By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
OTBWY on 10 April 2021
Edit Thread
twintail said:
OTBWY said:


Are you kidding me? They were forced to do something else instead of doing what they wanted to do, which was making a sequel to a game that while had mixed reviews, was still profitable. And the fact that they had fear about getting absorbed into ND should say enough.

What you have is a pitch that clearly wasn't good enough. And judging from the article, they had no alternative plans. So what exactly should Sony do with a studio whose sole pitch wasn't viable, and who don't have a strong record to their names? Helping ND at least ensured they were in fact getting work and not just doing nothing until a new plan could be finalised. 

There's nothing about creative freedom remotely in this decision. If you have the misconception that Sony will just greenlight whatever a studio wants, than you have been looking at what Sony has been offering their teams all these years, incorrectly. Many years ago, an insider shared that Sony Bend had at least 2 other unsuccessful pitches: for Uncharted and Infamous. So clearly, this news is not anything new for how Sony handles new ideas from their studios.

Besides, the article clearly states that Sony Bend are not working on a brand new IP. How you can argue creative freedom issues after that is surprising. 

I love how you bend the narrative there. The fact of the matter is, is that they forced them to work on something that they didnt want to work on (you just gloss over the them saying they feared being absorbed into ND) as they would rather work on a sequel of a game they made. That to me is by definition a lack of creative freedom, no matter new IP (goalpost) or not.