This site may earn affiliate commissions from the links on this page. Terms of employ.

Star Citizen's development procedure has been fraught, with marked disagreement among both developers and the gaming community over whether Cloud Imperium Games (CIG) can really bring its incredibly aggressive product to market. I rare point of understanding among the various parties is Chris Roberts' determination to use the Crytek engine for a space sim equally complex as Star Citizen is didn't pan out well, and the CIG team had to spend a slap-up deal of time rewriting the game engine. Now, Crytek is suing CIG and RSI (Roberts Space Industries is the parent company of CIG) for breach of contract and unauthorized utilise of Crytek avails.

In its complaint, Crytek lays out several arguments. Showtime, it alleges CIG's decision to carve up Star Citizen into two separate titles, Star Denizen (multi-player) and Squadron 42 (unmarried-histrion), meant Crytek was at present owed a licensing fee on the 2nd title, equally the agreement as written merely covered one game. Crytek informed CIG it was in alienation of its own agreement in February 2016, but it's not clear if CIG or RSI e'er came to the negotiating table.

StarCitizenShip

Second, Crytek alleges CIG bankrupt the terms of its licensing understanding past removing required trademarks and copyright notices. I of the terms of the license was that Crytek branding and trademarks would exist prominently displayed. At first, RSI followed these rules, only by September 24, 2016, Crytek notes Chris Roberts was referring to CryEngine as "Star Engine." Before long subsequently this, Crytek trademarks and copyright notices were removed from the game.

Third, Crytek alleges that Department 2.one.2 of its Game License Agreement (GLA), CIG was explicitly forbidden to utilize another game engine besides CryEngine to develop Star Denizen. Star Citizen's decision to use Lumberyard was, co-ordinate to Crytek, a alienation of the previous agreement.

Fourth, Crytek alleges that CIG bankrupt its written agreement to periodically contribute all issues fixes and optimizations it developed to Crytek itself. Crytek notified CIG it was in breach of this aspect of its agreement on 3 separate occasions in 2015, 2016, and 2017. CIG, while claiming to be ready and willing to provide relevant optimizations and bug fixes, supposedly never did so.

Fifth, Crytek alleges CIG shared source code with third-political party developers without seeking license-mandated prior approval from Crytek, or fifty-fifty informing Crytek information technology had washed then. This breached multiple sections of the license agreement, including an understanding that third-party developers could be brought in to work on the project, provided Crytek acquiesced commencement.

Crytek has requested a jury trial in this matter and claims overall amercement in excess of $75,000.

Does Crytek Have a Case?

I'one thousand not a lawyer, so I tin't exactly render a verdict on this point, simply if the language of the license is as articulate as Crytek makes it sound, the company very well may. Our GameWorks investigations several years ago illustrated but how important source code access can exist to game developers, and how carefully companies guard their code. Crytek claims to have given CIG a license fee well beneath the market place rate in exchange for prominent trademark and logo placement, and an exclusivity agreement. We don't know if the situation is equally airtight as Crytek makes it sound, only the underlying concept seems reasonable. When Roberts announced the switch to the Lumberyard engine, he talked nigh it equally a matter of adopting more robust netcode. That may well be true, but information technology doesn't automatically mean CIG was costless of its obligations to use CryEngine or that any understanding Crytek struck with Amazon would embrace Cloud Imperium Games' conclusion to switch to Amazon'south game engine.

In short? Information technology'south complicated. CIG has weighed in on the topic, telling Polygon:

Nosotros are aware of the Crytek complaint having been filed in the US District Court. CIG hasn't used the CryEngine for quite some time since nosotros switched to Amazon'south Lumberyard. This is a meritless lawsuit that we will defend vigorously against, including recovering from Crytek whatsoever costs incurred in this affair.

One thing that leaps out in that quote is the line about not using CryEngine for "quite some time." According to Crytek, CIG's license understanding required them to apply CryEngine, and simply CryEngine. If Crytek's summary of the license requirements is accurate, CIG just admitted its in violation of a key part of the GLA.

We're not saying that'due south the case, to be clear. That'll be for courts to decide. It's just another interesting chapter in the development of a game that'll make for interesting reading one day, regardless of how well Star Citizen succeeds — or doesn't.