Google+

Activision budgets $500m for Destiny. History tells us that’s fine… right?

Activision has confirmed that Destiny’s 10-year budget is $500million (as reported by CVG News). Not only will Dr Evil’s finger will be getting quite the workout, that also means Destiny action is pretty much guaranteed for the next ten years. But wait a sec... New IP? Most expensive game ever? Long-term plan for multiple instalments? Why on Earth would this be ringing massive alarm bells in my head?

The answer may be predictable--and totally playing to type--but it has to be Shenmue. The game that cost so much to produce (roughly $100m in today's money by my calculations, although the exact figure is unclear) every Dreamcast owner would have needed to buy it twice just to break even. The game that many people blame for Sega exiting the hardware business. The game that only managed two instalments before being cancelled indefinitely.

But I’m sure Bobby Kotick and co aren’t just taking a punt here. Let’s see what he says:

"If you're making a $500 million bet you can't take that chance with someone else's IP," Kotick reportedly said (according to Reuters). "The stakes for us are getting bigger."

Know what that is? That’s the language of gambling. Sure, new series are always a risk, which is why most big-name publishers shy away from them. Most company heads want a tried-and-tested formula tied to a name that gamers trust.

Speaking of which, it does suggest an admission that Call of Duty’s days are finite. Acti’s flagship franchise undoubtedly has more profitable and spectacular games left in it (as Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare shows), but it’s no longer the peg on which Activision is hanging its ten-year plan. Otherwise the story would be about CoD getting a $500m investment. 

And after seeing other Activision stalwarts such as Guitar Hero and Tony Hawk being milked for all they were worth before crashing spectacularly, it makes a lot of sense to invest in the future before the CoD bubble bursts completely.

"Bungie's very ambitious plan is designed to unfold over a ten-year period" an Activision spokesperson explained. "The depth of creative content, scope and scale is unprecedented and is required to bring Bungie's vision to life."

That’s highly commendable. I applaud it, I really do. Creating something new and backing it with the kind of clout only one of the world’s biggest publishers can do is a fantastic boon for our industry. It should show us what the new generation of machines can really do when pushed. And show us what Bungie can do when it isn’t bound by the decade-old conventions that people now expect—nay, demand--from the Halo series.

Maybe I’m reacting to it with such concern because I’ve been conditioned--by Activision itself--only to expect tried-and-tested properties when it comes to AAA games. Sony’s The Last of Us was a massively-deserved success in the end, but I distinctly remember a time when we were writing stories about The Last of Us and nobody was reading them. “I’ve never heard of it before so why should I care” seemed to be the thinking of the average GamesRadar reader. Naughty Dog and Bungie may be big names to you and me, but how many people outside our clued-up circle could tell you which games they have been responsible for?

Maybe Titanfall and its decent chart success (three weeks on top of the UK all-format charts at the time of writing, though it’s slipped to #2 this week) has convinced Activision that it’s OK to announce such massive figures and backing of a relatively unknown quantity. Sure, Bungie is a respected developer, but then so was Bizarre Creations. And after just one flop (Blur), that team was given the poison chalice of the Bond license, and then closed. Nobody is safe.

It’s that gambling analogy that concerns me. If it was down to me, of course I’d take the risk because I believe wholeheartedly in the pursuit of creativity. Heck, I’d commission Shenmue III right now if I had the cash, regardless of prospective returns. But putting so many eggs in one basket (and reducing the number of other baskets too, as seen with the Infinity Ward/Neversoft merger yesterday) is a gamble. And there is such thing as the ‘Gambler’s Ruin’.

Activision has plenty of money with which to put a big stake on one roll of the dice, but it is finite. Yes, if the worst happened and the game is a flop, the cost can probably be absorbed because of the CoD juggernaut's success. But, again with the Shenmue analogy, Sega was flush with cash thanks to the Mega Drive/Genesis’ success, then just a few bad bets later (Mega-CD, 32X, Saturn and Shenmue), it was all over bar the software. 

Fortunately, all signs point towards Destiny being a success. It’s shooting stuff, it’s online, it’s Bungie, it’s Activision with all its mass-market clout and know-how… everything points to it being a great game and a commercial success. Plus it won’t just be one game. It will be several games, each recouping some of that massive development cost. A significant chunk of that will be used to market the game, so we’re going to have Destiny thrust in our faces for the next 10 years, whether we like it or not. Everyone will know about it and it will probably become as big as Call of Duty is in a relatively short space of time.

But ‘probably’ isn’t ‘definitely’. There is always the chance it will fail to ignite the public’s interest and goes the way of Haze, or Shenmue, or Okami. Sure, everyone loves shooting stuff. But what if the wheels fall off that genre like they did the racing games of the 1990s? Activision has profited from skateboarding, plastic guitars and first-person shooting. It's a brave move to suggest shooting (with RPG elements) is going to to be the next decade's must-have gaming genre too.

We Recommend By ZergNet

9 comments

  • james-myhre - May 6, 2014 10:05 a.m.

    and all i could think was rpg shooter hey was borderlands 2 a rpg shooter didn't that receive game of the year rewards multiple times
  • Jackonomics2.0 - May 6, 2014 9:29 a.m.

    You would think with such a bloated budget they would advertise the crap out of it but nope, nothing, maybe because it's an early game and such but when your planning sequels it's not helping. AD-VER-TISE. Though to be fair, Titanfall was advertising up the balls and it didn't do shit. But this is what happens when you have a multi console big hit as an exclusive, and if your getting third party exclusives outside Nintendo your doing it wrong.
  • Timstertimster - May 6, 2014 5:13 p.m.

    If you knew anything about marketing you'd realize that in today's over informed world, in order to get above the noise, you need to completely carpet-bomb the entire media scape across the whole planet. All at the same time. So you wait to advertise until the product is actually available for purchase. Just wait for release month. You won't be able to watch 15minutes of Family Guy without swing a Destiny commercial. You will see it on buses, subways, billboards, magazines, YouTube, yahoo news, wired magazine, everywhere.
  • lionheart1986 - May 6, 2014 9:10 a.m.

    I think you bring up a really good point about the difference between a gamer who reads all these articles and knows the different development studios, and the gamer who only recognizes the brand. I'm always surprised when I talk to people about the upcoming shooters, and people go, "I like Call of Duty, Halo sucks, but Destiny looks pretty cool." Then I ask them if they were aware that most of the original team that work on Halo's 1-3 is working on Destiny, and it's developed under the same Bungie Studio that did the same Halo they said now "sucks". Their response is always, "wait, wuh? How can that be?" I think games mostly meet mainstream success because of their brand recognition or how people relate to the game itself. You ask most Call of Duty players and they are completely unaware of all the details about the fallout of the main Infinity Ward leads and the involvement of the other studios like Neversoft, Sledgehammer, etc. They just see Call of Duty and are unaware of the studios that make the game. So if the brand of Destiny doesn't catch on with the public, it probably wouldn't matter if Bungie was the developer or not. It's success is only going to be determined how the game itself can catch mainstream appeal.
  • theguyinthecloset - May 6, 2014 7:27 a.m.

    But that's 500M for 4-5 games + DLC. Remember the plan is to put out a game every two years with an expansion the other years. If a game fails and makes a big hole in their walet, they can always stop making the games. If the first game doen't make profit, that's not the whole of the 500M, only a fraction.
  • MikeJazzfaceTheDancingSquirrel - May 6, 2014 6:47 a.m.

    I hope it isnt anything like cod, i hope its a lot like halo, but with enough new elements to make it original. Halo is pretty much the only sci fi shooter than appealed to a braud audience like cod does- so if they can make it appeal to both braud and niche audiences like halo did its gonna kick ass, halo was so good because of the thriving fanbase- it had hardcore and softcore gamers all shredding it up in full lobbies like the whole time.
  • Cyberninja - May 6, 2014 5:30 a.m.

    I feel like they are going to be targeting the COD fanbase they have already for this which could either end well or poorly. Most people play CoD because that's what their friends play and nothing else except maybe the new sports game.
  • Timstertimster - May 6, 2014 5:17 p.m.

    Indeed. And as CoD wanes more and more, those friends look for something fresh and new. If Destiny becomes Skyrim-meets-CoD-meets-Borderlands... Then I'm certain you got a winner.
  • GamesRadarCollanderCooper - May 6, 2014 5:26 a.m.

    This game is exactly what I expect. It's not like Bungie is making a kart racer. This is just another Halo.

Showing 1-9 of 9 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

OR…

Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.