The Future of Game Licensing 37
Gamasutra has a writeup of an E3 event where representatives of some of the big publishers discussed the future of game licensing. Representatives from THQ, Viacom, and Marvel were there, among several others. From the article: "The perception of quality has also hit the publishers. Gioia noted that at THQ, the company has shifted to where one SKU can cost as much as 15 million dollars. 'Why would I do that unless you're dealing with a substantial license or an original IP?' She argues that you have to be narrowly focused on what will work for your target demographic; properties like The Godfather with mass-market capability are really quite rare. With that in mind, there are plenty of other game size opportunities out there for content producers looking at games; it doesn't have to be the AAA game that so many licensed games seem to be skewing towards."
THQ + AAA? (Score:2)
Re:THQ + AAA? (Score:1, Informative)
The closest would be Dawn of War, Full Spectrum Warrior, and Red Faction with GameRankings scores of 87%, 83%, and 86% respectively. Their line-up in the past has been mostly Pixar, WWE, and Nickelodeon games. I think they realize that and that is why they are publishing original content like Destroy All Humans!, Company of Heroes, and Titan Quest.
Shocking release schedules... (Score:1)
What's new? (Score:1)
Re:What's new? (Score:1)
Re:What's new? (Score:2)
sickening (Score:3, Insightful)
makes me sick. The Godfather is a piece of art (whether a good or a bad one is another discussion) and culturally belongs to everybody; the fact that it "belongs" to someone in some narrow copyright sense is incidental.
Fortunately, over the next decades, technology will make the creation of movies and computer games no more difficult than typing out a story on a typewriter, and computer networks make publishing them essentially free. Lots of good content will be free, and the content that won't be free will cut out the kind of windbags that talk about "properties", "franchises", and "mass-market capabilities".
Re:sickening (Score:2)
Both game development and movie making are getting more difficult and more expensive. People are still going to want to uy quality games and watch quality movies, and I hate to break it to you but hippies aren't going to be making them and distributing them over thar intarweb, its going to be the big corperations, and your still going to watch your movies in the theatre and pay 10$ a ticket plus popcorn and pop, your always going to be playing your games on a 300$ (or more from what ive
Re:sickening (Score:2)
Yes, they are, because they are trying to do more complicated things. But now tool makers have a market and are automating more and more of the process. It will take a few more years, but the process will be almost completely automated.
I hate to break it to you but hippies aren't going to be making them and distributing them over thar intarweb
No, hippies aren't going to be making them, but writers and storytellers a
Re:sickening (Score:2)
The Godfather is a work of art. Like every other work of art since the dawn of time, it belongs to the artist.
The fact that it was a collaborative work does not diminish the ownership of its creator. In the end run, copyright is a limited run, and in a few hundred years it will all be public domain.
Re:sickening (Score:2)
Re:sickening (Score:2)
Don't forget the original purposes of the fair-use doctrine: news and scholarly reporting.
(And don't ever think that fanfiction follows different rules; if you favorite fanfic writer suddenly got a million fans who paid him $1 each, the copyright holder would likely want a piece of the cash. It's just that most of the time, fanfics aren't worth tracking down.)
Though I would argue copyright should expire with the creator-- history has sh
Re:sickening (Score:2)
The first movie to bring me to tears *shudder* , I was thinking maybe i had exagerate how bad it was and last year decided to whatch it again . Unfortunatly i was right the first time
PT1 and 2 are great art , pt3 however is comparable to an andy warhols soup cans(unless you like warhol , then replace him with an artist you strongly dislike)
Ugh (Score:1)
Re:Ugh (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Ugh (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Ugh (Score:2)
Re:Ugh (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Ugh (Score:1)
Re:Ugh (Score:3, Insightful)
Movies vs. Games (Score:5, Insightful)
Has anyone noticed the games industry has got slightly over obsessed with how big business it thinks it is?
It's like the claim they're bigger than the movie industry when, in fact, they only just beat box office sales and don't come close when comparing DVDs, Video, Rental, Cable and other distribution channels of the exact same product.
A single SKU can cost "as much as $15m"?! Woo. So what you're saying is that games are now comparable to small movies where the very cheap ones still go for a couple of million to around $20 million, the mid size ones around the $60m mark and the massive ones around the $100m mark.
Hollywood is somewhat discerning about licenses but only somewhat. For every Batman or Spiderman movie, there's going to be a Darkman, Phantom or Dick Tracey. If their budgets are even bigger still, how come they keep doing it?
Because they've got over themselves and stopped being impressed with how big they've got. Instead, they ask the simple question: Will what I invest in an IP allow me to recoup more at the end? If yes, they buy it, if no, they don't.
Just as in the movie industry, the games industry is going to discover:
The Spiderman IP is probably worth quite a few million. You can no doubt recoup that investment and more if you make a decent game.
The Darkman IP isn't ever going to add several million to what you recoup on the strength of the name alone. Thus it's not worth several million to buy in the IP. But the point is you don't buy in the IP for several million. You buy it in for several tens of thousands or whatever and it adds more than that amount to your otherwise anonymouse masked hero game.
Yes, games cost a lot and make a lot these days. But get over yourselves. You're still relative babies by the movie industry's standards. They still buy in the occasional small IP for a smaller title because it's still profitable. That's the only thing that counts. If you're so hyped up yet nervous about making a mistake that you've lost track of return - cost = profit, you really shouldn't be in the position to be making those decisions.
Waaaaah (Score:4, Insightful)
developers should be focused on franchises, not games.
Yeah, I'm always like "man, I wish the developers focused a little less on this game, and a little more on 'the franchise'". These douchebags better keep working on polishing up their turds so that unsuspecting parents can continue to disappoint their children with licensed games.
Re:Waaaaah (Score:2)
I just think games were better when they were simple enough for one or two developers to make who actually had both a vested interest in the end product, and also cared about it. The more people involved with making something, the less people really care about it.
the one that got it right (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:the one that got it right (Score:2)
Re:the one that got it right (Score:2, Informative)
Re:the one that got it right (Score:2)
Of course there have also been many, many terrible Star Wars games. "Yoda Desktop Adventures" anyone?
Yeah, I now development costs are going up, but... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Yeah, I now development costs are going up, but (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Yeah, I now development costs are going up, but (Score:2, Informative)
One less license for Xbox 360 (Score:1, Offtopic)
"yesterday development company Factor 5 helped Sony fire another blow to Microsoft's camp by declaring allegiance to the Playstation 3. President Julian Eggebrecht told News.com that the Playstation 3 offered more processing power to more easily simulate the real world for a better game experience. The company had previously stated that
Re:One less license for Xbox 360 (Score:1)
Xbox 360 is just as the original Xbox was. No more than a gigantic "Market Penetration Excerscise"
MS are making the Xbox for company PR, and as a way to Sell other MS stuff though ancilliary channels.
I expect its fairly obvious there will be a point where they release a full OS for it and nice matching versions of their core software suites. All bundled at a discount price for already having gotten the (by the time) near manditory for all the "must have games" Xbox live service (and