2K Boston

Goodbye, Irrational. Hello 2K Boston.

Next up should be Disney Interactive, Austin.

Soon, we won't have any problems identifying the indies. They'll be the ones who aren't named 2K, Disney, EA, Eidos, or Biodemicware.

More.
More.

Let's hope they won't be standing before closed doors like Rockstar Vienna (formerly Neo) did.

its a small price to pay having your companies name changed if it allows you to stay alive and continue to develop great games.

I don't know. First, I think it's a shame to lose a name with great credibility, such as Irrational. Not a big deal, but still.

Ken talks about how he likes being able to concentrate on the creative side instead of where the next gig will come from, but will that last? How long before 2K cracks the corporate whip and they have to make a game they don't really want to?

those are valid concerns and yes i liked the name irrational as well, meant alot unlike some barcode name. but if the cowtowing of changing the name means years more of development from them its an albino alligator in my opinon.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0115495/

Originally Posted by Dhruin
Ken talks about how he likes being able to concentrate on the creative side instead of where the next gig will come from, but will that last? How long before 2K cracks the corporate whip and they have to make a game they don't really want to?

Unfortunately that line seems to come from a lot of places when a major take-over occurs, and is usually made not long before the studio is shut down by the new owners and the titles assimilated into the parent company's holdings.

What puzzles me about this move is that the name Irrational means something to a lot of gamers, it has brand recognition, but 2K really doesn't mean anything. It strikes me that "developed by Irrational" would mean a heck of a lot more than "developed by 2K Boston". Even if you didn't know Irrational, the former sounds at least like it was made by a studio while the latter sounds like an identity-less bland corporation.

personaly i'd be more pissed if they moved the studio from boston. boston is known for its music, culture, and academia. its also the home to not only most of my favourite american musicians but also american game developers.

I feel similar. Irrational Australia means something to me. 2K sounds like a distance, or a disaster (as in Y2K ), not a game developer!!

I think 2K is a publisher, not a creator. And as Gallifrey writes, the comments from Ken about creativity is more likely the statement to be said before the shit hit the fan.

Why destroy a brand recognition as Irrational. I could buy it if they kept the name.

Altough, it doesn't need to be bad altogether. But, if it is bad then this is why:

The publisher will make profit from Bioshock.
Irritational Games is not - the development costs to high and the debt to the developer to high. 2K offer to take on the debt if they get the company.
To keep everybody smiling - they make this statement.
What kind of games has Irrational been doing before? How much innovative is their new engine and settings? How expensive has it been? Bigger comapnies with bigger titles before it went belly up has happend.

In two-three months Ken announce his quitting and is starting up is new, better studio, where creativity is everything.

Or - None of this will happen.

Hm, i think i am a judgment day kinda guy today. But - it has happened before

Ken leaving down the track? Certainly wouldn't be the first time. Only time will tell, but it likely depends on the terms of the agreement!!

I'm mostly with Gallifrey in that.

Studios are bought up, and swallowed like a amoeba consumes everything in its way - leaving nothing behind than a shell.

I mean - haven't we seen this before ? What's left of Origin, Westwood, Neo ?

The big companies just take their brands, exploit them … and that was it.

It appears to me as if small, creative companies are merely considered as a deliverance of great brands to the major companies who are keen and willing to swallow them in order to exploit them ("cash cow").

Apart from delivering brands, small studios seem to be of no use to major ones.

I call this parasitism.

Originally Posted by mute
The publisher will make profit from Bioshock.
Irritational Games is not - the development costs to high and the debt to the developer to high. 2K offer to take on the debt if they get the company.

What do you mean by "get the company"? Irrational has been a part of Take 2 Interactive since January 2006 already.
All that's happening now is that Take 2 is renaming their studios to strengthen the 2K Games label/brand. Not a big deal if you ask me.

I believe that Irrational's brand recognition might be a little overestimated around here, too. What games have they made? Tribes, Freedom Force, SWAT… those are all pretty niche.
To a casual gamer Irrational probably means nothing and I would bet that even among "real" gamers you'd bump into folks who'd go "huh?" when asked about Irrational. Irrational are certainly not in the same category as Blizzard, Rockstar or id. It's only when you start mentioning Looking Glass in the context of Irrational that -especially among older gamers- the bells start ringing. But Irrational on its own doesn't really have much of a rep (IMHO).

Finally, I'm quite sure that Levine & co are quite happy under the 2K Games roof. Those guys are people like you and me. They have gotten older and grown more experienced over the years. Maybe they even have families now. There comes a time when the survivalist lifestyle of doing contract work and never knowing if and what project you're going to work on next becomes uncool and where it becomes cooler to have some security in life. Take 2 is giving them that security. A "they pulled funding and you can all go home like… right now" moment has become infinitely less likely to happen ever since they became a part of Take 2 and if Take 2 is indeed giving them the creative freedom that Levine is saying they have, well, what more could they ask for?

Well, my point is, that the game they have done before is niche market. Not big budget - and high risk - but the game they've done has been very well recieved by fans and press.

I didn't know that 2K owned Irriational, i was just typing out of assumption that 2K was their publisher.

And in that light, when the publisher take chances, they usually make sure they do make a profit, and the company that looses is the company developing the title. And since Irrational were doing niche market games, they probably didn't have big budget, from their own pocket, to spend, so they - or Ken - would have to work hard to assure they got fundings to make the game they wanted. And seeing, the red numbers, knowing that they never would get black - 2K offered a deal.

And i HAVE ABSOLUTLY NO IDEA about this. Just painting a scenario, where Irrational was a company, and 2K the publisher. (Which your link clearly negate - so i was totally off my mark, but i was just doomsday speculating anyway)

I am just another example of that the ordinary forum going is typing out of his arse.

… oh, you forgot System Shock II. The only reason i care about what happen to Irrational is System Shock II.

Oh, and seeing that they are hyping AI i am sure of Bethesda Softwork will hire Ken to be AI director in their new version av Radiant AI.

On a serious note: I am really looking forward to Bioshock.

Originally Posted by Moriendor
Irrational are certainly not in the same category as Blizzard, Rockstar or id.

Rockstar is a "no name company" to me.

But this might be due to the fact that I don't play GTA …

Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer
Rockstar is a "no name company" to me.

But this might be due to the fact that I don't play GTA …

Well, there you go. You recognized Rockstar as the makers of GTA. Moriendor would call that brand recognition.

Okay, you're right, but that's all I know about that game.
(And I once found out it even by chance !)

Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer
Rockstar is a "no name company" to me.

But this might be due to the fact that I don't play GTA …

But whether or not *you* know them matters little to the billions of $$ they have made. Just as some here might think of THQ for Titan Quest rather than the heaps of licensed movie and TV games they have made their fortune pumping out … ask a kid under 13 to pull out 5 games from their collection and aside from Nintendo, THQ is most likely to own the majority!

THQ is still a publisher for me who once bought Softgold.

I don't like THQ due to 2 facts (2F) :

- older games become COMPLETELY erased from their web page, data banks, whatever. You can't access patches and information on older games they ponce published anymore.

- they didn't want to publish the Zanzarah add-on.