Dev wrote on Jan 30, 2019, 09:03:
Beamer wrote on Jan 29, 2019, 07:34:
We all read the Starbreeze article yesterday, and 4A is even more dependent upon its games being hits than Starbreeze was. There's zero diversification.
They actually still have money coming in. Their problem is more that they squandered all their money because of a "visionary" CEO that turned out to be more of a dud CEO. Expensive secondary HQ's in places like LA, heavy investment in VR that didn't pan out. Buying up studios that were weird choices (like the one making a semi competitor to payday) and then releasing that game themselves, etc. Basically the dude had money coming out of his ears and burning a hole in his pocket and rushed to spend it everywhere in things that weren't their core competency, and spread themselves too thin.
Almost a little like star citizen. Except in that case, they still have tons of people throwing wallets at them so they are going to survive for a while more. If that stops at any point, then they are only a few months away from bankruptcy at their burn rate. If that income continues until release, we might get a game. Not sure if it will be a good game though.
You're not entirely wrong. Like I said in that thread, there was so much hubris from the CEO, and while his diversification efforts weren't necessarily bad ideas (they mostly were bad ideas, but not necessarily so), they were ideas bigger than his company. He needed more dependable revenue in their core business. The money coming out his ears was somewhat earned, and also equally much borrowed, which is a problem. And the games he invested in seemed less a good investment and more sharing the wealth with buddies.
You're right, though, they had income coming in, in the form of Payday 2. That's a luxury that 4A doesn't have, meaning 4A is even more vulnerable to a one game failure. I highly doubt they have enough reserves to keep going if they have a true flop, like Overkill's The Walking Dead was.