So,... what's the situation on the Dark engine source code? - by Cliftor
lost_soul on 10/8/2011 at 03:48
"They clearly care a great deal about this loyal community. . ."
Well said. Unfortunately that is the way game companies traditionally treat their fans. I went through the same thing today spending multiple hours tweaking and tweaking to get an old favorite game from '99 to run on a modern system. I eventually got the game to run and I'm having a lot of fun with it.
Unfortunately we live in a throw-away society. Older media from years past is to be buried and forgotten about, not enhanced and upgraded. They won't even officially remove the disk check so I can run it on my netbook.
Yep, shafting the fans is par for the course for most game publishers.
Fortunately the TDM guys went with a company that respects its fans.
New Horizon on 10/8/2011 at 11:30
Quote Posted by sNeaksieGarrett
But a version of the source code has already been released. Albeit, an illegal, possibly outdated version, but it's source code nonetheless.
No, the version leaked from the Dreamcast dev kit wasn't outdated...it was the latest version, and after T2's release.
Quote Posted by lost_soul
Fortunately the TDM guys went with a company that respects its fans.
Yup. I honestly didn't expect the D3 source until 2012...but I'm extremely happy that it will be released to us in 2012. I suspect we will get some soft shadows in the game at long last...hopefully as an option in the menu so lower end users can turn them off to shave off some overheard. Optimization of the loading time is definitely going to be something we look into...as well as a bunch of optimizations that we have already discussed. I'm very hopeful that we'll see some performance gains. Performance may not double or anything, but even if we can get 5 to 10 fps for some players, that would be a help.
jaxa on 10/8/2011 at 14:16
Quote Posted by New Horizon
but I'm extremely happy that it will be released to us in 2012.
2011.
lost_soul on 10/8/2011 at 14:50
I'm pretty sure the main killer of performance on my low end system is the AI. If I remove the guards, the maps run fine. :)
As for soft shadows, I've never seen the appeal of them. The only times I've seen soft shadows, they've had shimmering edges due to perhaps poor filtering/anisotropy. Perhaps this can be avoided some how.
sNeaksieGarrett on 10/8/2011 at 16:46
@New Horizon:
Holy shit, I wasn't aware of that!:eek:
Albert on 10/8/2011 at 17:48
Meh, this thread is pointless now. I'd hate to fall back on my old argument (And volca hasn't touched it in half a year, due that source code scare), but for reals:
We'll see OPDE, before we ever see Eidos lift a leg, pass gas and notion the source code through the gates into free territory.
We've got zilch out of the source found because of those issues. And I heavily doubt that Eidos would take the axe to something they clearly don't give a rats ass about.
Hell, I'm starting on learning C++, because I got too much freetime to be the damn polemic around here. More should do the same...
Renzatic on 10/8/2011 at 18:19
Quote Posted by Albert
And I heavily doubt that Eidos would take the axe to something they clearly don't give a rats ass about.
That's what I'm thinking. Eidos originally lost the source code. Why? They didn't particularly care one way or another. They had other things to worry about. When it eventually did find its way out onto the internet, not much was done. Once again, they didn't seem too flustered about it (and yes, they more than likely knew about it happening).
Whoever is holding onto the source code now could, at the very least, use it to make a few patches to get the game up and running on modern systems, and Eidos probably wouldn't bat an eye. As long as people aren't releasing core Thief assets, such as textures, soundfiles, OM missions, and whatnot, I doubt very seriously Eidos would lift finger one against it.
Of course, it would be nice to get an official response. Unfortunately, online petitions and emails haven't done much to spur them on. You gotta do something to really get their attention, because I doubt they're ignoring us out of spite. My suggestion, beyond just going ahead and working on it, would be to start a hardcore letter writing campaign. Each one of us should write a letter consisting of a single line, such as "HEY HOW BOUT THAT DARK ENGINE SOURCE CODE, HUH? (appropriate links go here)", copy it off about 1000 times, slip em all in envelopes, make the return address something like TTLG DARK ENGINE SOURCE CODE PROJECT, and mail it to the Eidos legal department postage due.
It's not angry or threatening, and just annoying enough to get their attention.
lost_soul on 10/8/2011 at 19:23
"And I heavily doubt that Eidos would take the axe to something they clearly don't give a rats ass about."
That isn't how this society works at all. Picture two people at the park, both with soccer balls. Jim's only ball accidentally lands on a thorn when he kicks it, and consequently pops. Meanwhile, Jake brought extra soccer balls just because they were on sale. Jim explains to Jake that his ball accidentally popped and asks to borrow one of the (endless supply) that Jake somehow managed to carry to the park.
Jake replies: "no, they're MINE, I'm using them. Get YOUR OWN!"... even though the extra balls are sitting on a distant bench in a bag unused.
The point? If Jim just uses one of the soccer balls without permission, Jake will probably raise hell just because he can.
Albert on 10/8/2011 at 19:41
I get what your saying, but since when did Eidos ever say we couldn't play with their (Ahem!) balls?
Your point doesn't have any backing for me, as Eidos has clearly been mum on the whole deal.
(That, and it seems Eidos has never really spoken out about other engine recreations of their legacy products, in the past. Those projects I bet, fell under the grand delusion of the case where other companies are staffed by total assfaces who strive to protect the products which they haven't seen a penny from, in ages. Possibly why they too are in the doldrums)
Renzatic on 10/8/2011 at 19:41
No, man. This situation would be more like...
"Hey. I really like soccer. I see you haven't played with that soccer ball in over 10 years. Can I use it"?
"Hmm...mmmaaayyyybbbeeee. I dunno. Possibly".
"...what if I just go ahead and use it anyway? You're not doing anything with it".
"Hmm. I guess you could possibly do that. But there could be legal ramifications involved. Hell, that's if I do anything at all. I dunno. I probably won't. It's old and useless to me. But maybe I will, cuz it's my ball, and I spent alot of money on it back in the day. I wonder what I'm having for dinner tonight...hmmm".
"Hey! Back on subject here! I really want that soccer ball".
"(walking away)....tacos sound nice. Maybe Italian. I really like spaghetti. Hmmm".
Edit: Thought it's a slight stretch, I really think the situation lies more along these lines...
"Listen. I'm not gonna give you express permission to use my ball. In fact, I'm not gonna give you a yes or a no at all. What I'm going to do is look the other way, because I know that sometime tomorrow, someone is going to end up finding the ball, and tossing it in your lap. It's old and near useless to me, but I still like having it. In the meantime, you can have fun with it. Maybe have fun with it forever. My moods are mercurial. But by not explicitly giving it to you, it's still officially mine, and I have legal options to C&D if things start getting out of hand".
