waiting for resolution RAZBAM Situation Post Archive (will be deleted)

[Gizmo03]

vor 30 Minuten schrieb StarLiner:

I think this statement is the opposite of good, right? 

What i meant was it would be awesome if they could clarify the statements. It would be nice if RB comes back and continue their job finally. 
But i have to admit……

vor 34 Minuten schrieb StarLiner:

 but don't worry the module will be developed in some form, eventually.

…meanwhile this is all i‘m interested in. I always tried to defend them when they had again one if their „difficult phases“ - even during this Final Release of the Harrier disaster and i didn‘t regret it because they really pushed the Harrier after this <profanity>storm. But after this show in April i think i don‘t know what to defend anymore and how. I‘d rather like to see their modules in the hands of a more reliable team.

Regarding the „eventually“ in your comment:
At the moment there are serious and justified doubts if RB will come back to DCS. This is also affecting the development of the Strike Eagle cause in the worst case we will lose it completely and compared to that….. yes… „eventually“ is absolutely ok for me. I‘ve got a lot of patience.

But that‘s all just my personal opinion. 

[Horns]

8 hours ago, Gizmo03 said:

That would be awesome since this is already some kind of official statement, isn't it?

Kate is the ED COO I believe, so this is certainly someone who could speak on behalf of ED. For me, as a non-Russian speaker I personally would not call this a statement that the current F-15E module's future has been secured, because:

1. Any English-language translation is only going to approximate what was said, so we can't read any detail into word choice and such. I wouldn't want to read a statement of belief as a promise (Edit: For Instance).
2. If there was such a major breakthrough in the dispute that ED could categorically say the F-15E will definitely be developed, I'd think it would be made as an actual statement, or at least the OP in a thread, rather than a one-line reply within another thread.
3. I'd expect the new information to be getting incorporated in the OP of this thread directly.
4. We have no context on Kate's reply: we don't know what the thread this was posted in was about or what, if anything, Kate was replying to.

I'd love to see the F-15E's future guaranteed in the way Kate's statement has been received. I'd much rather that the issues of a module being abandoned and Razbam having a future in DCS would no longer be inextricably tied together. However, I'd need something much clearer than a DeepL (or whatever) translation of a one-line reply before I pop that champagne cork, even with Kate being the source of that reply.

Either way, I'll wait a while longer in the hopes that a clarification comes along, but I see why others might not see the need to be so cautious.

Edited November 28, 2024 by Horns

[Gizmo03]

vor 4 Minuten schrieb Horns:

Either way, I'll wait a while longer in the hopes that a clarification comes along, but I see why others might not see the need to be so cautious.

That‘s what i was asking for. I quoted your „request“ for a clarification and i just said that it would be awesome to have one because - as you said - as the COO she can speak in behalf of ED (ok, i called it an official statement which seems to make you a bit nervous). And if you don‘t want to call it a statement… fine. Replace the word „statement“ with the word „comment“ or whatever - for me it‘s the same because english is not my first language and i‘m not a lawyer - so i‘m not good in twisting words and analyzing who said what with which words in which way to figure out if it‘s legally useful or not.

Long story short: i just wanted the same as you.

[Horns]

1 minute ago, Gizmo03 said:

That‘s what i was asking for. I quoted your „request“ for a clarification and i just said that it would be awesome to have one because - as you said - as the COO she can speak in behalf of ED (ok, i called it an official statement which seems to make you a bit nervous). And if you don‘t want to call it a statement… fine. Replace the word „statement“ with the word „comment“ or whatever - for me it‘s the same because english is not my first language and i‘m not a lawyer - so i‘m not good in twisting words and analyzing who said what with which words in which way to figure out if it‘s legally useful or not.

Long story short: i just wanted the same as you.

Oh ok, understood, apologies for the tone. FWIW I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said on the subject. We both want the same thing 

[Gizmo03]

vor 9 Minuten schrieb Horns:

Oh ok, understood, apologies for the tone. FWIW I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said on the subject. We both want the same thing 

Ah no, it‘s ok. Your tone was fine. I just wanted to make clear that i have no idea of all these legal things and don‘t care if something is called this or that

[Joe1978]

En 28/11/2024 a las 9:22, BIGNEWY dijo:

Hey Starliner, I am not aware of any plans currently, I will ask but I suspect until the dispute is resolved we wont be able to say much. 

 

I would really appreciate it because neither of them (baltic_dragon/RB) take responsibility for it, and it is up to us, the users, to "solve" the problems of this campaign (and several others such as the Mig21).

[BigBorner]

16 hours ago, Horns said:

Kate is the ED COO I believe, so this is certainly someone who could speak on behalf of ED. For me, as a non-Russian speaker I personally would not call this a statement that the current F-15E module's future has been secured, because:

1. Any English-language translation is only going to approximate what was said, so we can't read any detail into word choice and such. I wouldn't want to read a statement of belief as a promise (Edit: For Instance).
2. If there was such a major breakthrough in the dispute that ED could categorically say the F-15E will definitely be developed, I'd think it would be made as an actual statement, or at least the OP in a thread, rather than a one-line reply within another thread.
3. I'd expect the new information to be getting incorporated in the OP of this thread directly.
4. We have no context on Kate's reply: we don't know what the thread this was posted in was about or what, if anything, Kate was replying to.

I'd love to see the F-15E's future guaranteed in the way Kate's statement has been received. I'd much rather that the issues of a module being abandoned and Razbam having a future in DCS would no longer be inextricably tied together. However, I'd need something much clearer than a DeepL (or whatever) translation of a one-line reply before I pop that champagne cork, even with Kate being the source of that reply.

Either way, I'll wait a while longer in the hopes that a clarification comes along, but I see why others might not see the need to be so cautious.

I mean, a statement by the acting COO of the operational entity of ED is pretty official. At least in my world it would be. And hence we’re all adults, one could just ask for clarification at the source. 

@Kate Perederko

Hi Kate, can you shed some light on the background of your comments? 

[Horns]

2 hours ago, BigBorner said:

I mean, a statement by the acting COO of the operational entity of ED is pretty official. At least in my world it would be. And hence we’re all adults, one could just ask for clarification at the source. 

@Kate Perederko

Hi Kate, can you shed some light on the background of your comments? 

I keep forgetting we can tag people direct, good call 

[Horns]

On 11/28/2024 at 8:58 PM, BIGNEWY said:

I don't have any new information to share currently. We continue to wait for a resolution to the dispute. 

So as far as you’re aware nothing has changed in recent weeks regarding the F-15E or anything else?

Edited November 30, 2024 by Horns
Added ‘E’ to F-15E

[PLAAF]

On 11/27/2024 at 2:15 AM, Horns said:

Translated here...

If this is meant as a promise I'm sure something more official will follow soon. In the meantime perhaps NL or BN can clarify?

What about the MiG-19 module? What will it become?

[Horns]

2 hours ago, PLAAF said:

What about the MiG-19 module? What will it become?

The MiG-19 left Early Access on 1/12/2023 according to the store page, so I’d presume the answer you’ll get is that ED will just try to maintain compatibility with future updates, like the other non-EA Razbam modules.

Once you get an official answer please ignore this in favor of that

[Maxthrust]

On 11/27/2024 at 10:17 PM, Ignition said:

ED needs as much 3rd parties as they can, the level of growth it had it wouldn't be possible alone.

The problem comes when military stuff gets mixed with gaming stuff, now the customers from a game pay the broken plates.

You hit the nail in there buddy. Must be a though one to swallow for razbam for sure.

Well now can someone carry on with the Mig-23 then?

[StarLiner]

These wounds weren't meant to heal

This pain is just too real 

Edited December 3, 2024 by StarLiner

[Citizen]

Welp.

[Oban]

1 hour ago, StarLiner said:

These wounds weren't meant to heal

This pain is just too real 

And yet nothing "official" from Razbam CEO or legal team, since when was Smiley appointed to be the Razbam spokesperson?

[Shimmergloom667]

3 hours ago, StarLiner said:

These wounds weren't meant to heal

This pain is just too real 

And you believe CptSmiley why?

Edited December 3, 2024 by Shimmergloom667

[Esac_mirmidon]

The slap of reality when everything is disclosed will resound so loud.......

 

[BIGNEWY]

Folks any news will Come from RAZBAM directly or Eagle Dynamics. 

Any thing else is noise

thank you 

[Nebula_Creates]

3 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Folks any news will Come from RAZBAM directly or Eagle Dynamics. 

Any thing else is noise

thank you 

Respectfully, all we've heard is noise, both from ED and RAZBAM. No one is giving us any information and it is beyond absurd at this point.

[BIGNEWY]

2 minutes ago, Nebula_Creates said:

Respectfully, all we've heard is noise, both from ED and RAZBAM. No one is giving us any information and it is beyond absurd at this point.

Respectfully, you have had the initial reply from us after RAZBAM went public and we have said that we need to wait for the dispute to be over.
We can not discuss the case in public, that would be irresponsible and unprofessional.  As soon as we can share news we will. 

thank you 

[AndyJWest]

7 hours ago, Esac_mirmidon said:

The slap of reality when everything is disclosed will resound so loud.......

 

Expecting 'everything' or even very much at all to be publicly disclosed seems optimistic. Regardless how this ends, neither party is likely to benefit from making the gory details available, and doing so would probably complicate matters further legally.

[Esac_mirmidon]

Its impossible to hide this forever. Internet is doorless. 

Sooner or later everything will be known

[ESA_maligno]

Well, it's great news that Razbam is redeveloping the M2000-5; taking into account that there is no environment similar to DCSW to sell it..., unless the announcement to the general public has been the product for Ad'A that no user will be able to use it. In my case I am inclined to believe that the agreement is close.

[Esac_mirmidon]

Edited December 3, 2024 by Esac_mirmidon

[Horns]

16 minutes ago, ESA_maligno said:

Well, it's great news that Razbam is redeveloping the M2000-5; taking into account that there is no environment similar to DCSW to sell it..., unless the announcement to the general public has been the product for Ad'A that no user will be able to use it. In my case I am inclined to believe that the agreement is close.

Is this announcement recent, and if so are you sure it's for DCS and not MSFS? I do remember them announcing they would do the 2k-5 for DCS, but that was some years ago...

Edit: @Esac_mirmidon beat me to it while I was typing...

Edited December 3, 2024 by Horns