If you ask me, this is just another reason why Kotaku (in general) is a load of ****. Not to say that all the writers there are horrible abominations of mankind or anything, but I do feel and believe that Kotaku has not been credible for quite some time now. The only thing they've been good at lately seems to be flame wars and causing a stir. Anyway, I hope Precursor gets the funding the need.

Also, as for readers, please use your heads! Don't take any news as fact until you've thought it over! Please! More ignorance is the last thing we need on the internet. Though most people reading this will probably use their heads to begin with.

Did Dennis just decry the use of annonymous sources due to their lack of credibility, and then refuse to disclose his own source because he didn't want to get anybody in to trouble?

Dyack hypocrisy? Next you'll tell me that water is wet.

Not to mention Dyack opens his pity party video by attacking the internet & the nature of internet news reporting. Wow, Dyack...you really learned NOTHING from your pathetic little war on NeoGAF & the subsequent EGM Live interview, did you?

And by the way, "I decided not to publicly refute the article until now because I didn't think people would actually believe it" is NOT a good excuse.  When someone attacks your credibility on as many levels as that article did, you refute it just to keep your good name clean.  You may have issues with Kotaku, but it's a major internet gaming news site. The article's not just going to go away if you ignore it.  So even if the article really isn't true as Dyack says, he still showed his total lack of leadership skills at Silicon Knights by not dealing with the article until now.  NOW it's an article worth refuting because he's at the point where he's begging his fans for money because his hubris destroyed his original company, and no one in the industry trusts him to deliver a product.  That doesn't speak highly of him.

I'm just going to highlight this because it's the truth, Ruth.

Even if the allegations the anonymous sources made were actually rubbish, we're still looking at one mediocre game and another total crap game in the last 8 years. Also, a horrible lawsuit that went against them in the most comical of ways. There's plenty of reason to be wary of giving Dyack any money.

This is a good video.  Thanks Dennis, Paul and Shawn.  I will be pledging my support for this game.

Also, I have a bone to pick with this, from the Precursor Games forum post:

This is such bullcrap. If I work the first 5 days of 30 day film shoot as an Assistant Director, but have to resign  for any kind of reasons(health, personal, fired) I still expect to receive a proper credit for my work. I'll understand that since I didn't work the full shoot, my name won't be the first listed. That's how credits should work. The people work the most get top billing. But if you worked as an animator for a week you should still get the credit, not get lumped in with an endless blob of "special thanks".




EDIT: Also, you put more money into a game than what the publisher gave you, and it still turns out crap? Oh boy...

Many multi-million dollar games from big time publishers and developers have come out as crap.  The money could have gone to something else besides gameplay, or they just didn't do a good enough job.

A super expensive oven isn't going to automatically make better-tasting food.

For me it's not so much about the expense of the project or that SK put some of their own money behind the game, but rather what that gesture signifies. That SK put their own money in to X-Men: Destiny tells me that the people developing the game, at least at a management level, were 100% behind the project. You don't throw good money after bad unless it's a passion project or it's a game upon which the continued existence of your company rests. The money itself isn't necessarilly important, but it does signify that SK really wanted Destiny to succeed and threw everything they had at it. The fact that despite those efforts and good intentions the game was still a failure...well, you can draw your own conclusions, but it doesn't exactly fill me with confidence as far as Shadow of the Eternals is concerned.

Let's say everything in the above video is true; That none of the rumours are true and that Dyack and the people at SK made a few mistakes, but were ultimately the victims of circumstance. Let's assume that everything in the Kotaku article is complete fabrication. Even if I were to accept all that (which I'm not sure that I do), I still wouldn't have confidence in this Shadow of the Eternals project based on the games that this group of people have released in the last few years.

So you see, they're between a rock and a hard place. If the accusations are true then the management at SK were rotten to the core. If they're not true, however, then all that SK is guilty of is being a terrible developer. The latter might be preferrable from a legal standpoint, but neither one makes a convincing case for why people should fund their next project.

About kickstarter projects: I liked the idea of Ouya, but it was a flimsy thing with nothing that I actually knew of to back it up and it wound up making millions of dollars in a short span of time. Shadow of the Eternals looks to be struggling and its based off of something I thuroughly enjoyed. If Shadow of the Eternals doesn't succeed than I'm backing this.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNlfQkNGFqk&list=FLQwkhTQQz50ETU5PjyVOUOQ&feature=mh_lolz

What's that sound?  Did someone bring popcorn?


There are so many interesting aspects to this whole thing.  I've made up my mind about whether to fund development, and the Kotaku article certainly did play a part... but not as much as the overall performance of Silicon Knights and Dyack over a period of many years.  Best of luck to Precursor Games with this project.


I look forward to reading the NWR roundtable discussion, and seeing the staff reactions.

I'm probably missing the point, but... No, I'm definitely missing the point.

So Ouya earned a ton of money. So what?  It was a cool sounding product backed by some industry names that people know and respect. There was nothing to bet on but the reputations of the people involved, but that was enough for it to succeed.

Who really cares how much money a KickStarter project earns though, beyond the obvious made it/didn't distinction? Funding totals don't mean anything about the quality of the finished product, or about the relative value of buying in early (often blindly) instead of waiting to see what the end product is like.

Smart money doesn't drive crowd funded projects; passionate money does. I'd rather be in the former category, personally... although that is probably a function of my limited budget.


Edited because I kind of do get the point. Just not sure how relevant it is, since we aren't betting on the IP but on the ability of the team involved to create a new product based on that (or at least, similar) IP.

I look forward to reading the roundtable discussion on this!

I helped fund this game and the ideas churning are looking excellent. Expect a far superior game to the original Eternal Darkness.

If he really did swipe Activision's money, why hasn't he been sued and/or indicted for doing so? That by itself should be enough for people to question whether the article is legit. I'll wait for some concrete evidence before I slander the man.

@ejamer This looks like a sure thing to me, as opposed to the Ouya which was a total unknown(still is)

The biggest reason people should support Shadow of the Eternals....


there isn't much announced coming out on the Wii U right now

"Swiping" money might be hard to prove.  A product was delivered after all, and the article seems to suggest that Activision didn't exactly follow up with the project as they should've (ie: fault for quality issues probably lies on both sides).

Off topic but related: Has Sega done anything regarding the release of Aliens: Colonial Marines? Will they?

But can't your last question be turned around? Can't the lack of any contradicting statement from Dyack, Silicon Knights, or any friends/employees that stayed with company be considered damning if the article really was blatantly incorrect and slanderous?  I mean, we have a statement being made now, after it's clear that his damaged public reputation is harming the ability to use crowd funding as a source of capital... but how credible is that?

I don't think any of us will ever know how accurate those anonymous sources were. My bet is that the one-sided story being presented by ex-employees (who probably weren't that fond of Dyack and/or Silicon Knights to begin with) is not a fair telling of what happened... but when you look at the overall track record for Silicon Knights over the past 8+ years*, it forces you to wonder just how much fire is behind all that smoke.

Again, very interested to hear what the NWR staff has to say - especially since at least one person has apparently met Dyack in person before.

* Track record in a nut-shell: mediocre and much-delayed Too Human release; disastrous Epic lawsuit that made Silicon Knights look rather bad; very poor X-Men Destiny release; difficulty meeting conditions for grant money from Canadian Government; then the article in question being unverifiable icing on the cake.

The studio does seem very passionate about the project, and really wants to see it be successful. That is likely the best selling point we can agree upon at this point in time.

I hope they do the roundtable discussion, I know a lot of people who are waiting on it.

We might do you one better: interview Dyack on a podcast or at E3. Or both.

Sorry for the delay, folks. Something cool *should* be coming soon.

Awesome, I look forward to it!