› ›

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links

Crytek Filing Lawsuit Against CIG

1…2021232526…53

Comments

  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 18,719
    Erillion said:
    Iselin said:
    AKA grandstanding.
    AKA same language style as CryTeks lawyers.


    Have fun
    I assume you have examples of gratuitous shots at CIG by the other side... I'll wait for the examples.

    ScotchUp
    "Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”

    ― Umberto Eco

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

  • TiamatRoarTiamatRoar Member RarePosts: 1,689
    Erillion said:
    "Under Crytek’s construction, CIG remains forever shackled to Crytek’s Engine, even if CIG has reason to believe Crytek is a sinking ship. "



    Yipe.  Ortwin must be really triggered, there.  These are the words of a very angry man.

    Really, they say they're filing and arguing for a motion to dismiss, but the fact that they're now arguing the specific details and bringing up things that HAVE to go to court in order to be proven (like them now claiming they submitted bug code to Crytek after all) is basically the equivalent of saying "You should dismiss this case so it doesn't go to court, and here are a bunch of reasons why which will have to be proven in court!"

    The whole point of a motion to dismiss is that there isn't anything worth arguing about, and yet here CiG is arguing the details like crazy thus showing there's lots to argue about.  At this point I wouldn't be surprised if their legal firm FKKS has already realized it will go to court no matter what CiG says in response so they just let Ortwin write this entire response so he could vent and leave them alone, because I can't imagine any serious legal firm that seriously wanted the judge to dismiss the case signing off on something like this.
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,846
    edited January 2018
    Independent of how they worded it, their argument is valid.

    Several legal people around back up the same assessment Crytek was manipulating the exclusivity wording and that they do not have a case there unless they show there was one agreement outside the GLA they were obligated to use Cryengine for SC.

    http://www.cgmagonline.com/2018/01/12/crytek-v-star-citizen-defense-lands/
    and several others explaining the same thing.
    Phry
  • Turrican187Turrican187 Member UncommonPosts: 787
    Ignoring the "exclusive" accusation, CIG is still using cryengine but with Lumberyard AWS netcode.
    There are parts in Bugsmashers that are calling CryEngine code that is not existant in LY (Like the UI calls)

    When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
    The cake is a lie.

  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,328
    Yipe.  Ortwin must be really triggered, there.  These are the words of a very angry man.

    **snip**
    Except that Ortwin did not write it.

    -->
    "JOSEPH R. TAYLOR
    (SBN 129933)
    JEREMY S. GOLDMAN
    (SBN 306943)
    AZITA M. ISKANDAR
    (SBN 280749)
    FRANKFURT KURNIT KLEIN & SELZ, P.C.
    2029 Century Park East, Suite 1060 Los Angeles, California 90067"

    and


    "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
    I hereby certify that on the 26th day of January, 2018, I electronically filed the foregoing REPLY MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT OR CLAIMS FOR RELIEF THEREIN OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO STRIKE CERTAIN PORTIONS OF THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT, with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will then send a notification of such filing (NEF) to the following:" **snip ... list of lawyers with e-mail ***
      "__________________________________ Azniv Khararjian"



    Have fun

  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,328
    edited January 2018
    Iselin said:
    Erillion said:
    Iselin said:
    AKA grandstanding.
    AKA same language style as CryTeks lawyers.


    Have fun
    I assume you have examples of gratuitous shots at CIG by the other side... I'll wait for the examples.

    Skadden uses words like :

    blatant
    absurd
    illusory
    wasteful
    contrary to common sense


    See:

    Skadden guys sound a little pissed :
     
    ".. the motion is a blatant effort to impose delay and burden on CryTek..."

    "The facts here are straightforward...."   ---> or maybe not ;-) 

    "That is absurd."


    "... rendering the entire GLA unenforceable and illusory ..." "...contrary to ... common sense.."


    "To avoid burdening itself and the Court with the wasteful motion practice threatened by Defendants..." .... LOL ... they fucked up and dropped the things (Re: Ortwins waiver) that could not stand in court and now call it **avoiding burdens**.



    Have fun
  • ShodanasShodanas Member RarePosts: 1,933
    Does anyone know of any big profile projects currently in development using Crytek's engine ? The more i read the more i get the impression that Crytek is in trouble and in desperate need to relate themselves with a big project. By any means necessary.
    Erillion
  • Turrican187Turrican187 Member UncommonPosts: 787
    Shodanas said:
    Does anyone know of any big profile projects currently in development using Crytek's engine ? The more i read the more i get the impression that Crytek is in trouble and in desperate need to relate themselves with a big project. By any means necessary.
    Cryengine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_CryEngine_games
    Lumberyard: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Lumberyard
    UnrealEngine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unreal_Engine_games
    Unity3D: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unity_games

    Those are the 4 game engines that Indie Devs are using most of the time (not included stuff like Torque)
    Cry is on Version V (4.5)
    LY is an evolved Cry 3 with built-in AWS connection (which can be changed)
    Unity was always free and therefore has the most games (most mobile)
    and UE is ... well UE ...

    Big projects/companies usually have their own engine.

    Graphic quality wise are all the same.

    When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
    The cake is a lie.

  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,328
    Hmm, not exactly big profile projects ... like @Shodanas said. 

    BattleCry maybe ?  But would not bet on it - that game fell on hard times.

    Several of the others are projects from CryTek studios that CryTek sold.


    Have fun


    Phry
  • Turrican187Turrican187 Member UncommonPosts: 787
    Erillion said:
    Hmm, not exactly big profile projects ... like @Shodanas said. 

    BattleCry maybe ?  But would not bet on it - that game fell on hard times.

    Several of the others are projects from CryTek studios that CryTek sold.


    Have fun


    I guess Prey from zenimax went well. But don't ask me I don't like Cryengine (for numerous reasons).

    When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
    The cake is a lie.

  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    Turrican187 said:
    Ignoring the "exclusive" accusation, CIG is still using cryengine but with Lumberyard AWS netcode.
    There are parts in Bugsmashers that are calling CryEngine code that is not existant in LY (Like the UI calls)
    CiG said though that both they and Amazon were using the same version / spur of CryEngine.  That said Amazon seem to have been extensively "re-working" the CryEngine stuff so maybe the stuff in Bugsmashers has been re-worked in LY and its all to do with how LY is integrated.
  • Turrican187Turrican187 Member UncommonPosts: 787
    gervaise1 said:
    Turrican187 said:
    Ignoring the "exclusive" accusation, CIG is still using cryengine but with Lumberyard AWS netcode.
    There are parts in Bugsmashers that are calling CryEngine code that is not existant in LY (Like the UI calls)
    CiG said though that both they and Amazon were using the same version / spur of CryEngine.  That said Amazon seem to have been extensively "re-working" the CryEngine stuff so maybe the stuff in Bugsmashers has been re-worked in LY and its all to do with how LY is integrated.
    In order to do that they need to license scaleform from Adobe and rebuild the whole Crytech UI libraries in Lumberyard without using Crytech code (because Amazon has no license from adobe they may not integrate it).
    And coincidently they named all their variables and classes exactly like Crytech did.

    This is not a job that (quote CIG) 2 devs can do in a few days.

    When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
    The cake is a lie.

  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    Shodanas said:
    Does anyone know of any big profile projects currently in development using Crytek's engine ? The more i read the more i get the impression that Crytek is in trouble and in desperate need to relate themselves with a big project. By any means necessary.
    Well Crytek are developing Hunt: Showdown - seems to be a Crytek game anyway. Other than that though .... ?

    That said I don't think Crytek - the company - are "in trouble" as such since the deal with Amazon was reported to be worth $50-$80M. Maybe more a case of "What now?".

    If a developer has decided they want to use CryEngine rather than e.g. Unity it comes down to new version of CryEngine + Crytek pricing vs. LY and everything else in the Amazon package. And Amazon's pricing of course. 
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    Erillion said:
    Yipe.  Ortwin must be really triggered, there.  These are the words of a very angry man.

    **snip**
    Except that Ortwin did not write it.

    -->
    "JOSEPH R. TAYLOR
    (SBN 129933)
    JEREMY S. GOLDMAN
    (SBN 306943)
    AZITA M. ISKANDAR
    (SBN 280749)
    FRANKFURT KURNIT KLEIN & SELZ, P.C.
    2029 Century Park East, Suite 1060 Los Angeles, California 90067"

    and


    "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
    I hereby certify that on the 26th day of January, 2018, I electronically filed the foregoing REPLY MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT OR CLAIMS FOR RELIEF THEREIN OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO STRIKE CERTAIN PORTIONS OF THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT, with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will then send a notification of such filing (NEF) to the following:" **snip ... list of lawyers with e-mail ***
      "__________________________________ Azniv Khararjian"



    Have fun

    So the first part is the lawyers name and the second part says they filed it. Doesn’t say anything that one of the lawyers at FKKS actually wrote the thing. 

    Reading Ortwins responses from previous years it reads like how he would write.
    ScotchUp
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,328
    Kefo said:
    So the first part is the lawyers name and the second part says they filed it. Doesn’t say anything that one of the lawyers at FKKS actually wrote the thing. 

    Reading Ortwins responses from previous years it reads like how he would write.
    So - because you THINK Ortwin wrote it and because you do not like available evidence that someone else authored it .... that makes it a fact that Ortwin wrote it ?

    Strange logic ....

    >>> Ortwins responses from previous years >>>
    Can you name these MULTIPLE sources ? I personally am only aware of one Ortwin response known to the public.


    Have fun


    Phry
  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    Erillion said:
    Kefo said:
    So the first part is the lawyers name and the second part says they filed it. Doesn’t say anything that one of the lawyers at FKKS actually wrote the thing. 

    Reading Ortwins responses from previous years it reads like how he would write.
    So - because you THINK Ortwin wrote it and because you do not like available evidence that someone else authored it .... that makes it a fact that Ortwin wrote it ?

    Strange logic ....

    >>> Ortwins responses from previous years >>>
    Can you name these MULTIPLE sources ? I personally am only aware of one Ortwin response known to the public.


    Have fun


    Maybe ...... Kefo wrote it!  Just because Kefo's name wasn't on it .....
  • TalulaRoseTalulaRose Member RarePosts: 1,247
    I wrote it. Now get to the cash shop and buy more ships to support the court case.
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,328
    TalulaRose said:
    I wrote it. Now get to the cash shop and buy more ships to support the court case.
    MUST ... RESIST .... MUST ... RESIST ...

    hmm ... did resist. Was easy ;-) 

    You may want to work on your mind control techniques ....


    Have fun
  • VrikaVrika Member LegendaryPosts: 7,990
    Erillion said:
    TalulaRose said:
    I wrote it. Now get to the cash shop and buy more ships to support the court case.
    MUST ... RESIST .... MUST ... RESIST ...

    hmm ... did resist. Was easy ;-) 

    You may want to work on your mind control techniques ....
    Those three dots are places where his mind control took hold and you purchased another ship, then forgot what happened.
     
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,328
    Vrika said:
    Erillion said:
    TalulaRose said:
    I wrote it. Now get to the cash shop and buy more ships to support the court case.
    MUST ... RESIST .... MUST ... RESIST ...

    hmm ... did resist. Was easy ;-) 

    You may want to work on your mind control techniques ....
    Those three dots are places where his mind control took hold and you purchased another ship, then forgot what happened.
    Too bad my CC company did not forget ... no ships were bought.

    Maybe subsonics and subliminals added next time ?


    Have fun
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    Erillion said:
    Kefo said:
    So the first part is the lawyers name and the second part says they filed it. Doesn’t say anything that one of the lawyers at FKKS actually wrote the thing. 

    Reading Ortwins responses from previous years it reads like how he would write.
    So - because you THINK Ortwin wrote it and because you do not like available evidence that someone else authored it .... that makes it a fact that Ortwin wrote it ?

    Strange logic ....

    >>> Ortwins responses from previous years >>>
    Can you name these MULTIPLE sources ? I personally am only aware of one Ortwin response known to the public.


    Have fun


    What available evidence that someone else authored it? You showed 2 different pieces of information that show absolutely nothing of who actually wrote it. So my opinion of who wrote it holds about as much water as your opinion of who wrote it. Funny how that works doesn’t it?

    As for the second part I’ll just pull a you and tell you to go find out for yourself and google is your friend.
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,328
    Kefo said:
    What available evidence that someone else authored it? You showed 2 different pieces of information that show absolutely nothing of who actually wrote it. So my opinion of who wrote it holds about as much water as your opinion of who wrote it. Funny how that works doesn’t it?

    As for the second part I’ll just pull a you and tell you to go find out for yourself and google is your friend.
    I know that Google is my friend. Google tells me so ;-)  Do no evil, right ? Like "The Circle" ;-)

    And Google told me there is only one Ortwin quote.

    What are the MULTIPLE sources that have been mentioned ? That allow people to deduce a psychological profile of Ortwin that betrays his writing style, so it becomes easily attributable in online documents ?

    Or did you pull those missing Ortwin quotes off the Darknet via a TOR portal from a Swedish Mafia server?


    Have fun
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    Erillion said:
    Kefo said:
    What available evidence that someone else authored it? You showed 2 different pieces of information that show absolutely nothing of who actually wrote it. So my opinion of who wrote it holds about as much water as your opinion of who wrote it. Funny how that works doesn’t it?

    As for the second part I’ll just pull a you and tell you to go find out for yourself and google is your friend.
    I know that Google is my friend. Google tells me so ;-)  Do no evil, right ? Like "The Circle" ;-)

    And Google told me there is only one Ortwin quote.

    What are the MULTIPLE sources that have been mentioned ? That allow people to deduce a psychological profile of Ortwin that betrays his writing style, so it becomes easily attributable in online documents ?

    Or did you pull those missing Ortwin quotes off the Darknet via a TOR portal from a Swedish Mafia server?


    Have fun
    Sorry if you can’t be bothered to do the proper searches I’m not helping you. 
    Erillion
  • BabuinixBabuinix Member EpicPosts: 4,467

    rpmcmurphy
  • ArglebargleArglebargle Member EpicPosts: 3,483
    Erillion said:
    Kefo said:
    So the first part is the lawyers name and the second part says they filed it. Doesn’t say anything that one of the lawyers at FKKS actually wrote the thing. 

    Reading Ortwins responses from previous years it reads like how he would write.
    So - because you THINK Ortwin wrote it and because you do not like available evidence that someone else authored it .... that makes it a fact that Ortwin wrote it ?

    Strange logic ....

    >>> Ortwins responses from previous years >>>
    Can you name these MULTIPLE sources ? I personally am only aware of one Ortwin response known to the public.


    Have fun


    If Ortwin didn't look over these things, he's not doing his job.   

    But I'd never underestimate CIG's top level disorganization.
    Kefo

    If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.

This discussion has been closed.