By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Movies & TV - Spider-Man no longer in the MCU after disagreement between Sony and Disney (UPDATE #2): Sony releases statement

Majin-Tenshinhan on 22 August 2019
JRPGfan said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

Was it still? Maybe the deal had a time limit that ran out and needed to be dealt anew?

I mean, I don't see any good reason why Disney and Sony would be happy with a deal and then suddenly nothing anymore?

Of course, greed is a valid counterpoint. But before really condemning either side, I want to be sure to know the full story.

Yes, it was and is.... for another 2 movies (I believe).
This is Disney going back on the words or contract (or possibly related to future films after these 2).


"I mean, I don't see any good reason why Disney and Sony would be happy with a deal and then suddenly nothing anymore?"

Greed is a good motive..... Disney saw Sony makeing $1.1bn on their last Spiderman movie and their like "we want half of the next movie you do", if we help you with the director + MCU appearences of Spiderman.

It all just boils down to greed.
Disney is makeing money hand over fist, they really dont have to screw over sony, to make a quick buck.
Plus the relationship right now, as benefiting everyone.

Its just greed, by disney.

No, the deal is over. The deal was for five MCU-connected films, which he has now been in - Civil War, Homecoming, Infinity War, Endgame and Far From Home. The deal was always set to be renegotiated after Far From Home. That doesn't mean Disney couldn't have reeled in their greed a bit and keep this lucrative partnership going, but they're doing a power play since they feel they can do whatever they want. If not for Venom's surprisingly high box office yield, Sony probably would have caved too, honestly.



betacon on 22 August 2019
KManX89 said:
Torillian said:

Don't see why we go back to ghost rider on this topic when Sony just made one of the best spider-man movies of all time without any assistance from Disney. 

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/spider_man_into_the_spider_verse

Don't you think that's more relevant than how bad a completely different super hero movie franchise was almost a decade ago?

So you're just gonna conveniently ignore the tidbit about Spidey 3 and both (Un)Amazing Spider-Man movies? Not to mention that was an animated film, huge jump from that and live-action, which they've fucked up since 2007. Also the leaked Spider-Man 4 script was terrible and would've garnered even worse reception than Spider-Man 3.

Plus it's Sony. Every attempt of theirs to start a franchise has fallen flat, Resident Evil, Jumanji, Ghostbusters, Men in Black. They WILL fuck it up eventually (it might not even take them long to do it judging by their track record, lol), that's just how they roll.

Jumanji failed? You mean the movie which Grossed 1 billion dollars failed?



The Fury on 22 August 2019
betacon said:

Jumanji failed? You mean the movie which Grossed 1 billion dollars failed?

Yeah, that's the one, the one with a sequel releasing in a few months.



Hmm, pie.

Barkley on 22 August 2019
KManX89 said:
deskpro2k3 said:
Yeah, fuck Disney for the sole purpose of being greedy.

@ that guy that said "Sony doesn't own anything"
Back in 2015, Sony struck a deal with Disney's Marvel Studios that PERMITTED Spider-Man to be part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Spidey has been in 3 MCU movies so far and Sony cannot incorporate the character into its own extended universe until the deal comes to a conclusion. Now guess what, that deal has come to a conclusion and Sony is free to incorporate the Spider-Man franchise into their own spidey-universe.

Because it worked so well for Spider-Man 3 and both ASM movies.

LOL. 

Yeah, both those movies made them a big profit. Accepting a 50/50 deal with Disney would have been stupid, they would make more money solo, even if the movies aren't liked as much.



The Fury on 22 August 2019
Hiku said:

I don't believe we know who asked who. But we do know that it wasn't a question of Spider-Man originally,but any Marvel character.

The jist of the story as we know it is that a Sony exec was down at Insomniac one day, and asked Insomniac's CEO Ted Price if they would want to make a Marvel game. Price's reaction was "fairly neutral" as the studio had built a following on the back of original properties, he "hadn't really considered working on someone else's IP."

Once he relayed this idea to their developers though, they showed great enthusiasm at the possibility. ‘Are you crazy? Of course we’re going to work on a Marvel game!'

Marvel wasn't interested in having Insomniac work around a movie or comic tie-in either, they wanted Insomniac to create their own version of a character, and Marvel was willing to let the developer take their pick. "[Marvel said] 'Look, we've got a lot of characters. Pick a character that you guys think works for you, and then we'd love to hear your take on it.'"

https://www.ign.com/articles/2018/09/10/how-insomniacs-spider-man-came-to-be-ign-unfiltered

Interesting, thanks. Kinda wish Marvel would do this more often. Go to a well known studio or developer and offer them the chance to make a game. It benefits everyone, we get a game for popular characters, developer gets to make their sort of game and Marvel makes money.

X-men games used to be pretty regular thing. The dispute and Activision contract ending changed that as we haven't had an X-men game outside of 1 on mobile a few years ago. But with Spider-man and Marvel Ultimate Alliance coming back, maybe Marvel will be looking to get their licenced characters out there again as DC have been winning the gaming thing, even if Marvel were winning the films.

Last edited by The Fury - on 22 August 2019

Hmm, pie.

Spike0503 on 22 August 2019
The Fury said:

Interesting, thanks. Kinda wish Marvel would do this more often. Go to a well known studio or developer and offer them the change to make a game. It benefits everyone, we get a game for popular characters, developer gets to make their sort of game and Marvel makes money.

X-men games used to be pretty regular thing. The dispute and Activision contract ending changed that as we haven't had an X-men game outside of 1 on mobile a few years ago. But with Spider-man and Marvel Ultimate Alliance coming back, maybe Marvel will be looking to get their licenced characters out there again as DC have been winning the gaming thing, even if Marvel were winning the films.

Agreed 100%. I wish they could make a deal with Sony to make several games set in the same universe. Say, Imsoniac makes Spider-man, Guerilla makes X-men, etc etc. I know it kinda sucks for some people since they would be exclusives but several high-quality games set in the same comic universe would be amazing.



DonFerrari on 22 August 2019
Spike0503 said:
The Fury said:

Interesting, thanks. Kinda wish Marvel would do this more often. Go to a well known studio or developer and offer them the change to make a game. It benefits everyone, we get a game for popular characters, developer gets to make their sort of game and Marvel makes money.

X-men games used to be pretty regular thing. The dispute and Activision contract ending changed that as we haven't had an X-men game outside of 1 on mobile a few years ago. But with Spider-man and Marvel Ultimate Alliance coming back, maybe Marvel will be looking to get their licenced characters out there again as DC have been winning the gaming thing, even if Marvel were winning the films.

Agreed 100%. I wish they could make a deal with Sony to make several games set in the same universe. Say, Imsoniac makes Spider-man, Guerilla makes X-men, etc etc. I know it kinda sucks for some people since they would be exclusives but several high-quality games set in the same comic universe would be amazing.

It would suck because we wouldn't see other games these studios make.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

konnichiwa on 22 August 2019



Disney has lauched a bot army to attack Sony tonight using #SaveSpiderman Tons of identical tweets coming from crooked "Disney Ops"

Now #SaveSpidermanFromSony is trending and the "Sony attack tweets" are getting 5k-20k likes in the last 3-6 hours. Disney's pulling ops to place social media pressure on Sony to fold. Walt Disney would fire crooked Bob Iger on the spot if he was still around today.

After Amazon (who's twitter army was rather weak) Disney's army is doing much better. 






Spike0503 on 22 August 2019
DonFerrari said:

It would suck because we wouldn't see other games these studios make.

Fair point I guess. Though the same thing could be said of every game. Ghost of Tsushima sucks for the people who were waiting for another Infamous. Spider-man sucked for the people who were waiting for another Ratchet and Clank, etc etc.

As long as the developers don't become Marvel-brand machines and they take turns between games, it could work.



DonFerrari on 22 August 2019
konnichiwa said:



Disney has lauched a bot army to attack Sony tonight using #SaveSpiderman Tons of identical tweets coming from crooked "Disney Ops"

Now #SaveSpidermanFromSony is trending and the "Sony attack tweets" are getting 5k-20k likes in the last 3-6 hours. Disney's pulling ops to place social media pressure on Sony to fold. Walt Disney would fire crooked Bob Iger on the spot if he was still around today.

After Amazon (who's twitter army was rather weak) Disney's army is doing much better. 

Would be funny seeing Sony investigating it and opening a lawsuit against Disney.

Spike0503 said:
DonFerrari said:

It would suck because we wouldn't see other games these studios make.

Fair point I guess. Though the same thing could be said of every game. Ghost of Tsushima sucks for the people who were waiting for another Infamous. Spider-man sucked for the people who were waiting for another Ratchet and Clank, etc etc.

As long as the developers don't become Marvel-brand machines and they take turns between games, it could work.

A little different on well instead of GoT we would want the 4th game of Infamous, and RT still had a lot of games on the last 2 gens.

The way you originally worded we would receive a bath of Marvel games and would miss other games. But sure Sony could double the size of all studios and the second team make Marvel games.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."