Epic's Motion to Dismiss SK Suit Denied

The ongoing saga of the suit/counter-suit battle between Epic Systems and Silicon Knights continues, with Epic's motion to dismiss dismissed. GameDaily reports: "GameDaily BIZ briefly spoke with SK's attorney on the case, Christopher T. Holland, an Equity Partner at Krieg, Keller, Sloan, Reilley & Roman, LLP. Holland confirmed to us that all of SK's initial claims will not be thrown out and 'remain in play for the trial.' An exact date for the trial has yet to be set. 'We're a long way from a verdict in this case, but certainly as a plaintiff we're pleased that the court has recognized the merit in our claims and we're happy that we can now proceed as planned with all the claims we brought for discovery and trial,' Holland said."

A spinning we will go

[Krozy]

My instincts are telling me that Epic is in the wrong here, simply from the commentary. From the article... Epic VP Mark Rein said. "Often these requests are denied. It is important to note that this was not a decision on the merits of Silicon Knights' claims. We are confident that the evidence will show Silicon Knights breached its license with Epic Games and violated our copyrights and trade secrets." So Epic licenses the Unreal Engine to SK. SK doesn't get all the working elements of the engine per th

Re:

[HandsOnFire]

I have a few friends that are in the know at SK.

From what I've been told, (this could be wrong, or a lie, I'm not sure) is that Epic didn't give them a working engine. It was so bad that it would be impossible to make a game from it. I could see why this would result in delays from them and other companies.

I'd say more, but I promised this person/these people I woldn't. :p

Re:

[AcidLacedPenguiN]

what about the tens of other games that were done with UE3 and had no issues with it? Are SK saying that they were ostracized from all other developers using UE3? Epic doesn't like us, boo-hoo, etc? wasn't the game they're working on supposed to come out 2 console generations ago?

Re:

[p0tat03]

Tens of games? To-date there's only been one AAA title made with UE3, and that's BioShock. Other have all been delayed, or in the case of Rainbow Six Vegas, switched engines (downgraded and then heavily hacked version of UE2). I'll admit, SK's track record is pretty lacklustre, but something definitely smells fishy from Epic's camp.

Re:A spinning we will go

[AcidLacedPenguiN]

sorry I was wrong, on closer inspection I count 11 games that are either out now or out within 3 weeks, and you are wrong about Vegas.
Bioshock
Blacksite: Area 51
Fatal Inertia
Hour of Victory
Mass Effect
Monster Madness
Stranglehold
Vegas
Medal of Honor: Airborne
Fury
and Unreal Tournament 3

then there are also a few XBLA games that use UE3.

if there was a problem on epic's end wouldn't you think at least one other dev team would have taken issue?

Re:

[im_thatoneguy]

Bioshock - First Person Shooter
Blacksite: Area 51 - First person shooter
Fatal Inertia - First person shooter
Hour of Victory - First person shooter
Mass Effect - Third Person RPG with shooter elements
Monster Madness - Simple third person slasher
Stranglehold - Third Person shooter
Vegas - Third Person Shooter
Medal of Honor: Airborne - First Person Shooter
Fury - RPG Shooter
and Unreal Tournament 3 - First Person Shooter

Now with the exception of 2 or so games on that list almost every single one of them could prac

Re:

[AcidLacedPenguiN]

but why would you license a FPS engine if you're not going to make an FPS? If you license a shooter's engine and expect it to work for anything other than a shooter expect to have to do something yourself. It's a little far-fetched to demand that Epic make an RPG or a platformer for you because you licensed their engine to make a game mechanic that the engine wasn't originally designed for.

Re:

[im_thatoneguy]

But Epic isn't licensing an "FPS Engine" They're marketing a 'flexible' middleware rendering engine.

A lot of studios are feeling like Epic exagerated the specs of their technology. I remember some of the claims they were making before GOW was even announced things that were more demonstration hacks than engine features.

Epic over promised, under delivered and failed to meet their deadlines. As a result Silicon Knights effectively said "Screw it it's easier to start from scratch" and now want out of their co

Re:

[DarkMantle]

Umm... yeah, there's a few more then that announced on the unreal technology [unrealtechnology.com] website.

Plus at least one US state is using it and 3 US school boards to make interactive 3d learning modules.

So there must be lots of problems with the engine. Either that or one company doesn't know how to read the UDN. [epicgames.com]

Re:

[Joelfabulous]

I think you forgot that robot game. Roboblitz, I think it is? I was under the impression that it was the first to use the engine in a demo and perhaps first released too.

Re:

[moderatorrater]

But they made Gears of War. Assuming they used the same engine, what's the problem?

Re:

[Krozy]

Well it's suggesting that Epic kept portions of the engine to themselves to build Gears of War, touted what could be done with it, but didn't turn the essential capabilities over to the licensees.

Re:

[bateleur]

On top of which there's the issue of documentation.

If I turned an engine I'd written over to someone else with next to no documentation, they very probably wouldn't be able to use it effectively. Scale this up to something as state-of-the-art and tough to use as Epic provide and it's a showstopping problem.

Re:

[Lane.exe]

The thing is, a motion to dismiss is a decision on the merits... sort of. The judge did find that there was at least some merit (perhaps not enough evidence to preponderate in SK's favor, but enough to warrant continuing the suit) to SK's claims.

Re:

[hedwards]

I remember reading a long time ago, when the quake engine was still the engine of choice for 3d games, that id would sell the license for 100k and include a cd with the appropriate source. That was it, no support, just a disc with the appropriate code and a formal agreement over agreed upon uses.

The engine doesn't have to include extensions, unless the contract indicates that it should. It really depends what the contract specified should be included. Unless the contract stipulated that the engine should be

Re:

[Cornelius the Great]

Handing over the source is one thing. Most newer technologies consist of some header files and documentation, and force you to dynamically link their stuff (you're not given access to the source), depending on the kind of license. $75k sounds sounds relatively cheap, so it wouldn't surprise me if Epic gave SK nothing more than header files and precompiled binaries to link against. I work for a firm that licenses middleware to companies for use in simulations and games, and this is what we typically do for "

Re:

[p0tat03]

Everyone is still ignoring the main (and only concrete) claim in the entire case: that the contract stipulated an exact date by which Epic must deliver a working Xbox 360 build of the engine. The contention here is that Epic did not. This claim is so trivially easy to prove/disprove that I have no doubt Epic missed the deadline, and honestly, on this alone Epic will be paying out to SK, no questions asked.

SK Excuses?

[ScotchForBreakfast]

I don't doubt that some or many folks have been having difficulty with the Unreal engine. Having said that Silicon Knights development of Too Human has seemed epically bumbling so I have trouble trusting them much. Too Human was at first a PlayStation game (claimed to be 5 disks), then a GameCube game, now a 360 game. Silicon Knights in general seems to have their own issues with getting a game out the door. Is this the fault of Epic's support? A continuation of SK's inability to finish a game? or a b

Re:

[DDLKermit007]

Other developers are having said issues. They just find it easier to bitch privately, and work around Epic's refusal to provide them with the final GOW code. It's still far easier to pay for an engine that has most of what you need rather than go it alone.

Pitty it was Epic instead of iD...

[FoolsGold]

Not that I wish any ill-will against Carmack and co., but it would certainly have been funny if he had to rock up to court, restate his motion to dismiss, at which point the judge would reply "DENIED!" and frag Carmack on the spot.

Re:

[Satanboy]

but then we wouldn't have gigapixels . . .