I don't know about Freelancer, but in the case of Fable, I'd say Peter Molyneux deserves the blame for that. Ever since the Black & White fiasco, he has earned himself a reputation for over-promising and under-delivering.

Is that how you think it works? Rather, large companies have this nasty habit of bleeding their acquisitions dry and then quietly closing their doors a year or two later.

Totally. And I'm going to be burned by Molyneux again when Fable 2 comes out, I'm sure.

I remember how excited I was when Bungie was developing this new, Mac-only game that had everybody buzzing. Then poof, Microsoft buys them up and I had to go buy an Xbox. Sheesh!

Did I correctly hear a rumor that Bungie was going to break away from Microsoft?

They did a while ago

Ugh! It had to be a GameSpot link... I used to work for CNET Networks and have vowed to never go to any of their sites. But for you, Annatar, I'll make an exception...

Oh cool. So it is true. Interesting.

Sorry, it was the only place I remembered seeing the news story

My post was meant as humour, in reply to Stardock CEO Frogboy's affirmation that his company was not for sale. I was implying, with a not too serious irony, that if EA or Microsoft made them "an offer they couldn't refuse", he and his business associates would sell Stardock for lots of millions that they could put in their personal bank accounts (which is always the privilege, in our capitalistic system, of entrepreneurs and owners).

But I will respect your reply and take it seriously. Allow me to pick up the ball where you left it.

Suppose a company, such as Stardock, has reached a level of success where it generates a lot of revenues and profits, and disposes of high-quality corporate resources. Suppose that a large corporation, such as Microsoft or EA, buys it for many millions of dollars.

I then do not quite understand what you are implying. Why would a corporation pay a small fortune to acquire a very successful company, and then run it into the ground ?

I would accept your argument when it is the case of a relatively small "development studio" : as you are implying, there are some examples of that having happened.

But Stardock is way beyond that modest level. If Microsoft or EA would acquire it, it would cost a lot of millions, and it would not then be in the larger corporation's interest to "bleed it dry". The latter would have to at least recoup its big investment, and if the acquired company is very successful, it would be better to let it continue to do what it does best, to generate even more profits.

CyberMage, EA has made an art form out of acquiring successful smaller endeavours (and let's face it, StarDock and IronClad are still "small" by comparison) and then imposing their management structure and process to deliver projects that their research indicates will be the most profitable.

Creativity requires a huge amount of room to realize. IronClad has already said that there's no room in their company for 'administrators', and that's the kind of thing that an acquisition by a large company like EA would impose. So the structure and rigorous enforcement that a larger company by its very nature demands, because they have such a broad territory to manage, is poison to the flexibility and nimbleness that makes companies like IronClad and StarDock be successful.

It's sad to acknowledge, but from a purely financial perspective, the intellectual property or license that comes with the company is often worth more than its people.

As an example, think about the number of people that would just up and buy MechWarrior 5 sight-unseen. But none of those people care whether or not it's the same team that built the previous games.

-- Retro

Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I agree with the way you describe the situation. Stated that way, it is credible to suppose that EA could extract a lot of profits from Stardock if it acquired that company, but at the horrendous cost of diminishing Creativity. I agree with you.

Also, one can suppose that EA would not tolerate Stardock's current policy of not having copy-protection and security disk-checks.

Fun fact since the discussion took a turn towards it: Blair and co actually left EA to start up Ironclad because they didn't like the EA corporate structure

Nobody likes working for EA much other than the execs... and even some of those don't like it much... or so the rumor mill says.

Hehe I like that quote I must admit good points all around though!

Can I take that to the bank?

You are getting too much popularity and that attracts people who want to buy their way to Nirvana.

Hehehe. Go over to the classicbattletech.com forum and post about how awesome Microsoft was for the franchise. I dare ya. Even got a swell deal on an asbestos suit...



Your wish has been granted. Accurate models, an incredible multiplayer campaign-esque game model with a battlefield ranging from Spheroid vs Clanner infantry to Mechs to fighters dogfighting overhead. All presented with the jaw-dropping graphics of the Crysis game engine.

http://www.mechlivinglegends.net/index.php

Yippie, thanks for the link! They have some nice screenshots up already