Former Infinity Ward Heads Form Respawn Entertainment With EA publisher

[raizjames 10]

EA has announced an exclusive publishing agreement with Respawn Entertainment, a new company formed today by Infinity Ward founders Jason West and Vince Zampella. The release just crossed the wire. The first news story appears in the L.A. Times.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-ct-callofduty12-2010apr12,0,6466384.story

[Tonci87 163]

Doesn´t surprise me they got a new job that fast

[Heatseeker 0]

Its surprising that nobody remembers when they pulled the same stunt after MOH, and left 2015 and EA.. maybe the COD players are young and didnt know that COD was just a MOH spin under a diferent name.. and just as crappy too.

[SWT_Janowich 10]

COD and MOH were and are both great games.

[Zipper5 74]

I find it funny how they left EA to start InfinityWard after not liking the direction MOH was going in, and then left Activision after apparently not liking the direction COD was going. Frankly, these two seem like very moody game developers. :rolleyes:

Not only that, but they're now back with the people they left in the first place? :confused:

[Heatseeker 0]

COD and MOH were and are both great games.

Eww.. old.

[raizjames 10]

I find it funny how they left EA to start InfinityWard after not liking the direction MOH was going in, and then left Activision after apparently not liking the direction COD was going. Frankly, these two seem like very moody game developers. :rolleyes:

Not only that, but they're now back with the people they left in the first place? :confused:

EA does seem to have learnt their lesson, they must have been really gutted seeing the people they fired now making billions for Activision, and so no wonder they took them back straight away and promised to support them.

I dont think West and Zampella have much choice in picking EA, they need a big and well-known publisher to support them, and this time, I am sure they got all the legal rights of the IP sorted

[Zipper5 74]

Eww.. old.

To each his own. Most people like COD, including myself, and people liked the early titles of MOH, again, including myself.

I dont think West and Zampella have much choice in picking EA, they need a big and well-known publisher to support them, and this time, I am sure they got all the legal rights of the IP sorted

Their choice of EA makes sense, but I wonder what exactly they will be working on, and what title it would have if not Call of Duty.

[JdB 151]

I find it funny how they left EA to start InfinityWard after not liking the direction MOH was going in, and then left Activision after apparently not liking the direction COD was going. Frankly, these two seem like very moody game developers. :rolleyes:

Not only that, but they're now back with the people they left in the first place? :confused:

X2

If they really wanted to make the games the way they want, they should accept a lower paycheck. Either that, or stop complaining that publishers who are paying your salary tell you how to do your work.

[Zipper5 74]

No kidding. :rolleyes:

Frankly, I'm beginning to come around as to why Activision fired them in the first place...

[Tonci87 163]

Ye me too

And yes the first COD is old, but it was a really good game, especially with the expansion. The Campaign was really sick with lots of memorable Moments

[raizjames 10]

X2

If they really wanted to make the games the way they want, they should accept a lower paycheck. Either that, or stop complaining that publishers who are paying your salary tell you how to do your work.

and why should publishers who know nothing about how to develop a game tell them how to do it? that doesn't make sense!

Games developers have all the rights to do what they like when it comes to developing a game, if publishers dont like it, then dont publish it!

and by the way, the reason publishers pay them money is because without these game developers, there wont be no money, so its game developers who are paying publishers the salaries not the other way round

Edited April 12, 2010 by raizjames

[JdB 151]

and why should publishers who know nothing about how to develop a game tell them how to do it? that doesn't make sense!

Games developers have all the rights to do what they like when it comes to developing a game, if publishers dont like it, then dont publish it!

and by the way, the reason publishers pay them money is because without these game developers, there wont be no money, so its game developers who are paying publishers the salaries not the other way round

Publishers invest the millions into the franchise needed to develop the product.

Publishers know how to make billions out of the franchise.

Publishers are not interested in good games, but in products they can sell to as many people as possible. If that happens to be a turd of a game, then so be it.

Without initial investors, these products for the masses wouldn't be made no matter how hard a developer tries, or how brilliant their ideas are. Developers need investors, not the other way around. If you have the money, you can always rent a different monkey to do the work for you if one doesn't do what you want. Investors make the industry possible, not the game developers, that hasn't worked for many years.

A lot of the money that finances games comes from investment funds and groups that have no interest in games, but do have an interest in max profits.

Right now, a game that sells well over a million copies (OFP) wouldn't be possible for a new developer without a major sugardaddy publisher (investment group). If it's a complicated game that costs millions of dollars to develop like the CoD franchise, it doesn't matter who the developers are, even if they were the most renowned developers in the world. Even if they managed to produce the best game ever, the David of gaming history, it would fail, simply because it would get lost in the swamp due to lack of funds for marketing.

No publisher = no financing for development, no worldwide marketing on all types of media, no game.

Or to put it the simplest way possible:

No publisher, no game.

These two developers have left a major publisher because they couldn't accept that whoever pays gets to decide what happens, and returned to the major publisher that they left because they couldn't accept that whoever pays gets to decide what happens. They should accept how the industry juggernauts work and stop whining, or go do something else, something that no one will interfere with, like woodcarving, painting or another form of art if they want to impress people with their artistic abilities that badly.

[raizjames 10]

Publishers invest the millions into the franchise needed to develop the product.

Publishers know how to make billions out of the franchise.

Publishers are not interested in good games, but in products they can sell to as many people as possible. If that happens to be a turd of a game, then so be it.

Without initial investors, these products for the masses wouldn't be made no matter how hard a developer tries, or how brilliant their ideas are. Developers need investors, not the other way around. If you have the money, you can always rent a different monkey to do the work for you if one doesn't do what you want. Investors make the industry possible, not the game developers, that hasn't worked for many years.

A lot of the money that finances games comes from investment funds and groups that have no interest in games, but do have an interest in max profits.

Right now, a game that sells well over a million copies (OFP) wouldn't be possible for a new developer without a major sugardaddy publisher (investment group). If it's a complicated game that costs millions of dollars to develop like the CoD franchise, it doesn't matter who the developers are, even if they were the most renowned developers in the world. Even if they managed to produce the best game ever, the David of gaming history, it would fail, simply because it would get lost in the swamp due to lack of funds for marketing.

No publisher = no financing for development, no worldwide marketing on all types of media, no game.

Or to put it the simplest way possible:

No publisher, no game.

These two developers have left a major publisher because they couldn't accept that whoever pays gets to decide what happens, and returned to the major publisher that they left because they couldn't accept that whoever pays gets to decide what happens. They should accept how the industry juggernauts work and stop whining, or go do something else, something that no one will interfere with, like woodcarving, painting or another form of art if they want to impress people with their artistic abilities that badly.

Am sorry but I cant be arsed to read all this, the bottom line is

No Game/Product = No Publisher

No Publisher = No Game/Product

Both cant work without each other, End of story:yay:

[Baff1 0]

I'm playing an online game with 20 million other players and no publsiher.

Today, games can exist without publishers.

It's the broadband era, publishers are an endangered species.

[Flash Thunder 10]

With all the money those two idiots made why dont they just fund their own project then they dont need a publisher.

This will be a back and forth relationship.

Can we expect yet another FPS game with arcadey game mechanics.

Respawns of Duty

They should of stayed with the Nazi germany of the video game industry Activision.

Or better team up with consolemasters since they love spitting on the PC platform for quick buck too. oh wait.

[echo1 0]

Publishers invest the millions into the franchise needed to develop the product.

Publishers know how to make billions out of the franchise.

Publishers are not interested in good games, but in products they can sell to as many people as possible. If that happens to be a turd of a game, then so be it.

Without initial investors, these products for the masses wouldn't be made no matter how hard a developer tries, or how brilliant their ideas are. Developers need investors, not the other way around. If you have the money, you can always rent a different monkey to do the work for you if one doesn't do what you want. Investors make the industry possible, not the game developers, that hasn't worked for many years.

A lot of the money that finances games comes from investment funds and groups that have no interest in games, but do have an interest in max profits.

Right now, a game that sells well over a million copies (OFP) wouldn't be possible for a new developer without a major sugardaddy publisher (investment group). If it's a complicated game that costs millions of dollars to develop like the CoD franchise, it doesn't matter who the developers are, even if they were the most renowned developers in the world. Even if they managed to produce the best game ever, the David of gaming history, it would fail, simply because it would get lost in the swamp due to lack of funds for marketing.

No publisher = no financing for development, no worldwide marketing on all types of media, no game.

Or to put it the simplest way possible:

No publisher, no game.

These two developers have left a major publisher because they couldn't accept that whoever pays gets to decide what happens, and returned to the major publisher that they left because they couldn't accept that whoever pays gets to decide what happens. They should accept how the industry juggernauts work and stop whining, or go do something else, something that no one will interfere with, like woodcarving, painting or another form of art if they want to impress people with their artistic abilities that badly.

I cite a certain "unofficial" sequel to our mutually beloved gaming franchise as a fine example of the good publishers do the development of games.

It's like the record industry. They existed in the day when the distribution and marketing of their respective product cost too much and involved specialized equipment that made it simple impossible for an individual to put their stuff out there into the market. These days the internet has destroyed this. Look at OFP/ArmA. How much marketing was sunk into it? Are there gajillions of copies of it in every store? No, yet here we all are...

The simple fact is that when a game sells for $50 in a store, the developer gets about $1-2 of that. You can do the math here - If someone self-publishes and sells only 1/20 of the copies that he would have under a publisher, he still makes an awful lot more money... Software publishers, like record companies are a malignancy that live off both the producer and the consumer. The producer gets most of their potential revenue whisked away, and the consumer ends up with a product that is often vastly inferior because some douchebag with an MBA calls the shots on things he knows nothing about.

I don't buy into the need for huge quantities of initial investment... look at the open source market. Granted that there has been huge investment into it recently, but there were definitely times before that... It goes to show what a determined individual with the right tools can knock up either by themselves or with their friends. Hell, just look at what people did to OFP when we were waiting for ArmA. I'm pretty much convinced that if the community had access to OFP's guts, we could have made ArmA ourselves.

Besides, what is the point of all the millions that go into the games? Most of it seems to go into marketing, or making glitzy graphics, or hiring in Hollywood actors to do voice-overs. Really in the scheme of things it doesn't make the intrinsic game play any better, forces people to upgrade their hardware every year and creates a cycle whereby this is perpetuated. What's the point? It serves no-one but the publisher where the illusion is created that they are needed for success.

Edited April 12, 2010 by echo1

[bjorn bakker 11]

maybe they start working on the medal of honour series

that would be nice as moh airborne sucks

[Leopardi 0]

Its surprising that nobody remembers when they pulled the same stunt after MOH, and left 2015 and EA.. maybe the COD players are young and didnt know that COD was just a MOH spin under a diferent name.. and just as crappy too.

Medal of Honor Allied Assault was crappy? :o One of the best games with still arguably the best soundtrack ever made for games... and even steven spielberg was assisting making the game.

[raizjames 10]

maybe they start working on the medal of honour series

that would be nice as moh airborne sucks

Nope, MOH is already done and will be released this autumn, I hope they work on something totally new and freshly made

---------- Post added at 12:11 AM ---------- Previous post was Yesterday at 11:56 PM ----------

Just read this;

Respawn Entertainment To Focus On New IP, Not Battlefield Or Medal Of Honor

http://kotaku.com/5515263/

[Baff1 0]

Not too bothered myself. I always appreciated the quality of their work but I've spent a lot more time with Minesweeper than all of their titles combined.

[Heatseeker 0]

Publishers invest the millions into the franchise needed to develop the product.

Publishers know how to make billions out of the franchise.

Publishers are not interested in good games, but in products they can sell to as many people as possible. If that happens to be a turd of a game, then so be it.

Without initial investors, these products for the masses wouldn't be made no matter how hard a developer tries, or how brilliant their ideas are. Developers need investors, not the other way around. If you have the money, you can always rent a different monkey to do the work for you if one doesn't do what you want. Investors make the industry possible, not the game developers, that hasn't worked for many years.

A lot of the money that finances games comes from investment funds and groups that have no interest in games, but do have an interest in max profits.

Right now, a game that sells well over a million copies (OFP) wouldn't be possible for a new developer without a major sugardaddy publisher (investment group). If it's a complicated game that costs millions of dollars to develop like the CoD franchise, it doesn't matter who the developers are, even if they were the most renowned developers in the world. Even if they managed to produce the best game ever, the David of gaming history, it would fail, simply because it would get lost in the swamp due to lack of funds for marketing.

No publisher = no financing for development, no worldwide marketing on all types of media, no game.

Or to put it the simplest way possible:

No publisher, no game.

These two developers have left a major publisher because they couldn't accept that whoever pays gets to decide what happens, and returned to the major publisher that they left because they couldn't accept that whoever pays gets to decide what happens. They should accept how the industry juggernauts work and stop whining, or go do something else, something that no one will interfere with, like woodcarving, painting or another form of art if they want to impress people with their artistic abilities that badly.

What? :confused: .

No developers no games either. No games no revenues..

Publisher investment wasnt a problem, Activision owns IW.

Also these guys didnt just leave, they were fired.

[Soldier of Anarchy 10]

And with all of this, more mind numbing rail shooters will continue for years to come...and this is good news???

[Deadfast 43]

And with all of this, more mind numbing rail shooters will continue for years to come...and this is good news???

It sure is for those who receive those millions in revenues ;)

Speaking of these two guys, it seem Activision is really pissed at them now. As it appears they are holding back the development of Modern Warfare 3. Valve should seriously consider learning from them. This is what you call episodic releases :D

Edited April 13, 2010 by Deadfast

[Tonci87 163]