If a company comes to you and say look make us this game as a exclusive and we'll pay off everything and you get a percentage of the profits. Which CEO is gonna turn that down? Every company wants minimum costs and maximum profits.
-
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.
Xbox E3 Conference 6/11 2pm PST
- Thread starter jbug617
- Start date
- Status
If a company comes to you and say look make us this game as a exclusive and we'll pay off everything and you get a percentage of the profits. Which CEO is gonna turn that down? Every company wants minimum costs and maximum profits.
Primethius
Banned
Yes but if those profits are less than a full multiplat game than the question is a bit more muddled. Which is likely what the case would be with a Ubi Splinter Cell game.
Salty Hippo
Member
Paying north of 40-50m for a new Splinter Cell is a complete waste of money for MS. It doesn't move hardware units and it's an IP they don't own. These types of deals make zero sense.
But again we'll go full circle if Microsoft had around 8 studios that could handle multiple projects each we wouldn't have to question if MS would try and pay for development of a third party franchise.
Doesnt the data suggest being multiplatform hadn't helped the splinter cell franchise much?
It's always a muddy question, and there are always a ton of factors to consider, but the benefit of first party marketing and planning cant be understated. Look at performance of titan fall 1 v titan fall 2, for example.
A game needed to fill the slate ...
CassidyIzABeast
Member
For 50M you might as well revive the old Black Tusk project.
tiredheadcrab
Member
A week from today I'll be playing games on the Scorpio.
Well maybe a dev kit scorpio. Still thats exciting.
LukasTaves
Member
I think they are headed towards that. Not sure if for not insiders are the same, but the file explorer app for insiders now shows some folders for pictures, documents, downloads like kinda you have on a phone.
And later out of the blue a folder called AppMods appeared. No announcement ever since, but perhaps they are coming with a way to mod uwp apps (and games)
Pretty much. Might as well finish scalebound for that kind of money
Salty Hippo
Member
They're better off funding a new IP that they own like Shangheist or ressurrecting one they already have like Perfect Dark. They could even contract Ubi develop it, but it has to be theirs. Paying dozens of millions for someone else's property is just stupid, unless it's something huge that actually makes a difference and pays off. But the big problem is that even paying 50m+ for an IP they own but isn't a GaaS is most likely being treated as crazy business inside MS right now. They don't want more Quantum Breaks.
MosquitoSmasher
Member
Yeah it's a bit odd that they won't be having at least a teaser of it. I mean they really take that shit seriously about not announcing games too early. Even for their freaking own flagship titles, lol.
It's probably going to be E3 next year for this one then.
Chobel
Member
lol at Splinter Cell being exclusive.
There's a lot of factors that made Titanfall 2 underperform: Release date, negative beta reception... I doubt MS marketing would have saved it.
There's a lot of factors that made Titanfall 2 underperform: Release date, negative beta reception... I doubt MS marketing would have saved it.
Yes. There's a quote out there from Bonnie Ross about that.
If MS was a stakeholder in titan fall 2, I doubt it launches between bf1 and COD.
I dont think the beta wouldn't have suppressed sales of the game would have launched away from other big hitters. A March release would have given them plenty of time to get that taste out of purples mouths.
Yup! And they should. I think if h4 had a beta they would have known that no one would like this changes.
MCC wouldnt have been a massive black eye.
H5 had a beta, then afterwards 343 and fundamentally changed the aiming system in ways that have thrown people off.
So yes they need to always have betas, and to heed the feedback. There are also other things 343 could test in a beta- h5s Netcode is still problematic, it's MM system leaves much to be desired. And they'll likely be making tweaks to some gametypes and weapons- these tweaks should be tested by the players.
CassidyIzABeast
Member
Halo:*insert subtitle*(because they're not announcing "Halo 6") beta with crackdown 3 confirmed.
Jup. But i am scared also with this Ubisoft atm (not that its a bad thing) just scared they push the online to much instead of the SP.
Jaguar Victory
Member
When does the next Division game hit? I want to close car doors on Scorpio.
CassidyIzABeast
Member
2019 at the earliest I would imagine.
arhra
Member
That wasn't Forza 6,it was ForzaTech, showing the current state of their engine without having to actually announce a specific product.
Of course, you could make a fairly reasonable assumption that that demo would be reasonably representative of what we'd see in FM7 (at that stage of development at any rate), but ForzaTech is used for more than just Forza Motorsport - they share engine tech with Playground for Horizon, and would undoubtedly do the same with a third studio if they have decided to go for a three year cycle with another spinoff being introduced to the mix.
I'd still bet on FM7, though.
SenseiAsad
Member
Yep, but technically speaking it doesn't stop them from putting out a "beta" 2 weeks before the game comes out to fulfill that promise.
darkinstinct
...lacks reading comprehension.
More like 2023. The developer is working now on the next Avatar game which will release in 2019 or 2020.
Next gen car door tech. Serious business. Not sure Scorpio can handle those kinds of things.
Jaguar Victory
Member
We're going to need a bigger Scorpio.
CassidyIzABeast
Member
There's no way in hell they're putting all their eggs in the Avatar basket considering how long it takes Cameron to finish a project. They should be big enough to have 2 games in development.
Yeah but I doubt this will happen. Can't hit 343 with a lack of transparency they are pretty open with the game and constantly had pro players during the process to help them out. Now the aiming is still fustrating and I get they wanted to tone down auto aim but a bit to far imo. Doesn't have to super stick like H2 but a little bit more than what we got would be nice
Chobel
Member
Except that E3 is the publisher, MS has no say to when or how it launches.
And even if MS had any say in it, they would have released in the holiday anyway. I mean this the company that doesn't care about "pre-season".
NOt sure about that. I don't think they would want to have it next to battlefield 1 and gears 4.
IF MS was funding it they definitely would have had a say in it. Come on, they aren't gonna put all those millions in to have zero say on release date
And if it would have released in the holiday, but MS tends to avoid the massive hitters these days as we could see with both Halo and Gears coming out "well" before CoD etc.
Also they had Gears coming out that window aswell, I don't think they would have put Titanfall 2 up against it. MS isn't the best when picking release dates but they won't sabotage their own games with another with release windows
Anyways Chobel, back to your original post, if it got delayed to next year out of the BF1 and COD window, do you think it would have THAT much done better to make it a success? or just as bad with the same marketing it received?
Chobel
Member
Well they had RoTTR release the same day as Fallout 4.
EDIT: I almost forgot about Sunset Overdrive, they had that one also very close to the big hitters.
And they're probably having most of the games (SD2- Forza 7- Crackdown 3) coming out in October-November, on top of marketing deal of AC: Origins and Shadow of Mordor.
It would have done much better, I think.
You think that MS spend that kind of money for an exclusive to have no say in how or when it launches... doubt it.
MS may not 'care about preseason" but they moved everything away from COD. Theyd essential treat tf2 line a part of their first party lineup, they wouldn't have it directly competing with gears, cod, and BF.
Primethius
Banned
The biggest thing I can think of against the past multiplat data of the Splinter Cell series is that plenty of previously dominant franchises on Xbox have swung the opposite way this gen due to PS4s sales dominance. So any deal between MS and Ubi would have to take that into account.
I'd find such a deal more likely if we were 2-3 years into the gen and the MS/Ubi deal happened prior to or near the console launches.
Never know, it could happen but I find it extremely improbable.
Chobel
Member
They did that exactly that with RoTTR.
We had this discussion a few weeks ago, you said MS didn't fund TR
So... different situations if you believe that, but anyways, that was temp exclusive (originally 6 months according to a Bish verified rumour too). I think TR would be different to Titanfall for a number of a reasons but I guess it's a good point I'll give you thatSunset Overdrive was a bad release date but it still released a good week ahead of all the big hitters. Nothing really came out in October that year, that was a bad release date for completely different reasons to Titanfall 2.
I don't think SOD2 will come out October or later. That's an August IMO. Forza late Sept.
Oh.. Well, I don't think so. The beta done serious damage to it and we've seen what happens when games don't get marketed properly... But if you think it would've done much better I guess there's not much to say. lol
I would prefer the second party approach. Fund and own the ip. Doing this with established IPs can be hit or miss. And outrage usually follows anyway. Look at Bayonetta 2.
It appears MS wanted an action adventure game for the holiday, since they didn't have one...
MosquitoSmasher
Member
The Tomb Raider deal was fine but releasing on the same day as Fallout 4.....
Really?
Really?
Chobel
Member
Uncharted was delayed (to 2016) months before RoTTR release was announced though.
We had this discussion a few weeks ago, you said MS didn't fund TR
We had this discussion since 2014 lol, and I still don't think it's "funding"
. Anyway if Titanfall 2 was MS exclusive, the situation wasn't going to be different that RoTTR:
1) Either MS funded a 3rd party exclusive from 3rd party publisher, and chose the date knowing the game may suffer.
2) Or MS has no control over these deals, and their part is mostly marketing these games.
Either way, Titanfall release date would still be in Holiday, thus not changing much.
Hawk269
Member
I wonder if we will see a new RTS type of game. MS created a separate division for these type of games and Dan Ayoub was in charge of it. Dan has moved on (which is a good news, since he jacked up MCC and HW2), I do wonder however if we will see Age of Empires IV or something else from that group?
So....? MS contracted a game with intentions of it launching during the holiday. And that's what was delivered to them. This deal was made well prior to uncharted being moved
MS exercised their say in the matter when they signed that deal. I can't imagine square enix would go for language that says "delay game if uncharted gets delayed". That would be fiscally irresponsible because anything could happen to uncharted's release plans at any time.
I imagine if they signed tf2, launching away from the typical cod and battlefield dates would have been part of the deal.
Rise of the Tomb Raider as announced in 2014 with a holiday 2015 release. Uncharted 4 was delayed in December of 2015.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
Probably some cameo in Sea of Thieves. Why oh why would the Rare guys do this to Banjo fans every single year? I cannot take it anymore >.<
I would be furious. For what purpose? You can play the original on N64, Xbox 360 and Xbox One, the game is still absolutely flawless, just for some better graphics? If they do something with Banjo, they should make a new game, not resell the same game over and over again.
Chobel
Member
Uncharted delay announced in early 2015 while RoTTR release date was announced in E3 2015.
So they didn't ask for that requirement when they signed RoTTR but they sure would have done it in case of Titanfall 2? Why? What's the difference here?
And even assuming you're right, their option are launch very close to Gears 4 or launch it after CoD but before Black Friday (2017 is out of question), and both scenarios are no better than release between BF1 and CoD:IW.
https://blog.us.playstation.com/2015/12/23/uncharted-4-a-thiefs-end-arrives-on-april-26-2016/
No, it wasn't.
Unless you're talking about the window in which case that was in March. They moved it back from there.
https://www.polygon.com/2015/3/11/8190105/uncharted-4-delayed-to-spring-2016
Chobel
Member
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-03-11-uncharted-4-delayed-to-spring-2016
Yes, it was.
Yes, I'm talking about this.
Im sorry man, no publisher would sign a contract tying their release date to the fluid release date of another publisher.
That's INSANE. Imagine if they sign that, then uncharted was pushed back a year? How would Square Enix's investors feel about their finished game having to sit on the shelf at the whim of Sony publishing? Makes no sense.
With Titan fall 2, there would have been no contract language tying it directly to the release date of COD and BF2, but there would be language tying it to a specific quarter- and they would have chosen one that differs from where COD and BF typically release.
There 'other' option, would have been to release in the Spring- the same time period where TF1 launched and was much more successful that TF2 despite having no SP, and being an Xbox console exclusive.
- Status