What amazes me is the company placing blame squarely on ED in terms of updates breaking their systems.

Who is actually the one to blame here? the company who can't fix\release a very 'basic' module in terms of coding and systems or the company who awarded contract to the 3rd party flopveloper to complete the module they were contracted to complete before the expiry date.

Would you not think that meeting the contractual deadline on the modules the business has signed up to release by a set time frame, have the module\s released or in fact seek an extension of the contract like it does in the real world?

Or perhaps VEAO publicly blaming ED for having a 'bawked' release of the engine for the shortcomings of VEAO had something to do with ED laying down the contract card.....one can only 'speculate' but I can say with some confidence that this was the beginning of the split between VEAO and ED's 'friendship'

flopveloper




But then again......how is this for an excuse.