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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Black Tusk renamed to The Coalition. will show more at E3. becoming a "gears machine"

true_fan on 03 June 2015
LudicrousSpeed said:
DerNebel said:
LudicrousSpeed said:



As it pertains to this thread and the reaction most of you are giving, no, they really don't. They eventually allow devs to move on to new IP's after the iron is no longer hot. Naughty Dog was relegated to Jak games on PS2, and only after three Uncharted titles were they allowed to release something new last gen. Which they have already re-released on PS4, and are now back to work on Uncharted 4. Sucker Punch has done nothing but Infamous. Maybe now after three Infamous games and two expansions are they going to be allowed to make a new IP?

Moving on, Sony Santa Monica. Just God of War. I don't care about how they've helped other studios with work on various games. SSM is considered one of the top studios in Sony's stable, and they've been allowed to release nothing but God of War ever since 2001. Polyphony. I'll throw your theory a bone here and even include games from when they were before Polyphony. GT and two other racers in another franchise. Aside from Omega Boost, released in 1999, they have done nothing but Gran Turismo racing games and a motorcycle racing game. Which, was out nine years ago.

Guerilla Games had to make six Killzone titles before they were finally allowed a new IP. Were they allowed this new IP because Sony regularly allows their studios to make them, or was it because the last KZ title was the lowest received since the original, and maybe Sony realizes games might be sick of Killzone after ten years?

I could go on here but 1. I think I have more than proved my point and 2. I don't want to make it seem as if this is some MS vs Sony thing. I'm not saying it's bad that Sony rarely allows their big studios to take big risks with new IP's, I am saying it's par for the course in the gaming world. Can you actually tell me of a big Sony studio that "regularly" releases new IP's on the scale of what Gears of War is or what Coalition was working on? I mean, sure, Media Molecule is allowed to create Tearaway after two LBP games. But that's not a AAA game. That's a low risk Vita title.

What you're going to have to do before you make comparisons like that to what Sony has done, you have to give MS and Coalition time. In seven years after they churn out two-three Gears titles, might MS allow them to work on a new IP, like Sony did with ND last gen? Maybe. But all this doom and worry at game one is just reaching and very premature. Would I have liked a new IP? Of course. They can be awesome. However, we know Gears of War is awesome. And Microsoft knows it's awesome. They also know it sells millions of units. Which is what allows them to fund other projects. This is just how business works.

7/10-Too much truth

-IGN



Around the Network
Mmmfishtacos on 03 June 2015
true_fan said:
LudicrousSpeed said:
DerNebel said:
LudicrousSpeed said:



As it pertains to this thread and the reaction most of you are giving, no, they really don't. They eventually allow devs to move on to new IP's after the iron is no longer hot. Naughty Dog was relegated to Jak games on PS2, and only after three Uncharted titles were they allowed to release something new last gen. Which they have already re-released on PS4, and are now back to work on Uncharted 4. Sucker Punch has done nothing but Infamous. Maybe now after three Infamous games and two expansions are they going to be allowed to make a new IP?

Moving on, Sony Santa Monica. Just God of War. I don't care about how they've helped other studios with work on various games. SSM is considered one of the top studios in Sony's stable, and they've been allowed to release nothing but God of War ever since 2001. Polyphony. I'll throw your theory a bone here and even include games from when they were before Polyphony. GT and two other racers in another franchise. Aside from Omega Boost, released in 1999, they have done nothing but Gran Turismo racing games and a motorcycle racing game. Which, was out nine years ago.

Guerilla Games had to make six Killzone titles before they were finally allowed a new IP. Were they allowed this new IP because Sony regularly allows their studios to make them, or was it because the last KZ title was the lowest received since the original, and maybe Sony realizes games might be sick of Killzone after ten years?

I could go on here but 1. I think I have more than proved my point and 2. I don't want to make it seem as if this is some MS vs Sony thing. I'm not saying it's bad that Sony rarely allows their big studios to take big risks with new IP's, I am saying it's par for the course in the gaming world. Can you actually tell me of a big Sony studio that "regularly" releases new IP's on the scale of what Gears of War is or what Coalition was working on? I mean, sure, Media Molecule is allowed to create Tearaway after two LBP games. But that's not a AAA game. That's a low risk Vita title.

What you're going to have to do before you make comparisons like that to what Sony has done, you have to give MS and Coalition time. In seven years after they churn out two-three Gears titles, might MS allow them to work on a new IP, like Sony did with ND last gen? Maybe. But all this doom and worry at game one is just reaching and very premature. Would I have liked a new IP? Of course. They can be awesome. However, we know Gears of War is awesome. And Microsoft knows it's awesome. They also know it sells millions of units. Which is what allows them to fund other projects. This is just how business works.

7/10-Too much truth

-IGN


Skewed and spun,  bUT hey he got the names of PDs other games right. That's something. 



Mmmfishtacos on 03 June 2015

Btw, they have confirmed they will be gears only. So any hope of a new IP from them will be slim, at least this gen.



Angelus on 03 June 2015
Mmmfishtacos said:
true_fan said:

7/10-Too much truth

-IGN


Skewed and spun,  bUT hey he got the names of PDs other games right. That's something. 

More like skewered and hung 



LudicrousSpeed on 03 June 2015
Mmmfishtacos said:
true_fan said:

7/10-Too much truth

-IGN


Skewed and spun,  bUT hey he got the names of PDs other games right. That's something. 


Sorry friend, but no skewing or spinning is required when you're speaking the truth. The only spin in that convo is someone trying to say Sony regularly allows their stuidios to make new IP's (which, again, is not a bad thing). I mean, you can't really spin or skew games into or out of existence ;)

Allow me to end my posting in this thread, with the companies new logo. I think it looks pretty awesome.

 

Gears of War, baby.



Around the Network
DerNebel on 03 June 2015
LudicrousSpeed said:
DerNebel said:
LudicrousSpeed said:

Translating the translation: Video Game Publishing 101

As if that's commendable or necessary, Sony for example is regularly letting their studios make new IPs.

As it pertains to this thread and the reaction most of you are giving, no, they really don't. They eventually allow devs to move on to new IP's after the iron is no longer hot. Naughty Dog was relegated to Jak games on PS2, and only after three Uncharted titles were they allowed to release something new last gen. Which they have already re-released on PS4, and are now back to work on Uncharted 4. Sucker Punch has done nothing but Infamous. Maybe now after three Infamous games and two expansions are they going to be allowed to make a new IP?

Moving on, Sony Santa Monica. Just God of War. I don't care about how they've helped other studios with work on various games. SSM is considered one of the top studios in Sony's stable, and they've been allowed to release nothing but God of War ever since 2001. Polyphony. I'll throw your theory a bone here and even include games from when they were before Polyphony. GT and two other racers in another franchise. Aside from Omega Boost, released in 1999, they have done nothing but Gran Turismo racing games and a motorcycle racing game. Which, was out nine years ago.

Guerilla Games had to make six Killzone titles before they were finally allowed a new IP. Were they allowed this new IP because Sony regularly allows their studios to make them, or was it because the last KZ title was the lowest received since the original, and maybe Sony realizes games might be sick of Killzone after ten years?

I could go on here but 1. I think I have more than proved my point and 2. I don't want to make it seem as if this is some MS vs Sony thing. I'm not saying it's bad that Sony rarely allows their big studios to take big risks with new IP's, I am saying it's par for the course in the gaming world. Can you actually tell me of a big Sony studio that "regularly" releases new IP's on the scale of what Gears of War is or what Coalition was working on? I mean, sure, Media Molecule is allowed to create Tearaway after two LBP games. But that's not a AAA game. That's a low risk Vita title.

What you're going to have to do before you make comparisons like that to what Sony has done, you have to give MS and Coalition time. In seven years after they churn out two-three Gears titles, might MS allow them to work on a new IP, like Sony did with ND last gen? Maybe. But all this doom and worry at game one is just reaching and very premature. Would I have liked a new IP? Of course. They can be awesome. However, we know Gears of War is awesome. And Microsoft knows it's awesome. They also know it sells millions of units. Which is what allows them to fund other projects. This is just how business works.

You're ignoring development times here, TLOU development started after Uncharted 2, also from everything we've heard it sounds like Uncharted 4 is actually the end of the series. As has been said Santa Monica was developing a new IP since 2010 that later on failed and was cancelled after almost 4 years (a risk that is always there). Guerrilla Games has been working on their new IP since sometime in 2011, so that had nothing to do with their latest Killzone title. Media Molecule is also working on another new IP aside from Tearaway. Bend is working on a new IP, Sony Japan is constantly working on new IPs, Sony San Diego is working on a new IP, even if it's "just" a digital title.

Polyphony Digital and Sucker Punch are really the only Sony studios that have not been working on a new IP in the last 5 years, with Sucker Punch the next game might be a new IP (though I doubt it), PD is probably going to keep working on Gran Turismo.



Mmmfishtacos on 03 June 2015
LudicrousSpeed said:
Mmmfishtacos said:


Skewed and spun,  bUT hey he got the names of PDs other games right. That's something. 


Sorry friend, but no skewing or spinning is required when you're speaking the truth. The only spin in that convo is someone trying to say Sony regularly allows their stuidios to make new IP's (which, again, is not a bad thing). I mean, you can't really spin or skew games into or out of existence ;)

Allow me to end my posting in this thread, with the companies new logo. I think it looks pretty awesome.

 

 

Gears of War, baby.

But the way you report it can be. It's really not that hard to understand.

We know for a fact ND has free rein to do what they want. They've been creating Gen defining games from the very start. And a 4th game in the same series is a fluke for them. Plus Uncharted 3 and the last of us was in development at the same time. 

PD always wanted to make GT, and nothing else. In fact when they made their first game they where making GT. Just being sly about it. 

This is guerrillas second gen with Sony, and they are making a new IP. As we already know from looking at Sony past they don't have a problem letting and IP go, especially if they feel it's run it's course. 

The old logo and name was much better, btw. 



method114 on 03 June 2015
Burek said:
bananaking21 said:
black tusk sounded a lot better IMO. also, such a shame that MS is turning this into a "gears of war studio". their new IP looked interesting before it was axed.


Agree. This name basically says: "We will never work on anything other than Gears ever again".


This is what I hate about MS they always do this. They find a game that does well and pump out unlimited sequels till the run it into the ground. Sony might not have released a lot of good new IPs this year but at least they are trying new things. That's what I love they are always trying to release new IPs and do new things. The one bad thing about that is it can take a long time to get a sequel to a game you do want like The Last of US. If MS owned The Last of Us we would be waiting for the third or fourth installment by now.



Jazz2K on 03 June 2015

I liked Black Tusk and their logo but I also like The Coalition and their logo as well. I don't care much whether they make a new ip or a new Gears. Imo their new Gears will be different from what Epic made. I rather MS builds studios that make sure their flagship titles are under good hands than trying many things with veterans and see some of their projects fail and their talents go to waste.

Also people on this thread are overreacting to this. How many games were canned from MS, Sony and Nintendo... I can't count, do people really need to make a fuss about this?



GhetooBillGates on 03 June 2015
Teeqoz said:
Azerth said:

Guerrilla have only ever made Killzone for them, Sucker Punch have done Infamous since the PS3 was born, Polyphony = GT, Sony Santa Monica cancelled their new IP, working on a new God of War 


Sucker Punch did the Sly series on the PS2 though, Guerrila, while they have only worked on KZ til now, are working on a new IP, Sony Santa Monica, while their only fully internally developed IP is God of War, they are basically the colab studio of Sony, as they have co-developed so many projects it's insane. Polyphony though, has indeed only worked on GT.

Polyphony also worked on a game called omega boost on the Playstation 1 so GT isnt the only IP they have worked on.