Space Loot: Star Citizen Has All Of The Money

When the Doublefine Adventure Kickstarter was in full flow, Castle Shotgun was filled with bemused exclamations. “Where do people find these funds when men such as we can barely afford caviar sculptures?” Jim cried in obvious distress. “Tim Schafer is undoubtedly wearing a money-beard”, Alec grumbled, envious. “We shall never see the like of this again,” came John’s conclusive statement. Then he hiccuped but it sounded a bit like he was saying ‘never’ again quite dramatically. Shortly afterwards, we saw the likes of it again and now Star Citizen has raised more crowdfunded cash than any other game (almost $6 million) and it’s not quite over yet. To celebrate, here’s a nifty video showing what happens to concept art if it eats its greens.

I’d like someone to find all of the best concept art that the world has ever known and then bring it to glorious life in CryEngine 3. It’d also be neat if people just posted links to the best concept art in the comments so I can look at it.

Just to clarify that headline – even with $6 million in the bank, Star Citizen doesn’t really have all of the money. It doesn’t even have all of the money it needs but Roberts and chums are confident that they can now secure the remaining investment from other sources.


  1. Durkonkell says:

    $6.2m and their website has fallen over and exploded. Space Sims are a dead genre, don’t you know.

    Incidentally, can I vote to skip 2013?

  2. luukdeman111 says:

    HELL YEAH!! It’s been quite some time for a good space sim to come out…

  3. Chromie192 says:

    This also means that Chris Roberts can now secure the $20 million in private funding for a total of $26 million. Can’t wait!

    • Papa_Dragon says:

      Just a small correction:
      In the interview to Eurogamer he said he will be needed 12 million overall to finish the game.

      Here’s a full quote:

      Roberts will create Star Citizen without a publisher. He has private investment, but needs to do “an element” of crowd funding to raise between two and four million dollars and validate the private investors’ valuation of the project. The game itself will cost between 12 million and 14 million dollars to create.

      “I can make it for this price because I’m not making it inside the system,” he said. “If I did it inside the system that would be $20+ million.”

      • scardb says:

        @papa_dragon As you seem to have insight into this subject can you explain what he meant by: “I can make it for this price because I’m not making it inside the system. If I did it inside the system that would be $20+ million.”?

        What ‘system’ is he referring to?

        • Papa_Dragon says:

          By system, he means publisher, financing the project. The extra money from the budget then would go on extensive marketing, for example, printing large quantities of unneeded in the DD-age discs with copy of a game. Speeding up the release by hiring third-parties. The usual post-production expensive spendings.
          By making this project crowdfunded, with private investors, interested only in positive investment return, insured by success of funding campaign, you can actually cut a lot of extra cash.

          • Cinek says:

            they’ll release game on custom-made pendrives – which is roughly as expensive as burning CDs. So it’s not like there won’t be any physical goodies.
            If it’d be all DD – I wouldn’t invest a pound in this game. I’m sick of virtual-only goods that are completely devalued after ~3 months.

        • SuicideKing says:

          I’m assuming he meant the publisher system.

        • Shadowcat says:

          I have researched your question on the internet, and I believe that this is what he was referring to.

  4. D3xter says:

    I was definitely interested in this a lot, but ultimately decided not pledge because of the blatant Pay2Win system that wasn’t properly detailed.
    Despite them stating that it is “not Pay2Win”, among the Info on their page it was detailed that you can buy “Galactic Credits” for real money and he then later stated separately that you can buy ships for Galactic Credits, and even a hypothetic exchange rate of 1000 Credits = $1: link to making certain ships cost $150-250+

    I’d rather wait for the end result and have no surprises if I decide I’m interested than put up my money upfront for something that doesn’t even exist yet but have no interest in later because the “Free2Play” model turns out worse than that for Star Wars: The Old Republic.

    For that and other reasons I found this Crowdfunding campaign to be especially problematic, most of the others were fully funded by fans and you’d know that you’d get the finished game in whatever state or of whatever quality it might end up to be. There have been a number of unanswered questions regarding the Payment Model for the final release and even these “mysterious investors” and their influence and stake over the game.

    • dsi1 says:

      The reason I backed is that modders can fix all this P2W bullshit.

      • Cinek says:

        There’s no P2W bullshit. All the ships and fancy stuff that you can buy for gold coins you can also earn in game never paying anything above the price of a game.
        It’s not P2W a’la World of Tanks bullshit.
        It’s even better then Mechwarrior Online scheme (which still offers $$$-only units – SC won’t)

    • jeriktelorian says:

      Eve online has a similar system — players can purchase timecodes for money, and sell those (through a developer supported secure system) to players for in game currency, which they can use to purchase ships/weapons, etc.

      The reality is that player skill is such a factor that purchasing ships will do little for you. Sure you can buy a fancy ship with your new credits, but if you lack the skill (not in game skills, actual personal aptitude) you’re going to lose it swiftly. Their description of the system indicates that they won’t take the World of Tanks route and sell golden ammo, etc., which provide a player with an insurmountable edge.

      • S Jay says:

        Good point. In EVE you can even try that, because your gear and character skills make a lot of difference. But in a game that you actually have to shoot with your own ability… hmmm, you just can’t. It is like paying for a gun in DayZ: yes, you can have a good gun, but a skilled player can get a jump on you with a hatchet.

        • MrUnimport says:

          Pay2NotGrindForever is just as insidious in my opinion.

          • LintMan says:

            ^Yes, this ^. Grind sucks, and devs making money from people paying to avoid the grind only encourages devs to make their games more grindy, Grrrr.

          • plectophera says:

            Just to elaborate on EVE Onlines model – time codes or PLEX (in-game game time consumables) are bought from CCP (EVE devs) or a trusted vendor then placed on the market to be traded as any other commodity. There’s no “new” money introduced to the economy which imo sets it apart from traditional dev sponsored P2W systems or game currency vendors.

            Edit: Eg. someone has to do the moneymaking, but they might want to spend their ISK (EVE currency) on game time while other people might want to spend their real life currency on timecodes to sell. It’s all fair and doesn’t put anyone at an advantage imo.

      • Consumatopia says:

        I think another thing about that makes paying for ships acceptable in an EVE-ish type game is that even if you pay for the biggest, baddest ship, a bunch of other players can team up and pool their resources to destroy it. It’s not like paying for an advantage in a one-on-one fight–other players will see which player is most powerful and combine forces against that player.

        So not only do I not see any moral difference between Pay-to-Win and Grind-to-Win, they’re also equivalent to Swarm-to-Win. And if you want a game where you can’t pay, you can’t grind, and you can’t even team up with your friends, then you just don’t want to play an MMO.

        (Of course grinding intrinsically sucks because it’s grinding, but not for any fairness reason).

      • plugmonkey says:

        “Their description of the system indicates that they won’t take the World of Tanks route and sell golden ammo, etc., which provide a player with an insurmountable edge.”

        That’s not entirely true. Firstly, gold ammo does NOT give you an ‘insurmountable edge’. It gives you a slight edge. Secondly, since the 0.8 upgrade about two months ago, you’ve been able to buy the ‘golden ammo’ with in-game currency anyway.

        With regard to buying advanced spaceships in Star Citizen, there’s a big, big difference here between ‘pay 2 win’ and ‘pay 2 skip to the endgame’. One is giving paying players the advantage, the other is letting paying players level the playing field. I don’t really understand why me having an extra few quid to buy a half decent gun is grossly unfair, corrupt and evil, but you having an extra 80 hours a week to unlock all the guns, and thereby tilt the playing field so far in your favour I might as well not bother playing at all, is considered super fine and dandy.

        Finally, ‘The Grind’ is a myth. An excuse for a game just being terrible. I can’t really imagine that trying to charge people extra money by making your game more terrible is a strategy that’s going to last long in the ‘core’ gaming arena. It’s already starting to die on its arse in the ‘casual’, Facebook game arena.

        I play through the progression in World of Tanks because I enjoy playing World of Tanks. It’s fun, and playing through the progression makes it more varied, and therefore more fun. If you’re not having fun, stop playing. And if you’re ‘grinding’ just to get the best tank then you’re going to be sorely disappointed. The unfortunate truth is that, once you get the best tank, what you’ll find is the same game you hated for the 100s of hours of ‘grind’ it took you to unlock the damn thing.

        In WoT, I don’t begrudge someone who buys straight into a Lowe. Why should I? It doesn’t impact my fun one iota whether I’m up against someone in a Lowe they’ve bought, or someone in a Tiger they’ve unlocked like I have. It’s not like I passed an exam to get to drive it. Everyone gets one eventually. Maybe he just doesn’t have the time to play the game as much as I do, and wants to see what a heavy tank is like before they turn the servers off. To have the same variety of experience that I’ve had, but over a shorter time. What difference is that to me?

        • Cinek says:

          Eh… WoT boys. When you’ll learn that your game and the financing models it offers are a song of past?

        • Parge says:

          Well said this man.

          Jeeze with all the whining. I work 40 hours a week, and have a lot of other social commitments, therefore I don’t get to play as much as I did in my student days etc. Sure I put time aside to game, but its rarely as much as I’d like it to be.

          I have no problem at all with people being able to buy better starships etc in Star Citizen with real currency, so long as you can unlock them for free using in game credits, earned through game time. Even then, if I’m a better pilot than Richie Rich over here in his Super Star Destroyer, I’m still going to be able to take you out as its a skill based game.

          I don’t like games that are purely pay to win – as in, that is the only way to win. But I certainly don’t have a problem with games that give you two avenues to progress in game, with time or real world money (some people are rich in time, some money).

    • derbefrier says:

      I would like to know how it pay to win if it can be acquired within the game for nothing but time investment? No content is locked out at all to anyone this has been stated over and over for people like you. so please explain how this is pay to win. I don’t think you can.

      • Bhazor says:

        I have a fight.
        I have spent 2 months building up my squadron and honing my skills.
        He has spent $50
        He wins.

        • derbefrier says:

          nope try again.

          you spent months building your squadron learning the game becoming a better pilot learning the ropes etc…
          I spent 50 bucks bought a cool looking ship but no experience with the game. your the better skilled pilot, you win period, end of story. this isn’t an MMORPG where gear means everything so assuming that just because you spend money in the cash shop makes you invincible to someone whos invested 100s of hours is quite stupid and shows you haven’t done the proper research on the game. I don’t know how many times Chris has said this over and over again. YOU CANNOT BUY SKILL people. I spent 250 bucks and got the constellation. If i don’t know how to handle it then I’l just get blown up like any other noob. you guys need to let go of you prejudice of microtransactions and quit making assumptions and actually read about the game.

          • Phantoon says:

            Yes! We should totally ignore everything that’s happened in the past which we reference, and just go with it because THIS TIME, it will be different. THIS TIME, it won’t suck!

          • Jenks says:


          • thebigJ_A says:

            We get you are excited for the game, but screaming prejudice at people making valid points is a bit silly.

            Example: my months of playing gets me a gun that shoots tennis balls. Your $50 gets you a Star Destroyer. It doesn’t matter how good I got at shooting tennis balls, the guy who paid $50 has an unfair advantage.

            Couple that with the fact that your scenario isn’t all that realistic. Likely, the guy who likes the game enough to drop $50 for a better ship has *also* been playing for months….

            You see the problem?

          • Brun says:

            The microtransaction system in this game sounds like it will be on the same level (in terms of the advantage it will confer) as a FPS-style unlock system. You could buy all the guns upgrades in BF3 if you wanted to, but that won’t stop a skilled player from blowing your head off with the starter weapons.

            I don’t see how that makes it P2W, given that paying doesn’t guarantee a win (or even equal footing).

            EDIT: Another problem is that you guys are assuming that the for-pay ships will be hugely overpowered in comparison to regular ships, when I’ve yet to see any evidence of that.

          • derbefrier says:

            ok since you guys are ignoring all of my counter points to your arguments I give up believe what you want.
            You prejudice obviously is more important to hold on to than how the game will actually work as I have tried to explain. If you would care to argue my points instead of just repeating the same thing over and over or just outright making these extreme imaginary situations we can continue but right now it just feels like I am having a conversation with a brick wall.

          • Vorphalack says:

            ”YOU CANNOT BUY SKILL people.”

            So what happens when two equally skilled players go against each other, and one of them has bought more stuff?

            Advantage, wallet.

          • Brun says:

            Can that stuff be obtained in-game without purchases? If so, the only advantage the wallet carries is speed – no different from the XP boosts or IP boosts in League of Legends or similar games.

          • tronbrvix says:

            These guys are crazy.
            Isn’t pay to win…. will be private servers like Freelancer with local persistent worlds and MODs.
            IF the RSI main server isn’t ok , play it at others.
            I backed mainly cuz that. I love Chris Games. I love Freelancer.
            Some aspects of Freelancer will be followed…. Will be good.

          • derbefrier says:


            you know as well as I do the chances of 2 equally skilled players in all facets of the game meeting is basically zero. your really reaching here and i think it only proves you and a few others unwillingness to budge on this no matter what is presented to you is evident. but lets entertain your thought for a minute.

            Even if this was to happen there would still be no gauruntee of an outcome. Remember its been stated none of the real powerful ships or weapons(i am not even sure weapons will be available for purchase I havent seen anything to think this will be the case all I have seen confirmed are ships and cosmetics) will not be in the shop. Chris himself has said this and that he wants skill to be the prevailing factor in the game not the shop so in a mr. moneybags fight vs. a hardcore players fight we still have to operate on the assumption that the difference in power will not likely be enough to decide a winner even these 2 players may be equally skilled. Why you ask? Because of other things that can happen human error being a big one. People are not machines maybe he zigged when he should have zagged and allowed the guy who hasn’t spent a dime to get behind him and blow his ass off or maybe he makes all the right choices and still looses just because his ship may have a weakness to what ever ship the the other guy may be flying. Theres really no way to predict an outcome in a game like this.

            I can also relate to my experience in evochron mercenary where we figured out an economic exploit and had unlimited funds on a server. my buddy piloting the best ship and weapons money could buy with well over 100 hours in the game got destroyed by a dude in a starter ship who had been playing for a lot longer. basically you don’t have a leg to stand on here.

            edit: One thing I forgot to mention is the matchmaking system so all of your fantasies that some guy that bought star destroyer is gonna show up and own your poor little broke ass cant even happen unless you voluntarily join his instance. The match making system will match players in similar equip ships so yeah really that seals the deal there your all just plain wrong and I am done with this debate.

          • Vorphalack says:

            Perhaps I should have been more clear, but I was making a general point about dismissing potential Pay2Win situations with the ”player skill will sort it all out” argument. I hate it when that gets thrown out as an excuse because it’s complete crap in any game with competent matchmaking. If the matches are more or less even, then the players with more / better stuff have an unfair advantage. While there is still the possibility that they can be out played in any given match, the odds are that they will win most of the time, which is the bread and butter definition of Pay2Win. I don’t know if Star Citizen will have a Pay2Win problem, but you want to be defending it with facts about the possible cash shop and upgrade system, not hoping player skill will even everything out.

        • Lev Astov says:

          So you’re saying that’s worse than:

          I have a fight
          I don’t have time to spend grinding for something
          The other guy does because he doesn’t have a job or is a student
          He wins

          So you’re being elitist about the amount a free time a person can have? I’m not sure how better to put that. I don’t want to pay to win, but I do want to pay to offset some of the intensive labor required for acquiring things.

          Also, you really shouldn’t base an argument around a made up figure like $50. The corvette as it is in the backer deals is $250 and would by no means be an “I win button” against lighter craft if they are more skilled than I am (I’m a horrible pilot).

          That said, there’s still plenty of room for them to screw up the balance and have a $50 thing ruin it for everyone as you’re suggesting. I just like to think that Chris Roberts will be smarter than that and produce a time/money ratio that is at least as palatable as Eve Online’s, or even just as player driven.

          • Cinek says:

            Corvette runs for 1000$.
            Also note that corvette will be available for all the students and no-lifers in game for free.
            And you spending $$$ basically skip loads of training and adventures in game, while he’ll be able to enjoy the much bigger part of the universe. So if anyone is loosing on this deal – it’s the person that buys stuff with the money, not one that’s spending time with the game.

      • D3xter says:

        How is it not, if there are ships priced at what is ~$150-250+ there would obviously have to be an in-game alternative to getting them worth that effort, which usually boils down to weeks, if not months of grind (which can in turn be skipped by simply buying something with real money for Mr. Moneyhat) = P2W?

        The point is that we wouldn’t know what will come out at the end, that’s why I found this proposition as problematic. In the other cases it’s usually just the finished game in whatever state it is.
        In this case I doubt that everything has been pre-planned and pre-revealed the way it’ll come out (or for that matter that he can keep all his promises). There’s only a few running prototypes involving a big carrier apparently running for now and A LOT of things can change till release, especially if you consider whatever investors that put 2-3x the money of the crowdfunding effort having their say and wanting a return on their investment.

        If it’d be done with a full set of features displayed like this: link to everyone could decide for themselves, at this point it’s largely speculation how it’ll turn out though. And I didn’t want to put any of my money into what might turn out to be a very exploitative game.

        • derbefrier says:

          its not, because you basic assumption is false. you thinking this like its an MMORPG. were gear is more important than individual skill. This is a space combat simulator not a RPG. A noob in a 100 dollar ship is still a noob and will get blown out of the water by organized squads and players with 100s hour hours of experience. I don’t blame you for taking the wait and see approach but saying its pay to win is just blatantly wrong. believe me this has been discussed to death on their forums and I have seen all the answers and chris’s ideas from preventing this from becoming pay to win. Its not going to happen. Its also fair to point out from what I have read there will also be a monthly cap on how much you can buy with cash and not every ship in the game will be available for purchase(the most powerful will have to be earned). Maybe when all the info thats out there is all in one place you’ll begin to understand. The community is already working on it so keep an eye out.

        • Brun says:

          How is it not, if there are ships priced at what is ~$150-250+ there would obviously have to be an in-game alternative to getting them worth that effort, which usually boils down to months, if not years of grind (which can in turn be skipped by simply buying something with real money for Mr. Moneyhat) = P2W?

          You’re making the assumption that having better ships unequivocally = win.

          • slight says:

            You’re missing the point.

            Take two equally experienced players. One has a better ship than the other because he bought it with money. He has the advantage because he spent money, not because he invested time in improving his skills.

          • rainsnow says:

            Everyone seems to be assuming that the pay ships will be better than everything else no matter what. At the very least you will be able to earn those very ships without paying anything, and hey, maybe the best ships you won’t even be able to buy. I think TB says it best when most preorder bonus items are worthless after 30 minutes into a game. Just because you paid for it doesn’t make it better.

            100 hours into a game, you should have access to at least something decent, more than likely quite good, so when someone goes and buys a ship because they are “casual” you could still have the vastly superior ship. We don’t know anything about this portion of the game, so people, stop making assumptions one way or the other, wait for the details to be released.

          • HothMonster says:


            You’re missing the point.

            You have two equally skilled players. One spent 40 hours grinding their ship. One spent the cash equivalent to 40 hours worth of game time, because he can’t afford 40 hours of real time, on his ship. The have a really good dogfight because they are equally skilled but the player with 40 hours of play time wins because he learned tricks Mr Money bags hasn’t had time to learn yet.

            Both players invested the same amount of starting cash. The first then invested time because that is what she can afford to spend on the game. The second then invested money because that is what he can afford to spend on the game. They both bought the same equipment but the first player still has the advantage because she has 40 more hours worth of experience.

            Special cash-only ships are bullshit, they already seem to be avoiding that. Making the grind unduly long so you have to spend cash or the majority of your childhood to earn upgrades is bullshit, hopefully they are smart enough to avoid that. But allowing people to exchange cash for time in and of itself is not pay2win.

    • Azradesh says:

      You can solve that little issue by just not playing on the main servers.

      • Bhazor says:

        Yeah I’m only really interested in single player but if theres currency free online version then I’m getting in on that.

        • Beybars says:

          The online version is currency free, Roberts has been saying this from the beginning. Paying hard cash, only serves to save you time. There are no premium locked ships or content like World of Tanks or MechWarrior Online. Skill, not money is the main factor in this game. There is nothing that you cannot have for free, given time and experience.

        • Cinek says:

          They’ll allow everyone to host their own online servers. So it’s not like your are limited to the official servers with your multiplayer game.

    • HothMonster says:

      I was really into this until I saw it was “HaveWayMoreFreetimeToWin” I get about 15 hours a week to game. So some 16 year old who can play 60 hours a week will constantly ruin my fun because I will never have a chance to have the same gear as him and level out the playing field.

      If only they would implement some method for me to invest money into the game instead of time. I have lots of money but not a whole lot of time. Won’t someone think of me and let me play with some of the nice ships? Don’t I deserve to see end game content? Is my money not worth the same value as your time?

      • D3xter says:

        You are what is destroying gaming.

        If there’s a game out there that requires time and you don’t have any then don’t play it and don’t infest it with real-world economic considerations, because that is what will make me not play it.

        When you sit down to play a round of monopoly or chess or anything similar, have you ever paid off your oponents to give you 5x the play money to start with or 3 queens, because you only have 20 minutes to spare?
        It would be called cheating and would at the same time decrease the fun of everyone involved, since you aren’t ready to abide by the rules a game has and should set.

        Why do you think that your time is worth so much more than anyone elses and how did you come to the insight, that you should be allowed to buy an advantage over everybody else because of that belief?

        • WIbigdog says:

          I think you’ve got your positions reversed. It’s people like you that don’t have jobs, or students that think everyone has unlimited time per week to play games. Go learn some other skills or get a job that pays well that requires more than just the straight 40 hours per week, or get a family, or anything else other than just sitting there playing video games. I’m all for letting people bypass the grind if they’re willing to part with money instead. Time is money. *YOU CANNOT BUY ANYTHING THAT YOU CAN’T GET FOR FREE BY GRINDING TIME IN GAME*. Him buying a ship is not putting him in any position higher than you, with all your time able to be spent to grind up to the ship. If he has a better paying job than you, or has a degree, then his time is objectively more valuable than yours. His opinion on not having the time to grind like some people is perfectly valid.

          • D3xter says:

            You are reaching quite far out and seem to be making a lot of assumptions.

            The point is that games mainly exist for recreation and the best in the multiplayer genre are those where everyone has equal opportunity and any “real world” values don’t play into it at all. Just as with the board games I’ve mentioned, every player usually starts out equal and it doesn’t matter who everyone is or how much can be found on his bank account, you can play chess as a king against a peasant and the one with the better strategy wins.

            Bring Pay2Win mechanics into it and it isn’t fun anymore if people can gain unfair advantages over anyone else. It’s cheating the game system and balances it towards those who have or want to spend lots of money. After all if someone is ready to spend $250 or more on an imaginary ship he or she will want “their money’s worth”.

            If you find a game to be too time-consuming, there’s always the choice not to play and get or do something else instead, it’s one of the main reasons why I will never get into EVE or WoW and similar. This perspective some people hold that they are all-important and their time is more worth than anybody elses and games should offer them a way to buy themselves to the top and have an advantage over those who have spent time or are more skillful in the game comes off as rather pompous and self-important and ruins both the games and their point to start with.

            Personally I wouldn’t “pay” to get advantages in a game even if I owned Trillions because I’d always feel like a cheater, catering to concepts of classism that way in them also usually makes me want to ignore them right fast.

          • darkmouse20001 says:

            I totally disagree. This is, from what I’ve read ( I’ve put money in the pot too) meant to be a good old fashioned space shooter, will some persistent online content. I realise that times have changed and that to make a game really profitable it has to be a solid game, and probably have some kind of online, optional micro-transaction feature built in.

            But a space shooter based on pay2win? No way – and just because someone has little time, but plenty of money they should be able to play at the same level as a skilled player? Bullshit. Imagine a personal aptitude based game with the skill taken out – its no longer a game.

            I used to be a master of IL2. I have very little time left to play it (I have an interesting, time consuming, well paying job) , but I can still go online and wreak havoc – but the satisfaction is in being good at something, not spending £20 on reaching parity. And I don’t necessarily fly ‘noob chariots’, ‘cos they might be good for a noob to learn in and get a few kills, but there are far more effective fighters out there if you know how to use them – but if you know them, and when to run, when to press an attack, when you an a buddy can toy with a much ‘better’ fighter, you can out fly anyone.

            I play tennis with a £4O raquet – I defy anyone to say I’m not bloody good, even if they have a £250 raquet – the satisfaction is in getting and being good. My windsurfing kit is old – my kitesurfing gear newer – and whilst kitesurfing is fun, instant gratification – the satisfaction of you get from a perfect cave jibe, outweighs the thrill of a huge jump kitesurfing because the skill involved is so much greater.

            As with games. Anyway, I’m drunk, but the sentiment remains – money shouldn’t ever put you on a par with someone who knows what they are doing, otherwise it undermines the satisfaction of learning a complex activity – at which point a game becomes pointless.

            Tie fighter required skill.

        • HothMonster says:

          How is it an unfair advantage if you can earn the exact same thing without spending a dime? You act like you don’t have the same options as me. You ask, “who made my time worth so much more than yours?” Well you did when you decided that you would never spend a dollar to get back an hour of your time.

          When i blow your ass up and listen to you cry will it really matter if i spent a month or 100$ getting that ship? How would you know the difference? Someone will always have more money than me and someone will always have more time than you. If you get beat, then get better.

          If there were cash only ships id be right behind you with my pitchfork. But I can’t buy a deathstar with pre-regulation destroyer class ion cannons, I can only buy the same shit people without a spare dime can get. It merely lets me trade time for money. Because, apparently based on your whining, my time is worth more than your time. I can easily throw one hours worth of pay at a game if it will save me 10 hours that I don’t have anymore. If the game is enjoyable enough to make me feel it’s worth my money and the time I do spend isn’t wasted. I, like you, don’t want a game that only lets you upgrade with money and won’t invest in one.

          The money goes to make the game better and you benefit and you can spend your copious amounts of worthless time complaining that i cheated while enjoying the updates i paid for.

          If adults are ruining space sims and preventing crybabies like you from playing then good. Ill enjoy my game and not care what currency my opponent spent on his gear because when you grow the fuck up you will realize that time is money. Whichever currency you have more of feel free to spend it. I don’t hate on the kids that can still spend 20 hours on a Saturday grinding out a weapons upgrade.

          And i play months long chess games via email but if my opponent has the day off he doesnt get to make 5 moves while i work. If someone was smart enough to convince me to play 20 minutes of monopoly with extra fake-money for real cash then he is a genius and I am a retard, because he still will win because no starting bonus will win monopoly in 20 minutes and he would make real fucking money for getting to beat me at monopoly.

          Time = money. Spend whichever is cheaper for you. Money doesnt buy special items it buys the same shit your time does. It doesn’t make me better than a skilled player. My having extra cash is no more cheating then you having tons of free time between fap sessions and thinking your lot in life is more honest and real than those of us who can’t spend as much time on games as you.

          You might as well complain that I have more friends than you and it’s no fair that you can’t win a duel 8v4. “You people with friends are ruining space-warfare boohoohoo! How is my little 2 person guild suppose to compete?”

          Also you seem to think of this as a multiplayer deathmatch only game. What if I spend my money on a trade ship? Or to upgrade my player base in non-pvp space? Am I still cheating or am I trading my money for entertainment? Exchanging what I think is a fair cash value for digital goods that I will be using and spending my time with.

          Why do you think your time is so important that it should even factor into my equation for how I spend my time and money on my entertainment? What makes you so important that your time is worth more than my money? What makes you think the devs need more of your time to continue making updates? What makes you think I should ever consider how you spend your time when I decide how I want to spend the money I earn? Where did you get the insight that everyone else in the world should cater to how you live your life and everything will always be fair for you?

          • MDefender says:

            Dare I suggest you play another game?
            For a guy on such a tight schedule you seem very dedicated to rationalizing the act of paying two hundred dollars for a virtual starfighter. I understand verbosity to be a terrible affliction to live with, but if you’re going to commit posts of that wordcount you might as well use them to do more than cry about “whining”. Like it’s even remotely discernible at this advanced stage of the internet argument.

          • HothMonster says:

            Mostly drunken rambling that I wrote during commercials while my sports team was getting their faces kicked in last night. I actually just came to see how horrible it was. I’m find it surprisingly civil. For some reason in my state last night D3x’s post was really bugging me.

            I’ll play any space sim I can get my hands on. Cheers.

    • BobbyDylan says:

      Pay2Win? This game isn’t an MMO, it”s basically a SP game in a persistan online universe. You can disable the PVP options, and just play against the game. And if you enable PVP, and get balsted out of the sky by a guy in a Stella, with 2 mega-deathray cannon turrets…. how are you to know how he got his ship and equipment?

      There is no leveling in the game, and (to the best of my knowlage) no way of determining if someone legitimately “Ground” for his toys or bought them for real cash. Either way, you’ll be just as dead.

      Whatever, don’t want to back a persistant online Priviteer style game, that’s your choice. Feel free to continue to while about how all games are Call of Duty instead.

      • Cinek says:

        This, This, This.
        Perhaps withouth one point – how will you recognize that someone bought his ship with $$$? By a fact that he gets raped by everyone else around in the same ship :D lol

    • Joshua says:

      Except that the game is not really online. It is instanced, using a matchmaking system. If someone, trough spending tons of money, has a much, much more powerfull ship then you have (if that is even possible in this game), then the chances are pretty damn likely that you won’t be seeing him. The assumption is that the matchmaking system takes this into account.

  5. Tiller says:

    $6,227,408 was the total as it ended. That puts it up 4.0 million was the original last stretch goal, which was then boosted to 5 million, then 5.5 million, then 6 million.

    • Meat Circus says:

      Remember when John said space sims couldn’t make money on Kickstarter?


      • kaffis says:

        I know there are situations where I’m perfectly happy to be wrong. I suspect this might be an example of the same for John…

      • Droniac says:

        To be fair, it only made about a third of that money on Kickstarter. The bulk of that 6.2 million came through their own site.

  6. Ratchet says:

    Space Sim was all I needed to know, really, so I jumped in at the $60 (digital) level. But can someone explain to me exactly what this is? Is it an MMO? Single-player only? Single-player with Multi-player components tied to the single-player? What does “single-player persistent world hosted by us” mean? What exactly?! I can’t seem to get a straight answer from any source!

    • Viper50BMG says:

      It’s a single-player space sim a’la Robert’s own “Wing Commander” for the first part of the game. You serve your time in the military, shoot down bogeys, and complete a story-driven campaign. Once that’s done, you get kicked out into a Freespace-like multiplayer Pseudo-MMO, where you can buy ships, trade, fight AI and player-controlled baddies, join police forces, be a mercenary, become a pirate king, whatever you want (in theory). That’s basically it. Two games, “Squadron 42” (right title?), the single-player story driven game, and “Star Citizen”, the pseudo-mmo.

      • Premium User Badge

        particlese says:

        Ahhhh, reading “shoot down bogeys” on a British website gave me an excellent laugh with which to end my day. Thank you, good sir!

        To your comment, I’d add that, at least the way I understand it, the “pseudo-MMO” part will have a slider where you can adjust the frequency of PvP encounters. Some areas will be NPC-only or have similarly-skilled players, if that’s where you’ve set the slider, but certain areas will be very dangerous according to the lore, and there will be many more higher-level players there. They plan to have some instancing magic going on to make this possible. And if I remember correctly, you can still choose to join up with friends, if you want, no matter where your slider is set.

        It sounds like quite the task to undertake, but if they can do it, I think folks like myself who prefer harassing NPCs with or without friends will have plenty to enjoy, and the PvP types can still have their fun. It might even ease me into the more multiplayery bits, which could be cool.

    • Feriluce says:

      As far as I can see, its going to be like freelancer, with a bigger multiplayer component.

      • subedii says:

        I used to play on Freelancer servers. Find a server to stay constant on and it does end up feeling like a sort of mini MMO.

    • S Jay says:

      There is a single player (Squadron 42). There is a multiplayer (Star Citizen).

      It seems to be an MMO. Every one in the same universe, but heavily instanced (so don’t expect EVE-like massive battles). It is more of a dog fighting thing. BUT it is not an MMO like EVE, where you click stuff. You have to actually pilot and shoot with your mouse/keyboard/controller/oculus/whatever.

      I don’t think the single player impacts the multiplayer.

      Of course, all the above is what I understood about the game. I might be wrong (shocker).

    • Dlarit says:

      Its a Text based Quick time event Space sim, the first of its kind!

    • ThTa says:

      It’s like (Roberts’) Freelancer, except even bigger.

      You can go all-singleplayer, and you get a full, story-driven campaign. Afterwards, you can just roam about and do whatever.

      You can also do the same thing online, either small-scale (co-op with friends, including the campaign), MMO-esque on private, moddable servers, or “basically an MMO” on official servers (which also get micro-transactions, to support future updates).

    • gattsuru says:

      All of the above.

      The main part, Star Citizen itself, is supposed to be a client-server setup. RSI says they’ll run persistent servers for general use, but there will also be (presumably somewhat smaller) private server options like in Freelancer‘s multiplayer option. No subscription, main server will likely have cash shop options.

      “Squadron 42” is a single-player offline game tied to the “Star Citizen” universe, comes with purchase, and provides offline ‘campaigns’ a la Wing Commander, but with an option to have impact on the Star Citizen universe. There’s also co-op play for the campaigns, although it’s not clear whether this will require online connections or support LAN multiplayer.

    • Ich Will says:

      Did you really just kickstart a game to the tune of $60 when you don’t understand if it is a single player or MMO?

      No matter, I have a wonderful house for sale in a er… vibrant part of town, no need to come and view it, I assure you, it’s er… rustic interior and styling is going to be just to your taste! It features* running water, heating a glass-less sunroof which penetrates from the attic to the ground floor, many mod cons** etc

      * Features dependant on weather
      ** mod con in this case means an ex-convict with a scooter sporting lots of mirrors

      • luckystriker says:

        Are you seriously mocking him for choosing to spending $60 of his own money on resurrecting a genre that he obviously loves?

        Let me explain. It’s not just a game, its a space sim. You must be too young to realise that for certain gamers of a certain age, space sims like Wing Commander, Tie Fighter, Freelancer, Freespace etc etc were once at the apex of gaming pleasure. And that, for over a decade, there’s been nothing on the horizon. I don’t remember how many times it’s been said among this group over the years that “someone should seriously make [insert their favorite series here].” Imagine the joy when one of the pioneers of the field is asking this group of gamers to help fund a new PC-only space sim.

        I am one of this group. I also kickstarted $60. And I will consider it money well spent the day I can sit in the cockpit of my fighter, with my mate as a wingman, admiring beautiful nebulae created in 2014 pc graphics fidelity, before diving into dogfight.

        • Ich Will says:

          “A genre that he obviously loves”

          He didn’t know if it was an MMO or a single player game – if he had not bothered to read the pitch how did he know the genre. Space game is not a genre, it is a setting and there have been and will continue to be tonnes of games set in space, which is apparently all he knew about it. So yes, I am gently ribbing him for having to ask if a game he kickstarted for the value of $60 is a single player game or an MMO because it was so clearly explained many times in the pitch, interviews, kickstarter updates etc I don’t possibly see how he could not understand unless he hadn’t bothered to read/watch any of it. How did he know this wasn’t just a Darkstar one or Taikodom or an Evochron or Starpoint or an EV Nova, or Space Probe or Elite Starfighter, or Galaxy on Fire, or Flatspace, or Final Rift, or Infinite Space or oolite or The Precursers, or Project Alpha or Riftspace or Rise, or Universal Combat or Freelancer or Space Pirates or Space Trekker or SW Galaxies or Tachyon or Universal or Vendetta or Venture or X or Space Force? Because all those franchises of freeform space combat and trading games from the last decade haven’t perked his interest (allegedly) so how did he know this one was the exception?

          And for your information, I played the original Elite on Amiga on UK release day and count Frontier as one of my all time top ten games having sunk what must have been thousands of hours into it. I am a kickstarter of this project and I will be receiving a metal citizen card for my pledge. Age that!

          You also kickstarted it? Did you know if it was a single player game or an MMO before you hit pledge?

          • luckystriker says:

            “if he had not bothered to read the pitch how did he know the genre”

            I don’t what his thought process was. I can only assume that it was like mine, that he saw Chris Roberts’ name, saw that it’s a ‘space sim’ (his words) and backed it blind. Apparently that’s enough for some people- because the name still means something.

            And to reply to your question, I backed the game on day one under the assumption that it was a singleplayer space shooter and didn’t follow any of the updates until the kickstarter ended. And so yes, I was surprised to learn that it became something more than that. What exactly, I’m not sure, nor am I fussed about something at least 2 years out. When I read your post I took offense to what I perceived as something a bit nastier than ‘gentle ribbing.’

          • Ich Will says:

            I’m genuinely sorry I offended you, it wasn’t what I set out to do.

            Offence is one of those things that anyone can cause anyone about anything so I see no reason to retract the point I was making. The point was simply that buying on blind faith without informing yourself when the information is freely available is quite frankly daft! I expect that behavior from investment bankers, children and people who buy houses at auction to try to become property millionaires.

            I just really hope the game is what you want it to be in two (let’s be honest, four) years time and same for the OP.

  7. VileJester says:

    Check that link for amazing concept arts, all made by the same artist.

    link to

    If you want to check other artists it’s possible, there are plenty of them on the site, you just have to find them.
    For exemple :

    link to

    Enjoy !

  8. Taidan says:

    Here’s hoping that David Braben is watching and learning the correct lessons to improve upon his own Kickstarter campaign.

    I’d dearly love to see the Elite: Dangerous Kickstarter succeed, and have already pledged, but it’s not looking too hopeful at the moment.

  9. Low Life says:

    I’ll have to be honest, when I saw this thing go up I was thinking “They’re asking $2M, I’m not sure they’re going to make that with this being a space sim and all. But shut up and take my money anyway.”


    *Wanders off to set up a savings account for the inevitable PC upgrade at the game’s release*

  10. The JG Man says:

    Can I also recommend viewing this video? It looks rather glorious.

    Incidentally, I’m ecstatic at the $6m goal-line, not only because of all the wonderful stuff that comes before (players will eventually be able to fly a carrer and hell, modding tools came at $4m) but because $6m means we’ll be getting an orchestrated soundtrack. More games need to embrace this. Hopefully at some point in the game, we can drift through space with something akin to the Blue Danube Waltz playing in our ears.

    • kombatunit says:

      Games have music? Humm, maybe I have played Eve too long.

  11. Bhazor says:

    Still amazed this did better than Eternity. I honestly thought Avellone et al would of had much more pull than a guy who really hasn’t done anything in the industry for a decade.

    Personally I’d put it down to how good the pledge drive was. Lots of hard details, lots of in engine footage, regular updates, AI showcases and lots and lots of PC master race stuff. So well done Roberts, you may have set the new bench mark for big budget Kickstarters.

    In comparison Eternity was “Black Isle/Obsidian want to make a real time tactical RPG. Insert credit card details below”. It was enough to make me kick in $60 but thats only because I’m enamored with Obsidian I can understand why people who weren’t would back off.

    • Vander says:

      The fact that the number of space game made recently is extremely low, far lower than the number of rpg made, had an effect too, i think.

      • FriendlyFire says:

        Yes. Those of us who appreciate space sims, especially multiplayer space sims, have been left with… Uh… Black Prophecy (which failed hard) and Freelancer.

    • InternetBatman says:

      I was also surprised by how much it made. A few things happened that make things a little murky.

      They had more to show in the kickstarter. The funding for Project Eternity doubled once they showed their first rendered in-game art. If they had kept that level of funding they would have gone north of $5m. Roberts was already showing 3d animations.

      They also had two kickstarters, which while being a risk also meant they had double start periods, and they had rewards for people who backed both.

      Project Eternity had plenty of competition, while the biggest competition to Star Citizen had failed (Skyjacker, Nexus 2).

      The other is that their prices were more expensive than Project Eternity’s; They pulled about $70 per customer, while PE pulled $52. If PE had the same amount of customers at the higher price (and they very well might not have) it would have made an extra $1.1m before paypal.

      Star Citizen’s page went down during the opening hours, which may well have driven the total amount down from what it could have been.

      Obsidian offered a tier with two games in it, further complicating things.

      So, if they had shown more, charged a higher price, and had two Kickstarters, Obsidian might have been at $6.1m, neck and neck with Star Citizen. But it wasn’t, and I think even if all those things had happened Obsidian would have still lost significantly. Star Citizen had 14k more backers at a higher price with a pretty cheap reward tier system (you don’t get a physical manual till $250).

      • Tim says:

        Huh, you got physical manuals at the $125 tiers (Modder’s manual for Freelancer, Squadron 42 manual for Colonel), at the $250 tier you didn’t get either of those, you got a ‘making of’ book

  12. RakeShark says:

    Lamp loves you.

    • Beybars says:

      I still don’t get the Lamp reference, sadly I can’t ask in Kickstarter.

      • ThTa says:

        I asked one of my friends, who’d been following the stream. He didn’t quite know where it started (he guessed the lamp blocked the camera for a while), but suddenly the whole chat was filled with things like “LAMP FOR PRESIDENT”.

    • nullward says:

      The Lamp is a reference to a period of livestream where the entire crew left for dinner for three hours on Sunday night, leaving a lamp in front of the camera with a piece of paper taped to it that said something like: “We’ll be right back! 5 million dollars! Thank you!”

      I guess the people watching live-feed of a lamp for 3 hours started to go a little crazy. There was a period of idolization and lamp worship, from what I understand. When the devs returned they were reading chat and were very confused. “Someone wants to name a system after the lamp.”

      I hear the lamp made further cameo appearances but I didn’t see many of them due to sleeping. I do know there was talk of a lamp bobble-head as a cockpit vanity item in the finished game.

    • kraken says:

      All hail the Lamp Commander!
      link to

  13. dE says:

    On one hand, I’m extremely happy that so many people seem to want more Spacegames. My favorite genre too. Might even revive the entire genre. On the other hand, I’m really baffled by the amount of hype. Even remotely voicing concern is cause for rabid hordes of fanbois acting like a hitman squad shooting puffy bile bullets.

    • kaffis says:

      As far as crowdfunding goes, though, Star Citizen has been pretty much the anti-hype. Footage of a live-playable, functioning engine? Check. Design docs for ships? Check. Full 3d renders of multiple ships? Check. Demonstrations of functional AI’s? Check. That’s pretty solid.

      Compare to “Hey, guys, I made X game you guys loved twenty years ago!” and “Look, we painted and scanned a background.”

      Hopefully, I’m not coming off as rabid, despite what my wallet might accuse me of being. And I say this from the perspective of a guy who’s backed dozens of other game projects this year.

    • Arglebargle says:

      Personally, I am a naysayer due to his background. Roberts gets disproportionate credit for those nostalgic games of yore. He wasn’t even in charge of Privateer or Freelancer. People I know who worked with him don’t have much positive to say. He was always more interested in making movies than in making games. Went off to Hollywood and produced a string of less than stellar movies (which weren’t particularly profitable). There’s also intimations that he took a lot of money from Microsoft to make a game and eventually came up with the awful movie version of Wing Commander instead.

      Maybe he’s matured and rediscovered a love (?) of gaming. Maybe not. But Roberts is the prodigal son returned, and the fans of the genre are starved for the attention. Best of luck with that.

      • SantoriV says:

        Yeah I’m a bit skeptical too. Although I’m not quite as harsh as you are.

        Star Citizen is the game that Chris Roberts wanted to make back in 1999 with Freelancer. Originally that game was supposed to be massively multiplayer, have dynamic economies, and all sorts of other interesting stuff. That didn’t end up happening. For whatever reason the resulting game got watered down. It was still a fun game, but nothing compared to what was promised. I played Freelancer for probably 15 hours and then got bored. I played EVE for years.

        I loved Privateer and Wing Commander 2. The above video certainly does feel very “Privateery”. I hope that Chris Roberts can achieve his original vision although I am concerned about the complexity and diversity of features that he is proposing. It kind of reminds me of the vision of Spore. It was supposed to be this amazing complex multi-faceted game. Like Civilization times 7. But then it ended up being a series of mini-games.

        I guess we’ll see. Hopefully Roberts having his own cash means that he will be able to develop the project on his timetable without external interference from a publisher. And hopefully that means we will get an amazing game.

  14. SuicideKing says:

    Maybe this will encourage THQ to buy the license for FreeSpace from Interplay and let Volition make FS3.

    Or Chris Roberts makes FS3 with the original Volition team after SC is complete.


    • Beybars says:

      Hope so, but with THQ’s rocky financial status, I doubt they would gamble with a Space Sim.

      • SuicideKing says:

        Probably send them some fan mail with a link to all the SC stuff. Say “see, people are ready to pay this much!”. Probably ask them to join Valve or something. Maybe HL3 and FS3 could release back to back… :D

    • TimMc says:

      Man I hope so. Volition have said before they would love to make Freespace 3, but its out of their hands. I heard that Interplay have lost the rights to Freespace though, since they didn’t renew copyright – so its just sitting there for the taking.

      On topic of star citizen though – I am a little concern about a few things.

      – Only 100 systems? I used to play Eve Online and Freelancer, so this sounds low for something thats aiming for MMO. They better be really detailed.
      – Credits… are these for DLC packs? Unlocking more campaigns and systems? I am ok with that. Unlocking more ships and weapons… not ok with.
      – He’s talking about doing alot, with a heavily fragmented community from single player, coop, persistent universe and user run shards. I would prefer he just drop the MMO talk, because it scares me that grind will enter the main game.

      I think this game will end up living and dying based on how moddable it is. If it is very moddable, then people will start releasing servers with thousands of star systems and designing nice campaigns.

      • SuicideKing says:

        I thought DLCs will be free…at least the periodic ones.

        I wish the multiplayer component was more like SquadWar though. Never played that, was too young then (plus those were the dial-up internet days), but the concept was pretty cool.

      • kaffis says:

        100 systems is the launch count. Additional systems will be added over the life of the game, as free micro-updates. Chris thinks one or two systems every two to three weeks is feasible. Additional ships would also be created for free, but at a slower pace.

        Credits are in-game currency. We have no idea how valuable a credit is in terms of purchasing power, let alone how quickly they are earned. This will probably be in heavy flux anyways through most of the way into beta. There will be a minor microtransaction model where players can buy credits with real cash, but there will be a monthly cap on how much can be bought in this way. Chris’ goal is for earning credits (normal gameplay) to be fun rather than a grind, but views this as a way to help those with busy lives keep up with their friends with less busy lives, and provide ongoing revenue to help support the free updates. There will be DLC on top of this; the DLC content will be story content in the form of additional mini-campaigns in an expansion pack style. I don’t believe these will be purchasable with in-game currency.

        The notion is that updates will arrive first on the persistent official server, and there may be some functionality related to scaling that’s kept proprietary there (so private servers aren’t intended to “compete” with the official one in scope, but be more like Freelancer scale projects with a few hundred simultaneous users across the galaxy, rather than support clustered server farm operations like the official one). The single player campaign builds some character advantages that can be taken into the persistent world, such as status and starting financial position.

        If the MMO parts concern you with regard to grind entering the game, Chris is a HUGE supporter of modding, hence the private servers. We’ll get modding tools released due to hitting the appropriate stretch goal, I guarantee there will be a diversity of mods that strip out any remnant of grind (or do so to varying degrees) available before you’re even done with the campaign. From there, run your own server with your friends.

  15. MrUnimport says:

    I am really quite concerned that this isn’t going to be the game I want it to be. Squadron 42, didn’t he compare it to World of Tanks with cutscenes before? That’s very worrying.

  16. Cytrom says:

    This was quite predictable.. and I don’t mean like 2 weeks ago, I mean this was predictable YEARS ago. When a popular genre, just completely dies out for almost a decade for no apparent reason, people just become so deprived of the theme they will throw their money at the first glimpse of hope.

    Letting the space shooter genre rot was such a waste. Somehow, I blame EA and Activision for this too (based on absolutely nothing, and acknowledging the chronological impossibility, but it would fit in their diabolic plans to destroy everything that is good about gaming… so I just blame them anyways.)

    • Droniac says:

      Well, Vivendi holds a majority share in Activision Blizzard, and they did kill off a bunch of space-sims back in the day (like Babylon 5: Into the Fire) so I suppose you might be able to validly blame Activision, in a way. Electronic Arts, not so much. Now Microsoft on the other hand… ;)

    • SuicideKing says:

      Interplay killed them when they decided to not promote FS2 and stagnate the series.

      LucasArts killed them when they stopped making X-Wing vs Tie-Fighter.

      Probably others too.

  17. Lone Gunman says:

    It would totally suck if the word does end in December. We would never get to play this :(

  18. SystemiK says:

    If it’s space ship concept art you are after, this site is orgasmic (in my humble opinion).

    link to

  19. rsiosdfn says:

    very good web: —( link to )—

    The website wholesale for many kinds of fashion shoes, like the nike, jordan, prada, also including the jeans, shirts, bags, hat and the decorations.

    All the products are free shipping, and the the price is competitive, and also can accept the paypal payment., After the payment, can ship within short time.

    We will give you a discount



    —( link to )—

    thank you!!!

    Believe you will love it.

    We have good reputation, fashion products,

    come here quickly

    Opportunity knocks but once

  20. Randomer says:

    So, the Kickstarter page says they raised $2.1M. Where is the other $4M coming from?

  21. Dakia says:

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m super excited about this.

    However, I can’t help but think how massively a new TIE fighter missed the boat on the trend of space sims coming back.

    • Angel Dust says:

      If LucasArts/Disney were to announce tomorrow, or even a year from now, that they are working on a brand new proper Tie Fighter game I highly doubt the response from gamers would be ‘meh’ because some other games got there first.

      It would be massive.

      • Lord Custard Smingleigh says:

        It would be the only Star Wars news that could still stir my cold, dead heart.

  22. rsanchez1 says:

    When December 22nd dawns, all those people are gonna realize that they didn’t have a license to binge spend on everything before the end of the world.

  23. lurkalisk says:

    It irks me a bit that I’ll be getting less for it now. I mean, I’m glad for them, and I’m still going to get me a ship package on the morrow, but I decided to wait ’til payday that I might give them even more. But that’s 1 day late (and I didn’t previously know this effected anything outside KS). So I won’t be getting what the initial campaign backers got, essentially because I didn’t think my available options would get them as much money as I wanted to give.

    Even if the difference is minor, it just feels bad…