System Shock 2 (the Dark Engine) source code release

[cobak]

Any chance we could get it? Or even any information on who we might contact about it?


For a while now the members of the TTLG forums have been on a mission to locate the source code through Eidos for Thief, and have even created a petition for it's release by Square Enix (http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=126456) but have had no luck so far.


If any devs would like to join the conversation, feel free to come over to TTLG:


http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125524


We'd also welcome any signatures as this code would benefit both the Thief and System Shock 2 communities.

[morosetroll]

Seconded.


That's right - there 1014 signs we've collected under that petition since May 9, 2009. Mr. Levine, if you read this, please answer us: could you help us, the Thief community (I can assure you that we're System Shock 2 fans as well ) to recover the Thief 1&2 and/or System Shock 2 source?

[Moncada]

I like the idea but I think there will be a world of hurt if they release the source code since it is no longer "their" property

[morosetroll]

Of course, I do know that System Shock 2 is an Electronic Arts' property. But hey, EA could demonstrate its good will by releasing the SS2 source because:

1) SS2 is old enough game like Quake 3 - both were released back in 1999.

2) SS2 was never be a bestseller like Quake 3.

3) Nevertheless, the Quake 3 source has been released back in 2005, and the SS2 source is still closed. What for?

[cogadh]

Because publishers and devs are under no obligation to release source code at all, nor are we entitled to it in any way. EA has nothing at all to gain from releasing the SS2 source code; they don't have anything to lose either, but what's more important is what's in it for them? Nothing. Nada. Zip. At least with Quake 3, that source code went on to inspire an entire generation of up and coming game devs, many of whom probably now work for EA. The SS2 source code can't even do that, its too old. The only way it is going to happen is if EA were to have a sudden personality shift and in a fit of generosity decided to do us a solid by releasing the source code... but this is EA we are talking about, what are the odds of that really happening?

[cobak]

True but we also have nothing to lose by asking certainly.


I think the biggest step is just making everyone aware that we would like to have it, which I am attempting to do here for Irrational at least (Eidos is very aware that we want it, but they apparently can't find it anywhere and we have asked a number of former Looking Glass people already who also do not know where it might be).


Of course the problem with this is really we need EA's attention, which I am hoping we may be able to enlist Irrational in helping with but I do realize that is probably a bit complicated with Irrational being owned by 2k and all.


Never hurts to ask though

[morosetroll]

I think we just need to ask Ken Levine about the System Shock 2 source. It's very important to get his answer here, at Irrational forum, or at TTLG.com. Of course, he will say that System Shock 2 is an Electronic Arts' property, but maybe he'd help us, the Thief/SS2 community, to contact to right person at EA. For example, I know nobody of EA's higher-ups except John Riccitiello, but how can I contact him? That's where Ken Levine could help us.

[newhorizon]

cogadh said:

Because publishers and devs are under no obligation to release source code at all, nor are we entitled to it in any way. EA has nothing at all to gain from releasing the SS2 source code; they don't have anything to lose either, but what's more important is what's in it for them? Nothing. Nada. Zip. At least with Quake 3, that source code went on to inspire an entire generation of up and coming game devs, many of whom probably now work for EA. The SS2 source code can't even do that, its too old. The only way it is going to happen is if EA were to have a sudden personality shift and in a fit of generosity decided to do us a solid by releasing the source code... but this is EA we are talking about, what are the odds of that really happening?

EA has a lot to gain releasing the source code.


It generates positive publicity. It allows the community to further increase the longevity of an older game like this by fixing bugs that make it difficult to run the game on new operating systems. It opens the door for the engine to be ported to alternative operating systems. The player still requires the original content, so if a player decides they really want to try System Shock now that the engine has been updated, they'll have to purchase the original game...and then patch it with the updated community source.


All this work is free, EA doesn't have to spend a dime...other than the initial tidying up and packaging of the code. In return, there is a very good chance that they will gather new sales of a very old title.


Every dollar counts.

[cogadh]

I disagree. EA has absolutely nothing to gain from this at all.... unless they were to also re-release SS2 to retail at the same time as releasing the source code. Without that, they will gain nothing from a release since they will not sell any more copies of the game if it isn't out on store shelves (when was the last time you saw SS2 in an actual store). This game is over 10 years old now, any NRFTB copies that might still exist in retail stores were long ago paid for and written off. EA will not see a dime from the sale of these copies. The only people who will make any money on it are those people selling old and used copies of the game on E-Bay. They stand to gain much from a source code release, EA does not.


Don't misunderstand, I would love to see this happen, but the cold hard reality is, without an attack of conscience and good will on the part of EA or a means of making money off it, there is absolutely no concrete incentive for EA to even consider releasing the source code. We can ask, beg and plead all we want, but we've got absolutely no means of convincing them this is in their best interests, which are the only interests they care about anyway.

[cobak]

*ahem*


http://www.gog.com/en/wanted/


Oh, look... its the perfect way to re-release an old game to retail and at least 9,414 people so far want System Shock 2 to be released so they can potentially buy (or re-buy, in my case) it and EA will see lots of THAT money.


So everyone further the cause and go vote for SS2 (as well as all the other good games on there like the Thief series)

[skumlex]

Regarding sourcecode to the Dark Engine, well I am not even sure EA holds those rights. They own the IP (Intellectual Properties) but not necessarily the tech behind the game. Looking Glass had the rights to the Dark engine. And since they were an independent studio I would guess that they kept the rights to the tech, just like Crytek owns the CryEngine (1 and 2) but not the FarCry name, which is also why FarCry 2 had a new engine developed. So depending on the specific details of the Looking Glass demise the rights to the tech could be placed a few places:

1. EA and EIDOS may both have bought the rights to the tech, and could legally MAYBE release the source code.

2. If Looking Glass owed money when the went down, any assets or the rights to them could be split between creditors.

3. The owners of Looking Glass may still have the rights to the tech.


Happy hunting!

[cobak]

number47 said:

Regarding sourcecode to the Dark Engine, well I am not even sure EA holds those rights. They own the IP (Intellectual Properties) but not necessarily the tech behind the game. Looking Glass had the rights to the Dark engine. And since they were an independent studio I would guess that they kept the rights to the tech, just like Crytek owns the CryEngine (1 and 2) but not the FarCry name, which is also why FarCry 2 had a new engine developed. So depending on the specific details of the Looking Glass demise the rights to the tech could be placed a few places:

1. EA and EIDOS may both have bought the rights to the tech, and could legally MAYBE release the source code.

2. If Looking Glass owed money when the went down, any assets or the rights to them could be split between creditors.

3. The owners of Looking Glass may still have the rights to the tech.

Happy hunting!

All very good points. I think best case scenario here, I'd just like for Irrational to let us know that yes, they do indeed have a copy of the source (which I think is fairly likely seeing as how they made a game based on it and have not since gone out of business).


If they do, then the best case scenario from there I think would be Eidos owning the rights (which I also think is fairly likely). Eidos Montreal has been very receptive to us, but they just haven't been able to actually manage to find a copy anywhere, so then we could get them in contact with Irrational.


And then we would all live happily ever after

[morosetroll]

I still don't believe that all three games (Thief 1, Thief 2 and System Shock 2), with all their milestones, were lost because of LGS' bankruptcy back in 2000. This can't be! Let's suppose that Thief 1 and Thief 2 were really lost, but System Shock 2 has been developed by another company, Irrational Games, so I don't believe that nobody at Irrational hasn't kept at least one of System Shock 2 milestone.

[yandros]

I'm pretty sure it's been established that Eidos owned the rights to the Dark source code after LGS shut down. And we have Rene at Eidos Montreal who says that they've been looking for the source code, although the last report I recall seeing is that its location was "unknown". At least one former LGS dev has come forward in the last year to say that he did not keep a copy of the source and didn't know anyone who did or who had it now.


At this point, it may be more difficult to actually locate the code than to convince Eidos to release it. NH gave some perfectly compelling reasons why it would be in Eidos' interests to do this, but then Eidos is not id and I will be shocked if it ever actually surfaces, at least through any official channel. Supporting OpenDE may be the best course of action for the community now...

[NomarDll769]

Id Software releasing source codes - Quake and Doom - are the exception, not the rule. Not to mention they were the developer and the publisher. If two companies own the rights, I doubt they will release. And even if one company has the rights, and only one, I think there is too much confusion that makes them say, "Better play it safe and just leave it be."


However, that is just my opinion. We can always dream. Who knows what will happen.

[cobak]

Yandros, that is exactly why I'm asking Irrational.... They are not Eidos affiliated but did indeed make a Dark Engine game.

NomarDll769 said:

And even if one company has the rights, and only one, I think there is too much confusion that makes them say, "Better play it safe and just leave it be."

However, that is just my opinion. We can always dream. Who knows what will happen.

The thing is, Eidos actually seems willing here, so if they own the rights I dont think that will be the problem. The problem here seems to be actually finding them a copy, which is what I'm hoping Irrational can help with.

[NomarDll769]

cobak said:

Yandros, that is exactly why I'm asking Irrational.... They are not Eidos affiliated but did indeed make a Dark Engine game.

NomarDll769 said:

And even if one company has the rights, and only one, I think there is too much confusion that makes them say, "Better play it safe and just leave it be."

However, that is just my opinion. We can always dream. Who knows what will happen.

The thing is, Eidos actually seems willing here, so if they own the rights I dont think that will be the problem. The problem here seems to be actually finding them a copy, which is what I'm hoping Irrational can help with.

The code source should be somewhere within Irrational I would imagine. So hopefully, we're in luck.

[morosetroll]

NomarDll769 said: Id Software releasing source codes - Quake and Doom - are the exception, not the rule. Not to mention they were the developer and the publisher.

I'm sorry to upset you, but both Doom and Quake series were published by GT Interactive and Activision, not id. So why shouldn't Electronic Arts walk that way?


I know that some TTLG's veterans already tried to find the Dark Engine-based games sources long time ago, but who knows.. .Could please anybody help me to invite somebody of Irrational higher-ups here, at this topic?

[cobak]

For another example we can throw in Volition/Interplay for releasing Freespace 2 as open source (which, btw, is an awesome game). There's still a thriving community for that game AND its a best seller on GOG.com... all around a successful move for the game I'd say.

[NomarDll769]

morosetroll said:

NomarDll769 said: Id Software releasing source codes - Quake and Doom - are the exception, not the rule. Not to mention they were the developer and the publisher.

I'm sorry to upset you, but both Doom and Quake series were published by [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GT_Interactive">GT Interactive and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activision]Activision, not id. So why shouldn't Electronic Arts walk that way?

I know that some TTLG's veterans already tried to find the Dark Engine-based games sources long time ago, but who knows.. .Could please anybody help me to invite somebody of Irrational higher-ups here, at this topic?

Actually, you're correct with Quake. "But GT Interactive didn't publish Doom exclusively." So I was wrong with that to an extent. But Id Software was highly evolved in the publishing of their games. Which is, in my opinion, one of the reasons their games went as far as they did.


As for Electronic Arts, they've never seemed too developer friendly. That's the reason Infinity Ward exists. Because they were tired of the limitation they had under EA as a publisher. Now, they have created one of the biggest game series in the history of gaming, and because EA wanted it their way, they lost out. You have to be strict with your developers, but you also have to let them and their ideas breath.

[morosetroll]

Maybe you're right about the relationship between EA and its developers, but right now we should to learn just one thing: does System Shock 2 source exist? Because if it doesn't, we're in problem.

[urifu]

About a year ago, I emailed Sean Barrett, the original dev of the Dark Engine's renderer. He replied with bad news. Here's the original conversation:


Dear Mr. Barrett,


I‘m not sure if you get contacted about this a lot or not, but you seemed like the best person to contact about this. I was wondering if you still had any remains of the Dark Engine and if you would like to share it with us. We have a large community of Thief and System Shock 2 players who constantly make modifications to the engine, but it would make all the difference if we had some source code to work with. We understand if, considering that you have it, you don’t wish to make it public. I’m not really sure if you have it, but if you do, I was wondering if you’d share it with us. If you wish to release the engine, considering you still have it, we don’t mind if it’s free or for a price. I’m not exactly sure if you have just the renderer, or the engine itself, with all the features, since I noticed on your bio that you wrote the renderer for the engine. Heck, I’m not even sure if the renderer is the engine itself. But if you have the full engine, we hope you would like to share it will us, whether it be free or for a fee. If you don’t have it, we hope you can tell us who would be the best person to contact to get the source code, because we’re not even sure if it still exists.


Thank you,

Steven Skomski


And his reply:

I actually didn’t keep a copy of the Thief source code

(or the engine, or the renderer) for myself, and I don’t

know offhand if anyone else from the team did either.

It’s unfortunate–it’s really inspiring that y’all are

still playing with that engine, and I know what you mean

about how useful the source code would be, but I just

don’t have any leads either.

I guess it's up to EA at this point.

[sunjammer]

As someone who made a bunch of Thief 2 levels and tried to get into the same with Shock 2; Do we REALLY want to open that can of worms?


It's an engine that does one or two very specific things well, and needs heavy modification to do more. I can't imagine releasing the source would result in a Freespace 2 sort of thing.

[morosetroll]

urifu: Agreed. It seems to me that we should contact EA somehow. But how exactly?


sunjammer: Am I get you right: you do not want the System Shock 2 source code to be open?

[cobak]

sunjammer said:

As someone who made a bunch of Thief 2 levels and tried to get into the same with Shock 2; Do we REALLY want to open that can of worms?

It's an engine that does one or two very specific things well, and needs heavy modification to do more. I can't imagine releasing the source would result in a Freespace 2 sort of thing.

What do you mean a Freespace 2 sort of thing? We certainly don't want to make a space sim using the Dark Engine. However, updating the engine and games to install and run better on modern hardware would be nice. Also, updating the capabilities of the engine to both look and perform better would also be nice and assist the editing communities of both Thief and SS2 to make better, more complex worlds using DromEd or maybe some new modified version of DromEd.


With Freespace 2, they ported Freespace 1 to the new engine and I think upgraded the capabilities a bit and are making full mods based on the engine...


I'm not sure how any of that would be a bad thing?

[sunjammer]

morosetroll, the Dark engine was, let's be honest, outdated at the time of its arrival, a good 12 years ago now. While it'd be nice to poke around in the source, i have a tremendously hard time imagining people putting real, hard effort into somehow updating it to match swords with modern specs, especially since the games powered by it still run well on modern systems.


I personally, as a huge, huge Thief/Shock 2 fan, just don't see the reason to beat that horse further into the grave when there are solutions like Unity3D or UDK around. As a developer; looking at the Dark engine today, even in its Shock 2 iteration, the notion of bringing it up to date is white hot terrifying.


Cobak, as we agree Freespace 2 is sort of the crowning example of all the things that can go right if a game's source is made public. FS2, today, is still the best game around of its sort. But it is a real exception, and not the rule. I just don't see the Dark engine blooming in the same way.


But i would love to be proven wrong, obviously

[morosetroll]

sunjammer said:While it'd be nice to poke around in the source, i have a tremendously hard time imagining people putting real, hard effort into somehow updating it to match swords with modern specs

Tell this to the Open Dark Engine Team (http://opde.sourceforge.net/).

sunjammer said:especially since the games powered by it still run well on modern systems.

Tell this to those thousand people who have signed that petition (http://www.petitiononline.com/ThiefSrc/). Almost every T1&T2&SS2 player is crying for help because these game have a lot of problem with installation (the old installer needs to be kicked with "-lgntforce" option), with multi-core nature of modern CPU, with nasty graphics issues on a modern graphics cards (16-bit dithering, lack of fog, lack of widescreen support, ), with a save problem (when a game thinks that there is no enough space on your HDD). Is that you call "run well?" That's why we need the Dark Engine source code: to fix all these issues, not to upgrade it to the modern engines' level.

[skumlex]

On Win 7 64bit, SS2 just installs and plays with Compatibilty set to WinXp SP3, after the patch is installed.

[morosetroll]

I'm glad for you, but seems many other people are not as lucky as you are. Just look at this (www.ttlg.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=153). Almost all of those people are just simple people, not IT specialists. They don't know what the Compatibilty feature is and where to find it. All they want is just to play the game they bought.

[skumlex]

Well, if they found their way into TTLG (my nick there is skumlex) I would venture the assumption they would know how to set the compatibilty on an .exe file. Right click on shock.exe and choosing properties is the way its done. And if you have found a copy of SS you're not som little kid who does'nt know anything about computers. And if you find your way into TTLG after purchasing the game, there is a guide to getting it to run on XP, vista and Win 7. (ATI owners as far as I remember are more affected than nvidia owners.) If you just want to play the game, pressure EA to alow GOG.com selling the game,since they guaranty xp, vista compatibility.

[morosetroll]

Too many assumptions, too many, I'd say, and I think you perfectly do know this. There lots of people are hurting because of those issues I've mentioned, and EA does nothing to help them. BTW, how exactly can we pressure EA?

[fisk0]

I don't have much to say on this issue, but I'm also a fan of open source, and wanted to point out that EIDOS has released source code before. They released the source code for the RTS Warzone 2100, by the defunct Pumpkin Studios, and that was an engine even more specialized for one purpose than the dark engine is. It was only used for that game, and while the release of the code has not resulted in any new open source games using the engine, it has made it possible for the Warzone 2100 community to improve on the engine and original game a lot (all the game assets, music, video sequences and graphics were released under the GPL license in 200 .

If it was possible for open source developers to get their hands on the source code, I'm sure the problems of running SS2 on modern systems could be fixed, and probably a lot of the other bugs too.

It's sad to see that it seems the source code has been lost though.

[morosetroll]

It's very bad that all the Dark Engine games' sources are disappeared without a trace .

[urifu]

Could that really be possible, though? Could the source code be completely gone? I mean, we had so many devs tinkering with it and using it through the time that it was being used. It can't be possible that it's not sitting on someone's hard drive at EA or Eidos. I have hope that we can find the source code somewhere. We just have to do some digging.


I think I'm going to try finding some info on people and get in contact with a few people to get some leads. It would be nice if I got some help, too. Who all have we contacted, anyway?

[morosetroll]

Sean Barrett, Kevin Wasserman, Ken Levine. They have nothing.

[urifu]

And I guess neither does Jonathan Chey or Paul Neurath. Or anyone that worked at Irrational Games or Looking Glass Studios, for that matter. All Looking Glass' assets were sold at auction after they went under. The source code either went to Eidos or EA. Nobody at either Irrational or LGS has the rights to use or distribute the source code for the Dark Engine, so our last options are Eidos or EA.

[morosetroll]

urifu said:...so our last options are Eidos or EA.

That's right! But how exactly could we contact EA in order to get the SS2 source?

[iglegacy_ig.collin]

Releasing the source code to System Shock 2 is out of our hands as Irrational Games doesn't own the IP or the code.

[morosetroll]

Collin, of course, I understand that. But you, at Irrational, ARE much more influential guys than we, ordinary people. I mean: you may help us to contact EA in order to recover the SS2 source. Just tell us (or PM me) an e-mail of some EA's higher-up, who could help, or invite him/her there.

[cobak]

Thanks for the reply Collin!


Do you happen to know who owns the code? Even without contact info, that bit of information would be useful so we would know whether contacting EA would even make sense.


Also, if someone has a copy of the code archived and Eidos owns the code then we would like to get that person in touch with Eidos Montreal, who are assisting us in trying to hunt down the code.