Shady dealings!! It seems Nintendo don't own the Eternal Darkness IP after all. Seeing how Silicon Knights is in ruins now it would be a good chance for Nintendo to buy out the IP.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: ejamer on October 30, 2012, 10:01:49 AM
"Sources" from this article suggesting that Silicon Knights own Eternal Darkness IP aren't trustworthy. They might be correct to some degree, but until there is some proof it's best not to put much faith in them.
On the other hand, there is proof that Nintendo owns and updates the Eternal Darkness trademark: http://www.trademarkia.com/eternal-darkness-77932350.html (http://www.trademarkia.com/eternal-darkness-77932350.html)
My personal take is that Silicon Knights was desperately trying to be relevant by returning to their glory days - possibly without permission or license - while mismanaging money and resources to make it happen. That's just speculation, but based on what I've read it seems likely.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: Shaymin on October 30, 2012, 10:12:20 AM
There's a very good chance that the "Eternal Darkness 2" was going to get a rapid name change if it was ever picked up, in much the way Sleeping Dogs did.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: Morari on October 30, 2012, 12:45:33 PM
Nintendo should make Eternal Darkness a primary focus. Maybe then I could stop laughing at the Wii U and consider getting one.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: broodwars on October 30, 2012, 12:52:34 PM
I believe this is actually not that unusual. I've heard of other companies who have made unauthorized demos of licensed games for pitching purposes, such as Sanzaru Games. If I remember correctly, Sanzaru made a conceptual demo for a potential Sly Cooper game on PS3, and they pitched it to Sony to convince them to make an actual Sly Cooper game on PS3. Sony liked what they saw, so they allowed them to put together the PS3 Sly Cooper Collection. They liked what they saw there, so they allowed Sanzaru to make Sly 4: Thieves in Time.
I suspect Silicon Knights intended to make Eternal Darkness 2 for Nintendo, so they were working on a conceptual demo to pitch the idea to them. It didn't work out, mostly because of "talent" being siphoned off for X-Men Destiny.
I seem to also remember a Western company a few years ago who tried (and failed) to pitch a Western-style Final Fantasy game to Square-Enix. I can't remember the company, though.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: ShyGuy on October 30, 2012, 02:51:00 PM
Didn't Cassamassina say that Factor Five pitched a Kid Icarus game to Nintendo? There was some concept art floating around.
Also, there was that Halo game for the DS.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: Adrock on October 30, 2012, 03:25:19 PM
I seem to also remember a Western company a few years ago who tried (and failed) to pitch a Western-style Final Fantasy game to Square-Enix. I can't remember the company, though.
I think you're referring to now defunct Swedish developer GRIN who was working on a Final Fantasy XII spin-off codenamed "Fortress" that was set in Ivalice some time after Revenant Wings. I remember the concept art which was nice, nothing super special. I had to look up some of the finer details (i only remembered that GRIN was in Europe). Apparently, Fortress was initially pitched as an original fantasy game and Square Enix wanted it to be a Final Fantasy spin-off.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: Kytim89 on October 30, 2012, 04:06:48 PM
Perhaps Nintendo does in fact own the rights to Eternal Darkness but SK some how has first priority when it comes to actually developing the game. For example, if Nintendo wanted a sequel to be developed then they would have to first offer it to SK before anyone else. Unless SK is unable or unwilling to make a new Eternal Darkness game then Nintendo's hands might be tied. If SK passes and gives permission for some other company to make the game then Nintendo can go ahead make ED 2 for the Wii U.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: ejamer on October 31, 2012, 10:30:10 AM
Perhaps Nintendo does in fact own the rights to Eternal Darkness but SK some how has first priority when it comes to actually developing the game. For example, if Nintendo wanted a sequel to be developed then they would have to first offer it to SK before anyone else. Unless SK is unable or unwilling to make a new Eternal Darkness game then Nintendo's hands might be tied. If SK passes and gives permission for some other company to make the game then Nintendo can go ahead make ED 2 for the Wii U.
Source?
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: Kytim89 on October 31, 2012, 11:41:12 AM
Perhaps Nintendo does in fact own the rights to Eternal Darkness but SK some how has first priority when it comes to actually developing the game. For example, if Nintendo wanted a sequel to be developed then they would have to first offer it to SK before anyone else. Unless SK is unable or unwilling to make a new Eternal Darkness game then Nintendo's hands might be tied. If SK passes and gives permission for some other company to make the game then Nintendo can go ahead make ED 2 for the Wii U.
It's just a theory.
Source?
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: toddra on October 31, 2012, 05:33:33 PM
Don't shoot me, but Eternal Darkness is the only game I have left for the Gamecube, that I still have never played. I think a sequel coming out might be the motivation to actually get me to stop putting it off. Of course there is the matter of dusting off the Gamecube and praying it still works.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on October 31, 2012, 10:23:12 PM
Don't shoot me, but Eternal Darkness is the only game I have left for the Gamecube, that I still have never played. I think a sequel coming out might be the motivation to actually get me to stop putting it off. Of course there is the matter of dusting off the Gamecube and praying it still works.
you could always stick it in your Wii. But you would probably have to dust that off too ;)
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: Stogi on November 01, 2012, 01:14:01 PM
Play it. Play it NOAW!
Actually, wait till it's thunder storming or just all around shitty weather, then play it at night with all the lights off in the entire house and the sound turned all the way up to the point where it sounds good but any higher would sound terrible, then play the damn game.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: MrPhishfood on November 01, 2012, 01:57:41 PM
Also at some point in the game you are asked to choose 1 of 3 paths. Choose the green one.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: toddra on November 01, 2012, 03:52:03 PM
I don't have a Wii anymore, I sold it in 2009. If the WiiU plays Gamecube games then maybe when I get one, if I get one, if not its the old trusty Gamecube.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: Morari on November 01, 2012, 04:04:00 PM
Dolphin Emulator to the rescue!
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: toddra on November 01, 2012, 04:21:55 PM
No thank you, while I am not at all against emulators, I never could get that piece of crap to work on anything. I actually have two Gamecubes sitting under my bed waiting for an excuse to be hooked back up. And I really only have 2 games left, Eternal Darkness which I never could bring myself to play so I never sold it, and Zelda Collectors Disk because that will be buried with me when I die.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: Plugabugz on November 02, 2012, 06:32:49 AM
Given SK only have 4 people working for them now, SK making ED2 seems unlikely at the moment.
This nintendo curse seems to be good and strong in 2012. All independent developers that work with them seem to run into troubles in the years after they split.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: Spak-Spang on November 02, 2012, 08:44:21 AM
Basically it shows that people need to continue working with Nintendo or die?
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: Adrock on November 02, 2012, 09:22:28 AM
As much as I've wanted Eternal Darkness 2, it seems it would be terrible without Nintendo's aid or too different without Silicon Knight's involvement given that the story and characters were their brainchild. I wouldn't want Nintendo to hand the IP to another developer. Not that such a game would be bad, but it would stray too far from what SK would have done. At that point, that developer might as well make a brand new IP. With SK handling development, Nintendo would have to hold their hands (again) and development would probably still take forever. I'll preserve my fond memories of the original and hope Nintendo keeps expanding their teams that know what they're doing so they can far surpass Silicon Knights and Eternal Darkness.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: Plugabugz on November 02, 2012, 10:06:25 AM
I never cared for RARE period to be honest. They had one game I liked, that was it.
That doesn't change the fact that they were highly successful with Nintendo and since being bought by Microsoft, they have become a shell of what they were.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: NWR_insanolord on November 02, 2012, 02:46:40 PM
They were already sort of a shell of what they were the last year or two of being owned by Nintendo, and then when they sold them the Stamper brothers, who founded the company, left. They've been largely awful ever since, though I did like Banjo Kazooie: Nuts & Bolts and have heard good things about Viva Pinata. They should dissolve the company and let the brand rest in peace and not be dragged through the mud making avatars and Kinect games.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: Pixelated Pixies on November 02, 2012, 03:03:31 PM
I'd kill for an Eternal Darkness 2. Kill all my servants and get committed to an insane asylum that is.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: toddra on November 02, 2012, 03:10:55 PM
I never cared for RARE period to be honest. They had one game I liked, that was it.
That doesn't change the fact that they were highly successful with Nintendo and since being bought by Microsoft, they have become a shell of what they were.
So what I just was saying how I felt about it, not using that as any basis for any argument just stating my own personal opinion, which I am sure I am allowed to do.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: Adrock on November 02, 2012, 03:19:20 PM
I never cared for RARE period to be honest. They had one game I liked, that was it.
That doesn't change the fact that they were highly successful with Nintendo and since being bought by Microsoft, they have become a shell of what they were.
So what I just was saying how I felt about it, not using that as any basis for any argument just stating my own personal opinion, which I am sure I am allowed to do.
Never said you couldn't have your own opinion.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on November 09, 2012, 06:28:51 AM
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: oohhboy on November 09, 2012, 08:02:06 AM
That is some serious overkill on the part of the courts.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: MrPhishfood on November 09, 2012, 08:22:21 AM
Ouch. Like a football to the groin.
But why do they have to destroy all the assets? Didn't they legally have the right to use the engine at the time those games were developed.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: KDR_11k on November 09, 2012, 03:22:34 PM
They claimed they developed their own engine while the court found them in violation of the Unreal Engine license. I suspect that means their "new" engine was built by stealing parts from Unreal. That would make all SK games using that engine copyright infringing, the usual recourse for that kind of stuff is destroying all offending material.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: Kytim89 on November 09, 2012, 09:48:25 PM
Is it safe to assume that SK is finished as a company?
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on November 09, 2012, 11:06:57 PM
Is it safe to assume that SK is finished as a company?
I think they were effectively dead for a while now, supposedly they're down to a staff of five (including Dyack and his wife, you may be able to operate an indie dev with five people but from the sounds of it all of the remaining guys are just management which you don't need for an indie like this), the company is just an empty shell now.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: Adrock on November 10, 2012, 08:03:45 AM
They really don't have any assets either. Nintendo owns the Eternal Darkness IP and no one cares about Too Human. They don't own Legacy of Kain and Raziel which was created by SK went to Eidos as well. Dyack could effectively "start over" and work on some smaller games to bolster the company's worth that relied so heavily on the coattails of Eternal Darkness for the last decade. Judging by reports of Dyack's ego, that doesn't seem terribly likely.
Silicon Knights had a lot of vision, but lacked discipline. Dyack only wanted to make his own games which is understandable, but dangerous when left unchecked. They would be better served operating like WayForward Technologies, who are super-passionate about their own IPs, but still take their licensed "grunt work" very seriously. Not all of them turn out like Contra 4 because WayForward Technologies is filled with raw talent that, like Silicon Knights, could use the guidance of a larger, influential company like Nintendo. However, their games also never turn out like X-Men Destiny. Even if WayForward Technologies wasn't especially thrilled about the license, they would still turn out a competent game. It's give and take; Dyack only wanted to take. It's a weird sense of entitlement because he worked with Miyamoto and Kojima.
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on November 10, 2012, 08:25:54 AM
Title: Re: Eternal Darkness 2
Post by: KDR_11k on November 10, 2012, 08:27:50 AM
Vision is one thing, any fool can have ideas, the smart man is the one who can tell good ideas from bad ones. I'm not convinced that Dyack has actual talent, he may just have gotten lucky (or well controlled) that he didn't stick any major idiocy into ED. Sure it's ambition to want to make a trilogy but it's also stupid to make the first game inadequately short. It's stupid to go for a super ambitious project without the necessary resources.
