Bizarre Situations

The boxed game market is a tougher place than ever to survive, even for studios with a proven track record.

Published as part of our sister-site GamesIndustry.biz's widely-read weekly newsletter, the GamesIndustry.biz Editorial, is a weekly dissection of an issue weighing on the minds of the people at the top of the games business. It appears on Eurogamer after it goes out to GI.biz newsletter subscribers.

It may just have scored an enormous commercial hit with the latest Call of Duty title - which probably means sighs of relief all around, after the embarrassingly public split with Modern Warfare's creative team earlier in the year - but all is not rosy in Activision's garden, it seems.

Indeed, the main activity in said garden this week has been pruning. Iowa-based Budcat Studios, which the publisher picked up two years ago and put to work on PS2 and Wii ports of Guitar Hero titles, has been shut down, and many jobs have been cut at the firm's US QA department - more than would be normal at this time of year, and probably a direct reaction to slowing sales in the music game sector.

It's always unfortunate to hear of any industry layoffs, but news of Budcat's closure and the QA layoffs was eclipsed by a disturbing statement from the publisher which said that it is presently mulling over the future of Bizarre Creations. The British studio, formerly most famous for the Project Gotham Racing franchise, was bought by Activision in 2007 and employs around 200 people.

Activision is careful with its words - it's considering a sale, it says, and is presently simply exploring its options. The giant publisher acts as if stung by the implication that it's going through the motions before shutting down the studio, and everyone undoubtedly hopes that it's not just saying that, although "exploring our options regarding the future" is a term commonly taken to imply that the aforementioned future is looking pretty bleak.

How did it come to this? How does a studio go from being a darling of the industry - and there's no question that Project Gotham Racing and Metropolis Street Racer before it were stupendously successful and well-loved games - to being considered more liability than asset?

The reason is not simple, and is not solely related to Bizarre's output. Certainly, its recent outing in the James Bond franchise hasn't been well-received - although then again, the last time any James Bond videogame was genuinely well-received, the N64 was still the world's most powerful home console - but its previous title, Blur, saw the studio back on its home turf and delivering a broadly well-liked racer which picked up over half a million sales.

In Activision's view, however, this constitutes a failure to find a "commercial audience" for the Blur franchise. Our first hint as to what's gone wrong lies right there.

The games business has always been a hit-driven one, and we've always accepted the basic contention that a large number of games flop and fail to make back their investments - but the firms behind them are supported by the smaller number of games which do stunningly well and turn enormous profits. In the middle lies a fairly thick layer of games which do "okay" - enough to earn back their costs, pay the salaries and the rent, keep the lights on and keep everything in the black.

Larger companies, with their fingers in many pies, succeed in this environment because they can survive a few flops off the back of a decent hit. Smaller firms, aside from those content to follow the work-for-hire path, either produce a hit and get rich, produce a string of mid-level titles and stay in business, or go bust, dispersing their staff elsewhere and often giving rise to new start-ups from their ashes.

That's the model, and those in the industry all know and understand that model. However, there's been a change in recent years which has tipped the balance - a fairly simple and direct change in the ratios involved. Put bluntly, the threshold at which a game is considered a "hit" has become much higher. Costs have risen, driving up the risks in the market. In tandem, boxed game prices have failed to deflate appreciably and have even risen, which also makes consumers more risk-averse.

So we simultaneously see a flocking behaviour among consumers, with high-profile titles and well-established franchises being favoured more than ever, and a concentration strategy among publishers, with the entire resources of large firms being poured into an ever-narrowing selection of surefire hits. When the risks are this high and the gap between success and failure this wide, the old approach breaks down a little. Your hits don't support so many misses any more, and the middle layer, the games which did okay and provided bread and butter for a host of studios, simply disappears.

Want to see proof? Look no further than Activision itself, and the dramatic gap in the performance of various titles in its catalogue in the past months. On one hand, the company has sold millions upon millions of copies of games like Call of Duty: Black Ops and StarCraft II. On the other hand, titles like Tony Hawk: Shred and DJ Hero 2 dramatically under-performed, with the Tony Hawk title in particular raising eyebrows by shifting a paltry 3000 units in its first week on sale in the USA.

Somewhere in the middle, then, is a title like Blur, with its half-million sales. Once, that would have been fine - unremarkable, perhaps not the start of a franchise, but enough to keep the lights on at a studio, especially one with a solid pedigree and strong goodwill behind it. In today's landscape, there's only room for the behemoths. Blur, for all its critical acclaim, joins the ranks of the flops, and Activision's bosses cock an eyebrow at Bizarre Creations and ruminate over whether the studio can ever produce the multi-multi-million sellers which are, apparently, the only things worth having in the market nowadays.

Of course, that's not entirely the right question to ask, because while Bizarre Creations developed Blur, the reality is that any new franchise created by a wholly owned studio of a major publisher is by no means the creation of that studio alone. Building a game franchise within a publisher is a vastly collaborative effort on a whole lot of different levels. From concept approval through to the gold master, the publisher's fingerprints are all over the project, and from that point on, the ball's almost entirely in their court, with marketing and distribution playing a vital role in establishing the franchise and getting early sales moving.

In other words, if Blur didn't perform up to standard, it's as much Activision's fault as it is Bizarre Creations' - probably more so, in fact, given the fact that the critics liked the game and the public seem simply not to have heard of it. Of course, a new franchise - especially in a crowded genre like racing - is a tough thing to launch, and even the most experienced publisher can trip up. On the other hand, Activision right now needs new franchises like a desert needs rain, because if the corpse of the Tony Hawk franchise has stopped twitching and the music game sector isn't going to take much more flogging... Well, take the properties controlled by the fiercely independent Blizzard out of the equation, and Activision ends up looking much like Take-Two did a few years ago, a company with one world-beating franchise which comes along once a year and nothing but drought in between.

Where will new franchises come from? Activision's not much of a company for nurturing new talent. One gets the impression that it feels itself a bit beyond such things, perhaps not so much out of arrogance but out of a wise recognition of how easy it is for a large corporate body like itself to have a Reverse Midas Touch when it comes to creative endeavours. Instead, it's keen on opening its wallet to established franchise creators - like Bungie, on whose first original IP since Halo the publisher has pinned significant hopes.

In the medium term, of course, Activision will be fine. It has Blizzard, after all, a golden egg laying goose which the publisher's top executives are forbidden by restraining order from approaching with sharp objects. It has Call of Duty, another magical goose which has thus far proved remarkably resilient in the face of attempts to cut it open. It just launched a game which took $650 million in its opening week. Nobody's predicting doom for Activision.

But the Activision business model - the model of concentrating its focus to reduce risk and hiking prices to ensure that consumers do much the same - has been pursued blindly by many other publishers who view the firm's turnover with envious eyes, and some of those publishers aren't going to emerge from all of this looking quite so healthy. In a world where consumer spend on boxed games is being laser-focused on hits to the increasing detriment of all the misses, Activision has been left holding a few cards - but some publishers will find themselves holding none at all.

Of course, the wider context is important too - this is all happening at one end of an industry which has grown remarkably in scope to encompass all sorts of less risky, more adventurous and even more creative enterprises, distributed at a whole host of price points on a variety of platforms which didn't even exist five years ago. If many developers and even some publishers are sailing their business away from traditional console titles and into fresher waters, it's not just for the love of shiny new things - it's because they can see what's happening in console gaming, and recognise that it's an increasingly hostile place to try anything new, to take a creative risk, or even to simply survive as anything other than a multinational behemoth.

As to Bizarre Creations, caught in the midst of all of this - we can only cross our fingers and hope that everything turns out well for the studio. Nobody questions its ability to make good games. Sadly, however, this sector of the games business is one where making good games simply isn't enough any more.

If you work in the games industry and want more views, and up-to-date news relevant to your business, read our sister website GamesIndustry.biz, where you can find this weekly editorial column as soon as it is posted.

Comments (51) Latest comment 1 year ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Shikasama #1 1 year ago

    The saddest thing for me is Bizarre created my favourite game of this generation - Geo Wars 2.

    For all of Activisions Call of Duty HD hyper realism multi million pound graphics, no COD has ever reproduced the rush of gameplay that GW2 did.
  • Shikasama #2 1 year ago

    Also, I wish the word 'franchise' would fuck off from gaming.
  • pingu #3 1 year ago

    A really good article Rob.
  • vaughan42 #4 1 year ago

    Killer article Rob, thanks.
  • chrism_scotland #5 1 year ago

    I hope Microsoft take them over, Project Gotham 5 really needs them at the helm!
  • Chaser #6 1 year ago

  • MiY4MOTO #7 1 year ago

    Blur was an odd title, as a long-time fan of Bizarre (I still own MSR, PGRs 1 thru 4 and The Club) I was really disappointed by Blur. I was hyped for it and after the demo / beta I simply cancelled my pre-order. I'm not sure the relatively poor sales could be levelled at the marketing department. It just wasn't my cup of tea and I suspect I wasn't the only one.

    It was a departure and a risk, Mario Kart in a shiny PGR skin was never going to appeal to all racing fans. Plus it was a new title rather than a franchise, if Activision had really expected the sales figures that they'd achieved with PGR then THEY were deluded from the start, and THEY are the reasons the figures don't balance.

    Bizarre produced and delivered a quality title and it is sad that a greedy publisher had overestimated a new title's success in a crowded market.

    Incidentally, how did it compare sales wise to Split Second? Which had exactly the same issues minus Activision?
  • MiY4MOTO #8 1 year ago

    Also, I for one would love to see them back with MGS at the helm of PGR5!

    After 5 games in the series, already counting MSR, they may not want to do another... groundhog day and all that. But I'm sure it would be preferable to closure.
  • TaniumZX #9 1 year ago

    I loved Blur - am still playing it now. Extremely addictive.
  • makeamazing #10 1 year ago

    The problem these days is the number of platforms available for people to buy their games on... for me i have:

    iPhone
    PC/Steam/GOG
    Xbox
    PS3
    PSN/Market Place

    Others might add DS/PSP/Other Mobile phone and some other platforms such as iPad.

    Then there is DLC for games already existing...

    When you consider how much tax people have to pay and how little money spare people have, while owning multiple platforms with hundreds/thousands of different companies trying to get you to buy their product, is there any surprise the games market is going towards a big wake up call.

    If you also consider the release schedules as well, again this year there have been times when new ips have released right next to big games, the first three months next year are going to see some games spectacularly fail... some companies need to consider moving their game releases asap (a few have already done this)... I can probably identify 2 games a month (maybe more) just for the first three months of next year.. so add in other purchases you are probably looking at Ł100 easily can be spent on a few games... and then they wonder why releasing a game in a busy period means less sales.
  • Tiger_Walts #11 1 year ago

    Another driving factor for Activisions reliance on franchise building could be partially due to the maturity of the current console generation and the plateau in technology that occurs. It's tougher at this point in the console cycle to make a game that stands out technically, that's not to say that developers stop pushing the envelope. The risk is simply lower if you put all the effort into the sequel of a successful game. Stretch the team on new or perceptually weak IP and you can get into a sticky situation like RDR did (and was propelled to success by marketing, the Rockstar name and being damn good) or just flounder before it's even seen in preview like Reich.

    Pretty graphics don't make a game play any better but it does give it visibility within its genre. However, Activision tried to release Blur in the arcade racing genre against 2 other strong titles which had significant presence in the gaming media. Activision looked at the cost of a final marketing push weighed against the likely sales and perceived a net loss on such a venture due to the preceeding development outlay. A forced delay in release was most likely financially unviable too, a restriction imposed when your portfolio of games in development are all AAA behemoths.

    The small to medium projects aren't gambles, they're lubricant. Their flexibility in scheduling and the (relatively small) cash flow they provide can give the AAA stuff a bit of extra leeway. There's also the possiblility of one of these small games being a surprise hit and providing a new franchise for the big bucks treatment.
  • metalangel #12 1 year ago

    Blur sounded poor when it was announced, the demo confirmed my fears. The big mistake was putting it up against Split/Second which had a superior marketing campaign (every break during the NBA and NHL playoffs, vs Blur's Mario Kart pisstake which I saw twice) and also a more appealing concept.

    Nobody wanted Blur, everyone wanted PGR5.
  • zm26 #13 1 year ago

    Excellent article. The parallels with the movie industry are there for all to see. The indies are doing great but the mid-level games are getting hammered just like mid-level movies.
  • patchbox360 #14 1 year ago

    The Activision Onlive is in the works. It would make fiscal sense.
  • ToAks #15 1 year ago

    The blur beta did the game really bad, i found the beta horrible and i almost decided to cancel my preorder...luckily i did not do that.

    Blur to me was miles ahead of Split Second...why? .. there was something with S/S that really annoyed me but i don't know what..that said, i loved both but blur was the better one IMO.

    it may have been a mario kart type of game but its the best mario kart game ever then :) (yes, even better than the fantastic Xtreme Racing from Alex Amsel)
  • M1chl #16 1 year ago

    I am big fan of PGR, but I also love Blur. With my friends we have a lot of fun on live and even local in 4 players split-screen. This game has awesome presentation and almost best soundtrack I have ever heard in racing game. I simply love it, I really hope that will be a sequel, but know I am hoping for rescue of Bizzare Creations. Long live Bizzare...
  • KD #17 1 year ago

    I'm still playing blur, mates of mine ask me to put it on when they around house, best game I seen for getting people on the edge of a seat even if they ain't playing. Better than the last party type racing game
  • dfua #18 1 year ago

    Activision must take a significant share of the blame for the failure. Blur was released at the wrong time, coming straight after Split Second, and Activision's spat with Game must have hurt Blur and Transformers badly, leaving them to slip by almost unnoticed on the high street.

    Still, I do feel that it was always going to be a tough sell as the demand wasn't really there, they would have done much better with a standard racer.
    Edited by 1 at 20/11/10 @ 12:25
  • KD #19 1 year ago

    Bloody iPod app. To finish above... San fransico rush 2049 on dc
  • StriderRex #20 1 year ago

    @ MiY4MOTO, I checked VGCharts and Split/Second:Velocity was just shy of 600,000 sales, not sure how accurate those sales figures are though, I feel a bit odd even commenting on this, im an S/S:Velocity fan through and through and think Black Rock Studios are fantastic (love Pure), its annoying to see Blur and S/S underperform, maybe the market is just too fragmented.

    I keep wondering if these were coming out on one platform that had a massive install base (think PS1 era) I wonder would they have sold a lot more, love PGR too so hope both studios are fine to make lots more games!!!
    I was suprised to see S/S sell more on PS3 too (I have a 360), I hope shooters arent taking up all the sales, I love them as much as the next person but games need to keep variety across all genres or it will just get boring.
  • kongzi #21 1 year ago

    There just isn't a whole lot of room in the marketplace for another racing franchise, even if it's good. Just look at what's going on: new racing IP's perform under expectations and the successes are well-established games like NFS/Burnout, Forza/GT and the Codies games and even those are far from being consitent chart toppers. The entire genre is stagnating: there hasn't been any real innovations in years so it's not going to draw in huge new crowds anytime soon.

    Bizarre is a great studio, but it doesn't have a great, guaranteed succes IP to work on, and you can't support a 200 head studio by making second rate games. So the only option is downsize into a small indie or sell. Sadly enough, but there's just more racing games around than people wanna buy apparently, so something like this was bound to happen.
  • DFawkes #22 1 year ago

    When I went to the shops to buy Blur, I had a heck of a time. No-one had it, and on enquiring it was the same story - they tried ordering more but the supplier didn't have them. There was a demand for it, but zero supply. Can't blame that on Bizarre now, really.

    Luckily HMV had a couple of copies left, but if it isn't on shelves, it's not going to sell - in my hometown at least.
  • E_Goldstein #23 1 year ago

    Ultimately there is no one to blame than ourselves. Activision run a cookie cutter business model seen in most industries. Buy low sell high. Why hold onto a duff investment.

    In order to break their spirit it is down to consumers to excersise their wallet powers, or rather keeping them shut. Unfortunatly ( and again this is seen in every industry) we expect others to do everything for us.
  • FenderMaster #24 1 year ago

  • Bremenacht #25 1 year ago

    Good read. I hope they sell Bizarre Creations, rather than close it down, but even if it does close, these talented people aren't going to disappear - they'll hopefully get funding, start again and come back with greater creative licence.

    Let Activision play it's massive franchise game. Eventually they'll bet their pots of CoD cash on a dev that doesn't deliver, and it'll bring them down.
  • President_Weasel #26 1 year ago

    Activision released Blur with very little marketing support (one badly-judged advert, which a commenter here said he'd seen twice, once or twice more than most people, I expect) and during a dispute with game retailers that saw them fail to stock the game. They couldn't have done more to kill it had they been doing it on purpose.
  • MaxiSleep #27 1 year ago

    Blur had a terrible single player experience so I am not surprised it bombed.
  • spadge #28 1 year ago

    500,000 copies is not "in the middle".

    I'd imagine given the costs involved, at least 3m copies would need to be sold (and not just "sold into" shops) just for recoup. In these days, where the gulf between success and failure ever widens, there is no room to be in the middle - and the finances dictate that the model of two or three titles out of ten carrying the rest no longer works. It's been heading this way for the last 2-3yrs.

    Publishers are also struggling with the trade-in market and massively from gaming habits as the hard-core gamers grow older, with less time availability and far broader entertainment options.

    Look at EA, they've produced probably the strongest line up of titles in recent years, yet still making losses every quarter.

    You certainly have to feel for the studios, but the model is broken and the industry is evolving.

  • midnight_walker #29 1 year ago

    One of these days, Call of Duty is going to sell the same way the latest Tony Hawk and Guitar Hero games have sold. And on that day, I will laugh heartily.
  • Subdominator #30 1 year ago

    I'm not exactly surprised or sad. I can't even blame Activision, only Bizarre. The reason why there was no big marketing budget for both those titles is because the developers failed to reach their milestones and went way over budget. Whatever marketing budget they had went into the studio, to pay those 200 developers that delayed both games for 1 year (James Bond) and 8 months (Blur).

    And why would they even start to create a racing game with weapons? Everybody knows it's simply annoying to be shot in the last lap/last corner by the AI. You can do that in a Mario Kart, where a complete race takes like 90 to 120 seconds. And they came out with the game when everybody was annoyed by night races. How stupid can you be? Obviously very stupid, because only then can you expect to create for racing games what CoD is for shooters. Racing games are niche. Nothing will ever change that. You have to keep your development budget in touch with reality. *cough* Realtime Worlds. If Bizarre gets lucky they have to fire 150 people and can then create a racing game in the tradition of PGR. Maybe even PGR 5.

    Some developers are divas. Like Bizarre, Bungie, Realtime Worlds, Polyphony ... they all will get their reality check sooner or later. Some learn the hard way, some don't at all. They don't understand why games are successful, they believe it's because of them.

    It's just like with actors in successful TV series. How many do you know that at some point decided to leave the show to become a movie star? And how many of the hundreds actually did it? A dozen? And those mostly not because they are terrific actors, but because they got lucky to star in a movie that people actually cared about. Success leads to arrogance leads to loss of reality. Happened before, will happen again. So that's why I am not particularly sorry for Bizarre. The few couple of deelopers there that actually deserved what they got paid (and judging by how average James Bond turned out to be those aren't many) will have no problem finding a new job.
  • LauraTheGreat #31 1 year ago

    I don't get the crowd who cry "I really didn't like the Blur demo or the game." Really? Everyone I've ever played the game with online, from the Beta days till now, LOVES Blur. Loved the beta, love the game, decry the release timing. Racing games are niche titles? I suppose those 25 million people that have bought Mario Kart Wii are a niche, eh?

    Seems to me the people that really hate Blur just want Bizarre to make (yet another) PGR game. Wow. Plain old racing = BORING. If you want that just pick up GT5.
  • vmanb #32 1 year ago

    @laura the great. Maybe people just have different tastes, would that be so hard to believe. I tried both blur and S/S and hated them both but by next wednesday there'll be only one racing game i'm going to need for the next couple of years
  • metamorphic #33 1 year ago

    And some people think the US games industry is any good? The originality-breeding Japanese games industry is far, far better than the shitty money-licking inane grubtards at Activision and co.
    Edited by 1 at 20/11/10 @ 23:23
  • m1rk #34 1 year ago

    What this says to me is, gameplay is king and gameplay is the result of a good (and sometimes simple) ideas that dont necessarily need massive cash injection. Bring back the bedroom programmers I say.

    Do we really need all these fancy features in games these days. Do they add to our enjoyment?

    I say nay!!!
    Edited by 2 at 20/11/10 @ 23:54
  • MegaCadet #35 1 year ago

    I really hope they come back to Microsoft and continue making amazing PGR and Geometry Wars titles. We need a PGR5 and a GW3!!
  • brod #36 1 year ago

    They really shouldn't have released Blur in the same two week timeframe as Split Second and Modnation Racers.
  • djed #37 1 year ago

    Of course great developers will crash and burn in the coming years. This is what you, Eurogamer, have been asking for, with your pro "mass acceptance" and "mainstream-ification" stance towards video games. Most people are real fucking stupid, and the more of them you put together in a group, the worse it gets.

    So if a developer fails to capitalize on how stupid the audience is, maybe that isn't a good developer after all? (capitalism, ho!)
  • ubergine #38 1 year ago

    I didn't bother buying Blur because of Activision's bad press in recent years. When a person's budget is very limited (and I preferred the demo for Split/Second anyway) sometimes an either/or decision will come down to who profits and how big an arsehole they've been lately.
    That said, I remember when Activision tried releasing a bunch of games towards the end of last gen at a budget price "Most Wanted" - games like Ultimate Spiderman and Gun. The fact they were AU$50 instead of AU$100 was kind of off-putting, and they were not great games either. middling, competent, but not great.

    I think Activision's main problem is that the people at the very top, who write the cheques, have no comprehension of what makes a game good, how to market it, timing or anything. In their current form they only need to have Call of Duty flop one year and they will seem like a bloated deformed fifth leg dragging behind Blizzard's epic mount. Given that Blizzard only have a few IPS and are right up themselves these days (with their Duke Nukem Forever approach to development times and Second Coming of Christ hype to long overdue Starcraft / Diablo follow ups) and neither Blizzard or Activision appear to make any committed investment in new IPs like comparable publishers do, it wouldn't take many more missteps for the gravy train to derail, and leaving the shareholders out of pocket and the high-ups with nothing but their hundreds of millions of dollars to hold back the tears.
  • spammage #39 1 year ago

    I agree Bizarre have been fantastic but Blur had horrifically broken single player progression (a vertical difficulty curve about 3/4 through) but definitely has the hallmark of a potentially amazing sequel which may now never come. Sad times.
  • jtodroc #40 1 year ago

    Why didn't Activision just get Bizarre to make a multi-format PGR style racing game. Surely that would have sold on both PS3 & 360.

    In my opinion the only weapons based racers that work are Wipeout style futuristic types or cartoony Mario Kart clones.
  • Mr.DNA #41 1 year ago

    I never bought Black Ops because it looks to be the same game that Infinity Ward released three years ago, albeit with a new lick of paint. I loved Modern Warfare, although the samey, derivative nature of the Call of Duty series is a real turn-off for me. I say fuck Activision (hardly an original sentiment, I know) because they would rather pump out the same game every year instead of supporting original ideas.

    It's almost as if Activision are actively attempting to alienate anyone who has a smidgen of knowledge about the games industry. I know that 99% of people who buy games will not know who Activision are- that's just the nature of the mass-market appeal of games these days. Most games-buyers are not knowledgeable about games companies or who the hell Bizarre Creations are, and it really is just as well for Activision. Their statements and policies over the past couple of years have been truly contemptible, and it is shame that their cartoon-like, villainous characteristics will never be known to Josephine Punter who goes into her local GAME and picks up Black Ops for her child.
    Edited by 3 at 21/11/10 @ 13:40
  • toy_brain #42 1 year ago

    This might sound a bit harsh, but Bizzare Creations have really been on a downward slope of dumb IP ideas since they stopped doing PGR.
    Ok, its a slope of just 2 games, but it does make you start to wonder.

    The Club was apparently a well-executed spin on the FPS genre, but the concept was just 'ehhhh'. Short fragments of levels, nothing cohesive tying them togeather, your enemies were.. what exactly? poor schmucks dragged off the street and given a gun so they could be shot at? How am I supposed to get behind that sort of concept?
    I won't argue with anyone who says it was a good game, but after playing the demo I just thought 'no, not for me' and carried on.
    And so did many others (judging by its bad sales).

    Blur is a racing game featuring realistic licenced cars, with arcadey handling, in realistic locations, with Wipeout-style powerups (I'm going with Wipeout instead of Mario Cart as visually its closer). Thats one heck of a disparate blend, and just looking at the game I had no idea what was going on with it. It really didn't have a cohesive artistic vision. If it was trying to be arcadey then the licenced cars made you think perhaps the handling would be too sim-like, and if it was trying to be realistic then the powerups were an uncomfortable fit, and the overabundance of neon lighting gave it a visual disconnect from reality.

    Good games, bad concepts.
    By no means do I think Bizzare 'deserve to go under'. I really hope they find another buyer and continue to put out good games, but somebody somewhere needs to focus-test their ideas first.
  • knightmt #43 1 year ago

    I guess it is a question of momentum. It has amazed me the sales of Black Ops. But as they say in the music industry you are only as good as your last album.
  • ColdShoulder #44 1 year ago

    Nice article.

    Even if BC's recent games haven't made enough money for Activision, they may still be worth while for a smaller publisher to buy up. I hope so... they might be trying to generate interest and get offers on the table by making this the announcement in the first place. The thought of them going down when they've done nothing wrong makes me sick to the stomach.
  • mo2010 #45 1 year ago

    What I'm interested in is what Activision do when one COD game flops or doesn't do as expected? Will they be simply relying then on Blizzard, which I almost see as a completely seperate entity from the Activision publishing side of things?

    Activision are almost a one-franchise publisher as it is, if they don't think about spending some of those COD profits on creating New I.P.'s and then, most importantly of all, promoting them with a budget that at least approaches that which they're willing to splash out on COD, in a couple of years Activision could see themselves stuck up the proverbial shit creek.
  • niz #46 1 year ago

    PGR 2 is still the most fun online racer I've ever seen. Perfect blend of "semi-realism" and arcade racing.

    Sadly PGR 3 and PGR 4 were just plain un-fun, full of really ridiculous design decisions which made especially the online play plain annoying.

    It's amazing how a studio can go so much down after creating the brilliant PGR 2. After PGR 4 I had zero interest to Blur.

    Still, there are surely lots of talented people there and I wish them all the best.
    Edited by 1 at 21/11/10 @ 17:00
  • SniperZoz #47 1 year ago

    MS should buy them ... and get them to make a new Midtown Madness game (with hidden in-games like roof-wars!). C'mon that should work!
  • captain-future #48 1 year ago

    interesting read... most interesting is that Blur might be the fault of both Activision and Bizarre... coz as much as I want to say something positive about Bizarre (I loved the MSR and PGR titles) Blur was far from attractive for me, I never got the concept from the trailers, never understood why the funny design should spike my interest and never liked it one bit.

    at least I own it ^^ but I played it maybe a few hours and moved an.

    many people say that Split/Second was released parallel, I think this really stole a lot of thunder from Blur... still Blur had bad marketing (IMHO) and was just not fun to play. It lacked many things I love in PGR titles.
    Edited by 1 at 22/11/10 @ 00:25
  • byakuya83 #49 1 year ago

    it wasn't long ago that there were precious few games available and most of us had to make a choice - blur or split/second.

    i went with split/second as it was a fresh idea, something different and fun to play. the demo on psn influenced by decision considerably. blur just seemed odd to me, licensed vehicles but with mario kart style weapons - peculiar mixture.

    it's fair to say that bizarre's blur and james bond were both middle of the road, neither was a hit. unfortunately two releases like that aren't going to convince the publisher a hit game is looming and they'll recover their losses down the road.

    at least if bizarre split and get some funding they can work on something of their own creation and use these experiences to their advantage.
  • laharl80 #50 1 year ago

    Metropolis Street Racer?
    So successful i've never heard of it.
  • asphaltcowboy #51 1 year ago

    Great article as usual Rob.

    If you're a developer, the problem with Activision (if you discount Activision wholly being the problem) is that unless it's CoD or a music game, they simply don't do marketing for your game. As Rob points out, blur was well received by critics (and the gamers that played it) but it was unheard of by... well, pretty much everyone else. You simply can't do that, then complain when it doesn't do a million sales. (edit: oh and release it up against RDR and Split/Second)

    As Rob says, the fact that blur didn't perform well is Activision's fault, almost entirely, as Bizarre actually put out a great game.
    Edited by 2 at 23/11/10 @ 17:14