Epic Games Wins Lawsuit With Silicon Knights [UPDATED]

@JeanLuc said:

I can't claim to know the full story but I have to side with Epic here. They put out the engine for use and then started making a game with it, None of that I find very bad. Just because Silicon Knights couldn't figure out the engine isn't a reason to sue. Just don't use Epic's engines anymore if you have a problem with it.

I think, and I'm not positive on this so don't quote me, Silicon's Knights claim was that Epic was holding back an integral update to the engine that resolved many of the early issues with the engine, while quietly using that updated engine to make their own game first. Silicon Knights was claiming that they did this with the intent to make other Unreal engine games look inferior to Epics own game.

According to Silicon Knights at least, there was part of the contract of usage for the engine that stated there would be timely and non-preferential release of any updates to the engine as made available. Epic allegedly breached that contract, which Silicon Knights claims led to their failure of the project.

They are probably right, partially, about Epic's misuse of their engine improvements. The problem is proving it. Silicon Knights failed to do so, the case was practically shut month ago.

@Sweep said:

Denis Dyack can't seem to catch a break, huh?

More like Denis Cryack. ZING!

Does anyone know if any pertinent details from the contract itself have been released to the public? Silicon Knights were, of course, attempting to make it out that Epic had done them a disservice, and the court decreed that it was not so. However, just out of curiosity, I would like to see tidbits of information from the actual legal document. I am not well-versed in the intricacies of these types of binding contracts, so I don't even know if it would be legal for any excerpts to be made public.

So, yeah, is there anything floating around on the interwebz?

@fox01313 said:

SK just needs to put out another Kain/Soul Reaver game to put it back on putting out better games again.

I'd rather Crystal Dynamics found a team proven competent in dealing with modern games, rather than a team more experienced in litigation in this generation and struggling to create games that, at best, belong in the last.

@Sweep: Well, he is, after all, "Owned by GAF."

Too Human was a piece of shit.

@patrickklepek: That's pretty interesting to hear. Seems almost like a waste to license their engine until they've shipped their first game, and casts SK's complaints in a completely new light. If that's true, they probably should've expected this. But I'm unfamiliar with how public cases like this are; is it public record? Or does it just depend on how much SK or EG are willing to say about it?

I don't think it's possible for me to read or hear the words 'Too Human' any more without adding a 'motherfucker' at the end. 

Unreal has problems but it's hardly "unworkable" as Silicon Knights characterized in their lawsuit. That said Silicon Knights deserves a comeback of any sort, because I really want to play Eternal Darkness 2. 

@whatisdelicious said:

I don't know. That "in essence" paragraph was maybe a little biased, as was the implication of tacking on "the poorly received X-Men Origins." I'd be interested in hearing why the jury ruled in Epic Games' favor, not a tweet by Mark Rein and then a skewed recount of the basis for the case. It never felt to me like Silicon Knights was expecting Epic to spend "all its time" on its licensees. It just felt like they expected a base level of service.

SK: "Hey, that engine you guys built that we're paying to license isn't working so well and it's really stunting development of our game."

EG: "Yeahhhh... See, we're kind of busy right now... Gears of War and all... So..."

That's the picture I have in my mind of all this, so I'd really like to hear how the case actually went.

Same. I'll see what I can dig up on it, but Epic Games, at least in public, has always been pretty clear that their engines are never optimized until they ship a game. Perhaps it was different in private.

SK just needs to put out another Kain/Soul Reaver game to put it back on putting out better games again (or just doing an updated/HD version of Eternal Darkness for other systems).

I don't know. That "in essence" paragraph was maybe a little biased, as was the implication of tacking on "the poorly received X-Men Origins." I'd be interested in hearing why the jury ruled in Epic Games' favor, not a tweet by Mark Rein and then a skewed recount of the basis for the case. It never felt to me like Silicon Knights was expecting Epic to spend "all its time" on its licensees. It just felt like they expected a base level of service.

SK: "Hey, that engine you guys built that we're paying to license isn't working so well and it's really stunting development of our game."

EG: "Yeahhhh... See, we're kind of busy right now... Gears of War and all... So..."

That's the picture I have in my mind of all this, so I'd really like to hear how the case actually went.

Really just seemed like SK were upset their game tanked while Epic's sold millions. If this was such a problem, wouldn't other devs have come forward too?

Looks like SK won't be getting that dollar after all

Oh man, Denis Dyack is fuuuuuuuuuuuuucked.

In an alternate reality where Silicon Knights won this case, Crayola must be quaking in their boots at the door this is opening wide for parents to sue them for the shitty drawings their kids made.

Well, this is pretty much the nail in the coffin for Silicon Knights, as if X-Men Destiny wasn't already. Oh well. It's not like a studio that released a mind-blowing 2 (two) games last decade should have stayed afloat as long as it did.

I can't claim to know the full story but I have to side with Epic here. They put out the engine for use and then started making a game with it, None of that I find very bad. Just because Silicon Knights couldn't figure out the engine isn't a reason to sue. Just don't use Epic's engines anymore if you have a problem with it.

This never made sense. As others have pointed out, there are a ton of games that use UE3 without complaints from their developers. And if anything, the work that Epic does with it's own games only serves as an advertising tool for others to see what can be done with their product. They are for the most part at this point in the business of creating and licensing game engines

Denis Dyack can't seem to catch a break, huh?

I'm no lawyer, but my arguments for Epic would have consisted of listing out every game using the Unreal engine that released successfully, and then maybe calling SK a bunch of whiners.

Kind of not surprised but this definitely can't help Silicon Knights which are already hurting. Given that they're the only ones that actually sued Epic though, it seems they were largely alone in their claims toward them. And since their claims only ended up being worth $1 each, I don't think they had the best lawyers either.

UPDATE: In addition to simply "winning" the lawsuit, Epic Games has been awarded damages totaling $4.45 million.

One has to wonder where that $4.45 million will actually come from, and if Silicon Knights ever envisioned a scenario where they would suddenly owe money.

"We are delighted with the jury's verdict," said Epic Games general counsel Jay Andrews in a statement.

I'm also able to share some BREAKING NEWS, courtesy of $2.30 that I just spent searching for court documents related to the case. Because the court charges you regardless of whether you find anything interesting, I'm sharing them with you now.

On May 29 and May 30, the court spent $251.24 in lunches for jurors--$99.23 on May 29 and $152.01 on May 30.

Scandalous.

Gallery

--

Silicon Knights filed a lawsuit against Epic Games in 2007 over a dispute with Unreal Engine 3 and the development of Too Human, and according to Epic Games CEO Mark Rein, Epic Games won.

"Case over,” said Rein on Twitter. “Jury finds for Epic on all counts.”

The Too Human developer was arguing breach of contract, which reportedly impacted the game’s development and Silicon Knights’ ability to properly deliver the game.

"Rather than provide support to Silicon Knights and Epic’s other many licensees of the Engine,” read the original lawsuit filing, “Epic intentionally and wrongfully has used the fees from those licenses to launch its own game to widespread commercial success while simultaneously sabotaging efforts by Silicon Knights and others to develop their own video games."

In essence, Silicon Knights was upset Epic Games was spending its time perfecting its own games (and thus, its own engine) rather than spending all its time helping out those who licensed its engine.

The problems prompted Silicon Knights to begin developing its own multi-platform engine.

“Epic’s actions and the consequent increasing delay and cost of development of Silicon Knights’ own game," argued the studio, "caused by the unworkable Engine forced Silicon Knights in May of 2006 to embark on the time and resource intensive task of writing its own game engine, the very task it had hoped to avoid be entering the Agreement with Epic."

The latest game released by Silicon Knights was the poorly received X-Men: Destiny.