Jump to content

Bruce Everiss Vs Stuart Campbell


Swainy
 Share

Recommended Posts

I was working in retial when Toca 2 came out. We pushed it quite hard in-store but lots of people who bought the first game just didn't want the sequel.

It's not that unusual for a sequel to fail to live up to the sales of the first game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I mentioned this earlier on in the thread. I'm an old fart, I grew up in the "playground tape swapping" era. I don't think it killed off companies like Imagine.

I'd often play a "copy" of a game myself or round my friends and, if it was good, I'd save up my pocket money (by the time I got my paperound I never had to! I could go up town on the Saturday and buy a game of my wages! Such decadancy!).

I think the point me and plenty of others is trying to make is that, while I agree piracy really got rife around this time - it never stopped a lot of other UK based developers "turning a coin" so to speak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am in no way standing up for RSC's comments, whilst I agree with some of them but surely the bottom of all this is that GT2 was far and away the more anticipated title of the two and was always going to sell more units, due to in been far more mainstream than the TOCA series ever was/is.

The TOCA brand, whilst without doubt one of the best racing series to date, just never had the same high street presence as GT.

This I assume is partially down to the change in the name to Race Driver / Grid etc.

Anyway as already said in this thread, Bruce is one of the good guys (from the short time I spent working with him) and whilst his articles on his page may attract critisism from a few, isnt that the point of it all, to have a bit of banter? were all entiltled to our opinions and fortunatly in this industry we can still make them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the thing bruce fails to realise is that other companies manage fine. in some ways, piracy sorts out the wheat from the chaff. GT sells by the truckload, the relatively minor TOCA didnt.

Oh it wasn't relatively minor though. It was extremely well received but was a niche title.

Only players intrested in Touring cars would have enjoyed it, not those into rally games - unlike GT2 which including this option as well as masses of cars and tracks.

But the codies released a rally game seperately so effectively spent double making 2 (successful) series of games (3 Toca's and 2 CMR's on the PS1) so whereas Polyphony made 2 games, the codies made 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont understand when Bruce says we should believe him becuase he was actually there and Stu wasnt. To me thats more reason not to believe him, he has a vested interest in trying to shift the blame away from him and the incompetency of his fellow directors.

Piracy may have been the tipping point for Imagine, but they would have went under eventually due to the crazy manner in which they were being managed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh it wasn't relatively minor though. It was extremely well received but was a niche title.

Only players intrested in Touring cars would have enjoyed it, not those into rally games - unlike GT2 which including this option as well as masses of cars and tracks.

not on the same scale as GT though was it, GT changed the goalposts. TOCA just didnt sell because o a bunch of stuff, piracy is bruce's scapegoat. It's all he's got as an argument. Read his blogs, theyre horrendous. In all seriousness, I've never known such a lack of insight from such an allegedly senior figure.

I can point and laugh etc but its this blokes livelihood...and he knows fuck all about it. It's just extremely weird.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh it wasn't relatively minor though. It was extremely well received but was a niche title.

Only players intrested in Touring cars would have enjoyed it, not those into rally games - unlike GT2 which including this option as well as masses of cars and tracks.

Yes, completly agree with this. At the time it was striclty based around the TOCA race series.

When the everyday consumer is presented with two games, one with one race series and a few tracks or one with multiple cars, tracks, series etc, we all know what the answer is. I honestly think that even if TOCA 2 or WTC had got 10/10 press wide (which if I remember rightly they werent far of) and GT2 got 6/10, GT2 would have still flown off the shelves (on the basis of the first game and the marketing) whilst predictably, TOCA would have a good opening week and fall into oblivion.

If there are any Codies reading this by the way, can you holt development on that 'Grid' thing your doing and give us a WTC HD. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm seriously looking forward to GRiD. I thought DiRT was superb.

It must be said that the codies have overtaken Poly in my book as far as game AI and gameplay goes.

GRID is the first proper racing game with 20 cars on screen and full crash damage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I forgot to mention.

In the week that the Imagine, Megagames, Piracy thread was happening the Very Reverend Bellend started zapping my private email address with his rant emails. I had to tell Outlook that he was spam. Which isn't far wrong.

And amongst those comments he boasted:

"you’re aware that I’ve been a professional videogames journalist for almost 20 years, and was also Development Manager at Sensible Software during their most successful period in the mid-90s, yes?"

and

"And yet I’ve already been Development Manager of a game developer better and more successful in its market than anyone you ever worked for. I was involved in the production of three games (writing most of one of them myself), and every one of them went to No.1 in the All Formats charts. That’s a 100% record of success by any measure, Bruce. If only you could say the same."

Now I know Jon Hare so I asked him if this was true. Obviously it wasn't. The Very Reverend Bellend lives in Walter Mitty land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I mentioned this earlier on in the thread. I'm an old fart, I grew up in the "playground tape swapping" era. I don't think it killed off companies like Imagine.

My experience is all anecdotal from my school days in Liverpool in the heady days of Bug Byte, Imagine et al. We all swapped tapes and copied games but we all bought our fair share of software to swap and trade. We all liked to have 'originals' for the good games. I was 12 in 1984, an unholy percentage of my pocket money went on software, we certainly weren't costing the industry any sales as there wasn't any more money to spend, but you could argue that some firms may have been disproportionately copied and thus lost out compared to others.

Imagine's problem was that after Arcadia most of their games were perceived as being crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Bruce....

Who was right? Bruce in 2008 who said piracy killed Imagine or Bruce in 1984 who said Piracy did not kill Imagine?

And what has made you change your mind from then until now?

I never said that Piracy did not kill Imagine. Never ever.

Some sub editor put it as a subtitle on an article I wrote.

But read the article and see what it actually says.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but bruce, you banned stu from your blog as he was kicking your argument in the eyes. then you banned everyone who linked to the picture of the headline

BRUCE SAYS: PIRACY NOT TO BLAME

then you refused to acknowledge everyone showing you this evidence of PAST BRUCE proving FUTURE BRUCE wrong.

nice going theyre mr hypocrite

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Stuart thinks that Hare backed him up. And it is a matter of record that he did most of the design work on Cannon Fodder 2, is it not?

Anyway, just one thing. The £11 million figure you claim is spurious comes from your article in Your Computer. Admittedly, we didn't realise this was paid piecemeal (and we should have, really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said that Piracy did not kill Imagine. Never ever.

Some sub editor put it as a subtitle on an article I wrote.

But read the article and see what it actually says.

A quick disclaimer: I'm not an advocate for piracy. I don't buy pirated games and I try to buy new releases rather than second hand copies. I like to support the sector that has given me so much enjoyment. But then I only buy games that I know I will enjoy.

But that article quite clearly details how badly Imagine was run. It was mismanagement that led to the disaster of Imagine collapsing not piracy. Not to say that piracy wasn't rife at the time but that would have had the same effect on all software publishers not just Imagine. And as we all well know plenty of British firms managed to continue through those times.

Unfortunately the business has consolidated and of the few big publishiong firms left Codemasters is the only British owned one, is that piracy's fault?

I think having a public row with Campbell is pointless. He is an opinionated person who's like a dog with a bone. But to say that he has not made any decent counter-arguements is fruitless. And I must admit that he is far more knowledgeable about the history of British videogames than I ever will be.

So... In my opinion, Imagine was badly run, it was going to get beaten by the competition anyway, regardless of piracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Stuart thinks that Hare backed him up. And it is a matter of record that he did most of the design work on Cannon Fodder 2, is it not?

Anyway, just one thing. The £11 million figure you claim is spurious comes from your article in Your Computer. Admittedly, we didn't realise this was paid piecemeal (and we should have, really).

The Very Reverend Bellend is deluded. Hare did not back him up. Quite the opposite. Jon specifically says that Bellend was not Development Manager. That he was lead designer in just one game (not three as implied). And that Cannon Fodder 2 had already been designed in Cannon Fodder 1.

There is no way anyone would have paid Imagine £11 million up front for anything. Obviouly Bellend and yourself know very little of business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the thing bruce fails to realise is that other companies manage fine. in some ways, piracy sorts out the wheat from the chaff. GT sells by the truckload, the relatively minor TOCA didnt.

There isn't any premeditated logic to what games are affected worst by piracy. If people A.) want a game and B.) know they can yarr it, they will. I agree to some extent with Bruce's musings in the latest article on this - even on a platform with widespread piracy there is still scope for legit sales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know the full details of Stu's involvement in CF 2 other than that he did the level design. If he wants to defend himself, I'm sure he can :).

I'm sorry about confusing the terms of the MC contract, but considering that the company was failing to pay duplicators, having to pay back the 200k probably didn't help you much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know the full details of Stu's involvement in CF 2 other than that he did the level design. If he wants to defend himself, I'm sure he can :).

I'm sorry about confusing the terms of the MC contract, but considering that the company was failing to pay duplicators, having to pay back the 200k probably didn't help you much.

We didn't pay back the £200K.

You see I have the advantage of being there at the time. So I know what happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.