Breaking: Silicon Knights Files Lawsuit Against Epic

[scooby_dooby]

On another note 2 years seems very reasonable for a modern game.

Jus tto clarify, of course 2 years is reasonable for a modern game, if anything it's the bare minimum.

What I'm speaking about is how quickly MS was able to get their AAA excluisives out the door, compared to Sony.

Using proprietary engines Sony devs are release titles like LAIR, Ratchet & Clank, Uncharted & HEavenly Sword in 2007, less than 12 months after launch. That's not saying these game took 12 months to develop!

Meanwhile, MS using UE3 and it's supposed advantage had most of their AAA titles delayed, miss holiday 2006, and are now appearing in holiday 07.

It seems there was no real benefit to using UE, and in fact it may have been a detriment.

 

[tabs]

I think that will depend on the quality of said games upon release. If it's found that on average UE3 games are better than the competition then it can't be considered a detriment.

Same time for better content? Could be... Have to wait and see.

I think the main benefits are not going to be realised in the first games that the licensees release, but in subsequent ones when they're already well versed in the engine and it's tools. Epic have not had to deal with this learning curve, they've been using the tools whilst simultaneously designing them so they know it back to front. Of course their first implementation is going to be better off because of that.

I don't think any company in their right mind is thinking of using UE3 only once then moving on to something else.

 

[valioso]

Jus tto clarify, of course 2 years is reasonable for a modern game, if anything it's the bare minimum.

What I'm speaking about is how quickly MS was able to get their AAA excluisives out the door, compared to Sony.

Using proprietary engines Sony devs are release titles like LAIR, Ratchet & Clank, Uncharted & HEavenly Sword in 2007, less than 12 months after launch. That's not saying these game took 12 months to develop!

Meanwhile, MS using UE3 and it's supposed advantage had most of their AAA titles delayed, miss holiday 2006, and are now appearing in holiday 07.

It seems there was no real benefit to using UE, and in fact it may have been a detriment.

Did any of MS games use UE3? Other than Gears?

 

[scooby_dooby]

Did any of MS games use UE3? Other than Gears?

Gears is the only UE 3 game to launch yet, period. Nothing else has made it our the door.

MS games using it this holiday are Lost Odyssey, Mass Effect and Too Human this spring (probably).

 

[Jimboc]

Gears is the only UE 3 game to launch yet, period. Nothing else has made it our the door.

MS games using it this holiday are Lost Odyssey, Mass Effect and Too Human this spring (probably).

Hour of Victory also: http://www.midway.com/us/Game_HourofVictory.html
Terrible game though.

 

[Richard]

Shacknews has posted comments on the lawsuit and Epic relations in general from some developers working (or that have worked) with UE3.

 

[Rainbow Man]

I think that will depend on the quality of said games upon release. If it's found that on average UE3 games are better than the competition then it can't be considered a detriment.

Better in what regard though?

If they're more fun; then that's not the benefit of the engine. That just drives the underlying mechanics of the game. The graphics and the input and file loading and so on.

If they LOOK better then that could be an engine-related advantage. However it seems to me - from a perhaps rather casual visual survey - that most every UE3 game has a particular UE3-like visual appearance most easily summed up into "bupms and glow".

There's bumps and glow all over in UE3 games. They all look the same to me.

You're not gonna mistake Lair screenshots with Heavenly Sword with Ratchet & Clank shots. But Gears of War and Unreal Tournament 2007 and even Bioshock shots look almost confusingly similar IMO. Everything's overexposed and washed out and overly bumpy.

So tyhese UE3 games look better then it's because someone prefers the particular graphics style to which UE3 seems particulary suited. IMO anyway.

Peace.

 

[scooby_dooby]

But Gears of War and Unreal Tournament 2007 and even Bioshock shots look almost confusingly similar IMO. Everything's overexposed and washed out and overly bumpy.

Sorry, but nobody in their right mind would cofnuse Bioshock with UT2007 or Gears of War, or Mass Effect for that matter.

The epic games look similar, but titles like Bioshock, ME, Stranglehold and Brothers in Arms certainly all have their own distinct look.

 

[tabs]

Better in what regard though?

I was merely making the point that we don't actually know what these games will be like. Sobek stated - 'It seems there was no real benefit to using UE, and in fact it may have been a detriment.' However my point was we don't know if there was any benefits yet because the games haven't been released.

Also I can't agree that most UE3 games look particularly similar, but UT3 and GeOW do from what we've seen so far. However I've certainly not mistook one for the other at any point since it Gears was announced, not even for a split second.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

It seems strange to me that a deal of this magnitude could go through without some form of gurantee in place as a safeguard for the developers (SK among them). There was a good reference about the phone companies, and alot of other industries that have safe guards in different forms like penalties. They are in a buisness that affect hundreds of thousands of people on a corporate level, obviously they are under scrutiny.

Didn't they create some kind of framework for their buisness that would forsee these problems if they are indeed true? Or at least have some kind of insight in what their actions affect licensees? Seems to me they've created a situation where they are the centre of attention and has become unprepared for the consequences of supply and demand.
.

Um, of course there are "gurantee's" in the contract about this very thing, this is why SK is suing. Epic isn't living up to their contract.

Otherwise you wouldn't have a case.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

This quite is interesting

Furthermore, the developer lent support to Silicon Knights' allegations that the PlayStation 3 version of UE3 has under-delivered in terms of Epic's original claims, with the significant divergence between Xbox 360 and PS3 hardware contributing to the issue. Such concerns may have prompted Sony's recent announcement of an agreement with Epic to optimize UE3 for PS3 development.

Source

You dont need to have a developer to confirm this, Epic went out at E3 2005 and showed of UT3 running at 48fps or so on a PS3. They claimed that this had taken them 2 months to build\port\whatever. Im quite sure that was BS. I'm curious why people haven't sued earlier.

 

[one]

This quite is interesting



You dont need to have a developer to confirm this, Epic went out at E3 2005 and showed of UT3 running at 48fps or so on a PS3. They claimed that this had taken them 2 months to build\port\whatever. Im quite sure that was BS. I'm curious why people haven't sued earlier.

In that specific case you have to note UT3 is also an Epic game just like Gears of War which SK claimed has the parts not included in the shipped UE3.

 

[psorcerer]

In that specific case you have to note UT3 is also an Epic game just like Gears of War which SK claimed has the parts not included in the shipped UE3.

I do not think that any UE3-based game with descent graphics will ever be reaching 48fps on PS3.
I think that Epic software engineers do not have enough experience/knowledge to make an optimized product.
I think that the people who made Gears of War look this good are artists and level designers. And they made a great looking game not because of great UE3 software engineering but in spite of it. I personally think that Gears of War is the feat of arms for the art designer.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

In that specific case you have to note UT3 is also an Epic game just like Gears of War which SK claimed has the parts not included in the shipped UE3.

You really believe that Epic has some wondertool that makes them able to port UT3 to the PS3 looking good (Mark Rein claimed some very impressive poly\sec number) at 48fps running on the PPE core only, in 2 months?

I personally think that Epic screwed everybody over, they manage to get the appropriate hype, and sell a licence that obviously isn't working as promised. Why do i say obviously? UE3 is according to Epic the simplest multiplatform engine to use, ever. They have promised and hyped this thing for ages, yet, ALL UE3 engine games except for GeoW and hour of victory (which is a broken game averaging 25% on gamerankings) have been delayed for about a year. Something isn't right.

I refuse to believe that every single developer who licenced UE3 is either a totally talentless one, or had their publisher delay a allready finished game, or they all missed their suggested launch dates by a year.

 

[Rainbow Man]

Sorry, but nobody in their right mind would cofnuse Bioshock with UT2007 or Gears of War, or Mass Effect for that matter.

Alright so I'm deranged then, but I definitely think Bioshock has that over-glowed bumpy look of UT/GoW. Artistically it may differ (it doesn't look hi-tech for starters) but the rendering style definitely seems very similar IMO. At least from the picsx I've seen.

The epic games look similar, but titles like Bioshock, ME, Stranglehold and Brothers in Arms certainly all have their own distinct look.

As stated above, don't agree about Bioshock. Havcen't checed out any of the others so I can't say either aye or naye about them.
Peace.

 

[mozmo]

Bioshock is an unreal 2.XX based game, so to say it looks like the bumpy/glow look of UE3 is totally off. I'd say with most custom 2.xx based unreal engine games, a lot of the shading effects/hdr lighting effects would most probably be a custom developed addition by the developers of said title.

 

[Platon]

You should grab a copy of Roboblitz and have a play with the UE3 editor. It's quite remarkable what you can do with it, and how easily (once you know how). This is a very early version of the editor too, I'd expect the one shipping with UT3 to be quite a bit better.

The visual scripting, the particle effects system, and the way it handles materials are all very impressive.

Cheers, thanks, didn't even think of that. I have the XBLA roboblitz and it didn't even cross my mind that the PC version would come with an editor. I might check it out, or wait for the PC version of Gears...

 

[one]

I do not think that any UE3-based game with descent graphics will ever be reaching 48fps on PS3.
I think that Epic software engineers do not have enough experience/knowledge to make an optimized product.
I think that the people who made Gears of War look this good are artists and level designers. And they made a great looking game not because of great UE3 software engineering but in spite of it. I personally think that Gears of War is the feat of arms for the art designer.

No one knows what UT3 was like 2 years ago. It might be the same as today's, or not.

You really believe that Epic has some wondertool that makes them able to port UT3 to the PS3 looking good (Mark Rein claimed some very impressive poly\sec number) at 48fps running on the PPE core only, in 2 months?

I personally think that Epic screwed everybody over, they manage to get the appropriate hype, and sell a licence that obviously isn't working as promised. Why do i say obviously? UE3 is according to Epic the simplest multiplatform engine to use, ever. They have promised and hyped this thing for ages, yet, ALL UE3 engine games except for GeoW and hour of victory (which is a broken game averaging 25% on gamerankings) have been delayed for about a year. Something isn't right.

I refuse to believe that every single developer who licenced UE3 is either a totally talentless one, or had their publisher delay a allready finished game, or they all missed their suggested launch dates by a year.

It's not a matter of believing it or not, I just pointed out your logical error in jumping to the conclusion.

 

[Subtlesnake]

You dont need to have a developer to confirm this, Epic went out at E3 2005 and showed of UT3 running at 48fps or so on a PS3. They claimed that this had taken them 2 months to build\port\whatever. Im quite sure that was BS. I'm curious why people haven't sued earlier.

They said they were only using the PPE and RSX, so I think it's just a case of them knocking up some amazing art.

 

[scooby_dooby]

It's not a matter of believing it or not, I just pointed out your logical error in jumping to the conclusion.

Well actually, SK is claiming the additional code was a result of Gears of War, which was around fall 2006.

In Spring 2005, there was no PS3 version of UE3, let alone code which Epic was keeping to themselves. Epic wasn't set to deliver the PS3 engine until 6 months after final dev kits were delivered, and they appear to have missed that deliverable by many months.