Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

ManofManyAliases posted:

I have a cat. I posted my cat and removed my picture because I don't want anyone using teh reverse googles on me. He's an orange tabby and incredibly handsome.

Did you cash out your cryptos yet or are you riding the crash all the way down to $0?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

ManofManyAliases posted:

I moved a lot of stuff to LTC and going to ride that one out.

Best of luck buddy....



100% serious advice - the bubble is bursting, turn anything you can into real actual money that is going to be worth something come February, unlike all this crypto crap

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

Did that thing that Derek was talking about happen yet?

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

Has anything even slightly interesting happened yet?

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

IANAL butt it seems like Derek might have called this one

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

Mangoose posted:

Would Crytek even take a $10 million settlement at this point? I know gently caress-all about law or how all this would fly in court, but my biased and worthless opinion is that Crytek + Skadden are just running circles around CIG.

What could Crytek expect to be awarded in damages by a jury if things go well for them?

Crytek's standard licensing terms at the time appear to be 20% royalties so if they'd not signed the GLA and instead just got a standard license they'd have been liable to pay $35 million dollars in royalties so loving lol $10 million would be a miracle.

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

Bayonnefrog posted:

Yup. You settle at that point. They want to keep as much of that out of the public as possible.

That would be bitterly disappointing.

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

Bayonnefrog posted:

Yes. But think about their side. When you start talking about punitive damages, supuenas, and we start getting into the $$$ wasted on cars, trips, etc etc. They still want to make a game ( I guess...$177 mil and still nothing) Who knows where it could lead. Essentially the trial is taking place right now with these motions and responses.

I'd be absolutely fascinated as to what Crytek would accept in settlement. It seems like CIG would have to liquidate to even meet their settlement demands - and frankly why should Crytek go easy on them given that they've raked in 170 million and wasted it all on stupid crap.

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

AngusPodgorny posted:

We haven't seen Crytek's damage model yet, but it's an interesting question.

Straight royalties doesn't seem valid, because that wasn't a benefit of the bargain that was actually made. The benefits they're missing out on are things like bug fixes from CIG) and copyright notices, and what's the real value of having code from CIG and being associated as the engine behind Star Citizen's 15fps? Luckily for CIG, the worse they are, the lower their damages should be!

Copyright damages I don't really know, but the existence of Lumberyard could cut into these, because Faceware seeing CIG's code less of a big a deal if they could see the same thing for free in Lumberyard.

CIG signed the GLA in order to get a more favourable licensing deal than they would have got otherwise, yeah? I know very little about this sort of thing, but it seems fair to me that the damages for violating the GLA should be relative to the amount that they avoided paying in royalties by signing it.

You can't turn the clock back, you can't "re-exclusive" the game to cryengine and so fourth. If the only reason Crytek were willing to waive their usual royalty payments was for exclusivity, wouldn't re-imposing the usual royalty payments be a reasonable remedy for violation of the contract?

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

AngusPodgorny posted:

You need something like fraud to get into the really good remedies like disgorgement (CIG having to give back all their ill-gotten profits). It's possible Skadden will bring out the nuclear option at some point, but they haven't yet. But the game has barely started.

For breach of contract you end up getting put into the position of where you would have been had the contract been fully performed. You don't get to use hindsight to claim a hypothetical deal that wasn't struck. Since Crytek willingly gave up the uncertainty of royalties in exchange for the certainty of a one-time payment, I don't see how to get them now.

But how could they put back the exclusivity clause, or the other violations such as the disclosure of source code? Would they argue for a particular monetary value attached to these clauses and claim it as damages?

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

TheAgent posted:

quote:

Super-Size me

I didn't realise it literally was a hamburger analogy

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009


Wow continuous integration is so cutting edge congratulations.

Star Citizen: Laymen sounding excited about numbers they don't understand.

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

Beer4TheBeerGod posted:

You can tell they're a professional, high quality organization by how they solicit customer feedback using Google forms.

There's a question on the last page that asks you what severe bugs most impacted your experience with the ship and you are REQUIRED to pick 2.

Such confidence in their game that you literally cannot submit your assessment of the ship if you claim to have only encountered one severe bug.

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009


A racing mode with 0.5 average concurrent players sounds really fun

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

tuo posted:

goddamn, the CSS.

This is the from the CENTRAL css file....look at this, just look at it:



I'm the width: 145.5%

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

The whole password in the url thing is testament to the quality of CIG's programmers and their code review process. loving highschool level programming mistakes on production systems, a class act all round.

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

ManofManyAliases posted:

No one's going to jail for a video game you nutjob. FFS fully retire already.

B-b-but what about space court?

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

Hey moma, how are the crypto currencies treating you on this fine day?

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

Duckaerobics posted:

lol starcitzen.com redirects to futureusa.com. I wonder what they do?


Lol - you spelt "star citizen" wrong in the url in your post. If you go to the one in your post it goes to the site with some guy's referral code in the url.

The garbage fire is filled with smaller garbage fires how is this possible.

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

Thoatse posted:

I am a Star Citizen



OH it's just a joystick

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

Phi230 posted:

So Kingdom Come, a game kickstarted 3 years after SC started development, is a cryengine game that just came out

It's pretty good

A bit buggy but really cool imo

It certainly serves are a reminder of quite how excellent The Witcher 3 is.

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

Dark Off posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LWJy0jnFZE&t=204s
from this weeks bugsmashers

:allears: I wonder what is causing that crash.
Surely it isnt caused by CIG_hack_begin :ohdear:

I'm the codebase with so many shoddy hacks in it that they had to create their own system for tracking them.

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

stinch posted:



someone calculate the size of the office and work out how closely packed the 234 employees would be.

Also how many of their employees would need to travel to work in the boot of a car if they carpooled.

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

Really though if that place has 240 employees in it then pretty much every car would need to contain 4 people.

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009


That's Not How Capitalisation Works

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

no_recall posted:

Someone translate this so an average goon can understand. Tia.

Crytek sues
CIG files motion to dismiss
Crytek move to begin discovery
CIG files request for protective order to limit the scope of discovery until the motion to dismiss has been dealt with
Crytek ask the court to tell CIG to gently caress off

IANAL but CIG's protective order request seems reasonable.

Chalks fucked around with this message at 11:38 on Mar 28, 2018

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

If it really was Star Citizen in case form, all the fans will collide with each other when they spin and the whole thing will explode into a million pieces.

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009


Do they have too many artists sitting around without enough to do? The core technologies aren't getting finished fast enough so they're having to give them pointless crap like this?

How can this game be so behind schedule but still have time being burnt on such meaningless frills?

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

Sindai posted:

The astonishing thing is that they started their April Fools joke two days early instead of two weeks late

Pretty sure they started it 6 years early.

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

Lladre posted:

Let's look at this cool animation.


We start off with hands not even on the ledge (Guy has strong finger tips). And the feet are bracing against thin air.
We then push off that said air to propel the body up and forward.
And last we have the foot not even reach the ledge (that centimeter of boot won't slip), also lol exposed skin in vacuum. Because why do you even need to protect your throat in vacuum am I right?

We start off with the rear end looking a bit weird - maybe it's just the lighting
We then see the rear end turn slightly towards the camera, looking bigger still
And last we have the rear end in its full glory, and the truth is revealed that Ben's job was in fact mocap rear end model.

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

Does anyone with some vague legal knowledge know if filing a moot motion like this is normal or a sign of incompetence?

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

Hav posted:

It’s normal to attempt to swing the court to a more favourable position by argument.

Sure, but the situation here is that CIG filed a motion saying "but we don't want to have to do discovery yet" and the court response was "you already don't have to do discovery yet so go away". It doesn't seem to have changed the position, it just seems to have shown that CIG's lawyers don't know how discovery works.

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

Blue On Blue posted:

Best marketing slide to date!

BUT HAVE YOU SEEN THE LATEST PAMPHLET FROM RSI INDUSTRIES!

Also how can a marketing tweet ever be the best ever, it's literally just 'but our product is better, because we made the graph show it as such'

I'm the "Great Gaming Performance" vs "GREAT Gaming Performance" USP

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009


Was going to post this, but you beat me. Hotline miami is probably the best soundtrack I've ever heard.

Also Bootcha your latest video is excellent, you are an excellent chap.

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

Daztek posted:



Oh, I guess it's okay!

Wonder why CIG keeps reworking stuff over and over though :thunk:

You only do work when things need to be done, and planning never needs to be done.

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

stinch posted:

is this cr having a space wank?

I'm the balled up tissue

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

The spirit of Derek lives on I see

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

boviscopophobic posted:

Did you read the response to this one? The bug is marked as invalid because:


:smuggo:

Holy poo poo I'm stealing that for the auto-reply for our bug reporting portal at work

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

Paramemetic posted:

My favorite part is how in space you kind of hover 3 inches above your seat.

Maybe this is what they interpreted "edge of your seat gameplay" to mean?

How else are you going to reach the procedurally generated food, which is also hovering 3 inches above the table?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

G0RF posted:

Thank you.

Also, anybody watching on Mobile would be advised to use the YouTube app. Browser playback in chrome or elsewhere can get pretty noisy.

Really it’s much better on a desktop. The Fidelity!

Holy poo poo dude, this is absolutely excellent. Is it actually a series?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5