waiting for resolution ED/RAZBAM Situation Info & Discussion

[Esac_mirmidon]

3 minutes ago, Oban said:

You missed out the part where Razbam, or parties thereof have already on at least 3 occasions in recent months breached the confidentiality clause that was allegedly part of said agreement, twice by Ron Zambrano himself. 


Personally I don't wish to see Razbam go out of business, but can they afford to write off what's owed to them by ED? 

Both parties need to be sat at a table and force fed shyt sandwiches by their customers until both agree to end this situation and get back to making great modules  

I didnt forget that.

But is something not helping to the resoluition. 

Also ED , IMO, is not helping, but this is my own subjective oppinion.

[SkateZilla]

Loose Lips Sink Ships.

Even if ED was 100% the bad guy *(assuming, just to play devils advocate)*, RB and Associates contract breaches don't help their cause, nor the proceedings, nor the litigation, nor the resolution.

It's like trying to end a fight with your spouse for driving your car, you say fine honey, lets settle this, and she/he brings up random events from 2 months ago, not applicable to the current fight, then calls you a broke deadbeat because you wont give him/her your debit card so they can goto the mall and buy things and you want him/her to pay for their own gas.

[JuiceIsLoose]

Just now, SkateZilla said:

Loose Lips Sink Ships.

Even if ED was 100% the bad guy *(assuming, just to play devils advocate)*, RB and Associates contract breaches don't help their cause, nor the proceedings, nor the litigation, nor the resolution.

It's like trying to end a fight with your spouse for driving your car, you say fine honey, lets settle this, and she/he brings up random events from 2 months ago, not applicable to the current fight, then calls you a broke deadbeat because you wont give him/her your debit card so they can goto the mall and buy things and you want him/her to pay for their own gas.

What litigation? What proceedings? Nothing has gone or is going to court. 
 

There was an agreement. And even ED has said it wasn’t implemented. So if there was a nda, get over it, that agreement is over. 

[alejandr0]

10 minutes ago, SkateZilla said:

Loose Lips Sink Ships.

Even if ED was 100% the bad guy *(assuming, just to play devils advocate)*, RB and Associates contract breaches don't help their cause, nor the proceedings, nor the litigation, nor the resolution.

It's like trying to end a fight with your spouse for driving your car, you say fine honey, lets settle this, and she/he brings up random events from 2 months ago, not applicable to the current fight, then calls you a broke deadbeat because you wont give him/her your debit card so they can goto the mall and buy things and you want him/her to pay for their own gas.

Sure, discretion matters... but silence from ED and broken promises still affect us directly. Customers aren’t bound by NDAs, but we are paying for the consequences.
When one side goes silent and the other speaks out, even messily, it’s often the only way the public gets any sense of what’s happening. That’s not ideal, but neither is being left completely in the dark.

[SkateZilla]

11 minutes ago, JuiceIsLoose said:

What litigation? What proceedings? Nothing has gone or is going to court. 
 

There was an agreement. And even ED has said it wasn’t implemented. So if there was a nda, get over it, that agreement is over. 

Suggest you google the definitions of Litigation. It's the Legal Process or resolving right's disputes. It does not always goto court. Both parties meet, with a legal representative from a legal firm. Most of the time Companies resolve their disputes in a conference room w/ a legal mediator. 

Or in modern / post covid times, on Teams/Skype/Video Conferencing Apps w/ Both Parties + the Legal Mediator w/ digital transcripts created for each session etc etc.

6 minutes ago, alejandr0 said:

Sure, discretion matters... but silence from ED and broken promises still affect us directly. Customers aren’t bound by NDAs, but we are paying for the consequences.
When one side goes silent and the other speaks out, even messily, it’s often the only way the public gets any sense of what’s happening. That’s not ideal, but neither is being left completely in the dark.

If both parties were too busy shooting shots at each other over discord and social media and newsletters, nothing would be salvageable. there wouldn't bee any progress.
ED being silent helps more than you know, they simply release updates stating as much.

What do you want them to do? release a newsletter and have them post PDF transcripts of any conferencing sessions and attendence logs showing who doesn't show up and who does, who buys the krispy kremes and who buys the starbucks.?

[av8orDave]

First, at this point everything you are all debating is just noise. What is ED's plan to keep this from happening going forward? What is their way to fix it for their customers now that it has happened? I have three Razbam modules that are already degrading in terms of functionality, have never received promised features, and it sounds like they'll stop working soon. How is ED going to fix this? Refunds? I'm not interested in "store credits", if that is the solution. I already own the modules I want.

Second, what should my expectation be in regards to 3rd parties? The modules I purchase could just stop receiving support at any time? Polychop had some well-publicized issues right after the release of the Kiowa... another reminder of how "fragile" ED's current business model is.

Which brings me to the third point: Is there any belief that this business model is sustainable? It takes years, sometimes 7 or 8 years, for these modules to be developed and released between actual development time and time spent in "early access". Does ED believe it is a sound business model to have to maintain an ever-growing portfolio of modules with no revenue stream beyond their initial purchase? Over time, it would become an exponential amount of work to maintain these modules while developing the core game, with the only source of revenue being new "early access" releases that take years to develop. I believe that is why the CH-47 was released in such a bare-bones state, has seen such slow progress, etc. 

I think the model is bad, and if not already in trouble, eventually will be in trouble without some ongoing source of revenue to sustain the existing modules, terrains, and core game (subscription?). I know it isn't a popular view, but it is real.

Edited Sunday at 02:16 PM by av8orDave

[alejandr0]

5 minutes ago, SkateZilla said:

If both parties were too busy shooting shots at each other over discord and social media and newsletters, nothing would be salvageable. there wouldn't bee any progress.
ED being silent helps more than you know, they simply release updates stating as much.

What do you want them to do? release a newsletter and have them post PDF transcripts of any conferencing sessions and attendence logs showing who doesn't show up and who does, who buys the krispy kremes and who buys the starbucks.?

I’m not asking for daily transcripts or drama. Just a minimum level of clarity and honesty from a company that continues to sell modules and build its reputation on trust.
Silence may avoid short-term noise, but long-term uncertainty erodes confidence... especially when paying customers are the ones left with broken promises. A simple, honest update like “We’re limited by X, and here’s what we can or can’t do right now” would go a long way.

That’s not unreasonable... it’s basic respect.

[JuiceIsLoose]

7 minutes ago, SkateZilla said:

Suggest you google the definitions of Litigation. It's the Legal Process or resolving right's disputes. It does not always goto court. Both parties meet, with a legal representative from a legal firm. Most of the time Companies resolve their disputes in a conference room w/ a legal mediator. 

Or in modern / post covid times, on Teams/Skype/Video Conferencing Apps w/ Both Parties + the Legal Mediator w/ digital transcripts created for each session etc etc.

 

Okay, here ya go:

“Public Court System”

[Gizmo03]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb Esac_mirmidon:

ED STATES the agreement is not implmented yet ant THEY-ED are hoping to BE ABLE to implement that agreement

So no money has been provided, they are hoping to be able to do so in his words. 

Yes, all good. It could be exactely as you said. But do you really think the statement means "There is an agreement but our part was to pay what we didn't do yet but we hope to be able to pay soon"?

Because i think the statement means "There is an agreement signed but both have to follow the conditions to implement it but this is not the case yet but we are hoping to implement it as soon as both parties are fullfilling their parts on the agreement". Further more NL also wrote that "We are acting in good faith on the agreement".

But anyway.... the only fact we really know is that there was an agreement signed by both parties but it's still not implementet. Everything else is nothing more than speculations and interpretations.

Edited Sunday at 02:36 PM by Gizmo03

[Esac_mirmidon]

Thats why we are here waiting for the outcome.

[SkateZilla]

56 minutes ago, JuiceIsLoose said:

Okay, here ya go:

“Public Court System”

Court System, Is not limited to actual use of the Court Rooms, Trials, etc.

But if we want to get technical, Mediation is prolly the accurate term for the current phase.

59 minutes ago, alejandr0 said:

A simple, honest update like “We’re limited by X, and here’s what we can or can’t do right now” would go a long way.

That’s not unreasonable... it’s basic respect.

Something like:

Quote

 

In response to recent comments and questions made by Razbam Simulations, its proxies and/or external developers, Eagle Dynamics confirms that it signed a settlement agreement with Razbam at the end of 2024 to put an end to the existing disputes and that such agreement also provides for a strict confidentiality requirement that prevents Eagle Dynamics from disclosing further information.

Eagle Dynamics can, however, confirm that Razbam instructed Eagle Dynamics to cease selling the modules developed by Razbam and its independent developers. All modules continue to function ‘as is’ and despite not receiving any access to source codes or cooperation from Razbam and its external developers, Eagle Dynamics will do its best to ensure that these modules continue to function in 2.9.X.

We are still hoping to be able to implement the settlement agreement and to find a satisfactory outcome to the current situation, in the best interests of our valued community.

 

 

Edited Sunday at 03:16 PM by SkateZilla

[Oban]

We're blessed to have so many legal experts who enjoy flying in DCS...where would be with them, and the self entitled consumers too... ? 


And in the mean time, Razbam modules are still very much enjoyable. 

[Oban]

 

14 hours ago, alejandr0 said:

I’m not asking for daily transcripts or drama. Just a minimum level of clarity and honesty from a company that continues to sell modules and build its reputation on trust.
Silence may avoid short-term noise, but long-term uncertainty erodes confidence... especially when paying customers are the ones left with broken promises. A simple, honest update like “We’re limited by X, and here’s what we can or can’t do right now” would go a long way.

That’s not unreasonable... it’s basic respect.

I keep reading and hearing about this word "Promise" can someone please point me to the official statements from either side that contain the word "Promise" please.

I promise my girlfriend I wont spend money on DCS modules again, but do it anyway... promises can be empty, nothing legal about them. face value etc. 

Edited yesterday at 04:40 AM by Oban

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

17 minutes ago, Oban said:

We're blessed to have so many legal experts who enjoy flying in DCS...where would be with them, and the self entitled consumers too... ? 


And in the mean time, Razbam modules are still very much enjoyable. 

I'm not sure anyone's arguing that they aren't. I certainly enjoy the MiG-19. But, the concern is the future, after all.

[Gizmo03]

vor 11 Minuten schrieb Oban:

I keep reading and hearing about this word "Promise" can someone please point me to the official statements from either side that contain the word "Promise" please.

Sorry i can't but can you please point me to the word "promise" in my post you just quoted? I just can't find it.

[Koziolek]

24 minutes ago, Oban said:

And in the mean time, Razbam modules are still very much enjoyable. 

Are they? That's good to know. So where can I get them?

[Esac_mirmidon]

1 hour ago, av8orDave said:

First, at this point everything you are all debating is just noise. What is ED's plan to keep this from happening going forward? What is their way to fix it for their customers now that it has happened? I have three Razbam modules that are already degrading in terms of functionality, have never received promised features, and it sounds like they'll stop working soon. How is ED going to fix this? Refunds? I'm not interested in "store credits", if that is the solution. I already own the modules I want.

Second, what should my expectation be in regards to 3rd parties? The modules I purchase could just stop receiving support at any time? Polychop had some well-publicized issues right after the release of the Kiowa... another reminder of how "fragile" ED's current business model is.

Which brings me to the third point: Is there any belief that this business model is sustainable? It takes years, sometimes 7 or 8 years, for these modules to be developed and released between actual development time and time spent in "early access". Does ED believe it is a sound business model to have to maintain an ever-growing portfolio of modules with no revenue stream beyond their initial purchase? Over time, it would become an exponential amount of work to maintain these modules while developing the core game, with the only source of revenue being new "early access" releases that take years to develop. I believe that is why the CH-47 was released in such a bare-bones state, has seen such slow progress, etc. 

I think the model is bad, and if not already in trouble, eventually will be in trouble without some ongoing source of revenue to sustain the existing modules, terrains, and core game (subscription?). I know it isn't a popular view, but it is real.

You need to have faith, because it seems ED will not reveal what modules are inside the file sharing policy since 2018.

[draconus]

2 hours ago, Koziolek said:

Are they? That's good to know. So where can I get them?

If you don't own any you're late to the party.

Edited Sunday at 05:56 PM by draconus

[draconus]

So the recent ED statement doesn't change much. Modules still work and will work for now but still no updates. What I don't like is threatening customers that their modules may not work in future DCS versions. I wait for that day before raising hell.

Keeping 2 DCS versions would be a silly workaround and have a major flaw. Hypothetically: What good is Iraq South released potentially in 3.0 when my F-15E no longer works with it? You'll be losing customers and sales, ED, big time.

[alejandr0]

1 hour ago, SkateZilla said:

In response to recent comments and questions made by Razbam Simulations, its proxies and/or external developers, Eagle Dynamics confirms that it signed a settlement agreement with Razbam at the end of 2024 to put an end to the existing disputes and that such agreement also provides for a strict confidentiality requirement that prevents Eagle Dynamics from disclosing further information.

Eagle Dynamics can, however, confirm that Razbam instructed Eagle Dynamics to cease selling the modules developed by Razbam and its independent developers. All modules continue to function ‘as is’ and despite not receiving any access to source codes or cooperation from Razbam and its external developers, Eagle Dynamics will do its best to ensure that these modules continue to function in 2.9.X.

We are still hoping to be able to implement the settlement agreement and to find a satisfactory outcome to the current situation, in the best interests of our valued community.

You know what’s truly frustrating about this whole situation? That everything still seems to rely on just hoping things work out.
People have asked repeatedly: what happens if the four modules stop functioning? Will ED simply say, “Well, go reinstall an old version where it still works”? That’s not a solution... it’s a shrug.
The constant “for now the modules still work” and “we hope for a resolution” messaging isn’t enough. At some point, hope runs out... and customers deserve to know: what is the actual plan if that happens? Is there even one? Will you prevent the fire from breaking out, or will you try to put it out once it breaks out?
Let’s not forget... the VEAO Hawk was one module. This time, it’s four, and the proposed “solution” seems even weaker.
That won't be progress... it’ll regression.

[hitman]

2 hours ago, SkateZilla said:

What do you want them to do? release a newsletter and have them post PDF transcripts of any conferencing sessions and attendence logs showing who doesn't show up and who does, who buys the krispy kremes and who buys the starbucks.?

It would casually tell me whos going to be the next guy to kick the bucket...

[alejandr0]

5 minutes ago, draconus said:

So the recent ED statement doesn't change much. Modules still work and will work for now but still no updates. What I don't like is threatening customers that their modules may not work in future DCS versions. I wait for that day before raising hell.

Hasn't much changed? Nothing has changed, after almost a year and a half, nothing has changed... they just mentioned that modules might not work properly in a future version.
Something that's been known for a much longer time.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

1 hour ago, alejandr0 said:

You know what’s truly frustrating about this whole situation? That everything still seems to rely on just hoping things work out.
People have asked repeatedly: what happens if the four modules stop functioning? Will ED simply say, “Well, go reinstall an old version where it still works”? That’s not a solution... it’s a shrug.
The constant “for now the modules still work” and “we hope for a resolution” messaging isn’t enough. At some point, hope runs out... and customers deserve to know: what is the actual plan if that happens? Is there even one? Will you prevent the fire from breaking out, or will you try to put it out once it breaks out?
Let’s not forget... the VEAO Hawk was one module. This time, it’s four, and the proposed “solution” seems even weaker.
That won't be progress... it’ll regression.

This is, to me, absolutely on target.

We can establish either party is the dastardly villain, stroking their comical handle bar mustache, and stealing into the night all we want. It's been very well established that RB did breach contract. To try and weasel around this fact is to not understand business and what has to be done to protect a brand.

However, where does that get us, the consumers? We know who to blame, but that hardly gives us a measure of confidence. What's worse is the lack of actual solution that benefits the paying customer. We clearly need more than just "Well it'll work until an undetermined date in the future."

It's nice to know that they'll work, but what about the point at which they don't? What about the point in which they're removed from the software all together? Do we just get an apology? The BP episode of South Park comes to mind in that case: Soohhhrrreeehh.

We're going to need something, not much, really. I wonder how many would be satisfied if ED says they intend to do something to compensate us in the event of total module failure.

[Tank50us]

3 minutes ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

We're going to need something, not much, really. I wonder how many would be satisfied if ED says they intend to do something to compensate us in the event of total module failure.

I mean... there is an option... one that's been brought up several times, and now has a whole thread in the wishlist section: Make new versions, and if someone hasn't gotten a refund, they get the new toy for free or significantly reduced cost

[Oban]

2 hours ago, Gizmo03 said:

Sorry i can't but can you please point me to the word "promise" in my post you just quoted? I just can't find it.

Look like 2 quotes were merged, but just one response, apologies, not directed at your comments, but Alejandros