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. " 😉👍
Awesome response by Bruce!, freaking exactly that's what we need in this game industry.
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.
Yes please. New IP. Tried of franchises and remakes/reboots.
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.
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: https://www.eurogamer.net/a... 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.
Naughty Dog, Santa Monica working on a New IP .
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
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.
so are you saying you don't agree with what Insomniac did with Spiderman? And you don't think things like that should continue?
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
that's right I prefer Insomniac to do new ip, they are excellt developer! one of my favourite
>Movie IP It's a comic book IP, broski.
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?
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.
I really wish him and Amy Hennig would open a gaming studio together, I'd love to see what they'd come up with.
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.
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
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).
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.
@Foxtrot The reports you're talking about were debunked: https://www.vg247.com/2020/... https://www.reddit.com/r/un... 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. https://www.gamespot.com/ar... https://kotaku.com/why-the-... "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.
Foxtrot. 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. https://www.criticalhit.net... People create controversey, create rumours that are unfalsifiable and the internent will run with it to no end.
@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. https://www.vg247.com/2020/...
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" LMAO Let me get this straight...you 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
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."
Very good answer to the usual hype tweet that is honestly starting to get irritating.
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.
Phil Spencer: "Am I a joke to you?"
Not only you should try to "stand" him, you should also love him cuz he's amazing.
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.
Nice shot at Naughty Dog for no reason at all.
Eh? 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.
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.
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.
Uncharted and TLOU2 aren't based on existing IP like star wars. That's what he was saying he had a problem with.
What is "thug" about his answer?
He shut that answer down. Harder than a hammer to a nail.
I agree in a sense but Geoff is an absolute dude, he isn't some Jason Shrier mothereffer. There will always be a desire for licenced content. E.g Star Wars, Alien, Marvel
I think it's pretty safe to say, based on the LONG running history of video games, that there is plenty of room for both.
a starwars open world will do well as its something new. a lot of people will be excited for an ac creed style game set in star wars universe with different plasnets etc it might be epic. i would also prefer new experiances etc but publishers also need playing it safe franchises
Or Wild idea here. Do both?
What I like about Sony first party titles is, they don't need a license or name to sell. Well, ok, they have Spider-Man (and its recent spinoff), but that's also just an all-around excellent game that wasn't just dumped onto the PS4 on the assumption that the license alone will encourage sales. That is more of an exception to the rule, anyways. Sure, there are often sequels to Sony's most popular titles, but it's important to note that they do plant new seeds periodically, and those popular titles only got that way because they were successful as new IPs at one point. I salute that, because new IPs have a lot more to prove than existing titles, by virtue of not being able to sell on name alone. You can probably argue that games can often sell just by the studio behind them, but that's more of a testament to that studio's ability to build that reputation. That wasn't how things were for them when they started. They had to earn that rapport with the consumer. Heck, even the sequels have more heart behind them than a lot of other sequels I've come across. They don't just coast on their name alone. They take what fans liked about the previous game(s) and build upon it, keeping what works, and improving what didn't.
We don't need anymore virtue signaling Last of Us titles. Something new please.
Both are doable, but yes, we do definitely need a lot more focus on new or original IP from gaming in general. ...that said, there ARE some licenses that are criminally overlooked in the games space too, and could be quite amazing. hile not necessarily new IP, they'd be new to the games space, and still fresh. Returning to the same franchises over and over again for games can get kind of tiring.
While I agree the industry needs new IP I also think its perfectly okay to do big licensed games now and then. We still get our fresh entries like our Ghost of Tsushimas and our Oris. But if we NEVER did licensed games we wouldn't have great games like Fallen Order or any of the anime titles that fans enjoy.
When was the last time a AAA studio innovated? Studio's create new IP's that are carbon copies of other games in terms of gameplay and innovation but just with a different look, story and characters. AAA gaming has become like blockbuster movies - all the same old nonsense with a different coat of paint or player perspective (1st to 3rd person for instance). There should be more AA studios around innovating like there used to be, they don't have the same financial pressures of AAA studios and can take more risks that may fail. New IPs will happen in AAA studios but Innovation - good luck
New IPs with gameplay we've seen before might as well be used with an existing IP. If you're gonna make something new....make sure it's new. Luckily he comes from one of the best studios in the busiiness.
No, please give me more, halo, gears and forza and I am happy as can be.
That's what gamepads is best at. Small new indie games you would not buy but would like to try.
I don't agree. Certain franchises still have lots of room to grow in the gaming section. New ip are coming out all of the freaking time.
Nostalgic stuff can still have a place, but please more new stuff overall :)
The problem nowadays is aaa's are so expensive to make, a lot of publishers are reticent to create new ip's in case of failure. So they stick to their franchises and sequels, not so much risk tbh.
Competition is goood!
I agree partially, I mean hold a mgs remake or a new up in front of me...I’m gonna choose mgs
Yes to a degree, i think a few sequels are fine and then its time to move on and do a new ip. For instance assasins creed i would much prefer ubisoft to be working on something rather than another assasins creed. Hoirzon needs another game as does spider man, so not againt more of the same just when it get the point aomething like assasins creed is it where its like cmon guys give us something new
or... you know... we could do both?
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.