thiefessa on 29/4/2013 at 18:27
Quote Posted by Brethren
While it would be nice to have the source code officially released, it's hard to care too much about it anymore with the "unofficial" version out there in the open and apparently being tweaked by someone behind the scenes.
Very true. :cool:
MoroseTroll on 29/4/2013 at 18:39
Quote Posted by Weasel
On top of what Vivian said, there's a big difference between a new game with a lot of concentrated buzz and a series that has officially (in terms of official releases) been dormant for 10 years.
Hey, Thief 4 has also some buzz last month, though it's not concentrated as it was in case with Dark Souls. And what do we see? The count of gamers who have reacted (here and on Eidos forum) is much less than it was in case of Alan Wake or Dark Souls. Of course, some gamers prefere to don't visit forums, some of them even don't know about forums, but I believe that this is just a confirmation of my theory - Thief is not a game for masses, because the masses don't care about Thief.
Quote Posted by henke
A petition for the source code though? Why would I care about that? If I feel tempted to play any FMs these days I'll load up TDM. Will access to the sourcecode make the originals look and play better than TDM?
Two things: 1. Due its old age, the Dark Engine works much better on an average PC than the relatively new idTech4-based TDM Engine. 2. Many gamers still prefere to play the original games - just try to count the number of Thief 1&2 FMs, and you'll be very surprized. So yes, the
official publishing of the source can
drastically boost the development of the Dark Engine, making it more modern, etc.
Quote Posted by thiefessa
A real shame you haven't taken on board B1skit's endeavours and appear to have given up. :wot:
It seems you didn't understand me: I
highly appreciate Adam's efforts, but I've completely lost my hope to see the source
officially published just because of the stubborn Eidos legal department. How much time, do you think, is needed to prepare the source of the game from the past century for the publishing? A few weeks, maybe a month. They had
three years and still did
nothing. So why on earth should I have my faith in them?
Quote Posted by thiefessa
If it was me, I would not give up until B1skit actually stated that the legal department said it was a "no-go". That would be a final answer; and I'd move on at that point.
I'm grown enough to understand that sometimes the answer we looking for is between the lines: Rene did say "We're working on it", so did Keir, Kyle, and now Adam, too. Like I said, I highly appreciate Adam's efforts (and, of course, respect him), but it seems to me that he is almost helpless against the Eidos bureaucratic machine, just like me, you, and everyone on the globe.
Renault on 29/4/2013 at 18:48
It would be disappointing but refreshing if they just came out and said "hey guys, this is our property, we paid for it, we own it, we're not releasing it to the public." But they probably figure it's easier to do nothing with the Le Corbeau release out there.
El_ on 29/4/2013 at 19:19
Quote Posted by jtr7
Legal permission will open up creative possibilities. Broken Glass purposely avoid developing certain things to avoid infringement.
EM aren't doing anything new with the IP. They are doing things that other games and FMs do already, but are avoiding Thief itself like an undead plague.
What's the status on Thief IP?
thiefessa on 29/4/2013 at 19:47
Quote Posted by MoroseTroll
It seems you didn't understand me...
Fair enough.
Quote Posted by Brethren
It would be disappointing but refreshing if they just came out and said "hey guys, this is our property, we paid for it, we own it, we're not releasing it to the public."
Perhaps the fact that they haven't said this means this is not the case? I mean, if it was the case, then it would be far easier to just say so and save themselves time and hassle participating in a truckload of unnecessary negotiation between various parties.
Renault on 29/4/2013 at 19:56
I think there's too much negative press by saying something like that - that's why they probably believe it's better to just say nothing. Just my opinion.
thiefessa on 29/4/2013 at 20:00
If they worry about negative press then no SR as Garrett would be more relevant than simply declining a source code; I would have thought.
Weasel on 29/4/2013 at 20:54
Quote Posted by thiefessa
If they worry about negative press then no SR as Garrett would be more relevant than simply declining a source code; I would have thought.
You're talking about cats being let out of bags here, but the two cats aren't quite the same.
The bag that holds the cat named "SR is not Garrett" can't stay closed if the game is being promoted. Once information was revealed, the cat was free.
The cat named "Dark engine source code" can stay in the bag forever (which might make it a descendent of Schrodinger's cat).
Renault on 29/4/2013 at 21:19
^^^ I was trying to put it into words, and then Weasel came along and said it perfectly.
So, just thinking out loud here. This is not something I want to happen, mind you, I'm just having a little fun with the situation. Say everything with the New Thief fell apart, and some of the reported stuff is true, and the game gets cancelled. And then, say Eido isn't really interested in the Thief IP anymore.
Does anyone have any kind of concept as to what buying an IP like that would cost? Just wondered if it would be a feasible kickstarter thing down the road for a group of dedicated fans (ala T2X) or even some ex-devs who worked at or with LGS before. Are we talking $50K, $200K, $500K, 5 million, 10 million...? I just don't have a clue how that would work and what the numbers would be.
Vivian on 29/4/2013 at 21:26
Way, way, more than finding a decent up-and-coming playwright for the dialogue, a bunch of decent up-and-coming theatre actors for the VA, and then paying the TDM devs and a few other local talents to make something rad for the Dark Mod.
