Studio Liverpool axed?

You are obviously being completely selective, ignoring my point, so I have nothing further to add.

 

You did get the part where their ideas that they pitched for a game were developed by other studios?

So they weren't unworkable or sucky ideas. An don't have the pedigree of ND? Er... Uh... They've been making games since the 80's. They were successful enough that they were able to transform themselves from a successful game developer into a successful games publisher.

Sony then spent a lot of money to aquire them due to their success as not only a games developer but as a games publisher. Both of which means being able to not only come up with ideas but to judge whether those ideas can be realized into an actual game and then whether you can actually make a profit on it.

And considering that their ideas went on to form the basis of games that Sony then allowed other internal devs to develope and from there become commercially successful... They obviously werent bad ideas.

It just sounds like Sony only wanted them to develope Wipeout and Formula 1 and didn't want them branching out. Same as I'm sure Sony won't allow PD to make anything but GT games. Or have Guerilla making anything other than Killzone. Etc. As Shifty pointed out, there aren't many internal studios that actually get to decide what they make.

Seriously...

Regards,
SB

 

Unless I misunderstand your reference, that was Sony Cambridge, and their ideas were developed for other non-Sony developers.

Regardless of a company's history, it's their current ability to perform that justifies their maintenance. If Studio Liverpool have lost the ability to deliver, then they should get the chop in favour of other developers. Of course if that's the case, one should question why. Had the management changed and lost their verve? Had their best designers left and they were unable to find suitable design talent? Or was it Sony HQ choosing what they'd make and then deciding they didn't want the ongoing cost of the studio?

I don't really know, but it seems that way to me at the moment seeing the content from the first party studios over the past ten years. Liverpool are the Wipeout devs. Sony no longer wants Wipeout, and already has their future investments in other studios. Sony closes Wipeout dev to save the expense. However, that's an assumption unsupported by hard evidence.

 

What ideas were developed by other studios?

 

Perhaps if they had released Wipeout HD as a £40 retail release rather than a £11 PSN download they might have looked more profitable?

I guess that was Sony's call, wanting to prove to consumers that there was quality available on PSN while also proving to publishers that PSN was a viable publishing platform. Doesn't make sense to beat Studio Liverpool with the profitability stick if that was Sony's decision as publisher, though.

Perhaps Sony were pissed that what was supposed to be a quick release - upscale some old PSP tracks to 1080p and release - became a technically brilliant game (dynamic framebuffer, etc) but delayed until two years after PS3 launch.

Thinking back, I see Studio Liverpool as some fantastic engineers coming up with some leading edge engine features but not really focusing on actually getting games out into the wild. From that narrow viewpoint it makes sense to keep the tech guys and hand the Wipeout franchise to Evolution or someone. I think other people have noted that some of the great old Psygnosis games were with them as publisher rather than developer.

 

Who would've bought it for £40?

I loved the original wipeout on PS1, but would never have even bought Wipeout HD. Only reason I have it is because it was free.

 

I would. I'd buy it twice for that amount of money. It's may come down to a matter of taste, but IMO - it's pure awesomness. I'm not sure what the game sold on PSone and Fusion on PS2 ruined some of its brilliance, but HD IMO combines the best aspects of the series. Great sound, stylish graphics, exhilirating speed, excellent replayability and there's a multi player mode too.

There's so much quality in this game, I wonder why they didn't sell it as a full retail game and market it as such. I also wonder if people (like some friends of mine) ignored this game because it was sold purely on PSN when it would have made such a bigger impression if it was sold on disc with some decent marketing behind it. I also wonder if starting at a "bargain price" made people think this was just some shoddy port of an old outdated game?

Either way - I think this game could have been a much bigger success than it is/was. The price at which it was sold (and given away for free) is clearly under its true value though.

 

Just came across this:

http://www.vg247.com/2012/09/17/son...sts-cryptic-we-are-alive-message-wipeout-art/

 

Psygnosis were fantastic on the Amiga, as soon as you saw the owl, you knew you were to play a great game.

Studio Liverpool specialized themselves in the racing-genre, and seemingly this genre has become less and less popular this generation. I doub't Liverpool will be the last casualty in the genre, racing studios seem to be at high risk. :-/

I don't think Sony were unhappy with the quality of WipeOut, however, I think Motorstorm have probably taken the spot as Sony's second most popular internal racing-franchise in Europe, behind GT. :-/