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

[av8orDave]

57 minutes ago, Hiob said:

@Aapje There is no underdog bonus in legal contracts. People need to stop romantacising the matter.

This. Somehow it seems many seem to conflate "they are smaller" with "they should be paid no matter what." If there was a breach of contract, size likely doesn't mean anything. For those who are about to chime in asking "how do you know Razbam breached contract?", save your breath. You could just as easily ask how you know they didn't.

[Ignition]

8 hours ago, cfrag said:

Which makes RZ the ones being unprofessional. You simply don't bring your inner disputes to the customer. I'm not a fan of ED's communication, but in this case not saying anything until the entire issue is resolved is what pros do. RZ is taking a childish approach, trying to win in the public space what can't be decided by the public.

So, how would you explain to your customers the pause on development for an unknown period of time? Remember its been 14 months since the last Razbam development update

[LordOrion]

7 minutes ago, Ignition said:

So, how would you explain to your customers the pause on development for an unknown period of time? Remember its been 14 months since the last Razbam development update

Crying that ED does not pay you and you can't work for free, which is exactly what RB did.

 

[cfrag]

1 hour ago, Aapje said:

I think that you are ignoring that there is a big disparity in size.

Yes. Because size is irrelevant when it comes to contract law.

1 hour ago, Aapje said:

Because ED chooses to do business with third parties, the disputes with those third parties are not 'inner.'

They are. Anything else is starkly unprofessional and a breach of business confidentiality. 

1 hour ago, Aapje said:

As far as I can tell,

You can't. All you heard is intentional, untrustworthy hearsay.

1 hour ago, Aapje said:

that doesn't mean that the modules will remain in DCS

Indeed. And that's between you and ED. I'm in the same boat. I trusted ED when they sold me all those modules (Mudhen, Harrier, Falklands, ...), and I expect them (ED) to be good to their word. I won't hear any excuses about some rogue supplier or other sob story. I'm ED's customer, and they will answer to me if they want my continued patronage.

Just now, Ignition said:

how would you explain to your customers the pause on development for an unknown period of time?

Like all others, and DCS has (unfortunately) ample precedence. My beloved Viggen and Yak have gone some 8 years without meaningful improvements. If push came to shove, the official line is usually 'ongoing internal discussions about the future of some product'; if it doesn't work out with a supplier, they are 'permanently put into maintenance mode' or simply 'no longer for sale'. Wouldn't be the first time. And yes, I own the Hawk. You simply do not launder your dirty underwear in public. That helps nobody.

[Ignition]

7 minutes ago, cfrag said:

Yes. Because size is irrelevant when it comes to contract law.

They are. Anything else is starkly unprofessional and a breach of business confidentiality. 

You can't. All you heard is intentional, untrustworthy hearsay.

Indeed. And that's between you and ED. I'm in the same boat. I trusted ED when they sold me all those modules (Mudhen, Harrier, Falklands, ...), and I expect them (ED) to be good to their word. I won't hear any excuses about some rogue supplier or other sob story. I'm ED's customer, and they will answer to me if they want my continued patronage.

Like all others, and DCS has (unfortunately) ample precedence. My beloved Viggen and Yak have gone some 8 years without meaningful improvements. If push came to shove, the official line is usually 'ongoing internal discussions about the future of some product'; if it doesn't work out with a supplier, they are 'permanently put into maintenance mode' or simply 'no longer for sale'. Wouldn't be the first time. And yes, I own the Hawk. You simply do not launder your dirty underwear in public. That helps nobody.

You are forgetting Razbam just released a module a few months earlier with a lot of features missing, you need to explain to your community you may pause its development for many months (14 months now).

You're assuming the Viggen and of COURSE the YAK! have the same complexity in development and are in the same condition of the F-15E after years of being released.

Edited April 11 by Ignition

[cfrag]

16 minutes ago, Ignition said:

You are forgetting Razbam just released a module a few months earlier with a lot of features missing

I did not. ED decided to go ahead and sell an unfinished module to their (ED's) customers. Their call, their risk. I don't want to hear sob stories afterwards. ED decided that their customers will buy anyway. ED will now have to defend why they did so, and I don't want to hear a single 'RAZ' in their justification. So ED picked a fight with one of their suppliers? I don't want to know. ED is responsible to keep their house in order, and none of that must ever spill over. That's how business is done. Clown shows are for Circuses.

[LordOrion]

18 minutes ago, cfrag said:

I did not. ED decided to go ahead and sell an unfinished module to their (ED's) customers. Their call, their risk. I don't want to hear sob stories afterwards. ED decided that their customers will buy anyway. ED will now have to defend why they did so, and I don't want to hear a single 'RAZ' in their justification. So ED picked a fight with one of their suppliers? I don't want to know. ED is responsible to keep their house in order, and none of that must ever spill over. That's how business is done. Clown shows are for Circuses.

Please, replaced "ED decided" with "ED AND RB decided" in the above.

And I'm not 100% sure that "ED AND RB decided"  is correct too: ED didn't ask to RB to develop the F-15E for DCS, RB did. So there is a good chance that actually RB decided to release before having all features done, which is also a common practice of all DCS developers, including ED.

18 minutes ago, cfrag said:

 So ED picked a fight with one of their suppliers? I don't want to know. ED is responsible to keep their house in order, and none of that must ever spill over.

I understand you are pissed for this situation (we all are), but blaming ED for RB stopped to ship updates is a nonsense.

Edited April 11 by LordOrion

[CarbonFox]

As a customer, I just hope this entire situation has a positive outcome where we don't see these modules die.

[LordOrion]

Just now, CarbonFox said:

As a customer, I just hope this entire situation has a positive outcome where we don't see these modules die.

So say we all.

[Czar66]

On 4/11/2025 at 12:38 PM, CarbonFox said:

As a customer, I just hope this entire situation has a positive outcome where we don't see these modules die.

Me too. The best Christmas gift would be to see the Harrier (even though I don't own it) , M-2000C, MiG-19 and.....e s p e c i a l y the F-15E back in the changelogs with the gang of other modules, and this thing going away just like a memory of a bad dream or that feeling of module pre release/pre purchase period where everyone seems angry in anxiety but forgets it all after launch day.

I can but I don't want to trade the F-15E for the C at all. This one was the flagship of modern fighter jets (blue side) for me.

Yes, I'll be forever annoying about the F-15E. It is irreplaceable. A good blend of a few things that are found on HB and ED modules + own RB stuff.

Anything else is wack talk.

Edited April 12 by Czar66

[Rosebud47]

Well then, let´s wait for Santa Clause fixing everything.

[Aapje]

3 hours ago, Hiob said:

@Aapje There is no underdog bonus in legal contracts. People need to stop romantacising the matter.

My point was that the underdog has an incentive to make things public, also because PR damage does scale with the size of the company.

[Aapje]

2 hours ago, cfrag said:

You can't. All you heard is intentional, untrustworthy hearsay.

It's more than hearsay, because a document has leaked with the allegations by ED against Razbam. Since neither side has called this a fake document, it's very likely real.

That takes care of one part of what I wrote. The other part about not getting paid has been made public by Razbam, so that's not hearsay either.

2 hours ago, cfrag said:

I trusted ED when they sold me all those modules (Mudhen, Harrier, Falklands, ...), and I expect them (ED) to be good to their word.

In my opinion, they made unsustainable promises, or at least created expectations that they cannot make good on. Even just doing maintenance on an ever increasing list of modules, means that it is ever more work to simply stay in place, let alone make progress. And many people expect continued development because a module is not done in their eyes, even though ED considers it to be finished.

[Hammer1-1]

It always bothers me that when peoples preferred...whatever it may; whether political parties, brands, animals, food, helicopters, city...you know, whatever...that when they stab their customer in the back, its always someone elses fault. In the case of animals, its whatever environment that makes them what they are. People are stupidly blinded by their preferences, so it really bugs me when I see people sticking up for Razbam when it was they who dropped support on their products (and not just in DCS either, btw). That goes for ED as well, as there are plenty of criticisms and drama from years gone by. Ive criticized both Razbam and ED for the better part of 20+ years. I only see one group of people right now acting like man-children, and its not ED.

Point is...is that people really should just STFU about the drama, quit pointing fingers, and just accept the fact that whats done is done. You arent helping your cause.

[cfrag]

14 minutes ago, Aapje said:

Since neither side has called this a fake document, it's very likely real.

Those are a lot of unfounded assumptions.

[Rosebud47]

vor 29 Minuten schrieb Hammer1-1:

It always bothers me that when peoples preferred...whatever it may; whether political parties, brands, animals, food, helicopters, city...you know, whatever...that when they stab their customer in the back, its always someone elses fault. In the case of animals, its whatever environment that makes them what they are. People are stupidly blinded by their preferences, so it really bugs me when I see people sticking up for Razbam when it was they who dropped support on their products (and not just in DCS either, btw). That goes for ED as well, as there are plenty of criticisms and drama from years gone by. Ive criticized both Razbam and ED for the better part of 20+ years. I only see one group of people right now acting like man-children, and its not ED.

Point is...is that people really should just STFU about the drama, quit pointing fingers, and just accept the fact that whats done is done. You arent helping your cause.

Thats a good point! Its not all bad. Through all of this Razbam stuff, there is now an opportunity for Eagle Dynamics to turn the page and level up to finally stop selling illusions and work on things DCS pilots and flight sim enthusiasts really want, need and expect from DCS World.

There are now a lot of brilliant 3rd party developers on this platform, who provide high quality and constantly pushing the envelop by delivering ( DELIVERING! ) great simulators. Not only the aircraft modules, but also the maps by UGRA or OrbX and the newer ED maps deliver more than expected quality.

Let me put it this way: Stepping on to that path of consequently and entirely delivering (!) high quality stuff for us comes with a sacrifice in the DCS World community...

[Aapje]

2 hours ago, cfrag said:

Those are a lot of unfounded assumptions.

No, they are founded assumptions.

[Ignition]

4 hours ago, cfrag said:

I did not. ED decided to go ahead and sell an unfinished module to their (ED's) customers. Their call, their risk. I don't want to hear sob stories afterwards. ED decided that their customers will buy anyway. ED will now have to defend why they did so, and I don't want to hear a single 'RAZ' in their justification. So ED picked a fight with one of their suppliers? I don't want to know. ED is responsible to keep their house in order, and none of that must ever spill over. That's how business is done. Clown shows are for Circuses.

You're continuously evading how would you answer to thousands of customers wanting an update on their module after 14 months without development. You say Razbam shouldn't have said anything and should've kept silent for 14 months without updates. Well, you need to answer to your customers at some point. There's no way to keep such thing under the rug for so much time.

If you quote someone you should quote the whole paragraph and not cut the middle of a phrase.

[NineLine]

Guys, everyone needs to relax a little, no one here in this thread is going to solve this or be able to find all the details. So don't fight with each other over things nobody really knows or understands. 

[Horns]

I saw a letter that said it was from Marshall and accused Colson of stealing his hairdryer. I asked Marshall if he’s seen the letter but he hasn’t talked about his beef with Colson and won’t start now. I asked Colson and he just said “Marshall’s accused me of that before”. I sat on a park bench to think and a big tree branch landed on my head. After that, I came to the obvious conclusion that since neither of them said it was fake the letter must be legit.

Anyway, enough about my day, I’m off to sue the council.

[Nightdare]

11 hours ago, LordOrion said:

Please, replaced "ED decided" with "ED AND RB decided" in the above.

 

Uhm, no, he is correct, no 3rd party decides what goes into the ED shop, the final word is ED in that matter

[Hammer1-1]

Yep, ED has to evaluate the model to see if it meets certain criteria before approving it for release candidate. This is probably why we dont have an F4U as of yet...

[NineLine]

3 hours ago, Nightdare said:

 

Uhm, no, he is correct, no 3rd party decides what goes into the ED shop, the final word is ED in that matter

Yes and no, the 3rd Parties have a say on many things, but we might expect a certain level on certain things. The EA vs no-EA is something a 3rd Party can choose to do, like the F-15E, whereas the Kiowa did not do an Early Access release.

[Horns]

4 minutes ago, NineLine said:

Yes and no, the 3rd Parties have a say on many things, but we might expect a certain level on certain things. The EA vs no-EA is something a 3rd Party can choose to do, like the F-15E, whereas the Kiowa did not do an Early Access release.

Does ED expect a certain level when deciding whether something leaves EA (ie reaches 'release' state, whether or not there will be a product sustainment phase), or is that the third-party dev's call?

[Tank50us]

4 hours ago, Horns said:

Does ED expect a certain level when deciding whether something leaves EA (ie reaches 'release' state, whether or not there will be a product sustainment phase), or is that the third-party dev's call?

I'd guess it's a mix of both. It's the ultimate call of the dev when they kick the product out the door like a mama bird telling her babies to "FLY B***H!"

But at the same time, ED is probably not going to be too amused if someone released an unrefined cylinder with a couple boxes someone called an Su7.

For example, if I were to lead a team in making a modernized Su17, it would go into EA with a working flight model, damage model, some decent liveries, its fox2s and its unguided weapons. The rest of its EA period would make adjustments to the models, and working in the other guided weapons. And it certainly wouldn't take a freaking DECADE to develop.... *looks over at Razbam and their on-again off again development of the Mudhen....*