Crytek sues Star Citizen developer Cloud Imperium, alleging copyright infringement

Update: We’ve updated with CIG’s official statement to us below.

Crytek is suing Cloud Imperium Games and Roberts Space Industries, the companies behind the sprawling and controversial crowdfunded MMO Star Citizen.

In documents filed with the California Central District Court yesterday, Crytek alleges that CIG infringed its copyrights by using CryEngine to develop non-Star Citizen game assets – specifically, Squadron 42.

“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,” plaintiffs argue.

Furthermore, Crytek accuses CIG of deleting Crytek logos in marketing materials and splash screens around the same time studio head Chris Roberts began calling the game’s engine Star Engine rather than CryEngine, which itself was allegedly a breach of the original licensing agreement.

Crytek has demanded “all direct damages (estimated to be in excess of $75,000), indirect damages, consequential damages (including lost profits), special damages, costs, fees, and expenses incurred by reason of Defendants’ breach of contract and copyright infringement” as well as a cut of the profit, punitive damages, and a permanent injunction against CIG’s use of CryEngine.

Squadron 42, you’ll recall, has been repeatedly delayed. CIG had promised a detailed status report on this game later this month.

We have reached out to Cloud Imperium for comment, recognizing that the company probably will not do so given pending litigation.

In related news, Polygon has a piece up today alleging that CIG has dragged its feet on refunding a backer’s $25,000 in pledges. CIG declined to comment on most of Polygon’s story.

Source: Scribd. With thanks to DK and Cotic.
Update: CIG has issued the following statement to Massively OP:

“We are aware of the Crytek complaint having been filed in the US District Court. CIG hasn’t used the CryEngine for quite some time since we switched to Amazon’s Lumberyard. This is a meritless lawsuit that we will defend vigorously against, including recovering from Crytek any costs incurred in this matter.”

SHARE THIS ARTICLE
Code of Conduct | Edit Your Profile | Commenting FAQ | Badge Reclamation | Badge Key

LEAVE A COMMENT

395 Comments on "Crytek sues Star Citizen developer Cloud Imperium, alleging copyright infringement"

Subscribe to:
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most liked
Reader
Joe Blobers

Update. We are now 21 days after this new “drama”. CIG has now answered to Crytek lawsuit.

Here are all the filed documents:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1mPjfXrjAf9RUq3_5cJgd-hF-I5XoCQta

Of course, that is not the end of the story. Crytek will obviously claim that breach of contract are real…. but I can’t resist to copy Voroxpete’s comments:

Highlights:

* CryTek attempted to sue RSI even though RSI didn’t actually exist when CIG negotiated the original agreement. They only created that company a few years later as a publicity arm for Star Citizen.
* CryTek tried to accuse Ortwin of not recusing himself even though he actually got a waiver from CryTek before negotiating the agreement. Owned.
* CryTek never showed the court the actual agreement they claim CIG violated, because it flat out disproves all of their claims.
* The agreement clearly states that CIG can use CryEngine for both Star Citizen and Squadron 42. Slam dunk.
* The claim that CIG has some kind of duty to only use CryEngine and nothing else is basically total bullshit, and really obvious bullshit at that. Like, we’re talking “A first year law student could spot that this case has no merit” levels of bullshit. CryTek are asking the court to ignore almost a century of established law in order to accept their interpretation of “exclusive”.
* As any sane person would expect, the whole “removing CryTek logos and copyright notices” thing is ridiculous because they only took them off after they stopped using CryEngine.

In short, CIG have unleashed the Ortwin. CryTek got rekt.

In short, we see the reason why the complaint was amended to list everything as being done ‘intentionally’… Then CIG goes and drops a metric ass-ton (that’s bigger than an Imperial ass-ton) of case-law into why that wont fly…. :)

Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
CasualSlacks

Speculation is fun, but I’m fine with waiting to see what happens. I’m a backer; I’m not particularly worried.

Bluxy
Reader
Bluxy

this thread tho
certainly brings you all out
there are other games than star citizen you know

Reader
Armsman

Yes, and those games get articles on MOP too when they get news – but you yourself choose to click and read this article on Star Citizen here and make a comment as well.

Bluxy
Reader
Bluxy

as a matter of causation,

Reader
Mikka Hansen

shut up, Chris! you got a free ticket to shut down the project and blame someone else!

what an out-of-jail card for someone that has scammed countless people with nothing but empty promises

Reader
Jeff Weideman

Lump of coal for Christmas I bet.

Reader
Jonny Sage

Nothing? There is a playable Alpha right now. I literally just opened the launcher to confirm I wasnt dreaming

Capture.JPG
Reader
Mikka Hansen

so if I promise you the moon but deliver you a pebble, would you say the promise was fulfilled?

Reader
Jonny Sage

Youre moving the goalposts. You said “nothing but empty promises”. They delivered far more than nothing. Many many pebbles, which one day may add up to the moon.

Reader
Armsman

What’s playable in SC Alpha 3.0 is hardly ‘a pebble’. It has a lot of the promised mechanics and they continue to expand on it.

Reader
socontrariwise

I’m not a lawyer so the questions that come to mind are:
1) Can you force someone to use your engine if the GLA says you would do so exclusively – and you later decided to drop it and use another?
2) Can you be sued for damage if your product never went live? I assume crowdfunding for a standalone-but-companion game is a problem if they used the CryEngine for S42 while asking for money?
3) Did they scratch out the watermarks and logos or such prior to switching to lumberyard internally and can CryTek prove the timepoint? Because the timepoint of announcement isn’t necessarily the same as the timepoint of the switch.

Reader
socontrariwise

Reading a few of the comments here brings up another questions: If CIG uses the CryEngine for the single player version (does that still have the logo’s?) and Lumberyard for the Star Citizen online version, they are not in breach of the GLA as described by CT, are they?

Reader
Skyrant

Read again: Star Citizen is the game CryTek gave CIG a license for. SQ42 is the second game they have no license for. Star Citizen was the Kickstarter game.

arandomusertoo
Reader
arandomusertoo

If you read the Kickstarter campaign, SQ42 was always considered a part of it…

Under the headline “The Reasons You’ll Want to Play Star Citizen” is the following bullet point:

“Squadron 42 – A Wing Commander style single player mode, playable OFFLINE if you want”

Reader
syberghost

“Was” is the key word, as it’s now sold separately.

Reader
Dystopiq

How is Crytek going to afford attorneys when they can’t even pay their own people. This smells of desperation.

Estranged
Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Estranged

Cause the attorneys think it is a solid case.

Reader
Mario Marques

If that’s the case, they wouldn’t ask for only 75k.

Reader
Skyrant

It’s hilarious how people that can’t even read properly think they have to make comments.

(estimated to be in excess of $75,000)

Reader
Baemir

“In excess of” usually means more or less that amount.

Reader
Adrian Brown

No it does not. In excess of simply means more than, above or beyond this amount. Good grief.

Reader
Baemir

Only on paper. In the real world people use that expression to make a number sound higher than it is.

April-Rain
Reader
Kickstarter Donor
April-Rain

I hope this goes to a jury in court as requested it will be +10 entertainment-

already a new twist- The Crytek and Star Citizen feud is getting more complicated

Woetoo
Reader
Woetoo

Opinion seems to be that the complaint at only 15 pages is the bare minimum to continue, and that’s to nudge CIG towards an out of court settlement. Seems you won’t get your court drama fix.

As to “getting more complicated”, they are muddying the waters by bringing up Ortwyn Freyermuth’s history in the complaint – when the reality it’s inconceivable they failed to notice he was someone they’d dealt with before and didn’t raise the matter whilst they drew up the Game Licence Agreement. If they signed the GLA in full knowledge of who was negotiating it, then they can hardly call foul now.

The only way they get a pass is if Freyermuth deliberately hid his involvement. Seems a side issue though.

Same as when they brought up that Carl Jones negotiated the deal from CryTek’s side and subsequently went to work for CIG. Unless CIG were talking (or hinting very hard) to him that a job was on the table for him BEFORE the GLA was signed, then it’s largely irrelevant to a copyrights/breach of contract case. CryTek might have cause to review Jones’ employment contract – but that’s entirely separate from this matter.

Edit: I mistakenly mixed up Freyermuth’s and Jone’s employment history. I *think* it’s right now ;-p

Reader
Adrian Brown

They brought Freyermuth’s relationship up so he cannot hide behind attorney-client privilege. He is considered a material participant as he is also Roberts’ business partner. Note that they said his conflict of interest was never resolved. If it goes to discovery I suspect we will get details of the entire process. I suspect neither party is a saint in all this. This is serious though. Skadden does not take up meritless lawsuits.

Reader
Darren Curtis

“We are aware of the Crytek complaint having been filed in the US District Court. CIG hasn’t used the CryEngine for quite some time since we switched to Amazon’s Lumberyard. This is a meritless lawsuit that we will defend vigorously against, including recovering from Crytek any costs incurred in this matter.”

I just read CIG just lied. :-|

Chris Roberts as He wrote:

“Lumberyard and StarEngine are both forks from exactly the SAME build of CryEngine.”

Source 1

Source 2

“Amazon Lumberyard is a free cross-platform triple-A game engine developed by Amazon and based on the architecture of CryEngine, which was licensed from Crytek in 2015.”

Amazon secretly paid $50 million to get a license for Crytek’s CryEngine technology. “to design Lumberyard”

Source 3

Annndddd they’re sued, pay up lairs!!!

Reader
primal

he hasnt lied actually. lumberyard and starengine are cryengine 3.8, that was the last build before they released cryengine 5.

difference is amazon paid to get the cryengine tech and could modify and more importantly distribute it freely as there own game engine. CIG would not be able to create there own version and be able to sell it for use to other people.

its something like this

“CIG has the AAA License, which would’ve cost around $1 million + support package.

Said license does not allow source code sharing, and CryEngine branding must be displayed in CIG videos and the splash screen. Renaming the engine is not allowed.

Moving away from a license and purchasing the source code for renaming + commercial distribution would require something similar to Amazon’s $70 million deal they have with Crytek (see Lumberyard).

Edit: I’m well aware that CIG “own” the source code, that’s the whole point of the AAA license. However that source code is still covered by a licensing agreement.”

“The $1 million license is buying the source code. It’s akin to branching off the engine once and then saying “you have full rights to modify this branch and create your game. Any modifications you make, you own”. For a long time, that was the only way to get access to the source.

However said source code usage is still covered under a licensing agreement. It’s pretty obvious they’re still under a license when there’s CryEngine branding present in the game and on videos.”

The main thing would be them switching over to lumberyard cus its the same base version of the game but is essentially a competitors version of the same thing

Reader
Pål Einar Jensen

This is going to make Project Copernicus look like a massive success.

Its the players that (pre)paid for a game that might not even get a release I feel sorry for.

I really, really hope this ends well for all involved.

Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
Space Captain Zor

I swear on my pretty pink bonnet if this screws with next weeks SQ42 stream I’m gonna be irritated.

Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
Space Captain Zor

Almost as if on cue, whew! This just came in the mail

Screen Shot 2017-12-14 at 2.52.15 PM.png
Reader
Loyal Patron
Armsbend

They have to bubblegum some shit together to start building a case. Any moron will see through that one.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
zeko_rena

Wait there is a SQ42 stream and I have not been informed personally by Chris Roberts himself?!

Sweet I shall have to find date / time and hope it isn’t at too crazy hours in my little corner of the world, thanks for the info :)

Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
Space Captain Zor

see my comment up above

Reader
shear

They might take this as an opportunity to not do it regardless whether or not is screws with it.

I genuinely don’t think they have anything to show for it, there was ample opportunity to show stuff from SQ42 and they didn’t.

Christmas stream is not as big as Gamescom or Citcon so the news on SQ 42 would be just as underwhelming too.

Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
Space Captain Zor

You have to look at SQ42 like anything normally developed behind a curtain. It’s a single player story, a narrative, nearly a movie for all intents and purposes. The most you should hope for are the handful of teasers/trailers until it finally gets released just like a movie coming to theaters. They just won’t show off the behind-the-scenes of something like that the same way they will for Star Citizen except for certain instances that won’t betray or spoil the story. If it were a multiplayer only game, this would be different.

Reader
shear

Oh no, I agree but they could show plenty of stuff from trailers to mocap being done to bits of cut scenes to tidbits of missions.

But nothing at all? I firmly believe they have nothing done for SQ 42. They probably have the story and all that sorted but nothing tangible for the actual game. I mean for crying out loud man it’s going onto 6 years and we are talking about a singleplayer game here. Just my take on it.

Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
Space Captain Zor

I think “nothing” is inaccurate. They have shown little bits and pieces from tech features to gameplay systems to animation to cutscenes and the unfinished Morrow Tour, it’s just few and far between.

Most recently was the render to texture stuff they showed off pieces of from what looked like a UEE captial ship interior and the Shubin mining platform, all clearly pieces from SQ42.

6 years developing 2 games, mind you. Still, 6 years is nothing special in and of itself in game development. Look around you can find plenty of examples of longer development cycles of perfectly successful games.

Reader
shear

Oh I agree six years to develop is not unheard of, but they could show trailers for crying out loud just so people who are only interested in SQ 42 would be fed something but they show very little of it, which leads me to believe there is very little of it.

Reader
primal

yeah but its using pretty much the same tech on the PU side though and with them wanting to use the procedural planets for the single player to they have to wait for all that code to be done to

Reader
Loyal Patron
Armsbend

Star Citizen folding because of a copyright infringement would be a bit anti-climatic for me personally.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Alex Willis

You’re right: a class-action lawsuit implosion would be far more dramatic.

j/k this thing is going to be in beta until 2024

Nathaniel Downes
Reader
Nathaniel Downes

Which still won’t match the time in Beta that War Thunder had.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
zeko_rena

Is Warframe still in beta?

Nathaniel Downes
Reader
Nathaniel Downes

Warframe? That was released in 2013.

Reader
shear

It’s actually still in beta :D

Nathaniel Downes
Reader
Nathaniel Downes

I don’t see anywhere on either the Warframe nor Digital Extremes website stating it is in beta. In fact, from all appearances Digital Extremes is working on a different title entirely at this time, Sword Coast Legends. Per the website, Warframe entered Beta in 2012, and was released in 2013.

Then again, the fact we’re sitting here debating if a game is or is not in beta should be a condemnation of how the whole early access concept has muddled the lines between a game being released or not.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
zeko_rena

Sorry, I just asked because I recall a while back something about beta still being on the login screen or something.

I think someone brought it up and the devs said they were still in beta, I could be wrong though my memory is a bit crap sometimes :)

Can’t remember how long ago that was either LOL

Reader
Loyal Patron
Armsbend

They’ve never officially released. Kind of an ongoing joke I think. Not a hilarious one.

Nathaniel Downes
Reader
Nathaniel Downes

Just booted it up on my XBox, I don’t see Beta on the loading screen or main menu.

TophatKiyaki
Reader
TophatKiyaki

Warframe is still in Open Beta, technically. It never had an official release. They removed all the “Open Beta” branding from the game under a year ago, when Plains was first really hyped up, but they game still hasn’t actually received an official release. Facebook Ads from as recently as last year saw the game

comment image Until PoE dropped, this still appeared if you installed the stand-alone launcher not through Steam. I don’t know if this is still the case with the PoE client, since I’ve always played through Steam (Except in the VERY beginning) and was only able to get this image from someone else posting it.

Warframe /entered/ Open Beta in 2013, it was in Closed Beta in 2012. At the recent celebratory Dev Stream 100, one of the questions that got asked by the viewers on what would be coming in 2018 was “Will the game leave Beta?” To which the team laughed and responded “Maybe.”

The game isn’t actually in beta from a practical standpoint and hasn’t been for some time, but for one reason or another the team failed to actually ever do a coordinated “launch” and as a result, the game being in a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_beta has become a community meme. They probably don’t remove it from Open Beta at this point just to keep the joke alive.

I’ve only ever seen one person claim that the game had released from Beta, and it was a random on Reddit who was basically saying “I have no proof and there isn’t any actual information about it anywhere on the internet but they said that they left Open Beta when they released on the XB1,” and got super defensive about it when people pointed out there was no verification that it was true…and the Devs have joked about the game still being in beta since that post happened, so you can draw your own conclusions there.

Reader
Zen Dadaist

Ooh, I have a quiet afternoon and look at what pops up! Impromptu Legal training through the medium of SC vs the world drama. *fetches popcorn, a cuppa and digs up a playlist*

Reader
Roger Melly

Reading up on this further elsewhere it seems the lawyer Crytek have employed is the same one that took down Oculus for half a billion dollars .

It does sound Crytek have a strong case and probably would win any lawsuit .

If that is the case and CIG cannot come to an out of court settlement with Crytek then it is quite possible that it will be game over for Star Citizen .

Reader
Joe Blobers

Goal of Crytek has never been to kill SC… but to try to get a portion of the pie by trying first to scare them, then to raise a complain because… they have nothing to lose. They thought CIG would prefer to rush in a corner… they waked up the Ortwin :)
Proof if that they hired a lawyer who do have a reputation… better scare the defendant that fight him… more profit. I won’t be surprised this lawyer asked up to 40% for himself… If it does not work, fine, he will try another softer target… and leave Crytek even more desperate than before.

Reader
Adrian Brown

Ortwin is not going to be the lawyer. He is a named party in the suit. Conflict of interest.

Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
Space Captain Zor

Crytek has the burden to prove that what CIG has done thus far has actually caused Crytek financial damage to win part of what they’re after. That’s going to be tough. I don’t really see how the SC/SQ42 project thus far, being that the entire thing is still in development, can harm or has harmed anyone. The other infractions of the GLA are a different matter.

Reader
shear

They don’t need to prove damage if they are going for breach of contract, which they are.

They do need to show damage for code distribution but honestly I don’t understand why they are going after for that they showed Lumberyard code not Cry Engine code, or am I wrong?

It has harmed them in a sense of “loss of profit” even in a sense of just having their logo attached to the game. Loss of potential gain in reputation.

This is definitely going to be interesting.

Reader
Armsman

The breach of contract damages are a drop in the bucket (probably come to less then what both sides are paying in law firm fees.) Crytek hopes to get one or more of the following:

– A monetary settlement.

– Access to and Rights to sell CR’s modified version of the current SC game engine.

– A share of any profit from both SC and SQ42,

At best they’ll probably get a lump sum settlement (an amount that WON’T be publicly disclosed by either side – nor will any particulars of said settlement <— That's what happens in 97% of these types of cases so there's nothing untoward or sinister if that's how it plays out.

Also remember Crytek had major offices wordwide up through mid 2013
https://www.polygon.com/2014/7/30/5952159/crytek-uk-usa-homefront-deep-silver-hunt
And is someone in the U.S. office (who at the time had authority to do so) did cut a deal with CIG for the sourcecode – there were a number of situations where the U.S. or other offices were doing things the German office wasn't made aware of – so you never know. That was one of the things that lead to Crytek's financial problems back then.

Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
Alberto

Unless you are the judge for this case or On the jury preemptively claiming they are in breach of contract is Silly, this is for the court to decide not some Rando on the internet. This all sounds like typical Patent Troll behavior Sue and hope the case doesn’t go to court. Crytek hasn’t payed its employees 2x now, has almost gone backrupt ( or has? ) 2x now and they recently had some new investors come in and “save’ the company..and just after CIG has the biggest monthly sale in its history…wham law suit for a quick payout. We will see what the court decides this could be in limbo for years Don’t hold your breath for a quick resolution unless it gets thrown out of court. Or CIG settles.

Reader
shear

“Crytek hasn’t payed its employees 2x now, has almost gone backrupt ( or has? ) 2x now and they recently had some new investors come in and “save’ the company..and just after CIG has the biggest monthly sale in its history…wham law suit for a quick payout. ”

Well, see the issue here is that the language in the complaint is very clear, and some of what you wrote is factually incorrect due to you not reading through the complaint.

Crytek TRIED to solve this without going this route CiG didn’t respond, this has been going on for a while, the timing is really just a coincidence, it’s in the complaint why not just go and read it before saying anything at all?

But you are right if this goes to court it could takes years.

Reader
primal

theyve been doing bug smashers for quite a long time, but anyone can download cryengine and see cryteks source code anyway cant they? but in any case as far as ive seen on bugsmashers its all been written by CIG anyway and then theres bugs with it if that code breaks later and they have to go back and fix it.#

“It has harmed them in a sense of “loss of profit” even in a sense of just having their logo attached to the game. Loss of potential gain in reputation.”

what reputation? the reputation of being so broke they cant pay there employees, nearly going bankrupt or having to sell off games like homefront because there to broke to finish it or might be the fact there desperate to try get devs to use there engine over UE4 which very few do. Its not going to do anything for there reputation because if SC does come out every dev worth there salt knows cryengine cant do the majority of it.

if hunt showdown is a failure crytek should shut its doors before it loses everything

Reader
Roger Melly

I think you sound very angry at Crytek but exactly what are they doing wrong ?

They clearly think they have a case and it will be decided in court .

If CIG have done nothing wrong they will win but if they have then they deserve to be made to pay what they owe to Crytek .

What Crytek has obviously had to do to survive in the past like making employees redundant to avoid going bankrupt has nothing to do with this so such vitriol really diminishes your argument .

It sounds to me like you are going on the attack because you have invested a little money in a game .

Reader
shear

Well, this response looks to be very angry and emotionally charged.

I don’t particularly care about Crytek although the Hunt game looks really cool and I am looking forward to it.

Crytek has money now though, I don’t think this is coming out of the position of weakness at all. This lawsuit is going to be expensive as hell for Crytek they wouldn’t do it if they didn’t think they can win. So having that fact in mind I would say that Crytek is very much solvent and are probably pissed that CiG breached the contract.

Now whatever your personal feelings towards Crytek are, they do not make CiGs actions any less wrong and in bad faith.

That’s my take on it.

Reader
primal

actually its more like they just copied monster hunter

Reader
primal

the hunt to me looks like a more realistic version of the game Evolve except at the end, well i dont really get the end. wonder if your team gets spawned with another team that has to kill you or just spawn some AI you have to get past and we all know what happened to evolve… dropped off a cliff rapidly.

i really dont think crytek does have much money tbh and apparently i read off someone crytek mention the 150mill it earned alot at whatever time they wrote it out so looks to me they are looking for a percentage to get alot more back than it would cost to have the lawsuit done.

kind of says alot when amazon can make it better faster than the people who created it

Reader
shear

Five teams of two have to kill one monster. Ones the monster is dead you have to “extract” but the hunters can kill other teams to thin out the competition. The whole Van Helsing vibe is cool to me.

Well, Amazon is a much bigger company than Crytek but that’s not an argument for CiG. This is simply the fact that they were supposed to use the Cry Engine and now they are using lumberyard. I assume CiG thought Crytek will liquidate and so didn’t see any repercussions from the move to lumberyard and Crytek somehow managed to keep its head above water. Now it’s coming back to bite them in the ass.

Either way, these are two similarly sized companies going at each other now, all I am interested is in how this is all going to end. I am genuinely not voting for Crytek or CiG, but from what we have to work with Crytek seem to have a case.

Reader
primal

ah ok so 2 teams try to kill it. makes more sense now.

suppose its a shakey one cus back in 2012 the projects vision was much smaller so general engine fixes yeah could be done but would there agreement basically mean they would also have had to hand over every single bit of code ever created by cig to? all the network stuff, procedural systems, AI systems, physics work, componentised stuff, the years worth of transforming into it 64bit co-ordinates stuff etc. Could be after all this effort CIG thought enough was changed to warrant them not to do that and when crytek stopped supporting CIG cus the engine was changed so radically they decided were not supporting you then

Reader
shear

Five teams, each with two members in it. Add me on steam “shear” ill play with you when it comes out :D

I really don’t know all this engine talk is way outside of what I understand about this but their agreement was “general bug fixes and improvements to the engine” and the fact that in their complaint Crytek claims CiG has responded that they are “ready and willing” to do it would suggest that there was an agreement of some sort to that effect.

I mean if Crytek is going after all the things you have mentioned then wow.It’s one thing to go after bugfixes it’s another to go after what is essentially whole new features developed by the company for their game, but if they actually mean and include that then I feel sorry for CiG because regardless of the scepticism I have they did do some amazing work on that front now to be claimed by another company as “their” property.

Wow, I never even considered it. This is crazy if you are right.

Reader
primal

technically speaking it is improving the engine, because it just means making it better. suppose comes down to if its any and all improvements or if theres any limitations in the contract which CIG didnt forsee because at that time he wasnt planning any of this.

The really strange thing is though they say it wasnt licensed for squadron but on the kickstarter squadron was the first thing to release and star citizen the multiplayer aspect was going be in beta or something. so i find it really strange how crytek didnt know about squadron when that was really going be the thing first out with SC out in beta as a very small thing that gradually got better in time.

Reader
shear

They might have known, they very well might have known that they are making two games and so they purposely put that in the contract, and whoever was reading over it missed it.

Crytek had to know I mean it’s part of their original campaign ffs, but that really doesn’t matter. That’s a mistake CiG made.

Reader
primal

yeah maybe unless it was planned to be sold as one package but because theyve split them now because they kind of will be 2 games in there own right its broke something in it.

Reader
shear

Yep, that could also be the case as well, because they were sold as one before weren’t they?

Reader
primal

just read the actual thing. i think CIG might actually be fucked.

they only wanted bug fixes and optimisations to the orignal source code but i think that might get thrown out because they changed it so much that if they sent it over to crytek it would probably break there engine.

Reader
shear

Yeah that part seems to me to be the case of “let’s throw all the booboos they did to us” and it’s usually how it goes, I remember that’s the first thing my Negligence professor told us in class ” sue all the possible defendants and sue for as many different claims, something has to stick and you only have one shot” he put it more elegantly but that was the jist of it.

There is definitely some meat in there, some valid claims. We’ll see what comes out of it.

Reader
primal

yeah you got both think that might of been last year i think. when they split them for a while you were able to buy sq42 addon for like £15 or something at the checkout then after a period of time they split them completely. which i suppose is klnd of fair. would be like having FF15 and FF14 MMO made together. pretty sure Square wouldnt let you have them both for one price if tons of money has been poured into both.

at the moment the £43 for squadron is a full price game which means it will get scrutinised as a full priced AAA game so it better be good

Reader
Oleg Chebeneev

In worst case scenario Amazon will probably step in since they are very interested in Star Citizen seeing a daylight. And Amazon is the biggest CryTek’s partner, so they have a lot of leverege

Reader
Adrian Brown

No they don’t. Amazon paid Crytek money to have an open license. That’s it. There is no partnership there. Amazon has since modified the engine for their own purposes and do not bother with Crytek updates.

Amazon cares about AWS. They issued their version of Crytek for free once you use AWS with it. If anything, Crytek has a bigger stake in SC being made as they reduced their licensing fees in expectation of getting tons of promotion on release and code updates. Keep in mind that Crytek built the Kickstarter demo for SC.

Reader
Loyal Patron
Armsbend

Why do you think Amazon cares about SC? If anything it is competition to their mystery game.

Reader
Oleg Chebeneev

Because SC is made on Amazon’s game engine so Amazon will recieve royalties?

Reader
primal

no lumberyard is completely free to use, amazon are trying to sell there AWS online services with it thats why they have it

Reader
Oleg Chebeneev

CryEngine is also completely free to use. No obligations, no royalties, nothing. It is written on front page of their site

Reader
primal

yeah it is from 1 or 2 years ago, depends what it was like back in 2012

Reader
Loyal Patron
Armsbend

Pulled off of Google:
“Amazon Lumberyard is free, with no seat licenses, royalties, or subscriptions required.”

But tbh, I don’t know how engine licenses – royalties work really. I can’t really weigh in on engine stuff because I frankly don’t know enough.

Reader
Brother Maynard

I can’t really weigh in on engine stuff because I frankly don’t know enough.

Pffff, internet noobs these days… holding back to learn more before commenting? What’s happening to this world?!

Now if you’ll excuse me, I’ll be going back to commenting on cold fusion and agricultural trade disputes mechanism.

Reader
Roger Melly

Actually for quite some time now I have said I thought before completion a larger company might step in to save the project so you may very well be right there .

Amazon stepping in would not be good news because its input into the game would certainly detract from the original vision .

Reader
Adrian Brown

No company is going to touch this mess. Squadron 42 is collateral for one of the loans Cloud Imperium made. Stepping in would involve buying the company and paying off its’ debt. Not to mention, there is a 175M backer obligation on the back of this game. What company is going to step in and deal with that by taking over the code of a game they didn’t build?

Estranged
Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Estranged

Roger, what is this vision?

Sounds like mine if I skipped my meds for a month.

Reader
Roger Melly

Don’t be silly Estranged comments like that only make you look small .

Estranged
Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Estranged

Roger, I’m serious, this project is all over the place.

Reader
Dystopiq

Crytek must be running out of money again. They should focus on paying their employees.

Reader
Roger Melly

Oh god forbid Crytek want to protect their copyrights . How awful .

Reader
Oleg Chebeneev

Are they protecting their copyrights with “you chose other engine with much better support!” complain? Or maybe “you didnt tell us you developing 2 games even though u publicly said about it to everyone else” is protecting the copyrights?

Reader
Roger Melly

http://www.pcgamer.com/star-citizen-crytek-lawsuit/

You might want to read this and other articles before commenting further .

The consensus it pretty much unanimous that Crytek make a compelling legal case .

So to answer your question Yes it is Crytek protecting their copyrights . Crytek are not at fault here it’s shady mismanagement at CIG that is to blame .

Reader
Oleg Chebeneev

Everyone saw Crytek’s complains. They are in public access. This case isnt about copyright protection, its about CIG not following a contract in some cases. And since Crytek didnt fullfill its responsibilies by supporting their engine, particularly its online tech, CIG had a firm ground to switch to another, more supported engine. This reason ofc will be big part of CIG’s defence

Reader
Adrian Brown

You are speculating. There is no evidence that Crytek had any support obligation or were not fulfilling their contractual obligations. Unless you have seen the GLA, that is hearsay.

While this is not a straightforward case (particularly in terms of valuing CIG’s potential liability as no game has been released), there must certainly be some merit on Crytek’s part. Skadden is not a firm that takes cases on with no substantive merit.

Reader
Roger Melly

Well we will see how it pans out in a court of law . I hope for your sake as a backer you are right but I have my doubts .

Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
Alberto

??? Do you think if Crytek were to win it would actually cause a real issue? They are “aiming at a min of $75,000” even if they Won ..10 X that $750,000, you think that would put a dent in SC’s dev..it wouldnt even be a blip.

Reader
Skyrant

learn to read: (estimated to be in excess of $75,000) it’s a standard phrasing.

Reader
Daniel Reasor

If Chris Roberts was looking for a way to end this scam and walk away with the money peacefully, this is his golden Willy Wonka ticket. He could settle out of court, force an NDA on Crytek to keep them from disclosing the size of the settlement, blame the lawsuit in his going out of business blogpost, and disappear to a non-extradition island nation with the unspent millions.

Heed Kenny Rogers, CIG, and know when to fold ’em.

Reader
A Dad Supreme

There would be too many people, Derek Smart among them, that would never let them get away with that since he was yelling “scam” all along.

So many backers would probably file a class action lawsuit, he would spend all the money he made (stole at that point?) in legal fees.

Reader
life_isnt_just_dank_memes

I just read this thread and passed the bar exam from all the legit copyright law talk going on in here!

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Loyal Patron
Jack Pipsam

Juicy~

Reader
Patreon Donor
Schlag Sweetleaf

.

meddling crytek kids.png
Reader
Aaron Tallman

It’s too bad CryTek hasn’t had the personnel or resources to meet their end of the bargain in a very long time. They’ve been defunct for a long time, selling Cryengine to Amazon which is now Lumberyard. SC will likely be able to make the argument that Crytek hasn’t done due diligence to uphold the infrastructure needed to complete the agreement. Hell, that’s why Cloud Imperium switched anyways. Crytek fired all their Cryengine experts and became completely useless expertise wise. Then CE hired those same employees, because they needed the expertise they originally hired Crytek to provide. Those same employees work in the Germany office and are responsible for some of SC’s more amazing tech. Crytek agreed to provide support then fired the staff needed to provide said support.

I liked Crysis, but I haven’t Crytek hasn’t put out anything worthwhile in years.

Reader
Skyrant

CryTek just sold Warface to a Russian social site for $100 million. Just because you have no idea what is going on does not make your fantasy world real.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

that’s an extremely artistic version of events.

it seems from this lawsuit that part of the sweet heart deal was for CIG to provide CT with bug fixing help with CE rather than the other way around.

and those employees that CIG gained from CT were still at CT when they were hired by CIG. granted CT was having trouble paying them regularly at the time.

Reader
Aaron Tallman

They left because Crytek stopped paying them altogether. That stands that Crytek was no longer functional if they can’t pay the staff to provide the service they agreed to. This is by Crytek’s own employee’s admission. I work in the tech industry and I can tell you, if my employer stopped paying me and the company that uses my tech offered me pay in my same town, I’d leave too. Crytek is no longer the same team it was before, those technicians are now with Cloud Imperium. Crytek is reaching for a cash grab to get some last handful of money before it dies.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

they were still at crytek when CIG started headhunting these specific employees who were working with CIG directly on the engine side of sc development when CIG heard the news that they weren’t getting paid.

this is by CIG’s own admission back then.

Reader
Aaron Tallman

CIG hired them after Crytek did their sweeping layoff, following insider complaints of payments not being made. Your comment of headhunting doesn’t make sense. Unless you mean that CIG caught wind that Crytek was failing to pay their employees and started watching closely. I’d do that too, since that was crucial personnel.

Reader
Adrian Brown

That’s not true. CIG poached employees at Crytek. Whether or not they were being paid is irrelevant. CIG poached a business partner for employees. That is unethical. Especially as there would have been no Kickstarter demo without Crytek’s help. The employees being hired are irrelevant to this case anyway.

Reader
Utakata

Oh dear… :(

Reader
Jeremiah Ratican

Dang!

Reader
Joe Blobers

Yes, say the man who predicted for SURE collapse 90 days top in 2015 and seamless from space to planet decades away… :)

Reader
Bruno Brito

Ah, the strawgrasp.

Reader
Tom Apollyon

Oh man, I completely forgot about this guy. I just had a lurk through his twitter and he’s truly obsessed with the downfall of SC / CIG. The sheer amount of time he pours into hating SC is not healthy. It’s literally his full-time vocation

Reader
Loyal Patron
Armsbend

Dang!

Reader
Utakata

Don’t post anything here by that person. It will rot our brains. :(

Reader
Aaron Tallman

You don’t want to hear from the person who obsessively nay-says a company for 5 years and can’t move on? lol

Derek’s level of butthurt will be written in legend and song.

plasmajohn
Reader
Patreon Donor
Loyal Patron
plasmajohn

The saga of DS goes back to the bad old days of Usenet and what happened then was the stuff of legends.

And then History said “history” again.

Reader
Utakata

Lol! :)

Reader
Bryan Correll

How can your brain rot from reading something Smart?

Reader
Utakata

How does it not? :(

Reader
Schmidt.Capela

Actually, the folder name and the original copyright disclaimer prove nothing. The files in Lumberyard have kept a very similar folder structure and the same disclaimers.

See for yourself; the file in the screenshot (or at least the unmodified Lumberyard version) can be seen in the official Lumberyard repository at https://github.com/aws/lumberyard/blob/master/dev/Code/CryEngine/CryCommon/INetwork.h .

Reader
Joe Blobers

… but… do you mean the Clown is wrong… again? :)

Reader
Armsman

This is hilarious since I believe CIG stopped using Crytek proper in 2015 – so TWO YEARS LATER (and hell after a full switch to Amazon’s version of Cryengine – aka Lumberyard, which I believe Amazon owns now) – Crytek want to sue a developer no longer even using their engine (and who also bought the source code)
^^^
Crytek seems desperate for cash again. What, did they start missing employee pay days again?

Reader
Skyrant

You are aware of the fact that CIG signed a contract that said they CAN NOT USE ANY OTHER ENGINE or did that escape your ironclad pants on head logic?

CryTrk just sold Warface for $100 million to a Russian social megacorp.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

just because you mod an engine doesn’t mean you get to remove the branding of the original engine and company that owns it.

SC’s ly implementation is minor at best as well.

large parts of what CIG is using is crytek’s code to this day.

CDqD1KV.jpg
Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
Alberto

Will have to see , I remember CIG stating when they First Put the Logo for Lumberyard on their splash screens that they were contractually obligated to do so By AMAZON.. You would think they checked out the legalities of this..right? before the switch they do have a full time corporate law layer as a partner.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

they had removed the crytek and CE branding from teh splash screen a year prior iirc in favour of the star engine thing.

CIG has a history of playing fast and loose with things. hell their whole revenue model is only quasi legal as it is.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Alex Willis

This picture is very amusing to me.

Reader
Armsman

Funny thing about copyright (whether it extends to software code IDK) – but if you change update more than 10% of the total (and I think they probably reworked and added more than that to the base engine) – that’s enough of a change to invoke a ‘fair use’ clause.

Also, IF CIG has the agreement where they purchased the source code outright (and it would be subject to whatever else is in such an agreement) – Crytek will have klost a huge portion of the case.
^^^
If CIG did ‘buy’ the source code – but that agreement didn’t change or void teh GLA portions Crytek has in its filed papers, then yes, a settlement would be in CIG’s best interests.

But again, we won’t know until CIG files a response (and they will). Right now Crytek’s lawyers did what all lawyers do – they put EVERY claim they could find in the complaint. It may be the CIG does have later agreements that supersede these.

If not, it’s going to show that CR isn’t a very savvy businessman (which could be the case because you don’t ignore or assume a company will just drop a clause. Crytek obviously will want rights to whatever tech CIG added if they can get it (as well as whatever monetary damages they can get IF the case is found to have merit.)

But, we’ll see. Either way this is NOT good for the development of the game no matter what happens and will negatively impact the project if it becomes a long and drawn out affair.

Reader
Connor

None of this has any basis in law or relevance to the case and in no scenario would CIG be buying “the source code outright,” that isn’t how software licenses work.

Reader
Armsman

Not necessarily. There are plenty of situations whee a company will sell you the source code. It doesn’t necessarily/automatically automatically end any licencing agreements you may have had (unless it’s part of the agreement when you purchased the source code); but again, I suppose we’ll see what CIG’s side of the argument is – and whether or not they have/mention any other agreements that might supersede those in the initial complaint.

Again, if CR somehow just assumed certain things and has nothing further in writing, it remains to be seen just how much (and if) they’ll ultimately settle for.

oldandgrumpy
Reader
Kickstarter Donor
oldandgrumpy

Common for the source code to be placed in escrow with a contract clause to allow it to be made available if the vendor goes under.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

that’s not how fair use works at all.

Godnaz
Reader
Godnaz

Fuck Star Citizen. That aside, the Yerli family who owns/runs Crytek are certainly looking to make money somewhere. Right now it doesn’t appear to be from game development.

* Unpaid employee wages this year that continue to go unpaid:
https://www.pcgamesn.com/crytek-wage-crisis-black-sea-studio

* Glassdoor employee reviews from a few months ago indicating how desperate the working environment at Crytek is:
https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Crytek-financial-problems-Reviews-EI_IE347451.0,6_KH7,25.htm

* Reddit Plea

* Crytek Wiki listing and restructuring details:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crytek

* Financial Market Snapshot:
https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=10930513

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

re you first link: i can’t take an article with that much embedded native advertising seriously. sorry XD

Reader
Ket Viliano

Try Opera as an alternate browser, there are some ads on that site, but only in a sidebar and there are no animated graphics. I hear Brave is also very good, but have yet to try it.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

these weren’t regular ads. they were native advertising right in the body of the article. i found it kind of amusing. but also pretty shady. since none of them are tagged as ads. so probably also illegal in most places. XD

edit: i use ublock origin, these aren’t ads that can be blocked becuase they’re plaintext and hypelink in the body of the article between paragraphs.

Reader
Oleg Chebeneev

Holy shit they are indeed desperate

Reader
Oleg Chebeneev

I wish CIG all the luck in this case. #fuckCryTek

Reader
Skyrant

Wonder if this StarCitizen fanboi would say the same if CIG would sue someone for copyright of their Star Engine. LMFAO!

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

yeah fuck business partners that give generous partnership deals and then are blackballed by that partner!

not even mentioning CIG poaching talent from them when they were down on their knees a few years back.

Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
Alberto

No FK Crytek not paying employees for months before Xmas then firing many of them and others had to leave as they couldn’t pay rent of feed their families. Then they got some money said we are BACK in Business and then Again failed to pay employees for months. I know your a gigantic SC Troll but Jeezus ,Crytek??? they aren’t the bridge to die on.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

again for the nth time – i’m not fan of crytek or their bad business decisions but that doesn’t absolve CIG of their own bad behaviour or mean this suit is without merit.

Reader
Joe Blobers

Quote “Deekay: “not even mentioning CIG poaching talent ”

Do you have inside information to support your claim about bad partner business practice from CIG toward Crytek contract? I mean beside a complain that prove nothing… I missed a court decision, a link may be?

About poaching talent… you can do better. Even Crytek does not mention it despite the fact this is an infringement in many Western countries. Do you think Crytek forgot to add this point to their complain?

You perfectly know the truth why not tell it?
– Employees from Crytek were fired by them and find a new job, many at CIG. Zero infringement.
– Employees from Crytek were Not fired but decided to join CIG who did have open slot on their web site. They did not sent email to former Crytek employee.. employees left Crytek, this is a huge difference. Zero infringement

Reader
Armsman

So, let me get this straight:
Employer A (Crytek) can’t meet payroll, so Crytek employees start looking for other jobs (to make money and you know continue to make a living.)

Employer B (CIG) HAS a job for said Crytek employee; and CAN make payroll.
^^^
Sorry, that’s not poaching, that’s business 101.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

actually it’s classic HR poaching but ok.

it’s not illegal or anything. it’s just considered shitty business behaviour that will lead to soured business relationships in teh future.

and ta fucking da look at the news today what a surprise!

Reader
Joe Blobers

Quote: “considered shitty business behaviour ”

Seriously stop shooting your own perception of what is shitty business behavior… it is not. Crytek is responsible for firing their own employees and not giving a bright future to the remaining ones. CIG or any companies who did hired them did nothing shitty…

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

crytek didn’t fire them. they just weren’t meeting payroll.

seriously stop spamming me with incoherent disconnected from reality nonsense you picked up one whatever sc fanboy discord you get your memes from.

Reader
Joe Blobers

Quote Deekay :”crytek didn’t fire them. they just weren’t meeting payroll.”

One does not exclude the other. Crytek did fired people and some left because working condition was not meeting their expectation. Late payroll, working conditions, no visibility on future… both of them. There is not single one cause but many.

How those facts can translate between you shitty behavior declaration and this glamorous ranting: “reality nonsense you picked up one whatever sc fanboy discord you get your memes from”

You don’t like facts Deekay?

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

except youre not posting facts you’re posting make believe

tyhey were still crytek employees when CIG hired them from crytek to work on the same thing they worked on at crytek.

the not meeting payroll is a valid motivator for them to want new jobs. it doesn’t absolve CIG of poaching HR from their business partners.

look i’m no fan of CT. their games were always super overated, they’ve made hilariously bad business decisions, and CE is a super overrated pile of shit that is badly coded and heavily commented on github how badly coded it is with numerous citations in teh github discussion section of the repository for it.

none of that absolves CIG’s wonton willingness to act shitty towards them, their chief business partners, and apparently aggrievously violate the terms of that partnership whenever it suited them.

so just because CT wants a pay out as they go down the hole and out of business, doesn’t mean the suit is without merit or that one wouldn’t question wtf the top people at CIG were thinking with these decisions and if they just had shitty lawyers or CR ignored teh legal advice he got from the company’s legal team or some combination thereof.

no amount of memeing that those employees had already left or were fired changes the fact that they were all still at crytek when CIG headhunted them specifically because they had been alreayd working together on the engine side of SC’s development. which is why CIG specifically targetted them when the news broke that CT wasn’t making payroll.

Reader
Joe Blobers

Quote Deekay:”no amount of memeing that those employees had already left or were fired changes the fact that they were all still at crytek when CIG headhunted ”

So all ex-employees hired by CIG are ALL falling in that description?

Of course not. And for those falling precisely in that description, you noticed that Crytek complain does Not point this situation, which mean there is nothing illegal. If you own a business and can’t stop yours best employees to seek for another job, it is your (Crytek) fault.
CIG was looking for precise Cryengine talent. Those talent had more faith in a crowdfunded game that their own company…

About the complain itself, you or I do not have the answer first because we are not lawyer and second we do not have the details.

Until further notice, I keep my first thought that Ortwin did worked for both companies, he is a Senior lawyer in the industry and had all informations in hands to keep CIG out of trouble for the years to come.
Out of trouble do not mean nobody can’t complain but that CIG will be legally able to deny such complain.

The fact Crytek did tried several times to get “something” and that CIG did not comply several times (as per Crytek) to those requests means Ortwin was confident enough to say something like : “based on their situation, there is a 99% possibility Crytek raise a complain for whatever reason…” but still decided those 99% risk was better than agreeing to what Crytek was looking for: technology + cash.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

you know those two guys working for both companies is not a positive but a big negative in this case right? it’s only going to work against CIG if this case goes to court.

Reader
Joe Blobers

They did not worked for both companies at the same time. Nothing prohibit to work in company A then company B… only if you have malicious intent. Which is not the point raised.
Even if (and it is a big if) Ortwin can’t defend CIG himself he does have all insights to provide support to the defenders, whoever it is.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

the two top teir guys that worked for both companies also did not work at both companies at the same time. doesn’t mean they didn’t have conflicts of interest that will play into crytek’s hands in court. which is why they are mentioned in teh complaint in the first place.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

i didn’t say they did.

i said they were currently employed at crytek when CIG headhunted them specifically becuase they had been working with those specific employees of crytek with CIG on CE for SC development.

me pointing this out isn’t calling out those employees or shaming them. it’s pointing out that CIG was being shitty by headhunting specific employees from their business partner, which generally sours business relationships between partners.

Reader
Joe Blobers

Quote Deekay: “which generally sours business relationships between partners.”

You have a good point talking about basics relationship… but what was CIG supposed to do? they were seeking for talents…. Crytek employees were fleeing their company….. no sorry get out, we are desperately looking for the few Cryengine specialists around but we don’t hire you. Stay at Crytek, go somewhere else… we will keep seeking for talent for another year… or two.

You know the answer Deekay. If you was in this situation, as CIG manager, you do hire those guys because they won’t come back to Crytek and this is Crytek problem to keep employees satisfied.

Reader
Roger Melly

According to SB Ford one of the better contributors to mmorpg.com “The court documents lay out a pretty compelling argument for Crytek’s allegations ” .

She usually is pretty accurate and if she is there is no way you are going to be able to sugar coat this one because CIG won’t have a leg to stand on . That means they will either have to do a deal where profits are shared between them and CIG or the project will have to be abandoned .

Reader
Joe Blobers

Fine. Ortwin is still the guy who worked as a lawyer for both company and made the contracts. My guess is that he knows a bit about what words and agreements implies.

That means nothing is written in stone and pretending that single solutions would be to either share profit or stop project is not only a shortcut (at anytime you mention Crytek may have NOT a case?) Project won’t be stopped either as they can switch all codes under lumberyard. It is not Cyrengine or nothing. It is Cryengine or Lumberyard.

What Crytek is doing is what all desperate company lawyers are doing, Try to scare the defendant and… hope for the best. Too bad, Ortwin is not SB Ford :)

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
zeko_rena

Poaching lol, yeah because it sounds like swings and roses working for Crytek wondering if your next pay check is actually going to be PAID.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

probably not. but you still don’t poach talent from your business partners when they’re on their knees.

sorry that’s just pretty low.

Reader
Bruno Brito

Sorry deekay, i’m against you this time: i’m more worried about the guy who can’t pay his dinner and needs a job, than the business that tries it’s best to not pay employees to avoid bankrupcy.

Badly managed businesses SHOULD fail.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

it’s not that i think crytek shouldn’t fail due to bad business decisions on their end. i’m not a fan of crytek at all.

it doesn’t make CIG’s behaviour here less shitty.

Reader
shear

I get what you are saying but on the other side people need jobs to you know, eat, CiG offered jobs for these people. As supposed to, you know, no jobs. :D

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

i heard epic has been hiring the past few years as has unity devs ;)

Reader
Adrian Brown

Deekay is right. There were ways for CIG to deal with this. Given a heads up to Crytek without calling employee names. Cleared it with them. Finesse it. Ortwin worked in both companies.

Yes, Crytek was in a state. But they were a business partner. You need to be able walk that fine line with some kind of professionalism and class.

Reader
Oleg Chebeneev

CryTek just tries to cash grab while pulling rediculous claims. They mad that SC makes 2 games instead of one? It was known since early announcement on Kickstarter in 2013. CIG doesnt show CryTek’s logo? They dont even use CryTek’s engine anymore. Or that claim that CIG reveals confidential code through Bugmashers show. Rediculous

Reader
Adrian Brown

I think you need to google what the word contract means. Also the word binding. You’re welcome.

Reader
Skyrant

Are you really that stupid to not have read the point where CIG signed a contract and was not allowed to change Engines?

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

teh claims aren’t rediculous tho. most of them you can point to where and when CIG clearly did what they claim they did.

the question is is the language clear enough in the GLA or not. and if copyright law applies to the situation (in case of them broadcasting CE tools and code).

and potentially if the language is clear in teh GLA if there were exit clauses and CIG has documentation showing they fulfilled those exit clauses.

Reader
Schmidt.Capela

You mean, broadcasting this code?

https://github.com/aws/lumberyard

You can download and study the whole codebase of Lumberyard, for free. And any changes CIG makes are their own to display as they see fit, and even to distribute if they respect the lumberyard license while doing so.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

no this code
https://github.com/CRYTEK/CRYENGINE

just because it’s on there doesn’t mean people have a right to broad cast it. or it’s tools. just because it’s on there doesn’t make it FOSS whatsoever free to broadcast without permision by others.

which CIG was doing for alot longer than they’ve been “using” lumberyard.

Reader
Adrian Brown

And I do not think Crytek code was public at the time of this contract anyway. If the GLA does not permit CIG to publish code then so be it. Crytek can decide to publish code wherever it pleases. That doesn’t give CIG the right to do so.

hunk_stalker
Reader
hunk_stalker

CIG no longer uses Cryengine, uses Lumberyard, gg Cryteck. CIG should only respond to Amazon.

Reader
Skyrant

You are aware of the fact that CIG signed a GLA that says: “embedd CryEngine exclusively with the game”

That means: DO NOT CHANGE ENGINES

Reader
sizer99

No, that’s part of the suit. That CIG lied about that, claimed to switch to Lumberyard, just replaced the Crytek logos with Amazon logos. Crytek supplies quite a bit of evidence. For instance, Lumberyard has a different editor, for example, but CIG still shows off dev videos with what is clearly the CryEngine editor.

Which explains how they were able to ‘switch’ engines insanely fast when they can’t do anything else fast. I can certainly believe CIG could just manage to change the logos in two weeks.

Woetoo
Reader
Woetoo

I’d be surprised if Star Citizen was able to quickly switch from one to the other.

But there’s a difference between still having/using CryEngine during the transition and it being actively part of the customer experience.

By which, I mean if the version of the game people are playing doesn’t use CryEngine, then I can see why RSI wouldn’t include the CryTek logo. But in the meanwhile, back in RSI studios, I can imagine there are still at lot of assets and data still awaiting migration between CryEngine and Lumberyard. I wouldn’t be surprised to see programmers with CryEngine’s editor open. I wouldn’t have thought switching to another engine would invalidate their licence to use the old engine (unless it does). I can still use my installed version of C++, even if I’ve switched to C#. Although, if the version people are actually playing still actively uses CryEngine, then that’s something else.

And maybe I’m missing something. But is Squadron 42 a separate product? It always felt to me that Squadron 42 WAS Star Citizen (single player) and all the other stuff was the scope creep that arose out of their fund raising. Would a company licence something separately in their single player from their multiplayer? Is, I don’t know, Mass Effect 3 separate from Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer? Of course, if the Star Citizen / CryTek contract makes that distinction, maybe there is.

Also since Squadron 42 is the part of the game that hasn’t been been play tested by the public (please correct me if I’m wrong) is it fair to say what is or isn’t in it? It’s not finished, and therefore by definition is in a state of flux. Again, I’m assuming a lot here, but if I started a project in say Unity and paid their licensing… did some work… and later switched 100% to UnrealEngine4 before it is “released”, and before the public ever saw it “live”… Would I need to acknowledge Unity, when the game no longer uses it? Plus I still have a Unity licence, I paid for it… how is me NOT using it detrimental to Unity? I paid for something, I used it legally. Unless I signed something to say it would be part of my final product, I wouldn’t see I’d breached my licence. Again, I’m trying to apply common sense to a situation I’m wholly unfamiliar with, so maybe I’m missing something.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

since lumberyard is literally CE i don’t see how these questions even come up here lol

and yes you do have to pay for licensing of the engine while developing games with that engine and it’s tools, even if you mod out the engine and tools (which is normally done for most games).

Reader
Adrian Brown

I do not believe it is the same. Didn’t Amazon make their own changes to the engine? They don’t even rely on Cryengine’s own updates any more from what I understand.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

CIG dev on atv said all they used from LY was later version libaries from crytek. lol. which is why it only took them a few hours to “switch”

Woetoo
Reader
Woetoo

I’m working from a position of ignorance. I wasn’t aware (before reading some of the more recent replies) that CryEngine had been sold to Amazon and they were rebranding the current version going forward as Lumberyard.

To me, that just means migration between the two would be easier.

And yes, I’m aware that using a tool means you need to pay for that tool (depending on the contract, either outright or periodically). And if Star Citizen developers are still actively using the tools, I presume they are still meeting their contractual obligations.

But let’s assume (and I recognise I’m doing a lot of that), that there are “pre-Lumberyard” assets and “post-Lumberyard” assets. I’d still expect CIG to be using CryTek’s software (and paying/paid for that privilege) to work on the “pre-” stuff and Amazon’s software going forward. But at the point where the actual GAME, the thing marketed and sold to the public no requires CryEngine tools/SDK’s to deliver, that’s the point I would expect the CryTek logos and acknowledgements to disappear from view.

In this case, the sale of CryEngine to Amazon makes the dividing line a much murkier place than I had originally envisaged. But I would hope it isn’t the case a company would still need to acknowledge a tool that is no longer part of their development pipeline. (Again, if it is still actively used to deliver any part of what the end user sees I would agree with CryTek).

I’m not suggesting CryEngine tools aren’t being used (I don’t know either way). I’m just suggesting just because they ARE being used internally (presumably legally), doesn’t automatically mean they are required for the the current version of Star Citizen that the end user is playing.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

the implementation of what constitutes lumberyard by CIG was just updating some of their 3.6 libraries to 3.7 libraries.

while they’ve done alot of modifciations to CE (to the point they rebranded it “star engine” over a year before the ly rebrand, which is itself a complaint in this suit), it’s still at it’s core CE 3.6 for the most part.

as well just because amazon owns the rights to license ce 3.7/LY doesn’t mean CIG has the right to just switch from licensing from crytek to licensing from amazon under teh terms of the GLA (or so crytek claims), and evne if they did excercise and fulfill any exit clauses, they would still ahve to do more substantial work than just update some libraries to avoid copyright infringement as there’s more to the 3.7 update sfrom CIG’s 3.6 base than just those libraries.

aside from those libraries, the engine that star citizen currently runs in and is developed with is still very much CE 3.6 at it’s core.

and the fact that CIG modified it heavily doesn’t mean dick all as modifyign the engine you work with to cater to teh specific game is routine in game development and one of the reasons developers can pay for source code access in teh first place, which is a routine option in any engine licensing “store”.

Estranged
Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Estranged

DK, this could be reason SC hid the “conversion” for around a year.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

they were in talks with amazon to do it for about a year. idk they made conflicting statements because at first they said they were using ti for a year then they made a post (wth a game update) that they switched over and it only took them a few hours to do it. so idk. lol now that you mention it.

Estranged
Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Estranged

DK, yep, it is like they are like children, constant exaggerations.

Woetoo
Reader
Woetoo

Aye.

I did a bit more reading after posting and see some merits in what CryTek are claiming (if their claims are valid).

1. CIG signed a GLA (Game Licence Agreement) to the effect of Star Citizen will explicitly promote CryTek in-game.

I can see that being true, while CIG use CryEngine. Obviously the devil is in the details.
The main detail being whether the GLA explicitly or the law implicitly covers what happens when CIG stops using CryEngine.
The other main detail being whether game as it exists now still uses CryEngine or CryTek tools.

I doubt the “Star Engine” defence will fly.

2. CIG signed the GLA saying they would exclusively use CryEngine.

Using Lumberyard breaks that agreement if true. Again, not withstanding future clauses or information coming to light.

3. CIG signed the GLA saying they wouldn’t provide access to 3rd parties.

Yet, CryTek seem to have evidence they did.

4. CIG signed the GLA for the development of a single game.

Roberts and others within CIG have said SQ42 is to be sold separately and has said phrases includes wording like “both games”.

Now, I can forgive their spoken phrases. That’s just words and people can say one thing, especially in promotional environments which don’t reflect reality.

But if SQ42 uses Lumberyard and not CryEngine, that’s okay I guess?
And by “uses”, I mean right now, not something that happened months or years ago (especially prior to the announcement they were selling it separately).
And that’s even if it can be even IS a separate game. I’d personally see it as a component, much like DLC. It IS the game (unless legally it isn’t).
Again, more information required.

5. CIG agreed to give feedback to CryTek about any improvements and bugfixes CIG made to CryEngine while CIG was using it.

CryTek seem to have a point here, assuming they can prove a negative – which is generally quite hard.
But even then, that’s only a breach of the GLA (and was seemingly handled up to this point as such). Hopefully the GLA also sets out penalties for breach of the GLA.

Now CryTek are also bringing to light CIG’s negotiator used to work on Crytek contracts and therefore had inside information another company wouldn’t.

Non-issue for me. They knew that when they were negotiating the GLA and still signed it.

CryTek’s own negotiator of the GLA also joined CIG later.

Again, another non-issue. Well, sort of.
CryTek may have cause to go after the person themselves, depending on his employment contract.
The only way I can see CIG being at fault is if they were talking (or strongly hinting) to him about employment opportunities before the GLA was signed.
Again, presuming other non-compete clauses don’t exist/apply.

Overall, I think CryTek may have a case about the exclusivity and the breach of 3rd party clauses.
Even that comes down the GLA wording, which I haven’t seen.
The rest… I’m personally less convinced.

Thankfully, this is why courts exist.
I look forward to finding out what really has gone on and how the law relates in due course.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

on the sq42 using CE – by CIG’s own claims they were developing sq42 actively before any supposed engine “switches” you still need an engine license before launch during development.

Woetoo
Reader
Woetoo

Oh, I don’t disagree and seemingly neither did CIG.

They bought a licence. They used the tools and libraries the licence gave them access to. They used CryEngine to develop SC and SQ42 back when they were one product.
For all I know, they are still paying a monthly CryEngine licence payment even now.

But…
There’s a point where they (seemingly) decided to treat SQ42 as a separate product.
There’s a point where they (seemingly) decided to stop using CryEngine and start using Lumberyard for Star Citizen.
There’s a point where they (seemingly) decided to stop using CryEngine and start using Lumberyard for Squadron 42.
There was a point (or will be in the future) when Star Citizen will compile/work without using any CryEngine code.
There was a point (or will be in the future) when SQ42 will compile/work without using any CryEngine code.

Which of those happened and in what order matters, especially depending on what clauses are in the GLA.

But personally, for me, if the order was :

Decide SC needs to use Lumberyard. -> Switch to Lumberyard -> Get SQ42 to compile using Lumberyard exclusively -> Decide SQ42 can be split out of Star Citizen -> Announce SQ42 as a separate product without CryTek logos.

That’d be fine on all points, except exclusivity. Because there was a point where SC (including SQ42) used both engines (seemingly) in breach of the GLA.

If things happened in a different order… then there are lots of permutations and too many conclusions for my poor old brain to consider.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

it should eb noted that bugsmasher began in 2015 before even the star engine branding replaced the ce and crytek branding in the launcher which is even before the LY “switch”.

Reader
shear

That’s sort of the issue…

Reader
sizer99

Ooooh, this is great. Star Citizen drama is the best (certainly better than the ‘game’).

Well, why would you expect RSI/CIG to be any more honest with their suppliers than they are with their customers?

Reader
Fervor Bliss

Details matter. Where is the lawyer this time?
Writing more letters threatening to sue the abused?

Reader
Sally Bowls

The/a lawyer even got mentioned in the suit – the part where a lawyer who used to be employed by Crytek negotiating licenses was a co-founder of CIG and negotiated with Crytek on behalf of CIG.

Reader
Schmidt.Capela

I don’t see the issue in this. Crytek certainly knew who they were negotiating with, so if they had reservations about who was negotiating in CIG’s behalf, they should have demanded he be replaced back then, before the negotiation was over; by finishing negotiations with him Crytek tacitly agreed to having him negotiate the licensing deal.

Reader
Zora

Boy this stuff is so fun, you don’t see legal drama of this level on TV anymore <3 thank you all, I am having a blast on this horrid evening!

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
zeko_rena

Sorry to hear you are having a horrid evening!

Reader
Zora

thank you, just another spiteful relapse of flu….didn’t even realize I had a 38+ fever until my hoousemate came back from work and got scalded hugging me haha

this could become a tv serie I agree^^

Reader
rafael12104

Well, I think we have proven over the years that there is no drama like dev drama.

Netflix couldn’t come up with some of this stuff.

Reader
Loyal Patron
Armsbend

You should pitch a crowdfunding tv show. Like Silicon Valley but interesting and funny.

Reader
rafael12104

It would work. And the source material? LOL! Hell, lets start with Daybreak. Make that Season 1. SC should be a Season 3 or 4 offering.

Reader
Loyal Patron
Armsbend

Matlock 2017: So wait, you are telling me…*fans self in the heat of a hot Mississippi courtroom afternoon with no AC* these…gamers you call them…are giving money to company that don’t have no product yet but ideas? We’ll I’ll be a spotted cat on a hot tin roof in a Texas July. I’ve heard it all now.

Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
mike foster

hoo boy

Reader
rafael12104

After years of watching this damn intro, it finally applies!

Reader
TheDonDude

Erin Roberts has replied to this on their forum: https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/comment/2895381/#Comment_2895381

There’s a vaguely possibly relevant post from a few years back on their forum.

Hi S1GN3T,

We did an outright buyout of the engine last year and have the source code, so while we hope all the noise about Crytek blows over, as they are great partners and friends to the project, if the worse happened we would be ok, as we’ve already branched the engine and have a large team that is adding features and supporting it every day here at CIG. So even in the worst case scenario we should be fine, but obviously we hope it does not come to that.

Cheers,

Erin

There. I think we can safely say that we’ll never have to worry about Star Citizen drama ever ever ever again… r-..ight?

Reader
Sally Bowls

I hope he did not believe that. I read about having branched the engine but I don’t think the question here is whether they are technically fine; it is what is the legal status of where they are. Although, I guess mere money can (and probably will) make all this go away.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

that post is from 2014. which quite possible he was bullshitting us ore more generously just wasnt aware of otherwise.

Reader
Sally Bowls

Ah, that is the missing context. Crytek had problems meeting payroll in ’14 (and ’16)
So this is a reasonable comment on the “what happens if Crytek goes under”

CIG opened a 21+ person company in Germany with a lot of ex-Cry people to insulate themselves from Cry risk.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

and it’s quite possible erin was either unaware of reality or bullshitting us at the time.

Reader
Armsman

Or it’s possible that CIG DID do a deal to buy the engionce source code (but as that wouldn’t help Crytek’s argument their lawyers won’t mention it.) As I said, we’ll have to wait for the CIG legal response to be filed to see there side and what evidence (if any they have to support it.)

Right now, you’re just reading one side’s interpretation, and of course they’re not going to include anything that doesn’t support their case in chief.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

just because you pay for the engine source code doesn’t mean you have a right to distribute that source code on your own unilaterially or broadcast it.

i can buy copies of scripts of movies and tv shows it doesn’t mean i can share them as i see fit online.

Reader
Brother Maynard

That was posted in 2014, i.e. more than a year before CIG started doing what Crytek complains about.

Even a buyout would have restrictions on the use of the engine, for example the exclusivity of CryEngine for SC, the obligation to show CE logo and trademarks, etc.

So again, even though CIG went beyond a standard licencing agreement by buying the code, it all depends on the exact terms of their agreement with Crytek and what CIG were allowed to do with the engine. And that is exactly what Crytek now questions.

Reader
TheDonDude

Whoops, you are totally correct.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Alex Willis

There. I think we can safely safe that we’ll never have to worry about Star Citizen drama ever ever ever again… r-..ight?

Reader
A Dad Supreme

In related news, Polygon has a piece up today alleging that CIG has dragged its feet on refunding a backer’s $25,000 in pledges. CIG declined to comment on most of Polygon’s story.

“You’ll see fewer and fewer players online there because if you play a game for three years with the same features, only slightly different, we don’t see any progress anymore,” Schulz said. “So the graphics aren’t great. You have a lot of lag. But nothing changes! They have produced less and less content over the years. More concept videos, more presentations with improved graphics, but nothing has changed in the game itself.”

Most damning, Schulz said, is the fact that the project’s single-player game, called Squadron 42, has seemingly drifted from the development team’s mind entirely. No release date for anything related to Squadron 42, which features the acting talents of Gary Oldman, Gillian Anderson and Mark Hamill, has been offered in over a year.

Quite a statement from a $25,000 backer who wants a refund. Far different from the Star Citizen players who post here regularly in defense.

I’m not a backer but was interested in the finished game for retail purchase. Not so optimistic about any of this now.

Reader
Joe Blobers

Quote a Dad Supreme: “Quite a statement from a $25,000 backer ”

I was surprised this new 25K “drama” did not surfaced earlier.. :)

First I note Polygon take it with a grain of salt. They remind us the not so far 45K fake refund and have no evidence this 25K is different… :)

Also the comment from this supposed backer: “we don’t see any progress anymore…. the graphics aren’t great…”
We can say a lot about delay perception, so called feature creep of whatever… but “no progress” at the time 3.0 is in PTU visible to thousands and “graphics not great”. Pure bullshit… I won’t be surprised that in a few weeks, this new “drama” fade out like the previous one. So far we got 15K and 45K forged refund, we are missing (not for long) the 25K… still 35K to go :)

malibutomi
Reader
malibutomi

LOL this guy haven’t seen 3.0 surely. About the graphics aren’t great i suggest google “Star Citizen 3.0 screenshot” You’ll see things like this:
comment image
comment image

Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
Space Captain Zor

That’s such sloppy reporting from Polygon. The claims being made in that above quote are completely ridiculous and without merit.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Dividion

The holiday livestream on 12/21 is supposed to give us an update on Squadron 42. They announced that that was the plan during CitizenCon back in October. That’s only eight days away, so I guess we’ll soon find out if that’s fact or fiction.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

unlike that false flag operation it seems this has real merit as this guy has filed in small claims court against CIG in europe.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
bluntoze

I call bull dudu.
1. SQ42 is a single player campaign of the game SC. They share the same tech and resources. Or we forgot the time when games used to have single player and proper campaigns?
2. As far as I understand CIG has made significant improvements on Cryengine, maybe some jealousy here that Cryengine has been left in the dust.

Reader
Sally Bowls

2. As far as I understand CIG has made significant improvements on Cryengine, maybe some jealousy here that Cryengine has been left in the dust.

That is one of the things CIG is being sued for.

Section 7.3 of the GLA contained a promise that Defendants would provide bug fixes and optimizations to CryEngine on at least an annual basis.

Section 7.3 of the GLA states that “[a]nnually during the Game’s development period, and again upon publication of the final Game, Licensee shall provide Crytek with any bug fixes, and optimizations made to the CryEngine’s original source code files (including CryEngine tools provided by Crytek) as a complete compilable version.”

On November 16, 2015, Crytek requested long overdue bug fixes and optimizations from Defendants. Defendants did not make a good faith effort to provide Crytek with the promised bug fixes and optimizations to the CryEngine as a complete compilable version.

On November 24, 2016, Crytek informed Defendants that they were in breach of Section 7.3 of the GLA. Although Defendants claimed that they were ready and willing to comply with their obligations, they did not comply.

On June 22, 2017, Crytek sent another letter to Defendants, again requesting the bug fixes and optimizations that were promised under the GLA. To date, Defendants have not made a good faith effort to provide Crytek with the promised bug fixes and optimizations to the CryEngine as a complete, compilable version.

Crytek has been damaged by Defendants’ breach of Section 7.3 of the GLA, including for the reason that Defendants have failed to provide the technology to Crytek that they promised to Crytek under the GLA, and Crytek accordingly has not benefited from use of that technology.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

1) they sell sq42 as a seperate game for some time now on their online store and in marketting materials.

2) if that had any merit at all bethesda would have no waited until they paid gamebryo devs out to rename their hacked to hell and back fork of that engine they’ve used and been modifying forever.

Reader
Brother Maynard

It depends on the GLA signed between CIG and Crytek and on the timing / contract for Lumberyard’s use for SQ42.

The claims in the court document seem solid. According to Crytek, the GLA expressly forbids the use of a different engine for SC, CryEngine was to be the exclusive engine. In such case CIG was not allowed to simply switch to Lumberyard.

SQ42 is not a SP campaign of SC. As of a couple of years ago, SQ42 has been presented and will be sold as a separate game, which – again – seems to be against the terms of the GLA.

Crytek also has other claims against CIG, it does give an impression of a long term and systematic breach of the CIG / Crytek contract.

My money is on CIG attempting to settle this out of court.

Reader
Armsman

It’s going to end up like the Marvel/Cryptic (for City of Heroes) settlement yeas as. hell, Crytek probably wants to see if they can get some of the Engine improvements.
(Remember right after the settlement marvel hired Cryptic to create Marvel Universe Online, which only died because Microsoft bailed once Cryptic responded to their inquiry of “This game will have similar subscription numbers as “World of Warcraft”, yrs?” to which Cryptic replied: “Probably not, no.”

But yeah, there will be a settlement. 97& of all civil matters settle because the only ones who win a long protracted court case are lawyers (with their fees.)

April-Rain
Reader
Kickstarter Donor
April-Rain

I understand CIG has made significant improvements on Cryengine and?

It’s still the cryengine under the hood, just because you make improvements for your own game does not mean you can start calling it your own and change the name to star engine and not pay for it.

CIG we just settle, plenty of backers money to pay for it.

Reader
Patreon Donor
Kickstarter Donor
agemyth 😩

Crytek continues to amaze me with the fact that they still exist in some form. CryEngine has to be their main source of income unless WarFace is somehow a big deal in Ukraine/Eastern Europe.

Reader
Rolan Storm

*laughs out loud – literally* Warface is a joke. Every time I got advertising I simple delete it. So no, it is not a big deal.

This clears things up, however. Are all Crytek projects this successful? *reads comments further* So, no. Some are alive. But if Warface any indication of their success no wonder they find ways to aquire money otherwise.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

they sold life time rights to cryengine to amazon last year for 70 million, as well as consolidated and hunkered down structurally.

Reader
shear

They have Hunt: Showdown game coming out.

I am actually looking forward to it. It looks really cool. The world they built is amazing.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
zeko_rena

I guess Crytek is having a bad year in sales, at least this way they can get potentially some money, and a lot of press coverage.

Don’t half the people from Crytek now work at CIG anyway?

Hopefully this won’t slow down any progress on the project.

Reader
A Dad Supreme

I’m not sure “bad year in sales” would mean they got sue happy. Crytek told CIG about the violations over a year ago, twice.

Try talking to someone you were in business with about them breaking a legal agreement that cost you money (according to Crytek) and see how fast you’d sue them.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
zeko_rena

This time last year was when I was reading news articles about Crytek not paying employees, why wait so long if they started violating the agreement over a year ago.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

that was like 3 years ago now.

Reader
silverlock

Suing your customers is always a last resort sort of thing as it’s bad for business.

Reader
Reht

That’s kind of what happens when you (Crytek) put all your chickens in one basket and it takes 3+ extra years, with no end in sight, to fill that basket. They hitched their wagon to CiG, at a discount if the documents are right, in hopes that the publicity and results of SC being successful would make other fledgling game companies use their engine.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

actually crytek expanded aggressively for a number of years with alot of big bets. those bets didn’t pay off which is what caused their financial issues.

Reader
A Dad Supreme

One possibility was that Crytek informed CIG (twice) about repeated breaches of contract in an attempt to work things out without an attorney. (reference the above linked Polygon article about the $25,000 backer who tried this with CIG and see how that went) https://www.polygon.com/2017/12/13/16767590/star-citizen-refund

Probably after a reasonable amount of time passed with no relief from CIG, they decided to sue. Just a guess on other possibilities other than “bad year in sales”.

Regardless it doesn’t matter when or why someone sues if they are in the right… if they are in the right, which Crytek appears to be.

Reader
shear

Build a strong case.