How in the world did MS let their relationship with Bungie get to that point?

"Hey Bungie, we're going to need another Halo"

"Ah... we told you about our new idea right? It's sorcerers in space, we're calling it De...."

"Right, right. You're calling it 'Not Halo'. I got that last time. Anyway, another Halo, going to need that next"

"..."

"Is that a yes? Because so help me God we will Rare your asses. Kinect Master Chief is feeling pretty due right about now"

"Yeah, no, ok. We'll do another Halo... we'll finish the fight... again"

"That better not be sass I hear boy. New Halo, next holiday season. Get on it"

"... Ok, sir."
 
PoloBlue28 said:
Halo 4, which was critically acclaimed and sold about 9 million copies, was 343i's first attempt at creating a game.

Bungie will be dividing their attention amongst several platforms and absolutely have to have a ginormous launch to please Activision.

When I said it won't come close, I wasn't referring to quality. I was referring to success.

edit;

If they do somehow end up finding more success with Destiny, then obviously good on them. I'm not hating on Bungie or Destiny, nor do I have any reason to.
Click to expand...

Considering the fairly poor job they managed technically with their Halo games on 360 (particularly Halo 3) I can't say I'm optimistic at how good each version will be especially PS3/360 but their focus is on Sony platforms now so I can't say I'm that optimistic for the Xbox One version either.
 
I've gotta say, a business relationship where a subsidiary is able to negotiate an amicable split where the resulting entity retains its staff and name is uncommon. It really did sound like a situation where for Microsoft to justify its ongoing operations, they would have needed to retain a similar role, and enough of the Bungie creative staff didn't want that, and it was talked out.
 
Alienous said:
"Hey Bungie, we're going to need another Halo"

"Ah... we told you about our new idea right? It's sorcerers in space, we're calling it De...."

"Right, right. You're calling it 'Not Halo'. I got that last time. Anyway, another Halo, going to need that next"

"..."

"Is that a yes? Because so help me God we will Rare your asses. Kinect Master Chief is feeling pretty due right about now"

"Yeah, no, ok. We'll do another Halo... we'll finish the fight... again"

"That better not be sass I hear boy. New Halo, next holiday season. Get on it"

"... Ok, sir."
Click to expand...

I know you're joking but the little narrative here suggests Bungie had final say when in fact Microsoft was under no duress to accept Bungie's terms of independence. The video game industry isn't a school playground: a simple "no" from MS executives would have meant Bungie remained a subsidiary.
 
You're talking about the company that has their roots in making FPS games for the Mac.

They were never going to stay with Microsoft.
 
PoloBlue28 said:
You just missed the point spectacularly, but carry on.
Click to expand...

Your point, as best I can tell, is MS made a correct decision in letting Bungie go, because Halo was what was important, not Bungie.

The reality is while it was the fastest selling Halo, it's never outsold Halo 3 in lifetime sales and has bled population out faster than any Halo in history, after people actually played the game. DLC sold so poorly that even with a map pass, it's near impossible for a playlist to survive with DLC requirements. It lost half of it's population a week after the game came out.

The first week of sales are the only pretty picture you can paint for Halo 4. You have to ignore 90% of the other important stuff to say Halo 4 was a success in terms of the fanbase.
 
cakely said:
No props to Microsoft, they used Bungie for two console generations as a Halo making machine.

I'm happy to see Bungie intact and working on their own projects now.
Click to expand...

They could have kept Bungie and forced them to make Halo forever but they let them buy back their independence. That should be commended. It would be like Sony letting Naughty Dog buy its way out of Sony's fold.

To me it shows that Microsoft values its relationship with them enough to let them live on as a studio instead as a studio name.
 
Let's at least wait for Destiny and the new Halo to come out before jumping to unsubstantiated conclusions. As an OG Macintosh gamer, I've got a tremendous amount of respect for Bungie and their franchises. 343's first crack at Halo wasn't nearly as bad as the Halo OT guys would have you believe, even if it wasn't as feature-rich as Bungie's iterations were.
 
Gestault said:
I've gotta say, a business relationship where a subsidiary is able to negotiate an amicable split where the resulting entity retains its staff and name is uncommon. It really did sound like a situation where for Microsoft to justify its ongoing operations, they would have needed to retain a similar role, and enough of the Bungie creative staff didn't want that, and it was talked out.
Click to expand...

Bungie / Microsoft was not an amicable split. It was a very, very ugly divorce.
 
PanicFreak said:
They could have kept Bungie and forced them to make Halo forever but they let them buy back their independence. That should be commended. It would be like Sony letting Naughty Dog buy its way out of Sony's fold.

To me it shows that Microsoft values its relationship with them enough to let them live on as a studio instead as a studio name.
Click to expand...

Is that true? Wasn't true for Infinity Ward. Sure, Activision kept the name, but the creative forces bounced and coalesced at a new developer, mostly.

If Bungie, as an entity, didn't want to make Halo the result would be poorer quality games, and people leaving. And 343 would be called Bungie right now. I don't see what options Microsoft had short of securing the new IP or letting go of Bungie, in the long run.
 
infinityBCRT said:
The thing that makes me crazy is that Destiny could've easily been set in the Halo universe. I thought they were going to do a big departure from what they were doing before when they wanted to leave MS. And while the online/borderlands/mmo stuff is, it all still could've worked as a Halo game.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this has always seemed odd to me, too. I think Destiny looks awesome, but after all the effort Bungie went to to get out of making Halo games, I was expecting something a bit different from them.
 
Alienous said:
Is that true? Wasn't true for Infinity Ward. Sure, Activision kept the name, but the creative forces bounced and coalesced at a new developer, mostly.

If Bungie, as an entity, didn't want to make Halo the result would be poorer quality games, and people leaving. And 343 would be called Bungie right now. I don't see what options Activision had short of securing the new IP, in the long run.
Click to expand...

Exactly, which is why I dropped in that last line. "To me it shows that Microsoft values its relationship with them enough to let them live on as a studio instead as a studio name."
 
It was a win for Microsoft and a win for Bungie, I don't see what the problem is.
Microsoft kept the Halo IP and Bungie got their independence back.
I really don't think either of them expected Halo to become as big as it did.

The Flash said:
I'm still surprised that Joe Staten is back at MS.
Click to expand...
I'm sure one factor was the convenience of staying in Seattle.
Another factor being that he is in a much bigger role than he had at Bungie.
His fingerprints will be on a lot of Microsoft IPs, not just one.
 
Destiny looks too much like Halo for "creative freedom" to have been a credible reason why Bungie wanted out. They could have made any game in the world and they make another shooter?

Makes me look at them in a lot less favorable light.
 
sangreal said:
They wouldn't have to broker any deal; Bungie was part of MS. They had no more bargaining power than Rare would have in an attempt to stop making Kinect game.

Bungie's next big creative idea was Destiny and MS probably didn't think it was worth the huge investment that game is turning out to be. The rest of the studio (non-creative talent) can and has been replaced

I think people are overestimating Destiny anyway. I mean, I think it will be succesful but more Borderlands than Call of Duty levels of success.
Click to expand...

Microsoft is lacking in the first party department overall. They haven't increased their first party talent significantly other than Black Tusk since last gen. It was one of the ways Sony managed to bring back the PS3 from an otherwise dominant 360. The execs at Microsoft knew Bungie was tired of making the same old tired forumla and wanted out. They could have their 343 "replaceable talent?" Halo factory and a new IP. Instead they have lost one a respected gaming studio and have a Halo factory which has alienated a large portion of the Halo fanbase. I'm also fairly confident that Destiny is going to do far better than Borderlands.
 
PanicFreak said:
Exactly, which is why I dropped in that last line. "To me it shows that Microsoft values its relationship with them enough to let them live on as a studio instead as a studio name."
Click to expand...

Yeah, I just don't see it as commendable.

They didn't fight for the studio name because they don't perceive value in it. They perceive the value in the 'Halo' franchise, and they had a dev team specifically tasked with making those games when they let Bungie go.

I don't see how they could've forced anything, other than taking the studio name. And with Bungie being independent longer than it'd been Microsoft owned, that would've been a weird and pointless fight.

The talent would've simply quit their jobs and reformed, probably not in much time.
 
Salvor.Hardin said:
Did no one in the Xbox executive team realize how valuable Bungie was beyond the Halo series and the potential they had in creating a new franchise for the company?

Bungie has been hailed as one of, if not the best fps dev in the industry for over a decade now. Surely MS would trust them enough to work on something new rather than forcing them to become a perpetual Halo womb. It's stuff like this that makes me wish MS treated its internal teams more like Sony treats ND.

Props to MS for letting Bungie go their own way without destroying them, something truly exemplary for an acquiring company as large as MS. But the fact that it came to the point where Bungie didn't feel comfortable at MS any more is what truly confounds me. How do you let relations with your premier dev erode like that?
Click to expand...
While public narrative was about wanting to do something new, my understanding is that breakup was mostly ego/money stuff. They were annoyed about being another developer under MS when they thought their games defined Xbox as a brand. MS, who had contractual right of first refusal for new Bungie projects, passed on Destiny due to the nine-figure budget and IP ownership Bungie demanded, as did most other publishers.
 
hoos30 said:
Destiny looks too much like Halo for "creative freedom" to have been a credible reason why Bungie wanted out. They could have made any game in the world and they make another shooter?

Makes me look at them in a lot less favorable light.
Click to expand...

Bungie was a shooter studio before Halo.
 
Alienous said:
Yeah, I just don't see it as commendable.

They didn't fight for the studio name because they don't perceive value in it. They perceive the value in the 'Halo' franchise, and they had a dev team specifically tasked with making those games when they let Bungie go.

I don't see how they could've forced anything, other than taking the studio name. And with Bungie being independent longer than it'd been Microsoft owned, that would've been a weird and pointless fight.

The talent would've simply quit their jobs and reformed, probably not in much time.
Click to expand...

Well, they owned 100 percent of Bungie so they could have kept the company. Yes, people there were tired of working on Halo. Yes, people would have left if they Microsoft hadn't let Bungie buy its independence. But they didn't have to because Microsoft let them buy its independence.

As a result of that, the people at Bungie didn't have to go through the building process that Respawn had to go through. Therefore they could get Destiny off the ground faster.

All of which, I think is a) awesome for the people at Bungie, b) pretty cool of Microsoft and c) pretty great for gamers.
 
par_bungie_declaration.jpg


"When in the course of creative endeavor it becomes necessary for one group to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another and to assume among themselves responsibility for their own future, the separate and equal station to which fundamentals of artistic and creative expression and financial freedom lead them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind, requires that they should disclose the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that basically, we want to make games and create experiences our way, without any kind of fiscal, creative, or political constraints from on high, since we believe that's the best way to do it. We want to benefit directly from the success of our endeavors and share that success with the people responsible for it.

The people of Bungie. We the people."​
 
I was under the impression that Bungie promised to make two halo games (Reach and ODST) for MS under the terms that they would be allowed to buy themselves back from the company afterwards.

They could do this because the Bungie name isn't important, it is the people working there that matters, and they could leave. MS knew this, so they agreed.

If you are going to credit MS with anything it should be realizing that forcing Bungie to make Halo games would be counterproductive in the long run. I'm not sure the split was an amicable one , though.
 
Loch Doun said:
It was a win for Microsoft and a win for Bungie, I don't see what the problem is.
Microsoft kept the Halo IP and Bungie got their independence back.
I really don't think either of them expected Halo to become as big as it did.


I'm sure one factor was the convenience of staying in Seattle.
Another factor being that he is in a much bigger role than he had at Bungie.
His fingerprints will be on a lot of Microsoft IPs, not just one.
Click to expand...

I don't know man, I remember seeing a trailer for Halo back in... maybe 1999, when it was a Mac exclusive. The hype was real. I remember the outrage from the Mac/PC communities when it was bought and made an Xbox exclusive (at the time there were no talk of a PC version).

It was the Titanfall, or Destiny of its day.
 
FyreWulff said:
Bungie / Microsoft was not an amicable split. It was a very, very ugly divorce.
Click to expand...


Which is why several key members left Bungie to go join/form 343, and some key figures like Joseph Staten would go later and join MS as of recent. If MS was shit people like Frankie and Staten wouldn't have to gone to work with them.

Say what you want about money, but all the money in the world isn't worth it when you end up hating your job.
 
FyreWulff said:
Bungie / Microsoft was not an amicable split. It was a very, very ugly divorce.
Click to expand...

I hear bits and pieces of info but is there a write up of what actually happened somewhere? I'd be interested to know more details if they're available outside of two or three "facts" random people seem to know.
 
Is there any confirmation that MS refused to let Bungie work on original IP? If not, I can totally see Bungie wanting to both own their IP and publish to double the market rather than be MS only.
 
Salvor.Hardin said:
It wasn't a zero sum game. Didn't MS own the Halo franchise? They could have had a new Bungie ip with 343 continuing on with Halo.

My question is that when it became clear they would have to develop a whole new Halo team called 343, why didn't they just let Bungie do whatever they wanted to do at MS?
Click to expand...

I don't think they were ready for that at that point. If I recall correctly, Bungie was pretty much done after Halo 3 and went to MS asking out or the major players were leaving and forming another company. MS wasn't ready for that, so they made a deal with Bungie that they break off and keep their "Bungie" moniker in exchange for the Halo IP and partnering with what became 343i to create another Halo and do a proper handoff.
 
Waaghals said:
I was under the impression that Bungie promised to make two halo games (Reach and ODST) for MS under the terms that they would be allowed to buy themselves back from the company afterwards..
Click to expand...

Bungie went independent in 2007, the same year they released Halo 3. They were already 'free' at the point, but yes, ODST and Reach were part of the terms of satisfying their exit contract before they could release Destiny.
 
Exploratory said:
Doesn't everyone? Mario and Uncharted.
Click to expand...

Yeah let's just ignore TLOU.

Everyone saying MS's actions were "commendable" are ignoring the entire OP. The question is "How did their relationship GET to the point where Bungie wanted to leave?" And the answer to that is MS did not want them to do anything else other than Halo. They could've created a second Halo team like 343i while letting Bungie work on new things. They didn't.
 
Destiny is coming out in 5 months and I still don't know what it is exactly. So when they pitched Destiny to Microsoft after Halo 3 wrapped. They probably didn't know what it was exactly either. So they passed on it, Bungie fullfilled their contract and they left.

Letting them go makes more sense than having them work on some undefined new IP for the next 7 years with no new releases in your #1 franchise.
 
Microsoft has always been shortsighted. They care about the right here and now, not the future. When that happens they'll moneyhat their way out of any problems.
 
I don't believe a lot of rumors about that contract, like first right of refusal.

Ultimately, MS didn't 'fuck up', Bungie wanted out, and MS gain nothing from stopping them, all they could retain is the brand, the staff could have all left to form another studio, but MS wouldn't have got another two Halos, they wouldn't have got paid for the name.

They both did pretty well out of the split. Of course MS would benefit from having Bungie exclusive, but ultimately there's nothing they could do to stop them, just as there's nothing any first party can realistically do to stop any of their teams leaving.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Bungie doesn’t get enough credit for the way they reveal their games / expansions...
2
92
801
SABRE220 replied
[Insider Gaming] Microsoft Removes DLC Discounts For Xbox Game Pass Members, Will Get MS Rewards Points Instead
2 3
116
449
Unknown? replied
MS still wants developers to put games on their consoles, as a developer what would be the point?
2 3
113
3K
TheSHEEEP replied
Destiny 2 Hits Lowest Player Count on Steam in Franchise History as Community Reaches Breaking Point: “I Don’t Trust Bungie Anymore”
News  2 3
123
334
DarkShadowXI replied
Jurassic World: Archipelago x MS Flight Simulator 2024
5
241
Hookshot replied
Top Bottom