Scalebound

really really sad considering how good each of Platinum's game always is :( ! In fact one of my friends had owrked on its assets and I was really looking forward to playing it on my new laptop ! Man, i am so disappointed. I had no idea this was in trouble.
 
BRiT said:
I can't say I am surprised, but I am disappointed. I was getting a Lost Planet vibe from the game and I know LP didn't do well at all in it's last incarnation. This was likely going to be a game I'd have bought anyways as it's something else to round-out the game library.
Click to expand...
quite disappointed too. I wasn't hyped tbh, because I wouldn't probably get the game this year anytime soon -in fact, I bought a very little amount of games last year-, in 2019-2020, perhaps I am going to have more time to play all that stuff. But that was an exclusive and with everything made for X1 also coming out on PC, there aren't exclusives left on the XB1. And that's such a pity...
 
This has me thinking of this 2014 interview with MS Ceo Sataye Nadella

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkai...of-microsofts-business-ceo-says/#34be80f54480

From the forbes article:
MS Ceo Nadella - "Xbox isn't that far from [the core]," he told the publication. "We can do a few more things than the core. But the point is, you've got to have a culture to do it.
"I want us to be comfortable to be proud of Xbox, to give it the air cover of Microsoft, but at the same time not confuse it with our core."
Forbes article Editor wrote: said:
That's a good sign for Xbox in the short-term at least, but I do wonder if an emphasis on the gaming division not being part of the "core" is bad news for Xbox in the long-term.
Click to expand...

Seems under Nadella's leadership they are focused more on the short term results from Xbox group rather than be willing to take on losses like they did under Balmer's leadership to support the platform.
 
Last edited:
RenegadeRocks said:
really really sad considering how good each of Platinum's game always is :( ! In fact one of my friends had owrked on its assets and I was really looking forward to playing it on my new laptop ! Man, i am so disappointed. I had no idea this was in trouble.
Click to expand...

So scalebound was outsourced to India?
 
orangpelupa said:
So scalebound was outsourced to India?
Click to expand...
I think it's increasingly common for small and medium size developers to outsource some asset production or pre-production work to third parties. When you consider the number of textures, sfx and models that go into your typical 3D game, it's challlenging to do everything yourself.
 
Already debunked on Twitter by the main Xbox powers that be. Its just an old and forgetten page that was never cleaned up.
 
https://www.videogameschronicle.com...es-to-microsoft-for-scalebounds-cancellation/

PlatinumGames‘ Hideki Kamiya has apologised to players and Microsoft for the events that led to the cancellation of Scalebound.

The action RPG was originally planned as an Xbox exclusive in 2017, but the game was eventually cancelled. In a new video on the Cutscenes YouTube channel, Kamiya explains how Scalebound came to be and why it was eventually scapped.

“Scalebound was a project we had teamed up on with Microsoft,” Kamiya explains. “They expected good things from us, and we needed to live up to those expectations with the project. Teaming up with Microsoft meant releasing the game on the latest Xbox console [the Xbox One]. I once again had the desire to make a high-end game. I wanted to go back to something photorealistic. While it was a personal wish of mine, I thought it was also a necessary mission for PlatinumGames to improve our graphical ability and get to the next step of modern game creation. So we first decided to go with a universe like that.

“I loved fantasy worlds since I was a child. I’ve always enjoyed worlds with swords, magic, and dragons. When I was a child, I don’t know if people overseas are familiar with these, but I would play Sorcerian, Hydlide, all these fantasy games from the classic PC era that I really enjoyed. I always wanted to make something around that theme. This is how I thought of a world revolving around a young man fighting together with a dragon. However, it was a big challenge for PlatinumGames. We were working in an environment we weren’t used to. We were developing on the Unreal engine, we also lacked the necessary know-how to build a game based on online features.

The hurdles we had to overcome were very big. We weren’t experienced enough and couldn’t get over that wall, leading to what happened in the end. ’m sorry to the players who looked forward to it, and moreover I’m sorry to Microsoft who had placed their trust in us as a business partner. I want to apologize both as a creator and as a member of PlatinumGames.”
Click to expand...

Maybe this public apology will be the start of them reviving scalebound. I mean series s and x has to fix the performance issues it had on stock xbox one consoles
 
eastmen said:
https://www.videogameschronicle.com...es-to-microsoft-for-scalebounds-cancellation/



Maybe this public apology will be the start of them reviving scalebound. I mean series s and x has to fix the performance issues it had on stock xbox one consoles
Click to expand...

Intereting...

“We were working in an environment we weren’t used to. We were developing on the Unreal engine, we also lacked the necessary know-how to build a game based on online features.
Click to expand...

I do wonder if Phil Harrison wasn't so tunnel visioned on trying to shove multiplayer down every Microsoft Published game's throat in order to try to monetize them as games as a service, if that pressure didn't exist... I wonder if Hideki Kamiya and his Platinum Games team would have been able to create an iconic Platinum Game's game.

It's good that both Platinum Games and Microsoft understood what happened.

From Platinum Games:

“Both sides failed,” Inaba said, and ultimately, the game “didn’t do all of the things that we needed to do as a developer”.

“Watching fans getting angry at Microsoft over the cancellation wasn’t easy for us to watch. Because the reality is, when any game in development can’t get released it’s because both sides failed.

“I think there are areas where we could’ve done better and I’m sure there are areas that Microsoft as a publishing partner wish that they could’ve done better. Because nobody wants a game to be cancelled.”
Click to expand...

From Phil Spencer:

“It’s a tough one because I have a ton of respect for Platinum, [Hideki] Kamiya-san, the team and I feel no ill will,” he said at the time. “We talk to those guys: there’s no animosity between the teams.

“We tried to go do something and it didn’t work, and I regret that we were so public about what we tried to go do. I did some learning around Fable Legends [and] I did some learning around Scalebound about being public with things before I know that we’ve got a real, believable plan, and something I’ve felt in my hands is gonna be there.

“We just didn’t get there with Scalebound and with the team. And I say that across both teams.”
Click to expand...

Even if Scalebound is well and truly dead (I believe it is), I'd love it if Phil Spencer approached Hideki Kamiya again with a deal to allow Kamiya to create something he really wants to create but maybe has been unable to due to budget constraints at Platnum Games (they are a relatively small development studio).

Regards,
SB
 
we also lacked the necessary know-how to build a game based on online features.
Click to expand...
I don't understand how an experienced dev can attempt to jump into online without first creating some little prototype game to get to grips with it. Will they not do side projects or evaluation projects before committing to an idea?
 
my guess is they didn't want to pass up the pay day and figured they could get it working. They should have told MS they weren't ready and lets make a single player game and expand on it in the sequel if its popular
 
eastmen said:
my guess is they didn't want to pass up the pay day and figured they could get it working. They should have told MS they weren't ready and lets make a single player game and expand on it in the sequel if its popular
Click to expand...

It might have also been the case of Phil Harrison or whoever personally handled the interaction between MS and Platinum games hand waving away the issue and telling them that it's technically easy to implement.

But the problem isn't so much that it might be technically easy or not, the problem is designing a game that is based on having a long tail WRT games as a service. Basically all mechanisms within the game have to operate with the purpose of keeping players engaged well past the end of any single player content. Additionally WRT Phil Harrion's view of games as a service, the gameplay would need to addictive in such a way as to encourage player to continue spending real world money in the game.

That isn't an easy problem to solve. Just look at the cancelled Fable game. Look at how Marvell Avengers turned out with Square-Enix basically throwing the developer under the bus and stating that it was their fault the game turned out badly ... when it was probably Square-Enix's insistence that the game be monetized after the single player campaign was over which forced the development team to try to do something try to get players to spend more money on the game after the campaign was over.

When done well, not only is something like that engaging and enjoyable to players over a very long time period (Warframe and Path of Exile, for example), it also provides gameplay that makes it tempting to spend real money in game but doesn't feel like you have to spend real money in game. A very tight balancing act that few developers can pull off.

Out of all the MS studios that were required to have some sort of long term games as a service type of monetization, only one succeeded. Sea of Thieves.

I'm so glad that Phil Spencer basically go rid of all incentives/requirements for that sort of monetization of 1st party games after release. We can see for example that 343i basically jettisoned all the horrible microtransactions that Halo 4 had and now there's basically just the non-expiring and non-gameplay influencing Battlepass for Halo 5 multiplayer. It also helps that you don't have to buy Halo 5 multiplayer and then on top of that have to pay for the Battle Pass. You can either play it for free or spend money if you want to unlock more cosmetic options.

Regards,
SB
 
Last edited:
Silent_Buddha said:
It might have also been the case of Phil Harrison or whoever personally handled the interaction between MS and Platinum games hand waving away the issue and telling them that it's technically easy to implement.

But the problem isn't so much that it might be technically easy or not, the problem is designing a game that is based on having a long tail WRT games as a service. Basically all mechanisms within the game have to operate with the purpose of keeping players engaged well past the end of any single player content. Additionally WRT Phil Harrion's view of games as a service, the gameplay would need to addictive in such a way as to encourage player to continue spending real world money in the game.

That isn't an easy problem to solve. Just look at the cancelled Fable game. Look at how Marvell Avengers turned out with Square-Enix basically throwing the developer under the bus and stating that it was their fault the game turned out badly ... when it was probably Square-Enix's insistence that the game be monetized after the single player campaign was over which forced the development team to try to do something try to get players to spend more money on the game after the campaign was over.

When done well, not only is something like that engaging and enjoyable to players over a very long time period (Warframe and Path of Exile, for example), it also provides gameplay that makes it tempting to spend real money in game but doesn't feel like you have to spend real money in game. A very tight balancing act that few developers can pull off.

Out of all the MS studios that were required to have some sort of long term games as a service type of monetization, only one succeeded. Sea of Thieves.

I'm so glad that Phil Spencer basically go rid of all incentives/requirements for that sort of monetization of 1st party games after release. We can see for example that 343i basically jettisoned all the horrible microtransactions that Halo 5 had and now there's basically just the non-expiring and non-gameplay influencing Battlepass for Halo 5 multiplayer. It also helps that you don't have to buy Halo 5 multiplayer and then on top of that have to pay for the Battle Pass. You can either play it for free or spend money if you want to unlock more cosmetic options.

Regards,
SB
Click to expand...

Yea it could be the issues with games as a service but the game got canceled under Phil right ? So at that point he could have said already lets ease back on the multiplayer stuff and focus on just a great single player game.

Anyway I agree its great that we get rid of a lot of the dumb things all the companies were doing for profit maximization. I don't mind things like a battle pass or cosmetic purchases
 
eastmen said:
Yea it could be the issues with games as a service but the game got canceled under Phil right ? So at that point he could have said already lets ease back on the multiplayer stuff and focus on just a great single player game.
Click to expand...

That far into the game's development cycle that would basically mean creating a new game. All of the games levels, story, and gameplay mechanisms will be tied to the concept of post campaign monetization.

At that point, on MS's side, it's about whether it's worth it to reboot the games development and face a potential 1-2+ year delay in the game's release. On top of that lingering dissatisfaction with what was originally shown would continue to haunt and taint the game going forward, potentially reducing it's sales potential. All of that means that MS would have to consider whether it's even possible to recoup the development cost much less the remote possibility of even making a profit on the title.

On Platinum Games side, there would be a concern about whether they were capable of doing a reboot of the development cycle and whether they could afford to do it. They may have had other commitments in place due to expectations of Scalebound development ending at a certain point in time. The team might have also been experiencing fatigue, possibly even burn out, with the frustrations associated with the development of the title up to that point combined with the generally negative public reaction that the intial reveal garnered across the internet.

Basically both MS and Platinum Games were likely wanting to end development on the title and neither were interested in the time and effort required to reboot the development cycle on the game. Evidence of that being that there was pretty much no acrimony from either company (or more importantly anyone associated with the product) around the cancellation of the title.

Regards,
SB
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Cyan
Army of Ruin, a 3D roguelike auto-shooter [PS, PC, NS, XBSX]
Replies
2
Views
375
Cyan
Cyan
Shortbread
Shortbread built a new PC. Example of how to buy a PC? *spawn
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
Shortbread
Shortbread
I
Honkai: Star Rail [PC/PS5/Mobile]
Replies
0
Views
196
idsn6
I
C
Light No Fire (Hello Games)
Replies
17
Views
1K
Scott_Arm
S
E
The first Berserker
Replies
12
Views
828
arandomguy
A
Back
Top