 |
|
|
| |
Activision Inks Ten-Year Multiplatform Bungie Deal
by Leigh Alexander [PC, Console/PC]
|
|
| |
|
April 29, 2010
|
| |
After weeks of ugly conflict with its most valuable studio and the resignation of its publishing executive, Activision finally has some good news to report in the signing of a major ten-year deal with Bungie.
The new, exclusive multiplatform deal means Activision will publish the Halo creator's new franchise, its first since it became independent from Microsoft.
Bungie's next project is described as an "action game universe"; as an independent studio, the developer will continue to own the IP. The terms of the deal were not publicly disclosed, but do not include all Bungie titles -- purely the "rights to publish and distribute all future Bungie games based on the new intellectual property on multiple platforms and devices".
The publishing deal is a major win for Activision, following an employee exodus from Call of Duty: Modern Warfare house Infinity Ward -- whose founders' next project will be published by Electronic Arts, Activision's biggest rival. Amid the brand reorganization for the prized Call of Duty franchise, something of a cloud has been hung over Activision's key shooter property.
"Bungie is one of the premier studios in our industry and we are extremely pleased to have the opportunity to work with their talented team over the next decade," said Activision COO Thomas Tippl.
"Bungie has developed some of the most compelling and successful games, multiplayer experiences and thriving fan communities, and this alliance underscores our long-standing commitment to foster the industry’s best creative talent," he adds.
As for Bungie, the studio will benefit from Activision's significant publishing infrastructure and marketing support, said studio president Harold Ryan. "From working together over the past nine months on this agreement, it is clear that Activision supports our commitment to giving our fans the best possible gaming experiences," says Ryan.
Bungie broke game sales records with the launch of Microsoft's Halo -- records now held by Infinity Ward's Modern Warfare 2. As of August 2009, the franchise overall has sold about 27 million units.
|
| |
|
|
[edit] its not like i have a stake
Meh. It's just a case of out of the frying pan and into the... frying pan. It seems to work for Bungie.
Activision is pure evil
The ramifications for the IW fiasco will be felt by their wallets.
Wouldn't that be ironic?
On difference was, back then, the flame wars took place on teletype machines. ;)
As for the franchise, I suspect it will persist but will depend heavily on how they choose to develop the canon.
The interesting part of the deal is the 10 year contract and multiplatform partnership. Technology wise Activision is relatively ahead in FPS in terms of frame rate and performance. (Note: This is distinct from game play as mechanics have a quality component.) Over all, I believe only 3 titles have been 60 fps on the PS3, Insomniac's Ratchet and Clank, Call of Duty 5 and 6, and God of War III.
While frame updates are a technical issue, it can have a dramatic influence in over all game play and tactile connection for the player. (i.e. hit markers, glitching, etc.) Additionally quality cross platform reduces over all specific issues in bugs and defects, reducing QA time and having comparable estimation benchmarks, but becomes harder the more specialized assets are per platform.
Over all it seems like a good deal and really depends on the IP's generated by Bungie and how they choose to develop their franchises. One would be enough so long as it has similar sell through rates and persistence. Also. studio size wise, they might start to get a little cramped for office space.
Is the Bungie Deal important?
Absolutely.
Does it erase the ignorance of the IW fiasco?
Absolutely Not.
And @Tyler I've said it before but IW cannot be called one of the greatest Devs in the last decade. 2 WW2 Cods the same copying MoHAA concept and then 2 mods bringing it to modern day MW1&2 . Granted incredibly successful but hardly original. If not for ATVI investment and marketing the CoDs would be a shadow of what they became.
The next Bungie game now has the potential to be as big as any CoD and even MW. The implications of this deal have not escaped Sony. It's going to be massive.
Just because Bungie scored good on Halo doesn't mean Bungie will score good again. Think Tabula Rasa for example of that not happening.
Did Valve lose street cred for L4D being published by EA? NO. The game was obviously from Valve based on the high quality of that franchise.
If Bungie makes another "Halo" in terms of success, then Activision's role as publisher shouldn't be an issue. Gamers will see the high quality of that developer and enjoy another awesome video game.
If the defected IW squad makes another "MW" in terms of success, then EA's role as publisher shouldn't be an issue. Gamers will see the high quality of that developer and enjoy another awesome video game.
Like all video game opinoins I shall take these future titles on one at a time. No sense judging a game that isn't finished because of a distrust or dislike of a publisher.
From a business pov, everyone is switching partners for the new decade. YEEEEEEEEHAAAAAAA!
1. Marathon ... a Mac game then ported to Win 95
2. Myth ... both Mac and PC
3. Oni ... on the Mac/PC & PS2
Remember, before Halo, there was no xbox. there was no MSFT console gaming market. And Halo was a market maker for the XBox. MSFT might have helped, but it was Bungie's experience in building games that made the Xbox.
Bungie was always a front runner in building good games with a strong community of followers (see Myth). They may not have had the mass commercial appeal that Halo did, but they were good games. Hence, I'd give Bungie the edge in making Xbox a success, more than I'd give MSFT credit in making Halo a success (IMHO).
You could say the exactly the same about Respawn. The only difference is Bungie's first ATVI game is well into developement unlike Respawn who are spending most of their time recreating an episode of LA Law episode where Michael Kuzak goes up against the evil corporation on behalf of wrongd employees.
Bungie would have been nowhere if it wasn't for Microsoft. Halo would never have gotten anywhere if it wasn't seen to be a step forward in console FPS. Personally I think Goldeneye was way better and I wish we could have seen that evolve. Combat Evolved? Nah, combat dumbed down.
Danny Pampel said: "Halo has to be one of the most lack luster FPS on any platform, I really fail to see the appeal."
There are a few key factors we should be aware of when it comes to Halo's success. Learning from this can help the rest of us make great games:
-4P Split screen multiplayer support with LAN support (in a phrase: A great social game)
-One of the best online infrastructures for any FPS (Bungie.net allows you to see ALL data of your matches, including where you died and how)
-Easy to use level customization (can change and in some cases build levels from scratch, all using a controller)
-Ability to save pictures and replays and share them with your friends (ties into the social aspect).
-Near infinite custom game types (I can make the game play like Counterstrike, or like UT by changing variables...and I can even turn it into a racing game with the vehicles and checkpoints)
-Unique gunplay (it's a game where it takes a combination of primary fire, secondary fire, grenades, and melee to kill a guy; nothing like most FPSs were a few shots will take someone down)
-Many grenade and equipment types (most FPS games don't feature these)
-Vehicles are a large part of the gameplay (outside of Battlefield and Warhawk this title still remains unique in this regard)
-coherent and sound physics system that applies to everything in the game from vehicles to even weapons lying on the ground.
Not everyone will like Halo (this is true with any game) but it's incredible success is based on some apparent qualities.
That said I think people will notice the MS influences on Halo: Reach and will appreciate the slight differences in it's gameplay as compared to previous titles. This may have much to do with one of FASA's multiplayer designers working with 343 for Reach.
You are probably right, but do note that the same would have also applied to a game like Goldeneye. And do keep in mind I'm not saying that Halo is the first title to feature some of those things, but rather it has a good collection of valued features and that combination makes it an appealing title.
And furthermore we can probably expect this same level of "polish" in Bungie's future titles. For example, Bungie.net implementation could become a standard among their other titles. Features like robust online modes and customizations.
While this may seem like a long shot, but perhaps Activision could have these sorts of features implemented in their other titles, like for example the next Call of Duty? I would think that the replay saving ability would be clamoured for among CoD players.
I agree with your points about Halo being the Gold Standard for how multiplayer games should be engineered. Bungie set the bar ATVI had to meet with COD and thus far, ATVI did not exceed it but met it.
On that note, Bungie had games like Tribes to borrow features from. That game had most of the gameplay mechanics Halo uses. Amazing nobody else who writes stories on the game industry remembers their history.