Nurturing creative talent is not as simple as throwing money at it - Jim Ryan (Sony)

[Gizmo_Duck]

But could Sony Bend make Days Gone 2 if they wanted? Naughty Dog is kind of an exception to the rule. Also in the last 2 decades Naughty Dog has made Jak, Uncharted, and Last of Us games exclusively so while they have limited freedom it's still amounts to them constantly being a franchise factory long term.

Take Rare. They wanted to make Viva Pinata. They got to make it. Even got a cartoon for it and the Stampers threw a tantrum and left because they thought Microsoft should put Gears of War money into it and the game came out and didn't make waves.

Naughty dog didnt want to make Jak so they made uncharted, they wanted to take a break from uncharted so they made TLOU, and once they want a break from TLOU they can make a new IP. Same with Corey Barlog, Suckerpunch, Bend, and a bunch of other studios who are currently working on new IP this gen.

It actually benefits sony more to have their major studios producing new IP.

Having a pitch shot down doesn’t mean they are beholden to the iron law of sony execs, it just means they had a pitch shot down, it happens everyday. In fact that proves the exact opposite, if sony just wanted franchise studios they would have made days gone 2. Now if Bend go on to make another big game, if they still want to come back and make another Days Gone sony would likely give them the green light, and I’m super the pitch would be 10x’s better following the learned experience and success of a new IP

Almost every single sony studio put out a new IP last gen, and they’re putting out new IP’s this gen, they aren’t beholden into making the same games forever. Microsoft pretty much said if bungie didn’t want to make halo they could hit the road

 

[TripleAgent]

Salty fakkit talk

 

[-DMP-]

Somewhat relavant.

 

[Trapperman Dave]

As long as it results in good games doesn’t matter if they are bought or not only reason it hadn’t been working for MS cuz they not taking the lumps that comes with making new ips

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Did each Halo game not require funds?

Yeah, they did.

Why??

 

[MeachTheMonster]

How are you reading his quote? Because that’s where I think we’re disconnecting.
What I am taking away from his statement is that simply buying studios will not facilitate success without giving them the chance to try new things.

That’s not what he said, but going by your interpretation he’s still full of shyt cause they buy studios like everyone else. Both Naughty Dog, and insomniac were purchased by Sony after they already built their own success.

They can’t “try new things” without being given a bunch of cash to purse them. There’s no way around it. If a game studio wants to be “creative” they need a bunch of money.

You are 100% correct about money, and how much it factors into decisions made, but it is not always the only thing that matters.

From a publishers standpoint it is. Again the publishers roll is to invest and make a profit. That’s it. Their roll is money. Profit is all that matters to a publisher.

Creative freedom does not mean a publisher has to give every single studio a $100 million dollar budget and 10 years of Dev time, creative freedom is a trifecta of creativity, risk taking, and smart funding.

Creativity is dictated by time.
Time=money.

Risk taking= Money

Smart funding=Money.

There’s no way around it. A publishers roll is to pass out money and make more in return. EVERYTHING they do is about money.

It’s the only answer.

If Naughty Dog wanted their next game to be a roguelite I believe Sony would allow it, would it have the same budget as The Last of Us Part II, no. But it doesn’t need it either.

Point is, it needs a budget. If Sony is gonna approve a side project for them, they they will need to fund both, I.E. “throw money” at them.

A different publisher with a different ideology would never go for that, not just because of the money but also because Naughty Dog is unproven in that particular genre.

No, they’d say no cause they want money. That’s it. Again publishers exist to make money.

And beyond that this romanticized vision of Sony y’all got is hilarious. They cancel games just like everyone else. Naughty Dog, Ready at Dawn, and gorilla games have all had projects rejected by Sony in recent times. Sony still decides which games are worth their money or not.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

The point is taking chances and not forcing them to keep doing Halo

Halo prints money. Would make no sense for Microsoft to abandon the franchise.

“Taking chances” cost money. They didn’t want to take chances when they had a franchise that prints money.

Again it’s all about money. A publisher who only exists to make money don’t give a fukk about taking chances. They want to make money.

Destiny could have been theirs

No, because bungee decided they wanted to own their own franchise. Microsoft wouldn’t have signed for that even if they gave them the money for two franchises.

 

[The Wolf Among You]

And beyond that this romanticized vision of Sony y’all got is hilarious. They cancel games just like everyone else. Naughty Dog, Ready at Dawn, and gorilla games have all had projects rejected by Sony in recent times. Sony still decides which games are worth their money or not.

I should’ve known this was the angle you’re arguing from.

I’m the last person to have a romanticized vision of Sony. I just like giving credit where credit is due.
Agree to disagree though.

 

[Rekkapryde]

Halo prints money. Would make no sense for Microsoft to abandon the franchise.

“Taking chances” cost money. They didn’t want to take chances when they had a franchise that prints money.

Again it’s all about money. A publisher who only exists to make money don’t give a fukk about taking chances. They want to make money.


No, because bungee decided they wanted to own their own franchise. Microsoft wouldn’t have signed for that even if they gave them the money for two franchises.

No one said abandon
After 4 Halo games, they earned the right to try something else. To not give them that chance and tell dem more Halo was wrong

 

[Fatboi1]

Yeah, they did.

Why??

So hypothetically speaking, what would be the issue with using the funds that would make a new Halo towards a new IP?

You said "Money=creativity" so if the money is there what's the issue?

 

[MeachTheMonster]

So hypothetically speaking, what would be the issue with using the funds that would make a new Halo towards a new IP?

You said "Money=creativity" so if the money is there what's the issue?

The publisher gets to decide what they spend their money on.

They want to reduce their risk. And increase their earning potential. That’s why they exist.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

No one said abandon
After 4 Halo games, they earned the right to try something else. To not give them that chance and tell dem more Halo was wrong

You can’t make multiple AAA game at once without a huge investment.

At the time, Halo the franchise was way more valuable than whatever bungies next idea was.

And in reality Microsoft was right.

Halo right now is still the more popular franchise and Bungie had to fight activision for the right to exist right now.

 

[Gizmo_Duck]

You can’t make multiple AAA game at once without a huge investment.

At the time, Halo the franchise was way more valuable than whatever bungies next idea was.

And in reality Microsoft was right.

Halo right now is still the more popular franchise and Bungie had to fight activision for the right to exist right now.

Or they could have had Halo AND Destiny without the last 2 turd games

 

[Rice N Beans]

I should’ve known this was the angle you’re arguing from.

Always assume Meach is in bad faith.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Or they could have had Halo AND Destiny without the last 2 turd games

And that would cost money.

Microsoft wasn’t willing to invest extra money.

What are y’all confused about?? Really??