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

[happyhappy]

Is the current buggy and half-baked RB F15 any good?

So it's okay to end development like this.

I am not convinced.

Users who bought it on Steam can't get a refund either.

By the way, they are still selling it. It's a joke.

I don't know why they don't remove it from the store, I think it's a joke.

I would be happier if you removed it from the module.

[Beirut]

39 minutes ago, happyhappy said:

Is the current buggy and half-baked RB F15 any good?

So it's okay to end development like this.

I am not convinced.

Users who bought it on Steam can't get a refund either.

By the way, they are still selling it. It's a joke.

I don't know why they don't remove it from the store, I think it's a joke.

I would be happier if you removed it from the module.

 

I would be happier if I flew it... right now! 

 

Even in it's awkward unfinished orphaned state, it's a great plane. There is a lot of very enjoyable flying to be had in the Strike Eagle.

[afnav130]

Christmas miracle. DCS update. Wait, nope. Guess it will be Q4 of 2025 before anything gets done. This was one grade A screwup and I think they all know it right now. 

[rcjonessnp175]

Its a bummer, but hopefully grace and the common goal of providing and continuing to provide the best combat sim ever gets everyone back on mission.  

[happyhappy]

I'm happy to be satisfied with imperfect things.

I want to play with the completed F-15E.

If it's never going to be completed with RB, I'd like someone else to make it. I'll buy the new completed F15E again.

[Nightdare]

On 12/24/2024 at 12:42 PM, happyhappy said:

I would be happier if you removed it from the module.

 

You're not buying it, so you are in no way impacted, complaining for complaining's sake

[av8orDave]

I’m sure I could scour the 21 pages of posts in this thread, or do some ambiguous search, and I didn’t see it in the first post on this thread, but what is ED’s “official” take on maintaining the functionality of the existing Razbam modules? As I noted above, a prior function or two on the Harrier no longer works and hasn’t for months (ATHS for example) and I’m curious if it will be rectified or if it is a lost cause.

Thanks

[Gizmo03]

vor 37 Minuten schrieb av8orDave:

I’m sure I could scour the 21 pages of posts in this thread, or do some ambiguous search, and I didn’t see it in the first post on this thread, but what is ED’s “official” take on maintaining the functionality of the existing Razbam modules? As I noted above, a prior function or two on the Harrier no longer works and hasn’t for months (ATHS for example) and I’m curious if it will be rectified or if it is a lost cause.

Thanks

I'm afraid the only official answer you could get is: "If there is something new, we will share it with you (in the first post)."
It was already mentioned that they will do their best to keep the modules in the current state. I think i saw a post (most probably in this thread) where i've read something which i understood like they don't do anything on the modules in order not to mess up the situation even more than it is right now and in case of a negative ending of this story they will keep everything in it's current state.
But i'm really not sure if i missinterpreted or missunderstood this post. I just tried to find it but i didn't and i just don't want to waste my time anymore on this because i'm pretty tired of this whole sh*t.
It feels like the CMs (don't get me wrong - i appreciate your work here) are strictly instructed not to share any single information but in the meanwhile the COO herself started with weird comments about the MiG-23 and the F-15. But still no confirmation or anything on this.
I think if you want just a rough information on this - you would need to be happy with "They'll do their best to maintain it in the current state." If you want a more detailed information i guess you should expect the one i wrote above - unfortunately.

[NineLine]

5 hours ago, Gizmo03 said:

It feels like the CMs (don't get me wrong - i appreciate your work here) are strictly instructed not to share any single information but in the meanwhile the COO herself started with weird comments about the MiG-23 and the F-15. But still no confirmation or anything on this.
I think if you want just a rough information on this - you would need to be happy with "They'll do their best to maintain it in the current state." If you want a more detailed information i guess you should expect the one i wrote above - unfortunately.

I hope everyone is having a great Christmas, those that celebrate anyway.

Everything we have is in the original thread, we will do our best to maintain the modules in working order if there are bugs coming up, report them and if it is something we can solve right now we will try, that said because this is a legal disagreement, we also will not do anything that can impede this, including removing products from the store without an agreement to do so.

As for the MiG-23 comments by our COO, so what? As far as I am aware there was no contract signed for the MiG-23 by any party, obviously RB had at some point had some intent who knows now what might happen. We have a number of Ru devs on our team, and many of them are very interested in doing Ru aircraft, they are super excited to finally be doing some form of the MiG-29 and I am sure there will be more to come. Kate stated that the MiG-23, one way or another will be in DCS one day, the statement was in discussion with those worried because one team was at risk of leaving DCS and this meant a plane would never be in DCS. It's the same as the F-15E, it must be in DCS, it's too important. Right now the best way of that happening is getting the RB issues solved, but if that doesn't happen, that doesn't mean the F-15E is forever disallowed in DCS. 

[TKhaos]

On 12/23/2024 at 11:46 AM, happyhappy said:

Jane's F-15, released in 1998

Still got that stored away in my old tech boxes, big box with the massive manual, over 300 pages. Used to play it for hours, loved all the Janes stuff. Imagine trying to play something like DCS on a dial up modem

Made a slight alteration to your date

Edited December 25, 2024 by TKhaos

[TKhaos]

On 12/24/2024 at 11:42 AM, happyhappy said:

By the way, they are still selling it. It's a joke.

I don't know why they don't remove it from the store, I think it's a joke.

I would be happier if you removed it from the module.

Probably because none of us know whats in the private contract between ED and RB. Technically, if ED pull the plug on the module it leaves them open to being sued by RB for loss of revenue through sales so pretty much damned if they do and damned if they don't.

[Gizmo03]

vor 50 Minuten schrieb NineLine:

…we also will not do anything that can impede this, including removing products from the store without an agreement to do so….

Yes, i think it was something like this, what i‘ve read and what i‘ve meant. It‘s pretty understandable.

 

vor 53 Minuten schrieb NineLine:

As for the MiG-23 comments by our COO, so what? As far as I am aware there was no contract signed for the MiG-23 by any party, obviously RB had at some point had some intent who knows now what might happen. We have a number of Ru devs on our team, and many of them are very interested in doing Ru aircraft, they are super excited to finally be doing some form of the MiG-29 and I am sure there will be more to come. Kate stated that the MiG-23, one way or another will be in DCS one day, the statement was in discussion with those worried because one team was at risk of leaving DCS and this meant a plane would never be in DCS. It's the same as the F-15E, it must be in DCS, it's too important. Right now the best way of that happening is getting the RB issues solved, but if that doesn't happen, that doesn't mean the F-15E is forever disallowed in DCS. 

Thanks for clarification. This is something, your COO should have mentioned in order to not confuse the community because it sounded a bit like ED is going to finish the F-15E in case RB doesn‘t. 
Anyway it means a lot to me to hear that the F-15E is for you guys from ED as important as for all the other fans of this aircraft. I think the easiest way would be if everything goes back to normal - as it was before all this happend. I‘ve no idea how that should work out but it would be the easiest way for all of us.

[ThorBrasil]

I don't know if it's a Google translator translation problem, but it suggests that Razbam went bankrupt and ED took over the F15E.

 

[happyhappy]

22 hours ago, Nightdare said:

 

あなたはそれを買わないので、何の影響も受けず、ただ文句を言うだけです

I'm not complaining.

When you build a house, would you be satisfied if the doors didn't open?

It's a simple customer lol

[draconus]

24 minutes ago, ThorBrasil said:

Razbam went bankrupt and ED took over the F15E

No, it doesn't mean any of that.

[Sunbather]

As a newcomer to the DCS, I just wanna say: please resolve this. I am super-interested in the F-15E (seeing that the F-15C was my very first A/C in DCS), the Harrier and the M-2000. All three of them are like in the top 5 of my next purchases (next to the F-4E), but there is no way I am going to spend money on these modules with the development being on hold.

Not knowing any of the preceding drama and without pointing fingers, I would appreciate it if the people responsible (whoever that is) just got over it and continued developing (and hence making money and increasing the companies' prestige levels again ;). I am afraid though that this is already in lawyers' hands and so things have the potential to get drawn out indefinitely.

PS: To not end on a sour note, I want to express my happiness that the South Atlantic map is still being developed despite being a module by Razbam. It will be some time before I buy that particular map but it's good to know that work continues in this department.

Edited December 26, 2024 by Sunbather

[Beirut]

2 hours ago, draconus said:

No, it doesn't mean any of that.

 

Bummer, I thought that was my belated Christmas present. 

[Gizmo03]

vor 3 Stunden schrieb draconus:

No, it doesn't mean any of that.

And what does it mean?

[Esac_mirmidon]

"The store is not obliged to notify users about the internal kitchen. The problems with RB arose after the module went on sale and from our side until RB left the business there was hope that everything would work out.

Now ED independently supports the F-15E module within its competence"

[Pillowcat]

26 minutes ago, Esac_mirmidon said:

within its competence"

"... within frames of its competence"
difference, as i understand english: not 'as much as we able', but 'as publisher role and other constrains allows'

[Nightdare]

4 hours ago, happyhappy said:

I'm not complaining.

 

Perhaps you need to read back what you were posting

 

4 hours ago, happyhappy said:

When you build a house, would you be satisfied if the doors didn't open?

It's a simple customer lol

 

I fail to see the analogy, but I assume you made a slight error and meant "Buy" instead of "build"?

Regardless

If you want to build a house of which the doors won't open, hey, whatever floats your boat, I see no way how this has any relevance to what I would want in my house

However, if you're trying to sell me that house, I either would not be interested until the doors open, or buy it with the knowledge the doors don't open

The only group your complaint has any relevance to, is the people who already bought the F-15, they bought under the Early Acces EULA 'the doors' would open

You aren't one of those people

 

And to add:

If you want a fully functional module, you're wasting your complaints on Early Acces and should have the maturity that the only way to get what you want, is wait until it's complete

Instead, you're miffed about delayed development without even spending a cent

 

 

[Esac_mirmidon]

8 minutes ago, Pillowcat said:

"... within frames of its competence"
difference, as i understand english: not 'as much as we able', but 'as publisher role and other constrains allows'

Its a direct Google translation. 

[Mike Force Team]

This seems to be a bogus new item.  

[StarLiner]

So yeah, the MiG19 campaign is abandonware apparently (as well as the Mirage campaigns). I don't fully understand the Why here as this campaign was broken for years before the current Razbam situation. Has Baltic not been getting paid for a very long time?

 

This is unfortunate news for those of us who purchased the module specifically because it included single player content that hasn't been functional for most of the life of the module. 

 

@NineLine will the store page be updated to reflect this content not functioning, possibly ever?

 

null

[Joe1978]

My recommendation: Consider Baltic Dragon's statement with a degree of skepticism.