gangsta_red

yes sir insomniac came right back and made ratchet and clank. they got the message that their loyal fanbase has been with play station brand. why you think they are working on spiderman for sony

and since sunset overdrive IP is owned by insomniac i wouldn't be surprised if future game/games come to play station or are even exclusives to play station

we all know how well sunset overdrive sold on xbox one(that's not a jab at ms it's more of a jab at xbox gamers who simply refuse to support verity) they much rather be in a rut with halo,gears and forza(since that's where ms is heading once again this gen)

Except that isn't by force , but by choice

It's not the same story for Insomniac because they never signed a deal with Sony in the first place.

The difference is that these developers signed a deal with Sony where they lost the rights to the IP and then a few years later they split from Sony to regain those rights.

Theres something else to the story that we are not seeing.

"It's well known that Sony likes to keep the rights on most games that other studios are making an exclusive for..."

... because they're exclusive games, and owning the rights would insure that they stay exclusive. Tequilla also signed a contract, and i'm sure that condition is clearly outlined within that contract. if they wanted to keep the rights, they shouldn't have signed the dotted line to begin with.

"So you can't trust Tequila but you are willing to trust Sony and whatever they say? What reasons would Tequila have to lie about?"

... and what reasons would Sony have to lie about? If Sony said there were development issues, how is that any less trustworthy than Tequilla saying that they split in order to regain the rights to the IP?

To be honest, I'm calling BS on their claims. Four years and absolutely nothing new shown and Sony agrees to sell the IP rights back to them. Sorry, but after that long, you either have something to show or there definitely are development issues.

***What reasons would Tequila have to lie about?***

In order to hide any development issues? As soon as something like that were to get out, their game would have a black mark.

you work so hard to make sony out to be the bad guy, even when it's harder to believe that than a simple truth.

Some of you guys seriously get emotional whenever Sony may get put in a bad light.

1. I never said sony was the bad guy and for whatever reason the outcome is just business. But for some reason some of you want to take it as me trying to make Sony the villain here.

2. Have we not heard about games before that were announced in the past and yet nothing shown for years? Just because we didn't see it doesn't mean there was production problems and the conclusion is Tequila is lying to us.

3. It is the same story with Insomniac, Insomniac was willing to make Sunset Overdrive for PS4 but they even said Sony wanted to own the IP. It's the reason they decided to go with Xbox because MS said they could keep their IP. It's also a reason they went independent.

@Ziggurcat

"and i'm sure that condition is clearly outlined within that contract. if they wanted to keep the rights, they shouldn't have signed the dotted line to begin with."

Do you have any proof of this claim?

"If Sony said there were development issues, how is that any less trustworthy..."

Because Sony just saying "development issues" can mean any number of things. The issues could come from them trying to secure the rights back, Tequila trying to find a different publisher, any number of things can be seen as a development issue.

@Christopher

I am positive Sony has had other studios that have had development issues that we never heard about. Not every aspect of development is made public. Who knows what dealings these two had with each other that caused this, I find it funny that people are quick to put the blame and disbelief on Tequila in order to keep a multi billion dollar company spotless.

All we can do is assume which I am doing too, but given what Tequila has said and what others have also said about Sony wanting control of their IP's, it isn't such a stretch that these guys may be telling the truth.

"I never said sony was the bad guy and for whatever reason the outcome is just business. But for some reason some of you want to take it as me trying to make Sony the villain here."

your entire argument is based on your belief that Tequilla is 100% telling the truth, therefore Sony must have been lying about there being development issues just because Tequilla said that there were none.

"'and i'm sure that condition is clearly outlined within that contract. if they wanted to keep the rights, they shouldn't have signed the dotted line to begin with.'

Do you have any proof of this claim?"

Don't be silly. The fact that they had to break their contract, and split from Sony in order to regain the rights to the IP shows you that there's a clause in the contract. The fact that Insomniac went with MS on SSoD because Sony wanted to own the rights to the IP shows that there's a clause in the contract. The fact that Sony owns the rights to all of their exclusive games shows that there's a clause in the contract.

"... Who knows what dealings these two had with each other that caused this, I find it funny that people are quick to put the blame and disbelief on Tequila in order to keep a multi billion dollar company spotless..."

... and yet, here you are - quick to put the blame, and disbelief on Sony about their claim that the reason for the split was due to development issues in order to paint a multi billion dollar company as the villain.

"Because Sony just saying "development issues" can mean any number of things. The issues could come from them trying to secure the rights back, Tequila trying to find a different publisher, any number of things can be seen as a development issue."

exactly. which is why Tequilla saying that there were no development issues is somewhat of a half-truth (because they're not including any administrative issues as a "development issue"), and why Sony saying that there were development issues isn't any less truthful than Tequilla saying there were none.

@Ziggurcat

"your entire argument is based on your belief that Tequilla is 100% telling the truth,"

So even if that were true, how does that make Sony the bad guy? In that same quote I even said "it's just business", so again, how is that making Sony out to be some sort of villain?

"The fact that they had to break their contract,..."

So basically you have no proof? You don't know the details of the contract, you don't know the details of development, you have no facts. Where is the proof Ziggurcat of all your facts?

"...quick to put the blame, and disbelief on Sony..."

As quick as you and others are ready to forgive Sony of any wrong doings and place all responsibility, blame and disbelief on an independent developer. As I have said numerous times, their story doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility given other stories that were related. It's you and a few others that seem to get over emotional if someone even mentions that this issue may have been caused by Sony.

"which is why Tequilla saying that there were no development issues is somewhat of a half-truth..."

Except Tequila is saying that the stories of there being actual development issues in terms of the game were rumors and false.

Believe what you want, but it's funny that the only reason why you and others are getting upset is because "i'm painting Sony as the bad guy". That is the only reason why you are here arguing now.

@gangsta red

Insomniac's always been independent, they just never self-published. And if Tequila isn't lying, they should have something to show by now. It's been, what, 3 years? Even Sony themselves admitted The Last Guardian had issues.

Give me some examples of games that didn't have anything be shown for years and yet no claims of development issues were brought up because every game I can think of in that situation has had issues.

And if any number of things can be a development issue, but it's definitely not that they have trouble making the game, then they should have no trouble showing what they've been up to.

@zeuanimals

Sony didn't admit there were issues until way, way later for Last Guardian, they kept development about that game quiet even letting a lot of rumors of the game being canceled go unanswered for a long period of time. It's exactly why we always wondered where was the Last Guardian for almost every past E3. We didn't here any inside official details about LG until it was later revealed for the PS4.

And yes, you are right, Insomniac was an independent developer but they were always(known for being) under Sony's roof making games that Sony owned. Which is why they broke out of that when they wanted to create Sunset Overdrive, Sony wanted to own that IP they were making. Something similar is what these devs are stating here, they wanted to take the rights back from Sony for Rime.

Again, not every aspect of development is made public, developers are not required to show you gameplay or development stage cycles, if this were true I would love to see where Crackdown 3 is now. We usually get the juicy bits in postmortems not during actual development. For all we know like this developer is saying the issues for this game could have stemmed from problems with who owns the rights to this game and then securing another publisher for this game.

"Give me some examples of games that didn't have anything be shown for years and yet no claims of development issues..."

How about any game that you 'never' heard of any development issues ;)
Or maybe a game like Deep Down, which is still claimed to be in development for the PS4.

***All we can do is assume which I am doing too, but given what Tequila has said and what others have also said about Sony wanting control of their IP's, it isn't such a stretch that these guys may be telling the truth.***

To be honest, your thoughts here don't seem very logical.

1. Sony selling back the IP isn't a sign of the devs having no issues and really just wanting their IP back from the tight-fisted Sony. If the tight-fisted Sony agreed to sell it back, there's got to be a really good reason for that. Song is tight-fisted after all.

2. Again, of course the developer is going to tell us everything is okay. Sean Murray was saying the same thing right up until release as well. It's in their best interest to have a positive outlook. I'm extremely surprised to see you side with another Indie developer on another game we know next to nothing about after NMS.

3. They have shown nothing other than the original trailer. Nothing. After 4 years, that's TLG level of development issues at least. But without any proof of any development taking place since they were debuted, you're going to "trust" them on this.

Makes no sense to me.

@Christopher

It seems less logical to automatically place the blame on a developer just because you haven't seen anything yet. Shenmue 3 is closely reaching 3(?) years and not one piece of actual gameplay has been shown...development issues?

"If the tight-fisted Sony agreed to sell it back, there's got to be a really good reason for that."

And that reason could be any number of things, it could be for the reasons the developer stated. Maybe Sony was willing to part ways with this IP because they didn't feel it was good enough to spend time and money hassling about. Maybe Sony just didn't want it because it wasn't goo. Sony were quick to let go of SOE and all those games they invested in, did those game also have development issues?

Maybe it did have development issues, but the reasons this guy is giving seems believable given past information about how Sony handles third party new IP's.

- Sean Murray was telling us what was in the game and selling us keys to the kingdom. It wasn't until we opened the front gate and saw it was a trap house with squatters there to greet us. But up until then there were people who were excited and still defend that game to this day. There have been plenty other independent developers that have given us exactly the game we all expected and wanted.

Maybe I just have less cynicism then most here.

If Rime comes out and it's a total flop or it's not representative of what was shown in the first trailer I'll be right here saying so, as I did with NMS. But it's a little premature to automatically start placing the sole blame on this developer and setting up a wall around Sony from any incoming criticisms.

"So even if that were true, how does that make Sony the bad guy? In that same quote I even said "it's just business", so again, how is that making Sony out to be some sort of villain?"

because you're insinuating that Sony lied about there being development issues by taking Tequilla's word as 100%, absolute truth, and therefore the trouble was 100% Sony's fault. saying "it's business" doesn't suddenly negate the tone of your argument, and doesn't absolve you from your implications that Sony isn't being truthful in this situation.

"So basically you have no proof? You don't know the details of the contract..."

you don't need to know the specific details of the contract if it's known that they had to break their contract with Sony in order to regain control of the IP rights. that alone tells you there is a clause, and you're being unnecessarily argumentative. here is an example of a Sony contract: http://bit.ly/2dADkn5 Section 5 specifically addresses IP ownership - item 5.2 in Section 5 under "Deliverables". there is enough reason to conclude that that specific item was also in the contract between Sony/Tequilla.

"As quick as you and others are ready to forgive Sony of any wrong doings and place all responsibility, blame and disbelief on an independent developer..."

what forgiveness needs to be given in this particular situation, exactly? what wrongdoing has Sony done in simply stating that the split was a result of development issues? who here is specifically placing responsibility, and blaming Tequilla? can you specifically cite where i've said Tequilla was lying? can you specifically cite where i've blamed Tequilla? can you specifically cite where i've placed the responsibility of the split entirely on Tequilla?

"Except Tequila is saying that the stories of there being actual development issues in terms of the game were rumors and false...."

except Sony just cited "development issues", which (as you openly admitted) could mean anything, and doesn't make their explanation for the decision any less truthful because it's not specifically saying that it was an issue of production (meaning that it wasn't because the game was a broken mess). i don't have any reason to believe that Tequilla is lying about there being no actual production issues, but they also don't say how far along they were when the relationship dissolved (only that it was "progressing perfectly"). the "development issue" could have very well been that Tequilla told Sony they were not going to continue to work on the game until they amend the contract to give the rights of the IP back to them (following an initial request from Tequilla, and denial from Sony).

Lots of studio's want to own their own IP, so it makes sense. Why give away the most valuable part of the game, the IP!?

MS will happily let you keep your IP, so maybe more devs should go there. MS is also more open to timed exclusivity too so you aren't leaving any money on the table. Just a thought! XD

Seems a bit silly to agree to a long deal and not know anything about Sony keeping the rights to some IPs...you don't just get half way in and go "SHIT...did they say that? I wasn't listening I was thinking about grabbing a bowl of Captain Crunch when I get home". Obviously something is up here.

The thing with Sunset Overdrive is that the WHOLE thing contradicts it's self

Lets think this through slowly

Sony wanted to keep the IP rights
Insomniac wanted to keep the IP rights
Insomniac made a deal with Microsoft instead
Microsoft let them keep the rights
The game is a Xbox One/PC exclusive

I'm sorry but I don't get that at all...you want to keep the rights of your game, which most developers like to do this so they can bring it to other systems later BUT it's an exclusive to Microsoft. In the end if Sony kept the rights at least more people would have bought the damn game because the PS4 selling so well and the fact that most of their fanbase are Playstation users. So after all that they've just just ended up being closed in regardless whether they own the rights or not...it's not like they have so much power with their games IP rights to put it on other systems unless they do a sequel but in order for more games to get a sequel you need to have pulled in enough of the market first time round. Did they? Who knows but considering how quiet it's been I don't think it's done as good as it has.

@Ziggurcat

Either you're trolling or you are being willfully ignorant.

"because you're insinuating that Sony lied about there being development issues by taking Tequilla's word as 100%,"

No! YOU are insinuating this. No where does that even remotely imply that I believe Sony is lying. AGAIN, AGAIN and AGAIN I have repeatedly stated that this does not make Sony the bad guy or villain. Why you have that fixated in your brain is beyond me.

As I have also repeatedly said; Sony claiming development issues could simply mean negotiating rights for the game. It's a broad term that can mean anything and now reading Tequila's explanation on what these "development issues" were does not seem out of the realm of possibility. It doesn't mean that Tequila had no gameplay or wasn't working on the game at all.

"you don't need to know the specific details of the contract if it's known that they had to break their contract..."

?!??!?

So basically you have no proof on the dealings between Tequila and Sony's contract. You're speculating just like I am given the information present and yet you like to put "FACT" in your comments.

"suddenly negate the tone.."

Dafaq!?! What exactly is my tone Ziggurcat, is this some mutant power where you can read the actual tone of someone's comment?

"what forgiveness needs to be given in this particular situation, exactly?..."

Holy Shit, then why exactly are you here and repeatedly replying to me Ziggurcat?

"except Sony just cited "development issues", which (as you openly admitted) could mean anything, and doesn't make their explanation..."

So what exactly is your issue here Ziggurcat?

You know what, nevermind...

@Fox

But lets also consider that Insomniac has had much more experience dealing with Sony and huge triple A projects. Could the same be said for Tequila Works?

I don't understand this notion that Sunset Overdrive would have done 100x better if on the PS4. As if games are a guaranteed success on PS4 because of a fanbase. Is it not out of the realm of possibility that a fanbase can be found on both platforms? I know I'm a fan of Insomniac and I also bought Sunset Overdrive.

@Red_Renegade

Ack, you're right, I always want to see something bad in Sony. I've been expooooosed!

you can't be less cynical, cuz you always wanna see something bad in sony. yes, you are making them out to be the bad guy, even though it doesn't make sense. damn shame.

“It’s really not complicated,” he stressed. “We decided that having the IP rights for one of our properties, and a game that was always conceived and planned, and dreamt of by Tequila Works, should remain in house. And that was why we reacquired the rights to the IP, and we came to this agreement with Sony, it was all on friendly terms. And of course, you know this industry has a lot of gossip and rumors, but really, that’s it. It’s not a complicated story.”

@Red is right Sony tries to control Ip's and as far as I'm concerned look at Infamous, Resistance and numerous other AAA Ip's from Sony they own them now. Sony historically has a big portfolio of games and I think its partly due to owning others Ip's to bolster its games its no secret. Nothing wrong with that from Sony's perspective they just need a team while they fund said Ip that they picked up. God forbid MS doing the same thing they got trashed 3 years ago for releasing games that wasn't from their own personal studios because I guess collaborating is a sin now.

Truth is Sony and MS know that the biggest pitfall in developing AAA games is, and always will and has been $$$$$ and thats NOT including advertisement. Especially with the rising cost of game development why do you think there's another Uncharted, GOW, Gran Turismo, remakes of old games from Sony? Gears, Forza and Halo every other year? Bread and butter people and Sony just like MS have and will continue to bank roll on another publishers Ips Capcome's in bed with both such as STF and DR. I mean do you any of you think MS and Sony actually "love" creating new ip's and spending 100s of millions plus nearly close to billion in ads? No they absolutely don't not even MS with there 100's of billions. New Ip's don't happen in the kindess of their heart they make executive decisions and spend the most money where it makes sense financially.

The latest trend from MS and Sony is them publishing either a established Ip or publishing a new ip from studios Why? Its faster that way they do all the ground work while Sony and MS lay the budget and its up to Sony and MS to determine how big they want to advertise the Ip. 2nd party comes into play and collaborations which works the same way, 3rd or 2nd party wins at the end of the day because they didn't have to spend a dime on development. Both companies don't want to spend more than they have to on new projects from 1st party with huge adverts behind it only for it to flop. That's how booth do buissness this gen and probably going forward for a while.

EDIT: I want to make clear that both companies will always do original AAA 1st party gaming, I'm just saying its not how it use to be like in 7th gen or any gen before that where the passion was in 1st party gaming and less about deals and buissness acquisitions like it is now.

*** It seems less logical to automatically place the blame on a developer just because you haven't seen anything yet. Shenmue 3 is closely reaching 3(?) years and not one piece of actual gameplay has been shown...development issues? ***

1. You're projecting bias by trying to bring in an IP like this as if it is at all relatable solely for its association with Sony. I think your thinking here is clouded by a bias rather than logic the way you do this. You're only proving my statement that you are not thinking logically.

2. Two years development since it was Kickstarted two years ago. It has also shown off more in-game assets than RIME since its debut.

3. It is completely possible that there are also development issues with Shenmue. Whether it does or doesn't has no bearing on the topic at hand.

*** Sony were quick to let go of SOE and all those games they invested in, did those game also have development issues? ***

SOE had very low profit margins and was likely otherwise to see a ton of cuts because of it. Just look at Landmark. Cancelled after years of development.

***Maybe it did have development issues, but the reasons this guy is giving seems believable given past information about how Sony handles third party new IP's. ***

And how does Sony handle these third-party IPs? As for as I can tell, they pretty much let them do what they want much how MS does the same thing. I would say the biggest involvement of any publisher is in Marketing, not development.

@Christopher

Really, bias? What bias is that Christopher? I'm bias because i believe this dev really wanted to get their rights back for their game from Sony? It's funny because the only bias i see is coming from you and your unwillingness to even consider that what this dev is saying may be what actually happened. No, your first response is you dont believe them only because 'you' personally havent seen any gameplay. That they are lying to avoid some fanatasy black mark of perception on their game.

How are your made up imaginary reasons anymore logical?

Then when I state this may be a possibility what this dev is saying is true, to you that is illogical and i'm projecting some sort of bias. Hilarious.

I am sure if I agreed with your opinion on this then there would be no accusations of bias now would there be? I'm sure I wouldn't have ziggurcat and Red constantly replying that I'm making sony out to be some villain.

My example of Shenmue is a game that has not had any gameplay shown and yet no reports of development issues. Something that you believe must be a cause of issues if no gameplay is shown to the public. Shenmue has shown assets but no actual gameplay after 3 years, even Bloodstained has shown something. At least Rime showed something and they say they will show something early next year.

Why you on the other hand brought up NMS and then went on to express how vocal i was about that game only shows how vindictive you are and your own actual bias since NMS has nothing to do with the situation here. You brought up NMS just to make some sort of far reaching point and we both know why, but it definitely has nothing to do with this article.

SOE had very low profit margins? You sure about that because last I checked Everquest still made a ton of money and so did the sequel and the expansions. Not to mention the ton of other money they dropped into their other games where there was no (that I read) reports of development issues. And with Sony pushing services on other devices it doesn't make sense for them to allow SOE to split and keep the IPs they created.

Like I said before you and others are unwilling to even fathom that what these devs are saying may be true. Instead you want to place blame on the developer and if anyone even mentions or suggest that what this dev is saying may be true, the reasons are not logical, bias, making Sony to be the villain. The fact that your apart of this collective way of thinking that anyone with a different view other than mine has to be bias is what truly is funny and scary at the same time.

I'll say it again since most of the members here seem to go overboard when their company of choice isn't presented in a way they favor....

What Tequila is saying sounds possible. That there was no development issues in terms of making the game and the issues of development could have stemmed from them trying to get the rights back and then finding another publisher.

Now with that said, if people still want to accuse me of making Sony a villain or if the admin wants to say im biased, then knock yourselves out but I'm done.

@Red

Perfect example of the extreme fanboy mentality is being displayed here.

*I believe my opinion more than yours and if you disagree then your bias.*

Seriously, why even bother Red? No where did you even imply that Sony was some sort of villain. Sony didn't shut the game down, the company has not been closed, no lay-offs have occurred because of the split, the game is still being developed and yet people are trying to accuse you of making Sony a villain or your biased against Sony.

Exactly how is Sony being portrayed as a villain in this story?

No one has answered that yet because they're too busy being upset that your in an article not praising Sony and calling the developers liars like they are.

The fact that I have read comments directed personally at you saying your making Sony a villain even though you have repeatedly said you weren't and explained why and they have not been marked just goes to show where the loyalties and true bias of certain folks really lie.