Currently Online 
| DonFerrari said: Full access to the source is different than open source. So no, they aren't allowed to do what they please. At least from what I know, but sure they may have a contract that allow they to do what they want without even crediting then. |
Well. Yes and no.
If you open your engine and base source up, then one must assume you have a ton of leeway of what you are allowed to do in there.
OIpen source also doesn't allow you to do 100% of what you want either, it does actually have restrictions on it's use.
I mean. Amazon essentially made it their own fork of CryEngine, but their agreement may have been different.
| DonFerrari said: And since we don't have access to any of the legal documentation to put all burden on crytek and consider they pricks is the morally wrong, unless of course innocent until proven guilty isn't something you value. |
This is also correct. We aren't privy to any legal documentation.
But to say we cannot put the burden on Crytek is a little disingenuous, Cloud Imperium Games isn't using CryEngine, they have licensed the engine from Amazon.
That means they do not have to adhere to any of Cryteks legalities outlined for it's CryEngine license.
| DonFerrari said: So you think it's wrong for Crytek to look for its right because PC community is paying for the game? Well all games are paid by customers in some way, so should we stop any litigation and allow people to breach every contract they want? And off course, is it morally wrong for Crytek to sue, but it's ok for the devs to nick and dime from customers to a point of charging 800 pounds for a vessel? |
Wrong? No. Morally grey? Most certainly.
I am all for litigation if your intellectual property is at some kind of risk or abuse, but that isn't what is happening here.
| DonFerrari said: What doesn't do good for customers is companies breaching contracts and laws as well. It's their responsibility to uphold it. |
I entirely agree.
But again... Cloud Imperium Games, engine contract lays with Amazon not Crytek.
| DonFerrari said: Have you been privy of any negotiation Crytek have done in the past with this company to try and resolve it out of court? Because it's quite probable they tried several times without success... but here we are at one of those "villain publisher x poor dev" situation. |
No I haven't. I am privy to statements that Cloud Imperium Games has made in regards to engine use though as are you.
Here is their statement on the use of Amazons Lumberyard Game Engine from a year ago.
https://venturebeat.com/2016/12/23/star-citizen-and-squadron-42-are-using-amazons-lumberyard-game-engine/
| DonFerrari said: It's funny to be interested in the game and the way it's funded, but to attack one company because you are interested in the other without really having any information to make that judgment isn't really fair at all, and that comes from someone that have zero love for Crytek and is interested in seeing what this game will turn up after all this hype. |
I haven't actually made an investment in StarCitizen. I don't actually agree with it's excessive methods of revenue raising, I understand why it's done though... And I think it's the game that had to happen and had to be made to push technology and to show what crowdfunding can/can't do.
Now don't get me wrong, I used to adore Crytek, back when they were champions of the PC and was even a moderator on the most popular Crysis forum. (That got sold off, I think merged with the official Crysis forums, I left a bit before that.)
But they aren't the same company that they used to be in my eyes, so it's no secret that I am no longer a fan of theirs.
I do hope however that they can turn their company around and go back to what truly made them great as having Crytek go bust is also not a good thing for the gaming industry or the consumer.
www.youtube.com/@Pemalite
