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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Insominiac biting the feeding hand?

So what exactly does owning the IP mean in this case? Do they get to release it on other platforms?



Around the Network
fallen said:
badgenome said:

Since Microsoft is feeding them now, no, they aren't.

I can understand why they're so keen on owning their IPs now. It has to suck that everything they worked on for the past decade plus belongs to Sony. That said, Insomniac aren't what they used to be and the footage of Sunset Overdrive is really disappointing to me.


Insomniac was never very good, they were just said to be good because they were Sony exclusive, and Sony has so many fans who automatically praise any sony exclusive.

 

once they went multiplat they no longer had that effect, so people were free to say the truth about their games.

 

That said, SO actually looks kinda cool, amd I dislike cartoony art, but it looks cool renough to overcome that maybe.

So obvious you're mad over them going to Microsoft to be exclusive. Either that or you never played the Resistance series but it's one of the best FPS triliogies. 



shikamaru317 said:
I think that Insomniac wanted to move on to new IP's and Sony wanted them to keep making new Resistance and Ratchet & Clank games. Insomniac has suggested in interviews that no publishers other than Microsoft believed in their idea for Sunset Overdrive and were willing to give them creative control and ownership of the IP.

Unfortunately, I can't see this being a big seller, especially if it releases in the fall.  It will be swallowed up by Destiny and COD.



Trunkin said:
Well, maybe Sony wasn't a very good partner for them. Who knows? Perhaps they weren't providing Insomniac with the freedom to realize their vision - I.e to stop churning out tired Resistance and R&C titles and work on something interesting for a change.


I wouldn't stay with a bad partner for 10 years when there are better partners available. I do believe what someone said about they selling low iin the last outputs made sony not keen on financing a new IP and them they had to look after MS. Would you stay with a partner for 10y and them complain how bad he was?



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: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

shikamaru317 said:
whatever said:
So what exactly does owning the IP mean in this case? Do they get to release it on other platforms?

They have the option to release sequels to SO on multiple platforms if they choose. Not the first game though since Microsoft is funding it's development and marketing. They also suggested in an interview today that the reason they wanted ownership of the IP is because they don't like the idea of a publisher giving the IP over to another developer when they feel like moving on to something else, they don't want to have no say over the future of their IP. 


Since we don't have the contract it is just conjectures. And I don't remember sony taking any IP that were being developed by Insominiac and making other dev make it...

Probably the biggest reason is trying new IP and since they had a stellar flop in the last try Sony didn't want to foot the bill. Even the last R&C was badly received.



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: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
shikamaru317 said:
whatever said:
shikamaru317 said:
I think that Insomniac wanted to move on to new IP's and Sony wanted them to keep making new Resistance and Ratchet & Clank games. Insomniac has suggested in interviews that no publishers other than Microsoft believed in their idea for Sunset Overdrive and were willing to give them creative control and ownership of the IP.

Unfortunately, I can't see this being a big seller, especially if it releases in the fall.  It will be swallowed up by Destiny and COD.

It really depends on reviews I think, if Insomniac returns to their old 80+ metacritic self I'm guessing 2-3 million lifetime. It looks at least as good as the first Crackdown and the first Crackdown sold 2+ million on 360 even though Microsoft didn't market it much (they mainly relied on Halo 3 beta access to sell the game). I suspect a pretty big marketing campaign for Sunset.

Titanfall will be one of the few X1 games launched this first half of the year to hit 3 million, I doubt Sunset Overdrive have any chance of that.



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: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

whatever said:
So what exactly does owning the IP mean in this case? Do they get to release it on other platforms?


That's generally what owning the IP means. But they might have a contract with MS to keep that series exclusive to Xbox One for future releases like Gears of War.

Alan Wake is owned by Remedy but they had to get permission from MS to make a PC port. MS wasn't involved in that port, they didn't even publish it.



Recently Completed
River City: Rival Showdown
for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

I don't know why gamers make such a big deal about the business decisions that developers, publishers, and console vendors make.

If you have an Xbox One you can feel good that you will get to play the game. If you don't that was a choice you made. Developers and publishers that own the rights to IPs decide where to publish the IP. Whether that was money-hat-ed or just plain a choice they made it is up to them.

I just wish gamers would judge the game's gameplay rather that what console it ships on.



You are butthurt.



Are people deliberately not reading the OP and just trying to guess from the title?

The biting part isn't about releasing exclusive game on MS is about bad mouthing Sony that was the previous partner... I know most people lack reading skills, but jizz it wasn't even a long OP for all this lazyness.



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: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."