Too Human Makers Get Green Light on Epic Lawsuit

March 31, 2011 -

After many years of waiting, it looks like a Silicon Knights lawsuit against Epic Games has been given the green light by a judge. You may recall the 2007 lawsuit in which Too human developer Silicon Knights alleged that Epic Games had neglected Unreal Engine licensees to develop its own game, Gears of War.

The Canadian studio alleged the four-year development period for Too Human was due to Epic misleading the company about what Unreal Engine 3 was capable of. Further, SK alleges that Epic prioritized the development of Gears of War above all the development studios that had licensed Unreal Engine 3. Curiously enough, no other development studio sued Epic.

Because the company didn't get the support it deserved or the engine it was promised the company is seeking a cut of the profits from Gears of War. It's certainly one of the boldest requests from a developer in a court case involving a product it had nothing to do with..

Here's what Silicon Knights president Denis Dyack told Kotaku related to the recent court victory:

"When Epic first went public about our case to the press, they said that our claims were without merit," said Silicon Knights president Denis Dyack in a statement. "Two separate federal court judges have now disagreed with Epic, and have ruled that the case does have merit." "Silicon Knights has always wanted to have our focus be on making great games, not litigation. This ruling will allow us to have our day in court, before a jury, and to shine the light publicly on Epic’s conduct," Dyack continued. "We are very confident the jury will see the truth behind Epic’s actions."

While Silicon Knights will get its day in court, it's tough to see a jury giving them profits from Gears of War. It just seems beyond the realm of possibility.

Source: Kotaku


Comments

Re: Too Human Makers Get Green Light on Epic Lawsuit

Well, if the claims are true, then Silicon Knights has a pretty solid case. There's at least the appearance of a conflict of interest on the part of Epic when they are developing games in direct competition with their engine licensees. If SK can prove that Epic oversold any part of the engine's capabilities, or if they neglected to provide support for the engine in a timely manner, then it should be a slam dunk.

For the record, Too Human really did stink out loud though.

Re: Too Human Makers Get Green Light on Epic Lawsuit

Odd that not one other company who used Unreal 3 in this timeframe is not suing.

Is it not a shoddy carpenter who blames his tools anyways? Maybe I "just don't get it." 

Re: Too Human Makers Get Green Light on Epic Lawsuit

When the 'shoddy' carpenter doesn't get the tools he paid for is it his fault.

Re: Too Human Makers Get Green Light on Epic Lawsuit

Agree 100%. Just seems like Denis wants someone(with money) to blame for how his game turned out. 

 

Also this: http://www.joystiq.com/2007/03/23/too-humans-denis-dyack-pokes-fun-at-penny-arcade-game/

Re: Too Human Makers Get Green Light on Epic Lawsuit

The lawyer for Silicon Knights had better keep Denis Dyack on a short leash- that guy is certifiably insane, and his obsession with Too Human is borderline obsessive.  Just take a listen to that episode of 1up Yours he was a guest on...or read about his antics against NeoGaf.  

Given the psychological profile demonstrated by his actions, I'd say Dyack is just trying to find someone else to blame for his shitty game.  Too Human was in trouble long before it went to Unreal Engine 3.  Remember, this is the guy who blamed the media for noticing how poor the preview version of the game was at that E3.  

Re: Too Human Makers Get Green Light on Epic Lawsuit

Explain why it, to my knowledge at leas,t never had a demo.

Re: Too Human Makers Get Green Light on Epic Lawsuit

I'm really surprised to see that this is still around, never mind that it's actually going ahead.

As I recall, Dyack was very vocal about the criticism he and SK received about Too Human (surely everyone remembers the EGM podcast he guested on a couple of years back?), and it's only to be expected that he'd passionately defend something he'd poured his life into.

But if his form in any upcoming trial is anything like that which was on display towards EGM et al previously, it looks like we could be in for our most interesting games-related court shennanigans since,... well, you know who I'm talking about.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will Target Australia sell the next GTA game upon its release?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenI still say "clickbait" is thrown around way too casually, to the point where it's completely meaningless. That aside, what alternate title would you suggest?07/31/2015 - 2:22pm
benohawkt was still delibrate clickait, something I would expect from a Gawker outlet, the article would of likely been much better recieved with a nicer title07/31/2015 - 2:18pm
Andrew EisenProvocative title to be sure but I didn't find it inaccurate or not reflective of its text.07/31/2015 - 2:12pm
benohawkGamasutra shouldn't of gotten clicks for the article until they had published under an accurate name instead of some pathetic clickbaiting07/31/2015 - 2:09pm
benohawkThe title of the article meant that the article was worth ignoring, not launching a massive campaign to try and end the site it was on.07/31/2015 - 2:08pm
Andrew EisenI will Ouija him my unceasing indignation!07/31/2015 - 1:59pm
Infophile@AE: The fact that he's dead does a good job of ensuring he won't hear it.07/31/2015 - 1:59pm
InfophileGood to hear. Just wish everyone offended felt that way07/31/2015 - 1:58pm
Andrew EisenRoger Ebert will never hear the end of my disdain for his I Spit On Your Grave review! http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/i-spit-on-your-grave-198007/31/2015 - 1:57pm
Big PermI don't support the email campaigns. I wouldn't support a comics venue getting them because of being offended, so it'd be hipocritical for me to do it to those who offend me07/31/2015 - 1:53pm
Infophile(cont'd) if it could be proven, it wouldn't merit anywhere near what Alexander has gone through.)07/31/2015 - 1:49pm
InfophileYeah, we can't prove or disprove it. My beef is with those who use the assumed intent to justify the actions taken against Gamasutra and Alexander. If it can't be proven, it shouldn't be retaliated against like that. (Hell, with how mild this was, even...07/31/2015 - 1:49pm
Andrew EisenNo problem. We just prefer to keep the front page clean.07/31/2015 - 1:43pm
Big PermAndrew- Alright, didn't know before.07/31/2015 - 1:42pm
Andrew EisenBig Perm - Not that big a deal, but do try to refrain from the heavier expletives in the Shout box.07/31/2015 - 1:40pm
Big Perm@ Info. I disagree, but we're just both speculating on intent. Is it possible you're right? Sure, but I don't see you being able convince me by saying she would have offended differently07/31/2015 - 1:40pm
Infophile(cont'd) title with the express purpose of offending non-game-devs? If offense was the goal, the article would have been different.07/31/2015 - 1:35pm
Big PermJust because I think your opinion is poopie, doesn't mean I think you're poopie.07/31/2015 - 1:35pm
InfophileIt's true that of course gamers will end up reading it. But it still makes it a stretch to assume they must have intended to offend them. Why would they make an article trying to convince those in the game industry of X and then randomly give it a...07/31/2015 - 1:35pm
Big PermWhile I think the opinion is poopie, I do wish Leigh herself didn't catch so much vitriol. Hate the idea, not the person imo. That's why I generally try to be friendly to journos07/31/2015 - 1:34pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician