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

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

"Stop selling RB modules!"
ED can't make that decision on their own because of legal obligations

But, when RB makes that request and ED complies (as they probably have to) and the suddenly great crimes have been committed.

It must be fun to be partisan.

[rob10]

3 hours ago, Jarhead0331 said:

It all begs the question, why, after a year, would Razbam make this request now? Furthermore, why would ED agree to it. There must be some contractual basis or development that led to this event.

Since ED have said due to contract that they couldn't remove it from sale barring an OFFICIAL request from Razbam or whatever other conditions in the contract might allow them to (meaning if they did remove it on their own they'd be liable for damages for breaking the contract) and now that Razbam has OFFICIALLY requested it's removal (and ED would be liable for damages for NOT removing it) it's pretty easy to understand why ED would agree to it.  As for the Razbam side, that's a guess because there doesn't seem to be lot of rationality to most of their actions in this affair.

[AJaromir]

29 minutes ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

"Stop selling RB modules!"
ED can't make that decision on their own because of legal obligations

But, when RB makes that request and ED complies (as they probably have to) and the suddenly great crimes have been committed.

It must be fun to be partisan.

RB OWNS the modules. RB is the only one who can pull the modules. That's why ED could not make that. Because RB did not make a request.

Even though the modules are sold on ED's website, they are still RB's modules and so ED must listen to their request. Just like in a regular store, for example, a supplier of oranges requests a recall of their products from that store.

Edited April 7 by AJaromir

[NineLine]

3 minutes ago, rob10 said:

Since ED have said due to contract that they couldn't remove it from sale barring an OFFICIAL request from Razbam or whatever other conditions in the contract might allow them to (meaning if they did remove it on their own they'd be liable for damages for breaking the contract) and now that Razbam has OFFICIALLY requested it's removal (and ED would be liable for damages for NOT removing it) it's pretty easy to understand why ED would agree to it.  As for the Razbam side, that's a guess because there doesn't seem to be lot of rationality to most of their actions in this affair.

This is correct, we were contractually bound to keep them up for sale, and we could not remove them from sale unless requested to by RB, this has finally been requested, and we are in the process of removing them. Why now and not the start we are unsure, but we are trying to follow along as we navigate the course to a full resolution. We will continue to support those that own the modules to keep them working as we have for over year now. 

[Bingo911]

Probably someone is contractually bound to pay Razbam, but that doesn't look like it happened. Now we are stuck with jets that aren't completed.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

2 minutes ago, NineLine said:

This is correct, we were contractually bound to keep them up for sale, and we could not remove them from sale unless requested to by RB, this has finally been requested, and we are in the process of removing them. Why now and not the start we are unsure, but we are trying to follow along as we navigate the course to a full resolution. We will continue to support those that own the modules to keep them working as we have for over year now. 

Be prepared to have to explain that several times over. To the same individuals.

[NineLine]

Just now, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

Be prepared to have to explain that several times over. To the same individuals.

Welcome to my life the last year

 

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

Humm, they are gone...

Edited April 7 by VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants

[NineLine]

1 minute ago, VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants said:

Humm, they are gone...

 

[UmamusumeMirage]

I hope to see an official explanation about this matter in this week's DCS news, after all, this is the first break news of DCS in 2025

[Mike Force Team]

Nick Grey should take responsibility by making an official response. The buck stops with him. 

 

Edited April 7 by Mike Force Team

[LordOrion]

4 minutes ago, UmamusumeMirage said:

I hope to see an official explanation about this matter in this week's DCS news, after all, this is the first break news of DCS in 2025

I think they did: RB asked for their product to be removed from the store and they comply.

[NineLine]

7 minutes ago, Mike Force Team said:

Nick Grey should take responsibility by making an official response. The buck stops with him. 

 

As you have been told over and over, it's a legal matter to be dealt with between the two teams within the confines of legal proceedings, we cannot make any official comments beyond what is in the original post here. Thanks. 

 

7 minutes ago, UmamusumeMirage said:

I hope to see an official explanation about this matter in this week's DCS news, after all, this is the first break news of DCS in 2025

Please scroll up one from your message, we already stated what happened. Thanks.

[Nightdare]

6 minutes ago, Mike Force Team said:

Nick Grey should take responsibility by making an official response. The buck stops with him. 

 

What makes him responsible?

To put it into context:

When was the last time you got arrested for being robbed?

[LordOrion]

1 hour ago, AJaromir said:

Many times ED has been accused of not pulling the module from the store. This is what I've been written the whole time. It is RAZBAM who control their modules in the ED store. 

Another really good point indeed!

[Jarhead0331]

1 hour ago, NineLine said:

...I am sorry to each and everyone of our customers that are being put through this rollercoaster ride. 

Technically it is not really a rollercoaster. It has pretty much been all down hill for us.

Edited April 7 by Jarhead0331

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

2 minutes ago, Jarhead0331 said:

Technically it is not really a rollercoaster. It has pretty much been all down hill for us.

Soapbox derby, then.

[Czar66]

1 hour ago, AJaromir said:

Steam have new EA rules. Once they are not updated for year, you will see "dead game" alert in the store page.

There is no Early Access for DLC, which the Strike Eagle is for DCS, in Steam.

The Early Access modules thing is only inside Eagle Dynamics ecosystem.

Edited April 7 by Czar66

[LordOrion]

My 2 cents: this is just another attempt form RB to put pressure on ED and, at the same time, do some captatio benevolentiae (capturing goodwill) among the customers.

[PD919]

10 hours ago, LordOrion said:

My 2 cents: this is just another attempt form RB to put pressure on ED and, at the same time, do some captatio benevolentiae (capturing goodwill) among the customers.

They could have requested the modules pulled a long time ago.  Their PR stunts don't work on the people that know them anymore.

Edited April 8 by PD919

[Czar66]

37 minutes ago, NineLine said:

This is correct, we were contractually bound to keep them up for sale, and we could not remove them from sale unless requested to by RB, this has finally been requested, and we are in the process of removing them. Why now and not the start we are unsure, but we are trying to follow along as we navigate the course to a full resolution. We will continue to support those that own the modules to keep them working as we have for over year now. 

So that claim ED was profiting on Razbam modules without Razbam consent can go to rest once and for all.

Very interesting Razbam kept them up for this long on stores, including Steam with their refund policy.

[Szprynmann]

4 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Please note:

After receiving an official request by RAZBAM to remove products from sale we have done so. All products will be fully supported by DCS and will continue to operate.

thank you 

@NineLine: Would you mind sharing to what extent will the modules be supported? Only those upgrades which are necessary to keep the modules alive while the core engine is undergoing major changes or will the ED take over some of the bug fixing burden?

I'm asking specifically in the context of ATHS problems with the AV8B.

[NineLine]

3 minutes ago, Szprynmann said:

@NineLine: Would you mind sharing to what extent will the modules be supported? Only those upgrades which are necessary to keep the modules alive while the core engine is undergoing major changes or will the ED take over some of the bug fixing burden?

I'm asking specifically in the context of ATHS problems with the AV8B.

What we have been able to do over the last year is what we can continue to do into the foreseeable future. We cannot make updates or add features. 

[Szprynmann]

Just now, NineLine said:

What we have been able to do over the last year is what we can continue to do into the foreseeable future. We cannot make updates or add features. 

Thanks, noted.

Good luck with resolving the issue with RB, I'm looking forward to it

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

11 minutes ago, LordOrion said:

My 2 cents: this is just another attempt form RB to put pressure on ED and, at the same time, do some captatio benevolentiae (capturing goodwill) among the customers.

Now, hold on. I'm not a fan, but someone pointed out elsewhere that he recalled a number of devs have left and RB does not a public list of employees. A possibility is that they feel that can't properly support these modules with a, perhaps, reduced set of manpower. If that is the case, then I'd view that as the responsible thing to do.

Them not listing this could have been their own legal representation telling them to just give customers the usual corpo-legal schpeil and not specifics. As they should have done from the get-go, really. On both topics.

14 minutes ago, PD919 said:

The could have requested the modules pulled a long time ago.  Their PR stunts don't work on the people that know them anymore.

There seems to be enough people, even here, who keep coming back to the same points even after they've had to explained to them over and over as to why this is the case. I guess it's hard to not be a crusader for justice on the internet.

 

14 minutes ago, Czar66 said:

So that claim ED was profiting on Razbam modules without Razbam consent can go to rest once and for all.

 

C'mon. You know it won't. Dozens upon dozens of pages later, the same folks show up, cry foul, have it explained to them, and then they seem to always manage to hit their factory reset switch before they go to bed and then return with the same grievance time and time again.