Rare questions Piñata marketing

By Robert Purchese Published 15 October, 2007

Says MS favoured Gears of War.

Rare has questioned owner Microsoft and its decision to pour more money into marketing Gears of War rather than Viva Piņata, GamesIndustry.biz reports.

Software engineer James Thomas felt sales of the new family-friendly game were affected by the decision, which propelled Epic's already very sought-after creation to worldwide chart success.

"Most interestingly I think from our point of view, it was interesting to see how the marketing budget was split last Christmas, because obviously everyone knew that Microsoft were publishing Gears of War and Viva Piņata," said Thomas, talking to Gamasutra.

"Yet, so much of the money went towards publishing Gears of War, which was going to sell millions anyway."

"It was a bit like, 'what about the other franchise?' I think we got left in the wake somewhat. Hopefully the PC version this Christmas, it might get something of a second wind."

In the same interview, Justin Cook, who worked as a designer on Viva Piņata, notes that the game has sold "close to half a million sales now, so that isn't a terrible debut for a game."

In contrast, Epic's Gears of War broke records on release, becoming the fastest-selling next-gen console game and hitting 3 million sales within ten weeks, as well as becoming the most played game on Xbox Live.

Epic Games president Michael Capps said earlier this year that much of the success of the game was due to a big marketing budget, and the company was "extremely lucky" to have the backing of Microsoft.

However, Microsoft does still has faith in the Piņata franchise. At E3 this year it unveiled Viva Piņata: Party Animals in development at Krome Studios, and Climax's Games for Windows version of the original is due shortly. A DS version is also in development.

Viva Piņata is due for release this Christmas, where it will ironically share shelf space once again with Gears of War, albeit the PC version due out on 9th November.

News lurks everywhere, which is why GamesIndustry.biz is far more important than breeding animals or chainsawing Locust.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (58) Latest comment 4 years ago

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

  • JayeM #1 4 years ago

    Doubt it would've sold as much either way.
    Edited by 1 at 15/10/07 @ 16:00

  • funkyd #2 4 years ago

    A TV show gets a lot more playtime than an ad. o_0

  • SeanLB #3 4 years ago

    The DS version should be all the promotion they need if it is half as good as they are saying it is in the interview. Should convince peeps to snap up the 360 titles, and should give the TV show a boost so that it is actually shown somewhere...is it even shown here?

  • NewYork #4 4 years ago

    How bad could the marketing have been? I mean, I saw ads of it. That's pretty good going in itself.

  • projectmayhem #5 4 years ago

    It wasn't the marketing that hurt the game, it was the game being from the studio who brought you Perfect Dark Zero. It's a gardening sim on xbox360, a console who's sales feature shooters ALL THE TIME. What market did they want with Viva Pinata?

    Pull a Bungie, break free and get back to Nintendo ASAP.

  • Nostromo13 #6 4 years ago

    Rare have a lot of cheek to say something like that, considering the amount that Microsoft paid for them they really haven't shown to be that valuable, call that an unfair statement but the proof is in the sales.

  • dsmx #7 4 years ago

    I can think of several reasons why pinata didn't sell well, but the main one is that it was released on the wrong console. Microsoft was always going the favour gears it was always going to sell more.

  • SeanLB #8 4 years ago

    They did raise a good point in the interview about deadlines, and Rare never being able to meet them, and now with the big owner are being forced to. They need to sort themselves out really, or break free like Bungie as already has been said.

  • Zanuah #9 4 years ago

    SeanLB : ...and should give the TV show a boost so that it is actually shown somewhere...is it even shown here?

    I've seen the TV show on dutch TV, I think it was on one of those kids channels like Jetix or Nickelodeon...

  • brooza #10 4 years ago

    I blame the ******* ROMANCE DANCES.

    SO tedious

  • Steroyd #11 4 years ago

    Oi DK64 was great. >:(

    A little too BK-ish but it was all good.

  • J.C #12 4 years ago

    Massive mistake for MS snapping up Rare. The only company to prosper from the buyout was indeed nintendo.

    Oi DK64 was great. >:(

    A little too BK-ish but it was all good.
    It wasn't bad, but banjo was better.
    Dont argue!
    Edited by 1 at 15/10/07 @ 16:34

  • Kiigan #13 4 years ago

    Viva Pinata was a damn hard prospect to sell, if you ask me.

    Sure, there's a nice little gardening game in there, but it is buried under layer after layer of patronizing fluff and irritating presentation masquerading as "polish". The whole product feels so schizophrenic... you have this deep, complex, difficult game, but presented as if it was for 5 year olds. It's all so inappropriate - it is as if both Rare and Microsoft had totally different games in mind. I'm not surprised Microsoft didn't pour as much money into marketing Viva Pinata - if anything they should have held back from releasing the game entirely until they figured out (a) what the game was and (b) who the game was for.

    Anyone who really thought that Viva Pinata was going be "Nintendo for the 360" or open up Xbox 360 to a more family audience was deluding themselves.

  • Fernando #14 4 years ago

    go 3rd party please

  • DUFFKING #15 4 years ago

    Clearly, they advertise the game that's not as good so it sells more.

  • Daryel #16 4 years ago

    Viva Pinata was still a very good game. I liked it a lot. But when Bill Gates himself makes a Statement in an interview that Pinanta is a Game for 9 year old girls - i understand that Rare is a little bit pissed off...

  • peterfll #17 4 years ago

    1 million sales shouldn't be sniffed at either. Sounds like it probably has made a nice little profit.

  • DFective #18 4 years ago

    Viva Pinata was better than Gears too.

  • LFMartins #19 4 years ago

    peterfll: read again,itīs "close to half a million" not one million.

  • Rash' #20 4 years ago

    In a matter of weeks Microsoft have lost bankable support through, Bungie and Bizarre and now this from Rare. What the hell is the company doing?

  • chicknstu #21 4 years ago

    "Rare has questioned owner Microsoft and its decision to pour more money into marketing Gears of War rather than Viva Piņata"

    Microsofts Answer : Yeah, we looked at one, perhaps the defining co-operative action game of the year, and the other, an annoying broken garden simulator, and decided to go with the first option....
    Edited by 1 at 15/10/07 @ 17:00

  • bonker #22 4 years ago

    Two things here:

    1/ I can't reason why so much money would be spent marketing GOW either given the uber hype that it already had behind it. Yes I know some of that hype was paid for but still it was at least as high profile as H3 at the time ...

    2/ I liked VP but it was another token effort by MS to break away from the FPS-athon that is 360. The problem was that it was sooooo far removed that it was like playing a game for 6-8 year olds (which absolutely was MS' design insistence). A bit like their RPG stuff, uber old-fashioned JRPG turn-based combat FTL ... You can't have most of your stuff at one end of the spectrum and then toss in a couple of token efforts at the complete other end of the spectrum and think you have a balanced portfolio of games for your console ...

  • T4RG4 #23 4 years ago

    Halo3 is bland, PGR4 Arcade mush and Rare are the New Rare (read not a patch on the old).

    Runs away...

  • kangarootoo #24 4 years ago

    I think the sales say more about the 360 installed base than the marketing spend for each game.

    He is probably right that GEoW got the lions share, but that was probably the right thing to do if the best return on the investment was important (which of course, it was).

  • infoxicated #25 4 years ago

    "However, Microsoft does still has faith in the Piņata franchise."

    ...and can has cheeseburger

  • Adaptor #26 4 years ago

    Viva Pinata is really one of the better titles on 360. I thought it was too kiddy for my tastes but, after playing it, I was totally hooked. The art style and gameplay are very unique and it is one of thos games that doesn't want to be tough or scare you, it just has this warm atmosphere that's really refreshing.

    I hope that more people try it out and Rare sells a lot more copies. They deserve it for making such a unique, fun game.

  • Pac-man-ate-my-wife #27 4 years ago

    http://vh 1.blogs.com/photos/uncategorize...

  • Penguinzoot #28 4 years ago

    I loved Viva Pinata, but it was difficult the more you progressed.

    Creating a TV series to publicise the game was a great idea. But I think part of the problem with sales of the game was the fact that the game was NOT really like the TV series: characters in the game didn't vocalise with the voices from either the TV series or the game trailers. I.e. the game wasn't "about" their favourite characters from the TV show.

    As a result, marketing it to kids who have expectations raised by seeing the TV show was always going to be a problem. What those kids probably wanted from the game was an adventure/story/activities (or whatever) involving their favourite characters from the show. Not the deep and engrossing gardening sim it actually is. Shame really, but no real surprise.

    For that audience, Viva Pinata Party Animals seems a much better idea. But at least Viva Pinata may have done some of the hard work by establishing the franchise.
    Edited by 1 at 15/10/07 @ 17:25

  • bengray66 #29 4 years ago

    "Rare died a long time ago"

    What are you, some sort of idiot? Rare are one of the best things to have ever happened to computer gaming.....

  • Monkey_Puncher #30 4 years ago

    Rare aren't dead, Viva Pinata proved that!

    The Banjo team at least is still there and still intact. I think he has a point in all honesty, Pinata was treated a bit like mutant cousin that nobody wants much to do with by Microsoft last Xmas. I was expecting a few adverts and bit more of a push of the game by Microsoft, instead it made its way onto shelves in Europe with barely a whimper.

    Oh and thank god it didn't have the voices from the cartoon in the game, I'd have ended up chucking the disk out of the window if I had to listen to those things every time I turned the game on.

  • Wendelius #31 4 years ago

    Viva Pinata is an excellent game and deserved to do well. It's the only game in my household which is played by my 6 year old, my 9 year old twins, my wife and myself. We all have gardens in progress and the last play session on it was yesterday.

    Not bad considering how long it's been out.

    Don't know about marketing budgets, but it certainly must have struggled against the shiny and exciting Gears of War. Of course, GoW was played by me alone for 2 weeks and then sold. So it's not hard to see which game I think is better.

    Wendelius

  • sharpfish #32 4 years ago

    It was a great game, with a couple of flaws, but easy to loose vast amounts of time on just 'doing a bit more'...

    I'm also glad the voices of the cartoon were nowhere near the game, I hated those voices. The game would have done better on Nintendo systems but it wouldn't have looked as good that's for sure. :)

  • cyber_nicco #33 4 years ago

    Viva Pinata is a great game. Most people who own it would agree (it seems).

    'Nuff said.

  • smelly #34 4 years ago

    Hmm.. But if Pinata got as much in the way as marketting spent on it.. then it would've ended up with 10/10 scores.. which most people wouldve spotted as a "bit suss"

  • kendoguk #35 4 years ago

    both are good

  • Monkey-Wizard-Ken #36 4 years ago

    Rare stop saying bad things about your your daddy!

  • cubbymoore #37 4 years ago

    I blame Mad World.

  • Brianstorm #38 4 years ago

    the best minds from rare ar working on haze for ps3..........

  • spud71 #39 4 years ago

    The best Game Designers are still there, they worked on Kameo and now Banjo!!

  • smelly #40 4 years ago

    Kameo? Lol.. Cube game!

  • deepmenace #41 4 years ago

    viva would never sell to the average 360 owner.

    ps3 is better suited demographic.

    shame.

  • The-Bodybuilder #42 4 years ago

    Personally, I couldn't get into VP. The game had so much tutorials, it put me off. I just don't have that time to invest into getting past a tutorial.

    Rare are partially right. But they seem to have forgotten..
    1. MS pays thier wage checks.

    2. MS paid a lot for them.

    3. MS invested, hyped, and wasted money on, Perfect Dark Zero, conkers, and virtually all other rare games before this.

  • T4RG4 #43 4 years ago

    "the best minds from rare ar working on haze for ps3.........."

    HA.HA.HA

    We've all seen Haze.

  • smelly #44 4 years ago

    @Supine: Still doesnt stop it from being a tarted up cube game.

  • Penguinzoot #45 4 years ago

    @smelly

    Kameo may be a tarted up Cube game, but I thoroughly enjoyed it. Controls were shit though.

  • NegativeZero #46 4 years ago

    I think a good part of the reason that it never sold is that it's very much a game looking for an audience. It's too hard for kids, but too kiddy for adults.

  • Ginko #47 4 years ago

    Viva Pinata can reach an audience on the Xbox 360, only that audience didn't really exist at release. It still doesn't, and that is Microsoft's fault for not marketing said audience enough.

    If they keep pouring all the marketing dollars toward the FPS-centric crowd then that's the only audience they'll have. They need to start treating non-FPS/mature titles as viable products on the platform. That's all about marketing. Pretty simple to understand.

  • Freek #48 4 years ago

    It's a very strange situation. On the one hand MS wanted this kind of game so bad they actually went out and bought a developer (Rare) to make them. Then they have their game, exclusively, but don't give it much attention.

  • ZeroAX #49 4 years ago

    it feels like what turbograf-x did with platform games (it didn't even have A and B buttons but RUN and JUMP ones) thinking haveing the most popular genre would sell many. but bonker wasn't mario or sonic like halo3 ain't half life2 or unreal tournament3

  • Pirotic #50 4 years ago

    Gears was a better game, so of course it deserved more of an advertising budget. Maybe if Rare could get back to making half decent titles Microsoft would show them off a bit more. Microsoft would have every right to be annoyed at Rare for churning out piss poor games since the buy-out, but Rare imo has no justification for trying to put the blame back on microsoft.

  • captainrentboy #51 4 years ago

    I friggin loved Kameo, the graphics were effing beautiful too.
    That's all.

  • Wash #52 4 years ago

    Viva is a good game. It got its own tv show, wot else do ya want.

  • bengray66 #53 4 years ago

    "3. MS invested, hyped, and wasted money on, Perfect Dark Zero, conkers, and virtually all other rare games before this."

    You sir can go fuck yourself... All other Rare Games? You mean the shit they turned out like GoldenEye and Banjo? Yeah, real wasted money there you twat.

  • L42yB #54 4 years ago

    @bengray66: I think his point was that Micro$oft invested money in Perfect Dark and the "New" Conkers (which was a brilliant game in its day but didn't deserve to be re-released at full price with a crappy multiplayer slapped onto it - I bought it expecting the single player to be different but was massively dissappointed.)

    Golden Eye and Banjo are both excellent games, but M$ has never spent money on them as they were b4 its time. I think we can all agree that since M$ bought Rare they have not lived up to our expectations...

    Oh, and VP is a fun game :)

  • gandhimaster #55 4 years ago

    i'd say if viva was actually as good as promised it wouldn't need the marketing budget increased. they tried to use the nintendo style etc but messed it up. things happen too often that interrupt was ur doing! annoying! ; )

    animal crossing just lets you slowly discover things at ur own pace. woooo lol.

  • Machetazo #56 4 years ago

    Microsoft sold Viva down the river from the get-go, when they started presenting it as a kid's game. In the end, Microsoft got caught out putting too much weight on the game to be able to foster a market for itself. Good as it was, it was never going to do that at that time, especially in the face of misdirected - you have to advertise and appeal to some kind of specific audience - and lackadaisical promotion.

    Just as Xbox set the foundation for 360, Viva's set the foundation for....? What?
    The market that Microsoft wanted to see arise as a secondary facet has probably since been consumed into Live Arcade.

    +1 to Ginko's latest comment, too. MS say they want to broaden the platform's perspective, but they're not willing to walk the walk, to make it happen. Which is especially odd, since the Xbox 360 is now competitive in pricing to the Wii, on the lower end, outside of the dedicated market.

  • Corben_Dallas #57 4 years ago

    They have a point, VP is a great game but MS missed the boat Marketing wise on this one.

    If Nintendo had VP it would sell millions...... but then they know how to sell stuff to a younger audience........ie kids.

  • The-Bodybuilder #58 4 years ago

    >"You sir can go fuck yourself... All other Rare Games? You mean the shit they turned out like GoldenEye and Banjo? Yeah, real wasted money there you twat. "

    LOL, what a freaking idiot. Did MS own rare during the N64?