Combat Over Universal Combat

In a turn of events that harkens back to the controversial release of the original Battlecruiser game, the Battlecruiser Online Forums now have more on the brewing disagreement between 3000AD developer Derek Smart and publisher DreamCatcher Interactive over whether Universal Combat is ready for prime time. There is a conflict over the possibility that RC1 of the game will be shipped, and this all may end up in the courts. Here's a bit:
Today, Eric and my attorneys in Canada are going to advise them via paperwork of their breach and my desire to protect my IP from damage and at any/all costs. Obtaining a TRO is not a big deal because my contract shows that I own the IP, that my company, rep, IP etc would be damaged if this RC1 build were to be allowed into the retail channel. With a TRO (which for expediatry reasons has to be taken out in Canada), they can replicate a million units, but will never ship them. And since a TRO requires a hearing in order to either (a) have it removed of (b) have it extended, if successful, the RC1 build will never enter the retail channel until the case is heard. Which could be 3-4 weeks, depending on the Canadian court system.
View : : :
18.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 22, 2003, 13:12
18.
Re: No subject Dec 22, 2003, 13:12
Dec 22, 2003, 13:12
 
No the game is obviously not like HL2. However some of you Derek bashing idiots may want to finally get the picture that there is a pretty large group of people out there that really like these games. Furthermore UC will push that even further because its such a more complete package.

Maybe you should get a clue, the reason why Derek is not liked has nothing to do with how good or bad BMG is.

Date
Subject
Author
1.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
2.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
3.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
11.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
4.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
5.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
6.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
7.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
8.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
9.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
10.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
12.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
23.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
24.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
25.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
32.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
33.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
36.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
38.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
39.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
40.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
26.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
27.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
14.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
41.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
48.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
13.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
16.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
 18.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
  Re: No subject
19.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
22.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
15.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
17.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
20.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
21.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
35.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
37.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
28.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
29.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
30.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
31.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
34.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
42.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
43.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
44.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
45.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
46.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
47.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
49.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
50.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
52.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
51.
Dec 22, 2003Dec 22 2003
53.
Dec 23, 2003Dec 23 2003
54.
Dec 23, 2003Dec 23 2003
55.
Dec 23, 2003Dec 23 2003
57.
Dec 23, 2003Dec 23 2003
58.
Dec 23, 2003Dec 23 2003
60.
Dec 23, 2003Dec 23 2003
     Re: No subject
56.
Dec 23, 2003Dec 23 2003
59.
Dec 23, 2003Dec 23 2003
61.
Dec 23, 2003Dec 23 2003
62.
Dec 23, 2003Dec 23 2003
63.
Dec 23, 2003Dec 23 2003