is there any reason to be so angry ???

we are discussing a flight sim for Heaven's sake.

In response to the "partnership" arguments etc:



The Kickstarter was RRGs, and RRGs alone,

One can pick apart the description and press releases all they want.

-TFC Manages ED And Supplied Access to Aircraft probrably,
-ED Supplied the Base Engine everything would be using, as well as support for using that engine. etc etc. (Games advertise partnerships with Havok, Unreal etc when they use their engines.)

Outside of maybe loaning them Igor, ED was not part of the development of the Aircraft or Map until it took over the project.

The Same Way ED is not part of development of 3rd Party Aircraft.

When a 3rd Party Signs a License Agreement to produce a Product for EDs Simulation engine, they are by definition "in cooperation", "partnership" etc.

You can debate and speculate all you want, as the specifics arent public and aren't going to be.

Granted It's frustrating for backers, especially the rewards re-structure afrer RRG dissolved, however, you cant fault ED for re structuring them to be more feasible.

The entire RRG Kickstarter and Rewards was inconsistent and unstable from day 1, RRG shifted the rewards and re-structured them almost every few days.

Im not gonna sit and make excuses, you guys are content with looking for loopholes and stuff in the wording of the RRG kickstarter etc. So it wont matter what I say, I'll just be cross examined regardless.

I can't believe you're even trying to argue this point. They were in partnership. Partners.

This thread speaks volumes about DCS imo. People are more entertained arguing about this sim instead of flying it. Check out the Falcon forum. Pretty much silence, as we are too busy enjoying ourselves.

Sorry for the interruption. Carry on. :-)

Actually...it looks like your the one looking for loopholes. The rest of the world has a pretty clear understanding of what "joint venture" and "partnership" means in business terms.

I hope it's not possible in the Kickstarter world that a "non-partner" can just step in and take over assets and funds and change rewards without the consent of the backers.

ED hired former RRG Personell and acquired the assets, they didnt just "Take Over".

RRG Dissolved, ED Hired and acquired the assets.

There's a timeline of events, it didnt happen overnight or even a few days. Only a few things were seen by public in the form of a deafening silence that lasted weeks to months, and the aftermath.

I wasnt making excuses, I was merely pointing out "partnership", the word everyone is fixated on, is a synonym for cooperation etc etc.

Even "Joint Venture",
A business arrangement in which two or more parties agree to pool their resources for the purpose of accomplishing a specific task. Sharing Prophits and Losses.

Pooling Resources likely being:
TFC, Access to Aircraft
ED, Access to The DCSW Development Tools
Igor, Access to the AFM Expertise

etc etc

ED woulda shared some of the prophit via whatever terms in the license agreement.

Skate,

We can go in circles on this and argue the semantics of it for ages...in fact, we already might have back in 2014. Let's just agree to dis-agree.

Fair enough?

Fair Enough.

I go with what Skatezilla says here. There's no way ED would expose themselves financially to the potential (and eventual actuality) of RRG's failure.

I reckon there were lawyers and letters of intent but the risk would all have been with RRG.

Why did ED step in when they failed? There's obviously a potential financial return and hopefully some sense of duty to customers.

Would have been a clusterfump of fighter ops proportions if they'd abandoned the whole ww2 project.

Even if what you are saying is 100% accurate...it exposes a serious flaw in the Kickstarter program that can be taken advantage of.

So anyone can go in partnership with a campaign...even if just in name only...let your "partner" promise the world and offer all kinds of rewards...enticing backers to fund at high levels. After a time...let your partner fail...swoop in and "save the day" by slashing rewards...profit.

I'm not saying this is how the RRG/ED Kickstarter happened...just saying there are serious loopholes that can be taken advantage of with the backers money. Apparently there is nothing that can be done.

There was one backer at the $2000 level and 5 at $1000 level. These are the folks I really feel bad for...weekly Skype meetings with the developer? Ugh...

Kickstarter/crowdfunding as a whole is extremely risky and can make or break a business.

Theres dozens of wrticles now warning users and companies about crowdfunding and the risks.


If ED was providing more than SDK support they woulda stepped in long before the kickstarter closed, It was RRGs project and business decisions were theirs,.

It was a massive project, not just a single module.

Simply Put, It was RRGs ball, they fumbled it, and it was recovered by ED.

Absolutely.

With each one that fails or falls short, it has a lasting affect that makes perspective backers not as willing to gamble in the future. This most certainly affects future flight sim developers that are trying to raise funds but cannot...since backers are more careful and shy away from the risk.

Assuming that's true...what gives ED the legal right to take over without the consent of the backers that funded the project at $158,000?

Perhaps because they were "partnered" and it was a "joint venture"?

It's still unclear weather Luthier was forced out or threw up his hands and said enough. We will probably never know. Either way, you would be hard pressed to say that Luthier and team would be any further behind then ED is right now with the WWII project. It seems pretty clear that WWII is at the very bottom of ED's priorities right now.

there are 1000s of sucessfully funded projects on KS a year that just take the money, transfer it to another company, and dissolve the company that published the KS Campaign, thus backers are legally given nothing.

Thats the issue with CF, and its seriously flawed and dangerous, I never back anything, I made an exception for DCS F35 and DCS WWII, simply because they were dcs related.

One guy raised 2 million+ for a CARD GAME, then after the campaign ended, took the money and bolted, using loopholes in the system.

DCS WWII is a massive project, when completed would bring in a HUGE WWII fanbase to DCS.

Please explain what legal rights are required and for what? Also please specify what exactly did ED acquire, what funding or work, exact details please.

Edit:- Skate actually deals with this below.......

When RRG Folded the WW2 project should have died. IMO ED should never have stepped in when it collapsed, it is waste of resources.

Nate

please... do tell more

By the time it's completed, we all might be pre-occupied complaining about how everyone in the world all has matching silver jumpsuits and playing with our flying cars...lol {Sorry...couldn't resist)

Point taken on the rest of your post.

A majority of the RRG staff were hired by ED.

If you look at the forums, RRG went silent with updates...

Eventually RRG dissolved there fore all I.P. went back to the Developers who developed it (3D assests etc).

Those Developers were then hired by ED.

DCSWWII as a standalone Sim died with RRG, The IP Shifted to employees,
Employees were hired by ED, and project was re structured into individual modules.

Legally ED didnt have to provide ANY backer rewards, if I read the TOS Agreement with KS correctly. That is the responsibility of the company that published the KS Campaign, which is the same for other CF sites.

Legally LNS isnt required to fulfil any of the IGG backer rewards as Studio Beczl Dissolved, Artists took their IP and formed LNS and continued Development.

DCSWWII was supposed to be a completely separate Sim, using EDs DCS World as a Core engine, for which RRG would develope and insert their aircraft.

Actually...I want someone to tell me that it's not just the Wild West out there in Kickstarter land. If your saying nobody needs any legal basis to take over a project...then you're saying that Electronic Arts could have just swooped in and took over the DCS WWII project? I doubt it.

There has to be some legal basis for someone to take over assets and a project.

Are you saying that anyone can take over any project at anytime without any legal issues Nate?

IANAL, but it probably just comes down to assignment of IP, in terms of legal. The IP was never owned by the backers, AFAIK. If the individual developers are ok with assigning it to ED (Or any company) for pay, then that's how that works.