The way development works, sometimes putting too many resources into a single task can cause delays. However, you can add more parrallel projects without interference, usually. Therefore star citizen's module system/stretch goals
You, and the following posts seem to miss the point completely. Rallying about pushing the gfx boundaries or (totally wtf "economy of the future" just goes wildly off tangent here. Nobody`s denying the right for these things to exists - it`s just that the way the stretch goal driven crowdfunding model is deeply flawed and in extreme cases like this, dishonest.
Imagine you can only make basic 3d models unless you hire a new graphic designer - that designer costs 20,000. Do you decide to set the initial goal higher to get him on board anyway (meaning you might not get the funding at all) or do you decide to let the consumer base choose whether or not they care enough about advanced 3d models, whilst still making sure the game gets enough funding anyway?
I don't get what part of it is deeply flawed, or flawed at all. The company starts off with a premise for a game which is small and achievable, and then they set stretch goals for what would make the game even better if they had the resources. That makes complete sense from both a consumer and business point of view.
I do agree that SOME games have poor stretch goals, and that some are unfortunately putting most of the game as stretch goals, but that's individual projects. Star Citizen doesn't seem like that - the stretch goals are for the most part not 'core gameplay'. Those that you might argue are a core part (like alien language) are well suited to stretch goals, as you would presumably need to hire someone who can do that sort of thing.
I also personally hate the idea of anyone telling anyone what they can spend their money on (as long as it's not illegal and they are an adult capable of basic mental capacity). I'll reiterate it - who are we to choose what is worthy of money and what isn't? For me, I think that games are a worthy purchase - others see games as the same level of frivolity as gambling or drugs. Would you prefer to set arbitrary limits on how much we are allowed to spend on virtual products? how would you define a virtual product as 'worth the money'? - it's all relative