Star Citizen Discussion Thread v11

[[VR] Merkir]

It seems to me a key aspect of the "engine switch" is the licensing agreement signed between Amazon and Crytek. We can't see that document, but considering it was a $50-$70M deal, one can reasonably assume Crytek granted Amazon a considerable number of rights, and few restrictions. Amazon would require such rights to be deemed a standalone Game Engine, completely unfettered by Crytek/Cryengine claims. I'd be surprised if the Amazon lawyers haven't locked the agreement down tight so that Crytek has no right to claim that a lumberyard customer is still using Crytek's engine/IP/software/copyright. Then again, the CIG - Crytek GLA is an absolute shambles, so who knows what the lawyers have let through on the Amazon - Crytek agreement.

In short, any speculation about the "engine switch" in the current litigation is just that, speculation. But if anyone has a copy of the 2015 Amazon - Crytek licensing agreement, do tell.

 

[sovapid]

To be precise…

Crytek claims that “CIG had publicly claimed it had switched to using the Lumberyard Engine for both Star Citizen and Squadron 42, but was forced to confirm during this litigation that no such switch had taken place.” They infer this from CIG saying that “the code is the same” (i.e. the code base they've modified for SC), and the argument is really one of CIG asserting that this code isn't actually CryEngine even though it's the same code as CryEngine because they're licensing it as Lumberyard.

The legal and semantic difference is that CIG appeals to licensing, whereas Crytek appeals to the code itself.
Basically, a difference between “changing to Lumberyard” meaning “getting a Lumberyard license” on the one hand, and “changing to Lumberyard” meaning “changing to Lumberyard code” on the other. One can be done in two days because it involves signing a form and swapping out a bitmap, whereas the other cannot because it involves a ton of code auditing, revisioning, regression testing and all kinds of other actual work.

And that most likely is what Crytek is trying to do, confuse the issue for non-technical people.

It is the close to the same situation if I have a Java app and am using Oracle's JDK. I get sick of Oracle's nonsense and move to an OpenJDK implementation.

Or I have a .Net app running on Windows and Microsoft's CLR. But I get sick of paying Microsoft, so I move to a Mono CLR implementation.

In either case my code should stay the same, and I am compiling and running against a different run time.

CryEngine => Lumberyard should be even easier, because it is not just fulfilling the same API, but the actual implementation was 100% the same at one point since Lumberyard is a fork of CryEngine.

Again, we may find out if this ever actually goes to trial.

 

[sovapid]

What do the crew do while you are flying to/from your destination?

Talk about how bad elite dangerous is, of course.

 

[Tippis]

And that most likely is what Crytek is trying to do, confuse the issue for non-technical people.

Not really, no, since it's not actually confusing — to technical people or otherwise. And again, CIG isn't actually disputing this. They're disputing whether it's a (lack of) change that contractually matters.

And your comparisons are not comparable because you're talking about different implementations which is not what we're dealing with here. We're dealing with the exact same code. In your comparison, it would be like if you “changed” from Oracle JDK to Oracle JDK.

Again, we may find out if this ever actually goes to trial.

We've already found out, though, and CIG has already explained it the same way.

 

[sovapid]

Not really, no, since it's not actually confusing — to technical people or otherwise. And again, CIG isn't actually disputing this. They're disputing whether it's a (lack of) change that contractually matters.

And your comparisons are not comparable because you're talking about different implementations which is not what we're dealing with here. We're dealing with the exact same code. In your comparison, it would be like if you “changed” from Oracle JDK to Oracle JDK.


We've already found out, though, and CIG has already explained it the same way.

Congrats on being so confidently wrong, but you do excel at it.

 

[AJW]

Sovapid, can you explain what the purpose of attempting to 'confuse the issue for non-technical people' would be? This is a legal case, and both sides will have access to 'technical people' who will be able to argue it in court. Confusing non-participants in the case achieves nothing...

 

[sovapid]

Sovapid, can you explain what the purpose of attempting to 'confuse the issue for non-technical people' would be? This is a legal case, and both sides will have access to 'technical people' who will be able to argue it in court. Confusing non-participants in the case achieves nothing...

If it makes it to a jury, the jury will most certainly not be technical people.

 

[Arcondes]

And you believe them? I do not

....“For example, at the outset of this case, CIG had publicly claimed it had switched to using the Lumberyard Engine for both Star Citizen and Squadron 42, but was forced to confirm during this litigation that no such switch had taken place.“
So CIG has confirmed it?

 

[AJW]

If it makes it to a jury, the jury will most certainly not be technical people.

No, but they will be presented with actual evidence from both sides, and informed as to what it is they are supposed to be determining. It would take an exceptionally stupid team of lawyers to assume that they can simply 'confuse' a jury and hope that the opposing team won't explain what the case is actually about.

 

[sovapid]

No, but they will be presented with actual evidence from both sides, and informed as to what it is they are supposed to be determining. It would take an exceptionally stupid team of lawyers to assume that they can simply 'confuse' a jury and hope that the opposing team won't explain what the case is actually about.

if you believe that, there aint much more to talk about.

 

[AJW]

So no actual response beyond bluster. What a surprise...

 

[MTBFritz]

Apologies if I'm missing the point as I'm slightly skimming the thread, but I thought the court documents made it clear that no switch has taken place? In which case two days to not do anything perhaps seems excessive.... even for CIG. ....

Obviously thats argued among the non-lawyers or being silently dropped as a non-concern among the faithful. Never quite believed it in the first place. The whole thing just landed like a bomb then was brushed off (despite being a major impact event) by CIG. As slow-going as the lawsuit is I admit freely that I simply lack the attention span to hold on to that molasse-like development. Star Citizen is challenging enough already with its fans picking up the slow times when CIG isnt doing anything.

Sovapid, can you explain what the purpose of attempting to 'confuse the issue for non-technical people' would be? This is a legal case, and both sides will have access to 'technical people' who will be able to argue it in court. Confusing non-participants in the case achieves nothing...

I dont doubt that CIG is always aware of its lies and deceptions coming to light to its backers. Already the lawsuits protection status from the public is doing Chris great favors. The purpose is of course to confuse the non-technical people among its supporters as if court jargon isnt hard enough to understand already.

 

[Tippis]

....“For example, at the outset of this case, CIG had publicly claimed it had switched to using the Lumberyard Engine for both Star Citizen and Squadron 42, but was forced to confirm during this litigation that no such switch had taken place.“
So CIG has confirmed it?

Confirmed in the sense that they have not said otherwise, and it would have been in their very best interest to do so if they could. Also confirmed in the sense that both Chris and other developers have explained that it wasn't an actual engine switch (since nothing was switched in the engine) but a license switch. And quite likely confirmed in redacted and protected portions of the filings and disclosure exchanges.

CI¬G's argument isn't “no it's not CryEngine” but rather “it doesn't matter if is because Amazon said we could”. Crytek's argument is “it matters if it is, because we said you couldn't.” Those are what the two positions boil down to.

[more incoherent ad homimem blathering]

Since you are unable to mount any kind of argument, and have to use fallacies instead, we can safely assume that, yes, you blew it before you even started.

 

[Viajero]

At this point KSP2 will beat ED and SC in 2020. Which is alright with me, as KSP is fun.

That Squad (Take Two) and FDEV are launching v2 or large updates to their games this year is alright with me as KSP and ED released respectively in 2011 and 2014.

CIG has not even released a single game yet.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

Not a bug I believe...it's either one of the new hacks appearing or something similar. I've seen too many videos with it in now for it to be a random bug.

Yea, it seems odd that character models and weapons would suddenly change size as a bug since those are rather static 3d models.

I have so far seen posted:

• Tiny people (the above)
• Tiny pistol on hip
• Giant weapon on the back

 

[Skizomeuh]

And there's those redacted sections...

 

[Snarfbuckle]

Look they put kids in SC already.

Considering how many backers have started to raise their kids as co-pilots and child laborers in their mining ships and such it's an excellent idea to add them as players that are shorter and cannot see over their control panels.

 

[Skizomeuh]

Yea, it seems odd that character models and weapons would suddenly change size as a bug since those are rather static 3d models.

I have so far seen posted:

• Tiny people (the above)
• Tiny pistol on hip
• Giant weapon on the back

CIG is working on expanding the verse. How? Shrink citizens et voilà!

Seriously, maybe there's something like that, like a trick to fix some kind of position issues: maybe they scale things depending on the context and location, and sometimes they forget to scale things back.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

CIG is working on expanding the verse. How? Shrink citizens et voilà!

Seriously, maybe there's something like that, like a trick to fix some kind of position issues: maybe they scale things depending on the context and location, and sometimes they forget to scale things back.

Next up from Chris Roberts on Cinema in 2021-2045 - Honey i Shrunk the Citizens

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

That Squad (Take Two) and FDEV are launching v2 or large updates to their games this year is alright with me as KSP and ED released respectively in 2011 and 2014.

CIG has not even released a single game yet.

Squad doesn't do KSP anymore I believe - it's another studio now. At least Steam cites another studio for development.