• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

News Square Enix claims Crystal Dynamics was the wrong fit for ‘disappointing’ Marvel’s Avengers

GymWolf

Member
Jun 11, 2019
21,927
33,244
670
Square enix has incredible experience with jrpg and their latest single player FF games are high tier trash so what's their point exactly?!
 
Last edited:
Aug 5, 2009
2,265
1,875
1,150
UK
I thought the game was good. I don't understand the hate directed to Crystal or the game myself. Sure, It wasn't 10 out of 10 stuff, but still rather decent with some nice moments
. I would still rather had seen Crystal have made a sequel to Rise of the TombRaider myself
 

FunkMiller

Member
Aug 14, 2014
9,183
28,275
990
Animated GIF
 

reksveks

Member
Jun 4, 2020
5,889
5,600
475
I might be a bit biased cause I like SE from my childhood but my take away is that it's not really SE throwing CD under the bus but admitting that SE fucked up by making CD make A GaaS product and the solution is to make another studio do it.
 

kuncol02

Member
Apr 4, 2020
1,877
2,260
465
I might be a bit biased cause I like SE from my childhood but my take away is that it's not really SE throwing CD under the bus but admitting that SE fucked up by making CD make A GaaS product and the solution is to make another studio do it.
There is no studio that would make good Avengers GAAS game. Not if player are expected to play as existing avengers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zannegan

GrayFoxPL

Member
Mar 26, 2007
21,056
3,106
1,570
Poland
Yeah Square-Enix can suck a dick. "Yes, it's all developers fault. We at all didn't force "service model" at them."

Suck and choke SE.

 
  • Like
Reactions: kuncol02

Wildebeest

Member
Sep 5, 2021
390
336
270
A lot of cheerleading for pure single player story mode here. But it is partly trends like Crystal Dynamics using a formula of QTE cutscenes and using very disposable gameplay which drive people to more persistent pure gameplay experiences like games as a service. It is more satisfying to collect loot you can use over time than to collect "achievements". Both are gamified reward loops but loot in a persistent game has the advantage that you can actually use it to have some fun while the "achievement" is purely extrinsic and unfun. There is no iron law saying that games as a service cannot drop very memorable and affecting story developments along the way.

Really the advantage of the single player experience is that they can be crafted to not waste your time so much. But what is time-wasting or content is subjective. The appeal of the single player game is not that you "play them how you want" but that you "pay your money and live with our choices".
 

Boss Mog

Member
Dec 12, 2013
9,334
15,110
1,140
More like Square Enix and their microtransaction policies were a bad fit for what should've been a story driven single player game akin to Spider-man and GotG.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GrayFoxPL

oldergamer

Member
Aug 20, 2004
4,337
4,595
1,605
This is really a strange statement for a publisher to make on one of their own studios. Eidos Montreal also made guardians of the galaxy. A game that looks to be a hit, but it really makes no sense to call out crystal dynamics in this manner.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Perrott

Nico_D

Member
Aug 9, 2013
1,589
834
665
Finland
Great that they are acknowledging the mistake but wouldn't hurt for them to take some responsibility. Why did they publish turd? They must have known it's not up to par or did it just occur to them?
 

Azurro

Member
Jun 11, 2018
2,642
4,828
485
Who was the genius that thought that focusing on the unknown teenage muslim girl superhero with lame powers was a great idea? That's where they lost me, I want a single player section that focuses on Captain America, Iron Man, Thor or Hulk, not on whatever that was.
 
Nov 4, 2017
232
219
360
youtube.com
Shouldn't throwing one of your own studios under the bus like this be seen as a PR disaster move and a red flag?

It's even especially scathing consider Square Enix wouldn't even throw Yuji Naka under the bus for Balan Wonderworld and that was full-blown kusoge territory. And that's not even the first crappy bomb that SE was involved in! Heck, it arguably was not even as bad as Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within! What the heck did Crystal Dynamics do to them in private to warrant such a public roasting?
 
  • Fire
Reactions: b6a6es

b6a6es

Member
Dec 28, 2020
181
355
275
Oh what’s next ?!, Platinum was the Wrong Dev for Babylon Fall ? 60$ GaaS sucks dick no matter who’s making it, as it LITERALLY only works with competitive PvP multiplayer games, otherwise The Avengers (and soon Babylon Fall) should’ve been F2P like Genshin
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: reksveks

Lanrutcon

Member
Feb 19, 2014
11,455
6,669
770
Irrelevant
You make a good game first, then you add the service element.
You don't make a service and sell it as a game.

Also: turning Mister Fantastic into a teenage girl was a weird move.
 

ZoukGalaxy

Member
Oct 3, 2017
681
1,200
435
Yeah, and also using UGLY ASS AVENGERS MODELS was bad fit after 10+ years of MCU awesomeness.
 
Last edited:

Zekra Dezivad

Member
Aug 22, 2011
1,669
739
880
Well, also making an Avengers game without considering what characters people would like to play that was a bad idea.
The game just asked for funny dialogues and spectacular combat with characters also seen in the movies to ride the wave of the cinematic universe. It's so easy that shows fucked up the whole premise is.
 

Nikana

Go Go Neo Rangers!
Jan 26, 2016
11,924
16,983
915
God damn. Savage.

Its not like ENix has had unrealistic expectations of IP they have given out before or anything.
 

reksveks

Member
Jun 4, 2020
5,889
5,600
475
Oh what’s next ?!, Platinum was the Wrong Dev for Babylon Fall ? 60$ GaaS sucks dick no matter who’s making it, as it LITERALLY only works with competitive PvP multiplayer games, otherwise The Avengers (and soon Babylon Fall) should’ve been F2P like Genshin
Yeah but I wonder what the expectations on Babylon Fall really are.

I do agree that game is not going to be good though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: b6a6es

JoeBudden

Member
Apr 28, 2021
560
886
300
I think the question is whether the game is bad because they created a game with a business model in mind.

Like I said man, let's just look at the Maestro arc for example and how CD treated such a powerful supervillian and his lore. It was embarrassing and insulting to the Marvel lore and fans. This is a guy who kills all the Avengers in the comics in his own timeline, and they relegated him to a boss fight with hardly any build up story wise.

If you go back to the reviews, there were tons of complaints on character design looking generic, the overall story being bad, and more. I'm talking about things outside the repetitive gameplay loop that comes with GAAS games. All these things are elements of the game that would've remained constant if the game was a GAAS game or not. And they all demonstrate a lack of talent and experience by CD.

Not only was this a bad GAAS game, but it was also a bad Marvel game.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Topher

VN1X

Member
Apr 21, 2016
2,787
4,737
820
Surejan.gif

If this thing sold gangbusters without MTX they would've still pressured Crystal Dynamics to put some sort of season pass in there with a ton of unlocks, cosmetics, DLC that can only be purchased, etc etc. I don't think Crystal Dynamics were the issue here lol.
 

JimmyRustler

Member
Jun 17, 2006
10,784
3,206
1,780
Well, they should finally assign CD to what they are supposed to do... A new Legacy of Kain game.
 

JoeBudden

Member
Apr 28, 2021
560
886
300
Surejan.gif

If this thing sold gangbusters without MTX they would've still pressured Crystal Dynamics to put some sort of season pass in there with a ton of unlocks, cosmetics, DLC that can only be purchased, etc etc. I don't think Crystal Dynamics were the issue here lol.

And there are tons of successful GAAS games or just games with MTX in general. Look at Apex Legends.

Being given the Avengers IP should've been a slam dunk for them, but CD gave us a generic story with generic characters, and they didn't respect the Marvel lore or fans at all. They're a mid tier studio that shouldn't have been given the IP.
 
Sep 19, 2021
486
620
280
These companies can't seem to get it through their thick skulls that the GAAS market is already far too bloated, and already take up too much of the player's time. But yeah, definitely keep making more of them, and then wonder why no one jumps in to YOUR particular game.
 

Bragr

Member
Jun 24, 2020
2,136
4,688
510
Which is why is why 5 million is good for an indie game.

A big budget $60 game selling 5 million copies in west is usually either okay or disappointing. Far from bad. Far from a big success. Other publishers have been disappointed with far more. $60 a game is rougly $200M in revenue to the publisher (subtract royalties, and retailer/digital cut), not every game sold was actaully sold at full price because we're talking over multiple years so it's signficantl less. Add on maybe 5-60M for marketing. Estimated budget is around $100 million. We're looking at tens of million in profit but that's over the whole dev cycle of what 4-5 years, and 1-2 or whater years it took to hit 5 milions which is shit reward for the risk. They could have took sigfnicantly less risk and got comparable or more returns elsewhere with the money they put in.
This has nothing to do with reality haha. Hades is considered a smashing indie success when it crossed over a million last year, and that is a massive indie game. Very few indie games get anywhere near 1 million, let alone 5. Most indie games are over the moon if they can reach over 300k.

Ghost of Tsushima is considered a big sales success, pushing over 6 million. Remedy had its strongest year financial year ever with Control selling over 2 million units. Very few games are even close to a 100 million budget, and most of the big games out there aren't selling what you think they are.
 

tkscz

Member
Oct 17, 2011
9,831
2,162
1,075
Thats how games are failing nowadays.

They don't look at new ideas, new ways to catch their consumer interest or being inovative.

They only look at the money. They just look where the money is, goes with the flow and nothing more.
Bandwagoning has always been a big issue in gaming and usually always has the same results. About three to five games become successful, the other 100 games to jump on that bandwagon usually just fail.
 

jakinov

Member
Nov 19, 2008
1,181
1,307
1,285
This has nothing to do with reality haha. Hades is considered a smashing indie success when it crossed over a million last year, and that is a massive indie game. Very few indie games get anywhere near 1 million, let alone 5. Most indie games are over the moon if they can reach over 300k.

Ghost of Tsushima is considered a big sales success, pushing over 6 million. Remedy had its strongest year financial year ever with Control selling over 2 million units. Very few games are even close to a 100 million budget, and most of the big games out there aren't selling what you think they are.
There's no contention on indie side so I don't know why you keep bringing it up. The 5 million is the number you brought up, my point has always been for a high budget game it's not great.

Ghosts of Tshumia sold 1.5 million more copies than 5 million. Sony pays royalties to themselves and the retailer/digital cut goes back to themselves. The game is developed by a team half the size and in turn the budget $60 million (versus $100 million). So better margins, cheaper development costs, 20% more sales in a shorter period of time (GoT as potential to keep selling more copies whereas Tomb Raider has plateaud). We're looking signficantly more profit than Tomb Raider brought even if they sold the same number copies.

I watched multiple Remedy investor presentations and they brag about how with how they designed their engine they can produce games really fast and cheap [unlike other companies]. Control budget was $30 million which is uncommon and it's sometihng they bragged about. They've said they are happy with the sales but not what they were hoping for or a major success either way. And their happiness is probably on partly because their mentality is that they can continue to get sustained income via selling the game over and over via digital promotions because that's their selling point to investors is that they old games are always selling at least something because of promotions.

In regards to games with 100 million budget, many big games are and if they aren't they are closer to that than they are of Control's $30 million. There's a general consensous that costs are on the rise too. Again 5M copies for a big-budget western game is not that great. The only exception to that is if the game gets supplementary income elsewhere (e.g. ads, DLC, mtx)
 
Dec 2, 2018
944
2,017
465
Thats how games are failing nowadays.

They don't look at new ideas, new ways to catch their consumer interest or being inovative.

They only look at the money. They just look where the money is, goes with the flow and nothing more.
This isn't specific to gaming, it's happening to the entire economy. Marx calls it "the tendency of the rate of profit to fall" - as capitalism develops it becomes harder and harder to make a profit, so companies become more and more obsessed with squeezing out every last bit of profit that they can by cutting costs and raising revenue. The result undermines the long-term profitability of the system (since consumers are less likely to spend money on low-quality products), which leads to recurring economic crises (see: the modern world).
 

Bragr

Member
Jun 24, 2020
2,136
4,688
510
There's no contention on indie side so I don't know why you keep bringing it up. The 5 million is the number you brought up, my point has always been for a high budget game it's not great.

Ghosts of Tshumia sold 1.5 million more copies than 5 million. Sony pays royalties to themselves and the retailer/digital cut goes back to themselves. The game is developed by a team half the size and in turn the budget $60 million (versus $100 million). So better margins, cheaper development costs, 20% more sales in a shorter period of time (GoT as potential to keep selling more copies whereas Tomb Raider has plateaud). We're looking signficantly more profit than Tomb Raider brought even if they sold the same number copies.

I watched multiple Remedy investor presentations and they brag about how with how they designed their engine they can produce games really fast and cheap [unlike other companies]. Control budget was $30 million which is uncommon and it's sometihng they bragged about. They've said they are happy with the sales but not what they were hoping for or a major success either way. And their happiness is probably on partly because their mentality is that they can continue to get sustained income via selling the game over and over via digital promotions because that's their selling point to investors is that they old games are always selling at least something because of promotions.

In regards to games with 100 million budget, many big games are and if they aren't they are closer to that than they are of Control's $30 million. There's a general consensous that costs are on the rise too. Again 5M copies for a big-budget western game is not that great. The only exception to that is if the game gets supplementary income elsewhere (e.g. ads, DLC, mtx)
We have no idea what they spent on Tsushima and what they got back, these sort of hobby speculations on expenses and profits are pointless. Truth is, it's a big triple-A game that was profitable when it crossed 5 million and they are likely extremely happy to get there.

You are trying to rationalize your comment saying that games like Control used a smaller budget, but what you are really talking about here is massive games with absurd budgets. Which is the small majority of triple-A titles. There was some guy who said that Doom Eternal has made hundreds of millions in profits, a game that is likely at 5-7 million. That is what most triple-A games are aiming at, look at the top 30 games of last year, very few of those titles have 100 million budgets. Most developers aim for around 1-3 million to recoup costs. The monster ones need 4-5. A game that hits 5 million is very likely to get greenlit to become a franchise and is making money back.
 

wipeout364

Member
Jun 13, 2004
2,577
1,689
1,600
Pretty harsh but probably an accurate assessment. I love crystal dynamics and think they are one of the best developers out there but this was pretty far out of their comfort zone. I hope they get a chance to redeem themselves, there were some really solid aspects to Avengers but I think it was just too much for the studio and it got out of hand. It needed a bigger studio and more time or more focused design to avoid content creep. I do agree that a ton of criticism would have been avoided if they had just launched as a F2P model at the start and I suspect hey might be financially much better off long term with the game. People are much more receptive to predatory pricing with the F2P model than with having just paid full price for a game.
 

captainnapalm

Member
Oct 26, 2011
4,039
688
910
As bad an idea as Avengers was as a live service game, it probably could have worked if the loot system wasn't so god awful. You can't even see the loot on your character, and the boosts they give you barely translate into anything you can get excited about or even sometimes fully understand. When you see a loot system that crappy, and about six currencies to support it... if its Crystal Dynamics who are responsible for all that, then they are absolutely to blame. I saw some reviewer call it literally the worst loot system ever in a game like this, and he's probably not far off.

The worst thing of all is this has had a knock-on effect, hurting the reception of Guardians of the Galaxy, which actually is a good game, so they've just screwed themselves twice over with their greed.
 
Last edited:

jakinov

Member
Nov 19, 2008
1,181
1,307
1,285
We have no idea what they spent on Tsushima and what they got back, these sort of hobby speculations on expenses and profits are pointless. Truth is, it's a big triple-A game that was profitable when it crossed 5 million and they are likely extremely happy to get there.

You are trying to rationalize your comment saying that games like Control used a smaller budget, but what you are really talking about here is massive games with absurd budgets. Which is the small majority of triple-A titles. There was some guy who said that Doom Eternal has made hundreds of millions in profits, a game that is likely at 5-7 million. That is what most triple-A games are aiming at, look at the top 30 games of last year, very few of those titles have 100 million budgets. Most developers aim for around 1-3 million to recoup costs. The monster ones need 4-5. A game that hits 5 million is very likely to get greenlit to become a franchise and is making money back.
Shawn Layden said their games costed as much as 100M$. Ghots of Tshumia from linkedin posts is suppsoedly aroudn $60 million from someone boasting about budgeting for the game. Even if it was more. the margins are still significantly better and 6.5 Million doesn't seem much more than 5 million but once you past the break-even point everything is like gravy. Their first 3,4, or sometimes even 5 million could even not be profitable.



30 million dollar is a super small budget and again Remedy brags about it in their investor presentations. Here's a quote from them directly "Control was developed in three years with a budget of less than €30 million. We don’t quite require the same huge lifetime numbers as many other games with bigger development budgets. Therefore, even though Control didn’t have chart-topping sales right from the get go, we are in a good position with steady sales. We always take the long view here".

In regards to Doom, U looked it up and the numbers floating around is revenue.

Non western games and smaller budget games want 1-3 million. Japanese studios overwork their employeees more and pay developers as much as janitors so they get tiny budgets and are very happy with few million in sales.

$50-100M+ budgets aren't monster budgets, they are just big budgets. You use "AAA" to describe all these smaller budget games but "AAA" is supposed to refer to how the size of the budget. There's a reason why Square Enix was disappointed with 5 million copies sold and that's because it probasbly didn't make them very much money for the risk they had to take.
 

Wildebeest

Member
Sep 5, 2021
390
336
270
Game publishers just need to find a way to get the government to bail them out whenever they fail. Then they can raise budgets as high as they want and not have to worry about that weird archaic graph. Do you think we are still living in a capitalist society or something?
 

lefty1117

Member
Mar 20, 2017
1,300
986
415
The game was fun. Campaign was interesting, graphics very good, the combat at higher difficulty was pretty solid. No problems with their choices around the core gameplay including using a new character to propel the campaign. Their mistakes were in game design - a crappy multiplayer flow with regionalized, platform specific matchmaking meant it very quickly became difficult to find players after the initial launch rush settled down. No crossplay. The way progression was structured meant that they didn't include a way to replay the campaign once you finished and moved into multiplayer. Imagine that, you couldn't actually replay the campaign (arguably the most enjoyable part of the game). But you could play the same multiplayer missions over and over and over. New content was very slow to come out which meant the game quickly began to feel repetitive and grindy after the campaign was done. And worst of all, to me, is the exclusivity deal with Sony for Spiderman ... locking a major fan favorite character behind one platform on a multi-platform game, just a real shitty move, a middle finger to customers in my opinion. The game had some potential but went off the rails with poor choices.
 

Solarstrike

Member
Jun 12, 2018
980
1,447
555
45
United States
What an asshole. Fire that guy. Game was good for what it was; a super hero beat-em up game. Wtf did he expect? Ben Hur style production values? A emotionally riveting and Oscar worthy story? They're frickin' comic book cartoons. Also, Crystal Dynamics was making great games before he was a scratch on his grand daddies left sack in the back of his Pinto with Suzy Flounderfingers
 
Last edited:

Shadowstar39

Member
Apr 25, 2018
925
1,142
455
In a few years will be gaas, online games, vr and metaverse :(
The sad thing is, this is probably right as JoeQ public, and kids love Gaas and pay to win. Simpletons think oh game is free.... They don't think about he implications of that. Its what has destroyed good games being on phones.
Kids have already accepted it. Its only old heads that remember the good ol days and hard core sp gamers who are hold outs. Eventually we will be too old, or small in number and the suits won't cater to us anymore. Enter end of gaming as we once new it.
 

Shadowstar39

Member
Apr 25, 2018
925
1,142
455
Not true but ok i guess?
Boomer GIF by MOODMAN
Not an insult... I'm gen X but would rather be called a boomer than a snowflake/sjw or whatever gen z or millenials called now. Single player, couch co-op and lan play ftw... Quake 3/UT2000 over fortnite any day. GaaS is shit.
 

scalman

Member
Feb 6, 2019
3,094
2,227
415
another fake news fake info about someone said or not said something ... and then all discuss it tons... r u kidding here ?
 

Mr Hyde

Member
Jun 1, 2018
4,703
9,765
645
Square Enix is terrible with their Western publishing division. As soon as their games underperform they throw the studio under the bus. Not to mention how they try to monetize their franchises with mtx bullshit and other scummy practices.