waiting for resolution ED/RAZBAM Situation Info & Discussion

[Fran11player]

hace 40 minutos, Koziolek dijo:

Nope,  they did not promised us anything. It's just your wishful thinking. They just said that from now on, the future contracts would require the game files available to ED. Apparently RB contracts were not "future". So maybe, just maybe, this situation will not happen to some of the other modules. But I agree, it would be nice to know which ones

Yes, they did. And they did not talk about future contracts as you say, check properly: "To avoid such issues in the future all 3d party are now required to make the game files available in case they are no longer able to support their product"

[NEW is my Callsign.]

25 minutes ago, Tank50us said:

I have a sneaking suspicion that this is why RB pushed the Strike Eagle out... they knew they were gonna get busted, tried to get it out and get what they could from it... take the money and take off... only... the contract stopped that from happening.

That said... It could be just that even if they agreed to the new policy... Ron might just be enough of a petulant child that he's basically refusing to give it up. It should be an open and shut court case. "You agreed to the new terms, now deliver"... but unless ED hires someone to fast-rope into the dudes house and retrieve that flash drive (and, well, any computer it might be on)... there's few ways for them to get the source code.

The only other option would be to put all of the modules in front of teams to basically reverse engineer them, rebuild the code from scratch, and PRAY it works in 3.#

If this same message was said by replacing RB with ED and Ron with Nick Grey this message would be quickly deleted due to the amount of misinformation and speculation being spread. Since this one benefits ED I doubt it will.

 

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

32 minutes ago, Tank50us said:

The only other option would be to put all of the modules in front of teams to basically reverse engineer them, rebuild the code from scratch, and PRAY it works in 3.#

That might not be entirely legal.

To be certain, I'm talking US law here and this might change internationally, but reverse engineering can be a complex legal issue. If you use any of RB's code to reverse engineer? Very much not legal and ED would find itself in the wrong. RB would be absolutely right to then seek legal recourse. It'd also set a horrible precedent for other third parties, regardless of outcome. That is something no one wants. The contract signed between RB and ED might even disallow reverse engineering all together.

Even if allowed, the case law on the books I'm referring to came from the late 80s and early 90s; the software is exponentially more complex. Even if legal, it could be a downright Sisyphean task. You may as well start from scratch.

[Koziolek]

20 minutes ago, Fran11player said:

Yes, they did. And they did not talk about future contracts as you say, check properly: "To avoid such issues in the future all 3d party are now required to make the game files available in case they are no longer able to support their product"

Sigh...Yes which means if I say that today, on 26th of July, then every contract signed from now on will require this. But it does not apply to a contract signed yesterday if there was no such clause in it

[NineLine]

24 minutes ago, Fran11player said:

Yes, they did. And they did not talk about future contracts as you say, check properly: "To avoid such issues in the future all 3d party are now required to make the game files available in case they are no longer able to support their product"

I dont have the info on contracts, and its not for sharing, but it is entirely possible all RB modules were signed before the escrow requirements, including the SE, but I do not have that info to share. 

[NEW is my Callsign.]

11 minutes ago, NineLine said:

I dont have the info on contracts, and its not for sharing, but it is entirely possible all RB modules were signed before the escrow requirements, including the SE, but I do not have that info to share. 

btw are you really deleting all the comments that spread misinfo or just the ones that don't paint ED in a good picture?

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

5 minutes ago, NEW is my Callsign. said:

btw are you really deleting all the comments that spread misinfo or just the ones that don't paint ED in a good picture?

Yes, you've unraveled the evil plot. He would have gotten away with it were it not for you meddling kids and dog named Scooby Doo.

[NEW is my Callsign.]

7 minutes ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

Yes, you've unraveled the evil plot. He would have gotten away with it were it not for you meddling kids and dog named Scooby Doo.

You're so desperate it's insane

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

Just now, NEW is my Callsign. said:

You're so desperate it's insane

Well yes, my evil plot to devalue an old theme park has been foiled. You'd be upset, too.

[Esac_mirmidon]

So is a matter of faith who is under the escrow and who is not. This info is not going to be shared with us, customers, so we dont know when buying something if ED is behind upholding it for future "issues" or not.

Then, the only informed decision for us, " customers " is not buying anything else from anyone outside ED, because this "issue" happened once, now twice, and who knows in the future we could have a third time. Except if you have enough faith in the future.

So is a matter of passion, support and now faith in the good will of escrows have been signed with ED. Because we dont know for real who is inn and this information is not going to be shared with us, "faithful customers" from now on.

 

[some1]

3 hours ago, mondo said:

It sounds pretty easy to resolve from what ED and what Ron has said but from an outsiders viewpoints it seems like egos are the issue here. Certainly RBs performance has been very unprofessional - I've worked for years in software engineering and games development and never seen anyone behave like that - but it's gone on so long now that even a stalwart DCS fan since day 1 like myself is really not understanding how this has spiralled out of control or why a resolution hasn't happened within weeks of these issues between you coming to light and entirely outside of the public sphere. 

Very true.

From an outsider's perspective is seems that for both companies the best outcome would be to continue working together, sell more products, keep customers happy. Yet here we are. Razbam needs to go find other business venues, while ED is only starting to feel the brunt of customer dissatisfaction. Just imagine what will happen when they'll actually have to remove those modules from the game going forward.

What that initially presented itself as gross miscommunication between the two parties, has spiralled to a point when the best outcome we can realistically hope for is that one company leaves DCS ecosystem and ED takes over barely maintaining the existing modules? Something that Chizh and other ED developers on the Russian side of the forum initially dismissed? Yay.

Well done ED & Razbam, you've killed most of my "passion and support" for the game. Gone are the days of me buying more modules just to support DCS as a whole. Ah well, more time and money left to spend on other things. 

[Hammer1-1]

48 minutes ago, NEW is my Callsign. said:

btw are you really deleting all the comments that spread misinfo or just the ones that don't paint ED in a good picture?

did Ron hire you?

[alejandr0]

3 hours ago, Oban said:

It is if there's a confidentiality clause in place. 

I hope you're also holding Razbam to the same standards with regards to accountability and as to why they decided to break the agreement, and the confidentiality clause associated with it? 

Yes, Razbam deserves equal criticism... their communication and conduct have been extremely unprofessional. But the key difference here is that ED still holds the keys to the platform, and they’re the ones continuing to sell products and build community trust. So naturally, the responsibility to maintain that trust also falls on them... not just Razbam.

At the very least, ED should be honest about their limitations and stop leaning on vague statements like "we hope for a resolution." People deserve clarity, not deflection.

[alejandr0]

2 hours ago, Hammer1-1 said:

dude...just open a support ticket and ask for one. Youll get store credit instead of a refund, but its 100% better than nothing. 

Unless he has on Steam, he won't get anything for a known reason.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

8 minutes ago, alejandr0 said:

Yes, Razbam deserves equal criticism... their communication and conduct have been extremely unprofessional. But the key difference here is that ED still holds the keys to the platform, and they’re the ones continuing to sell products and build community trust. So naturally, the responsibility to maintain that trust also falls on them... not just Razbam.

At the very least, ED should be honest about their limitations and stop leaning on vague statements like "we hope for a resolution." People deserve clarity, not deflection.

I at least agree with this sentiment. Pushing for a little more clarity cannot hurt.

[upyr1]

10 hours ago, NineLine said:

All we have to go on is the announcement in this thread, and it only mentions them working in 2.9.x, even after 3.0.x is here, we will keep an older version of DCS available for those that still want to use those IF this dispute is not solved. The preferred outcome is that something changes, and those modules can be updated to continue on with the future DCS major versions. 

As you said, 3.0 is most likely a ways off, and things can change between now and then. We will try to keep you as updated as possible, just like this statement we released yesterday. 

This is fine, within reason, and while we are a little more lax in this specific thread, repetitive posts and threads of already answered questions are frowned upon. Thanks

If you can't get things settled then all I ask of ED is please make your own Strike Eagle, Harrier, MiG-19, and Mirage 2K 

[WipeUout]

What DCS and the community need is commercial competition.  DCS is basically the only product in the realistic combat flight sim market.

[upyr1]

Just now, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

I at least agree with this sentiment. Pushing for a little more clarity cannot hurt.

Agreed  

11 minutes ago, alejandr0 said:

Yes, Razbam deserves equal criticism... their communication and conduct have been extremely unprofessional. But the key difference here is that ED still holds the keys to the platform, and they’re the ones continuing to sell products and build community trust. So naturally, the responsibility to maintain that trust also falls on them... not just Razbam.

At the very least, ED should be honest about their limitations and stop leaning on vague statements like "we hope for a resolution." People deserve clarity, not deflection.

I'm upset with both sides

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

Just now, WipeUout said:

What DCS and the community need is commercial competition.  DCS is basically the only product in the realistic combat flight sim market.

I think that goes without saying and that was the case even before this issue. Though, don't operate under the assumption that if ED upsets everyone, we'd see a huge exodus to the other. The result will be a reduction in player numbers for a time before people forget and go back to whatever it was they preferred. That'll make a whole lot of gamers butthurt to hear, but it's the truth. 

I'd just want more flight sims, truthfully.

[Hammer1-1]

15 minutes ago, alejandr0 said:

Unless he has on Steam, he won't get anything for a known reason.

yeah, but I still recall those users having some recourse.

[alejandr0]

16 minutes ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

I at least agree with this sentiment. Pushing for a little more clarity cannot hurt.

Appreciate that and that’s really all I’m trying to get across.
I’m not taking sides here... I just believe both parties should be held accountable. This isn’t about choosing ED or Razbam, it’s about the fact that paying customers are stuck in the middle with no real clarity.  The situation doesn’t need miracles  just transparency and responsibility.

And let's not forget about those who have the other three modules.

Edited Saturday at 07:38 PM by alejandr0

[Nightdare]

1 hour ago, NineLine said:

I dont have the info on contracts, and its not for sharing, but it is entirely possible all RB modules were signed before the escrow requirements, including the SE, but I do not have that info to share. 

 

I'm gonna push your butt against the stove for this one:

So, which 3rd party modules would be lost to updates if their developer decides to not work with you anymore?

It's ok you don't have that info, someone at ED does and can tell you.

Edited Saturday at 07:40 PM by Nightdare

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

7 minutes ago, alejandr0 said:

Appreciate that and that’s really all I’m trying to get across.
I’m not taking sides here... I just believe both parties should be held accountable. This isn’t about choosing ED or Razbam, it’s about the fact that paying customers are stuck in the middle with no real clarity.  The situation doesn’t need miracles  just transparency and responsibility.

And let's not forget about those who have the other three modules.

100% agree, I'm in that boat myself. It's no mystery that RB has been a bad faith actor and anyone who doesn't seem to get that is really trying their hardest. But, the idea that ED will shrug at us if nothing happens and just pull those 3 modules from the software when we hit 3.0?

That's unacceptable. Pure and simple. The fact that ED wouldn't stop and see that as such? Talk about rudderless.

[alejandr0]

7 minutes ago, Hammer1-1 said:

yeah, but I still recall those users having some recourse.

What kind of recourse did Steam users actually have? As far as I know, no refunds, no store credit, and no alternatives were offered ... unlike ED store customers. Were there any real options available that I might’ve missed?

[Nightdare]

2 minutes ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

But, the idea that ED will shrug at us if nothing happens and just pull those 3 modules from the software when we hit 3.0?

 

And that's an honest worry, Hell, the Hawk 'guarantee' was what gave me trust in handing ED $80 per virtual plane

 

But here we are with the F-15 nuked, 1 year in public, 5 years after people have been told this problem was dealt with

So,..which modules are still under the old stipulations? Seems everything announced and under development ATM which isn't ED's can be relegated to abandonware when things go sideways