I do think the communities concerns over the Razbam situation are valid. We seem to forget about the VEAO disaster. Razbam occupies a large chunk of the DCS universe, from AI assets such as the Tarawa and KC-135 MPRS or the fact that to date they have the most aircraft released as a third party dev and arguably many of the most popular.
The communities concern over a dev of that scale having an issue as big as described is quite justified imho. Follow that up with the insinuations that ED does not possess code for Razbam aircraft or possibly any aircraft you have a situation ripe for hurting community trust at high levels.
You are right that itās a matter of great concern to all of us who do DCS as a part of their pass time curriculum. Where I disagree with almost everyone heating air and electrons over this issue is that it is not up to us. We are not a party in this negotiation. We do have a dog in this fight, in fact, we care for both dogs. But we are not in the ring, and itās not up to us to take a stance for we donāt, shouldnāt and canāt know enough to do so. So ahā¦ until both partiesā CEOās make statements weāre to stfu.
My two cents on this issue and thatās all I gots to say 'bout that.
I agree concern is valid. I however donāt like scaremongering - which is what, IMO, Enigmaās video is. If the switch was actually broken Iād have held my tongue over it. But lying (or spreading malicious rumours, to be more charitable) about the actual state of the game isnāt helping anyone.
If Enigma is having real problems with ED about keeping his server running, thatās something Iād like to hear about from him. We did lose SoW in the past (though arguably 4YA has taken that spot) and Enigmaās Cold War server was a refreshing take on DCS MP with a couple of fairly unique features when it launched.
But, fact remains is if I wanted (for some reason) to fly the VEAO Hawk I still can - the option to install the old version of the game is still there - and bitrot affects all software eventually. Except Falcon4, thanks to the amazing folks at BMS
Iām still on the fence. I recently viewed several posts in a group Iām in and it seems that the issue is complicated. Some people are getting refunds while others arenāt. Not sure what metrics ED is using to determine who gets refunds. Itās the same situation over on Reddit. I know I can hope to get a refund now then repurchase the jet, if things get resolved. Butā¦
I recently did a hop in the jet and I love it to the point that I would hate to lose it; however, if is going to be bricked then I wonder why keep it. I, honestly, hope Ed and Rasbam resolve the issues.
I bought 2 RB products. If this goes side-ways (I canāt use my original purchase) then RB wonāt get any of my funds anymore. If it gets too bad then neither will ED. Iāll likely get outdoors more often then? (got sunburned today, a little - bad on me).
I havenāt poked around deep into bowels of every system (been operating it like a mid 90ās multi-role bomber) so there are likely things that donāt work that Iāve yet to notice.
I am pretty happy with it. Or I was: no telling what future DCS updates may do (the crux of the issue given the DCS modus operandi). This situation is something Iād pass on to potential new purchasers, ie; Iāve thought about getting the Mirage 2000 but for now my wallet is in the Holding Stack, waiting for an EFC[1] .
[1] For the non-geeks: EFC = Expect Further Clearanceā¦a time given when you can expect things to āmove alongā.
First off, there is nothing new to report as of the date of this post, this new thread is simply a clean-up and ease of access for all current official information on the current issues between Eagle Dynamics & RAZBAM. Hopefully, this will make it easier to see the current known information and weed it out from the theories, guesses and suggestions in the other thread. If you want to see that one, the link will be available at the bottom of the post.
The first public knowledge of the disagreement happened with an announcement on the RAZBAM Discord here:
razbam_prowler ā 04/04/2024 10:17 AM
Dear Customers and Community,
You may have noticed that the that the latest RAZBAM announcements does not include a changelog or any updates for our products. We would like to inform you that, until further notice, all support for RAZBAM-developed aircraft modules is on hold. This suspension encompasses, but is not limited to, bug fixes and updates.
We want to reaffirm our unwavering commitment to this exceptional community, our current customers, and prospective clients. Unfortunately, due to circumstances completely beyond our control, we are temporarily unable to continue our work at this time. Our team, a group of highly skilled and professional developers, is first and foremost made up of dedicated individuals. They invest not only their expertise but also their personal dedication and sacrifice into crafting our products. For many, this work provides essential supplementary income or even constitutes their primary livelihood.
We are hopeful for a swift resolution so that we can resume our normal operations. However, until these issues are resolved, we will not be issuing any updates about our products. We ask for your understanding during this challenging period, a situation that RAZBAM Simulations did not seek and which has previously seriously affected other parties, for example Heatblur Simulations. We have been patient, perhaps too patient, waiting for a resolution from the responsible parties. Now, we find it necessary to take a stand and await a practical solution to this deadlock.
I also want to extend my heartfelt thanks to my fellow third-party developers. Their support, once aware of the relevant facts, has been overwhelming. Thank you for elevating DCS to new heights; it truly wouldnāt be the remarkable experience it is without your contributions.
The suspension will remain in effect until the significant issues between Eagle Dynamics and RAZBAM Simulations LLC are resolved to our mutual satisfaction. Once these issues have been addressed, we will resume our standard practices of bug fixing, updates, and upgrades, just as we have since our inception as developers for DCS. We hope this resolution results in a more stable and optimistic future for DCS and all 3rd Party Developers.
Best regards
Ron Zambrano
CEO
RAZBAM Simulations, LLC
Eagle Dynamics was compelled to respond shortly after on their Discord found here:
04/04/2024 1:18 PM
Following the message published by Ron Zambrano of Razbam Simulations, we believe that it is necessary to rectify some of the unfounded allegations and to reassure the Community that everything is being done to resolve the current situation promptly and for the benefit of all concerned.
Without entering into the details of matters that are confidential to the parties, we firmly reject the allegations that the current disagreement between Eagle Dynamics and Razbam Simulations would be as stated by Razbam ādue to circumstances completely beyond our control" and that it is āa situation that Razbam Simulations did not seekā.
On the contrary, the current disagreement is the result of improper actions that have been taken by Razbam Simulations, in breach of its contractual obligations towards our company and of our legally protected IP rights, and for which we are seeking a reasonable and forward-looking commercial outcome rather than entertaining legal claims.
We very much regret that Ron Zambrano has decided, without even pre-advising us, to make these disparaging public statements and, more importantly, to take the customers of the Razbam developed aircraft as leverage in the discussions with us.
Please rest assured, we are addressing the situation with the utmost attention and constructiveness.
Many thanks and kind regards,
Nick Grey
RAZBAM followed with this reply:
razbam_prowler ā 04/07/2024 4:21 AM @here
Dear customers and community
RAZBAM Simulations is actively working with EAGLE DYNAMICS to reach an agreement to resolve our internal dispute and we donāt want the discussion that our public declaration has generated to escalate any further. We want to assure you that it has never been nor will it be our intention to abandon our products. We look forward to a prompt and satisfactory resolution, turn the page, and move forward.
Best regards
Ron Zambrano
CEO
RAZBAM Simulations, LLC
This was the last of the official announcements from both management parties.
While both teams have officially been very quiet due to the delicate nature of issues at hand there has been some events that have come up and caused concerns.
Some Anti-Virus programs were picking up a false positive on some DCS DLLs. Sadly it seemed to be worse on some of the RAZBAM modules fueling fears of issues with the modules. This can be solved by adding the DCS install folder to the exceptions for your anti-virus software, this happens from time to time so this was nothing new.
The M2000 had some issues, including CTDs. This was an accidental merge of some changes one of the developers was working on. Once it was identified the changes were reverted and the issues were solved (although nothing was noted in the changelog at the time). This was not anything related to compatibility with the core game.
June 12th at Midnight the F-15E radar stopped working. While we have internally identified the issue no fix has been presented as of yet. once we have solid news on that we will share that ASAP. Again this had nothing to do with core compatibility but rather something in the coding of the F-15E.
Refunds
While at first, we were maintaining our normal refund rules, we decided to bend a little for those who were frustrated with the issues and how they affected an Early Access Product. We have been giving a store credit for the value of the F-15E when you purchased it. You may open a ticket here: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/ for a refund, but we ask for patience as it may take up to 7-10 business days to process your refund.
Other modules will not be refunded at this time, all of these are out of Early Access and remain working. It is our commitment that no matter what happens we will do our best to make sure these continue to work into the future. We understand those of you who remember losing the Hawk, this is not something we intend to do again.
Steam refunds are based on the play time of the core game, not the individual module. It is their policy and they handle the refunds. As we understand it, no refunds have been accepted by Valve. All modules continue to work, aside from the current radar issues with the F-15E which we hope will be addressed sooner than later. South Atlantic continues to be updated and as I stated above, the other older modules we plan to make sure they continue to work into the foreseeable future.
Is ED broke?
No, Eagle Dynamics is very healthy aside from this dispute currently, all other 3rd Parties and the ED development team continue to work and push new and exciting content out to you.
Is ED pushing things out because they are out of money?
No, most of these recent products have been scheduled for quite some time now, into early last year. The 3rd Party products are based on when they are ready from their own team, although some delays here and there squished some release dates together, nothing has been out of the ordinary except more goodies in a short amount of time.
How can you keep selling the F-15E or other modules?
Right now we are working within the framework of the legal advice moving forward and not wanting to cause any more riffs or issues. Itās a complex process at this point and most likely why it seems to be moving so slowly for everyone. Nothing more can be said about that right now. Sorry.
We cannot comment on any more conspiracy theories than this. This was an unfortunate disagreement that had been going on for some time and finally went public. I can only speak for Eagle Dynamics but I believe both teams want to resolve this as fast as possible and get back to making virtual airplanes.
The discussion below was the old thread. This new thread may be moderated a little harder, so please be nice to each other, know that all the other customers in here discussing this with you are in the same boat and probably want the same thing. So letās be open to their opinions and concerns and understand they are allowed to have them as much as you are. Anything from any user here without an official tag wonāt be making any official comments, me and @BIGNEWY will only comment on publically available info as this is a legal matter at the end of the day.
I cannot say enough, on behalf of all of us at Eagle Dynamics, how sorry we are that you are being made, in part by us, to go through this. We are committed to getting this sorted as soon as we can.
I think it is ok since it is from a verifiable and official source, with links. However, ED might consider this a violation of copyright, or they may be happy that the information is spread widely.
I wonāt tolerate any heated debates about this subject though. Nobody here knows enough about these matters to be able to make a stand for or against either party.
I for one just hope that they will find a solution to the issue.
Thanks for posting that @tempusmurphy I hadnāt realised the stuff with the radar had been going on. Interesting stuff and certainly very worrying indeed for all concerned.
Personally, I noticed issues with F-15E radar before that. I was baffled what I was doing wrong flying MP with my group as I could see things visually, even fire AMRAAMs or AIM-7s blindly in flood and get hits, but forget BVR as nothing would show up.
So before I even heard about this stuff, I had given up the Beagle for now (as the missions we fly have mixed air and surface threats, so I couldnāt afford to fly around without regard to enemy air). That said, I had barely touched the Apache till now despite getting it on release, so good a time as any to learn now that we have FCR and stuff.
Yaāll know thereās a work around right? Just start the game and set the date on your computer before June 13th. At least thatās what Iāve heard from several people.
Agreed. It has highlighted an interesting point about the whole āplatform with third party modulesā mechanic, though, which hopefully will be addressed going forward.
So far, when a third party module has been released into the game, it has been reasonable to assume that, from now on, that module remains part of the game - and will form part of the playable unit compositions that make a given theatre enjoyable/feasible (say, the F5 / MiG-21 pairing of Cold War).
We have now seen that this assumption may be a flippant one - and I hope something that ED will consider when it comes to intellectual property arrangements going forward.
I think Iāve read somewhere that this is already a consideration, and Iām not an IP expert or software expert so canāt really opine. Having said that, it seems to me that the longer DCS exists, and the more modules and third party developers there are, the higher the risk is that, unless ED is able to take over the maintenance of existing modules in case of a developer ceasing support, we will eventually see modules fall off the DCS stable.
Honestly I think DCS needs to move to something akin to MSFS where the code base is largely frozen for a few years. Itās really the only want to keep modules working for sure, and I think it would really help with the development learning curve to have a stable code base.
Well all software suffers from bitrot eventually (unless you can keep very old hardware goingā¦ not my scene ). If youāre really really worried about third party modules going away then yes - Iād say stick to the ED ones only.
But itās possible that this dispute might in part be related to the code escrow requirement that ED put in after VEAO bailed and left the Hawk unfinished (which was also after the start of work on the F-15E IIRC, so there might be something there). That factor might improve EDās ability to support abandoned modules ā¦ in the future
Edit: freezing the codebase might be a good idea, but I know a lot of people are unhappy with where DCS, the sim engine, is right now. Maybe after 3.0/when Vulkan comes along? MT is still buggy/crashy in the latest patchā¦
(got sunburned today, a little - bad on me).
.