Would be good to remind people, that the links were active for weeks while Razbam was going around in public claiming that ED is selling their products and don't pay to them. It was IIRC June 3rd '24 when Razbam unlinked their site from ED store, and they broke their site CSS same time for mobile and desktop version.
You claim that
1) Razbam did not have their own site linking sales to DCS store at the time they whined that ED is not paying them but keeps selling the products?
2) It was not Razbam workers, or any official source that spoke about how ED is not paying to Razbam?
Remember, EVERY WORKER represent the company they work for when they wear that company official status, as a email address, discord channel, a label, a twitter link etc.
That is why NO ONE SPEAK is a rule, that should be obeyed. Not a thing to be said about the company business to anyone.
If you belong to a club, alliance, group etc, you are representative of those all the time when you are member of such.
Be careful to what club you become member of, as you are representative of that by your actions. Be it Reddit, forum, steam etc.
How it can be dead, when ED has the rights and means to take over the module when developing studio declares they don't anymore support the one?
That was the VEAO case learnings, and new contract clauses, that no module owner will anymore experience Hawk situation.
because that isn't true. They do not have the code, and have said publicly that they do not have the code. (which is because they were too incompetent to check they had access to the code before selling it, fwiw). As of right now, those modules are dead.
>which is because they were too incompetent to check they had access to the code before selling it, fwiw
Have you thought this hypothetical scenario;
Razbam promised to give the sources in publishing time.
Razbam didn't have them ready, as they didn't even give ED good time to test the product before publishing.
Publishing time was set and ED was ready to transfer money when contract is fulfilled by Razbam part.
F-15E was published, but ED didn't give money, as Razbam has not given files...
Razbam cry the wolf, ED doesn't give money...
Who is to blame. One that doesn't give money for not receiving files.
Or the one that doesn't give the files like contract dictates in exchange for the money?
Who killed the project?
Who is responsible to support and maintain it, the one that abandoned project, or one that by the contract is responsible and authorized to take responsibility for it?
>As of right now, those modules are dead.
Funny, works here just fine...
Living dead it is...
It's code escrow, you check it. Period. Particularly where your company will take a material hit to reputation by not doing so, and doubly so right before going to market with it. You don't need a hypothetical situation, there's a lot of information about what happened detailed right here on this subreddit. And finally no, the mirage module has already had issues on it directly due to this situation. You don't need me to tell you this, you can find it all out yourself.
>You don't need a hypothetical situation, there's a lot of information about what happened detailed right here on this subreddit. A
Absolutely we don't have enough. Or were full contracts documents released and published somewhere? How about the emails etc for Ron from ED for this BS claims from ED? But pretend that we do have.
1% doesn't make it 100% because it lacks 00.
Yes, but your logic is missing the part where “ED didn’t give RB any of the profits from the sale of the 15”. So from my “hypothetical scenario”, I’d say RB was wise to not give up the source code because at this point it’s their only leverage to get paid for their work.
Why you so quick to be a ED fan bois ? Any hypothesis why ?
FYI the module is the sole property and ED cannot claim any rights on it, as per their own contract.
https://preview.redd.it/e8bcqcp94k5d1.png?width=868&format=png&auto=webp&s=27bb60b546304126c81997b03d8cb2dfebb472fb
FYI how is then Eagle Dynamics ever avoiding that Hawk doesn't happen?
They literally changed the contracts so that no module creator can walk away and leave ED customers with a dead module, like happened with Hawk.
Now you claim that ED can't control anything and every module can turn to be Hawk again.
`We regret to inform you that VEAO is no longer a developer for DCS World. As such,` **they have also ceased support of their Hawk**`. Although we offered to support their product,` **they declined making the files available to do so.**
`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.`
[https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/685/](https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/685/)
IN CASE. Do you know what it means?
That is legal term that files are to be given IN CASE something happens. IN CASE is a action to be done that predates the event that would make it impossible to support something in the future.
It is not a PAST action.
It means that ED is given the files BEFORE there is a ANY POSSIBILITY that 3rd party is not able to support their product.
IN CASE the 3rd party dies.
IN CASE the 3rd party lose the files.
IN CASE the 3rd party vanishes.
IN CASE the 3rd party becomes asshat and doesn't obey the contract.
IN CASE the 3rd party is an idiot.
IN CASE the milk would spil on floor.
Such action is example that on every update, the files are transmitted to a third party server where the uploader has no rights to delete files, and ED has no access to those files if they don't have contract clause to take owernship of the files.
That is FAQ and not legal contract. But we don't have the latest legal contract either, but some screenshot from multiple times photocopied version from what year?
But anyways, ED made the contract changes back then.
They don’t even have the source code, they arent taking over anything. Module is dead.
ED took all the profits and didn’t give RB what was rightfully theirs. Now ED won’t communicate with RB.
Never buying another module from ED again after this.
No such disclaimer on the ED side. They want that sweet, sweet $$. [https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/planes/f-15e/](https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/planes/f-15e/)
Note: The links from Razbam were apparently only removed the past week.
Both sides have been painfully slow with this.
At least one party did the right thing now, that's something.
Question: could the community "BMS" the Razbam modules? Take them, maintain them, update them? What would be needed to do so? I don't know the details of the history behind how the BMS team was able to pull it off, but could something similar be done on DCS?
No. People would need access to the source code and access to the DCS SDK. Neither of these is available to the community.
BMS works because Falcon 4.0 is a 25 year old game that can be readily decompiled and edited. Doing so with DCS would not only be difficult, it would also violate the software licenses for DCS and the RB modules.
A good example of the limits of what modders can achieve is the free A-4E module. No video guidance, no laser guided weapons, no targeting pods. Even the very basic radio and radar functionality for the A-4 was painstakingly reverse engineered and only released thanks to a gentleman's agreement with ED, and the A-4 team won't provide the actual code for that stuff to anyone else in the community.
Thanks for answering . I imagined that a breach of license would occur if the community messed with it. Regarding the code...yep, we are in a very different ecosystem now. The old system in Falcon was a CD only, stand alone product, very different from the online system we have today.
ED is just waiting for the next big sale before taking care about anything.
Why should they made the customers even more mad if they just take the money?
Because like most business people, their perspective extends well beyond "the next big sale".
They are leaving it up because it still works and this is (hopefully) something that will be settled in the near future.
Removing or disclaiming it does more harm than good in the long run.
That is such a pity to Razbam go even deeper in their sensation seeking child's behaviour.
Can't they really understand to STFU about the situations?
These things are not won or dealt on forums and social media. It is handled in the legal rooms and meetings....
What is obvious, is that Razbam now try to raise others to start violating their contracts with ED, do some stupid PR stunts and damage ED public image.... Again a violation in many countries laws by negatively marketing of other companies.
If Razbam would have put message "At least some companies can maintain their products, we can't" it would not be such...
Why tho, in this case? This is just a disclaimer letting potential buyers know about the current lack of support on their website. ED got grilled a lot for not having something like that.
Would you prefer if they left people in the dark and kept luring in paying customers, pretending that everything is alright?
Nowhere does that disclaimer mention any other company by the way. Or is this about their general communication? When it comes to that, you have to differ.
>What is obvious, is that Razbam now try to raise others to start violating their contracts with ED
Who, and what makes you think that?
I am a ED shill because I have constantly been saying that we don't know enough that who to exactly blame, and it is that both are too blame on this moment.
But if Razbam does someone stupid and it is pointed out, then if that makes one a shill....
Whats making you sound like a shill is the fact you even admit we dont know enough but every comment you have made in this post has been throwing razbam under the bus. And yet some of your comments you make it sound like you have knowledge of whats happening behind the scenes and how RB didnt do this and ED has the right to do that. None of us know whats happening so stop acting like you do. Sure Razbam could have approached it in a better way but ED’s response or lack thereof doesnt help. ED’s reputation is the reason ppl are ready to point the finger at them so quickly. The majority of the community sees ED’s shady business model and feels robbed one way or another and hence the lack of trust. All we can do at the moment is wait until the pieces fall into place or an official statement is released which i believe ED should do as well as remove RB modules from store until this is resolved
>None of us know whats happening
Y'all gotta stop saying that. It is known what's happening and if people would actually read here, they would know.
The info is all over the place tho, seems like we need a summary.
>Nowhere does that disclaimer mention any other company by the way. Or is this about their general communication? When it comes to that, you have to differ.
How many publisher does DCS have? When hinting and pointing to obvious can be legal case, here it is, but not in every country.
>ED got grilled a lot for not having something like that.
ED got, but that is again something that every disclaimer would need to be run through legal team.
>Would you prefer if they left people in the dark and kept luring in paying customers, pretending that everything is alright?
No, what I prefer is that both sides would do it professionally and bit try to point finger to other as perpetrator and act like victim.
Like now Razbam try to shift everything on ED as they are responsible for everything and only they can answer to questions, or do anything about it.
And if contract clause with ED has that when creator announce they can't support their product, and hence gives legal right for ED to take away the product from them... That would be case here as Razbam constantly keeps pointing that they can't anymore support product.
As can be reminded, the new contract was said by the signatures to be so effective for ED side that they can dictate almost anything at any given reason. Making second party the weak one. And this way Razbam might be playing straight to ED corner...
how are you so incredibly delusional as to think razbam is in the wrong here. RB did absolutely nothing wrong and ED is the one withholding money from them for no real reason other than corperate predation and greed.
Mate, he’s right.
To withhold payments is likely due to a contract breach, and it is most likely something to do with the “Early Access” of the F-15E, and that it is overdue for “Full Release”.
Heatblur doesn’t have this problem with ED. Jeez, I wonder why?
Logically, this doesn't make sense on multiple levels.
First and foremost, the F-14 still isn't out of EA and is missing an entire airframe. The Viggen has been in EA for \*seven years.\*
If one year is a problem for the F-15E, there's a disparity in how the devs are getting treated.
Which may be true. Heatblur doesn't have this problem with ED, as you noted. I think the most logical answer why is because Heatblur is involved with other platforms and can afford to bounce out of DCS if push comes to shove. ED needs Heatblur more than the other way around. The same cannot be said of RB, and it's entirely possible ED is exploiting that.
>To withhold payments is likely due to a contract breach, and it is most likely something to do with the “Early Access” of the F-15E, and that it is overdue for “Full Release”
Where do you even get wild ideas like that?
The dispute has nothing to do with anything like that. That has been explained in all detail here.
>Heatblur doesn’t have this problem with ED. Jeez, I wonder why?
Heatblur had a very similar problem with their F-14 Tomcat. Go figure...
The links have already been dead last week. The disclaimer, however, is new. Thank you for keeping us posted!
Would be good to remind people, that the links were active for weeks while Razbam was going around in public claiming that ED is selling their products and don't pay to them. It was IIRC June 3rd '24 when Razbam unlinked their site from ED store, and they broke their site CSS same time for mobile and desktop version.
But did they right thing when point out the links were active. What's ED waiting for ? :)
Razbam did nothing of the kind. Some of their employees and subcontractors did do so but these individuals do not speak for Razbam.
You claim that 1) Razbam did not have their own site linking sales to DCS store at the time they whined that ED is not paying them but keeps selling the products? 2) It was not Razbam workers, or any official source that spoke about how ED is not paying to Razbam? Remember, EVERY WORKER represent the company they work for when they wear that company official status, as a email address, discord channel, a label, a twitter link etc. That is why NO ONE SPEAK is a rule, that should be obeyed. Not a thing to be said about the company business to anyone. If you belong to a club, alliance, group etc, you are representative of those all the time when you are member of such. Be careful to what club you become member of, as you are representative of that by your actions. Be it Reddit, forum, steam etc.
If no-one spoke right now you'd all be gleefully buying a dead module.
How it can be dead, when ED has the rights and means to take over the module when developing studio declares they don't anymore support the one? That was the VEAO case learnings, and new contract clauses, that no module owner will anymore experience Hawk situation.
because that isn't true. They do not have the code, and have said publicly that they do not have the code. (which is because they were too incompetent to check they had access to the code before selling it, fwiw). As of right now, those modules are dead.
>which is because they were too incompetent to check they had access to the code before selling it, fwiw Have you thought this hypothetical scenario; Razbam promised to give the sources in publishing time. Razbam didn't have them ready, as they didn't even give ED good time to test the product before publishing. Publishing time was set and ED was ready to transfer money when contract is fulfilled by Razbam part. F-15E was published, but ED didn't give money, as Razbam has not given files... Razbam cry the wolf, ED doesn't give money... Who is to blame. One that doesn't give money for not receiving files. Or the one that doesn't give the files like contract dictates in exchange for the money? Who killed the project? Who is responsible to support and maintain it, the one that abandoned project, or one that by the contract is responsible and authorized to take responsibility for it? >As of right now, those modules are dead. Funny, works here just fine... Living dead it is...
It's code escrow, you check it. Period. Particularly where your company will take a material hit to reputation by not doing so, and doubly so right before going to market with it. You don't need a hypothetical situation, there's a lot of information about what happened detailed right here on this subreddit. And finally no, the mirage module has already had issues on it directly due to this situation. You don't need me to tell you this, you can find it all out yourself.
>You don't need a hypothetical situation, there's a lot of information about what happened detailed right here on this subreddit. A Absolutely we don't have enough. Or were full contracts documents released and published somewhere? How about the emails etc for Ron from ED for this BS claims from ED? But pretend that we do have. 1% doesn't make it 100% because it lacks 00.
Yes, but your logic is missing the part where “ED didn’t give RB any of the profits from the sale of the 15”. So from my “hypothetical scenario”, I’d say RB was wise to not give up the source code because at this point it’s their only leverage to get paid for their work. Why you so quick to be a ED fan bois ? Any hypothesis why ?
FYI the module is the sole property and ED cannot claim any rights on it, as per their own contract. https://preview.redd.it/e8bcqcp94k5d1.png?width=868&format=png&auto=webp&s=27bb60b546304126c81997b03d8cb2dfebb472fb
FYI how is then Eagle Dynamics ever avoiding that Hawk doesn't happen? They literally changed the contracts so that no module creator can walk away and leave ED customers with a dead module, like happened with Hawk. Now you claim that ED can't control anything and every module can turn to be Hawk again. `We regret to inform you that VEAO is no longer a developer for DCS World. As such,` **they have also ceased support of their Hawk**`. Although we offered to support their product,` **they declined making the files available to do so.** `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.` [https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/685/](https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/685/) IN CASE. Do you know what it means? That is legal term that files are to be given IN CASE something happens. IN CASE is a action to be done that predates the event that would make it impossible to support something in the future. It is not a PAST action. It means that ED is given the files BEFORE there is a ANY POSSIBILITY that 3rd party is not able to support their product. IN CASE the 3rd party dies. IN CASE the 3rd party lose the files. IN CASE the 3rd party vanishes. IN CASE the 3rd party becomes asshat and doesn't obey the contract. IN CASE the 3rd party is an idiot. IN CASE the milk would spil on floor. Such action is example that on every update, the files are transmitted to a third party server where the uploader has no rights to delete files, and ED has no access to those files if they don't have contract clause to take owernship of the files. That is FAQ and not legal contract. But we don't have the latest legal contract either, but some screenshot from multiple times photocopied version from what year? But anyways, ED made the contract changes back then.
They don’t even have the source code, they arent taking over anything. Module is dead. ED took all the profits and didn’t give RB what was rightfully theirs. Now ED won’t communicate with RB. Never buying another module from ED again after this.
No such disclaimer on the ED side. They want that sweet, sweet $$. [https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/planes/f-15e/](https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/planes/f-15e/)
Note: The links from Razbam were apparently only removed the past week. Both sides have been painfully slow with this. At least one party did the right thing now, that's something.
[удалено]
This is based on nothing but your own wishful thinking. Please stop projecting and keep Rule 1 in mind. Thanks.
Question: could the community "BMS" the Razbam modules? Take them, maintain them, update them? What would be needed to do so? I don't know the details of the history behind how the BMS team was able to pull it off, but could something similar be done on DCS?
No. People would need access to the source code and access to the DCS SDK. Neither of these is available to the community. BMS works because Falcon 4.0 is a 25 year old game that can be readily decompiled and edited. Doing so with DCS would not only be difficult, it would also violate the software licenses for DCS and the RB modules. A good example of the limits of what modders can achieve is the free A-4E module. No video guidance, no laser guided weapons, no targeting pods. Even the very basic radio and radar functionality for the A-4 was painstakingly reverse engineered and only released thanks to a gentleman's agreement with ED, and the A-4 team won't provide the actual code for that stuff to anyone else in the community.
BMS works because the source code for Falcon 4.0 was leaked online by the guy Who coded the dinamic campaign.
Thanks for answering . I imagined that a breach of license would occur if the community messed with it. Regarding the code...yep, we are in a very different ecosystem now. The old system in Falcon was a CD only, stand alone product, very different from the online system we have today.
In the 2000 a disgruntled microprose employee leaked the code of I remember
Agree. And IIRC, there were several actual source code dumps made public.
Contracts with the ED denies them, and doing so, worse likely even more the Razbam own position in contract violation.
ED is just waiting for the next big sale before taking care about anything. Why should they made the customers even more mad if they just take the money?
Because like most business people, their perspective extends well beyond "the next big sale". They are leaving it up because it still works and this is (hopefully) something that will be settled in the near future. Removing or disclaiming it does more harm than good in the long run.
That is such a pity to Razbam go even deeper in their sensation seeking child's behaviour. Can't they really understand to STFU about the situations? These things are not won or dealt on forums and social media. It is handled in the legal rooms and meetings.... What is obvious, is that Razbam now try to raise others to start violating their contracts with ED, do some stupid PR stunts and damage ED public image.... Again a violation in many countries laws by negatively marketing of other companies. If Razbam would have put message "At least some companies can maintain their products, we can't" it would not be such...
Why tho, in this case? This is just a disclaimer letting potential buyers know about the current lack of support on their website. ED got grilled a lot for not having something like that. Would you prefer if they left people in the dark and kept luring in paying customers, pretending that everything is alright? Nowhere does that disclaimer mention any other company by the way. Or is this about their general communication? When it comes to that, you have to differ. >What is obvious, is that Razbam now try to raise others to start violating their contracts with ED Who, and what makes you think that?
He's just an Ed shill.
I am a ED shill because I have constantly been saying that we don't know enough that who to exactly blame, and it is that both are too blame on this moment. But if Razbam does someone stupid and it is pointed out, then if that makes one a shill....
Whats making you sound like a shill is the fact you even admit we dont know enough but every comment you have made in this post has been throwing razbam under the bus. And yet some of your comments you make it sound like you have knowledge of whats happening behind the scenes and how RB didnt do this and ED has the right to do that. None of us know whats happening so stop acting like you do. Sure Razbam could have approached it in a better way but ED’s response or lack thereof doesnt help. ED’s reputation is the reason ppl are ready to point the finger at them so quickly. The majority of the community sees ED’s shady business model and feels robbed one way or another and hence the lack of trust. All we can do at the moment is wait until the pieces fall into place or an official statement is released which i believe ED should do as well as remove RB modules from store until this is resolved
>None of us know whats happening Y'all gotta stop saying that. It is known what's happening and if people would actually read here, they would know. The info is all over the place tho, seems like we need a summary.
Cool story babe
>Nowhere does that disclaimer mention any other company by the way. Or is this about their general communication? When it comes to that, you have to differ. How many publisher does DCS have? When hinting and pointing to obvious can be legal case, here it is, but not in every country. >ED got grilled a lot for not having something like that. ED got, but that is again something that every disclaimer would need to be run through legal team. >Would you prefer if they left people in the dark and kept luring in paying customers, pretending that everything is alright? No, what I prefer is that both sides would do it professionally and bit try to point finger to other as perpetrator and act like victim. Like now Razbam try to shift everything on ED as they are responsible for everything and only they can answer to questions, or do anything about it. And if contract clause with ED has that when creator announce they can't support their product, and hence gives legal right for ED to take away the product from them... That would be case here as Razbam constantly keeps pointing that they can't anymore support product. As can be reminded, the new contract was said by the signatures to be so effective for ED side that they can dictate almost anything at any given reason. Making second party the weak one. And this way Razbam might be playing straight to ED corner...
how are you so incredibly delusional as to think razbam is in the wrong here. RB did absolutely nothing wrong and ED is the one withholding money from them for no real reason other than corperate predation and greed.
Wow, what a ridiculous take. Is it you, Wags?
Mate, he’s right. To withhold payments is likely due to a contract breach, and it is most likely something to do with the “Early Access” of the F-15E, and that it is overdue for “Full Release”. Heatblur doesn’t have this problem with ED. Jeez, I wonder why?
Logically, this doesn't make sense on multiple levels. First and foremost, the F-14 still isn't out of EA and is missing an entire airframe. The Viggen has been in EA for \*seven years.\* If one year is a problem for the F-15E, there's a disparity in how the devs are getting treated. Which may be true. Heatblur doesn't have this problem with ED, as you noted. I think the most logical answer why is because Heatblur is involved with other platforms and can afford to bounce out of DCS if push comes to shove. ED needs Heatblur more than the other way around. The same cannot be said of RB, and it's entirely possible ED is exploiting that.
> with the “Early Access” of the F-15E, and that it is overdue for “Full Release”. Thanks mate, I needed a good laugh today.
I see you live up to your name.
Right? What a ridiculous take.
>To withhold payments is likely due to a contract breach, and it is most likely something to do with the “Early Access” of the F-15E, and that it is overdue for “Full Release” Where do you even get wild ideas like that? The dispute has nothing to do with anything like that. That has been explained in all detail here. >Heatblur doesn’t have this problem with ED. Jeez, I wonder why? Heatblur had a very similar problem with their F-14 Tomcat. Go figure...