Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Video Game News › [Kotaku] Crytek Sues Star Citizen Makers For Breaching Contract
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Kotaku] Crytek Sues Star Citizen Makers For Breaching Contract - Page 9  

post #81 of 97
apparently it was supposed to release in 2014, then again in 2016, and as of right now has no release date. at least that's what I have read. over on WIKI, but i am pretty sure someone will tear that apart. just interested to see how this goes.
Frankenputer
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD RYZEN 7 1700 ASROCK X370 TAICHI ASUS ROG GTX 108 Ti strix G Skill Ripjaws V series 3200 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingCooling
samsung m.2 1TB Sony DVD-+RW DL + Sony bdu Custom Loop EK supremacy AM4 block 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Windows 10 home BenQ bl series LED 4k EVGA 1000 watt corsair 400r 
  hide details  
Frankenputer
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD RYZEN 7 1700 ASROCK X370 TAICHI ASUS ROG GTX 108 Ti strix G Skill Ripjaws V series 3200 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingCooling
samsung m.2 1TB Sony DVD-+RW DL + Sony bdu Custom Loop EK supremacy AM4 block 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Windows 10 home BenQ bl series LED 4k EVGA 1000 watt corsair 400r 
  hide details  
post #82 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by battlenut View Post

apparently it was supposed to release in 2014, then again in 2016, and as of right now has no release date. at least that's what I have read. over on WIKI, but i am pretty sure someone will tear that apart. just interested to see how this goes.

The 2014 date was an estimate given during the crowd funding campaign based on the initial scope of the game. The scope has expanded significantly over time so naturally it missed the estimated release dates. The problem IMO is not so much that the release dates for the game or particular milestones are (repeatedly) wrong, but that they're publicly pushed back very late. CIG should be able to project whether it will hit rough targets months in advance. Withholding that knowledge is disingenuous.

Throwing deadlines out the window entirely won't work in the long run either. Telling people that it will be ready when it's ready doesn't inspire much confidence without evidence that progress is being made. Jira reports and videos of developers talking about visual glitches aren't evidence of progress.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 D0 MSI X58 Pro-E Gigabyte GTX 970 (GV-N970IX-4GD) 3x2GB G.Skill DDR3-1333 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
840 Pro Caviar Black LG BD-ROM Windows 8.1 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2713HM Dell U2311H Turbo-Trak (Google it :D) Corsair HX-520 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM690 Mionix Avior 7000 Everglide Titan AKG K 242 HD 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 D0 MSI X58 Pro-E Gigabyte GTX 970 (GV-N970IX-4GD) 3x2GB G.Skill DDR3-1333 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
840 Pro Caviar Black LG BD-ROM Windows 8.1 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2713HM Dell U2311H Turbo-Trak (Google it :D) Corsair HX-520 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM690 Mionix Avior 7000 Everglide Titan AKG K 242 HD 
  hide details  
post #83 of 97
If the contract says that CIG was supposed to contribute towards the development of CryEngine, then that part where they overhauled the multi-player portion, which is arguably the big limitation of CryEngine as it was, should have been shared with Crytek for eventual inclusion in the engine.

Question is, was Crytek able or willing to do that, or general engine development according to CIG's needs according to the contract? Especially since 2014, the year when Crytek's difficulties started appearing in public.

It will be interesting to see how this unfolds.
 
Metro 2033 review
Metro 2033
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3820 Asus Sabertooth X79 MSI GTX 1060 6 GB Gaming X 16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 2TB Sony Optiarc DVD-RW Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ RL2455HM Cooler Master Octane Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus 
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane 
  hide details  
 
Metro 2033 review
Metro 2033
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3820 Asus Sabertooth X79 MSI GTX 1060 6 GB Gaming X 16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 2TB Sony Optiarc DVD-RW Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ RL2455HM Cooler Master Octane Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus 
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane 
  hide details  
post #84 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by tpi2007 View Post

If the contract says that CIG was supposed to contribute towards the development of CryEngine, then that part where they overhauled the multi-player portion, which is arguably the big limitation of CryEngine as it was, should have been shared with Crytek for eventual inclusion in the engine.

Question is, was Crytek able or willing to do that, or general engine development according to CIG's needs according to the contract? Especially since 2014, the year when Crytek's difficulties started appearing in public.

It will be interesting to see how this unfolds.
According to the complaint the required contributions applied to "bug fixes and optimizations" so I'm not sure the multiplayer would fall under the agreement. Regardless, the information was "long overdue" in November 2015 so it seems unlikely crytek got much of anything. On the other hand the complaint says CIG failed to provide "the promised bug fixes and optimizations to the CryEngine as a complete, compilable version." which may imply they were getting something but crytek just deemed it unusable.
post #85 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Chimera View Post

Thank you, I read it but maybe someone with legal knowledge can explain it a bit in simpler words.

Crytek is asking for $75k + other damages to be awarded by the court, right?

thumb.gif

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MzzuiQVTDw Starts at 3:55

Basically Splitting SC into SC and Squadron 42 was a breach of contract, because the contract only allowed SGI to develop one video game with they cryengine.
Edited by Bryst - 12/15/17 at 9:03pm
post #86 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by chispy View Post

I got the feeling this game as a full will never be finished , people keeps blindly trowing money at CR and Star Citizen by the millions. I trully would like to see a finished , polished product , but the future looks uncertain for SC. That's why i do not support kickstarter projects or early access anymore as i got burned already by Bugbear and their early access on Steam of Next Car Game Wreckfest that has been on pre-alpha stage since 2012 , missing many launch dates set on stone. Welp that's why i do not buy anything if not full retail / finished product.

They have just released a huge update for wreckfest and the game is taking shape now, because surprise, it has an evil publisher now...
post #87 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryst View Post

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MzzuiQVTDw Starts at 3:55

Basically Splitting SC into SC and Squadron 42 was a breach of contract, because the contract only allowed SGI to develop one video game with they cryengine.

They are only developing one game. Whether you purchase it as just the open universe game or as the Squadron42 version it is still precisely the same engine and game.

The two are not independent. Consider Squadron42 package as a DLC that comes with the basic no-perks game and Star Citizen to be the basic game with perks. Both are Star Citizen.

Apparently, somehow, that was lost in translation. It isn't CryTek suing RSI/CIG, it is the company that now owns CryTek and they probably don't understand CryTek's agreements any better than most the posters in this farce of a discussion.
post #88 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryan92084 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by tpi2007 View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
If the contract says that CIG was supposed to contribute towards the development of CryEngine, then that part where they overhauled the multi-player portion, which is arguably the big limitation of CryEngine as it was, should have been shared with Crytek for eventual inclusion in the engine.

Question is, was Crytek able or willing to do that, or general engine development according to CIG's needs according to the contract? Especially since 2014, the year when Crytek's difficulties started appearing in public.

It will be interesting to see how this unfolds.
According to the complaint the required contributions applied to "bug fixes and optimizations" so I'm not sure the multiplayer would fall under the agreement. Regardless, the information was "long overdue" in November 2015 so it seems unlikely crytek got much of anything. On the other hand the complaint says CIG failed to provide "the promised bug fixes and optimizations to the CryEngine as a complete, compilable version." which may imply they were getting something but crytek just deemed it unusable.

Interesting. Thanks for the info. Rep+
 
Metro 2033 review
Metro 2033
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3820 Asus Sabertooth X79 MSI GTX 1060 6 GB Gaming X 16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 2TB Sony Optiarc DVD-RW Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ RL2455HM Cooler Master Octane Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus 
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane 
  hide details  
 
Metro 2033 review
Metro 2033
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3820 Asus Sabertooth X79 MSI GTX 1060 6 GB Gaming X 16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 2TB Sony Optiarc DVD-RW Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ RL2455HM Cooler Master Octane Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus 
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane 
  hide details  
post #89 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apoll View Post

This is the second time Roberts trying to pull such scam.

No it really isn't, getting a deal to make a game for Microsoft and taking too long to finish so they kick you out and badly finish it on their own is not a scam, but it does have similarities to Star Citizen. The difference being the lack of people to kick him out and finish it badly.

Chris Roberts does have a history of overreaching and missing release dates because of it but that is quite different than a scam. Also that is what is good about Star Citizen, overreaching is what it is all about. Missing dates is an expected side effect of overreaching and most backers would rather the time was spent to do the game well than finish the game based on an arbitrary deadline.

Personally, I hate working on software projects where the suits start cutting features until they (we) can meet the deadlines. Please let us keep working because the resulting product would be much better with most of the features you made us cut (and more testing). I don't care about your ROI, I am a geek. mad.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apoll View Post

Get over it. Star Citizen is done. Finito.

Even if this lawsuit was not baseless Star Citizen would not be done, this is effectively Crytek's creditors looking for some cash and they would settle for a reasonable amount of money.
Desktop
(19 items)
 
RAID
(17 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i9-7900X @ 4.7GHz Asus ROG Rampage VI Apex Titan X (Pascal) @ 2.05GHz 32GB DDR4 4000-17-17-17-37 CR1 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
480GB - Intel Optane 900P 2TB - Samsung 960 Pro EK Monoblock + GPU + 560 Rad Windows 10 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Acer XB270HU bprz HTC Vive LG OLED55C7P Logitech G810 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic PRIME 1200 Platinum Old Marble Slab Logitech G900 Logitech G440 
AudioAudioOther
Sennheiser HD 600 Creative SoundBlasterX AE-5 Mellanox ConnectX-3 MCX312A-XCBT 10 GbE Adapter 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-5960X @ 4.2GHz Asus Rampage 5 Extreme Nvidia GeForce GT 545 32GB DDR4 (2400-12-12-12-28-1T) 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Samsung 950 Pro M.2 512GB HGST NAS 4TB x8 - 21.8TB RAID6 Western Digital Black 4TB Samsung SH-S183L 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-D15 Windows 10 Pro Asus VG278H WASD "CODE" Keyboard 
PowerCaseMouseOther
SeaSonic Platinum-1000 DIYPC Alpha-GT3 Logitech G700s Mellanox ConnectX-3 MCX312A-XCBT 10 GbE Adapter 
Other
Adaptec RAID 71605 
  hide details  
Desktop
(19 items)
 
RAID
(17 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i9-7900X @ 4.7GHz Asus ROG Rampage VI Apex Titan X (Pascal) @ 2.05GHz 32GB DDR4 4000-17-17-17-37 CR1 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
480GB - Intel Optane 900P 2TB - Samsung 960 Pro EK Monoblock + GPU + 560 Rad Windows 10 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Acer XB270HU bprz HTC Vive LG OLED55C7P Logitech G810 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic PRIME 1200 Platinum Old Marble Slab Logitech G900 Logitech G440 
AudioAudioOther
Sennheiser HD 600 Creative SoundBlasterX AE-5 Mellanox ConnectX-3 MCX312A-XCBT 10 GbE Adapter 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-5960X @ 4.2GHz Asus Rampage 5 Extreme Nvidia GeForce GT 545 32GB DDR4 (2400-12-12-12-28-1T) 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Samsung 950 Pro M.2 512GB HGST NAS 4TB x8 - 21.8TB RAID6 Western Digital Black 4TB Samsung SH-S183L 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-D15 Windows 10 Pro Asus VG278H WASD "CODE" Keyboard 
PowerCaseMouseOther
SeaSonic Platinum-1000 DIYPC Alpha-GT3 Logitech G700s Mellanox ConnectX-3 MCX312A-XCBT 10 GbE Adapter 
Other
Adaptec RAID 71605 
  hide details  
post #90 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by prjindigo View Post

They are only developing one game. Whether you purchase it as just the open universe game or as the Squadron42 version it is still precisely the same engine and game.

The two are not independent. Consider Squadron42 package as a DLC that comes with the basic no-perks game and Star Citizen to be the basic game with perks. Both are Star Citizen.

Apparently, somehow, that was lost in translation. It isn't CryTek suing RSI/CIG, it is the company that now owns CryTek and they probably don't understand CryTek's agreements any better than most the posters in this farce of a discussion.

However, there are several cases where CIG has said themselves Squadron 42 is a SEPERATE game. And you can purchase Squadron 42 by itself and does not require Star Citizen. Pretty cut and dry. Contract allowed for cryengine in one game. By splitting the 2 and calling each a seperate game they screwed themselves.

Also they removed the Cryengine/Crytek copyright disclaimer and splash screen. And are on record as saying they no longer use the cryengine, they call it star engine. Again breaching the contract.
Edited by Bryst - 12/16/17 at 11:51am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Video Game News
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Video Game News › [Kotaku] Crytek Sues Star Citizen Makers For Breaching Contract