Slashdot Mirror


Developer Bungie Splits With Publisher Activision, Will Keep World Shooter Series Destiny (kotaku.com)

Developer Bungie and publisher Activision are splitting up in an industry-shaking divorce that will see the shared world shooter series Destiny enter fully into Bungie's control. From a report: This development comes after years of tension between the two companies -- tension that has existed since before the first Destiny even shipped. Bungie, the studio that created and has led development on the franchise, told employees during a team meeting this afternoon, framing it as fantastic news for a studio that has long grown sick of dealing with its publisher. Employees cheered and popped champagne, according to one person who was there.

[...] One of the most significant tensions between Bungie and Activision had long been the annualized schedule, which mandated the release of a new Destiny game or expansion every fall. Now, separated from Activision, Bungie will no longer be constrained to that schedule. "We'll continue to deliver on the existing Destiny roadmap, and we're looking forward to releasing more seasonal experiences in the coming months," the company said, "as well as surprising our community with some exciting announcements about what lies beyond."

39 of 63 comments (clear)

  1. Next? by McFortner · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Can we get Blizzard split off next, please? Activision is too worried about new characters to fix the problems they have with the game as it is.

    --
    Beware of Sales Reps bearing gifts.
    1. Re:Next? by McFortner · · Score: 1

      At least with Overwatch IMHO.

      --
      Beware of Sales Reps bearing gifts.
    2. Re: Next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      At this point, I'd take the bloody stumps of Blizzard over the intertwined fuckery that is Activision Blizzard. Things can still get worse with A-B, but we're quickly approaching a day where that statement will be false.

    3. Re:Next? by meglon · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't that saying actually be: Beware of gifts bearing Sales Reps.

      --
      Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
    4. Re:Next? by bondsbw · · Score: 1

      The sentence is grammatically ambiguous. It can mean the same either way.

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    5. Re:Next? by meglon · · Score: 1

      Well, no. It's a play off the old saying "beware of Greeks bearing gifts;" beware of the Greeks giving the gift. Restated to other way (which i used as a play on the original), "beware of gifts bearing Greeks" means to beware of a gift that has Greeks inside... like the trojan horse, which is what the original saying was founded on. In that instance, they were both good advice. So while we have to beware of sales reps giving gifts, we also have to beware of gifts concealing sales reps.... although they don't usually sack the city (usually).

      Next we'll go into the differences between "retreating" and "advancing in a different direction."

      --
      Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
    6. Re:Next? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      I would say that this is unlikely as Activision needs all of Blizzard's games. Without Blizzard, they only have Call of Duty as an active title. They have dead titles like Guitar Hero which they could ressurrect. Activision would likely fight against such a split.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    7. Re: Next? by perpenso · · Score: 1

      Blizzard is largely autonomous of Activision, they don't have to deal with the BS Bungie did. Vivendi, Blizzard's owner, bought Activision. The name "Activision" was retained since it was far more recognizable than "Vivendi Games". It was not a merger of equals. Blizzard remained mostly hands off and left to run itself on its own schedule, hence the of the new company "Activision Blizzard".

    8. Re: Next? by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      I don't think that will help. :-/ The classic meme:

      "Fun detected; Nerf incoming."

      has been true before they merged with Craptivision.

      When they insult PC fans at the 2018 BlizzCon who supported them for the past 20+ years with an idiotic "Don't you guys have phones?!" response you can tell they are severely out of touch with what fans want. /sarcasm Yeah, some shitty reskinned Chinese mobile ARPG clone with MTX is what PC gamers want! NOT.

      Ironically the thing is that this COULD have worked if they had announced: Yes, Diablo 4 is in the works. In the meantime here is a mobile Diablo game to hold you over until then.

      They jumped the shark when they shutdown bnetd 2 because "a program in RAM is an illegal copy". **Facepalm**

      Even the Diablo 2 producers says Blizzard is out of touch with gamers.
      https://screenrant.com/diablo-...

      Blizzard has long been dead. They are slowly burning through all the goodwill they bought over the years.

    9. Re:Next? by Kyr+Arvin · · Score: 1

      Bungie wasn't the cash cow that Blizzard is for Activision. Expect an extraordinarily high price if Blizzard was to split off.

    10. Re:Next? by Sumus+Semper+Una · · Score: 1

      Interesting bits of timing to note:

      Blizzard was a part of the Vivendi games group since 1998 according to their wikipedia page. According to that same page, Activision Blizzard was formed by the merger of Vivendi and Activision in July, 2008.

      Wrath of the Lich King (the last Blizzard game or expansion to have a majority of old-time fans agree was at least "good" by long-time Blizzard standards) came out in November, 2008.

      I have no other proof or evidence, but just from the timing of major events and quality of products I get the feeling there was a major change in decisions and (more likely) who made the decisions before and after that merger. I think the people who poured their souls into making the games we most remember and love are long gone, and there is no going back to the Blizzard we once loved with fervent passion.

  2. Finally free? by Pfhorrest · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I thought that when Bungie finally broke away from Microsoft, we might see a return to the old Bungie, from the days of Marathon and Myth.

    But then Destiny was... not that... and some people say that that's more Activision's fault than Bungie's.

    Maybe now that they're finally free and back to self-publishing like they always used to, before the dark times, before the acquisition, maybe now we'll finally see a return of the old Bungie?

    I'm not counting on it. The only person still around from the olden days is Jason. Even Robnar is gone now, and I can't even find where to.

    --
    -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
    "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    1. Re:Finally free? by dostert · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I thought that when Bungie finally broke away from Microsoft, we might see a return to the old Bungie, from the days of Marathon and Myth.

      But then Destiny was... not that... and some people say that that's more Activision's fault than Bungie's.

      Maybe now that they're finally free and back to self-publishing like they always used to, before the dark times, before the acquisition, maybe now we'll finally see a return of the old Bungie?

      I'm not counting on it. The only person still around from the olden days is Jason. Even Robnar is gone now, and I can't even find where to.

      Marathon and Myth days were great. Things I remember most were the Letters to the Webmaster and the annual April Fools update to Pimps at Sea

    2. Re:Finally free? by Snufu · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The people who created Marathon, Myth, and Halo are long gone. Expect more of the same, just less often.

    3. Re:Finally free? by ItsJustAPseudonym · · Score: 1

      Bungie won't have Activision to "incentivize" them with a bonus of $x million if they sell N items by a certain date. That was supposedly the motivation for selling so many pieces of the game as DLC (which counted toward the "N items"), in the first year. Supposedly.

      What Bungie does with this new-found freedom is anyone's guess.

  3. Re:Destiny 2 is garbage. by alvinrod · · Score: 2

    MechWarrior 2 was pretty good back in the day. They're mainly a publisher though, so they haven't actually developed all that many games themselves, but if you include those they had a lot of great games like Pitfall, Quake II, Tony Hawk Pro Skater 2, and Rome Total War where they acted as the publisher.

  4. The third classic blunder by meglon · · Score: 1

    At least Bungie didn't make the third classic blunder, the first getting involved in a land war in Asia, the second being crossing a Sicilian in matters of death, both of which are only slightly more well known than: never get into bed with Sony Online Entertainment to publish your game. It's one thing to get Munson'd, it's another level entirely to get Sony'd. Admittedly though, Activision isn't all that much better....

    --
    Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
  5. Re:Destiny 2 is garbage. by arth1 · · Score: 1

    Destiny isn't a great game,

    Good to know. I hadn't even heard of it.
    Back to RDR2 :)

  6. Publisher? by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

    What does a game publisher do? It's not like they have to put CDs in boxes and ship them to stores. Upload to steam and be done with it.

    --
    I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    1. Re:Publisher? by ItsJustAPseudonym · · Score: 1

      And, I think, fronting some of the development costs.

    2. Re:Publisher? by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      Depending on the size and state of the game dev studio a publisher may do one or more of the following:

      * Traditionally, Pay for all (or partial) development of the game
      * Traditionally, Marketing
      * Traditionally, Quality Assurance. Does the game dev have ALL the GPUs / phones / tablets released from the past 5+ years?
      * Traditionally, Localization
      * Helo define Alpha, Beta, and Gold states
      * Withhold milestone payments if deliverables haven't meet the goals
      * Contract out other developers to help (one dev team might do single player, another multiplayer)
      * Contract our Cinematics
      * Telemetry
      * Voice Recording
      * Distribution Logistics
      * Make and keep SKU Deals. They have experience dealing with Walmart, Costco, etc.
      * Change design based on regional culture & demographics
      * Interface with Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft's over getting dev consoles, making sure the game meets their technical requirements checklists, and dealing with their idiotic policies so your game can get released on their platform

      It all depends on how much experience, size, and money the game developer studio has.

    3. Re: Publisher? by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      Yet I've never got a game on the basis of such things. I see some reviews and decide whether to buy it based on price, reviews and whether I care (like I'm not working through some other game at the time). I question the value of such promotions in the current market with online distribution and rapid access to user reviews. I guess the game developer did too.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
  7. Blizzard, well Vivendi, bought Activision by perpenso · · Score: 1

    Can we get Blizzard split off next, please? Activision is too worried about new characters to fix the problems they have with the game as it is.

    Blizzard, well Vivendi which owned Blizzard, bought Activision. Vivdendi was wise enough to have hands off Blizzard and wise enough to recognize "Activision" was a more well known brand than "Vivendi Games". So Vivendi's new company was named "Activision Blizzard". Blizzard is still largely autonomous of the Activision management that was retained and put in charge of the other Vivendi Games studios.

    Note how Blizzard is still on its decades old, it will ship when its ready schedule, and not tied to any sort of annual release schedule as Bungie was complaining of.

    1. Re:Blizzard, well Vivendi, bought Activision by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      Blizzard still has to answer to the quarterly shareholders meetings.

      Blizzard has just been less vocal about it.

    2. Re:Blizzard, well Vivendi, bought Activision by perpenso · · Score: 1

      Blizzard still has to answer to the quarterly shareholders meetings. Blizzard has just been less vocal about it.

      Its a short answer: "We are highly profitable. Talk to you in three months. Bye." :-)

    3. Re:Blizzard, well Vivendi, bought Activision by lgw · · Score: 1

      Heroes of the Storm flopped. Overwatch did not meet expectations. D3 was a disaster, though they made some money back with the expansion, it was still a damaged brand that was abandoned.

      Blizzard lost its autonomy as a result of successive flops, which is why everyone old-school has now left.
       

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    4. Re:Blizzard, well Vivendi, bought Activision by perpenso · · Score: 1

      Blizzard still has to answer to the quarterly shareholders meetings. Blizzard has just been less vocal about it.

      More seriously, shareholders are nothing new to Blizzard. They had them before when Vivendi owned, they had them before that when CUC owned.

      Blizzard's owners and their respective shareholders have always known Blizzard is "different". For God's sake they MISSED CHRISTMAS with Diablo 1 and it still went on to set industry sales records.

      Activision, Vivendi, and CUC shareholders get the same message. These are the revenues on our shipping games. We have additional unannounced games under development and their ship dates are unknown, if they ship at all and are not canceled. We ship games if and when they meet our standards, not according to a calendar date. For decades owners and shareholders have had no problem with this message..

    5. Re:Blizzard, well Vivendi, bought Activision by Kyr+Arvin · · Score: 1

      Heroes of the Storm did not flop -- it's still well-maintained, and it's the eSports thing that flopped. Overwatch league has brought in nearly a billion dollars for Activision. Not my thing, particularly, but that's not chump change. I don't care if it's not LoL level either, it can exist as a success or failure on its own. That's also after the base game made a billion dollars in sales, which isn't too bad given it was built from the ruins of Titan, which they spent $150m on before they canned it.

      D3's launch and initial year was an absolute disaster, though it turned into an excellent game with the expansion. YMMV with "damaged brand," but it was not abandoned, it's putting out a patch in a week that's the largest since the expansion. People who still play D3 are excited about it. If you play on the ladder, it's a frequently evolving game. I don't know if I'll do that much with it; my time with that game might be past.

    6. Re:Blizzard, well Vivendi, bought Activision by lgw · · Score: 1

      HOTS made far less money that expected. Overwatch made less money than expected. D3 made vastly less money than expected. Titan didn't even make it out the door. HOTS and D3 are parked in maintenance mode now.

      Most importantly: Blizzard didn't make the money that Fortnite made from the Battle Royale craze. Blizzard has not had a break-out success in years, and missed the giant break-out success every investor wishes they had.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  8. Re:Destiny 2 is garbage. by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

    No one remembers if a good game was late,
    No one remembers if a bad game shipped on time.
    -- Gabe

  9. Remember when Activision was cool? by MrSavage · · Score: 1

    Pitfall Harry and Pepperidge Farms remembers.

  10. Re:Destiny 2 is garbage. by alvinrod · · Score: 1

    That actually makes me respect Activision a lot more than previously. There's a quote from Nintendo's Shigeru Miyamoto that sums it up nicely: "A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad."

  11. Re:Destiny 2 is garbage. by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

    Yup, that's another great quote!

  12. Blizzard 46% of Activision Blizzard's revenue by perpenso · · Score: 1

    Heroes of the Storm flopped. Overwatch did not meet expectations. D3 was a disaster, though they made some money back with the expansion, it was still a damaged brand that was abandoned. Blizzard lost its autonomy as a result of successive flops, which is why everyone old-school has now left.

    Nope. According to the Q32018 financial report Blizzard had $1.5B in revenue for the first nine months of 2018. The rest of Activision combined had $1.8B in revenue. Blizzard alone is responsible for 46% of Activision Blizzard's revenue. Blizzard still has amazing employee retention and many 10 and 20 year veterans to this day.

    1. Re:Blizzard 46% of Activision Blizzard's revenue by lgw · · Score: 1

      Doesn't matter in the least. They did not go as well as they were expected to do. That's all that matters.

      If you don't follow the industry, this is a common tactic for tearing down any studio that isn't a corporate puppet: just set the bar high enough that they fail, then corporatize them. But to be fair, in this case Blizzard has stumbled a few times, WoW is fading, and there's nothing they've done recently to show they can grow.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    2. Re:Blizzard 46% of Activision Blizzard's revenue by perpenso · · Score: 1

      And yet your hypothesis remains untrue. Blizzard has not been corporatized, its still produces a high level of revenue, it still has a high degree of autonomy. Owners and investors are still in a mindset of don't f*ck with the most successful part of the company. As they were when Vivendi owned, as they were when CUC owned before that. Corporate ownership and stockholders is nothing new to Blizzard. Failed projects are nothing new to Blizzard. There were various games that were internally canceled. There were multiple reboots of games that were eventually published.

      If Activision Blizzard misses expectations then wall street pays less for their stock. They do *not* call for changes at the unit bringing in 46% of revenue. Such suggestions are nonsense.

    3. Re:Blizzard 46% of Activision Blizzard's revenue by lgw · · Score: 1

      That makes no sense at all. If things aren't working, you change the big parts, not the small parts. And it doesn't matter how big they are, it matters how fast they grow. Activision has started outsourcing dev on Blizzard-branded products to chase growth.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    4. Re:Blizzard 46% of Activision Blizzard's revenue by perpenso · · Score: 1

      That makes no sense at all. If things aren't working, you change the big parts, not the small parts. And it doesn't matter how big they are, it matters how fast they grow. Activision has started outsourcing dev on Blizzard-branded products to chase growth.

      You do not change the big part that is working, that is outproducing all the other parts.

      Blizzard is seeking growth but not by abandoning its ways. It no longer has 3 main internal dev teams (RTS, Diablo, WoW), it has additional teams working on unannounced products. Plus some smaller teams on smaller products. Yet all of these are working on Blizzard's timeframes per Blizzard's values. They'll ship when their done, they'll get reworked or canceled if off track, they will not ship whatever they got when some calendar date arrives.

  13. Re:Mechwarrior wasn't Activision... by Kyr+Arvin · · Score: 1

    Aaaaah, Dynamix. Too bad they couldn't stick with Sierra.