Do you hate Epic now that u know what they did to Silicon Knights?

nope, every footage i have seen from SK on Too Human didnt look that impressing. the enviroment looks pretty, but the char animations looked like crap. so nah im not mad at epic. mazdaspeed-rx8

well that's the whole point, SK is blaming Epic for a buggy engine... saying it's the reason why the game looked crappy, and that it took them alot of time to upgrade the egine themselves (to the point where there are no Epic codes left) when they could DEVELOP the game itself...

Honestly how do any of you know if it's not the fact that Silicon Knights are run by a bunch of hacks?

Why is there no one else complaining, lots of companies are using the same engine right? Heck Sony just announced a collaboration for this engine that Silicon KNights claims is defective lol.

Maybe it's Silicon Knights shortcomings......no engine can fix that. I think it needs to be brought up this game has been in the works for like 10 years......maybe these devs just honestly suck at their work. Who knows but one thing is for sure saying Epic is guilty of something without knowing the facts isn't right (and yes equally wrong saying Silicon Knights are at fault but I had to play devils advocate since obviously the poster thinks it's their fault)

Honestly how do any of you know if it's not the fact that Silicon Knights are run by a bunch of hacks?

Why is there no one else complaining, lots of companies are using the same engine right? Heck Sony just announced a collaboration for this engine that Silicon KNights claims is defective lol.

Maybe it's Silicon Knights shortcomings......no engine can fix that. I think it needs to be brought up this game has been in the works for like 10 years......maybe these devs just honestly suck at their work. Who knows but one thing is for sure saying Epic is guilty of something without knowing the facts isn't right (and yes equally wrong saying Silicon Knights are at fault but I had to play devils advocate since obviously the poster thinks it's their fault)

darthogre

well it's because SK isn't as big of a dev as the rest of the companies who bought the UE3 engine... and that should give you and idea of how confident they are for filing such a suite that could CRUSH them if lost...

but all we can do atm is to wait and see the thing unravelled, who knows maybe other companies will side with either SK or Epic... that would be interesting to see

bye

remington38

The way i see it, dennis dyack has blamed everyone but his mother for his failures on TooHuman.

this is most likely an attempt to either stall his publisher for more time, or stop his investors from pulling out their capitol...due to the fact he hasnt been able to turn water into wine like he claimed he owuld be able to. the reality is ...the game never looked that good in the first place.he would be suing ID if they provided the engine, becasue thats the kind of guy he is...

had he been making this game for 6 months, and said "woah...woah this engine is not what they promised me, im suing" that would be one thing but he signed on with UE3 in 2005.....almost 3 years ago! i mean come on..

ubisoft seems to have no problem
bioware seem to have no issues
EA is doing fine

the reality is dyack is trying to use a small companies budget to produce a big studio release....and it will not work.

"Too Human was originally in development for the PlayStation as a 5-disc action-adventure game. It was shown at E31999,[1] but shortly before its completion Nintendo announced an exclusive partnership with Silicon Knights, and the game was moved to the Nintendo GameCube in 2000. A teaser trailer was shown at SpaceWorld 2000 showing what appeared to be a re-building of the PlayStation game. The game never surfaced though, and the partnership between the two companies was ended. After this, the title was still thought to be in development for the GameCube, but those plans have since been canceled.

In the May 2005 issue of EGM, Silicon Knights announced a partnership with publisherMicrosoft to develop a trilogy revolving around the Too Human universe exclusively for the Xbox 360. The game was originally being developed using Epic Games' Unreal Engine 3, but is now being developed using an internal engine. On July 19, 2007 it was announced that Silicon Knights were suing Epic Games due to "inadequacies" of Unreal Engine 3"

dennis dyack was joke after he attacked the media for not "hyping too human" and he is now an even bigger joke....

flood

You sir are correct. This is a stall tactic. Epic did not make any mistakes here. This is just a case of SK not being able to step up and play ball with the big boys so they blame everyone but themselves. Sad thing is that Epic could lose and not because they did anything wrong.

SK is suing them because Epic charged them an exhorbant licensing fee? Uh.............yeah this lawsuit is going to flop hard, very very hard.Vandalvideo

SK is suing them because Epic charged them an exhorbant licensing fee? Uh.............yeah this lawsuit is going to flop hard, very very hard.Vandalvideo

Did you even read ?

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]SK is suing them because Epic charged them an exhorbant licensing fee? Uh.............yeah this lawsuit is going to flop hard, very very hard.Jandurin

[QUOTE="Jandurin"][QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]SK is suing them because Epic charged them an exhorbant licensing fee? Uh.............yeah this lawsuit is going to flop hard, very very hard.Vandalvideo

They have to support their Engine, don't they? Or they just sell them code and walk away? Even if their code is broken?Jandurin

Contextually, they are only obligated to give them the engine, which they did in abundant ammount of time. Its Silicon Knights that claims that the coding was insufficient and had multiple problems. However, on the other hand, Epic claims the same build of the engine is what was used for the same E3 Gears presentation. If you ask me, this colors Silicon in the wrong.Vandalvideo

I wish things were that simple.

"SK accuses Epic of something. Epic denies it, therefore SK is wrong."

[QUOTE="Jandurin"]They have to support their Engine, don't they? Or they just sell them code and walk away? Even if their code is broken?Vandalvideo

Then why is it the majority of games using the Unreal Engine have been delayed time and time again? Here is a list of some of the games that have been delayed Stranglehold, BioShock, Lost Odyssey, Mass Effect, Rainbow Six: Vegas, Turok, Frame City Killer, Fatal Inertia and Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway

Silicon Knights doesnt even compare to Epic. Epic makes AAA games. Silicon Knight's Too Human looks lame and uninspired. I say to Silicon Knights, make your own engine if u whine so much and stop makingcrap games.

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="Jandurin"]They have to support their Engine, don't they? Or they just sell them code and walk away? Even if their code is broken?spinecaton

Then why is it the majority of games using the Unreal Engine have been delayed time and time again? Here is a list of some of the games that have been delayed Stranglehold, BioShock, Lost Odyssey, Mass Effect, Rainbow Six: Vegas, Turok, Frame City Killer, Fatal Inertia and Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway

Silicon Knights doesnt even compare to Epic. Epic makes AAA games. Silicon Knight's Too Human looks lame and uninspired. I say to Silicon Knights, make your own engine if u whine so much and stop makingcrap games.

mantisybza

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"] Contextually, they are only obligated to give them the engine, which they did in abundant ammount of time. Its Silicon Knights that claims that the coding was insufficient and had multiple problems. However, on the other hand, Epic claims the same build of the engine is what was used for the same E3 Gears presentation. If you ask me, this colors Silicon in the wrong.Forza_2

I wish things were that simple.

"SK accuses Epic of something. Epic denies it, therefore SK is wrong."

Silicon Knights doesnt even compare to Epic. Epic makes AAA games. Silicon Knight's Too Human looks lame and uninspired. I say to Silicon Knights, make your own engine if u whine so much and stop makingcrap games.

mantisybza

First off

http://www.gamespot.com/gamecube/adventure/eternaldarknesssr/index.html

9.4

Secondly, Silicon Knights isn't as big of a company as Epic so they might not have the resources to make an entire engine from scratch, but looks like they are going to try.

[QUOTE="Jandurin"][QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]SK is suing them because Epic charged them an exhorbant licensing fee? Uh.............yeah this lawsuit is going to flop hard, very very hard.Vandalvideo

From what I understand they are suing because supposely Epic lincensed out the UE3 engine and took the money to make Gears of War (though I believe it was actually MS who funded Gears, ironicly they are funding Too Human as well). Then supposely Epic sent everyone a bad version of the engine while using the good one for Gears. By doing so, they would make Gears look good compared to other games using the same engine (in this case Too Human) and give the devs of those other games hell and make them have to delay their projects ect... If true, than that would have cost those devs money and time. So, if it turns out to be true, than it's infact a legit claim from Silicon Knights. pins_basic

[QUOTE="Slyprince"]

Nope, because they produce games like:

Gears of War

UT3

And their engine is used in games like:

Mass Effect

feel free to add to the list

grayfox_2k

but aren't a little pissed that all the games that are working on the UE3 engine are getting delayed and this might prolly be the problem?

Obviously the Unreal Engine 3 is a complicated engine, they are not supposed to be easy to work with these days when games are becoming more complex, UE3 is probably the best engine in a while in terms of performance to graphics ratios, just look at what has been made with the engine and the games are not even using the consoles fullest potentials. If Silicon Knights is having problems with the engine because it is complicated, that is not Epic's fault really, because developers should know what they are buying into before spending the cash. UT3 and Gears of War were in development using early builds of the engine and only one of those two games has been released, however when Gears was released, it was using the final build of the engine at the time that was also being distributed to other developers. Ubisoft seems to not have had trouble with it, neither has Bioware and I do believe that Factor 5's title Lair uses UE3 as well.

If SK is suing Epic because they used the money from licensing out the engine to other developers which in turn went to funding Gears of War and now UT3, what gives them the right to do it. Hell you paid the money SK, once its in their pockets you cannot tell them what to do with it.

Contextually, they are only obligated to give them the engine, which they did in abundant ammount of time. Its Silicon Knights that claims that the coding was insufficient and had multiple problems. However, on the other hand, Epic claims the same build of the engine is what was used for the same E3 Gears presentation. If you ask me, this colors Silicon in the wrong.Vandalvideo

Not necessarily right. It depends on the contract.

Anyway, has anyone READ the lawsuit? SK does have an argument here, and asking for all the profits GeoW made is standard in lawsuits: Shoot for the stars, you don't want to limit your potential winnings because you were modest. That's why people keep asking for hundreds of millions of dollars because they fell down.

The whole crux of the matter is divided into a couple of claims:

1.- Epic was six months late in delivering UE3 for the 360, and is currently six months late in delivering it for the PS3. This has caused SK problems (since they did not have the engine for E3, which resulted in a poor showing).

2.- Epic was so busy with Gears that it did not provide adequate support. This seems to be true, as other UE licensees (notably Turok devs) have stated it's quicker to find a solution themselves than to wait for Epic.

3.- The Engine is uncapable, in it's current state, of fulfilling the technical requirements of MS without heavy reworking. According to SK, Epic assured them that the engine would be capable of doing this.

It's important to note that despite what it looks like, the lawsuit is timely: SK only received the UE3 engine in November 2006, and has been trying to make it work since then. Their latest problem came in february 2007, and if you consider the time needed to both try and solve the matter peacefully and prepare a lawsuit, july 2007 sounds like an appropiate date.

There is more, but that's the gist of it, as I saw it when reading the lawsuit last night. Depending on the contract, all these claims could very well be easily held in court. SK stated that they tried to work this out with Epic and that it was fruitless, and there's no actual evidence that the UE3 is workable outside of Gears.

Currently, there are three UE3 games out there: Gears of War, Roboblitz... and Hour of Victory. Rainbow Six Vegas uses UE2. The roboblitz dev noted that if it had been a full retail game, any publisher would've dropped the game because of the delays and necessary reworkings on the engine, and Hour of Victory, well, it's Hour of Victory. Every other UE3 game has been delayed.

So, in short, seems SK might have a case. Dennis Dyack is a monkey, a whiner and a barrel full of negative descriptors... but he might be right this time.

EDIT: I stupidly forgot to add the most important part. SK has an agreement to exclusively use UE3. However, since they've had these problems, they've basically made their own engine. Basically they want out of a bad partnership, and to save on licensing an engine they're no longer using but are forced to purchase.

If SK is suing Epic because they used the money from licensing out the engine to other developers which in turn went to funding Gears of War and now UT3, what gives them the right to do it. Hell you paid the money SK, once its in their pockets you cannot tell them what to do with it.

DSgamer64

there were probably things in the contracts that called for Epic to support the engine and the developers that license it. that's not unusual. SK contends that instead of providing that support Epic spent all(or most) the licensing money on developing other games and didn't provide substantial support. if they can proof it then they deserve their money back.

if they can proof it then they deserve their money back.Ontain

If it's TRUE, they deserve to get their money back.

If they have proof, they will. ;)

Ubisoft seems to not have had trouble with it, neither has Bioware and I do believe that Factor 5's title Lair uses UE3 as well.

DSgamer64

Ubisoft had trouble putting Rainbow Six Vegas to PS3, hence all the delays on the PS3 version, Unreal Engine could have been because of that.

Bioware is showing a bunch of framerate issues like Too Human. Sure KOTOR also had some framerate problems but it could mean that Unreal Engine could be inhancing these framerate issues. How many times have Mass Effect been delays?

Lair does not use unreal engine as far as I know.

Not necessarily right. It depends on the contract.Anyway, has anyone READ the lawsuit? SK does have an argument here, and asking for all the profits GeoW made is standard in lawsuits: Shoot for the stars, you don't want to limit your potential winnings because you were modest. That's why people keep asking for hundreds of millions of dollars because they fell down.The whole crux of the matter is divided into a couple of claims: 1.- Epic was six months late in delivering UE3 for the 360, and is currently six months late in delivering it for the PS3. This has caused SK problems (since they did not have the engine for E3, which resulted in a poor showing).2.- Epic was so busy with Gears that it did not provide adequate support. This seems to be true, as other UE licensees (notably Turok devs) have stated it's quicker to find a solution themselves than to wait for Epic.3.- The Engine is uncapable, in it's current state, of fulfilling the technical requirements of MS without heavy reworking. According to SK, Epic assured them that the engine would be capable of doing this.It's important to note that despite what it looks like, the lawsuit is timely: SK only received the UE3 engine in November 2006, and has been trying to make it work since then. Their latest problem came in february 2007, and if you consider the time needed to both try and solve the matter peacefully and prepare a lawsuit, july 2007 sounds like an appropiate date. There is more, but that's the gist of it, as I saw it when reading the lawsuit last night. Depending on the contract, all these claims could very well be easily held in court. SK stated that they tried to work this out with Epic and that it was fruitless, and there's no actual evidence that the UE3 is workable outside of Gears.Currently, there are three UE3 games out there: Gears of War, Roboblitz... and Hour of Victory. Rainbow Six Vegas uses UE2. The roboblitz dev noted that if it had been a full retail game, any publisher would've dropped the game because of the delays and necessary reworkings on the engine, and Hour of Victory, well, it's Hour of Victory. Every other UE3 game has been delayed.So, in short, seems SK might have a case. Dennis Dyack is a monkey, a whiner and a barrel full of negative descriptors... but he might be right this time.EDIT: I stupidly forgot to add the most important part. SK has an agreement to exclusively use UE3. However, since they've had these problems, they've basically made their own engine. Basically they want out of a bad partnership, and to save on licensing an engine they're no longer using but are forced to purchase.Grive

Its way too premature to be saying they COMMITED what Silicon Knights claims they did. Vandalvideo

It's also premature to be saying otherwise.

"Epic claims the same build of the engine is what was used for the same E3 Gears presentation. If you ask me, this colors Silicon in the wrong."

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]Its way too premature to be saying they COMMITED what Silicon Knights claims they did. Forza_2

It's also premature to be saying otherwise.

"Epic claims the same build of the engine is what was used for the same E3 Gears presentation. If you ask me, this colors Silicon in the wrong."

[QUOTE="Forza_2"]

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]Its way too premature to be saying they COMMITED what Silicon Knights claims they did. Vandalvideo

It's also premature to be saying otherwise.

"Epic claims the same build of the engine is what was used for the same E3 Gears presentation. If you ask me, this colors Silicon in the wrong."

Thats how the justice system works. They are innocent until proven guilty. You are OBLIGATED to presume the defendant is in the right.Vandalvideo

You seemed to be giving your personal opinion on the matter. If you ask me...

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="Forza_2"]

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]Its way too premature to be saying they COMMITED what Silicon Knights claims they did. Jandurin

It's also premature to be saying otherwise.

"Epic claims the same build of the engine is what was used for the same E3 Gears presentation. If you ask me, this colors Silicon in the wrong."

I respect both these devs. and one thing is certain, if this matter is settled out of court; it means to me that Epic prob. is culpable.

In that event, Epic will be hard at work trying to help in all ways to make Too Human a huge success or else !!!

Why would I hate epic? This is purely between SK and Epic, I'm not involved in this.

Do I think Epic should have followed through with their contract? Of course.

Do I hate them now? No.