Crytek moves to pause Star Citizen lawsuit until Squadron 42 launches

Cloud Imperium Games/Roberts Space Industries

A motion Crytek filed recently in its lawsuit against Star Citizen maker Cloud Imperium Games effectively says Squadron 42, the narrative mode CIG has promised for years, won’t be launching before this summer.

It’s a complicated bit of legal maneuvering, going back to the lawsuit Crytek brought in 2017. Crytek alleges that CIG is violating the terms of a licensing agreement and still using CryEngine 3 code to develop Star Citizen and Squadron 42 — which Cloud Imperium maintains is a separate game and not a module of Star Citizen.

In 2016, Cloud Imperium announced it was switching from CryEngine 3 to Amazon’s Lumberyard development platform, which is itself a fork of CryEngine 3 that Amazon purchased and developed. Crytek, in its 2017 lawsuit, said CIG was actually using CryEngine 3 code to which it had no license.

But as Crytek’s action is predicated on CIG bringing a product to market without permission to use CryEngine code, Crytek’s claim can’t really go anywhere if no offending product is released. So the company is asking a judge to put off their claim for the time being, as it doesn’t think Squadron 42 will be released by or before the June 2020 date when this lawsuit was originally set to go to trial. Crytek is looking to reschedule the trial for October.

Crytek’s filing pointedly mentions CIG’s internal uncertainty over when Squadron 42 will, if ever, see the light of day. “While this came as a surprise to Crytek (and undoubtedly will to the public who has pre-paid for Squadron 42, assuming the truth of CIG’s response, Crytek’s Squadron 42 claim is not yet ripe,” the filing says. “Ripe” means that something has to happen before Crytek has an actionable claim — in this case, the launch of Squadron 42.

The filing is an incremental development in a very technical dispute but it does provide some third-party insight into the development schedule of Squadron 42. The project, which will star Gillian Anderson, Gary Oldman and Wing Commander alumni Mark Hamill and John Rhys-Davies, has been in development since the beginning of Star Citizen itself back in 2012.

The most recent guidance from Cloud Imperium Games on when anything from Squadron 42 would be available to the public is that a beta might be released in the third quarter of this year. Star Citizen itself is still in an alpha state, even though it has drawn more than $260 million in donations since 2012.

At the end of 2018, Cloud Imperium announced that it had gotten an infusion of $46 million from a private investor, and targeted a summer 2020 launch for the long anticipated game.


At this point there is no possible way this will live up to the hype. Hopefully they make a return investment down the road for everyone involved but experience tells me no

I bought the full game during the holiday break and have been pretty blown away with what they’ve achieved. The scale of the cities on the planets with the graphic level its pushing is unparalleled. The missions are fairly entertaining. Lot of bugs, but it’s in alpha. I can certainly see the huge potential and have very little reason to believe they couldn’t pull off Squadron 42, unless they just suck at story telling.

My only worry about the story is that it’s boring and uninspired like 90% of war stories. Pulling off an interesting military narrative is difficult because it’s full of true stereotypes, hard to avoid cliches and set in stone military dialogue.

If the narrative isn’t strong, not even the star studded cast can keep it from being boring.

It’s been a whole year since this lawsuit was shot down. That it hasn’t been buried yet is itself a miracle. In any case, there was never a plan to release the game this year in any other form but beta. And even when they do release it, it’s doubtful Crytek’s lawsuit picks up any wind nor does it have any chance of winning.

If it gets released, not when.


The real interesting thing from the lawsuit is that it’s now clear CI never switched to Lumberyard.

which is of course not true, just another one of Crytek’s deliberate misinterpretation/lies like 99% of the whole lawsuit.

CIG said when they switched to Lumberyard they could switch quick because the code is basically the same. This is what Crytek interprets as they haven’t switched at all.

CIG didn’t actually change anything but the splash screen, though; they just figured that since they were using a CryEngine version (3.7, I think?) that existed from before the branch that Lumberyard is based on (3.8) and apparently the Lumberyard license includes some rights to earlier CryEngine branches, they could coast on that. They’d just ditch their deal with CryTek and sign up with Amazon so they could keep using everything they’d already done with CryEngine, easy-peasy, with no worries about how to bring their existing changes forward into Lumberyard.

They haven’t changed engines, they just declared that the engine they were already using is Amazon’s rather than CryTek’s. Which, given how much work they still have left to do, is probably pretty sensible: their codebase is apparently complicated enough as it stands and they’ve already put a lot a work into trying to get it under control. Trying to actually take it into Lumberyard would add many months (maybe years) of work to a project that’s already considered to be either a marathon (by fans) or a death march (by skeptics), and god only knows when the ship sales will stop working. Might as well stay on the same horse while you’re neck-deep in the river.

It’s not from Crytec it’s from the court documents.

Yeah, show me in the court document where CIG states they haven’t switched engines.
There’s no such things in the documents, just Crytek’s twisting of words again as almost everything in this lawsuit.

Same happened when the first news came about the lawsuit, people jumped on it believing what Crytek stated, and it turned out to be bullcrap.

So CI is lying to the court when they say they never switched? Big if true.

Sounds like if CI cleans up any offending code before launch, there would be no case. So that may be part of the delay.

View All Comments
Back to top ↑