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

[Nightdare]

53 minutes ago, Oban said:

If I buy a car from a salesman, and he said it will pass its MOT, and it doesn't because the internal software failed, who's at fault? The salesman for selling you the car, the computer chip manufacturer or you for buying it?

 

But then there's this:

Quote

What is DCS World Early Access?
Early Access is an option for you to play this module in an early state, but it will be incomplete with bugs. The time a product remains in Early Access can vary widely based on the scope of the project, technical hurdles, and how complete the module is when it enters Early Access. Eagle Dynamics and all of our third parties strive to make this period as short as possible. Once the module exits Early Access, you will automatically have the Release version.

That statement promises the buyer a completed module

If the F15 is missing some key features that were stated prior and during sales of the EA module, there is now a problem

 

And no customer gives a damn when the realtor is trying to blame the contractor for not finishing a house "It's your contractor, you sold us the house"

[Oban]

2 minutes ago, Nightdare said:

 

But then there's this:

That statement promises the buyer a completed module

If the F15 is missing some key features that were stated prior and during sales of the EA module, there is now a problem

 

And no customer gives a damn when the realtor is trying to blame the contractor for not finishing a house "It's your contractor, you sold us the house"

Nowhere in that statement does the word promise appear....

[NineLine]

*sigh*

[Nightdare]

1 minute ago, Oban said:

Nowhere in that statement does the word promise appear....

You're right, you're automatically getting the finished module, so it's not a promise but a guarantee, the only question is when and what defines the 'release' version

[Mizzy]

3 hours ago, NineLine said:

I can't really say, I only know that it takes a little more work on our end to keep compatibility with the core. 

That is what the Razbam farce is really all about. Zambrano is making it as difficult as possible for ED to resolve this dispute since Zambrano went public with his idiotic reason of him not updating modules that he has no control of unless paying his developers, but he breached IP contractual protocol. As I have said, the resolution to this will not include Razbam (zambrano) being a developer for DCS ever again and that is very good news. 

As for the future of zambrano's published modules in DCS, I think Kate let the cat out the door, bless her. Anyway, The Hawk nonsense was a turning point for ED in 3rd Party development in that, a 3rd Party by 'Contractual agreement' must submit their source code in disputes that severs their continuation as a developer for DCS for 'whatever reason'.

As I have said many times, zambrano is not a developer as such, he doesn't do anything other than his skills of packaging other peoples work and selling it to a marketplace. I believe ED may have been naive dealing with zambrano and his brand 'Razbam' It's no surprise to me this has happened other than how many years zambrano has got away with it exploiting others. 

Mizzy   

[Beirut]

From Stormbirds:

 

https://stormbirds.blog/2025/01/13/razbam-provides-two-brief-updates-on-their-ongoing-eagle-dynamics-dispute/

[Oban]

12 minutes ago, Beirut said:

From Stormbirds:

 

https://stormbirds.blog/2025/01/13/razbam-provides-two-brief-updates-on-their-ongoing-eagle-dynamics-dispute/

The comments section on various sites are great entertainment....

Ron accuses ED community managers of misinformation, whilst allowing his 3rd party developers to throw gasoline into the fire, without a single comment from him to have them dial it down speaks volumes of the mans true nature.

[afnav130]

25 minutes ago, Oban said:

The comments section on various sites are great entertainment....

Ron accuses ED community managers of misinformation, whilst allowing his 3rd party developers to throw gasoline into the fire, without a single comment from him to have them dial it down speaks volumes of the mans true nature.

You know on the RB discord, Prowler is Ron Z, right? Nevermind, misread your post, sorry. The end result after what almost 9 months of this crap is this. Ron says they weren't paid. ED hasn't stated if they did or didn't.

The F15E isn't even the issue. It's the Super Tucano module. The comical part of this is that they could, one would assume, have given a cease and desist letter about the Tucano and let the E model keep humming along. Instead they went nuclear and forced dev on the E model to stop as well. 

Edited January 14 by afnav130

[NineLine]

Please let's not discuss how others monitor or police their Discords or other such servers, please keep it focused on the topic. 

[Oban]

5 minutes ago, afnav130 said:

You know on the RB discord, Prowler is Ron Z, right? Nevermind, misread your post, sorry. The end result after what almost 9 months of this crap is this. Ron says they weren't paid. ED hasn't stated if they did or didn't.

The F15E isn't even the issue. It's the Super Tucano module. The comical part of this is that they could, one would assume, have given a cease and desist letter about the Tucano and let the E model keep humming along. Instead they went nuclear and forced dev on the E model to stop as well. 

IF, and that's a big IF, according to the leaked conversations and documents, to include legal letters, and parts of conversations, a C&D letter was indeed sent by ED legal team...and ignored, I believe more than one was sent. ... there's also NO love lost on that reddit channel between the staff there, and ED...

ED have always maintained that anything official would come from either CEO's... 9 months down the line and after all of the leaks, which I'm 99.99999% confident did not come from any of the ED team, RB was fully aware that confidential information regarding contracts etc was leaked, he then decides to post what is really a big fat nothing burger about "misinformation", then you had CommandT the other day post on his Youtube channel, that he had it from the horses mouth that the F15E was dead, and that ED and RB would be no more... again, there's 2 horses, Nick Grey, and Ron Zambrano... even Stevie Wonder can see that the horse CommandT was referring to was Ron Zambrano, or someone within Razbam.... and Ron's own words... "Razbam official" ... what did he do, deputise all his staff to become officials ??

Now call me a cynic, but when you use words like "misinformation" and then fail to address what was publicly posted by a YouTuber the other day, then that speaks volumes about a persons integrity. 

 

[afnav130]

3 hours ago, Oban said:

IF, and that's a big IF, according to the leaked conversations and documents, to include legal letters, and parts of conversations, a C&D letter was indeed sent by ED legal team...and ignored, I believe more than one was sent. ... there's also NO love lost on that reddit channel between the staff there, and ED...

ED have always maintained that anything official would come from either CEO's... 9 months down the line and after all of the leaks, which I'm 99.99999% confident did not come from any of the ED team, RB was fully aware that confidential information regarding contracts etc was leaked, he then decides to post what is really a big fat nothing burger about "misinformation", then you had CommandT the other day post on his Youtube channel, that he had it from the horses mouth that the F15E was dead, and that ED and RB would be no more... again, there's 2 horses, Nick Grey, and Ron Zambrano... even Stevie Wonder can see that the horse CommandT was referring to was Ron Zambrano, or someone within Razbam.... and Ron's own words... "Razbam official" ... what did he do, deputise all his staff to become officials ??

Now call me a cynic, but when you use words like "misinformation" and then fail to address what was publicly posted by a YouTuber the other day, then that speaks volumes about a persons integrity. 

 

Today someone, or actually yesterday now asked Prowler if they still had the people etc to continue the F15E and he said yes they do. So this Command T, to me, is just stirring up bleep. 

[stonewall197922]

8 минут назад, afnav130 сказал:

Today someone, or actually yesterday now asked Prowler if they still had the people etc to continue the F15E and he said yes they do. So this Command T, to me, is just stirring up bleep. 

Of course, what else he can say? Saying otherwise can ruin RB contracts with other partners.

[Oban]

19 minutes ago, afnav130 said:

Today someone, or actually yesterday now asked Prowler if they still had the people etc to continue the F15E and he said yes they do. So this Command T, to me, is just stirring up bleep. 

Totally agree.

[Nightdare]

8 hours ago, Mizzy said:

The Hawk nonsense was a turning point for ED in 3rd Party development in that, a 3rd Party by 'Contractual agreement' must submit their source code in disputes that severs their continuation as a developer for DCS for 'whatever reason'.

 

Unfortunately as we established already, ED has that in place, but no actual fall back plan in worst case scenarios

Holding the keys to the company car isn't so useful if you have no one capable of driving it

[JuiceIsLoose]

11 hours ago, afnav130 said:

You know on the RB discord, Prowler is Ron Z, right? Nevermind, misread your post, sorry. The end result after what almost 9 months of this crap is this. Ron says they weren't paid. ED hasn't stated if they did or didn't.

The F15E isn't even the issue. It's the Super Tucano module. The comical part of this is that they could, one would assume, have given a cease and desist letter about the Tucano and let the E model keep humming along. Instead they went nuclear and forced dev on the E model to stop as well. 

ED has stated a few times that they in fact have not paid RB. They say it is because of a valid reason regarding IP. But there is no question ED has confirmed non payment. 

1 hour ago, Nightdare said:

 

Unfortunately as we established already, ED has that in place, but no actual fall back plan in worst case scenarios

Holding the keys to the company car isn't so useful if you have no one capable of driving it

Again, this has been dispelled numerous times. Even by ED, that they do not have the source code. And that the contract for the Strike Eagle predates this new mandate ED stated. So there is nothing ensuring they get the source code. Not sure why ED doesn’t help inform users on these things by clarifying the actual facts rather than leaving users in the dark with a misunderstanding. 
 

edit: not meaning to take a shot at any CM or anything. But these things should be shared when users bring them up. 

Edited January 14 by JuiceIsLoose

[BIGNEWY]

5 minutes ago, JuiceIsLoose said:

Again, this has been dispelled numerous times. Even by ED, that they do not have the source code. And that the contract for the Strike Eagle predates this new mandate ED stated. So there is nothing ensuring they get the source code. Not sure why ED doesn’t help inform users on these things by clarifying the actual facts rather than leaving users in the dark with a misunderstanding. 
 

edit: not meaning to take a shot at any CM or anything. But these things should be shared when users bring them up. 

Contracts and business details are not for sharing in public, RAZBAM going public does not change that fact. 

We will have to wait for a resolution to the dispute, when that happens we will let people know. 

thank you 

 

[Ignition]

I want to thank Razbam again to say publicly they wouldn't update their modules. Imagine 9 months of silence without any update LOL.

[Nightdare]

 

2 hours ago, JuiceIsLoose said:

Again, this has been dispelled numerous times. Even by ED, that they do not have the source code. And that the contract for the Strike Eagle predates this new mandate ED stated. So there is nothing ensuring they get the source code. Not sure why ED doesn’t help inform users on these things by clarifying the actual facts rather than leaving users in the dark with a misunderstanding. 

 

So this is DcsPool? ED made an "Educated wish" when telling Simmerine securities were put in place the Hawk Debacle wouldn't happen again?

 

At best it's having a "perpetual early access module" That'll be going way of the Dodo Hawk anyway, the moment ED (has to) upgrade their engine and modules need to be converted to it

[Gary]

4 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Contracts and business details are not for sharing in public, RAZBAM going public does not change that fact. 

We will have to wait for a resolution to the dispute, when that happens we will let people know. 

thank you 

 

Whilst I have all the RB modules and Map, I have no strong feeling either way as to who is at fault, why, or indeed individuals conduct throughout the drama nor how it all ends.

I can see very good reason why IP protection is paramount to ED but also how some individuals, whom might be very reliant upon income for their hard work to pay their bills and feed their families, might be so frustrated that they lash out publicly. This saga will end however it ends and whatever feelings I might have at that time will just be a passing moment with no real impact upon my spending habits or future DCS journey.

However,

ED's conduct more generally does interest me, particulary in relation to trust. Here's a good example.

I too purchased the Hawk and enjoyed it for what it was. The partnership with ED went belly up (irrelevant as to why for me) and that was that. Sad but hey ho.

To their great credit ED recognised the "possible" trust and confidence implications and addressed this as best they possibly could by publicly announcing the "contractual and business changes" they would subsequently put in place to secure source code to guard against a repeat.

Whether this ED contractual change is relevant to the current RB issues or not does not matter.

ED stating "Contracts and business details are not for sharing in public" however very relevant to me. It was yourselves who brought contractual arrangements into the public forum and arena in order to calm your customers purchasing fears (as I say a good move at the time) - its a bit rich to now fall back on the "its private" attitude.

I've seen it stated a number of times that the two disputes (Hawk and RB) are very differant but I disagree. Both "could" result in me losing access and use of modules I've paid for.

Again, if that does happen hey - ho. No big drama or issue for me personally. The investment at the time have all been worth it and I would argue I've already had my money's worth (maybe except the F15) and frankly I've paid more for some really disappointing family meals in fancy resturants in my long life.

I'm disappointed the "Polychop" thread got shut down too. The point of my post is really about "how" ED handles these issues - not necessarily what they say. They made a move several years ago to be a bit more open and tolerant and I for one want to see that attitude continue please. It does enable us users to be just a tad more informed than the old ways!

Regards,

Gary

Edited January 14 by Gary

[Schmidtfire]

I think ED needs to sit down and reconstruct their 3rd party model. Perhaps so that ED holds complete ownership of the module and assets at the time of release, like hiring a subcontractor. At some point 3rd parties will be leaving, for a myriad of different reasons. And given the complex nature of ongoing DCS development and long EA times, it will spawn a trail of modules abandoned/left in various stages of development. New developers will come, others will depart.

This time it was Razbam with the F-15E (and M2000C, Harrier, MiG-19). As much as I hope this situation can be settled.. This should be a big wakeup call for how these situations will be dealt with. Because it will 100% happen again, on good or bad terms. Settling the F-15E issue is like putting on a small band-aid on a bigger issue: Long term support and sustainment regarding 3rd party products.       
 

Edited January 14 by Schmidtfire

[Lord_Pyro]

If i got all the posts during the last year right, there is a system in place. However only for newer modules. Though Razbam started working on the SEagle way before that, so those new terms do not apply for them.

[some1]

Doesn't sound like that from what the Russian devs were posting on the other side of the forum. They don't seem too keen to be taking over development of any 3rd party module, they just sell them.

Edited January 15 by some1

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

On 1/13/2025 at 8:18 PM, Oban said:

Ron accuses ED community managers of misinformation, whilst allowing his 3rd party developers to throw gasoline into the fire, without a single comment from him to have them dial it down speaks volumes of the mans true nature.

Honestly, it's this kind of chicanery that makes me look upon this whole situation with unease directed at RB. This has all happened before and will happen again when they move on to another platform.

[Nightdare]

6 hours ago, some1 said:

Doesn't sound like that from what the Russian devs were posting on the other side of the forum. They don't seem too keen to be taking over development of any 3rd party module, they just sell them.

 

And customers aren't keen on losing $60 pixel planes in return for platitudes and store credit, I got in because of the F-14, Imagine if I just became a first time buyer because of the F-15

 

I guess ED rather want this headache and backlash than less headache and keeping control and ownership

 

t's easier to finish a brick wall if you still have the plans, bricks, mortar and tools, but only need to find a new mason after the one you hired initially found himself suddenly pregnant on the job

[afnav130]

Razbam is done with new modules for DCS at the very least. I don't care about the MiG-23 but guess that module has been <profanity> canned. Good job ED. Anyways, if I were RB I would go freaking nuclear and lay all my cards out on the table. 

Someday the full story will come out and it will be easy to figure out who is right, and who is wrong. If I were RB no chance I'm signing any kind of NDA about any settlement. I don't think either side will come out of this looking great if we got the full story.

Edited January 15 by afnav130