f13.net

Damn if the jokes don't write themselves:

I'm paying some attention to Fury, which has just announced its North American publisher as... Gamecock Media Group.


The first Google link I came across for Gamecock says a lot about Mike Wilson that makes him look pretty damn iffy (http://dubiousquality.blogspot.com/2005/06/mike-wilson-unplugged.html), which when combined with the press photo below... well, judge for yourself.

(http://kotaku.com/assets/resources/2007/02/Gamecock_headcocks__sm.jpg)

The five games Gamecock is taking to launch can be seen on a Kotaku page (http://kotaku.com/gaming/gamecock/gamecocks-five-games-235722.php). At a quick glance, if you've been wondering when the next Ultima Underworld game was going to be released, Hero looks like the game for you. Other than that and Fury... meh.

My final link: the history of Gamecock. (http://www.gamecockmedia.com/about.html) Jesus wept.

That history page reads like a badly written "I hate the industry" blog.

"Finally, our chicken choked."


what's the submit to fuckedcompany? 

Someone gave these guys money?   :roflcopter:

Ya, I had hopes for Fury.  *hopes smashed*

Well if it's any consolation this is only their NA publisher, and they only just made this deal, so I don't really think that Gamecock has that much say in design decisions.  Also, the game has been well in development for a while now (and playable as shown at E3/PAX/etc..) so I'm not sure this will really affect the gameplay at all.

I think Codemasters remains as their European publisher.

...

Then I went looking to confirm the above bit of info, but can't find anything about it other than Codemasters sponsored a Fury sneak peak.

It's starting to remind me of the mid 90's, when VC's were giving truckloads of cash to anyone with a dot com idea.  One in particular that I read in Money magazine that stands out the most was two hispanics/mexicans/whatever in their early to mid twenties that got something like 100 million in capitol to fund a start up soccer apparel (player jerseys, 'officially licensed' uniforms, etc) sales website.

It tanked.

So you hate them because they make penis jokes?

At least I can put their site to good use.

I wonder if this means The Promised Lot will return at this years E3.

I don't hate them - I just think they look like unprofessional wankers.

Unprofessional wankers who (in part) were responsible for Daikatana, at that.

  I don't know why you guys are shitting on the idea of rampant V.C. in games.  It means one of two things bubble or growth, and growth either way for at least the sort term.  Seriously, who here would ask for less game companies if they could?  More companies, good.  Besides that Insecticide (http://www.insecticidethegame.com/) seems cool, but then again I'm an adventure game kid who loves noir. win, win.

They're getting a lot of attention though.  Probably more than they'd get if they were just "random company X" announcing their formation in a bland press release.

These guys are dipshit twats who will produce nothing but lowered standards of professionalism in the gaming industry while wiping their asses with investor money.

It's a shame too because companies like EA (http://ea-spouse.livejournal.com/) and Vivendi (http://money.cnn.com/2004/11/15/commentary/game_over/column_gaming/index.htm) are working so hard to raise those standards.

I'm half expecting Darniaq to wiegh in here with a lecture on why you wouldn't want a dot com like bubble to happen.

It's not worth tryig to explain why bubles are bad if someone sees a bubble as "Ok because it's still growth, just short-term!"

"Ask" and ye shall receive :)

Seriously, growth good but bubbles are not. When the latter bursts, it not only takes those directly involved with them, but causes a lot of collateral damage as well. Imagine the dozens of MMOs under development if there's a 90s-style bubble burst (on a much smaller scale of course). Unless those MMOs were coming from SOE (who makes them inspite of themselves) or Blizzard (with a name they could use to sell cars if they felt like it), most in-development MMOs would limp along to eventual free public beta or close outright. All those people not getting paid, all that equipment getting obsoleted. Bad times.

Growth is better all around. Unfortunately, what we may be experiencing right now is a sort of bubble/growth hybrid.

WoW raised awareness of what real potential is. But that's with a crazy-expensive approach nobody else can touch (or at least wants to touch). Maplestory and Habbo show what you can achieve for a lot less money, but most of "we need an MMO" crowd seem to lean WoW side, and are convincing the big money that's the way to go.

From there could a bubble loom, from the point of view that WoW is the thing to chase because your diku is going to outshine their diku. That's fine if you have, a) five years to develop and plan to spend two of that testing; b) have a huge game-based IP; c) are reknowned already for making polished games that iterate enjoyed convention; and, d) have a hands-off publisher that knows how to push product around the world. Lacking any of those you're not going to hit WoW numbers anytime soon.

The more people don't, the more some VCs will run. Or if you have a strong launch but a quick falloff in players (because the game sucks, is broken, etc), then there's that negative PR thing that'll really work against you.

At the same time, it seems some groups are pretty smart in what they back. They KNOW WoW is sort of an exception for all of the above reasons, so fund other projects, figuring the aggregate will net the nice money.

For now I think we're good. There's a lot in the pipe, but it's easy to notice which ones are serious. Those that are serious either HAVE a lot of the above (or think they do) or are trying for a narrower/different audience, and scaled their execution appropriately. Nobody thinks the Tyra Banks MMO is going to pull millions away from WoW, and they didn't spend $65mil to deliver it. Even LoTRO looks to have been responsibly budgeted with a more objective outlook on expected number of players, VC aside.

Is there an ignore function on this board? Or at least one of those "Click here to read more!" if the post is bigger than about 15 lines. The more I think about the "read more" option the more I like it.

There's already an ignore function.

I'm sorry life doesn't work by sound byte.

Because spinning a scroll wheel is hard?

Yea, I guess I wasn’t paying attention to the same stuff as you guys.  I saw a diversified lineup of various game types for various platforms, so the idea that one of those ventures was an MMO project didn’t seem as important.  but I agree a bubble in exclusively MMO titles is a really bad prospect, mostly because 80% or more of the "new" MMO ideas are diku + one new idea, and bubbles mean outsiders throwing money at things they don’t understand (fuck, we can't even get insiders to understand most of the time).

It's not, but putting Darniaq and geldon on ignore / "click here to read more" would postpone the onset of carpal tunnel for a decade.

Gamecock is fucking Gathering of Developers.

ROCK.
 
No more making fun.

There is? How do I use to never see any of your posts again?

Keep going on like that and I'm gonna have to ask if I can have your stuff.

If you want to get a pretty good idea about Gamecock and the history/evolution from GOD games, try to pick up a copy of this month’s Gameinformer.  It has a good interview with them about what happened with Gathering of Developers and what they’re hoping to do with Gamecock.

Remember when a company would work for years to make a reputation for quality by releasing interesting and innovative products that worked well?  After a while you grew to trust the label and could safely purchase something of theirs that maybe you weren't 100% certain of but the brand gave you the confidence to try it?  Usually with good results?

When did it become realistic to just expect to have a good reputation and assume that the quality product will come later?

O I C.  It's because their (Gamecock's) business isn't producing quality software, it's getting mega-bucks from investors and to do that you have to have hype, hype, hype.  For some reason I seem to doubt that I will ever by a product with the Gamecock logo or copyright on it.  Probably because I doubt if they will ever produce anything worth purchasing.

Geldon I could understand, but Darniaq?  The fuck, you don't like thinking?

Yes.  And I bought WoW.  What's your point ?

Everyone has to start somewhere people. Besides, at least the guys behind Gamecock have produced some hit games in the past.

Personally I'm a Fury Fanboi because it will deliver where guild wars failed.

Maybe the thread title wasn't clear?  This thread isn't about Blizzard.

It's about Gamecock, which used to be GOD games?  Who've never produced anything worth while and yet feel the need to have press releases announcing the fact that they are once again producing nothing worth while?

Yes, I know you are pointing our that Blizzard did just what I am saying, unfortunately they are the exception and not the rule.  Also, I'm getting tired for WoW this and WoW that in every thread.  Sure it's the 800lb gorilla in the room but it wasn't in this room until you pulled it's ass in here.

I don't feel like typing a decent flame, so I'll just say Darniaq > the people flaming him.  Also cocks.

I'd play it. I want to be America's Next Top Model. Offline would be better, but online would be a fair compromise.

goddamn that was beautiful.

GOD had admirable intentions when they started, but the idea fell through fairly quickly. Kind of the like most of the independent/grassroots film studios out there that end up getting acquired. These guys start out trying to buck the system, and being favorable to content creators and developers (and not suits), but they eventually end up becoming part of the system. It's the oldest story in civilization, I guess.

Maybe people are expecting the same from Gamecock. I don't know. I'd agree that, game-wise, they aren't hype-worthy though (that Clover -> Seeds news is more important than this imo).

The part I can't take serious about them is the name, and I think that's going to be a big issue for them (unless it's a double-entendre and they go the characterized-chicken-logo route). It comes down to something Murgos said "For some reason I seem to doubt that I will ever by a product with the Gamecock logo or copyright on it. "

See, I can't imagine there being a Gamecock logo in the first place. It's hard to take a company with a name like that seriously. There's pushing the envelope and there's pissing on the whole of the industry. Both will get you noticed but only one in the way that can get business done. And eventually you need to do that if you want to publish anything, either in store or digital.

Gamecock's a fighting rooster, as I recall.  As usual, the joke is a bit too obvious to my taste.  At least they didn't waste a bunch of cash on it.  I hope.

Name and logo *could* be bearable in the longterm.
What I really can't stand is this picture. It makes my eyes bleed venom. I couldn't take seriously a terminal illness should it present itself with it.

(http://kotaku.com/assets/resources/2007/02/Gamecock_headcocks__sm.jpg)

I don't think Gamecock is a terrible name, especially for some sort of fighting game.  They've named airplanes, sporting teams, pubs, all sorts of things after it.  Maybe some people will have trouble or giggle over the word "cock", but they're just being silly twats.  As for the weird picture... at least they have a bit of humour.  Of a sort. 

I get GameInformer magazine.  I don't know why.  I don't read it.  I think it might have been some sort of free gift from FP or something.  It's seems to have even followed me from New Jersey.  Anyway... I think this game, Fury, looks like fun.  The magazine actually sat on a shelf for I don't know exactly how long when I suddenly remembered this thread because my sister called someone she doesn't like a cocksucker. 

Ok, so I didn't actually read the words yet but I looked at the pictures and they look like fun.  I'll get to the words later.  I haven't read an NDA or anything so I don't know if people can say whether or not they're in beta.  I suppose you can say not.  So... anyone in it?

(I'm having a befuddling day.  Sorry if I'm confusing anyone.)

From talking to the QA lead, you can say that you are in alpha, but thats it. 

I am of the alpha, but not yet in the alpha (ie files are on my PC).

I am the Alpha, and the Omega...

oh, wait..what were we talkng about?