Again though, CIG doesn't pay these websites money via advertising, not surprised by raging double standards. It's myopic as hell what people complain about sometimes. talk about SC ships which basically are the most complex assets ever done in Cryengine (that I know of). Meanwhile, you have cash shops in basically web browser level games that rake in BILLIONS (Zynga) selling low-effort assets, oh that's fine. We've even had a few 'journalists'/writers say to basically stop pledging for the game and that selling expensive ships (that at least are complex) is crazy or that CIG has 'made enough' money and should arbitrary deny more pledging (wtf, since when does a standard business need to stop accepting money from willing customers?). 'drama' relative to the multi-crew video article length, which was inexplicably very short.

I don't remember Pcgamer (example) writing up articles that were portraying Battlefront as this controversial (over and over sometimes). Both business models can succeed/fail, yet I mainly hear trash talking about these smaller indy games failing that usually have a fraction the resources.Д®ven here with CIG, they have $, but they're also judged far more harshly than similar titles with publishers. I know, you'll hear about publishers canceling multi-year projects, but often you mostly you see complaints about how bad Kickstarter style games are, despite success stories just like the almighty publisher games.

Everybody has a price wow