Also, I believe I was the only person here who said most of Crytek's claims in that lawsuit were complete rubbish. I argued with many on this thread, with sound reasoning. The outcome turned out to be exactly as I predicted, much to the disappointment of many here.
Nah I think you're putting yourself on a pedestal after the event there. There was plenty of rubbishing of aspects of Crytek's claims as I recall. The 'exclusively' bit in particular got a savaging on the whole. (As much as many did see it as a 'gotcha' as well, sure).
There was lots of giddiness about the whole event, absolutely. But I think anyone painting that as all 'this will bring down CIG' frenzy (as vapid is) is painting with a massively broad brush.
I can't speak to the source of others' giddiness, but mine stemmed from: The possibility of getting more info from inside the machine via discovery and exchanges, and the possibility of CIG getting bit on the bum for pulling a fast one (seemingly skipping out on a contract when they thought a business partner was out for the count).
I'd totally I agree that I didn't get what I wanted on the whole on that front
. Just some dribs and drabs in terms of CIG owning up to still using Cryengine builds essentially, and fun stuff like Ortwin's grandstanding seemingly being used against him. (Sorry, only 500k for the deposit, because you said at length that Crytek are pitifully broke
).
But it was another fun bit of drama all told
But the outcomes of the lawsuit are well known. We all read the judge's rulings to dismiss Crytek's main claims and uphold others. And considering how much I was attacked at the time for agreeing with CIG, I have no issue pointing out that those rulings were exactly as I predicted.
Nah, you can say the outcomes of the lawsuit are known, but they're definitely still not. It was a private settlement, and prior to that there were still aspects heading to court, as you note. (The most fun ones being: Could Crytek's claim that their license still held, despite the Amazon license being in place, convince a jury and judge. And could they stand up their, admittedly sketchy, stance of SQ42 needing to be launched via the Star Citizen launcher. IE not as a stand-alone title.)
We know that Crytek's odds of landing a big hit were poor. Their contract was for a one-off payment with no royalties attached. They were looking at breach of contract and some reputational loss due to missing splash screens at best.
But did that constitute enough of an impediment to any SQ42 launch that they were paid to go away? It's still possible. Just as it's possible that CIG turned the screw on the weaknesses of the case, and Crytek cut their losses and bowed out.
Stating that these outcomes are known either way is still silly though
![[VR] Merkir](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/141/141091.jpg?1553527154){kind=avatar}
