• @Aurenkin
    link
    English
    39
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Or, you know, you could have kept lucasarts around. Pretty sure they were still a thing and pretty well respected at the time of the acquisition.

    EDIT: Shortsighted corpo scum don’t even understand the value of the thing they spent unimaginable amounts of money on, smh.

    • HarkMahlberg
      link
      fedilink
      239 months ago

      IIRC, Lucasarts had a massive legacy reputation as a publisher, but toward the end of its life, the public perception of Lucasarts had soured after the cancellation of Star Wars Battlefront 3. According to the developer Free Radical, Lucasarts cancelled the game, didn’t pay the developer for creating a “99% finished” game, the developer went bankrupt, and then all the assets fell into Lucasarts’s hands since it was their IP. These assets were then repurposed to create Renegade Squadron for the PSP.

      https://www.gamespot.com/articles/battlefront-3-was-99-percent-done-when-canceled/1100-6400833/

      • @Aurenkin
        link
        English
        139 months ago

        Damn that’s really shitty and such a shame that lucasarts would do that.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    359 months ago

    Anyone else remembering the time when Disney closed all their development studios because licensing is supposedly more profitable?

    • @sugar_in_your_tea
      link
      English
      22
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      I think it still is, it’s just that game devs have found a recurring revenue model that works similarly to licensing: microtransactions.

      I can see Disney wanting back in now that MTX is socially acceptable. Milking the same IP for decades is exactly their MO.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        39 months ago

        I can see Disney wanting back in now that MTX is socially acceptable. Milking the same IP for decades is exactly their MO.

        They could then just be a publisher for their own IP and outsource development work. Disney gets to own all copyrights and revenue and pick an independent studio most suited for each game. Buying something like EA for around a similar or higher price than Microsoft spends for Activision is just stupid.

        • @sugar_in_your_tea
          link
          English
          19 months ago

          Yeah, that makes sense too. I also wonder if they’re interested in having a game distribution platform as well. That’s in line with their Disney+ service they’ve been pushing. Buying EA means they get that and a bunch of popular games to seed it with.

          I guess we’ll see what they end up doing.

  • Computerchairgeneral
    link
    fedilink
    109 months ago

    Didn’t Disney drop out of gaming during Iger’s first run as CEO? He seemed pretty disinterested in gaming outside of licensing IPs. Then again his opinions may have changed over the years. Not sure how I feel about EA being bought up by Disney. On the one hand, Disney gets one step closer to being an all-consuming pop culture monopoly. On the other hand, at least Disney doesn’t have a console or platform to make EA games exclusive to. Well at least not yet.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -19 months ago

      Better idea, you should start with learning something before trying to present your drool-coated opinions to others.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          09 months ago

          You absolutely are, Disney made $28billion last year, a 27% increase over the previous year, and you called it a money pit. Idiot.

          And I know you won’t understand this, but disagreeing with someone doesn’t mean your feelings are hurt. In this case it just means that you were wrong and likely racist/sexist/homophobic, since you cried about them being “woke.” It’s a shame your feelings are so hurt by inclusiveness though.