Game News Bad News: Chaos Chronicles development on hold due to legal trouble with bitComposer

[Bitcher1]

The path of a codexer once again proves to be paved with misery. No wonder Torment is held in such high regard here.

 

[Stabwound]

I just noticed that Citadels - a recently released game - was also published by bitcomposer and released in a completely broken and incomplete state with missing features out the ass. I mean, that kind of tells you something here.

 

[Grunker]

Bitcomposer didn't "publish" Conquistador in the vidya game sense of "publish." They didn't fund the game at all. They got some distribution deals, among these Steam.

I just noticed that Citadels - a recently released game - was also published by bitcomposer and released in a completely broken and incomplete state with missing features out the ass. I mean, that kind of tells you something here.

It tells you one (or more) of these things:

1) bitComposer is willing to push unfinished product out the door, when that product meets the deadline. This is bad, and they proved it with Citadels and their March attempt with Chaos Chronicles.

2) bitComposer does not want to inject more money into project which do not reach the deadline. This is reasonable.

3) bitComposer are either too nice for their own good (not pushing devs harder when they struggle to meet deadlines) or incapable of publisher oversight. Either way, the result is the same.

It does not tell you anything about whether Coreplay held their end of the bargain or not.

 

[Micmu]

...that they are shitComposer indeed

 

[Jashiin]

Bitcomposer published that too. No sale.

You talking about Conquistador? That's not really fair. No point in punishing the developer for their publisher's wrongdoings. Every purcahse money still mostly goes to Logicartists at the end of the day

Sure there is. CC would have been the exception. Now they're on the blacklist forever.

 

[Metro]

 

[Monty]

This is one of the risks of having multiple funding sources for these projects, given the likelihood of games going over budget.

If there's a single source of funding, whether it's one publisher paying a developer or indie devs investing their own/borrowed money, then it's up to one group to make a call if more money is needed or the scope expands. Either put in more money, cut down on features, or cancel.

In this case there seems to be a complex arrangement with different types of investors. So maybe Bitcomposer originally agreed to pay, say, 500k for 25% of a game. When it became clear that more cash was needed and it would be a 3m game, either each investor had to put in more money or stakes would have to be renegotiated, ie 500k would now only get you 1/6 of a game.

Renegotiating existing arrangements is a recipe for this sort of legal clusterfuck. Bitcomposer didn't want to increase the budget and just wanted something out the door, the devs wanted the opposite and started looking for other investors, cue Bitcomposer stopping all payments and getting that injunction.

Sadly most of the staff are probably already working on new projects so it's got less chance of coming out than Grimoire HD.

 

[Volrath]

At least fucking leak your last build or something. Don't let all that work go to waste

 

[Jashiin]

At least shitcomposer lost money on it.

 

[Grunker]

This is one of the risks of having multiple funding sources for these projects, given the likelihood of games going over budget.

If there's a single source of funding, whether it's one publisher paying a developer or indie devs investing their own/borrowed money, then it's up to one group to make a call if more money is needed or the scope expands. Either put in more money, cut down on features, or cancel.

In this case there seems to be a complex arrangement with different types of investors. So maybe Bitcomposer originally agreed to pay, say, 500k for 25% of a game. When it became clear that more cash was needed and it would be a 3m game, either each investor had to put in more money or stakes would have to be renegotiated, ie 500k would now only get you 1/6 of a game.

Renegotiating existing arrangements is a recipe for this sort of legal clusterfuck. Bitcomposer didn't want to increase the budget and just wanted something out the door, the devs wanted the opposite and started looking for other investors, cue Bitcomposer stopping all payments and getting that injunction.

Sadly most of the staff are probably already working on new projects so it's got less chance of coming out than Grimoire HD.

Errrr, no. In any event, only two negotiating parties have existed: bitComposer and Coreplay. There are no other parties with negotiating powers here.

 

[Volrath]

Also, this is probably karma for raping jagged alliance. When you make a deal with the devil, don't come crying back when it bites you in the ass.

 

[MetalCraze]

At least shitcomposer lost money on it.

Evil Shitcomposer lost money
while dev got paid for a product they failed to finish (esp. considering their track record)

evil EVIL shitcomposter!

If they didn't have shitComposter ruining their game they would produce a great turn-based cRPG like Realms of Arkania remake

 

[Monty]

Errrr, no. In any event, only two negotiating parties have existed: bitComposer and Coreplay. There are no other parties with negotiating powers here.

OK, well maybe I'm not remembering correctly but I thought HG mentioned that Bitcomposer had funded less than 50% of the game, the Bavarian State had funded some of it, the devs the rest, and to me that seemed a more volatile situation than a regular development arrangement with one party calling the shots.

 

[Infinitron]

Errrr, no. In any event, only two negotiating parties have existed: bitComposer and Coreplay. There are no other parties with negotiating powers here.

OK, well maybe I'm not remembering correctly but I thought HG mentioned that Bitcomposer had funded less than 50% of the game, the Bavarian State had funded some of it, the devs the rest, and to me that seemed a more volatile situation than a regular development arrangement with one party calling the shots.

Yes, I wouldn't be so sure about that. Like Hobgoblin said, things are complex.

 

[Jashiin]

At least shitcomposer lost money on it.

Evil Shitcomposer lost money
while dev got paid for a product they failed to finish (esp. considering their track record)

evil EVIL shitcomposter!

If they didn't have shitComposter ruining their game they would produce a great turn-based cRPG like Realms of Arkania remake

I'd happily see shitcomposter go broke so the game gets funded. It's the least they ought to do after funding JA:BIA.

 

[Stabwound]

It makes you wonder how often situations like this happen without anyone ever knowing about it. The only reason this one has come to light is because the CC team was heavily promoting the game from its inception, and the devs were taking part in discussion on it the whole way through. Then one day, uh oh, all hell breaks loose.

But yeah, shitcomposer probably owns the rights to the game in its current state, so that about sums it up. I still don't believe Coreplay is a completely innocent party in this situation, though. I'm sure they had their hand in fucking it up, too.

 

[Hamster]

 

[Grunker]

Errrr, no. In any event, only two negotiating parties have existed: bitComposer and Coreplay. There are no other parties with negotiating powers here.

OK, well maybe I'm not remembering correctly but I thought HG mentioned that Bitcomposer had funded less than 50% of the game, the Bavarian State had funded some of it, the devs the rest, and to me that seemed a more volatile situation than a regular development arrangement with one party calling the shots.

Yes, I wouldn't be so sure about that. Like Hobgoblin said, things are complex.

Is it an American/Israeli thing not to know what a fond does? I severely doubt that any interaction has gone on from the fond's side of things after the funding, since all they care about is the submission for approval. Indeed, this is mirrored in BOTH HobGob's and bC's statements, which both hold that the meeting was between the new Coreplay partners, Coreplay and bC. This is what makes the case complex - internal disagreement in Coreplay. Not that the Germna state is suddenly going "lulz we own you." That's not how a fond works.

I might be wrong, but all conventional wisdom on the subject says I'm not.

 

[Infinitron]

I'm not necessarily talking about the fond. ("Fond?" Do you mean fund? Foundation?)

 

[imweasel]

Coreplay wants more money becuase they couldn't finish the game on time - and Bitcomposer doesn't want to pay anymore.

This really sounds like a job for Kickstarter.

 

[Grunker]

I'm not necessarily talking about the fond. ("Fond?" Do you mean fund? Foundation?)

Typical Grunkerian Danification. I mean foundation.

 

[Metro]

He means fondant!

 

[AbounI]

Errrr, no. In any event, only two negotiating parties have existed: bitComposer and Coreplay. There are no other parties with negotiating powers here.

OK, well maybe I'm not remembering correctly but I thought HG mentioned that Bitcomposer had funded less than 50% of the game, the Bavarian State had funded some of it, the devs the rest, and to me that seemed a more volatile situation than a regular development arrangement with one party calling the shots.

Yes, I wouldn't be so sure about that. Like Hobgoblin said, things are complex.

Sure it is, especially when there is some points concerning Jagged Alliance calling back the last contract they had together.it goes back much further than what we can think

At least, we now know it's not because of the place of the official forum

 

[Cosmic Misogynerd]

May shitcomposer burn in hell. Such a long list.

 

[Hegel]

Is it an American/Israeli thing not to know what a fond does? I severely doubt that any interaction has gone on from the fond's side of things after the funding, since all they care about is the submission for approval. Indeed, this is mirrored in BOTH HobGob's and bC's statements, which both hold that the meeting was between the new Coreplay partners, Coreplay and bC. This is what makes the case complex - internal disagreement in Coreplay. Not that the Germna state is suddenly going "lulz we own you." That's not how a fond works.

I might be wrong, but all conventional wisdom on the subject says I'm not.

I work in the private, generally speaking Coreplay and bC would have someone constantly breathing on their neck. Since a chunk of the round was from a public entity I assume things were a bit more lax (which is the point I brought up with you on the other thread).