PDA

View Full Version : Duke Nukem Court Battle Getting Nasty


nekrosoft13
06-15-09, 09:15 PM
Update: 3D Realms/Apogee Ltd. founder Scott Miller has chimed in with his thoughts:
Do readers here realize that filed lawsuits are entirely one-sided statements, based on knee-deep BS and with more spin that a top?

3DR has been in nearly a dozen lawsuits (including against Warner and Fox). We're always innocent, and we always win. This one is no exception. Give it a year, then the truth will come out.


Original: More documents relevant to the ongoing courtroom drama between Duke Nukem Forever developer 3D Realms/Apogee Ltd. and publisher Take-Two have been released, shedding new light on the circumstances that lead to the termination of the game's dev team and the subsequent lawsuit over the game's incomplete state.



The team handling the long-in-development shooter was let go on May 6, with 3D Realms later explaining that this stemmed from funding issues after negotiations with Take-Two fell through and the publisher made an "unacceptable" last minute proposal "to acquire the Duke Nukem franchise and the 3DR development team."

The court documents reveal that those negotiations were related to an Xbox 360 port of the anticipated game, which Apogee subsidiary 3D Realms was crafting for the PC.

In early 2009, Take-Two "solicited" 3D Realms to see if the studio could co-develop an Xbox 360 edition. In the following negotiations, 3D Realms apparently "demanded that Take-Two fully fund Apogee's reaching certain milestones" if it was to co-develop an Xbox 360 edition alongside the long-coming PC version.

Duke Nukem Forever was formally announced in 1997, with the game then expected the next year. Since then, the title has suffered from numerous delays and setbacks.

Take-Two was reluctant to fully fund the game "in light of the extensive delays in development of the PC version," and says it offered to fund half of the "concurrent development" costs "up through" 3D Realms hitting the "Alpha Milestone," with the remaining half to be paid upon completion of the game.

Take-Two claims that 3D Realms rejected the above proposal. 3D Realms, meanwhile, previously claimed that "Take-Two materially changed the parameters of the proposed funding agreement"--something 3D Realms reportedly told the company it could not "financially afford"--with 3D Realms claiming to reject the "unacceptable" proposal Take-Two later made for the franchise and development team.

With the game's development now halted and its development team disbanded, Take-Two says that 3D Realms "breached its commitment" to deliver the "completed source code of DNF in a timely manner," a move that also prevents Take-Two from porting the game to consoles, such as the Xbox 360.



As part of a 2000 agreement to "promote and exploit" Duke Nukem Forever, Take-Two claims it has "exclusive, irrevocable and worldwide rights to develop" DNF for consoles. Take-Two further adds that the agreement allowed the company to "independently develop" console ports once 3D Realms had delivered the PC source code .

In terms of compensation, Take-Two believes it is entitled to the incomplete source code--which would help "in the development of the Console Versions of DNF"--along with "damages equal to...lost profits caused by Apogee's failure to timely develop and deliver" DNF PC and "an award of damages equal to the DNF Advances with accrued interest."

3D Realms received two advances for Duke Nukem Forever: $400,000 from former publisher GT Interactive in 1998--a debt Take-Two assumed when it acquired the DNF publishing rights--and $2.5 million from Take-Two Interactive in 2008.

According to Take-Two, that second advance was provided with the stipulation of "7% per annum" interest after September 2009, and an agreement that the sum would "become immediately due" if Duke Nukem Forever was not released by October 22, 2012.

Perhaps most shockingly, Take-Two claims that "upon information and belief, [3D Realms/Apogee Ltd.] has title to a substantial amount of funds deposited in an off-shore account, which Take-Two believes Apogee can use to fund its outstanding obligations."

Take-Two further notes that, in the event of "any future development of the Console Versions of DNF," 3D Realms and Apogee are "required to cooperate"--suggesting that there may still be a chance of Duke Nukem Forever, in some form, hitting store shelves.

Shacknews has contacted 3D Realms for comment. If you're interested, the full 20-page court document can be found over on FileShack.


http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/59148

saturnotaku
06-15-09, 09:37 PM
Does any of this matter, really?

Destroy
06-15-09, 09:41 PM
Does any of this matter, really?

I cried.

lee63
06-15-09, 09:43 PM
Does any of this matter, really?

NO!!

methimpikehoses
06-15-09, 10:08 PM
Come get some.

Lfctony
06-15-09, 10:32 PM
And the joke continues...

NarcissistZero
06-15-09, 10:50 PM
Offshore accounts eh?

I really think Apogee/3D Realms was up to something.

Vanzagar
06-15-09, 10:56 PM
Does any of this matter, really?

someones probably losing a **** load of money...

autobot
06-16-09, 01:58 AM
I would be pissed too if I payed a company $400,000 dollars to produce a game in '97 and to this day still has NOT sen any return whatsoever. I think after 4 years, game publishers should just cut their ties if the game developer doesn't provide any proof that there are any milestones being met. Whats stupid is that in 2008 they gave them another $2.5 MILLION dollars after waiting 11 years with no product! While it is lame that they gave them the extra money, I think that they should have all rights to DNF. 3DR screwed them over BLATANTLY and should pay the price for their foolishness.

nekrosoft13
06-16-09, 02:08 AM
I would be pissed too if I payed a company $400,000 dollars to produce a game in '97 and to this day still has NOT sen any return whatsoever. I think after 4 years, game publishers should just cut their ties if the game developer doesn't provide any proof that there are any milestones being met. Whats stupid is that in 2008 they gave them another $2.5 MILLION dollars after waiting 11 years with no product! While it is lame that they gave them the extra money, I think that they should have all rights to DNF. 3DR screwed them over BLATANTLY and should pay the price for their foolishness.

just because they don't publicly show what was done, doesn't mean they haven't shown anything to the publisher. Us consumers are the last to know.

NaitoSan
06-16-09, 05:18 AM
I think they're going to lose a lot of money even if they're innocent. Getting a lawyers and whatnot do cost money. Being sued several times will hurt you especially you don't have much money like big studios do. They will keep suing and spend money until you're broke.

Atomizer
06-16-09, 05:49 AM
I would be pissed too if I payed a company $400,000 dollars to produce a game in '97 and to this day still has NOT sen any return whatsoever. I think after 4 years, game publishers should just cut their ties if the game developer doesn't provide any proof that there are any milestones being met. Whats stupid is that in 2008 they gave them another $2.5 MILLION dollars after waiting 11 years with no product! While it is lame that they gave them the extra money, I think that they should have all rights to DNF. 3DR screwed them over BLATANTLY and should pay the price for their foolishness.

Who gives a crap about the publisher? Wont someone PLEASE think of the fans?!..meh, I dont care, the whole thing is a joke

rudedog
06-16-09, 05:56 AM
I'm sorry once development goes over say 3 Years MAX then something is terribly wrong. If you as the dev can't see it , then the backing publisher should have seen it and demanded all funding returned. - end of story.

Granted, I think the DNF contract clause was invented by this disaster.

Sorry but I don't trust 3DR as far as I could throw them and it's their own fault. Sorry but they are the laughing stock of the dev industry, no matter how good Duke was at the time.

sharvin
06-16-09, 09:11 AM
I'm sorry once development goes over say 3 Years MAX then something is terribly wrong. If you as the dev can't see it , then the backing publisher should have seen it and demanded all funding returned. - end of story.

Granted, I think the DNF contract clause was invented by this disaster.

Sorry but I don't trust 3DR as far as I could throw them and it's their own fault. Sorry but they are the laughing stock of the dev industry, no matter how good Duke was at the time.

not necessarily, half life 2 took nearly 5 years to make, just depends if they are taking their time polishing it, or sitting around playing WoW instead.

autobot
06-16-09, 12:17 PM
not necessarily, half life 2 took nearly 5 years to make, just depends if they are taking their time polishing it, or sitting around playing WoW instead.

Thats funny cause in an interview video online 3DR was asked why DNF was taking so long and the head devloper stated that they were simply too busy playing WOW.

bacon12
06-16-09, 01:36 PM
not necessarily, half life 2 took nearly 5 years to make, just depends if they are taking their time polishing it, or sitting around playing WoW instead.

TF2 was in development even longer. It is different however when it is someone elses money who is being put up for the game development.

Atomizer
06-16-09, 08:44 PM
Really, it all comes down to the developer, no game should ever take 10 years, unless its the bloody coming of messiah and makes Crysis look like Pong.
However, 5 years is acceptable if you're talking about a developer like Blizzard or Valve, who polish their games out the wazzu, cant really complain.

What should have happend with Duke Forever, when they wanted to do the second engine change, after several years, THATs when things should have been pulled.
I remember reading a history on Half-Life 1, it didnt go through an engine change, but they basically scrapped the game and started again, which was a huge risk for the publisher, but they allowed it and we got HL1, if they hadnt of then we either might have got something mediocore and Valve would not be where they are today, or we never would have gotten HL1 at all.
3DR however, when they decided to change engines once, its not that bad, "do what you need to", but the second time, the publisher shouldnt have allowed it and forced them to finish what they had, it still would have been ok at that point.