CryTek v CIG/RSI

[dsmart]

The idiot Montoya says things about the court case:

Apparently it's all fine. Also, back in Jan, apparently Leonard French said is was unlikely the judge would dismiss anything. Just for a reminder, this is what Montoya said in Jan (start at 00.34):

He's a moron. Both French and Lessor said the same thing. They were wrong. I was right. And IANAL.

[Backer42]

Some might ask why Crytek wouldn't want to settle for anything "reasonable" that CIG can afford because if CIG do go to the wall sooner rather than later, Crytek would get less...wouldn't they ?   

I note you said in your earlier response that if you were Crytek you might be minded to see CIG go to the wall (rather than make this purely about immediate $$)

The most hilarious outcome would be CT grabbing all existing assets without the debt, turn them into a decent game based on the Kickstarter concept and release that exclusively for Xbox One X as "Space Citizen Squadron 409" having Microsoft cover the remainder of the cost.

And three years later when any Croberts cultist still talks about "Star Citizen saving PC gaming" nobody remembers anything except "You mean that Xbox game?"

[N0mad]

The most hilarious outcome would be CT grabbing all existing assets without the debt, turn them into a decent game based on the Kickstarter concept and release that exclusively for Xbox One X as "Space Citizen Squadron 409" having Microsoft cover the remainder of the cost.

It would be hilarious, but I'm of the opinion that the assets are worthless: the motion capture and art assets are specific to SQ42 / SC and the core engine changes are a mess. Besides, everyone who was going to buy the game has already done so. And there will be so much bad blood between the cultists and Crytek that none of them will touch the game if Crytek release it themselves.

Crytek are out to recover the money they feel is owed and I suspect they don't care if it bankrupts CIG in the process.

[Backer42]

the assets are worthless: the motion capture and art assets are specific to SQ42 / SC

Who cares? They are already made and can be salvaged.

and the core engine changes are a mess.

CT owns a modern engine, which is compatible with the assets, they don't need CIG's outdated pile of shit.

Besides, everyone who was going to buy the game has already done so.

Xbox owners? I don't think so.

And there will be so much bad blood between the cultists and Crytek that none of them will touch the game if Crytek release it themselves.

I don't think anybody cares about a few Reddit zealots. If Microsoft Xbox division funds it, they are not even going to make a PC version. Cultists are simply left in the cold.

[dsmart]

If taking assets from a failed game, and using it to make the same game were that easy, there wouldn't be any game cancelations.

The fact is that Star Citizen has reached the point whereby it will cost more to refocus and retool than it would to finish it. Even if all the required assets were already created - and they are not - you still have the tech issues to deal with. For one thing, what game are you going to make, when in fact the world envisioned for the game isn't even completed yet. How are you going to make, for example, SQ42, when in fact currently only one small space area and some barren moons exist.

Crytek or any company getting the assets at bankruptcy would be stuck with the IP (Star Citizen, Squadron 42) and marketing assets only. Sure, you could use some of the created assets to make something, but that wouldn't be Star Citizen, Squadron 42, or the game pitched in 2012.

[Backer42]

If taking assets from a failed game, and using it to make the same game were that easy, there wouldn't be any game cancelations.

Nobody can do what Chris Roberts promised. Because what he promised is impossible. The latter is the reason why he got so much money.

[dsmart]

Nobody can do what Chris Roberts promised. Because what he promised is impossible. The latter is the reason why he got so much money.

Precisely. He made money on lofty promises once he figured out how to monetize scope creep.

[Bubba]

Should it come down to a fire sale, I see two bits of IP that could be worth something.
1. Believe it or not, Squadron 42. They basically had a slew of B-listers plus Oldman agree to have their name and likeness used,  then spent a bunch of time doing mocap and recording. Plus -- and this is a plus -- the story is hackneyed garbage. You could reçut this schlock for a straight-to-Netflix cashgrab, or if the contracts Ortwin prepared don't allow that,  at least make a crappy bejeweled -in-space with fancy cutscenes. Or threaten to, and get the actors to pay you to bury the project.

2. All that footage they've shot of themselves. The scope of their development onanism shouldn't be underestimated, as wwe will find out in discovery. Remember, part of their project was a documentary. That team is probably long gone,   but combined with all the other features that exist to pad the IMDB pages of the ruling elite, and you've got enough for a two -hour piece. I can hear Werner Herzog's voice already.

All told, there might be a million bucks worth of IP!

[N0mad]

All told, there might be a million bucks worth of IP!

The only value to come out of this mess will be Star Citizen The Movie about the shit show behind the scenes, directed by Armando Iannucci along the lines of Veep / The Thick of It. It'll feature Sandi firing anyone who questions her marketing qualifications and Chris prowling the office shouting at people for having the wrong coloured pixel.

[dexatron]

lol can't wait... 'on this episode of Dirty Money we delve into the world of epic high fidelity computer gaming fraud'.

The only value to come out of this mess will be Star Citizen The Movie about the shit show behind the scenes, directed by Armando Iannucci along the lines of Veep / The Thick of It. It'll feature Sandi firing anyone who questions her marketing qualifications and Chris prowling the office shouting at people for having the wrong coloured pixel.

[dsmart]

Leo is back!

@8:37 is where you trip up, and is precisely why most of us were regarding 2.1.2 as "exclusive" use.

When you look at 2.4, it goes with 2.1.2.

The thing is that since the judge has thrown out 2.1.2, it doesn't mean CIG has to continue to promote CryEngine if they're not using it. That's bs. It just means that unless the contract terminates + 2 yrs, they can't do anything listed in 2.4. So guess what? If they had, in fact, stopped using CE, why didn't they terminate the GLA? Simple. They're still using it. And if so, that's where they are screwed with 2.4. As a dev, I explained this in detail. https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1030835962899849222.html where I also show how their use and promotion of Star Engine, long before they switched to Lumberyard, also violates 2.4.

Crytek obviously believes that CIG didn't fully (if at all) switch to Lumberyard. That's what discovery is for.

Why didn't CIG terminate the GLA if they switched and were no longer using CE3? The GLA doesn't have an automatic termination clause. There is no legal standing to say "Yeah, we're no longer using it, so we don't need to terminate it". Contracts don't work like that. Especially in contracts which have a material level of performance.

Even if CIG responds to the SAC and files a motion to dismiss 2.4, as it's an issue that's material to the contract, only discovery via the lawsuit will prove that. So I don't envision the judge granting it. Heck, she was the one who actually pointed it out in her own ruling. And NEITHER side had raised 2.4 before she did. Guess why that is? Because neither side disagrees that the GLA is still in full force and effect. Had it been terminated properly as per the contract, there would be NO lawsuit.

As to the tech, the GLA already REQUIRED CIG to provide any/all changes to CE. And even CIG admitted to and agreed to this in their lawsuit filings. There's no argument there. So whatever improvements CIG made to CE3, Crytek is entitled. Things like OCS have to be implemented at engine level; so there is no way that's restricted to the Star Engine.

Fans attack Crytek and us because they have come to the sudden realization that not only is the project dead, but it's now in a very damaging lawsuit. But the fact is, if Crytek didn't have a case, the judge wouldn't have DENIED 4/6 items in the CIG MtD filing. And one of those items (monetary punitive damages) isn't even an issue because statutory damages in the other claims (e.g. SQ42) will completely eclipse that. The other item (exclusivity) is immaterial because it carries less weight than all the other claims, especially where 2.4 is concerned.

This case is going to trial unless CIG can write Crytek a check with a lot of zeros (From case precedent, I would estimate around $50M or more, due to the number of claims) in it. And I don't personally believe that, with all the bad blood between these two companies, Crytek settles before discovery starts or ends. Heck, it was CIG that started settlement talks back in April as we learned in a court filing. If Crytek were interested in money, they would have initiated or at least entertained settlement back then. But they didn't. And they indicated why in their April filing.

[Bubba]

Yes, it's pretty funny. It's like these guys don't get the basics of contract law.

Here's a similar case. An athlete signs a contract with a shoe company. The shoe company agrees to supply the shoes for free (or for a discount, or with additional consideration. It doesn't matter). The athlete agrees to wear the shoes in competition and the company's cap during gameday interviews.

Now, the athlete switches shoe brands and doesn't wear the cap. The shoe company sues, and the athlete replies "but I stopped wearing the shoes!" Not that he gave the shoes back to the company, or made any effort to terminate the contract.

This is a simple case. Both sides agree to do something in exchange for consideration. One side stops doing something (using CryEngine), stops giving consideration (Promoting CryEngine, Sharing improvements made), and keeps the consideration the other side gave: CryEngine at a discount, support, trailers, all of which have contributed value to the team -- hell, their developers wouldn't have had such an easy time of switching to Lumberyard if they hadn't the CryEngine experience; Chris Roberts himself said so.

So, why do these guys keep deluding themselves that this is a weird contract in parts where it isn't? I mean, with Ortwin involved on both sides of the table, you're going to expect weirdness.

[dsmart]

Yes, that's a perfect example of the spirit of the GLA between these two parties.

[Spunky Munkee]

So do you think that it will be required of Crytek to examine all of the code the CIG is using at any point after the lumberyard switch to find lines of code that are clearly Cryteks source code and definitly not Lumberyards altered code?

How much unalterated Crytak code must remain to satisfy the judge as proof that CIG faied to comply and still uses Crytek code? Granted, you are not a lawyer but you probably discussed this with your lawyers at some point. You masy already know as you have alluded to a source of information on the inside many times so that person was aware of how Robbers played it fast and loose and faked the switchover.
Will it just be a few dozen lines of code or will it take whole sections that regulate a given function in game to satisfy the judge?

I dont know how this stuff works. I only took a basic course in Machine language long ago using 80 bit IBM data cards long ago.

[N0mad]

Leser seems to be doubling down. Fact is that all those internet lawyers dismissed 2.4 originally as a non-compete clause, we didn't, we were right.

Now, I suspect 2.4 is meant to be a non-compete clause, but it's written so badly that it can be interpreted in other ways.

It would be hilarious if we discovered that Ortwin had a hand in the drafting of this part of the agreement and messed it up so badly that Crytek were able to sue them out of existence.