Video: CIG smacks down Crytek

Jan 5, 2016
4,218
17,326
1,100
RSI Handle
NaffNaffBobFace
#2
FIRST!

Now, time to watch the video!

EDIT - So fun I watched it twice. We'll just have to wait and see what come in the response if there is one.
 
Last edited:

Mich Angel

Grand Admiral
Sep 19, 2016
1,990
7,694
1,110
RSI Handle
ARCHANGEL_666
#7
The dying company of Crytek falling down a endless pit.
It grabs the shoelaces of CIG's shoes to pull them self up.
But CIG is not standing in those shoes any more.
CIG got new strong Lumberyard shoes now, that don't have shoelaces...
Crytek fall in to the abyss with the empty shoes...
The End!
 
Jan 1, 2018
11
83
110
RSI Handle
Starburger
#9
Interesting. Has CIG filed a counter-suit for frivolous claims so they don't have to pay to defend against this?
Well.. it states that either party can only sue if there are personal damages.. among other things.. Blaming Ortwin that he basically F'ed up. And they KNEW that there was a waiver... well CIG, or Ortwin can now sue Crytek if i'm not mistaking..
 

ThomSirveaux

Space Marshal
Sep 12, 2014
1,105
1,780
1,520
RSI Handle
Thom_Sirveaux
#10
Well.. it states that either party can only sue if there are personal damages.. among other things.. Blaming Ortwin that he basically F'ed up. And they KNEW that there was a waiver... well CIG, or Ortwin can now sue Crytek if i'm not mistaking..
It looks like CIG is refusing to counter-sue because 1. They're taking the high-road, and 2. They know Crytek isn't good for any money that may come from it.
 
Nov 7, 2017
1,435
5,869
760
RSI Handle
Sraika
#13

R0NAN

Captain
Jan 7, 2018
11
67
200
RSI Handle
R0NAN
#15
Between the amount of funding this project has and the dedication that Chris has for it, I was pretty confident that this wasn't going to be a big deal to CIG. With the help from legal I'm sure that any choices made on the direction of the company would be best for CIG and legal. Sad that Crytek would do something like this though desperate or not.
 

Radegast74

Grand Admiral
Oct 8, 2016
1,328
5,261
1,100
RSI Handle
Radegast74
#20
I was thinking to myself last night about how stuff in the GLA didn't make sense, like that indemnification clause, etc.

After thinking about it some more, it all started making sense when I went back to the original context. In Nov 2012 (when the GLA was signed), CryTek was the big guy on the block, and CIG was the totally new kid with about ?$4 million? $6 million? CryTek's position then was, "Hey, anybody can license our engine for a fee, BUT, we aren't going to support you in any of your endeavors (beyond fixing anything that is broken on our end), and don't come crying to us if you lose all your money and/or make a crap game and lose money / want to blame us for it. And don't try to make any money trying to re-license out our engine, that is our legal right."

I'm still having trouble believing that CryTek would then, 5 years later, twist all the logic of the GLA inside-out and on its head (as well as not even disclose the GLA to the court), but I guess they really are desperate.

Still waiting to hear what their next filing will bring, the only thing I think they have that is viable in any way is the "revealing code via Bug Smashers" thing, but, I don't think they can expect any body really thinks they were damaged by that, and would then deserve any money.