Jump to content

Kotolom

Members
  • Posts

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Kickstarter backers got forced to accept $40 for 2 planes as a "good deal" and told anything less than that would be "financially unattainable" :mad:
  2. The point is that it's bad PR to treat your customers like that. I'm pretty sure the goal of DCS WW2 was to vastly broaden the appeal of DCS by attracting WW2 enthusiasts, who'd otherwise show little interest in a sim full of computer controlled jets. This taints the public image of DCS WW2 and all future DCS related kickstarters. I'm certainly not spending any money on DCS modules any time soon. Possibly on Mig-21 (who's creators did honor their backer's contracts despite the project creator running with the money), which I planned on buying before DCS WW2 happened, but that's it.
  3. Company A and B partner to make product Company A sells non yet existing product to get capital Company A spends capital to develop product Company A gives partly developed product to company B for free Company B hires company A's employees Company B still works with company A's owner Company B will earn all profits from selling the product Company B tells company A's customers to buy the same product again Nobody is going to sue either company because company B is technically not liable unless you can prove some sort of fraud and A is bankrupt and suing for $40 isn't worth it anyway.
  4. That's the fishy part. Ilya didn't vanish. He's still contracted to work for ED. Same goes for the majority of RRG who now work for ED. They must have made some deal with Ilya to aquire the assets that RRG has developed. If Ilya gave them away for free while defaulting on his depts, then that's fraud. "Project Creators are required to fulfill all rewards of their successful fundraising campaigns or refund any Backer whose reward they do not or cannot fulfill." Straight from the kickstarter terms of use
  5. The reason we do not know the facts is because neither ED or RRG disclose the nature of their joint venture or the nature of ED's acquisition of the project.
  6. Some of us are not and would rather have their money back. P51-D was on sale for as low as $10. $20 per plane is not what I would have agreed to on kickstarter. It was advertised as a joint venture between ED and RRG from the start. If ED hadn't put their name to it nobody would have given Luthier any money. I really wonder what the deal between ED and RRG is regarding RRG's assets. If ED paid for it, then Luthier should have some money to refund backers. If RRG gave what they had developed away for free then that's fraudulent in my book. Is RRG in receivership?
  7. Will chose P-47D and Me-262. Will not buy any of the other planes. Did the Typhoon get scrapped?
  8. Expecting backers to read these forums instead of being open and telling them through the usual communication channels of a KS project that there have been massive changes is what makes me most mad about this. This has all happened weeks ago, but I bet the majority of backers don't even know about it. I think ED is hurting their sales a lot by not fulfilling the rewards. Do they expect the people who now only get 2 planes to actually buy the other planes after release? ED's primary asset is their good reputation. Giving a few backers a refund or simply giving them all the planes they paid for is a small investment for in return getting a lot of good will and a WW2 project that would massively increase the appeal of DCS by opening the target market to WW2 enthusiasts who otherwise have little interest in modern planes. People backed this despite Ilya's history. They backed it primarily because Eagle Dynamics was behind this and supposedly in a joint venture or partnership with RRG Studios.
  9. Just found out about all this by randomly checking the Kickstarter comments because I was wondering what happened to the project. Still reading up on what happened, but I'm not happy about this situation at all. a) Why wasn't there an e-mail send to kickstarter backers to inform them of all these changes? b) I think it's very disappointing that ED thinks it's OK to take over all the assets that has been created with the kickstarter money and continue the project that was supposedly a joint venture from the beginning, but not feel responsible to honor the rewards that were sold in exchange for that money. If they took over a worthwhile project, then it should be no big deal to refund backers, since most backers would use their refund to buy DCS modules or the final DCS WW2 release anyway. Taking over the project and telling the backers to just accept the reduced rewards with no refund option leaves a very bitter aftertaste. I would have loved to use the refund to buy Mig-21 or F86-Sabre and then decide if I want to buy DCS WW2 when it releases. By cutting the rewards you're not enticing me to buy the DCS WW2 planes I'm now not getting after release. You're doing the exact opposite.
×
×
  • Create New...