ZeniMax (Bethesda) buys id software...

[obsidian]

Valve does well, their Steam distribution model ensures financial success, and their games are fun, but I don't think they are necessarily the industry leader. Their game engine for example, is quite old, recycled and seriously needs an update. Its granddaddy still goes back to id.

There really isn't the strong game developer industry leader anymore, there's way too much competition and variation.

Does Infinity Ward (Call of Duty) and other companies that use engines that are heavily modified off of id Tech engines still pay royalty fees to id Software? Even Splash Damage is using their own modified id Tech 4 engine for Brink. I wonder if id Software is losing its engine licensing business due to their open sourcing of older technologies.

[Infernis]

It's just business, nothing personal. If it makes sense for them, then why not? The thing that keeps people talking is that nobody saw this coming. I for one was stunned, that's for sure. But hey, the world changes and things will never be the same. I guess that sooner or later, only time can if this really was a smart move.

And let's face it, a change was needed. Because the last 3 games, either developed by Id or a partner company, were not worthwhile. Sure, maybe it were commercial successes but I played them all for one run through and never touched them again. Can't say the same for the original Doom and Quake series. Those were classics and are still fun today. We've got communities to prove that!

I really hope that Rage and Doom 4 will be different because the new Wolfenstein does not really impress me so far. Let's hope the actual game will change that.

As far as all the whining goes, let them be. People will always be whiners for various reasons. No point in arguing with that.

[phantasmagoria]

Valve does well, their Steam distribution model ensures financial success, and their games are fun, but I don't think they are necessarily the industry leader. Their game engine for example, is quite old, recycled and seriously needs an update. Its granddaddy still goes back to id.

I'm not sure that matters.

In my eyes, no company including id (everything since q3 has, frankly, been rubbish) can hold a candle to Valve, who seem to be the only big company experimenting with new gameplay mechanics. Portal and L4D have been the only games released recently that I have really been properly impressed by. Also, their dedication and release of additional content to TF2 has been unmatched.

I also like the look of Valve's engine. The very fact everything doesn't look shrink wrapped catapults it beyond most games in terms of visuals as far as I'm concerned.

[Dr_Watson]

what was the price tag?

[Fender]

interview
http://venturebeat.com/2009/06/25/the-b ... o-zenimax/

[^misantropia^]

I wonder if id Software is losing its engine licensing business due to their open sourcing of older technologies.

No, because any company that would use one of id's open-sourced engines as a base, would have to open source their spinoff as well.

[Eraser]

I wonder if id Software is losing its engine licensing business due to their open sourcing of older technologies.

No, because any company that would use one of id's open-sourced engines as a base, would have to open source their spinoff as well.

that, and id Software waits a good 5 or 6 years before opening up the source to an engine. No game developer is interested in that sort of old tech anymore.

[Eraser]

Does Infinity Ward (Call of Duty) and other companies that use engines that are heavily modified off of id Tech engines still pay royalty fees to id Software? Even Splash Damage is using their own modified id Tech 4 engine for Brink. I wonder if id Software is losing its engine licensing business due to their open sourcing of older technologies.

I guess royalties still are to be payed, although Infinity Ward built their own proprietary engine for all CoD games since CoD2

[jal_]

Valve does well, their Steam distribution model ensures financial success, and their games are fun, but I don't think they are necessarily the industry leader. Their game engine for example, is quite old, recycled and seriously needs an update. Its granddaddy still goes back to id.

I'm not sure that matters.

In my eyes, no company including id (everything since q3 has, frankly, been rubbish) can hold a candle to Valve, who seem to be the only big company experimenting with new gameplay mechanics. Portal and L4D have been the only games released recently that I have really been properly impressed by. Also, their dedication and release of additional content to TF2 has been unmatched.

I also like the look of Valve's engine. The very fact everything doesn't look shrink wrapped catapults it beyond most games in terms of visuals as far as I'm concerned.

There's a too easy tendency to confuse the renderer and the engine. Source engine is modern and well capable, only the renderer is a bit lacking. Also, I'm not so sure why there is this asumption that using the very latest state of the art on rendering is the best option. Valve shows it's not always the case. By keeping their renderer a very little "outdated" while putting stronger effort on art and gameplay they are able to reach a wider audience while their games look just as good as they need to.

On the id sell topic. I'm afraid it will mean the end of id open sourcing their engines, which, on a egoistic position from my side, is a pity. I also guess we will see many more id game sequels in the future at much faster ratio than now.