Gamasutra: The Art & Business of Making Gamesspacer
View All     RSS
October 31, 2014
arrowPress Releases
October 31, 2014
PR Newswire
View All





If you enjoy reading this site, you might also want to check out these UBM Tech sites:


Q&A: Crytek owns Homefront - so now what? Exclusive
Q&A: Crytek owns  Homefront  - so now what?
January 28, 2013 | By Kris Graft




As the original creators of the Far Cry series and Crysis, Crytek knows a lot about making first-person shooter games. Now the game developer also knows a whole lot about the Chapter 11 process, thanks to THQ's bankruptcy and auction.

Crytek's Nottingham, UK studio had been working on Homefront 2 for THQ. As the publisher collapsed, Crytek moved to acquire the intellectual property rights to the Homefront franchise from the publisher. The developer was successful, and now the 140 people working on the game can breathe a little bit easier, knowing that the fate of the game is more in their hands.

Don't Miss: Interview: What Vigil's core team is up to at Crytek USA

We spoke with Crytek general manager Nick Button-Brown and CEO Cevat Yerli about what's next for the company, and for Homefront.

A month ago when THQ went bankrupt, could you have ever imagined that you'd buy the franchise that you were working on in an auction?

Nick Button-Brown: No not at all. Our relationship with THQ is really good, and we like all the people we worked with. And no, we certainly didn't predict that it would happen this way. We were very surprised when it went into Chapter 11 at all. It felt that they were making a lot of progress, and the games were coming along really well. It was a bit of a shock before Christmas. ... Then we get back, it all kicks off, lots and lots of lawyers are involved, and we've learned a lot about the Chapter 11 process now! A month ago, we knew nothing.

$500,000 for a franchise that sold over 2.5 million units... that's a pretty good deal, isn't it?

NBB: It was a little more than $500,000--I think about $540,000, or something like that...that was really pedantic, wasn't it? [laughs]

Anyway, we think we've got a pretty good deal. We're very happy with the outcome for us. Obviously, the friends that we had working on Homefront on the THQ side, we're a bit sad for them. They all seem to be finishing today.

In the end, the reason why we were interested [in buying the property] was because our team had worked really hard on it. The last little bit they showed, the milestone, was really good. They've made a huge amount of progress, they put their heart and souls into it. And we just wanted to make sure that didn't get thrown into the bin.

So we've achieved our goal [in regards to the THQ auction]. The team can finish the game they were working on.

It's hard to imagine any other option for the survival of the franchise, aside from you guys making an attempt to buy it.

NBB: It would've been very difficult for someone else to take our code and bring it over. But yeah, the Chapter 11 process, it seems that anything can happen. You've got some really random outcomes--people who you didn't expect to buy were buying studios. It could've gone very differently. Who knows who we would've been working with.

Was anyone bidding against you for it?

NBB: No. In the initial bid round, it was only us. In all honesty, it was quite difficult for anyone else to pick it up, because they needed us to work on it. So nobody bid against us. By the end of the process, we were bidding against the stalking horse bidder for the last few rounds. But in the end, that worked fine.

Do you feel that you can breathe a little bit easier now that the fate of the game is in your hands? I remember someone from Crytek saying how the December bankruptcy made them nervous.

NBB: It's almost like it hasn't settled in it, because it happened so manically. We really were on the phone through the night as the auction proceedings were happening in different time zones from ours. We know it's happened, but it hasn't settled.

The great thing was telling the team. The team is really happy. Being in control of our own destiny is something everybody likes to have. They reacted really well--they were worried that they wouldn't be able to carry on with the game.

So there really was a point where people thought the game would be canned, and it'd be over with.

NBB: Yeah, definitely. The whole process is a bit strange, but there were times when it could've happened where the game was put in the drawer.

Cevat Yerli: Just to be clear, we did not stop in the meantime. We always thought that this [development] would continue. However, there were some concerns. But it was more that [the team] was concerned because [management] couldn't talk about it too much--what we were planning to do. So we had to keep quiet, internally. We told the team to keep working on the project, but the silence also created a feeling of "What's management going to do with it?" though there was never any intention to stop it.

I understand the relationship you had with THQ was good. But now that THQ and the folks on their side are no longer involved, is there anything that will change with the development or the vision of the game?

CY: For one, we are going to look strategically how this might be modified to fit with the direction of the company, to be more aligned with it, because before there were certain things that we would like to do. But THQ would say that it doesn't fit in their strategy. Now this is a different situation, where we can apply a different direction--not necessarily from the game content perspective, but more from a business perspective, and flexibility in general.

Now we can do whatever we want. Before, effectively, there were some business constraints. Not creative constraints, but business constraints from THQ.

I know one of your strategies is free-to-play. This seems like a packaged type of game, but is there some way the Homefront IP could be incorporated with free-to-play?

CY: It's too early to say that. But, every normal human could probably conclude that there is some research being done on that right now. For now the team is continuing what it started. The team has started a retail game, and the chance that it will ship as a retail game is very high.

I know that this is really early on, but have there been any talks with new publishers for the game? Has there been any headway there?

CY: It's all too early. [laughs] I can't give you the names, sorry!

NBB: Obviously, a lot of people are interested in it. We've got a to think about it and be certain about what we want to do.

How has the date of release been affected?

CY: The date right now has not been affected, and we have not announced a date yet.


Related Jobs

Activision Publishing
Activision Publishing — Santa Monica, California, United States
[10.31.14]

Tools Programmer-Central Team
Vicarious Visions / Activision
Vicarious Visions / Activision — Albany, New York, United States
[10.31.14]

VFX Artist-Vicarious Visions
Magic Leap, Inc.
Magic Leap, Inc. — Wellington, New Zealand
[10.30.14]

Level Designer
Amazon
Amazon — Seattle, Washington, United States
[10.30.14]

Sr. Software Development Engineer - Game Publishing










Comments


Rob Wright
profile image
If no one was bidding against Crytek then....why'd they pay more than $500,000 for it?

In all seriousness, I like parts of Homeland but felt it was a bit clunky with some weak level design and occasionally cartoonish villains/scenarios.

Stephen Horn
profile image
They had to bid against the stalking horse bidder.

Also, Homeland does seem like a cartoonish game (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeland_%28video_game%29). Yes, yes, I know you meant Homefront. :P

Rob Wright
profile image
Ack....Homeland/Homefront mix up strikes again!

(for the record, I reference Cory Doctorow's book, not the TV show)

Daneel Filimonov
profile image
"By the end of the process, we were bidding against the stalking horse bidder for the last few rounds. But in the end, that worked fine."

It all worked out for them in the end.

Edit: Misinterpreted what stalking-horse bids are, my bad!

Nick Harris
profile image
I'm pleased at this news. Homefront multiplayer had 32 players on the 360 when it launched, but this dwindled over time until its gained a reputation that no one played it which enough people believed to stop people verifying it. The problem is that over time every game is justifying its typically short campaign with a multiplayer mode. It does not matter if some are good and some are indifferent, the problem is that without similar growth in the consumer base there won't be enough players to fill up the slots for each match in every gametype.

I suggest some solutions:

- Be conservative about the variety of gametypes on offer (i.e. just have Battle Commander not four)

- Balance the teams so each has a mix of skilled and less skilled and make up the numbers with bots

- Anyone wanting to play a match can jump into a bot of their choice after observing their video feed

- Anyone who quits for whatever reason is replaced by a bot and is barred from rejoining that match

- Bots exhibit varying levels of skill - i.e. the game endeavours to balance itself as players join/leave

- No one gets to choose what map is played, just vary "big outdoors" with "small indoors" for variety

Lewis Wakeford
profile image
I think if they didn't waste money on a less than 6 hour champaign and focused on making a cheaper, purely multiplayer game they might have got more takers. No one is going to pay $60 (or whatever it was on release) for a game that might as well be multiplayer only.

Adam Bishop
profile image
Lots of people buy Call of Duty, Battlefield, etc. to only play the multiplayer. Plenty of people paid full price for Left 4 Dead, which was more or less a multiplayer only affair. And so on.

Lewis Wakeford
profile image
Call of Duty, Battlefield and Left 4 Dead (or Valve, rather) became powerhouses before they started charging people $50 for multiplayer. Call of Duty started as a singleplayer focused title with fairly standard multiplayer then slowly became more multiplayer orientated, the original Battlefield was more modestly priced until it became hugely successful, and Left 4 Dead was a Valve game. You can't come out of nowhere with an above average shooter and expect the same success.

Geoffrey Rowland
profile image
I wasn't a huge fan of the first game, but the multiplayer certainly had potential. I think it is great that Crytek picked up the IP so their team could continue to work on it, rather than lay off everyone. I will probably pick up the game when it releases, simply for that fact.


none
 
Comment: