Microsoft Bootstraps "Matrix" Game Rights Purchase 158
richardbowers writes: "An article released today on IGN claims that Microsoft has managed to get its hands on exclusive rights for Internet-based games using the Matrix license.
According to the article, Microsoft lent Interplay five million dollars in exchange for this exclusivity and for a bunch of other contractual goodies - including characters, sound tracks, and other features that will not be included in other versions of the same game, thanks to the agreement. They also have to guarantee delivery of the game in the same time-frame as the release of the next sequel."
Re:Why why why??? (Score:1)
Re:Interesting (Score:1)
Appropriate... (Score:1)
They've bought the video game rights to a movie that can be described roughly the same way: visually appealing but inconsistent, badly written, contrived, with a disappointing ending, inspiring sequels that are late and likely to be even worse.
Release to coincide with the next sequel? (Score:5)
- A.P.
--
Forget Napster. Why not really break the law?
What you must realize... (Score:2)
Whatever... (Score:2)
Console games will never be as good as PC games until everyone has an HDTV and the consoles themselves become a lot more like PCs.
Re:Whatever... (Score:2)
I'm more than happy to deal with the occaisional driver problem if I get to play better games. Then there's the fact that you can do a lot more cool things with computer games than you can with console games. How many console games have several hundred user-created maps or levels available? How about mods or total conversions? How about new skins, weapons, characters, etc? Can't do any of that very well or very easily with consoles now. Even as consoles become more PC-like, it's still gonna take them a long time to get anywhere near the flexibility you get with a PC and a game like Halflife or Quake (or any of a few dozen other games).
I think the only reason consoles make so much money is because the hardware is cheap and there are millions of kids that want to play games, but parents aren't always that willing to let them have a computer, or if they do have a computer, they aren't willing to let them play games on it (It cost $3000!! You are not gonna use it like a Nintendo!!). With any luck this will change more over time and we'll have a lot more powerful PCs at lower prices and kids will have better access to them. Seems to me that once you've played some really good PC games, you can't really go back to playing on consoles. They just can't manage the same kind of depth or complexity of gameplay along with flexibility to change, tailor or improve the game.
Re:That doesn't exactly validate your claim (Score:1)
Some of it's sequels have also been released for the Dreamcast as well.
Perhaps Tomb Raider is just "too cerebral" for the N64...
Re:Why why why??? (Score:1)
Re:as exclusive as yo'momma (Score:1)
Re:This is depressing (Score:1)
Free Software is a reaction to the fact that the likes of NeXT or Atari or even Apple simply don't have a chance against an entrenched monopolist good at exploiting vendorlock.
It doesn't matter that the beast doesn't know what it's other hand is doing. It is still a beast. Doing anything that might even slightly feed it is a BAD idea.
Re:This is depressing (Score:1)
Great arcade game, plays poorly under MAME though (Score:2)
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:1)
Or Morpheus, Neo, and Trinity will wear penguin t-shirts and copyleft hats and the agents will all be MCSEs in which case people resistance will be destroyed in great style.
Then I wonder what will be in in 3rd (in time sequence, not in release sequence) sequel - maybe after all those problems AIs will be succesfull in creating simulated "heaven" for people so they are not forced into this 20th century "peak of civilisation"?
Re:Game over. Microsoft wins. (Score:2)
Honestly if there's one thing that MS loves to do, it's leveraging their monopolies in favor of each other. And if there's one thing that they're deathly afraid of it's any possible threat to their monopolies. Even the crappy hotels on Baltic and Mediterranean.
The XBox is just getting into the door as a game console. That's not the real point though.
The point is that there is an effective floor on the price of PC's at around $400 - the point at which the cost of the OS becomes a serious liability. Rather than drop prices, and permit computers to become as cheap as dirt, MS would prefer to firmly fix that floor in place, before low-end dealers are ever capable of using free (beer) OSes. It's fairly typical monopolistic behavior.
MS has no such costs for the OS, and no desire to permit them to come to a head for others. So they'll just combine the desired features of a home PC into their own box:
*Gaming (obvious)
*Internet (MSN, IE, WebTV, broadband)
*Light office apps (Office.Net over IE)
Thanks to not having to spend money for software on a per-unit basis, the hardware can be somewhat better than everyone else's at the same final cost. (Xbox is expected to be ~$300-400)
Also maybe add a few bonuses, such as video recording (heavily locked up at the behest of big business) a la Ultimate TV as well as DVD playback.
They already have most of the pieces, now they're just going to put them together and essentially restrict the open PC market to everyone that makes sufficiently high end hardware that they don't compete with MS. It's a pretty good strategy, though chock full of the kind of evil we've all come to expect from MS.
There is no Xbox :-) (Score:2)
I wonder if there is a penalty clause for late delivery in the agreement. If Microsoft's games hardware and software divisions are as tardy as their operating system brethren, the Matrix's famous "There is no spoon" will doubtless be echoed with funnier versions to keep us amused.
All I have to say is... (Score:1)
neo...
PS ( I fucking hate that those bastards used the nick "neo". I used it for years and then this stupid movie steals my nick and now I have to look like some damn 13-years-old fanboy. It's enough to make me want to change my name, but I got this really kicking low user number. Sigh.)
Re:Does this mean they fear Nintendo more? (Score:1)
It's an interesting tactic, but it could easily backfire, making x-box the platform of licenses, which hardly have the worlds greatest track record when it comes to great games.
Re:That doesn't exactly validate your claim (Score:1)
Gran Tourismo is really a 2nd party game, so exclusivity there isn't particularly suprising.
Re:Oh no! (Score:1)
Uhh.. let me get that straight.. 1) Microsoft shuts down mods. 2) You boycott Interplay. That's, like, brilliant man. That'll teach those MS bastards.
Where's mod points when you need 'em..
OBMatrixQuote (Score:2)
Whoa
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:1)
Lando
Re:Game over. Microsoft wins. (Score:1)
>best-sellers are original material, such as Final >Fantasy and Zelda.
I agree with what you mean, but someone pointed out Goldeneye in an earlier post. I haven't even ever owned an N64 and I played that more than I've played some computer games that I own and liked.
Also, most of the people that I know who play games have played both starcraft and AoE, the second when we all got tired of the first, and liked both about as much. AoE really is a fun game, at least I think so. Don't let the poor quality of microsoft's OS division close your mind entirely...
Hi, the Matrix has you... (Score:2)
This may be only the beginning... So beware.
Rather than compete on a level field.. (Score:2)
..Microsoft buys the market.
This is a dirt cheap way of Microsoft guaranteeing it sells loads of XBoxen and future games.
Joe Consumer buys XBox for his kid to play The Matrix, Joe Consumer's kid wants the next Neat XBox Game, Joe Consumer buys the game as "hey, I already have the XBox.
This $5 million is a cheap CHEAP CHEAP way to get their foot in the door of millions of households looking to buy a new gaming platform.
Pass me a red pill, please .
Re:This is depressing (Score:1)
That post was not offtopic, and overrated is silly.
Re:This is depressing (Score:1)
Yes, I am. The services need almost no CPU, and I have plenty enough memory. I only have one machine.
I don't understand why you feel machines have to have their little categories.
It's not a particularily high volume web server, and the other services don't need lots of horsepower. They'd all probably run comfortably on a 386 with enough memory. So, playing a game on the same machine is unnoticeable to others using it. I've had people test actually.
Re:This is depressing (Score:2)
It's called running a webserver, and a few other public services. It's also called not wanting to pay for a Windows liscense. And I won't buy a box (especially a Microsoft one, just one more industry for them to destroy) just for gaming. Seems like a waste of money to me.
This won't happen but... (Score:1)
(I doubt that this will happen because I would bet that this game is an action title like Quake or Oni, and not like say, System Shock 2 or Deus Ex.)
On a side note, was BSD used for some of the effects in the Matrix 1?
Re:This doesn't affect the overall outcome of the (Score:1)
I can see it all now... (Score:3)
You thought the LAST movie was scary!
--
Re:Just beefing up their line for XBox (Score:1)
Re:Does this mean they fear Nintendo more? (Score:1)
So I take it the fact that the XBox design team toured the States, visiting gamers' homes, getting input on what gamers want, is just a copycat move, that every company does that during the research and design period? Or the fact that a number of Microsoft-written and Microsoft-published games have been great games, often topping many gaming top-10 lists (Flight Simulator, Age of Empires series, the * Madness games, Mechwarrior games, and more) is just hype? And I guess the 150+ third-party developers that have already signed on (including big names, like Sega, Capcom, and Konami from the console side, and Epic and id from the PC side) are just marketing?
Re:Does this mean they fear Nintendo more? (Score:1)
I was talking about the XBox hardware team, not any of the gaming groups. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
I'm referring to Monster Truck Madness, Motocross Madness, Midtown Madness, and the sequels thereof. Sure, you'll just reply with, "Whee, racing games. More of the same," and there's little I can say to prove otherwise, except that the games are all great fun to play (which is what matters, when you think about it).
Yes, Microsoft bought the FASA license after Activision made a set of good games (Mech2, Mech2: Mercennaries, and the addons for each). I wouldn't go so far as to say that Mech1 was a hit, though. But, even so, Microsoft has done a much better job with the license than Activision ever did (IMHO, of course).
I'll be the first to admit that Microsoft doesn't often break new ground. However, what Microsoft does do extremely well is take an existing concept (app type, game genre, what have you), and really improve upon it. Sure, Flight Simulator can be considered "just another flight sim", but it has a host of well-done features that, while they have been copied by other games, are still first-class implementations (real-time weather, radio chatter, air traffic control, extreme customizability, etc). To go along with that, Microsoft more often acts as a publisher, rather than a developer, when dealing with games (along the lines of what Sierra is doing these days). With their marketing muscle and excellent distribution network, many game developers could do much worse than being published by Microsoft.
Epic has already released Unreal Tournament for DC and PS2, so they're no different from the others I mentioned. What I didn't say is that those developers were signed on exclusively for the XBox. Few are. In fact, there are very few third-party development houses that do anything exclusively, anymore (SquareSoft is one of the few remaining). That's not necessarily a bad thing. With that said, the XBox will have its share of exclusive titles, such as the new Oddworld game, and Halo (which is not 100% exlcusive, as it'll be released for the PC as well, but it's exclusive as far as consoles are concerned). Yes, Microsoft is publishing those games. So? It's the same way Rare develops games for Nintendo to publish exclusively.
Can you back that up with examples? As of right now, I haven't seen anything that I'd call truly "revolutionary" for the PS2. Yes, Metal Gear Solid 2 is going to look great and play well, but it's just the next step in the evolution of Metal Gear (Plus, Konami is making a Metal Gear Solid game for the XBox, though not MGS2 ...). Sure, FFX will also look great, and is supposedly going to be the first FF with a voice track, but is it really going to be anything so revolutionary over what's come before in the series? Now, to use your own argument above against you, many development houses are going to be targetting multiple consoles. That means we'll see Super Hyper Impact Street Fighter 3 ex Alpha 2 for the XBox and the PS2, and probably even the GameCube. Sega is also going to be developing for multiple platforms (including the GBA). Because of the importance of third-party titles, I think what this next console "war" is going to come down to is the ease of development. The PS2 has already lost smaller development houses (which, btw, are oftentimes the ones that come up with the more unique games, like Chu Chu Rocket), due to the extremely steep learning curve (learning a new console costs money, and the steeper the curve, the more expensive it gets). In that respect, I think the XBox will be able to pull a major coup, in that Microsoft has always provided excellent developer support.
Product Placement Potential (Score:5)
NEO: Wait a second... I've got the codes in my palm pilot
TRINITY: Palm pilot? There's no such thing. It exists only in the Matrix. Here's a winCE PDA.
NEO: WinCE? What about a linux based one?
TRINITY: Linux? You don't believe in linux, do you? You really think it's possible to have stable code that's open source?
RMS: You mean Free.
TRINITY: Whatever. Seriously, Neo. The only company to survive the OS wars was Microsoft, thanks to their stable, user-friendly software that's well worth relicencing every six months.
NEO: I guess you're right. It is the world's favourite operating system.
TRINITY: It's not just an operating system; it's a friend.
NEO: Thanks, Microsoft!
Re:Just maybe this is a good thing? (Score:1)
they don't get paid back, then they litigate for the money back.
they DO get paid back, they have a huge market for their xbox.
the idea isn't all that innovitive... but the ability to actually get someone to agree to this is.
"I'll pay you $100 to do this for me. but then you have to pay me back in $2 royalties."
Beachhead in the home ... (Score:1)
Licensing a category killer is a lower risk approach than actually trying something innovative (CD carpet bombing
As the Russians found out with their fighter planes, it's not the airframe which is important but the electronics and software. Ditto for the hardware entry point which is why MS is using its PC experience of controlling the APIs to reimpose their vision onto game developers.
These horizontally integrated companies are going to be a royal challenge for competitors.
LL
Either that. . . (Score:1)
Re:There is no Xbox :-) (Score:1)
It's all or nothing.
Many of Star Wars titles are good... (Score:1)
Up until now, it could also be said that the converse is also true... how many GOOD movies have been based on video games? I'm holding out hope for Tomb Raider and Final Fantasy this summer. I personally would like to see a Starcraft movie.
What about games based on other works? Rainbow Six is a smash hit... it could have easily been a movie before a game.
I think the thing that separates the Star Wars games apart from the rest is that it was guided by the owner of the idea. Most others, I am afraid, have been an attempt to quickly tap the momentum of a film's success by selling out to the first person who can create a game. Don't forget, E.T. was an overnight success and I'm sure that the idea to cash in was conceived after the success of the movie. Today, merchandizing begins before the film is even shot.
Most of the successful titles (i.e. X-Wing, Goldeneye) were concepts that were based on an established market. They had the time to cook the game before releasing it... not nearly as time sensitive as other games that try to cash in on movie momentum. Star Wars and James Bond are icons in our society and don't need the momentum of a film to sell. Create a good game with good story, characters and game play and it will sell on merit with the identification with known characters being the marketing hook. But the game play has to be good... for example; the Star Trek titles have not done so well... they are enjoyed by some hard core fans, but not by the general gaming market. So it all comes down to creating a good game.
I would be interested to know what Microsoft has in store the Matrix title(s) it will produce. While Microsoft has no history of creating GREAT titles, who know what they can come up with. In most cases, it is not Microsoft who is doing the developing... other gaming companies produce the titles for them. Who knows, it might be cool. I may be a huge multiplayer universe that will allow gamers to enter into a digital world and learn to live without boundaries... who knows, but until the title is released, who is to say it will suck?... not me.
Just my $0.02,
Re:Why why why??? (Score:2)
Raiders of the Lost Ark (2600)
Star Wars (arcade, vector)
Hmmm.. that's about it
They got Oddworld Inhabitants too... (Score:1)
Re:From the MS Director's Cut.. (Score:1)
Remember your Spoiler Warnings (Score:1)
Misinformed Slashdot (Score:3)
Truth: MS has forward Shiny some dough, so that they can have a 3 month exclusive on the game and so that only MS gets multiplayer. That is what the article should read. I swear, anyone else sick of these misleading articles?
Re:Game over. Microsoft wins. (Score:4)
The may eventually win, and possibly make a profit, but I don't think they've necessarilly played the game all that well.
Let's take an analogy. I wrestle. The last tournament I was in, I ended up wrestling a gentleman 20lbs lighter than me. I didn't have to wrestle 'well' in order to win, because I could 'muscle' my way out of bad situations. Futhermore, everything I did looked smoother because I didn't have apply as much force as he did.
Microsoft is able to 'win' in the same way. With huge cash reserves already built up, the can stumble, fall, and roll around in the mud a while and still get up and win. They can bleed cash for years and still pull it out of their asses.
I don't think Microsoft has 'played' the gaming business at all. They've just bought up a lot of companies with their huge cash reserves.
Re:Why why why??? (Score:2)
The Robocop Arcade game being -- oddly -- based on the Sinclair Spectrum version of Robocop. Which spawned the Amiga & Atari version... and so on and so on...
Simon
Re:This is depressing (Score:2)
So you run games on your webserver? Intelligent.
Simon
This just seems so wrong. (Score:1)
Re:Game over. Microsoft wins. (Score:2)
Comments like this really puzzle me. Microsoft is a public company, accountable to their shareholders. They're not just going to burn cash so that they can turn to the competition and say "haw haw! we won!" If they didn't believe they could turn a *profit* in the console market, they wouldn't be entering it. And sure, some people will say, "oh, they're just building a monopoly now so they can have profits in the future." But the history of the console industry does not support the concept of a lasting console monopoly at all. With every new generation of consoles, a company's fortune can change dramatically. I'm sure microsoft realizes this.
And also, about this whole "microsoft has lots of cash so they'll win!" thing...just what the hell is Sony, some kind of sniveling upstart company?
Courting developers like this is common in the gaming industry. There's really nothing special about this.
--
No, this is different than Goldeneye (Score:2)
The major issue isn't exclusive rights to the Matrix games (MS only wants a 6 month lead, after which Interplay is free to publish it for other plats). It's the exclusive rights to certain features of games based on this license.
Goldeneye for N64 is published by Rareware. They hold second-party status with Nintendo for their consoles -- they make games for no one else. Interplay does not have the same status with MS, AFAIK. MS is only trying to limit how well the implementation of the Matrix games on the other consoles are.
The reason and result are obvious. Whereas previously it was preferred for, say, Sega to have exclusive rights to a particular title from a third-party dev, MS wants to show the world that only the BEST version runs on xbox. "It's available on other platforms, but why in hell would you want to play it like THAT? You can't even play it on the internet!"
If this were the PC world, it would be like MS paying Adobe to give the Windows Photoshop release a 6 month headstart over Mac OS versions, and the Mac version isn't allowed to do Gaussian blur. It is NOT like MS paying Adobe to make Photoshop exclusively for Windows.
< tofuhead >
--
Gaming companies don't do this all the time. (Score:4)
No, this is different. If you read the linked article, you'll see that MS wants to limit the featureset of Matrix games for other consoles. Amazingly, this is being treated by everybody here like a sidenote, rather than the real meat and potatoes of the deal.
It's true though...exclusive licenses are a dime a dozen. That's why this is a big deal. This is less typical: Effectively MS is castrating any future Nintendo and Sony versions.
< tofuhead >
--
MS in war mode (Score:2)
Nintendo and Sony have their own "exclusive" titles and MS is just trying to build/buy their own.
I still doubt that Halo will come out on the PC.
Not a bad move (Score:1)
As for the move, personally I think its a good move, since MS has a hell of a lot more money to work with. Hopefully they'll provide a kick ass gaming environment, and hopefully Bill Gates and co., won't try to reach the geek masses my marketing MS crapware along with the games.
Forget neo make minesLara [antioffline.com]
Re:Does this mean they fear Nintendo more? (Score:1)
It will be interesting to see if this includes all of the Matrix Mods for Quake, HL & UT. Hopefully M$ will not squash them, becuase some of them are looking really cool. And obviously they are internet-capable, which M$ wants exclusively for Xbox.
Re:Whatever... (Score:1)
You'll never be able to play HL at 1600x1200 on a console. But then again, you'll never have a driver issue either.
Re:Just beefing up their line for XBox (Score:1)
The battletech series of games are really awesome. I need to get MW4, but MW3 rocked the house. These games could actually MAKE me buy a X-Box as opposed to the MAtrix.
Re:Whatever... (Score:1)
Yesterday I spent over an hour installing and upgrading my drivers so that I could play Black and White. Is this a good use of my time? No.
I loved the original DOOM and downloaded every map that I could get my hands on and 95% of them were crap. I downloaded tons of UT maps.. Most are CRAP. Point in case? Most expansions are crap. Not to knock the HalfLife CounterStrike team, they are awesome! but unfortunatly the exception rather then the general case.
It takes a lot of time and effort to make quality product.
The X-Box will allow you to customize your game. The Hard drive will let you download/install massive amounts of crap (skins/weapons/etc.) So don't think that the PC will be the only kid on the block with that ability. While most of the content will be created on the PC still, if the X-Box is a success, then you will see CounterStrike style mods for X-Box games. You can count on it.
It will be cool.
I play console games because I know they will work and won't crash... I really hate games like B&W when they crash.
This doesn't affect the overall outcome of the war (Score:2)
The X-Box isn't going to kill or even hurt the PS2/GameCube in the long run. I think that it will more likley be the beginning of the end of Windows-based PC gaming. If it's as cheap to develop for a console as for a PC, then why develop on a PC. I think that most smaller outfits will prototype their 'breakthrough' game on the PC, then present it to a publisher. If the publisher decides it's good enough, then give them the money to make it an X-Box game. There is and always has been more money in console gamin for the producers and programmers of games then in PC gaming. That's why nintendo still makes gameboys instead of switching over to PC games.
I really wonder why it took them so long to announce a matrix based video game. With the popularity of the Matrix movie you would think that they would to have cashed in on it before. Maybe they are using this game to help generate awareness and hype for the next movie since most 'normal' (read non-slashdot reader) people have not been aware of the next movie.
Re:Maybe, but you missed something... (Score:1)
That doesn't exactly validate your claim (Score:2)
Gaming Industry: Wake up call. (Score:2)
Welcome aboard.
Re:Why why why??? (Score:2)
Re:Rather than compete on a level field.. (Score:2)
And you call that an excuse? Maybe it is okay, but not because everyone does it. "Everyone" in the US used to do slavery. "Everyone" in old mexico practiced cannibalism.
"Did Linus write the Linux kernel from scratch?"
At first, yes. Later, he had help from volunteers all over the world. Your point?
"No, he essentially ported Unix to X86."
Linus wrote the kernel so it would be compatible with GNU. The FSF ported Unix to X86. Get your facts straight, please.
"Microsoft buys technology because they can."
Are you saying this makes it okay for M$ to buy technology? It does not.
You are a jerk because of the way you talked to grub. Please apologize to him.
You also excuse Microsoft for predatory and anticompetitive business practices. Do you believe in a free market? A Microsoft monopoly will kill the free market in this area. Do you believe in a well-regulated economy? Microsoft has broken the Sherman Anti-Trust Act and a similar, later act that I have forgotten the name for, as well as copyright law. Microsoft has also abused patent law and contract law.
You defend a corporation that is predatory and dangerous, you insult and whine about a poster who was peacefully expressing his opinion, and you got your facts wrong.
Again, you owe grub an apology.
Re:From the MS Director's Cut.. (Score:2)
(My apologies for using "efficiency" in a Microsoft post.)
--
Re:Why why why??? (Score:2)
Does anyone remember any of the millions of 2d platformers? Ocean were one of the worst culprits, although by no means the worst.
I think the games were actually the same, there was a low performance engine which could handle about 5 things moving at the same time, and that was in about 5 frames!
Re:From the MS Director's Cut.. (Score:5)
Re:That doesn't exactly validate your claim (Score:2)
(a) Microsoft are doing something unusually evil, or
(b) The Matrix game will have to suck.
Re:Isn't this at the heart of Microsoft? (Score:3)
Its certainly an interesting idea, but there are two problems with it:
1) The Sony Corporation aren't exactly small fry either, and already have deals sewn up with Square, Polyphony and others.
2) Nintendo, while not as rich as Microsoft, aren't likely to give away exclusive rights to Mario or Zelda unless Microsoft want to buy the whole company.
Somehow I don't think even Microsoft have the guts to try and buy the whole console industry.
Re:Rather than compete on a level field.. (Score:5)
Re:Game over. Microsoft wins. (Score:2)
The reality of the situation is that people will make decisions based on product name alone. If you don't believe me, ask yourself the name of the President of the USA.
M$ is going to be a major player in the industry if for no other reason than people recognize the name. Games based on "The Matrix" are going to sell like crazy because it was a cool movie and people will assume it's a cool game. The hardcore gamers won't buy them because they know better than to buy licensed games (they generally suck quite a lot of ass), but since they make up less than 25% of the market, that won't matter in the least.
RIP Dreamcast, RIP.
Gaming companies do this all the time. (Score:5)
Hmmm.... (Score:5)
well (Score:2)
Interesting (Score:4)
From the MS Director's Cut.. (Score:5)
If you don't have anything nice to say, say it often.
Isn't this at the heart of Microsoft? (Score:2)
Microsoft entered an agreement that prohibited deployment of this game on any console other than MS's XBOX for at least 6 months. Yes, they had to pay a pretty penny for it but they have (in a way) stopped other consoles from ever getting good with this game. 6 months is a long time in an industry that is as fast paced as the gaming industry.
While one game doesnt really matter, MS could (conceivably) make the same offer to all of the other upcoming "BIG" titles--so the XBOX gets all the goodies b/c they have the most money.
While this is partially at the heart of capitalism, doesn't it bother anyone that MS could (and probably will) shut down all console competition? Doesn't matter how good a console is if it has no games . . .
Bring in the Clones (Score:2)
Time for an Open Source Internet play clone - with a distributed system for the modules/rooms/levels/etc - so that this becomes really surreal.
In fact, I like this. P2P Gaming. Could be fun.
Check out the Vinny the Vampire [eplugz.com] comic strip
Re:Game over. Microsoft wins. (Score:2)
I don't think it was "record-setting", but "Alien vs. Predator" was a respectable game in its own right. And when you think about it, it makes sense why it worked -- the Alien and Predator movies were already how I'd expect a FPS-based movie to turn out; they just went the other way in translating it from movie to game.
When I think about "Matrix", it just screams MMORPG. I mean we're talking about a shared, consensual reality in which billions wander around while exceptional entities wield God-like power. That would, of course, make it an Internet game, which is exactly what Microsoft has the exclusive rights on. Then again, a commercial MMORPG releasing a non-Windows client is the exception, rather than the rule. But it still annoys me that that option has been ruled out entirely.
Re:Game over. Microsoft wins. (Score:2)
Not neccessarilly. MS is going to push, push, push the console market for all they're worth to break into it, and in some areas of the world they have a good shot. However, there is one place which I feel they will have trouble in:
The Japanese console market.
ALL of the successful consoles have been put out by Japanese companies. Sony and Nintendo are not going to take any sort of incursion of the X-box lightly. If we have not seen them before, expect some heavy licensing restricitons to be placed on console-game makers in response to MS's restrictions: companies will be made or broken based on what console they choose to develop for, which will be a shame.
The Japanese electronics consumers, morover, are very intense. Console gaming is a VERY big thing over there. While in the US and perhaps Europe, you may run into the occasional guy who has one of every console made (even an old Neo*Geo he takes out reverently now and then) in Japan multiple consoles are the norm. Multiple instances of the same consoles is also not unknown, within the same household. There are also consoles over there that are simply not known about abroad.
Gaming also covers a broader spectrum -- it's no joke that 'dating simulations' are pretty popular there, but there's even wierder stuff that has never been really exported (except for Japanese consoles abroad.) Morover, for more "conventional" games, some have never been exported, either. The array of games in the Japanese market is stunning.
X-box is going to have a really tough time in the Japanese market. I would not be surprised if it dies horribly over there, even if it does well in the US and Europe. And even then, expect a strong assault by Nintendo and (what's left of) Sony. If these two companies can keep their sh** together, they've got a fighting chance to survive the first year of X-Box (whenever that might be.)
---
Chief Technician, Helpdesk at the End of the World
Changes? (Score:2)
Not necessarily a bad thing (Score:4)
But..
Goldeneye on the Nintendo64 was a fantastic game. A real killer app for the (then) fledging console. Perhaps MS want to do the same for theirs.
So...what about their shockwave game? (Score:3)
Just beefing up their line for XBox (Score:3)
Microsoft will indeed have an impressive stable of horses when the XBox comes out, but they are counting heavily upon older titles. As we all know, the next Hot game always comes from some least expected group, not because they have money or big backing, but because they had a dream.
Expect Microsoft to snap up some of these, too.
Any game company getting into bed with Microsoft best remember the Flight Simulator disaster for SubLogic, where Microsoft pointed out that they could indeed sell the same game for less than SubLogic and thus drove them out of business. Jet was cool, but too late to save them.
--
Oh no! (Score:5)
Grrrrr.....if that happens, Interplay can kiss any future business from me goodbye. 'By Gamers, For Gamers' indeed....
Re:From the MS Director's Cut.. (Score:2)
Apparently they want their side told "fairly" (Score:3)
'Big Titles' (Score:2)
While I agree that Microsoft is (once again) using their monopoly power to leverage games, it's worth noting that there's really no way to say which title is going to be big and which isn't.
For example, Daikatana was supposed to be super-big, and fell flatter than John Romero's ego. If Microsoft had done the same thing here, they would have been stuck with an incredible bomb while everyone was playing the 'Sleeper' titles that they missed.
Sure, you can accuse them of cashing in on name recognition, but the truth of the matter is that movie-based video games tend to do very poorly, with the notable exception of Starwars stuff. Some of the Trek stuff does okay, too, but M$ was in bed with Paramount quite a while before any of the Trek games hit the shelf.
Long and short is the fact marketroids have the intelligence of sea slugs and just because someone *says* something's going to be a hit, and even if they license it, it just ain't so.
What is the Matrix? (Score:5)
Neo: But what is it, really? When you get right down to it.
Morpheus: No one can be told what the matrix is, but I can tell you this: You see that little paperclip guy?
Neo: Yeah...
Morphus: Part of the matrix. That annoying sound you get when you start your computer? Also part of the matrix. That smiling guy who asks 'Where do you want to go today?"
Neo: (gulps, realizing the severity of Morpheus's words.)
Re:Maybe, but you missed something... (Score:5)
I wonder what would be happening to Interplay if Microsoft hadn't offered them this money. It appears the company is cash-strapped enough to accept this deal, so they obviously are in some trouble staying afloat now. At least this deal gives them cash to play with and continue development. And Microsoft is only placing a requirement on $500,000 of the $5 million loan, leaving the vast remainder entirely in Interplay's hands. The deal doesn't say they have to put all of that money into the XBox game. Yes, I know that a lot of that money will likely end up in the Matrix game, and the company's fortunes will be somewhat tied to the success or failure of that XBox game... but Interplay has at least been given a chance to stay afloat through this loan. Better to get money now and have a chance at survival, than to stop all development from a lack of funds and die sooner.
Quick! Give Charleton Heston a share of MSFT! (Score:3)
Re:Why why why??? (Score:5)
And ET was fucking cool. I still remember cute little ET sticking his head up to eat a pixel (reese) and getting caged in a 16 block by 16 block cell until that guy came and rescued me. And the part in the forest type thing where you got back on your space ship?? It was probably one of my most favorite games, second only to maybe Midnight Maddness.
Re:Game over. Microsoft wins. (Score:4)
Good God the ignorance(maybe its bias...or maybe plain stupidity) out there on the internet and in a majority of the mainstream press baffles me.
Microsoft has pretty much won this console war before it begins. Exclusivity is a huge thing in the gaming world
You're quite right, exclusivity is, obviously, a major influencing factor behind who wins most console wars. But to compare, Microsoft easily comes in a distant 3rd place behind Sony and miles behind Nintendo. Heres a quick breakdown of major exclusives:
Sony- Gran Turismo, Final Fantasy, Metal Gear, and Dragon Warrior, four incredibly established franchises.
Nintendo- Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Pokemon ($$), Wave Race, every Rare franchise out there, etc etc etc (theres many more).
Microsoft- Halo, Oddeworld: Abes Oddyssey, which arent really even franchises yet. See my point?
especially for a game that will almost certainly be a blockbuster.
*Sigh*. Where to begin. Movie franchises converted to games over the years have been notoriously shoddy. Goldeneye, which im assuming was the basis for your comment, was the exception to the rule. Why? Because it was made by Rare. Does microsoft have Rare? No. Just have one thing to say if youre gonna start comparing Interplay to Rare. Interplays bankrupt for a reason.
In no way is Microsoft going to dominate the next console war, unless of course people like you perpetuate the image of the "kiddy" gamecube and the blatant lie that Microsoft somehow has a majority of exclusives.
Just myRe:Why why why??? (Score:2)
Batman (NES)
True Lies (SNES)
Robocop (arcade)
Those are just the three that immediately come to my mind.
Does this mean they fear Nintendo more? (Score:5)
Nintendo, on the other hand, has extremely strong first- and second-party developers, so strong that in-house development is practically the sole reason the N64 managed to stay afloat against competition from Sony. The only software publisher that even comes close to Nintendo as far as variety and great games are concerned is Sega (though Squaresoft tries to pretend that it doesn't just make RPGs). This looks to be a major asset to Nintendo in the next console war, because they'll be the only one with great exclusive games.
So, is the fact that Microsoft went out and bagged exclusive rights for The Matrix a sign that they're seriously concerned about GameCube's ability to sell on exclusive games alone?
More importantly, will a Matrix game written by Microsoft be able to stand up against Zelda, Metroid, Perfect Dark, etc, or will Microsoft just be another poser to get smacked down hard like so many before? (After the PhotoShop debacle, I'm tempted to think the latter).
Oh, and one more thing: Does the fact that Microsoft now needs to ship out patches for a bug in UltimateTV an example of Microsoft's (lack of) ability to build a solid set-top box?
Re:Game over. Microsoft wins. (Score:5)
I can't think of any record-setting games that were based on a movie. Most of the best-sellers are original material, such as Final Fantasy and Zelda.
"and the XBox tech looks pretty good"
Yeah, no other system runs PhotoShop quite as well...
"Microsoft has played the gaming business better than anyone else ever has."
Like hell they have! When my friends and I have a LAN party, it's StarCraft we're playing, not AoE.
"Microsoft has decided they want to break into this market, and they're well on their way to domination."
I'm sorry, but I've yet to see anything from Microsoft that suggests that they'll be able to top Nintendo. So far, everything I've seen in the way of products for the Xbox seem rather wishy-washy at best, nothing really solid. At the very least, I don't see them being able to compete with a company that has been publishing sold and record-breaking hits from Donkey Kong to Zelda. If anything, Nintendo is gearing to seriously mess with Microsoft's turf with the new Metroid.
"The XBox will have a huge selection of software when it arrives"
A "quantity over quality" kind of person, I see... And what makes you think either GameCube or PS2 aren't going to have equally large libraries?
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:3)
-
Maybe, but you missed something... (Score:5)
I just wonder what will happen to Interplay if the X-Box is a flop and the game doesn't sell well..
Re:Misinformed Slashdot (Score:2)
Re:This won't happen but... (Score:2)
C:>
Awesome! I'm in!
C:> cd windows
"Dude I cracked the system!"
the matrix has you, microsoft has the matrix
who watches the watcher? . . hmm...