Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image

PS3Blog.net | November 25, 2017

Scroll to top

Top

25 Comments

Insomniac Partners with EA. Plans New Multiplatform Franchise | PS3Blog.net

Insomniac was widely rumored to go multi-platform, and it’s now official. They are working on an unnamed PS3/360 multiplatform to be published by EA and are planning both PS3/360 multiplatform releases and some PS3 exclusive releases in the future. See Ted Prices’s video announcement here.

This is in some ways similar to how Epic does both 360 exclusives and PS3/360 multiplatform releases.

Congratulations to Insomniac. Quality developers have choices, and I’m glad that Insomniac isn’t afraid to use them and get the most favorable arrangement that they can.

Resistance is awesome, Ratchet & Clank is even better, and I will almost surely buy whatever else they make of that quality, regardless of the platforms it ships on.

  • Eddie

    I wonder what new IP they are working on. Ratchet and Resistance will stay exclusive obviously.

  • Jay

    ah another developer that went the Bungie route, but instead of Activision, it’s EA? 😛 hopefully they get a must-have IP out of the deal!

  • EdEN

    No Wii or DS release means it’s not Multiplatform. It’s just porting from PS3 to 360.

    Still, a new Insomniac franchise could be great considering their past work.

  • I don’t know which is worse, sigining with EA or Activision.

  • Jay

    well, at least EA has turned it’s image around quite a bit in genres outside of sports. If they hadn’t, we wouldn’t have an excellent game in Dead Space for one

  • derrickgott007

    Resistance died in my eyes the minute they released the first map pack DLC for Resistance 1.

    I paid for the maps only to find out that you COULDN’T shoot from 90% of the elevated areas of the maps, and I played ONLY as a sniper on that game.

    Resistance 2 felt like a cheap knock off version of Resistance 1…

    Get your act together Insomniac!

  • Jonaskin

    Good news, they’re a great developer, it’ll be good to see their talents noticed outside of the loyal PS fanbase.

  • Darrin

    I’ve never heard a logical reason why EA or Activision is “bad”.

    The publishers provide dev studios with financial, advertising, and distribution services. Studios like Insomniac (and Bungie) are well educated and have shopped around and selected the best deals and arrangements that suit them.

    What is wrong with that? Because the executives said some dumb things in interviews? Because these publishers have records of partnering with studios that shortly later, fall apart? Because there have been ugly publisher/developer break ups? Because they’ve put out some boring games?

    None of those reasons warrant any negativity from gamers.

  • Darrin

    OK, the big publishers do deserve some negativity of the “they are boring and make boring games (with a few amazing exceptions)” type, but not the “they are evil and we should cheer for their downfall” type.

    Particularly Ubisoft. EA and Activision have a few stand outs, but Ubisoft is the most consistently boring.

  • DarkKnight32

    I dont blame them. R2 kinda flopped but what can they possibly do on 360 that cant be done on ps3. i just see this as more money for them which is good for them and us as well. More money means bigger and better games.

  • Well we know what the new NC Studio is working on, sounds like the main house behind rachet and resistance will be sticking to that for now and the new house will be making the multiplat, which im all for. Playstation owners get three insomniac franchise’s to look forward to.

  • Blackstaffer

    EdEN: how is PS3 + 360 NOT multiplatform? More than one platform EQUALS multiplatform.

    Darrin: How about the fact that Activision, for the longest time, refused to let Guitar Hero guitars work with Rock Band? Or that they never released GH2 for the PS3, when they could have? Or the fact that the PS3 version of CoD3 didn’t get any map pack support even though the 360 did? Or that the PS3 version of CoD3 had no splitscreen support while the 360 version did? Or the MW2 maps coming out on 360 earlier than on the PS3? Or how about the prohibitive price of the map packs for MW2? (They’ve made so much money off our backs on MW2, maybe they could consider giving something back for a change!) Or how about the fact that the MW2 developers are still lazier with the PS3 port? Just look at the names when playing splitscreen multiplayer – they’re numbered on the PS3 while they’re proper names on the 360.

    Then look at how they’re treating the IW employees. Do you really think they’re leaving in droves because working at Activision is just SO pleasant? I don’t think so.

    You could argue that Activision is just trying to maximize shareholder value. But since when does that mean that they’re nice people? They’re not. They treat gamers terribly in the name of the almighty dollar.

  • as long as they don’t do any 360 exclusives i’ll be happy 😛

  • Darrin

    Blackstaffer, great points. But why are those things the publisher’s fault and not the dev studio? Most of those sound like dev issues and not details that the finance or marketing people care about.

  • JohnGalt

    “Ratchet and Resistance will stay exclusive obviously.”

    Well, from what I understand (and I certainly don’t keep up with these things very well), Ratchet has seen his last adventure. A crying shame if true, as it’s an excellent franchise.

  • So how upset will everyone be if the PS3 version is inferior to the 360?

  • Eddie

    Darrin: I’ve never heard a logical reason why EA or Activision is “bad”.The publishers provide dev studios with financial, advertising, and distribution services. Studios like Insomniac (and Bungie) are well educated and have shopped around and selected the best deals and arrangements that suit them.What is wrong with that? Because the executives said some dumb things in interviews? Because these publishers have records of partnering with studios that shortly later, fall apart? Because there have been ugly publisher/developer break ups? Because they’ve put out some boring games?None of those reasons warrant any negativity from gamers.  

    I think the current issue with Infinity Ward and Activision is a telltale sign of how they treat their partners. It seems they are well known for reducing creative freedom and apply impossible standards to many games.

    Many of the studios they bought they eventually closed down. Gray Matter, Infocom, Luxoflux, Shaba Games, Red Octane, Sierra, Underground Development all have been closed by Activision. Infinity Ward seems it will follow this path.

    And lets not forget to mention Activisions practice of raising the standard price of games. MW2 was more expensive then most games in the UK and other parts of Europe. Starcraft 2 will be sold in 3 iterations. $15 map packs…

    So there are many reasons to not like the some publishers. Just some people over act about it.

  • Darrin

    Studios are easily formed and just as easily disbanded. Publishers don’t have some sacred obligation to preserve these come-and-go studios. You named Luxoflux: the founders of that “studio” left and started another studio with a different name before Activision closed what was left. I really don’t see any wrong doing there.

    And creative freedom is great, but that’s ultimately the responsibility of developers to discover satisfying work, not the responsibility of their publishers to guarantee it to them. You can’t just dump everyone’s problems on the publisher like they are some all powerful god.

    And lastly, if these studios were so terrible, then developers shouldn’t voluntarily enter deals with them. The fact that so many veteran, educated, respected, and successful development teams (very recent examples are Insomniac, Bungie, and Respawn) have very voluntarily entered serious relationships with EA and Activision and seem so happy about it suggests that these publishers are making genuinely positive contributions.

  • @Blackstaffer:
    “Just look at the names when playing splitscreen multiplayer – they’re numbered on the PS3 while they’re proper names on the 360.”

    This is 85% Sony’s fault. They had a year to learn something from Xbox Live, multiplayer login is still not properly supported, which Xbox holds *mandatory*, immediately the second player is told to login, either as a true user or guest when the controller is activated.

    Current multiplayer login such as in LBP or even resistance are just patches to a non-standard feature. I am for *certain* on LBP the second user never gets any trophies, and I guess it is the same case for resistance. So far, the appalling support for local multiplayer is just like a “hack”.

    It is up to Sony to enforce some very *basic* standards to PS3 games published. Even recent PSN games don’t have the (even though half-assed) multiplayer login support.

  • EdEN

    @Blackstaffer: Porting from PS3 to 360 and calling it multiplatform doesn’t ring true. Multi is several which is more than two. Two is just that, two. Not releasing on Wii is ignoring 70+ million customers of which at least 5% could get behind a new project by Insomniac. There are no differences between a PS3 and a 360 SKU, but a Wii one, as Ubisoft has shown, opens up different choices in design and gameplay.

    Infinity Ward were stubborn enough to not release MW on Wii and Treyarch released World at War and will release Black Ops on Wii, which means an extra 1.5 million copies sold.

  • Blackstaffer

    Darrin: You say “But why are those things the publisher’s fault and not the dev studio?” What you fail to realize is that IW is wholly owned by Activision. IW is part of Activision. Anything IW does, is by definition what Activision does. Ditto for the developers of Guitar Hero. They ARE Activision. Now if we were talking about Bungie or Insomniac, that’s different. They just have publishing deals with Activision and EA, in which case your argument would hold some water.

    Emrah: while I agree that Sony should have set some standards here, the particular issue I’m complaining about is IW’s fault, not Sony’s. IW could easily have given us the proper names.

    EdEN: I guess your definition of “multiple” (multi) is more than two. My definition of “multiple” is more than one, which I think that makes more sense. Wanting a Wii port doesn’t change the definition of the word “multiple”.

  • Ehandlr

    Multi can be translated into more then one or more then two.  It depends on its usage.  Multiplatform in this case designates more then one.
     
    Besides, when developing a multiplatform game, you have to develop to the lowest denominator.  Which means if you want a true multiplatform game, the 360/PS3 versions will be the exact same with a higher resolution and better textures. 
     
    There wasn’t anything stubborn about Infinity Ward.  They did all of the work for Treyarch and just let them put the pieces together for the Wii while they continue working on the next HD versions of MW. 
     
    The reason most dev’s concentrate on HD consoles or just the Wii, is because the Wii demographic is flighty.  We see this in poor core game sales on the Wii. 
     

  • Jonaskin

    Couldn’t agree more with the above statement that Ubisoft releases the most consistently boring games. The only franchises they have going for them are Assassins Creed and to a lesser extent Prince of Persia (which is starting to slip). The Clancy games are a snorefest.

    I just can’t wait to see what Bungie and Insomniac come up with next.

  • @Darrin: Just imagine if Sony required publishers to adhere to that rule.. They don’t.. That is Sony’s fault. If this is going to save 2 days of programming, they will go ahead and be lazy about it.. But if Sony set some standards, which it does about lots of things (like mandatory logo viewing and probably lots we don’t even know), they could make sure games published from a certain date would be required to have that functionality, much like trophies.

  • Argh, I meant at @blackstaffer, sorry 🙂