People are sick of remakes, remasters and endless sequels over original content, so EA says okay (given that their last deadspace was a remake that didn’t sell well), and now we have the other side of the pendulum where everyone’s up in arms because they didn’t renew an existing series that has seen a long term drop in interest and revenue….
Why is anybody even remotely surprised
EA aren’t interested in anything that they can’t use to manipulate kids into gambling
It’s an old series that has already tried remakes that failed and the original creator went and made their own deadspace but as a totally distinct IP and it too did not sell well….
But yes, EA can’t manipulate kids into gambling so that is totally the reason why they aren’t renewing the series…. Yeah it’s about tricking children into to gambling and totally not investing in something the market has clearly shown to be not interested in at the moment.
Lastly, yeah, EA is a piece of shit for using mtx and the like to trick people in general into chasing bullshit, but I think it doesn’t help anyone to regurgitate unrelated claims whenever possible.
When they’re pushing lootboxes into kid games, then cry about it there. This has nothing to do with that.
The Remake apparently didn’t sell, and the legally-distinct-Dead-Space (Callisto Protocol), from the OG creator also didn’t sell well. Doesn’t seem like people want Dead Space right now.
I mean they squeezed all the blood from that orange. Not that that ever stopped Ubisoft…
And yet they still won’t just sell off the IP, like many others they’re sitting on, doing nothing with. We need reform to the IP system. Make IP squatting both illegal and impossible by default.
True but even the original creator made a legally distinct game that was essentially deadspace and it didn’t sell well either…
Is it a problem with EA or with the IP (or state of the market for the moment) if it doesn’t do well with and without EA?
Legally distinct is where things can get extremely murky already. A spiritual successor is in no way guaranteed to get the sales figures of the original IP. Sometimes fans go rabid, others not so much.
Now, in less general terms Dead Space is a horror game, a niche segment of the market that traditionally “doesn’t sell well”. In usual big game company fashion, it’s really difficult, if not impossible to get apples-to-apples numbers on sales and costs. I’m not claiming to be a DS fan, let alone expert but does spending $162M (Callisto Protocol’s reported cost) on the development of a niche game, that is a legally distinct game from a franchise that has been reported to not sell well sound like a good idea?
I couldn’t find a sales figure for DS3, a game that I remember being poorly received by fans at the time so the best I can do is use the 4 million copies from DS2, a game that was supposedly a commercial failure with a $60M budget. CP had a sales expectation of 5 million copies. At $60 per ideal sale, Krafton were apparently expecting to make $300M. Does 85% profit margin sound realistic?
Keeping in mind EA and other large publishers in the AAA and rolls eyes AAAA sphere have a history of over-estimating their sales numbers, begging the question of whether the people setting these numbers are doing so realistically or just because that much profit sounds nice?
Regarding your question of EA or IP (or market), I’d add on “Or is it due to project mismanagement?”. Are incompetence and greed making it so that fans will never see more of a franchise they love?
Didn’t they just remake the first one or something? That pretty much signals it’s a dead franchise. I’ve always seen remakes/masters as a sending off love letter.
It’s a misleading headline, EA rejected Glen Schofield’s pitch for dead space 4. The guy who was responsible for the first one and Callisto protocol. It might be that EA is just not interested in letting them handle the franchise anymore.
I see, thanks.
Maybe the team should make an indy spiritual successor then. Especially if the reason is that AAA gamea cost too much to make.They kinda did, and the person you replied to mentioned it — Callisto protocol
given the budget was like 160 mil, not exactly Indy but:
“The Callisto Protocol was a brand-new IP from a newly established studio, but he game received mixed reviews from critics, which may have affected its appeal to players. The PC version of the game was plagued by performance problems at launch, which may have deterred some players.”
I agree with /u/9point6 above. This type of game is less marketable for add-on content.
So if that’s true then why did nobody buy Callisto protocol then? If it’s not about deadspace but instead about EA being greedy, then why did one of the original deadspace devs go and make their own legally distinct version of deadspace with a big budget and a brand new studio — just to see it fall on its face and fail?
Maybe the market isn’t interested at the moment as they’ve already turned their nose up at DS remakes from EA as well as spiritual successors from the original DS devs??
Oh, but EA can’t market add-on content? As if DLC story and new modes doesn’t exist?? You seriously think EA is incapable of developing DLC and charging money for it???
I don’t mean to be rude, but why didn’t you just reply to the comment that you’re directly talking about? That’s pretty much what the reply feature exists for… that, and replies.
