AV
We ain't outta here in ten minutes, we won't need no rocket to fly through space
Because they are ran by chimps.
Brother if you don't want an actual conversation, save me the time.
Because they are ran by chimps.
Lol but Crash still belongs to Activision/ Microsoft
You’re right, it was a sound decision by Microsoft.Halo was a multi-billion-dollar franchise with Halo 3 having up to that point in 2007 broken several sales records in the days and weeks after release...and yet Bungie wanted to move on from the IP. That is definitely not a trivial "shits and giggles" matter and it put both parties at odds. Microsoft valued the Halo IP and Bungie valued their creative decision making which made the agreement to separate easy when all was said and done. Bungie has yet to create any game that lives up to the Halo 1-REACH tsunami that took over the video game world between 2001 and 2011.
You are the one trying to say that MS made a good call in letting Bungie go independent (even though the long term success of Destiny and absolute decline of Halo clearly proves otherwise) and now Toys For Bob.Brother if you don't want an actual conversation, save me the time.
Bungie owned the Halo IP. They were not going to sell the IP to Microsoft unless it included making Bungie independent. Doesn't make sense to keep a studio in-house who has lost passion for the IP.You’re right, it was a sound decision by Microsoft.
They couldn’t have retained Bungie and allowed them creative freedoms whilst setting up 343 to manage Halo.
They had to let them go. What can you do I suppose.
The answer is: allow your creatives creative freedom. It’s not hard but it was lost on Microsoft.Bungie owned the Halo IP. They were not going to sell the IP to Microsoft unless it included making Bungie independent. Doesn't make sense to keep a studio in-house who has lost passion for the IP.
You are the one trying to say that MS made a good call in letting Bungie go independent (even though the long term success of Destiny and absolute decline of Halo clearly proves otherwise) and now Toys For Bob.
Microsoft are always right, I get it
If Destiny was as successful as you seem to believe, there would be no way in hell Activision would let them leave with the IP. And let's not pretend like Destiny 1 or 2 has the same critical acclaim that the original Halo trilogy had.You are the one trying to say that MS made a good call in letting Bungie go independent (even though the long term success of Destiny and absolute decline of Halo clearly proves otherwise) and now Toys For Bob.
Microsoft are always right, I get it
Destiny wouldn't have worked as an exclusive game on any one platform. It's financial success in the early years was due to it being a good GAAS game on ALL platforms. Even now that isn't enough to keep them afloat without a financial backer like Activision or Sony.The answer is: allow your creatives creative freedom. It’s not hard but it was lost on Microsoft.
Microsoft should have just said ‘fine, make Destiny’.
With hindsight on our side does anyone actually think otherwise?
I half expect to see a lot of "Sony acquire this studio!!1" tweets and posts on forums, but you know what?
I think they ought to be acquired by Nintendo. Toys for Bob proved itself to be capable to producing (and exceeding) Nintendo visual quality with Crash 4 & Spyro Trilogy. With Nintendo's name, money, backing & IP to work with they could really shine.
Yeah, potentially - the wording is interesting. New "stories, characters and gameplay experiences" rather than "worlds" or, explicitly, IPs/franchises. Can see them wanting to do some of their own stuff, but as far as I'm concerned Spyro 4 is a lock. Exploring a partnership with MS and they close the statement with "keep your horns on". I would bet they were already working on Spyro 4 before they got relegated to a COD studio and they desperately want to finish it up.
Immensely risky too when there really are only a few massive IPs
Any falloff of brand value significantly erodes their value
yup, absolutely mind-blowingMS own Banjo-Kazooie, Spyro, Crash and Conker. The 4 biggest 3D platform mascots in gaming outside of Nintendo IP.
And they’ve let Toys For Bob go.
Honestly, Microsoft are astoundingly bad at gaming. You can’t imagine worse decisions, but they continue to outdo themselves.
Good for Toys For Bob to be honest. Hopefully they continue to make great games.
There’s plenty of info out there re its success. Just a cursory Google search tells me the first game made more than $500m in its first week.If Destiny was as successful as you seem to believe, there would be no way in hell Activision would let them leave with the IP.
I think companies measure success in revenue not critical success.And let's not pretend like Destiny 1 or 2 has the same critical acclaim that the original Halo trilogy had.
When was that pattern established?
They haven't made a Crash or Spyro game in a while now. Last one was Crash 4 in 2020. More likely they're not keen on working as a COD support studio and want to be in control of their own fate after the recent round of layoffs.
You explicitly mentioned "long term success" in our conversation about Destiny. A cursory Google search tells me that last year was as especially awful time at Bungie...There’s plenty of info out there re its success. Just a cursory Google search tells me the first game made more than $500m in its first week.
Feel free to live in denial.
I think companies measure success in revenue not critical success.
Well no one can say that microsoft could gain too much power in the cloud market then..so is a good thing?The specific obligation of COD is for consoles. The obligation for the different cloud services extends to all games produced by ABK Studios.
That is, MS is only obligated to release COD on PS and Nintendo consoles for 10 years. It is not obligatory for the rest of the ABK games.
But what cloud gaming? MS is obliged to launch all ABK games on the different services competing with Xcloud (GForceNow, Bosteroid, etc...). The exploitation rights (except for the US) are held by Ubisoft for the next 15 years.
Long term success - presents 1 year as evidence.You explicitly mentioned "long term success" in our conversation about Destiny. A cursory Google search tells me that last year was as especially awful time at Bungie...
Mass layoffs at Bungie Studios after Destiny 2 reportedly fails to meet revenue projections
Stop throwing out words like "denial" when you are living here buddy...
You're the one who gave me week one sales of Destiny 1 to prove your point about "long-term success" LMAO. Keep tryingLong term success - presents 1 year as evidence.
The game has sold millions of expansions regularly, over the vast majority of the franchises life span.
Penny's Big Breakaway has proven that Neogaf has zero interest in cute platformers.
Good Luck to them.
You're the one who gave me week one sales of Destiny 1 to prove your point about "long-term success" LMAO. Keep trying
Halo has been around for over 20 years now. Let's see where Destiny is 10 years from now.Destiny is at it's lowest point and it's still miles ahead of halo lmao
Halo has been around for over 20 years now. Let's see where Destiny is 10 years from now.
Waitttt a second…going independent but partnering with Microsoft? Something doesn’t add up here lol
I know, I’m just playing any way. Truthfully I’m glad they don’t have to deal with Acti now, and believe they deserve much better because they are a great studio. Happy to see them staying above water!Timed exclusivity or game pass deals on licences they own are two options.
No, I said there’s plenty of info out there and that a quick cursory Google search told me the first weeks sales figures. I know reading is hard though.You're the one who gave me week one sales of Destiny 1 to prove your point about "long-term success" LMAO. Keep trying
A multi-platform GAAS game franchise generates more revenue than a FPS franchise that was traditionally only available on one console. News at 11.Destiny is more successful than any game that Microsoft have launched themselves since Bungie’s Halo. Only an idiot would argue otherwise.
Destiny is already pretty much dead, and it's going to take Bungie down with it.Probably still ahead of halo
Destiny is already pretty much dead, and it's going to take Bungie down with it.
In your case unfortunately, it's plain for the world to see.We all have a bit of retard in us
In your case unfortunately, it's plain for the world to see.
I don't think it is particularly clever to bring up the original Halo trilogy, which concluded in 2007, to make point about the current state of the Halo franchise in 2024.If Destiny was as successful as you seem to believe, there would be no way in hell Activision would let them leave with the IP. And let's not pretend like Destiny 1 or 2 has the same critical acclaim that the original Halo trilogy had.
You're right, they are arguing that Destiny is much bigger than Halo ever was.I don't think it is particularly clever to bring up the original Halo trilogy, which concluded in 2007, to make point about the current state of the Halo franchise in 2024.
Maybe only to show how insignificant it has become, but neither Banjo64 or anybody else in this thread argued that Destiny was ever as big as peak Halo.
You're right, they are arguing that Destiny is much bigger than Halo ever was.
So does this mean Toys for Bob is going to be backed by Microsoft to make new Crash Spyro Conker etc games for Playstation and Switch now?
I'm kind of happy they, and many rumored studios are tryna break off and be a single entity again.
I worry how much damage was done but if we have all these consolidated studios going independent again and making stuff they are passionate about then gaming might just get the shot in the arm it desperately needs.
Obviously its waaaay easier said than done. But imagine more studios being able to do their own things again and budgeted as such. Toys for Bob, vicarious visions, does neversoft still exist?
That's a gaming future I'm keen on
I mean we kind of have a bit of that going on already, if you think about what embracer own.Very much likely, yes. Though I doubt Conker's getting touched by TFB.
I dunno about that. It might establish a pattern where these big companies acquire studios & pubs to get the IP and tech patents they own, then release the talent, who don't have any of those IP with them and have to make new ones. They make new ones that become mega-popular, the same companies that bought them before buy them again, absorb the IP & patent rights, then shed the talent to go independent again. Rinse and repeat.
That sounds like it would become abusive in some way and questionable in terms of it being a fair market practice or not.
Do you even have an argument? It just seems to be shifting all over the place. I thought you were originally saying Destiny was not a success, now you are saying it is. Cool I guess, thanks for agreeing with me.A multi-platform GAAS game franchise generates more revenue than a FPS franchise that was traditionally only available on one console. News at 11.
You seem to equate revenue with success. I hope you understand that bigger revenue does not necessarily correlate to bigger profits.Do you even have an argument? It just seems to be shifting all over the place. I thought you were originally saying Destiny was not a success, now you are saying it is. Cool I guess, thanks for agreeing with me.
Thanks for the lesson. At least we’re moving beyond engagement on GAF.You seem to equate revenue with success. I hope you understand that bigger revenue does not necessarily correlate to bigger profits.
You seem to equate revenue with success. I hope you understand that bigger revenue does not necessarily correlate to bigger profits.
Waitttt a second…going independent but partnering with Microsoft? Something doesn’t add up here lol
So does this mean Toys for Bob is going to be backed by Microsoft to make new Crash Spyro Conker etc games for Playstation and Switch now?
You seem to equate revenue with success. I hope you understand that bigger revenue does not necessarily correlate to bigger profits.
Cultural impact and legacy.Why don't you explain how you're defining "success"? That would be helpful for all parties involved.
Cultural impact and legacy.
Yes you can. And I just did.You can't define "success" with something that is immeasurable. What a dumbass comment.