Lorne Lanning leaves VG industry.

[slade]

http://www.thehollywoodreporter.com/thr/columns/video_games_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000884458

After four consecutive platinum hits, you'd think a video game developer would want to parlay his success into more elaborate -- and profitable -- next-generation titles. But the co-creator of the Oddworld universe has taken a look at the direction he sees that industry heading and he doesn't want to play. Instead, Lorne Lanning, president and creative director of the award-winning Oddworld Inhabitants, is waving goodbye to all that and is taking his company to where he sees greater opportunities – to movies and TV. This month, he ended Oddworld games with a bang -- by shutting down his 60-person San Luis Obispo, Calif.-based development studio and moving to the Bay Area. In a chat with HollywoodReporter.com columnist Paul Hyman, Lanning talks about the huge hurdles for game developers today, why he is all about protecting his original IP, and the reasons he believes he has a 2-1/2-year window to make his transition.

The Hollywood Reporter: Your games -- beginning with "Oddworld: Abe's Oddysee" in 1997 and continuing right up to your most recent, "Oddworld Stranger's Wrath," this year -- have all taken place in the wacky Oddworld universe that you and [CEO] Sherry McKenna created back in 1994. They've all been solid hits, but this last one was frustrating for you.
Lorne Lanning: Yes, it was very critically acclaimed but it wasn't advertised or marketed because Electronic Arts couldn't get its PlayStation 2 port of our Xbox original to run and if EA isn't on all SKUs, it just won't promote the game. It was very disheartening to us that we could have a title with a Metacritic.com user metric of 9.6 [out of 10], a game that was praised as being a fusion of filmmaking and video games in terms of being less 'gamey' and more story- and character-driven ... and then to see that the largest publisher in the industry had no interest in marketing it regardless of how innovative it was.

THR: You told me pre-launch that it was a challenge to get support for "Stranger's Wrath" right from the get-go and you attributed that to "sequel-itis."
Lanning: It's an industry-wide problem. As game production costs rise, publishers want more sure bets because with rising costs come rising risks. What we see is an industry which is rapidly discouraging innovation because people don't want to take chances on more innovative types of titles.

THR: But your fourth "Oddworld" title was a sequel. Yet you still had a tough time getting a deal?
Lanning: It's not like we alone had a particularly hard time; everybody is having a hard time getting a deal today. It's not that different from taking your movie script around Hollywood. What are your chances of selling it to a studio and getting the financing? There's no doubt that we got the deal because we had a history of successes. A track record is all-important in this business.

THR: Given the way that the marketing of that game turned out -- which must have been a frustrating experience ...
Lanning: Surely.

THR: ... is that why you shuttered your studio?
Lanning: No. If you speak to any developer and they don't tell you they have the same frustrations that I had, they're lying. We closed the studio because of what the realities of the marketplace are. There is currently only one financing model in the games industry, and that is that the publisher pays for the entire game; it handles the manufacturing, the marketing, the distribution, the advertising, practically everything, much the way it used to be in Hollywood pre-United Artists. But, as the film industry matured, it took on a more sophisticated financing structure. Today, for example, studios don't pay for a movie by themselves. They pay a percentage and then other parties pick up the other 66%; it's usually a three-party investment package. But not in the games industry. And so, as a developer, you have limited options in terms of how many parties are actually willing to finance your games, what types of games they are willing to finance, and what are the terms you face as a third-party developer to get that financing. That's not a very exciting climate.

THR: What does that mean for developers like Oddworld that have insisted on retaining the rights to their original IP?
Lanning: To this day, we own every IP we've ever created, as well as all the publishing rights -- licensing, merchandising, game publishing, TV, and film. It wasn't easy but, because we did it from day one, it set a precedent and we were able to sustain those terms through the different deals we did. As we look towards the future, that is not viable for developers to get those terms. Which means that if you're going to get financing on a next-gen title, the publisher is going to own that IP. And, as publishers are currently the only ones financing games, those are the terms of the industry. So, if we were to continue building games, the likelihood would be that we'd be in the business of building other peoples' IPs, and that wasn't why we created Oddworld Inhabitants.

THR: Is this situation going to worsen as games become even more expensive to build?
Lanning: Absolutely. Costs are going up, but not because the quality expectation is higher. Costs are going up because of the design of the next-generation hardware. The code that just one guy used to write on the Xbox is now going to take five guys. It's as if the movie camera that you started shooting with 10 years ago has improved some features and now you need 12 people to operate it instead of one. So you ask yourself, what is on the horizon as a content creation company, which is always how we've seen ourselves. We've always released our properties in video game form, but when you look at the terms and conditions of the next-gen platforms versus what's happening in other media -- like movies and TV ...

THR: What's happening in movies and TV that's so attractive to you?
Lanning: Ten years ago, if I were trying to raise money for an all-CG animated film, not only would I have heard 'it's never been done before' -- since "Toy Story" hadn't come out yet -- but I'd be asking for a minimum of $120 million. Today, I believe I can make three times that film -- meaning in terms of what's on the screen -- and I could do it for $35 million. So, as CG is evolving -- becoming more efficient, more streamlined, more practical at a more reasonable price -- we believe we can hit that $35 million price point with a CG film today, a film that we currently own all the publishing rights to.

THR: As long as I've known Oddworld, I've heard people asking you when is an Oddworld movie coming out.
Lanning: Which has always been part of the plan. And the reason why today seems to be the right time is that game technology is now moving in an opposite paradigm. Video game systems aren't being designed to be conducive to development, creativity, or content. They're being designed to be cheaper for manufacturing. If movie cameras were made that way, you'd have a rebellion in Hollywood. But this isn't Hollywood and it isn't a movie camera; it's a videogame system and the public wants basically a $1,000 box but only wants to pay $150 for it. I'm not saying that anyone is guilty in this process, but this is the reality of the current climate for development in video games and where it's headed. And because the costs are higher, more ownership needs to be seen on behalf of the publishers and, quite frankly, I don't blame them. They can say, "Look I used to pay for video games when they were $6 million, but now they're $16 million. And you know what? My shareholders are not going to like it if I fund your game, it's a big hit, and then you take it to someone else. That's going to hurt my stock. We need to see a path to ownership or ownership right out of the gate."

THR: What is Oddworld's next move?
Lanning: We have some fascinating opportunities. For instance, all the technology that we built for "Stranger's Wrath" can be used to generate all-CG TV shows that surpass the visual quality of CG for TV today at just a percentage of the cost. You can understand the opportunities if, say, you look at India which currently has 70 cable stations and is discussing 700. The same in China. The same all around the world. When you look at the world market and how many more stations are being created, well, everything in entertainment needs content.

THR: Are you implying that, given the way the games industry is headed -- with increasingly more expensive production -- that developers like you who have original IP may abandon gaming and go into other forms of media because they can make more profit off the same tools?
Lanning: Currently there aren't many game creators who have true multimedia IPs. Oddworld is kind of obvious that way. And so, for us, what we're choosing to do is abandon 100% in-house development for games. Every time we pursued other opportunities in the past, we just wound up being completely consumed with the game productions because we just don't have the bandwidth or the time.

THR: And you've chosen to make this move now because ...
Lanning: Because we believe there's a window that's open for all-CG feature films and TV. And if we don't crack it in the next 2-1/2 years, we're not going to be able to. Our plan is to be a content creation company with someone else bearing the load of the actual production. We'll stay focused on multimedia content, really solid concepts that would make great games, great TV, great movies.

THR: Using the Oddworld universe?
Lanning: Not necessarily. We've been cooking up other non-Oddworld stuff.

THR: Where is the game industry going in the next two years -- in the same direction that prompted you to get out? And what will that mean for other game developers who are in the same situation? Will they get out too?
Lanning: What it means moving forward is more consolidation, fewer opportunities for developers to make money and own properties, and continued sequel- and license-itis.

THR: What then is your best advice to game developers? Follow your model?
Lanning: [Laughs] You know, we're really brave and are willing to bite the bullet. We don't look at our company and go, wow, if we sell it now, we could pocket big bucks. No, we're saying we set this company up to build brands and create exciting entertainment and we're not about to stay a slave to this just so we can put some extra money in the bank. So my advice is this: Follow what you love. There are some guys out there who just love game development. And if they stick to it, they'll probably prosper -- if they're really intelligent and have the discipline and wherewithal to pull it off. This is still a lucrative career. I mean, the quality of life issue is an ongoing one and it really is a problem with no sign of real change on the horizon. But people still make good salaries. However, if you're a third-party developer who wants to be a content creator and to control the destiny of that content, the game industry is not the place to be right now.

THR: So the moral is, what? Keep your eye on Lorne Lanning and then, when he's successful at doing what he intends to do, follow suit?
Lanning: From your lips to God's ears.

Well, who takes the greatest blame here? EA for not marketing the game or MS for dropping Lanning in the first place or, do you blame Lanning himself for choosing to go with MS. He was pretty adamant at the beginning of this newest round of console wars that his vision could be better achieved on X-box. The first Oddworld title to come out of that was not exactly a critical success and it took him until now to deliver another one.

[Cuddly Knife]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!

The quintology isn't complete!!!

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!

Does this mean that Fangus is cancelled?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!

Movies?......

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! I want to play them, not watch them on my PSP!!!

[theWacoKid]

Hmm, interesting, this interview doesn't contain the direct quotes slamming EA like gameindustrybiz.

The outspoken company president and creative director, who created the Oddworld universe with co-founder and CEO Sherry McKenna in 1994, has always had a tempestuous relationship with the videogames industry - and this interview is no different, with Lanning slamming EA's handling of Stranger's Wrath and the entire industry's creative direction.

"It was very disheartening to us," he said, "that we could have a title with a Metacritic.com user metric of 9.6, a game that was praised as being a fusion of filmmaking and video games in terms of being less 'gamey' and more story- and character-driven... and then to see that the largest publisher in the industry had no interest in marketing it regardless of how innovative it was."

The oddworld universe is just that, odd. And their decision not to make these titles on the pc hurt them more than anything else. You can't really fault EA. Hell, they had 2 page ads running for the game in the gaming mags, that's a lot more than MS wouid've done. I really didn't care for the whole western chicken theme as it was. Blaming EA because the public rejected you is sour grapes. A little less odd might help in gaining mass appeal. If you want big sales, you have to cater to the masses. Give em what they want.

[Glockstar]

Well, who takes the greatest blame here? EA for not marketing the game or MS for dropping Lanning in the first place or, do you blame Lanning himself for choosing to go with MS. He was pretty adamant at the beginning of this newest round of console wars that his vision could be better achieved on X-box. The first Oddworld title to come out of that was not exactly a critical success and it took him until now to deliver another one.

Well I appreciate the article, but I don't appreciate the commentary.
What you said was... kind of dumb. I'll give you kudos for posting the article - if it was for educational purposes. But if you your sole reason for posting it was to try to start something, then boo to you.

Did you not read it, man? He says that there were a number of factors for why he's getting out. Chief among them is that gamers themselves (or "the market") just aren't showing enough interest in these, his, kinds of games. So the publishers just aren't as willing to take the risks anymore. (Like MS, who started out taking chances, but as time went on, started taking less.) Which, in turn, means that it's getting harder and harder for him to get paid. (Though he did.)

I told you all this... I told you this was why MS dropped it. I know it's hard for Lorne and company, but at the same time it sounds like he understood why MS did it. It doesn't sound like he's holding any kind of grudge against them at all. It sounds like he understands the market very well.

MS dumped it; nobody would pick it up; except for EA; and 'they wouldn't promote it'*.

I think the only people who are "holding a grudge" against MS for dumping the game (if anybody even is) are the MS haters - the ones who are gonna say something negative about them no matter what.

This is pretty sad to read, but it's also a very informative article. One of the best ever, I think, in that regard. So again, I will give you thanks for sharing it.

* These statements by Lorne kind of bug me. I don't see how EA failed to market the game properly. Or wait, I'm sorry, "enough". I suppose I can... empathize... with Lorne, on the basis of "it's never enough", but come on, really, I thought Stranger's Wrath was promoted and covered very well. And you know I'm no fan of EA.

[Glockstar]

Blaming EA because the public rejected you is sour grapes.

Yep, sour grapes. Those are exactly the words that I was thinking.

(And you all know I'm no fan Wacko. So you know how much I hate agreeing with him.)

[slade]

What exactly was dumb about my commentary? You sure didn't seem to disagree with it as much as you're letting on.

[theWacoKid]

What exactly was dumb about my commentary? You sure didn't seem to disagree with it as much as you're letting on.

Actually, lorne lanning said, his vision could only be achieved on the xbox. He took the opportunity to slam the ps2 and claim it wasn't capable of handling his 3d world. That's when the fracas started with Jason Rubin at Naughty Dog who stated that Oddworld's programmers were incompetent at handling 3d due to their total lack of experience, which was true. The previous oddworld games were 2d affairs that didn't even scroll.

Glockenspiel can claim whatever he wants, dumping a developer mid-game and pulling their funding stinks and MS has funded far worse games. If you can pony up the dollars for crap like Azurik and Kakuto Chojin you can fund the likes of Stranger's Wrath and Psyconauts. MS has basically declared to the world, that they intend to become the EA of first party publishers.

[Rogue Bounty Hunter]

If you can pony up the dollars for crap like Azurik and Kakuto Chojin you can fund the likes of Stranger's Wrath and Psyconauts.

You forgot about the two Blinx games.

[Renzatic Gear]

Better enjoy the fun little games while they last. It's becoming harder and harder for little companies to put out cool games without having to bend over for a publisher nowadays. It simply costs too much and requires three times as much manpower to make games with the latest and greatest graphics.

The future is gonna be about some hardcore sequelitis simply because it's too much of a risk to try and spend money on an unproven IP. The videogame industry is gonna be like Hollywood without the indie scene and sundance in other words.

[Glockstar]

What exactly was dumb about my commentary? You sure didn't seem to disagree with it as much as you're letting on.

Oh come off it. You're a notorious MS hater, and have been since day 1.

Neither the guy from The Hollywood Reporter nor Lorne Lanning himself even once make mention of MS! And they barely make mention of the Xbox. Yet, like, 90% of your commentary was about MS. Why? What did MS have to do with the game selling bad? What did the system - the Xbox itself - have to do with it? That's what your little comment seemed to be all about.

And furthermore, you said something about the Xbox failing Lorne Lanning as the medium in which to carry his vision. WTF? I'm sorry, but that is dumb... considering that Lorne himself said it was the failings of EA and the PS2.

I want to give you the benefit of the doubt - I even said as much - but the evidence doesn't weigh in your favor.


-

Glockenspiel can claim whatever he wants, dumping a developer mid-game and pulling their funding stinks and MS has funded far worse games. If you can pony up the dollars for crap like Azurik and Kakuto Chojin you can fund the likes of Stranger's Wrath and Psyconauts. MS has basically declared to the world, that they intend to become the EA of first party publishers.

I've never said it didn't. In fact, I don't like it. I never did. I do think it stinks. But there's a difference between not liking something and recognizing it as a smart business decision. It sucks yeah, from an ethical standpoint, or from a personal idea of what justice is, or whatever. But it was smart. Albeit shrewd. But what are you gonna do? It's business. Right?

"It's nothing personal; it's just business." We hear that everyday, don't we? Well... videogames are a business too. Sorry to tell you that. But this is not an ethical issue, it's a dollars and cents one.

Now, try to stay on topic for once, yeah? Every time somebody makes mention of Oddworld Inhabitants Strangers Wrath or Tim Schafers/Majesco's Psychonauts you gotta try and derail the conversation and bring that 'MS dumped but kept' *bleep* up. Even when it's the gameplay we're talking about! You're a broken effn record, hata'.

-

Now, because I'm on a roll, this is for those of you who want to assess blame... and want to know who should get it... here's who, and here's what I'm sorry for:

First, I'm sorry MS didn't sign a better deal with Nvidia when they agreed to make the Xbox. I'm sorry Nvidia were jerks about the renogotiations. I'm sorry that MS continues to lose money on every unit sold, despite the fact the system is now 3.5 years old. I'm sorry that they had to make cuts - and that they had to make some hard business decisions (like seperate themselves from Oddworld Inhabitants) to help compensate. And I'm sorry that they have to rush another console to market - because this one's bleeding money like a sieve.

So I say, Thanks Nvidia. Thanks a lot. I hope your happy. Rolling around in all that money. You see what you've done? Ahh, you don't care...

[Gadfly2317]

Whether EA or MS was the publisher, its Xbots who shunned the game, who shunned Voodoo Vince, who shunned Panzer Dragoon, who shunned Crimson Skies, who. . . . .

Lanning's right, the game had review scores out the roof, for good damned reason, the game was incredible, absolutely stunning on many levels--the only criticisms you get are from the realism/shooter addicts who have a fetishized idea of what a shooter "should" be like.

Oddworld Inhabitants can't handle 3D programming? Anyone looking at this eye-meltingly beautiful game and can say that with a straight face should be kicked in the nuts by a donkey on angel dust, drawn and quartered, and then the quarters drawn and quartered and then those quarters served as hor devours on triscuit crackers at a $1000 a plate Republican fundraiser.

The consolidation of the industry in the hands of unimaginative greedy cretins fisting true artists. . .just one more reason not to be too much in a hurry to buy a next gen console ,ESPECIALLY the Xbox2, where very little creative ever happens, and what does whithers on the vine, or is prematurely cut from the vine, left to rot on the ground, never to grow again.

[Glockstar]

Whether EA or MS was the publisher, its Xbots who shunned the game, who shunned Voodoo Vince, who shunned Panzer Dragoon, who shunned Crimson Skies, who. . . . .

. . . .shunned Fight Club, who shunned Playboy the Mansion, who shunned Greg Hasting's Tournament Paintball, who shunned Tron 2.0, who shunned Breakdown, who shunned Dead Man's Hand, who shunned Cabela's Dangerous Hunts, who shunned Conflict Vietnam, who shunned Men of Valor, who shunned Prisoner of War, who shunned Vietcong Purple Haze, who shunned Shellshock Nam 67, who shunned SWAT Global Strike Team. . . .

. . . .oh wait... dang it, I'm sorry... you don't like these games... I almost forgot - these games don't count. :rolleyes:

[Cuddly Knife]

Better enjoy the fun little games while they last. It's becoming harder and harder for little companies to put out cool games without having to bend over for a publisher nowadays. It simply costs too much and requires three times as much manpower to make games with the latest and greatest graphics.

The future is gonna be about some hardcore sequelitis simply because it's too much of a risk to try and spend money on an unproven IP. The videogame industry is gonna be like Hollywood without the indie scene and sundance in other words.
Could this mean the beginning of the next great video game crash? Saturation can do horrible wonders on popularity.

[Brendon]

Could this mean the beginning of the next great video game crash? Saturation can do horrible wonders on popularity.
I said that a little while back, and it's looking more and more likely, in fact, the industry was headed in the same direction for movies during the seventies, hopefully, there's going to be a George Lucus# who pulls gamings arse back out of the fire.

#Say what you will, but George understood what had been missing from the films of the period.

[Gadfly2317]

. . . .shunned Fight Club, who shunned Playboy the Mansion, who shunned Greg Hasting's Tournament Paintball, who shunned Tron 2.0, who shunned Breakdown, who shunned Dead Man's Hand, who shunned Cabela's Dangerous Hunts, who shunned Conflict Vietnam, who shunned Men of Valor, who shunned Prisoner of War, who shunned Vietcong Purple Haze, who shunned Shellshock Nam 67, who shunned SWAT Global Strike Team. . . .

. . . .oh wait... dang it, I'm sorry... you don't like these games... I almost forgot - these games don't count. :rolleyes:

Only an Xbot would equate Fight Club and Playboy Mansion with Strangers Wrath and Voodoo Vince. . . . that's the problem with the Xbox demographic. . .they don't know Sh!t from Shinola.

"I" don't like those games? NO ONE liked those games. I CAN'T read your posts blindfolded, because I never know what whacked out irrellevant thing from left field you are going to pull out of your ass . . . .what you just posted makes zero sense.

(For you sensitive xbots--referring to the "xbot demographic" is not a personal insult--we know many of our local xbot brethren have better taste than the xbot herd at large.)

[slade]

You gotta read a bit more Glocky. I said one sentence about MS and then 90% of my post was about Lorne Lanning. Furthermore, just because he doesn't mention MS doesn't mean that they don't figure into this situation. From my point of view, if he's gonna go after EA for not marketing the game enough, then he's gotta criticize MS as well for dumping it in the first place. You're the one here that's looking at this with blinded eyes.

As for the X-box failing Lanning's visionl, look at the facts. Heck, look at what waco said.

[slade]

Ok, I'm back. As for X-box failing Lanning's vision, here's how that came about. Like I said before, Lanning at the beginning of this generation basically slammed the PS2 for not being adequate at handling games. He went over to MS and developed Oddworld: Munch's Oddyssey there, which wasn't exactly a critical or financial success. Then, along comes Stranger's Wrath. This is where, I think, he compromised his vision. The game was even more removed from its predecessors then RE4. The title was predominantly a FPS and IMO, it was made to appeal to the X-box userbase. That's why I think he criticized EA for not handling the marketing better because he believed that this game would actually sell. It was lauded critically and it was a FPS. You could do a lot worse and have better sales then the game enjoyed in the end.

But the gamble he took was in alienating the existing fanbase for his games. This is the same gamble Capcom took with RE4 and it didn't work in either case. RE4 has underperformed in Japan. In fact, it has sold even less then REmake and RE0. Munch's Oddyssey may not have been a big seller but it probably sold a lot better then Stranger's Wrath did, topping out at around 28,000 units, I think.

So, who exactly has the biggest blame here? I mentioned MS because I do see them as contributing to this dilemma. It has far less to do with being an "X-box hater," and more to do with looking at the situation objectively. And in the end, I ended up blaming Lanning anyway.

[DrunkenThumbmaster]

Slade, Waco, Gadfly you all are missing the point. Reread the interview. You keep blaminig MS for dropping certain games and keeping others. What's the difference between Blinx and Oddworld? One is good the other is bad but the real difference is that MS owns Blinx they don't own Oddworld and that is the bases behind the whole decision. They wouldn't have owned Psychonaughts either. Publishers want to own the IP's they don't want to fund a successful franchise only to have the developer take that franchise somewhere else. There is nothing in the world that will make me believe the MS would have dropped the game if they owned the IP or even owned Oddoworld out right.

Bascially the whole interview Lanning is talking about it's hard to get a game published that's orginal and harder to get it published if you want to keep the rights. He goes into how the Movie industry is set up different where studios (pixar) can own the rights to there movies. You guys skip over that and hop on the MS hate party.

Waco are you really serious by saying that EA's lack of advertisment (why would they fun an exlusive game they don't own) had nothing to do with the lack of sales of this game.

Gadfly say what you want but the critiziems I laid against the game was legitimate it was fun and beautiful but the twist in the game basically nullified the whole first 3/4.

[slade]

They could have just as easily worked as a second party and I'm sure there are publishers that would have let them retain their IP's. Silicon Knights did this and there are other publishers like Majesco that have made a living by liscensing other companies games and bringing them to X-box. This isn't a bad reason but I can't look at it as the only reason.

[thelastword]

Ever heard of; "Don't bite the hand that feeds you", well! you probably have, but it seems to be applicable here to me. Lorne Lanning, despite the fact that he is a respected developer made some crucial mistakes. First off, you don't alienate your PS fanbase simply because you're more at ease with Pc-fied hardware(XBOX), He should have stuck in there learn the intricacies of the PS machine and do the best that he could, Hell! all the games the guy made before the first MUNCH"s ODYSEE was successful on the PS, that's clearly where he received his first real success. To forget about all these ODDWORLD PS2 fans just to ease your development woes on an unknown/almost inexistant userbase explains ODDWORLDS erratic decision making and therefore their current Dilemma.

These comments above have nothing to do with hating MS or otherwise, Clearly Oddworld made some bad decisions, they basically cut their hands off early this gen, and now they here like, "If our hands were'nt severed we would have done better you know". Glockstar in one of his posts alluded to the fact that developers are here to make money off their games, nobody doubts that here, I think that if a developer want's to remain in the business however, that their decisions should be indicative of that and not the other way around.

If movies state the new frontier for Oddworld by all means they should go for it, but I still believe that they would have to up their management a bit more for success there, as it stands, I think they have nobody, absolutely nobody to blame for their lack of success this gen.

[T.Tashi]

Waco is right about the comments Jason Rubin made. Essentially he said Oddworld were artists, and not programmers. If you look at games like Jak and Daxter, Rachet and Clank and Sly Cooper, I don't think Manning's commments about the technology is legit.

The mistake he made was taking his franchise off of the Playstation which had a fanbase, and trying to recussitate the franchise on Xbox. IMO, that move was never successful. If you do something like that you can't count on a fanbase from one console running over to a new console. You basically have to build a new fanbase all over again. So he was between a rock and hard place. They couldn't program for the PS2, so he did the thing that enabled him to launch his product on time. So, I don't blame MS and I don't blame EA. It was just a set of unfortunate circumstances where his team didn't have the technical expertise and it came back to bite him.

[T.Tashi]

Ok, I'm back. As for X-box failing Lanning's vision, here's how that came about. Like I said before, Lanning at the beginning of this generation basically slammed the PS2 for not being adequate at handling games. He went over to MS and developed Oddworld: Munch's Oddyssey there, which wasn't exactly a critical or financial success. Then, along comes Stranger's Wrath. This is where, I think, he compromised his vision. The game was even more removed from its predecessors then RE4. The title was predominantly a FPS and IMO, it was made to appeal to the X-box userbase. That's why I think he criticized EA for not handling the marketing better because he believed that this game would actually sell. It was lauded critically and it was a FPS. You could do a lot worse and have better sales then the game enjoyed in the end.

But the gamble he took was in alienating the existing fanbase for his games. This is the same gamble Capcom took with RE4 and it didn't work in either case. RE4 has underperformed in Japan. In fact, it has sold even less then REmake and RE0. Munch's Oddyssey may not have been a big seller but it probably sold a lot better then Stranger's Wrath did, topping out at around 28,000 units, I think.

So, who exactly has the biggest blame here? I mentioned MS because I do see them as contributing to this dilemma. It has far less to do with being an "X-box hater," and more to do with looking at the situation objectively. And in the end, I ended up blaming Lanning anyway.
Yes that's the point I just made in another post. You build up a fanbase on one console, and you move the franchise to a new console, you will alienate a large portion of your fans, and you will have to find new ones. Oddworld was something of a cult game or niche game since it had.. well... Odd characters and really quirky humor. I think that was its selling point. Now, I never liked Oddworld, never liked the art style, never cared for the gameplay. Even if I own several consoles, and I do, I'm not gonna buy into the franchise. So therein is the risk. How many are going to follow Oddworld to a new platform and how many new gamers will it pull in? Whatever the answer is, it will not be equal to the orginal fanbase. That is almost guaranteed.

About the IP... it is just a sad fact... in movies, music and games. The creators rarely keep the rights to what they created. So in a way I admire Oddworld. I wish 'em luck.

[DrunkenThumbmaster]

There is a whole lot of could've would've should've in this thread. The fact is this we don't know what success they (oddworld) would've had on the PS2. When strangers wrath was released there were over 20 million xboxes out there. So the game needs to be marketed toward those fans. The switch to the Xbox was made before the PS2 was released obvious those fans didn't like the series that much to follow them. So waht makes you think that those fans would've automatically picked up the game on the PS2 there is no information to gurrantee that fact. So they still would have had to market the game to the PS2 fanbase who by the way had more varied choices in the genre. Exlusive games can succeed on the Xbox the fact is Strangers Wrath wasn't marketed.

Also the game was a conflict on itself it wasn't the traditonal puzzler platformer like the other games in the series and as a shooter while still a good game there are other shooter in more traditional settings on the xbox that gamers prefer.

Somebody mentioned ED by Silicon Knights well what happened there first Nintendo gives them a glorified port job then drop them as they were working on other IP's (too human) that they would own. Also that game from what I remember didn't have a good marketing push.

Bottom line is this the game wasn't marketed and it didn't sell. That's it the why's and wherefore really don't matter no marketing budget no sells will happen to just about anygame.

[DrunkenThumbmaster]

As for Jason Rubin he and Naughty Dogs maybe be technical genuises but outside of CTR they haven't don't anything remarkable design wise. I am looking forward to the Jak racing game though.

[T.Tashi]

There is a whole lot of could've would've should've in this thread. The fact is this we don't know what success they (oddworld) would've had on the PS2. When strangers wrath was released there were over 20 million xboxes out there. So the game needs to be marketed toward those fans. The switch to the Xbox was made before the PS2 was released obvious those fans didn't like the series that much to follow them. So waht makes you think that those fans would've automatically picked up the game on the PS2 there is no information to gurrantee that fact. So they still would have had to market the game to the PS2 fanbase who by the way had more varied choices in the genre. Exlusive games can succeed on the Xbox the fact is Strangers Wrath wasn't marketed.

Also the game was a conflict on itself it wasn't the traditonal puzzler platformer like the other games in the series and as a shooter while still a good game there are other shooter in more traditional settings on the xbox that gamers prefer.

Somebody mentioned ED by Silicon Knights well what happened there first Nintendo gives them a glorified port job then drop them as they were working on other IP's (too human) that they would own. Also that game from what I remember didn't have a good marketing push.

Bottom line is this the game wasn't marketed and it didn't sell. That's it the why's and wherefore really don't matter no marketing budget no sells will happen to just about anygame.
There's no guarantee of anything. That's why publishers have so much power. If you had to gamble, and every game released is pretty much that, are you going to put money on Playstation/Oddworld fans picking up a PS2 or are you going to bet on those fans migrating to Xbox? Which one is the most sensible bet?

[Glockstar]

Only an Xbot would equate Fight Club and Playboy Mansion with Strangers Wrath and Voodoo Vince. . . . that's the problem with the Xbox demographic. . .they don't know Sh!t from Shinola.

"I" don't like those games? NO ONE liked those games. I CAN'T read your posts blindfolded, because I never know what whacked out irrellevant thing from left field you are going to pull out of your ass . . . .what you just posted makes zero sense.

(For you sensitive xbots--referring to the "xbot demographic" is not a personal insult--we know many of our local xbot brethren have better taste than the xbot herd at large.)

What the...?! Did you just recently smack your head or something? Or is your IQ on holiday? :confused:

Or maybe I need to word it like Moody Today... er, I mean The Game... er, I mean Gamer Today... for you to understand?

I'll give you one more chance... 'What does Fight Club and Playboys Mansion and the other games I listed have to do with Voodoo Vince and PDO and Crimson Skies?' What do those game you mentioned have to do with Strangers Wrath?

Get a grip already. Your tastes in games suck! Everybody elses is fine!
Now try to grasp that sooner rather than later, if you can. More and more your posts are becoming garbage... and they're making people sick.

[Gadfly2317]

What the...?! Did you just recently smack your head or something? Or is your IQ on holiday? :confused:

Or maybe I need to word it like Moody Today... er, I mean The Game... er, I mean Gamer Today... for you to understand?

I'll give you one more chance... 'What does Fight Club and Playboys Mansion and the other games I listed have to do with Voodoo Vince and PDO and Crimson Skies?' What do those game you mentioned have to do with Strangers Wrath?

Get a grip already. Your tastes in games suck! Everybody elses is fine!
Now try to grasp that sooner rather than later, if you can. More and more your posts are becoming garbage... and they're making people sick.

I guess my IQ's on holiday then. . . I still don't get it. MY taste in games suck because I very much enjoyed the few original--and I might add criticially acclaimed (Voodoo Vince was most highly praised by none other than YOU!)--while Xbots who shun these games in favor of yet another Drive Around in a Circle Game or yet another Walk Around and Shoot at Things from a First Person Perspective Games or YET ANOTHER EA SPORTS GAME. .

Those guys have GREAT taste and are really pushing gaming and game developers in a wonderful direction beneficial to all of us who have long loved electronic game.

Thank God that cookie-cutter unoriginal crap-slinger Lorne Lanning has been driven out of the business because no one bought his most recent piece of puke---reviewers giving it a 9, what were they smoking? Mulitmillion dollar work of art, originality, and killer action only selling 26,000 copies? No way that it could have anything to do with the Xbot Jarhead demographic. Nah, you're right, oh brainy Glock. Any smart gamer with decent taste and an eye for originality, creativity and fun knows the Oddworld Games should be lumped in there with Fight Club and Knight Rider.

Thanks for saving me from my own ignorance, Glock.

[Glockstar]

Thanks for saving me from my own ignorance, Glock.

Uhh... actually... it looks like I haven't yet.
You really don't get it do you?

-

You gotta read a bit more Glocky. I said one sentence about MS and then 90% of my post was about Lorne Lanning. Furthermore, just because he doesn't mention MS doesn't mean that they don't figure into this situation. From my point of view, if he's gonna go after EA for not marketing the game enough, then he's gotta criticize MS as well for dumping it in the first place. You're the one here that's looking at this with blinded eyes.

He's 'got to'? I reckon the guy doesn't have to do anything. I figure he knows more about the nuances of why MS dumped his game and why EA didn't market it to his liking than you or I. So when he doesn't even bring up the fact that MS dumped his game - not even once - then it seems pretty pointless for you or I to. Yeah, I would have thought that that would be something he'd mention - I would've thought that would be something that he'd like to air out or get off his chest - I would've thought that that would be something that he'd be bitter about if anything - but he doesn't do it, and he doesn't seem it. Not at all.

And "blinded eyes" my eye. Like I said, I was expecting him to lament over the MS thing, and when I didn't read that I went thru and read the whole article again. I read it twice. And I got a lot of it. I see a whole lot of commentary on the state of the industry, I think it reveals a lot about Lorne Lanning as person/creator/businessman, and I see a lot of insight into the developer/publisher relationship. But I do not see any System Wars material there at all.

So for you to even allude to the Xbox's technical capabilities or generalize about it's userbase is trolling. Plain and simple.

Now in trying to explain yourself, you kind of backpeddled - or changed your tune - a bit in your follow up post. And even though a couple of other items pop up that I take exception too, I don't know if I can conjure up an appropriate response to them right now; as that post is a lot more thought provoking than your flippant side-of the mouth comments of before. You're still, clearly, an xbox hater tho'.

-

Now, I'm going to be doing all I can to keep this thread going, and not let it die, for awhile (even if I have to start talking to myself (again)), because there are still a couple of issues that I'd like see get touched upon and a number points brought up in the article that I'd like to see brought to light herein.

However, I don't like to have to do everything myself. (Especially when I know that there are some of you out there who can do it better. ;) ) And I like it when you guys think.

Which is what I'm trying to get Gadfly to do right now. So I'm a little preoccupied at the moment. He'll get it soon tho'. Or he'll get it soon.

[slade]

I don't know why he didn't mention MS. The guy is loudmouthed enough and has proven it in the past. His whole, 'Sony wouldn't let me be creative,' schtick at the beginning of this gen was regurgitated at trade show after trade show when MS was gearing up to release the X-box.

As for your whole, 'i reckon the guy doesn't have to do anything.' Well 'scuse me pard, but I don't buy your excuse. It could be as simple as the fact that he doesn't want to slam the company that created the system his game is on.

And again, just because he doesn't mention MS doesn't mean that they don't figure into the situation. I, for one, look beyond what is waved in my face.

[Gadfly2317]

Sorry Glock. . . .way preoccupied right now. You're not going to get much more in the way of substantive thought on this topic from me. I have no idea. . . there's plenty of blame to go around. Bad luck? Bad timing?

It is a great game; I don't think it needed to be another platformer. Probably shouldn't have left Sony. . . I mean going from a 1million selling series to 26,000. It just boggles the mind.

But I have no thoughts on Lorne Lanning or whatever it is you are trying to prod me towards. I'm just dissapointed. No one expected a million seller, but this one was a high-budget polished game that did everything I like games to do, and it just went down the toilet.

No thoughts. Just feelings. I feel bad. . . like the kinds of games I like will get made less and less often until I just go back to playing chess, dominos, poker and billiards.

[Glockstar]

"More"?! "More"?!
I didn't get any!

:p

No, I hear ya.

And that's fine. But here's the thing: I wish you'd have taken this route in the first place. Better to say nothing at all than gunk up the discussion, throwing it off-topic, with the same personal-preference-jealousy-issues-crap that we've heard out you a thousand times before... don't you think? I mean, we get it already, our tastes in games suck, yours is righteous! Gosh!

Look, if you were trying to say that you're personally sorry to see Lorne Lanning take his Odd-world out of videogames and take it over to tv and film because you like vg's and you particularly liked his vg's then you had a funny way of saying that. Even If you were looking for somebody, other than Lorne himself, to blame for that decision and decided to lay it the feet of your fellow gamers for "having bad taste" and for not supporting his games to your liking... well, you did that rather peculiarly too.

Now it's not my intention to put words in your mouth, I'm just giving you the benefit of the doubt here. And don't feel like you have to respond either way. You're busy - I understand. (Lord knows I understand.)

But with regards to that off-topic topic of ours... the answer to the questions…
A) "What does Voodoo Vince and PDO Crimson Skies have to do with Strangers Wrath"?
B) "What does Fight Club; Playboy the Mansion; Greg Hasting's Tournament Paintball; Tron 2.0; Breakdown; Dead Man's Hand; Cabela's Dangerous Hunts and so many of those militaristic FPSs have to do with VV/PDO/CS"?
C) What do the games that Gadfly and Glockstar mentioned have to do with Strangers Wrath?"
D) So why mention these games at all?
… are:
A) They’re just 3 other Xbox exclusive games that Gadfly liked, that, also like SW, sold poorly
B) They’re just a bunch of other Xbox games (most of which are Xbox exclusive) that Gadfly doesn’t like, that, also like SW, sold poorly.
C) Nothing – they’re all just games that sold poorly.
D) Well, if you’re Gadfly, you bring them up because you want to cry about how nobody seems to like the same games as you – xbots in particular; while if you’re Glockstar, you bring them up to show Gadfly that it’s not just the games that Gadfly likes that sell poorly.

Savvy?

[Glockstar]

So if we're all done with that blame shizznit... and if we're all grown up now... maybe we can move on?

And maybe, hopefully, we can get Zilla Man's input - and get him to check on some things for us.(?) ;)

Here's what I'm focusing on...

"We closed the studio because of what the realities of the marketplace are. There is currently only one financing model in the games industry, and that is that the publisher pays for the entire game; it handles the manufacturing, the marketing, the distribution, the advertising, practically everything ... And so, as a developer, you have limited options in terms of how many parties are actually willing to finance your games, what types of games they are willing to finance, and what are the terms you face as a third-party developer to get that financing."

"To this day, we own every IP we've ever created, as well as all the publishing rights -- licensing, merchandising, game publishing, TV, and film. It wasn't easy but, because we did it from day one, it set a precedent and we were able to sustain those terms through the different deals we did. As we look towards the future, that is not viable for developers to get those terms. Which means that if you're going to get financing on a next-gen title, the publisher is going to own that IP. And, as publishers are currently the only ones financing games, those are the terms of the industry. So, if we were to continue building games, the likelihood would be that we'd be in the business of building other peoples' IPs, and that wasn't why we created Oddworld Inhabitants."

"Ten years ago, if I were trying to raise money for an all-CG animated film, not only would I have heard 'it's never been done before' -- since "Toy Story" hadn't come out yet -- but I'd be asking for a minimum of $120 million. Today, I believe I can make three times that film -- meaning in terms of what's on the screen -- and I could do it for $35 million. So, as CG is evolving -- becoming more efficient, more streamlined, more practical at a more reasonable price -- we believe we can hit that $35 million price point with a CG film today, a film that we currently own all the publishing rights to."

"Video game systems aren't being designed to be conducive to development, creativity, or content. They're being designed to be cheaper for manufacturing. ... ...the public wants basically a $1,000 box but only wants to pay $150 for it. I'm not saying that anyone is guilty in this process, but this is the reality of the current climate for development in video games and where it's headed. And because the costs are higher, more ownership needs to be seen on behalf of the publishers and, quite frankly, I don't blame them. They can say, "Look I used to pay for video games when they were $6 million, but now they're $16 million. And you know what? My shareholders are not going to like it if I fund your game, it's a big hit, and then you take it to someone else. That's going to hurt my stock. We need to see a path to ownership or ownership right out of the gate."

"...if you're a third-party developer who wants to be a content creator and to control the destiny of that content, the game industry is not the place to be right now."

[All of the above were quotes from "The Man", Lorne Lanning, himself.]

Interesting, que no?

Now correct me if I'm wrong here (and here's where Zilla Man and his connections could really help out) but the way I'm understanding things, it sounds like the developers get paid a lump sum (so to speak) in advance of the game's release, then after that all the proceeds go to the publisher. (?) Or to put it another way, the publishers pay the developers to make a game - and that's it - while the publishers take on all the other responsibilites - which also means that they take in all the cash from sales. The developers don't see a penny - directly - from their games' sales... is that right?

[Gadfly2317]

"
And that's fine. But here's the thing: I wish you'd have taken this route in the first place. Better to say nothing at all than gunk up the discussion, throwing it off-topic, with the same personal-preference-jealousy-issues-crap that we've heard out you a thousand times before... don't you think? I mean, we get it already, our tastes in games suck, yours is righteous! Gosh!

Look, if my post was a little pissy, that's the nature of the place sometimes. But I wish you'd stop acting like I think my tastes are great and yours suck. I do think I have good tastes in games, but I do know they are preferences. I especially don't know where you think I'm saying YOUR tastes suck since we like so many of the same games.

Yes, I tend towards arrogance and elitism, it's my personality, but I don't think I'm better than others here. What I do lament though is that my preferences for originality and more artistic vs realistic games seem to be failing. I just don't like the direction of the industry, the consolidation, the EAification, the MS PCification, and the emphasis on the Extreme Mountaindew Manboy crowd.

Take a game like Okami. NOT an Xbox gamel. In sys wars we smack talk a little bit, we get called kiddies, you get called blood-and-boob xbots, but what it comes down to is I'm seeing my preferences dwindling.

The failure of Strangers Wrath, a great game, a genre bending game, an artistic game, and even a GUNS BLAZING game,. . . .it's failure, along with other xbox failures of games even MS expected to succeed (like Crimson Skies) has made me realize that for certain Xbox is NOT the place I need to be, and second I fear it won't just be Xbox but the whole industry continuing to creep this way.

Sorry if I repeat myself too much about my love of innovation and originality. I love games, but I want them to be fresh and new most of the time, and the occasionaly really good sequel.

Sorry for such a personal post, but I really am tired of you painting me as someone who thinks they are better than everyone else. I don't. I just like playing hardball with my opinions and preferences around here just like everyone else.