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

Forums - Sony - Pachter: Insomniac nuts for not going multiplatform!

Alby_da_Wolf on 15 May 2010
Galaki said:
WTF?! Why is he criticizing something else other than the Wii?

It works as simulated annealing for his neural network.



Stwike him, Centuwion. Stwike him vewy wuffly! (Pontius Pilate, "Life of Brian")
A fart without stink is like a sky without stars.
TGS, Third Grade Shooter: brand new genre invented by Kevin Butler exclusively for Natal WiiToo Kinect. PEW! PEW-PEW-PEW!   


Around the Network
IllegalPaladin on 15 May 2010

I can't believe it... He knows the reason, but he's saying this crap?

The reason Insomniac is staying on the PS3 is because they're going to get HUGE sales once the WiiHD comes out.

Insomniac and Sony will be rolling in the money.



ZenfoldorVGI on 16 May 2010
CGI-Quality said:
ZenfoldorVGI said:
CGI-Quality said:
RVDondaPC said:
Pachter is right. From a financial standpoint they would be much better off going multi platform. Would they be happier as employees and as a company? Maybe, maybe not. But Pachter is looking at it from a financial stand point. Because, THAT'S HIS JOB.

Unless they are financially struggling, which they probably aren't, I don't see an issue. Some devs care more about their work than just making a quick buck. Thank goodness those types of devs exist.

The point is, profit should take priority over loyalty when it comes to the health and future of your company. Struggling or not, the future is impossible to predict. Loyalty is different between enterprises, and in business. Sound business decision forces one to make choices based on personal benefit, as most companies do, including Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft, and nearly every developer who makes every game you love, ever. There are no personal feelings involved here. To not be loyal is not a betrayal in business, it is simply the nature of business, and expected by all those parties involved.

Who's to say they aren't profiting? For your logic to make any sense, they'd need to be in a situation where they either:

A. Aren't making any money (or enough).

B. Have a relationship with Sony that is strict

Since I'm inclined to believe neither of those, I see no reason for them not to stay right where they are.

I mis-spoke there. Business is about MAXIMIZING profits, not simply making them. The theory being, the future is unpredictible, and you never know when you will be making no profits. At those times, past profits and performance is key to survival. Thus, maximizing profits is always good business practice. It is actually legally required in many publically traded entities.

If you are planning to argue that maximizing profits is not good business practice, then you would be wrong. It is not always required, but it is always recommended. Kind of like fastening your seatbelt.



I don't need your console war.
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor.
You're power hungry, spinnin' stories, and bein' graphics whores.
I don't need your console war.

NO NO, NO NO NO.

Naum on 16 May 2010
Galaki said:
WTF?! Why is he criticizing something else other than the Wii?

He must have had a bad day I guess.



If it isn't turnbased it isn't worth playing   (mostly)

And shepherds we shall be,

For Thee, my Lord, for Thee. Power hath descended forth from Thy hand, That our feet may swiftly carry out Thy command. So we shall flow a river forth to Thee And teeming with souls shall it ever be. In Nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritūs Sancti. -----The Boondock Saints

TheNoobHolocaust on 16 May 2010

I think Insomniac is waiting to be purchased as a first party developer for Sony.




Get your Portable ID!

Around the Network
Kennyheart on 16 May 2010
TheNoobHolocaust said:
I think Insomniac is waiting to be purchased as a first party developer for Sony.

I am surprised they haven't done that yet.



TheNoobHolocaust on 16 May 2010
Kennyheart said:
TheNoobHolocaust said:
I think Insomniac is waiting to be purchased as a first party developer for Sony.

I am surprised they haven't done that yet.

I know, its sad, they buy all their franchises but not the developer.




Get your Portable ID!

MONSTERgamer100% on 16 May 2010

i hope they dont go multiplatform and stay sony exclusive. they are one of sony's best



Goddbless on 16 May 2010
Vetteman94 said:
So Media Molecule is stupid to now be apart of a large multi-billion dollar corporation and the safety net that comes with that? OK

You have to remember this IS Pachter saying this nonsense. He thinks everyone should go multi. It seems like every few months when he doesn't have anything better to say he starts talking about one of the great exclusive developers going multi.



Love the product, not the company. They love your money, not you.

-TheRealMafoo

RVDondaPC on 17 May 2010
ZenfoldorVGI said:
CGI-Quality said:
ZenfoldorVGI said:
CGI-Quality said:
RVDondaPC said:
Pachter is right. From a financial standpoint they would be much better off going multi platform. Would they be happier as employees and as a company? Maybe, maybe not. But Pachter is looking at it from a financial stand point. Because, THAT'S HIS JOB.

Unless they are financially struggling, which they probably aren't, I don't see an issue. Some devs care more about their work than just making a quick buck. Thank goodness those types of devs exist.

The point is, profit should take priority over loyalty when it comes to the health and future of your company. Struggling or not, the future is impossible to predict. Loyalty is different between enterprises, and in business. Sound business decision forces one to make choices based on personal benefit, as most companies do, including Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft, and nearly every developer who makes every game you love, ever. There are no personal feelings involved here. To not be loyal is not a betrayal in business, it is simply the nature of business, and expected by all those parties involved.

Who's to say they aren't profiting? For your logic to make any sense, they'd need to be in a situation where they either:

A. Aren't making any money (or enough).

B. Have a relationship with Sony that is strict

Since I'm inclined to believe neither of those, I see no reason for them not to stay right where they are.

I mis-spoke there. Business is about MAXIMIZING profits, not simply making them. The theory being, the future is unpredictible, and you never know when you will be making no profits. At those times, past profits and performance is key to survival. Thus, maximizing profits is always good business practice. It is actually legally required in many publically traded entities.

If you are planning to argue that maximizing profits is not good business practice, then you would be wrong. It is not always required, but it is always recommended. Kind of like fastening your seatbelt.

Insomniac is a privately held company. Maximizing profits may not be what their goal is. Business is not always about maximizing profits, it's only always about that with publicly traded companies. There are non profit businesses, there are employee owned business, there are businesses that people run just so they can make a living doing what they love. There are businesses that could make money but the owners are not willing to put in the extra effort they'd rather enjoy life. I don't know who owns Insomniac but there is a good chance the majority of ownership is held by actual high employees of the company. If that's the case they may not care about maximizing profits. They may just want to have the freedom to make video games they want to make and make a living doing it. No stress, lots of freedom, and many other life benefits other than money.