PGS Windows 10 gaming handheld - GPD WIN competitor

[vcoleiro1]

@Exophase

Don't forget that one of the KS rules is to explicitly show a working prototype, and in fact , that was the rule that got the Skarp razer booted. Yes, they are still breaking one rule.

But I agree, I wouldn't stoop low and report them.

 

[Exophase]

@Exophase

Don't forget that one of the KS rules is to explicitly show a working prototype, and in fact , that was the rule that got the Skarp razer booted. Yes, they are still breaking one rule.

But I agree, I wouldn't stoop low and report them.

I thought the rule was that you needed to show a working prototype if and only if you have photorealistic renders. Hence why they downgraded their render quality.

Skarp Laser Razer could have technically run afoul of that but it was a pretty dumb application of the rule.

 

[vcoleiro1]

I thought the rule was that you needed to show a working prototype if and only if you have photorealistic renders. .

Short answer, no, that's not the case.

https://www.kickstarter.com/rules/prototypes

 

[Exophase]

Short answer, no, that's not the case.

https://www.kickstarter.com/rules/prototypes

I think they changed the wording at some point. Maybe this was the original intent and they updated the wording to be more in line with it. I never thought the old rule made a lot of sense.

When push comes to shove, they're going to argue that they have a prototype and it's really going to come down to KS's opinion of exactly what qualifies as one. On some level someone could argue that what they're showing "does" the function it's supposed to, while on some other level someone else could argue Skarp didn't. I have a feeling that the background, knowledge, and preferences/bias of the KS reviewer play a big role in this, and maybe the level of outside media buzz and negative attention the project is getting along with overall amount raised. And maybe also because Skarp was promising a quite groundbreaking new application of technology that demanded more proof of concept. The Skarp cancellation was not a very ordinary thing to happen, if every project w/o a true well approximating in form/fit/function prototype got booted I think we'd see it happening all the time.

 

[vcoleiro1]

Lets be honest here, if people complained to KS, and KS actually got around to seeing those complaints amongst the zillions they must get everyday. Then I'd find it hard to believe they would not toss the PGS project for breaking that rule. Hard to argue a tablet and ipega controller with a rough shell are in the spirit of the rule to explicitly show a working prototype. Even the 3d print connected to third party items didn't even have anaologue sticks in it - just blank holes

That would be like me starting a KS to develop a car, only for me to show a Ford Explorer with no wheels, and doors I made out of foam . I then said, yep, explicit prototype. It aint going to fly.

By the way, to anyone reading this, I do not condone reporting them.

 

[FlapJack]

C

As I mentioned before, Skarp showed a prototype also, it was orders of magnitude better than what PGS showed. So if you are looking for precedence, there's that.

Lets be honest here, if a number of people complained to KS, and KS actually got around to seeing those complaints amongst the zillions they must get everyday. Then I'd find it hard to believe they would not toss the PGS project for breaking that rule. Hard to argue a tablet and ipega controller with a rough shell are in the spirit of the rule to explicitly show a working prototype.

That would be like me starting a KS to develop a car, only for me to show a Ford Explorer with doors I made out of foam and said, yep, explicit prototype. It aint going to fly.

By the way, to anyone reading this, I do not condone reporting them.

Could also be that Kickstarter wants the 10% gratuity for doing nothing. They must be losing some of the potential gloabl market place for such aspirations. Indiegogo, GoFundMe, Crowdrise, BuzZbnk, Fundly, I'm not even doing this horrifically long list justice. There are tens of dozens of crowd-funding sites now. Look at what GPD Win did with their latest handheld. They hit a half-dozen sites with their product. Maybe Kickstarter started out with the greatest intentions of their own, but in order to make money? They might just look the other way. #greed

 

[vcoleiro1]

You need to understand how big KS is and,how many projects they get. I doubt very much that they do much of any vetting. The thing then, is when these projects go live, so many people complain that they are flooded with complaints. So you then need to hope that they get to your complaint and review it.

Them looking at the cash is probably a factor, but there is a risk for them also, if a project broke their rules and falied, the backers would have legal recourse against KS for allowing the project against their rules.

KS really need to be careful though, if a project didn't meet their rules and slipped through to the end and eventually failed. Then that would open the door for legal action against KS for allowing a project that broke their rules. Might be the wake up call they need.

 

[FlapJack]

You need to understand how big KS is and,how many projects they get. I doubt very much that they do much of any vetting. There are so many dodgy projects . The thing then, is when these projects go live, so many people complain that they are flooded with complaints. So you then need to hope that they get to your complaint and review it.

Could be that. That they are now soooo big, that the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. Maybe. I have NO idea why this is still up on KS. It seems to violate most of their rules - at least at some point or another. The "team" seems to monitor these boards (among others) and use them to realize their next step in their deception....errr, campaign.

 

[vcoleiro1]

Well , I don't think they are scammers. I think they are dreamers.

 

[FlapJack]

Well , I don't think they are scammers. I think they are dreamers.

Maybe "that" distinction will help to soothe the backers woes, when they look at their empty wallets.
[doublepost=1467947378,1467945903][/doublepost]...BUT, aren't they "scammers"? You've been watching this KS train-wreck unfold. They lied before they were supposedly "forced by these imaginary investors" to go to Kickstarter? You've pointed out many examples of their inconsistencies. They've mislead at almost every turn, and then when called on their lies (misrepresentations of the truth), they come up with new ideas on how to appease the backers. Looking at how this vaporware-handheld has been "developed", in a 3-D CAD program and in someone's imagination...it will NEVER be real.

They DON'T have a prototype. They are banking on the hundreds of thousands of dollars of support so that they can come up with a product after collection of the funds? Get real.

 

[vcoleiro1]

Ok, I find there is something a little strange with the company staff announcements

1) The KS video shows 14 people, but they told me on reddit AMA recently that they have only 7 staff, some may have left over time as it was an old video. They did say they had others in the past . Ok, so that's fair enough

2) Lola the actress is there legal affairs manager ?

3) Alan Williams in the KS video - the lead guy, is said to be the Product designer, yet in the KS update the other day, he is billed as the Community manager. Odd role change don't you think, particularly when they need a product designer

4) The KS update now has them at 6 staff

5) I can't find anything on the other members of their staff other than for the CEO who was exposed before the KS update, and Lola the actress .

 

[FlapJack]

Ok, I find there is something a little strange with the company staff announcements

1) The KS video shows 14 people, but they told me on reddit AMA recently that they have only 7 staff, some may have left over time as it was an old video. They did say they had others in the past . Ok, so that's fair enough

2) Lola the actress is there legal affairs manager ?

3) Alan Williams in the KS video - the lead guy, is said to be the Product designer, yet in the KS update the other day, he is billed as the Community manager. Odd role change don't you think, particularly when they need a product designer

4) The KS update now has them at 6 staff

5) I can't find anything on the other members of their staff other than for the CEO who was exposed before the KS update, and Lola the actress .

...and that's not all. If you dig deep enough, you'll find out that "they" are rather fluid. The business (LLC? by an Arabic Gentleman living in Michigan) has the business, yet the American team is in China and the Russian team is running things, but they have great Japanese Engineers somewhere? Yet they hope to rent an office in Detroit, MI USA? They don't even know how to lie well.

 

[vcoleiro1]

I think the guy noted on their LLC filing is the agent that people go to start companies. So that isn't odd to me.

I can possibly understand that Lola the actress is helping them and helped start some things for them. It just seems like they slapped that legal affairs title on her. Who knows, maybe she is also a legal affairs person. It just sounds all a little weird combined with everything else.

 

[FlapJack]

I think the guy noted on their LLC filing is the agent that people go to start companies. So that isn't odd to me.

I can possibly understand that Lola the actress is helping them and helped start some things for them. It just seems like they slapped that legal affairs title on her. Who knows, maybe she is also a legal affairs person. It just sounds all a little weird combined with everything else.

I'm not familiar with her. If she's an actress and is being hired to prop up more "advertising" support for this vaporware, then it's even worse than I imagined. Their margins are already squeezed to nothing (actually negative). It just looks like they're trying to promise the heavens and the moon with their insane stretch goals in order to get more funds from the rubes. Maybe it should be shut down.
[doublepost=1467950486,1467950323][/doublepost]I do believe in "caveat emptor", but it's really disheartening when so many people are taken. It borders on "Why didn't I do something to prevent this???"

 

[vcoleiro1]

Look at the comments section of their KS page, everything said here has been said there countless times. Yet people still back it. Negative comments there are overwhelming. yet people still back it.
I think most people there know there are red flags and this is extremely risky. Yet they continue to back it. What can you say, hopefully PGS have an investor to bail them out.

 

[FlapJack]

That Wrath of Kahn person said something along the lines of that the supporters only have themselves to blame. There is certainly that to consider.....but this will get messy.

I do appreciate the openness of the Pyra and even the latter stages of the Pandora development(s) after ED took over from Craig. I will purchase AGAIN from this company - they do things right/correctly.

 

[Exophase]

Some people just don't have the experience or knowledge to be able to see the red flags in a device like this. What they see now is the hundreds of other people who backed it and that speaks loudly.

PGSLab themselves may not understand the problems...

I still hold KS themselves more accountable than anyone, although at least they tightened up the restrictions a bit. But they do as little as they possibly can, extremely little oversight, and put all of the risk on the backers and project creators.

Interestingly, even KS themselves say you can run projects that are only intended for R&D, where the output is developing a prototype and the deliverable is showing people what you developed and moving on to the next phase. I don't know why we don't ever seem to see people actually do this. The process is better for all parties involved, so long as the backers can be convinced to pay for something that won't turn into an immediate deliverable. For a project like this you'd think several would be.

Most investment in the real world (as well as fixed price contracting) would also be tiered with similar milestones.

 

[FlapJack]

Some people just don't have the experience or knowledge to be able to see the red flags in a device like this. What they see now is the hundreds of other people who backed it and that speaks loudly.

PGSLab themselves may not understand the problems...

I still hold KS themselves more accountable than anyone, although at least they tightened up the restrictions a bit. But they do as little as they possibly can, extremely little oversight, and put all of the risk on the backers and project creators.

Interestingly, even KS themselves say you can run projects that are only intended for R&D, where the output is developing a prototype and the deliverable is showing people what you developed and moving on to the next phase. I don't know why we don't ever seem to see people actually do this. The process is better for all parties involved, so long as the backers can be convinced to pay for something that won't turn into an immediate deliverable. For a project like this you'd think several would be.

Most investment in the real world (as well as fixed price contracting) would also be tiered with similar milestones.

If that is true: "even KS themselves say you can run projects that are only intended for R&D, where the output is developing a prototype and the deliverable is showing people what you developed and moving on to the next phase" then THAT is ill conceived by KS, but in 22 days...this PGS company needs to show a prototype then? Right? When do they need to show a real product? This is insane.
[doublepost=1467953575,1467953350][/doublepost]If it's their contention that they're collecting massive funds (hundreds of thousands of dollars) in order to actually start to figure out how to make the product that they promised? This is out-right fraud. I can't believe that people can buy into this.

 

[Exophase]

If that is true: "even KS themselves say you can run projects that are only intended for R&D, where the output is developing a prototype and the deliverable is showing people what you developed and moving on to the next phase" then THAT is ill conceived by KS, but in 22 days...this PGS company needs to show a prototype then? Right? When do they need to show a real product? This is insane.
[doublepost=1467953575,1467953350][/doublepost]If it's their contention that they're collecting massive funds (hundreds of thousands of dollars) in order to actually start to figure out how to make the product that they promised? This is out-right fraud. I can't believe that people can buy into this.

Not sure if I was being totally clear. What I meant is that KS allows prototype projects, where you fund the project then they use the money to develop a prototype. The obvious difference is that those projects don't promise backers a shipped product, they just promise that they'll show the prototype.

KS says you can do these prototype projects but they don't seem to encourage it and I'm not sure the system is really well setup for it. Really they should fixed contribution caps that are some multiple of the goal, because the project's output doesn't scale with the total contribution.

In PGS's case, since the project is for a delivered product, they needed to show a prototype before starting. It's already too late, they've broken the rules. They probably think the thing they showed and called a prototype qualifies as one, or at least they thought people would be convinced. At least they described it accurately, rather than trying to pass it off as something it wasn't. They couldn't turn what they have into a prototype development project, it never qualified.

 

[FlapJack]

Not sure if I was being totally clear. What I meant is that KS allows prototype projects, where you fund the project then they use the money to develop a prototype. The obvious difference is that those projects don't promise backers a shipped product, they just promise that they'll show the prototype.

KS says you can do these prototype projects but they don't seem to encourage it and I'm not sure the system is really well setup for it. Really they should fixed contribution caps that are some multiple of the goal, because the project's output doesn't scale with the total contribution.

In PGS's case, since the project is for a delivered product, they needed to show a prototype before starting. It's already too late, they've broken the rules. They probably think the thing they showed and called a prototype qualifies as one, or at least they thought people would be convinced. At least they described it accurately, rather than trying to pass it off as something it wasn't. They couldn't turn what they have into a prototype development project, it never qualified.

Yes. That's the way that I see it as well. I can't improve on your last paragraph. Good Night, Exophase.