Star Citizen Development Discussion (Is Derek Smart Right?)

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Sabrewings

Golden Member
Jun 27, 2015
1,942
35
51
When we talk about cig TOS i found this article:
Star Citizen developer Cloud Imperium Games (CIG) has paid out an impressive US$2500 refund to a single player after a case was taken to the California Attorney General.

Is that true?
Source:http://www.gameplanet.co.nz/pc/news/g578c1783ef5d4/Star-Citizen-developer-gives-player-2500-to-go-away/
It's probably true. At a certain point it's not worth paying to fight it. Even though they have legal representation on staff already, there's still court fees and the bad press of fighting with a backer to keep their money (ToS not withstanding) to the point it isn't worth it.
 

rivethead

Platinum Member
Jan 16, 2005
2,635
106
106
If you ask nicely, they will give you a refund. There are numerous examples of this in the CIG forums.
 

SLU Aequitas

Golden Member
Jul 13, 2007
1,252
26
91
I think somebody fixed this issue :D Maybe we should all thank SLU Aequitas? :D



Can somebody explain to me ,what is deal with this video?
Cute. Don't worry, still here, just nothing to respond to until now :)

This was good idea. I checked few times the main star citizen thread, but it was nothing interesting for me there. All the time pictures of new ships and modifications. I checked that thread maximum 20 times from the time it was started. But drama around development is interesting for me.



Maybe it's not an issue about running with backers money, but more issue making business where cash flow keeps coming and coming...



How rich CR is only his accountant knows...Depends of luxury expenses, bad or good investments and so on... But i think this is more the case of greed. I'll get back to this later...
We've had moderators specify that the SC thread shouldn't have the "drama" (not sure what you mean by that?) of development attached. There are several SC backers--myself included--who are more than willing to discuss issues with the development, things CIG or CR could have done better, etc. What I (and most of us) take exception to is obvious trolling. To make it more specific, for me, that would be calling out members repeatedly (there's a rule against that) and making unsubstantiated claims or claims that have been thoroughly debunked.

For the record, DS is an absolutely horrible source who has a proven track record of being horribly wrong about development (in general, not just Star Citizen). Click here for +1 Intelligence!

With regards to CR's personal finances, I think it's relatively safe to say he was pretty well off (multiple assets, liquidity to start development on his own back in 2012 to show something for the Kickstarter, etc). But what would I know, right?


That's what bothers me. There's no specifics. You can blind follow like we know who or you can only guess and try to figure it out...
Can you specify what you mean? I mean, there's a metric ton of development info and behind the scenes info out there.
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/

One day i send to my friend link to cig ship costs. He wonted to play sc but as soon he look at prices he sad: f*** that,they are not normal...
I see this complaint a lot. First of all, basic pledge is ~$45-60, normal cost. You don't need to start in an Idris-P. However, there is a niche group of people and orgs who want to back the project and will put up these pledges. I don't see why others want to police those of us who have backed more.

For the record (again), my pledge consists of an original Colonel package ($125) + whatever the concept pledge for the Sabre was.



You still using that presentation for logo? Damn, how the hell you will make nice tshirts for cute girls to promote clan? :D
It's the epitome of good taste, I'm sure everyone would want to wear a tshirt emblazoned with our balls logo.



You are the only one complaining about title of the thread. The rest of us are more concerned about info in this thread.
Not really, it detracts from the purpose of this thread. If we're talking whether DSmart is right (see above link, he's an absolutely horrible track record), then this thread really doesn't serve a purpose.

If we want to talk general development issues, I think this thread serves a purpose, and could indeed foster some good conversations that really couldn't/shouldn't have been held in the other thread.



I was quite nice surprised that there are few star citizens who can talk like adults about issues of sc. I can't expect all are like that.
It's also nice when people want to discuss the development and bring up substantiated complaints/criticisms (great example is the Kotaku article). Sadly, not everyone is like that.

So my question is this: Is Cris Roberst greedy little b**** According to imdb he is so busy, that i was wondering my self how the hell he finds time to make a game on such a big scale. Or is he planning to make this game 20 years?
source:http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0730932/
This list has already been covered, but you probably could have answered it yourself with a 5 minute check on youtube. The introductory sentence for this wasn't inflammatory at all either :)

I honestly don't care how much CR is worth. It's not the person so much as the company for me. As long as he's not embezzling millions to line his own pockets, what he's earned before this is his business. If he is somehow embezzling (which I really don't think is the case) then that's a different story. Until someone proves beyond doubt that's the case, I don't get the personal attacks on him. He's not the best leader, and does appear to cause drama for his staff with his feature creep (I know I'll piss someone off by using that phrase, but come on.. that's what it is) but those are all his actions.. not the man himself. If anything, I'd like to see this thread kept clean on personal attacks on him and DS.
Completely reasonable. For the record, if this was really a giant ponzi scheme or embezzlement racket, it'll go down in history as one of the crappiest examples of either. CR is embezzling millions by creating multiple game studios across the world to hire hundreds of people, paying them all as well as various contractors including famous actors like Mark Hamill, just to provide us regular updates and playable alpha slices.

I get it's crowdfunding, but even then there's only so much one has a right to know. I'm not sure people should get a complete accounting of the money in any case, as all that does it open the doors for someone like DS to say they misspent because they didn't know about some dealer in Hong Kong. Having said that, there is a major question on why we're still not seeing anything close to a game with all the tiem and money they've spent. I can see why people want to have a better understanding on how their pledges are spent.
Honestly, I'm not sure how beneficial releasing financials would be. Firstly, most people aren't able to properly interpret a full set of financials spanning multiple countries with different reporting requirements. The intercompany arrangements would be fun enough alone (FYI, this is my full-time job, CPA on a large multi-tiered PIE with operations around the world). Secondly, it wouldn't stop those like DS with an agenda from purposely misinterpreting information to spin for his narrative.

I think ultimately, most backers (and those watching this project), just want the product delivered. Everyone has varying levels of patience, and it reflects in most people's reactions. I think it's perfectly fair for people to be frustrated that they can't play right now, if not entirely realistic.


It's what people are willing to spend.. I can't get my head around people willing to do it, but it's not my money. I've seen guys spend thousands on collectibles, so I cant' say I'm surprised. I personally would at least like to have a clue when the ship I've paid hundreds for will be playable, but that's me.
So much this. I can't personally fathom why people will put hundreds/thousands down for various hobbies, but if they have the money, more power to them. Additionally, we all benefit from the donor "whales" who have backed the project to larger amounts (the same we do with subscribers [recurring monthly pledges of $10/$20] who subsidize all of the behind-the-scenes videos).



One thing I can not ever take away from them.. they found a way to keep funding coming in. It's impressive how they've continued to milk money. I'm not sure anyone else could have done it. I'm still not too sure how they've done it. If anything, this should be a wake up call to the industry that space shooters need to be a thing again... and yes, I know this is soooooo much more. I'm just saying.. space sim games are in short supply, which is one of the major reasons I think they've made as much as they have.
It's the exact reason why I backed (and also backed Elite Dangerous $150 and $50 to Everspace). I grew up on space sims like Independence Wars, X-wing, Freespace, Starlancer and Freelancer (and Battletech, but PG bent me over on that one :'(). Everyone said this genre was dead, so when I saw SC, I was more than happy to back its resurgence.

I've never asked anyone else to, but I was happy to use my money.

What I seriously have problems understanding is why some people, with no personal money in this project, are acting like CR and SC backers personally insulted their mothers?

Seriously.. you keep saying anyone that says anything negative is a troll. Maybe not everyone is as educated on the subject as you, it doesn't make them a troll.. If this is all you're going to do when someone posts, maybe you should take the advice you give in the SC game thread and leave.
I agree, this isn't a constructive approach. However, there have definitely been some troll posts in here. I don't think post count is indicative or a reason to dismiss someone, let the actual post do that.

More later <3
 

Sabrewings

Golden Member
Jun 27, 2015
1,942
35
51
It's the exact reason why I backed (and also backed Elite Dangerous $150 and $50 to Everspace). I grew up on space sims like Independence Wars, X-wing, Freespace, Starlancer and Freelancer (and Battletech, but PG bent me over on that one :'(). Everyone said this genre was dead, so when I saw SC, I was more than happy to back its resurgence.
This sums me up pretty well too. I backed Everspace, Rogue System, Elite Dangerous, Star Citizen, etc. I have a pretty decent chunk of change for Star Citizen, but I look at it like this. It's less than my other hobbies. The amount I've put into Star Citizen, I couldn't have even bought the Tein coilovers I got for my STI. I couldn't have purchased my high end Trek mountain bike for it either. I couldn't have built my current PC for it. In fact, I've blown more than that on a whim for a quick weekend trip to the beach.

I'm quite comfortable with my return on it thus far. Playing what they've produced and watching the development process has been fun and I look forward to what else they have to offer. If it tanks next month, oh well. We tried. Space sims are what I remember playing most on PC growing up (same ones mentioned above, especially the original X-wing from 1993). Their resurgence has been pretty fun. I try not to let it enter the discussion, but the wife and I are not bad off. We don't have kids, and don't plan on it anytime soon. She is super stoked for SC as well, so we spend money on it as we decide is relevant for us. I'm also a subscriber for the last two years, and the content they've been pumping out the last six months makes me glad for that as well. I want them to push content like that, but I don't want to take away from the development budget for it, so I subscribe.

Would I spend that amount for just any game? Not really. I'm absolutely bought in because of all of the fun I had playing the Wing Commanders, Starlancer, and Freelancer. I accept that's part of why I did it and at peace with whatever happens. I do like what I see coming out of them, and I absolutely believe such a game would not be possible with traditional publishers.

Anyway, enough ranting, but I figured I'd give my perspective there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SLU Aequitas

Skel

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2001
6,185
562
136
When we talk about cig TOS i found this article:
Star Citizen developer Cloud Imperium Games (CIG) has paid out an impressive US$2500 refund to a single player after a case was taken to the California Attorney General.

Is that true?
Source:http://www.gameplanet.co.nz/pc/news/g578c1783ef5d4/Star-Citizen-developer-gives-player-2500-to-go-away/
If you ask nicely, they will give you a refund. There are numerous examples of this in the CIG forums.
In this case they didn't refund even after being asked. It took him going to his state's AG to get it. I'm sure they're better about refunds than other companies, but in this one case it took a lot more to get it. From what I've read, the guy wanted the game, not a early access alpha. That's something I get a bit confused on. I will always support those that are happy, and people can spend money as they please, but early access isn't really the game. Is it? From all the early access things I've done, they're normally buggy, missing most of the heart of the game, and here it sounds no different. I do get confused by some fans of the game acting like just because they've allowed users early access, they're getting their money's worth. Again, that's great for those that feel that way, but it shouldn't take away from those that want the full game.. or at least the ships they've bought. Also, one should never have to go to the AG to get a refund.. but this was kicked off by the change in the TOS. It seems that really effects the timeframe one can get a refund. Probably nothing... unless you're one of the people wanting a refund.

<<snip>>
What I seriously have problems understanding is why some people, with no personal money in this project, are acting like CR and SC backers personally insulted their mothers?



I agree, this isn't a constructive approach. However, there have definitely been some troll posts in here. I don't think post count is indicative or a reason to dismiss someone, let the actual post do that.

More later <3
I agree there's some people that do go overboard that don't even have skin in the game.. DS is a perfect example of it.. in this forum, I've seen way more of them reacting to the way fans have attacked them. I wouldn't say this is in every situation, but I've mostly seen a few posters that jump on anything negative being said about the SC and the company. At least on this forum.
 
Feb 4, 2009
32,567
13,296
136
If the benchmark for Corruption is a State AG being involved then:
Google
Microsoft
Every wireless provider ever
Every Cable Company
Every ISP
Most large employers
apple
And many more
Many Colleges and Universities
Amazon
EBay
Any Car Manufacturer

All would be corrupt.
 

SLU Aequitas

Golden Member
Jul 13, 2007
1,252
26
91
Skel, agree that jumping on people for expressing frustration on aspects of the game's development is overboard, and one of the reasons why I don't frequent the CIG forums (or generally any game's forums. I don't think that's been an issue as much on these forums however. Usually you see reactions when certain individuals are goading others (trolling). A good example of this would be coming in and saying CR is embezzling all of us backers. No proof, nothing but libel really, purposely designed to garner a reaction (and for the record, there is a very vocal group of goons (mods: SA members, they refer to themselves as such). To make matters worse, there's an equally annoying group of people who insist CR/CIG can do no wrong, and go crazy when you bring up valid point (I've mentioned multiple times here the Kotaku article).

I think you can go through the SC thread and you'd find examples of us criticizing development without people being attacked. It just sucks when the discussion gets derailed.

Overall, I think this thread (minus the title and some obvious trolling) has been pretty good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KMFJD

KMFJD

Lifer
Aug 11, 2005
25,415
32,139
136
Anyone have a good guess when it will be finally released? What is significant about 2.6 and 3.0 release?
 

SLU Aequitas

Golden Member
Jul 13, 2007
1,252
26
91
You are my new senpai :D


To my eyes few of u are lets say troll sensitive :D I mean, u can see trolling everywhere :D
Only because the SC thread has been thoroughly trolled out. And in general, Mr. Mail-In "Dr." Smart has trolled the hell out of space sims in general.


Do you really expect that all know what was thoroughly debunked? Give me a break :D When star citizen come to kickstarter i sad nice, this would be awesome. I waited to release date. Game wasn't finished. I sad to myself: oh well another kickstarter game went to dust. Do you really expect that all know what was debunked? :) Then there's no need for this thread...
No, but generally there's a difference between voicing concerns (usually with something specific) versus coming in here and shit posting along the lines of "CR IS EMBEZZLING U ALL LOLZERS!!1oneittyone".


I'm more kinda you tube guy. Don't have patience to dig trough cig sites for info. And further more i heard, that on forums there's banning for putting info which doesn't seems ok to forum moderators. I didn't check if this is true. But usually i don't look for info on forums or sites where baning for info is taking place...
Which is fine. Most people don't have time to follow all the news, etc. However, that doesn't mean people then get to turn around and say that CIG isn't being open about development or that there's too little information.

It was a joke. He put on at ballers site presentation of logo which I made, and he never contacted me for vector of a logo. And he needs vector if he wants to use on t-shirts or where ever...
And your balls are made quite elegant and I don't see a reason why hot chick can't put them on their breasts :)
I know, I was responding with a joke. Also, well played :D


Here is the thing. For me,for player who doesn't know anything about star citizen except what i saw in hangar when i installed free few weeks game is funny situation. One simple question and two totally different answers. How the hell new guy finds out what is true? They give refunds? They don't give refunds? For my eyes looks like even star citizen community doesn't have the same opinion. Off course in this matter I will agree with Skel, but the question is why...The article about law suit is the reason. And it is logical for me, that if person confirms that article I would rather go with that opinion. At least in that case. So, seems like cig somethimes give refunds and somethimes not? :)
Here's the thing, I don't think there's much debate over whether CIG gives refunds--they do (plenty of examples). However, like most companies, I think there's certain situations where refunds simply aren't warranted. As an example, someone who purchases the game this year, they know that it's in an early alpha state, they know it's buggy/unfinished, and they know it's going to take a while (simple product research). Can they use the alpha for a couple of months, play it, and then turn around and demand a refund? I don't think they should. Same deal with people who get stupid with their wallet, plop $2500 down, and then realize they can't pay bills. Manage your money dude.

That being said, if CIG were advertising this as a finished game now, I think everyone would be entitled (and should) demand refunds. That's just not the case.


And then they wonder why people don't get good information about cig development. Who the hell would like to ask something about cig in the pool full of sharks? :)
Dude, we just talked about this with my last post and just above. Just because you haven't spent any time researching it doesn't mean there isn't a shit ton of information out there. Again, I don't know a game developer who has been more open and given us more looks into game developments than CR & CIG.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TechBoyJK

Skel

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2001
6,185
562
136
If the benchmark for Corruption is a State AG being involved then:
Google
Microsoft
Every wireless provider ever
Every Cable Company
Every ISP
Most large employers
apple
And many more
Many Colleges and Universities
Amazon
EBay
Any Car Manufacturer

All would be corrupt.
It's not about corruption (at least for me) as I don't think CIG or CR is corrupt. What the issue in this case was, CIG refused a refund request from a guy that hadn't touched the Alpha and was tired of what he considered a driving reason to buy the game being unfulfilled. The AG was brought in as a last resort to get his money back. The fact it took the AG getting involved before this guy got his money back is the issue. I get that some people won't see an issue here, but for me, it's a huge red flag. To each their own though..

<<snip>>

Here's the thing, I don't think there's much debate over whether CIG gives refunds--they do (plenty of examples). However, like most companies, I think there's certain situations where refunds simply aren't warranted. As an example, someone who purchases the game this year, they know that it's in an early alpha state, they know it's buggy/unfinished, and they know it's going to take a while (simple product research). Can they use the alpha for a couple of months, play it, and then turn around and demand a refund? I don't think they should. Same deal with people who get stupid with their wallet, plop $2500 down, and then realize they can't pay bills. Manage your money dude.

That being said, if CIG were advertising this as a finished game now, I think everyone would be entitled (and should) demand refunds. That's just not the case.
<<snip>>
This is one point that I keep going back and forth on.. The game isn't close to being finished, I'm not sure anyone would disagree, though I have been wrong with this subject before. I don't think it's finished or close, so while I can get 'Alpha' access, which is nice of them (if not downright necessary at this point) it's not the full game. If I bought the game and ships based upon CR's hype of what's coming, and when... I get real fuzzy when you talk about timelines. I *think* they've given timelines on when stuff will be out there and done, only have had issues with the deadlines they made. Not judging them on that as every project falls behind schedule.. I do judge them upon how far off they are now, and how they appear to have gotten there.. Either way.. if I buy the game and ships based upon that, load up the 'alpha' because it's better than nothing, decide this sucks and without the features and ships I wanted to play, I hate the game. Add the constant changes to the ETAs on stuff, why wouldn't I be entitled to a refund? More so if I buy a ship thinking it'll be in the game, only to find out it's not on the timeline for getting in the game. I've heard complaints on other sites (and I agree and know there's possibility of misinformation there but... ) that some ships were promised and then pushed out. What's the point where one can say it's taking too long and SC isn't delivering on what it promised? To me at least, it feels different than a kickstart campaign where there's always that chance things won't pan out. Now they're selling DLC ships and promising they're covered to at least finish the game.

There's a lot of misinformation going both ways on the alpha, a lot of people talk about it like it's a finished game and it's beyond awesome and stable. Even on this forum, I've seen a bunch of posts when the release is challenged with a "You can play the game right now, it's out there". Others say otherwise, and it really seems like until you load it up and see you'll never know if it's a fit for you. My point is, just because I load up the alpha shouldn't mean that people can claim I've gotten a game that I wanted and have lost my entitlement to a refund. More so in the case of SC and it's many many promises of what's going to be in the release.

On the flip.. I completely agree that refunds shouldn't be used to cover buyers' remorse, nor should it be allowed to be used to cover some idiot that overspends for whatever reason. I just don't know if the normal software terms where once it's installed it's yours (and in most cases that's how it is) should ever cover an alpha build. I'm not sure there's a right answer for CR and crew as I'm not sure how you can tell the difference when someone's asking for a refund.
 

Skel

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2001
6,185
562
136
Thanks, I wasn't aware they were doing the holiday stream, which from what I've read had issues and pushed out the release of the new alpha.


What they neglect to mention is that this happens every year with the holiday livestream. It's something backers asked for back in 2013.
Did backers ask for the holiday stream, or did they ask for ship sales every year? I'm a bit confused if it's the latter..

Also is it correct that they've raised over $130mil (which I gathered from this site so if that's wrong please correct)??
 

Sabrewings

Golden Member
Jun 27, 2015
1,942
35
51
Did backers ask for the holiday stream, or did they ask for ship sales every year? I'm a bit confused if it's the latter..
Yes, they asked for the sale. CIG doesn't sell all ships at any given point in time. Most are not for sale. Backers asked for large "all ships" sales so they could pick up whatever they wanted around the holidays. The holiday sale has been a yearly thing ever since.

Also is it correct that they've raised over $130mil (which I gathered from this site so if that's wrong please correct)??
Yes, that is correct.
 

Skel

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2001
6,185
562
136
Yes, they asked for the sale. CIG doesn't sell all ships at any given point in time. Most are not for sale. Backers asked for large "all ships" sales so they could pick up whatever they wanted around the holidays. The holiday sale has been a yearly thing ever since.



Yes, that is correct.
I've been under the impression that people could buy ships any time.. I want to comment on how bizarre spending money like this on ships that aren't playable is, but the reality is it's not my money. I've said it many times in the past and continue to, if people are happy (and it's not hurting anyone else) who the fuck am I to tell them they're wrong?

Is 130mil normal for these AAA games? It seems excessive to me. I get that they've had issues that's caused a ton of rework and the engine rework. It just seems so odd that a game that's not even out yet still gets a steady income coming in.. it's hard to get my head around sometimes.. It's impressive what they've done.
 

rivethead

Platinum Member
Jan 16, 2005
2,635
106
106
It just seems so odd that a game that's not even out yet still gets a steady income coming in.. it's hard to get my head around sometimes.. It's impressive what they've done.
But it IS out. That's part of the reason CIG get so much money: people can actually load up an alpha game build (bugs, crashes, and all) and see what they're building and the direction they're going.

It's crazy much money that buggy pile of code has earned CIG. But it has. CIG were at the right place at the right time: gamers were starved for a sandbox space sim.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SLU Aequitas

bguile

Senior member
Nov 30, 2011
506
43
91
I've been under the impression that people could buy ships any time.. I want to comment on how bizarre spending money like this on ships that aren't playable is, but the reality is it's not my money. I've said it many times in the past and continue to, if people are happy (and it's not hurting anyone else) who the fuck am I to tell them they're wrong?

Is 130mil normal for these AAA games? It seems excessive to me. I get that they've had issues that's caused a ton of rework and the engine rework. It just seems so odd that a game that's not even out yet still gets a steady income coming in.. it's hard to get my head around sometimes.. It's impressive what they've done.
It's hard to say. There have been big games that cost alot more, and big games that have cost alot less. I do I think 130 million is a bit high for an average AAA title. HOWEVER, for the scope that CIG is shooting for, I feel its kinda low.

Derek Smart is wrong, they will release it eventually, but at this point, I don't think it will ever live up to its expectations.

2.6 I think just came out, and it's looking better. Star Marine is finally out and it doesn't look to bad, but again its all alpha. They are making progess. But then you see their last live stream they just did, and holy shit was it bad. Looked like was produced by Greendale Community College, not a big budget studio.
 

Sabrewings

Golden Member
Jun 27, 2015
1,942
35
51
But then you see their last live stream they just did, and holy shit was it bad. Looked like was produced by Greendale Community College, not a big budget studio.
They have made the commitment that the video content they produce comes out of Subscriber money only, and not backer money. I think it shows in this case, and quite badly. Their precut pieces are usually quite good, but man this was a rough live stream.
 

Skel

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2001
6,185
562
136
But it IS out. That's part of the reason CIG get so much money: people can actually load up an alpha game build (bugs, crashes, and all) and see what they're building and the direction they're going.

It's crazy much money that buggy pile of code has earned CIG. But it has. CIG were at the right place at the right time: gamers were starved for a sandbox space sim.
This is something that I scratch my head on and find it a bit frustrating in convos about the issues and concerns about SC. If someone comments on the game having unplayable issues or people bitching major parts of the game aren't close to being released, we get told "The games not out yet.. you need to wait until it's released before passing judgement". and if people complain or comment concerns about the game not being out it's "the game IS out.. you can play right now (just pay no attention to the issues, and lack of features like proper missions, though I conceed I've heard of there being some missions in the game even if they are buggy, and story lines). Which is it?

It's hard to say. There have been big games that cost alot more, and big games that have cost alot less. I do I think 130 million is a bit high for an average AAA title. HOWEVER, for the scope that CIG is shooting for, I feel its kinda low.

Derek Smart is wrong, they will release it eventually, but at this point, I don't think it will ever live up to its expectations.

2.6 I think just came out, and it's looking better. Star Marine is finally out and it doesn't look to bad, but again its all alpha. They are making progess. But then you see their last live stream they just did, and holy shit was it bad. Looked like was produced by Greendale Community College, not a big budget studio.
I thought 2.6 was delayed until next year, as per the articles I've read on it. That not the case?

They have made the commitment that the video content they produce comes out of Subscriber money only, and not backer money. I think it shows in this case, and quite badly. Their precut pieces are usually quite good, but man this was a rough live stream.
I didn't watch all of it, but the parts i did see I just chalk up to tech issues. Others have told me it was a train wreak that wasn't properly thought out, but again I couldn't really comment on all of it, just the parts I did see. Those parts looked more like the tech they were using glitched
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY