Anyone else think its crazy Bungie convinced Naughty Dog to cancel factions. And now Bungie is about to drop Concord 2?

corgiix3

corgiix3

Member
Lately I haven't been to big on Last of Us overall as I am getting tired of it. But I have always thought that out of any live service multiplayer that Factions would have actually succeeded. But noooo lets listen to the washed up clowns at Bungie riding on the cocktails of success provided by old employees that are all long gone :messenger_peace:

Freak Marathon. Respectfully...
 
I find this idea that Bungie conspired or lied or played 83D chess to get Factions cancelled and push Marathon to be totally bizarre.
 
Last edited:
And then the heads of bungie were let go. Tells you all you need to know about one of the dumbest decisions Sony made this gen. I also don't believe anything Neil says about this game.
 
Lunarorbit said:
And then the heads of bungie were let go. Tells you all you need to know about one of the dumbest decisions Sony made this gen. I also don't believe anything Neil says about this game.
Click to expand...
Neil Druckmann is a terrible writer who cannot hear or comprehend criticism. The moment Intergalactic: Heretic Prophet flops, any support Sony still has for him will be dropped, and he'll be fired. Unbelievable they didn't fire his ass during the Uncharted 4 development fiasco.
 
mayham2199 said:
Of course you don't because that breaks the Narrative. You also don't believe Shu on top of it. The whole company has come together to conspire and protect Bungie.
Click to expand...
It has already been established in the Marathon impression thread that some people here have somehow created their own version of reality, especially when it comes to Playstation and Bungie.

Completely revisionist and dodging any source proving them wrong.
 
Last edited:
The impression I got from the reporting at that time wasn't that Bungie convinced Naughty Dog to cancel the game. What it seemed like they communicated was the volume of work that goes into supporting a GaaS over the course of many years - the head count, hour count, and spending required. It seemed like they were trying to say "In order to do this successfully, you will have to become a different studio with way more people and a fundamentally different set of skills."

It seemed like Naughty Dog didn't want to give up making single-player games, so they were inclined to back away from Factions.

Ultimately, I'm sure the decision rested with PlayStation. They had to look at it and know if the talent at Naughty Dog didn't want to devote their time to making that game, forcing them to do it would have just resulted in the talent leaving, which wouldn't have made any sense. The alternative was probably "Do we have another studio who could support this game long term if we keep it going?" Again, that's time and money, and reputational risk. They ultimately decided it wasn't worth it.

I'd love to know the details behind who decided Bungie should work on an extraction shooter. Was that a higher up at PlayStation telling Bungie they needed to make a GaaS and they should take a crack at the genre? Was it someone at Bungie who really believed they could make a highly successful one of these? I'm sure the details are pretty interesting.
 
Last edited:
Lunarorbit said:
And then the heads of bungie were let go. Tells you all you need to know about one of the dumbest decisions Sony made this gen.
Click to expand...
Take your criticisms up to Jim Ryan and especially the Board of Directors at Sony and their shareholders.

Any person with a rational brain, after seeing everything that has transpired over the years, will know the Bungie buyout would not be worth the high price tag they paid.
 
rm082e said:
I'd love to know the details behind who decided Bungie should work on an extraction shooter. Was that a higher up at PlayStation telling Bungie they needed to make a GaaS and they should take a crack at the genre? Was it someone at Bungie who really believed they could make a highly successful one of these? I'm sure the details are pretty interesting.
Click to expand...
One of the streamers from the Marathon reveal stated that he has been involved in playtesting for Marathon for the past 6 years, so that was way before Sony acquired Bungie.
 
Last edited:
Killjoy-NL said:
One of the streamers from the Marathon reveal stated that he has been involved in playtesting for Marathon for the past 6 years, so that was way before Sony acquired Bungie.
Click to expand...

Ah, thank you. I wasn't read in on the history.

In that case, in one sense I applaud Sony for supporting the team as long as they have on this project. On the other hand, I wonder how many people at PlayStation raised their hand to the executives and said "Hey boss, I don't think that thing's going to be a hit."
 
I think people got way too invested in the unproven rumor that Bungie was single handedly responsible for Faction getting cancelled, and that they have absolute power within Sony to shut down projects from other studios.
 
Last edited:
I'm not interested in Marathon, looks very unoriginal and the aesthetic is very weak but, can anyone explain to me why it's being treated like a confirmed bomba and getting compared to Concord? Concord was outright antagonizing but I ain't aware of Marathon is goin that far (except for the pricing model and the scarce map count). If anything, it leaves me so indifferent I'm shocked about how much chatter there is around it.
 
JaksGhost said:
I think it's crazy that some of you keep running with this narrative for some fuck head reason.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure they played a big role in it being canceled.

Bungie Reportedly Reviewed 'The Last Of Us Factions' And Found It Lacking
"Sony has invested heavily in "games as a service," or video games designed to be monetized beyond their initial sales through ongoing purchases. As part of that push it asked another of its video-game studios, Seattle-based Bungie, to evaluate the games across its portfolio. Bungie raised questions about the The Last of Us multiplayer project's ability to keep players engaged for a long period of time, which led to the reassessment."
 
mayham2199 said:
Of course you don't because that breaks the Narrative. You also don't believe Shu on top of it. The whole company has come together to conspire and protect Bungie.
Click to expand...

Killjoy-NL said:
It has already been established in the Marathon impression thread that some people here have somehow created their own version of reality, especially when it comes to Playstation and Bungie.

Completely revisionist and dodging any source proving them wrong.
Click to expand...
Ah yes my narrative that I've created and have now ensnarled you all in.

Of course they are gonna lie about 1 of the biggest acquisition flops of all time. Neil lies when he talks about not knowing the scope of multiplayer games and what it takes to keep them relevant.

People still play factions and then weirdos come to the thread arguing about how marathon is this great product. Some generic robot art and you all go crazy. There's enough garbage multiplayer shooters out there
 
Killjoy-NL said:
One of the streamers from the Marathon reveal stated that he has been involved in playtesting for Marathon for the past 6 years, so that was way before Sony acquired Bungie.
Click to expand...
Marathon being what Bungie could make after 6 years tells me everything I need to know. Bungie is Bioware 2.0 I can feel it lol
 
Loxus said:
Pretty sure they played a big role in it being canceled.

Bungie Reportedly Reviewed 'The Last Of Us Factions' And Found It Lacking
"Sony has invested heavily in "games as a service," or video games designed to be monetized beyond their initial sales through ongoing purchases. As part of that push it asked another of its video-game studios, Seattle-based Bungie, to evaluate the games across its portfolio. Bungie raised questions about the The Last of Us multiplayer project's ability to keep players engaged for a long period of time, which led to the reassessment."
Click to expand...
Takes 10 seconds to find the official statement from ND:

"In ramping up to full production, the massive scope of our ambition became clear. To release and support The Last of Us Online we'd have to put all our studio resources behind supporting post launch content for years to come, severely impacting development on future single-player games. So, we had two paths in front of us: become a solely live service games studio or continue to focus on single-player narrative games that have defined Naughty Dog's heritage."

www.naughtydog.com

An Update on The Last of Us Online || Naughty Dog

www.naughtydog.com www.naughtydog.com
 
Killjoy-NL said:
Takes 10 seconds to find the official statement from ND:

"In ramping up to full production, the massive scope of our ambition became clear. To release and support The Last of Us Online we'd have to put all our studio resources behind supporting post launch content for years to come, severely impacting development on future single-player games. So, we had two paths in front of us: become a solely live service games studio or continue to focus on single-player narrative games that have defined Naughty Dog's heritage."

www.naughtydog.com

An Update on The Last of Us Online || Naughty Dog

www.naughtydog.com www.naughtydog.com
Click to expand...
Like I said, Bungie played a big role in it being canceled.

This Is Why The Last of Us Factions Was Cancelled
Naughty Dog realized they weren't suited for creating a live-service game. They initially led the project but worked with Bungie, the team behind Destiny, to help them out. Bungie's involvement showed how tough it is to keep players engaged in these games over a long period.

Bungie informed Naughty Dog that what the team had was not enough for a few weeks of gameplay on live service. A high-quality live service game would take away a lot of staff. That meant fewer members to develop other games. Yoshida said, "Naughty Dog realized, 'Oops, we can't do that! If we do it, we can't make Intergalactic: The Heretic Prophet.' So that was a lack of foresight."
 
Loxus said:
Pretty sure they played a big role in it being canceled.

Bungie Reportedly Reviewed 'The Last Of Us Factions' And Found It Lacking
"Sony has invested heavily in "games as a service," or video games designed to be monetized beyond their initial sales through ongoing purchases. As part of that push it asked another of its video-game studios, Seattle-based Bungie, to evaluate the games across its portfolio. Bungie raised questions about the The Last of Us multiplayer project's ability to keep players engaged for a long period of time, which led to the reassessment."
Click to expand...
Why do people think Bungie conducted this review in bad faith?

Maybe Factions 2 actually did suck.
 
jCD2VAd.gif


saHvktL.gif
 
diffusionx said:
Why do people think Bungie conducted this review in bad faith?

Maybe Factions 2 actually did suck.
Click to expand...
People are putting too much on something that we didn't even get to see in motion and it trips me out. A lot of people enjoyed Factions, so of course they wanted more. But without actually seeing Factions 2, we have no idea what everything could've been. It's just all a gigantic assumption that people invested way too much into.
 
And what makes you think Factions 2.0 wasn't going to turn out like a Concord 2.0 as well? People talk like Naughty Doge been cranking out successful GAAS games every damn year, when they couldn't even let the servers for their PS3 games keep going and shut them all down the same day :pie_roffles:
 
Loxus said:
Like I said, Bungie played a big role in it being canceled.

This Is Why The Last of Us Factions Was Cancelled
Naughty Dog realized they weren't suited for creating a live-service game. They initially led the project but worked with Bungie, the team behind Destiny, to help them out. Bungie's involvement showed how tough it is to keep players engaged in these games over a long period.

Bungie informed Naughty Dog that what the team had was not enough for a few weeks of gameplay on live service. A high-quality live service game would take away a lot of staff. That meant fewer members to develop other games. Yoshida said, "Naughty Dog realized, 'Oops, we can't do that! If we do it, we can't make Intergalactic: The Heretic Prophet.' So that was a lack of foresight."
Click to expand...
Yeah, but clearly the reason was that ND couldn't support a live service game.
Not because Bungie told them it sucked so they could push Marathon.
 
Last edited:
diffusionx said:
Why do people think Bungie conducted this review in bad faith?

Maybe Factions 2 actually did suck.
Click to expand...

No where does it say they felt the game sucked. It was about monetization concerns. Live service isn't easy. Look at Epic, they aren't making single player games anymore. Same with Bungie.

They made the decision to cancel it when there were several options available to them. They could have released it as a stand alone multiplayer game for like 50 bucks. It didn't need to be live service.

I think the game wasn't as far along as people think it was.
 
No crazy but stupid, Sony is still suffering from it's GAAS. adventure...after Marathon it will be over and Bungie will be reduced Even more.

Don't think Marathon will fail like Concord , it will have a user base but not the same as Destiny so Bungie will be smaller or disapoear

Sony Will keep losing money for some time and they only good good game that this edventure Will left is Helldivers.
 
I doubt they talk to each other. I also think Druckman is so arrogant no one can convince him of anything.
 
Loxus said:
But still manage to support the first Factions and found the time and staff to remaster part 1 and 2?
Click to expand...
Factions 1 barely got any support and was as minimal as could be.

And the remasters are singleplayer games. As they said, they are a singleplayer studio.

Besides, adding a multiplayer mode is very different from making a live service game.
 
They may have evaluated it in good faith. If it was a project Naughty Dog truly believed in I don't doubt they could have fought for it and kept it alive, they haven't burned through all their goodwill yet.
 
Killjoy-NL said:
Factions 1 barely got any support and was as minimal as could be.

And the remasters are singleplayer games. As they said, they are a singleplayer studio.

Besides, adding a multiplayer mode is very different from making a live service game.
Click to expand...
What's difficult about hiring a small team to make content for Factions 2 every 3 months or so?

There's literally no excuse for canceling it.
 
Last edited:
I hope Marathon flops badly and I'm glad that all the other GAAS besides Helldivers 2 flopped.

Sony needs to be taught a bigger lesson about this gaas bullshit. We showed them with Concord, but we still need to show them with Fairgame$ and also every other multiplayer only game they try to force down our throats.

They wasted a whole generation on it and still haven't learned their lesson. They wasted all of our times. They wasted years funding and making Concord while ignoring Bloodborne and closing Japan studio. Real smart Jim. Super genius.

Get Bungie's people working on a new Halo campaign and just call it something else. Stop wasting my valuable time with this trendchasing horseshit. ND also wasted a whole game on this horseshit and it never even released. Who was punished for that? Shouldn't someone have had to answer for that? Isn't it very obvious that you would have to offer support after a product launched? Who missed that during the whole development cycle? Am I not supposed to call someone dumb here? How dumb is that to not realize that the studio would have to support a gaas after launch? Is that a super knowledgeable and smart person who made these decisions? Say what you want about Nintendo or MS but they didn't fuck their pipeline up like greedy trendchasing Sony, now did they? Get tf back on track Sony or we will bring in someone who will.
 
Last edited:
They removed their inner competition, since GaaS are all competing in the same space.

In this case, they are also fighting for Sony's resources. This "chess" doesn't go beyond 3D, it's plain to see.

We know for a fact that Bungie's management lacks any moral and good faith. Why give them the benefit of the doubt? Facts speak for themselves.
 
Mibu no ookami said:
No where does it say they felt the game sucked. It was about monetization concerns. Live service isn't easy. Look at Epic, they aren't making single player games anymore. Same with Bungie.

They made the decision to cancel it when there were several options available to them. They could have released it as a stand alone multiplayer game for like 50 bucks. It didn't need to be live service.

I think the game wasn't as far along as people think it was.
Click to expand...
"Bungie raised questions about the The Last of Us multiplayer project's ability to keep players engaged for a long period of time, which led to the reassessment"

This could mean anything from "we are worried about monetization" to "yea this game sucks cancel it immediately" in corporate speak. We don't have enough information to know for sure.

The point is that people seem to believe Bungie conducted this assessment in bad faith, just doesn't make sense.
 
diffusionx said:
"Bungie raised questions about the The Last of Us multiplayer project's ability to keep players engaged for a long period of time, which led to the reassessment"

This could mean anything from "we are worried about monetization" to "yea this game sucks cancel it immediately" in corporate speak. We don't have enough information to know for sure.

The point is that people seem to believe Bungie conducted this assessment in bad faith, just doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

Keeping players engaged for long period of time does not mean the game sucks and it's beyond a stretch to suggest it.

More importantly is that is that Naughty Dog cancelled the game not bungie.
 
Mibu no ookami said:
Keeping players engaged for long period of time does not mean the game sucks and it's beyond a stretch to suggest it.

More importantly is that is that Naughty Dog cancelled the game not bungie.
Click to expand...
I don't know why you continue to quote me for this.

It's a vague statement, we don't know for sure, we never played the game. we know nothing about it. It might have sucked, or it might not have, and it's not the point anyway.
 
I think TLou Factions was cancelled because of incompetence and poor management and bungie had nothing to do with it.

I also think bungie is going to release Concord 2.0... its not going to be a flop like concord, but it's not going to have legs.

Extraction shooters become second jobs, and when you have to wait 3 hours for X to craft or have 3 contracts to collect just random junk from rng drops, something dumb like that, people will drop off and play something else.
 
Remember when people tried to downplay what Concord cost to make, saying no one knew how high it was? Well we all know exactly how much Bungie cost lol.
 
I think Naughty Dog was better focusing on single player games which is where they excel. At the same time, a multiplayer component added to the campaign has worked fine in the past. Stick with what works. Regardless, I'm not seeing Bungie as the studio that others should be emulating in any sense at this point.
 
Last edited:
Loxus said:
Bungie raised questions about the The Last of Us multiplayer project's ability to keep players engaged for a long period of time, which led to the reassessment."
Click to expand...
Bungie should look in the mirror.

They just released an alpha for a game coming out in 4 months and hardly anyone cared to play it. The company that made Halo and Destiny games and is supposed to be master GAAS expert and the game was tracking at 300 CCU on Steam in the final week of the test. It peaked right away at 7,000-ish CCU and then cratered to less than 2,000 in a few days. Then 300.
 
Last edited:
Loxus said:
What's difficult about hiring a small team to make content for Factions 2 every 3 months or so?

There's literally no excuse for canceling it.
Click to expand...
They literally stated why they made the decision and Yoshida reiterated it.

How dense can you be?
 
Honestly I wouldn't be suprised if Sony in internally looking for studios that can make fractions 2 a reality. Such high budget projects rarely get shelved permanently. It is very likely that either

A. Naughty dog is quietly expanding to be able to support factions 2

B. Helping Sony create or look for a studio that can do so.

Personally wouldn't be suprised if we hear it is being revived in around 2-3 years
 
Insanemaelstrom said:
Honestly I wouldn't be suprised if Sony in internally looking for studios that can make fractions 2 a reality. Such high budget projects rarely get shelved permanently. It is very likely that either
Click to expand...
It happens all the time.

They just axed two more of them earlier this year including one that Bluepoint was working on for years.
 
we don't know the details but i can guarantee you something, every person working in these companies has a title card with their pronous on their desk.
 
The best thing Bungie has done in the last 5 years was advising naughty dog not to become a gaas shithole studio. Create new studios for gaas, don't ruin already established signal player studios with that shit.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
I think Sony will shut Bungie after Marathon
4
175
Moses85 replied
Marathon delayed by Bungie
5 6 7 8 9
445
2K
clarky replied
Laura Fryer: Saving Bungie
23
351
bitbydeath replied
  • Locked
Laura Fryer | Saving Bungie
1
141
Jinzo Prime replied
Laura Fryer - Saving Bungie
33
582
simpatico replied
Top Bottom