Denver, 5:48 AM
Wed Dec 9
64 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip us:
Editor-In-Chief:
Brian Crecente
| AIM | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Stephen Totilo
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Editor:
Michael McWhertor
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor, Japan:
Brian Ashcraft
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, East Coast:
Michael Fahey
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Oceania:
Luke Plunkett
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Weekends:
Owen Good
| AIM | Twitter
Correspondent, San Francisco:
AJ Glasser
| AIM | Twitter
Columnist:
Leigh Alexander
Columnist:
Tim Rogers
| posts about #financialresults more → |
EA Cuts Loose Bottom Third Of Its Game Lineup |
Funcom Loses Big, Chief Financial Officer Bails |
Sega Loses Big At Pachinko |
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
Kotaku 
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
And I thought it couldn't get any more bland. #ea
11/09/09
11/10/09
How are you disagreeing with my statement? That's exactly what I said. #ea
11/10/09
"NOT all original IPs are NOT profitable." #ea
11/10/09
11/09/09
The 360/PS3/PC will look less appealing as the generation drags on.
Publishers hopefully will get the message that one has to back the market leader, not some 3rd rate product.
11/10/09
11/09/09
Isn't it kind of weird to wish for new IP then ask for a sequel? Wouldn't it be better to say that was good but use what you learned and create something new and different? #ea
11/09/09
No reason to abandon a good idea which wasn't perfectly implemented the first time around just because it's not brand spankin' new anymore. Look at some of the paragons of gaming which are sequels: Sonic 2, Halo 2, Half-life 2, Super Mario Brothers 3, Final Fantasy #-whatever, Diablo 2, Warcraft 2, etc., etc. #ea
11/09/09
It reminds me of something I am pretty sure Kotick said in that gamers want innovation but prefer it to be within established franchises, which for the most part is true. As mush as the gaming world hates him he really knows how we *really* act with regards to buying games. #ea
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
...I have a feeling what one of those games were....
:'( #ea
11/09/09
Depends on who was/is working on SC5. The Sims Studio is in Redwood Shores, so hopefully none of those guys got laid off.... i doubt Maxis is working on it. And i doubt the Stupid Fun Club is working on it either. #ea
11/09/09
Let's hope! ;_; #ea
11/09/09
Been like 7 years since Sim City 4. Cities XL tried to jump in a now open market, and still failed.
Theres just bugger all decent City Builders out there. #ea
11/09/09
Cities XL was just.... flat compared to the other SimCity games. It had no character, and the single-player was just bad compared to SC4.
*sigh*... At least we all have our minds for city construction, eh? #ea
11/09/09
Profit is what you make beyond all the costs incurred -- so, if a game covers itself, why can't that be enough? Because people are greedy as hell -- it's better to fire talented people, and not have to pay their wages to get a lot of profit than to keep a lot of people employed with lower profits.
It's all their hard work that made the company what it is ... it's just sad. This is the negative side of capitalism. Capitalism is great when there are a lot of small companies ... but, when everything merges and you just have a few megacorps, it's gets evil.
Atlus is my idol when it comes to these things. #ea
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
Being privately held does not mean that you have absolutely no shareholders. What I was getting at was the fact that you don't have to worry about day traders and their ilk, who are in most cases just mindless sheep, ruining your stock price. Your shareholders in a privately held company usually take much more interest in your company. There is also the issue VC's but thats a talk for another day. #ea
11/09/09
I'm your biggest fan; I'll follow you until you love me, papa-paparazzi.
Oh dear, pardon me, actually I won't be doing any following, because you do not warrant it, and do not understand the concept of opportunity cost, the economic manifestation of a hierarchy of values, undeniably the most important thing any living being possesses, or can possess, "life" notwithstanding, though even life can be subsumed under the hierarchy ultimately; it is simply immovable from its foundational position save for extreme circumstances.
Digression aside, no, it's not "good enough" that someone can cover his work when someone else can cover more. Ceteris paribus, what possible justification is there for hiring the less productive? But you say they differ. One only provides crass fiscal incentives, and the other, presumably, "higher quality" games. Since it is up to the owner to decide that, and since he can defer to consumers' judgment pursuant to cash rewards (which he should not), the only real way we have of judging this situation is by how much a game sells, which of course, you want to sacrifice for the vague, lesser, and possibly nonexistent value of greater quality. Of course, as I said, it's all moot; the owner should produce games in line with his values, whatever they are, and nothing else, so really even consumer demand is irrelevant, rationally speaking.
Using this metric of "talent," why would a company fire it's talented employees, and further, how could it possibly expect to profit from doing so?! Talent qua profitability is the only sense in which we can use "talent" if we are not going off of the owner's values, since certainly we cannot merely substitute your values for his. Therefore, from our view, with no means of determining the owner's purpose, objectively our only standard is the going rate and dollar value of his product, bearing in mind that of course we cannot judge the owner like this in reality,; we simply abstain from forming judgment until we know whether he is following his hierarchy properly.
Next, what's "evil" about these big companies? They don't fund unsuccessful ventures? So what? Do you think that small, "quality" game X would have a better chance with a smaller, non-assimilated company? Maybe, but then that company would go down, and what games would it make then? None. You know why only "evil" companies get large? Because they're corrupt, immoral and borderline communist, willing to snatch up whatever taxpayer-subsidized handout they can, but more importantly because they are, at least initially, rational, and put out games (a) that they like to make, and (b) from which they can make a profit.
Two more things.
One, capitalism is always great, but wanting only small companies to exist is ludicrous and defeats the inherent benefits of capitalism as a system, to allow for growth and reward productivity, and besides is a glaring contradiction of what will happen under the auspices of its main purpose: to allow and enforce only free, voluntary, non-compulsory, and mutually beneficial trade. A profusion of squalid, egalitarian businesses is a nightmare, and much better suited to socialism or communism; having such an environment in a capitalist system would just be an ironic, vicious joke.
Two, those people that made the company did so voluntarily. Presumably, no one told them that they could not be fired, or that anything they made was guaranteed to be distributed. They got their agreed upon wages for their work, and the company, which is only a collection of voluntarily associated people, simply no longer includes them, and has no obligation to since there was, again presumably, no agreement that they would remain a part of the company forever.
As for the "megacorps," it's excruciatingly simple: they must continue to output desired products or they will fail by virtue of a new competitor in the market. I know this is begging the response of "monopolies!" on your part, but just know that they are not a naturally occurring compound; they require the synthetic element governmentium.
Baby there's no other superstar, you know that I'll be, your papa-paparazzi. #ea
11/09/09
11/09/09
I prefer to think it's karma. #ea
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
With no new IPs, people eventually get bored of your company. With too much, you can't fund projects. #ea
11/09/09
I'm gonna guess Medal Of Honor, and Godfather were amongst the titles cut?
Maybe Boogie too?
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
The more I think about it, the more I realize just how bad this news is, no matter what's been axed. EA had *just* started winning us over, and now it's back to Franchise City. Out of financial necessity, no less. This just sucks from every conceivable angle. #ea
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
I don't know if we as gamers are to blame for this. If we didn't buy into yearly franchises so much then maybe the developers wouldn't have to resort to them their sole means of survival. But I find it hard to believe that new IP is completely unprofitable, more like its NOT AS profitable.
New IP rarely sells as well as an established game (looking at Guitar Hero, CoD, The Sims, Madden.. Mario, Zelda, FF, Metal Gear Solid...etc)
We are getting what we paid for.... I suppose.
Will new IP become even rarer in the future, perhaps only 1 or 2 new attempts by big publishers a year? #ea
11/09/09
11/09/09
Please say that they are going to make another Boom Blox sequel. I adored Bash Party. #ea
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
Dead Space and Mirror's Edge and Boom Blox....all games that deserved to do better!
(actually Dead Space did sell a 1 and half mil so.....) #ea
11/09/09
All that gets blown away by what Game Sequel X does.
I'm pretty sure that the publishers recognize the sales needed to start a new IP franchise. If Mirror's Edge can be kept fresh and run out every 2 years, they'll keep it going because 1.5 million sales the first time around means ME2 could sell 2.5... and then you are in bona-fida hit territory. #ea
11/09/09
11/09/09
L4D was certainly something new, albeit from Valve, and while there's been some negativity concerning it and L4D2, it's still a big hit.
Take something like Borderlands, a new IP and it seems to be doing pretty well. It was probably a make or break title for Gearbox too.
Of course, a game like Demon's Soul, while probably only catering to a smaller, more hardcore audience, has been sold out pretty much everywhere I go since it was released a month or so ago. But that probably has more to do with low(er) expectations so not a lot of copies available than anything. #ea
11/09/09
11/09/09
Seems like really bad timing. Like it's mere existence has banged you up pretty bad. #ea