Would you rather have the sony/ea method Buy a developer and force them to produce the same game over and over?
really because that's not what Richard Lemarchand from nuaghty dog said.
"IGN: There's obviously extremely good ties with Sony as well, but how does it affect Naughty Dog working with such a huge company?
Richard Lemarchand: It's really good, because we have this mutual trust with Sony, and we have very regular check-ins with them. They'll give us the latitude to really run on our own, which frees us up to work in this fast and loose way. It's great that they trust us -- I wish there was more of that in the industry generally. I think that it's got to come from both sides -- from publishers and developers -- but as those bonds of trust get stronger then developers are going to be able to take more risks and work towards more innovative types of games, once the publishers know that the developer is going to reliably deliver on time."
i thing you must have gotten Microsoft and Sony mixed up
beacuse Bungie's CEO Harold Ryan said that "Microsoft only saw Bungie’s continual Halo success translate into dollars, while Bungie saw Halo as “the baby of the studio.” In fact, as Ryan points out, “it certainly wasn’t our goal to make two more versions [of Halo.]” In another question he explains that the pressure to make more sequels was one of the key reasons why Bungie decided to seek its independence."
View
