Ex Naughty Dog developer urges focus on new IP in response to Indiana/Star Wars Ip

Geoff: "What’s your dream studio / franchise collaboration you hope to see one day?"

Straley: "None. We need all that talent & money focused on creating new content, new IP, and innovating in the AAA space Geoff. "

The story is too old to be commented.
masterfox45d ago (Edited 45d ago )

Awesome response by Bruce!, freaking exactly that's what we need in this game industry.

Jin_Sakai45d ago (Edited 45d ago )

Geoff Keighley:
“What’s your dream studio / franchise collaboration you hope to see one day?“

Bruce Stahley:
“None. We need all that talent & money focused on creating new content, new IP, and innovating in the AAA space Geoff.”

Bruce gets it.

LordoftheCritics44d ago

Yes please. New IP.

Tried of franchises and remakes/reboots.

DiRtY44d ago

Well, I see that new IPs are somehow exciting, but I refuse to follow that narrative, that a talented studio working on a new IP is always better than a talented studio working on an established franchise.

Tell that all the fans of God of War, Halo, Spider Man, Gears of War, etc.

You’ll face a gigantic shitstorm if you tell your community that franchise XYZ will be on hold for 7-8 years...

So yeah, new IP is fun, but if there are things to be told in an established franchise, this will work as well. One is not better than the other.

CrimsonWing6944d ago

I agree completely BUT it's one thing to say that as a consumer it's another thing to do that as a business.

I feel the SNES - PS2 era was the gold age of gaming. So many unique titles and if you look at how quickly these companies release titles from the PS1 generation to the PS4 generation you'll see some differences.

It comes down to how risky it is to develop a game and not have people buy it. It's sad, but the reality of the situation is companies aren't willing to take that risk anymore.

Even that idiot Jim Ryan made a statement for Sony you can read here:

Games were considered a massive success when they sold a million copies back in the day. Now, it can get a dev studio shut down if they only sold a million.

Ceaser985736143d ago

Naughty Dog, Santa Monica working on a New IP .

seanpitt2343d ago

Yeah definitely don’t want TLOU3 now with Joel gone.. the game is dead now nowhere to take it everybody is dead or has lost everything now let’s bury the franchise and move on to another IP naughty dog are talented enough to innovate the gaming space

IGiveHugs2NakedWomen43d ago

Exactly. These developers can make money if they focus on making games that entertain and draw the player in. Look at a game like Diablo 3. It doesn't focus on AAA, CGI graphics, but the mechanics and gameplay are ultimately what makes it an amazing game.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 43d ago
Neonridr45d ago

so are you saying you don't agree with what Insomniac did with Spiderman? And you don't think things like that should continue?

Sonic-and-Crash44d ago

if you asking me about Spiderman ... yes they should stop that too

Generally stop mixing Movie Ip with Game industry (especially if those are worn out and tired )and start creating new franchises

blacktiger44d ago

that's right I prefer Insomniac to do new ip, they are excellt developer! one of my favourite

ShadowWolf71244d ago

>Movie IP

It's a comic book IP, broski.

darthv7245d ago

Insert the gif of the girl saying, "cant we have both?"

you can take an existing ip and make new content and innovative AAA experiences. How else do people think spin offs happen?

Christopher44d ago

I think it's more the focus people have over certain IP. It's a problem that ends up creating games over hype rather than being designed from the ground up with a goal and passion. Similar to Marvel's Avengers. Spider-man is definitely not the usual success, and much of it is built upon past games, not necessarily original elements. But to build a new game with an existing IP rarely results in focusing on design so much as forcing it to match an expected gameplay.

-Foxtrot45d ago (Edited 45d ago )

I really wish him and Amy Hennig would open a gaming studio together, I'd love to see what they'd come up with.

BlackIceJoe44d ago

Now we are talking about something I completely agree with.

Even if they have to use Kickstarter or Fig to get their game made I'm game, to pitching in.

-Foxtrot44d ago

I think they’d make a good team and there’s been a few people here and there who’s left ND, maybe they could all join up together.

I’d support their Kickstarter

LucasRuinedChildhood44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

Bruce and Amy made great games together but they've also had had some major creative differences which he likely hasn't forgotten about - this is the reason he left the AAA industry in the first place.

Bruce and Neil threw out 8 months worth of recording work on Uncharted 4 after Hennig left and the story had to be rewrote. They only had 2 years to work on U4 and he's stated the stress of this made him give up on AAA games.

If he and Druckmann (co-directors) had complete control of the direction of Uncharted 4 from the start, he'd probably still be making AAA games since it would have been a less intense experience. Bruce also clearly preferred working with Druckmann (used him as creative director on both TLOU and Uncharted 4).

-Foxtrot44d ago

Going off some reports, whether they are legit (no one knows) it seems Amy had a problem with Neil not Bruce and that's where the creative clash came from.

Again, we don't know, there's no proof just a number of little things you see go around the web BUT if he preferred working with Druckmann why did he leave, especially during development of a game he and Neil both created, if it was some brand new IP fair enough but the Last of Us. Clearly something happened between him and Neil and if we had to guess based on what we have, which isn't much of anything really, then I think it's the same thing that happened with Amy Hennig.

I just think there's no way in hell Amy Hennig would just leave Uncharted 4 like that, a franchise she was a big part of and helped create, not to mention when they were doing the final instalment of Nathan Drakes story, clearly something, or someone pushed her to the point she couldn't even stay to finish off the story of a beloved character she helped create.

Amy leaves behind one of her biggest franchises and then Bruce does the same? Yeah something is up with that no matter what anyone says. Then you have the reports of a fair number of people leaving during TLOU2 development...

Considering the only person that has remained is Neil and he was involved with both people and their teams, I personally believe Bruce would rather work with Amy than him especially if it was on a smaller, stress free project.

LucasRuinedChildhood44d ago (Edited 44d ago )


The reports you're talking about were debunked:

Bruce has publicly stated why he left in interviews and podcasts - he felt burnt out. There's no need for speculation. They had 4 years to make TLOU and only 2 for Uncharted 4 as they had to scrap much of Hennig's work.
"Oh my god, it's time to take a break. It's just time to step away."
"We needed to get the game out the door, and we needed it to be something good, so that it didn't put a mark on the Naughty Dog name. I felt like, I guess in hindsight I took on that role more for the team than for me personally... Two years to create that beast, that then became the hardest project [I had worked on]."

"especially during development of a game he and Neil both created," He took a long break after Uncharted 4 and never actually returned to direct TLOU2 at all. As he said, he was burnt out. He was never a director for TLOU2 so what you're saying simply isn't true.

"Then you have the reports of a fair number of people leaving during TLOU2 development." There were also reports that many left during Uncharted 4's development when Bruce was the director - senior developers like Uncharted 3 co-director Justin Richmond, lead character artist Michael Knowland, and art director Nate Wells. These were huge departures.

"I personally believe Bruce would rather work with Amy." He picked Druckmann as creator director OVER Amy because he preferred his creative direction, particularly on the heels of TLOU1 while Hennig directed Uncharted 3 (very few people argue that U3 is as good as U2). That's just a fact. There is no evidence that he had creative differences with Neil - only the opposite.

Kilua43d ago


Do you realize that people can leave a studio at different times, for different reasons? And i promise you, it doesnt have to be doom and gloom every single time like the media reports. Those "reports" were most likely blown up it because it's Naughty Dog. Bruce left because he wanted to take a break from AAA gaming. What happened with Amy could happen with any studio. Her project at EA got cancelled outright, and you didnt see the same mud thrown at whatever studio she was at, not nearly as much as with ND.

People create controversey, create rumours that are unfalsifiable and the internent will run with it to no end.

zumlauf1444d ago (Edited 44d ago )

@foxtrot those rumours were confirmed false. Neither Neil OR Bruce caused Amy to leave. It was mainly a result of Amy having issues coordinating and creating any direction for the team. Not surprising from you though.

-Foxtrot44d ago

Oh please, there was stuff going around before Mitch even wrote his article on IGN, again they were rumours but what Mitch is saying is he was forced to take this these rumours and make them fact. See where I'm going with this, that article isn't about disproving those rumours, just Mitch having a go at IGN for trying to make them look like 100% fact when no one knew.

Like I said above, none of us really know but things go on behind closed doors where all things just boil down to internal politics.

". It was mainly a result of Amy having issues coordinating and creating any direction for the team"


Let me get this are trying to call me for believing "false rumours" despite saying "NO ONE KNOWS" multiple times, yet you've just pulled that bullshit claim out of thin air, again, another so called rumour but making out that was the real reason.

Jesus. Pot calling the kettle much

zumlauf1443d ago (Edited 43d ago )

So Mitch was simply "taking a shot at IGN" when multiple other ex-ign staff at the time were also reporting similar unethical behavior at ign under the same two members of leadership whom also appologized publicly on twitter directed at those accusations including Mitch's!? Okay i guess he just made that all up. There was NOTHING out before that intitial report before he was pressured into publishing it. So stop with the "oh there was stuff going around before" crap. And YES we DO know generaly what happened. Stop trying to cover your ass after two people provided sources confirming your bs rumours as false. --(playstationlifestyle) "Others say that Amy Hennig had trouble making decisions and that the nascent game wasn’t shaping up very well. Some who were working on Uncharted 4 wished that there was a more cohesive direction. Others thought it was perfectly understandable, considering how small the Uncharted 4 staff was, that the game hadn’t coalesced yet."

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 43d ago
Abriael45d ago

Very good answer to the usual hype tweet that is honestly starting to get irritating.

potatoseal45d ago

I know Geoff Keighly is the games media's darling... but I just despise him. I can't stand him. He's as fake as the day is long. He'll always be the Dorito Pope to me.

Unknown_Gamer579444d ago

Phil Spencer: "Am I a joke to you?"

Pego43d ago

Not only you should try to "stand" him, you should also love him cuz he's amazing.

Fishy Fingers45d ago (Edited 45d ago )

The opposite of what ND did for the entirety of last gen. Proven sequels, proven formulas.

I agree with him 100% but be realistic, much like movies of late any big investment (AAA) requires an all but guaranteed return, thats why we see established IPs rolled out again and again. AAA is the least innovating, least experimental space because of this. No invester is gambling on a 300+ million project.

Silly gameAr44d ago

Nice shot at Naughty Dog for no reason at all.

Fishy Fingers44d ago (Edited 44d ago )


Last gen they only made sequels to their existing, proven, or if you prefer, successful, loved, respected, award winning (use whatever adjective your sensitive little soul desires). Not a "shot" at ALL, just the truth and the opposite of what this ex ND director is saying.

RazzerRedux44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

Not sure ND is exactly the poster-child or "proven sequels, proven formulas". Not like they are churning out Call of Duty number of iterations. There are better examples but I get your point considering Staley used to work for ND. AAA isn't where you go to be stunned with new gameplay, typically. New AAA IP is risky as hell and hard to come by, unfortunately.

Ultimately, I think it is a necessary evil and frankly, I'm not going to complain about what ND puts out when ND is about as good as you get overall, imo.

LucasRuinedChildhood44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

ND are rumoured to be working on a new IP and have given Uncharted to a different studio, so you'll have something new soon enough. They usually make a new IP each gen on average but the PS3 generation went on for a long time (2 new IPs). Games take longer to make now. You may as well think of TLOU as a PS4 franchise since it was out on the PS4 within a year and most people played it there.

Whether you like it or not, ND objectively took some pretty big risks with TLOU2 as well. Can't think of a AAA game since MGS2 that did something like that.

HusbandAndWifeGaming43d ago

Uncharted and TLOU2 aren't based on existing IP like star wars. That's what he was saying he had a problem with.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 43d ago
RazzerRedux44d ago

What is "thug" about his answer?

purple10144d ago

He shut that answer down. Harder than a hammer to a nail.

Show all comments (56)
The story is too old to be commented.