Here's hoping that whoever buys Cryptic the next time around insists on removing Jack Emmert from the company as a condition of sale. I think a large part of Cryptic's problems are because of Emmert's influence and decisions.
"Soloists and those who prefer small groups should never have to feel like they''re the ones getting the proverbial table scraps, as it were." - Scott Hartsman, Senior Producer, Everquest II "People love groups. Its a fallacy that people want to play solo all the time." - Scott Hartsman, Executive Producer, Rift
I have to wonder how many of those so quick to call STO crap have actually played it within the last six months or at all since it's launched.
When SOE shut down DCUO for the security issue, I hopped over to STO. I was amazed at how many folks are playing that game. Traffic jams at all my mission sites. The game its self has a lot more content. Thats why I was intested in this thread. Atari and Cryptic really need to manage what they got better. BTW, the ground game still blows IMHO.
I have to wonder how many of those so quick to call STO crap have actually played it within the last six months or at all since it's launched.
When SOE shut down DCUO for the security issue, I hopped over to STO. I was amazed at how many folks are playing that game. Traffic jams at all my mission sites. The game its self has a lot more content. Thats why I was intested in this thread. Atari and Cryptic really need to manage what they got better. BTW, the ground game still blows IMHO.
Agreed on the ground combat, thankfully with the season 4 update in july the ground combat is finally getting revamped.
Considering no one here knows the exact details of Atari's purchase of Cryptic, there could be certain buy back clauses that Cryptic has. Cryptic could have a chance to go privately owned again if Atari fails to sell them OR if Atari tenders them to someone unacceptable to Cryptic. At any rate, Cryptic won't sell immediately and I don't see any changes for now.
I have to wonder how many of those so quick to call STO crap have actually played it within the last six months or at all since it's launched.
I have played it as recently as last week. I had also played it very regularly since BETA, but in recent months I login maybe once a month. I have a half dozen FED characters to VA level and 1 Klingon to LG level. I'll go ahead and call the game crap.
This is just my two cents, so take it as you will. A year plus after launch and the game is still unfinished, with boring, repetitive and poorly written content. Yes, Cryptic has made some improvements but at least to me, they simply are not enough to justify playing this game for the long term. Cryptic studios is not the company for the Trek IP. They just do not care about it. Admit it or not, the game is overpriced and having new overpriced items in the cash shop just about every week or so should be a clear indicator where Cryptic's thinking lies. They lucked out and landed the rights to one of the largest IPs in the world with an enormous fanbase and looked to squeeze every last cent they could out of it as fast as they could, instead of trying to create a quality product.
I have said it in other posts and I still believe it. The best thing that could happen to the Star Trek IP is for some other development studio who will actually care about it and cultivate it properly take it over. Given the right development studio and vision, there is no reason STO could not have given WoW a run for their money.
It'd be useful to know if that annual loss for Cryptic includes the development costs of ChampO and STO (or a portion thereof). Or how much of that loss is driven by development of Neverwinter.
In the end, I'm not sure who would buy Cryptic - history has shown it is cheaper for potential buyers to wait until the game / company crashes, then come in and pick up the pieces for a much cheaper rate.
Anyone want to explain exactly what it means to "divest itself" of Cryptic? I read that without Cryptics numbers included in their report that Atari actually showed a small profit. Does this mean that Cryptic is now its own company and has to figure out what to do about its annual multi-million dollar loss?
It means that Atari is selling Cryptic to the highest bidder.
Anyone want to explain exactly what it means to "divest itself" of Cryptic? I read that without Cryptics numbers included in their report that Atari actually showed a small profit. Does this mean that Cryptic is now its own company and has to figure out what to do about its annual multi-million dollar loss?
Cryptic has always been its own company since it's development of City of Heroes back in the day.
As for the Divesting of Cryptic, I am thinking INvest = supporting the company with $. DIvest = no longer supporting the company with $.
Actually, they sold themselves to Atari a few years back.
I wonder, will gold subscribers get their "atari token" stipend this month?
There's some interesting terminology in that article. The developers may be continuing on as normal for right now (this week) but when I see Atari bandying about the words "discontinued operation" it makes me wonder if they will shut Cryptic down if a quick sale isn't in the works.
There's some interesting terminology in that article. The developers may be continuing on as normal for right now (this week) but when I see Atari bandying about the words "discontinued operation" it makes me wonder if they will shut Cryptic down if a quick sale isn't in the works.
Oh, please God, yes!
I hope no one picks them up, so that there's a good example for other gaming companies of what not to do.
Continously posting huge losses, trying to make/maintain 3 different games with a minimal staff (DStahl said less than the staff in a Starbucks for STO), nickel and diming even lifetime subs to death, holding a firesale 1 month after the game was even released, and oh so many other examples.
I see Cryptic Studios and think of one thing, Bill Roper. There's your problem! This guy hasn't been the head of anything successful since his days with Blizzard. Everyone kept praising him,"Oh! It's Bill Roper! The guy behind Diablo." Nobody thought maybe there was a bigger piece of that puzzle. Does anyone believe me now? This guy is a joke. He makes junk games, and the only way anyone buys them is because he keeps stamping them with "From the makers of Diablo"
Anyone want to explain exactly what it means to "divest itself" of Cryptic? I read that without Cryptics numbers included in their report that Atari actually showed a small profit. Does this mean that Cryptic is now its own company and has to figure out what to do about its annual multi-million dollar loss?
Cryptic has always been its own company since it's development of City of Heroes back in the day.
That is incorrect; Atari bought Cryptic Studios, it was not a partnership. Basically what Atari is doing here is seperating their Cryptic division from the rest of their corporation, so that the individual piece (Cryptic Studios) may be purchased by someone else. For the time being Atari will continue to run Cryptic, including continuing development on the NWN game and collecting revenue from CO and STO, until such time as someone negotiates a purchase of Cryptic. If it takes too long to find a buyer, it could be possible that Atari would just shut it down.
For a more in-depth explanation of disvestment, here is the wiki link for it: Link
Thanks for the correction, that is a bit more serious than I thought without researching it.
There's some interesting terminology in that article. The developers may be continuing on as normal for right now (this week) but when I see Atari bandying about the words "discontinued operation" it makes me wonder if they will shut Cryptic down if a quick sale isn't in the works.
Just my own personal thought here but I do not see anyone buying Cryptic. While they do have some attractive IPs, they have not been able to generate the subscription numbers those IPs should be bringing in. Remember, STO received very poor reviews at launch and have spent the past year bringing the game to where it should have been at launch.
Given the developers recent statements regarding their reliance on the Foundry to "fill the content gaps", I will put my money on Cryptic trying to milk the C-Store for as long as they can before either folding or selling the IP to another company. Heck, CBS may want to pull their license if they feel the game is going to hurt the franchises' future.
There's some interesting terminology in that article. The developers may be continuing on as normal for right now (this week) but when I see Atari bandying about the words "discontinued operation" it makes me wonder if they will shut Cryptic down if a quick sale isn't in the works.
Oh, please God, yes!
I hope no one picks them up, so that there's a good example for other gaming companies of what not to do.
Continously posting huge losses, trying to make/maintain 3 different games with a minimal staff (DStahl said less than the staff in a Starbucks for STO), nickel and diming even lifetime subs to death, holding a firesale 1 month after the game was even released, and oh so many other examples.
This is really good news.
You know all of the things you listed are more under control of a developer's publisher, NOT the developer itself, right?
Firesale - Nickle and Diming : Usually because a publisher is leaning on a dev house to make more money.
Understaffed: Almost universally the fault of the publisher putting overhead restrictions on a dev house.
Huge Losses: Could be the developer, but do you remember how fast STO went through development? That smacks of publisher forcing it out the door unfinished.
I am not saying Cryptic is great, but I don't think all fault is theirs. Atari has a terrible track record, so I would say it is at least 50/50 Atari's fault but probably more.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire: Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
Well, does Atari own the IP licenses or does Cryptic?
If Atari owns them as the publisher and has “divested itself” of Cryptic Studios alone then the developers may not have rights to continue making STO or CO games for a future owner… I am not sure about the legalities of transferring rights to intellectual property in this case as Atari may mantain them for their own future use.
There's some interesting terminology in that article. The developers may be continuing on as normal for right now (this week) but when I see Atari bandying about the words "discontinued operation" it makes me wonder if they will shut Cryptic down if a quick sale isn't in the works.
Oh, please God, yes!
I hope no one picks them up, so that there's a good example for other gaming companies of what not to do.
Continously posting huge losses, trying to make/maintain 3 different games with a minimal staff (DStahl said less than the staff in a Starbucks for STO), nickel and diming even lifetime subs to death, holding a firesale 1 month after the game was even released, and oh so many other examples.
This is really good news.
You know all of the things you listed are more under control of a developer's publisher, NOT the developer itself, right?
Firesale - Nickle and Diming : Usually because a publisher is leaning on a dev house to make more money.
Understaffed: Almost universally the fault of the publisher putting overhead restrictions on a dev house.
Huge Losses: Could be the developer, but do you remember how fast STO went through development? That smacks of publisher forcing it out the door unfinished.
I am not saying Cryptic is great, but I don't think all fault is theirs. Atari has a terrible track record, so I would say it is at least 50/50 Atari's fault but probably more.
I'm not saying it's all Cryptic's fault either. However Cryptic made the game after all, not Atari.
I just think Cryptic makes way too many shortcuts (or shortcomings), when they develop games. All is made to the bare minimum, and later on after the release cash is raked in, is improved by a miserably low speed compared to c-store additions. Everything is made using their game engine that frankly belongs to the 90's.
There's also plenty of direct gameplay problems in STO that have been around for quite a while now, totally unaffected by Atari, I mean these are all design problems: Horrible state of PvP, Fire-At-Will, Ground Combat, end-game content, lack of overall content, adding replays of already existing content to excuse making new content within reasonable timeframe, Klingons, repetive missions, and so on.
I seriously can't blame any of those issues I mentioned on Atari, which is really not a great a company either, but still. I also can't say it's going to be much appreciated by recent LTS buyers, since Cryptic already knew of this when their sale came up. Maybe they would've stayed quiet for an eternity, if this issue wasn't brought up by Atari itself, 1½ months after it happened.
Considering no one here knows the exact details of Atari's purchase of Cryptic, there could be certain buy back clauses that Cryptic has. Cryptic could have a chance to go privately owned again if Atari fails to sell them OR if Atari tenders them to someone unacceptable to Cryptic. At any rate, Cryptic won't sell immediately and I don't see any changes for now.
There more than likely there is a buyout option, considering that Cryptic had one when they were partnered with NCSoft during their CiH/CoV days. The question is, can Jack Emmert come up with the capital to do so? Needham has moved on to greener pastures, and Atari is going to be looking to recoup as much of that BlueBay credit line as they can from selling Cryptic (most of which, according to the financial statements, was used to fund the purchase of Cryptic and keep it running). Jack's going to need to find investors or a publisher willing to put up that kind of money.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
Thanks for the correction, that is a bit more serious than I thought without researching it.
You're welcome! As for the seriousness of it? Yes and no. While it is a serious development, the average player shouldn't see too many noticeable changes in the short run. It is possible, if a sale goes through quickly, that other than some corporate name changes, players of CO and STO may not notice any significant changes.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
I see Cryptic Studios and think of one thing, Bill Roper. There's your problem! This guy hasn't been the head of anything successful since his days with Blizzard. Everyone kept praising him,"Oh! It's Bill Roper! The guy behind Diablo." Nobody thought maybe there was a bigger piece of that puzzle. Does anyone believe me now? This guy is a joke. He makes junk games, and the only way anyone buys them is because he keeps stamping them with "From the makers of Diablo"
Just to make a clarification, Roper had nothing to do with the development of STO before it launched; he was in charge of CO then (and should only be held accountable for that). He did run STO briefly, but he was no worse than the ones before or after him. It was only long after he was gone that STO started seeing significant changes.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
You know all of the things you listed are more under control of a developer's publisher, NOT the developer itself, right?
Firesale - Nickle and Diming : Usually because a publisher is leaning on a dev house to make more money.
Understaffed: Almost universally the fault of the publisher putting overhead restrictions on a dev house.
Huge Losses: Could be the developer, but do you remember how fast STO went through development? That smacks of publisher forcing it out the door unfinished.
I am not saying Cryptic is great, but I don't think all fault is theirs. Atari has a terrible track record, so I would say it is at least 50/50 Atari's fault but probably more.
I would say it closer to 50/50, or slightly leans towards Cryptic: After all, it was Cryptic that sold Atari the line that they could produce quality, AAA MMOs; Atari merely held them to that promise. It also explains the small staff; Cryptic was promising that its Cryptic Engine 2.0 was a versatile, reusable engine that would greatly cut down on manpower and development costs. That being said once CO launched and Atari had a good look at the work Cryptic was doing, they had absolutely no excuse for allowing STO to launch in the shape it did. Atari definately got the hint after STO launched (and remember, Cryptic had arranged the development of that game, in addition to CO, before Atari bought them), which was why Cryptic's future games were being billed as OMGs and not MMOs. Cryptic is definately as much to blame in all of this, if not more, than Atari.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
Well, does Atari own the IP licenses or does Cryptic?
If Atari owns them as the publisher and has “divested itself” of Cryptic Studios alone then the developers may not have rights to continue making STO or CO games for a future owner… I am not sure about the legalities of transferring rights to intellectual property in this case as Atari may mantain them for their own future use.
Kind of a mess, aye?
CBS owns the Star Trek IP. Cryptic bought out the Champions franchise, and then Atari bouht Cryptic; that means that currently Atari owns the Champions IP. I expect ownership of the Champions IP will be one of the terms of the sale. As for STO, no matter if another company takes it over or not, CBS will still own the IP itself. Also we still have the Hasbro vs. Atari lawsuit, where Hasbro is suing to revoke the D&D license from Atari. That means that the NWN game, which apparently is still going forward with production, could go defunct as well. What that means is anyone's guess, as it is being billed as an OMG and not a MMO. OIt's kind of like watching a train wreck in slow motion.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
Think about the excutive, " ops spent 15 million too much, My B."
Right now the top guy at Cryptic is Emmert. If he manages a buyout, that would mean he would be in charge with no one above him to keep him in check. Scary thought, eh?
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
Comments
Here's hoping that whoever buys Cryptic the next time around insists on removing Jack Emmert from the company as a condition of sale. I think a large part of Cryptic's problems are because of Emmert's influence and decisions.
"Soloists and those who prefer small groups should never have to feel like they''re the ones getting the proverbial table scraps, as it were." - Scott Hartsman, Senior Producer, Everquest II
"People love groups. Its a fallacy that people want to play solo all the time." - Scott Hartsman, Executive Producer, Rift
When SOE shut down DCUO for the security issue, I hopped over to STO. I was amazed at how many folks are playing that game. Traffic jams at all my mission sites. The game its self has a lot more content. Thats why I was intested in this thread. Atari and Cryptic really need to manage what they got better. BTW, the ground game still blows IMHO.
Agreed on the ground combat, thankfully with the season 4 update in july the ground combat is finally getting revamped.
Considering no one here knows the exact details of Atari's purchase of Cryptic, there could be certain buy back clauses that Cryptic has. Cryptic could have a chance to go privately owned again if Atari fails to sell them OR if Atari tenders them to someone unacceptable to Cryptic. At any rate, Cryptic won't sell immediately and I don't see any changes for now.
Let's party like it is 1863!
I have played it as recently as last week. I had also played it very regularly since BETA, but in recent months I login maybe once a month. I have a half dozen FED characters to VA level and 1 Klingon to LG level. I'll go ahead and call the game crap.
This is just my two cents, so take it as you will. A year plus after launch and the game is still unfinished, with boring, repetitive and poorly written content. Yes, Cryptic has made some improvements but at least to me, they simply are not enough to justify playing this game for the long term. Cryptic studios is not the company for the Trek IP. They just do not care about it. Admit it or not, the game is overpriced and having new overpriced items in the cash shop just about every week or so should be a clear indicator where Cryptic's thinking lies. They lucked out and landed the rights to one of the largest IPs in the world with an enormous fanbase and looked to squeeze every last cent they could out of it as fast as they could, instead of trying to create a quality product.
I have said it in other posts and I still believe it. The best thing that could happen to the Star Trek IP is for some other development studio who will actually care about it and cultivate it properly take it over. Given the right development studio and vision, there is no reason STO could not have given WoW a run for their money.
Yep, casual gaming is where the money is and that does mean doom for the rest of us.
It'd be useful to know if that annual loss for Cryptic includes the development costs of ChampO and STO (or a portion thereof). Or how much of that loss is driven by development of Neverwinter.
In the end, I'm not sure who would buy Cryptic - history has shown it is cheaper for potential buyers to wait until the game / company crashes, then come in and pick up the pieces for a much cheaper rate.
It means that Atari is selling Cryptic to the highest bidder.
Actually, they sold themselves to Atari a few years back.
I wonder, will gold subscribers get their "atari token" stipend this month?
There's some interesting terminology in that article. The developers may be continuing on as normal for right now (this week) but when I see Atari bandying about the words "discontinued operation" it makes me wonder if they will shut Cryptic down if a quick sale isn't in the works.
Oh, please God, yes!
I hope no one picks them up, so that there's a good example for other gaming companies of what not to do.
Continously posting huge losses, trying to make/maintain 3 different games with a minimal staff (DStahl said less than the staff in a Starbucks for STO), nickel and diming even lifetime subs to death, holding a firesale 1 month after the game was even released, and oh so many other examples.
This is really good news.
I see Cryptic Studios and think of one thing, Bill Roper. There's your problem! This guy hasn't been the head of anything successful since his days with Blizzard. Everyone kept praising him,"Oh! It's Bill Roper! The guy behind Diablo." Nobody thought maybe there was a bigger piece of that puzzle. Does anyone believe me now? This guy is a joke. He makes junk games, and the only way anyone buys them is because he keeps stamping them with "From the makers of Diablo"
Thanks for the correction, that is a bit more serious than I thought without researching it.
Work hard Play Harder
Just my own personal thought here but I do not see anyone buying Cryptic. While they do have some attractive IPs, they have not been able to generate the subscription numbers those IPs should be bringing in. Remember, STO received very poor reviews at launch and have spent the past year bringing the game to where it should have been at launch.
Given the developers recent statements regarding their reliance on the Foundry to "fill the content gaps", I will put my money on Cryptic trying to milk the C-Store for as long as they can before either folding or selling the IP to another company. Heck, CBS may want to pull their license if they feel the game is going to hurt the franchises' future.
You know all of the things you listed are more under control of a developer's publisher, NOT the developer itself, right?
Firesale - Nickle and Diming : Usually because a publisher is leaning on a dev house to make more money.
Understaffed: Almost universally the fault of the publisher putting overhead restrictions on a dev house.
Huge Losses: Could be the developer, but do you remember how fast STO went through development? That smacks of publisher forcing it out the door unfinished.
I am not saying Cryptic is great, but I don't think all fault is theirs. Atari has a terrible track record, so I would say it is at least 50/50 Atari's fault but probably more.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire:
Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
Well, does Atari own the IP licenses or does Cryptic?
If Atari owns them as the publisher and has “divested itself” of Cryptic Studios alone then the developers may not have rights to continue making STO or CO games for a future owner… I am not sure about the legalities of transferring rights to intellectual property in this case as Atari may mantain them for their own future use.
Kind of a mess, aye?
I'm not saying it's all Cryptic's fault either. However Cryptic made the game after all, not Atari.
I just think Cryptic makes way too many shortcuts (or shortcomings), when they develop games. All is made to the bare minimum, and later on after the release cash is raked in, is improved by a miserably low speed compared to c-store additions. Everything is made using their game engine that frankly belongs to the 90's.
There's also plenty of direct gameplay problems in STO that have been around for quite a while now, totally unaffected by Atari, I mean these are all design problems: Horrible state of PvP, Fire-At-Will, Ground Combat, end-game content, lack of overall content, adding replays of already existing content to excuse making new content within reasonable timeframe, Klingons, repetive missions, and so on.
I seriously can't blame any of those issues I mentioned on Atari, which is really not a great a company either, but still. I also can't say it's going to be much appreciated by recent LTS buyers, since Cryptic already knew of this when their sale came up. Maybe they would've stayed quiet for an eternity, if this issue wasn't brought up by Atari itself, 1½ months after it happened.
There more than likely there is a buyout option, considering that Cryptic had one when they were partnered with NCSoft during their CiH/CoV days. The question is, can Jack Emmert come up with the capital to do so? Needham has moved on to greener pastures, and Atari is going to be looking to recoup as much of that BlueBay credit line as they can from selling Cryptic (most of which, according to the financial statements, was used to fund the purchase of Cryptic and keep it running). Jack's going to need to find investors or a publisher willing to put up that kind of money.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
You're welcome! As for the seriousness of it? Yes and no. While it is a serious development, the average player shouldn't see too many noticeable changes in the short run. It is possible, if a sale goes through quickly, that other than some corporate name changes, players of CO and STO may not notice any significant changes.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
Just to make a clarification, Roper had nothing to do with the development of STO before it launched; he was in charge of CO then (and should only be held accountable for that). He did run STO briefly, but he was no worse than the ones before or after him. It was only long after he was gone that STO started seeing significant changes.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
Think about the excutive, " ops spent 15 million too much, My B."
I would say it closer to 50/50, or slightly leans towards Cryptic: After all, it was Cryptic that sold Atari the line that they could produce quality, AAA MMOs; Atari merely held them to that promise. It also explains the small staff; Cryptic was promising that its Cryptic Engine 2.0 was a versatile, reusable engine that would greatly cut down on manpower and development costs. That being said once CO launched and Atari had a good look at the work Cryptic was doing, they had absolutely no excuse for allowing STO to launch in the shape it did. Atari definately got the hint after STO launched (and remember, Cryptic had arranged the development of that game, in addition to CO, before Atari bought them), which was why Cryptic's future games were being billed as OMGs and not MMOs. Cryptic is definately as much to blame in all of this, if not more, than Atari.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
CBS owns the Star Trek IP. Cryptic bought out the Champions franchise, and then Atari bouht Cryptic; that means that currently Atari owns the Champions IP. I expect ownership of the Champions IP will be one of the terms of the sale. As for STO, no matter if another company takes it over or not, CBS will still own the IP itself. Also we still have the Hasbro vs. Atari lawsuit, where Hasbro is suing to revoke the D&D license from Atari. That means that the NWN game, which apparently is still going forward with production, could go defunct as well. What that means is anyone's guess, as it is being billed as an OMG and not a MMO. OIt's kind of like watching a train wreck in slow motion.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
Right now the top guy at Cryptic is Emmert. If he manages a buyout, that would mean he would be in charge with no one above him to keep him in check. Scary thought, eh?
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
Agreed.
Neverwinter Nights 1 is still on my system to this day.
NwN2 hasn't been on there since... geeze... forever.
I hope the new NwN game ends up going to someone who will do the setting justice.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops