As for me I have no worries I believe in SMS as much as many other top developers that receive a lot of praise and am engaged into their titles.
Where I draw the line is when someone is called a moron for wanting to put forth a large sum into something they believe in. This was done by a couple of people there. Very Wrong for it to happen. This person never did a damn thing to deserve the comments directed at him.
I was thinking last year, a fella nicknamed Micas used to "walk" around here and boast about his thousands of dollars invested into the project. No one called him a single name because of that; his behaviour, though, provoked others into insulting him as well (classic, he posted long walls of text filled with insults, inevitably people shot back - wrong, for sure, but understandable).
Don't remember anyone calling an investor or a potential investor any names lately. If that actually happen, it's obvious who the "moron" is - and it's not he or she who wants to invest his or her own money.
But why, I wonder do people have so much faith into this? For me, the previous game titles from SMS and the way they got promoted destroyed any positive reputation.
That is an interesting question. Why indeed. I think not all investors are avid simracers or even have a passing interest in simulations. This was proven last year when Micas and some others came here to "explain" what was happening. If that is so, then it's not a matter of faith but of classic investment risk taking.
But some of those that became members seem to...er...feverishly believe in the concept (community based development). Which, obviously, no longer is in effect from the moment that different members with different investments have a different weight/say on development/management matters. Micas was quite clear about that, and to be fair, that is how investments work - the more you put in the more you can say about important matters (or any matter).
For it to be a truly community project, each member should have the opportunity to contribute with whatever they chose (from 25 Euros up, for sure), but each member would share the same rights/responsibilities in decision making. Different people, but any voice as important as the next. Then, either SMS would make some decisions based on the majority of votes by the "community", or at the very least statistics (opinion polls or even important votes) would influence some of the objectives of the project. That would be quite close to "community development".
That would require some risks, which SMS or other companies would not or will not take. Understandable too.
Regarding previous game titles:
I cannot accept hype, it is a repulsive albeit sophisticated way of lying to potential customers. Marketing departments such as the one from iRacing are examples example of what NOT TO DO. Other examples exist as well, but iRacing is by far the most explicit in this regard.
I don't think SMS has had any bearing in the marketing of previous titles. The Shift series is controlled by EA; EA is known for hyping any thing, from the "ultra realism of FIFA" (oh my...) to Shift titles being "stunningly realistic". Test Drive Ferrari Legends was/is controlled by ATARI.
It is true that both Ian and Doug said (in interviews) some relevant things about how promising the new physics engine was, but that pales in comparison to iRacing's marketing dept. claims or EA's promotional "skills".
Either can I believe in a revolutionary project that uses progressive membership dues and still talks about equality among the members. The only equality that existed, was to buy oneself into a membership, best of all - a manager status. It's business and the people have to buy into it and therefore I refuse to talk about equality in a world, built on neocapitalism.
Stratification was inevitable when a bigger investment allows that member different things.
Pure business, not a community as some hoped for. That said, I doubt there is a single member who didn't know what exactly he/she was getting into. The WMD portal was quite clear about different types of membership and what they entitled their owners.