"According to unconfirmed reports from employees of developer Irrational Games, the company has been acquired by U.S. publisher Take-Two Interactive. The two companies have already been working in close conjunction, with Take-Two registering the trademark for and agreeing to publish Irrational?s forthcoming game BioShock.BioShock has been variously described as the spiritual successor to System Shock 2 (the trademark for which, perhaps coincidentally, Electronic Arts was yesterday reported to have renewed), which was the developer?s first game in 1999. Subsequent titles have included Freedom Force, Tribes: Vengeance and SWAT 4 - produced from the company?s Boston and Braddon, Australia studios."
From Yahoo...
Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. (NASDAQ: TTWO - News) today announced the acquisition of Irrational Games, the award-winning development studio behind such titles as System Shock 2 and Freedom Force. Irrational Games joins the team of development studios under Take-Two's 2K Games publishing label.2K Games has multiple titles in development at Irrational's North American and Australian studios. The first title to be published under the 2K Games label will be BioShock, a role-playing shooter for next-generation console systems and PC. Already anticipated by the gaming press as one of the most innovative next-generation titles, BioShock is planned for release in early 2007.
"We saw a rare opportunity with Irrational Games, a development studio that has consistently produced creative and original games," said Christoph Hartmann, Managing Director at 2K Games. Susan Lewis, VP of Business Development at 2K Games, added, "2K Games will provide additional resources and support to the Irrational team so they may continue to deliver cutting-edge games..."
lt's hope this turns out to be a far happier affair than the disgraceful events surrounding midway's acquisition and subsequentl sudden closure of ratbag
A lot of people think working for a publisher directly offers better job security and conditions. They might even go so far as to stay in a less rewarding job with the mistaken belief that there is greater security where they are. In actual fact working directly for a publisher can be a very risky as the publishers take the greatest risks in the games industry and the focus is almost entirely on making a buck. Statistically Publishers fortunes come and go faster than developers, much of the activity isn't made public of course.
A well-run independent developer provides far greater job security and creative freedom. The risk is spread over several different publishers. Independents can provide a buffer zone. Publishers are notorious for closing down internal studios (or ripping their hearts out). At the end of the day it's nothing more than a business decision or worse. Publishers don't necessarily value development the way an independent developer might.
Independent developers are willing to go the extra mile and keep a studio running even if it isn't making a monstrous profit. The owners see value beyond making a quick buck. In some instances the owners feel a responsibility towards their employees.
The cycle continues:
Publishers purchase good developers.
Publishers start to loose money.
Someone needs to get the blame so an independent management consultant is hired.
Management consultant tells the publisher to outsourced development.
Internal staff are fired on mass with little ceremony.
Publisher goes on to loose even more money as it selects the wrong development partners. Things go from bad to worse.
Technology that was once valued in the millions is now considered worthless and disturbed on the Internet for free.
Management consultant buys himself a new BMW and everyone thinks he's a genius.
New developers start to emerge from the fire and rubble. The industry gets a big injection of innovation and frees up much needed development staff.
Publishers start using new innovative developers with new fresh ideas.
Publishers start making lots of money
Publishers buy good developers.
and so on
That really depends on the publisher. The guys from blue tongue, the only complaint I've heard from those guys is that they just get to work on sponge bob but otherwise the level of employee morale is high. They just don't get to choose their projects is all.
Midway had a bad reputation to begin with as well. And ratbag had a bad reputation of lying about their recievables while Irrational now have a good name.
I think we really ought to get real about this job security thing. You don't see movie industry people expecting to be kept on a secure salary by their studio, its just not the nature of the business.
With the budgets and the volatility in game development these days its a surprise that any studio tries to maintain a staff. The odds the next project will require the exact same set of talent is pretty much zero. The cost of keeping a studio fully staffed between projects is massive.
If you want to get secure employment for 5+ years, this just isn't the right industry for you.
Its not really that simple. In movies you start teams from scratch each and every time and the technology is almost always the same for all movie production. In games you cannot afford to start from scratch each time you must build on what you have done in the past and the technology is almost always different in each case. You rely on the know-how as much as the technology itself. You can't just have a piece of technology add a team and you end up with a game. You need to hang onto the team that goes with the technology (art and code). If you are building a team from scratch then you're likely to create a new technology and processes from scratch (even if you're taking stuff off the shelf) and this adds 1 or 2 years to the dev cycle. You can definately outsource more work, but you still need the core studio team in place.
Outsourcing and licensing of technology will almost certainly continue to increase. Additionally the size of the core team that possesses the know how grows at a far slower rate than the rest of the team. What are you going to do with 50 animators whilst your 10 person technology team is re-tooling for the next project?
Agreed, so the first statement about job security isn't entirely corect then as suggested by VIP. So I gues the point is if your on the core team (ie. working in the studio) then there is a job for as long as the company is around and you are able to do the job - as is the case in any other job in any other industry. So if your working for a smart studio it will grow its core team (internal team) slowly and make extensive use of outsourcing. The benefits are numerous including a better relationship with staff (ie. they don't feel they are constantly on the chopping block), more money in the bank for the company, better project outcomes, the list goes on.
I agree with pb, if you want job security, look to a job in IT or something - though I wouldn't call it job-security exactly.
I think it is a false notion for an entertainment industry, and would welcome a change to a more film or music style of production, where there is far more collaboration and movement of people to work on various projects that interest them the most - and in this manner you are more likely to have the right mix for your project, rather than being forced to work with what you have and probably failing.
In this way good / strong development practises will migrate from studio to studio and with any luck, the local industry will get better as a result.
I think the notion that there is a core team with various other elements being contracted out, either it being production assets or middleware, as being a good one. It is far more realistic, as when the project end draws to a near, you're not giving junior artists a shock when they get laid-off from the team - for example.
It is this job-security that is pushed for - or perpetuated by studios - that does a lot of damage, as when you are aware that you will be out of a job as your contract is coming to an end, you won't waste your time clinging to a pipedream that you will have a job at the end of the project with the company, but will start sending out applications ASAP.
Working in an environment where you are dead-weight and are being promised future work by the studio, and getting to a point where that studio can no longer afford to pay your salary and most cut-back the salary of their core team, doesn't do much good IMHO.
If you want job security, you better look elsewhere other than an entertainment industry - but don't expect to get better results, as these days everything changes rather quickly.
The reality is that you have to keep your core teams and you have to look after them. They are just far to valuable and there is just too much competition for good people in our industry. The idea that people let their core teams go is rubbish, companies try to hold on to their people if they can.
Yeah but you might be a super star at one company and end up working in QA at another unless you're on very good terms with the CEO of the last place and can get a kick ass reference. From the US perspective we definately would want to talk with your last boss before putting you onto any critical tasks. Always check the references.
This is the type of mentality of the games industry needs to get out for it to progress forward. Treating any form of employee as disposable is the problem. Publisher's need foresight to get future project's in and keep the staff at the developers, so that the developer does not get a bad name for high staff turnover. The game industry is a small world and word gets around about how staff are treated:)
There is no problem if your staff know what to expect. There is no problem if you don't treat contracted staff as second-class or expendable workers. There is no problem if you use outsourced asset producers like for art and audio - so that employees are not out of a job.
If a studio can keep people on after a project, all the better. If they can't then they can't and should try to. Being stuck in a role as a studio tries to get further work and funding in for the studio does not do that studio's employees any good nor the studio itself.
I think there are a fair number of people in our industry that have shot themselves in the foot staying with the current employer instead of moving on from their last project, only to end up being out of a job regardless. I am not talking about a few months but periods spanning into years.
You don't get into the game industry just to have a job. There are plenty of ways of earning a living in Australia. For those of us working in companies without projects its not just about working for someone, we work together and for each other in a team, we work "with" no "for". Idealistic or realistic ? Its not so much about us and them, its really about the whole team and feeling a responsibility towards your fellow workers. I feel sorry for anyone foolish enough to own a game studio, it always wants more money, more attention, more toys, more everything and then when it grows up and leaves home makes sure it kicks you in the teeth on the way out the door.
No, people seeing the concept of going in, getting the job done and moving on as something bad is the problem. Viewing it as treating employees as "disposable" or "second-class" or "expendable" is the problem.
Studios don't owe you a job and you're only responsible to the people that sign your cheque (for as long as they're willing and able to do so).
I'm amazed at the dramatic language that gets used... "staff on the chopping block"?!? I've never expected to hang around anywhere beyond the project I was hired to do and I'm on good terms with those who've supposedly treated me as a second class disposable expendable asset when the project was over.
Studios don't expect publishers to guarantee them a living so you shouldn't expect it from studios either. And that's fair enough, because the only way a publisher could guarantee forthcoming projects is if you the consumer guaranteed to buy everything they published.
There are plenty of really first class independent studios in Australia where you can happily exist for as many years as you like and you get to work on the best games. It's not just a job; very few people are able to do the work. If you're good at what you do the studio looks after you.
The best of the independent studios in Oz are (in no particular order),
Tantalus
Krome Studios
Redtribe
Pandemic
Creative Assembly
Microforte
Team Bondi
Auran
The best of the non-independents are:
Blue Tongue a.k.a THQ
Irrational
It's probably a little harder to get into an independent studio.
What about IR Gurus ?
Wow, Micro Forte huh?
IR Gurus is dead, after it was brought.
Only a few weeks ago it was shut down...
IR Gurus bought and then shut down? Heh.. Surely you're talking about Ratbag?
Dont forget Halfbrick as a great independant.
Creative is owned by Sega, so they don't really count as being independent, do they?
What's the dealio with IR Guru's? I want my Dr Who game!