Star Citizen - Revision history

Andrew V: /* References */

2026-04-04T01:07:37Z

References

Andrew V: /* References */

2026-04-04T00:55:18Z

References

Sojourna at 03:25, 16 March 2026

2026-03-16T03:25:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:25, 16 March 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Incomplete\|Issue 1=Insufficient references and in-text citations.\|Issue 2=~~Impromper~~ formatting of references.}}{{Tone}}		{{Incomplete\|Issue 1=Insufficient references and in-text citations.\|Issue 2=Improper formatting of references.}}{{Tone}}
	{{ProductCargo		{{ProductCargo
	\|ArticleType=Product		\|ArticleType=Product
Line 6:		Line 6:
	\|Description=		\|Description=
	\|InProduction=Yes		\|InProduction=Yes
	\|Logo=Star ~~citizen~~ logo.png		\|Logo=Star Citizen logo.png
	\|ProductLine=		\|ProductLine=
	\|ReleaseYear=2012		\|ReleaseYear=2012
	\|Website=https://robertsspaceindustries.com/		\|Website=https://robertsspaceindustries.com/
	}}		}}
	'''~~[[Wikipedia:Star Citizen~~\|Star Citizen]]''' is a crowdfunded space station simulator game. Star Citizen combines features from space simulators, first-person shooters, and massively multiplayer online genres across its four playable modes. These modes, known as modules, offer distinct player experiences.		'''{{Wplink\|Star Citizen}}''' is a crowdfunded space station simulator game. Star Citizen combines features from space simulators, first-person shooters, and massively multiplayer online genres across its four playable modes. These modes, known as modules, offer distinct player experiences.

	==Background==		==Background==

Sojourna: /* Consumer protection concerns */

2026-03-16T03:22:59Z

Consumer protection concerns

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:22, 16 March 2026
Line 37:		Line 37:
	==Consumer protection concerns==		==Consumer protection concerns==
	The practice of selling digital products years before they are implemented has raised significant concerns regarding consumer protection. Despite marketing these items as 'pledges' or 'concepts', CIG continues to charge real money for digital goods with no firm delivery timeline or guarantee of implementation. The company's terms of service have been modified multiple times since 2012, changing the conditions under which refunds are offered and altering customer rights regarding purchased content. Many backers who attempted to obtain refunds for undelivered products have reported difficulties, with CIG often citing their evolving terms of service as justification for denial. The lack of concrete development schedules for sold items, combined with regular price increases for unreleased content, has led to criticism from consumer advocacy groups and gaming industry observers. Additionally, the practice of artificial scarcity through "limited-time sales" of digital products that don't yet exist has been questioned as potentially misleading marketing.		The practice of selling digital products years before they are implemented has raised significant concerns regarding consumer protection. Despite marketing these items as 'pledges' or 'concepts', CIG continues to charge real money for digital goods with no firm delivery timeline or guarantee of implementation. The company's terms of service have been modified multiple times since 2012, changing the conditions under which refunds are offered and altering customer rights regarding purchased content. Many backers who attempted to obtain refunds for undelivered products have reported difficulties, with CIG often citing their evolving terms of service as justification for denial. The lack of concrete development schedules for sold items, combined with regular price increases for unreleased content, has led to criticism from consumer advocacy groups and gaming industry observers. Additionally, the practice of artificial scarcity through "limited-time sales" of digital products that don't yet exist has been questioned as potentially misleading marketing.
	[[File:ASA Response .png\|thumb\|A response letter from the Advertising Standards Authority affirming that Cloud Imperium Games likely had breached the Advertising Rules. ]]		[[File:ASA Response.png\|thumb\|A response letter from the Advertising Standards Authority affirming that Cloud Imperium Games likely had breached the Advertising Rules.]]
	In 2021, following a consumer complaint to the UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) by a member of the /r/starcitizen_refunds community, Cloud Imperium Games was required to modify its concept ship marketing emails after the ASA determined that they violated UK advertising rules<ref>https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/comments/pfgchs/uk_advertising_standards_agency_rule_concept_ship/ ([http://web.archive.org/web/20210831222423/https://old.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/comments/pfgchs/uk_advertising_standards_agency_rule_concept_ship/ Archived])</ref>, Cloud Imperium Games was needed to alter its concept ship marketing emails after the ASA determined they violated Advertising Rules in the UK. The issue centered on emails promoting concept ships without clear disclosure that the advertised vessels did not yet exist in the game. In response, CIG added a standardized disclaimer to their marketing emails stating that concept ships are "being offered here as a limited vehicle concept pledge". The disclaimer also notes that purchasers receive a temporary "loaner vehicle" until their bought ship becomes available.		In 2021, following a consumer complaint to the UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) by a member of the /r/starcitizen_refunds community, Cloud Imperium Games was required to modify its concept ship marketing emails after the ASA determined that they violated UK advertising rules<ref>https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/comments/pfgchs/uk_advertising_standards_agency_rule_concept_ship/ ([http://web.archive.org/web/20210831222423/https://old.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/comments/pfgchs/uk_advertising_standards_agency_rule_concept_ship/ Archived])</ref>, Cloud Imperium Games was needed to alter its concept ship marketing emails after the ASA determined they violated Advertising Rules in the UK. The issue centered on emails promoting concept ships without clear disclosure that the advertised vessels did not yet exist in the game. In response, CIG added a standardized disclaimer to their marketing emails stating that concept ships are "being offered here as a limited vehicle concept pledge". The disclaimer also notes that purchasers receive a temporary "loaner vehicle" until their bought ship becomes available.

Sojourna: /* In-game moderation inconsistencies */

2026-03-16T03:19:36Z

In-game moderation inconsistencies

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:19, 16 March 2026
Line 55:		Line 55:

	==In-game moderation inconsistencies==		==In-game moderation inconsistencies==
	[[File:~~Example of Exessive Griefing~~ .png\|thumb\|An example of a user being ~~banned~~ for the term 'Excessive Griefing' and being directed to review the terms of service and rules of conduct for a term that doesn't exist. ]]		[[File:Star Citizen excessive griefing example.png\|thumb\|An example of a user being suspended for the term "Excessive Griefing" and being directed to review the terms of service and rules of conduct for a term that doesn't exist.]]
	The moderation practices of Cloud Imperium have drawn criticism for inconsistent and opaque enforcement. Users can receive bans for "excessive griefing" despite this term having no defined parameters in either the Terms of Service<ref>https://robertsspaceindustries.com/en/tos ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260204133014/https://robertsspaceindustries.com/en/tos Archived])</ref> or Rules of Conduct<ref>https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/4409491235351-Rules-of-Conduct ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251023231231/https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/4409491235351-Rules-of-Conduct Archived])</ref> documentation. Users receive these ~~bans~~ without stated reasons, requiring them to file support tickets to learn of their alleged infractions. This lack of transparency and disconnect between written policies and enforcement has created significant uncertainty about what constitutes acceptable behavior.		The moderation practices of Cloud Imperium have drawn criticism for inconsistent and opaque enforcement. Users can receive suspension and bans for "excessive griefing" despite this term having no defined parameters in either the Terms of Service<ref>https://robertsspaceindustries.com/en/tos ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260204133014/https://robertsspaceindustries.com/en/tos Archived])</ref> or Rules of Conduct<ref>https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/4409491235351-Rules-of-Conduct ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251023231231/https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/4409491235351-Rules-of-Conduct Archived])</ref> documentation. Users receive these punishments without stated reasons, requiring them to file support tickets to learn of their alleged infractions. This lack of transparency and disconnect between written policies and enforcement has created significant uncertainty about what constitutes acceptable behavior.

	Star Citizen's Persistent Universe, or PU for short, is an open sandbox that allows players to engage in ~~PVP~~ activities such as Piracy and Bounty Hunting, yet participating in these activities could lead a player to being banned for 'excessively' engaging in this activity under the guise of it being 'harassment' to do so.		Star Citizen's Persistent Universe, or PU for short, is an open sandbox that allows players to engage in PvP activities such as Piracy and Bounty Hunting, yet participating in these activities could lead a player to being banned for "excessively" engaging in this activity under the guise of it being "harassment" to do so.

	===The HuskyPie Incident===		===The HuskyPie Incident===
	On April 21, 2025, Cloud Imperium Games ~~banned~~ player HuskyPie for 17 days after German content creator Karolinger falsely accused him of stream sniping. The incident occurred in Pyro, a lawless system explicitly for PvP combat. HuskyPie was completing a mercenary mission when he encountered and killed Karolinger twice at Bueno Ravine. Despite having no evidence beyond the streamer's accusations, CIG suspended HuskyPie's account. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0eipkl66-8 As documented in an episode of the "Griefers Pub" podcast], HuskyPie was forced to appeal by providing his own game logs, which proved he was already at the location on mission objectives and had never watched Karolinger's stream. CIG eventually overturned the ~~ban~~ but offered no apology or explanation for its actions. This case directly demonstrates preferential treatment for content creators. It shows how regular players can be banned for engaging in permitted gameplay while content creators receive special protection from legitimate game mechanics.		On April 21, 2025, Cloud Imperium Games suspended player HuskyPie for 17 days after German content creator Karolinger falsely accused him of stream sniping. The incident occurred in Pyro, a lawless system explicitly for PvP combat. HuskyPie was completing a mercenary mission when he encountered and killed Karolinger twice at Bueno Ravine. Despite having no evidence beyond the streamer's accusations, CIG suspended HuskyPie's account. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0eipkl66-8 As documented in an episode of the "Griefers Pub" podcast], HuskyPie was forced to appeal by providing his own game logs, which proved he was already at the location on mission objectives and had never watched Karolinger's stream. CIG eventually overturned the suspension but offered no apology or explanation for its actions. This case directly demonstrates preferential treatment for content creators. It shows how regular players can be banned for engaging in permitted gameplay while content creators receive special protection from legitimate game mechanics.

	==References==		==References==
	{{reflist}}		{{reflist}}
	[[Category:Star Citizen]]		[[Category:Star Citizen]]

Bananabot: Added archive URLs for 1 citation(s) using CRWCitationBot

2026-02-23T13:03:05Z

Added archive URLs for 1 citation(s) using CRWCitationBot

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:03, 23 February 2026
Line 25:		Line 25:
	*Orion: First sold in 2014 for $325 (original concept sale), the industrial mining vessel remains undelivered; current price is $575.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Orion ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260128224132/https://starcitizen.tools/Orion Archived])</ref>		*Orion: First sold in 2014 for $325 (original concept sale), the industrial mining vessel remains undelivered; current price is $575.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Orion ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260128224132/https://starcitizen.tools/Orion Archived])</ref>
	*Genesis Starliner: Sold in 2015 for $400 (original concept sale), passenger transport remains undelivered.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Genesis_Starliner ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251112221548/https://starcitizen.tools/Genesis_Starliner Archived])</ref>		*Genesis Starliner: Sold in 2015 for $400 (original concept sale), passenger transport remains undelivered.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Genesis_Starliner ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251112221548/https://starcitizen.tools/Genesis_Starliner Archived])</ref>
	*Endeavor: Made available in 2015 for $350 (original concept sale), with limited availability due to price increases.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Endeavor</ref>		*Endeavor: Made available in 2015 for $350 (original concept sale), with limited availability due to price increases.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Endeavor ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260209102243/https://starcitizen.tools/Endeavor Archived])</ref>
	*Hull D: Sold since 2015 for $350 (original concept sale), price increased in subsequent sales.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_D ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251213110038/https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_D Archived])</ref>		*Hull D: Sold since 2015 for $350 (original concept sale), price increased in subsequent sales.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_D ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251213110038/https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_D Archived])</ref>
	*Hull E: Offered in 2015 for $550 (original concept sale), increased to $950 in later sales.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_E ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260219233750/https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_E Archived])</ref>		*Hull E: Offered in 2015 for $550 (original concept sale), increased to $950 in later sales.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_E ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260219233750/https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_E Archived])</ref>

Bananabot: Added archive URLs for 18 citation(s) using CRWCitationBot

2026-02-23T07:45:03Z

Added archive URLs for 18 citation(s) using CRWCitationBot

Bythmusters: Added Cargo template in place of Infobox, moved to Product

2026-01-29T18:39:20Z

Added Cargo template in place of Infobox, moved to Product

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:39, 29 January 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Incomplete\|Issue 1=Insufficient references and in-text citations.\|Issue 2=Impromper formatting of references.}}{{Tone}}{{~~InfoboxProductLine~~		{{Incomplete\|Issue 1=Insufficient references and in-text citations.\|Issue 2=Impromper formatting of references.}}{{Tone}}
	\| ~~Title~~ = ~~Star Citizen~~		{{ProductCargo
	\| ~~Release Year~~ = ~~2012-present~~		\|ArticleType=Product
	\| ~~Product Type~~ = ~~Digital Game Content~~		\|Category=Video Games
	\| ~~In Production~~ = Yes		\|Company=Cloud Imperium Games
	\| ~~Developer~~ = ~~Cloud Imperium Games~~		\|Description=
	\| ~~Official~~ Website = https://robertsspaceindustries.com/		\|InProduction=Yes
	~~\|Logo=Star citizen logo.png~~}}		\|Logo=Star citizen logo.png
			\|ProductLine=
			\|ReleaseYear=2012
			\|Website=https://robertsspaceindustries.com/
			}}
	'''[[Wikipedia:Star Citizen\|Star Citizen]]''' is a crowdfunded space station simulator game. Star Citizen combines features from space simulators, first-person shooters, and massively multiplayer online genres across its four playable modes. These modes, known as modules, offer distinct player experiences.		'''[[Wikipedia:Star Citizen\|Star Citizen]]''' is a crowdfunded space station simulator game. Star Citizen combines features from space simulators, first-person shooters, and massively multiplayer online genres across its four playable modes. These modes, known as modules, offer distinct player experiences.

ClippyFellow47: Major grammar edits to improve tone.

2025-12-13T17:44:49Z

Major grammar edits to improve tone.

Show changes

AnotherConsumerRightsPerson: Reworked lead section and added tone warning (Totally didn’t copy lead section from Wikipedia!)

2025-09-24T15:36:25Z

Reworked lead section and added tone warning (Totally didn’t copy lead section from Wikipedia!)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:36, 24 September 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Incomplete\|Issue 1=Insufficient references and in-text citations.\|Issue 2=Impromper formatting of references.}}{{InfoboxProductLine		{{Incomplete\|Issue 1=Insufficient references and in-text citations.\|Issue 2=Impromper formatting of references.}}{{Tone}}{{InfoboxProductLine
	\| Title = Star Citizen		\| Title = Star Citizen
	\| Release Year = 2012-present		\| Release Year = 2012-present
Line 7:		Line 7:
	\| Official Website = https://robertsspaceindustries.com/		\| Official Website = https://robertsspaceindustries.com/
	\|Logo=Star citizen logo.png}}		\|Logo=Star citizen logo.png}}
			'''[[Wikipedia:Star Citizen\|Star Citizen]]''' is a crowdfunded spacestation simulator game. Star Citizen combines features from space simulator, first person shooter, and massively multiplayer online genres across its four playable modes. These modes, called modules, provide different player experiences from one another.
	'''[[Wikipedia:Star Citizen\|Star Citizen]]''', a crowdfunded space ~~simulation game~~, ~~has sold numerous digital products~~ and ~~features since 2012 that remain undelivered as of 2024~~. ~~Key items include ships costing hundreds of dollars, a modding platform~~, ~~private server capabilities~~, ~~pets, and much more, all of which continue to be marketed and sold despite no implementation timeline~~.

	==Background==		==Background==
	Star Citizen began as a Kickstarter campaign in 2012 by Chris Roberts, creator of Wing Commander. The project promised a combination of space combat, trading, and exploration alongside a single-player campaign called Squadron 42. The campaign raised $2.1 million initially, with total crowdfunding exceeding $600 million by 2024 through continuous sales of digital ships and game packages.		Star Citizen began as a Kickstarter campaign in 2012 by Chris Roberts, creator of Wing Commander. The project promised a combination of space combat, trading, and exploration alongside a single-player campaign called Squadron 42. The campaign raised $2.1 million initially, with total crowdfunding exceeding $600 million by 2024 through continuous sales of digital ships and game packages.

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:07, 4 April 2026
Line 38:		Line 38:
	The practice of selling digital products years before they are implemented has raised significant concerns regarding consumer protection. Despite marketing these items as 'pledges' or 'concepts', CIG continues to charge real money for digital goods with no firm delivery timeline or guarantee of implementation. The company's terms of service have been modified multiple times since 2012, changing the conditions under which refunds are offered and altering customer rights regarding purchased content. Many backers who attempted to obtain refunds for undelivered products have reported difficulties, with CIG often citing their evolving terms of service as justification for denial. The lack of concrete development schedules for sold items, combined with regular price increases for unreleased content, has led to criticism from consumer advocacy groups and gaming industry observers. Additionally, the practice of artificial scarcity through "limited-time sales" of digital products that don't yet exist has been questioned as potentially misleading marketing.		The practice of selling digital products years before they are implemented has raised significant concerns regarding consumer protection. Despite marketing these items as 'pledges' or 'concepts', CIG continues to charge real money for digital goods with no firm delivery timeline or guarantee of implementation. The company's terms of service have been modified multiple times since 2012, changing the conditions under which refunds are offered and altering customer rights regarding purchased content. Many backers who attempted to obtain refunds for undelivered products have reported difficulties, with CIG often citing their evolving terms of service as justification for denial. The lack of concrete development schedules for sold items, combined with regular price increases for unreleased content, has led to criticism from consumer advocacy groups and gaming industry observers. Additionally, the practice of artificial scarcity through "limited-time sales" of digital products that don't yet exist has been questioned as potentially misleading marketing.
	[[File:ASA Response.png\|thumb\|A response letter from the Advertising Standards Authority affirming that Cloud Imperium Games likely had breached the Advertising Rules.]]		[[File:ASA Response.png\|thumb\|A response letter from the Advertising Standards Authority affirming that Cloud Imperium Games likely had breached the Advertising Rules.]]
	In 2021, following a consumer complaint to the UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) by a member of the /r/starcitizen_refunds community, Cloud Imperium Games was required to modify its concept ship marketing emails after the ASA determined that they violated UK advertising rules<ref>https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/comments/pfgchs/uk_advertising_standards_agency_rule_concept_ship/ ~~([http~~://web.archive.org/web/20210831222423/https://old.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/comments/pfgchs/uk_advertising_standards_agency_rule_concept_ship/ ~~Archived~~])</ref>, Cloud Imperium Games was needed to alter its concept ship marketing emails after the ASA determined they violated Advertising Rules in the UK. The issue centered on emails promoting concept ships without clear disclosure that the advertised vessels did not yet exist in the game. In response, CIG added a standardized disclaimer to their marketing emails stating that concept ships are "being offered here as a limited vehicle concept pledge". The disclaimer also notes that purchasers receive a temporary "loaner vehicle" until their bought ship becomes available.		In 2021, following a consumer complaint to the UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) by a member of the /r/starcitizen_refunds community, Cloud Imperium Games was required to modify its concept ship marketing emails after the ASA determined that they violated UK advertising rules<ref>{{Cite web \|last=@mazty \|title=UK Advertising Standards Agency Rule Concept Ship Sale Emails to be Misleading - Disclaimer Now Added \|url=https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/comments/pfgchs/uk_advertising_standards_agency_rule_concept_ship/ \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210831222423/https://old.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/comments/pfgchs/uk_advertising_standards_agency_rule_concept_ship/ \|archive-date=2021-08-31 \|website=[[Reddit]]}}</ref>, Cloud Imperium Games was needed to alter its concept ship marketing emails after the ASA determined they violated Advertising Rules in the UK. The issue centered on emails promoting concept ships without clear disclosure that the advertised vessels did not yet exist in the game. In response, CIG added a standardized disclaimer to their marketing emails stating that concept ships are "being offered here as a limited vehicle concept pledge". The disclaimer also notes that purchasers receive a temporary "loaner vehicle" until their bought ship becomes available.

	==Development status contradictions==		==Development status contradictions==
Line 44:		Line 44:

	==Development communication issues==		==Development communication issues==
	Squadron 42's "Answer the Call 2017" marketing campaign ultimately failed when CIG failed to deliver the promised single-player campaign, despite extensive marketing featuring a star-studded cast, including Mark Hamill, Gary Oldman, and Gillian Anderson. <ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Squadron_42 ~~([http~~://web.archive.org/web/20260221031725/https://starcitizen.tools/Squadron_42 ~~Archived~~])</ref> Following community backlash over the missed release, CIG announced plans for a new project roadmap in late 2017. However, this evolved into what became known as the "Roadmap to the Roadmap," with a release view being finally available in March of 2018. When finally delivered, the new roadmap consistently showed missed deadlines and delayed features. Rather than address these delays, CIG ultimately discontinued much of the roadmap's progress tracker in February 2022, dismissively labeling concerned backers as "roadmap watchers" <ref>https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/3/thread/roadmap-roundup-february-2nd-2022 ~~([http~~://web.archive.org/web/20250814053537/https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/3/thread/roadmap-roundup-february-2nd-2022 ~~Archived~~])</ref> and claiming that showing development progress "puts too much attention on features that had a high probability of shifting around" and was "a distraction both internally at CIG and within the community". This marked a significant departure from their previous promises of transparency and was met with substantial community backlash, particularly from backers who had used the roadmap to track progress on features they had purchased years earlier.		Squadron 42's "Answer the Call 2017" marketing campaign ultimately failed when CIG failed to deliver the promised single-player campaign, despite extensive marketing featuring a star-studded cast, including Mark Hamill, Gary Oldman, and Gillian Anderson. <ref>{{Cite web \|title=Squadron 42 \|url=https://starcitizen.tools/Squadron_42 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260221031725/https://starcitizen.tools/Squadron_42 \|archive-date=2026-02-21 \|website=[[Star Citizen Wiki]]}}</ref> Following community backlash over the missed release, CIG announced plans for a new project roadmap in late 2017. However, this evolved into what became known as the "Roadmap to the Roadmap," with a release view being finally available in March of 2018. When finally delivered, the new roadmap consistently showed missed deadlines and delayed features. Rather than address these delays, CIG ultimately discontinued much of the roadmap's progress tracker in February 2022, dismissively labeling concerned backers as "roadmap watchers" <ref>{{Cite web \|last=@JakeAcappella-CIG \|date=2022-02-02 \|title=Roadmap Roundup \|url=https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/3/thread/roadmap-roundup-february-2nd-2022 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250814053537/https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/3/thread/roadmap-roundup-february-2nd-2022 \|archive-date=2025-08-14 \|website=[[Roberts Space Industries]]}}</ref> and claiming that showing development progress "puts too much attention on features that had a high probability of shifting around" and was "a distraction both internally at CIG and within the community". This marked a significant departure from their previous promises of transparency and was met with substantial community backlash, particularly from backers who had used the roadmap to track progress on features they had purchased years earlier.

	==Consumer response==		==Consumer response==
	[[File:-r-Starcitizen Corruption.png\|thumb\|CIG Employee Zac Preece is requesting that a post be removed from the /r/starcitizen Reddit in a private Discord server. This post, by the Reddit moderator Ian (MrRiceGuy), didn't violate the rules, yet it was still removed anyway. ]]		[[File:-r-Starcitizen Corruption.png\|thumb\|CIG Employee Zac Preece is requesting that a post be removed from the /r/starcitizen Reddit in a private Discord server. This post, by the Reddit moderator Ian (MrRiceGuy), didn't violate the rules, yet it was still removed anyway. ]]
	The prolonged development timeline and sales practices have led to organized consumer response movements, notably the /r/starcitizen_refunds subreddit community, which has over 18,000 members.<ref>https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/ ~~([http~~://web.archive.org/web/20250803112513/https://old.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/ ~~Archived~~])</ref>. This subreddit serves as a platform for dissatisfied backers seeking refunds, documenting development delays, and tracking changes to terms of service that affect consumer rights. Discussion of these issues on official channels is heavily restricted, with CIG's Spectrum forum rules explicitly prohibiting posts deemed to spread "fear, uncertainty, and doubt" (FUD)<ref>https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/115013196427-Spectrum-and-Website-Rules-and-Moderation-Responsibilities ~~([http~~://web.archive.org/web/20250714211323/https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/115013196427-Spectrum-and-Website-Rules-and-Moderation-Responsibilities ~~Archived~~])</ref> and the discussion of support tickets/moderation decisions.		The prolonged development timeline and sales practices have led to organized consumer response movements, notably the /r/starcitizen_refunds subreddit community, which has over 18,000 members.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=r/starcitizen_refunds \|url=https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/ \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250803112513/https://old.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/ \|archive-date=2025-08-03 \|website=[[Reddit]]}}</ref>. This subreddit serves as a platform for dissatisfied backers seeking refunds, documenting development delays, and tracking changes to terms of service that affect consumer rights. Discussion of these issues on official channels is heavily restricted, with CIG's Spectrum forum rules explicitly prohibiting posts deemed to spread "fear, uncertainty, and doubt" (FUD)<ref>{{Cite web \|last=@Kraiklyn \|title=Spectrum and Website Rules and Moderation Responsibilities \|url=https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/115013196427-Spectrum-and-Website-Rules-and-Moderation-Responsibilities \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250714211323/https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/115013196427-Spectrum-and-Website-Rules-and-Moderation-Responsibilities \|archive-date=2025-07-14 \|website=[[Roberts Space Industries]]}}</ref> and the discussion of support tickets/moderation decisions.

	While unofficial communities, such as the /r/starcitizen subreddit and Discord server, exist, these spaces are heavily moderated to prevent discussion of negative sentiment due to the strong ties between their moderators and Cloud Imperium Games employees.		While unofficial communities, such as the /r/starcitizen subreddit and Discord server, exist, these spaces are heavily moderated to prevent discussion of negative sentiment due to the strong ties between their moderators and Cloud Imperium Games employees.
Line 56:		Line 56:
	==In-game moderation inconsistencies==		==In-game moderation inconsistencies==
	[[File:Star Citizen excessive griefing example.png\|thumb\|An example of a user being suspended for the term "Excessive Griefing" and being directed to review the terms of service and rules of conduct for a term that doesn't exist.]]		[[File:Star Citizen excessive griefing example.png\|thumb\|An example of a user being suspended for the term "Excessive Griefing" and being directed to review the terms of service and rules of conduct for a term that doesn't exist.]]
	The moderation practices of Cloud Imperium have drawn criticism for inconsistent and opaque enforcement. Users can receive suspension and bans for "excessive griefing" despite this term having no defined parameters in either the Terms of Service<ref>https://robertsspaceindustries.com/en/tos ~~([http~~://web.archive.org/web/20260204133014/https://robertsspaceindustries.com/en/tos ~~Archived~~])</ref> or Rules of Conduct<ref>https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/4409491235351-Rules-of-Conduct ~~([http~~://web.archive.org/web/20251023231231/https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/4409491235351-Rules-of-Conduct ~~Archived~~])</ref> documentation. Users receive these punishments without stated reasons, requiring them to file support tickets to learn of their alleged infractions. This lack of transparency and disconnect between written policies and enforcement has created significant uncertainty about what constitutes acceptable behavior.		The moderation practices of Cloud Imperium have drawn criticism for inconsistent and opaque enforcement. Users can receive suspension and bans for "excessive griefing" despite this term having no defined parameters in either the Terms of Service<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2023-09-28 \|title=ROBERTS SPACE INDUSTRIES LLC TERMS OF SERVICE \|url=https://robertsspaceindustries.com/en/tos \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260204133014/https://robertsspaceindustries.com/en/tos \|archive-date=2026-02-04 \|website=[[Roberts Space Industries]]}}</ref> or Rules of Conduct<ref>{{Cite web \|last=@Thrysurr-CIG \|title=Rules of Conduct \|url=https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/4409491235351-Rules-of-Conduct \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251023231231/https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/4409491235351-Rules-of-Conduct \|archive-date=2025-10-23 \|website=[[Roberts Space Industries]]}}</ref> documentation. Users receive these punishments without stated reasons, requiring them to file support tickets to learn of their alleged infractions. This lack of transparency and disconnect between written policies and enforcement has created significant uncertainty about what constitutes acceptable behavior.

	Star Citizen's Persistent Universe, or PU for short, is an open sandbox that allows players to engage in PvP activities such as Piracy and Bounty Hunting, yet participating in these activities could lead a player to being banned for "excessively" engaging in this activity under the guise of it being "harassment" to do so.		Star Citizen's Persistent Universe, or PU for short, is an open sandbox that allows players to engage in PvP activities such as Piracy and Bounty Hunting, yet participating in these activities could lead a player to being banned for "excessively" engaging in this activity under the guise of it being "harassment" to do so.

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:55, 4 April 2026
Line 20:		Line 20:

	===Ships and Vehicles===		===Ships and Vehicles===
	*Idris-M: Military variant sold in 2012 for $1,000, incomplete version delivered May 2025.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Idris-M ~~([http~~://web.archive.org/web/20260202174221/https://starcitizen.tools/Idris-M ~~Archived~~])</ref>		*Idris-M: Military variant sold in 2012 for $1,000, incomplete version delivered May 2025.<ref>{{Cite web \|last= \|date= \|title=Idris-M \|url=https://starcitizen.tools/Idris-M \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260202174221/https://starcitizen.tools/Idris-M \|archive-date=2026-02-02 \|website=[[Star Citizen Wiki]]}}</ref>
	*Idris-P: Civilian variant sold since 2012 for $1,250, price increased to $1,500, incomplete version delivered May 2025.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Idris-P ~~([http~~://web.archive.org/web/20251220101204/https://starcitizen.tools/Idris-P ~~Archived~~])</ref>		*Idris-P: Civilian variant sold since 2012 for $1,250, price increased to $1,500, incomplete version delivered May 2025.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Idris-P \|url=https://starcitizen.tools/Idris-P \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251220101204/https://starcitizen.tools/Idris-P \|archive-date=2025-12-20 \|website=[[Star Citizen Wiki]]}}</ref>
	*Banu Merchantman \| Merchantman: First sold in 2013 for $250 (original concept sale); currently priced at $600.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Merchantman ~~([http~~://web.archive.org/web/20251219235610/https://starcitizen.tools/Merchantman ~~Archived~~])</ref>		*Banu Merchantman \| Merchantman: First sold in 2013 for $250 (original concept sale); currently priced at $600.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Merchantman \|url=https://starcitizen.tools/Merchantman \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251219235610/https://starcitizen.tools/Merchantman \|archive-date=2025-12-19 \|website=[[Star Citizen Wiki]]}}</ref>
	*Orion: First sold in 2014 for $325 (original concept sale), the industrial mining vessel remains undelivered; current price is $575.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Orion ~~([http~~://web.archive.org/web/20260128224132/https://starcitizen.tools/Orion ~~Archived~~])</ref>		*Orion: First sold in 2014 for $325 (original concept sale), the industrial mining vessel remains undelivered; current price is $575.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Orion \|url=https://starcitizen.tools/Orion \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260128224132/https://starcitizen.tools/Orion \|archive-date=2026-01-28 \|website=[[Star Citizen Wiki]]}}</ref>
	*Genesis Starliner: Sold in 2015 for $400 (original concept sale), passenger transport remains undelivered.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Genesis_Starliner ~~([http~~://web.archive.org/web/20251112221548/https://starcitizen.tools/Genesis_Starliner ~~Archived~~])</ref>		*Genesis Starliner: Sold in 2015 for $400 (original concept sale), passenger transport remains undelivered.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Genesis Starliner \|url=https://starcitizen.tools/Genesis_Starliner \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251112221548/https://starcitizen.tools/Genesis_Starliner \|archive-date=2025-11-12 \|website=[[Star Citizen Wiki]]}}</ref>
	*Endeavor: Made available in 2015 for $350 (original concept sale), with limited availability due to price increases.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Endeavor ~~([http~~://web.archive.org/web/20260209102243/https://starcitizen.tools/Endeavor ~~Archived~~])</ref>		*Endeavor: Made available in 2015 for $350 (original concept sale), with limited availability due to price increases.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Endeavor \|url=https://starcitizen.tools/Endeavor \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260209102243/https://starcitizen.tools/Endeavor \|archive-date=2026-02-09 \|website=[[Star Citizen Wiki]]}}</ref>
	*Hull D: Sold since 2015 for $350 (original concept sale), price increased in subsequent sales.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_D ~~([http~~://web.archive.org/web/20251213110038/https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_D ~~Archived~~])</ref>		*Hull D: Sold since 2015 for $350 (original concept sale), price increased in subsequent sales.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Hull D \|url=https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_D \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251213110038/https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_D \|archive-date=2025-12-13 \|website=[[Star Citizen Wiki]]}}</ref>
	*Hull E: Offered in 2015 for $550 (original concept sale), increased to $950 in later sales.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_E ~~([http~~://web.archive.org/web/20260219233750/https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_E ~~Archived~~])</ref>		*Hull E: Offered in 2015 for $550 (original concept sale), increased to $950 in later sales.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Hull E \|url=https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_E \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260219233750/https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_E \|archive-date=2026-02-19 \|website=[[Star Citizen Wiki]]}}</ref>
	*Crucible: Sold in 2015 for $350 (original concept sale), repair ship remains undelivered.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Crucible ~~([http~~://web.archive.org/web/20260117044445/https://starcitizen.tools/Crucible ~~Archived~~])</ref>		*Crucible: Sold in 2015 for $350 (original concept sale), repair ship remains undelivered.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Crucible \|url=https://starcitizen.tools/Crucible \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260117044445/https://starcitizen.tools/Crucible \|archive-date=2026-01-17 \|website=[[Star Citizen Wiki]]}}</ref>
	*Pioneer: Marketed in 2017 for $850 (original concept sale), base-building vessel remains in concept phase<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Pioneer ~~([http~~://web.archive.org/web/20260125190110/https://starcitizen.tools/Pioneer ~~Archived~~])</ref>		*Pioneer: Marketed in 2017 for $850 (original concept sale), base-building vessel remains in concept phase<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Pioneer \|url=https://starcitizen.tools/Pioneer \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260125190110/https://starcitizen.tools/Pioneer \|archive-date=2026-01-25 \|website=[[Star Citizen Wiki]]}}</ref>
	*Drake Kraken: First sold in 2018 for $1,400 (original concept sale), capital ship with privateer variant sold for $2,000, remains undelivered.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Kraken ~~([http~~://web.archive.org/web/20251112222501/https://starcitizen.tools/Kraken ~~Archived~~])</ref>		*Drake Kraken: First sold in 2018 for $1,400 (original concept sale), capital ship with privateer variant sold for $2,000, remains undelivered.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Kraken \|url=https://starcitizen.tools/Kraken \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251112222501/https://starcitizen.tools/Kraken \|archive-date=2025-11-12 \|website=[[Star Citizen Wiki]]}}</ref>
	*Railen: First sold in 2021 for $200 (original concept sale), remains undelivered.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Railen ~~([http~~://web.archive.org/web/20251129082032/https://starcitizen.tools/Railen ~~Archived~~])</ref>		*Railen: First sold in 2021 for $200 (original concept sale), remains undelivered.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Railen \|url=https://starcitizen.tools/Railen \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251129082032/https://starcitizen.tools/Railen \|archive-date=2025-11-29 \|website=[[Star Citizen Wiki]]}}</ref>

	Note: All listed vessels have been sold multiple times since their original concept sales, often at increased prices. Many remain in concept phase or early development despite years passing since initial sales.		Note: All listed vessels have been sold multiple times since their original concept sales, often at increased prices. Many remain in concept phase or early development despite years passing since initial sales.

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:45, 23 February 2026
Line 20:		Line 20:

	===Ships and Vehicles===		===Ships and Vehicles===
	*Idris-M: Military variant sold in 2012 for $1,000, incomplete version delivered May 2025.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Idris-M</ref>		*Idris-M: Military variant sold in 2012 for $1,000, incomplete version delivered May 2025.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Idris-M ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260202174221/https://starcitizen.tools/Idris-M Archived])</ref>
	*Idris-P: Civilian variant sold since 2012 for $1,250, price increased to $1,500, incomplete version delivered May 2025.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Idris-P</ref>		*Idris-P: Civilian variant sold since 2012 for $1,250, price increased to $1,500, incomplete version delivered May 2025.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Idris-P ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251220101204/https://starcitizen.tools/Idris-P Archived])</ref>
	*Banu Merchantman \| Merchantman: First sold in 2013 for $250 (original concept sale); currently priced at $600.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Merchantman</ref>		*Banu Merchantman \| Merchantman: First sold in 2013 for $250 (original concept sale); currently priced at $600.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Merchantman ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251219235610/https://starcitizen.tools/Merchantman Archived])</ref>
	*Orion: First sold in 2014 for $325 (original concept sale), the industrial mining vessel remains undelivered; current price is $575.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Orion</ref>		*Orion: First sold in 2014 for $325 (original concept sale), the industrial mining vessel remains undelivered; current price is $575.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Orion ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260128224132/https://starcitizen.tools/Orion Archived])</ref>
	*Genesis Starliner: Sold in 2015 for $400 (original concept sale), passenger transport remains undelivered.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Genesis_Starliner</ref>		*Genesis Starliner: Sold in 2015 for $400 (original concept sale), passenger transport remains undelivered.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Genesis_Starliner ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251112221548/https://starcitizen.tools/Genesis_Starliner Archived])</ref>
	*Endeavor: Made available in 2015 for $350 (original concept sale), with limited availability due to price increases.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Endeavor</ref>		*Endeavor: Made available in 2015 for $350 (original concept sale), with limited availability due to price increases.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Endeavor</ref>
	*Hull D: Sold since 2015 for $350 (original concept sale), price increased in subsequent sales.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_D</ref>		*Hull D: Sold since 2015 for $350 (original concept sale), price increased in subsequent sales.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_D ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251213110038/https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_D Archived])</ref>
	*Hull E: Offered in 2015 for $550 (original concept sale), increased to $950 in later sales.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_E</ref>		*Hull E: Offered in 2015 for $550 (original concept sale), increased to $950 in later sales.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_E ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260219233750/https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_E Archived])</ref>
	*Crucible: Sold in 2015 for $350 (original concept sale), repair ship remains undelivered.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Crucible</ref>		*Crucible: Sold in 2015 for $350 (original concept sale), repair ship remains undelivered.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Crucible ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260117044445/https://starcitizen.tools/Crucible Archived])</ref>
	*Pioneer: Marketed in 2017 for $850 (original concept sale), base-building vessel remains in concept phase<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Pioneer</ref>		*Pioneer: Marketed in 2017 for $850 (original concept sale), base-building vessel remains in concept phase<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Pioneer ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260125190110/https://starcitizen.tools/Pioneer Archived])</ref>
	*Drake Kraken: First sold in 2018 for $1,400 (original concept sale), capital ship with privateer variant sold for $2,000, remains undelivered.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Kraken</ref>		*Drake Kraken: First sold in 2018 for $1,400 (original concept sale), capital ship with privateer variant sold for $2,000, remains undelivered.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Kraken ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251112222501/https://starcitizen.tools/Kraken Archived])</ref>
	*Railen: First sold in 2021 for $200 (original concept sale), remains undelivered.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Railen</ref>		*Railen: First sold in 2021 for $200 (original concept sale), remains undelivered.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Railen ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251129082032/https://starcitizen.tools/Railen Archived])</ref>

	Note: All listed vessels have been sold multiple times since their original concept sales, often at increased prices. Many remain in concept phase or early development despite years passing since initial sales.		Note: All listed vessels have been sold multiple times since their original concept sales, often at increased prices. Many remain in concept phase or early development despite years passing since initial sales.
Line 38:		Line 38:
	The practice of selling digital products years before they are implemented has raised significant concerns regarding consumer protection. Despite marketing these items as 'pledges' or 'concepts', CIG continues to charge real money for digital goods with no firm delivery timeline or guarantee of implementation. The company's terms of service have been modified multiple times since 2012, changing the conditions under which refunds are offered and altering customer rights regarding purchased content. Many backers who attempted to obtain refunds for undelivered products have reported difficulties, with CIG often citing their evolving terms of service as justification for denial. The lack of concrete development schedules for sold items, combined with regular price increases for unreleased content, has led to criticism from consumer advocacy groups and gaming industry observers. Additionally, the practice of artificial scarcity through "limited-time sales" of digital products that don't yet exist has been questioned as potentially misleading marketing.		The practice of selling digital products years before they are implemented has raised significant concerns regarding consumer protection. Despite marketing these items as 'pledges' or 'concepts', CIG continues to charge real money for digital goods with no firm delivery timeline or guarantee of implementation. The company's terms of service have been modified multiple times since 2012, changing the conditions under which refunds are offered and altering customer rights regarding purchased content. Many backers who attempted to obtain refunds for undelivered products have reported difficulties, with CIG often citing their evolving terms of service as justification for denial. The lack of concrete development schedules for sold items, combined with regular price increases for unreleased content, has led to criticism from consumer advocacy groups and gaming industry observers. Additionally, the practice of artificial scarcity through "limited-time sales" of digital products that don't yet exist has been questioned as potentially misleading marketing.
	[[File:ASA Response .png\|thumb\|A response letter from the Advertising Standards Authority affirming that Cloud Imperium Games likely had breached the Advertising Rules. ]]		[[File:ASA Response .png\|thumb\|A response letter from the Advertising Standards Authority affirming that Cloud Imperium Games likely had breached the Advertising Rules. ]]
	In 2021, following a consumer complaint to the UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) by a member of the /r/starcitizen_refunds community, Cloud Imperium Games was required to modify its concept ship marketing emails after the ASA determined that they violated UK advertising rules<ref>https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/comments/pfgchs/uk_advertising_standards_agency_rule_concept_ship/</ref>, Cloud Imperium Games was needed to alter its concept ship marketing emails after the ASA determined they violated Advertising Rules in the UK. The issue centered on emails promoting concept ships without clear disclosure that the advertised vessels did not yet exist in the game. In response, CIG added a standardized disclaimer to their marketing emails stating that concept ships are "being offered here as a limited vehicle concept pledge". The disclaimer also notes that purchasers receive a temporary "loaner vehicle" until their bought ship becomes available.		In 2021, following a consumer complaint to the UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) by a member of the /r/starcitizen_refunds community, Cloud Imperium Games was required to modify its concept ship marketing emails after the ASA determined that they violated UK advertising rules<ref>https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/comments/pfgchs/uk_advertising_standards_agency_rule_concept_ship/ ([http://web.archive.org/web/20210831222423/https://old.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/comments/pfgchs/uk_advertising_standards_agency_rule_concept_ship/ Archived])</ref>, Cloud Imperium Games was needed to alter its concept ship marketing emails after the ASA determined they violated Advertising Rules in the UK. The issue centered on emails promoting concept ships without clear disclosure that the advertised vessels did not yet exist in the game. In response, CIG added a standardized disclaimer to their marketing emails stating that concept ships are "being offered here as a limited vehicle concept pledge". The disclaimer also notes that purchasers receive a temporary "loaner vehicle" until their bought ship becomes available.

	==Development status contradictions==		==Development status contradictions==
Line 44:		Line 44:

	==Development communication issues==		==Development communication issues==
	Squadron 42's "Answer the Call 2017" marketing campaign ultimately failed when CIG failed to deliver the promised single-player campaign, despite extensive marketing featuring a star-studded cast, including Mark Hamill, Gary Oldman, and Gillian Anderson. <ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Squadron_42</ref> Following community backlash over the missed release, CIG announced plans for a new project roadmap in late 2017. However, this evolved into what became known as the "Roadmap to the Roadmap," with a release view being finally available in March of 2018. When finally delivered, the new roadmap consistently showed missed deadlines and delayed features. Rather than address these delays, CIG ultimately discontinued much of the roadmap's progress tracker in February 2022, dismissively labeling concerned backers as "roadmap watchers" <ref>https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/3/thread/roadmap-roundup-february-2nd-2022</ref> and claiming that showing development progress "puts too much attention on features that had a high probability of shifting around" and was "a distraction both internally at CIG and within the community". This marked a significant departure from their previous promises of transparency and was met with substantial community backlash, particularly from backers who had used the roadmap to track progress on features they had purchased years earlier.		Squadron 42's "Answer the Call 2017" marketing campaign ultimately failed when CIG failed to deliver the promised single-player campaign, despite extensive marketing featuring a star-studded cast, including Mark Hamill, Gary Oldman, and Gillian Anderson. <ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Squadron_42 ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260221031725/https://starcitizen.tools/Squadron_42 Archived])</ref> Following community backlash over the missed release, CIG announced plans for a new project roadmap in late 2017. However, this evolved into what became known as the "Roadmap to the Roadmap," with a release view being finally available in March of 2018. When finally delivered, the new roadmap consistently showed missed deadlines and delayed features. Rather than address these delays, CIG ultimately discontinued much of the roadmap's progress tracker in February 2022, dismissively labeling concerned backers as "roadmap watchers" <ref>https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/3/thread/roadmap-roundup-february-2nd-2022 ([http://web.archive.org/web/20250814053537/https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/3/thread/roadmap-roundup-february-2nd-2022 Archived])</ref> and claiming that showing development progress "puts too much attention on features that had a high probability of shifting around" and was "a distraction both internally at CIG and within the community". This marked a significant departure from their previous promises of transparency and was met with substantial community backlash, particularly from backers who had used the roadmap to track progress on features they had purchased years earlier.

	==Consumer response==		==Consumer response==
	[[File:-r-Starcitizen Corruption.png\|thumb\|CIG Employee Zac Preece is requesting that a post be removed from the /r/starcitizen Reddit in a private Discord server. This post, by the Reddit moderator Ian (MrRiceGuy), didn't violate the rules, yet it was still removed anyway. ]]		[[File:-r-Starcitizen Corruption.png\|thumb\|CIG Employee Zac Preece is requesting that a post be removed from the /r/starcitizen Reddit in a private Discord server. This post, by the Reddit moderator Ian (MrRiceGuy), didn't violate the rules, yet it was still removed anyway. ]]
	The prolonged development timeline and sales practices have led to organized consumer response movements, notably the /r/starcitizen_refunds subreddit community, which has over 18,000 members.<ref>https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/</ref>. This subreddit serves as a platform for dissatisfied backers seeking refunds, documenting development delays, and tracking changes to terms of service that affect consumer rights. Discussion of these issues on official channels is heavily restricted, with CIG's Spectrum forum rules explicitly prohibiting posts deemed to spread "fear, uncertainty, and doubt" (FUD)<ref>https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/115013196427-Spectrum-and-Website-Rules-and-Moderation-Responsibilities</ref> and the discussion of support tickets/moderation decisions.		The prolonged development timeline and sales practices have led to organized consumer response movements, notably the /r/starcitizen_refunds subreddit community, which has over 18,000 members.<ref>https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/ ([http://web.archive.org/web/20250803112513/https://old.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/ Archived])</ref>. This subreddit serves as a platform for dissatisfied backers seeking refunds, documenting development delays, and tracking changes to terms of service that affect consumer rights. Discussion of these issues on official channels is heavily restricted, with CIG's Spectrum forum rules explicitly prohibiting posts deemed to spread "fear, uncertainty, and doubt" (FUD)<ref>https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/115013196427-Spectrum-and-Website-Rules-and-Moderation-Responsibilities ([http://web.archive.org/web/20250714211323/https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/115013196427-Spectrum-and-Website-Rules-and-Moderation-Responsibilities Archived])</ref> and the discussion of support tickets/moderation decisions.

	While unofficial communities, such as the /r/starcitizen subreddit and Discord server, exist, these spaces are heavily moderated to prevent discussion of negative sentiment due to the strong ties between their moderators and Cloud Imperium Games employees.		While unofficial communities, such as the /r/starcitizen subreddit and Discord server, exist, these spaces are heavily moderated to prevent discussion of negative sentiment due to the strong ties between their moderators and Cloud Imperium Games employees.
Line 56:		Line 56:
	==In-game moderation inconsistencies==		==In-game moderation inconsistencies==
	[[File:Example of Exessive Griefing .png\|thumb\|An example of a user being banned for the term 'Excessive Griefing' and being directed to review the terms of service and rules of conduct for a term that doesn't exist. ]]		[[File:Example of Exessive Griefing .png\|thumb\|An example of a user being banned for the term 'Excessive Griefing' and being directed to review the terms of service and rules of conduct for a term that doesn't exist. ]]
	The moderation practices of Cloud Imperium have drawn criticism for inconsistent and opaque enforcement. Users can receive bans for "excessive griefing" despite this term having no defined parameters in either the Terms of Service<ref>https://robertsspaceindustries.com/en/tos</ref> or Rules of Conduct<ref>https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/4409491235351-Rules-of-Conduct</ref> documentation. Users receive these bans without stated reasons, requiring them to file support tickets to learn of their alleged infractions. This lack of transparency and disconnect between written policies and enforcement has created significant uncertainty about what constitutes acceptable behavior.		The moderation practices of Cloud Imperium have drawn criticism for inconsistent and opaque enforcement. Users can receive bans for "excessive griefing" despite this term having no defined parameters in either the Terms of Service<ref>https://robertsspaceindustries.com/en/tos ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260204133014/https://robertsspaceindustries.com/en/tos Archived])</ref> or Rules of Conduct<ref>https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/4409491235351-Rules-of-Conduct ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251023231231/https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/4409491235351-Rules-of-Conduct Archived])</ref> documentation. Users receive these bans without stated reasons, requiring them to file support tickets to learn of their alleged infractions. This lack of transparency and disconnect between written policies and enforcement has created significant uncertainty about what constitutes acceptable behavior.

	Star Citizen's Persistent Universe, or PU for short, is an open sandbox that allows players to engage in PVP activities such as Piracy and Bounty Hunting, yet participating in these activities could lead a player to being banned for 'excessively' engaging in this activity under the guise of it being 'harassment' to do so.		Star Citizen's Persistent Universe, or PU for short, is an open sandbox that allows players to engage in PVP activities such as Piracy and Bounty Hunting, yet participating in these activities could lead a player to being banned for 'excessively' engaging in this activity under the guise of it being 'harassment' to do so.