Duke4.net Forums: Looks like someone can now buy Blood IP - Duke4.net Forums

Jump to content

  • 6 Pages +
  • « First
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Looks like someone can now buy Blood IP

User is offline   Jesus is King 

  • Jeffrey Epstein didn't kill himself

#121

They're probably on the fence about who owns what and just really don't give a shit enough to even bother with the IP.
0

User is offline   Forge 

#122

we all know these entertainment industries are out of ideas and have been for years.
look at all the fucking movie remakes and cookie cutter video games.

WB will one day make a Blood movie, then re-market the game to ride on the popularity wave
0

User is offline   ZedSlayer 

#123

I STILL say they should try a kickstarter or something to get us all to pitch in money to help buy the rights, show WB/Atari/Whomever that fans want this so bad we will throw money at the screen.
0

User is online   Micky C 

  • Honored Donor

#124

Assuming they care that we care...
1

User is online   Malgon 

#125

Just out of curiosity, we've always heard that WB wants too much for the Blood IP, from others who have looked to acquire it, but has it ever been stated how much that figure actually is?
0

#126

View PostZedSlayer, on 26 April 2014 - 08:23 PM, said:

I STILL say they should try a kickstarter or something to get us all to pitch in money to help buy the rights, show WB/Atari/Whomever that fans want this so bad we will throw money at the screen.


Acquiring copyrights and IPs costs a lot more money than your average kickstarter could provide. It might be a nice gesture, but there's no way someone could buy the IP with just plucky fans contributing about $100k.
1

User is offline   Plagman 

  • Former VP of Media Operations

#127

Why are people still talking about WB? I thought Atari owned it now...
0

User is online   Micky C 

  • Honored Donor

#128

Wasn't it that Atari owns the rights to the original Blood (possibly Blood 2?), but WB owns the IP and the rights to future Blood games?
1

User is offline   Jblade 

#129

View PostMalgon, on 26 April 2014 - 09:35 PM, said:

Just out of curiosity, we've always heard that WB wants too much for the Blood IP, from others who have looked to acquire it, but has it ever been stated how much that figure actually is?

I doubt we'll ever know how much due to legal reasons (fuck bloated legal systems) but I think it would easily be in excess of several million dollars, if not more. Definitely more than a re-release of blood with a sourceport would bring back in (as much as we all love Blood, it's ultimately a niche game that wouldn't draw in megabucks)
4

#130

View PostPlagman, on 26 April 2014 - 10:01 PM, said:

Why are people still talking about WB? I thought Atari owned it now...


I think WB and Atari owns 50/50 of the rights. Jace Hall has gone quiet a/b the Blood revival.
0

#131

View PostMalgon, on 26 April 2014 - 09:35 PM, said:

Just out of curiosity, we've always heard that WB wants too much for the Blood IP, from others who have looked to acquire it, but has it ever been stated how much that figure actually is?


They can't disclose the actual amount to the public.
Dealings like that are bound by legal contracts, specially when the deals don't go through. Devolver can't say how much WB is asking for it. If they did, they'd only be putting themselves in a bad spot.

View PostPlagman, on 26 April 2014 - 10:01 PM, said:

Why are people still talking about WB? I thought Atari owned it now...


Blood was published by GT Interactive, who was purchased by Infogrames. Atari later purchased Infogrames.
Atari had distribution rights to the Blood games, and own the source code (even though they themselves don't have the source code... Matt does), Atari has the final say in if the source code is released.

But, Warner Bros owns the IP itself. 3DRealms sold the Blood IP to Monolith shortly after they purchased Q Studios (who was developing Blood). Lith have always owned the Blood IP, and when Lith was bought by Warner Bros, WB got the IP.
So, to purchase the IP you have to buy it from WB. To get rights to re-release the original Blood and Blood II... you'd have to get with WB and Atari.
0

#132

View PostMickey C, on 26 April 2014 - 10:05 PM, said:

Wasn't it that Atari owns the rights to the original Blood (possibly Blood 2?), but WB owns the IP and the rights to future Blood games?


Atari owns the publishing rights to the released games while WB owns the IP as such. It it no different really than how the relationship was between Take Two and 3D Realms concerning the Duke IP.
0

User is offline   Sance231 

#133

View PostDamien_Azreal, on 26 April 2014 - 07:29 PM, said:

Yeah, it's been known for a while that Devolver weren't going to continue pursuing the IP.
They were very up front when the chances of it happening fell through.



You can't go by DN3D or Shadow Warrior's recent STEAM releases. Both those games were owned by 3DR and arranged to bring them to Steam through both 3DR, General Arcade and Devolver.
Blood is owned by WB, DN3D or Shadow Warrior have nothing to do with what WB will do with Blood.

Devolver really would love to get ahold of the Blood IP and have Flying Wild Hog handle a reimagining of the series. But, WB have no desire to part with the IP. Mostly because they don't need the money. So for them, why sell something they could use later on? Most publishers sell off IPs when they are hurting. WB are far from being in a situation were they need to unload some IPs to get some money in.
And Devolver have said that given how much WB priced it, it would be an incredibly stupid move for any company financially to spend that amount on the IP.

Devolver are successful. And in their eyes, they don't want to become a "big" publisher. They've said that's the biggest issue with the gaming industry. That developers don't know that they don't need the publisher. Publishers need developers much more, and Devolver are well aware of this.
And they've had plenty of big hits. Sam 4 blowing up won't change how they run things. And it won't magically make WB lower the price of an IP they have zero desire in selling.

I was not saying that Devolver should be the next Activision, I only said that if they could afford to do a lot of things with the Blood IP they may buy into a more expensive solution. I love them too but realistically speaking they are still a relatively small company that can't really afford buying IPs. Seeing that people did not really "buy the s*** out of" the new Shadow Warrior I'm not surprised. Sam 3 was a huge indie hit, Hotline Miami was also a huge indie hit but they need to produce a "real" hit in order to step their game up a bit so they'd be able to start a discussion with WB from a financially stronger position. WB will never sell the IP dirt cheap because that would send the message that they're not okay financially (as usual a company starts selling its assets if it's not in a good shape so in every other situation the price has to reflect the company's strenght). I'm not buying into the talk that "they don't want to get big", of course they want to just like every company does.

Anyway I don't understand the hate WB gets when it comes to Blood: I'd be okay with them resurrecting the IP, no one says it has to be Devolver. Even if a new game would suck, Caleb still has a chance to be in Mortal Kombat. ;)

This post has been edited by Sance231: 27 April 2014 - 07:54 AM

0

User is offline   Commando Nukem 

  • Judge Mental

#134

View PostJames, on 26 April 2014 - 11:33 PM, said:

I doubt we'll ever know how much due to legal reasons (fuck bloated legal systems) but I think it would easily be in excess of several million dollars, if not more. Definitely more than a re-release of blood with a sourceport would bring back in (as much as we all love Blood, it's ultimately a niche game that wouldn't draw in megabucks)


You'd have to do a port/re-release of Blood for every platform possible, and then do a major-league reimagining for today's audience, without screwing it up, to get the money back
1

#135

I figure the owners of the IP would prefer to do a shitty remake instead of releasing the source code... ;)
0

#136

View PostSance231, on 27 April 2014 - 07:46 AM, said:

I was not saying that Devolver should be the next Activision, I only said that if they could afford to do a lot of things with the Blood IP they may buy into a more expensive solution. I love them too but realistically speaking they are still a relatively small company that can't really afford buying IPs. Seeing that people did not really "buy the s*** out of" the new Shadow Warrior I'm not surprised. Sam 3 was a huge indie hit, Hotline Miami was also a huge indie hit but they need to produce a "real" hit in order to step their game up a bit so they'd be able to start a discussion with WB from a financially stronger position. WB will never sell the IP dirt cheap because that would send the message that they're not okay financially (as usual a company starts selling its assets if it's not in a good shape so in every other situation the price has to reflect the company's strenght). I'm not buying into the talk that "they don't want to get big", of course they want to just like every company does.

Anyway I don't understand the hate WB gets when it comes to Blood: I'd be okay with them resurrecting the IP, no one says it has to be Devolver. Even if a new game would suck, Caleb still has a chance to be in Mortal Kombat. ;)


It's not that WB won't sell the IP dirt cheap... WB are pricing it intentionally high so it's out of other publishers price range. WB don't want to sell it. But, it's easy to throw a insanely large price tag on it when people inquire. Devolver went after it, WB priced it intentionally high to turn them off.

And, I know you're not saying Devolver should become Activision or EA. Devolver employee six people. Hell, they said bringing in a sixth person was unreal to them and at times... felt like the wrong move. And they are happy like that, they want to stay small like that. And I'm glad, I love how they do things because they know that as a publisher, they need the developers more then the developers need them.
Yes, they want to be successful, but being successful doesn't mean they have to grow larger. They are successful. Because they stay focused on what matters... the games and the developers. Not the size of their company.


And, the hate people have for WB in relation to Blood is that they are sitting on it. And that hate simply comes from nostalgia, people want another Blood just because they love the first one. So, knowing WB owns the IP and aren't doing anything with it makes people unhappy.
My dislike for WB comes from what they did to Monolith. Canceling projects, (Craig had a secret project in the works for a while that they canned), working with SEGA to cancel Condemned 2's PC port and Condemned 3. Laying off several staff members and basically making Lith a license developer instead of letting them make creative new games like they used to.

Right now, I'd rather they sit on Blood and not do anything with it. Monolith now isn't the same company it once was, and the real talent there has gone off to do other things. The only studio I'd trust to make a new Blood is Flying Wild Hog... but that won't ever happen with WB determined not to sell the IP.
0

User is offline   Sance231 

#137

View PostDamien_Azreal, on 27 April 2014 - 08:08 AM, said:

It's not that WB won't sell the IP dirt cheap... WB are pricing it intentionally high so it's out of other publishers price range. WB don't want to sell it. But, it's easy to throw a insanely large price tag on it when people inquire. Devolver went after it, WB priced it intentionally high to turn them off.

And, I know you're not saying Devolver should become Activision or EA. Devolver employee six people. Hell, they said bringing in a sixth person was unreal to them and at times... felt like the wrong move. And they are happy like that, they want to stay small like that. And I'm glad, I love how they do things because they know that as a publisher, they need the developers more then the developers need them.
Yes, they want to be successful, but being successful doesn't mean they have to grow larger. They are successful. Because they stay focused on what matters... the games and the developers. Not the size of their company.


And, the hate people have for WB in relation to Blood is that they are sitting on it. And that hate simply comes from nostalgia, people want another Blood just because they love the first one. So, knowing WB owns the IP and aren't doing anything with it makes people unhappy.
My dislike for WB comes from what they did to Monolith. Canceling projects, (Craig had a secret project in the works for a while that they canned), working with SEGA to cancel Condemned 2's PC port and Condemned 3. Laying off several staff members and basically making Lith a license developer instead of letting them make creative new games like they used to.

Right now, I'd rather they sit on Blood and not do anything with it. Monolith now isn't the same company it once was, and the real talent there has gone off to do other things. The only studio I'd trust to make a new Blood is Flying Wild Hog... but that won't ever happen with WB determined not to sell the IP.

In the long run I think Monolith's decline has little to do with WB, they simply started to put out bad products with FEAR 2.
0

User is offline   Daedolon 

  • Ancient Blood God

#138

View PostDuke of Hazzard, on 27 April 2014 - 08:04 AM, said:

I figure the owners of the IP would prefer to do a shitty remake instead of releasing the source code... ;)


IP != rights to the source code.
0

#139

id Software having publishing agreements with Activision and other partners did not stop them from releasing the source code to bunches of their games. The same can be said with regards to 3D Realms and other companies that have had released source code do their games. Atari having any kind of say in the release of Blood source code is a pervasive myth in the Blood community that as far I can tell is unfounded. See my sig for the opposite point of view of someone in the known.
0

#140

The publisher isn't the problem; it's whoever owns the IP ATM. WB doesn't sound like the type that would like the source code of their games floating around, regardless of how useful it could be.
0

#141

View PostMYHOUSE.MAP, on 28 April 2014 - 12:56 AM, said:

The publisher isn't the problem; it's whoever owns the IP ATM. WB doesn't sound like the type that would like the source code of their games floating around, regardless of how useful it could be.


I agree. I was responding to Daedolon. He seemed to imply that WB's permission might not be enough to release the source code.
0

User is offline   Daedolon 

  • Ancient Blood God

#142

Atari still holds the rights to the first two games.
0

#143

View PostDaedolon, on 28 April 2014 - 10:26 AM, said:

Atari still holds the rights to the first two games.


They hold publishing rights to those two games yes. Just like Activision held publishing rights to Quake 3 its source code was released.
0

User is offline   Plagman 

  • Former VP of Media Operations

#144

OK now I'm even more confused than I was before. You're saying both Atari or WB can sign off on the source code release? Or do they have to agree?
0

User is offline   Daedolon 

  • Ancient Blood God

#145

To me it's pretty clear cut, Atari owns the publishing rights to anything related to Blood and Blood 2, while WB would be the company you'd go to if you wanted to create Blood 3.
0

#146

View PostPlagman, on 28 April 2014 - 12:14 PM, said:

OK now I'm even more confused than I was before. You're saying both Atari or WB can sign off on the source code release? Or do they have to agree?


From what I can tell only WB needs to sign off. That is also what the quote in my sig seems to imply. One would think the one who negotiated the contract would know.

"To me it's pretty clear cut, Atari owns the publishing rights to anything related to Blood and Blood 2, while WB would be the company you'd go to if you wanted to create Blood 3."

That is how I see it as well.
0

User is offline   Plagman 

  • Former VP of Media Operations

#147

So Atari owns the publishing rights for Blood 1 and sold it through GOG, but they're not the ones that can sign off the source code release? OK.

To be clear, Matt is talking about the original Blood contracts he negotiated while he was still at Lith, correct? What relevance does that have to the current legal situation, which became affected by tons of acquisitions and potential deals after that?
0

User is offline   Hendricks266 

  • Weaponized Autism

  #148

View PostDaedolon, on 28 April 2014 - 12:16 PM, said:

To me it's pretty clear cut, Atari owns the publishing rights to anything related to Blood and Blood 2, while WB would be the company you'd go to if you wanted to create Blood 3.

View PostKristian Joensen, on 28 April 2014 - 11:24 AM, said:

They hold publishing rights to those two games yes. Just like Activision held publishing rights to Quake 3 its source code was released.

So, do publishing rights equal source code release rights?

Let's ask Carmack!
1

User is offline   Commando Nukem 

  • Judge Mental

#149

View PostHendricks266, on 28 April 2014 - 01:21 PM, said:

So, do publishing rights equal source code release rights?

Let's ask Carmack!



0

User is offline   Hendricks266 

  • Weaponized Autism

  #150

View PostHendricks266, on 28 April 2014 - 01:21 PM, said:

So, do publishing rights equal source code release rights?

Let's ask Carmack!

http://i.imgur.com/WC3r2xM.png
2

Share this topic:


  • 6 Pages +
  • « First
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic


All copyrights and trademarks not owned by Voidpoint, LLC are the sole property of their respective owners. Play Ion Fury! ;) © Voidpoint, LLC

Enter your sign in name and password


Sign in options