|
"we need a cash infusion and we promised Calders Squadron 42 would be released in 2020. Let's just release it wide for a quick cash infusion and hope it attracts new customers." "Like, as a separate game? Because Star Citizen isn't close to ready yet." "Sure, new customers are our only hope at the moment." "Do you think Crytek and the Court might take issue with that?" "..." "..."
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 04:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 03:31 |
|
|
What's Star Marine
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 04:46
|
|
|
Scruffpuff posted:I have my personal pet theory, which is that discovery turned up the evidence that Squadron 42 does not exist, in any form, whatsoever. Considering that a good portion of the meat of this lawsuit hinges on that game, this discovery on Crytek's part guts a good portion of their case. I agree with this in spirit. Technically there was a wee bit of embarrassing space combat in the vertical slice. If you forgot that, it’s because it is so very forgettable! But hell ya every glimpse we’ve seen is different and none of them look or “play” remotely like a game. They’re all exactly what Chris joked about to Forbes all those years back, just fake vertical slices cranked out for publishers (backers), all “gummed up together in the back to make your milestone.”
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 04:50
|
|
|
It's both incredibly likely and completely loving hilarious that SQ42 does not meet the legal definition of a product that exists
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 05:02
|
|
|
hot ham water posted:What's Star Marine Only the single greatest shooter ever made. More lethal than Call of Duty, it promises “the best playable soldiers on the simulated battlefield.” Created by Chris Roberts. Need I say more?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 05:02
|
|
|
Has anyone told Chris that the Subnautica expansion does snow storms better than SC? Because it does lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 05:06
|
|
|
G0RF posted:Only the single greatest shooter ever made. More lethal than Call of Duty, it promises “the best playable soldiers on the simulated battlefield.” You forgot to mention the 10k players. And the attention to fidelity.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 05:46
|
|
|
Dogeh posted:You forgot to mention the 10k players. ^^^THIS! And THIS! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 06:48
|
|
|
G0RF posted:^^^THIS! I’m the furious laser kick.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 06:50
|
|
|
G0RF posted:^^^THIS! Until I saw the parp in the corner my brain was going a mile a minute trying to figure out if this was real. I love the hosed up face
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 07:52
|
|
|
squirrelzipper posted:I’m the furious laser kick. I'm the snoop cap (v1.0)
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 09:27
|
|
|
Which one of you idiots wants to die pointlessly in my Kenshi game?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 09:30
|
|
|
Having finally watched Blade Runner Two I can say with confidence that there is an untapped market for Chris in the form of Hologram Waifus (with portability upgrades) and various models of Replicants (for crew and 'other purposes')Meridian posted:Which one of you idiots wants to die pointlessly in my Kenshi game? Throw me in there! Tell me how I go.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 09:45
|
|
|
hot ham water posted:Until I saw the parp in the corner my brain was going a mile a minute trying to figure out if this was real. I love the hosed up face  —“It’s real!”      
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 09:52
|
|
|
Dogeh posted:You forgot to mention the 10k players. Since we are at it, is there somewhat reliable data available about player counts of SC and Star Marine? I have the gut feeling that the narrative CIG tries to build that SC is some big-rear end game with a large community doesn't hold water. I mean, yeah, there is a community theorycrafting on Spectrum or Reddit, but how many of these people actually play Star Citizen or Star Marine? I doubt the player counts are nearly as high as CIG wants the people to believe.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 09:55
|
|
|
G0RF posted:
Holy crap, where are these quotes from? In 2020 they are even more hilarious
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 09:56
|
|
|
DarkDobe posted:Having finally watched Blade Runner Two I can say with confidence that there is an untapped market for Chris in the form of Hologram Waifus (with portability upgrades) and various models of Replicants (for crew and 'other purposes') My dude, you're going to live forever in the sweatshop.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 09:58
|
|
|
ggangensis posted:Holy crap, where are these quotes from? In 2020 they are even more hilarious Imagine finding this thread later in 2036 and finding out that the hype is still the same, but 20 years later?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 10:25
|
|
|
ggangensis posted:Holy crap, where are these quotes from? In 2020 they are even more hilarious It was from back in 2017. There was a dude (TBH) posting boring “Interesting Facts” on the subreddit, trying I guess to make a meme thing happen or something. So these were just goofy parodies using his template with embellishments on stuff we’d see posted so often in the subreddit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 10:33
|
|
|
AntherUslessPoster posted:Imagine finding this thread later in 2036 and finding out that the hype is still the same, but 20 years later? As there are Wing Commander historians, there will be Star Citizen historians. And they will have a hard time creating a truthful and consistent picture, with the ever-changing narrative, smoke&mirrors by backers or CIG and such. And hell, we will need them. Drawing a correct picture of the Mid-Tudor Crises is a calk walk compared to working through all the lies and changed history since Star Citizens and SQ54 inception.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 10:35
|
|
|
ggangensis posted:As there are Wing Commander historians, there will be Star Citizen historians. And they will have a hard time creating a truthful and consistent picture, with the ever-changing narrative, smoke&mirrors by backers or CIG and such. And hell, we will need them. Drawing a correct picture of the Mid-Tudor Crises is a calk walk compared to working through all the lies and changed history since Star Citizens and SQ54 inception. Makes me wonder if the creator of these pics still a supporter or already refunded
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 10:39
|
|
|
MEMORANDUM in Support of NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case Voluntary Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 41 91 [Redacted] filed by Plaintiff Crytek GmbH. (Davidson, Ben) https://docdro.id/7lT4ft0 It has some redacted stuff
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 12:09
|
|
|
Daztek posted:MEMORANDUM in Support of NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case Voluntary Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 41 91 [Redacted] filed by Plaintiff Crytek GmbH. (Davidson, Ben) quote:This case has been marked by a pattern of CIG saying one thing in its public statements and another in this litigation. For example, at the outset of this case, CIG had publicly claimed it had switched to using the Lumberyard Engine for both Star Citizen and Squadron 42, but was forced to confirm during this litigation that no such switch had taken place. See Crytek’s Response to CIG’s Motion for Bond 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 12:19
|
|
|
Quavers posted:Are Coutts still happy with holding the IP rights of Sq42 to ransom for their payday loan to CIG? Coutts still have the charge registered but the loan amount was zero at the year end after the Calders money came in. Pixelate posted:I'm going to call a thing! Judge Gee will agree with the ripeness bit at least. If Crytek are going to focus on Squadron 42, it seems like they would want to go after a UK company in the UK courts, where the UK company has made claims to the UK authorities about the separate new game they claim to be essentially 100% responsible for.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 12:19
|
|
|
They never switched engines, Chris is just treating the lumberyard licence as a way to keep using cryengine without paying crytec.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 12:36
|
|
|
quote:Crytek based its primary claims in this case on multiple public statements by CIG indicating the release of Squadron 42 as a standalone game with release set for the first half of 2020  quote:.While this came as a surprise to Crytek (and undoubtedly will to the public who has pre-paid for Squadron 42), assuming the truth of CIG’s response, Crytek’s Squadron 42 claim is not yet ripe. Following CIG’s response, Crytek and CIG discussed this issue and attempted to reach an agreed resolution and path forward. But when it became clear that the parties would be unable to reach agreement, th e parties’ promptly prepared and filed their Joint Stipulation regarding the briefing for this Motion. Joint Stipulation Regarding Briefing Schedule for Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss Voluntarily and Continuance of Trial and Related Dates, Dkt. 89. quote:Further, just 10 days after Crytek filed this lawsuit, CIG itself seemingly confirmed this fact. In a video CIG uploaded to its Star Citizen YouTube page showing Squadron 42 gameplay, CIG included a description of the video, stating: “Watch the standalone Squadron 42 Vertical Slice Gameplay Demo CIG had not decided how the game would be released" seems like a good thread tittle Dark Off fucked around with this message at 12:41 on Jan 4, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 12:38
|
|
|
colonelwest posted:Yeah but can you get up and walk to the passenger cabin of your plane and serve a Hairy Roberts via complex drink mixing mechanics? I think not. Obviously it’s just another poo poo tier low fidelity game from a big publisher. Technically you can. I tried it in VR with Xplane and a passenger mod in my 757-300. I hit a few hurdles, literally. As my computer is in the mancave/workshop, I tripped over an extension cord, fell over a saw horse and never did find the bar. So technically you can't. That is my story. Oh and you can't do that either in Star Citizen, FUDster.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 12:40
|
|
|
I managed to get this before it was redacted.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 12:50
|
|
|
Wow, this is hot court news. The fact that they haven't actually switched over to to Lumberyard is a bit of a shock.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 13:10
|
|
|
Dark Off posted:
So, all those debates on whether CIG plan to release one or two games and how that go on, are in the end, all worthless, since CIG themselves claim they don't know. Ok, we know CIG will say whatever they need to say to wiggle out of commitments, but this is in a court statement, so its pretty official, even if internally they really have plans, but don't want to admit to that because it would hurt their case.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 13:18
|
|
|
Fargin Icehole posted:I made a post awhile back about seemingly failed kickstarters and was rebuked by plenty of great examples. A list comes up a lot of what is considered a "failed" kickstarter either due to critical or commercial failure post release and actually its neither. It's a failure for missing features say, missing multiplayer when it was promised. Mighty no.9 more or less fails if you payed for a console version you were hoping it would end up on and didn't. But if you didn't know the issues and controversies surrounding it's development or time it took to release, it's just a subpar game that looks like megaman. It's the same by the people who made the Banjo-Kazooie games with Yooka-laylee, it is no-where close to being as good as the N64 titles so people label it as a failed kickstarter, but that just makes it a bad game, nothing more nothing less With Star Citizen and Shroud of the Avatar, what you have is 2 games that are completely missing massive chunks of features they promised, the fact it's been years since "release" and no sign in sight of when said features will make it, despite both selling themselves as having said features in the game, that's what makes them failures or failures in the making.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 13:23
|
|
|
hot ham water posted:What's Star Marine Holy gently caress did they ever get the rights to call star marine, star marine? Is that still there? Also:  Lmao, its all a lie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 13:26
|
|
|
shrach posted:I managed to get this before it was redacted. I'm guessing there is no way for a third party to sue to get these un redacted because of "i'm gett'n scammed ur honor" .
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 13:29
|
|
|
ErrEff posted:Sometimes, the stars align. loving LOL.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 13:31
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 13:46
|
|
|
Dark Off posted:
Hmm, is anyone lawyery enough to easily source the full text referred to here?: quote:See Crytek’s Response to CIG’s Motion for Bond, Dkt. 74 at 1; CIG’s Reply in support of Motion for Bond, Dkt. 74, at 8 (“Crytek makes much of the fact that the code is the same . . .”) That initial incomplete statement is not really clear about it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 13:50
|
|
|
Armadillo Tank posted:I'm guessing there is no way for a third party to sue to get these un redacted because of "i'm gett'n scammed ur honor" . I guess they are supposed to redact things that are the direct result of discovery but it seems like there's unredacted stuff that infers what is redacted.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 13:53
|
|
|
Bravo 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 13:56
|
|
Welcome to the
|
MedicineHut posted:Hmm, is anyone lawyery enough to easily source the full text referred to here?: As far as I can tell they haven't provided proof that CIG are still using Cryengine precisely. Think they're just referring to this prior argument. (That the switch was so quick, and CIG's lawyers used language to that effect) CRYTEK GMBH’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR BOND posted:While CIG may yearn to stop using the CryEngine in order to avoid the requirements of the GLA, it did not do so. In fact, CIG’s bond motion is inextricably entwined with its contention that it “switched” from the CryEngine to the Lumberyard Engine. Yet, CIG’s own nuanced statements indicate that CIG did not actually replace the CryEngine code embedded in the game with the Lumberyard Engine code. Instead, the “switch” suggested by CIG was nothing more than CIG electing to enter a new license agreement with Amazon whereby CIG apparently licensed the CryEngine for a second time. CIG’s apparent decision to take a second license does not render its agreement with Crytek null and void. At least as long as CIG is using the CryEngine code, it is bound by the terms of the GLA whether it calls the code the CryEngine or the Lumberyard Engine. This thread that underlies many of CIG’s arguments, once pulled, will unravel CIG’s premature claims of victory and will lead to Crytek meeting many if not all of its objectives in this litigation. CRYTEK GMBH’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR BOND posted:In its brief, CIG describes taking this second license as a “switch” to the Lumberyard engine. Dkt. 57-1, at 3. CIG further argues in its brief that “Crytek’s code will no longer be in use.” Id. at 13. In contrast, Mr. Freyermuth’s actual declaration statements do not say any such thing: “Amazon granted CIG a license to use in Star Citizen and Squadron 42 not only Lumberyard, but also the version of CryEngine that was then embedded in the games’ source code. Following execution of the Amazon license, CIG began developing the games under the Amazon license. When CIG releases Squadron 42 to the public, the game engine source code will be licensed under this Amazon agreement, not the GLA.” Dkt. 57-2, at ¶ 9 (emphasis added).
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 14:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 03:31 |
|
|
No real thread on the suit, as far as I can see, on the SC Reddit. Seems strange to me, especially in light of these last twists.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 14:32
|
|
