| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (86)

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 12:02PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Anyone who saw that cinematic movie they released at E3 should know exactly what's going on here. SKs is a cheap developer who hires noobs for production and who blames their failures on everyone but themselves. Bad direction, horrible animation, mediocre character and creature design, bad voice acting, pathetic cinematography, poor lighting, bad editing, bad pacing, pitiful sound design, amateur mix.... is it any surprise why this game is flailing? It's clear as day to me.

This is the fault of everything internal and very little external... and I'm sure Epic's half-baked engine isn't helping the matter. But it is not EPIC's fault, as there are plenty of successful games being made and shipped with UE... it is primarily the fault of SK, and they're lashing out as a pathetic attempt to save face. A classic case of a company going down in flames and trying to set fire to everyone around them. Fortunately, Epic probably has the money to hire much more expensive lawyers, so this is likely the end of SKs. Adieu

Posted: Jul 19th 2007 9:14PM DashShiron said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Have these people even seen what the Unreal Engine 3 can do? All they have to do is look at Bioshock, Mass Effect, UT3, and GoW; all of which use the engine beautifully. Seriously there aren't many engines out there that are as flexible as UE3. Sure the majority of UE3 games at the moment are FPS titles, but games such as The Last Remnant and Lost Odyssey really show the various ways it can be used. SK needs to stop blaming others for their development problems and start looking for a real solution.

Posted: Jul 19th 2007 10:21PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Ignoring the legal issues, does anyone still give a damn about Too Human? I really don't care if the game ever comes out. Too many other (and probably BETTER) games have my attention.

Posted: Jul 19th 2007 10:46PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
hmm...

Seems to be working fine for everyone else.

This sounds like a cover up for the fact that Too Human's development in taking so long.

Remember Silicon Knights, don't bite the hand that feeds you. Epic doesn't HAVE to let you use the Unreal 3 Engine. Wouldn't it be a shame if they pulled your licensee rights this late in the development of a game?

Posted: Jul 19th 2007 11:07PM tpnmvz said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Read the lawsuit at Kotaku which provides more details.

You'll learn that Silicon Knight eventually did end up creating their own engine due to the troubles with the unreal engine.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2007 11:21PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@eldee: Well put. But, in light of this new information, I'd say SK did essentially what I suggested, they're using their own engine. I think it'll work out better for them, anyway. I imagine it's easier to get what you want out of your own engine rather than someone else's.

What I'm wondering now is how long SK's been working on their own replacement engine, and if it's going to affect the release date. I hope not. I've been waiting for this game long enough!

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 12:22AM hvnlysoldr said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It cost them a year of development.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2007 11:29PM radicoon said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Guys, they are not saying it doesn't work now. They're saying it should have worked eons ago.

Posted: Jul 19th 2007 11:35PM falcomadol said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
You've got two of MGS's second parties suing the shit out of each other here. Microsoft is very likely not pleased with this development.

It's a really interesting tangle here, that's for sure.

Posted: Jul 19th 2007 11:44PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
It's easy to be ignorant and loud, huh?

Posted: Jul 19th 2007 11:46PM Tez said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I'm not sure who to side with here. Epic is a bunch of smug jerks and Denis Dyack is an annoying whiner on a slightly above-average dev team.

I don't disbelieve that Epic would hold out a few details in the release engine that would go into Gears of War, but I also can't imagine that it hurt SK that much- ditching it to create your own engine is all fine and good, but would that really be faster than just waiting for the UE3 updates? Apparently that has slowed the game development down for a year? Who are they suing over the other 10 years of development? On the other hand, creating your own engine costs money and time, but even if that's what they're suing Epic over, it doesn't seem to hold much water.

Oh, and heavy forbid you just FINISH YOUR GAME before starting a court process. Nonono, the game can wait, you have to sue a company because your game is taking longer to make! Where's the logic there? Wouldn't court proceedings slow development down further?

I smell shenanigans on both sides.

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 12:04AM aristokrat said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
It doesn't seem like too many people have checked out the Gamasutra analysis. The claims laid forth by SK seem believable when put into an extensive argument rather than a quick news blurb. And boy did SK file a lot of anti-competitive-type claims, but my favorite is that they disgorge ALL profits made from Gears of War based on anti-competitive activity. Maybe Epic took one too many cues from good old Microsoft...

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 12:30AM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
heres to EPIC now gonna be best partners with sony join the ps3 and say FUCK you microsoft we will keep gears of war only on the ps3 and thats how we fuck you back you lose your main console pusher.so too human will eventually be too shitty.lets get back to business with sony and develop ut3 on ps3 first and see what happens to microsoft losing peter moore and see how gears do on ps3 cell processor like sony said it would do cause now ill see METAL gear solid 4 shaping up better on ps3 than the 360

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 1:51AM DashShiron said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
My god do you always spew shit out of your mouth when you talk?
Reply

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 8:26AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Every time I see your posts, I have to pretend/assume you are a troll. Otherwise I get headaches.
Reply

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 3:02AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"The Too Human developer points to Gears of War as evidence that Epic Games was withholding game-specific enhancements to the Unreal engine in order to give its own games preference."

K.. AND?? I'm sorry, but it's Epic's engine. It seems to me that they would take first priority with its use.

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 4:53AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Ya know ..... no one should be allowed to even post their ignorant thoughts in this thread unless they have actually read the full complaint.

If what SK claims Epic did can be proved by SK ...... and im sure it can be with a physical copy of the licence agreement and invoices of what was delivered to SK when and for how much, this looks like a pretty open and shut case. Epic either knowingly fucked around and didnt get at least a dozen devs the tools they PAID FOR in an effort to be the 1st one to show off a "wow" game for E3, or they are just slackers and still .... they fucked up.

You people need to read the entire complaint before you start making accusations. Just because Epic made a game you take to bed with you at night, doesnt make them beyond reproach.

Theres a post on the Neogaf forums that details about a dozen games that are being made with the Unreal engine that have been either delayed, pushed back or canceled outright.

Aliens — (2009) Gearbox Software
America's Army 3.0 — (2008) US Army
APB — (2008) Webzen
Black Powder Red Earth - (2007) Echelon Studios
Brothers In Arms: Hell's Highway — (2007) Gearbox Software[34]
BioShock - (2007) Irrational Games
BlackSite: Area 51 — (2007) Midway Austin
DC Comics MMO — (TBA) Sony Online Entertainment
Earth No More — (2009) Recoil Games / 3D Realms
Elveon — (2007) 10tacle Studios[35]
Fatal Inertia — (2007) Koei[36]
Frontlines: Fuel of War — (2008) Kaos Studios
Fury — (2007) Auran[37]
Gears of War — (2006) Epic Games
Global Agenda — (TBA) Hi-Rez Studios[38]
Huxley — (2007) Webzen Games[39]
The Last Remnant — (2008) Square Enix
Lineage III — (TBA) NCsoft[40]
Lost Odyssey — (2007) Mistwalker[41]
Mass Effect — (2007) BioWare[42]
Medal of Honor: Airborne — (2007) Electronic Arts[43]
Monster Madness: Battle for Suburbia — (2007) Artificial Studios[44]
RoboBlitz — (2006) Naked Sky Entertainment[45]
Rogue Warrior: Black Razor - (2007) Bethesda Softworks
Stargate Worlds — (2007) Cheyenne Mountain Entertainment[46]
Stranglehold — (2007) Midway Chicago[47]
To End All Wars — (2008) Kuju Entertainment [48] [49]
Tom Clancy's EndWar — (2008) Ubisoft
Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Vegas — (2006) Ubisoft
Turning Point: Fall of Liberty — (2007) Spark Unlimited
Turok — (2008) Propaganda Games
Undertow — (2007) Chair Entertainment
Unreal Tournament 3 — (2007) Epic Games
Hour Of Victory — (2007) Midway Games
Upcoming Mortal Kombat 8 Game — (Unknown) Midway Games
The Wheelman — (2007) Midway Games
HEI$T — (2007) InXile Entertainment

Now which of those are already out? Oh? let me give you people a fucking clue. Gears of War?

Funny how of ALL those games Gears is one of probably about 3 games that has been released in a timely manner, and for the record, Rainbow Six Veags campaign mode made shit use of UE3, it ran like shit and suffered frame rate drops during some moments of the game. The same goes for Area 51, the demo suffers from frame rate issue. Sorry you cant see it, but it IS there. Not ALWAYS, but it was there and it was noticeable, nowhere as smooth as Gears of War.

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 6:47AM Anticrawl said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Heh, you forgot Hour of Victory.. I mean Midway diserves most of the credit for how shitty that game was but clearly there were some deeper problems with that terrible game.
Reply

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 6:45AM Anticrawl said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
You have to be kidding me dude. You have no idea what you're talking about. I heard rumors about developers complaining about the lack of support from Epic and I guess it's true. Their promising code and not delivering. These people signed contracts for big bucks and banked millions on Epic following through on their legal obligations. Sounds like they have a right to be pissed, and I understand Epic wanting their version of the code to be far superior to others making their games more complete and desireable. Brilliant really, flood the market with your code, make people dependent on it, then stop feeding them promised updates in order to make your better versions shine out among the crowd. If Epic just handed out the code like they agreed to there might be games that would overshadow Gears of War visually and with gameplay.

Bah, and I love Epic, but I like Silicon Knights too. Sucks Epic would resort to practicing this type of business, already upset enough about them trying to get a full price tag out of us to play that PC content for Gears.

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 6:51AM Anticrawl said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Fraid they do have to let them use it. They sign a contract for said number of years and updates. If you signed up for cell phone service with 1500 minutes at a fixed rate of said number of dollars a month and they took 1000 minutes from you and added a %50 percent increase you'd probably be pretty pissed to right? They breached your contract, which isn't right.

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 8:57AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I don't usually post in threads but this warrants a comment. The case itself when viewed in the context of not delivery goods by an agreed time is an open and shut case, dragging gears of wars into it looks petty (never played so I have no affinity to it) the fact is that while it would be great for them to get the Gears of War code to speed things up its the equivalent of going to say bioware and expect them to hand over their textures and models to make your own game run better. Epic is the maker or the UE3 engine however at the same time another team is responsible for the development of this specific game, ergo they are not obligated under the contract to provide that teams title specific code. SK's cred greatly devalues when the you call into question the fact that this game has been in development since I was in high school over a decade ago and has shown about the same level of progress across 3 different generations of consoles. Whats also suspect is the fact they are now once again building their own engine...would it not be more cost and time effective to continue building on the UE3 code and just release the game then work on a lawsuit perhaps? I used to have a lot of respect for this company (legacy of Kain) but this course of action on this title leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Look at it this way...duke nukem forever is in a similar predicament but atleast across all the engine changes they never blamed the engine developers.

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 10:16AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
GRAW, GRAW2, Rainbow 6: Vegas, Splinter Cell have all used the Unreal 3 engine and shipped games on time. A couple have even been released on the PS3. Ubisoft certainly isn't suing Epic. The PS3 has a reputation for being very difficult to program for. Many of their "launch titles" have still not come out. If anything has been the cause of delays, I would guess that it would be this. Of course, none of us knows what's really going on within the two companies. My feeling is that SK has mismanaged the project from the start, with delays spiraling out of control, and that this is a last ditch effort to save some face. Even if Epic has had some delays, it does not account for all of SK's problems. This suit will be bad for both companies and bad for the game industry in general. And ultimately, it will be bad for us gamers.

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 11:26AM DashShiron said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
My point exactly. There are plenty of games based on the UE3 that have been in development just as long as Too Human and yet have still been released looking impressive. Perhaps the UE3 engine they used for Gears is different from the one they are selling to developers, but it is their engine and who knows what tweaks/modifications were made to it during the development of Gears. Every developer makes these small modifications to engines that they didn't make otherwise the games released wouldn't be what the developer planned them to be. I still think that this is more the fault of SK than Epic, just look at Mass Effect to see what a good team can do with the engine (even if it isn't the one Epic uses).
Reply

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 11:43AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Bzzzt wrong.

Neither graw titles used UE3 and neither did Splinter Cell double agent.

Like I said, if you people would actually READ the complaint instead of just pulling accusations out of your ass, a stipulation claimed by SK that Epic has in its licence agreements is that when you pay for the engine, you have to put "Powered by Unreal Technology" in the startup screen as well as on the box.

When was the last time you booted up either graw 1 or 2 and saw "Powered by Unreal Technology"?
Reply

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 12:57PM DashShiron said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
You don't hear Irrational Games or BioWare complaining about the engine. Why is it so wrong to give credit where credit is due? You've heard of RenderWare right? Well games that were built on that engine all display the RenderWare logo on startup and I'm pretty sure no one has complained about them. This is simply a lazy developer blaming their problems on something else.
Reply

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 1:55PM Tephlon said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Thank you Michael. I was just about to post the same thing myself.

Where in the hell did all this misinformation about these games come from??
Just recently I've seen several places where people site that the GRAWs and SC:DA use the Unreal3 engine. What the hell people!?
EVERY SINGLE Splinter Cell (I guess save maybe the portable ones) has used the UNREAL2 (2!!) ENGINE!
Granted, as they've progressed the engine becomes more and more modified to the point where I'm sure there's not much UE2 left in it to be seen... but it still sure as hell isn't UE3. Even Conviction is UE2 (HEAVILY MODIFIED).
Grin has developed their own engine for both GRAWs for the PC (GRIN Diesel Engine), and the Xbox versions also use UE2 tech. Again, no UE3.
Vegas is THE ONLY UE3 game out besides GoW, and I'm sure we can all clearly see the differences between those two games. Vegas isn't UGLY, but ain't no Gears of War.

I'm with everyone else, there's enough signs to point to a validity in SK's case. I'm not saying it's DEFINITELY TRUE, but it sure seems like it could be.

I'm gonna give SK the benefit of the doubt. Lets wait and see how this plays out.
Reply

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 1:58PM Tephlon said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Dash,

Michael wasn't saying that SK has a problem putting Epic's Unreal logo on their game.
He was simply saying that it's Epic's policy to require a game using their tech to display the logo. He was using that fact to support his point that GRAW 1 and 2 are not Unreal 3 engine games.
That's it.
Reply

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 11:30AM DashShiron said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Sorry for the double but scratch that initial comment, I completely forgot how long Too Human has been in development. Still, good looking games have been released in shorter times based on the same engine.

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 1:43PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
this is perhaps the most interesting point,

""Epic be required to disgorge all profits obtained on its Gears of War game as a result of the misconduct set forth above." "

And something to keep in mind, the complaint largely revolves around 2006, not what games are coming out now or started development later (ports).

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 11:49AM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Sounds like Dennis is looking for a fall guy for his inability to get a decent game out.

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 12:32PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The game isn't working? Seems like you're now victim of the nintendo curse. Leave me and you get no more cookies.

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 3:33PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
lol SK qq moar plz.

We all know how much ownage Unreal Tournament III will be. UT3 > TH

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 3:43PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I haven't any other developers crying about the Unreal tech but I am trusting that we may hear more in the following months from other developers.

Although it may sound snotty but it seems Silicon Knights really has a beef with Epic since the Too Human Demo last year. They said it was Unreal 3's patch that broke the E3 06 build of Too Human but I didn't see any games that had this problem other than Too Human. Square, EA, Activision, THQ, Bioware are all using Unreal and there games look amazing.

If they want their money back they cant have any code from Epic in the "Silicon Knights Engine" or thats theft.

Posted: Jul 20th 2007 6:22PM D dogg said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
JOHN CARMACK TO THE RESCUE!!!

WOW, in a weird twist of fate... this could help id Software take back what was once theirs... market leadership in game engine licensing!

Intel did it to AMD...

Nintendo did it Sony...

Whoohoo! Let the oldies but goodies rise again!!!

Posted: Jul 21st 2007 2:42AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
once again, I will confirm with the others that GRAW, GRAW2 and Splinter Cell DID NOT use the Unreal 3 Engine.

They used Ubisoft's "Yeti" Engine.

We have a very valid point here. If you look at the list of games that ran on the Unreal 3 Engine, only 2 have been released.

Gears of War and Rainbow Six Vegas.

Keep in mind that for some mysterious reason the PS3 version of Rainbow Six Vegas JUST released about 2 weeks ago. Hmmm...

None of the other games that have been announced to be using the Unreal 3 Engine are out, and MANY have been delayed. While it may sound like Silicon Knights is just making excuses right now, if you start to see more developers jump on, Silicon Knights may have a valid point. However, I doubt we will see that. The last thing a developer wants is through a wrench in their development schedule by messing with Epic. Granted, I understand that Epic can't stop them from using the engine, but something like this could easily have a negative effect if the company were to lose in court.

Posted: Jul 21st 2007 12:17PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Firstly, to those referring to Ubisoft's games coming to the PS3 (like Double Agent) must realize that Ubisoft is writing their OWN code for that.

Splinter Cell Double Agent while running on Unreal 2.x, does use Unreal Engine 3 code. Developers like Ubisoft are able to manage writing custom code for development on any system they want, as they have some of the best developers in their studios, and the have the VS framework of the entire engine

As for the lawsuite, it's very simple. If they signed a contract with Epic that says they will have PS3 and X360 compatible engine builds by X date and they failed to deliver, Epic has violated their contract. Especially of their own games (GoW) use engine scripts that were promised to their licensees.

(For the record, Splinter Cell ConViction is more UE3 than anything else. )
Reply

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

TUAW

TUAW

Massively

Massively

WoW

WoW