Silicon Knights Suing Epic

[Marvel_us]

I can't wait to see how this one works out. Curious to see if any other devs speak up on the "inadequacy".

"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."

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

[|MaguS|]

Wonder if any other developers will step up in their defense, on both sides of the issue. It might be the case, Koei claimed issues with the UT3 engine on the PS3 which is the reason they shelved Fatal Inertia for it (even though they recently demoed it at the Playstation Event /boggle) and Silicone Knights does seem to be having tons of performance issues with Too Human.

[Namrok]

Meh. Getting incomplete tools is par for the course so far as software development goes. Cry me a river.

[|MaguS|]

Meh. Getting incomplete tools is par for the course so far as software development goes. Cry me a river.

Thing is when you License the tools from Epic they send you updates for the engine when they update it on their end. It's not like they send you half complete engine and say "ok now **** off".

EDIT:
Wonder how this will affect the release of Too Human.

[Sabadin]

Thing is when you License the tools from Epic they send you updates for the engine when they update it on their end. It's not like they send you half complete engine and say "ok now **** off".

EDIT:
Wonder how this will affect the release of Too Human.

I'm sure they'll scrap it and start over again once another new system gets announced, it's like the console version of DNF.

[Stoneyguy]

Why would you show a terrible demo at E3?

[Madpistol]

I hope all of the stuff they're outlining is in writing for the contract they signed to license Unreal Engine 3. If it isn't, they don't stand a chance of winning this fight unless they get some serious backing from the video game industry.

[Ninja Prime]

I'm sure they'll scrap it and start over again once another new system gets announced, it's like the console version of DNF.

Sadly, that might just happen. Looks like a awesome game to me, but then how long have they been working at it, 8 or 9 years now? Wasn't it originally for the Playstation 1?

[nekrosoft13]

Why would you show a terrible demo at E3?

because its a terrible show now, no one really pays attention :D

[Stoneyguy]

because its a terrible show now, no one really pays attention :D

True, but they showed it at E3 '06

[Namrok]

The more I read about this case, the more it seems like this is what they promised:

Thing is when you License the tools from Epic they send you updates for the engine when they update it on their end.

And this is what actually happened:

It's not like they send you half complete engine and say "ok now **** off".

Some of the stuff is pretty damning. Things like MS having certain fundamental requirements for games. Like being able to start up in a certain amount of time, of having the UI always be able to render in 66ms. And the version of the UE that Epic had delivered, to this day, still can't do those things. And they refuse to hand over the code that CAN claiming its game specific to GoW, which it very well may be, but that just means their engine still sucks.

[ENU291]

The worst part about all this is if you license the U3 engine and find it lacking in anyway you have to wait until Epic updates it to address whatever issue you are having. If you as a developer modify the engine even the slightest Epic reserves the right to terminate all technical support and future updates. So basically if you license this engine and run into problems Epic pretty much has you by the balls. :thumbdwn:

[Marvel_us]

The worst part about all this is if you license the U3 engine and find it lacking in anyway you have to wait until Epic updates it to address whatever issue you are having. If you as a developer modify the engine even the slightest Epic reserves the right to terminate all technical support and future updates. So basically if you license this engine and run into problems Epic pretty much has you by the balls. :thumbdwn:

Interesting, I didn't know that you couldn't modify the code. Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see the harm in that as long as you don't go trying to sell the new stuff as your own.

So how is it possible for devs like Irrational Games to use a modified UE2.0 engine in Bioshock?

EDIT: Did some digging and I found this:
What engine is BioShock using?

BioShock is using the Unreal engine which has been massively modified by Irrational.

Originally BioShock was being built on an Irrational-modified version of the Unreal 2 Engine known as Vengeance. Since then it has been ported to Unreal 3.0 and has once again been heavily modified.

The game will feature some DirectX10 content for Vista users.

The game also utilises Havok Physics.

I'm not too knowledgeable on how engine licensing works btw. I wonder what kind of modifications they made. Maybe it's in line with some of the "inadequacies" SK is talking about?

[S.I.N]

No wonder nearly every game using the engine is delayed.

[Butter Bandit]

I was really interested in Too Human a few years ago...but it really has become another DNF. I had completely forgotten about it until I read this thread.

With as much time as they've spent on the game, they probably could have built their own engine from the ground up.

[Marvel_us]

I didn't know this game has been in development for that long. To me it seems like the hype for this game goes through extreme positive and negatives. Everytime they show a vid that looks good it is hampered by something.

[S.I.N]

I was really interested in Too Human a few years ago...but it really has become another DNF. I had completely forgotten about it until I read this thread.

With as much time as they've spent on the game, they probably could have built their own engine from the ground up.

People have actually seen and played Too Human.

[|MaguS|]

People have actually seen and played Too Human.

And they now wish they hadn't.

[Namrok]

And they now wish they hadn't.

I donno, it's been a while, but most of what I remember hearing was that it played great, but the framerate was ****.

[ENU291]

Interesting, I didn't know that you couldn't modify the code. Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see the harm in that as long as you don't go trying to sell the new stuff as your own.

So how is it possible for devs like Irrational Games to use a modified UE2.0 engine in Bioshock?

EDIT: Did some digging and I found this:


I'm not too knowledgeable on how engine licensing works btw. I wonder what kind of modifications they made. Maybe it's in line with some of the "inadequacies" SK is talking about?Here is some info on SK Silicon Knights claims it received a working Xbox 360 build of the engine a year after Microsoft's system commercially released. Even then, the developer claims it was not told how to implement the code into its development efforts, and that if they rigged the engine themselves in order to make it work, Epic would not support the altered product. As for the PlayStation 3 version of the engine, Silicon Knights said it is still waiting to receive it, even though the agreement called for it to be delivered in February.Sounds like Epic has full control of the situation unless you're willing to forfeit the support that comes with the engine license.


Source (http://www.gamespot.com/news/6175386.html?action=convert&om_clk=latestnews&tag=latestnews;title;0)

[|MaguS|]

Thats how most licensed engines are though. Most developers will provide support for their own code byut if you alter the engine they would not support the changes you did.

I read some of their claims but to me it sounded like they weren't able to implement alot of the features they wanted so they are blaming the engine and epic on it. I never seen an engine that cannot be altered to support what the designers want without alittle effort.

One claim is that the UT3 engine doesn't support many characters on screen yet Square's Last Remnant has hundreds of characters on screen at once. The UT3 Engine is also being used in MMOs so I don't understand how they can make such a claim.

[Namrok]

Thats how most licensed engines are though. Most developers will provide support for their own code byut if you alter the engine they would not support the changes you did.

I read some of their claims but to me it sounded like they weren't able to implement alot of the features they wanted so they are blaming the engine and epic on it. I never seen an engine that cannot be altered to support what the designers want without alittle effort.

One claim is that the UT3 engine doesn't support many characters on screen yet Square's Last Remnant has hundreds of characters on screen at once. The UT3 Engine is also being used in MMOs so I don't understand how they can make such a claim.

You mention these UE3 games that can do these things... but are they out? Can we play them?

On another note, and I can say from experience, licensing tools can be a total crap shoot. Ideally when someone sells you an engine, it saves you time and money. Often times, you end up with a shoddy engine that has so many problems and is so fundamentally broken that it just makes more work than it saves. Sounds like that could be the case with UE3, or at least the case that SK is trying to pursue.

Still, suing over it is as far as I know unprecedented. Bull****, deception, and flat out lies are such a key part of selling middleware, and so hard to substantiate, I doubt SK can win their case beyond "They said they'd deliver a complete UE3 platform at this date, and missed the mark by 6 months."

[|MaguS|]

You mention these UE3 games that can do these things... but are they out? Can we play them?

We can't but many people have. Look at Bioshock, its running on the UT3 Engine and looks as great as it seems (from all the previews and demo's we have been shown) to run.

EDIT:
Monster Madness released for the X360 and PC with it having tons of enemies on screen aswell as alot of interactivity within the levels. Graphics were "ok" but thats not the issue...

[Sabadin]

Sadly, that might just happen. Looks like a awesome game to me, but then how long have they been working at it, 8 or 9 years now? Wasn't it originally for the Playstation 1?

Actually was the N64 IIRC.

[|MaguS|]

Actually was the N64 IIRC.

Originally started off on the Playstation...