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

[Nightdare]

7 hours 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.

 

Not entirely what I mean

I was stating the fact that the shop is your property, no 3rd party is going to get a product on there without your say-so

You guys veto what gets shop acces

[bfr]

On 4/11/2025 at 4:04 PM, 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.

Consider that if early access releases weren't a thing then some of the modules we have/had might not ever have existed. The EA model allows for money to come in to fund ongoing development. Without it you've got to find all the funds upfront to develop a feature-complete product, which significantly raises the bar of entry (and bear in mind a lot of modules take years to just reach initial EA standard).

[SharpeXB]

Sadly what this all reveals is how little money even a major Third Party Dev makes from DCS. Such a small amount to them that it’s not worth resolving. Imagine how much priority you’d place on setting an issue over a year of your own back pay. Clearly this is not an important income source for these people. It’s more a hobby than primary employment. 

Edited April 12 by SharpeXB

[Hammer1-1]

5 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Sadly what this all reveals is how little money even a major Third Party Dev makes from DCS. Such a small amount to them that it’s not worth resolving. Imagine how much priority you’d place on setting an issue over a year of your own back pay. Clearly this is not an important income source for these people. It’s more a hobby than primary employment. 

where you get this info from??

[SharpeXB]

33 minutes ago, Hammer1-1 said:

where you get this info from??

Just deducing this from the facts at hand. 

[Hammer1-1]

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

Just deducing this from the facts at hand. 

what facts? its not how much they get paid, its WHEN they get paid. You like deducing things from thin air.

[SharpeXB]

38 minutes ago, Hammer1-1 said:

what facts? its not how much they get paid, its WHEN they get paid. You like deducing things from thin air.

Didn’t Razbam claim they hadn’t been paid by ED since this all started last year?

[bfr]

2 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Sadly what this all reveals is how little money even a major Third Party Dev makes from DCS. Such a small amount to them that it’s not worth resolving. Imagine how much priority you’d place on setting an issue over a year of your own back pay. Clearly this is not an important income source for these people. It’s more a hobby than primary employment. 

Not really. It just shows that intelligent people with highly marketable skills unsurprisingly have a relatively low tolerance to working for free.

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, bfr said:

Not really. It just shows that intelligent people with highly marketable skills unsurprisingly have a relatively low tolerance to working for free.

Ok if it’s a hobby. Not very “intelligent”  if you’re trying to make a living at it. I’m sure many people are in between where they have multiple jobs and such. Nobody can afford to lose their primary income for that long unless they’re independently wealthy or retired etc. 

[cfrag]

2 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

3 hours ago, Hammer1-1 said:

what facts? its not how much they get paid, its WHEN they get paid. You like deducing things from thin air.

Didn’t Razbam claim they hadn’t been paid by ED since this all started last year?

Perhaps. The question is: where and when did „Razbam claimed“ turn into facts? It would be an alarmingly large leap of logic, and hopefully not indicative of your other approaches to reason.

[SharpeXB]

22 minutes ago, cfrag said:

The question is: where and when did „Razbam claimed“ turn into facts?

Given the situation that’s seems very likely to be true. They certainly aren’t being paid now that their products are no longer for sale here. Oh their bio here does state many of their people are contract or free-lance. That makes sense. 

[cfrag]

7 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Given the situation that’s seems very likely to be true.

Sure. And earth is flat. Seems likely too, at least it looks like it. 

[Mike Force Team]

ED, why does the company not make a bonafide,legitimate, serious real-world offer to buy Razbam's modules outright? I am suggesting buying all Razbam's products where ED is the official owner. Then ED has 100% control of those modules. ED can then phase RB outright. The best solution appears to be buying out RB and ending a long business relationship due to an impasse. I am saying that eagle dynamics and razbam would go their separate ways.

Edited April 12 by Mike Force Team

[cfrag]

13 minutes ago, Mike Force Team said:

ED, why does the company not make a bonafide,legitimate, serious real-world offer to buy Razbam's modules outright?

MFT, how do you know that they didn‘t? And what, in your opinion constitutes a „bonafide, legitimate, serious, real-world offer“? To not put you in the spotlight, you can make a +/-10% estimate.

I hate shilling for ED, but the amount of armchair quarterbacking from clowns is becoming egregious. Let’s all just STFU and not become silly muppets in this farce. @BIGNEWY, please close this thread, it reads like a bad Kafkaesque.

Edited April 12 by cfrag

[SharpeXB]

18 minutes ago, cfrag said:

Sure. And earth is flat. Seems likely too, at least it looks like it. 

If they’re in violation of their agreement, why would ED pay them? The only real leverage ED has is withholding those funds. And that means Razbam has nothing to lose by taking their products off the store. Why would they have done that if they’re still being paid?

[PhantomHans]

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

If they’re in violation of their agreement, why would ED pay them?

ED would pay them to prevent ED from violating the agreement.

 

ED would then file a civil suit for damages over whatever they perceived as a violation.

[AndyJWest]

5 minutes ago, PhantomHans said:

ED would pay them to prevent ED from violating the agreement.

 

ED would then file a civil suit for damages over whatever they perceived as a violation.

You clearly don't understand what a contract is. 

 

[SharpeXB]

22 minutes ago, PhantomHans said:

ED would pay them to prevent ED from violating the agreement.

 

ED would then file a civil suit for damages over whatever they perceived as a violation.

If they breached it, it’s void now. If they’re still getting paid why have they apparently stopped work on the modules? And they certainly aren’t getting paid now that the products are no longer being sold. 

Edited April 13 by SharpeXB

[Hammer1-1]

6 hours ago, cfrag said:

Perhaps. The question is: where and when did „Razbam claimed“ turn into facts? It would be an alarmingly large leap of logic, and hopefully not indicative of your other approaches to reason.

you seem to have this annoying "ignoring the facts" problem for some reason. jump to whatever conclusion you're going to jump to; theres no convincing you otherwise despite the evidence provided to you. Im just going to give you a small math equation for you: Razbam has been accused of IP infringement by ED; Razbam and Microprose announced some sort of deal recently for Falcon 5.0, with Razbam working on an F-15E; coincidentally, that happens to be the same one ED is paying Razbam for. 2+2=?

9 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Didn’t Razbam claim they hadn’t been paid by ED since this all started last year?

how the hell does that amount to a small sum of money? you've zero idea how much money is to be paid. Im finding it hard to take you even remotely seriously nowadays. for all you know, it could be a 15 million dollar contract that gets dispersed at specific intervals, and you're making it out to be less than minimum wage + tips.

Edited April 13 by Hammer1-1

[SharpeXB]

7 minutes ago, Hammer1-1 said:

how the hell does that amount to a small sum of money?

Amazingly it’s not enough of an incentive to resolve the situation.

[NineLine]

7 hours ago, Mike Force Team said:

ED, why does the company not make a bonafide,legitimate, serious real-world offer to buy Razbam's modules outright? I am suggesting buying all Razbam's products where ED is the official owner. Then ED has 100% control of those modules. ED can then phase RB outright. The best solution appears to be buying out RB and ending a long business relationship due to an impasse. I am saying that eagle dynamics and razbam would go their separate ways.

Mike, one more time, we are not sharing any details on the discussions being had, we won't be answering any such questions, we are working on a solution, that is all there is to it right now. 

44 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Amazingly it’s not enough of an incentive to resolve the situation.

SharpeXB, just understand that if you are here to poke the group like you tend to do in other threads, let me stop you right here, thanks. 

[Ronin14]

Nineline and the rest of the moderator team looking over this thread, yes they are all under 21, its been a hard paper round!

Edited April 13 by Ronin14
Text added

[cfrag]

3 hours ago, Hammer1-1 said:

you seem to have this annoying "ignoring the facts" problem for some reason. jump to whatever conclusion you're going to jump to

And that's just the thing, isn't it? I refuse to jump to conclusions. I've been part of, and partial to, too much litigation in the past 30 years to know but one thing: that we'll never know all the relevant facts, and unless this is adjudicated in an open court (highly unlikely) we never will. Sure, both sides may play fast and loose with some self-serving factoid, carefully manicured to be evocative of something. We won't get the full facts unless we are the principals of the case, and even then we may not. 

3 hours ago, Hammer1-1 said:

theres no convincing you otherwise despite the evidence provided to you.

Indeed. We simply shouldn't (tempting however it is) draw conclusions on an incomplete, convenient trail of factoids presented by the sides of this dispute. Most of the "evidence" I've seen is suggestive, none of it conclusive.

3 hours ago, Hammer1-1 said:

2+2=?

If it only ever was that easy. Yes, 2+2 equals 4, and always will. And that's not the relevant equation at hand. That would be something along the lines of "(2+2-X) * Y / Z = ?". Are there attenuating clauses in some contracts? What even are the relevant contracts, and which country's jurisdiction do the fall in? Who are the plaintiffs? AFAIK Micropose isn't, so bringing them up does not serve the proceedings. We simply don't know enough of the relevant facts. Sure there are some juicy details, put forward by some parties. Suggestive, circumstantial evidence, unfortunately not backed up sufficiently to make a case in court.

I'm not prepared to call either side to be in the right nor wrong, because there isn't enough evidence for me to do so - and if precedence is any indication, we never will: I suspect this will be settled out of court, and none of us will ever know what actually went down. Speculation won't help, and this entire thread is IMHO an exercise in futility.

 

[Hammer1-1]

I dont know why you dont understand that ED HAS ACCUSED RAZBAM OF IP INFRINGEMENT and Im not going to try either. Its been talked to death, and Im not going to list all of the evidence thats already been listed 10 times already having already been mentioned by both Razbam and ED. Hint of advice: dont ever meet your heroes. Just...go read EDs statement, go read Razbams statements, and...whatever. Read into it what you want or must.

Edited April 13 by Hammer1-1

[cfrag]

Just now, Hammer1-1 said:

I dont know why you dont understand that ED HAS ACCUSED RAZBAM OF IP INFRINGEMENT and Im not going to try either.

I understand that. Being accused of something is a far cry from being guilty of that same thing, and you seem to be ready to make that call. I'm simply not because I do not feel that I have seen enough of the case.