Interview RPG Codex Exclusive Interview: bitComposer's Take on the Chaos Chronicles Dispute

[Grunker]

Tags: bitComposer; Chaos Chronicles; Coreplay; Michael Hoss; Peter Ohlmann; Wolfgang Duhr

UPDATE, August 11, 2013: Coreplay has issued a statement in response to this interview. See the end of this interview for Coreplay's response.

Chaos Chronicles was the kind of game the Codex had not dared hope for. Isometric perspective. Turn-based combat with a complex character system a la Temple of Elemental Evil. Overland map travel a la Realms of Arkania. To this formula a pinch of Gold Box was added along with a dash of Wizardry. Dungeons to delve into, treasures to find, creatures to kill. And not a single cent from Kickstarter or any other crowdfunding platform. Chaos Chronicles was to prove to the world and to us exactly what a small developer, full of passion and talent, allied with a small publisher willing to take the necessary risks, would be able to do.

And then, of course, it all went wrong. Chaos Chronicles rapidly sank into the depths of development hell.

After fans petitioned them to allow the game's development to continue, bitComposer issued a statement, and Peter Ohlmann (aka HobGoblin42) of Coreplay responded to that statement. When all was said and done, the question of who was to blame quickly became muddy. Determined to uncover the truth on what happened to Chaos Chronicles, I contacted both Michael Hoss (aka CrashOberbreit) of bitComposer and Peter Ohlmann to hear if they wanted to tell their sides of the story. Michael was the first to respond.

Today, we bring you an interview with Wolfgang Duhr, a member of bitComposer's board of directors. In this surprisingly frank interview, Duhr speaks of the hardships of being an "evil publisher," responds to the accusation that bitComposer was trying to force an early release of Chaos Chronicles, and encourages the community to show ongoing interest in the game so that it might be released.

Regardless of how you feel about bitComposer, this interview is one that we feel is well worth the read.

Read the full article: RPG Codex Exclusive Interview - bitComposer's Take on the Chaos Chronicles Dispute

 

[Cosmic Misogynerd]

Nice interview. It's really weird to read how a publisher representative (of shitComposer) answers the questions in a very candid way. Eagerly waiting for the other side of the story (coRAPElay) to make comparisons. But it seems that both sides are to blame for this.

 

[garren]

So Coreplay got a new shareholder that's fucking things up with his/her unreasonable demands. Speculation, I know, that's just the impression I got from the article.

 

[Cosmic Misogynerd]

Yep. Evil publishers shareholders always ruining the fun.

 

[Bubbles]

But it seems that both sides are to blame for this.

How did you arrive at that conclusion? Judging from the interview, it sounds like there's three sides involved (publisher, state funding, devs), and the devs are the ones causing the trouble.

Stuff like this

On top of this, Coreplay’s lawyers previously expected us to sign a document the very same day it was first presented to us, without the opportunity to properly examine it first.

is typically what you hear the publisher doing in this kind of story; for a dev to behave in this way strikes me a pretty unusual.

So Coreplay got a new shareholder that's fucking things up with his/her unreasonable demands. Speculation, I know, that's just the impression I got from the article.

I wouldn't call that "speculation" when the publisher outright states

The legal injunction was necessary, as their new lawyer and shareholder had a very unusual view of the contracts we had previously entered, and Coreplay planned to finalize and release the product without our involvement.

 

[The Vanished One]

Duhr's answers seem reasonable and reasonably transparent to me, and accepting to answer questions from the 'dex is always a plus. I'm inclined to believe bC more, at least until Cp clear up this "new investor" thing.

 

[ikarinokami]

He gets an A+ for dodging the citidels question. my reading of the interview is that this dispute is all about the royality share. the new investor wants coreplay to get a higher royality share. I'm guessing that coreplay does not really want to complete the game based upon the old contract because they won't make any money on it and most of it will go to bitcomposer.

 

[evdk]

You are already being called "ShitComposter" on our forums by some people.

Was this really necessary?

 

[Cosmic Misogynerd]

How did you arrive at that conclusion?

Your mom told me.

 

[IDtenT]

Since the first statement the publisher's made it has seemed to be a disagreement on the part of the developer. I don't hold the publisher guilty of anything - no matter how much I have loved games that @HobGoblin42 has been involved in.

 

[toro]

He gets an A+ for dodging the citidels question. my reading of the interview is that this dispute is all about the royality share. the new investor wants coreplay to get a higher royality share. I'm guessing that coreplay does not really want to complete the game based upon the old contract because they won't make any money on it and most of it will go to bitcomposer.

They signed the contract, they have to follow it. Everything else is just an imbecilic move.

 

[AbounI]

Thanks for this innerview, it was a necessity to help us to overstand this shituation.At least, it gets some positivity over the baderation from the last days.So, I guess there is still hope

 

[Mrowak]

@Grunker
Excellent interview! It's exceedingly rare to see a publisher being so candid about legal issues.

I affirm my sympathy to the publishing side of the dispute. Clearly changing arrangements mid-development all the while refusing to prepare development plans and schedules is the main reason any producer would lose faith in the project. Generally it seemed that Coreplay aimed to keep bitComposer in the dark for a long time.

 

[Bubbles]

As the publisher mentioned, the old contract gave Coreplay the option to get a bigger piece of the pie by investing more of their own money during development. That contract actually sounds fairly flexible to me.

 

[Grunker]

My own take on the interview: I am thoroughly satisfied with the frank manner in which bitComposer chose to answer the questions. This is in no small part thanks to DarkUnderlord and Vault Dweller's assistance with the questions, by the way. I feel that bitComposer side-stepped the question about Citadels rather ungracefully, however, and that is probably the biggest spot on an otherwise commendable set of answers.

My conclusions after following the debate and conducting this interview is that this is obviously much more complicated than the "evil publisher and lazy developer" story (or any variations there-off). Small, risk-willing publisher with good intentions but without top-class management and passionate and competent but uncontrollable developer seems closer to the truth, though obviously that's just my sense of the situation and at its core, guesswork. I imagine none of us will ever get the whole truth. I just hope the game sees release at some point.

I also hope Coreplay decide to do an interview with us, so both sides can have their say.

You are already being called "ShitComposter" on our forums by some people.

Was this really necessary?

Yes (though credit should be given to DU for the specific wording). Above all the Codex is about cutting out the bullshit and being honest. We did not want to arrive at bitComposer's doorstep with all pretty words and "please-may-we-have-an-interview" only to do the same to Coreplay afterwards. We also clearly stated the terms of our deal with Coreplay's hosting of their forums here. I imagine it was exactly that lack of bullshit and evident honesty that led bitComposer to trust us with their as-honest-as-possible take on the situation (for which we are, quite obviously, thankful).

 

[Bubbles]

Since everybody involved seems to be desperate for money, I'd imagine we're going to see some version of CC on the shelves sooner rather than later. Possibly followed by another injunction and/or a years long legal battle.

 

[evdk]

Yes. Above all the Codex is about cutting out the bullshit and being honest. We did not want to arrive at bitComposer's doorstep with all pretty words and "please-may-we-have-an-interview." We also clearly stated the terms of our deal with Coreplay's hosting of their forums here. I imagine it was exactly that lack of bullshit and evident honesty that led bitComposer to trust us with their as-honest-as-possible take on the situation (for which we are, quite obviously, thankful).

Seems to me they you can have all that without going all "ShitCompostor LOL," which is frankly just the different kind of bullshit. I also believe that there was no need to beg, as the interview was their idea in the first place to try to get their version of the story out at the place where most of the game's fans visit. I don't dispute that hardballing this interview wasn't warranted, I just question the choice of vocabulary.

 

[Gurkog]

Great interview!

This article supports the ever growing case that everything is shit.

 

[Cosmo]

We need a point by point answer by Coreplay now...

 

[The Vanished One]

Since everybody involved seems to desperate for money, I'd imagine we're going to see some version of CC on the shelves sooner rather than later. Possibly followed by another injuction and/or a years long legal battle.

Under these circumstances, it'd probably be a broken, pale shadow of the original concept.

Ah well, modders will fix it.

 

[Grunker]

Yes. Above all the Codex is about cutting out the bullshit and being honest. We did not want to arrive at bitComposer's doorstep with all pretty words and "please-may-we-have-an-interview." We also clearly stated the terms of our deal with Coreplay's hosting of their forums here. I imagine it was exactly that lack of bullshit and evident honesty that led bitComposer to trust us with their as-honest-as-possible take on the situation (for which we are, quite obviously, thankful).

Seems to me they you can have all that without going all "ShitCompostor LOL," which is frankly just the different kind of bullshit.

It seems you misunderstand. We're not calling them ShitComposter. Most of the staff are pretty sympathetic to both sides of this issue I imagine. What we're doing is informing them that some members of the forum are calling them that, so they don't have any illusions about the crowd they're talking to.

If someone were to interview me about something this delicate, I'd be thankful to know beforehand exactly what I'm dealing with.

I also believe that there was no need to beg, as the interview was their idea in the first place

No it wasn't. It was mine.

I don't dispute that hardballing this interview wasn't warranted, I just question the choice of vocabulary.

It wasn't our choice of vocabulary. It was a restatement of what many of our members were using as a nickname for bC.

 

[Metro]

Yes. Above all the Codex is about cutting out the bullshit and being honest. We did not want to arrive at bitComposer's doorstep with all pretty words and "please-may-we-have-an-interview." We also clearly stated the terms of our deal with Coreplay's hosting of their forums here. I imagine it was exactly that lack of bullshit and evident honesty that led bitComposer to trust us with their as-honest-as-possible take on the situation (for which we are, quite obviously, thankful).

Seems to me they you can have all that without going all "ShitCompostor LOL," which is frankly just the different kind of bullshit.

It seems you misunderstand. We're not calling them ShitComposter. Most of the staff are pretty sympathetic to both sides of this issue I imagine. What we're doing is informing them that some members of the forum are calling them that, so they don't have any illusions about the crowd they're talking to.

No, you're not directly calling them that but it looks stupid (and you already got the same point across with the 'evil publisher' stuff)... just like the TotalBiscuit reference. Way to lend that guy more credence. Anyway, the questions were good overall -- it's just that you'd be better off with some form of editorial assistance.

It wasn't our choice of vocabulary. It was a restatement of what many of our members were using as a nickname for bC.

You choose to use it. You didn't have to. Stop arguing for argument sake.

 

[Grunker]

Yes. Above all the Codex is about cutting out the bullshit and being honest. We did not want to arrive at bitComposer's doorstep with all pretty words and "please-may-we-have-an-interview." We also clearly stated the terms of our deal with Coreplay's hosting of their forums here. I imagine it was exactly that lack of bullshit and evident honesty that led bitComposer to trust us with their as-honest-as-possible take on the situation (for which we are, quite obviously, thankful).

Seems to me they you can have all that without going all "ShitCompostor LOL," which is frankly just the different kind of bullshit.

It seems you misunderstand. We're not calling them ShitComposter. Most of the staff are pretty sympathetic to both sides of this issue I imagine. What we're doing is informing them that some members of the forum are calling them that, so they don't have any illusions about the crowd they're talking to.

No, you're not directly calling them that but it looks stupid (and you already got the same point across with the 'evil publisher' reference... just like the TotalBiscuit reference. Way to lend that guy more credence. Anyway, the questions were good overall -- it's just that you'd be better off with some form of editorial assistance.

I disagree, and so does my editorial assistance which did look through the questions and the finished versions more than once. I have explained the part about ShitComposter. As for the TB reference, it makes it clear that the bC's poor reputation isn't just a Codex invention - it is shared by mainstream critics as well.

Fortunately, the interview does not have to take your (or indeed my own) hatred for TB into its consideration. The fact is that he represents a lot of gamers, and thus he was adequate as an example in the question.

 

[Infinitron]

Yes, yes, tactless Danish RPG nerd is tactless. Whatever, get over it.

 

[Metro]

The fact is that he represents a lot of gamers, and thus he was adequate as an example in the question.

Codex gamers? I mean that's who you're trying to represent, right? At least that is your logic behind using 'shitcomposter.' But if TB really is representative of the Codex then I concede the point.

Anyway, to the actual substance I'm leaning more towards this being a developer issue. Also had no idea this project started out as a ARPG... scary.