id sells out!

[princec]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06...s_to_bethesda/

That's the way to go, boys!

Cas

[Bad Sector]

If i ever make the money Carmack makes, i wouldn't mind to sell my company. In the worst case i'll start a new one :-P.

[DFG]

When was the last time they had a big hit? With the Quake online project, I wondered how they were going to make money off of it. I wonder if they were starved for cash.

[sindisil]

If i ever make the money Carmack makes, i wouldn't mind to sell my company. In the worst case i'll start a new one :-P.

Carmack did, some time ago: Armadillo Aerospace.

[TMK]

According to this article and quotes from John Carmack, it sounds like they will be more independent (i.e. becoming their own publisher and handling their own IP) after this buy-out:

http://kotaku.com/5302060/id-softwar...ompany-zenimax

[princec]

It doesn't really matter The point is - they had an exit strategy and they executed upon it. Every indie should aspire to one day sell their company and assets for a phat wad, and then found a new business with the money!

Cas

[Cevo70]

It just feels cooler when you're not a sell out though. And somewhere along the line, I feel as though the product is cheapened.

[luggage]

It doesn't really matter The point is - they had an exit strategy and they executed upon it. Every indie should aspire to one day sell their company and assets for a phat wad, and then found a new business with the money!

Cas

This is spot on. And it's also how the serious money is made.

[cliffski]

Why not just grow? Apple, google and microsoft didn't sell out. All 3 were started by just 2 geeks.

[princec]

Why not just grow? Apple, google and microsoft didn't sell out. All 3 were started by just 2 geeks.

There are basically 2 exit strategies in business, and Apple/Google/MS did the other one. The first one is Get Bought, and happens to about 80% of businesses. The remaining 20% do an IPO and float on the stock market.

Cas

[DigitalDuffman]

This isn't just an out... they sold their company but they also signed long term deals to work for them.

It simply sounds like they were frustrated with the bussiness end of creating a game (marketing, distribution, etc) and wanted to concentrate more on just making games. By selling the company like they did, they can let their parent company take care of all the work that they wanted to avoid... and probably get a lot richer while doing it.

[jcottier]

Id is a AAA tech savy company. In todays market, it takes #very big number# millions $ to create competitive games. I guess, they didn't have the cash flow to carry own like that.

The current market is terrible for a dev for selling out. Don't make mistake, if they sold today (to a minor player) it's because they had no other choice. Otherwise, they would have wait until the economic is better and ask for a better deal.

JC

[vjvj]

This isn't just an out... they sold their company but they also signed long term deals to work for them.

It simply sounds like they were frustrated with the bussiness end of creating a game (marketing, distribution, etc) and wanted to concentrate more on just making games. By selling the company like they did, they can let their parent company take care of all the work that they wanted to avoid... and probably get a lot richer while doing it.

Yeah, but they've been accomplishing that with Activision for years, now. I think the problem is that publishers are getting sick of putting money into id with "only" royalty money to gain and no long-term IP benefits. id was able to dictate this kind of deal when they had the clout that they did, but I think the lukewarm response to Doom 3, ETQW, etc. has given publishers the negotiating leverage they needed to start saying "no" to this kind of arrangement.

[KNau]

They also used to make boatloads licensing their engine but that's not the case anymore AFAIK.

[Jim Buck]

Does anyone know if they will still license their tech? They still have the licensing pages up, and nothing in that press release says "no" (but nothing in that press release says "yes" either).

[vjvj]

Does anyone know if they will still license their tech? They still have the licensing pages up, and nothing in that press release says "no" (but nothing in that press release says "yes" either).

I would hope so considering how much time and money they've put into it... Or maybe their "parent company" (rofl) has plans to use it as an internal, cross-studio engine? From what I've seen of it so far, it looks like a really nice tool suite and they'd be crazy to let it sit. Just a matter of whether or not anyone external will ever see it I guess.

[Pallav Nawani]

but I think the lukewarm response to Doom 3

Doom 3 sold 3.5 million copies according to wikipedia.

[m3xican]

An interesting interview with John Carmack.

[Jim Buck]

Hmm, I wasn't even thinking about their in-progress tech, but that's now an interesting question too. However, I was really wondering about their past tech since I have one of their engines that I ported to PSP and think about using now that the PSP is making a combeback.

I would hope so considering how much time and money they've put into it... Or maybe their "parent company" (rofl) has plans to use it as an internal, cross-studio engine? From what I've seen of it so far, it looks like a really nice tool suite and they'd be crazy to let it sit. Just a matter of whether or not anyone external will ever see it I guess.

[desmasic]

idTech 5 or 6 (Doom 4 as far as I know) for next Bethesda game maybe (Tech 5 already looks better than Gamebryo).

Also, hopefully this means next Quake sequel will be done by id itself than ruining it by passing onto Raven or Splash Damage (QW was good but it's not Quake, stop ruining the universe FFS).

Good luck to id, one of my favorite developers.

[vjvj]

Hmm, I wasn't even thinking about their in-progress tech, but that's now an interesting questions too. However, I was really wondering about their past tech since I have one of their engines that I ported to PSP and think about using now that the PSP is making a combeback.

Yeah, good point... Were you using the GPLed code?

Doom 3 sold 3.5 million copies according to wikipedia.

I didn't say that it didn't sell well, just that the reception was lukewarm. For some reason, the press was relatively unforgiving with Doom 3 in their reviews (unfairly IMHO; perhaps the relative critical/consumer success of Half Life 2 was a factor), and Doom 3 tech licensing basically went nowhere. Regardless of how you want to slice the rational/logical side of the picture, the fact of the matter is that Valve and Epic are enjoying continued retail publishing relationships while id couldn't land a similar deal in the same market.

[Jim Buck]

Yeah, GPL but with the option to go closed-source (for $$$) if I release my stuff "into the wild".

Yeah, good point... Were you using the GPLed code?

[jrjellybeans]

For some reason, the press was relatively unforgiving with Doom 3 in their reviews (unfairly IMHO; perhaps the relative critical/consumer success of Half Life 2 was a factor), and Doom 3 tech licensing basically went nowhere. Regardless of how you want to slice the rational/logical side of the picture, the fact of the matter is that Valve and Epic are enjoying continued retail publishing relationships while id couldn't land a similar deal in the same market.

I think the whole thing of it not being as PHENOMENAL as Doom 1 and Doom 2 was a factor as well.
Those games were HUGE and AMAZING. Doom 3 was good (very good at best).

But, yes, the fact that they weren't able to land a deals within the right markets I found strange. They were once one of the greats/giants in the industry (still are in a way I guess...)