.loriano.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

@TheDaddy Quote:

Who says so? Without luxuries the world's economy would collapse? Really? In which society? Never heard of that before.

I have a feeling this could go very off-topic, so I won't respond beyond this one post (unless you choose to create a suitable thread - and even then I make no promises) :

It's probably hard to understand without a historical perspective, but luxuries are a relatively recent invention, and modern capitalism would not exist without them. Factories & mass-production has vastly reduced the labour required to manufacture essential goods. On it's own this would mean that most people would be effectively unemployed (as wrongly predicted by many people, including H.G.Wells in his 1895 story The Time Machine).

The reason we're not all unemployed is that people started to have "surplus" income, also known as "disposable income". This allowed them to buy non-essential goods & services, which I rather broadly label as "luxuries". I don't just mean jewellry & diamond-studded mobile phones, but also clothes in the latest fashion, or a second television (to put in the kitchen), or a television with a bigger screen to replace the smaller one, or a house with a big garden, or even services like say hand car washes (you can wash your own car!), etc.

People often feel like they "need" these luxuries, when in fact they are wasting a large portion of their (disposable) income on something they could manage without... but because they do buy them, they are spending money & so creating jobs to supply those luxuries. That's not actually a bad thing, because it helps drive progress in producing better (& cheaper) goods.

Quote:

Recessions are caused by people not buying luxuries? What?

That's not exactly what I meant, and what I wrote above is not the whole story. The problem with luxuries is that people DON'T need them, so when push comes to shove they can stop buying them. If a whole country stops buying luxuries at the same time, then they destroy the jobs that create those luxuries. (In our current "global economy", the people buying the luxuries may even be in an entirely different country.)

This makes an economy based upon luxuries quite unstable (think "boom & bust"), because it only takes a short-term financial problem to cause a lot of people to (perhaps unnecessarily) worry about their jobs, who then reduce their spending on luxuries. People producing those luxuries then loose their job or take a pay cut, which then increases people's financial worries, so they cut back on luxuries even more. Thus a vicious circle, which economists may simply describe as a "lack of confidence". Often the economy gets stuck in a "recession", where people are only buying essentials (and avoiding luxuries) so that the lost jobs don't reappear (until certain changes happen).

It is of course possible to get recessions in other ways, although I suspect they tend to become long-lasting depressions, such as a bank going bust (if people can't get at their money, then they can't spend it even if they want to). Even investors being unwilling to invest only really tends to happen because they don't think people are going to buy their new products (which are probably "luxuries" in my use of the word).


In summary: Luxuries are not exactly the cause of recessions, but rather the main reason that economies tend to be so unstable. If people only bought things they needed, then they would continue to buy them whatever happened (*), and so jobs would be fairly stable, and so would the economy. (* = except in the worst circumstances, such as banks going bust, or civil war.)

_________________
Author of the PortablE programming language.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue...