If Sea of Thieves Succeeds?

[DonFerrari]

ThisGuyFooks said:

Veknoid_Outcast said:

1) 343 was created to continue making Halo games. That's its sole purpose. Look at the company name.

2) Black Tusk I'll give you. It was founded in 2012 to create a new IP, "to build the next Halo." Now it's working on Gears.

3) Rare has been given an obscene amount of freedom to create its own games, yes, including Kinect: https://www.destructoid.com/microsoft-didn-t-push-for-kinect-development-rare-chose-it-327384.phtml

4) According to reports, Playground is working on an RPG: http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/11/23/forza-horizon-devs-secret-new-game-is-an-open-world-action-rpg

Playground is an Independent Studio tho. They are not owned by MS.

Does Nintendo and Sony has any studio built to make a single franchise?

The only one i can think of is Polyphony Digital.

PD was made because Kaz wanted to make GT... but he also made a bike game and helped on LoD.

Veknoid_Outcast said:

ThisGuyFooks said:

Playground is an Independent Studio tho. They are not owned by MS.

Does Nintendo and Sony has any studio built to make a single franchise?

The only one i can think of is Polyphony Digital.

Well these are two different topics right? Couldn't we assume that these studios want to work on the same IP again and again? Creating a bunch of games from the same property over a short amount of time isn't proof positive that publisher meddling was the cause. Otherwise we should extend the same scrutiny to Polyphony, as you wrote, or Naughty Dog, which turned out five Uncharted games in a decade.

For the record I think Microsoft is a poor manager of its properties. But not because of micromanagement. 

Deciding what game the dev will make isn't micromanagement. And ND was free to do TLOU, and decided to go back to UC and there are plenty of examples similar on Sony. While we have Halo and Gears example of devs leaving MS because of lack of freedom over what they would do.