I'm glad I did my part.

I think kickstarting any game to the tune of hundreds or thousands of dollars is foolish for ordinary folks. If you’re wealthy, that’s a different story, but I’m betting we have more than a few people who hurt themselves financially for this game. If it’s your life’s dream, put in 200 bucks and have faith that enough other nerds will help.
AI combined with a small team of visionaries will probably be able to bang out a bigger space game in 20 years.

And after all MS has thrived on selling unfinished OS' for decennia and nobody complained.

Ahyes. I member, 6... 7 years ago... the time it surfaced. The PC crowd full of enthusiam and bravado.

What do you mean "so?" Big fancy maps take time to make, especially with the tech on display here. Doesn't matter what you think of the quality - I wasn't arguing that. Regardless of what you think of the quality of the game's mechanics, it absolutely cannot be argued that 5 years or less is a reasonable development timeframe for the scope of game these guys are making. The ambition of the city-planet specifically is to be just as dense and complex as any city in a standard open world game. This is what people bought into, and it's a cursory aspect of the game. To pretend that that isn't drastically more ambitious than anything that has come before and would therefore require more dev time is to deny the obvious.

Also, people have "something." The game is playable in its development state right now. You're acting like nothing has been done with those $200m and 5 massive teams over those 6-7 years and, again, you're acting like just because you're not seeing the assets, not enough is being done. The game is being built from scratch while implementing completely new, industry-changing, technologies. Coding procedural planetary-city generation software from scratch, for redundant example, that has never before been implemented or created in any game literally ever is not a cursory task. It is, however, an unceremonious one because it's not something you can show off until it's almost done. It's like when people complained about BotW's dev time and lack of showing anything off when most of what likely dragged that game's development was building physics engine. It's silly and shows a complete lack of appreciation for what game development actually entails.

What I mean by "so"? Well it means how you read it, am I meant to be impressed by a big fancy map alone? What exactly do you do on this big fancy map you're trying to hype? What are the applications employed? I've seen a number of smaller games that are still big and keep things straight forward in their focus that have turned out to be spectacular games more so than many that tried to be complex, BOTW, GOW, Nier:A, HZD etc... Speaking of BOTW even with it's delay we saw gameplay 6 months after the announcement then two years later a proper reveal of the game before it's release 9 months later that's 5 years compared to the 8 here and still counting and Star Citizen was announced even before BOTW and the other mentioned games and has a much higher budget than any of these games as well. From the videos I've watched of this I feel I'm being shown more of a tech demo than what's supposed to draw players into the game.

They put up a crowdfunding campaign that had a date that passed 5 years ago so don't give me that about taking time as being in pre-alpha is still not a release nor anywhere close to it despite 8 years so people are obviously going to be skeptical at this point especially as the is a history of such ambitious projects in this industry that drag on becoming vaporware or releasing in concerning states. We've seen situations many times where this ambition becomes a hindrance to the project and by the time the game releases it's form that doesn't execute the many things it tries to do right while simpler games end up executing the few things they do brilliantly.