Krafton Says Ex-Subnautica 2 Devs Lost Interest in Project

Krafton responds to Subnautica 2 lawsuit

Krafton filed an answer in Delaware Chancery Court pushing back on a recent suit from three former Unknown Worlds executives who claim the publisher delayed Subnautica 2’s early access launch to avoid paying an earnout bonus.

The plaintiffs — Ted Gill, Charlie Cleveland, and Max McGuire — say Krafton intentionally postponed release timings so the earnout conditions wouldn’t be met. They argue the studio was ready and that the delay cost them promised compensation after Krafton acquired Unknown Worlds in a deal that included $250 million in potential earnouts.

Krafton’s filing tells a different story. The publisher alleges the three executives ‘‘lost interest in developing Subnautica 2’’ after the sale and shifted focus to other projects, like films or initiatives outside core development. Krafton says leadership gaps left the game incomplete and forced sensible delays.

In the filing, Krafton cites a March 2025 note from the Subnautica 2 development lead estimating that the planned early access build represented only about 12% of the intended 1.0 scope, joking that at that pace development could take decades. When the plaintiffs pushed back against a delay, Krafton says it terminated them — a move that escalated the dispute into litigation.

Why this matters

Beyond a high-profile developer feud, the case exposes predictable friction in studio acquisitions: earnouts create incentives that can clash with product quality, launch timing, and leadership roles. Who controls scope, who signs off on milestones, and how progress is measured become litigation flashpoints if not nailed down in governance documents.

• Align incentives: tie payouts to objective, verifiable technical milestones rather than subjective readiness claims.
• Governance: define clear decision rights for launch timing, scope changes, and who counts as a ‘‘key employee’’ under earnout rules.
• Monitoring: use frequent, transparent health metrics so sponsors and sellers share a single view of progress.
• Dispute resolution: agree ahead of time on impartial technical reviewers or arbitration for contested milestone calls.

For gaming leaders and acquirers, the Unknown Worlds dispute is a reminder to bake clarity into deals. Ambiguous definitions of ‘‘ready,’’ vague milestone language, and weak oversight can turn integration into courtroom drama instead of a growth outcome.

Litigation will decide who is right in this case, but the business lesson is already plain: when money follows milestones, measurement design is as important as the product. Clear data, independent checkpoints, and shared dashboards can keep focus on completing great games rather than on who gets paid when.

QuarkyByte’s approach is to treat disputes like engineering problems: surface objective signals early, model incentive paths, and recommend governance fixes that preserve value. For studios, publishers, and boards, that means fewer surprises and clearer decisions during the fragile post-acquisition phase.