- last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT
Posted by: unlucky17
As an industry insider, you would be aware that taking the time and effort to revisit a 4 year old title that was released for a last-gen console in order to add a single feature (XBL) that is also last-gen would be a move that would have all sorts of risks.
Since you make games for a living, then how about you propose the following to Bungie.
Your company will pay for the rights to re-code Halo for the Xbox.
Your company devotes the man-hours to decompiling the existing game.
Your company re-writes the game to have altered netcode.
Your company re-writes the game to allow downloadable content.
Your company re-writes the game to include a matchmaking system.
Your company recompiles and tests the game and the changes.
Your company decides what factors of online play have to be altered to compensate for the change from a 100 MBit LAN to the Internet.
Your company allows Bungie to have final say as to the playability of the final product and that it stayed true to the original. It is after all, their IP.
Then the new product is packaged, marketed and released. *cha-ching!* And how long? Just a few months? That's one hell of a short production cycle, I would imagine at least a year to a year and a half.
Then it hits shelves. What price? $50?
So a gamer is given the choice of spending $50 on an Xbox title (which aren't really flying off of the shelves even now) that is the same game that came out (that is by then) 5-6 years previously and it's merely added the ability to play on the legacy XBL system.
And guess what else is on the shelves at the same time?
Halo 3 for the 2 year old 360.
Halo 2 for the 5 year old Xbox and 4 year old XBL for $15-20
Halo 1 for the 5 year old Xbox for $10-20 and free tunneling software
Halo 1 re-released for the 5 year old Xbox (with XBL-classic support) for $50?
Countless other titles that are attempting to get the attention and dollars from the gamers out there.
I don't see that as a valid or viable business plan. I don't see your company, Bungie or Microsoft Gaming making anything off of this but red ink. Now, before you get defensive on me, I am not attacking you, nor am I questioning (or necessarily impressed) by your statement of being in the industry. So please don't feel that I am attacking you or your idea. I merely see problems with it.
I do however believe that Bungie is making a wise decision to let that game stand as-is and not place the reputation of themselves or their titles at risk by undertaking such a dangerous move.
Recon 54- so what you're saying is the age-old staple of the gaming industry: The gaming company (Bungie, in this case) wouldn't be willing to take the risk.
I understand your point of view, and it is justified enough. As you said, yes, they probably would not take the risk. I think if presented with enough of a reason, and having reasonable evidence that they could make a big profit off it, they would do it. Any company would do anything reasonable if they knew they could make money.
However, like you've stated, they probably wouldn't, even if they knew what kind of money and support they would get from the community, simply because: they don't want to take the risk.
Unfortunately, that's the problem with a lot of gaming companies today. While, yes, a lot of their decisions are justified in denying new ideas for games just because of the risk involved, I don't think the industry listens to enough ideas to understand where the market COULD move, instead of where it's inevitably going to wind up. That's where people like me step in and try to think in a different direction. Who knows... you could see me in a couple years leading one of the most revolutionary gaming groups in the history of the world... or I could wind up working at McDonald's for the rest of my life. There's no harm in thinking, right?
My main point is that there's no way to really tell whether or not they're going to lose money, right off the bat. How do I know that? Well, first off, you are eliminating several months if not a year or two of work and funding by not having to re-design anything within the game. The characters, maps, physics engine... everything is there already, and tested to an acceptable level. That right there saves bundles of money and plenty of time (and risk), compared to any new game hitting the market. There is also marketing eliminated from the equation because Halo:CE is already one of the most revolutionary games of it's kind, and there are millions of avid fans out there salivating at the thought of being able to play with anybody they wanted. Afterall, several Halo fans still prefer Halo:CE over Halo 2.
After that, all you'd need to worry about is coding the online portion of it quickly and efficiently, and marketing the game properly.
For one, Bungie and Halo:CE already have a strong enough reputation in the gaming industry, and to gamers around the world, to be able to market this game minimally and still be able to sell copies without much effort.
The one thing that I believe Halo has separated from is competition with other titles. When Halo:CE came out, many gamers literally bought an XBOX just to play Halo:CE. How many console sellers have we seen in our time? Very few. With the reputation behind the company AND the game, there's no question the product would sell itself. Worrying about competition with other titles is obsolete, as it never had competition in the first place. Console sellers don't compete with anybody other than itself, and the limits it can set and break continually.
However, your proposal to sell the game for $50 is the flaw in your argument. Of course, for a game that is already made, released, and a tad outdated, you wouldn't turn around and sell it for $50 again. You could sell it for $25-$30 and maximize your sales to profit efficiency... of course you'd have to actually test for the correct number, but I'd be willing to venture that something around $25 would sell more copies AND maximize profits in this case, in comparison to $50.
As a gamer, would you pay $50 to buy the same game, but with online capabilities added? Probably not. Do you think a majority of people would be willing to pay less than $30 for this title (and in consideration of Halo's several million fans, most of whom are already great targets for the release)? I believe so.
I think, if Bungie were willing to take the chance, and they could find an optimal price to sell the game, they could easily make a profit just from the people that are already fans of their products, JUST BECAUSE of their reputation. It's a rare thing to see profit being made just from loyal fans... very few companies can claim to that, ESPECIALLY in the gaming industry. Take a look at Halo 3. You KNOW there will be several million copies of it pre-ordered (paid for before the game even hits the market), and Bungie could throw it together haphazardly and still easily make money. Their reputation sells games, which is why I believe Halo: CE Online for Xbox would do well.
Of course, this is all just my opinion, and really, business is run on opinions of others. Bungie could hear a proposal like this and say I'm insane. Whereas if I proposed the same thing to a scrappy group of designers, they would jump at the opportunity, assuming we had the rights and everything.
Outsourcing is a possibility, and I know on both ends, Bungie would be willing to let somebody else do it (if they figured they could make money), and there would be another company out there to take the small task of just adding another feature to a game that is already created, tested, and sold VERY well. I'm not saying I want to take the responsibility, as I am also working on things and can't afford to spend time on anything other than what I am trying to accomplish, nor do I have much money to risk right now.
Oh well. Opinions don't have to agree, and I didn't think they would seriously consider the proposal anyway, just because they are already working on something else, and the biggest reason for denial in the gaming industry: They don't want to take the risk. I was simply posting this to see what kind of support the fans would have of the idea. Afterall, once you get a ball rolling and some support behind it, there's not much of a limit to what you can achieve. Bungie should know this. The same game we're discussing proved that concept.
Thanks for the reply.
As a fan, I would like to see it done. As a businessman, I doubt Bungie would be willing to invest time or money to make it happen.
Just face it man - you got pwned by your crap idea. no-one is going to bother to remake or buy a live enabled halo 1. its dead. just get over it and wait for halo 3.