saintrobyn

Thank you, too, very interesting words :)

Candlejack

As for looking forward to what... I dunno... I know I'll get another UT and I know it'll stick to formula. I like the formula being that I played the hell out of it and all the Quakes in LAN parties over the last half of the 90s and beyond. I honestly do look forward to that, because I enjoy the status quo on some level.

I look forward, with frustration mind you, at Too Human because it's attempting to break molds and be all that it can be. My fear is that it tried to be "more" than it can be and it'll either bomb on some level or end up vaporware.

I truly wish Denis Dyack would get pissed off enough at people like me and say "you know what, screw you... HERE... eat THIS, it's the greatest game ever made." and prove me wrong. Being wrong, in this case, means I get a kickass game. Yeah... real lose/lose situation there.

But again, as far as MS in concerned... Epic and SK both sorta made a deal with the devil there. Epic gained enough clout to lobby for what they wanted... and I applaud their balls for getting it... because it's good for them, good for gamers, and probably good for MS on some level whether they see it yet or not. SK just isn't in that same bargaining position. They may have clout because MS sunk a shit-ton of money into them... but past that, little to bargain with.

I guess I'm just plain out of faith. Hope? Hope I still got... but faith, plum dry.

Excellent discussion btw... thanks.

dv8godd

So yea, UT never got me, I'm a born CS(S) gamer, since 4 years, as well. Nothing beats it for me :P I generally have a distaste for deathmatch-like games.

But, if you are looking practically more forward to TH than whatever Epic throws in (UT2k3 out at this point), don't you want Microsoft to pick on Epic rather than SK in this lawsuit? I sure do :P

Epic has pissed off many gamers from what I picked up, and they pissed off Microsoft big time. Gears being a hotseller or not, nobody can be sure if Gears of War 2 is/will be, and imagine some company you signed exclusive deals with suddenly creates rage against you by going into public with stuff like "We wanted our DLC for free!!! WAAAH!!!!". I'd be helluva pissed.

Candlejack

Well... that depends on whether or not you're trying to validate the game's quality or it's personally "perceived" quality. I'll take you at your word that you're judging by what you've seen thus far, not assessing final value... which I think all rational people can agree is still up in the air. SK's "goals" sound amazing... but whether they actually meet them is pretty hazy given what little meat we've been thrown thus-far.

"...taking Gears into reference when thinking about a 360 purchase cause they can have it on the PC as well (even leeched for free possibly)."

Now that, we can agree on. Though I wonder how many people are honestly deterred by 360 vs PC release. At this point, most people are one, the other, or both... and staunchly so. Not sure there's that much shake-out left on the "do I want to PC or console game" debate. PC gamers are often rabid about their choice... and console gamers tend to ignore the PC. Being both, I'm frequently surprised by the rift.

Point is... yeah, that makes sense... though I think actual impact is probably low... especially considering the health of the PC gaming market anymore.

"the fact that Microsoft paid a shitload of money for the trilogy of Too Human proves at least to me that they are very interested in the game and not interested in losing it because of a company, namely Epic"

Oh, I don't doubt for a second that they want a return on their investment... I just wonder that, if they had to choose a side and only got to choose one, would they:

A) Choose to back SK despite not yet having a marketable product when it's still unknown whether the property will absolutely sell.

B) Choose to back Epic, despite the push/pull of egos, when they currently possess an IP that is the #2 jewel in the 360 crown.

"With "credible", I merely was talking about the track record of SK, which holds MGS:TTW and EternalDarkness. Epic sure is as credible when it comes to... graphics quality. They don't nearly earn my respect for their gameplay value, which is horrid in my opinion - I never got into UT."

4 years of playing in a UT CTF ladder over here... can you tell?

Basically, at the end of the day, my thinking ends with this:

MicroSoft might not "want" to back Epic... but if they piss Epic off, do they want to lose the Gears publishing exclusivity? Do they really want to see that become a multi-platform or, shudder, PS3 exclusive? After Halo 3, they're pretty lean on the exclusive FPS IP that can sell in numbers comparable to Halo.

I used to think it was ridiculous for MS to push so hard to get Halo as a prime title for the original Xbox because it cannibalized the FPS crowd which were already PC gamers... rather than stealing from Sony and Nintendo... they stole from themselves.

Today the landscape looks a bit different, of course, but from MicroSoft's side, pushing a high-end FPS IP has been extremely lucrative... and many other bright ideas have been critically accepted but relatively weak in the big picture. As an avid gamer, I'm much more interested in the promise of Too Human than another Gears... but what sells is what sells. I, for some reason, enjoy Nippon Ichi games as well... but that doesn't mean I believe they have a shot at mainstream success. I'm still on the fence as to whether or not Too Human can achieve the same success, especially considering all the negative buzz floating around now.

SK, to me, is a gamer's game company... but then, so is Epic (or at least a PC FPS player's game company). I really don't like seeing the two of them piss and moan at each other because I think both do good work when they concentrate on the work. All this getting distracted by sundry bullshit just sounds like bad news for us as gamers.

dv8godd

Furthermore, since Gears of War is published to the PC as well, even if by MS, it is not necessarily an exclusive anymore, and many people (I can assure that) are not taking Gears into reference when thinking about a 360 purchase cause they can have it on the PC as well (even leeched for free possibly).

Additionally, the fact that Microsoft paid a shitload of money for the trilogy of Too Human proves at least to me that they are very interested in the game and not interested in losing it because of a company, namely Epic, that has made them look like asses because of the DLC debacle, the UT2K3 exclusivity, and also killing the exclusivity of Gears.

With "credible", I merely was talking about the track record of SK, which holds MGS:TTW and EternalDarkness. Epic sure is as credible when it comes to... graphics quality. They don't nearly earn my respect for their gameplay value, which is horrid in my opinion - I never got into UT.

Basically, Microsoft stepping in is not far fetched, you have to agree that they want to get each exclusive they can, and keep it. Why'd they let go of a paid trilogy, because of one Gears? One company? That made UT2K3 exclusive for MS's main enemy and even paid them disrespect by criticizing their XBL policy including user-created content? No sir, I hardly think so.

Candlejack

1) Why would MicroSoft consider a 360 AND PC version of any game "non-exclusive"... if they're publishing both? How does a company compete against itself for market share on two platforms that they own and an IP they're publishing themselves?

2) Your assessment of Too Human's quality is subjective at best. You said it "definitely ranks very high in the quality list" just before you said you didn't even want to make comparisons. What do you call what you just did? Of the professional gaming journalists that actually have touched it, it's been widely criticized. The only people still defending the game are fans of SK that have seen trailers of debatable quality and have convinced themselves that it was brilliant and everyone else it nuts. But beyond that, it's almost like you're writing the review of the game before it's even released... how is that objective. I've been trying to hold out judgement on the game's quality, speaking only to what I've seen and actually played, and to what looks like SK blaming other for continued woes... but SK fanatics are clearly losing all perspective here, repeatedly saying how great it is or how great it must be because of previous SK work. Logical fallacies abound.

3) MicroSoft owns the rights to publish Gears of War sequels. The only way the IP can move to anothe system is if MiroSoft refuses to publish a sequel. Why would they do that? It's the second most profitable IP to ever appear on their platforms, period. It, unlike Too Human, has a proven track record of making money... whereas Too Human, thus far, has only cost MicroSoft money. That you don't want to compare apples to oranges is fine... but why not apples to apples, bottom line comparisons? Is it because you know those facts go against your pre-assumed positions?

4) That a sequel for GoW2 isn't "confirmed" outright means practically nothing. Nearly every single person covering the industry assumes it as a foregone conclusion. To quote Mark Rein:

"Gears is a trilogy? If we can keep making quality games that fans obviously then why would we have to stop at three? I don't see the Metal Gear Solid, Mario, Grand Theft Auto or Final Fantasy series (among others) stopping at three and they're still delivering compelling entertainment content that's easily worth the money (see Unreal Tournament as well). There's definitely, as many of you have pointed out, a lot more to learn about what's really happening on the plant Sera and in the lives of the members of Delta Squad."

Yeah... really sounds like he's planning on packing up that IP and putting in in cold storage.

5) You've said that SK is a "credible" company, and thus imply that Epic is not. How much money has MicroSoft made from SK to date? How much from Epic? Are you basing your "credibility" on "critical success" or "financial success"? Which do you really think MicroSoft gives a shit about? You assign credibility to them because you like their games... and take it from Epic because you don't or don't like what they're doing to SK. This is another subjective assessment of the situation.

6) In order for game "B" to sell, MicroSoft needs to promote the hell out of it. Considering all the publicity it's gotten so far has been mostly negative... how do you expect them to turn that into something positive? Gears sold well because MicroSoft promoted the product well, and it had already shown very well to a huge portion of the gaming population, including most everyone who is now slandering Epic. Considering it is the most costly enterprise in gaming history, compared to GoW costing about $10 million to make... how many copies is a game of this type going to need to sell in order to break even, let alone profit. And we're, as you said, talking about a completely different game... so different that it's not even on the radar for mass acceptance at the same level of Gears. That you and I, as avid gamers, are more excited about Too Human is beside the point. To date, SK has never had a game reach platinum success (a million or more units), and Epic has done this repeatedly. Proven track records are what establish credibility to businesses like MicroSoft... not the subjective views of the fans of a money pit.

dv8godd

The sequels to Gears are simply not save to be on any system exclusively, while three games off a credible company are.

I don't even want to compare TH to GoW because I never played the first obviously, but even the simplest comparison is beyond me. Those are totally different games. And sales of game A don't mean a shit for how good game B will sell, understood?

@Samos42: Sadly, there's no talk or confirmation of any sequel to Gears on any system.

Candlejack

Candlejack

DrXym

if they are willing to send threats to someone for making a action figure then there is no way they would have waited until now to sue Silicon Knights if those claims are true.

frankstallone

raikoh05

ohnoez

Soldrak

First, you mean UT3 (not UE3), just to clarify.

Here's the real deal: Unreal 3 is now a timed exclusive for PC (which is Microsoft too, you know) and PS3 first... with 360 a quarter later. That might, if you weren't paying close attention, seem like MicroSoft got shafted on the 360 part of the deal... but it simply isn't true.

Consider that, at the time of it's initial announcement, UT 2007 (now called UT3) was spoken of, by Epic, to appear solely on the PS3 and PC... and wasn't announced for the 360 at all. This occured back at E3 2005. One of the guys at Epic came out during Sony's keynote and demoed the Unreal Engine 3 to gasps of shock and amazement that it was actually running in real-time. At no point during the expo was 360 mentioned by Epic... and no sites had any news of a 360 release whatsoever.

So... a year goes by... and then MicroSoft ends up getting the announcement that UT3, a game that wasn't previously announced at all for 360, is actually coming there too. This is a major slam against Sony for two reasons: one, because Mark Rein initially commented that they were aiming to have Unreal 2007 (now UT3 remember) as a PS3 launch title... and two, because Sony now lost all exclusivity.

Fast forward again... and it's now "timed" with the 360 coming out later. But rather than actually think about the situation, 360 owners turn against Epic and act like MicroSoft got shafted. Here's another theory:

1) With it coming to the 360 at all, Sony's thunder was stolen completely anyway... timed or not, it doesn't really impact 360 owners because they will get the game, which wasn't always the case.

3) The inital plan was for UT3 to be a PS3 launch title... not only did that not happen, but Epic released Gears of War up against the PS3 launch... which, if you read my earlier post, has proven to be 2nd most important franchise to MicroSoft... ever. Again... Gear isn't just 360 only... it was released against the PS3's coming out party... which again... didn't get UT3 like it was hoping for.

2) The currently scheduled time for UT3 release is right smack in the middle of an already kick-ass 360 holiday schedule filled with triple-A titles... including Halo. Why put one more product on 360 at a time when cash is already going to be spread thin... and have a game known solely for it's multi-player games go up against the premier Xbox franchise, also loved primarily for it's multi-player? Why not wait a few months until early 2008 when 360 owners are getting over the xmas rush and looking for something new? Keeping a steady supply of decent quality games from month to month has been a great strategy for MicroSoft this generation, resulting in steady software sales at times not usually profitable.

So... tell me again how this screws MicroSoft?

The only other "screwing" that MicroSoft is getting is that Epic wants to release "free" content (for UT3 and Gears)... and to allow user-created mods on UT3. Both of these requests are based upon an Epic policy that has been in place since the original Unreal. This wasn't some new fangled way to mess with MicroSoft... this was Epic trying to assert that these elements were important to the Unreal Tournament brand... which they are. This is a big part of Epic's business model and how they retain player loyalty.

First, MicroSoft didn't want to release things for free... they wanted to continue to milk the shit out of us, the consumers, for every piece of content. For Gears, they struck a bargain, releasing some items for free, and some paid... even though the effort was put in by Epic to release it for free since that's what they've always done. Epic didn't go to MicroSoft and say "hey... you need to charge for all this work we're doing... you can't give it away for free"... no, they went to MicroSoft and said "we have always done this kind of work for free to build brand loyalty... we don't want to charge for it". But MicroSoft decided that was silly and they'd charge anyway. Bad, bad Epic... doing all that free work in good faith.

Second, Epic wants to retain mods on UT3... and MicroSoft runs a closed system. There is certainly a "possibility" that Epic threw a bit of weight around here to get MS to change their position... but it has always been this way with UT, it should always be this way with UT. Epic, again, wanted to give back to the fans, and MicroSoft rejected this approach. That Sony gave the green light was most likely what changed MicroSoft's mind. In other words, Sony screwed MicroSoft by doing what Epic wanted... not Epic. Sony provided support to a franchise they already had coming to their platform (UT3) allowing Epic to protect their own IP by keeping it intact when MicroSoft wanted to make us all pay for updates, maps, mods, etc.

You'll never convince me that any company that has made so much money for MicroSoft is somehow screwing them by protecting their own intellectual properties on the side. It's no skin off MicroSoft's back if Epic wants to put free content out there for us, is it? I mean, they already charge us for XBL, right? If Sony can support PSN for free and have mods... why not MicroSoft?

As for Too Human being more important that Gears? Oh, here it comes... I can feel it building up inside...

1) Gears is more important because it is a real, proven franchise that is #2 in the 360's crown... that is also a trilogy. Read my earlier post again and pay attention to it's other credentials next time.

2) Too Human is a hopeful, unproven franchise... that's been in development for nearly a decade... that is so far the most expensive game that has ever been made (though it shows no signs of a release date still)... that bombed at E3 2006... that is headed by Denis Dyack, who just spent the last year pissing in gaming journalist's faces for not kissing his ass... and who is now suing the company responsible for Gears, UT, and UE3 (see: all early points).

As for Too Human being "simply amazing"... I'd suggest glasses. I saw the same video you did when it came out and was honestly bummed out at the lack of attention to detail that was in the cutscene. Nearly every other game that debuted at E3 2007 made it look unrefined... just like E3 2006. I don't even think anyone nominated it for any awards or mentions at E3 this year.

To be perfectly honest, as I've said in other threads, this upsets me because I've been looking forward to this game since it was announced for the PS1. The more I heard with passing years, I wanted it all the more. What I am outright pissed about is that it's unlikely to come out any time soon, if at all, and SK has spent all this time and all this money to show me nothing that impresses me anywhere near where it should. Maybe they're right... maybe Epic is to blame for all their woes and problems... just like all the journalists were to blame last year... just like...

... you know what? I'm not sure I even care anymore. Dyack has the biggest budget in gaming history and 8 years to make this game: and it's everyone's fault but his.

Somehow... I just don't buy that. Call me crazy... but I think we're being had.

dv8godd

Lanky Bugger

Judge: Epic did the engine meet the specified goals in a timely manner.
Epic: Well not completely but it is coming.
Judge: So it didn't meet the described needs.
Epic: I guess.
Judge: SK is your engine base on the source provided by Epic's UE3 engine
SK: No we rebuilt all the code then went in and removed all the Epic code.
Judge: So your code was built on top of the UE3 engine.
SK: Well technically.
Judge: Well it is my opinion that you are both at fault. SK you had full access to there code and it is without doubt that it was at least some aid to your development however Epic's failure to deliver on the product has also cause SK long delays and loss of cash. I find that Epic is due some of the money since there engine was used but but not the original amount ruling partial payment and or refund by and or to SK.

Konchu

The settelment will be like this.....

Epic:OK, you shut your yaps to the public and we will get your game running.

SK:or?

Epic: or we keep you in court so long you go bankrupt.

SK: uh, ok.

there ya go! All wrapped up with a nice neat bow.

TehBoognish

Konchu

Samos42

There's other factors, as well. By releasing the game as a timed exclusive, Epic stops competing with itself. However, let's use your logic here:

Let's assume that everyone who owns a PS3 also owns an Xbox 360, and that every single one of the users who own both prefer to get Unreal for their PS3 and don't intend to repurchase the game for Xbox 360, regardless of any features added later. Let's also assume that 20% of the currently purchased Xbox 360s have been purchases made to replace a RROD'ed Xbox 360. Finally, let's assume that a further 5% of Xbox 360 owners are computer users with both a preference for and the system power to run Unreal on their computer.

That still leaves a market for the game of 4.2 million Xbox 360 consoles. That doesn't touch on the fact that being released later will increase the potential market for the game. Sure, it'll effect the sales of the game a bit, that's true. However, it won't prevent the game from selling hundreds of thousands of copies. You're vastly overstating the potential for the PS3 version to damage the Xbox 360 version of the game.

The inverse, however, is not true. A timed exclusive for the Xbox 360 would, relatively, have a greater impact on the sales for the PS3 version due to the (relative) market saturation of the Xbox 360.

Lanky Bugger

dixon0396

Yes, because the PS3 and 360 (dual system) owners are so plentiful, MSFT surely will notice in their profits.

Seriously!

EnigmaNemesis

Someone owns a PS3 and 360. They are a UT fan. The 360 version comes out 6-12 months later. Which version do you think this person will get? Wait for it.........THE PS3 VERSION!!! Thats why companies pursue timed exclusives; because it gives them the advantage over the competitor. Its not that hard to understand. Remember, Microsoft and Sony make most of their profits from the sale of games; thats why its preferable if they can get timed exclusives for multiplatform games. Anything that gives them an edge basically.

You have to consider the 360's install base too which is much bigger then the PS3's. Its most likely that the 360 version would sell way better if there was a simultaneous release but this is not the case anymore. And what about the PC version? The 360 version of UT3 looks like its going to sell poorly by the time it comes out......

asianmacker

You must think the majority of game makers are clueless. If UE3 was underdelivering, don't you think most of the many many dozens of companies using it would have noticed by now? Gamasutra said something like 3 more companies announced today they're using it.

MSFT is not weeping over UT3 when Halo is shipping this Christmas. What would MS have done with it, market it against Halo?

FreddyGlitter

A timed exclusive is not more painful than a 100% never going to be on the other system exclusive.

Seriously, how long have you paid attention to the gaming world? Not to mention it is Unreal Tournament, not exactgly diehard for console people. Mostly PC.

What will hurt MSFT more than a "timed exclusive", is the fact hey Sony will allow KB/Mouse and MSFT still has yet to.

I fail to see how it is Epic screwing over MSFT, when this is just business. At least the 360 will get it, unlike Gears for the PS3.

EnigmaNemesis

Arctordarkley

Funny you say overpromised and underdelivered as by pretty much all accounts that is what Epic have done with the Unreal Engine. The amount of delays hitting games that use the engine certainly don't make you think that everything is just as expected.

Zim

Iceman B.

asianmacker

I guess the reasoning is that I expect this game to diappoint me big time. As long as it never comes out the legend can live. A release could destroy it or worse yet make it into a joke in the future...

And on the subject of epicly delayed games, what about this Duke Nukem Forever? Have you seen this? Have you heard about this? What if after all these years of it being a joke to us, it turns out they were assembling some feature of epic proportions? What after all these years they come out announcing the game and show us the neural interface attachment? You are actually in the game total Matrix style, and it is quite simply the greatest game of all time? The history of gaming will skew off into a tangent we never saw coming and we will truly be DUKE NUKEM FOREVER!

Bobby McPresscott

P.S I'm not even being serious here so even if you do reply and get all worked up then good; i managed to piss you off and I can sit back with a big smirk on my face :p

asianmacker

You mean like the content MSFT paid $50 million for in GTAIV?

Give me a break, nobody screwed over anybody. MSFT could have easily been floating Epic their due as well, but were plenty happy with the 100% exclusive Gears.

You want to talk about screwing people over, it is MSFT now charging $59.99 for their first party games, when they told everyone they would only be $49.99. Funny how things changed when Gears came out, and from then on. (yet I still buy them, mostly through GameFly though)

EnigmaNemesis

Too Human better be the best damn game of all time, or it becomes Canada's Duke Nuken Forever.

reginald

Remind me never to buy anything from Epic.

HSE

Arctordarkley

asianmacker

Is it not?

beramodk

Ummmm you do realize that Epic has screwed over Microsoft in the past few months right? UE3 as a timed exclusive for PS3 anyone?

How does that screw over MSFT? They gave MSFT a 100% exclusive in Gears. For fucks sake is there anything but hypocrisy on the gaming talk anymore?

EnigmaNemesis

As it stands right now, Too Human is a much more important franchise for Microsoft considering the fact that it is a 360 exclusive unlike UT3 which is multiplatform. You would be a fool to think that Microsoft won't value or back up their exclusive franchises.

I don't understand why some people are dissing Too Human or discrediting SK; Have any of you seen the new videos? It's simply amazing:

[media.xbox360.ign.com]

asianmacker

EnigmaNemesis

y2julio

[biz.gamedaily.com]

Kousetsu Kitsune

And if we are going to be rocking some FRCP, and SK is telling the truth about Epic lying all the time, I bet we'll get some Rule 20 action. That's right folks: PERMISSIVE JOINDER! Wooo.

Every company licensing the Unreal Engine vs. Epic in a knock down, drag out brawl.

Catalyst

Sharkmenow

dv8godd

SK should just give up making the game...too human will probably end up becoming the next duke nukem forever...

JunjiHiroma2k7

Let's follow along with your logic for a minute and assume that MicroSoft gets what MicroSoft wants and that's the most important factor in play... which franchise do you think has more value to MicroSoft?

The one that's been in and out of development for 8 years... from PS1 to Gamecube to 360 and showed poorly to the press at one E3?

Or the one that's sold 3.7 million units so far, was ranked 4th for 2006 in total aggregate reviews (based on Metacritic and Game Rankings scores) for any game on any system, was the first Xbox or 360 game to ever reach the top 10 in Japan, is ranked the number one seller for the 360 and number 3 between 360 and Xbox combined, has a film adaptation currently underway, is part of a trilogy, has a version that runs on Windows, and is also licensed to Microsoft Game Studios for exclusive publishing rights.

Nevermind the fact that the US legal system is an entirely different beast that's already had MS in through it's doors to consider whether to disband the company for unfair business practices / antitrust litigation.

Seriously... you're stretching beyond reason on that one. It's one thing to be hopeful... but seriously.

If I were MicroSoft and I had to pick a pool to piss in... it wouldn't be Epic's. Lots more to lose in that relationship.

I mean it "could" happen that MS steps in and tries to make them both calm down because they have something to lose in either case... but your insistence that Epic "CANNOT" win is just ludicrous.

dv8godd

xiphos

chinesedentist

I wish they'd settle and Too Human comes out as well, I'm sure SK has talent to make the game great, they just have to get over the learning curve.

FreddyGlitter

Arctordarkley

There is no possible way that Too Human will "get canned." That's not how the legal system works for stuff like this. It will all come down to fines and a possible injunction on not licensing their new engine out, and removing any of epic's things from it if they do.

You people watch too much Law and Order. You think they will put Cliffy B on the stand and Sam Waterson will yell at him for 5 minutes until he admits the engine sucks and he lied to SK?

Catalyst

As i already said and from the words of kenshiro:
SK.... is already dead....

JunjiHiroma2k7

FreddyGlitter

Other developers are going to rely on UE3 in the future, so they can't afford to burn any bridges by suing Epic, whereas SK can because they have an engine that's not UE3, but their own (although it probably is a derivative of it).

AZRoboto

chinesedentist

Arctordarkley

But if it gets settled in court, Too Human will get canned...AGAIN...and this is one of Microsoft's heavy-hitters for next year, a title I'm personally looking forward to.

AZRoboto

SK bit off more than they could chew so long ago that the initial platform for "Too Human" operated on vacuum tubes. Now that they still can't get it together, they're looking to blame Epic for their overreaching with too short arms. "It's not our fault!!! It's Epic!!!! SUE!!! SUE!!! SUE!!!" Why aren't other developers whining and crying about UE3 like SK? Hmmm?

As for all the praise for SK's past games, does anyone remember the games Rare put out in the past compared to their output for the past couple of years? How about Peter Molyneaux? Yeah, yeah, yeah, he made Populus for the 386-era PCs, but what happened with Fable, Black & White, and The Movies? Overpromised and underdelivered.

DirkBelig

Zeouterlimits

Expect Too Human to enter dev phase z.5.9 on iD's tech5 engine. :P

sadkermit - soon to be banned for standing up to the ummm nazi.

Digitalguardian

Nexus6

-

superbabyproject

SK has been the company with the most problems in all honesty, from losing the rights to make more games based on Blood Omen, bad reception (in terms of sales) for Eternal Darkness and of course the horrible reception for Too Human in E3. With this track record of them. In my eyes SK just has HORRIBLE luck, they made some good games but last one was a PORT...and nothing else since then.

daknight

drifter13

Runna

Get off your high horse it's harder to see who your friends are from up there.

x999x

MetaKz

On the PS3 side Sony have shouldered some of the blame in order to minimise impact on PS3 projects using the engine (very uncaracteristically noble of them) but, on the 360 side Microsoft have done no such thing and are staying out of it for the most part.

penhalion

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
Rule 13. Counterclaim and Cross-Claim
(a) Compulsory Counterclaims.
A pleading shall state as a counterclaim any claim which at the time of serving the pleading the pleader has against any opposing party, if it arises out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the opposing party's claim and does not require for its adjudication the presence of third parties of whom the court cannot acquire jurisdiction. But the pleader need not state the claim if (1) at the time the action was commenced the claim was the subject of another pending action, or (2) the opposing party brought suit upon the claim by attachment or other process by which the court did not acquire jurisdiction to render a personal judgment on that claim, and the pleader is not stating any counterclaim under this Rule 13.

We need more legal journalists on mainstream gaming blogs. If anyone's looking for an IP soon-to-be-lawyer/gamer for their blog, let me know. :P

Throtex

0ldb0y

Oyn

Arctordarkley

@Arctordarkley: What the hell are you talking about? The Too Human trailer and videos at this years E3 was amazing. Wanna know why too? SK developed their OWN game engine which they should have done in the first place to avoid this stupid lawsuit nonsense. This comment is also directed towards OhioSavage as well who seems to think SK has weak programmers.

asianmacker

bugashi

Kyle81

Heidern

I know that if I was in a position to decide between the two companies in a close race, I'd probably go with id because this cloud hangin over epic at the moment wouldn't make me feel warm and fuzzy. I'd rather buy Carmack another Ferrari then fund some lawsuit.

Game industry strife FTL :(

ColbyCheese

I think Epic should have helped them out more.

Gigith

great companies should always get in bed together and make-up ^_^

ghibli303

superbabyproject

You Guys can suck my dick

I can see why Epic would be pissed because they feel like they've done a lot of SK's work for them without any compensation (if SK win the suit).

Still I'd say that Epic didn't fulfill their original contract in the first place soo....

...glad I'm not judging this.

two dev's enter, one dev' leaves!
Welcome to Thunderdome!

TokeYo

@3xch4ng3: You honestly think SK would be dumb enough not to read the fine print lol? SK isn't stupid and im sure they have well paid lawyers who help translate all the legalese for them.

asianmacker

Kreean

You are absolutely right.
On the other hand, if it is true that SK has used U3E-technology in their SK-Engine without licensing it, they should really settle it outside the court. If notm it could end bad for SK and Too Human.

Kreean

Arctordarkley

AspergerSyndrome

penhalion

Blaaguuu

Stevedroid

OhioSavage

SomeRandomGuy

I get the feeling that Epic will use this as a counter to SK's claims of it being incomplete; essentially saying "We never said it would be working properly."

They don't seem to be very confident with that argument, though. They said "Potentially damaging", as if they're not sure if that's a sound counter-claim.

All in all, I think Silicon Knights had a legitimate reason to file suit, and Epic is just firing back with the usual claims instead of rolling over and taking it in the ass. All we need now is for CliffyB or Mark Rein to file a separate suit seeking damages for "emotional distress", and we'll have a genuine Bullshit Lawsuit™ on our hands.

Nedus

Epic has been around for a long time and has been in the licensing business for a while now. I doubt that suddenly they forgot better business practices and decided to screw a particular client.

Finally we would have heard from other major publishers who are using this engine as well by now don't you think?

Babygames

TheBagofSand

kagebutsu

CastorKrieg

CastorKrieg

And then the developers are like, "Really? I didn't think I really wanted that. But, hey, you're the expert!"

minister.of.rhetoric

Forgot that part

3xch4ng3

Epic said Silicon Knights accessed Unreal Engine documentation 2,109 times during the evaluation period. The two companies officially entered a commercial licensing agreement in May 2005.

According to the filing, Epic gave Silicon Knights a "substantial discount" on the license, as the firm allegedly promised Epic to use UE3 exclusively on all of its games for Xbox 360, PS3 and PC.

9 Months for free? Discount Fee for Exclusivity? Not to mention BioShock, Mass Effect, Huxley, Rainbow Six Vegas, Stranglehold, and even Roboblitz all are all using the UT3 engine sucessfully?

I don't think SK got a case with this one.

3xch4ng3

It's like buying a cat in the bag!

CastorKrieg

Candlejack

tee hee

AtomicAgeZombie

I can imagine a "Phoenix Wright: Gaming Edition" hehe

omegasc

Potentially damaging to Silicon Knights' claims is the licensing agreement for UE3, which states, according the filing, that Epic's warranties "do not include any warranty that the functions performed by the Unreal Engine … will meet [Silicon Knights'] requirements, nor that the operation of the Unreal Engine … will be bug free or error free in all circumstances, nor that any defects of the Unreal Engine … can or will be corrected."

Maybe Silicon Knights didn't read the fine print?

3xch4ng3

Anyhow, this looks like time to get the popcorn and stuff. They should have this on film, and make it a reality TV show while we're at it. XD

Lyner

@CONVERGE: They're talking about all builds of the game (and subsequently, the engine) using UE3 or this internal engine that is, allegedly, based on UE3 (which means it at least uses part of the source code). The Playstation and Gamecube builds didn't use that engine, obviously.

mphz

I think that Epic can recognise from press releases and maybe E3 materials whether or not SK engine is build on top of core UE3. Even SK said in the lawsuit that new engine was not new from scratch, it was heavily-modified UE3, which in eyes of SK makes it a completely new engine.

I also think that Epic counter-suit is just a normal response and effort to save face = PR stunt. SK has a pretty solid case, delays in supplying the engine should be easy to document.

CastorKrieg

Oh yeah I say they settle it in a ctf match thats last 3 months long!

Runna

StrangeEarth

jaredgood1

the good part is epic next engine has to rock! And be complete!

Runna

photoboy

that is just damn HARSH, hasnt the game been in dev' for like yeeeears now? oh epic... shame on you

Naif

Trust me: Those other guys are bad news.

baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad news

Gamemaster

adsfsa

Anarchist_Gamer

Marasai

iFlash

Marasai

Gagamus

JunjiHiroma2k7

jaredgood1