It was worth it just to reboot Tomb Raider by introducing Lara Croft in the Uncharted universe.
Eidos Montreal founder: "I heard rumours that Sony said they're really interested in [acquiring] Square Enix Tokyo, but not the rest."
- Thread starter John Elden Ring
- Start date
- Status
They paid staff retention wages to Bungie. It'd also get them expanses into new game development areas like Montreal.
Heaven is in Montreal already.
Bungie is actually bringing money.
Maybe Sony was not interested acquiring those studios. Even MS didn't make a move...that should tell you something.
It tells me ironically that no one seems to value IPs as much as they perhaps should. What happens if someone old or new buys Embracer and a whole slew of history is no longer multiplatform?
Oh IP is valuable. But sure, it's weird that those studios were like "meh" no one gives a shit about them.
The publisher that values IPs the most is MS, hardly looks like a winning formula.
As far as those Eidos games going away, clearly Sony couldn't care any less. The most telling thing is MS who currently is working with Crystal Dynamics and has a recent history of partnering with them showing no interest whatsoever.
Embracer clearly took advantage of that and got some decent studios that were put in a bad position for very little money but maybe there is something else to the story that would explain the cheap price.
Wait wat? This dosen't make sense at all.
Sony owns all the IP when a studio (specially second party) makes a game for them
I.E.
The Order 1886
MS usually didn't own the IP when working with second party.
I.E. Sunset Overdrive.
Edit: I said didn't cuz MS will own like 2/3 of the western publishers
MS paid for Minecraft after the creator left the studio, they bought the Gears IP from Epic, they let Bungie become independent, they create entire AAA studios dedicated to specifically work on single IPs, they milk their IPs like crazy and rarely invest big on new IPs, they bought Activision mostly because of CoD (a franchise developed by multiple studios), they passed on working with Disney because they wanted to make game with IPs they own, they let studios die just to get other studios to work on the same IPs (and they do that again and again).Wait wat? This dosen't make sense at all.
Sony owns all the IP when a studio (specially second party) makes a game for them
I.E.
The Order 1886
MS usually didn't own the IP when working with second party.
I.E. Sunset Overdrive.
Edit: I said didn't cuz MS will own like 2/3 of the western publishers
You just picked a very odd example where they were trying to attract a studio that previously worked closely to Sony but history shows MS is willing to spend a lot of money on IPs.
Last edited:
So? They just paid for an IP AFTER became successful.
So, they didnt own the I.P.
More like.
Microsoft didn't let Bungie to make a NEW IP.
Oh, I see what you are saying.
No. Because at least to me. If a company values IP MEANS that they care about the process from the ground up securing the rights from the beginning = they are invested in the success of that IP, but also is risky.
MS just buys IP without actually doing the hard work.
That's my point, they care too much about IPs to the detriment of everything else. MS always pick IP over dev.
Your most renowned dev wants to work in something other than Halo? Bye, you are free to go, we'll create 343i. Finally creates a new studio? Here, work on Gears. Creates another studio? Perfect Dark. Working with a new partner? Forza spin-off. They now want to make another game? Fable. Strategy game? Lets bring back this old IP or create spin-offs of IPs we already are milking to death.
It's the Phil Spencer method of guaranteeing they'll never make something truly great, always settling for established mediocrity.
Last edited:
At least Square is willing to make some of their games exclusive to Playstation. Capcom clearly arent willing and they dont want to sell
If you have said that MS has tons of IP but never invested in any of them then I should agree.
But not even Halo and Gears they value anymore.
Yes they do, why do you think they can't let go of them? You think those studios actually want to work on the same IP forever?
I never said they have great success with their IPs, just that they value established IPs too much.
Sony can easily move on from moderately successful franchises like Infamous, Resistance while MS can't let go of stuff like State of Decay, Crackdown, Gears and Halo that are going nowhere.
- Status