• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Sony: Naughty Dog will be on Vita, all of our studios [Naughty Dog: Nope]

MrHicks

Banned
Dec 2, 2007
7,389
0
0
handhelds will always be "B Team" crap in the west

lesser/lower budget/B teamified versions of games compared to console counterparts
 
Dec 28, 2008
19,767
0
0
UK.
Keep ND on the consoles. That's where they shine.

Putting them on a handheld and delaying a console game for it would be horrible. They're the tech masters of Sony hardware and I want them to keep making amazing console games.
 

Hyuga

Banned
May 26, 2011
2,526
0
0
handhelds will always be "B Team" crap in the west

lesser/lower budget/B teamified versions of games compared to console counterparts

SONY has much more studios.
If one or two of their studios are "PS3/4 only", it shouldn't be a problem.
 

Auto_aim1

MeisaMcCaffrey
Jul 7, 2010
12,879
54
1,050
Great. Fucking shit.

Sony owns Naughty Dog or not ?
They do. But I think they feel Naughty Dog has other important priorities (which they do), so they don't want to force them to develop for the Vita.
 
Jul 9, 2010
26,663
9
0
Mushroom Kingdom
For some reason the thread title made me Drakes.

 

DiscoJer

Member
Sep 26, 2009
12,299
776
1,030
St. Louis
They do. But I think they feel Naughty Dog has other important priorities (which they do), so they don't want to force them to develop for the Vita.

Well, I would disagree - if Sony wants to show that there is a market for a dedicated gaming handheld like the Vita, they need to back it up with their big guns.

If ND is so vital to the PS3/PS4, then why isn't it so vital to the Vita?
 

-Cally-

Neo Member
Jan 26, 2012
31
0
0
Keep ND on the consoles. That's where they shine.

Putting them on a handheld and delaying a console game for it would be horrible. They're the tech masters of Sony hardware and I want them to keep making amazing console games.

I'd like them to at least release one handheld game in their careers.
 

Kintaro

Worships the porcelain goddess
Jun 10, 2004
27,926
0
0
Keep ND on the consoles. That's where they shine.

Putting them on a handheld and delaying a console game for it would be horrible. They're the tech masters of Sony hardware and I want them to keep making amazing console games.

They can be "tech masters" on the Vita too. Sony needs to get a ND game on that. That's all there is to it. Perhaps a new Jak game.
 
May 2, 2008
23,865
0
0
Well given that Sony will plan for the Vita to be on the market for upto the next ten years, I can see why they're confident all of their studios will release something for it
 

Bumhead

Banned
Nov 14, 2010
8,202
0
0
I'd be disappointed if Naughty Dog miss out on the Vita just because they don't feel it's a powerful enough system. I think much of the value of a studio comes in their flexibility as much as their ability to make "shiny new things!". I'd be really interested to see what a smaller Naughty Dog team could do on Vita. Even something like a Shadow Complex style side scrolling shooter or something would be pretty cool.
 

Vilam

Maxis Redwood
Mar 3, 2009
6,686
0
1,105
San Francisco
www.gnardone.com
SONY has much more studios.
If one or two of their studios are "PS3/4 only", it shouldn't be a problem.

Western developers in general look down on any handheld development, and Sony has way more important western studios, so... You don't keep most teams of top western devs happy by forcing a handheld project on them.
 

LiquidSolid

Member
Aug 15, 2010
10,415
0
0
Keep ND on the consoles. That's where they shine.

Putting them on a handheld and delaying a console game for it would be horrible. They're the tech masters of Sony hardware and I want them to keep making amazing console games.

Yeah because everyone knows amazing games aren't possible on handhelds. The hell's wrong with you?

SONY has much more studios.
If one or two of their studios are "PS3/4 only", it shouldn't be a problem.

When there are way more than just one or two studios that are console exclusive and they include all of Sony's top developers, it sure as hell is a problem. Consumers aren't stupid. They could tell Sony was phoning it in with the PSP and ditched it in droves. If they've any intention of being competitive with Nintendo, they need high profile games and developers on the Vita. Otherwise, they may as well not even bother.
 

Auto_aim1

MeisaMcCaffrey
Jul 7, 2010
12,879
54
1,050
Well, I would disagree - if Sony wants to show that there is a market for a dedicated gaming handheld like the Vita, they need to back it up with their big guns.

If ND is so vital to the PS3/PS4, then why isn't it so vital to the Vita?
Well they did say there are 100 odd titles in development for the Vita. It's their best studio, so there's no point in forcing them to do something that they don't want. It would be great if they did develop for the Vita, though. I think this is a delicate matter that Sony is handling the right way.
 

Aselith

Member
Mar 17, 2008
30,246
0
1,285
www.youtube.com
Would you say they've been a.....naughty dog?

Sony better put their jak boots on make them sail an uncharted course. Not doing so could lead to a crash in their market share. Better to follow the way of the warrior. Sony need to show them that when someone says Sony...that name rings of power. If they manage to get ND onboard they'll get even the last of us that were resistant to the Vita. Maybe Keef the Thief for Vita?
 

patapuf

Member
Nov 18, 2011
9,962
0
0
maybe i'm totally off the mark but naughty dog worked on uncharted 3 until very recently, and they are still working on the last of us.

when exactly where they supposed to do a vita game?

edit: and even if they started right now that game probably wouldn't be out til late 2013 or so...
 

Ignis Fatuus

Banned
Feb 17, 2009
12,539
1
0
Well given that Sony will plan for the Vita to be on the market for upto the next ten years, I can see why they're confident all of their studios will release something for it

They should come up with a plan for the next ten months before worrying about the next ten years.
 

Pyccko

Member
Feb 26, 2010
1,759
0
650
Sony better put their jak boots on make them sail an uncharted course. Not doing so could lead to a crash in their market share. Better to follow the way of the warrior. Sony need to show them that when someone says Sony...that name rings of power. If they manage to get ND onboard they'll get even the last of us that were resistant to the Vita. Maybe Keef the Thief for Vita?

Bravo.
 

StuBurns

Banned
Jan 9, 2008
69,534
0
0
Forcing them is a terrible idea, you could have a Bungie situation, or even worse a Respawn situation.

Sony are always going to want the big bombastic releases for their home consoles, as long as they have home consoles, so Sony aren't going to force their hand. They're even letting RAD work on a PS3 game despite them having made the two handheld GoWs, and are clearly the ideal candidates for the next handheld GoW, which could have an impact on the PSVs success. They seem a pretty docile publisher really.
 

thehypocrite

Member
Mar 28, 2010
6,251
3
0
Dominican Republic
Western developers in general look down on any handheld development, and Sony has way more important western studios, so... You don't keep most teams of top western devs happy by forcing a handheld project on them.

If a "team" doesn't consider the importance of the company strategy and success, they should just leave. ND is being all primadonna here. Sony doesn't even need to force them to have a Vita project, they should be the ones trying to participate on Vita and help the company wide project to reach success.

However since ND refuses to play team ball, Sony should force them to make a Vita project. If some of them leave, so be it. no individual is worth compromising company success. Let them walk.
 

StuBurns

Banned
Jan 9, 2008
69,534
0
0
ND is their highest earner at this point, possibly second to PD. You don't 'let them walk' if it's at all possible to avoid, and it is.
 

Massa

Member
Jan 16, 2009
16,846
1
0
Bend is in no way shape or form a B-team.

Neither is Ready at Dawn. These games don't get nearly the same push from SCEA though, which is the real problem imo. I wouldn't be surprised if the marketing budget for Uncharted 3 was higher than the entire budget for Golden Abyss.
 
D

Deleted member 30609

Unconfirmed Member
Somehow, mostly because most Vita threads don't interest me, I've avoided the Vita-evangelists up until now.

D-d... dear lord.
 

Raonak

Member
Aug 19, 2010
8,556
1,910
955
29
New Zealand
dreammodule.com
ND should stick to consoles, no need to put them on the vita.

ND only have 2 teams. Each game takes 2 years to make.
They have, at most 1 more project before the PS4 comes out(assuming it comes out 2014). I would rather both teams concetrate on that.
 

Hyuga

Banned
May 26, 2011
2,526
0
0
Western developers in general look down on any handheld development, and Sony has way more important western studios, so... You don't keep most teams of top western devs happy by forcing a handheld project on them.

Nearly all of their studios have two teams now. GG, Naught Dog, Zipper Int., hell even their "Evolution Studios" got an own VITA team.
So they are not "forcing" them. They give them an own/internal VITA team.
Sounds good and makes sense.
 

thehypocrite

Member
Mar 28, 2010
6,251
3
0
Dominican Republic
ND is their highest earner at this point, possibly second to PD. You don't 'let them walk' if it's at all possible to avoid, and it is.

You must be willing to let anyone that doesn't align with the company strategy walk. Even in PD. If they are the highest earners for the company they must be aware of their pull and importance to have a game in the new company platform. You cannot be saying we are important for the company and don't support company initiatives.

If PD and ND think they are too good for vita and don't develop/ship a game in-house for the nascent platform, Yoshida has issues running the SCEWWS and needs to step down. That's not the kind of leadership that drives a company to success, likewise for the team leaders at ND.
 

StuBurns

Banned
Jan 9, 2008
69,534
0
0
Nearly all of their studios have two teams now. GG, Naught Dog, Zipper Int., hell even their "Evolution Studios" got an own VITA team.
So they are not "forcing" them. They give them an own/internal VITA team.
Sounds good and makes sense.
That's hardly the same thing, at that point it's just the brand name. If it's not the same people, it's irrelevant. They could put anything and call it Naughty Dog, they own the name, why even bother having the team in the building? They could have have renamed Bend ND Bend, and used the ND name in marketing Golden Abyss.

If it's not the same talent, as a consumer I don't see the benefit.
You must be willing to let anyone that doesn't align with the company strategy walk. Even in PD. If they are the highest earners for the company they must be aware of their pull and importance to have a game in the new company platform. You cannot be saying we are important for the company and don't support company initiatives.

If PD and ND think they are too good for vita and don't develop/ship a game in-house for the nascent platform, Yoshida has issues running the SCEWWS and needs to step down. That's not the kind of leadership that drives a company to success, likewise for the team leaders at ND.
So your management approach is instead of letting the high revenue arms happily make games you need for the consoles you sell, fuck them off because they won't work on PSV? Just kill your two biggest studios? That seems exceptionally stupid.
 

Aselith

Member
Mar 17, 2008
30,246
0
1,285
www.youtube.com
So your management approach is instead of letting the high revenue arms happily make games you need for the consoles you sell, fuck them off because they won't work on PSV? Just kill your two biggest studios? That seems exceptionally stupid.

Especially when the people most likely to leave are the ones that you most don't want to leave. The top developers at ND would easily get a job at another studio if they wanted. If you want a skeleton crew of the least valuable employees, sure you can piss them off by forcing them into a multiyear comittment.
 

Zeouterlimits

Member
Apr 2, 2007
16,810
0
0
Ireland
www.skynet.ie
I don't... this doesn't strike me as a huge deal.
It makes sense to me that Sony's top tier studio would have the autonomy to choose the projects they want to work on because that's part of how you attract and foster top tier talent and innovators.
They need to have the motivation/investment that goes beyond 'Our parent company wants us to do this'.

Sony will certainly try to incentivise ND, but hopefully respect them all the same.
ND Vita could still happen, if they feel passionate about it.

Edit : Aselith gets it.
 

thehypocrite

Member
Mar 28, 2010
6,251
3
0
Dominican Republic
So your management approach is instead of letting the high revenue arms happily make games you need for the consoles you sell, fuck them off because they won't work on PSV? Just kill your two biggest studios? That seems exceptionally stupid.

1st. I never said kill the 2 biggest studios. stop making things up. I just said let the individuals whose ego is so affected by working on PSV to leave the company, if it is such a big deal for them.

2. Stupid is sending the message that if you want the best products that we produce don't buy the latest product/platform that we released to the market. Stupid is sending this message: We think that product cannot be the home for the efforts of our greater talents/studios, We will only allow our B teams to develop for it. Expecting people to buy a product in which you haven't committed to fully support as a company is stupid.
 

DiscoJer

Member
Sep 26, 2009
12,299
776
1,030
St. Louis
Great.
I don't want Naughty dogs to waste their thime on handhelds.

And again, that's why ND working on the Vita is so important as a symbol - it shows that the Vita isn't a waste of time for consumers, that it is a full blown gaming platform on par with the PS3.

And frankly, long term, Sony needs the Vita to be a success. It probably won't make or break them, but they as a company are not in the best of shape.
 

StuBurns

Banned
Jan 9, 2008
69,534
0
0
1st. I never said kill the 2 biggest studios. stop making things up. I just said let the individuals whose ego is so affected by working on PSV to leave the company, if it is such a big deal for them.
And what if those 'individuals' is the whole company? What if ND say, "No, we're not doing a PSV game, and if that's the only option, we're all leaving"? What would you suggest then?
 

thehypocrite

Member
Mar 28, 2010
6,251
3
0
Dominican Republic
Especially when the people most likely to leave are the ones that you most don't want to leave. The top developers at ND would easily get a job at another studio if they wanted. If you want a skeleton crew of the least valuable employees, sure you can piss them off by forcing them into a multiyear comittment.

You can be the best, but companies aren't playing 1 on 1 basketball. You need individuals that are willing to support team and company wide efforts, to be an effective resource within the team and company structure.
 

Kintaro

Worships the porcelain goddess
Jun 10, 2004
27,926
0
0
Nintendo runs a tight ship while Sony just lets their studios run willy nilly. This will work.

And what if those 'individuals' is the whole company? What if ND say, "No, we're not doing a PSV game, and if that's the only option, we're all leaving"? What would you suggest then?

Sony would probably wave some contracts around at this point that would prohibit such matters to occur in such a way.
 

Zeouterlimits

Member
Apr 2, 2007
16,810
0
0
Ireland
www.skynet.ie
1st. I never said kill the 2 biggest studios. stop making things up. I just said let the individuals whose ego is so affected by working on PSV to leave the company, if it is such a big deal for them.

2. Stupid is sending the message that if you want the best products that we produce don't buy the latest product/platform that we released to the market. Stupid is sending this message: We think that product cannot be the home for the efforts of our greater talents/studios, We will only allow our B teams to develop for it. Expecting people to buy a product in which you haven't committed to fully support as a company is stupid.

"Stupid is" expecting anyone who is not properly motivated to make an A-tier game for your system.
"Stupid is" driving your top tier to competitors.
"Stupid is" not being able to find other top tier people who are invested in your mobile platform.
 

thehypocrite

Member
Mar 28, 2010
6,251
3
0
Dominican Republic
And what if those 'individuals' is the whole company? What if ND say, "No, we're not doing a PSV game, and if that's the only option, we're all leaving"? What would you suggest then?

We need team players and company wide alignment, sorry that we cannot get you guys to act as part of the team. Good bye and good luck in the job market
 

thehypocrite

Member
Mar 28, 2010
6,251
3
0
Dominican Republic
"Stupid is" expecting anyone who is not properly motivated to make an A-tier game for your system.
"Stupid is" driving your top tier to competitors.
"Stupid is" not being able to find other top tier people who are invested in your mobile platform.

Stupid is paying top money to developers and let them do what they want and not what you need from them as a company. See Thq Vs EA.
 

Aselith

Member
Mar 17, 2008
30,246
0
1,285
www.youtube.com
We need team players and company wide alignment, sorry that we cannot get you guys to act as part of the team. Good bye and good luck in the job market

"Haha, lucky we had that other team that can easily replace them! Oh, wait. FUUUUUUUUUU-"


Stupid is paying top money to developers and let them do what they want and not what you need from them as a company. See Thq Vs EA.

Actually, it was the corporate decision to pursue uDraw fullforce that caused problems for THQ this year. Apparently, it was a very profitable year otherwise but they took a huge loss on that. The fact that their top developers doing what they wanted nearly saved them speaks volumes for letting your top developers make the games they want to make. Saint's Row 3 has been a big success for them. Imagine how bad it'd have been if corporate made them make a uDraw game.

Their decision to pursue shitty children's licensed games also put them in the shit house. Which I can't imagine any developer wanting to do.
 

Kintaro

Worships the porcelain goddess
Jun 10, 2004
27,926
0
0
All of this being said, Naughty Dog strike me as smart people. 3DS just hit 5 million handhelds. Wouldn't it behoove them to help make the Vita a success as well so they have TWO platforms to sell their titles on? Hell, I'm pretty sure some 3DS titles sold better than their Uncharted titles.

It is time for Western developers to get the fuck over themselves.
 

patapuf

Member
Nov 18, 2011
9,962
0
0
why are so many even assuming naughty dog refused to develop for vita? maybe sony wants them to do other things?
 
D

Deleted member 30609

Unconfirmed Member
In a Team structure, regardless of what some GAF jaded posters may think, everyone is replaceable, as you never substitute the person but the role they played in the team structure.

It turned out very well for Capcom