Talk:Silicon Knights

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Video games (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Current status?[edit]

Their website has no updates since 2005. Are they still around and operational? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:20, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Obvious answer, but yes: they released Too Human in 2008. --Daev (talk) 07:33, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Henifin. Petros471 15:35, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Agree. Also, the same should happen with Denis Dyack, perhaps into a section specifically for detailing S.K. executive management. --Kickstart70-T-C 16:55, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Silicon Knights making lawsuit against Epic over misuse of Unreal Engine 3[edit]

Since someone was probably going to say something about this, and I would at least like to copyXpaste information I got from Gamasutra about this issue.

The lawsuit, which was filed in North Carolina district court and demands a jury trial on the grounds of breach of contract regarding Unreal Engine 3 licensing.

The suit initially alleges that: "Rather than provide support to Silicon Knights and Epic’s other many licensees of the Engine, Epic intentionally and wrongfully has used the fees from those licenses to launch its own game to widespread commercial success while simultaneously sabotaging efforts by Silicon Knights and others to develop their own video games."

It goes on to detail a number of specific alleged breaches of contract, particularly related to the delivery of Xbox 360 versions of the Unreal Engine 3 code. Epic's licensing document stated that a functional version of the engine would be available within 6 months of development kits being available.

Silicon Knights claims: "The final development kit for the Xbox 360 was released in early September, 2005, such that Epic was obligated to release the functional Engine for that platform no later than March, 2006."

The suit continues: "However, that deadline came and went without Epic providing Silicon Knights with a functional version of the Engine. Indeed, it was not until much later (November, 2006, far too late for time and cost-sensitive projects like SK’s videogames) that Epic ever provided anything resembling working Xbox 360 code to its licensees. Even at that belated date, though, Epic did not provide any guidance to licensees in how to implement the code it finally released."

Another area of concentration is Epic's simultaneous development of its own titles alongside engine development. The lawsuit charges: "In particular, at the same time that Epic was supposed to be supporting its many licenses to the Engine (Silicon Knights’ among them) Epic was also racing to complete and market its own games: “Unreal Tournament 2007” and “Gears of War.""

It goes on to explain: "The support Epic had misrepresented it would provide Silicon Knights... became increasingly inconsistent as both Silicon Knights and Epic progressed toward the target launch date for their respective games. Epic has attempted to avoid its obligations under the Agreement by representing to Silicon Knights that the support, modifications, or enhancements to the Engine – all of which are essential to the Engine’s proper function – were “game specific” and not “engine level” adaptations, and that Epic therefore need not provide them to any of its licensees, including Silicon Knights."

It's claimed: "That representation is false, as evidenced in part by the fact that Epic later provided nearly all the Gears of War code to all of its licensees, at no extra charge, in a belated effort at damage control."

Further on in the document, it's revealed that Silicon Knights is no longer using Unreal Engine 3, despite showing multiple versions of the game using the engine. It's explained: "Epic’s actions and the consequent increasing delay and cost of development of Silicon Knights’ own game caused by the unworkable Engine forced Silicon Knights in May of 2006 to embark on the time and resource intensive task of writing its own game engine, the very task it had hoped to avoid be entering the Agreement with Epic." Gamasutra July 19, 2007

Any input about weather we should create a article in Epic's article as well. Thanks!

Greenlink42- July 20, 2007

You mean "whether", and I think we should, it opens it up more, and they are both related.Andokool12 15:27, 8 August 2007 (UTC)


Their location is in St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada. It is written down as just, "Canada". Andokool12 15:22, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I edited it to properly display it as St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada on in it's "Headquaters area on the side. That's where it was missing. Andokool12 15:25, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Nintendo still owns stock to SK? How much? There isn't a source.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CE6D:6FB0:1AE7:F4FF:FE5E:8773 (talk) 21:13, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Use of past tense[edit]

Just for clarification: the first three words in this article are "Silicon Kinights was..." - so does the company no longer exist? Has there been any official statement from the company saying that it's dead? Because with fewer than five employees anyway and the man who held it together quitting to start a new company in Precursor, do we know for sure that SK has gone? NP Chilla (talk) 17:52, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Game Informer reported that, according to Silicon Knights' chief financial officer, Mike Mays, the company still exists with multiple staffers (verbatim: "more than one"). At the moment, only the lead section implies they are not operating, with "was a video game developer" - which could quite possibly be justified with the sources out there, as they say they are "mostly working on legal issues" now. However, if the article is expanded further, I would be careful not to describe them as dead. Although it seems clear that they will not be producing any new games for the foreseeable future, and, indeed, most likely never will again, we shouldn't conclude that they are a totally defunct entity with the information currently available. --LoK Wiki (talk) 19:05, 23 May 2013 (UTC)