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

[pjbunnyru]

[Gorn_GER]

2 hours ago, Horns said:

Your argument based on the product only being identified twice as being a Razbam product has nothing to do with anything. The reason the emails you received about the order are from DCS because you're buying from a DCS storefront, if you had bought through Steam instead you would have received these emails from Steam. For that matter, if you buy any early access game from Steam, the game studio's name may turn up on the store page in one place only and none of the order emails. Yet, if that studio collapses, you end up with only what got made because the responsible studio no longer exists to be held to account.

If a dev, in this case Razbam, ceases to exist while a DCS module is in Early Access that product can wind up incomplete, as we're seeing with the F-15E. No one is saying a company can just decide not to make a module anymore and thereby leave you with a module partway through EA (eg Razbam could not have simply declared the F-15E abandoned and then proceeded to release a new module), but the dev alone - Razbam for the F-15E - bears the responsibility for delivering.

These are not new issues. These are not untried issues. Arguing with me doesn't change the fact that ED is not the liable party. If you think otherwise, make a legal claim out of it.

I'll assume when you talk about "stop calling the Eagle and its Developers dead before they die" you're addressing that to people who think ED is going out of business - if that's the case I guess we may agree on something, ED is fine and DCS is not under threat.

Half of your answer leans on that E-Mail thing? Are you sure that you know what we are all talking about here and what my point in this was?  

Please tell me more about how much in common Valve and Eagle Dynamics are. But before you do, please read the “STEAM® SUBSCRIBER AGREEMENT” that you get send with every purchase Mail by noreply@steampowered and compare it to the Terms of Eagle Dynamics.

(To give you a hand with this, look for 2F. “Ownership of Content and Services” and 5. “THIRD-PARTY CONTENT”)

Valve is responsible for all Valve products and its content. Not more not less.

But this Topic is about “ED/RAZBAM Situation Info & Discussion”. I do not want to get another warning just because I fade away from the Thead-Topic and explain to people how the world works.

You are the one here, calling the F-15 Eagle and its developers dead because you talk about Razbam “ceases to exist” and “people may not have understood before the Razbam situation that buying into EA may not end with them receiving a completed module”. NineLine and BIGNEWY always telling us to stick to official information. Noone says that “DCS is under threat” we just talk about who is responsible for the content of DCS and that is Eagle Dynamics. If they decide to have a disput with one of the Third-Party-Developer, they have to provide a solution to deliver a completed release Version of the Modules they offer in their game. “”If”” (and not when) ED decides to kick out RAZBAM as developer for the F-15E, it is not on RAZBAM to decide what happens with the future of the DCS F-15E, nor they are responsible to decide what happens to the customer who force to deliver a completed release Version or want the money back otherwise. 

[Horns]

1 hour ago, Gorn_GER said:

Half of your answer leans on that E-Mail thing? Are you sure that you know what we are all talking about here and what my point in this was?  

 

Please tell me more about how much in common Valve and Eagle Dynamics are. But before you do, please read the “STEAM® SUBSCRIBER AGREEMENT” that you get send with every purchase Mail by noreply@steampowered and compare it to the Terms of Eagle Dynamics.

 

(To give you a hand with this, look for 2F. “Ownership of Content and Services” and 5. “THIRD-PARTY CONTENT”)

 

Valve is responsible for all Valve products and its content. Not more not less.

 

But this Topic is about “ED/RAZBAM Situation Info & Discussion”. I do not want to get another warning just because I fade away from the Thead-Topic and explain to people how the world works.

You are the one here, calling the F-15 Eagle and its developers dead because you talk about Razbam “ceases to exist” and “people may not have understood before the Razbam situation that buying into EA may not end with them receiving a completed module”. NineLine and BIGNEWY always telling us to stick to official information. Noone says that “DCS is under threat” we just talk about who is responsible for the content of DCS and that is Eagle Dynamics. If they decide to have a disput with one of the Third-Party-Developer, they have to provide a solution to deliver a completed release Version of the Modules they offer in their game. “”If”” (and not when) ED decides to kick out RAZBAM as developer for the F-15E, it is not on RAZBAM to decide what happens with the future of the DCS F-15E, nor they are responsible to decide what happens to the customer who force to deliver a completed release Version or want the money back otherwise. 

Oh ok, so that thing about calling "Eagle" dead was directed at me. Let me point out where you are confused.

Razbam and ED are not the same entity. Someone can think Razbam will cease to exist and ED will be just fine without those thoughts contradicting each other. And yes, if Razbam go away guess what, they don't finish the F-15E, and ED is not obliged to do anything about that. Again, if you think I'm wrong there are more productive ways to spend the time you are arguing with me.

Next, you're misunderstanding the comparison I was making when I spoke about ED and Steam. Valve is a developer, Steam is a storefront. I was comparing the DCS store to Steam, *not* Valve. In fact, I never mentioned Valve, so it's very difficult to see that you have genuinely just made a "good faith" mistake there.

I'll have you on ignore after this, so don't bother replying if it's for my eyes, but if you want to, you do you 

[Ignition]

14 hours ago, Gorn_GER said:

seams you are right about the AGM88. I was misslead by the quote "For air-to-ground missions, the F-15E can carry most weapons in the Air Force’s inventory".

That may have been Israel or South Koreans F-15.

But are you sure about the AGM84? Maybe bad examples but the F-15E from 2003 had some weapons that are not implemented yet or do not work well, I would like to see for a release Version of this module.

The DCS F-15E is missing: AGM-64, GBU-15, AGM-130, GBU-27. GBU-28, AIM-9X, GBU-39.

It didn't use neither the AGM-88 or the AGM-84

[draconus]

9 hours ago, Ignition said:

The DCS F-15E is missing: AGM-64, GBU-15, AGM-130, GBU-27. GBU-28, AIM-9X, GBU-39.

It didn't use neither the AGM-88 or the AGM-84

The USAF canceled the AGM-64 before service entry in 1968.

[Burning Bridges]

Isn't it possible to keep the Razbam issue separate from the rest of DCS?

I'm watching this only from the sidelines - was once interested in the F-15E but not anymore. The picture that formed for me is that Razbam quit development over a legal issue with the DCS (entertainment) license and it's a catch 22.

As in every dispute between 2 once happily married parties it's impossible for an outsider to get the full picture and say who is right. I just say as much that apparently one side has quit work on their product, the other definitely has not. And while merely arguing over something can often be solved, downright quitting never comes without consequence.

But it is absolutely possible in life for both sides to feel they have been doing the right thing all the time and still have to break up. That's very regrettable but there are dozens of addons that are not in such financial limbo.

 

 

[Gorn_GER]

57 minutes ago, Burning Bridges said:

Isn't it possible to keep the Razbam issue separate from the rest of DCS?

I'm watching this only from the sidelines - was once interested in the F-15E but not anymore. The picture that formed for me is that Razbam quit development over a legal issue with the DCS (entertainment) license and it's a catch 22.

As in every dispute between 2 once happily married parties it's impossible for an outsider to get the full picture and say who is right. I just say as much that apparently one side has quit work on their product, the other definitely has not. And while merely arguing over something can often be solved, downright quitting never comes without consequence.

But it is absolutely possible in life for both sides to feel they have been doing the right thing all the time and still have to break up. That's very regrettable but there are dozens of addons that are not in such financial limbo.

What happened to lead to this situation is rumors, as long as we keep with the official informations and no leaks. Therefor I wont comment the "what happened" side of your message.

The more important takeaway from the upcoming outcome is how we as customer can handle to buy 3rd Party Developer modules.

case Examples:

1. ED and RB find a way to deal that and keep working, so we as the customer do not have to fear of loosing RB Module quality and developer knowledge.

2. ED and RB split but ED finds a way to continue work on all RB modules without any loss of quality and bring them up to ED-Modules level of quality, would be fine for us as customer.

3. ED and RB split up and the RB modules get abandon. Therefor me for example have to deal with 3 expencive modules that will die from time to time by updates of DCS engine and the F-15E will never get to release-State even though I paid $55.99 USD for that and nearly played it because I was an Early Buyer because I had thrust that this Module will get as good in quality and function as my AV8B does.

The Most important point is that something like this already happened with "Hawk T.1A for DCS World by VEAO Simulations" some years ago and all the customer had high hope that something like that will never happen because ED would be better prepared for that.

DCS 2.9.3.51704 - 22.02.2024  was the last Version of DCS that got an Update for F-15E and all the other RB Modules. (with the ecxeption of the one Patch that fixed the M2000 and the F-15E radar by ED)

No customer here really cares what happenes to RAZBAM if we keep it real. We are all interested what will happen with the Money we spend on Modules "by RAZBAM" and when we will get modules like the MIG-23 that was already in advanced developementstate by RAZBAM.

 

So all of this thead is not about if we should buy the F-15E, M2000 and AV8B. Its about how ED will handle with the customer who already bought these modules and how customer will look in the future of buying Modules "by Aerges/AvioDev/DekaIronwork/Heatblur/IndiaFoxtEcho/Magnitude3LLC/OctopusG/Orbx/Polychop/RedStar/UgraMedia"

rumors say that this was not the first time we nearly lost a 3rd party developer before this RAZBAM Situation happened. But as I said rumors, we should not depend on them.

When I got intoduced to digitalcombatsimulator, a friend of mine told me that it was a good thing to buy Modules for this game because the money goes to small developer studios that make very good work and do the development with so much passion that the modules are worth buying even at full price because that keeps the development of this game running. Now I got modules from nearly every single DCS-Developer in this store and depending on how ED deals with the future I may or may not loose some of these modules over the years without me to be able to do something about that.

Therefor I am so invested in this. I have no personal conflict with ED or RB and the same way I am not tied to one or the other but I am a customer with hopes and dreams.

[Horns]

2 hours ago, Burning Bridges said:

Isn't it possible to keep the Razbam issue separate from the rest of DCS?

I'm watching this only from the sidelines - was once interested in the F-15E but not anymore. The picture that formed for me is that Razbam quit development over a legal issue with the DCS (entertainment) license and it's a catch 22.

As in every dispute between 2 once happily married parties it's impossible for an outsider to get the full picture and say who is right. I just say as much that apparently one side has quit work on their product, the other definitely has not. And while merely arguing over something can often be solved, downright quitting never comes without consequence.

But it is absolutely possible in life for both sides to feel they have been doing the right thing all the time and still have to break up. That's very regrettable but there are dozens of addons that are not in such financial limbo.

 

 

Couldn't agree more. All I'd point out is that Razbam haven't actually left yet, they have stopped pushing updates for their modules, but it's theoretically possible they could come back and pick up where they left off once the disputed issues are resolved.

I've got my opinions on which parties I hold responsible and for what - again, your analogy of a marriage breakup works, it's tough for family and friends of one partner not to form opinions, even if they are based on an incomplete picture - but at the end of the day my opinion doesn't make a difference, nor does anyone else's, outside of the parties to the dispute. Our mods have kept this thread open so people can ask genuine questions and express ourselves, but once we know what's on the first page of this thread there's nothing else that's really relevant until there is a resolution.

DCS will continue to thrive, with or without Razbam.

Edited November 23, 2024 by Horns
Fixed grammar

[Slippa]

Exactly.

Until the legalities are done it’s all just waffle.

[Ignition]

5 hours ago, draconus said:

The USAF canceled the AGM-64 before service entry in 1968.

EDIT: Sorry I meant AGM-65

1 squadron trained with it for a while.

The pilot can command 1 missile while the WSO can command another.

Edited November 23, 2024 by Ignition

[Mike Force Team]

It would have been nice to have an actual resolution, we receive the needed RZ updates, and we mark it as "resolved." 

The lack of official information is frustrating for us. 

[Beirut]

Someone remarked in another thread about the Harrier not being on sale right now.

 

Since it is for sale why it can't be on sale?

 

 

[Slippa]

2 hours ago, Beirut said:

Since it is for sale why it can't be on sale?

Because it’s in the sales? 

[Beirut]

19 minutes ago, Slippa said:

Because it’s in the sales? 

 

 

You pulling that Stephen Hawking **** on me again?

[lee1hy]

I salute all of dcs ues you wait and watch  gentlemanly and patient for this circumstance
while ED and 3RD PARTY trolled 
And still we continue with passion and support DCS

Edited November 24, 2024 by lee1hy

[rob10]

11 hours ago, Beirut said:

Someone remarked in another thread about the Harrier not being on sale right now.

Since it is for sale why it can't be on sale?

Not everything that's "for sale" is "on sale" even outside the Razbam stuff.  To be "on sale" requires a separate agreement with the 3rd party seller vs just being "for sale".

[Beirut]

1 hour ago, rob10 said:

Not everything that's "for sale" is "on sale" even outside the Razbam stuff. 

 

Yes, I'm aware. Hence my post.

 

1 hour ago, rob10 said:

To be "on sale" requires a separate agreement with the 3rd party seller vs just being "for sale".

 

Just seems odd to have it all for sale but not on sale. They've had the "on sale" agreement many times and obviously still have the "for sale" deal going. You'd think being part of the sale would be good for everyone. 

 

Quite the silly mess.

[MustangSally]

On 11/23/2024 at 2:45 AM, pjbunnyru said:

Hmm, can't translate a pic!

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

44 minutes ago, MustangSally said:

Hmm, can't translate a pic!

"The F-15 will still be in its current state, but don't worry. It will see development one way ore the other, in time." Basically.

[felixx75]

On 11/22/2024 at 10:42 AM, Gorn_GER said:

This includes weapons platform and radar functionality the the Strike Eagle had at this time. (I Still have no working AGM-65, AGM-84 and AGM-88 on this module)

From the Q&A's

 

[Gizmo03]

vor 9 Stunden schrieb MiG21bisFishbedL:

"The F-15 will still be in its current state, but don't worry. It will see development one way ore the other, in time." Basically.

Thanks for the translation but i have to ask (maybe a stupid question) did she say development or maintenance?

Edited November 25, 2024 by Gizmo03

[draconus]

3 minutes ago, Gizmo03 said:

Thanks for the translation but i have to ask (maybe a stupid question) did she say development or maintenance?

development

[Gizmo03]

vor 3 Minuten schrieb draconus:

development

Thank you. Now i'm a bit confused...

[Maxthrust]

Razbam won't touch DCS unless a material change made in ED's management. The rest will follow suit when they also don't get paid.

Edited November 26, 2024 by Maxthrust

[Shibbyland]

I come back here regularly to check on the situation and see no change or meaningful information. 

This has really taken the shine off DCS for me. I've spent so much money on it and it just feels like DCS is in a death spiral, the golden era of around 2020 or so long behind us. I could be wrong but yea I just find I don't enjoy DCS as much with this hanging over it and as such I've not just stopped making purchases but I can't remember the last time I played at all.

Fingers crossed something happens soon to restore confidence.