Potential Sony buyout situation for Insomniac

Sony and Insomniac. Two companies with a long storied history of ventures together. Originally, Insomniac was one of the developers for the long defunct 3DO platform. However, once the 3DO fizzled out, they moved onto the new up and coming (at the time) system, the Playstation. And thus, the union began. Ever since their first game for the system, Disruptor, Insomniac has had continued success within the playstation family of systems. Spyro, Ratchet & Clank, and Resistance were all franchises they've created and these franchises assisted heavily into the growth of the Playstation brand. However, even with their great business relationship, Insomniac has always managed to remain independent, time and again turning down any potential buyouts by Sony.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Nawert1962d ago (Edited 1962d ago )

The only reason I would see Sony wanting to buy them now after they went multiform and received bad press all around will be because the value dropped. I wouldn't mind them somehow taking control of Spyro again somehow. Sony, Activision, and Insomniac need to talk.

Abash1962d ago

I personally don't feel like buying Insomniac is worth it. The relationship they have with them developing the Ratchet & Clank games is fine as is. Fuse shows that the new IPs they'd make would try to appeal more to the mass audience and don't really stand out

Jinkies1962d ago

"Fuse shows that the new IPs they'd make would try to appeal more to the mass audience and don't really stand out"

What are you talking about FUSE looks terrible, with Overstrike it looked promising but under EAs control they will be ruined just like Bioware and Visceral Games.

I really hope Sony buys then, I think Fuse will fail, not because it looks generic and that it's had hardly no marketing despite coming out in a few months but because in that same month it's going up against God of War and Gears of War.

I really hope they will go bac to Spyro is Sony ever buys the rights back, same goes for Crash Bandicoot who they arn't even using.

shutUpAndTakeMyMoney1962d ago

Sony doesn't need more shooters. They need to buy an company to make rpgs so I don't need skyrim 2.

andrewsqual1962d ago

If Microsoft buy them anyway, Abash, they will bleed them dry then discard them like a used tampon.
RIP Rare, Bungie, Lionhead, Ensemble Studios (Age of Empires) , Aces Studio (classic Flight Sim games).
For the love of God Insomniac Games, don't be shackled.

SilentNegotiator1962d ago (Edited 1962d ago )

Insomniac has really been slipping lately. (edit: Sony owns the R&C IP, nevermind) They should end all contracts with Insomniac ASAP and let other studios have a hand at Resistance and Ratchet and Clank.

"I wouldn't mind them somehow taking control of Spyro again somehow. Sony, Activision, and Insomniac need to talk. "
Activision OWNS Spyro. Insomniac would have nothing to do with such a negotiation.

Larry L1962d ago

Just so everyone knows, Activision is NEVER giving up the Spyro brand. At least not in the near future, or at least not full rights. Because maybe as older gamers, we're ignorant to what's popular with little kid gamers (meaning 10-11 and under), but I recently read an article about how much money is being made with the Skylanders video game and toy tie-in franchise and it blew my mind. I've been seeing these displays everywhere for a couple years, and just thought it was some stupid lame new franchise, but I guess it's HUGE with the kiddies.

Now I honestly still don't know anything about Skylanders, but I see Spyro all the time on the displays, so obviously it's tied directly into Spyro in some way. Activision is ALL about the money, and with the amount of money being generated with Spyro by way of Skylanders, there's no way in gaming hell, anyone else is getting those rights.

guitarded771962d ago

Insomniac is kinda on a downward trend right now. FUSE is the next big thing from then, and I haven't heard much from gamers being interested. I've bought every Insomniac game this gen, and about 50% were good, the rest were mediocre or worse. Just my opinion, I'm sure someone will take it personally and tell me about how naive I am in the most polite way.

kupomogli1962d ago (Edited 1962d ago )


Visceral Games will be ruined under EA by people like you who don't purchase the games because it's an EA published game, despite how good it may actually be.

If you haven't noticed, the budget that EA gives Visceral Games is a bit ridiculous and the quality of the games show. Too bad we have fanboys like you who avoid these games because of some biased opinion about the publisher.

Yes. A lot of studios have went under because of EA, but it wasn't really because of EA specifically. It's because the games they developed stopped selling. Why is EA going to keep a development studio that isn't turning a profit?

Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft have closed down many studios and laid off many employees. You want to know why we don't hear about most of it? Because this is usually their own studios that they hired a number of people. Although just recently Sony closed down three of their studios. Liverpool Studios who developed some amazing games on the PSX closed down because the games they developed didn't sell well. Sony developers are given freedom with their projects, so I'm not sure if Liverpool wanted to continue making Wipeout or if it was Sony that wanted them to. Either way, the last few games in the series barely sold, so why should Sony continue to lose money by continuing their funding.

When EA shuts down a studio. Guess what happens. The same thing when any other developer shuts down a studio. These same people usually get hired by another studio. Or atleast potentially hired.

You don't hear people bit**ing that the Saints Row team is made up of a lot of former Rockstar employees. OMG. ROCKSTAR LAYS PEOPLE OFF AND FIRES THEM. I'M NOT BUYING GTA5!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You people hating on EA when other companies do pretty much the exact same thing is hypocritical. If EA never bought the companies, they wouldn't have made as many games as they had because they wouldn't have had the backing, and most of them would have more than likely went bankrupt long ago. EA did nothing more than give these developers a much longer life than they would have had otherwise.

At the end of the day. These companies are businesses attempting to make money. Origin Systems, Bioware, Bullfrog, Psygnosis(Liverpool,) etc, didn't have to sell themselves to EA, Sony, whoever. They had the choice and they decided to sell their company for a certain sum of money.

ScubbaSteve1962d ago


Such a long paragraph and the only thing it reminded me to do was to not buy EA games. Sure I like some of the developers they've purchased in the past but my support for them doesn't outshine my fiery hot desire to see EA go out of business.

Short half Assed DLC
Fifa 13
Cutting content for Day 1 DLC
Online passes

Yea f those guys. I liked Westwood studios and command and conquer but those games just weren't good after being bought out by EA. That's not even the only developer that's fizzled out under EAs oversight either. Then lets look at origins and limiting where you can buy games, it sure doesn't seem like they want to broaden their market.

Lvl_up_gamer1961d ago

@ kupomogli

I completely agree with you.

@ ScubbaSteve

Nobody is forcing you to buy DLC. That responsibility is on YOU not EA. If you don't like the length of the DLC at the price they are asking....then don't buy it.

Fifa 13 is the most realistic soccer game on the market and the highest reviewed by the industry. If you don't like it, go buy PES 13.

Show me any kind of PROOF that content was cut from any game so that it could be day 1 DLC. You are just speculating.

Online passes shouldn't affect you UNLESS you buy used or pirate. If you buy used and know about the online pass, then make sure you are getting a good deal on a used game. If not, then it's simply just better to buy new.

Games I loved this gen:

NHL series
Dead Space 1&2
Mass Effect 2&3
Dante's Inferno
Mirror's Edge
Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning
Battlefield series
Dragon Age
Crysis series
Fight Night series
Rock Band

EA has given a wide assortment of games in so many genre's I highly doubt that ANYONE who is a gamer hasn't liked at lest 1 or 2 of these EA titles that claim they are EA haters.

Jinkies1961d ago


The only thing I got out of your rant was this

"Visceral Games will be ruined under EA by people like you who don't purchase the games because it's an EA published game, despite how good it may actually be."

Who said I don't buy them because it's EA, I bought Dead Space, I bought Dead Space 2 but after what EA has done to them and turned DS3 into a generic, over the top action game like what Capcom did with RE6 why would I buy it. It's called not sucking up to a developer when you know deep down they screwed up.

kupomogli1961d ago (Edited 1961d ago )


"but after what EA has done to them and turned DS3 into a generic, over the top action game like what Capcom did with RE6 why would I buy it."

What EA has done to them? Visceral Games is the one that changed the style of Dead Space 3. EA owns them, but they had nothing to do with that. If Visceral ruins their games EA isn't the reason behind it.

I know what you're talking about now. You're talking how EA sends their corporate leaders to supervise each game and give decisions based on their opinion rather than the opinion the designers had. They only do this after the first or second game, that way they can make sure to get one good game out then ruin the company. Because that's the way EA rolls, son.

You're a complete idiot if you think anyone but Visceral had any say of the change in Dead Space 3. Budget, time frame, etc. Those are things that corporate EA controls. They don't tell developers how to make their games.

But way to go being one of the many supporters of the EA hate train on the basis of nothing more than them being a company or the fact that it's popular to hate on EA.

Jinkies1961d ago (Edited 1961d ago )


Your dulusional mate if you honestly think that EA dosen't have a say in the develoeprs they have under them then I pity you...I really do

EA has influenced Bioware, VG, DICE and even Insomniac...what they say goes.

Imalwaysright1961d ago (Edited 1961d ago )

"Visceral Games is the one that changed the style of Dead Space 3" Do you really think that EA doesnt demand certain features in the games made by their devs in order to meet their sales target? Are you really that naive? Every publisher does that.

Uncharted originally wasnt going to be a TPS but it was Sony, the publisher, that wanted Uncharted to be more realistic after seeing the success of shooters on the 360.

And this is Sony, one of the few publishers out there that allows their devs to have creative freedom. Demons Souls, SoTC, HR, LBP, TLG, Sly... are a result of that freedom.

Cover system, infinite ammo and co-op in DS3 were most likely added to DS3 in order to meet the 5 million units sold wich is EA sales target. They saw the success of Gears and Uncharted and what better way to achieve it than copy those games?

kupomogli1961d ago (Edited 1961d ago )

So I shouldn't have said that publishers don't ever have a say in whatever because they do. The co op being in Dead Space 3 is because of EA, as EA has even said that there needs to be atleast some sort of online component in every single one of their games from now on.

But with Dead Space 3, it's still the same game, and the change to it I'm sure isn't because EA said do this or do that. Visceral is a competent developer who's made two great games in the Dead Space series and I'm sure it was Visceral that decided to branch out and do something new with the series, or otherwise have fan backlash for a second time that the game is too similar to the first title, just like they received with the second. The series even in the enclosed corridors has always been a survival horror/shooter, now there are some areas in the game that are going to be open and not so enclosed.

If you've seen the videos they're still going to be in enclosed areas, but also out in the open. But do you really want to be in a ship or ships the entire time once again for the third game as well?

I'm just saying it was a shooter already. EA didn't make it as such. Let's say EA told Visceral to change the location of the game. If EA told Visceral to do something other than being in a small ship the entire game on the third game, wouldn't it be something you agree with rather than be against? Or like I said above. Would you rather be in an enclosed space and feel like you're playing the exact same game for a third game in a row?

Only one month after Dead Space 3 releases, Army of Two the Devil's Cartel is released. There's your Gears of War clone. The series is better than Gears if you ask me, although that's a matter of opinion.

sikbeta1961d ago

What would be the point of buying Insom now that are on their average state, rather than doing back in the PS2 days where Ratchet games were king?

Also Insomniac don't want to be bought by anyone...

LOOK_AT_THIS_I1961d ago

You want proof of dlc cut from the game all you have to do is look for the sorry ass 100kb download for the maps/guns/characters. It's been plaguing this generation. You can't get much more proof to show someone if they can't comprehend that maps/modes/extras will ring in a hell of a lot higher than 100 kbs.

Lvl_up_gamer1961d ago


You are simply generalizing (based on Capcoms history) that EA is doing it when you have absolutely ZERO proof or facts to substantiate your claims that EA is withholding content from games for day 1 dlc.

I asked you for PROOF that EA has withheld content from a game for Day 1 DLC.

NOW PROVIDE IT with some kind of source or stop generalizing and spreading misinformation.

DragonKnight1961d ago

@kupmogli: The only thing I can say about all your seemingly pro-EA spiel is this. EA are one of the first publishers to begin making contracts with ridiculous clauses that force games to be made a certain way. I'm talking clauses like having a game get a metacritic score of at least 80 and having the game sell at least 1 million copies the first month. First of all, f*ck metacritic. They need to be taken down. Secondly, that kind of contract is purely about chance so the clauses are ridiculous.

These kinds of clauses force developers to do certain things they know will succeed based on the market, meaning less risks taken or less possibilities of new IP's. So screw EA and any developer that decided EA were worth doing business with. Nowadays, the best way to get interesting new content is either by going with Sony or going with a Kickstarter.

+ Show (15) more repliesLast reply 1961d ago
-Alpha1962d ago

Ha, Activision is cleaning house with Spyro/Skylanders. They dont need Insomniac, and Insomniac would have never made money off of Spyro in 2012 like Activision is doing.

As much as I hate the deviation of Spyro in Activision's hands, you have to admit that they did a damn good job making the game financially successful.

shivvy241961d ago

their marketing team did a pro job on that part

showtimefolks1961d ago

we been through this before sony wanted to buy insomniac but insomniac wanted to stay independent. they will still work for sony in some cases, they have more than one development team so i could see one team working on multiplatform while other continues to work on sony's platform

MoveTheGlow1961d ago

Um, the article link is down... so, that's the comment I have about the article.

About this speculation, I have no clue why Sony would do that. Ratchet and Clank was obviously passed off from Insomniac to lesser companies - All 4 One was not enjoyable at all. Their new title looks like Yet Another Shooter With a Comic Style To It Part 401: This Time, It's Different. Resistance, while fun, isn't going to net a giant amount of cash without a drastic change.

For that to happen - not that it will, but for it to happen - I'd imagine that Sony either was shown something very new and very awesome, or they would refocus the company on something else entirely.

Cam9771961d ago

Spyro should make a "proper" comeback. I want to see a game as memorable as the first 3, nothing more.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1961d ago
remanutd551962d ago (Edited 1962d ago )

Resistance 4 needs to happen you hear me sony/Insomniac, better yet as ps4 launch title.

Oh and i forgot to add one important detail: Hale as main protagonist, thank you.

Hanso1962d ago

would love to see Hale return in Resistnace 4 :D

SyWolf1962d ago

How could Hale be the main protagonist in Resistance 4?

KingofGambling1962d ago

hell yeah Resistance 4 on the PS4.

Soldierone1962d ago

Not only that

-Creepieness of RFOM. The narrator, the bigger aliens, the grungy look.

-Bigger battles. I don't care about "personal battles" I want 30 vs 30 matches again!

LOOK_AT_THIS_I1961d ago

^. This. I loved the 1st resistance. I wish they would have went back and made a patch for the controls to make it a little more modern style but it was the first FPS game that I enjoyed. The maps were great in that they adjusted size based on number of players.

If they do make another game resistance game I'd pick it up for next gen. They need to give it a rest for this gen.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1961d ago
TotalHitman1962d ago

Insomniac have some great ideas, but their games always fall short of their potential. Resistance for example, could have been much better than it eventually ended up. I would like it if Sony did buy Insomniac.

WeAreLegion1962d ago

You didn't play Resistance 3?

Nodoze1962d ago

The best in the series by far. It was a REALLY great game and is highly underrated.

TotalHitman1962d ago

I did actually. The ending felt rushed.

WeAreLegion1961d ago

I would have to agree with that. The ending was rushed. Other than that, it was phenomenal!

Athonline1961d ago

Am I the only one who found Resistance 2 the best in the series? 3 was solid, but the ending was rushed... plus I enjoyed R2 Multiplayer a lot more than 3.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1961d ago
Ashriel1962d ago

"Fate all rests on Fuse."

Oh boy :/

Megaton1962d ago (Edited 1962d ago )

Meh. They wanted to get in bed with EA, let them suffer the full effect of that decision.

animegamingnerd1962d ago

working with EA is the gaming industry is pretty much just like selling your soul to the devil

torchic1962d ago

yeah, and with that I just don't understand why West and Zampella would do themselves a disservice and sign with EA. I will never understand that decision

Athonline1961d ago

I doubt the decision was an easy one... but look at the industry now. All studios are "forced" to work with publishers to bear the increasingly costs. The only ones not working with publishers, are indie games who sell cheap, "small", less graphical-savy games... The industry as an industry sucks compare it's former "glory"....

calis1962d ago

They wanted to do an IP that they owned, Sony doesn't do that. EA gave them the opportunity so they went for it. Can't blame them.

SoundGamer1962d ago

What are you talking about? There are a lot of PlayStation exclusives that have been published by Sony yet are not Sony IPs.

calis1961d ago (Edited 1961d ago )

Like what? Especially recently?

I know Sly Cooper, Infamous, R&C, Resistance are all Sony owned and these were created when Sucker Punch (and obviously Insomniac) were 2nd party.
Heavenly Sword as well

NonApplicable1961d ago

Pixlejunk, Metal Gear & a large amount of Japanese games aren't Sony owned IP. I'm sure there are more!

calis1961d ago

When was the last time Metal Gear was published by Sony?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1961d ago