The thing is 95% of the market's consumers don't give a shit or even know who made a product. Maybe after they boot the game up and see the bumpers they might recognize, but while purchasing I just don't see them taking it into consideration.
Then those of us that DO are usually keen enough to know the difference between the publisher and the developer.
Though it does piss me off to see a developer get shot down simply because they're under a certain publisher.
I think the best point from this entire discussion is the fact that the developer's themselves don't get enough recognition for the products they make. Seriously.... go ask a great deal of people who play games to name some developers.... of course they will more than likely name Blizzard... but who else? Only people that work in the industry or are associated with it really know who develops the games... and only we know the artists/designers and amazing leads.
I guarantee you they know who Steven Spielberg or James Cameron or Peter Jackson is...
There needs to be a shift towards recognizing the people behind the games. There has been a great deal of this through interviews and conferences... but personally I would rather hear about the game from the standpoint of someone working at the development company than some representative of a huge 3rd party publisher that only knows about the game from what he/she was briefed on 20 minutes prior.
Again let's look at the movie industy, they know the talent is what sells tickets. Actors, directors, whatever else. Sure they still let everyone know who paid the bills, and that still helps their branding, but I think we can all agree that's not what sells the tickets. "James Camerons" Avatar would be a good example.
The Epic logo isn't the face on the box that moves units off the shelf, Marcus Phoenix is. He's you're Brad Pit, he's your Morgan Freeman.
I would say that Epic is one of the more well branded names out there. Still, put copies of Epic Pinball on the shelves and see how fast that Epic logo moves those units. Put Marcus Pheonix's Epic Pinball with a big GoW logo on it and it will probably do better.
I totally agree that funneling ton's of cash back at publishers after they've dished out a few bucks here and there is a bad business model. If and whenever possible I think studios should self fund and self promote. But they often find themselves in the difficult position of being close but not close enough.
I think its insanity to demand that publishers put their interests aside and promote the studios first the studio only exsists because the franchise is there.
It's a horrible business idea for a pub to put a studio before a franchise. It would only really work on well established studios, that are acquired like Blizzard.
Any start up studio is going to have to earn its spot on the box, especially if its working with a publishers money. Infinity Ward still has its name all over CoD, probably will for sometime to come. Keep in mind they aren't telling IW to stop making them, just that they're diluting their franchise.
Don't like the publishers game, don't play it. But like the man said don't talk to the ape if you don't like a face full of poo.
I agree, letting a publisher manage your franchise, is franchise suicide. They're in it for cash, as fast as possible and obviously its how Activision is running things. Again, dance with the devil, he's going to lead and you're going to get burned.
The solution isn't to demand that publishers change their carnivorous ways but just cut them out.
Activision wouldn't have any of its franchises without a solid development team, solid game designers, programmers and artists.
Are we really the only entertainment industry that doesn't seem to WANT to recognize and push its talent at the forefront? That's pretty sad.
I agree.
Take boxing for example, sure it's the promoters, managers, and venues that put the events together and the money, but ultimately the boxer is the product.
Without the boxer, they'd have fuck all, and that's why the elite fighters pretty much call the shots, they are the ones generating the millions, and they are the ones who get most of the money. Unless of course they are being skanked up and down by Don King.
I am pretty sure that IW developed CoD games sell alot more then Treyarch games so it cant ALL be about the CoD brand?
Saying that "people have no clue about who the developer is" is exactly the point. They dont know but they SHOULD. The only example of this done right is Blizzard imo (maybe some of the famous japanese designers aswell). ANY Blizzard game will sell well at this point even if it is a new IP. Everyone knows who blizzard is and everyone know they stand for quality.
Building up a brand is kind of pointless when it doesnt stand for ANYTHING except a name. When the brand gets tossed around to different developers resulting in an uneven product.
talent will always be recognized, you dont have to brag about it...
Yeah, I suppose your right.
I guess Blizzard's method has proven to be very unsuccessful.
:P
I guess the the Non-IW created CoD's were every bit as successful, both critically and commercially as the IW developed ones.
:P
Blizzard should really learn from Activision. 7 Starcraft titles, in 7 years would make more money than 1 Starcraft game every 7 years. They should itirate on that, and if they can't deliver, they should sublet some other studio to make it for them.
:P
/sarcasm
Vig - I'm aware of how the current publishing model works. I also think it's very flawed.
Marketing Talent is different than marketing bottled water.
Take boxing for example, sure it's the promoters, managers, and venues that put the events together and the money, but ultimately the boxer is the product.
Without the boxer, they'd have fuck all, and that's why the elite fighters pretty much call the shots, they are the ones generating the millions, and they are the ones who get most of the money. Unless of course they are being skanked up and down by Don King.
Marcus Pheonix is your boxer not Mark Rein.
He's a handsom chap, but a lil to soft and squishy to really get people excited about killing mutants.
If they spend any money promoting Gears of War 3 You know who's face is going to be used.
Do you really want to see Gabe Newell on the cover of HL3?
I'm sure he's a lovely guy but he's in the business of making games not underwear modeling.
Promote the franchise, make money. If you want to be famous you're probably in the wrong biz.
If you're not happy with the way the publisher is using its marketing team to market your product... yea I've said it enough...
Marcus Pheonix is your boxer not Mark Rein.
He's a handsom chap, but a lil to soft and squishy to really get people excited about killing mutants.
If they spend any money promoting Gears of War 3 You know who's face is going to be used.
Do you really want to see Gabe Newell on the cover of HL3?
I'm sure he's a lovely guy but he's in the business of making games not underwear modeling.
If you're not happy with the way the publisher is using its marketing team to market your product... yea I've said it enough.
Sorry but that is kinda taking things way literally for the sake of having argue-fodder :P We're talking about promoting the team and studios responsible for making Gears such a good game, not literally putting their faces on the box. Point missed?
Sorry but that is kinda taking things way literally for the sake of having argue-fodder :P We're talking about promoting the team and studios responsible for making Gears such a good game, not literally putting their faces on the box. Point missed?
Promote the franchise, make money. If you want to be famous you're probably in the wrong biz.
Money diverted away from the franchise seems like money spent on studio ego. Will the money spent getting the studio name out there, actually bring in more sales or will it be wise to spend it on the franchise and let that PR boost you're company name. Now I agree that pubs probably smother smaller studios but they also let companies that earned a reputation, shine.
You're a Nascar driver. You're car is covered in stuff someone paid you to put there. Feel free to plaster your name all over your car when you don't need their money. Will that be good at boosting driver recognition, sure, how many drivers can actually do that? Very few.
Why the obssesion with franchises, game developers arent a chain of restaurants, where they dole out their name and a few resources to anyone whom wants to stump up the cash.
A game developer is a group of individuals with resources and tech that can be put to any task regardless what they did in the past(as long as their not a complete bunch of plebs).
What does looks have to do with it? I dont think that most famous movie directors are all that pretty but they manage to sell movie tickets just fine anyway because they have TALENT. Just as they market Avatar by saying its made by the same guy that did Terminator, Aliens and Titanic they can market games the same way.
I would buy anything with Mark Rein's face on it, he's so dreamy.........
Anyway, I agree with Vig to a point... I think so people will buy games too simply because they know a publisher/developer has made good games in the past. These are usually the people that pay no attention to the industry, but I'm sure it happens. They see Epics logo or Marcus' face, they are going to buy it (Not just Epic, any well developed company). I, for example, know I'm going to get a good game if Bethesda's name is on it.....unless it say's Rogue Warrior on the box, then I'm getting an OK at best game :P
I guess Blizzard's method has proven to be very unsuccessful.
:P
I guess the the Non-IW created CoD's were every bit as successful, both critically and commercially as the IW developed ones.
:P
Blizzard should really learn from Activision. 7 Starcraft titles, in 7 years would make more money than 1 Starcraft game every 7 years. They should itirate on that, and if they can't deliver, they should sublet some other studio to make it for them.
:P
/sarcasm
Vig - I'm aware of how the current publishing model works. I also think it's very flawed.
Marketing Talent is different than marketing bottled water.
as i said, talent will be recognized, so what...
IW got talent so they sell shitloads even without shouting out everywhere that they are the gods, same for blizzard... they let the games do the talking.. i dont se any problem in creating a brand out of a recognized franchise and take it further...
i mean blizzard took their known brand warcraft and expanded it to WOW and putting out expansions ever year.... which is basicly the same as COD does, only they dont charge you every month for playing (yet)..
starcraft 2 SP will be coming in episodes so, that pobably 1 SC title a year...
Marcus Pheonix is your boxer not Mark Rein.
He's a handsom chap, but a lil to soft and squishy to really get people excited about killing mutants.
If they spend any money promoting Gears of War 3 You know who's face is going to be used.
Do you really want to see Gabe Newell on the cover of HL3?
I'm sure he's a lovely guy but he's in the business of making games not underwear modeling.
Promote the franchise, make money. If you want to be famous you're probably in the wrong biz.
If you're not happy with the way the publisher is using its marketing team to market your product... yea I've said it enough...
Hahaha
I see the developer as the boxer. They are the meat and potatoes of the industry, without the devs, there is no industry.
Sure they can use the game/characters etc for promotion, but one could make the analogy of the games/characters as the boxer's fighting style, the boxer's highlight reel of awesome KO's etc.
Nobody really cares about the boxer's private life, they care about what the boxer does in the ring. Same with devs, people don't care about the devs themselves, they care about what they DO. Same thing, ultimately they are both the essence of the product.
Why the obssesion with franchises, game developers arent a chain of restaurants, where they dole out their name and a few resources to anyone whom wants to stump up the cash.
A game developer is a group of individuals with resources and tech that can be put to any task regardless what they did in the past(as long as their not a complete bunch of plebs).
A studio normally builds a game and the tech they develop is pretty specific to that style and genre of game. Most studios if you click on their "previous games" link you'll get a style and genre that cater to their tastes and tech.
I'm sure Infinity Ward could do Cute Pony Poker if they where tasked with it but they'd hate it and most of their tech would be wasted. Let them do what they do best. Don't try and sell Cute Pony Poker by using the Infinity Ward name. Which is the BS that would happen if Pubs shifted to a Studio centric marketing approach.
Cut the pub out, use your own money, don't over inflate your studio and never barrow more than you can absolutely pay back. Don't bitch when you have to go crawling to the pub to get cash or to promote and distribute your game.
I used to buy any comic drawn by Todd McFarlane
I used to buy any comic written by Alan Moore
I used to buy every album released by Metallica
I used to watch every movie with Al Pacino in it.
Common theme was, talent is what sold me on their products.
I will buy every Blizzard game.
I will buy every Bioware game.
I will buy every Valve game.
I will buy every IW developed game (now up in the air).
I will buy every Relic developed RTS
I will buy every Castlevania game made by Konami Tokyo.
just the same as:
I will watch every James Cameron directed movie
I will read every book by Neil Gaiman and Chuck Palahniuk.
I will buy every NIN album.
I Do NOT watch movies because they were distributed by Paramount.
I do NOT buy songs because they were from Columbia Records.
I do NOT buy all books published by Penguin Publishing.
I do NOT watch shows because they are on NBC.
And I sure as hell don't buy games because they were published by EA or Activision.
I think it's about time they started marketing their talent rather than hide it.
I see the developer as the boxer. They are the meat and potatoes of the industry, without the devs, there is no industry.
Sure they can use the game/characters etc for promotion, but one could make the analogy of the games/characters as the boxer's fighting style, the boxer's highlight reel of awesome KO's etc.
Nobody really cares about the boxer's private life, they care about what the boxer does in the ring. Same with devs, people don't care about the devs themselves, they care about what they DO. Same thing, ultimately they are both the essence of the product.
Mark Rein is your boxers trainer. He's not getting his hands dirty, but he has the skills and the know how to make your boxer into a champ. He's an integral part of any boxers career ask any boxer or anyone in the know and they'll tell you who the trainer is for who ever. They get paid great money but its not their ass in the ring, or their face on the box of Wheaties.
Marcus Pheonix is your boxer not Mark Rein.
He's a handsom chap, but a lil to soft and squishy to really get people excited about killing mutants.
If they spend any money promoting Gears of War 3 You know who's face is going to be used.
Do you really want to see Gabe Newell on the cover of HL3?
I'm sure he's a lovely guy but he's in the business of making games not underwear modeling.
Promote the franchise, make money. If you want to be famous you're probably in the wrong biz.
If you're not happy with the way the publisher is using its marketing team to market your product... yea I've said it enough...
No, that's not how it works... Did fans of Quake charge out to buy Quake 2 because they were so excited about Nameless Space Marine? Were people chomping at the bit to buy Doom 3 because it had been it had been so long since they last had a chance to play as Other Nameless Space Marine? Are people currently excited to see what Rage can do, so they can get a compelling experience with the character who will likely be Nameless Post-Apocalyptic Guy?
iD is what people know, and John Carmack in particular. The Quake and Doom franchises are widely recognized, but people absolutely know who made them. Rage is a totally new IP, built entirely from scratch, and we all know it'll sell a truckload of units because people want to see what iD does next.
iD aren't the only ones this applies to. If Blizzard announced an entirely new IP, people would be interested - it's Blizzard. If Valve announced an entirely new IP, people would be interested - it's Valve. It's the same way many people will see a Pixar movie, regardless of the characetrs or whatever. Sure, Woody and Buzz are cool, but you'll drop money to see talking fish or cute robots or whatever else Pixar wants to put on the screen - it's Pixar. No one here went to see 'Up' because they were just so compelled by seeing some animated grandpa in a house with balloons coming out the chimney; they went because it's Pixar. With the big name game studios, it's really no different.
Don't talk box art - it's the age of teh internets, no one buys a game because of the box art. I'll be fucked if I can even remember what the MW2 box art looks like, and it's in my 360 right now...
A studio normally builds a game and the tech they develop is pretty specific to that style and genre of game. Most studios if you click on their "previous games" link you'll get a style and genre that cater to their tastes and tech.
I'm sure Infinity Ward could do Cute Pony Poker if they where tasked with it but they'd hate it and most of their tech would be wasted. Let them do what they do best. Don't try and sell Cute Pony Poker by using the Infinity Ward name. Which is the BS that would happen if Pubs shifted to a Studio centric marketing approach.
Cut the pub out, use your own money, don't over inflate your studio and never barrow more than you can absolutely pay back. Don't bitch when you have to go crawling to the pub to get cash or to promote and distribute your game.
Thats it, and neither would their established audience accept it. I think Rockstar did a Table Tennis Game which is a bit different, but arent they like a publisher or something anyway?
If they wanted to do something entirely different they'd have to branch out with a new company. But that doesnt stop the developer creating new ips which play to their strengths, instead of rehashing the same name over and over again.
Some of these games I think its a bit silly calling them a continuation of the saga anyway as the gameplay and stories change so much. But everything has to be known now and from a familiar ip because it sells better that way.
Marcus Pheonix is your boxer not Mark Rein.
He's a handsom chap, but a lil to soft and squishy to really get people excited about killing mutants.
If they spend any money promoting Gears of War 3 You know who's face is going to be used.
Do you really want to see Gabe Newell on the cover of HL3?
I'm sure he's a lovely guy but he's in the business of making games not underwear modeling.
Promote the franchise, make money. If you want to be famous you're probably in the wrong biz.
If you're not happy with the way the publisher is using its marketing team to market your product... yea I've said it enough...
In regards to Gabe Newell, he does have a presence in the gaming world. Without the vision that Gabe and his partner's brought to the company, you wouldn't have Gordon Freeman. You could just have some other generic spacemarine.
Also loosing the 2 people in IW, is quite a morale shocker. I wouldn't be surprised if people started to jump ship because of this. To also see Activison come in and impose their people as the new leaders of the company is going to turn a lot of people off. Since they have been for some time now, hating on Activion.
Either way, we don't know enough of the details to know whats going on. But this is probably going to start the downfall of the CoD franchise. I've been on a boycott for well over a year now, since I got layed off at Radical, and I'll continue to do so.
"The Society aimed to advance the interests of independent producers in an industry overwhelmingly controlled by the studio system.
SIMPP fought to end ostensibly anti-competitive practices by the seven major film studios MGM, Columbia Pictures, Paramount Pictures, Universal Studios, RKO, 20th Century Fox and Warner Bros. that controlled the production, distribution, and exhibition of films".
Charlie Chaplin, Orson Welles, Walt Disney, among many others fought for their rights, and won.
And that's why you know who they are, and what they did.
I used to buy any comic drawn by Todd McFarlane
I used to buy any comic written by Alan Moore
I used to buy every album released by Metallica
I used to watch every movie with Al Pacino in it.
Common theme was, talent is what sold me on their products.
I will buy every Blizzard game.
I will buy every Bioware game.
I will buy every IW developed game (now up in the air).
I will buy every Relic developed RTS
I will buy every Castlevania game made by Konami Tokyo.
just the same as:
I will watch every James Cameron directed movie
I will read every book by Neil Gaiman and Chuck Palahniuk.
I will buy every NIN album.
I Do NOT watch movies because they were distributed by Paramount.
I do NOT buy songs because they were from Columbia Records.
I do NOT buy all books published by Penguin Publishing.
I do NOT watch shows because they are on NBC.
And I sure as hell don't buy games because they were published by EA or Activision.
I think it's about time they started marketing their talent rather than hide it.
Other people evaluate things on a case by case basis and won't just gobble up every turd someone who has managed to make a name for themselves, puts on a shingle. You show signs of having limits too, look at the list of things you used to gobble up without pause.
It will be interesting to see just how far Bungie strays from Halo and see how many Bungie fans turn out to be Halo fans and do what you did to Metalica.
Some people who saw Avatar won't watch Titanic.
I didn't go see Speed Racer but I liked the Matrix, even liked the old cartoon.
I've probably seen 5% of the movies Steven Spielberg has been connected to. It doesn't mean I'm going to support the other 95% I have zero interest in.
The publisher, and I'm saying this again for the 5th time, are going to do whats good for the publisher. Which means trying to get their sink all over games they lent money to, or exert their parental control over the studio that's independent only in theory. Don't want their stink on games, don't work for studios that take their money don't buy their games. Take or fanatical purchasing habits and do something good with them.
Feel free to take your case up with the publishers and see how far you get. If its a really good idea, that's a win win for everyone they'll be all over it.
"The Society aimed to advance the interests of independent producers in an industry overwhelmingly controlled by the studio system.
SIMPP fought to end ostensibly anti-competitive practices by the seven major film studios MGM, Columbia Pictures, Paramount Pictures, Universal Studios, RKO, 20th Century Fox and Warner Bros. that controlled the production, distribution, and exhibition of films".
Charlie Chaplin, Orson Welles, Walt Disney, among many others fought for their rights, and won.
And that's why you know who they are, and what they did.
This likely also made movies much better.
They blazed their own trails, fighting to be autonomous and surprisingly when all was said and done they didn't sell their companies to the studios and then cry foul when they didn't get the cash or the credit they thought they deserved.
I think you're right, it will have a positive impact when more devs fund and manage their franchises themselves. But the ones that choose to use the publisher system or worse sell their studios to the publishers giving all that up, they have very little room to bitch.
Publishers deal in games, they don't deal in studio promotion, that's up to the studios to do, which naturally happens as good games get their names out there. Maybe if they where buying and selling studios they would market the studios, but they sell games first and foremost so that's where their effort goes.
This is a pretty pointless arguement. People are attracted to quality. If every Call of Duty game released from this point on is pure gold and incredibly fun and well designed no one will care about IW.
If they all suck, then it's because IW didn't work on them. See my point?
People don't care who made what, as long as the product is good. The second that brand, company, person etc. starts doing things that aren't good... suddenly no one wants their product.
It's the same way with actors and actresses. You do two to three hit movies and you're on top of the world... do a few that flop after that and you're a no body, it doesn't matter if you have the talent to produce hits, your last few sucked.
Therfore it all boils down to...
Quality of the product > Everything else.
The second Pixar or Blizzard or someone else starts putting out crap on a stick their names will mean nothing except to a few hardcore fans.
Ultimately what it comes down to for me is... is the product good. Every movie I saw of Steven Spielberg was awesome until I saw AI. Which taught me that it doesn't matter how talented someone is they can still make utter shit.
The publisher, and I'm saying this again for the 5th time, are going to do whats good for the publisher.
The publisher will do what they think is good for them. Unfortunately, publisher's have proven -- PROVEN -- to be notoriously awful judges of that. If you wrote down a list of publishers who have done well for more than a few years and publishers who have died or gone into massive debt, one of those lists would be extremely short.
Publishers don't know what they're doing and never have. They luck into a big blockbuster hit by a talented studio they own, get arrogant and try to take over control, drive it all into the ground, destroy themselves, and then a new publisher rises from their ashes.
Over and over again.
Perhaps a publisher that took second seat to their development talent would find themselves in a much more sustainable position. Sure, a talented studio is not going to have an 100% success rate, but I'd wager it'd be a hell of a lot higher than the massive failure rate that publishers have when they mess with things and they'd be a hell of a lot more secure with multiple big-name studios to fall back on instead of just their own publisher brand.
Woah. Imagine if they win, and they do take away the CoD rights away from Activision.. this is gonna be a brutal next few months.
ha, if that happens then Bobby Kotick is fired. I don't know much about how the legal system would work in these matters but wouldn't it be a shame if Activision Locked this thing up in court over the course of years? Throwing millions at keeping a deadlock? They could do it for longer than West and Zampella could I'm sure.
Here's to West and Zampella's Victory and the end of doctor evil's Reign.
"If you want to be famous you're probably in the wrong biz."
While I have no express desire to be famous, if I made really good games it would be nice to have my name on the box in the same way you would get MGS with "A Hideo Kojima Game" somewhere in small but noticeable letters.
ha, if that happens then Bobby Kotick is fired. I don't know much about how the legal system would work in these matters but wouldn't it be a shame if Activision Locked this thing up in court over the course of years? Throwing millions at keeping a deadlock? They could do it for longer than West and Zampella could I'm sure.
Here's to West and Zampella's Victory and the end of doctor evil's Reign.
How sweet is 2010 going if Kotick gets fired? It might yet be the best year in gaming for this decade.
I still want to know exactly what activision is calling insubordination. Need specifics until then gonna go pop some popcorn,
Anything they want. "Insubordination" is such a loosely defined term, especially in a legal sense, it could be anything from willfully disrupting production to simply disagreeing strongly in a meeting and making your boss look bad. It's like getting a divorce for "irreconcilable differences."
Blizzard should really learn from Activision. 7 Starcraft titles, in 7 years would make more money than 1 Starcraft game every 7 years. They should itirate on that, and if they can't deliver, they should sublet some other studio to make it for them.
Whats funny is they tried, it was called StarCraft Ghost. Went through 2 publishers I believe before Blizzard realized what Activision cant. Some times you cant sacrifice the quality of your games/studio/name for the sake of quick and dirty money.
I really wanna know whats happening now, Suppose if the royalties for the whole company was so much that they could buy themselves out from under activisions nose. Its happened by companies before, and if they take the call of duty license with them then treyarch and their other new studio have to cease production and Infinity ward can find new publishers or even publish themselves. their royalties/bonuses could possibly be huge. They sold over a billion pounds worth of MW2 software even before xmas hit.
Im sure if activision heard they were thinking of flying solo or taking the call of duty brand back then they would employ shed loads of lawyers to find loopholes to get rid of them before its too late.
At the moment though it just sounds like they want their royalties, not the license or anything else. I love an underdog story though
This is a pretty pointless arguement. People are attracted to quality. If every Call of Duty game released from this point on is pure gold and incredibly fun and well designed no one will care about IW.
If they all suck, then it's because IW didn't work on them. See my point?
People don't care who made what, as long as the product is good. The second that brand, company, person etc. starts doing things that aren't good... suddenly no one wants their product.
It's the same way with actors and actresses. You do two to three hit movies and you're on top of the world... do a few that flop after that and you're a no body, it doesn't matter if you have the talent to produce hits, your last few sucked.
Therfore it all boils down to...
Quality of the product > Everything else.
The second Pixar or Blizzard or someone else starts putting out crap on a stick their names will mean nothing except to a few hardcore fans.
Ultimately what it comes down to for me is... is the product good. Every movie I saw of Steven Spielberg was awesome until I saw AI. Which taught me that it doesn't matter how talented someone is they can still make utter shit.
It doesnt really work like that. In an idea world it should, but it doesnt at all. The majority of people do follow that person like Tom Cruise they will see whatever he's in no matter how much he jumps up and down on some womans sofa, or whether he's expousing we are all descended from aliens.
The only thing that can influence that is other people, if they really start passing backwards and forwards with their friends and peers that what they have done or are doing is rubbish. When that happens they just focus their attentions on other persons.
And did you not go to see to AI because of Spielbergs reputation. Perhaps ignoring some of the critiques floating around. If it was another director perhaps you would not have seen it at all.
Its very easy for persons to float on a cloud, from the reputation of just one decent product even if it was accidental. People will go for the rest because they liked that one thing they did and their subsequent trash has vague shadows of that. Probably not in huge numbers, but enough to be sustainable.
I still want to know exactly what activision is calling insubordination. Need specifics until then gonna go pop some popcorn,
I heard a RUMOUR that Activision told them to lay off some of their development staff and they refused. This is completely unsubstantiated as far as I know, however.
I heard a RUMOUR that Activision told them to lay off some of their development staff and they refused. This is completely unsubstantiated as far as I know, however.
My brain tells me that would make no since but with this last week, who knows. Never have I seen greed to this level. It's certainly an eye opener.
One of the first things i thought upon hearing about all this and reading the news this morning is, this makes EA's CEO John Riccitiello look like a saint.
I heard a RUMOUR that Activision told them to lay off some of their development staff and they refused. This is completely unsubstantiated as far as I know, however.
Yeah the gamasutra article sounds pretty close to what I think the truth would be. Activision knows that no other studio but IW can work on it and thus had to "break" the contract by making it look like the other guys.
Shitty situation to be in for anyone involved and it shows to what extent companies will go to get their way.
If you read the copy of the lawsuit on kotaku you will be quite surprised at some of the facts.
That is seriously crazy, if there allowed to get away with not paying them for work they have done, and completed(and they completed it completely before they were fired), then its a sad sad miserable shit hole of a planet we live on.
The rest I dont know about, but I guess we will have to wait and see how this pans out.
It seems these Publisher are really, really stupid, what is the developer? Its the chairs and tables and the servers and the coffee machine, and the name. Its not the people at all, there just background noise, WE WANTS THE NAME!.
Replies
Then those of us that DO are usually keen enough to know the difference between the publisher and the developer.
Though it does piss me off to see a developer get shot down simply because they're under a certain publisher.
I guarantee you they know who Steven Spielberg or James Cameron or Peter Jackson is...
There needs to be a shift towards recognizing the people behind the games. There has been a great deal of this through interviews and conferences... but personally I would rather hear about the game from the standpoint of someone working at the development company than some representative of a huge 3rd party publisher that only knows about the game from what he/she was briefed on 20 minutes prior.
I would say that Epic is one of the more well branded names out there. Still, put copies of Epic Pinball on the shelves and see how fast that Epic logo moves those units. Put Marcus Pheonix's Epic Pinball with a big GoW logo on it and it will probably do better.
I totally agree that funneling ton's of cash back at publishers after they've dished out a few bucks here and there is a bad business model. If and whenever possible I think studios should self fund and self promote. But they often find themselves in the difficult position of being close but not close enough.
I think its insanity to demand that publishers put their interests aside and promote the studios first the studio only exsists because the franchise is there.
It's a horrible business idea for a pub to put a studio before a franchise. It would only really work on well established studios, that are acquired like Blizzard.
Any start up studio is going to have to earn its spot on the box, especially if its working with a publishers money. Infinity Ward still has its name all over CoD, probably will for sometime to come. Keep in mind they aren't telling IW to stop making them, just that they're diluting their franchise.
Don't like the publishers game, don't play it. But like the man said don't talk to the ape if you don't like a face full of poo.
I agree, letting a publisher manage your franchise, is franchise suicide. They're in it for cash, as fast as possible and obviously its how Activision is running things. Again, dance with the devil, he's going to lead and you're going to get burned.
The solution isn't to demand that publishers change their carnivorous ways but just cut them out.
same gme for all other big publishers.....
talent will always be recognized, you dont have to brag about it...
I agree.
Take boxing for example, sure it's the promoters, managers, and venues that put the events together and the money, but ultimately the boxer is the product.
Without the boxer, they'd have fuck all, and that's why the elite fighters pretty much call the shots, they are the ones generating the millions, and they are the ones who get most of the money. Unless of course they are being skanked up and down by Don King.
Saying that "people have no clue about who the developer is" is exactly the point. They dont know but they SHOULD. The only example of this done right is Blizzard imo (maybe some of the famous japanese designers aswell). ANY Blizzard game will sell well at this point even if it is a new IP. Everyone knows who blizzard is and everyone know they stand for quality.
Building up a brand is kind of pointless when it doesnt stand for ANYTHING except a name. When the brand gets tossed around to different developers resulting in an uneven product.
Yeah, I suppose your right.
I guess Blizzard's method has proven to be very unsuccessful.
:P
I guess the the Non-IW created CoD's were every bit as successful, both critically and commercially as the IW developed ones.
:P
Blizzard should really learn from Activision. 7 Starcraft titles, in 7 years would make more money than 1 Starcraft game every 7 years. They should itirate on that, and if they can't deliver, they should sublet some other studio to make it for them.
:P
/sarcasm
Vig - I'm aware of how the current publishing model works. I also think it's very flawed.
Marketing Talent is different than marketing bottled water.
Marcus Pheonix is your boxer not Mark Rein.
He's a handsom chap, but a lil to soft and squishy to really get people excited about killing mutants.
If they spend any money promoting Gears of War 3 You know who's face is going to be used.
Do you really want to see Gabe Newell on the cover of HL3?
I'm sure he's a lovely guy but he's in the business of making games not underwear modeling.
Promote the franchise, make money. If you want to be famous you're probably in the wrong biz.
If you're not happy with the way the publisher is using its marketing team to market your product... yea I've said it enough...
Sorry but that is kinda taking things way literally for the sake of having argue-fodder :P We're talking about promoting the team and studios responsible for making Gears such a good game, not literally putting their faces on the box. Point missed?
Money diverted away from the franchise seems like money spent on studio ego. Will the money spent getting the studio name out there, actually bring in more sales or will it be wise to spend it on the franchise and let that PR boost you're company name. Now I agree that pubs probably smother smaller studios but they also let companies that earned a reputation, shine.
You're a Nascar driver. You're car is covered in stuff someone paid you to put there. Feel free to plaster your name all over your car when you don't need their money. Will that be good at boosting driver recognition, sure, how many drivers can actually do that? Very few.
Why the obssesion with franchises, game developers arent a chain of restaurants, where they dole out their name and a few resources to anyone whom wants to stump up the cash.
A game developer is a group of individuals with resources and tech that can be put to any task regardless what they did in the past(as long as their not a complete bunch of plebs).
Anyway, I agree with Vig to a point... I think so people will buy games too simply because they know a publisher/developer has made good games in the past. These are usually the people that pay no attention to the industry, but I'm sure it happens. They see Epics logo or Marcus' face, they are going to buy it (Not just Epic, any well developed company). I, for example, know I'm going to get a good game if Bethesda's name is on it.....unless it say's Rogue Warrior on the box, then I'm getting an OK at best game :P
as i said, talent will be recognized, so what...
IW got talent so they sell shitloads even without shouting out everywhere that they are the gods, same for blizzard... they let the games do the talking.. i dont se any problem in creating a brand out of a recognized franchise and take it further...
i mean blizzard took their known brand warcraft and expanded it to WOW and putting out expansions ever year.... which is basicly the same as COD does, only they dont charge you every month for playing (yet)..
starcraft 2 SP will be coming in episodes so, that pobably 1 SC title a year...
Hahaha
I see the developer as the boxer. They are the meat and potatoes of the industry, without the devs, there is no industry.
Sure they can use the game/characters etc for promotion, but one could make the analogy of the games/characters as the boxer's fighting style, the boxer's highlight reel of awesome KO's etc.
Nobody really cares about the boxer's private life, they care about what the boxer does in the ring. Same with devs, people don't care about the devs themselves, they care about what they DO. Same thing, ultimately they are both the essence of the product.
I'm sure Infinity Ward could do Cute Pony Poker if they where tasked with it but they'd hate it and most of their tech would be wasted. Let them do what they do best. Don't try and sell Cute Pony Poker by using the Infinity Ward name. Which is the BS that would happen if Pubs shifted to a Studio centric marketing approach.
Cut the pub out, use your own money, don't over inflate your studio and never barrow more than you can absolutely pay back. Don't bitch when you have to go crawling to the pub to get cash or to promote and distribute your game.
I used to buy any comic drawn by Todd McFarlane
I used to buy any comic written by Alan Moore
I used to buy every album released by Metallica
I used to watch every movie with Al Pacino in it.
Common theme was, talent is what sold me on their products.
I will buy every Blizzard game.
I will buy every Bioware game.
I will buy every Valve game.
I will buy every IW developed game (now up in the air).
I will buy every Relic developed RTS
I will buy every Castlevania game made by Konami Tokyo.
just the same as:
I will watch every James Cameron directed movie
I will read every book by Neil Gaiman and Chuck Palahniuk.
I will buy every NIN album.
I Do NOT watch movies because they were distributed by Paramount.
I do NOT buy songs because they were from Columbia Records.
I do NOT buy all books published by Penguin Publishing.
I do NOT watch shows because they are on NBC.
And I sure as hell don't buy games because they were published by EA or Activision.
I think it's about time they started marketing their talent rather than hide it.
Ironically I feel like that's what's happening here
No, that's not how it works... Did fans of Quake charge out to buy Quake 2 because they were so excited about Nameless Space Marine? Were people chomping at the bit to buy Doom 3 because it had been it had been so long since they last had a chance to play as Other Nameless Space Marine? Are people currently excited to see what Rage can do, so they can get a compelling experience with the character who will likely be Nameless Post-Apocalyptic Guy?
iD is what people know, and John Carmack in particular. The Quake and Doom franchises are widely recognized, but people absolutely know who made them. Rage is a totally new IP, built entirely from scratch, and we all know it'll sell a truckload of units because people want to see what iD does next.
iD aren't the only ones this applies to. If Blizzard announced an entirely new IP, people would be interested - it's Blizzard. If Valve announced an entirely new IP, people would be interested - it's Valve. It's the same way many people will see a Pixar movie, regardless of the characetrs or whatever. Sure, Woody and Buzz are cool, but you'll drop money to see talking fish or cute robots or whatever else Pixar wants to put on the screen - it's Pixar. No one here went to see 'Up' because they were just so compelled by seeing some animated grandpa in a house with balloons coming out the chimney; they went because it's Pixar. With the big name game studios, it's really no different.
Don't talk box art - it's the age of teh internets, no one buys a game because of the box art. I'll be fucked if I can even remember what the MW2 box art looks like, and it's in my 360 right now...
Thats it, and neither would their established audience accept it. I think Rockstar did a Table Tennis Game which is a bit different, but arent they like a publisher or something anyway?
If they wanted to do something entirely different they'd have to branch out with a new company. But that doesnt stop the developer creating new ips which play to their strengths, instead of rehashing the same name over and over again.
Some of these games I think its a bit silly calling them a continuation of the saga anyway as the gameplay and stories change so much. But everything has to be known now and from a familiar ip because it sells better that way.
In regards to Gabe Newell, he does have a presence in the gaming world. Without the vision that Gabe and his partner's brought to the company, you wouldn't have Gordon Freeman. You could just have some other generic spacemarine.
Also loosing the 2 people in IW, is quite a morale shocker. I wouldn't be surprised if people started to jump ship because of this. To also see Activison come in and impose their people as the new leaders of the company is going to turn a lot of people off. Since they have been for some time now, hating on Activion.
Either way, we don't know enough of the details to know whats going on. But this is probably going to start the downfall of the CoD franchise. I've been on a boycott for well over a year now, since I got layed off at Radical, and I'll continue to do so.
Interesting how it unfolded for Hollywood.
"The Society aimed to advance the interests of independent producers in an industry overwhelmingly controlled by the studio system.
SIMPP fought to end ostensibly anti-competitive practices by the seven major film studios MGM, Columbia Pictures, Paramount Pictures, Universal Studios, RKO, 20th Century Fox and Warner Bros. that controlled the production, distribution, and exhibition of films".
Charlie Chaplin, Orson Welles, Walt Disney, among many others fought for their rights, and won.
And that's why you know who they are, and what they did.
This likely also made movies much better.
It will be interesting to see just how far Bungie strays from Halo and see how many Bungie fans turn out to be Halo fans and do what you did to Metalica.
Some people who saw Avatar won't watch Titanic.
I didn't go see Speed Racer but I liked the Matrix, even liked the old cartoon.
I've probably seen 5% of the movies Steven Spielberg has been connected to. It doesn't mean I'm going to support the other 95% I have zero interest in.
The publisher, and I'm saying this again for the 5th time, are going to do whats good for the publisher. Which means trying to get their sink all over games they lent money to, or exert their parental control over the studio that's independent only in theory. Don't want their stink on games, don't work for studios that take their money don't buy their games. Take or fanatical purchasing habits and do something good with them.
Feel free to take your case up with the publishers and see how far you get. If its a really good idea, that's a win win for everyone they'll be all over it.
I think you're right, it will have a positive impact when more devs fund and manage their franchises themselves. But the ones that choose to use the publisher system or worse sell their studios to the publishers giving all that up, they have very little room to bitch.
Publishers deal in games, they don't deal in studio promotion, that's up to the studios to do, which naturally happens as good games get their names out there. Maybe if they where buying and selling studios they would market the studios, but they sell games first and foremost so that's where their effort goes.
some hardcore fans are actually asking for employee's signature.
that how much they love their art just like comic artist and celebrities.
If they all suck, then it's because IW didn't work on them. See my point?
People don't care who made what, as long as the product is good. The second that brand, company, person etc. starts doing things that aren't good... suddenly no one wants their product.
It's the same way with actors and actresses. You do two to three hit movies and you're on top of the world... do a few that flop after that and you're a no body, it doesn't matter if you have the talent to produce hits, your last few sucked.
Therfore it all boils down to...
Quality of the product > Everything else.
The second Pixar or Blizzard or someone else starts putting out crap on a stick their names will mean nothing except to a few hardcore fans.
Ultimately what it comes down to for me is... is the product good. Every movie I saw of Steven Spielberg was awesome until I saw AI. Which taught me that it doesn't matter how talented someone is they can still make utter shit.
that and rush hour 2 as movies.
Publishers don't know what they're doing and never have. They luck into a big blockbuster hit by a talented studio they own, get arrogant and try to take over control, drive it all into the ground, destroy themselves, and then a new publisher rises from their ashes.
Over and over again.
Perhaps a publisher that took second seat to their development talent would find themselves in a much more sustainable position. Sure, a talented studio is not going to have an 100% success rate, but I'd wager it'd be a hell of a lot higher than the massive failure rate that publishers have when they mess with things and they'd be a hell of a lot more secure with multiple big-name studios to fall back on instead of just their own publisher brand.
http://kotaku.com/5485295/
http://www.joystiq.com/2009/10/07/infinity-ward-activision-didnt-want-call-of-duty-to-go-modern/
.....
and
lets wait and see ,-_- .........
ha, if that happens then Bobby Kotick is fired. I don't know much about how the legal system would work in these matters but wouldn't it be a shame if Activision Locked this thing up in court over the course of years? Throwing millions at keeping a deadlock? They could do it for longer than West and Zampella could I'm sure.
Here's to West and Zampella's Victory and the end of doctor evil's Reign.
While I have no express desire to be famous, if I made really good games it would be nice to have my name on the box in the same way you would get MGS with "A Hideo Kojima Game" somewhere in small but noticeable letters.
How sweet is 2010 going if Kotick gets fired? It might yet be the best year in gaming for this decade.
Anything they want. "Insubordination" is such a loosely defined term, especially in a legal sense, it could be anything from willfully disrupting production to simply disagreeing strongly in a meeting and making your boss look bad. It's like getting a divorce for "irreconcilable differences."
Whats funny is they tried, it was called StarCraft Ghost. Went through 2 publishers I believe before Blizzard realized what Activision cant. Some times you cant sacrifice the quality of your games/studio/name for the sake of quick and dirty money.
Im sure if activision heard they were thinking of flying solo or taking the call of duty brand back then they would employ shed loads of lawyers to find loopholes to get rid of them before its too late.
At the moment though it just sounds like they want their royalties, not the license or anything else. I love an underdog story though
It doesnt really work like that. In an idea world it should, but it doesnt at all. The majority of people do follow that person like Tom Cruise they will see whatever he's in no matter how much he jumps up and down on some womans sofa, or whether he's expousing we are all descended from aliens.
The only thing that can influence that is other people, if they really start passing backwards and forwards with their friends and peers that what they have done or are doing is rubbish. When that happens they just focus their attentions on other persons.
And did you not go to see to AI because of Spielbergs reputation. Perhaps ignoring some of the critiques floating around. If it was another director perhaps you would not have seen it at all.
Its very easy for persons to float on a cloud, from the reputation of just one decent product even if it was accidental. People will go for the rest because they liked that one thing they did and their subsequent trash has vague shadows of that. Probably not in huge numbers, but enough to be sustainable.
I heard a RUMOUR that Activision told them to lay off some of their development staff and they refused. This is completely unsubstantiated as far as I know, however.
My brain tells me that would make no since but with this last week, who knows. Never have I seen greed to this level. It's certainly an eye opener.
One of the first things i thought upon hearing about all this and reading the news this morning is, this makes EA's CEO John Riccitiello look like a saint.
Stock price has gone up since the news. Not gonna happen.
The rumor is worse than that.
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=27482
He says it's rumored Activision made the order for layoffs knowing IW would refuse, thus generating the "insubbordination" grounds for dismissal.
Shitty situation to be in for anyone involved and it shows to what extent companies will go to get their way.
If you read the copy of the lawsuit on kotaku you will be quite surprised at some of the facts.
The rest I dont know about, but I guess we will have to wait and see how this pans out.
It seems these Publisher are really, really stupid, what is the developer? Its the chairs and tables and the servers and the coffee machine, and the name. Its not the people at all, there just background noise, WE WANTS THE NAME!.