So,... what's the situation on the Dark engine source code?

jtr7 on 12/5/2009 at 11:44

Exactly.

We haven't given up! But that doesn't get the job done any faster.

Albert on 12/5/2009 at 16:41

Reverse engineering?! :confused:

jtr7 on 12/5/2009 at 17:00

Something like that, but it can only be faked. The intent is to improve upon it and remove all the hard-wired limitations for ten-year old machines, but without being able to see the code running it all, it's an educated guess to make things work.

epithumia on 12/5/2009 at 17:08

Actually, if the code simply cannot be found, explicit permission to decompile and reverse engineer would be nice as it would eliminate what's currently a bit of a legal grey area.

eddy on 12/5/2009 at 17:40

Reverse engineering is still a hell lot of work. I get the impression that some people think this kind of work is a piece of cake.

Macha on 12/5/2009 at 18:16

It will be found guys, come on, chin up. No one could let something like this disappear.

epithumia on 12/5/2009 at 19:38

Quote Posted by eddy

Reverse engineering is still a hell lot of work.

I never said it wasn't. I know how difficult it is, because I've tried to do it in the past. But it could be useful even in limited situations, except that anyone who cares about the legality of their work must currently avoid it.

jtr7 on 12/5/2009 at 20:45

That's a great point about permission to decompile, epithumia!:thumb:

MoroseTroll on 13/5/2009 at 07:26

epithumia: "explicit permission to decompile and reverse engineer?" :eek: I'm very doubt that Eidos will ever give us such a permission, because it breaks its EULA.

jtr7 on 13/5/2009 at 07:43

That's why we need permission.:)

We could ask them to update the EULA to supercede the old one and let us decompile the source code, or ask them for permission to let us break that rule with their blessing.