Frequently Asked Forum Questions
Search the HBO News Archives Any All Exact		Search the Halo Updates DBs Halo Halo2		Bungie Webcam HBO XBL Gamertags *Ar's Simple HTML Guide Shishka's Guide for Newcomers The Lowdown on Download Accelerators Red Loser's Anti-Spamming Guide Egg FAQ | More Egg Stuff c0ld's Movie Starter Guide Shishka's HaloPC Pre-Release FAQ 3.1 AutoMagic 117 StripzMaker
Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts

Re: Don't worry, one comes along every 5 minutes
Posted By: Ma1agate	Date: 5/26/06 1:00 p.m.
In Response To: Don't worry, one comes along every 5 minutes (Narcogen) : I think the question the article asks is whether or not it is really : practical to say that Bungie and Microsoft have equal say in what goes : on-- let alone that Bungie has autonomy. If MS wants Halo 3 or 4 and : insists on it, probably the only thing everyone at Bungie can do is quit-- : and the book says that threat was made. Microsoft obviously doesn't want : that. But perhaps they would turn the franchise over to someone else. : Perhaps they have that right, unless the buyout language prohibits it. It may not be my place to chime in, what with not having read the requisite material and all, but were MS to pull such a stunt, I can't imagine that, regardless of the actual quality, any Halo title not done by Bungie would do particularly well. As skeptical as I was of the MS buyout in the beginning, I've grown to trust MS to a certain degree in regards to games. If it were to come to light that MS has in the past or continues to exert a significant amount of pressure on Bungie to produce Halo titles, in my opinion that would indicate either a severe lack of faith on MS's part in Bungie's ability to produce anything profitable outside of the Halo franchise, or simply a lack of vision and an unhealthy fixation on their favorite cash cow (being Halo, not Bungie). I can't be alone in suspecting that the latter is the case, although it seems like MS is attempting to apply their formula that worked so well with Bungie and Halo to other studios and not just Bungie. Not that there is anything inherently wrong with that strategy, but I can't think of any examples offhand of a studio being bought by MS and starting up a new IP not tied to the one MS had its sights originally set on. : Allard's mention of Halo 3 prior to that either means that he wanted a Halo 3 : before it ever became a necessity, regardless of what Bungie did or didn't : want to do, OR that even with Halo 2 shipping in late 2004 he wanted : Bungie to some how crank out a sequel or expansion or something for the : 360 launch, which also clearly didn't happen. But that certainly doesn't mean there wasn't some kind of pressure for it, although we admittedly don't have any proof. I'm starting to sound like a conspiracy theorist. =( : It's been suggested that nobody but Fries really knew what Microsoft had with : Bungie. Certainly, if the book is right, they didn't have to pay top : dollar for them. The cited purchase price for Bungie, for instance, is : around 10% of what MS just paid for Lionhead. That Halo was the smash hit : for the original Xbox I think was better anticipated by old Bungie fans : and the gaming press than it was by Microsoft. Maybe, but also keep in mind that Fable was pretty well received and didn't appear on any other consoles. I doubt MS wanted LH to be tempted to release ports of future installments of that franchise for other consoles. The Xbox has always been weak on RPG titles, and I can't imagine MS letting that exclusivity fish slip out of their hands willingly. That, coupled with LH's weakened state after closing at least one location, I'd think would explain a significant portion of the number that MS was willing to pay. : Nor would I; and I think he planned it much earlier than the rescheduling of : Halo 2. I think it's possible he also wanted Halo 2 early enough to make : Halo 3 a launch title-- even if Bungie didn't intend to make Halo 3 at the : time! Surely not out of the question, in my opinion. : On the details: Bungie neither developed nor published Myth 3, as the : property was sold to Take Two as part of the buyout. And we all know how well that went. Which is why I would put exactly zero faith in any Bungie IPs after they've changed hands. : I cannot agree with you there. There is every indication that Halo 2 only : exists as an Xbox game in order to put a profitable quarter in the books : for the Entertainment division; otherwise they could have retooled as a : 360 launch title, finished the story, and moved on to something else. I can't really disagree with this, although I think it's entirely possible that sometime after Halo was released the overall story was changed and expanded completely independent of any kind of pressure from MS. : If MS really wanted ONLY to compete in the living room with sony, then the : Xbox would have an HD-DVD in it. That is a long-term strategy, not a : short-term one, though. MS cannot indefinitely afford to throw money at : the Xbox without getting anything back for it. They cannot simply pound : Sony into submission. And Microsoft's other divisions, which foot the bill : for projects like the Xbox, are seeing the first hints of trouble in : years-- Microsoft's stock has had a dip for the first time in recent : memory. And Halo 2 was a nice shot in the arm, but if the franchise really was originally intended for two installments only, it says a lot that MS wouldn't trust Bungie to generate a successful new IP for the 360 launch and wanted instead to milk the Halo cow a little more. : Takahashi's book suggests that this is exactly what Allard wanted, and it was : Fries who said that to do so would ruin the franchise and thus make those : profits impossible to get. Something that I'm more afraid of than I am excited about Halo 3. : Yes, it is-- because that is what J Allard and Peter Moore have said. They : consider Halo 2 a success story of what happens when you give a studio : creative freedom, and they mean it without sarcasm or irony. What : Takahashi is saying is that if were not for Ed Fries, Bungie would not : have had that freedom-- and that even so, they didn't have as much freedom : as they might have liked. I really would like to believe Allard and Moore on this, and when they deliver lines like that I almost do, but practicing and preaching are two very different things. Again, this would mean seeing an MS-bought studio generate a completely new IP whilst under MS ownership. I can't think of any studios that have, offhand. I could very well be wrong, though. : As for what fans think, I do know there are some who consider Halo 2 the : opposite-- as an example of what happens when a studio has its creative : style cramped by deadlines and bean-counters. To be fair, there was a ridiculous amount of fanbase clamor as well. Not that either set of pressures is ever reasonable. : What I can understand, though, would be not burnout of the people, but of the : franchise. Bungie will have been working on Halo for nearly nine years by : the time Halo 3 ships if my guess is right. That's a long time. I might : never get sick of playing it, but I wouldn't blame them for getting sick : of making it. Not everybody is-- or wants to be-- George Lucas. God forbid. "The end of this story arc" gives me the heebie-jeebies. As much as I love the franchise, I think 3 games in any universe is enough to call it quits. I seriously doubt I'd buy another game set in the Haloverse after Halo 3 ships. Back when Marathon (and I) was much younger, I would have been happy with Marathon sequels ad infinitum, but after playing Myth, I saw how nice change can be, particularly when playing a game by people who's skill and passion and dedication you trust. ~Ma1

Message Index

bungie burnout	visibledetritus	5/25/06 7:30 p.m.
Re: bungie burnout	Frankie	5/25/06 7:47 p.m.
Re: bungie burnout	UrsusArctos	5/25/06 8:08 p.m.
Hogan's Heroes...	Pratch™	5/25/06 8:20 p.m.
Allard was right, Fries was wrong.	JakeDaGreat	5/25/06 8:53 p.m.
Re: Allard was right, Fries was wrong.	visibledetritus	5/25/06 8:57 p.m.
Re: Allard was right, Fries was wrong.	MSN	5/25/06 9:25 p.m.
Re: Allard was right, Fries was wrong.	visibledetritus	5/25/06 10:54 p.m.
Real Artists Ship	Narcogen	5/26/06 1:29 a.m.
Re: Real Artists Ship	Count Zero	5/26/06 12:36 p.m.
Not to mention	Pratch™	5/26/06 12:50 p.m.
Re: bungie burnout	Roger Wilco	5/25/06 9:15 p.m.
Re: bungie burnout	Rade	5/25/06 10:31 p.m.
Harsh	Narcogen	5/26/06 1:41 a.m.
Re: bungie burnout	Narcogen	5/26/06 1:35 a.m.
Re: bungie burnout	Roger Wilco	5/26/06 2:32 p.m.
Re: IMO: somebody missed the boat *really LONG*	gspawn	5/26/06 8:08 a.m.
Don't worry, one comes along every 5 minutes	Narcogen	5/26/06 10:18 a.m.
Re: Don't worry, one comes along every 5 minutes	Matt	5/26/06 10:28 a.m.
Re: Don't worry, one comes along every 5 minutes	Narcogen	5/26/06 10:38 a.m.
Re: Don't worry, one comes along every 5 minutes	Matt	5/26/06 11:02 a.m.
Re: Don't worry, one comes along every 5 minutes	Narcogen	5/26/06 12:01 p.m.
Re:The three levels deal	ShortRoundMcfly	5/26/06 12:08 p.m.
Re:The three levels deal	Count Zero	5/26/06 12:42 p.m.
Re:The three levels deal	Narcogen	5/26/06 1:16 p.m.
Re: Don't worry, one comes along every 5 minutes	MSN	5/26/06 10:59 a.m.
LIES!	Pratch™	5/26/06 11:45 a.m.
Refutation	Narcogen	5/26/06 11:54 a.m.
Re: Refutation	MSN	5/26/06 9:06 p.m.
Re: Refutation	Narcogen	5/26/06 9:58 p.m.
Re: Don't worry, one comes along every 5 minutes	Ma1agate	5/26/06 1:00 p.m.
So why not...	Pratch™	5/26/06 1:27 p.m.
Re: So why not...	Ma1agate	5/26/06 2:07 p.m.
By all means	Pratch™	5/26/06 2:29 p.m.
Well...	Pratch™	5/26/06 2:43 p.m.
Re: IMO: somebody missed the boat *really LONG*	Matt	5/26/06 10:22 a.m.
Re: IMO: somebody missed the boat *really LONG*	Narcogen	5/26/06 10:40 a.m.
Re: IMO: somebody missed the boat *really LONG*	Sep7imus [subnova]	5/26/06 12:42 p.m.
Re: IMO: somebody missed the boat *really LONG*	KP	5/26/06 1:23 p.m.
Re: IMO: somebody missed the boat *really LONG*	Louis Wu	5/26/06 1:42 p.m.
Re: IMO: somebody missed the boat *really LONG*	Narcogen	5/26/06 3:22 p.m.
Re: IMO: somebody missed the boat *really LONG*	UrsusArctos	5/26/06 8:33 p.m.
Re: bungie burnout	Twelve Large	5/26/06 10:41 p.m.
Re: bungie burnout	Narcogen	5/27/06 6:55 a.m.