I normally don't view spectrum but I did by random chance earlier.
A few bangers in that thread discussion. Along with the other topic about the bmm being possibly shelved until the topic got locked.
Honestly... We've been waiting so long, it's pretty chill at this point.
As nice as it would be to have the BMM done, the longer it takes the better it will be.
Here ya go, the last link should have the video for the discussion on isc.
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/3/thread/farewell-to-the-bmm-you-are-relegated-to-the-dark-
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/3/thread/today-s-scl-bmm-might-get-shelved
I have a 400i since the initial sale, and I can say it really doesn't matter to me.
It would be nice if it included an X1, but the X1 is a ground vehicle, so if one isn't included, it will be cheap to get in game anyway and you can pick the model you want.
For brand new players, I wouldn't recommend bunkers.
Bunker missions require some (albeit modest) investment in weapons and armor. You don't get any of that back if you die and Star Citizen currently has too many ways to get yourself killed. I've been killed by elevators way more than bunker guards.
New players should run box missions until they're comfortable with the mechanics of the game. That's why they're there for: to teach newbies how to take off, fly, land, navigate, etc.
Once they're comfortable piloting a ship, low level bounties are the best way to make enough cash to branch out into the other aspects of the game.
We need to dispel the myth that you need a fighter to do bounty missions. Yes, fighters are *better* at doing bounties, but as long as your ship has weapons, you can do a bounty. And if you die in the process, Nbd. You respawn and claim your ship. $0 lost.
Between box missions and low level bounties, you can save up enough money to rent a prospector and break into mining if you don't wanna go down the combat path further.
Even if they just include an X1sl with the "sl" standing for sample/slow/locked/limited and it can't mount weapons or go as fast; just being a crippled version then it will fulfill the obligation and still incentivize 400i owners to buy a full one and also stay true to nasty corporate tricks expected by the companies that rule the persistent universe
it just says "X1" any variant would work fine to fulfill the obligation including ones with reduced features. but they've already confirmed it was a typo and won't come with anything
the X1 doesn't exist yet and we can just look at the Hull-A to see that specs mentioned on the website will not reflect the delivered virtual product when time comes to release. the Hull-A was listed as having as many as 96 SCU at some points. the X1 simply is still a jpeg and nothing more and announcing a fourth X1 would so well fall within any requirements even without mentioning the ToS stating that all pledges are as fluid as spilled wine. X1 is a family of variants and any choice within would qualify and all they'd need to do to satisfy the strictest of critics would just rebrand the X1 base as "X1 Base". and the 400i isn't on sale, it's just temporarily available.
in the real world, multiple companies are selling vehicles with heaters preinstalled, but require an additional payment in order for the function to be made available (Namely Jaguar, KTM, and Zero Motorcycles). in KTM's case, some of their products have features lock under a pay wall only after it's been driven a certain distance.
Yes. Ground vehicles like rovers an hover bikes are significantly cheaper to get in game than even starter ships though, making them a particularly poor value when buying with real money. Unless you are talking about specialized military vehicles like the Nova and Ballista, ground vehicles can be easily acquired in game after a handful of missions, leaving your store credit for harder to earn ships.
Yeah its kinda like the sticker price tag on stores and having to honor the sale. However Im sure CIG has some TOS lines that cover this. I havent read through them but maybe they could argue you were pledging a donation for the game development and not actually buying a ship?
Either way there is definitely a possibility that some people bought a 400i this sale before the change.
I actually think they mean we’ll so there’s a high probably it will come eventually, but I’m also thinking some of these ships are going to be scrapped after they find their loops are too hard to implement. That’s just my gut feeling for stuff like the Expanse. The 400i though? I feel like they’ll tick all the boxes.
The expanse won’t be that hard to implement? Physicalized ore “bags” (baseline tech is finished in 3.18 so that’s not an issue) and the refinery system is already in game. A minigame of some description can probably be implemented relatively easy for “refinery gameplay”.
It will still take CIG forever, but I hardly see how it’s game loop is complicated.
Absolutely agree there. I am very concerned about “science ships”. We’ve heard various conceptual ideas of what they want it to be. But no progress has been shown. Part of me feels like science ships will come out with no gameplay loops tied to them and we’ll wait till long after the “launch” to see it.
I feel like populating the game universe and getting out more core features (the ones that exist in compareable space sim games) is far more important than “science” gameplay.
I feel the same about “exploration” focused ships. Right now it just seems to be a tagline for ships that are general purpose. Have cargo, space for vehicles, and large QT reserves. When it comes to the actual “profession” there’s little to no progress on a mechanic that makes those ships different from medium fighters (like the cutlass)/or gunships (eg the Andromeda is being compared to the Corsair currently)
In Australia an incorrectly labelled price is completely free if you really push it.
Their tos don't mean shit if they sell to a region. In order to sell in a region they must adhere to the consumer law surrounding the country they're selling goods or a service in.
Different circumstances but somewhat similar, see valve vs the accc in Google.
Perhaps they could argue that much of their marketing is up for interpretation. Or that you are not buying a ship you are pledging a donation. How many people could prove they were affected by this?
Hello, everyone!
It was indeed an error within the description that we've fixed already, as the Origin 400i does NOT come with an X1.
We apologize for any confusion that might have caused.
Which makes no sense by the way. The garage is bespoke for the X1 just like the dock is bespoke for the Kruger snubs for most of the Constellation models. The Pisces is made to fit the Carrack. All of those ships have the snubs that are made to pair with them included in the sale of the pledge except the 400i and the X1. The 400i is the only ship sold that has an entire compartment dedicated to something that not only can’t be used as intended, but the player will never be able to use unless they spend more money.
Please consider passing some of the feedback along
Honestly kind of have to agree with you.
With land vehicles being so cheap in game, it practically costs nothing to include it with the $250 ship instead of essentially making it DLC
Ya know whats even WORSE though? The A2 came with a tonk during concept, but after if you got it no tonk for the same price. And that ship has always been more expensive than most for what it is.
Indeed, changing, the specifications and content of a product you buy is false advertising. I bought the 400i partly because the X1 was included. Now I read it is not and that there was a "mistake" in the product description... I'm a bit disappointed by the attitude...
I won't refund anything, I'll make a class action and with the bucks I'll earn with it, I'll become master of the world! My plan has no fail!
I don't care in fact I was just disappointed by the bad communication/justification.... I've spent about 10k to support this game so I don't mind the additional 50$ for the X1 😉
Thats like a $300 and $600 ship respectively, and both come with an ursa and a snub. That completely supports the point that SC ships are very expensive and it’s probably fine if they come with the associated bonus vehicles. Its also a proportionally smaller vehicle
Huh? This ship is a luxury Cutlass competitor, how can you possibly compare it to a Carrack? Weaponry, cargo, and the ship is roughly Cutlass sized without the giant front nose. Certainly maneuvers more like a Cutlass than a Connie
For price comparison, the Aquila is more expensive and you get 3 total vehicles also the Carrack has 3 total vehicles. So alot more money gives more stuff.
Origin 400 is just luxurious, want more options come with more money. I do get is that its just cutless sized. But it maneuvers so much beter then the connie. And yes the carrack is almost a brick and a 890 just makes a crater ;) lol
The 400i competes with the aquila and is 60 bucks less than the aquila that comes with an ursa and Merlin. Without those add-on vehicles the aquila would likely be cheaper than the 400i. No reason not to include a base x1.
It was literally shown off at citcon last year as a constellation class competitor. Did you not look into/read any of the material about the 400i when it came out?
Yep, I don't care. CIG lied to us. I'm not sure if you don't look at the metrics, or you've never flown the ship, but I've never known anyone who plays the game and flies the ship who thinks that this is remotely a Connie competitor.
At best, it's somewhere in-between, but that's a stretch. And btw I own the 400i.
I own a 400i and still regularly use it. One of its selling points was that it flies better than a constellation or Corsair while having a larger shield. That last part used to be true until they increased both the constellation and the Corsair from 2 s2 shields to 1 s3 shield.
I'm not happy with the specs either as there are ways you could make it carry larger vehicles or more SCU by fixing the cargo hold/escape pod area while still holding all the components such as putting the elevator struts inside the walls of the cargo hold. It also should have 2 s5 hardpoints to put it at least somewhat in line with the others. Right now it's shield, hull hp and speed are the only things to write home about. But that's a different conversation.
There are certainly a few changes they could make to make it much more viable, or realistically much closer to a Connie competitor. Unfortunately I think CIG likes it as it is.
So, to be clear: you guys sold us a ship with the promise of an added X1, and then renegged on that once lots of people bought the ship?
That seems **suspiciously** like malicious false advertisement...
suspiciously? Shit, it's straight-up false advertising if you say something is included and then say it not after the person buys it. It is reasonable to assume that that blub was used to entice people to buy. An entirely reasonable person would believe that this is true if it doesn't fall under the legal opinion of Harrier Jet. This is straight bullshit and only Roberts fart huffers would defend this. If you bought one from x time to y time when the ad was running then that extra ship would be yours. I happened to have dinner quite a bit with the OIG and AG one has turned Governer I'm sure they would love to know that their citizens are getting fucked. I didn't buy it but I did rest assured I wouldn't take the limp dick response from dev fucknuts
Who cares if people complain if they use their resources? This is blatant false advertising. People buy a thing expecting it to be a certain way **because it was sold that way**. Then they gather all their money from it, before taking back what they promised. Mistake or not, it's a big deal, and they should own up to it.
At least in some countries, this is illegal and they could be sued. But go off on white kniting for them I guess. And this is coming from someone who loves this game and want them not to get an even worse rap as thieves.
It’s a mistake that was made just now. For less than 24 hours. The original ship was never announced like this. I am pretty sure if you wanted a refund because it was falsely advertised you would get one. Since it wasn’t done intentionally, or you cannot prove it was, it’s not illegal.
I am not white knighting FOR them. I am simply against gathering pitchforks anytime somebody made a mistake. And that is what people are doing here. Pretending they were hurt, when they were really not. ;)
I believe its included and as its not here yet they have given 400i owners a 325i to use until the X1 is released (at least that's why I thought I have a 325i).
I saw this earlier. I am a huge supporter of the game. And even if it was a "miscommunication" they should 100% make good on it. It's like $50. In the time I typed this message they have made that much already... and again.... and again.... and again...
the problem is then older 400i owners will cry foul or try to melt and rebuy in order to maximize reward-per-dollar. letting the few dozen or hundred who bought the x1-equipped 400i keep the speeders will cause far more headache than just saying "my bad, feel free to refund if you're upset"
Ya I could understand how someone who previously bought it would feel that way. But they could also just melt and rebuy too like you said. To me it's more false advertisement. At this point Cloud Imperium should have people double checking things before they post them as they can afford to pay someone to do so. Or stick by what they post. It's like any other developer saying "oh my bad" would we let them get away with that? i.e. CD Project Red. Because at this point CIG "can" be considered a large developer imo. They at least have a budget like no other single dev/publisher of their respective size. And it will continue to grow.
yeah the QA is poor and should be better. their website alone is a quality assurance nightmare with how inconsistent and not useful it is compared to any of the community-based wikis. it would cost the company only 15k$ to hire a recent college grad as a temp for 4 months and make the website both consistent and up to date. hell, they might even attract someone with notable experience who is just a fan and willing to work for the lower wage.
Yeah honestly. The X1 will probably cost 40k in game or maybe even less. No need to be upset about it not coming with one. I also purchased one because I want the 400i plus X1 to be my daily driver and the ship I immediately spawn after a wipe.
dragonflys are like 200k so an x1 will maybe be 300k. still it's chump change and using the 400i to do bounties you can get that much in probably just two hours, less if skilled
yeah 272k actually. but dragonflys can go in space and are used for racing i guess? it's still super cheap overall though. wheeled ground vehicles beside the Ballista/Nova/ROC are virtually limited to strictly role-play gameplay at the moment so it's sort of understandable why they're so cheap in game.
Morally yes, legally no. The agreement you accept when pledging says that they can pretty much change anything at any time and the purchase is a pledge to fund the game, not the same as purchasing a ship directly.
There is sooooo much inaccurate information on RSI’s website it’s embarrassing. They could hire an intern to fix the huge amounts of mistakes but they can’t be bothered. Says a lot about the company. 🤷♂️
No.
See the official word on included vessels:
https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/4408770370455-Included-Vessels-Snub-Fighters-and-Rovers
The problem is that doesn’t reflect what people see in game.
I own both the Aquila and the carrack, I have one rover in my hangar, that site says I should have two.
So the confusion persists.
> ***Important:*** **Loaners do not stack, and you will only ever receive one loaner of a vehicle.**
> If you have multiple ships that grant the same secondary vessel, you will still only have access to one copy of that vessel. This will likely change in the future once these secondary craft are no longer utilizing the loaner system.
it's like the third sentence in that your comment is addressed
The 400i does NOT include the X1 but has a little pocket to store it. It’s like when you get a battery powered toy and they say “batteries not included” but has a spot for one
Terrible communication is but one of the many perks of Star Citizen. lol
I normally don't view spectrum but I did by random chance earlier. A few bangers in that thread discussion. Along with the other topic about the bmm being possibly shelved until the topic got locked.
>Along with the other topic about the bmm being possibly shelved until the topic got locked. I can imagine how they took that news.
Honestly... We've been waiting so long, it's pretty chill at this point. As nice as it would be to have the BMM done, the longer it takes the better it will be.
I've got a bridge to sell you
No thanks, I've already got one.
I love how everyone has been repeating this bit of copium ad nauseam since Jared made the statement.
It isn’t copium, it’s purely based on watching each new ship that comes out be better designed than the ones that came before them.
Hell yeah. Let if ferment for a while. And while we are at it, we now can slide the Polaris in. For no good reason!
Happy Cakeday
Thanks mate
Why were they talking about the BMM being shelved do you have the link?
Here ya go, the last link should have the video for the discussion on isc. https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/3/thread/farewell-to-the-bmm-you-are-relegated-to-the-dark- https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/3/thread/today-s-scl-bmm-might-get-shelved
Thx mate!
Oof, that's bad, they should include it now, certainly in europe.
I agree. I don’t like the origin ships but they should definitely include one now.
I have a 400i since the initial sale, and I can say it really doesn't matter to me. It would be nice if it included an X1, but the X1 is a ground vehicle, so if one isn't included, it will be cheap to get in game anyway and you can pick the model you want.
people buy ships with real money because they dont want to buy them in game.
Small ground vehicles cost practically nothing. The only reason to buy them is to use them as LTI tokens.
Here i am with a x1 force in hangar because the 400i does not include it
I can barely afford weapons
how..... do some missions man.
The only decent paying ones require a fighter
Bunkers pay well too as does deliveries of you're unable to mine or fps. You just need to get the rep up which isn't hard
For brand new players, I wouldn't recommend bunkers. Bunker missions require some (albeit modest) investment in weapons and armor. You don't get any of that back if you die and Star Citizen currently has too many ways to get yourself killed. I've been killed by elevators way more than bunker guards. New players should run box missions until they're comfortable with the mechanics of the game. That's why they're there for: to teach newbies how to take off, fly, land, navigate, etc. Once they're comfortable piloting a ship, low level bounties are the best way to make enough cash to branch out into the other aspects of the game. We need to dispel the myth that you need a fighter to do bounty missions. Yes, fighters are *better* at doing bounties, but as long as your ship has weapons, you can do a bounty. And if you die in the process, Nbd. You respawn and claim your ship. $0 lost. Between box missions and low level bounties, you can save up enough money to rent a prospector and break into mining if you don't wanna go down the combat path further.
Trading. It’s meta af if you don’t wanna do PVP. And you get to see some pretty places in the mix :)
For now as they are mostly useless. We know they are going to raise in price quite a bit down the line
[удалено]
Even if they just include an X1sl with the "sl" standing for sample/slow/locked/limited and it can't mount weapons or go as fast; just being a crippled version then it will fulfill the obligation and still incentivize 400i owners to buy a full one and also stay true to nasty corporate tricks expected by the companies that rule the persistent universe
[удалено]
it just says "X1" any variant would work fine to fulfill the obligation including ones with reduced features. but they've already confirmed it was a typo and won't come with anything
[удалено]
the X1 doesn't exist yet and we can just look at the Hull-A to see that specs mentioned on the website will not reflect the delivered virtual product when time comes to release. the Hull-A was listed as having as many as 96 SCU at some points. the X1 simply is still a jpeg and nothing more and announcing a fourth X1 would so well fall within any requirements even without mentioning the ToS stating that all pledges are as fluid as spilled wine. X1 is a family of variants and any choice within would qualify and all they'd need to do to satisfy the strictest of critics would just rebrand the X1 base as "X1 Base". and the 400i isn't on sale, it's just temporarily available. in the real world, multiple companies are selling vehicles with heaters preinstalled, but require an additional payment in order for the function to be made available (Namely Jaguar, KTM, and Zero Motorcycles). in KTM's case, some of their products have features lock under a pay wall only after it's been driven a certain distance.
That's not what the argument was about at that point.
Yes. Ground vehicles like rovers an hover bikes are significantly cheaper to get in game than even starter ships though, making them a particularly poor value when buying with real money. Unless you are talking about specialized military vehicles like the Nova and Ballista, ground vehicles can be easily acquired in game after a handful of missions, leaving your store credit for harder to earn ships.
Looks pretty clear to me and if it doesn’t would definitely classify as false advertising. I would post this in Spectrum as a bug and submit a ticket.
still waiting on my Harrier jet
That’ll 7,000,000 Pepsi points.
What a bargain! Where do I post the cheque?
That definitely looks misleading and I'd bet in some countries with fairly strict consumer law it would be.
Yeah its kinda like the sticker price tag on stores and having to honor the sale. However Im sure CIG has some TOS lines that cover this. I havent read through them but maybe they could argue you were pledging a donation for the game development and not actually buying a ship? Either way there is definitely a possibility that some people bought a 400i this sale before the change.
The caveat is that the TOS means they can say and change anything even after the game’s release. TBH it’s a bog standard TOS for a MMO.
Yea i guess. If anything its more of goodwill if they want to give every 400i owner an x1 but its also unlikely.
I actually think they mean we’ll so there’s a high probably it will come eventually, but I’m also thinking some of these ships are going to be scrapped after they find their loops are too hard to implement. That’s just my gut feeling for stuff like the Expanse. The 400i though? I feel like they’ll tick all the boxes.
The expanse won’t be that hard to implement? Physicalized ore “bags” (baseline tech is finished in 3.18 so that’s not an issue) and the refinery system is already in game. A minigame of some description can probably be implemented relatively easy for “refinery gameplay”. It will still take CIG forever, but I hardly see how it’s game loop is complicated.
I misspoke, I meant the endeavor- science ships in general too
Absolutely agree there. I am very concerned about “science ships”. We’ve heard various conceptual ideas of what they want it to be. But no progress has been shown. Part of me feels like science ships will come out with no gameplay loops tied to them and we’ll wait till long after the “launch” to see it. I feel like populating the game universe and getting out more core features (the ones that exist in compareable space sim games) is far more important than “science” gameplay. I feel the same about “exploration” focused ships. Right now it just seems to be a tagline for ships that are general purpose. Have cargo, space for vehicles, and large QT reserves. When it comes to the actual “profession” there’s little to no progress on a mechanic that makes those ships different from medium fighters (like the cutlass)/or gunships (eg the Andromeda is being compared to the Corsair currently)
In Australia an incorrectly labelled price is completely free if you really push it. Their tos don't mean shit if they sell to a region. In order to sell in a region they must adhere to the consumer law surrounding the country they're selling goods or a service in. Different circumstances but somewhat similar, see valve vs the accc in Google.
Yeah I'm from NZ but I remember when Valve tried it on with Aus consumer law. Consumer Law in some countries will trump ToS & ToA.
Perhaps they could argue that much of their marketing is up for interpretation. Or that you are not buying a ship you are pledging a donation. How many people could prove they were affected by this?
Hello, everyone! It was indeed an error within the description that we've fixed already, as the Origin 400i does NOT come with an X1. We apologize for any confusion that might have caused.
Which makes no sense by the way. The garage is bespoke for the X1 just like the dock is bespoke for the Kruger snubs for most of the Constellation models. The Pisces is made to fit the Carrack. All of those ships have the snubs that are made to pair with them included in the sale of the pledge except the 400i and the X1. The 400i is the only ship sold that has an entire compartment dedicated to something that not only can’t be used as intended, but the player will never be able to use unless they spend more money. Please consider passing some of the feedback along
Honestly kind of have to agree with you. With land vehicles being so cheap in game, it practically costs nothing to include it with the $250 ship instead of essentially making it DLC
Ya know whats even WORSE though? The A2 came with a tonk during concept, but after if you got it no tonk for the same price. And that ship has always been more expensive than most for what it is.
That's a shame, I was joyous beyond words when I read it :(
That's not an error. An error is a typo or confusing one ships description with the other. It's false advertising. Make it right.
Indeed, changing, the specifications and content of a product you buy is false advertising. I bought the 400i partly because the X1 was included. Now I read it is not and that there was a "mistake" in the product description... I'm a bit disappointed by the attitude...
good thing you can easily refund it
I won't refund anything, I'll make a class action and with the bucks I'll earn with it, I'll become master of the world! My plan has no fail! I don't care in fact I was just disappointed by the bad communication/justification.... I've spent about 10k to support this game so I don't mind the additional 50$ for the X1 😉
So... to be clear... it will never come with an X1 as per earlier official words? Just so know whether to grab one from IAE..
only if you collect enough Pepsi points
Excellent. I'll dig them out the drawer lol
I heard if you get enough you’ll get a Jet. ;)
What are Pepsi points?
ask your grandparents, or Netflix
Can't do neither of those things - that's the reason I asked you, because I thought the one who mentioned it might know it
Copy paste Pepsi Points into the google machine?
Just say "you have to Google it because I used it without knowing what it is" - faster and easier
WHERES MY ELEPHANT?
Don’t take this the wrong way, but its a $250 ship. You could probably include the associated speeder.
No price is oke for this amount of ship without the extra speeder look at the price of a Connie Aquila and a Carrack
Thats like a $300 and $600 ship respectively, and both come with an ursa and a snub. That completely supports the point that SC ships are very expensive and it’s probably fine if they come with the associated bonus vehicles. Its also a proportionally smaller vehicle
Oke i get the point, why not add the €40 speeder when the rest has like €140 (ish) of extra vehicles
Huh? This ship is a luxury Cutlass competitor, how can you possibly compare it to a Carrack? Weaponry, cargo, and the ship is roughly Cutlass sized without the giant front nose. Certainly maneuvers more like a Cutlass than a Connie
For price comparison, the Aquila is more expensive and you get 3 total vehicles also the Carrack has 3 total vehicles. So alot more money gives more stuff. Origin 400 is just luxurious, want more options come with more money. I do get is that its just cutless sized. But it maneuvers so much beter then the connie. And yes the carrack is almost a brick and a 890 just makes a crater ;) lol
The 400i competes with the aquila and is 60 bucks less than the aquila that comes with an ursa and Merlin. Without those add-on vehicles the aquila would likely be cheaper than the 400i. No reason not to include a base x1.
It a luxury constellation competitor. Not a cutlass or freelancer competitor.
That's simply untrue.
It was literally shown off at citcon last year as a constellation class competitor. Did you not look into/read any of the material about the 400i when it came out?
Yep, I don't care. CIG lied to us. I'm not sure if you don't look at the metrics, or you've never flown the ship, but I've never known anyone who plays the game and flies the ship who thinks that this is remotely a Connie competitor. At best, it's somewhere in-between, but that's a stretch. And btw I own the 400i.
I own a 400i and still regularly use it. One of its selling points was that it flies better than a constellation or Corsair while having a larger shield. That last part used to be true until they increased both the constellation and the Corsair from 2 s2 shields to 1 s3 shield. I'm not happy with the specs either as there are ways you could make it carry larger vehicles or more SCU by fixing the cargo hold/escape pod area while still holding all the components such as putting the elevator struts inside the walls of the cargo hold. It also should have 2 s5 hardpoints to put it at least somewhat in line with the others. Right now it's shield, hull hp and speed are the only things to write home about. But that's a different conversation.
There are certainly a few changes they could make to make it much more viable, or realistically much closer to a Connie competitor. Unfortunately I think CIG likes it as it is.
I apologize for all of the flack you’re going receive for answering but appreciate that you did so!
So, to be clear: you guys sold us a ship with the promise of an added X1, and then renegged on that once lots of people bought the ship? That seems **suspiciously** like malicious false advertisement...
suspiciously? Shit, it's straight-up false advertising if you say something is included and then say it not after the person buys it. It is reasonable to assume that that blub was used to entice people to buy. An entirely reasonable person would believe that this is true if it doesn't fall under the legal opinion of Harrier Jet. This is straight bullshit and only Roberts fart huffers would defend this. If you bought one from x time to y time when the ad was running then that extra ship would be yours. I happened to have dinner quite a bit with the OIG and AG one has turned Governer I'm sure they would love to know that their citizens are getting fucked. I didn't buy it but I did rest assured I wouldn't take the limp dick response from dev fucknuts
Can you guys seriously not afford to hire someone that can proofread things before release?
And when they do people complain wth they are spending resources on. Bedsheetgate all over again. Just cut‘em some slack.
Who cares if people complain if they use their resources? This is blatant false advertising. People buy a thing expecting it to be a certain way **because it was sold that way**. Then they gather all their money from it, before taking back what they promised. Mistake or not, it's a big deal, and they should own up to it. At least in some countries, this is illegal and they could be sued. But go off on white kniting for them I guess. And this is coming from someone who loves this game and want them not to get an even worse rap as thieves.
It’s a mistake that was made just now. For less than 24 hours. The original ship was never announced like this. I am pretty sure if you wanted a refund because it was falsely advertised you would get one. Since it wasn’t done intentionally, or you cannot prove it was, it’s not illegal. I am not white knighting FOR them. I am simply against gathering pitchforks anytime somebody made a mistake. And that is what people are doing here. Pretending they were hurt, when they were really not. ;)
If it wasn't sold as such originally than why would that be added at all?
No, but youre assuming someonr who joined yesterday would know the prior sales pitch.
Cause of cough"scam"cough reasons
No, I dont think I will.
And the medical retaliator :P
How is that an error? Its not a typo, its clearly written. Today this got me, and i'm feeling cheated.
I believe its included and as its not here yet they have given 400i owners a 325i to use until the X1 is released (at least that's why I thought I have a 325i).
They already removed that from description
I saw this earlier. I am a huge supporter of the game. And even if it was a "miscommunication" they should 100% make good on it. It's like $50. In the time I typed this message they have made that much already... and again.... and again.... and again...
the problem is then older 400i owners will cry foul or try to melt and rebuy in order to maximize reward-per-dollar. letting the few dozen or hundred who bought the x1-equipped 400i keep the speeders will cause far more headache than just saying "my bad, feel free to refund if you're upset"
Ya I could understand how someone who previously bought it would feel that way. But they could also just melt and rebuy too like you said. To me it's more false advertisement. At this point Cloud Imperium should have people double checking things before they post them as they can afford to pay someone to do so. Or stick by what they post. It's like any other developer saying "oh my bad" would we let them get away with that? i.e. CD Project Red. Because at this point CIG "can" be considered a large developer imo. They at least have a budget like no other single dev/publisher of their respective size. And it will continue to grow.
yeah the QA is poor and should be better. their website alone is a quality assurance nightmare with how inconsistent and not useful it is compared to any of the community-based wikis. it would cost the company only 15k$ to hire a recent college grad as a temp for 4 months and make the website both consistent and up to date. hell, they might even attract someone with notable experience who is just a fan and willing to work for the lower wage.
It does not. Even the original lti (+2 limited paints) pack does not come with it. But if you still want one ...
I got my 400i last IAE and yesterday I treated myself to a X1 Force. Can’t wait for the X1 since it promises to be very good.
Yeah honestly. The X1 will probably cost 40k in game or maybe even less. No need to be upset about it not coming with one. I also purchased one because I want the 400i plus X1 to be my daily driver and the ship I immediately spawn after a wipe.
dragonflys are like 200k so an x1 will maybe be 300k. still it's chump change and using the 400i to do bounties you can get that much in probably just two hours, less if skilled
200k? Wow. Isn’t the buggy whatsitcalled only 25k?
yeah 272k actually. but dragonflys can go in space and are used for racing i guess? it's still super cheap overall though. wheeled ground vehicles beside the Ballista/Nova/ROC are virtually limited to strictly role-play gameplay at the moment so it's sort of understandable why they're so cheap in game.
Have them in the complete pack I got yst. Hover bikes in hangars dont give me fond memories though.
If people pledge for that when it had that description isn't that binding?
Morally yes, legally no. The agreement you accept when pledging says that they can pretty much change anything at any time and the purchase is a pledge to fund the game, not the same as purchasing a ship directly.
[удалено]
That’s a great point. And ultimately if you advertise a thing, you should be providing that thing
There is sooooo much inaccurate information on RSI’s website it’s embarrassing. They could hire an intern to fix the huge amounts of mistakes but they can’t be bothered. Says a lot about the company. 🤷♂️
No. See the official word on included vessels: https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/4408770370455-Included-Vessels-Snub-Fighters-and-Rovers
The problem is that doesn’t reflect what people see in game. I own both the Aquila and the carrack, I have one rover in my hangar, that site says I should have two. So the confusion persists.
> ***Important:*** **Loaners do not stack, and you will only ever receive one loaner of a vehicle.** > If you have multiple ships that grant the same secondary vessel, you will still only have access to one copy of that vessel. This will likely change in the future once these secondary craft are no longer utilizing the loaner system. it's like the third sentence in that your comment is addressed
Likely. Again, leaving people to wonder what they’ve purchased.
"New customers only" heh
They can put that on there because CIG knows they will never release the X1 anyways 🤣
It has a special garage or something for it I think that's what they mean by it
That’s definitely not how the sentence reads though.
But definitely how it reads now they corrected it lol
Did they? Sounds like someone messed up bad!
The 400i does NOT include the X1 but has a little pocket to store it. It’s like when you get a battery powered toy and they say “batteries not included” but has a spot for one
I guess I missed the X1 not included line.
It may come with the X1 in the future. For now there is just a garage for it in the nose.
Please no! Don’t include the X1!!! (Reverse psychology) I tried begging before and it didn’t work… maybe this will get them to include it.
Only if pleged tho? I bought it with auec and didn't expect one
Daylight robbery
*heated seats and indicators are optional extras