David_020@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 8:21 pm :
BloodRayne@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 8:23 pm : ID is ID no more. Long live ID.
BNA!@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 8:50 pm : David_020 wrote:
They are licensing tech5 to the large Zenimax world. That would make for example a idtech5 Fallout possible.
Since they became an internal to a larger company the range of potential licencees has widened dramatically.
Your headline is misleading.
David_020@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 9:16 pm : BNA! wrote:
David_020 wrote:
They are licensing tech5 to the large Zenimax world. That would make for example a idtech5 Fallout possible.
Since they became an internal to a larger company the range of potential licencees has widened dramatically.
Your headline is misleading.
Yes and no. For the sake of brevity, I didn't state "external" in the headline but it has the same effect. Anyone outside of Zenimax who's interested in licensing the engine (according to this press statement) is out of luck. How long that policy remains in effect is questionable since during today's Blockbuster panel at Quakecon Jason West mentioned they're looking at all engines for Respawn. Being that the former IW devs have a lot of experience using id tech, I imagine they would like to use id tech 5 since they can't use their prior toolset from IW.
Correction: Anyone who doesn't want Zenimax
publishing their game is out of luck using the engine.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 9:57 pm : David_020 wrote:
Yes and no. For the sake of brevity, I didn't state "external" in the headline but it has the same effect. Anyone outside of Zenimax who's interested in licensing the engine (according to this press statement) is out of luck.
considering that the only non-id "friend" company to use the D3 engine was human head, this is non-important as far as I'm concerned.
The biggest hurt could be that they won't sell it for $10k to anyone once it's GPL.
Serpentine@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:00 pm : If you didn't see this coming a few months ago you're pretty blind
On one side it's really quite sad, but on the other I think that it could take Zeni/Bethesda to some nice places and hopefully allow them to continue focusing on primarily the PC side of their games... and that I think is more important in the long run as they are one of the last few that are still putting the PC first and showing it can work, without being massive tools about it (hi blizz).
Since the SDK is confirmed for Rage and 99% sure Doom4 will subsequently be getting a release I think that it might even help the modding community as I'm of little doubt that Zeni have a far bigger focus on polished tools than raw id ever did; however it's undoubted how many developers learned and matured by working on the old gpl releases and even a great SDK can never really replace that.
aaa111@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:21 pm : David_020 wrote:
Well Todd says that they won't licence their engine unless Zenimax publishing it.So any Zenimax publishing game could use idtech5.
RangerMcFriendly@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:34 pm : David_020 wrote:
Yes and no. For the sake of brevity, I didn't state "external" in the headline but it has the same effect. Anyone outside of Zenimax who's interested in licensing the engine (according to this press statement) is out of luck. How long that policy remains in effect is questionable since during today's Blockbuster panel at Quakecon Jason West mentioned they're looking at all engines for Respawn. Being that the former IW devs have a lot of experience using id tech, I imagine they would like to use id tech 5 since they can't use their prior toolset from IW.
Correction: Anyone who doesn't want Zenimax publishing their game is out of luck using the engine.
The former devs at IW could just develop their own engine. They only used the Quake 3 engine for the first Call of Duty. Everyone develops their own engines these days, unless the devs are not stubborn enough to work with an engine they didn't make or don't see it worthwhile to developer their own engine when a superior engine already exists.
The news is unfortunate. Engine wise, it's a subjective issue. Like I mentioned, most developers create their own engines these days. id tech 4 could be considered a stunning success or a moderate one depending on how you look at it. However, with this news and seemingly less interest in id's engines, it says that id doesn't have the influence it once did in the gaming world. That's the real unfortunate news.
Zenix@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:36 pm : RangerMcFriendly wrote:
The former devs at IW could just develop their own engine. They only used the Quake 3 engine for the first Call of Duty. Everyone develops their own engines these days, unless the devs are not stubborn enough to work with an engine they didn't make or don't see it worthwhile to developer their own engine when a superior engine already exists.
The latest Call of Duty engine still has its roots in Quake 3, that's why it credits id Software on the box. It's a lot of work to make an engine completely from scratch.
a@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:39 pm : Despite what a lot of people say, id has never been a technology company; they've always been a gaming company. Sure, id has Carmack and with it comes the best technology, but so far THEIR games have always made the most use of the engine anyway. Or games from some related company.
And idTech 4 hasn't been licenced by pretty much anyone anyway, so obviously there isn't that much demand. I mean, who would pick IdTech with their most likely very limited support over UnrealTech with big special support teams?
Well sure, I'd like to see id's technology getting more use, just because their technology works great, is smooth and reliable. But if they don't have the muscle to support all the licensees, I'm happier with id concentrating on games. You know, games. Like, good games. Remember those? Yeah it's easy to forget good games have actually existed. One of the last good games came out in 2004 after all...
David_020@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:43 pm : RangerMcFriendly wrote:
Everyone develops their own engines these days, unless the devs are not stubborn enough to work with an engine they didn't make or don't see it worthwhile to developer their own engine when a superior engine already exists.
That's not exactly true. Most studios don't have the resources to create an engine from scratch. That's why middleware flourishes today. Most license an existing engine and modify it to suit their needs. As for IW, when they began work on CoD 1 they were given the RtCW engine (the modified Q3 engine from Gray Matter) since they were backed by Activision.
reko@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:55 pm :
RangerMcFriendly wrote:
The former devs at IW could just develop their own engine. They only used the Quake 3 engine for the first Call of Duty. Everyone develops their own engines these days, unless the devs are not stubborn enough to work with an engine they didn't make or don't see it worthwhile to developer their own engine when a superior engine already exists.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IW_4.0#IW_4.0
Quote:
The engine was first used under a proprietary license of id Tech 3 until Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare where the engine was overhauled by Infinity Ward. Enhanced versions of the engine were used by Treyarch in three of their games: Call of Duty: World at War, Quantum of Solace and Call of Duty: Black Ops.
Quote:
enhanced versions
RangerMcFriendly@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:57 pm : David_020 wrote:
RangerMcFriendly wrote:
Everyone develops their own engines these days, unless the devs are not stubborn enough to work with an engine they didn't make or don't see it worthwhile to developer their own engine when a superior engine already exists.
That's not exactly true. Most studios don't have the resources to create an engine from scratch. That's why middleware flourishes today. Most license an existing engine and modify it to suit their needs. As for IW, when they began work on CoD 1 they were given the RtCW engine (the modified Q3 engine from Gray Matter) since they were backed by Activision.
You're right. I forgot about that fact. I looked into it and they've used Quake 3's source code, which was made open source so it wasn't licensed, in the IW engine. However, you have to give them credit for their own work. The Modern Warfare engine is still listed as being proprietary and I am sure they are more than capable of writing their own engine if they wanted to, from scratch. Yes, other people are capable of this too
I didn't include heavily modified engines into my earlier statement btw. I'm aware that many engines are heavily modified or based from other engines. The Unreal 2.0 engine is a good example of an engine used or based off of. The list of games that use the the U2.0 engine or in some way completely dwarfs the id tech 3 and 4 lists.
Kristian Joensen@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 1:46 am : " I looked into it and they've used Quake 3's source code, which was made open source so it wasn't licensed, in the IW engine."
No, you can't do anything you like with Quake 3's source code just because it is open source, you can't make your derivative works proprietary for example. To do what IW did you still need a license.
BNA!@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 11:28 am : The licensing success of idtech4 vs unreal is directly related to the quality of the available tools, support and production pipeline tools.
It's not the engine that matters, it's the tools. So a good engine can be better for production than the best engine when the tools lag behind.
id software held onto their small company structure roughly one cycle too long. Epic's headcount did outweigh id software by far, but a fair share of the additional resources was / is allocated to tools as I got once told.
Relying or allowing the community to do the trick for you in terms of im-/exporters, documentation... is neat and gives us the opportunity to really contribute and enjoy both, the deserved spotlight and job opprtunities for otherwise unnoticed talent, but you can't build a reliable licensing business on top of it since the early zero years.
The strength of id software was never to come out with the most polished development environment.
RangerMcFriendly@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 6:54 pm : I agree BNA.
Kristian Joensen wrote:
" I looked into it and they've used Quake 3's source code, which was made open source so it wasn't licensed, in the IW engine."
No, you can't do anything you like with Quake 3's source code just because it is open source, you can't make your derivative works proprietary for example. To do what IW did you still need a license.
So, are you saying you still need a license to use the Quake 3 engine?
Well I was just quoting Wikipedia, which listed the engine used from Call of Duty 4 as proprietary.
Tron@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 7:03 pm : RangerMcFriendly wrote:
I agree BNA.
Kristian Joensen wrote:
" I looked into it and they've used Quake 3's source code, which was made open source so it wasn't licensed, in the IW engine."
No, you can't do anything you like with Quake 3's source code just because it is open source, you can't make your derivative works proprietary for example. To do what IW did you still need a license.
So, are you saying you still need a license to use the Quake 3 engine?
Well I was just quoting Wikipedia, which listed the engine used from Call of Duty 4 as proprietary.
If you want to use any of ids released code in your own engine you have two choices as far as I am aware.
1) Use the code for free, but release your own source code as well if you are going to distribute your project.
2) Pay to use the code, in which case you get to keep your source code private.
Mordenkainen@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 7:25 pm : RangerMcFriendly wrote:
Well I was just quoting Wikipedia, which listed the engine used from Call of Duty 4 as proprietary.
That's because it wouldn't look good if they said it was based on a 7/9 year old engine. They did mountains of work but the copyright notice and Radiant level editor betrays its heritage.
RangerMcFriendly@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 7:51 pm : Well maybe they can make use of id tech 4 and impress us. Brink is using a heavily modified version of it as far as I know and it looks absolutely fantastic!
evilartist@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 8:14 pm : I just fantasized about Elder Scrolls with idtech5. I think I came.
It's unfortunate to see this kind of sacrifice, especially after a nearly two-decade long policy of freely licensing out to developers and squeezing out every drop of potential from an engine. I hope Zenimax (Bethesda, especially) can make up for these licensing restrictions.
vertex007@Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:09 pm : well, it is good news on my book, Riddick was a very good game (the dark athena not as good but it still ok), they already made games that looked as if they were using idtech in the past, so I think idtech5 is in good hands here.
wonder if it will be somehow Riddick related again or a completely new IP..
vertex007@Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:09 pm : well, it is good news on my book, Riddick was a very good game (the dark athena not as good but it still ok), they already made games that looked as if they were using idtech in the past, so I think idtech5 is in good hands here.
wonder if it will be somehow Riddick related again or a completely new IP..
David_020@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 8:21 pm :
BloodRayne@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 8:23 pm : ID is ID no more. Long live ID.
BNA!@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 8:50 pm : David_020 wrote:
They are licensing tech5 to the large Zenimax world. That would make for example a idtech5 Fallout possible.
Since they became an internal to a larger company the range of potential licencees has widened dramatically.
Your headline is misleading.
David_020@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 9:16 pm : BNA! wrote:
David_020 wrote:
They are licensing tech5 to the large Zenimax world. That would make for example a idtech5 Fallout possible.
Since they became an internal to a larger company the range of potential licencees has widened dramatically.
Your headline is misleading.
Yes and no. For the sake of brevity, I didn't state "external" in the headline but it has the same effect. Anyone outside of Zenimax who's interested in licensing the engine (according to this press statement) is out of luck. How long that policy remains in effect is questionable since during today's Blockbuster panel at Quakecon Jason West mentioned they're looking at all engines for Respawn. Being that the former IW devs have a lot of experience using id tech, I imagine they would like to use id tech 5 since they can't use their prior toolset from IW.
Correction: Anyone who doesn't want Zenimax
publishing their game is out of luck using the engine.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 9:57 pm : David_020 wrote:
Yes and no. For the sake of brevity, I didn't state "external" in the headline but it has the same effect. Anyone outside of Zenimax who's interested in licensing the engine (according to this press statement) is out of luck.
considering that the only non-id "friend" company to use the D3 engine was human head, this is non-important as far as I'm concerned.
The biggest hurt could be that they won't sell it for $10k to anyone once it's GPL.
Serpentine@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:00 pm : If you didn't see this coming a few months ago you're pretty blind
On one side it's really quite sad, but on the other I think that it could take Zeni/Bethesda to some nice places and hopefully allow them to continue focusing on primarily the PC side of their games... and that I think is more important in the long run as they are one of the last few that are still putting the PC first and showing it can work, without being massive tools about it (hi blizz).
Since the SDK is confirmed for Rage and 99% sure Doom4 will subsequently be getting a release I think that it might even help the modding community as I'm of little doubt that Zeni have a far bigger focus on polished tools than raw id ever did; however it's undoubted how many developers learned and matured by working on the old gpl releases and even a great SDK can never really replace that.
aaa111@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:21 pm : David_020 wrote:
Well Todd says that they won't licence their engine unless Zenimax publishing it.So any Zenimax publishing game could use idtech5.
RangerMcFriendly@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:34 pm : David_020 wrote:
Yes and no. For the sake of brevity, I didn't state "external" in the headline but it has the same effect. Anyone outside of Zenimax who's interested in licensing the engine (according to this press statement) is out of luck. How long that policy remains in effect is questionable since during today's Blockbuster panel at Quakecon Jason West mentioned they're looking at all engines for Respawn. Being that the former IW devs have a lot of experience using id tech, I imagine they would like to use id tech 5 since they can't use their prior toolset from IW.
Correction: Anyone who doesn't want Zenimax publishing their game is out of luck using the engine.
The former devs at IW could just develop their own engine. They only used the Quake 3 engine for the first Call of Duty. Everyone develops their own engines these days, unless the devs are not stubborn enough to work with an engine they didn't make or don't see it worthwhile to developer their own engine when a superior engine already exists.
The news is unfortunate. Engine wise, it's a subjective issue. Like I mentioned, most developers create their own engines these days. id tech 4 could be considered a stunning success or a moderate one depending on how you look at it. However, with this news and seemingly less interest in id's engines, it says that id doesn't have the influence it once did in the gaming world. That's the real unfortunate news.
Zenix@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:36 pm : RangerMcFriendly wrote:
The former devs at IW could just develop their own engine. They only used the Quake 3 engine for the first Call of Duty. Everyone develops their own engines these days, unless the devs are not stubborn enough to work with an engine they didn't make or don't see it worthwhile to developer their own engine when a superior engine already exists.
The latest Call of Duty engine still has its roots in Quake 3, that's why it credits id Software on the box. It's a lot of work to make an engine completely from scratch.
a@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:39 pm : Despite what a lot of people say, id has never been a technology company; they've always been a gaming company. Sure, id has Carmack and with it comes the best technology, but so far THEIR games have always made the most use of the engine anyway. Or games from some related company.
And idTech 4 hasn't been licenced by pretty much anyone anyway, so obviously there isn't that much demand. I mean, who would pick IdTech with their most likely very limited support over UnrealTech with big special support teams?
Well sure, I'd like to see id's technology getting more use, just because their technology works great, is smooth and reliable. But if they don't have the muscle to support all the licensees, I'm happier with id concentrating on games. You know, games. Like, good games. Remember those? Yeah it's easy to forget good games have actually existed. One of the last good games came out in 2004 after all...
David_020@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:43 pm : RangerMcFriendly wrote:
Everyone develops their own engines these days, unless the devs are not stubborn enough to work with an engine they didn't make or don't see it worthwhile to developer their own engine when a superior engine already exists.
That's not exactly true. Most studios don't have the resources to create an engine from scratch. That's why middleware flourishes today. Most license an existing engine and modify it to suit their needs. As for IW, when they began work on CoD 1 they were given the RtCW engine (the modified Q3 engine from Gray Matter) since they were backed by Activision.
reko@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:55 pm :
RangerMcFriendly wrote:
The former devs at IW could just develop their own engine. They only used the Quake 3 engine for the first Call of Duty. Everyone develops their own engines these days, unless the devs are not stubborn enough to work with an engine they didn't make or don't see it worthwhile to developer their own engine when a superior engine already exists.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IW_4.0#IW_4.0
Quote:
The engine was first used under a proprietary license of id Tech 3 until Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare where the engine was overhauled by Infinity Ward. Enhanced versions of the engine were used by Treyarch in three of their games: Call of Duty: World at War, Quantum of Solace and Call of Duty: Black Ops.
Quote:
enhanced versions
RangerMcFriendly@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:57 pm : David_020 wrote:
RangerMcFriendly wrote:
Everyone develops their own engines these days, unless the devs are not stubborn enough to work with an engine they didn't make or don't see it worthwhile to developer their own engine when a superior engine already exists.
That's not exactly true. Most studios don't have the resources to create an engine from scratch. That's why middleware flourishes today. Most license an existing engine and modify it to suit their needs. As for IW, when they began work on CoD 1 they were given the RtCW engine (the modified Q3 engine from Gray Matter) since they were backed by Activision.
You're right. I forgot about that fact. I looked into it and they've used Quake 3's source code, which was made open source so it wasn't licensed, in the IW engine. However, you have to give them credit for their own work. The Modern Warfare engine is still listed as being proprietary and I am sure they are more than capable of writing their own engine if they wanted to, from scratch. Yes, other people are capable of this too
I didn't include heavily modified engines into my earlier statement btw. I'm aware that many engines are heavily modified or based from other engines. The Unreal 2.0 engine is a good example of an engine used or based off of. The list of games that use the the U2.0 engine or in some way completely dwarfs the id tech 3 and 4 lists.
Kristian Joensen@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 1:46 am : " I looked into it and they've used Quake 3's source code, which was made open source so it wasn't licensed, in the IW engine."
No, you can't do anything you like with Quake 3's source code just because it is open source, you can't make your derivative works proprietary for example. To do what IW did you still need a license.
BNA!@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 11:28 am : The licensing success of idtech4 vs unreal is directly related to the quality of the available tools, support and production pipeline tools.
It's not the engine that matters, it's the tools. So a good engine can be better for production than the best engine when the tools lag behind.
id software held onto their small company structure roughly one cycle too long. Epic's headcount did outweigh id software by far, but a fair share of the additional resources was / is allocated to tools as I got once told.
Relying or allowing the community to do the trick for you in terms of im-/exporters, documentation... is neat and gives us the opportunity to really contribute and enjoy both, the deserved spotlight and job opprtunities for otherwise unnoticed talent, but you can't build a reliable licensing business on top of it since the early zero years.
The strength of id software was never to come out with the most polished development environment.
RangerMcFriendly@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 6:54 pm : I agree BNA.
Kristian Joensen wrote:
" I looked into it and they've used Quake 3's source code, which was made open source so it wasn't licensed, in the IW engine."
No, you can't do anything you like with Quake 3's source code just because it is open source, you can't make your derivative works proprietary for example. To do what IW did you still need a license.
So, are you saying you still need a license to use the Quake 3 engine?
Well I was just quoting Wikipedia, which listed the engine used from Call of Duty 4 as proprietary.
Tron@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 7:03 pm : RangerMcFriendly wrote:
I agree BNA.
Kristian Joensen wrote:
" I looked into it and they've used Quake 3's source code, which was made open source so it wasn't licensed, in the IW engine."
No, you can't do anything you like with Quake 3's source code just because it is open source, you can't make your derivative works proprietary for example. To do what IW did you still need a license.
So, are you saying you still need a license to use the Quake 3 engine?
Well I was just quoting Wikipedia, which listed the engine used from Call of Duty 4 as proprietary.
If you want to use any of ids released code in your own engine you have two choices as far as I am aware.
1) Use the code for free, but release your own source code as well if you are going to distribute your project.
2) Pay to use the code, in which case you get to keep your source code private.
Mordenkainen@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 7:25 pm : RangerMcFriendly wrote:
Well I was just quoting Wikipedia, which listed the engine used from Call of Duty 4 as proprietary.
That's because it wouldn't look good if they said it was based on a 7/9 year old engine. They did mountains of work but the copyright notice and Radiant level editor betrays its heritage.
RangerMcFriendly@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 7:51 pm : Well maybe they can make use of id tech 4 and impress us. Brink is using a heavily modified version of it as far as I know and it looks absolutely fantastic!
evilartist@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 8:14 pm : I just fantasized about Elder Scrolls with idtech5. I think I came.
It's unfortunate to see this kind of sacrifice, especially after a nearly two-decade long policy of freely licensing out to developers and squeezing out every drop of potential from an engine. I hope Zenimax (Bethesda, especially) can make up for these licensing restrictions.
simulation@Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 12:01 am : BloodRayne wrote:
At the QuakeCon 2009, Carmack said that he planned to petition Zenimax to release the id Tech 4 source upon the release of Rage (expected in 2011).[5]
He repeated the wish to do this at QuakeCon 2010 too.
Gamasutra News wrote:
Carmack also teased during his speech that after Rage ships, id will look at making the Doom 3 source code available as well.
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/29903/QuakeCon_id_Software_Releases_Source_Code_For_Two_Wolfenstein_Titles.php
aardwolf@Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 12:50 am : Yes, but that wasnt what i asked. I was asking whether or not id software still gives commercial licenses to id tech 4 right now, as in, what they did for their earlier tech like licensing id tech 3 for Call of duty. Can a studio that wants to make a commercial closed game with id tech 4 still buy one from them?
simulation@Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:10 pm : aardwolf wrote:
Yes, but that wasnt what i asked. I was asking whether or not id software still gives commercial licenses to id tech 4 right now, as in, what they did for their earlier tech like licensing id tech 3 for Call of duty. Can a studio that wants to make a commercial closed game with id tech 4 still buy one from them?
I asked Timothee Besset about the removal of the idTech4 licensing info on the web site and his reply was "that makes sense, following the move away from licencing". So I guess that it isn't something they're really persuing any more. Supporting licencees is probably another drain on their resources they can do without.
BloodRayne@Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:55 pm : aardwolf wrote:
Yes, but that wasnt what i asked. I was asking whether or not id software still gives commercial licenses to id tech 4 right now, as in, what they did for their earlier tech like licensing id tech 3 for Call of duty. Can a studio that wants to make a commercial closed game with id tech 4 still buy one from them?
Simple logic, who would license an engine that will be
free of cost in perhaps 12 months?
aardwolf@Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:05 pm : BloodRayne wrote:
aardwolf wrote:
Yes, but that wasnt what i asked. I was asking whether or not id software still gives commercial licenses to id tech 4 right now, as in, what they did for their earlier tech like licensing id tech 3 for Call of duty. Can a studio that wants to make a commercial closed game with id tech 4 still buy one from them?
Simple logic, who would license an engine that will be
free of cost in perhaps 12 months?
They could then release it GPL now.
BloodRayne@Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 7:56 pm : No, they are waiting for the current licensees to release first. They paid a lot of money for the engine (and support).
I'm wishing they'll release after Brink is released, but I won't get my hopes up.
Mordenkainen@Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 8:23 pm : BloodRayne wrote:
Simple logic, who would license an engine that will be free of cost in perhaps 12 months?
True, though you still need to GPL your new game's engine; many companies are afraid of doing that and rightly so for MP games. That's probably why Activision/IW chose to pay for another Q3 license for CoD2 (and probably a multi-game license at that) instead of going with the open source release.
Personally I don't think this has any bearing on id Tech 4's release. Finishing Rage and going through the code to make sure it's clean, perhaps implement an alternative to the Creative Labs shadow volumes software patent Carmack said he had pursued in case they couldn't reach a deal with CL, etc. etc. I think those things are more influential in whether the source will be released.
aphexjh@Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:40 pm : drill_sarge wrote:
... and will not be given away to other devs like Raven. which I dont "trust" anymore after f.e. lame Wolfenstein (or Q4 1.0 multiplayer). maybe thats good news
Its unfortunate that raven will not likely partner with id in the future (provided they not switch to zenimax. )
That being said, and wolfenstein's drawbacks aside, Quake 4 and its multiplayer were positive contributions, the fact that the 1.0 release was flawed is no reason to write off Raven. Especially considering the following releases, which made it the multiplayer we doom 3 fans always wanted.
I don't know why there is the assumption that MT cannot stream 3 textures, instead of one, which would enable dynamic lighting. Although likely at a lower resolution.
simulation@Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2010 10:33 pm : aphexjh wrote:
drill_sarge wrote:
... and will not be given away to other devs like Raven. which I dont "trust" anymore after f.e. lame Wolfenstein (or Q4 1.0 multiplayer). maybe thats good news
Its unfortunate that raven will not likely partner with id in the future (provided they not switch to zenimax. )
That being said, and wolfenstein's drawbacks aside, Quake 4 and its multiplayer were positive contributions, the fact that the 1.0 release was flawed is no reason to write off Raven. Especially considering the following releases, which made it the multiplayer we doom 3 fans always wanted.
I don't know why there is the assumption that MT cannot stream 3 textures, instead of one, which would enable dynamic lighting. Although likely at a lower resolution.
They can't "switch" to Zenimax; they're owned by ATVI.
And as for Q4, the post 1.0 patches were mostly from id, not Raven, I believe. With a big dose of help from AnthonyJ and the Q4MAX team too, I suspect.
aphexjh@Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 12:49 am : Quote:
They can't "switch" to Zenimax; they're owned by ATVI.
And as for Q4, the post 1.0 patches were mostly from id, not Raven, I believe. With a big dose of help from AnthonyJ and the Q4MAX team too, I suspect.
Oh, well I tend to believe you. but I maintain that Raven is a top tier studio.
aardwolf@Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 1:04 am : aphexjh wrote:
Quote:
They can't "switch" to Zenimax; they're owned by ATVI.
And as for Q4, the post 1.0 patches were mostly from id, not Raven, I believe. With a big dose of help from AnthonyJ and the Q4MAX team too, I suspect.
Oh, well I tend to believe you. but I maintain that Raven is a top tier studio.
A top tier studio that keeps pouring flops.
Serpentine@Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 6:48 pm : BloodRayne wrote:
No, they are waiting for the current licensees to release first. They paid a lot of money for the engine (and support).
I'm wishing they'll release after Brink is released, but I won't get my hopes up.
Considering it once again came up at QuakeCon and once again was confirmed as "After Rage", It should be around or at least news of whats going on quiet a while before Brink's release.
I'm looking forward to what comes of all of this, since they also recently purchased Arkane which are a very interesting and PC-centric bunch, I'm hoping that the future titles try to keep up with rich content backed with decent ingame UI's (hopefully they realized that the Obliv UI was shit tho). Another interesting aspect is that if they start working towards replacing Gamebryo completely the merger of the radiant and the TES would be quite interesting to use, both tools excel in the same/similar areas and if done well could be something quite fun and powerful to use. The resulting merger of the modding communities would surpass the sum of their parts as well as allowing TES modders to split further from the game that mods are based on, which would be quite nice - as I admire the Oblivion mods, but at the same time,they're always so close to the base game.
As for Raven, I'd prefer it if they just stopped trying and accepted that they died ages ago and let old things die, go work on IW or some other pubbie title or just detail the train of failure.
vertex007@Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 8:44 pm : last good Raven game was Q4.
Wolf09 sp was ok but as a whole it didn't match the quality of Q4, the open world aspect felt half-assed, the consolization pretty much in your face.
Singularity at least has no open world ambitions and is a decent one but after the promising first half it became somewhat average and uninspired.
a filler at best, nothing else.
I still think Timeshift did a better job with TM.
IMO
aardwolf@Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 11:52 pm : BloodRayne wrote:
No, they are waiting for the current licensees to release first. They paid a lot of money for the engine (and support).
I'm wishing they'll release after Brink is released, but I won't get my hopes up.
I dont think the licensees have to GPL their modified engines. Have all the CoDs titles' engines been GPLed? The only licensee to their technology right now is SD, whose game looks more interesting than Rage to be honest. I'd say next quakecon they'll GPL id tech 4.
rich_is_bored@Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2010 5:21 am : He's not talking about releasing source code, he's talking about releasing their commercial titles.
aaa111@Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 6:04 pm : Good news,Bethesda/Zenimax acquired Purchased Machinegames(ex-Starbreeze) who in turns is going to use idtech 5 for their next game:
Quote:
ZENIMAX MEDIA ACQUIRES EUROPEAN STUDIO
MachineGames™ Established by Starbreeze Founders to Develop
Multi-Platform Titles for Bethesda Softworks
Creators of High-Scoring “Chronicles of Riddick” Game will Use id Tech® 5
November 11, 2010 (Rockville, MD) – ZeniMax Media Inc., parent company of noted game publisher Bethesda Softworks, today announced it has acquired a European development studio, MachineGames™, based in Uppsala, Sweden.
Established in 2009 by the founding members of Starbreeze Studios, the creative team behind the award-winning title, The Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher’s Bay (Metacritic score: 90) and the highly-regarded game, The Darkness, MachineGames is working on an unannounced project for ZeniMax publishing subsidiary, Bethesda Softworks, that is being built on id Software’s revolutionary id Tech® 5 engine technology.
Jerk Gustafsson, the studio’s CEO who will also oversee development as Executive Producer, expressed his studio’s enthusiasm at joining ZeniMax by saying, “Working with our new colleagues at id and the world class publisher, Bethesda Softworks, is a tremendous opportunity.”
“MachineGames has assembled a dedicated team that has extensive experience working together to produce quality games. We are excited to create a new AAA title for gamers on id Tech 5 that will push the game development envelope,” Gustafsson continued.MachineGames joins a group of high-profile development studios which includes Bethesda Game Studios®, id® Software, Arkane® Studios and Tango Gameworks™. This deal reinforces Bethesda’s commitment to delivering premier titles to gamers worldwide.
“MachineGames shares our passion for creating ground-breaking gaming experiences,” said Robert Altman, Chairman and CEO of ZeniMax Media. “We are excited to have these accomplished industry veterans join ZeniMax Media’s group of world-class studios.”
About ZeniMax Media Inc.
ZeniMax Media is a preeminent media organization which has brought together a team of world class game developers, artists and designers, programmers, producers, and leading executives and talent from traditional media. ZeniMax Media creates and publishes original interactive entertainment content for consoles, the PC, and handheld/wireless devices. ZeniMax Media divisions include Bethesda Softworks, Bethesda Game Studios, id Software, Arkane Studios, Tango Gameworks, MachineGames, Vir2L Studios, ZeniMax Europe Ltd., ZeniMax Asia K.K. and ZeniMax Online Studios. For more information on ZeniMax Media, visit
http://www.zenimax.com.
About Bethesda Softworks
Bethesda Softworks, part of the ZeniMax Media Inc. family of companies, is a premier developer and worldwide publisher of interactive entertainment software. Titles from some of the world’s top development studios – Bethesda Game Studios, id Software, and Arkane Studios – are featured under the Bethesda Softworks label and include such blockbuster franchises as DOOM®, QUAKE®, The Elder Scrolls®, Fallout®, Wolfenstein® and RAGE™. For more information on Bethesda Softworks’ products, visit
http://www.bethsoft.com.
ZeniMax, Bethesda Softworks, Bethesda Game Studios, Tango Gameworks, MachineGames, Vir2L, The Elder Scrolls, Oblivion, Morrowind and related logos are registered trademarks or trademarks of ZeniMax Media Inc. in the U.S. and/or other countries. ID, id Software, DOOM, QUAKE, Wolfenstein, RAGE and related logos are registered trademarks or trademarks of Id Software LLC in the U.S. and/or other countries. Fallout is a registered trademark or trademark of Bethesda Softworks LLC in the U.S. and/or other countries. Arkane and related logos are registered trademarks or trademarks of Arkane Studios in the U.S. and/or other countries. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. All Rights Reserved.
pbmax@Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2010 5:28 pm : Funny 'cause Darkness and Riddick look just like idtech4 games...
drill_sarge@Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2010 3:03 pm : so "id no longer licensing id tech 5" means "zenimax will buy everyone who wants to use idtech5"? XD
aaa111@Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2010 10:55 pm : Well outside dev can license idtech 5,but it have to be published by zenimax/bethesda.The acquisition is just that they are trying to expand themselves a lot bigger.
aardwolf@Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2010 1:27 am : Zenimax is on a buying spree. Strange that they still haven't bought Splash Damage.
I suppose id is going to offer QA to this new studio, since id tech 5 is fairly new. Anyone wanna bet their game will be out before Rage?
David_020@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 8:21 pm :
BloodRayne@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 8:23 pm : ID is ID no more. Long live ID.
BNA!@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 8:50 pm : David_020 wrote:
They are licensing tech5 to the large Zenimax world. That would make for example a idtech5 Fallout possible.
Since they became an internal to a larger company the range of potential licencees has widened dramatically.
Your headline is misleading.
David_020@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 9:16 pm : BNA! wrote:
David_020 wrote:
They are licensing tech5 to the large Zenimax world. That would make for example a idtech5 Fallout possible.
Since they became an internal to a larger company the range of potential licencees has widened dramatically.
Your headline is misleading.
Yes and no. For the sake of brevity, I didn't state "external" in the headline but it has the same effect. Anyone outside of Zenimax who's interested in licensing the engine (according to this press statement) is out of luck. How long that policy remains in effect is questionable since during today's Blockbuster panel at Quakecon Jason West mentioned they're looking at all engines for Respawn. Being that the former IW devs have a lot of experience using id tech, I imagine they would like to use id tech 5 since they can't use their prior toolset from IW.
Correction: Anyone who doesn't want Zenimax
publishing their game is out of luck using the engine.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 9:57 pm : David_020 wrote:
Yes and no. For the sake of brevity, I didn't state "external" in the headline but it has the same effect. Anyone outside of Zenimax who's interested in licensing the engine (according to this press statement) is out of luck.
considering that the only non-id "friend" company to use the D3 engine was human head, this is non-important as far as I'm concerned.
The biggest hurt could be that they won't sell it for $10k to anyone once it's GPL.
Serpentine@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:00 pm : If you didn't see this coming a few months ago you're pretty blind
On one side it's really quite sad, but on the other I think that it could take Zeni/Bethesda to some nice places and hopefully allow them to continue focusing on primarily the PC side of their games... and that I think is more important in the long run as they are one of the last few that are still putting the PC first and showing it can work, without being massive tools about it (hi blizz).
Since the SDK is confirmed for Rage and 99% sure Doom4 will subsequently be getting a release I think that it might even help the modding community as I'm of little doubt that Zeni have a far bigger focus on polished tools than raw id ever did; however it's undoubted how many developers learned and matured by working on the old gpl releases and even a great SDK can never really replace that.
aaa111@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:21 pm : David_020 wrote:
Well Todd says that they won't licence their engine unless Zenimax publishing it.So any Zenimax publishing game could use idtech5.
RangerMcFriendly@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:34 pm : David_020 wrote:
Yes and no. For the sake of brevity, I didn't state "external" in the headline but it has the same effect. Anyone outside of Zenimax who's interested in licensing the engine (according to this press statement) is out of luck. How long that policy remains in effect is questionable since during today's Blockbuster panel at Quakecon Jason West mentioned they're looking at all engines for Respawn. Being that the former IW devs have a lot of experience using id tech, I imagine they would like to use id tech 5 since they can't use their prior toolset from IW.
Correction: Anyone who doesn't want Zenimax publishing their game is out of luck using the engine.
The former devs at IW could just develop their own engine. They only used the Quake 3 engine for the first Call of Duty. Everyone develops their own engines these days, unless the devs are not stubborn enough to work with an engine they didn't make or don't see it worthwhile to developer their own engine when a superior engine already exists.
The news is unfortunate. Engine wise, it's a subjective issue. Like I mentioned, most developers create their own engines these days. id tech 4 could be considered a stunning success or a moderate one depending on how you look at it. However, with this news and seemingly less interest in id's engines, it says that id doesn't have the influence it once did in the gaming world. That's the real unfortunate news.
Zenix@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:36 pm : RangerMcFriendly wrote:
The former devs at IW could just develop their own engine. They only used the Quake 3 engine for the first Call of Duty. Everyone develops their own engines these days, unless the devs are not stubborn enough to work with an engine they didn't make or don't see it worthwhile to developer their own engine when a superior engine already exists.
The latest Call of Duty engine still has its roots in Quake 3, that's why it credits id Software on the box. It's a lot of work to make an engine completely from scratch.
a@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:39 pm : Despite what a lot of people say, id has never been a technology company; they've always been a gaming company. Sure, id has Carmack and with it comes the best technology, but so far THEIR games have always made the most use of the engine anyway. Or games from some related company.
And idTech 4 hasn't been licenced by pretty much anyone anyway, so obviously there isn't that much demand. I mean, who would pick IdTech with their most likely very limited support over UnrealTech with big special support teams?
Well sure, I'd like to see id's technology getting more use, just because their technology works great, is smooth and reliable. But if they don't have the muscle to support all the licensees, I'm happier with id concentrating on games. You know, games. Like, good games. Remember those? Yeah it's easy to forget good games have actually existed. One of the last good games came out in 2004 after all...
David_020@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:43 pm : RangerMcFriendly wrote:
Everyone develops their own engines these days, unless the devs are not stubborn enough to work with an engine they didn't make or don't see it worthwhile to developer their own engine when a superior engine already exists.
That's not exactly true. Most studios don't have the resources to create an engine from scratch. That's why middleware flourishes today. Most license an existing engine and modify it to suit their needs. As for IW, when they began work on CoD 1 they were given the RtCW engine (the modified Q3 engine from Gray Matter) since they were backed by Activision.
reko@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:55 pm :
RangerMcFriendly wrote:
The former devs at IW could just develop their own engine. They only used the Quake 3 engine for the first Call of Duty. Everyone develops their own engines these days, unless the devs are not stubborn enough to work with an engine they didn't make or don't see it worthwhile to developer their own engine when a superior engine already exists.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IW_4.0#IW_4.0
Quote:
The engine was first used under a proprietary license of id Tech 3 until Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare where the engine was overhauled by Infinity Ward. Enhanced versions of the engine were used by Treyarch in three of their games: Call of Duty: World at War, Quantum of Solace and Call of Duty: Black Ops.
Quote:
enhanced versions
RangerMcFriendly@Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:57 pm : David_020 wrote:
RangerMcFriendly wrote:
Everyone develops their own engines these days, unless the devs are not stubborn enough to work with an engine they didn't make or don't see it worthwhile to developer their own engine when a superior engine already exists.
That's not exactly true. Most studios don't have the resources to create an engine from scratch. That's why middleware flourishes today. Most license an existing engine and modify it to suit their needs. As for IW, when they began work on CoD 1 they were given the RtCW engine (the modified Q3 engine from Gray Matter) since they were backed by Activision.
You're right. I forgot about that fact. I looked into it and they've used Quake 3's source code, which was made open source so it wasn't licensed, in the IW engine. However, you have to give them credit for their own work. The Modern Warfare engine is still listed as being proprietary and I am sure they are more than capable of writing their own engine if they wanted to, from scratch. Yes, other people are capable of this too
I didn't include heavily modified engines into my earlier statement btw. I'm aware that many engines are heavily modified or based from other engines. The Unreal 2.0 engine is a good example of an engine used or based off of. The list of games that use the the U2.0 engine or in some way completely dwarfs the id tech 3 and 4 lists.
Kristian Joensen@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 1:46 am : " I looked into it and they've used Quake 3's source code, which was made open source so it wasn't licensed, in the IW engine."
No, you can't do anything you like with Quake 3's source code just because it is open source, you can't make your derivative works proprietary for example. To do what IW did you still need a license.
BNA!@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 11:28 am : The licensing success of idtech4 vs unreal is directly related to the quality of the available tools, support and production pipeline tools.
It's not the engine that matters, it's the tools. So a good engine can be better for production than the best engine when the tools lag behind.
id software held onto their small company structure roughly one cycle too long. Epic's headcount did outweigh id software by far, but a fair share of the additional resources was / is allocated to tools as I got once told.
Relying or allowing the community to do the trick for you in terms of im-/exporters, documentation... is neat and gives us the opportunity to really contribute and enjoy both, the deserved spotlight and job opprtunities for otherwise unnoticed talent, but you can't build a reliable licensing business on top of it since the early zero years.
The strength of id software was never to come out with the most polished development environment.
RangerMcFriendly@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 6:54 pm : I agree BNA.
Kristian Joensen wrote:
" I looked into it and they've used Quake 3's source code, which was made open source so it wasn't licensed, in the IW engine."
No, you can't do anything you like with Quake 3's source code just because it is open source, you can't make your derivative works proprietary for example. To do what IW did you still need a license.
So, are you saying you still need a license to use the Quake 3 engine?
Well I was just quoting Wikipedia, which listed the engine used from Call of Duty 4 as proprietary.
Tron@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 7:03 pm : RangerMcFriendly wrote:
I agree BNA.
Kristian Joensen wrote:
" I looked into it and they've used Quake 3's source code, which was made open source so it wasn't licensed, in the IW engine."
No, you can't do anything you like with Quake 3's source code just because it is open source, you can't make your derivative works proprietary for example. To do what IW did you still need a license.
So, are you saying you still need a license to use the Quake 3 engine?
Well I was just quoting Wikipedia, which listed the engine used from Call of Duty 4 as proprietary.
If you want to use any of ids released code in your own engine you have two choices as far as I am aware.
1) Use the code for free, but release your own source code as well if you are going to distribute your project.
2) Pay to use the code, in which case you get to keep your source code private.
Mordenkainen@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 7:25 pm : RangerMcFriendly wrote:
Well I was just quoting Wikipedia, which listed the engine used from Call of Duty 4 as proprietary.
That's because it wouldn't look good if they said it was based on a 7/9 year old engine. They did mountains of work but the copyright notice and Radiant level editor betrays its heritage.
RangerMcFriendly@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 7:51 pm : Well maybe they can make use of id tech 4 and impress us. Brink is using a heavily modified version of it as far as I know and it looks absolutely fantastic!
evilartist@Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 8:14 pm : I just fantasized about Elder Scrolls with idtech5. I think I came.
It's unfortunate to see this kind of sacrifice, especially after a nearly two-decade long policy of freely licensing out to developers and squeezing out every drop of potential from an engine. I hope Zenimax (Bethesda, especially) can make up for these licensing restrictions.
simulation@Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 12:01 am : BloodRayne wrote:
At the QuakeCon 2009, Carmack said that he planned to petition Zenimax to release the id Tech 4 source upon the release of Rage (expected in 2011).[5]
He repeated the wish to do this at QuakeCon 2010 too.
Gamasutra News wrote:
Carmack also teased during his speech that after Rage ships, id will look at making the Doom 3 source code available as well.
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/29903/QuakeCon_id_Software_Releases_Source_Code_For_Two_Wolfenstein_Titles.php
aardwolf@Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 12:50 am : Yes, but that wasnt what i asked. I was asking whether or not id software still gives commercial licenses to id tech 4 right now, as in, what they did for their earlier tech like licensing id tech 3 for Call of duty. Can a studio that wants to make a commercial closed game with id tech 4 still buy one from them?
simulation@Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:10 pm : aardwolf wrote:
Yes, but that wasnt what i asked. I was asking whether or not id software still gives commercial licenses to id tech 4 right now, as in, what they did for their earlier tech like licensing id tech 3 for Call of duty. Can a studio that wants to make a commercial closed game with id tech 4 still buy one from them?
I asked Timothee Besset about the removal of the idTech4 licensing info on the web site and his reply was "that makes sense, following the move away from licencing". So I guess that it isn't something they're really persuing any more. Supporting licencees is probably another drain on their resources they can do without.
BloodRayne@Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:55 pm : aardwolf wrote:
Yes, but that wasnt what i asked. I was asking whether or not id software still gives commercial licenses to id tech 4 right now, as in, what they did for their earlier tech like licensing id tech 3 for Call of duty. Can a studio that wants to make a commercial closed game with id tech 4 still buy one from them?
Simple logic, who would license an engine that will be
free of cost in perhaps 12 months?
aardwolf@Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:05 pm : BloodRayne wrote:
aardwolf wrote:
Yes, but that wasnt what i asked. I was asking whether or not id software still gives commercial licenses to id tech 4 right now, as in, what they did for their earlier tech like licensing id tech 3 for Call of duty. Can a studio that wants to make a commercial closed game with id tech 4 still buy one from them?
Simple logic, who would license an engine that will be
free of cost in perhaps 12 months?
They could then release it GPL now.
BloodRayne@Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 7:56 pm : No, they are waiting for the current licensees to release first. They paid a lot of money for the engine (and support).
I'm wishing they'll release after Brink is released, but I won't get my hopes up.
Mordenkainen@Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 8:23 pm : BloodRayne wrote:
Simple logic, who would license an engine that will be free of cost in perhaps 12 months?
True, though you still need to GPL your new game's engine; many companies are afraid of doing that and rightly so for MP games. That's probably why Activision/IW chose to pay for another Q3 license for CoD2 (and probably a multi-game license at that) instead of going with the open source release.
Personally I don't think this has any bearing on id Tech 4's release. Finishing Rage and going through the code to make sure it's clean, perhaps implement an alternative to the Creative Labs shadow volumes software patent Carmack said he had pursued in case they couldn't reach a deal with CL, etc. etc. I think those things are more influential in whether the source will be released.
aphexjh@Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:40 pm : drill_sarge wrote:
... and will not be given away to other devs like Raven. which I dont "trust" anymore after f.e. lame Wolfenstein (or Q4 1.0 multiplayer). maybe thats good news
Its unfortunate that raven will not likely partner with id in the future (provided they not switch to zenimax. )
That being said, and wolfenstein's drawbacks aside, Quake 4 and its multiplayer were positive contributions, the fact that the 1.0 release was flawed is no reason to write off Raven. Especially considering the following releases, which made it the multiplayer we doom 3 fans always wanted.
I don't know why there is the assumption that MT cannot stream 3 textures, instead of one, which would enable dynamic lighting. Although likely at a lower resolution.
simulation@Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2010 10:33 pm : aphexjh wrote:
drill_sarge wrote:
... and will not be given away to other devs like Raven. which I dont "trust" anymore after f.e. lame Wolfenstein (or Q4 1.0 multiplayer). maybe thats good news
Its unfortunate that raven will not likely partner with id in the future (provided they not switch to zenimax. )
That being said, and wolfenstein's drawbacks aside, Quake 4 and its multiplayer were positive contributions, the fact that the 1.0 release was flawed is no reason to write off Raven. Especially considering the following releases, which made it the multiplayer we doom 3 fans always wanted.
I don't know why there is the assumption that MT cannot stream 3 textures, instead of one, which would enable dynamic lighting. Although likely at a lower resolution.
They can't "switch" to Zenimax; they're owned by ATVI.
And as for Q4, the post 1.0 patches were mostly from id, not Raven, I believe. With a big dose of help from AnthonyJ and the Q4MAX team too, I suspect.
aphexjh@Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 12:49 am : Quote:
They can't "switch" to Zenimax; they're owned by ATVI.
And as for Q4, the post 1.0 patches were mostly from id, not Raven, I believe. With a big dose of help from AnthonyJ and the Q4MAX team too, I suspect.
Oh, well I tend to believe you. but I maintain that Raven is a top tier studio.
aardwolf@Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 1:04 am : aphexjh wrote:
Quote:
They can't "switch" to Zenimax; they're owned by ATVI.
And as for Q4, the post 1.0 patches were mostly from id, not Raven, I believe. With a big dose of help from AnthonyJ and the Q4MAX team too, I suspect.
Oh, well I tend to believe you. but I maintain that Raven is a top tier studio.
A top tier studio that keeps pouring flops.
Serpentine@Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 6:48 pm : BloodRayne wrote:
No, they are waiting for the current licensees to release first. They paid a lot of money for the engine (and support).
I'm wishing they'll release after Brink is released, but I won't get my hopes up.
Considering it once again came up at QuakeCon and once again was confirmed as "After Rage", It should be around or at least news of whats going on quiet a while before Brink's release.
I'm looking forward to what comes of all of this, since they also recently purchased Arkane which are a very interesting and PC-centric bunch, I'm hoping that the future titles try to keep up with rich content backed with decent ingame UI's (hopefully they realized that the Obliv UI was shit tho). Another interesting aspect is that if they start working towards replacing Gamebryo completely the merger of the radiant and the TES would be quite interesting to use, both tools excel in the same/similar areas and if done well could be something quite fun and powerful to use. The resulting merger of the modding communities would surpass the sum of their parts as well as allowing TES modders to split further from the game that mods are based on, which would be quite nice - as I admire the Oblivion mods, but at the same time,they're always so close to the base game.
As for Raven, I'd prefer it if they just stopped trying and accepted that they died ages ago and let old things die, go work on IW or some other pubbie title or just detail the train of failure.
vertex007@Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 8:44 pm : last good Raven game was Q4.
Wolf09 sp was ok but as a whole it didn't match the quality of Q4, the open world aspect felt half-assed, the consolization pretty much in your face.
Singularity at least has no open world ambitions and is a decent one but after the promising first half it became somewhat average and uninspired.
a filler at best, nothing else.
I still think Timeshift did a better job with TM.
IMO
aardwolf@Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 11:52 pm : BloodRayne wrote:
No, they are waiting for the current licensees to release first. They paid a lot of money for the engine (and support).
I'm wishing they'll release after Brink is released, but I won't get my hopes up.
I dont think the licensees have to GPL their modified engines. Have all the CoDs titles' engines been GPLed? The only licensee to their technology right now is SD, whose game looks more interesting than Rage to be honest. I'd say next quakecon they'll GPL id tech 4.
rich_is_bored@Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2010 5:21 am : He's not talking about releasing source code, he's talking about releasing their commercial titles.
aaa111@Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 6:04 pm : Good news,Bethesda/Zenimax acquired Purchased Machinegames(ex-Starbreeze) who in turns is going to use idtech 5 for their next game:
Quote:
ZENIMAX MEDIA ACQUIRES EUROPEAN STUDIO
MachineGames™ Established by Starbreeze Founders to Develop
Multi-Platform Titles for Bethesda Softworks
Creators of High-Scoring “Chronicles of Riddick” Game will Use id Tech® 5
November 11, 2010 (Rockville, MD) – ZeniMax Media Inc., parent company of noted game publisher Bethesda Softworks, today announced it has acquired a European development studio, MachineGames™, based in Uppsala, Sweden.
Established in 2009 by the founding members of Starbreeze Studios, the creative team behind the award-winning title, The Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher’s Bay (Metacritic score: 90) and the highly-regarded game, The Darkness, MachineGames is working on an unannounced project for ZeniMax publishing subsidiary, Bethesda Softworks, that is being built on id Software’s revolutionary id Tech® 5 engine technology.
Jerk Gustafsson, the studio’s CEO who will also oversee development as Executive Producer, expressed his studio’s enthusiasm at joining ZeniMax by saying, “Working with our new colleagues at id and the world class publisher, Bethesda Softworks, is a tremendous opportunity.”
“MachineGames has assembled a dedicated team that has extensive experience working together to produce quality games. We are excited to create a new AAA title for gamers on id Tech 5 that will push the game development envelope,” Gustafsson continued.MachineGames joins a group of high-profile development studios which includes Bethesda Game Studios®, id® Software, Arkane® Studios and Tango Gameworks™. This deal reinforces Bethesda’s commitment to delivering premier titles to gamers worldwide.
“MachineGames shares our passion for creating ground-breaking gaming experiences,” said Robert Altman, Chairman and CEO of ZeniMax Media. “We are excited to have these accomplished industry veterans join ZeniMax Media’s group of world-class studios.”
About ZeniMax Media Inc.
ZeniMax Media is a preeminent media organization which has brought together a team of world class game developers, artists and designers, programmers, producers, and leading executives and talent from traditional media. ZeniMax Media creates and publishes original interactive entertainment content for consoles, the PC, and handheld/wireless devices. ZeniMax Media divisions include Bethesda Softworks, Bethesda Game Studios, id Software, Arkane Studios, Tango Gameworks, MachineGames, Vir2L Studios, ZeniMax Europe Ltd., ZeniMax Asia K.K. and ZeniMax Online Studios. For more information on ZeniMax Media, visit
http://www.zenimax.com.
About Bethesda Softworks
Bethesda Softworks, part of the ZeniMax Media Inc. family of companies, is a premier developer and worldwide publisher of interactive entertainment software. Titles from some of the world’s top development studios – Bethesda Game Studios, id Software, and Arkane Studios – are featured under the Bethesda Softworks label and include such blockbuster franchises as DOOM®, QUAKE®, The Elder Scrolls®, Fallout®, Wolfenstein® and RAGE™. For more information on Bethesda Softworks’ products, visit
http://www.bethsoft.com.
ZeniMax, Bethesda Softworks, Bethesda Game Studios, Tango Gameworks, MachineGames, Vir2L, The Elder Scrolls, Oblivion, Morrowind and related logos are registered trademarks or trademarks of ZeniMax Media Inc. in the U.S. and/or other countries. ID, id Software, DOOM, QUAKE, Wolfenstein, RAGE and related logos are registered trademarks or trademarks of Id Software LLC in the U.S. and/or other countries. Fallout is a registered trademark or trademark of Bethesda Softworks LLC in the U.S. and/or other countries. Arkane and related logos are registered trademarks or trademarks of Arkane Studios in the U.S. and/or other countries. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. All Rights Reserved.
pbmax@Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2010 5:28 pm : Funny 'cause Darkness and Riddick look just like idtech4 games...
drill_sarge@Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2010 3:03 pm : so "id no longer licensing id tech 5" means "zenimax will buy everyone who wants to use idtech5"? XD
aaa111@Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2010 10:55 pm : Well outside dev can license idtech 5,but it have to be published by zenimax/bethesda.The acquisition is just that they are trying to expand themselves a lot bigger.
aardwolf@Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2010 1:27 am : Zenimax is on a buying spree. Strange that they still haven't bought Splash Damage.
I suppose id is going to offer QA to this new studio, since id tech 5 is fairly new. Anyone wanna bet their game will be out before Rage?