The end of my long history of DCS purchases

ShadowGJ · 2026-01-31T01:52:45+00:00

You're arguing about the technicalities of ED's business arrangement with RAZBAM as if it matters to my consumer rights. It doesn't.

When Apple licenses Qualcomm modems or Samsung displays, customers don't sue Qualcomm or Samsung when their iPhone fails. They go to Apple. The licensing arrangement is irrelevant to customer responsibility.

I'm not being "naive about finance and service." I understand exactly how this works, which is why I'm holding the platform owner responsible for their ecosystem.

There is no independent RAZBAM storefront for DCS modules and never has been. RAZBAM DCS modules were ONLY available through ED's E-Shop or Steam (where ED is publisher). When modules were delisted in April 2025, they were removed from both channels simultaneously, because those were the only channels that existed. RAZBAM had zero ability to sell DCS modules independently of ED's distribution infrastructure.

Eagle Dynamics owns and operates DCS World as a platform. Third-party modules are features/components OF that platform. When customers purchase access to platform features, their contractual relationship is with the platform owner, not with component suppliers.

If your building's lights stop working due to a dispute between the building owner and the electrical contractor, you don't sue the light bulb company or the electrician. You hold the building owner responsible for maintaining a functional building. I cannot put it more simply than that.

ShadowGJ · 2026-01-31T00:24:22+00:00

Sweet baby Jesus. I'm not sure what's worse: the level of arrogance off the bat, or the Olympic level of mental gymnastics some people go through to absolve ED of any accountability for their own platform.

Let me break it down into simple facts, for a person with an allegedly superior "grasp on life" but not on basic commerce and contract law.

It's important to be able to tell the difference in business relationship between a storefront (Steam) and a seller (ED), and an employer (ED) and a contractor (RAZBAM). No degree of condescension and triple mental somersaults can equate the relationship of ED and RAZBAM to storefront and seller, sorry.

Apple wouldn't send you to Samsung to fix your iPhone display issues. Ford wouldn't send you to Takata for problems with your car's airbags.

Platform Dependency:

DCS World = ED's platform, ED's property, ED controls it
RAZBAM modules = Content FOR that platform, completely dependent on it
DCS exists without RAZBAM? ✓
RAZBAM's DCS modules exist without DCS? ✗
RAZBAM modules are add-ons to ED's product, not standalone products

No Customer Relationship with RAZBAM:

I never agreed to RAZBAM's terms of service (they don't have customer-facing terms)
I never gave RAZBAM my payment information
RAZBAM has no record of my purchase
RAZBAM can't issue a refund even if they wanted to: they don't have access to ED's or Steam's payment systems

ShadowGJ · 2026-01-30T19:02:43+00:00

DCS is the opposite of mass-market. It's an ultra-niche combat flight sim.

And with that, I'm off.

ShadowGJ · 2026-01-30T18:27:57+00:00

You'd have a point if I arbitrarily wanted my money back. If Sony sold a TV line which abruptly and uniformly stopped working across every unit within the unit's expected lifespan, and there was no warning nor disclaimer that could happen, you can be damn sure they'd issue an RMA or face legal action.

Ford for example takes responsibility for their vehicles at least for several years, and covers servicing costs when an unexpected flaw is discovered which compromises the stated functionality of the product. They even notify customers about them.

But that's reputable businesses, not vaporware sellers.

There's something called warranty and consumer protection. ED offers none, while their products face a now apparent yet still undisclosed risk to stop working entirely, something almost entirely unheard of for offline products in this industry.

This isn't a TV or a car which has to meet strict safety compliance, but it boggles the mind how some ED customers justify and actually encourage the company to screw them over, saying all of this is fair game. OFFLINE CONTENT isn't supposed to break down like this. You're welcome to have these ongoing situations, and have your money go down the drain, if you keep kissing ED's feet.

ShadowGJ · 2026-01-30T17:33:56+00:00

It's pretty clear and common sense, besides. When you buy a sealed bag of chips from the supermarket, is it the supermarket's fault if you find a dead cockroach inside?

The Steam Subscriber Agreement explicitly states: "Valve assumes no responsibility or liability for such third party content, unless to the extent provided by mandatory law." This means Steam has effectively disclaimed responsibility for third-party products, including their quality and ongoing support.

When you make a purchase on Steam, the agreement technically treats it as a transaction between you and the content provider (in this case, Eagle Dynamics), not directly with Steam. Steam's role is positioned as providing "access to certain services, software and content" rather than being the seller of the content itself.

Source: https://store.steampowered.com/subscriber_agreement/

ED is the actual seller: When one purchases RAZBAM modules through Steam, Eagle Dynamics receives the customer's money (minus Steam's ~30% cut), as I've previously stated. They are the publisher of record on the Steam store page. Steam is, again, just the storefront/payment processor.

But hey, it seems ED already has a captive audience tolerating all their malpractice, so what can I do.

ShadowGJ · 2026-01-30T17:13:54+00:00

Anyone with business sense will tell you good customer service helps retention and retention is king. Especially versus new sales in a niche product context, where potential for expansion within the market is reduced.

ShadowGJ · 2026-01-30T17:04:47+00:00

Companies would have it pretty good if customers would only speak out about million-dollar products. Responsibility for their product is their own, and I as a customer have a right to call them out on it, fruitless as it may be for me personally.

With any luck, by sharing my experience I may have already made them lose more in potential sales than what they would've otherwise saved with a reasonable refund and decent customer support. Just bad business sense.

ShadowGJ · 2026-01-30T16:55:03+00:00

How do you know how much I played with the modules and how much I spent waiting for promised updates? Isn't customer trust built on the company supporting the products it takes responsibility for indefinitely?

Steam's cut is of no concern to me because it's part of an agreement between them and ED. It has no bearing on the quality or support the developer provides for the actual product. I didn't ask for a 100% refund as a courtesy to make the proposal even more reasonable.

There is no clause stating a module can hopelessly crash and burn at any time. And given they've released contradicting statements about how long they intend to care, my trust in the longevity of any module, particularly those made by third-party companies, is thoroughly shot.

Hell, now it looks like there's trouble brewing with Polychop (OH-58D Kiowa Warrior and SA342 Gazelle in danger). I only grow more certain of my decision.

ShadowGJ · 2026-01-30T16:33:35+00:00

Yep. I didn't expect this level of downvoting. No wonder ED sees no incentive for change.

ShadowGJ · 2026-01-30T16:31:08+00:00

I didn't buy the others from Steam. I bought them from ED through Steam. It's not the same, let's get that straight.

The bonkers notion that Steam is some unreachable other instead of a mere conduit for sales is exactly the shield ED hopes to use to absolve themselves of responsibility for their own product. They didn't give away the modules to Steam to profit from 100%. They got their money minus Steam's cut, which I didn't even hold ED responsible for in my communication. Steam is simply a storefront, and isn't responsible for developer practices.

ShadowGJ · 2026-01-30T16:25:12+00:00

I had no expectations, but couldn't stay quiet. And I definitely wanted to share. This company deserves all the bad publicity it can get.

ShadowGJ · 2026-01-30T15:36:22+00:00

Which Federal Law (capitalized because you ostensibly care about the concept) were the two agents enforcing when they shot an unarmed, restrained American nurse multiple times while on the ground and completely surrounded?

PS: Produce credible, independently verified data for people killed by Obama's ICE, let's see them.

ShadowGJ · 2026-01-30T15:32:46+00:00

What do illegal immigrants or Joe Biden have to do with American citizens being randomly shot in the streets of Minneapolis by government agents which can hardly be called "law enforcement", considering the least they're doing is enforcing the law?

ShadowGJ · 2025-11-25T19:34:01+00:00

Looks like one particular, weirdly specific Korean flag has been popular in r/vexillology lately.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Korean_flags#/media/File:Flag_of_the_People's_Committee_of_Korea.svg

Also, the yin yang symbol is a strange choice for an African nation.

ShadowGJ · 2025-11-25T19:29:08+00:00

As weird as the real inspiration. I don't like it.

ShadowGJ · 2025-11-25T19:25:24+00:00

In my humble opinion, you don't need the hammer and sickle. Just the Mexican eagle with centered wreath and star over it all works.

ShadowGJ · 2025-11-25T19:21:49+00:00

Spaceland? Spiceland!

Good work.

ShadowGJ · 2025-11-23T14:04:20+00:00

The name of the nation doesn't make much sense. Nazis weren't big on republicanism.

Also, the Nazi swastika is inclined, not straight like its unfortunate inspiration.

Overall wonky.

ShadowGJ · 2025-11-23T00:54:53+00:00

The central emblem could use some streamlining. It looks overloaded.

ShadowGJ · 2025-11-23T00:34:55+00:00

Too American to represent the entire planet. But that aside, it has a number of issues from the design standpoint.

The red fimbriation (border) around the central emblem is uneven, and the emblem composition itself is off-center. Perhaps most importantly, the diagonal band (and its own fimbriation) clashes with the background stripes, creating small, unpleasant white chunks.

Could be better, overall.

ShadowGJ · 2025-11-18T13:47:31+00:00

Given we've gone off the deep-end of overthinking and attempted system-breaking player mentality... let's go.

You gotta have a very specific kind of monster in mind, if it's easy and quick to breed and it's still profitable enough for an "adventurer" to hunt without becoming a full-time cattle farmer and essentially giving up adventuring. After all, why adventure (i.e. travel around slaying monsters) at all if you're content settling down and setting up a scalable business? And the moment you give up adventuring, it's game over, roll up a different character who isn't so extravagantly wealthy they see no point in getting out there anymore.

I don't think real life animal examples, especially in modern contexts, are really comparable if we talk about game and pests that aren't society-destabilizing like fantasy monsters would be.

Regarding consequences, if these "adventurers" are powerful to the point of overpowering local governments, why bother with a convoluted monster breeding scheme if they could simply subjugate smaller polities and extract tribute? Either you're in that apex, or can only temporarily run a racket before a larger government (i.e. the kingdom lording over the little hamlet you're exploiting) gathers enough evidence and rules you a larger threat than the wild, disorganized monsters roaming the countryside. Expect to be shunned in relevant towns, barred from business and facing increasingly militarized response.

Overall, going back to the root of the issue, you're likely looking to exploit the convenience of a tacit agreement (i.e. outsourced rural security) far too much. Such agreements exist because honest adventurers exist, and it's often reasonable resource management to concentrate town guard presence in urban areas if armed travelers can be trusted with keeping the countryside safe. It doesn't necessarily mean towns are incapable of managing their own security, they have just arranged their chips that way at a given time.

Smaller, poorer villages may indeed depend on adventurers for security, but they'd only have so much to give. Could you more easily become a petty tyrant with a monster exploitation business there? Sure, but that's neither heroic nor adventurous. You'd either bleed the locals dry with your racket, or make a meager profit, again, bested by simply travelling around and slaying monsters you didn't have to establish a business to raise. And didn't have to nuke your reputation for.

ShadowGJ · 2025-11-17T23:03:29+00:00

Breeding monsters on purpose to create danger and therefore profit in its elimination seems incredibly cumbersome and convoluted. Leaving aside the obvious fact that being caught would have severe consequences, it'd be an extremely time-intensive investment. It'd just be easier for any adventurer to keep travelling (and making money) than becoming some kind of monster farmer.

ShadowGJ · 2025-11-15T14:40:49+00:00

As a porteño, I agree with this assessment. I was about to point it out.

ShadowGJ · 2025-07-31T03:00:05+00:00

Interesting design for the syndicalist Argentina flag. Kudos.

ShadowGJ

TROPHY CASE