And let’s not exclude the MASSIVE performance boost in the latest update. They’re doing great over there.

> In a lawsuit filed last month, the cofounders claimed Krafton tried to sabotage Subnautica 2‘s planned Early Access launch this year to avoid paying a $250 million bonus it had agreed to at the time Unknown Worlds was sold if the studio hit certain revenue targets in 2025 and early 2026. The legal complaint alleged that Krafton violated the terms of the deal by overriding the studio’s independence and firing the cofounders without cause. > In its response filed on August 12, Krafton denies most of the allegations in the original complaint and argues that it was the cofounders who were trying to rush Subnautica 2 out into the wild despite being behind on its expected content scope. When the company tried to enlist the cofounders, who were not directly involved in the game’s development, to get it back on track, it says it was rebuffed. Krafton claims it had no choice but to remove them from the studio in order to protect Subnautica 2 and prevent a disastrous launch. _“We made a deal in which they had to successfully launch the game and get a big payment when they hit certain revenue targets, but we had to fire them because they only wanted the money for which they had to make a good game, they didn’t wanted to make a good game, they were in only for the money, for which - again - they had to make a good game, they were clearly sabotaging the game!”_ They are so full of shite. Corporate BS 101.

"We wanted a fresh _new_ debacle instead!"

Well first, this deal was part of that sale. That'd be like someone's boss pocketing a tip and telling the waitress "you don't deserve this tip you already got paid" or a salesman "you get something hourly, why would you need this commission?" They worked for it, after the sale, because it was in their contract. That said, the company didn't even say it was a mess. They said that they needed something like, one more biome, one more leviathan, a few bits and bobs like that. Requirements that they added on later in development, that those three guys say aren't needed. I really wanna hear from the other devs, the ones under the 3. Theirs is the opinion I'd trust in this mess. But I'm leaning towards corporate fuckery, personally.

Well first, this deal was part of that sale. That'd be like someone's boss pocketing a tip and telling the waitress "you don't deserve this tip you already got paid" or a salesman "you get something hourly, why would you need this commission?" They worked for it, after the sale, because it was in their contract. That said, the company didn't even say it was a mess. They said that they needed something like, one more biome, one more leviathan, a few bits and bobs like that. Requirements that they added on later in development, that those three guys say aren't needed. I really wanna hear from the other devs, the ones under the 3. Theirs is the opinion I'd trust in this mess. But I'm leaning towards corporate fuckery, personally.

So from what I understand. That 250$ million bonus to "employees" was almost all going to like 3 people. The smaller bonus that was going to actual employees, they said they would honor it anyways. I'm happy those three founders gave us the first subnautica, but I'd rather a better game on release then something rushed so they get a payday (they also already got paid when they sold their company in any case). Really hard to say who is in the right without having gameplay footage or reap details, but it wouldn't surprise me if it does need more time and it was going to come out as a mess.

It's a lot of money. There are huge incentives on both sides to do the wrong thing (either delay a finished game or push out something half baked). That being said, the current course of action, regardless of justification, is actually going to get us a better game in the end. So there is a sunny side to it for the consumer, which is kind of really rare when you think about it. I would also love to hear from other workers.

What about this clusterfuck gives you the impression that this will improve the game beyond where it's already at?

When two parties sign a contract then they have to act in good faith. Preventing the other party from fulfilling their obligations to avoid a payout or invoke a penalty is not good faith. And that's why the sea witch Ursula's contract with the mermaid Ariel would not have held up in court. Maybe the game would make more money during it's life span if released later but that's irrelevant when there's a contract about how much money the game should make before a certain cut off date.

Subnautica isn't just a survival game, but a story driven game as well, and given how janky their engine was, it's not a surprise that they'd want to overhaul it from the ground up.

Their engine? It was built on Unity.

We currently don't know which party is acting in bad faith. The publishers could be delaying to avoid the payout or the 3 founders could be rushing to get the payout. It's true that a shit half baked game would ruin the series and cause damages, if there is an actual lack of content, there is justification in delaying it. I guess we will get a clearer picture as the lawsuits draw to a close and the game is released.

So from what I understand. That 250$ million bonus to "employees" was almost all going to like 3 people. The smaller bonus that was going to actual employees, they said they would honor it anyways. I'm happy those three founders gave us the first subnautica, but I'd rather a better game on release then something rushed so they get a payday (they also already got paid when they sold their company in any case). Really hard to say who is in the right without having gameplay footage or reap details, but it wouldn't surprise me if it does need more time and it was going to come out as a mess.

Rushing to get the payout is not bad faith. That's the terms of the contract.

"We wanted a fresh _new_ debacle instead!"

The fact that it's getting delayed to add content?

It's a lot of money. There are huge incentives on both sides to do the wrong thing (either delay a finished game or push out something half baked). That being said, the current course of action, regardless of justification, is actually going to get us a better game in the end. So there is a sunny side to it for the consumer, which is kind of really rare when you think about it. I would also love to hear from other workers.

The fact that it's getting delayed to add content?