Brian The Dog on 11/10/2010 at 19:20
I'm tired of waiting too, but I guess we wait.
An added complication, which may be why the lawyers are mulling it over, is that the Dark engine is used in Thief & Thief II (owned by Eidos) and System Shock 2 (owned by EA). So there may well be some serious checking with EA before they release Dark's source code that EA won't be too upset. I know ID licensed the Quake III engine for other companies, but Eidos may not have a totally clear contract with them.
If it gets past the laywers, then it may take a few days for someone to strip the assets out before it is released (presumably this will have to be done by someone in their own time, hence the delay)
New Horizon on 11/10/2010 at 19:49
Quote Posted by Brian The Dog
I'm tired of waiting too, but I guess we wait.
An added complication, which may be why the lawyers are mulling it over, is that the Dark engine is used in Thief & Thief II (owned by Eidos) and System Shock 2 (owned by EA). So there may well be some serious checking with EA before they release Dark's source code that EA won't be too upset.
The former LGS developer who had the source code was aware of this and also offered to remove the SS2 code if it was a legal problem.
MoroseTroll on 12/10/2010 at 06:44
Quote Posted by Brian The Dog
So there may well be some serious checking with EA before they release Dark's source code that EA won't be too upset
You will have do your best to upset EA - just try to find SS2 in its database, and you will fail:cheeky:. IMHO, EA has forgotten SS2 at all. So, I just don't understand why Eidos is still waiting with a Dark Engine source publication...
Jah on 12/10/2010 at 07:34
Quote Posted by New Horizon
I and other community members had approached Eidos several times over the years to ask them to try and locate the source code for release. During my own attempts, I was either told 'it is lost' or the contact person would just stop responding to my PM's. What amuses me most about this situation, is that it pretty much establishes that they didn't put a hell of a lot of effort into finding it. If Eidos can't locate former employess of LGS with all the resources available to them, and a community member not only finds former employees but also locates the source code...it doesn't say much to me about their sincerity when the people I asked to help us would say, "Oh yes, we are going to look into that".
Which probably amounted to, "Hey Bob, what do you know about the Thief source code?". "It's lost.". "Oh, good enough!"....*whistles and walks away*
Well, what else did you expect? Considering that finding and releasing the source code would be just a service to the community that isn't going to earn Eidos a single cent, it doesn't surprise me at all that they're not going to go out of their way to do it.
MoroseTroll on 12/10/2010 at 07:49
Jah: There is one thing which every developer and publisher should sustain - its reputation. A releasing of source of some old but popular game is a nice gesture to sustain the reputation. Some developers and publishers do that: id (it's a champion - John Carmack have released this August RtCW (2001) and RtCW:ET (2003)), Raven, Volition, Rebellion, even 3D Realms. Once upon a time Eidos already did that, so why don't to do that once again?
mr. hermit on 12/10/2010 at 08:21
Quote Posted by MoroseTroll
Jah: There is one thing which every developer and publisher should sustain - its reputation. A releasing of source of some old but popular game is a nice gesture to sustain the reputation. Some developers and publishers do that: id (it's a champion - John Carmack have released this August RtCW (2001) and RtCW:ET (2003)), Raven, Volition, Rebellion, even 3D Realms. Once upon a time Eidos already did that, so why don't to do that once again?
The only companies that do that are the ones owned by their developers, which share those values. There's no legal issues in releasing the source code unless proprietary 3rd code is used, and that can be removed, also EA has no legal standing to force the code proprietary. These are just excuses, if you don't get a reply back within a fortnight they're not interested.
And to the former LGS employee: why the hell didn't you just release anonymously!
Jah on 12/10/2010 at 08:22
I'm guessing that in those cases, they had the source code already and didn't have to start hunting former employees of another company to find it.
Brian The Dog on 12/10/2010 at 09:30
Quote Posted by MoroseTroll
IMHO, EA has forgotten SS2 at all. So, I just don't understand why Eidos is still waiting with a Dark Engine source publication...
EA most definitely hasn't forgotten about SS2 - Bioshock is its spiritual successor, and it's the most requested game on Good Old Games with >13000 requests.
MoroseTroll on 12/10/2010 at 09:35
Quote Posted by mr. hermit
And to the former LGS employee: why the hell didn't you just release anonymously!
Just think about it: who wants a problem? If that former LGS employee will release the source anonymously, sooner or later Eidos' lawers will recognize him and sue against him. Morethen, Eidos can state something like this: "Everyone, who is using the unofficially released source, will be sued." How about this?
