• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

[Redfall] 70% of Arkane Austin have left the company - Jason Schreier

Status
Not open for further replies.

Boss Mog

Member
Interested GIF by Nick Cannon
You're reading too much into it friend, It has nothing to do with skin color but more about hiring based on somebody's politics rather than skill. In my experience based people tend to be more hard working and more skilled than woke people; they also complain a lot less. Remember that woman who worked at Insomniac who said Rivet was gay and went around the office screaming "lombax titties" because she felt the character design was too feminine. The more of those people you have on your team the less chance you have of putting out a good game. They are counter-productive and will care more about promoting an agenda than making a quality game.
 

Boss Mog

Member
So who had it worst :
1) Arkane "70% of our devs quit" with Redfall.
2) Bioware "90 hour work week for 15 months" with Anthem.

Its wild how similar the two games ended up being.
Not at all comparable since Anthem was actually a good game at its core. The gameplay was very solid and fun, the problem was there was not much built around that gameplay in terms of story content and world-building. If you want to compare it to BioWare then compare it with BioWare Montreal's Mass Effect Andromeda, that's a far more accurate comparison.
 
If you join a company to make single player immersive sims and then have to work on something as directionless as Redfall then it’s no surprise people left.

Microsoft’s broader problem is that Zenimax was in a dire financial state before they bought them and were bleeding money. Games are now more expensive to make than ever and the types of games Bethesda make take a very long time.
I don’t know whether Fallout 76 and Elder Scrolls Online make a lot of money as ‘evergreen’ titles but I would imagine the company is still quite a money sink.

The pivot of a lot of Zenimax studios to make games that have DLC or service elements was born out of necessity to make money. If Microsoft are happy to blank cheque Bethesda then great, but they also are bankrolling GamePass and putting in (probably) not very profitable games into it from Bethesda at a high cost of development. The two elements are a bad combo.

Add in that they won’t be able to count on the PlayStation userbase due to their own choices and then it gets even more of a precarious situation.
 
Last edited:

Ozriel

M$FT
The loss of Shinji Mikami lol. He's a legend but the last couple of good games Tango has made, namely Evil Within 2 and HiFi were directed by Mikami's protege, John Johanas.

Apparently, in 25 years time when all these legends retire, the videogames industry dies. No protégés, nobody learn anything, no succession plan.

If you join a company to make single player immersive sims and then have to work on something as directionless as Redfall then it’s no surprise people left.

Microsoft’s broader problem is that Zenimax was in a dire financial state before they bought them and were bleeding money. Games are now more expensive to make than ever and the types of games Bethesda make take a very long time.
I don’t know whether Fallout 76 and Elder Scrolls Online make a lot of money as ‘evergreen’ titles but I would imagine the company is still quite a money sink.

The pivot of a lot of Zenimax studios to make games that have DLC or service elements was born out of necessity to make money. If Microsoft are happy to blank cheque Bethesda then great, but they also are bankrolling GamePass and putting in (probably) not very profitable games into it from Bethesda at a high cost of development. The two elements are a bad combo.

Add in that they won’t be able to count on the PlayStation userbase due to their own choices and then it gets even more of a precarious situation.

Much of this just reads like assumptions you’ve come up with to reach a conclusion you like.

Bethesda games take a long time to make, but are usually very successful commercially. And the fact that their ongoing games like FO76 and ESO are not only still running, but getting content at a steady clip, it means they’re profitable endeavors.

Some Zenimax/Bethesda games or studios aren’t known for setting the world alight with commercial performance. Others have very successful IP and strong commercial performance. Prey and Redfall are one end of the spectrum, but on the other hand you have the Dooms and Elder Scrolls.

There’s absolutely nothing we’ve seen that paints a picture of a ‘precarious situation’, and Redfall failing does not change that. It’s a small piece of the pie, blown up by MS in importance due to the sheer need for first party content to fill a sparse release schedule.

Now if Starfield flops…that would be another discussion
 

YeulEmeralda

Linux User
If you join a company to make single player immersive sims and then have to work on something as directionless as Redfall then it’s no surprise people left.

Microsoft’s broader problem is that Zenimax was in a dire financial state before they bought them and were bleeding money. Games are now more expensive to make than ever and the types of games Bethesda make take a very long time.
I don’t know whether Fallout 76 and Elder Scrolls Online make a lot of money as ‘evergreen’ titles but I would imagine the company is still quite a money sink.

The pivot of a lot of Zenimax studios to make games that have DLC or service elements was born out of necessity to make money. If Microsoft are happy to blank cheque Bethesda then great, but they also are bankrolling GamePass and putting in (probably) not very profitable games into it from Bethesda at a high cost of development. The two elements are a bad combo.

Add in that they won’t be able to count on the PlayStation userbase due to their own choices and then it gets even more of a precarious situation.
This is a very interesting point. The people who decide to go into the gaming industry do so because they are PASSIONATE about the medium.

With their skills they can easily become salary men in the tech industry and get better pay checks/stable careers.
 

Aenima

Member
Sony is making the same mistake smh.
They are. The diference is they big studios can aford making a flop as they have multiple teams working on 2 or more projects, but by the end of the gen, i bet my left nut that a couple of the smaller studios chasing gaas will be dead.
 
Last edited:

Ozriel

M$FT
This is a very interesting point. The people who decide to go into the gaming industry do so because they are PASSIONATE about the medium.

With their skills they can easily become salary men in the tech industry and get better pay checks/stable careers.

I’ve seen way too many despondent tweets from devs after layoffs to know it certainly isn’t true that they’d easily pivot to regular employment at higher pay.

Sure, this holds true for the Carmacks of this world, but you’re hardly going to pivot from working as a senior environmental artist or narrative lead to working as a Data Scientist, for example.
 

balls of snow

Gold Member
Not at all comparable since Anthem was actually a good game at its core. The gameplay was very solid and fun, the problem was there was not much built around that gameplay in terms of story content and world-building. If you want to compare it to BioWare then compare it with BioWare Montreal's Mass Effect Andromeda, that's a far more accurate comparison.
Anthem and Redfall are always online. They both are coop focus and one day when the powers that be turn off the servers both can finally be forgetten to time. Whilst ME Andromeda can still be played 20 years from now.
 
Apparently, in 25 years time when all these legends retire, the videogames industry dies. No protégés, nobody learn anything, no succession plan.



Much of this just reads like assumptions you’ve come up with to reach a conclusion you like.

Bethesda games take a long time to make, but are usually very successful commercially. And the fact that their ongoing games like FO76 and ESO are not only still running, but getting content at a steady clip, it means they’re profitable endeavors.

Some Zenimax/Bethesda games or studios aren’t known for setting the world alight with commercial performance. Others have very successful IP and strong commercial performance. Prey and Redfall are one end of the spectrum, but on the other hand you have the Dooms and Elder Scrolls.

There’s absolutely nothing we’ve seen that paints a picture of a ‘precarious situation’, and Redfall failing does not change that. It’s a small piece of the pie, blown up by MS in importance due to the sheer need for first party content to fill a sparse release schedule.

Now if Starfield flops…that would be another discussion
You’ve put the cart before the horse.

Zenimax put themselves up for sale. As a whole they were bleeding money. Their GAAS pivot was to try and rake in more cash. Those are facts.

Even the games an average gamer may say is successful sadly often aren’t financially.

Let’s take an example of a game like Fallout 4. That is a game that was very succsssful, selling over 20 million units. What platform did it sell the most on? PS4.

Xbox will be putting Starfield on Game Pass day one. That will severely eat into Xbox and PC retail and digital sales.

So with no PlayStation sales, and significantly diminished sales from Xbox and PC - that doesn’t look good for the bottom line. That is going to be one of Bethesda’s biggest hits - it would be a game they’d want a huge amount of income from. That’s the game that would offset much of the failure or sub-ideal revenue from other games. It’s a guaranteed hit with significantly lower earning potential now. That’s a game that will have been in development for about 8 years using Bethesda’s most expensive team to run.

Repeat that with the next Doom, Elder Scrolls etc and you have some franchises that would have been huge cash cows that now produce less cash. When that happens, the target is placed on the smaller teams who will have their worth judged and be put under the microscope.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see Bethesda’s studio slate reviewed.
 
Xbox will be putting Starfield on Game Pass day one. That will severely eat into Xbox and PC retail and digital sales.

If Game Pass severely eats into Xbox and PC sales of Starfield, that indicates that the service has significant traction (a win for MS). Just as Netflix rolls along with no sales at all, you can't discount the subscription revenue.
 

SaintALia

Member
No goal posts were moved. Unless you can point out from where exactly I moved them from?

I asked the poster what he heard about Schrier to know if there have been instances where he mis-reported or any other reasons why he would be mistrusted.

"Migration of talent. Not enough devs to balance that loss of talent. Not enough time to get the new devs up to speed."

Is an exact quote of my reply to the other poster, BEFORE You even commented on my post or my response to you and it was my second post in the entire thread, and the first was the initial questioning. SO yea, I'd like to know when I moved goal posts and where I even moved them from.
 

Ozriel

M$FT
If Game Pass severely eats into Xbox and PC sales of Starfield, that indicates that the service has significant traction (a win for MS). Just as Netflix rolls along with no sales at all, you can't discount the subscription revenue.

I’m always speechless how these people don’t realize how inane that narrative is.

“More and more people will join Gamepass and retail revenue will drop, hehe that’s bad”

It seems many here believe people pay for Gamepass with bananas and thoughts and prayers.
 
I’m always speechless how these people don’t realize how inane that narrative is.

“More and more people will join Gamepass and retail revenue will drop, hehe that’s bad”

It seems many here believe people pay for Gamepass with bananas and thoughts and prayers.

You used to hear the same things regarding the major shift in enterprise software from upfront sales to subscription. You'd think with the way that turned out people would understand why corporations favor the recurring revenue by now. 🤷‍♂️
 

Ozriel

M$FT
Zenimax put themselves up for sale. As a whole they were bleeding money. Their GAAS pivot was to try and rake in more cash. Those are facts.

Their founders were 73 and 69. They’ve been shopping Bethesda for sale for a while to cash out, as their valuations kept rising. You’re yet to produce a single source for your assumption that they were ‘bleeding money’.

You can want to make more cash and still be financially strong. Activision is very profitable and still monetizes aggressively. Ditto for EA. Sony makes record profits and still closes studios.

Even the games an average gamer may say is successful sadly often aren’t financially.

Let’s take an example of a game like Fallout 4. That is a game that was very succsssful, selling over 20 million units. What platform did it sell the most on? PS4.

This is an incoherent point. Your first paragraph talks about gamers being misguided about a popular title’s commercial success, but then you mention Fallout 4 which WAS very commercially successful.
Platform split is an entirely different point.


Xbox will be putting Starfield on Game Pass day one. That will severely eat into Xbox and PC retail and digital sales.

PC retail sales are barely dented by PC Gamepass. Sea of Thieves - for example - had sold over 5 million units from 2020 to December 2021 on Steam alone, despite being on PC gAmepass since 2018. Forza Horizon 5 has been on Steam’s Gold Revenue charts for 2021 and 2022…and also showed up in NPD’s top 20 for 2021 despite a Q4 release.

A mod heavy game like Starfield will sell millions on PC alone.

Retail aside, these games drive Gamepass subscription and hence revenue. Hundreds of millions of dollars monthly, billions annually.

Repeat that with the next Doom, Elder Scrolls etc and you have some franchises that would have been huge cash cows that now produce less cash. When that happens, the target is placed on the smaller teams who will have their worth judged and be put under the microscope.

Will Gamepass and platform exclusivity eat into retail sales and lead to significant drop in potential retail revenue? Sure

Will great AAA titles from Zenimax studios drive Gamepass subscriptions and hence more subscription revenue? Sure. You can’t have one and not the other.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see Bethesda’s studio slate reviewed.

That would certainly be a surprise to everyone then, since Microsoft’s been increasing head count for their studios and pretty much every Bethesda studio is working on a highly anticipated title.

Will they close iD software? Or MachineGames, working on Indiana Jones? Or Bethesda with the biggest IP? Or Tango Games, on a roll with successful releases? Or Alpha Dog Games, one of their handful of Mobile game developers that MS is desperately trying to grow? Or Arkane, that despite the Redfall setback is being grown with more employees now between Lyon and Austin than before the acquisition?

Which one?
 
I literally said it should of been a dpuble A budget game and you said they dont make money qnd ive literally just posted double A games that have made profit
we are talking about how a publisher like bethesda can't be sustained with AA games.

just look at the industry right now. All major Publishers are highly dependent of AAA hits and especially Live Games.
 

Ozriel

M$FT
we are talking about how a publisher like bethesda can't be sustained with AA games.

just look at the industry right now. All major Publishers are highly dependent of AAA hits and especially Live Games.

The context was Arkane, not the entirety of Bethesda. It started with him suggesting they should have given (Arkane) an AA budget instead of pushing for an AAA game.
 

Wildebeest

Member
how many OG project dark people are still in Rare?
The fps guys famously left to set up Free Radical to make TimeSplitters, back in the day. It no doubt affected Perfect Dark Zero, and people at the time were amazed by the glacial five-year wait for a sequel. Now, only five years, such rapid turn around.
 
The context was Arkane, not the entirety of Bethesda. It started with him suggesting they should have given (Arkane) an AA budget instead of pushing for an AAA game.
and that is what i am saying. You cannot ignore Bethesda in this context, because they are the publisher, they are paying for the development and marketing.

Maybe if other Betheada's games were undisputed hits (financially) Arkane could have a chance to make a AA games or keep making what they do best.
WOR3Tt8.jpg

and there is a lot of information about Betheada/Zenimax's shady behavior/controversies over the years.

The point is, Bethesda (as an independent subsidiary) was the one pushing for this new direction, probably due to its multiple underperforming games. This is where Microsoft could have intervened to retain Arkane's identity and talent.

in other words: Bethesda as and independent entity wouldn't have made the decision of give Arkane a AA budget instead AAA.

why?

because AA dont make money.

and they they (publisher) had a lot of underperforming AAA title already.
 
They are. The diference is they big studios can aford making a flop as they have multiple teams working on 2 or more projects, but by the end of the gen, i bet my left nut that a couple of the smaller studios chasing gaas will be dead.
The difference is Sony is buying talent and increasing salaries upon acquiring studios to maintain that talent.

Microsoft is buying IPs and just watching as the majority of the developers leave upon the change in leadership.
 
Their founders were 73 and 69. They’ve been shopping Bethesda for sale for a while to cash out, as their valuations kept rising. You’re yet to produce a single source for your assumption that they were ‘bleeding money’.

You can want to make more cash and still be financially strong. Activision is very profitable and still monetizes aggressively. Ditto for EA. Sony makes record profits and still closes studios.



This is an incoherent point. Your first paragraph talks about gamers being misguided about a popular title’s commercial success, but then you mention Fallout 4 which WAS very commercially successful.
Platform split is an entirely different point.




PC retail sales are barely dented by PC Gamepass. Sea of Thieves - for example - had sold over 5 million units from 2020 to December 2021 on Steam alone, despite being on PC gAmepass since 2018. Forza Horizon 5 has been on Steam’s Gold Revenue charts for 2021 and 2022…and also showed up in NPD’s top 20 for 2021 despite a Q4 release.

A mod heavy game like Starfield will sell millions on PC alone.

Retail aside, these games drive Gamepass subscription and hence revenue. Hundreds of millions of dollars monthly, billions annually.



Will Gamepass and platform exclusivity eat into retail sales and lead to significant drop in potential retail revenue? Sure

Will great AAA titles from Zenimax studios drive Gamepass subscriptions and hence more subscription revenue? Sure. You can’t have one and not the other.



That would certainly be a surprise to everyone then, since Microsoft’s been increasing head count for their studios and pretty much every Bethesda studio is working on a highly anticipated title.

Will they close iD software? Or MachineGames, working on Indiana Jones? Or Bethesda with the biggest IP? Or Tango Games, on a roll with successful releases? Or Alpha Dog Games, one of their handful of Mobile game developers that MS is desperately trying to grow? Or Arkane, that despite the Redfall setback is being grown with more employees now between Lyon and Austin than before the acquisition?

Which one?
The question is will the revenue lost from game sales outstrip the gains in GamePass? If Microsoft aren’t selling enough consoles then GamePass can’t grow quicker than competitors, and unlike competitors they’ll be putting games that cost hundreds of million to develop straight into GamePass, hitting the games revenue.

Remember, this year it’ll be Redfall, Forza, Starfield, Hi-Fi Rush and probably Hellblade, but they’ve got many many studios developing games that will run into the hundreds of millions of dollars a year that they’ll put into that service.

They’ve got to keep selling consoles to keep the subs rising and they aren’t doing that well enough. The last number we had for GamePass was around 30 million subs. By contrast Sony have got 14.1 million PS+ extra and above subs in under a year and have not launched a single first party game to launch into the service. Every single one has already had its retail and digital sales before being a catalogue game. They are breaking records with PS5 sales and will convert more and more users into extra and above subscribers and will be able to do that faster than Microsoft.

GamePass has been on the market 5 years so far. It is a great service, but there is a tipping point with cost.

As per my point with Bethesda, their games are very very expensive to make and they take a long time. The company was in dreadful financial shape prior to being bought and if I were Microsoft looking at GamePass growth, slow sales of the console and where cost savings could be made - it would be in that part of the company.
 

Slikk360

Member
Microsoft would buy Rockstar for a reasonable price in the billions, just to own the GTA IP. The amount of staff left wouldn't matter after that.
Yea owning the ip is one thing but having devopers with talent and vision to create a great game is way more valuable imo.
 

Gambit2483

Member
Well, Microsoft managing a studio. Again.

- FASA Studio : closed.
- Ensemble Studios : closed.
- Bizarre Creations : closed.
- Lionhead Studios : closed.
- Bungie : sold.
- Digital ANVIL : closed.
- RARE : alive, but more like of ghost of what it was before.
- Press Play : closed.

Yeah that's so exciting to see MS buying all those studios, it always ended up so well.

But hey, Minecraft is doing well, so who cares.

Thank You!

Everytime I hear about MS acquiring a studio I keep asking myself "how the hell can anyone be happy about this"???

Damn near every studio they acquire is either squandered, left a broken shell of its former self, or flat out closed.

They SUCK at studio management and yet you people want them to acquire more??
 
Last edited:
Thank You!

Everytime I hear about MS acquiring a studio I keep asking myself "how the hell can anyone be happy about this"???

Damn near every studio they acquire is either squandered, left a broken shell of its former self, or flat out closed.

They SUCK at studio management and yet you people want them to acquire more??
And this is exactly why I'm so strongly opposed to the MS/Activision deal. They've already bought a ton of other studios/publishers and fucked all of them up royally. It's like, they already own a shit ton of IPs, many of which were successful in the 360 era. How about you try to make use of those first, before going out and buying other shit?
 
And this is exactly why I'm so strongly opposed to the MS/Activision deal. They've already bought a ton of other studios/publishers and fucked all of them up royally. It's like, they already own a shit ton of IPs, many of which were successful in the 360 era. How about you try to make use of those first, before going out and buying other shit?
This is why Sony and Nintendo’s approaches work - they’ve always invested in talent. A large part of Bungie’s price was talent retention. Microsoft have bought a lot of IP but the talent churn is something else.
 

Ozriel

M$FT
Well, Microsoft managing a studio. Again.

- FASA Studio : closed.
- Ensemble Studios : closed.
- Bizarre Creations : closed.
- Lionhead Studios : closed.
- Bungie : sold.
- Digital ANVIL : closed.
- RARE : alive, but more like of ghost of what it was before.
- Press Play : closed.

Yeah that's so exciting to see MS buying all those studios, it always ended up so well.

But hey, Minecraft is doing well, so who cares.

Eh. Bungie released 4 extremely successful AAA Halo games under MS and your only descriptor for how well this management period went is ‘sold’? For a split that wasn’t acrimonious?

Rare’s having some of their best ever success yet, with strong retail performance for Sea of Thieves and a successful GaaS tail.

You’ve also carefully omitted Playground games, Turn 10, Coalition, Obsidian and of course Mojang. Not to mention the inside looks we’ve gotten from Ninja Theory and Double Fine.


The question is will the revenue lost from game sales outstrip the gains in GamePass? If Microsoft aren’t selling enough consoles then GamePass can’t grow quicker than competitors, and unlike competitors they’ll be putting games that cost hundreds of million to develop straight into GamePass, hitting the games revenue.

Remember, this year it’ll be Redfall, Forza, Starfield, Hi-Fi Rush and probably Hellblade, but they’ve got many many studios developing games that will run into the hundreds of millions of dollars a year that they’ll put into that service.

They’ve got to keep selling consoles to keep the subs rising and they aren’t doing that well enough. The last number we had for GamePass was around 30 million subs. By contrast Sony have got 14.1 million PS+ extra and above subs in under a year and have not launched a single first party game to launch into the service. Every single one has already had its retail and digital sales before being a catalogue game. They are breaking records with PS5 sales and will convert more and more users into extra and above subscribers and will be able to do that faster than Microsoft.

GamePass has been on the market 5 years so far. It is a great service, but there is a tipping point with cost.

As per my point with Bethesda, their games are very very expensive to make and they take a long time. The company was in dreadful financial shape prior to being bought and if I were Microsoft looking at GamePass growth, slow sales of the console and where cost savings could be made - it would be in that part of the company.
If compelling games come out, consoles will be sold. To play these games, either retail sales go up or Gamepass subscriptions go up. You can’t have it both ways where games are available and both struggle.

Most AAA games don’t cost ‘hundreds of millions’ to make, and retail sales alone should handily cover development costs for well received games.

You’re still yet to provide any data to show Bethesda was in a ‘dreadful financial situation’ at the time of acquisition, and whatever state they were in would have been fully built into the valuation at purchase.
 

Dr. Claus

Banned
Eh. Bungie released 4 extremely successful AAA Halo games under MS and your only descriptor for how well this management period went is ‘sold’? For a split that wasn’t acrimonious?

Are you seriously trying to compare the MS and Bungie of 15+ years ago to today's? You do realize they are essentially completely different companies now, right? You can't be this ignorant.
 

Ozriel

M$FT
Are you seriously trying to compare the MS and Bungie of 15+ years ago to today's? You do realize they are essentially completely different companies now, right? You can't be this ignorant.

Did you seriously fail to read the post I responded to for context?
The post that talked about FASA studios, closed in 2007? Ensemble, closed in 2009? Digital Anvil, closed down in 2006?

You cannot be serious.

Just realized the guy’s post had Bizarre Creations in it as a studio ‘mismanaged by Microsoft’. It was actually an Activision studio.
Folks are making up studios for an argument and it’s me you’re taking to task.
 
Last edited:

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Well, Microsoft managing a studio. Again.

- FASA Studio : closed.
- Ensemble Studios : closed.
- Bizarre Creations : closed.
- Lionhead Studios : closed.
- Bungie : sold.
- Digital ANVIL : closed.
- RARE : alive, but more like of ghost of what it was before.
- Press Play : closed.

Yeah that's so exciting to see MS buying all those studios, it always ended up so well.

But hey, Minecraft is doing well, so who cares.
Bizarre Creations was last owned by Activision in their final 5 years. MS closes many studios. But Sony does too.
 

Nydius

Member
Rare’s having some of their best ever success yet, with strong retail performance for Sea of Thieves and a successful GaaS tail.

You’ve also carefully omitted Playground games, Turn 10, Coalition, Obsidian and of course Mojang. Not to mention the inside looks we’ve gotten from Ninja Theory and Double Fine.

Rare was almost killed by Microsoft's push to turn them into their Kinect and New Xbox Experience studio. The fact that they got to make Sea of Thieves at all is surprising but let's not forget that the game was absolute shit at launch and took almost two full years of updates to become their "best ever success". That is hardly a statement of quality, especially from a studio that once had a large stable of very popular IPs.

Playground Games and Turn 10 are the only consistent performers of the bunch, and all they do are Forza games. I won't include Fable until it actually arrives. Right now, these two studios do one thing and one thing only. Turn 10 hasn't put out a game in six years. The Coalition has only made two Gears games. Obsidian has done almost nothing for Microsoft since their acquisition except for Grounded -- Obsidian's biggest/best work is still Fallout New Vegas and The Outer Worlds, with no ETA on Outer Worlds 2.

You can play defense force as much as you want, it doesn't change reality. Microsoft has a twenty year history of mismanagement of studios (and third party exclusivity arrangements; see: Mistwalker Studios). The amount of IPs they have now is nothing compared to what they could have had if they had fostered the talent and studios they had during their OG Xbox and early Xbox 360 days. Instead, they got overly focused on Halo, Gears, Forza and trend-chasing with Kinect.

Crimson Skies, MechAssault, Shadowrun, Project Gotham Racing, Fuzion Frenzy, Quantum Redshift, Blinx, Kameo, Viva Pinata, Banjo-Kazooie... just a few IPs that were sacrificed so Xbox could focus on the dudebros and trying to copy Nintendo's success with the Wii.

It was actually an Activision studio.
It wasn't an Activision studio until Microsoft stopped working with them because they didn't want PGR competing against Forza.

Thanks for showing me you don't know shit about what you're talking about and can safely be ignored.
 
Last edited:

Trogdor1123

Gold Member
Now, before we jump to conclusions (funny), what is normal attrition rate for a studio, especially after a game fails?
 
Source = “Trust me bro”



It's fine if you don't follow this stuff closely, but do a quick Google search before you start accusing others of making stuff up.
 
Last edited:
Now, before we jump to conclusions (funny), what is normal attrition rate for a studio, especially after a game fails?
The problem is the people were leaving during development, which contributed to its failure.

Why 70% of the staff felt the need to leave is the question.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom