Actually, even in a sarcastic sense, bitComposer won nothing. Their only purpose is to make money. Even if all they do is recoup costs, or recoup a fraction of their costs, that's better for them than just not releasing the game.Coreplay gets to keep their artistic integrity by not releasing an unfinished game and Bitcomposer gets to maintain their status as an evil overlord aka publisher. See? Everybody wins!
And for the records: the main reason for this dispute was the controversy about an early release of Chaos Chronicles in March 2013. A release at this time would have led to horrible consequences for the game regarding its quality, content and stability.
Since bitComposer rejected to invest more money into our game, we had to get the money elsewhere. Throwing an unfinished and crappy game on the market was no option for us and that's why we had no other choice than borrowing money from third parties to continue the development and completion of our game. We wanted to release this particular game as it was intended, because otherwise we wouldn't get a second chance to create such a game again.
The last sentence of that statement sounds pretty damn final. Ack.
bitComposer wanted a meeting. Coreplay claims bitComposer had already indicated they wouldn't sign anything at the meeting so they didn't go. Until they can discuss whatever the issue is, the game is dead in the water.
Why should Bitcomposer commit to sign anything at the meeting? Presumably the idea would have been to thrash out some compromise and then get the lawyers to look it over, before signing. I don't see why Coreplay should be hung up on getting this signature instantly. So far we have no basis to judge between the two stories and work out who is being pigheaded.