| MontanaHatchet said:
Your second link doesn't really argue for your point, and the first reiterates my point that the biggest money-loser for THQ was uDraw on the PS3/360. The problem isn't casual vs. core, it's high vs. low development costs. For a company like THQ, with a very tenuous financial situation, betting on high budget games is a very risky strategy. I'm sure we all want THQ to bankrupt themselves making games we like to play, but it's not a sound business strategy. |
THQ have been a in a bad position for a long time, and U Draw for the Wii was one of there rare successes. U Draw for the PS360 was a desaster that would have killed the company, if it wasn't for Saint's Row the third which was at the same time their most successful and seccond most expensive game they have ever made. Making smaller games doesn't guarantee success ether, it just spreads the risk arround. THQ has been dieing a death by a thousand cuts for this entire generation with flop after flod of mid to low teir games, and like you said this is not casual vs core, it is about "quality" games. And they have decided that rather than die a slow death they will go big where they have a chance of succeeding.
I would love for them to become a publisher like Paradox which can make lots of small niche games and become hugely successful but going that route is a big risk as well and would likely mean even more staff cuts for THQ. I think they have a chance of pulling through with AAA development as long as they keep budgets in check and don't try and do another Homefront and spend $80m on one game, they might not be so lucky and have it break even a seccond time. I mean I know that it's a risky business, and I think they know that too. But I think they have a shot, they have some great developers, and I don't think that it's guaranteed doom.
@TheVoxelman on twitter
