test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options
Cryptic's hand forced?
System
Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
I read somewhere today that Cryptic was forced to release the game on the day they did because they would have been in nasty trouble with CBS otherwise. Is this true and provable?
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
most likely they are under legal obligation to not tell.
Yep.
Also remember this IP was Perpetual's before it became Cryptic's. They got the IP second-hand, wouldn't be surprised if that cut into the project timeline as well, or was a negotiating point with CBS (or Atari perhaps) to get the IP off of Perpetual.
Why would CBS have anything to do with Cryptic's development schedule? CBS own the property around which Cryptic wished to build a game. There was an existing license to use the intellectual property of CBS that was transferred to Cryptic. That's CBS' involvement. As long as Cryptic remained within the constraints and parameters of their license then CBS are nothing to do with STO.
As part of the payment to Cryptic's owners when Atari bought them out, as well as the cash and earn-out agreements there is a clause that will pay the previous owners a bonus up to and not exceeding USD 20 million (in cash or stock at Infogrames choosing ) if Champions online and STO exceed previously agreed revenue targets by Aug 2010 for CO and May 2011 for STO. Who knows if those bonus' are on target to be triggered?
What I am worried about is just how much effort will be put into really expanding the game, completing it, expanding it more, etc.
Where has this ludicrous idea come from that CBS had anything to do with the game being made? They just sold the usage rights to their IP.
Why would you think CBS wouldn't care about the game?
I think this idea stems from at least one Dev post where they said they had to have a number of meetings with CBS folks. They sold the rights to the IP, but it appears they have quite a bit of say on how that IP is used in-game. Only Cryptic has the real TRIBBLE of course.
Why would you think that CBS had anything to do with making the game is more important.
CBS care about their brand and their property. The only thing that CBS have done is to ensure that Cryptic do not alter established canon or damage their brand. Which is pretty much what grown ups do when they discuss a rights licensing deal.
I'm amazed at the amount of people who talk about this game as though it was a project that CBS hired people to make. It's not true.
But in the end, it doesn't matter who pulled the trigger early on the game. The product is the product, and it is either worth your money or it isn't. Who's "fault" it is has no practical importance whatsoever.
That's straight-forward buisiness. Of course CBS will have the say on how their property is used.
If I went to the BBC and said i wanted to make a Dr Who game and can I buy a rights license, all they are initially concerned about is can I do it without damaging their brand and do I have the cash. But of course there would be meetings to ensure I don't create a pink tardis with hello kitty plastered all over it.
Link or it didn't happen.
Rumor, probably correct, was that Cryptic had a limited development window with CBS/ Paramount.
http://www.crypticstudios.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=244&Itemid=32
That was posted in 2008.
This idea that it's all down to CBS is rubbish.
Why would CBS care when or even if the game is ever released? They sold a license. That's the end of their involvement beyond clarification of the terms of that license.
This is the simplest thing. I'm amazed it causes so much confusion.
Yep. CBS being involved makes sense to me (though having a bunch of execs who probably don't know an MMO from a cheerio worries me, it's kinda unavoidable). I don't believe CBS forced anybody's hand. I think a proposal was made between parties and then accepted. Period.
This is a big possibility. An IP license requires completion and upkeep for the project. Fail to release by the date specified, and the IP reverts.
Emmert pulled the trigger. Cryptic promised 2 years maximum and their 2 years was up. So it's release or be made out to be a liar ( which may well have been a breach of terms reached in their sale conditions to Atari but that's pure speculation on my part based upon what 'd have expected were I buying them and their fancy promises )
Not really. Cryptic could do it because they had the ability to. The Perpetual rights were not perpetual, they have a limited shelf life, like any IP. IT makes more sense that there is an end date, than there is no end date and Cryptic can sit on the IP for years and years.
Likely. However, it still has no importance, aside from purely academic discussion. The product is what it is, and you either find it worth the money or you don't. Who made the bad calls does not change that simple fact.
Oh I agree completely. I've pretty much given up discussing the meat of the game. I've had my say. I will however keep up in these 'academic' conversations. Especially when there are people still willing to repeat rumor and opinion as fact.
Y'all should quit *****ing, they could have given it to $OE, which means it'd been shipped much worse with a horrible community relations staff.
Or Blizzard, which means we'd be playing it in 2024... maybe.
Or Funcom.. where all the female officers would be topless.
OK, maybe funcom