ManofManyAliases posted:

I was responding to ice's comment about this royalty language:

"Crytek has not been compensated for Defendants' unlicensed use of Crytek technology in the Squadron 42 game, and has been substantially harmed by being deprived of that compensation, which would ordinarily include a substantial up-front payment as well as a substantial royalty on game sales."

In either regard, the whole purpose of these types of complaints are to throw as much poo poo as possible on the wall in hopes that some of it will stick. I honestly think that CryTek was negligent in their promise to provide support to CIG, hence CIG's switch to partner with Amazon's LY and receive ongoing support as necessary (in addition to poaching ex-developers and support from CryTek).

quote:

Last update : Jan 5th, 2018

Hello Citizens,

Now that Alpha 3.0 is out, we wanted to give you all an update on our plans for this coming year. As we discussed before the holidays, we now have a delivery schedule based on dates rather than features.

We are doing this for several reasons. First, thanks to the huge improvements to core tech, we can be more predictable about delivering our patches, as we are building upon and refining existing tech. Second, we want to get more build iteration, which gives us more opportunities to get feedback from the community going forward. Finally, this new approach provides more flexibility in our development. If a proposed feature takes longer than anticipated, we will push it to the next release, rather than delaying other new content.

We plan on delivering new builds once a quarter, starting with our first drop at the end of March. After that, we aim to deliver again at the end of June, September, and December of this year.

Our first release will pull together all the great work that was completed last year with a focus on optimizing the server and client. We also intend to include one or two new features which will enhance gameplay around Crusader.

3.1 is about enhancing performance and polishing the gameplay systems and UI, including ships, system traversal, a large balance pass of our economy, and improving AI for spaceflight and combat. All the great data and feedback from the community over the holiday period is really going to help us with these tasks.

Although 3.1 is our focus for late March, several teams will also be working on our long-term goals for this year, in which we plan to deliver the vast majority of systems and mechanics so players have a variety of options to lose themselves in the ‘Verse.

For our end-of-June release, we plan to implement the initial tier 0 versions of mining, salvaging, mobile refueling, and repair into the game, as well as give the player the ability to create their own missions like hiring mercs, transport, or refueling missions. On the AI side, we plan to improve both ship and FPS AI for both missions as well as general activity on space and planetary bases.

Our next delivery in late September will introduce another major long-term tech goal: Object Container Streaming. This technology will allow us to start expanding the Stanton system with additional destinations, while managing our memory usage much better. In this delivery, we would also like to start introducing the mechanics of how you stake and file land claims and the gameplay that comes with this feature. This release will also continue to consolidate and polish all the new features in the past milestone.

That will leave our final build of the year in late December. Now that our streaming tech has been tested and can support the huge amount of new data content introduced(), we will continue to expand the Stanton System, allowing players to explore, fulfill their career choices, and do many different types of missions, either with friends or on their own.

Stay tuned as the new Star Citizen Production Roadmap will come online along with the new RSI website later this month, with more development and release details.

See you in the ‘Verse (literally),

— The Star Citizen Team

In the meantime, head over to the launcher page and download the 3.0.0 patch to see the universe for yourself. You can also visit our Spectrum thread to leave your feedback.

hot balls man no homo posted:

Okay, so here is a crazy theory that might not be so crazy if you think about it:

The reason why the word "intentionally" was liberally sprinkled throughout the amended complaint that gave CIG another two weeks?

Somebody is talking. Skadden has somebody that was present at high level meetings where the decisions to ditch Cryengine because Crytek was probably going to be out of business. There are plenty of leavers that Skadden could have found or maybe the leavers were a bit disgruntled and came to Skadden themselves. Or it could be somebody still on the inside that is trying to cover their own rear end for when the poo poo truly hits the fan. Or maybe it's someone on the inside that was told to redo a bomber jacket one too many times. But the point is that there are many people who could have been privy to the decision to intentionally break contract. Even if their testimony can't be used, they still might know where the bodies are buried and could point Skadden towards the right documents and the right people to depose with the right questions.

Daztek posted:

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/Schedule-report-05012018


To the neeeew page

Gosts posted:

My magnum opus is done

A Neurotic Corncob posted:

looks like Relay gave the dumb one the account again.

Daztek posted:

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/Schedule-report-05012018


To the neeeew page

ManofManyAliases posted:

At the absolute worst, a 10m settlement and CIG goes about its business. So far there have been a dozen pages about speculation, the end of times as we know it, and parp. Yawn.

Someone called it earlier: a nothingburger.

D_Smart posted:

Oh, and your inconsequential bullshit above - much like all your other ramblings - is somehow not speculation.

Yeah, CIG could write a check for $10M, so they let a highly damaging matter that's over a year in the works, hit the court system.

Right.

STFU and please sit down.

ManofManyAliases posted:

Does it? If it boils down to around 20% royalties at the time of the agreement and they were around 30m in we're looking at 6 mil + "damages." And I'm talking a settlement here, not a judgement.

CryTek has poo poo for cash. Skadden is likely not collecting massive fees unless a settlement/judgement (if that).

Preen Dog posted:

But if CiG dies too hard, there won't be much to loot, and Chris gets an out.

It'd be funnier if the settlement is a Versaille's treaty where they have to put the Crytek logo back and pay reparations forever.

Thoatse posted:

Chalks posted:

What do you mean "at the time of the agreement"?

The way royalties work is that you agree to pay 20% of all revenue from the game you made using Cryengine.

Revenue to date is around 170 million dollars. So without the GLA they would owe 20% of that figure. And they would continue to owe 20% of all future revenue resulting from the game.


A business rate loan is not free, obviously, and if they already have the cash sitting around then literally what point would there be in taking out a loan while that cash sits in a bank account? Do you think they were getting a better interest rate from their bank account than the lender was getting on the loan?

Gosts posted:

My magnum opus is done

Gosts posted:

My magnum opus is done

Regrettable posted:

It's surprisingly easy to burn through half a billion dollars.

Gosts posted:

My magnum opus is done

IncredibleIgloo posted:

I don't know the history of the Star Citizen timeline. When was the agreement with Crytek made? If Crytek helped produce the demo that they used for the Kickstarter, then they would be in it from the beginning, yes? That would have been the time to sign the agreement? Why would the number be only that at which time it was signed; I thought royalties were based on the product being continuously sold? Even if we were to suppose that CIG no longer had to pay royalties when they switched to Lumberyard, that switch still came after the 100 million mark, right?

ManofManyAliases posted:

In either regard, the whole purpose of these types of complaints are to throw as much poo poo as possible on the wall in hopes that some of it will stick. I honestly think that CryTek was negligent in their promise to provide support to CIG, hence CIG's switch to partner with Amazon's LY and receive ongoing support as necessary (in addition to poaching ex-developers and support from CryTek).

Chalks posted:

Considering the contract specifically said they would exclusively use Cryengine for their game, I'm willing to make a bet on whether there was a termination clause in their contract allowing them to drop Cryengine for a different engine.

Assuming the information in the complaint is accurate, that is. The complaint also cites the fact that they're still using cryengine code, since they've repeatedly revealed proprietary code on their loving bugsmashers, because they are morons.

I do so hope this goes to court.

D_Smart posted:

Don't even waste your time. The GLA is solid. You don't give someone a licensing fee break to use your engine in exchange for promo, code exchange etc, THEN give them an escape hatch. Because yeah, that makes a ton of sense.

hot balls man no homo posted:

Nobody that has a shred of doubt about the project is going to shell out another 350 dollars for a pizza lunch and a chance to yell at Chris Roberts and the dev team. Remember that this is for high level backers only. High level backers with doubts aren't buying more ships and are not flying to LA. This is all for the true believers. Gotta keep a tight hold on their wallets. Make them feel like they are valued and an important part of Star Citizen.

ManofManyAliases posted:

No. The agreement was that as long as CryEngine was used being licensed and used in the production of a game by RSI/CIG, then they will receive royalties. If I have an exclusive agreement with Tesla to license my lithium refinery techniques in battery production and will receive a royalty on every battery sold, but then Tesla switches to another vendor and terminates the agreement with me in accordance with some termination clause of our contract, then would I continue to receive royalties for every battery sold after that if Tesla is utilizing the refining technique of that other vendor?

Ghostlight posted:

3.0 was the Jesus patch so it only makes sense to pull it out of the grave at the end of march.

Chalks posted:

Dude, read the complaint and get back to us please. It claims that under the GLA they signed they will exclusively use Cryengine for the game and in exchange for this they will pay zero royalties.

They're not being sued for failing to pay royalties, they're being sued for damages incurred as a result of them breaking the GLA in a bunch of different ways.

The most obvious violation being them claiming to have stopped using the engine, and the most obvious damages being the loving enormous royalty bill they avoided paying.

Ghostlight posted:

3.0 was the Jesus patch so it only makes sense to pull it out of the grave at the end of march.