You really think Haze flopped because of market conditions and not because it was a bad game? Or that Timsplitters isn't the huge franchise the PA forums seem to think it is because there are to many FPS games?
Also MS and Sony courted PC gamers who were tired of dealing with PC hardware. "Hardcore" PC gamers are still happily playing PC games.
No, the point is that with too many games for a market that's not big enough, the criteria for being good enough to not flop has gotten way too high, if only 20% of the games are good enough to make a profit, pretty soon a lot of the studios making the other 80% and going to leave the market.
A source close to staff at Free Radical Design told Edge on Thursday that the developer has shut its doors--and changed the locks--just before the Christmas holiday.
"Staff arrived for work this morning to find the locks had been changed and notices on the doors advising them to attend a meeting at a nearby Novotel [a hotel chain] at 12 noon today," said the source, who preferred anonymity and worked with Free Radical in better times. "Heavy duty security staff was patrolling the buildings."
"...I think they're all a bit shell-shocked."
The studio employed around 150-200 staff, the tipster said. "After the poor reviews of Haze and subsequent loss of a contract with LucasArts, [Free Radical was] struggling to find publishers to back the long-awaited TimeSplitters 4 and other smaller projects and were left with no choice but to pull the plug."
Free Radical was founded in 1999 by former Rare developers including David Doak, Steve Ellis, Graeme Norgate and Karl Hilton, who created games including Goldeneye 007 and Perfect Dark. Free Radical also created the aforementioned TimeSplitters series of games.
The independent studio had a publishing deal with LucasArts on the unannounced Star Wars Battlefront III, a deal that fell through in October after about two years of development, the source said. "[Free Radical] was relying on Lucas for further contracts which had been promised in some sort of exclusivity deal. Obviously that all went down the pan."
Perhaps the worst news for fans of the studio is the demise of TimeSplitters 4. "They had already started working on TimeSplitters 4, and had been for over a year, but due to the failure of Haze and the deal falling through with Lucas, they couldn't get a publisher to back them. They had a last ditch attempt last week down South somewhere, but it came to nothing so I think that was the last hope."
The source claimed that the company "didn't treat their staff well at all." Rumors of a closure were circulating within the company for "a few weeks."
"People have been leaving in droves due to lack of security, poor treatment of staff, better offers and guaranteed work from other local developers such as Monumental Games and one in Derby whose name escapes me [Rebellion and Core Design both have Derby locations--ed.]."
Doak reportedly "officially" left the company early this month, and Ellis has set up another company called Pumpkin Beach, which already has a placeholder website registered under his name. The two are reportedly working on this project together and will "hand pick" Free Radical staff to join them.
The source also said that despite the looming closure, the company still held a big Christmas party last week and gave staff a week's pay as a Christmas bonus.
Attempts to contact Free Radical have been unsuccessful.
After the meeting
Later on Thursday, our source updated us with more inside information from the Free Radical staff meeting that took place at a hotel near the studio. Apparently, Free Radical knew the urgency of its situation six months ago.
Co-founder Ellis was "visibly upset" when he talked to the staff, the source said. "[He] told staff how very sorry he was and they'd been doing all they could, working flat-out to either find a publisher or a buyer over the past six months, but no offers were made. There have been several visits to the States, but to no avail."
About 20 staff members were offered positions with Ellis' new venture, Pumpkin Beach, while the rest of the employees were told in a separate room that they would be laid off.
Staff had reportedly been paid to the end of December, but are not expected to receive any further compensation "as there was nothing left to give."
Reps from U.K. game makers Codemasters and Monumental Games were at the hotel after the meeting asking for CVs and applications from former Free Radical staffers.
Update: Added meeting notes.
All in favor of burning down Lucasarts, say "aye."
You really think Haze flopped because of market conditions and not because it was a bad game? Or that Timsplitters isn't the huge franchise the PA forums seem to think it is because there are to many FPS games?
Also MS and Sony courted PC gamers who were tired of dealing with PC hardware. "Hardcore" PC gamers are still happily playing PC games.
No, the point is that with too many games for a market that's not big enough, the criteria for being good enough to not flop has gotten way too high, if only 20% of the games are good enough to make a profit, pretty soon a lot of the studios making the other 80% and going to leave the market.
Even if there were less shooters on the market Haze would still be a bad game. It might have sold a few more copies to kids desperate to play any shooter that comes along, but I doubt it would of had a huge impact on sales.
All in favor of burning down Lucasarts, say "aye."
AYE
Though I wasn't into console gaming during Free Radical's heyday, it's sad to see any big developer go under. Hopefully their talent finds new homes out there among the other developers.
Props to Free Radical for putting their employees first. Giving everyone an Xmas bonus and paying them through the end of the month, even though that wipes out the rest of the company? That's damn generous.
I enjoyed TimeSplitters 2, but it was really one of the last of the "lots of characters with lots of weapons" type of FPS. The genre's really changed towards either specific roles (TF2) or good weapon balance. The downside to the TS franchise is that it focuses on fun, goofy gameplay and not highly competitive gameplay. I think there's a place for both -- playing a level with only Bricks as your weapon is a good laugh -- but you really only need one game for that. That game becomes the "party FPS" and there's no reason to update it or search for another game to fill that niche.
The stories for their games were always pretty dumb, and I think they just got left behind with the shift towards more realistic stories and more competitive online multiplayer.
Even if there were less shooters on the market Haze would still be a bad game. It might have sold a few more copies to kids desperate to play any shooter that comes along, but I doubt it would of had a huge impact on sales.
Every gaming company goes under because their game are "bad", because not enough people though the game was good enough to buy. The problem is the industry model right now makes it impossible for the majority of games to be good enough to buy. There is simply not enough gaming dollars out there, Sony and Microsoft have subsidized it, but Sony is putting an end to that, and too many of the major publishers are losing money. Pretty soon all of them are going to cut back.
Obviously when they do the worst studios (the one that most recently released a bomb) are the first to go, but it's going to go up the chain. In other words, this is just the beginning.
TimeSplitters 4 and the unnamed project were both still in development said Ellis, as were "other unannounced projects, which are in the process of being signed."
They are in the process of being signed. I'm sure we'll get TS4. Whether or not it'll be good, remains to be seen. But we'll at least get it.
I love the part about the hotel, that's still better than when GoO shut their doors. (Except I was happy about that.)
One has to be pretty brave to go into the gaming industry these days anyway, regardless of the economic state. With the hits the much bigger companies are taking, I'm surprised how few studios are closing.
The problem is the industry model right now makes it impossible for the majority of games to be good enough to buy.
There we go. Games are a low-volume product that isn't naturally disposable*, and frankly there are so many bad (or pathetically short) ones nowadays that the individual market share is closing even tighter.
*The genius behind subscription online studios, of course, is that their product is renewable.
Strayth on
That's right.
0
ViscountalphaThe pen is mightier than the swordhttp://youtu.be/G_sBOsh-vyIRegistered Userregular
The current video game industry is broken. At least the HD twins.
The spent billions subsidizing the industry hoping to lure and grown their market. They had some growth but all they really managed to do was cannibalize the hardcore PC gaming market. The OMG 60 FPS crowd.
Once that portion was absorbed their assumption that they can continue to grow at the same rate fell completely flat. The HD gaming market simply isn't big enough to support 2 platforms or the number of games that are released on them, there are not enough HD gaming consumers to buy enough games to make most of these games profitable, which means a larger percentage of these games are going to bomb and lose money, add that to the drastic increase in the cost of making these games, every game that bombs has a strong potential to kill it's development studio.
This was never a sustainable model, there is going to be fewer games released in 2009 and 2010 compared to 2007 and 2008.
The current video game industry is broken. At least the HD twins.
The spent billions subsidizing the industry hoping to lure and grown their market. They had some growth but all they really managed to do was cannibalize the hardcore PC gaming market. The OMG 60 FPS crowd.
Once that portion was absorbed their assumption that they can continue to grow at the same rate fell completely flat. The HD gaming market simply isn't big enough to support 2 platforms or the number of games that are released on them, there are not enough HD gaming consumers to buy enough games to make most of these games profitable, which means a larger percentage of these games are going to bomb and lose money, add that to the drastic increase in the cost of making these games, every game that bombs has a strong potential to kill it's development studio.
This was never a sustainable model, there is going to be fewer games released in 2009 and 2010 compared to 2007 and 2008.
Fuck me really?
I dunno about that. I can name three games off the top of my head that are already "must haves" for next year and all three are so-called "HD" titles. Considering that the 360 and PS3 share most of their games and have combined sales approaching 50 million, labeling HD gaming as unsustainable is premature at best. This year had a ton of great games for HD consoles that sold well.
I think a better conclusion might be that we will see a reduction in studios putting out crap HD games and trying to market people into buying them. If a dev doesn't want a game to bomb, then they shouldn't make a terrible game and market it like crazy. If they want to develop shovelware, take it to the Wii where it's a lot cheaper to develop.
Additionally, in relation to the video game market I think the effects of the economic crisis are overestimated. If people have the kind of cash to purchase a 360 or PS3, they likely can afford a game a month without too much trouble. I've got a pretty weak income and I can still fit in at least one purchase a month and that's for a brand-new game.
We may as well come out and say "Nintendo to buy Microsoft in 5 years" along with doom-and-gloom statements with the way things are now. There just isn't the evidence to presume that HD gaming is going to sink.
The issue is more complex than quality. Look at Dead Space. It's a great game, very high quality, sold like shit. Maybe if they'd called it Gears of Dead Space or Call of Dead Space it might have done well, but it didn't. Consumers are only buying "guaranteed" hits, and that's a direct result of the soft economy.
The next few years are going to see a lot fewer risky games, which is bad for consumers. I guarantee you if Dude Huge was pitching Gears of War in this economic climate, it wouldn't get greenlit.
The current 2.5-console model is sustainable, in the age of convergence (your 360 plays Netflix, your PS3 plays Blu-ray discs). The problem is the lack of consumer spending, that's all.
Well, also consider the marketing. Marketing plays as much a role in this as well.
Higher production/development costs and the necessity of marketing up the wazoo generally make it hard, regardless of how risky (or good) the game is. I didn't see any five-story wall murals for Haze.
tastydonuts on
“I used to draw, hard to admit that I used to draw...”
1. Developing costs keep going up and up, thanks at least in part to increasingly powerful systems.
2. A recent survey indicates only 20 percent of games manage to make money.
You add the two together, and the industry has a problem. Many developers/publishers weren't doing that great before the recession, and now that the economy's gone to crap you'll see more and more cutting back or shutting their doors.
I don't think HD is entirely to blame, but much of the video game industry as it stands now just isn't sustainable in the long run anymore.
The current 2.5-console model is sustainable, in the age of convergence (your 360 plays Netflix, your PS3 plays Blu-ray discs). The problem is the lack of consumer spending, that's all.
I don't follow. Consumer spending on games is going up at a very rapid rate. If you can't make money now then you need a new plan.
lowlylowlycook on
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
The current 2.5-console model is sustainable, in the age of convergence (your 360 plays Netflix, your PS3 plays Blu-ray discs). The problem is the lack of consumer spending, that's all.
I don't follow. Consumer spending on games is going up at a very rapid rate. If you can't make money now then you need a new plan.
This is what I meant by unsustainable. You can make games profitable now, it's just that so many people don't for whatever reason.
Yeah, I know a guy who used to work there (and returned to Rare) and he's been telling me all day about how people have been getting in touch really upset.
A sad day for British game development. Hopefully Rare, Lionhead, Bizzarre and the other big UK boys will pick up many of their most talented staff.
" I was born into a world of war, I was born into a world, unless some one makes things right, they will never be right!"
Horrid. Just plain horrid.
Actually, it's just plain mediocre. And it's "I was born into a world where unless some one makes things right, they will never be right." It didn't come off too bad to me, but there's definitely an overwhelming backlash, that I feel I'm a part of, in gaming culture against any type of melodrama. And on top of being melodramatic, it's uninteresting and unoriginal.
What is Rare doing anyway? Perfect Dark was a nonstarter (although at the time it was a neat little game with a retarded story)
That particular team has been working on the next entry in said franchise, leaked accidentally by the writer of the second Perfect Dark novel who talked about how the novels lead into the 'new one' that's being made and how he's been privvy to design docs and stuff.
The novels that are out so far bridge Zero directly into the first game, including a haircut and image change for Jo and whatnot. The novels are pretty good, and the story of the next game is rumoured to be written by the same. I expect now all Rare's other games are out we'll get details about a few more of their projects, including the next Perfect Dark. They've been on radio silence for three damn years, though, so I expect something good. Microsoft seems to really want to make this series into a Halo/Gears sized beast, as evidence by their already getting novels out and stuff even after the bad reviews of Zero.
Perhaps some of the Free Radical guys will get picked up and end up working on it. Ouroboros.
2. A recent survey indicates only 20 percent of games manage to make money.
And whilst I'd love to say that that 20% is all the great megaman 9s of the world, I have a dark feeling it's the Fifas and the casual shit that 1/5th is occupying.
The issue is more complex than quality. Look at Dead Space. It's a great game, very high quality, sold like shit. Maybe if they'd called it Gears of Dead Space or Call of Dead Space it might have done well, but it didn't. Consumers are only buying "guaranteed" hits, and that's a direct result of the soft economy.
The next few years are going to see a lot fewer risky games, which is bad for consumers. I guarantee you if Dude Huge was pitching Gears of War in this economic climate, it wouldn't get greenlit.
The current 2.5-console model is sustainable, in the age of convergence (your 360 plays Netflix, your PS3 plays Blu-ray discs). The problem is the lack of consumer spending, that's all.
Since when is selling over 1 million copies considered "selling like shit" (especially considering the game was banned in one of the largest gaming markets)?
Or perhaps that's the real problem with the industry. Not every game can sell like Halo or GTA. Perhaps sales expectations are just way too high?
2. A recent survey indicates only 20 percent of games manage to make money.
And whilst I'd love to say that that 20% is all the great megaman 9s of the world, I have a dark feeling it's the Fifas and the casual shit that 1/5th is occupying.
This is only partially a problem.
Because the Gears of Wars also make a profit.
We've been slipping for a while now into territory where game developers use Imagine: Party Babyz(I still cannot believe that's a fucking real game) to basically pay for Prince of Persia. Luckily publishers still understand that there is a market for the real games and developers continue to want to develop games they want to play, like Dead Space and PoP and Mass Effect.
The issue is more complex than quality. Look at Dead Space. It's a great game, very high quality, sold like shit. Maybe if they'd called it Gears of Dead Space or Call of Dead Space it might have done well, but it didn't. Consumers are only buying "guaranteed" hits, and that's a direct result of the soft economy.
The next few years are going to see a lot fewer risky games, which is bad for consumers. I guarantee you if Dude Huge was pitching Gears of War in this economic climate, it wouldn't get greenlit.
The current 2.5-console model is sustainable, in the age of convergence (your 360 plays Netflix, your PS3 plays Blu-ray discs). The problem is the lack of consumer spending, that's all.
Since when is selling over 1 million copies considered "selling like shit" (especially considering the game was banned in one of the largest gaming markets)?
Or perhaps that's the real problem with the industry. Not every game can sell like Halo or GTA. Perhaps sales expectations are just way too high?
Buh? Dead Space wasn't actually banned anywhere, as far as I know. Regardless, a million copies worldwide doesn't cut it these days. It fell well under expectations. I doubt it lost money but it was still soft enough to be alarming.
Look at the top 5 games this quarter. They're all either Wii games or sequels. Spending may have gone up but it was strongly focused on Gears 2, GTA4, and so on- the "safe bets".
2. A recent survey indicates only 20 percent of games manage to make money.
And whilst I'd love to say that that 20% is all the great megaman 9s of the world, I have a dark feeling it's the Fifas and the casual shit that 1/5th is occupying.
This is only partially a problem.
Because the Gears of Wars also make a profit.
We've been slipping for a while now into territory where game developers use Imagine: Party Babyz(I still cannot believe that's a fucking real game) to basically pay for Prince of Persia. Luckily publishers still understand that there is a market for the real games and developers continue to want to develop games they want to play, like Dead Space and PoP and Mass Effect.
But do the profitable 20% make enough profit to cover for the other 80%? Sure, there are megahits like Gears of War, but there are also mega flops like, well, Haze, that cost bales to make and don't even crack six figures. Casual games make a decent profit, but they might not make enough profit to cover for the big games. Carnival Games (which just has a sequel and is still near the top of the charts in the UK) wasn't enough to keep Take-Two from reporting a hefty loss the last quarter.
Edit: And yeah, if development costs and marketing are high enough, a million-seller can still lose money. Dunno if Dead Space is in that situation though.
Well Fifa/Madden is a game they make every 3 or so years but release a new one every year because of popularity and profit margins.
Don't do this. Every year the teams change, and people expect an update. The football/american football leagues run on a yearly cycle, the people buying the games expect them to follow suit. They do. Sure it's great for EA to have an annual franchise they can cash in on, but don't think it's a one-sided affair.
Buh? Dead Space wasn't actually banned anywhere, as far as I know. Regardless, a million copies worldwide doesn't cut it these days. It fell well under expectations. I doubt it lost money but it was still soft enough to be alarming.
Look at the top 5 games this quarter. They're all either Wii games or sequels. Spending may have gone up but it was strongly focused on Gears 2, GTA4, and so on- the "safe bets".
What the fuck are you babbling about? They developed the game in one year and it got 50-60 million dollars in sales. It did great. Jeff Green, who now works for EA, was recently on the Gamers with Jobs podcast and he said that people at EA were very happy with how it did.
Buh? Dead Space wasn't actually banned anywhere, as far as I know. Regardless, a million copies worldwide doesn't cut it these days. It fell well under expectations. I doubt it lost money but it was still soft enough to be alarming.
Look at the top 5 games this quarter. They're all either Wii games or sequels. Spending may have gone up but it was strongly focused on Gears 2, GTA4, and so on- the "safe bets".
What the fuck are you babbling about? They developed the game in one year and it got 50-60 million dollars in sales. It did great. Jeff Green, who now works for EA, was recently on the Gamers with Jobs podcast and he said that people at EA were very happy with how it did.
The novels that are out so far bridge Zero directly into the first game, including a haircut and image change for Jo and whatnot.
So they took away all her raver girl clothes and sent her to detox?
Half of one book is her being semi-suicidal about her fathers' death until Carrington pretty much says sort yourself out and go on a mission for me or get the fuck out. The change is gradual, but yeah, pretty much - she becomes a proper agent. One book also handles what happens to DataDyne after the original Japanese owner dies at the end of Zero, going through the rise of Cassandra from the first game and detailing the love affair between her and Carrington that's hinted at in the first game. They're pretty good books. They're not exactly amazing pieces of literature, but neither are the Halo books or the Mass Effect books. They're very solid expansions on a fairly interesting universe.
Posts
No, the point is that with too many games for a market that's not big enough, the criteria for being good enough to not flop has gotten way too high, if only 20% of the games are good enough to make a profit, pretty soon a lot of the studios making the other 80% and going to leave the market.
http://www.edge-online.com/features/source-free-radical-locked-up
All in favor of burning down Lucasarts, say "aye."
Even if there were less shooters on the market Haze would still be a bad game. It might have sold a few more copies to kids desperate to play any shooter that comes along, but I doubt it would of had a huge impact on sales.
AYE
Though I wasn't into console gaming during Free Radical's heyday, it's sad to see any big developer go under. Hopefully their talent finds new homes out there among the other developers.
I enjoyed TimeSplitters 2, but it was really one of the last of the "lots of characters with lots of weapons" type of FPS. The genre's really changed towards either specific roles (TF2) or good weapon balance. The downside to the TS franchise is that it focuses on fun, goofy gameplay and not highly competitive gameplay. I think there's a place for both -- playing a level with only Bricks as your weapon is a good laugh -- but you really only need one game for that. That game becomes the "party FPS" and there's no reason to update it or search for another game to fill that niche.
The stories for their games were always pretty dumb, and I think they just got left behind with the shift towards more realistic stories and more competitive online multiplayer.
Every gaming company goes under because their game are "bad", because not enough people though the game was good enough to buy. The problem is the industry model right now makes it impossible for the majority of games to be good enough to buy. There is simply not enough gaming dollars out there, Sony and Microsoft have subsidized it, but Sony is putting an end to that, and too many of the major publishers are losing money. Pretty soon all of them are going to cut back.
Obviously when they do the worst studios (the one that most recently released a bomb) are the first to go, but it's going to go up the chain. In other words, this is just the beginning.
They are in the process of being signed. I'm sure we'll get TS4. Whether or not it'll be good, remains to be seen. But we'll at least get it.
One has to be pretty brave to go into the gaming industry these days anyway, regardless of the economic state. With the hits the much bigger companies are taking, I'm surprised how few studios are closing. There we go. Games are a low-volume product that isn't naturally disposable*, and frankly there are so many bad (or pathetically short) ones nowadays that the individual market share is closing even tighter.
*The genius behind subscription online studios, of course, is that their product is renewable.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7qsGVExfAY
This is the best I can do. This game is soooo bad.
" I was born into a world of war, I was born into a world, unless some one makes things right, they will never be right!"
Horrid. Just plain horrid.
Fuck me really?
I dunno about that. I can name three games off the top of my head that are already "must haves" for next year and all three are so-called "HD" titles. Considering that the 360 and PS3 share most of their games and have combined sales approaching 50 million, labeling HD gaming as unsustainable is premature at best. This year had a ton of great games for HD consoles that sold well.
I think a better conclusion might be that we will see a reduction in studios putting out crap HD games and trying to market people into buying them. If a dev doesn't want a game to bomb, then they shouldn't make a terrible game and market it like crazy. If they want to develop shovelware, take it to the Wii where it's a lot cheaper to develop.
Additionally, in relation to the video game market I think the effects of the economic crisis are overestimated. If people have the kind of cash to purchase a 360 or PS3, they likely can afford a game a month without too much trouble. I've got a pretty weak income and I can still fit in at least one purchase a month and that's for a brand-new game.
We may as well come out and say "Nintendo to buy Microsoft in 5 years" along with doom-and-gloom statements with the way things are now. There just isn't the evidence to presume that HD gaming is going to sink.
The next few years are going to see a lot fewer risky games, which is bad for consumers. I guarantee you if Dude Huge was pitching Gears of War in this economic climate, it wouldn't get greenlit.
The current 2.5-console model is sustainable, in the age of convergence (your 360 plays Netflix, your PS3 plays Blu-ray discs). The problem is the lack of consumer spending, that's all.
Higher production/development costs and the necessity of marketing up the wazoo generally make it hard, regardless of how risky (or good) the game is. I didn't see any five-story wall murals for Haze.
1. Developing costs keep going up and up, thanks at least in part to increasingly powerful systems.
2. A recent survey indicates only 20 percent of games manage to make money.
You add the two together, and the industry has a problem. Many developers/publishers weren't doing that great before the recession, and now that the economy's gone to crap you'll see more and more cutting back or shutting their doors.
I don't think HD is entirely to blame, but much of the video game industry as it stands now just isn't sustainable in the long run anymore.
I don't follow. Consumer spending on games is going up at a very rapid rate. If you can't make money now then you need a new plan.
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
I don't...understand... what I just watched.
This is what I meant by unsustainable. You can make games profitable now, it's just that so many people don't for whatever reason.
A sad day for British game development. Hopefully Rare, Lionhead, Bizzarre and the other big UK boys will pick up many of their most talented staff.
XBL/PSN/Steam: APZonerunner
That particular team has been working on the next entry in said franchise, leaked accidentally by the writer of the second Perfect Dark novel who talked about how the novels lead into the 'new one' that's being made and how he's been privvy to design docs and stuff.
The novels that are out so far bridge Zero directly into the first game, including a haircut and image change for Jo and whatnot. The novels are pretty good, and the story of the next game is rumoured to be written by the same. I expect now all Rare's other games are out we'll get details about a few more of their projects, including the next Perfect Dark. They've been on radio silence for three damn years, though, so I expect something good. Microsoft seems to really want to make this series into a Halo/Gears sized beast, as evidence by their already getting novels out and stuff even after the bad reviews of Zero.
Perhaps some of the Free Radical guys will get picked up and end up working on it. Ouroboros.
XBL/PSN/Steam: APZonerunner
Since when is selling over 1 million copies considered "selling like shit" (especially considering the game was banned in one of the largest gaming markets)?
Or perhaps that's the real problem with the industry. Not every game can sell like Halo or GTA. Perhaps sales expectations are just way too high?
This is only partially a problem.
Because the Gears of Wars also make a profit.
We've been slipping for a while now into territory where game developers use Imagine: Party Babyz(I still cannot believe that's a fucking real game) to basically pay for Prince of Persia. Luckily publishers still understand that there is a market for the real games and developers continue to want to develop games they want to play, like Dead Space and PoP and Mass Effect.
So they took away all her raver girl clothes and sent her to detox?
Buh? Dead Space wasn't actually banned anywhere, as far as I know. Regardless, a million copies worldwide doesn't cut it these days. It fell well under expectations. I doubt it lost money but it was still soft enough to be alarming.
Look at the top 5 games this quarter. They're all either Wii games or sequels. Spending may have gone up but it was strongly focused on Gears 2, GTA4, and so on- the "safe bets".
But do the profitable 20% make enough profit to cover for the other 80%? Sure, there are megahits like Gears of War, but there are also mega flops like, well, Haze, that cost bales to make and don't even crack six figures. Casual games make a decent profit, but they might not make enough profit to cover for the big games. Carnival Games (which just has a sequel and is still near the top of the charts in the UK) wasn't enough to keep Take-Two from reporting a hefty loss the last quarter.
Edit: And yeah, if development costs and marketing are high enough, a million-seller can still lose money. Dunno if Dead Space is in that situation though.
Don't do this. Every year the teams change, and people expect an update. The football/american football leagues run on a yearly cycle, the people buying the games expect them to follow suit. They do. Sure it's great for EA to have an annual franchise they can cash in on, but don't think it's a one-sided affair.
This. Don't be a prick.
Half of one book is her being semi-suicidal about her fathers' death until Carrington pretty much says sort yourself out and go on a mission for me or get the fuck out. The change is gradual, but yeah, pretty much - she becomes a proper agent. One book also handles what happens to DataDyne after the original Japanese owner dies at the end of Zero, going through the rise of Cassandra from the first game and detailing the love affair between her and Carrington that's hinted at in the first game. They're pretty good books. They're not exactly amazing pieces of literature, but neither are the Halo books or the Mass Effect books. They're very solid expansions on a fairly interesting universe.
XBL/PSN/Steam: APZonerunner