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

[Horns]

I think, if Razbam's absence becomes permanent, I expect ED will be able to maintain Razbam's modules - that is, allow them to function as they do currently in future versions of DCS - but I can't see they'd complete the EA South Atlantic map or the EA F-15E beyond where they are today.

Edited June 2, 2024 by Horns
Deleted possible OT comment

[Braunn]

Maybe we should just quit this silly game full of bugs, and find a better hobby where you DON'T have to pay real money for merely loaning the right to use a virtual item to play make believe in. 

It is possible. 

[Atazar SPN]

hace 18 minutos, Braunn dijo:

Maybe we should just quit this silly game full of bugs, and find a better hobby where you DON'T have to pay real money for merely loaning the right to use a virtual item to play make believe in. 

It is possible. 

I agree.

I left DCS a month ago. I thought I would take it worse, but right now, in its current state, it is not attractive to me.

Now it's time for family, sports and friends.

Soon we will have a non-military alternative, but extremely immersive and challenging.

I give you my like.

[lee1hy]

Looking at it so far, it seems like this is not the first incident like this. There is no future for Razbomb products in the future. Even the products they sell now

gg game over RB

[Horns]

44 minutes ago, lee1hy said:

Looking at it so far, it seems like this is not the first incident like this. There is no future for Razbomb products in the future. Even the products they sell now

gg game over RB

As someone who preordered the Harrier I can confirm that this is not Razbam's first sh!tshow. Personally my solution is just to vow not to buy RB products, but I understand why people's confidence in the broader game might be shaken.

[Swiso]

I think it's unfair to blame ED for keep selling RB modules....

ED continuing to sell RB modules mean that the money for paying RB it's there....blocked but it's there.

This to me prove the good faith of ED in this mess.

RB should know that.

If the claim by RB are correct: Why would ED not pay a developer if their products sell ? Why would ED shoot in his own foot by doing that? For what gain ? Who would do that? It doesn't make sense.

The question is : Why RB, knowing that their modules keep selling, claim they're not being paid? Obviously because they're in the wrong...

 

[stonewall197922]

If think out carefuly. RB anouncement contains nothing about situation. RB said ED owes them money. Ok, there can be dozens of active agreements between them. And some of them can hold nothing common with DCS modules. Moreover, it can be totaly different agreements. To understand fully situtation, more data must be provided. Such as: active agreements term between ED and RB (not part of the agreement but full unedited copy of it), banking transfers (to and from), correspondence (to and from). only then you can just understand something about this case. And that is not possible due confidentiality notes of the agreements terms. So my current thoughts are-bold comunity manipulation by RB providing zero info. We don`t know under which agreement RB implies ED owes them(if ever) and what circumstances is. That can hold nothing with DCS even. What we know for sure that is RB has stoped supporting and development  its products. And as i can only suspect without notifying ED first (if they notified ED so there will be atleast official statement). From the point of ED management, if holding payments not involves  DCS agreements, so theres no point to stop selling RB modules (i dont know situation, that is my guesses). But both side`s should take responsibilities over this. One side for stopping development and possibly ruining own buisness other - before consumers. Company finances is difficult thing and manipulation by comunity doesnt help alot. It can become even worse in that way.

Edited June 3, 2024 by stonewall197922

[Dav IRL]

My two cents. 
 

Razbam and ED are both responsible and both will suffer reputational damage as a result. 
 

So hopefully and without speculation they release a joint statement explaining how they have resolved their disputes and are returning delivering for their customers.
 

[lee1hy]

It appears that a refund for the F-15E is possible. Are the remaining products also eligible for a refund? Even if it’s a haft refund?
 

[Horns]

3 minutes ago, lee1hy said:

It appears that a refund for the F-15E is possible. Are the remaining products also eligible for a refund? Even if it’s a haft refund?
 

I got knocked back for a refund on the South Atlantic map (based on it being a 2022 purchase - I am definitely under 2 hours playtime) so I wouldn’t be too hopeful…

[Oceandar]

It appears that a refund for the F-15E is possible. Are the remaining products also eligible for a refund? Even if it’s a haft refund?
 

Just made a ticket for F-15E refund and waiting for the answer. Wish I could refund the harrier and M2K and be done with it.

Wish me luck

[=37.Sqn= Mjugen]

Good luck, and by fact that they are willing to refund something it is obvious that things are not good....

And I will not buy anything from ED until their top management wont officially make communication about situations and what steps are they willing to take that this wont be another Hawk.

 

 

[JAPman]

Shot down in an off-site brawl...

I hope MiG-19P will take over around Belsim.

[Gizmo03]

vor 30 Minuten schrieb =37.Sqn= Mjugen:

Good luck, and by fact that they are willing to refund something it is obvious that things are not good....

Ah no.... it's just simple math. I bought the SE at the beginning of the prepurchase for 55,99$. If i ask for a refund they would give me my 55,99$ back, then after they solved the situation with RB of course i want my SE back and i have to rebuy it for 63,99$ which is the current price with EA discount
Ok... i'm just kidding and i couldn't resist but hey - from an economical point of view it could actually be like this

But to be honsest i think they are giving the refunds because they just don't want to heat up the situation even more as it already is.

[hreich]

Also requested refund for F-15E , wish me luck

[fragal]

Is this fixed yet ? 
I would straight up love to not lose 3 of my most played modules in DCS.

k thanks

[Gizmo03]

vor 31 Minuten schrieb fragal:

Is this fixed yet ? 
I would straight up love to not lose 3 of my most played modules in DCS.

k thanks

Nothing is fixed as long as there is no official statement. Here you can only find speculations based on vague and 2 month old statements.

[Malakhit]

I was encouraged to provide constructive and respectful feedback in this forum thread, so here goes;

I'm a long-term customer when it comes to the DCS ecosystem. I started with Black Shark 1 in 2009, and have purchased the vast majority of modules over the years since then. I've seen DCS grow as a game and as a community, and I'm no stranger to some of the highs and lows that DCS has gone through over the years.

With all of that said... the recent situation between Razbam and Eagle Dynamics has completely shaken my trust in the DCS ecosystem in a way that no other incident has. I was not under any impressions that DCS would last forever - nothing does - but there is a difference between a product coming to a natural conclusion, and a promising module being potentially written off before it's even been in the game for a year. As a result, I have decided that - for my own part - I no longer feel comfortable taking the risk of spending my money on further content for DCS World.

Not only is the F-15E (which is, in my own personal opinion, one of the most impressive modules ever made for DCS World) jeopardised by this disagreement, but three well-established and beloved modules in the form of the AV-8B, M-2000C and MiG-19P are now also possibly facing their own termination.

This also brings with it the news that ED does not in fact hold the source code for third party modules in escrow, contradicting a policy that was first mentioned in the 23/12/2018 newsletter:

Quote

To avoid such issues in the future, all future 3rd party agreements are now required to make the game files available in case they are no longer able to support their product.

This news comes from the Russian side of the forums, where it appears to have been stated that, even if ED were to hold the source code in escrow, they would not take over the development of "abandoned" third party modules anyway. This situation is therefore greatly concerning to those of us with an interest in seeing DCS grow and improve, as it would imply that third party modules could be deprecated overnight with no contingencies in place.

As custodians of the ecosystem as a whole, ED have a greater responsibility to the customer base to ensure that disagreements that could result in third parties leaving are dealt with as amicably and expediently as possible. It is not my belief that this has been achieved in this instance.

My overall feedback would thus be as follows:

• Eagle Dynamics should strive to ensure that their relationships with third parties are kept in good standing. A positive environment for third parties to flourish is beneficial to everyone in the long run. Lately, I have heard too many rumblings that this environment is not currently present, and this is cause for concern.
• Eagle Dynamics and third parties should seek to be more transparent about issues "behind the scenes" earlier on in the future, if they are potentially going to cause customer impact. A more well-informed customer is a happier customer, and is more likely to buy from ED again. In a similar vein, it would not be unreasonable to expect a well-worded, neutrally-phrased warning to be present on the store pages for Razbam modules - knowingly selling an incomplete product with a list of upcoming features that stand a good chance of never being fulfilled is not a good look.
• Eagle Dynamics should, as a matter of some urgency, clarify in concrete terms what will happen to third party modules after a developer leaves for whatever reason. The contradiction between the 2018 newsletter and the recent statements on the Russian forums must be settled one way or another.

I hope this feedback is received in the manner in which it is intended - to provide ED management with guidance about what customers want to see going forward.

Thanks for your time.

[NineLine]

23 hours ago, JuiceIsLoose said:

ED management is aware of these forum topics and all of the talk in Discord then, correct? And ED management truly believes their best course is to provide no update to their customers? ED management then must realize, by providing no information or update for 2 months that they are forcing customers to look into every other source of information. DCS users are passionate about their modules, ED management always thanks the customers for their PASSION and support. Yet, it seems ED management is no longer thankful for that passion, by remaining silent. ED management is selling multiple products which have no support at this time. And there is no statement from ED management stating there be will continued support, regardless of how the situation is resolved. 

Please note, I am using ED management as the target of my questions, as I don’t feel this burden to provide updates or commitments should be put on you community managers. To be honest, I feel ED management is not only failing its customers, but also you as community managers by remaining silent. 

ED management is aware of everything, and I try to pass along as much as I can to them as well. The only reason things are silent right now is because there is nothing new to share, we are not going to see blow-by-blow updates on this. This needs to be handled professionally behind closed doors between the two sides. Using Discord or other social media to try and sway people to you or them being right is not professional and it's not fair to anyone, especially our customers. 

As for how we will proceed based on the results of these issues, it's impossible to say right now as well as there are so many variables. Obviously, our goal is to see RAZBAM back to work and everything back to normal. I can understand everyone's fears if that doesn't happen but to give an answer to that we would have to guess at things that could happen and we are not willing to do so right now. 

I know you guys want more, or you want responses to some of the noise around the internet but it's just not professionally sound to do so right now as we work towards a solution. Doing the he said/he said thing only undermines customer trust more than it has already been. I think we would fail customers even more by engaging in such communication. I don't blame any of you for wanting more info, but we just don't have it right now and all I can do is say sorry.  The goals have not changed and the full resolution of these differences is where we want to be. 

[Rudel_chw]

11 minutes ago, NineLine said:

Obviously, our goal is to see RAZBAM back to work and everything back to normal.

 

+1 ... will pray and have fingers crossed, truly hoping that goal can be realized. Thanks for your words 

[Rainmaker]

26 minutes ago, NineLine said:

Using Discord or other social media to try and sway people to you or them being right is not professional and it's not fair to anyone, especially our customers.

Pot call kettle?!?

Try harder than that….the entire community deserves it. 

[Oceandar]

ED refunded me in store credit. Well it's better than nothing. I probably use it to buy Kiowa if it's possible or save it for HB Eurofighter ( for the next 2 - 3 years ?)
As for the F-15, I'm going to C version in the sim that can't be named.

I'm done here. Good luck guys.

[shinobi61]

So they can't say if the modules will be bricked or not, so i assume they cant do anything with 3rd party modules if they duck out. thanks for response.

[WipeUout]

1 hour ago, NineLine said:

The goals have not changed and the full resolution of these differences is where we want to be. 

Can both parties come up with a joint statement that ED and RB actively work towards that destination or goal?  Or better, that both organization see a path towards this goal?  That would help to cool the situation nicely.

[Horns]

1 minute ago, shinobi61 said:

So they can't say if the modules will be bricked or not, so i assume they cant do anything with 3rd party modules if they duck out. thanks for response.

Easy for me to talk, but even If worst comes to absolute worst I don't think anything will get bricked. If no work at all can be done on the Razbam modules and the next update breaks them, I think ED would make the current version of DCS available into the future, so nothing should really get 'bricked', worst case is you wind up with what you have now and you're stuck with the current version of the sim. I know that's a long way from what you all deserve, but at least things wouldn't get worse than they are now. I'm just voicing that as opinion, but I believe that was one possible solution for the Hawk situation.

I know ED can't keep commenting on hypotheticals or say much more than they have about this Razbam situation, but maybe it would be helpful if they could clarify if, in principle, if any module couldn't have compatibility maintained into the future, whether ED would endeavor to make the last known compatible version of the sim available into the future so that customers could have enduring use of their existing modules in their existing form.