Support NeoGAF

[Ishan]

I don't believe people realize how rare the bungie scenario was . Most companies that get brought almost never re establish themselves. Eg do you think Skype would remove itself from ms or Instagram from Facebook . The parent companies almost never allow it .

I understand the game studio scenario is more complicated so ill try to explain using examples.

Bungie brought itself back because
1) They had enough clout where other third parties were willing to fund their ideas.

Example of why this is not that common look at what happened to rare or Psygnosis . They made games but over time their name recognition/pedigree as a studio went down.

NAughty dog does have the pedigree but how much money and freedom will third parties give them? Even Bungie has such a sales dependent contract

2) The bungie team seemed to have a large sense of unified dissatisfaction

This I assume was the result of the culture clash . Look at Naughty Dog they don't have their founders anymore . They've had many new hires and they still have maintained their standards this shows they gel well with Sony and Sony understands them enough to not cause a mass "UNIFIED" exodus. An example is how they agreed to make 2 teams to allow the better talent expanded roles.

3) The value of the brand itself
I think MS cared more for the HALO brand than the Bungie brand . They knew bungie is unhappy but they got an extra halo game out of them and in the meantime prepped 343 to take over .

ND as a brand is more important. They are better known as a studio to the Sony faithful . I'm sure more Sony gamers know and respect ND than the Ms games for Bungie at the time.

Think of it as and I know this isn't entirely accurate but to illustrate polyphony digital and GT . If PD wanted to leave Sony might be more willing as they still have the GT brand.

Look what happened with Infinity Ward activision wanted both the Ip Cod and the infinity ward studio name . So the only option was a mass exodus and creation of a new studio . IF naughty dog is unhappy with Sony in the future this could happen rather than the Bungie all out buy out.

All in all from naughty dogs perspective

They've been involved with Sony for AGES before they got brought over and are happy with where they are and are super INTEGRATED into the Sony development ecosystem from the ICE team to the inter studio collaboration to having an input and early access to hardware.

Also they have a LOT of creative freedom . They have come out and said this . Some have mentioned Sony may not let them make a far left game or influenced uncharted from fantasy to shooter aspects . Yes I agree there are still constraints but when you're talking millions of dollar dev and marketing budgets there will always be constraints . Naughty dog and many other Sony affiliates and studios have one of the best deals GIVEN the circumstances.

So ND is too ingrained and quite satisfied to have a bungie scenario in the near future .

TLDR No

 

[K1ng P3n]

Happy sure but is Sony holding them back from an even bigger market? That's the question.

Without a doubt, but the same could be said about any big exclusive whether it be from Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo.

 

[rdrr gnr]

Don't know why anyone would be against this unless they are a Sony fanboy and wish for their games to only remain on a Sony system.

Unlimited capacity for not reading the thread? There are 18 pages of why it isn't necessarily a good thing.

 

[davepoobond]

Unlimited capacity for not reading the thread? There are 18 pages of why it isn't necessarily a good thing.

I read naughty dog are still on a contract and when that contract runs up....

 

[To Far Away Times]

I'd argue exclusivity has helped Naughty Dog a lot. Gameplay-wise they don't do anything better than your typical western game, so they need something to stand out and being a high production value exclusive is one way to do that.

 

[BadAss2961]

They already have more freedom and resources with Sony than they'd get under any other publisher. Why anyone would want ND's quality compromised by developing for multiple consoles is beyond me.

The current situation is ideal for both them and their fans.

 

[Nafai1123]

What other publisher would allow a AAA studio with a AAA franchise to make a completely new IP at the end of the generation?

 

[unholyrevenger72]

From a player's perspective any first party developer should buy itself back. Console exclusivity is a shitty, outdated concept on life support.

You should've told MS that before they started beefing up their first party.....

 

[miso_Jeff]

No(2003).

Several games - Half-life and CoD amongst them - moved the industry towards a more cinematic approach and ND followed.



Or another take: Post-apocalyptic zombiegames are popular and new ones appear everywhere, which leads ND to create Last of US.

Like I said earlier, I think they very carefully follow trends in the industry and do their take on them, which may very well result in worthwhile games, but I've yet to see them do something completely leftfield, opposed to whatever else is happening around them and I doubt Sony would let them do it. There's just too much money involved.

What is kinda unique, however, is that they're allowed to keep going from franchise to franchise. Most big publishers wouldn't allow that to happen and Sony deserves some measure of respect for that.

I was referring more to Modern Warfare. It didn't blow up till it was on PS3/360. You make a good argument and I agree with most of it.

My only question is how many BIG studios create something truly unique and original? I think most of the big guys create games that are unique, but not necessarily original. The smaller/indie guys are ones who can/willing to try and do so.

 

[miso_Jeff]

But they are owned by Sony, they don't have exclusive deal. Turn 10 are owned by Microsoft, Retro Studios are owned by Nintendo. Do you wan't those developers also be sold by MS, Nintendo? And you don't think console makers should have first party studios to make exclusive games?

That's the thing that's so weird about this thread. This question could be asked of any major first party/exclusive title. Why didn't Bungie release Halo on other platforms? What about Gears, and Infamous. It's not a stupid question, just one that didn't needed to be asked... we know what the answer is.

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

I don't think Gran Turismo is popular here like it is in Europe so I forgot about that one.

Where is here.....USA:

GT5 sold 2.81 million in USA, thats more than many multiplatform AAA titles.

 

[J-Rzez]

That's what I'll be doing. Used and at half the price like every other ND game I've bought.

Quick, tell me what your favorite games, developer, publisher, and console so I can teach you a lesson by buying that stuff used and at half the price too.

 

[Enkidu]

That's the thing that's so weird about this thread. This question could be asked of any major first party/exclusive title. Why didn't Bungie release Halo on other platforms? What about Gears, and Infamous. It's not a stupid question, just one that didn't needed to be asked... we know what the answer is.

They didn't release those games on other platforms because they were published by a first party, so they couldn't (and perhaps wouldn't, but that's purely speculation). The Point isn't whether Uncharted should be released on other platforms, it's whether Naughty Dog should try and separate from Sony so whatever new game they make (that isn't in an established Sony owned franchise) can be released on other platforms than Playstation.

Even if Sony was selling, I doubt it would benefit Naughty Dog all that much. Their games sell well enough and they have a lot of freedom. However in an ideal world, where they could find a publisher who would give them exactly the same type of deal that Sony does now except that they could release their games on other platforms as well, it would definitely be in everyone's (except Sony's but we don't really care what large multinationals think here) interest for Naughty Dog to go independent.

 

[tassletine]

No. When your business works extremely well it's foolish to want more. Naughty Dog are sensible and very well organised. There's no reason to jump ship for more money, they have enough.

 

[Audible Phonetics]

What other publisher would allow a AAA studio with a AAA franchise to make a completely new IP at the end of the generation?

This.

If ND was owned by a different publisher. We most likely wouldn't even get Last of Us. Instead we'd have UC4

 

[PlanetSmasher]

They didn't release those games on other platforms because they were published by a first party, so they couldn't (and perhaps wouldn't, but that's purely speculation). The Point isn't whether Uncharted should be released on other platforms, it's whether Naughty Dog should try and separate from Sony so whatever new game they make (that isn't in an established Sony owned franchise) can be released on other platforms than Playstation.

Even if Sony was selling, I doubt it would benefit Naughty Dog all that much. Their games sell well enough and they have a lot of freedom. However in an ideal world, where they could find a publisher who would give them exactly the same type of deal that Sony does now except that they could release their games on other platforms as well, it would definitely be in everyone's (except Sony's but we don't really care what large multinationals think here) interest for Naughty Dog to go independent.

Naughty Dog's games wouldn't be as good as they are now if they had to develop for multiple platforms instead of coding to the metal for one specific system. Also there's no publisher out there that would give them the freedom and funding to make what they want.

So it's really not in everyone's best interest for ND to go independent. It's only in the best interest of people who are too stubborn to buy Sony systems.

 

[Dennis]

Can Naughty Dog do graphics like this without Sony?

Then, by all means.

 

[Brofist]

Quick, tell me what your favorite games, developer, publisher, and console so I can teach you a lesson by buying that stuff used and at half the price too.

I play MMOs like WoW and FFXI most, so good luck with buying yourself some used coasters.

 

[Triggerhappytel]

Like I said it's ok by me. It would just make the topic easier if people would just admit where they stand on the issue instead of giving some bullshit reason like Uncharted is too controversial to get greenlit by any other publisher.

No-one is saying other publishers wouldn't green-light Uncharted; you either misreading what people are saying or being belligerent. What people are suggesting (and I agree) is that Naughty Dog would not get the same level of creative freedom under probably any other publisher as they do under Sony. I don't know of another publisher who has let the lead developers in arguably their greatest development team step aside after releasing one of their most critically and commercially successful games ever, and create a new IP. That's the real fruit of the ND/Sony relationship, and as a result we get games like The Last of Us.

That's what I'll be doing. Used and at half the price like every other ND game I've bought.

Out of spite aimed specifically, or for some valid reason? It sounds like you've got a signifcant anti-ND chip on your shoulder.

I read naughty dog are still on a contract and when that contract runs up....

Where'd you read this? They're owned by Sony. Since about 2000 or 2001, as I recall.

 

[trmas]

I see XBox fans are wanting them some Naughty Dog - not going to happen. But I don't blame them a bit. Recently started TLoU, and I cannot believe how good these guys have gotten.

But Sony keeps them happy, and you won't be playing their games elsewhere for quite a while. Kind of like Nintendo. Everyone would like to see Nintendo go third party, but that isn't going to happen either.

 

[Emwitus]

I'd argue exclusivity has helped Naughty Dog a lot. Gameplay-wise they don't do anything better than your typical western game, so they need something to stand out and being a high production value exclusive is one way to do that.

Yeah, the typical third person vertical traversal multiplayer shooter.

 

[Byakuya769]

Seeing as how TLOU managed to sell over 3 million in 3 weeks on just one system I think it goes to show that they have the name power that very few developers hold. They could potentially sell twice as much going multiplatform. I know Sony gives them plenty of funding and resources but just look at Bungie. Activision seem to be doing all they can to put Destiny on the map. I'm sure a major 3rd party publisher would do just as much for ND as Sony can.

I never thought it could be possible until Bungie managed to do so. Why don't we see more 1st party developers leaving exclusivity? Course only the cream of the crop will survive in such a dog eat dog environment but come on, ND? Yeah they would be huge!

Sorry, bud - you're going to have to get a PS4.

 

[shandy706]

Can Naughty Dog do graphics like this without Sony?

Then, by all means.

There's this thing called the PC. Might want to look into it.

ND's talent is obvious...they could have had better textures, framerate, and AI on the PC.

I'm fine with them staying with Sony. Your "point" was a bit silly/wrong though.

 

[kmax]

lol, I'm sure there are many developers out there that would much rather join Sony where they can get the financial backing they need and keep their artistic integrity intact, rather than joining up with selected publishers that will have the final say in everything.

What I'd give to have TLoU on PC though...

 

[Knuf]

Stealthiest port begging thread ever on GAF, confirmed?

Spoiler

Sorry, the zillions of daily "Nintendo is doomed" and "Why should Nintendo go third party" threads are not stealthy at all.

 

[nded]

There's this thing called the PC. Might want to look into it.

ND's talent is obvious...they could have had better textures, framerate, and AI on the PC.

I'm fine with them staying with Sony. Your "point" was a bit silly/wrong though.

If TLoU was funded and published by, for example, Activision and Naughty Dog had to ensure that the game would run on multiple consoles and a variety of PC setups, we would probably get a very different game. I think the point a lot of folks in this thread are trying to make is that a big part of the reason Naughty Dog's games are as good as they are is because of the amount of support they get from Sony. ND are extremely well-funded, enjoy a level of autonomy beyond most developers outside of Valve/Blizzard and have direct access to PS3 hardware documentation (and likely the PS3 hardware team themselves).

I'm sure if the people behind Naughty Dog were to go third-party multi-plat they would still make some excellent games, but you're not just going to get stuff as focused and polished as Uncharted and TLoU on every platform under the sun.

 

[Forceatowulf]

Nah, fuck that noise. They've had such a brilliant run with Sony. Why fuck up a beautiful thing that's working so damn well?

Plus, if ND ever got picked up by a publisher like Bathesda, or god forbid fucking EA..............

 

[Clockwork5]

Being an in house developer has its advantages. You cant tell me you think TLOU would have made the impact it did without Sony's budget...

 

[McLovin]

For PS4/X1 I don't mind them going multi-platform since the hardware is very similar. But the uncharted games were made for PS3. The 360 doesn't have anything approaching uncharted 2/3 set-pieces. And they gave you control of the character while that stuff was happening. I honestly don't think they would have been possible if they made uncharted multi-platform.

 

[davepoobond]

Where'd you read this? They're owned by Sony. Since about 2000 or 2001, as I recall.

this thread, mang.

 

[F4r0_Atak]

Seeing as how TLOU managed to sell over 3 million in 3 weeks on just one system I think it goes to show that they have the name power that very few developers hold. They could potentially sell twice as much going multiplatform. I know Sony gives them plenty of funding and resources but just look at Bungie. Activision seem to be doing all they can to put Destiny on the map. I'm sure a major 3rd party publisher would do just as much for ND as Sony can.

I never thought it could be possible until Bungie managed to do so. Why don't we see more 1st party developers leaving exclusivity? Course only the cream of the crop will survive in such a dog eat dog environment but come on, ND? Yeah they would be huge!

Sorry for the bump... The Decima Engine thread brought me here. A few people did raise some valid points.

My guess would be that they are allowed the creative freedom they want when it comes to their projects. Not all publishers would allow for this kind of leeway. Sure Activision invested a lot of money in Destiny and good for Bungie for having found the right publisher for such endeavor, but Sony at least gives their studios more creative freedom than the average publisher. Heck, they've let Bend studio work on 3 or 4 new ideas for IPs ever since their last game (Uncharted Golden Abyss) until they got Days Gone (maybe Days Gone was one of the 3 or 4 Idk). They even featured Bend's game after GOW at their last E3 conference. Maybe my memory is having problems for Bungie's reasoning.. but didn't Bungie buy themselves back because they knew MS would pin them on Halo for another decade? Or was it because MS didn't really believe in Destiny's potential since they already had Halo? :/

 

[Ploid 3.0]

Sorry for the bump... The Decima Engine thread brought me here. A few people did raise some valid points.

My guess would be that they are allowed the creative freedom they want when it comes to their projects. Not all publishers would allow for this kind of leeway. Sure Activision invested a lot of money in Destiny and good for Bungie for having found the right publisher for such endeavor, but Sony at least gives their studios more creative freedom than the average publisher. Maybe my memory is having problems... but didn't Bungie buy themselves back because they knew MS would pin them on Halo for another decade? Or was it because MS didn't really believe in Destiny's potential since they already had Halo? :/

Yeah, someone mentioned this on the first page. Well if you have it set to 100posts at least. Naughty Dog is very comfortable I bet, they are now ready to make what game they want next after TLOU2 which I bet they want to do as well.

Bungie bought themselves back because they were not allowed to make anything other than Halo. Do you really see EA or Activision funding Last of Us with as much money Sony pored into it?

 

[killatopak]

ND is in good hands.

 

[jonno394]

if all they cared about was the fact that they wanted to sell more copies of their games, then yes. Something like Uncharted would sell on any Xbox and PC, as would The Last of Us, especially if the game were as good as their PS exclusives.

Only thing is, where would they get the money for such endeavors? Would they have the same freedom under an Activision or an EA? Would these publishers have higher targets etc would this negatively affect the game?

 

[Zok310]

In that case it would be better for them to stay with Sony and just somehow get Sony to release their games on other platforms after a staggered launch on Sony consoles.
Kill 2 birds with one stone, Sony don't lose their best studio and NF gets to sell a bazillion units of whatever games they developed to be multi.

 

[MaximumSpider]

I remember this thread! Has it really been 3 years? Wow.

 

[nephilimdj]

After news they blocked Uncharted 2* Vita and no.1 not coming to PS4, I assume was some disagreement with Sony at one stage, doubt anymore.

edit: golden abyss 2*

 

[boujeejamboree]

Would Sony even allow that?

 

[Spyder_Monkey]

Ew

 

[flaxknuckles]

After news they blocked Uncharted 2 Vita and no.1 not coming to PS4, I assume was some disagreement with Sony at one stage, doubt anymore.

WAT

 

[Jack cw]

This port begging with half ass knowledge of things and now even reviving deader than dead corpses is really annoying.

 

[Mega Caprison]

Remember people in US want change and got Trump?
Now do we really want that in the video game universe?

 

[Megatron]

Where is here.....USA:

GT5 sold 2.81 million in USA, thats more than many multiplatform AAA titles.

I love how people just pretend that gt6 doesn't exist.

 

[SolidSnakex]

I love how people just pretend that gt6 doesn't exist.

That post was made before GT6 was even released.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

In that case it would be better for them to stay with Sony and just somehow get Sony to release their games on other platforms after a staggered launch on Sony consoles.
Kill 2 birds with one stone, Sony don't lose their best studio and NF gets to sell a bazillion units of whatever games they developed to be multi.

Sony isn't going to lose their best studio regardless. You talk as if that is something they should actually be worried about. I'm pretty sure ND gets treated like the golden goose they are both financially and creatively.

 

[zkorejo]

Because they dont want to? Kojima wanted to stop making MGS games and Konami forced him to pump out more because they wanted to milk mgs as much as they could.

ND wanted to end Uncharted 4 (another huge franchise) and Sony I guess is okay with that. Why would ND want to end that kind of a partnership?

 

[Zaheer]

I love how people just pretend that gt6 doesn't exist.

Well, that post is from July 2013, so...

 

[Vault Dweller 111]

That post was made before GT6 was even released.

Well, that post is from July 2013, so...

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

 

[ArtHands]

Yah, exclusivity is holding Naughty Dog back in terms of sales. Imagine the numbers of 10/10 reviews they will have got from PC, Microsoft and Nintendo sites if they are free of Sony's shackles too.

On PC, they will not get constrained technologically speaking, and their games can be on portable if on Switch.

 

[Supermanisdead]

don't think any other company would give them the freedom to make a game starring a lesbian teenager, tbh.