Quantcast
If Sea of Thieves Succeeds?

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - If Sea of Thieves Succeeds?

What will happen with Rare if Sea of Thieves is successful?

They'll make more new IPs 13 35.14%
 
They'll resurrect some of their old IPs 8 21.62%
 
They'll separate from Microsoft 4 10.81%
 
They'll expand into other genres 3 8.11%
 
Other (please specify) 9 24.32%
 
Total:37
ThisGuyFooks said:
Veknoid_Outcast said:

As always, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle. There's evidence out there suggesting team leads are given a lot of leeway, and also evidence, in the case of Lionhead or Black Tusk, of Microsoft meddling.

In the case of Rare, however, which is at the heart of this thread, there seems to be a clear history of Microsoft being hands-off, often to the detriment of the finished product.

How would you rate Rare's performance this gen?

According to Wikipedia, the studio currently has around 200 workers.

For the Xbox One they have released:

 

  • Killer Instinct (0.11)
  • Kinect Sports Rivals (0.62)
  • Rare Replay (0.88)
In my opinion, considering the amount of workers they have, this has been a very underwhelming generation for them.
We have to wonder what will Microsoft do with them IF Sea of Thieves underperforms.

 

Killer Instinct was made by other studios, notably Double Helix and Iron Galaxy Studios, Rare had some small amount of input however.

Rare Replay is just a repackaging of a heap of old games, Microsoft's other development teams that are responsible for building the Xbox 360 emulators did the bulk of the hard work IMHO.

And that leaves Kinect Sports Rivals... Yuck.

At least last generation Rare gave us some solid games like Kameo, Banjo Kazooi Nuts and Bolts, Viva Pinata and I even enjoyed my stint through Perfect Dark: Zero.
I mean... None of those games were genre defining like Killer Instinct, Donkey Kong, Perfect Dark and so on... But they were still solid titles.

Rare has some great talent at their studio, it's a shame Microsoft doesn't leverage it more and give them more resources.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Around the Network
Azzanation said:
If SoTs is successful, no one will be complaining about a SoTs 2 or continued support for SoTs 1.
Cant wait to play it.

"Microsoft doesn't have enough exclusives or new ip" it's true and constantly repeated on these forums. In amazed that even though microsoft is checking both boxes here, it's being spun into a negative about how old ip not being rebooted...

Not to mention this releases a once great dev from pumping out Kinect only games...

 



CaptainExplosion said: 

I believe Rare, and for that matter Microsoft as well, will invest further into classic Rare franchises like Banjo-Kazooie or Conker, because it's pretty much common sense.

What do you think will happen if Sea of Thieves is successful?

I severely doubt this, unless they can turn said IPs into service titles or unless MS decides to stop doubling down on MP.

 

I see the success of Sea of Thieves meaning that Rare is pushed to maintain the game over a long period of time.



Azzanation said:
DonFerrari said:

It isn't stupid to kill a franchise from milking? Ok then. You probably also think it's better to demand a dev to work on something against their will than to let they challenge themselves and get something even bigger.

By my logic if disney team wants to make more StarWars do it, but if the team doing it doesn't want to do, the result will be bad. And anyway for me SW is really only 4-6, the other ones I watch but care very little.

But as I said, if they want to keep making Halo and their userbase want to buy it, do it... funny although is how many times it was supposed to end with a specific game but they just gone and kept going. That means a company that have no capacity to create new things.

Why don't all movies are only sequels from the ones that made success on the 50's? Why aren't all books sequels until the writer dies? Per your reasoning when you do something that sell you should stuck yourself to do it.

And again I just provided you points that when MS do a franchise that sells good the dev is tied to it, which is what you try to deny, but then go and prove that it's what they do.

Your wrong.

1st - MS isnt milking the franchise, they claimed the Halo franchise has over 10 years of content. Halo has a huge following and they want more games made. 

2nd - 343i was created to sololy make Halo games for there fans and audience

3rd - No one is complaining Halo is being milked. Do you know what games Nintendo have been making for the past 30 years? Exactly. 

Killing off games because you think milking them to death is bad only works on franchises that gamers dont want. 

Sony do it with Polyphony with GT

ND did it with Uncharted

Nintendo do it with Mario, Zelda and Pokemon etc

The big differences between MS compared to Sony and Nintendo is they build dedicated companies to keep series going without locking devs in for life. Bungie was a unique case because Halo makes too much money which Sony and Nintendo would have done the same.

Rare is not a dedicated company built from the ground up to support SoTs. They will probably support it until it dies than make something new.

Yearly releases of Halo isn't milking? So for them to milk it they need to make how many per year? Still doesn't deny the fact Halo was supposed to end on the 2nd or 3rd by their own admission.

343i being created for it doesn't neglect the fact Bungie left, and you wanted me to say what studio that wasn't created to do that single game is stuck to it, we can also put Mojang with Minecraft on this bag.

Yes I do know what franchises and characters Nintendo have been doing, and mostly 1 or 2 per genre, and after discussions with Nintendo fans I accepted that doing Mario Tennis, Soccer, RPG, etc that could work with any char is a new IP that Nintendo choose to use their main stars to make it easier to market and succeed not as a milking of games. Or when did you seem any Nintendo game be a yearly release?

Sony doesn't do it with GT, you already started wrong. Kaz were granted an independent studio because he wanted to create GT, he still loves to create it, but also made a bike game and helped on LoD. And if he wanted he could make other game.

ND was moving away from UC (as they done with previous IPs) even creating TLOU, but they decided to go back. There isn't a shred of evidence Sony mandated ND to keep doing UC games.

Yes Nintendo release once a gen or twice something on each of their main franchises and their userbase like it, I don't know if their devs like or not. What I haven't seem so far is they closing studios or studios leaving because they are mandated to do it.

If MS make a studio to do that series how isn't that locking them for life? You know you aren't making much sense right?



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

DonFerrari said:
Azzanation said:

Your wrong.

1st - MS isnt milking the franchise, they claimed the Halo franchise has over 10 years of content. Halo has a huge following and they want more games made. 

2nd - 343i was created to sololy make Halo games for there fans and audience

3rd - No one is complaining Halo is being milked. Do you know what games Nintendo have been making for the past 30 years? Exactly. 

Killing off games because you think milking them to death is bad only works on franchises that gamers dont want. 

Sony do it with Polyphony with GT

ND did it with Uncharted

Nintendo do it with Mario, Zelda and Pokemon etc

The big differences between MS compared to Sony and Nintendo is they build dedicated companies to keep series going without locking devs in for life. Bungie was a unique case because Halo makes too much money which Sony and Nintendo would have done the same.

Rare is not a dedicated company built from the ground up to support SoTs. They will probably support it until it dies than make something new.

Yearly releases of Halo isn't milking? So for them to milk it they need to make how many per year? Still doesn't deny the fact Halo was supposed to end on the 2nd or 3rd by their own admission.

343i being created for it doesn't neglect the fact Bungie left, and you wanted me to say what studio that wasn't created to do that single game is stuck to it, we can also put Mojang with Minecraft on this bag.

Yes I do know what franchises and characters Nintendo have been doing, and mostly 1 or 2 per genre, and after discussions with Nintendo fans I accepted that doing Mario Tennis, Soccer, RPG, etc that could work with any char is a new IP that Nintendo choose to use their main stars to make it easier to market and succeed not as a milking of games. Or when did you seem any Nintendo game be a yearly release?

Sony doesn't do it with GT, you already started wrong. Kaz were granted an independent studio because he wanted to create GT, he still loves to create it, but also made a bike game and helped on LoD. And if he wanted he could make other game.

ND was moving away from UC (as they done with previous IPs) even creating TLOU, but they decided to go back. There isn't a shred of evidence Sony mandated ND to keep doing UC games.

Yes Nintendo release once a gen or twice something on each of their main franchises and their userbase like it, I don't know if their devs like or not. What I haven't seem so far is they closing studios or studios leaving because they are mandated to do it.

If MS make a studio to do that series how isn't that locking them for life? You know you aren't making much sense right?

You just proved your lack of knowledge with Halo. For starters the mainline Halo games are not released yearly, Halo 4 came out in 2012, Halo 5 came out in 2015 and Halo 6 is due out possibly in 2018. That's almost 3 years per mainline Halo games, the ones 343 actually make. Halo Spin offs are made from other Devs for example Halo Wars 2 was developed by Creative Assembly. 

You also miss the point that Halo has a huge following and they want more Halo games. This isn't Killzone where no one cares for it. Halo makes a ton of money and it also pleases there fans so its a win win making them. It would be a stupid business decision to stop doing them. Halo is to MS is what Star Wars is for Disney. 

Halo 3 was where Bungie wanted to end the series not Halo 2 so for you to say the series was meant to end with 2 or 3 is very silly indeed. Look what Bungie make now, they make a Halo Spin off (Destiny) and are locked in for 10 years doing it so they definitely improved... Destiny yay?

Mojang released Cobolt and Scrolls not long ago so even though Minecraft is there specialty, they have freedom to create when they wont to. So including them is another silly one.

Your excuse for Poly and GT is a poor one.

There's a difference between locking a company that makes different types of games and genres compared to locking in a company built to only make that series. In other words, those devs who signed up for 343, and Turn10 etc know what there meant to create. 343 is Halo and Turn 10 is Forza. Rare is nothing like those two, they have creative freedom to make what they want which is why Sea of Thieves is being made.

Keep trying to downplay this though. Your not getting very far.

Last edited by Azzanation - on 14 December 2017

Around the Network
Azzanation said:
DonFerrari said:

Yearly releases of Halo isn't milking? So for them to milk it they need to make how many per year? Still doesn't deny the fact Halo was supposed to end on the 2nd or 3rd by their own admission.

343i being created for it doesn't neglect the fact Bungie left, and you wanted me to say what studio that wasn't created to do that single game is stuck to it, we can also put Mojang with Minecraft on this bag.

Yes I do know what franchises and characters Nintendo have been doing, and mostly 1 or 2 per genre, and after discussions with Nintendo fans I accepted that doing Mario Tennis, Soccer, RPG, etc that could work with any char is a new IP that Nintendo choose to use their main stars to make it easier to market and succeed not as a milking of games. Or when did you seem any Nintendo game be a yearly release?

Sony doesn't do it with GT, you already started wrong. Kaz were granted an independent studio because he wanted to create GT, he still loves to create it, but also made a bike game and helped on LoD. And if he wanted he could make other game.

ND was moving away from UC (as they done with previous IPs) even creating TLOU, but they decided to go back. There isn't a shred of evidence Sony mandated ND to keep doing UC games.

Yes Nintendo release once a gen or twice something on each of their main franchises and their userbase like it, I don't know if their devs like or not. What I haven't seem so far is they closing studios or studios leaving because they are mandated to do it.

If MS make a studio to do that series how isn't that locking them for life? You know you aren't making much sense right?

You just proved your lack of knowledge with Halo. For starters the mainline Halo games are not released yearly, Halo 4 came out in 2012, Halo 5 came out in 2015 and Halo 6 is due out possibly in 2018. That's almost 3 years per mainline Halo games, the ones 343 actually make. Halo Spin offs are made from other Devs for example Halo Wars 2 was developed by Creative Assembly. 

You also miss the point that Halo has a huge following and they want more Halo games. This isn't Killzone where no one cares for it. Halo makes a ton of money and it also pleases there fans so its a win win making them. It would be a stupid business decision to stop doing them. Halo is to MS is what Star Wars is for Disney. 

Halo 3 was where Bungie wanted to end the series not Halo 2 so for you to say the series was meant to end with 2 or 3 is very silly indeed. Look what Bungie make now, they make a Halo Spin off (Destiny) and are locked in for 10 years doing it so they definitely improved... Destiny yay?

Mojang released Cobolt and Scrolls not long ago so even though Minecraft is there specialty, they have freedom to create when they wont to. So including them is another silly one.

Your excuse for Poly and GT is a poor one.

There's a difference between locking a company that makes different types of games and genres compared to locking in a company built to only make that series. In other words, those devs who signed up for 343, and Turn10 etc know what there meant to create. 343 is Halo and Turn 10 is Forza. Rare is nothing like those two, they have creative freedom to make what they want which is why Sea of Thieves is being made.

Keep trying to downplay this though. Your not getting very far.

Who said mainline? I said Halo is being released yearly between mainline, remaster, collection, spin-offs, etc. That makes the game being released every year, so don't try to dismiss it on someone lack of knowledge.

Star Wars is to Disney a new IP they just bought, so? I don't miss the point. Rock Band and Guitar Hero also had huge following and sales until they dried it out. Halo have been losing sales since 4. But sure MS will keep doing it until it isn't profitable anymore.

How me saying the series was to end on 2 and 3, with Bungie wanting to finish on 3 is silly? You just proved my point that the series was to end, but MS made it keep going to milk it out. If Bungie left to make a game similar to Halo and will do it for another 10 years, that is their choice. Case in point is that they could have been doing it inside of MS if they weren't demanded to keep doing Halo.

About Mojang, I wasn't aware of those 2 games, where they even big releases or micro pet projects like SSM do when helping small teams?

What excuse on PD? They are an independent company that have their own book, with Kazunori being president and taking the decisions also having made games outside of GT. You call it excuse because you can't counter?

Do you have the contract of those devs to be sure about it? Because what we have is more evidence of MS keeping devs doing the same thing when it sells then they doing new IPs.

And what downplay? You have real spin capacities.



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 said:

You just proved your lack of knowledge with Halo. For starters the mainline Halo games are not released yearly, Halo 4 came out in 2012, Halo 5 came out in 2015 and Halo 6 is due out possibly in 2018. That's almost 3 years per mainline Halo games, the ones 343 actually make. Halo Spin offs are made from other Devs for example Halo Wars 2 was developed by Creative Assembly.

Call of Duty alternates game releases between developers with their yearly releases.
Assassins Creed alternates game releases between developers with their yearly releases.

Those franchises are usually stamped with a big giant cow as far as milking goes.

Halo... Gets an almost yearly release in the franchise that alternates between different developers.
So... Halo should be held up to the same standard as Call of Duty and Assassins Creed... Ergo. It is a milked franchise.

I am a massive Halo fan, I own *every* Halo game on *every* released platform, but there is no denying that the franchise is a milked franchise.
Even if the games were released on only a bi-yearly cadence, it would still be a milked franchise.




--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

DonFerrari said:
Azzanation said:

You just proved your lack of knowledge with Halo. For starters the mainline Halo games are not released yearly, Halo 4 came out in 2012, Halo 5 came out in 2015 and Halo 6 is due out possibly in 2018. That's almost 3 years per mainline Halo games, the ones 343 actually make. Halo Spin offs are made from other Devs for example Halo Wars 2 was developed by Creative Assembly. 

You also miss the point that Halo has a huge following and they want more Halo games. This isn't Killzone where no one cares for it. Halo makes a ton of money and it also pleases there fans so its a win win making them. It would be a stupid business decision to stop doing them. Halo is to MS is what Star Wars is for Disney. 

Halo 3 was where Bungie wanted to end the series not Halo 2 so for you to say the series was meant to end with 2 or 3 is very silly indeed. Look what Bungie make now, they make a Halo Spin off (Destiny) and are locked in for 10 years doing it so they definitely improved... Destiny yay?

Mojang released Cobolt and Scrolls not long ago so even though Minecraft is there specialty, they have freedom to create when they wont to. So including them is another silly one.

Your excuse for Poly and GT is a poor one.

There's a difference between locking a company that makes different types of games and genres compared to locking in a company built to only make that series. In other words, those devs who signed up for 343, and Turn10 etc know what there meant to create. 343 is Halo and Turn 10 is Forza. Rare is nothing like those two, they have creative freedom to make what they want which is why Sea of Thieves is being made.

Keep trying to downplay this though. Your not getting very far.

Who said mainline? I said Halo is being released yearly between mainline, remaster, collection, spin-offs, etc. That makes the game being released every year, so don't try to dismiss it on someone lack of knowledge.

Star Wars is to Disney a new IP they just bought, so? I don't miss the point. Rock Band and Guitar Hero also had huge following and sales until they dried it out. Halo have been losing sales since 4. But sure MS will keep doing it until it isn't profitable anymore.

How me saying the series was to end on 2 and 3, with Bungie wanting to finish on 3 is silly? You just proved my point that the series was to end, but MS made it keep going to milk it out. If Bungie left to make a game similar to Halo and will do it for another 10 years, that is their choice. Case in point is that they could have been doing it inside of MS if they weren't demanded to keep doing Halo.

About Mojang, I wasn't aware of those 2 games, where they even big releases or micro pet projects like SSM do when helping small teams?

What excuse on PD? They are an independent company that have their own book, with Kazunori being president and taking the decisions also having made games outside of GT. You call it excuse because you can't counter?

Do you have the contract of those devs to be sure about it? Because what we have is more evidence of MS keeping devs doing the same thing when it sells then they doing new IPs.

And what downplay? You have real spin capacities.

Mate Halo gets released yearly however those devs aren't locked into making Halo games. Those devs are contracted to make 1 or 2 and they normally change after that. 343 is the brand designed to make Halo games, and they release them every 3 years. Halo makes a ton of money and expect no less with Halo 6. Look up how much Halo 5 made for MS and you will be shocked. You know why Halo profits so much and the sales seem to be less than the previous game? its because Halo isn't bundled as much as they use to be and Digital sales also take into account. Profits > Sales numbers. 

Disney have made 3 Star Wars movies since they purchased the franchise. 343 have made 3 Halo Games when they were formed. So what's your point?

It doesn't matter what Cobolt and Scrolls are, they are games released by Mojang so your point is invalid.

So what recent games have PD made outside of GT?  

You should be thanking MS for letting Rare make something new not bash them for locking devs into IPs and worried for future games if SoTs is successful.

I for one am looking forward to SoTs if your not. And I will be really happy if Rare support the game years on end.

All companies milk there big IPs if you see it as milking. Its just Halo is a lot bigger than the IPs you probably play which most likely die off and stop selling after awhile. Halo continues to profit massively and MS would be loving it.

Pemalite said:
Azzanation said:

You just proved your lack of knowledge with Halo. For starters the mainline Halo games are not released yearly, Halo 4 came out in 2012, Halo 5 came out in 2015 and Halo 6 is due out possibly in 2018. That's almost 3 years per mainline Halo games, the ones 343 actually make. Halo Spin offs are made from other Devs for example Halo Wars 2 was developed by Creative Assembly.

Call of Duty alternates game releases between developers with their yearly releases.
Assassins Creed alternates game releases between developers with their yearly releases.

Those franchises are usually stamped with a big giant cow as far as milking goes.

Halo... Gets an almost yearly release in the franchise that alternates between different developers.
So... Halo should be held up to the same standard as Call of Duty and Assassins Creed... Ergo. It is a milked franchise.

I am a massive Halo fan, I own *every* Halo game on *every* released platform, but there is no denying that the franchise is a milked franchise.
Even if the games were released on only a bi-yearly cadence, it would still be a milked franchise.


Halo is no different to Mario, Zelda and Pokémon for Nintendo. Huge followings allow for more games made. That's the way it is. CoD releases a mainline CoD game yearly that different devs make. Halo mainline is made every 3 years with an exception of a spin off in between. 



Pemalite said:
Azzanation said:

You just proved your lack of knowledge with Halo. For starters the mainline Halo games are not released yearly, Halo 4 came out in 2012, Halo 5 came out in 2015 and Halo 6 is due out possibly in 2018. That's almost 3 years per mainline Halo games, the ones 343 actually make. Halo Spin offs are made from other Devs for example Halo Wars 2 was developed by Creative Assembly.

Call of Duty alternates game releases between developers with their yearly releases.
Assassins Creed alternates game releases between developers with their yearly releases.

Those franchises are usually stamped with a big giant cow as far as milking goes.

Halo... Gets an almost yearly release in the franchise that alternates between different developers.
So... Halo should be held up to the same standard as Call of Duty and Assassins Creed... Ergo. It is a milked franchise.

I am a massive Halo fan, I own *every* Halo game on *every* released platform, but there is no denying that the franchise is a milked franchise.
Even if the games were released on only a bi-yearly cadence, it would still be a milked franchise.


Every successful game gets milked. Even games like overwatch and counter strike go gets milked because they push microtransactions like crazy. In this industry which we should know about hardly anyone takes chances on new ips. Sure we got pubg, overwatch and destiny that are now popular but those games required a lot of advertisement money.



Snoopy said:

Every successful game gets milked. Even games like overwatch and counter strike go gets milked because they push microtransactions like crazy. In this industry which we should know about hardly anyone takes chances on new ips. Sure we got pubg, overwatch and destiny that are now popular but those games required a lot of advertisement money.

Sony Interactive Entertainment Studios want you to hold their beer mate.