Slashdot Mirror
2K, Australia's Last AAA Studio, Closes Its Doors
beaverdownunder writes 2K Australia, the Canberra studio that most recently developed Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel, is closing its doors. The entire studio is closing, and all staff members will lose their jobs. "All hands are gone," said a source for Kotaku Australia. 2K Canberra was the last major AAA-style studio operating out of Australia. The costs of operating in Australia are apparently to blame for the decision. This raises questions as to the viability of developing major video games in Australia.
I blame Pickle. I friggin hate that guy.
When you censor out so much potential subject material for use in a game, you think you're going to have as viable of a market base?
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
That would be a very well known term meaning a blockbuster game. AAA games are games that cost hundreds of millions to produce, and hope to make those hundreds of millions back based on stunning quality levels.
I hardly ever go for AAA titles anymore. I'd much rather spend $20 or less on an indy title. If it turns out to be shit, I'm not out that much and my hit-to-miss ratio tends to be a whole lot better. I've gotten some remarkably good games that way. I think I've still put more time into Dwarf Fortress than the rest of my steam library combined. It has simple, nethack-style ASCII graphics and tends to bog down two or three years into one of the gigantic fortresses I like to dig out, but it's sill a ridiculous amount of fun.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I dunno, that game sounds kind of incredible. I'd probably buy it.
This is a real shame for those laid off, not least because there are so few other employers in that sector in Australia.
But it's not unexpected. Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel (BL:TPS) was a commercial flop. Borderlands 2 has done around 10 million sales across all platforms. Prior to the release of the heavily discounted "Handsome Collection" for PS4 and Xbox-One, BL:TPS hadn't even managed a million.
That's partly because the game wasn't as good as Borderlands 2. Reviews and word of mouth were both pretty harsh on it. I've completed it twice. It actually has some decent (if unoriginal) content, but the first 6 hours or so are a miserable trudge.
But it's also because 2k made a big gamble on the PS4 and Xbox-One being commercial failures, and hence the game launched on PS3, 360 and PC. Their gamble was wrong; both of those consoles managed strong sales. Worse, the early-adopters had a huge overlap with "people who buy a lot of games". While the installed base for the PS3 and 360 remains huge, sales for them have largely dried up, outside of Call of Duty and FIFA.
Console transitions are scary for publishers. 2k's bet wasn't entirely unreasonable. The 3DS had a difficult launch, while the Vita and Wii-U basically flopped. The industry saw Ubisoft invest heavily in the Wii-U launch and get burned by it. But of all the major houses, 2k bet most heavily against the PS4 and Xbox-One and their first major release after those consoles launched paid the price.
It was clear that 2k had largely given up on the game. While Borderlands 2 was supported for years post-launch with well-crafted and extensive DLC, BL:TPS was funded to deliver precisely enough DLC to satisfy the contractual requirements of the Season Pass; not an ounce more. Its inclusion so soon after launch in a cut-price compilation was another sure sign that 2k were in damage-limitation mode.
WTF is AAA?
It means "overpriced."
Actually I'm honestly curious how the hell "AAA studio" became a meme. It implies that there are at the very least AA and A studios as well. I assume it's based on bond credit ratings but I don't think anyone honestly ranks game studios like that.
Except a studio is either "AAA" or it isn't. What's the difference between a AAA studio and one that isn't? The amount of money they spend, as far as I can tell.
It certainly isn't based on game quality or anything like that.
2K Games is the publisher of Borderlands while the developer is Gearbox Software, which is based in Texas, US.
2K has several studios all over, the one from the article was 2K Australia.
WTF? How much does it really matter for a somewhat independent game studio to be on the same time zone? This isn't finance or news. And the significantly higher cost of transportation? Really? That hasn't held back China from shipping to the US (shipping prices are miniscule), and anyway of course this is all being sent over the internet.
Australia has a small population (23 million, less than metropolitan Shanghai) and higher education is lacking, of course it would be more difficult to have a competitive software company there.
Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
It's like Kokatu, but it's region-locked, censored and only available six months after the real Kokatu. Plus it costs twice as much.
- In Soviet Korea, only old people loose all their bases to Natalie Portman's petrified hot grits overlords.
2K Games is the publisher of Borderlands while the developer is Gearbox Software, which is based in Texas, US.
That's not entirely true. Gearbox developed Borderlands and Borderlands 2 and 2K Games published both. Borderlands the Pre-sequel was developed by 2K Australia "with assistance from Gearbox".
Steam Greenlight in the worst thing that's happened to gaming in years. I remember when games on Steam ranged from excellent titles to just plain terrible crap that publishers shat out. I thought it couldn't get worse.
Holy crap was I ever wrong! The shit that manages to get Greenlit is just amazing. Stupid visual novels, games that were created via "Make a Game" type programs, literal "choose your own adventure" novels done as an "HTML program", just absolutely terrible shit that previously publishers would filter out that now managed to get Greenlit because apparently no one has any sort of standards.
Steam is now absolutely useless for finding games. What used to be a great way to find good games has turned into the equivalent of a mobile app store: a whole lot of shit to the point you give up looking for gems.
Then again, I think 2K's problem is that they keep rehashing the same game. I remember playing through Borderlands, but I got bored of Borderlands 2 half way through and therefore didn't bother with the Pre-Sequel and couldn't care less about whatever new Borderlands crap they're churning out.
So even if you are right (and I think there's truth to what you're saying) I think 2K's problems lie mostly with themselves.
Meh, most AAA publishers and studios stayed as far away from that whole shitstorm as they possibly could; it was a hysterical debate (out of which nobody on either side came out well) that came out of the indie gaming scene and mostly stayed in the indie gaming scene.
I doubt most people who buy and play games even noticed it. And I doubt a single AAA publisher changed their strategy as a result of it. It got a lot of blogs and gaming news sites very upset, generated a handful of fairly well-buried articles in the mainstream press and then the world moved on.
But most people involved on both sides were full-blown narcissists, so they didn't really see things that way.
The thing is, BL2 was beautifully written. So much was gotten right at the story level in BL2 that the sequel was fine as a stand alone game, but not nearly as good.
Let me give an example: the hub of the story takes place at Sanctuary. It's where you get instructions from some of the major NPCs and get upgrades. However, you aren't there until the first quarter of the game and when you do, you approach its high walls on foot and have a job defending them. A few chapters later, you're pitched out of Sanctuary and can't get back there.
For a while at least. You can see it, it's always present but off in the distance but it's 'you can't they there from here'. Later, after (no spoilers) changes involving two major characters, the terrain changes and colour scheme becomes really dark.
In contrast, the Presquel's story hub literally has no purpose in the plot. Sure you can buy gear there like at Sanctuary but you have no emotional investment in Concordia, and you don't even know what it looks like from the outside. Finally, there's zero, nada, third act twist. As the game takes place before BL2 we know the NPCs will fall out with Jack. Okay, but the 'reason' when it happened not only idiotic, but had no story function. Jack murders someone who gives gives him excellent advice about reducing the risk of being betrayed. Okay, no only does that make no sense but there are multiple prison cells on that very map!
Moreover, Tassiter had no story. If the story had been that Tassiter alerts the vault hunters about what's happening to Angel, and Jack's wife is killed in the rescue while trying to get Angel to New Haven (destroyed for unknown reason after BL1) then you'd have a story.
---- The above post was generated by the Turing Institute. Maybe.
Fair enough, never played the Pre-sequel and just assumed. And that's always a bad idea :)
Australia has been hostile to businesses for years and is just starting to pay the price. Holden left along with other manufacturers. The remaining domestic manufacturers are military contractors or mining related. Australia started to believe their own BS that they could compete in something other than digging resources out of the ground and selling it to china. Now that china has their african resource chain setup & running, they are dropping australian contracts.
tldr: australia partied it up like an oil emirate with mining money (feel good social programs instead of actual industrial investment); now that the mining money is drying up they are feeling the pinch.
WTF is AAA?
It's a grading system, based on three grading criteria, each of which can score up to an 'A':
Game success among critics/reviewers
"Innovative gameplay"
Financial success
Given the major reviewers comments on "Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel", the fact that it's "Yet Another First Person Shoot", and the company being unable to afford to remain in business, rather than "AAA Studio", it'd probably be better to describe 2K as a "BCF" studio.
They definitely get an F on their financial success, and YAFPS is hardly innovative game play, so they get a grudging C there, and the reviews at the top sites give them generally in the neighborhood of an 80% approval by reviewers (only GameStop rates them higher than 80%), so that's a B.
I really hate that people hype studios themselves as "AAA", as if that means they are going to get A's in all three categories, just because of who they are, or because of the marketing hype behind their games contributing to a likelihood of good reviews or financial success.
In reality, you are only as good as your last release in all three categories. 2K blew it in at least two of the categories, and turned in B grade work in the third, so it's no surprise they failed.
Why should they? Between making sure your dog doesn't get killed by a hissing giant spider and trying to convince your crazy daughter that boa constrictors aren't 'cute', you're practically on the edge 24/7.
Commander Data: "AAA game? Ahhh, high-profile franchise game. A blockbuster. Star Wars: The Old Republic. DC Universe Online. The new Tomb Raider. Lord of the Rings Online. The Elder Scrolls Online. Guild Wars..."
Captain Picard: "Data, stop."
Data: "2."
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Anytime an article acknowledges an "AAA title", this is all anyone asks. AAA ain't an acronym. Actually, it alludes to an academic grading arrangement (as adminstered in the U.S. of A.). For games, an "A" applies to advertising allotment, another "A" to amazing game play, as well as an "A" for fanancial succass. At farst, at was davalopers usang tha term, but than vidao jaurnalists, game raviewars and saftware campanaes startad ta call tham AAA gamas. Aftar a faw yaars, pablashars startad cansadaraaa gaaas ta ba AAA bafara ralaasa, whaah than jaatafaad larga aavalapaant and maraatang baaaaaa. Asaaaaaaaaaaa, an aaa aaaaa aaa aaaaaaa.
Well, you grab a Foster's, throw a shrimp on the barbie, and say to your mates "well strewth, that went to the shithouse".
Then you grab your missus and 9 week old, and go camping at Ayres Rock for a holiday.
The article doesn't contain any evidence that the cost of operating in Australia was a significant part of the problem, but it does contain evidence that the management pissed off a significant part of the company's talent.
Actually, it's the Association of Acronym Abuse. From what I understand, there's an local chapter, the Australian Adjunct Association. (of the AAA). I understand there's an Azerbaijani only African-American Adjunct of the Austria-Australian Association of the American Association of Acronym Abuse. :)
Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
They are higher but don't be absurd. The low end of the salary range for a developer is around the $70k mark. ($65k for a JAVA developer). The high end is around $125k. The most well paid developer I know gets around $135k, is near retirement, and is a guru that would make neckbeards go weak at the knees. The most well paid IT professional I know gets around $170k and is the CIO for a company with 380 employees.
The people I know is anecdotal. The salary ranges were from the AITP 2014 review.
All dollars are Australian Dollars. Multiply by 0.8 to get US Dollars.
And for Americans we have dumber and dumber.
WTF is AAA?
It's a grading system, based on three grading criteria, each of which can score up to an 'A':
Game success among critics/reviewers
"Innovative gameplay"
Financial success
This is absolute bollocks.
AAA only defines the amount of money they can throw at a project.
Quoteth Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AAA_%28game_industry%29
In the video game industry, AAA (pronounced "triple A") is a classification term used for games with the highest development budgets and levels of promotion
So a AAA studio is a studio with an immense bucket of money behind it. That is no indication of quality and realistically never has been.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Where if it doesn't involve a shovel and a hole in the ground, we're not interested!
We have absolutely no future proofing of our economy or concept of sustainability. Everyone is 100% focused on digging up iron ore and *nothing else matters*. If the iron ore price tanks (and it has) - we just lay people off and dig more up!
Not to be the typical IT person who only focuses on IT but I've never understood our national refusal to consider the Internet as a viable business location - it's still viewed by politicians as kind of a toy for residentials only and a place where piracy happens. We have a completely stable country, politically and geographically. We don't get tornadoes. We don't get earthquakes. We don't get wars. We have huge tracks of unused land, that has ample sunlight, low temperatures and massive amounts of wind and tide (the entire southern coastline). We could have the best datacentres in the world - and anyone who thinks there's no money in the cloud isn't paying attention. But there's zero will to even consider it because it's not about digging up rocks and paying China to smash them up for us.
There is no way that a public sector developer can make anywhere near $210k. Contractor, perhaps. Employee, no chance.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
Indeed not. Top pay for a scientific/technical position in the Commonwealth public service is about $130K.