Patch 4.10 - Development Updates by Daidalos Team

TheGrunch · #1 03-30-2010, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FVV190

Daidalos team is not doing Grumman aircrafts?

There are legal issues associated with adding Grumman aircraft to the game, unfortunately.

FVV190 · #2 03-30-2010, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheGrunch

There are legal issues associated with adding Grumman aircraft to the game, unfortunately.

Oh i am sorry to hear that. But thanks so much for your work and I will continue supporting your products

.

FVV190 · #3 03-30-2010, 11:22 AM

I read english very slow but i begin to know about it a bit....

i am not a legal profession but i think you are doing the right thing. "leave it alone".

1 if you want to win the case, hire good lawyers...cost a lot. N-G and MS are both obvirously extremely rich.

2 these money will help more if spent on development, marketing, etc. and now developing the BOB need plenty of resources.

3 there are still plenty aircrafts to work on, even high performance prop. ones. For example the sea fury, which is included in the "untrapack" MOD.

4 things will change when 1c dominant the whole FS bussiness.

EJGr.Ost_Caspar · #4 03-30-2010, 04:48 PM

In fact it is said, that we could do 'as if' like planes.... differing in details and carrying wrong names (like 'FAF8 Beartrap' or so), as a possible workaround, but 1st: Its not sure, Grumman will inflict anyway and 2nd: we just don't want to make mockups, but real stuff.

EDIT: This is not only affecting planes, but also alot additional american stuff, like battleships for instance.

MBot · #5 03-30-2010, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar

EDIT: This is not only affecting planes, but also alot additional american stuff, like battleships for instance.

Out of pure interest, how exactly does it affect battleships? It is my understanding that the battleships were designed by the Navy and then contracted to yards. With most BB actually being build in the Navys own yards. Or did I get that wrong?

Insuber · #6 03-30-2010, 07:12 PM

This grummann story pi**ed off the entire community, also because it was not properly handled by UBI according to the available information. Frankly speaking there are so many non-grummann planes yet to model that I don't regret too much the lack of a Beartrap

.

Bye,
Insuber

EJGr.Ost_Caspar · #7 03-30-2010, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MBot

Out of pure interest, how exactly does it affect battleships? It is my understanding that the battleships were designed by the Navy and then contracted to yards. With most BB actually being build in the Navys own yards. Or did I get that wrong?

I'm not much into the liscence details and I'm no lawer, but AFAIK Grumman owns the rights on the ships designs and names too. Much properly they bought it later or ate another company who owned the rights before.

Hunger · #8 03-30-2010, 11:18 PM

I salute thee again

A sad situation, yet be it Grumman's jingoism or mismanagement by Ubi, whatever the cause, lets look at what can be done an try to make the best out of it.

Luckily the "PTO problem" does not take Japanese planes nor ships into account (And there are quite a lot of them to choose from) yet I also understand that cockpit information on the later is rather scarce.

I also guess that your selection of indigenous British aircraft and ships are limited by their proximity to SOW,because it would be unproductive to start a "competition with" Maddox Games, or am I mistaken in my interpretation of that topic?.

Anyway keep up the good work

Kind Regards
Hunger