Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed

Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. Reports Results for Fourth Quarter and Fiscal Year 2012, saying the losses for the year were in line with projections. Here's word: "For the fiscal year ended March 31, 2012, net revenue was $825.8 million, as compared to $1,136.9 million for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011, which had benefited from the release of Red Dead Redemption. GAAP loss from continuing operations was $107.7 million, or $1.30 per diluted share, as compared to GAAP income from continuing operations of $53.8 million, or $0.62 per diluted share, for the prior fiscal year. Non-GAAP net loss was $59.4 million, or $0.71 per diluted share, as compared to Non-GAAP net income of $94.3 million, or $1.02 per diluted share, for the prior fiscal year." There's also news of a delay to 2K Marin's planned XCOM first-person shooter, which was most recently delayed to their fiscal 2013. Now word is: "2K Games now expects to release XCOM, its shooter version of the franchise that is in development at 2K Marin, during fiscal year 2014," so this additional one-year setback means the game may not be released until March 31, 2014.

View
29 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

29. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 27, 2012, 07:30 Jerykk
 
I also mind the scripting, such as doors opened by AI, far less than others do. I don't really care if a door opens when a teammate opens it or if it opens when a monster smashes through it, like Half Life. In the long run it's all the same. I can't think of a single game that's "immersive" in a way that I forget I'm playing a game. Worlds can be ruined by things that destroy immersion (like, say, if Thief had Pepsi ads), but gameplay? I'm always aware I'm in a game...

There are varying degrees of immersion. It's not a binary thing. Games that are rigidly scripted and linear are less immersive than games that offer dynamic gameplay because the player has less agency. Games as a medium are defined by interaction, so when you remove interaction or meaningful choice, you're making less of a game and more of a slightly interactive movie.

Games like CoD have lazy design that removes player agency. Invisible walls, arbitrary fail states, the inability to do things that you should logically be able to do... if an NPC can open a door, why can't I? If you want to prevent the player from doing something, you should provide logical and intuitive obstacles. For example, I can't open a door because it's blocked by rubble. However, a monster can smash through the wall nearby because it has freakish strength, creating an opening for me to progress. Games like CoD don't bother with this. If you stray from the designated path, they just pop up a mission failure screen. If you shoot someone you aren't supposed to, failure screen. If you don't stay close enough to the NPC with the giant "FOLLOW" text above his head... failure screen. It's just incredibly lazy design.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
28. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 27, 2012, 07:21 Jerykk
 
StingingVelvet wrote on May 25, 2012, 16:39:
Jerykk wrote on May 25, 2012, 04:42:
Your argument is made laughable when you insert your opinion as fact. For people who like that style of game, which is a ton of people, Modern Warfare is of tremendously high quality. Similar games like Medal of Honor or Breach are much worse, and sell much worse.

Medal of Honor was much worse? Really? I heard it was pretty much the same as CoD, which was its biggest problem. But if you actually enjoy pseudo-realistic military shooters with completely linear and scripted single-player campaigns, I'm pretty sure you'll enjoy MoH. Hell, if MoH was called Call of Duty: Modern Honor, it would have sold about as much as any other CoD game. Not that it sold badly or anything. 5 million units is hardly a poor showing.

Let's not fool ourselves here. CoD sells because it has CoD in the title. Just like Diablo 3 sold because it was called Diablo 3. There are better games in each of those genres but quality isn't what sells games. Hype and marketing is what sells games. If quality sold games, then every good game ever made would sell well but as history can attest to, that's not the case.

I played MoH. It had nowhere near the polish, spectacle or adrenaline rush that CoD has. The multiplayer was largely panned by people I know who play and enjoy CoD multiplayer. Don't assume because you lump these games into "har har idiots" categories that they are all the same level of quality.

Fair enough. I haven't actually played MoH, so I based my opinion on what I've seen and read of it. Still, your assertion that it sold less than CoD because of quality is questionable at best. It's well-established that hype and marketing are the largest factors in a game's financial success. Even if MoH ended up being better than CoD, CoD would still sell better because the CoD brand has far greater recognition than the MoH brand.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
27. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 25, 2012, 17:12 Beamer
 
Medal of Honor was far, far worse. The game didn't do a single thing well. Call of Duty has its flaws, infinite spawning being the biggest, pacing being the second biggest, incoherent plotline being the third biggest, but the actual combat mechanics are butter-like.


I also mind the scripting, such as doors opened by AI, far less than others do. I don't really care if a door opens when a teammate opens it or if it opens when a monster smashes through it, like Half Life. In the long run it's all the same. I can't think of a single game that's "immersive" in a way that I forget I'm playing a game. Worlds can be ruined by things that destroy immersion (like, say, if Thief had Pepsi ads), but gameplay? I'm always aware I'm in a game...
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 25, 2012, 16:39 StingingVelvet
 
Jerykk wrote on May 25, 2012, 04:42:
Your argument is made laughable when you insert your opinion as fact. For people who like that style of game, which is a ton of people, Modern Warfare is of tremendously high quality. Similar games like Medal of Honor or Breach are much worse, and sell much worse.

Medal of Honor was much worse? Really? I heard it was pretty much the same as CoD, which was its biggest problem. But if you actually enjoy pseudo-realistic military shooters with completely linear and scripted single-player campaigns, I'm pretty sure you'll enjoy MoH. Hell, if MoH was called Call of Duty: Modern Honor, it would have sold about as much as any other CoD game. Not that it sold badly or anything. 5 million units is hardly a poor showing.

Let's not fool ourselves here. CoD sells because it has CoD in the title. Just like Diablo 3 sold because it was called Diablo 3. There are better games in each of those genres but quality isn't what sells games. Hype and marketing is what sells games. If quality sold games, then every good game ever made would sell well but as history can attest to, that's not the case.

I played MoH. It had nowhere near the polish, spectacle or adrenaline rush that CoD has. The multiplayer was largely panned by people I know who play and enjoy CoD multiplayer. Don't assume because you lump these games into "har har idiots" categories that they are all the same level of quality.
 
Avatar 54622
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 25, 2012, 04:42 Jerykk
 
Your argument is made laughable when you insert your opinion as fact. For people who like that style of game, which is a ton of people, Modern Warfare is of tremendously high quality. Similar games like Medal of Honor or Breach are much worse, and sell much worse.

Medal of Honor was much worse? Really? I heard it was pretty much the same as CoD, which was its biggest problem. But if you actually enjoy pseudo-realistic military shooters with completely linear and scripted single-player campaigns, I'm pretty sure you'll enjoy MoH. Hell, if MoH was called Call of Duty: Modern Honor, it would have sold about as much as any other CoD game. Not that it sold badly or anything. 5 million units is hardly a poor showing.

Let's not fool ourselves here. CoD sells because it has CoD in the title. Just like Diablo 3 sold because it was called Diablo 3. There are better games in each of those genres but quality isn't what sells games. Hype and marketing is what sells games. If quality sold games, then every good game ever made would sell well but as history can attest to, that's not the case.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 24, 2012, 04:58 StingingVelvet
 
InBlack wrote on May 23, 2012, 09:57:
Ok, let me take a crack at your post here. Bullshit. See I know that word too.

Case in point? Every single Modern Warfare game since the first one. A game doesnt have to be good to sell well, it needs to be average at worst and have an expensive marketing campaign.

I dont see bad word of mouth slowing down Diablo3's sales even though its the weakest game in the series (story and atmosphere wise) and the horrific launch problems (which still continue), despite Blizzard giving refunds (amazing right?) and despite the delayed features (pvp, real money auctionhouse).

Sorry to burst your bubble bro, but quality is a dying charateristic in this industry, its sad but its true.

Your argument is made laughable when you insert your opinion as fact. For people who like that style of game, which is a ton of people, Modern Warfare is of tremendously high quality. Similar games like Medal of Honor or Breach are much worse, and sell much worse.

Anyway, go on thinking what you want to think. All games that don't stick to their predecessors' style are doomed to failure, despite tons of evidence to the contrary.
 
Avatar 54622
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 24, 2012, 00:13 Jerykk
 
I disagree. It's hard to claim that RPGs like Skyrim or The Witcher 2 aren't setting new peaks; racing games like F1 2011 are more realistic than anything that has come before; strategy games like Civilization V still appear in the top-ten of most played games on Steam, etc. The games industry is as strong as it has ever been. And we even have Kickstarter for funding niche games that would have previously never been made.

In terms of profits, yeah, the games industry is more successful than ever before. In terms of quality... that depends on what you're looking for. Good luck finding a high quality space sim or mech sim. While indie games like Wasteland 2, Shadowrun, Age of Decadence and Dead State have potential, we have yet to see the quality of their final releases. Games like Planescape: Torment and Fallout still stand unrivaled in the CRPG genre. The stealth genre is equally sparse these days, with pure stealth games being practically non-existent. Ditto with survival horror.

Truth is, publishers took more risks in the 90's and early 2000's and we saw a much wider variety of genres as a result.

However, you still see great, genre defining games like Skyrim, Diablo III, Batman: Arkham City, The Witcher 2, etc.

It's a bit of a stretch to call any of those "genre-defining." Good games? Sure. But what genres are they defining? RPGs existed before Witcher 2 and Skyrim. Hack 'n slash games existed before Diablo 3. Open-world action games existed before Arkham City. None of these games have defined or redefined any genres. They're just good games within established genres.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 23, 2012, 20:10 Fletch
 

"XCOM shooter" just sounds wrong.

 
Avatar 10520
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 23, 2012, 13:07 theyarecomingforyou
 
Beamer wrote on May 23, 2012, 10:29:
A lot of those games I played in the mid 90s were innovative, but I wouldn't say they were quality. People really think quality is a dying characteristic? Hell, with indies quality has never been higher (did you ever go to a mid 90s computer show and buy a demo CD? 200+ games, each one shittier than the last.) And in majors I'd say quality is pretty damn high, too.
Exactly. Games were just as crap in the past, yet people only remember the good games (and the occasional flop like Daikatana). The reality is that there are a lot more games on the market now so it is to be expected that there will be a lot more crap games. However, you still see great, genre defining games like Skyrim, Diablo III, Batman: Arkham City, The Witcher 2, etc. The games industry is as strong as ever, despite the dross that publishers like EA, Activision and Ubisoft put out.

Beamer wrote on May 23, 2012, 10:29:
We may not hit peaks as high as we used to, but the industry is far more consistently fun than it ever was.
I disagree. It's hard to claim that RPGs like Skyrim or The Witcher 2 aren't setting new peaks; racing games like F1 2011 are more realistic than anything that has come before; strategy games like Civilization V still appear in the top-ten of most played games on Steam, etc. The games industry is as strong as it has ever been. And we even have Kickstarter for funding niche games that would have previously never been made.

That said, the XCOM shooter looks terrible. The Firaxis strategy game on the otherhand is looking awesome.
 
Avatar 22891
 
SteamID: theyarecomingforyou
Star Citizen: Blue's News
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 23, 2012, 12:29 Jerykk
 
Fallout3 was a remake. This 'FPS' isnt. Im not making this up as I go along here, care to use another argument other than the Fallout reboot which was an actual reboot and in essence is still an RPG?

FO3 wasn't really a remake or reboot. The Fallout canon remains intact.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 23, 2012, 10:29 Beamer
 
InBlack wrote on May 23, 2012, 09:57:
StingingVelvet wrote on May 23, 2012, 09:21:
InBlack wrote on May 23, 2012, 07:30:
Im guessing that the 'real' XCOM game is the real reason for the delay.

Management Fail is what I call it, anything other than a remake of the original was/is bound to fail. Oldschoolers will shun it for its heresy, and newschoolers are clueless as to what the fuck its supposed to be anyway.

As someone else just basically said, this is such BS. Good games sell, bad games don't, more or less. Fallout 3 was certainly not hurt by the legions of whining old fans who were mad about it. Syndicate sold moderately because it wasn't that great a game.

XCOM the shooter being delayed is all about the game not fitting 2K's standards. 2K are actually really good about not releasing shitty games just to make a deadline.

Ok, let me take a crack at your post here. Bullshit. See I know that word too.

Case in point? Every single Modern Warfare game since the first one. A game doesnt have to be good to sell well, it needs to be average at worst and have an expensive marketing campaign.

I dont see bad word of mouth slowing down Diablo3's sales even though its the weakest game in the series (story and atmosphere wise) and the horrific launch problems (which still continue), despite Blizzard giving refunds (amazing right?) and despite the delayed features (pvp, real money auctionhouse).

Sorry to burst your bubble bro, but quality is a dying charateristic in this industry, its sad but its true.

A lot of those games I played in the mid 90s were innovative, but I wouldn't say they were quality. People really think quality is a dying characteristic? Hell, with indies quality has never been higher (did you ever go to a mid 90s computer show and buy a demo CD? 200+ games, each one shittier than the last.) And in majors I'd say quality is pretty damn high, too.

We may not hit peaks as high as we used to, but the industry is far more consistently fun than it ever was.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 23, 2012, 09:57 InBlack
 
StingingVelvet wrote on May 23, 2012, 09:21:
InBlack wrote on May 23, 2012, 07:30:
Im guessing that the 'real' XCOM game is the real reason for the delay.

Management Fail is what I call it, anything other than a remake of the original was/is bound to fail. Oldschoolers will shun it for its heresy, and newschoolers are clueless as to what the fuck its supposed to be anyway.

As someone else just basically said, this is such BS. Good games sell, bad games don't, more or less. Fallout 3 was certainly not hurt by the legions of whining old fans who were mad about it. Syndicate sold moderately because it wasn't that great a game.

XCOM the shooter being delayed is all about the game not fitting 2K's standards. 2K are actually really good about not releasing shitty games just to make a deadline.

Ok, let me take a crack at your post here. Bullshit. See I know that word too.

Case in point? Every single Modern Warfare game since the first one. A game doesnt have to be good to sell well, it needs to be average at worst and have an expensive marketing campaign.

I dont see bad word of mouth slowing down Diablo3's sales even though its the weakest game in the series (story and atmosphere wise) and the horrific launch problems (which still continue), despite Blizzard giving refunds (amazing right?) and despite the delayed features (pvp, real money auctionhouse).

Sorry to burst your bubble bro, but quality is a dying charateristic in this industry, its sad but its true.
 
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
17. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 23, 2012, 09:38 InBlack
 
Beamer wrote on May 23, 2012, 08:42:
InBlack wrote on May 23, 2012, 07:30:
Im guessing that the 'real' XCOM game is the real reason for the delay.

Management Fail is what I call it, anything other than a remake of the original was/is bound to fail. Oldschoolers will shun it for its heresy, and newschoolers are clueless as to what the fuck its supposed to be anyway.

People said the same thing about Fallout 3. Repeatedly. If a game is good it will probably sell, if it isn't good it probably won't. Calling this "X-COM" won't damn it, especially as it's pretty far removed but keeps the same general theme.

Also, I doubt the "real" X-COM game is the real reason. Why wouldn't you want to release both together? And the "real" game has been in development for 3 years, which is about the same as the "other" game, so odds are they were planned that way.

Fallout3 was a remake. This 'FPS' isnt. Im not making this up as I go along here, care to use another argument other than the Fallout reboot which was an actual reboot and in essence is still an RPG?
 
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 23, 2012, 09:21 StingingVelvet
 
InBlack wrote on May 23, 2012, 07:30:
Im guessing that the 'real' XCOM game is the real reason for the delay.

Management Fail is what I call it, anything other than a remake of the original was/is bound to fail. Oldschoolers will shun it for its heresy, and newschoolers are clueless as to what the fuck its supposed to be anyway.

As someone else just basically said, this is such BS. Good games sell, bad games don't, more or less. Fallout 3 was certainly not hurt by the legions of whining old fans who were mad about it. Syndicate sold moderately because it wasn't that great a game.

XCOM the shooter being delayed is all about the game not fitting 2K's standards. 2K are actually really good about not releasing shitty games just to make a deadline.
 
Avatar 54622
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 23, 2012, 08:42 Beamer
 
InBlack wrote on May 23, 2012, 07:30:
Im guessing that the 'real' XCOM game is the real reason for the delay.

Management Fail is what I call it, anything other than a remake of the original was/is bound to fail. Oldschoolers will shun it for its heresy, and newschoolers are clueless as to what the fuck its supposed to be anyway.

People said the same thing about Fallout 3. Repeatedly. If a game is good it will probably sell, if it isn't good it probably won't. Calling this "X-COM" won't damn it, especially as it's pretty far removed but keeps the same general theme.

Also, I doubt the "real" X-COM game is the real reason. Why wouldn't you want to release both together? And the "real" game has been in development for 3 years, which is about the same as the "other" game, so odds are they were planned that way.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 23, 2012, 07:51 Zadig
 
InBlack wrote on May 23, 2012, 07:30:
Management Fail is what I call it, anything other than a remake of the original was/is bound to fail. Oldschoolers will shun it for its heresy, and newschoolers are clueless as to what the fuck its supposed to be anyway.

Yes, that's why the Syndicate 'remake' was sure to fail too. It would be nice if the idiot developers would learn something from this besides "those old game franchises don't sell, we need to make more generic console shooters and wowclones".
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
13. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 23, 2012, 07:30 InBlack
 
Im guessing that the 'real' XCOM game is the real reason for the delay.

Management Fail is what I call it, anything other than a remake of the original was/is bound to fail. Oldschoolers will shun it for its heresy, and newschoolers are clueless as to what the fuck its supposed to be anyway.
 
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
12. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 23, 2012, 05:23 Orogogus
 
I think it's more interesting that for 4Q 2011, only 12% of their revenue came from "PC and other," but total sales (console & PC) are apparently split 19/81% between downloaded and retail sales, "driven by offerings for the Grand Theft Auto franchise, the Sid Meierís Civilization franchise, Red Dead Redemption, Borderlands, NBA 2K12 and L.A. Noire." I wish they'd broken down the split by platform. For downloads Civ is PC and RDR is console, obviously. How long has it been since the Red Dead Redemption DLC was released?  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
11. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 23, 2012, 05:14 StingingVelvet
 
I thought XCOM looked great. Unique art style and setting, cool strategy and RPG elements. It's a shame it must have had severe development problems.  
Avatar 54622
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10. Re: Take-Two Financials - XCOM Shooter Delayed May 23, 2012, 03:29 Dev
 
Jerykk wrote on May 22, 2012, 22:48:
Wait, I thought Take-Two and 2K were different publishers?
Nope, same.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Take-Two_Interactive

Take-Two wholly owns 2K Games and Rockstar Games.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
29 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo