Bungie Studios Independence Discussion Thread

[AlNom]

That and their desire to explore other platforms as evident in the Halo DS prototype.

Do it ! My DS is in the storage now. I will revive it if Bungie release a DS game

There is no reason why Bungie can't go multi-platform.

It's probably more-so to do with PS3 than the Nintendo platforms seeing as how Rare is already developing a Viva Pinata game for the DS.

Q: Would MS be the publisher on other platforms, or do the Bungie folks have to look for one for that non-MS platform

 

[wco81]

What is WETA?

MS gets 45% of equity but majority in the board?

This could be an IPO play. There's no guarantee they will have another hit. And why would MS give them more money for Halo than they've already been giving them?

For the IPO to draw interest, they have to have the prospect of bigger revenues from Halo sequels as well as new IP. But for all we know, Bungie may be a one-hit or one-IP wonder.

They'd be smart to do an IPO with Halo4 announced and before they actually have to demonstrate sales from any new IP. That might be enough hype to get them a big IPO.

For MS, maybe their incentive is get a chunk of the IPO proceeds, as was the case with Expedia. While their stock has stayed frozen for years, the spinoffs have produced some good price appreciation.

 

[Carl B]

I really don't see an IPO in the immediate cards, unless MS was hoping that Halo hype would drive it through the investment community. But the Bungie fundamentals are pretty weak in light of the MS retained IP, and for such a developer like this to IPO would be pretty unique. Think of the public game companies you know; these are all large publishers in their own right, not subservient vassal-states to a larger company.

For Bungie to be independent today, it means that presently someone other than Microsoft owns 55% of the shares. So... just want to clarify that the 45% would be in the immediate context also, rather than a post-IPO target.

 

[patsu]

It would seem so, unless Microsoft continue to evolve their relationships with Bungie, and if something more is being planned to drive the independence. But these are even more speculative than the list. I went there because I find it strange that MS is controlling the boardroom and finance of an supposedly independent studio.

 

[dobwal]

This is mainly about money.

There are major financial implications involved when going from a MS employee to a MS partner.

 

[Carl B]

It would seem so, unless Microsoft continue to evolve their relationships with Bungie, and if something more is being planned to drive the independence. But these are even more speculative than the list. I went there because I find it strange that MS is controlling the boardroom and finance of an supposedly independent studio.

Well that's commonly the case in private businesses (a single overriding voice) - in fact much more so the case than in public business. I'd advise looking at the private equity model rather than the public corporation model here. I think if we view it from the standpoint that MS had full discretion in terms of Bungie's fortunes, that the deal on the table as something MS finally acceded to as being acceptable - rather than a deal they ever had to make in the first place - puts things in a better light.

IMO in order to stem what might have been an internal rebellion, Microsoft agreed to spin-off the studio, but in return Bungie is essentially a semi-independent vassal state of the MS empire.

 

[patsu]

Then what about the rumor of Bungie execs paying to get their name back ? Usually, the majority owner will call the shot.

If that is the final arrangement, then the under-current may still be there. I guess it may be why they chose to use the word "evolve" in the PR.

 

[Zaphod]

Then what about the rumor of Bungie execs paying to get their name back ? Usually, the majority owner will call the shot.

There's a thing such as a blocking minority. I would think that MS is more interested in controlling what what Bungie doesn't do rather than what they, err.. do do.

Also, as I mentioned above: Jason Jones is credited in the Bungie press release as "Bungie founder and partner", which I in this context would read as equity partner (i.e. shareholder). Thus, it seems there was some truth to the notion of "Bungie execs paying to get their name back".

 

[patsu]

There's a thing such as a blocking minority. I would think that MS is more interested in controlling what Bungie doesn't do rather than what they, err.. do do.

Ugh, if they go that route, then I think the keyword in the entire PR is truly evolve. Historical baggage is heavy indeed.

 

[Deepak]

How can it be termed as a win-win situation for MS (Ok, win for Bungie)? THE most imp studio under their control is now moving towards becoming an independent studio, with potentially developing titles for rival consoles.

 

[patsu]

How can it be termed as a win-win situation for MS (Ok, win for Bungie)? THE most imp studio under their control is now moving towards becoming an independent studio, with potentially developing titles for rival consoles.

Well... at this moment, according to that list, MS still have control -- unless that list is bogus (which sounds more and more likely to me).

 

[dobwal]

There's a thing such as a blocking minority. I would think that MS is more interested in controlling what what Bungie doesn't do rather than what they, err.. do do.

Also, as I mentioned above: Jason Jones is credited in the Bungie press release as "Bungie founder and partner", which I in this context would read as equity partner (i.e. shareholder). Thus, it seems there was some truth to the notion of "Bungie execs paying to get their name back".

While MS owns only 45% of the shares, I wonder if MS is the largest shareholder. I sure the other 55% is not under control of one person but distributed amongst all the Bungie employees plus whoever financed the buyout.

 

[Deepak]

Well... at this moment, according to that list, MS still have control -- unless that list is bogus (which sounds more and more likely to me).

Even if they have control, it is still a loss for them. Not to mention bad publicity this move is going to garner for them.

 

[RobertR1]

Well... at this moment, according to that list, MS still have control -- unless that list is bogus (which sounds more and more likely to me).

More likely the list is incomplete. I seriously doubt the arrangement was anything but simple thus the bullet points seem complicated. Chances are we won't know the full details but see things unfold over the years. Seeing that they've been working at this since last year (according to frankie) the arrangement has likely been re worked many times until they came to an understanding.

 

[patsu]

While MS owns only 45% of the shares, I wonder if MS is the largest shareholder. I sure the other 55% is not under control of one person but distributed amongst all the Bungie employees plus whoever financed the buyout.

Silly me, good point. That makes more sense (and cleaner). The other shareholders can still vote to overcome the largest shareholder individually.

 

[Carl B]

While MS owns only 45% of the shares, I wonder if MS is the largest shareholder. I sure the other 55% is not under control of one person but distributed amongst all the Bungie employees plus whoever financed the buyout.

They may or may not be, but at the same time what Zaphod's discussing isn't related to equity interest but to the distribution of voting rights as written into the by-laws of the new entity. Bungie is free (well who knows how free) to develop a new IP on the Wii, for example, but MS is going to make sure that their interests are looked out for. It seems that MS probably has a couple of provisions in there as well to be sure any compelling Bungie developed IPs come their way before going anywhere else.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Why would Microsoft "anger" Bungie if they are the makers of the company's top franchise? Microsoft are not made up of idiots, they could easily say, "Because of the great job you all did on Halo 3, you can now go ahead and create whatever you want at this time with the understanding that you will in the future develop Halo 4" without spinning off the company.

They could've, and then they would've had to explain to their bosses why they didn't immediately start on Halo 4 which would've netted the company another 1/2 billion dollars.

Currently MS is too fixated on short term profitability IMO, which is negatively impacting many facets of their strategic planning. Because of this, I'm glad Bungie is now at arm's length.

 

[holsty101]

What is WETA?

WETA is the VFX company that did the the LOTR/King Kong films (co-owned/founded (? something like that) by Peter Jackson), I think it's the subsidary Weta Digital involved in the Halo games.

I guess it may be why they chose to use the word "evolve" in the PR.

And wasn't the Halo tagline "combat evolved"? Maybe a play on that too.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Even if they have control, it is still a loss for them. Not to mention bad publicity this move is going to garner for them.

It's a win compared to the worst case scenario, i.e. Bungie employees quitting en masse because they're sick of workin on Halo, and MS being left with a skeleton company.

It's a win because by granting them some sort of independance it greatly increases the chance that Bungie as a whole will stay together.

So, if you consider the internal tensions inside bungie, some sort of move was inevitable, this probably the best case scenario for MS if something had to happen.

 

[Silent]

Why does it seem microsoft is shedding first-party console developement. Between bungie, bizarre creations buyout, fasa closing seems like they are outsourcing all exclusives now. Does MS have any inhouse 360 teams left?

Anyone think this is a preamble to them leaving the console arena after the 360? All this seems like a piece of a much bigger strategy for ms's console future.

Things at rare have been pretty quiet recently. Wonder what all those teams have been upto. Or if rare will be spunoff as well soon.

Really I was thinking the same thing. It's not that the 360 (outside NA) is a big succes and then i'm not even talking about the financially money drain this project has become.

WETA is the VFX company that did the the LOTR/King Kong films (co-owned/founded (? something like that) by Peter Jackson), I think it's the subsidary Weta Digital involved in the Halo games.

Am I mistaken or did WETA digital also worked on the motion capturing for Heavenly Sword ?