Rumor: MS and Bungie splitting

[PARANOiA]

There seems to be a lot of doom and gloom toward MS here, lets not forget they are in the drivers seat. I look at the PS3 game lineup this holiday and I dont see any stunners..you have R&C and Uncharted, which aren't going to move systems..MS has Halo 3 and Mass Effect..arguably better. Third party titles are somewhat even, but the PS3 has developed a nasty habit of getting multi-plats late and 2nd best. Also..World In Conflict is a nice 2nd tier 360 exclusive imo.

When the September NPD's come and you're looking at 500K 360's and 120k PS3 or something like that, I think some tunes will change.

I doubt it. People have sung doom and gloom for the other two, so I guess it's MS's turn on the merry-go-round

 

[archangelmorph]

Definitely not. It means MS might make far less profit three years from now. They'll make far more profit now and in the interim period. In fact, right after a highly successful finished project would be the best time to rid yourself of a studio. They're hot property an you're probably not too invested in their next project. Add to that the rumors of 'developer strain' and it seems almost like a no-brainier.

Certainly there are some Bungie fans out there, but I'd venture to guess that the amount of Halo fans far surpasses that number. 'Guy at forum' might be critical, but he's in the minority and three years from now even he could have forgotten.

And as long as we're doing rumors and wild speculation. Who's to say that MS isn't eying up the next 'Bungie anno 1999' as we speak? Hell, for the money they must free up by loosing 'Bungie anno 2007' they probably could afford two or three of them and still have cash left over for coffee and danishes...

That was the first thing that came into my mind when i heard this rumour but i instantly shrugged it off..

I wonder exactly what it was that MS saw in Bungie pre-Halo that made then swoop in and pick them up?

IMO they never really did anything significantly impactful prior to the big H so it was a bit of an odd mood at the time in my view..

Maybe MS are looking at the next big 'halo-killer' (with respect to sales and hype) and prepping to pick up a new 'out-of-the-blue' little dev house who have something majorly significant under wraps.. Preferably something with a little more global appeal that would be considered 'system-seller' quality by not just the hardcore crowd but the casual crowd too..

I know many have said that MS need to diversify their portfolio more if they plan on getting their consoles into more consumer's homes and sell into the 100 millions so maybe they're eyeing a nice little douzy to do just that..

*who knows*

 

[Rainbow Man]

What fantasy world do you live in?

Wow that's a constructive reply if ever I saw one.

(Your sarcasm-o-meter should be twitching right now btw.)

 

[.Melchiah.]

I look at the PS3 game lineup this holiday and I dont see any stunners..you have R&C and Uncharted, which aren't going to move systems..MS has Halo 3 and Mass Effect..arguably better.

You don't see Ratchet & Clank and Uncharted as system sellers, but you see Mass Effect as one. I wonder why exactly. Both Uncharted and Mass Effect are new unproven titles, unlike R&C series, and as far as I know BioWare's previous titles (Knights of the Old Republic 1 and 2) weren't that much of a help for the Xbox sales.

 

[BoardBonobo]

You don't see Ratchet & Clank and Uncharted as system sellers, but you see Mass Effect as one. I wonder why exactly. Both Uncharted and Mass Effect are new unproven titles, unlike R&C series, and as far as I know BioWare's previous titles (Knights of the Old Republic 1 and 2) weren't that much of a help for the Xbox sales.

Don't forget Haze and UT3 and Heavenly Sword is out there and getting played. Are there anymore 360 exclusives? As in they aren't coming out on the PC as well?

 

[Johnny Awesome]

I wasn't crazy about MS cutting Bungie loose at first, but the more I think about this the more I realize that 1st party devs carry huge risk. Look how many great ideas result in games that just don't perform in the marketplace: PGR, Forza, Rare's latest efforts, etc... Sure there are exceptions like GT and Halo series, but most 1st party games don't do all that great really.

 

[Archgamer]

Halo 3 will definitely move systems. Mass Effect? I agree it's unproven. So is Uncharted. Both however are made by talented teams. So lets put them in the same league for now. R&C in my opinion will be the biggest exclusive seller for PS3 this year.

UT3 will sell the best on PC. Heavenly Sword, although doing well in sales will probably be overshadow by better titles for the holidays.

 

[rabidrabbit]

I wasn't crazy about MS cutting Bungie loose at first, but the more I think about this the more I realize that 1st party devs carry huge risk. Look how many great ideas result in games that just don't perform in the marketplace: PGR, Forza, Rare's latest efforts, etc... Sure there are exceptions like GT and Halo series, but most 1st party games don't do all that great really.

I think generally the 1st party games are of better quality, and also sell very well.
Don't see how you think Forza and PGR weren't good sellers, though I must agree with Rare... but that's more of an exception to rule.
The reason they might lag in sales to titles like Need For Sped, Maddens etc.. is just that they are not multiplatform, but as a single platform games... I don't think generally 1st party games "don't do that great really".
Obviously, there can only be that many "Halos" or "GT" on a platform, not every game can be the iconic platform title.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

Look at the charts. I'm right. The huge investment in 1st party software rarely pays off. Especially for MS.

IMO when you think about it you realize that it's probably hard to be objective about titles when you own the company that is making them. For instance, Sony would have passed on Viva Pinata. Cool title. Good reviews. Too hard. Won't grab casual gamers. MS pretty much had to pick it up because it's really what Rare wanted to do.

I imagine that the money spent on internal devs could buy an awful lot of exclusives.

Another consideration: How do you think 3rd parties feel about competing with 1st party titles that have extra support and marketing, bundling etc... Probably not that great. This means better dev relations for MS as well IMO.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

I decided to dig up the data:

PSX Top 20 Sellers:

Gran Turismo (1st)
Final Fantasy VII (3rd)
Gran Turismo 2 (1st)
Final Fantasy VIII (3rd)
Crash Bandicoot 2 (2nd)
Crash Bandicoot 3 (2nd)
Tekken 3 (3rd)
Crash Bandicoot (2nd)
Driver (3rd)
Resident Evil 2 (3rd)
Metal Gear Solid (3rd)
Tekken 2 (3rd)
Final Fantasy IX (3rd)
Resident Evil (3rd)
Tomb Raider 2 (3rd)
Spyro (2nd)
Driver 2 (3rd)
Crash Team Racing (2nd)
Tony Haws Pro Skater 2 (3rd)
Tomb Raider (3rd)

PS2 Top 20 Sellers:

GTA:SA (3rd)
GT3 (1st)
GTA:VC (3rd)
GTA (3rd)
GT4 (1st)
FF X (3rd)
NFS: Underground (3rd)
NFS: U2 (3rd)
Metal of Honour: Frontline (3rd)
MGS2 (3rd)
Kingdom Hearts (3rd)
FFX-2 (3rd)
Crash Bandicoot (3rd)
FF XII (3rd)
DQ VII (3rd)
MoH: Rising Sun (3rd)
Madden 2005 (3rd)
Spiderman (3rd)
Lord of the Rings: Two Towers (3rd)
NFS: MW (3rd)

In other words, GT and that's about it for 1st party. Same goes for MS pretty much. Just Halo and Fable were even close to the above titles.

 

[Acert93]

Try those lists for MS and Nintendo

Going by your arguement, since many 1st party titles don't crack the top 20, Sony should let Polyphony Digital walk?

The above list is an emphatic arguement why Sony would want to keep PD -- and why MS should keep Bungie.

Also, 1st party titles are very important a) at launch and b) to "preach and execute" your gameplan. Imagine how the Wii would be without 1st parties... or how MS would be without games like Halo 2 and PGR2 to establish Live.

Further, 1st party titles are essential when times get tough. 1st party has carried Nintendo; 1st parties are what is making the PS3 compelling and relevant. Imagine a PS4 launch that is day and date -- or a year earlier -- than the Xbox 3. If I am Bioware, Epic, RTS, Capcom, etc why do I pen exclusives on the Xbox 3 when the PS4 will be out and I can make more by being multiplatform. The current 360 strategy works because of market conditions and timing, not because it is a universal win.

A final note: Those lists contain many casual games. Many of those are defacto titles that don't drive initial console sales. Not all 1st party titles are aimed to drive pure sales, but instead to either generate early sales by capturing core audiance "movers" or to broaded the platform. e.g. Kameo was an important 360 launch title because it gave the impression of diversity and appealed to a wider demographic than launching with another shooter.

 

[StefanS]

I decided to dig up the data:
...

In other words, GT and that's about it for 1st party. Same goes for MS pretty much. Just Halo and Fable were even close to the above titles.

Johnny for the sake of traceability, could you tell of where you got that data from and what region(s) it covers? I assume it's worldwide, right?

 

[patsu]

In this particular incident, it sounds like Bungie is the one who initiated the change. So it is kind of arguing backwards if people try to retrofit MS's grand plan into it. The debacle should be an exception, though MS probably saw it coming much earlier on.

The outcome may turn out to be ok for MS because of the deep history between the 2 companies. However it should be even better for Bungie and the consumers.

In my view, first part games should be more than just "insurance" (That's too passive). I think they should be viewed as "console shaping tools" and "revenue generators". The platform owners will have better development knowledge as they eat their own dog food. They will also be able to pool their development resources and help a second/third party out more convincingly and effectively (like EDGE). Otherwise, there is little reason why businesses like Sony and Nintendo want to get into it.

And to answer a poster above, I believe MS bought Bungie because of Halo. They were developing it for the Mac. I was waiting eagerly for its release. Ed Fries saw it and liked it enough to rope them in during XBox's initial days.

 

[fearsomepirate]

In other words, GT and that's about it for 1st party. Same goes for MS pretty much. Just Halo and Fable were even close to the above titles.

You're acting like if your game doesn't make the top 20, it was a waste of money. Sony-published games like God of War and Ratchet & Clank have sold multiple millions of units. I'm sure execs at Sony aren't saying, "What? R&C 3 only sold 2 million instead of 6 million? We need to cut that dead weight ASAP!"

 

[Carl B]

People should remember for context that a lot of games considered to be first-party are actually second party. Like Ratchet and Clank, like Project Gotham... in fact the only first-party title of note so far on PS3 has been Warhawk; HS, Motorstorm, Lair, and Resistance were all 2nd party. That said, I do think first parties can play a crucial role, but in MS' case it might be better to go piecemeal on the financing across the independent dev community rather than to lock up part of that community within their walls.

 

[patsu]

People should remember for context that a lot of games considered to be first-party are actually second party. Like Ratchet and Clank, like Project Gotham... in fact the only first-party title of note so far on PS3 has been Warhawk; HS, Motorstorm, Lair, and Resistance were all 2nd party.

MotorStorm is now first party.

 

[Carl B]

MotorStorm is now first party.

Well, the developers are, but the point stands; Evolution was independent at the time of the titles release.

 

[patsu]

Yes, you're correct. I might have put too much emphasis on the development help parts. If Sony can pull 2nd parties together to simplify game development on PS3. MS should be able to do so with independent entities too.

 

[dobwal]

Personally, I think a Rare developed Halo 4 has a great chance of carrying on success for the franchise. They have the experience to pull it off. A Halo game might reinvigorate them. Their name hasn't generated wide spread hype since their Nintendo days even though all their past FPSes have been well received critically and financially.

The hardest part will be pulling off the online MP aspect. But they won't be starting from scratch. They just need to be careful of changing too much of the core experience, but at the same time adding enough to stay current so not to seem dated.

Also, a future Bungie developed Halo game is not out of question. Being independent allows the dev to have more creative control but it also put financial responsibility square on their shoulder. Recreating Halo's success is not going to be easy and it will only take one crappy selling game before pressure show ups to put out something thats going to sell. A successful Halo developed by an independent Bungie would give them a huge cushion. Plus they already starting in the hole by paying a huge sum to get from under MS with relatively no franchise for at least the next couple of years.

 

[archangelmorph]

Plus they already starting in the hole by paying a huge sum to get from under MS with relatively no franchise for at least the next couple of years.

Do we know that though?