Advertisement
Atari exec gives Driv3r a kicking News
PC
PlayStation 2
Xbox
News
by
Games Industry.biz
Atari's sales and marketing VP, Nique Fajors, has slammed the third instalment in the publisher's Driver series - just weeks after the franchise was sold off to Ubisoft.
Speaking at Atari's annual press event in LA, Fajors described Driv3r as "a half-baked product that was pushed out the door for revenue reasons."
Driv3r met with a poor critical reaction when it was released for PS2 and Xbox in 2004, and failed to perform well despite a high profile marketing campaign. Series creator Martin Edmondson resigned from his position at developer Reflections in December of the same year, and later sued for unfair dismissal, eventually reaching a US$4 million settlement.
A fourth instalment in the series, Driver: Parallel Lines, was better received by the critics - but that didn't stop Atari from selling the franchise and most of Reflections' assets to Ubisoft in a deal worth 19 million Euro.
Fajors went on to state that Atari intends to focus more on quality control in the future, and is seeking to hire development staff who feel "disgust with losing and disgust with being mediocre."
He also revealed that Atari plans to re-release titles from its back catalogue via Xbox Live Arcade, and establish a new Atari Online community.
Advertisement
Related Games
DRIV3R
DRIV3R
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Comments: 1-36 of 36 in total
Poster
|
repairmanjack
11/08/06 @ 11:14
0
"Atari" and "quality control". No. Don't belong in the same sentence.
|
|
0
Good words, noble thoughts. Doesn't mean SHIT to anyone who wasted his/her money on Driv3r. The least he could do is not spout this apologist BS at this late stage, given how many people have actually paid for the game.
And, to put it midly, history doesn't do any favours to Atari quality control in general, so why put the blame on one game? |
|
ManicDrunkMonk
11/08/06 @ 11:27
0
The worst thing about this is that it shows they weren't just being dim, they knowingly put out an unfinished game. Surely its time for some Americans to bring a class-action.
|
|
TripleSeven
11/08/06 @ 11:48
0
Law suits? It's your own fault however bought that game. There are plenty of options to avoid such mistakes.
|
|
chupachups
11/08/06 @ 11:53
0
"The worst thing about this is that it shows they weren't just being dim, they knowingly put out an unfinished game. Surely its time for some Americans to bring a class-action."
You can't sue someone for boring you, otherwise Kevin Costner and David Duchovny would be in debtor's prison right now. |
|
President Weasel
11/08/06 @ 11:59
0
"Fajors went on to state that Atari intends to focus more on quality control in the future, and is seeking to hire development staff who feel "disgust with losing and disgust with being mediocre."
I doubt the development staff were the problem. Maybe they should hire financial staff who realise that if you bundle half finished crap out the door for financial reasons you end up losing more money in the end, not to mention the last vestiges of your reputation. Then again maybe the fact that Atari are now selling off every asset that isnt nailed down in a desperate effort to keep afloat might have taught them that already. |
|
0
Infogrames: Dont be cheap, give the developers the money and the time they need to get a good product together.
That does not mean postponing the project if it seems like it is not going to make it. You have to plan this from the beginning. Please just realize that the time, manpower and money estimations may actually be good estimates and let them roll with it. |
|
0
He must have checked his diary and seen "make a complete knob of myself in public" the day he spewed forth this garbage. Since when did developers under the thumb of a largish producer ever decide when to ship a game? It is knobs like him who foist this kind of garbage onto the public and rob them of their hard earned cash. Sitting in their "Middle Manager's Monthly Mediochrity Meeting" deciding the fate of games they don't understand or have barely played and kow-towing to the whims of marketing people who've already blown their marketing budget and need a release.
Like the Guinness, I'm not bitter ;-) |
|
kangarootoo
11/08/06 @ 12:58
0
Atari have a bit of a history of periodically saying odd stuff. I remember some head honcho over there suggesting that devs should be paid royalties based on review scores rather than sales. Of course that only works one way round, I can't see them paying royalties for a well received game that didn't sell.
His reasoning was that a poor game could damage a good franchise, giving the example of the first Matrix game. Quite how he reasoned this against the Matrix films themselves harming the Matrix franchise by getting progressively worse (but selling regardless) I'm not sure. We all brain fart from time to time, and often as not we write it here. Knee jerk thoughts that just pop out before we have had a chance to think things through. It seems though that when you get to a very senior position you occasionally have one of these moments whilst pointing your gob at a journalist. Just like politicians, company execs are unfortunately normal people (as opposed to the wise prophets we hope they must be, given the power they wield) and everyso often they do or say something bloody ridiculous that they later regret. Case in point. |
|
Eighthours
11/08/06 @ 13:55
0
That infamous Gamesradar thread should stand as a monument for all time. Shame it was purged as soon as possible.
Fragments remain on Stu Campbell's site, mind. |
|
0
Driv3r was in development for at least 2 and half years. Reflections had plenty of time to make a decent and playable game. Atari became so pissed that they just wanted to put the game out. Of course, it's not a very inteligent way of thinking. I think it was better NOT to release the game. They could have used the huge driv3r map and make some other game. Ubisoft had the same problem with Tomb Raider : AOD
|
|
0
@Skooch: perhaps he sued them for constructive dismissal(think thats the term) instead of unfair.
@Atari: I used to respect Infogrames, they put out some of the best games in the late 90's and early 2000's, but they started turning shit shortly before the took over the Atari name. Anyone with a bit of cop-on has known Atari has been going the way of interplay for at least 2 years though. |
|
Max_Powers
12/08/06 @ 11:07
0
"ROFL
America - Where the lawsuits run rampant. I can't believe i didn't catch onto that." America? Atari is French and Reflections British. Still ROFL'ing? |
|
0
Just thought I'd say that I attended the Test Drive Unlimited playtest in London, and I thought that the game was pretty cool. Only reason I won't be buying it is that it looks rubbish on my TV (can't afford a high-def TV yet).
And not all Atari games are bad - I loved Fahrenheit, though it was a bit ugly |
|
0
You can't wholly blame Atari for the mess that was Driv3r, Reflections had more than enough time but problems with Stuntman and woeful project management internally crippled the game. It's a shame because on paper it should have been amazing and the art work was fantastic, it's just once it was running on the console it look poor and played bad. Atari should have taken steps to remedy this early on in the development cycle.
The comment about "...seeking to hire development staff who feel "disgust with losing and disgust with being mediocre..."" makes me laugh, most people who feel that way left a long time ago. |
|
NegativeZero
14/08/06 @ 00:08
0
The Atari name is clearly cursed. It makes their execs slowly go insane, like mercury poisoning.
|
Comments: 1-36 of 36 in total
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
