Silicon Knight sues Epic! Too Human changes game engine entirely (AGAIN).

[QUOTE="asdasd"]

What Dennis really thinks

"I suck at making games so I will sue Epic because I cant make them work!"

Forza_2

Have you ever heard of Eternal Darkness, youngster ?

I thought so, it's one of his most recent games - http://gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/913957.asp (Also 9.4 on GS, mind you)

Maybe I shouldve worded it better. He sucks at making Too Human :P The game was supposed to come out on the damn PS1

[QUOTE="Forza_2"][QUOTE="asdasd"]

What Dennis really thinks

"I suck at making games so I will sue Epic because I cant make them work!"

asdasd

Have you ever heard of Eternal Darkness, youngster ?

I thought so, it's one of his most recent games - http://gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/913957.asp (Also 9.4 on GS, mind you)

Maybe I shouldve worded it better. He sucks at making Too Human :P The game was supposed to come out on the damn PS1

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.

the rest is history

but from what i see, it looks more like publisher difficulties than actual development problems

unless you want the game to look like a playstation game when it's on the gc or 360... takes a while to switch to higher tech engines

[QUOTE="Hoobinator"]

Money can also be made on the PS3. The PC has also made Epic where it is today but it seems they are concentrating just as much on consoles as on the PC. Why?, because that's business they go where the money is and where they feel in control.

thinicer

So you interpret Epic's dealings with other platforms and companies as evidence that they hate MS? Funny how that works.

No, but if you were paying attention during their spat with MS you'd see there was a genuine needle between the two. i.e. Epic saying they didn't want to charge for a map pack and MS basically throwing their toys out of the pram and saying that it was Epic who cost them a billion dollars by asking to put in an extra 256MB of RAM.

There has to be a real reason why SK would sue Epic. I mean they have a really promising game, getting lots of good feedback from the press. They know Too Human has already been in development far too long. UE3 is just about the most licensed engine ever, and nobody else is complaining about it. So why would SK make up some BS about the engine being faulty, just to delay their game for a court battle they probably won't win?

IMO this sounds like SK's lawyers grubbing around for more cash, or that there really is something wrong with the UE3 that was given to SK.

Whatever, I don't really care about these developers' catfights. The main thing is that Too Human is delayed again, possibly forever. Recently I've been considering whether to get a 360 or a PS3 and this news just about seals the deal in Sony's favour. So MS has already lost one customer over this.

SK also wants Epic to give up all income earned from GeoW as SK charges that Epic used the licensee version of the UE to hinder development of other games in competition with them, Epic.

SK claims Epic did not give them and other licensees a working version of the UE.

SK claims Epic did not update and provide adequate support for the UE.

SK claims Epic themselves used a different version of the UE for GeoW than what they gave licensees.

SK claims Epic would not support the UE in any way if that support would hinder development of GeoW.

SK claims Epic used 3rd party "middleware" to create stability within the UE and would not provide licensees this same stabillity.

SK claims Epic lied when pitching the UE to them. Epic claimed any genre of game (i.e. racing, action, platformer, etc) could be created with the new UE. SK claims that it is only good for games such as Unreal Tournament and IPs created by Epic.

Very serious charges. I wonder if Ubisoft had any of this trouble.

Hmm...wtf? SK is just developing a game...while USING the UE3, sooooo...i could see Epic suing Silicon Knights for doing something illegal with their engine....but wut could Silicon Knights possibly be suing Epic over? this is weird :|....and it also sucks really bad. Too Human has been in the works forever...finnally about to see the light of day....and now it gets pushed back to 2012? Think it'll stay a 360 game, or will SK once again push it back to next (next) gen consoles? Ugh...boo :(duble_Needler23

360 wont be around in 2012 lol.

No, but if you were paying attention during their spat with MS you'd see there was a genuine needle between the two. i.e. Epic saying they didn't want to charge for a map pack and MS basically throwing their toys out of the pram and saying that it was Epic who cost them a billion dollars by asking to put in an extra 256MB of RAM.

Hoobinator

There is no needle. Microsoft and Epic will continue to do business with each other in the forseeable future. You are looking for conflict when there is none. And Microsoft, three years ago, told Epic that they 'cost them a billion dollars." That was made light last November, around the release of Gears.

Epic I'm sure is disappointed with Microsoft for charging for the map pack, but whatever. It's not going to result in a falling out between the two entities.

Hmm...wtf? SK is just developing a game...while USING the UE3, sooooo...i could see Epic suing Silicon Knights for doing something illegal with their engine....but wut could Silicon Knights possibly be suing Epic over? this is weird :|....and it also sucks really bad. Too Human has been in the works forever...finnally about to see the light of day....and now it gets pushed back to 2012? Think it'll stay a 360 game, or will SK once again push it back to next (next) gen consoles? Ugh...boo :(duble_Needler23

Did it ever cross your mind that maybe Silicon Knights, you know...licensed the engine?

I mean, not that two straight years of screenshots, trailers, and gameplay videos showcasing the game rendered in the UE3 was enough to get Epic's attention that their engine had been stolen, amirite?

[QUOTE="thinicer"][QUOTE="Hoobinator"]

Money can also be made on the PS3. The PC has also made Epic where it is today but it seems they are concentrating just as much on consoles as on the PC. Why?, because that's business they go where the money is and where they feel in control.

Hoobinator

So you interpret Epic's dealings with other platforms and companies as evidence that they hate MS? Funny how that works.

No, but if you were paying attention during their spat with MS you'd see there was a genuine needle between the two. i.e. Epic saying they didn't want to charge for a map pack and MS basically throwing their toys out of the pram and saying that it was Epic who cost them a billion dollars by asking to put in an extra 256MB of RAM.

You don't see Epic refusing their share of the map pack profits do you?

[QUOTE="Hoobinator"]

No, but if you were paying attention during their spat with MS you'd see there was a genuine needle between the two. i.e. Epic saying they didn't want to charge for a map pack and MS basically throwing their toys out of the pram and saying that it was Epic who cost them a billion dollars by asking to put in an extra 256MB of RAM.

thinicer

There is no needle. Microsoft and Epic will continue to do business with each other in the forseeable future. You are looking for conflict when there is none. And Microsoft, more than two years ago, told Epic that they 'cost them a billion dollars." That was made light last November when they made the design decision to put 512 megs of ram in the 360, at Epic's urging.

Epic I'm sure is disappointed with Microsoft for charging for the map pack, but whatever. It's not going to result in a falling out between the two entities.

Of course they'll release more games on the 360. But no doubt its also shown them that there are other options as well. I also like the way the PS3 has allowed them to deliver mods to the PS3 community without going through official channels ala Microsoft. MS just likes to penny pinch its customers, especially with the marketplace.

SK also wants Epic to give up all income earned from GeoW as SK charges that Epic used the licensee version of the UE to hinder development of other games in competition with them, Epic.

SK claims Epic did not give them and other licensees a working version of the UE.

SK claims Epic did not update and provide adequate support for the UE.

SK claims Epic themselves used a different version of the UE for GeoW than what they gave licensees.

SK claims Epic would not support the UE in any way if that support would hinder development of GeoW.

SK claims Epic used 3rd party "middleware" to create stability within the UE and would not provide licensees this same stabillity.

SK claims Epic lied when pitching the UE to them. Epic claimed any genre of game (i.e. racing, action, platformer, etc) could be created with the new UE. SK claims that it is only good for games such as Unreal Tournament and IPs created by Epic.

Very serious charges. I wonder if Ubisoft had any of this trouble.

cametall

What confuses me about this is one thing. Didnt MS basically fund the entire development of GeoW, which probably includes the revision of UE3 to make GeoW possible. Why doesnt SK sue MS while they're at it? :P

You don't see Epic refusing their share of the map pack profits do you?

TyrantDragon55

No, but they were prepared to forego all profits in the first place.:|

Maybe they'll use that money and pump it back into their games and gamers.

Didnt MS basically fund the entire development of GeoW

asdasd

No. They just did the marketing.

[QUOTE="TyrantDragon55"]

You don't see Epic refusing their share of the map pack profits do you?

Hoobinator

No, but they were prepared to forego all profits in the first place.:|

Maybe they'll use that money and pump it back into their games and gamers.

Still, if Epic really was so upset with microsoft over this whole thing don't you think they would have refused their share?

[QUOTE="Hoobinator"][QUOTE="TyrantDragon55"]

You don't see Epic refusing their share of the map pack profits do you?

TyrantDragon55

No, but they were prepared to forego all profits in the first place.:|

Maybe they'll use that money and pump it back into their games and gamers.

Still, if Epic really was so upset with microsoft over this whole thing don't you think they would have refused their share?

No because if the money was going to be taken from the consumer anyway they would know they could use that money to put directly back into games, and thus indirectly give back to the consumer.

http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/feature/?id=16868

[UPDATE] GameDaily BIZ has now heard from Silicon Knights president Denis Dyack.

"We stand behind everything in our complaint and believe it is highly unfortunate that Epic forced us into this situation. We would rather spend our time focusing on making great games, but as stated in our complaint, Epic simply refuses to acknowledge the inadequacies of the Unreal Engine 3 code it provides to its licensees," he said, "and refuses to accept the fact that its code has caused serious damage not only to Silicon Knights, but a number of other developers in the industry. We look forward to successful resolution of our claims in this court proceeding."

:lol:

vgf434

:lol: It is their own stupidity if they can't properly use the engine, I mean jesus how many games are using UE3 right now? Not to mention more are coming. I have not heard of Ubisoft having any problems with the engine as well and they made R6 Vegas which was just fine. Silicon Knights folks need to lay off the alcohol and drugs methinks :lol:

It is simple. SK has been having trouble optimizing the UE3 engine, and based on official comments, Epic doesn't seem to offer proper support to fixing the trouble that SK is having with Too Human. Epic runs a business, and part of the business that they run is support for their products. Think of a game engine much like an apartment or townhome and consider Epic games the Land Lord of said living quarter. If there is a leak in a tenants house, it is the land lords responsibility to fix the problem, failure to fix the problem results in a breach of contract.

Seems to me that the same thing is happening here. There is a so called "leak" in the engine that requires a fix that only Epic can supportbut neglecting to do so. Obviously there is more to the suit than meets the eye, but those of you saying that there is no reason what so ever for this suit to be happening are completely wrong.

Assuming this is indeed the case, SK is more than likely suing for money lost due to the delays the trouble is causingthe team.

Epic made GeoW, yes? Huh. Maybe they're truly bastards to licensees. They may just deserve this.

We'll see what justice renders.

I just started Eternal Darkness... it is good. So, I have a certain faith in the general ability of SK.

GeoW was good too, but Epic used its own knowledge about its own engine... maybe there were faults that they just had the know-how to work around, but that is more than should be asked of someone paying for their engine?

Time will tell.

Epic made GeoW, yes? Huh. Maybe they're truly bastards to licensees. They may just deserve this.

Jandurin

So little is known, it is REALLY stupid for anyone to be bashing either Epic or SK.

It sucks this is happening, but business is business. I hope it can all be settled well and none of this hurts the industry.

I do know other devs have complained about Epic not doing a good job supporting the engine.

So little is known

LegendofYaslint

I do know other devs have complained about Epic not doing a good job supporting the engine.

LegendofYaslint

Sad really.

I do know other devs have complained about Epic not doing a good job supporting the engine.LegendofYaslint

Can you give us examples ?

[QUOTE="LegendofYaslint"]I do know other devs have complained about Epic not doing a good job supporting the engine.Forza_2

Can you give us examples ?

If Epic didn't deliver the UE on time to SK, then it is possible that SK has reason to sue Epic. I still don't think they will get all the profit from Gears though. That is just absurd. Well any way, I just want Too Human to come out. I have every right to believe that Too Human will be good, considering SK's track record.Sir-Marwin105

I don't think you understand what this suit is about. It doesn't have to do with not recieving the engine on time :/ They have been working with the engine since before they announced the game as a trilogy for the 360 :/ It has to do with support or apparently lack their of from Epic's end.

It's for the better.

Honestly, the UE 3.0 looks fantastic, but I think they need a better engine, perhaps, in the direction of the Source Engine, for a game that they're trying to make.

[QUOTE="Sir-Marwin105"]If Epic didn't deliver the UE on time to SK, then it is possible that SK has reason to sue Epic. I still don't think they will get all the profit from Gears though. That is just absurd. Well any way, I just want Too Human to come out. I have every right to believe that Too Human will be good, considering SK's track record.gamer620

I don't think you understand what this suit is about. It doesn't have to do with not recieving the engine on time :/ They have been working with the engine since before they announced the game as a trilogy for the 360 :/ It has to do with support or apparently lack their of from Epic's end.

OMG is this game ever going to come out? are they gonna have to put it on hold so they can rework it with another engine? Even though most games this gen are using the Unreal Engine 3. black_awpN1

If Duke Nukem Forever can come out after switching engines like3 times (quake 2, unreal, doom 3...)... Oh wait...

well... Prey came out after an engine switch... 7 years later :/

And Marwin, once again, thats a support issue. They still had an engine, whether it was a finished build or not, they were working with an engine under the assumption that Epic would support them with the proper engine code, or whatever other issues they were having with the engine. It is, i would assume, part of a contract that Epic has to fully support the company with any help they need to make the engine work to the proper specifications, and this lawsuit seems to be about failing to fullfil that duty.

Too Human is a joke. The E3 2006 demo was garbage, but they released footage later on and it still sucked. Somehow, Ubisoft was able to get the UE3 engine to work with Rainbow Six: Vegas just fine, and Bioware doesn't seem to have any issues with Mass Effect.

Too Human is a joke. The E3 2006 demo was garbage, but they released footage later on and it still sucked. Somehow, Ubisoft was able to get the UE3 engine to work with Rainbow Six: Vegas just fine, and Bioware doesn't seem to have any issues with Mass Effect.

Sooshy

Too Human is more ambitious than any of those titles, so really, it doesn't apply.

Too Human is a joke. The E3 2006 demo was garbage, but they released footage later on and it still sucked. Somehow, Ubisoft was able to get the UE3 engine to work with Rainbow Six: Vegas just fine, and Bioware doesn't seem to have any issues with Mass Effect.

Sooshy

Mass Effect, R6, and Bioshock are3 very different games from Too Human.

[QUOTE="Sooshy"]

Too Human is a joke. The E3 2006 demo was garbage, but they released footage later on and it still sucked. Somehow, Ubisoft was able to get the UE3 engine to work with Rainbow Six: Vegas just fine, and Bioware doesn't seem to have any issues with Mass Effect.

FrozenLiquid

Too Human is more ambitious than any of those titles, so really, it doesn't apply.

[QUOTE="Jandurin"]

Epic made GeoW, yes? Huh. Maybe they're truly bastards to licensees. They may just deserve this.

Teufelhuhn

Reminds me of Microsoft APIs that only they know about. Or would customize windows to work better with their products.

[QUOTE="FrozenLiquid"][QUOTE="Sooshy"]

Too Human is a joke. The E3 2006 demo was garbage, but they released footage later on and it still sucked. Somehow, Ubisoft was able to get the UE3 engine to work with Rainbow Six: Vegas just fine, and Bioware doesn't seem to have any issues with Mass Effect.

Sooshy

Too Human is more ambitious than any of those titles, so really, it doesn't apply.

Wow.

You've never heard Denis Dyack speak about games?

Really...... this is the game to lead all games into being the "Eigth Art", alongside movies, painting, dance etc.

You haven't been paying attention to Too Human outside E3, have you?

76. The problems created by Epic's withholding of such enhancements and
optimizations on the dubious grounds of them being "game-specific" became especially
pronounced when such withholding impacted the specific benchmarks known as "Technical
Certification Requirements" (or "TCRs") that every videogame must meet before it can be
played on a particular game console. For example, Microsoft imposes certain TCR's for games
that are to be run on the Xbox 360. One very basic TCR is simply how long it takes the
videogame to start-up. For Silicon Knights, as of May, 2006, the Engine had been unable to
meet even that simple start-up requirement, still taking over twice as long as Microsoft requires
in its Xbox 360 TCRs.

77. Another of Microsoft's TCRs is that the system User Interface ("UI") can be
rendered at least every 66 milliseconds at all times. As of at least as late as May, 2006, it was
clear to Silicon Knights that the Engine and its renderer could not satisfy that TCR.


78. However, when Epic was asked what was being done to bring the Engine into
compliance with these fundamental TCR requirements from the Xbox 360 manufacturer (which
again, Epic warranted to Silicon Knights it would meet), Epic responded that, though it was at
that very time working toward meeting the TCRs in Gears of War, that level of functionality
would not "make it to the engine level, as it is custom to the game."

but wait, there's more

BIA: Hell's Highway - delayed
Bioshock - delayed
Elveon - delayed/cancelled
Fatal inertia - delayed
Huxley- delayed
Mass effect - delayed
MOH - delayed
Stranglehold - delayed
Too human - delayed
Turok - delayed
Frame City Killer - cancelled
Endless Saga - cancelled

im beginning to think because of all of epic's fanboy love, some people really aren't well versed in SK's roots

these are developers who know howto write an actual story

voxware00

That seems daming to me, if its true.

You've never heard Denis Dyack speak about games?

Really...... this is the game to lead all games into being the "Eigth Art", alongside movies, painting, dance etc.

You haven't been paying attention to Too Human outside E3, have you?

FrozenLiquid

[QUOTE="FrozenLiquid"]You've never heard Denis Dyack speak about games?

Really...... this is the game to lead all games into being the "Eigth Art", alongside movies, painting, dance etc.

You haven't been paying attention to Too Human outside E3, have you?

Sooshy

Game play can only go so far in video games.

Game play is the "visual effects" of movies. Back when films first appeared, all you needed was someone doing something wicked on screen, and that's enough.

Now days, you cant do that.

http://blogs.ign.com/silicon-knights/

You will not see any developer talk about games like this today.