http://yahoo.reuters.com/financeQuoteCompanyNewsArticle.jhtml?duid=mtfh3760 1_2004-11-23_23-03-11_n23503347_newsml

Does it mean anything for the progress that has been made by Firaxis on civ4?

Edit: clarifying..

Well, that really depends on who bought it, doesn't it?

yeah, I guess, Firaxis has nothing to say in this then, more than that they have a halfmade game?!

Or could it be somekind of publish/distribute rights only?!

Well, reading this says that some obviously thinks that Civ will make a profit for them.

"Bonnell also said that Infogrames recently sold the franchise for the game "Civilization," making a capital gain of 15.5 million euros, which should help second-half accounts."

So, either we will start seeing a lot of Civ Action figures, expansion packs, or CIV IV! I personally think it would be Civ IV since it is already in production, since we believe it is being produced. Hopefully it does not slow down its release.

No, these issues are mostly business issues. It sounds like Infogames is suffering from poor financing of funds.

Usually if the right company buys the game, they try to make it better. The only bad part is if they have bad ideas. Videogames lately have sucked because they have focused on 3D and not on gameplay and originality as it was in the 80s.

who bought the license anyways?

You stole my thread. :p

I think I'm scared. What if they turn civ4 into a no brainer action game? I don't even want to think about that! :sad:

I think that if they do that, they won't bother to call it Civilization. Or at least, they'd better not.

Come on, Civ has made quite a niche in this market.

You stole my thread. :p

So it seems :( I thought this was the place for the thread since the news might have some impact on the civ4 development, so I didn't bother checking the other forums. I just read it at Bluesnews...

Anyway, does anyone here have any insight in these things? If there's a contract between Infogames and Firaxis that carries over or anything?

Nobody knows yet. An Atari/Infogrames rep said that it was up to the other party to disclose their name. There's some speculation on who it is at both Apolyton and CFC, as well as at other news sites.

Personally I am hoping it was Sid himself who bought it. :)

Sid? I don't think so. ;) Firaxis maybe.

If someone bought out a franchise, I doubt it's to overhaul the game in a radical new direction -- which is good news and bad news.

A lot of people buy existing franchises to turn them into cash cows, and pump out a sequal with improved graphics and not much else.

Personally I'm hoping it's either Sid himself or Firaxis who bought it. I'm not buying it if it just has improved graphics.

Many are suspecting it is firaxis (see front page news). Also this is a change in publishers, NOT production house. Firaxis will still produce the game to their vision and would probably kill the project before it becomes perverted by a publisher.

If someone bought out a franchise, I doubt it's to overhaul the game in a radical new direction -- which is good news and bad news.

A lot of people buy existing franchises to turn them into cash cows, and pump out a sequal with improved graphics and not much else.
*Cough*EA games*Cough*
Do I need to explain more :crazyeye:

Just out of interest, how long does a thread have to lie unreplied to before someone bringing it back up is a nuisance?

Just out of interest, how long does a thread have to lie unreplied to before someone bringing it back up is a nuisance?

ehh, yes? :confused:

three days =Þ

Any sensible answers?

*Ahem*, the technical term for "bringing a thread back up" is bumping; and there's a smilie for it -> :bump:

Does Firaxis have the kind of money necessary to buy the franchise?

Sorry, but your post, Spatula, makes no sense to me.

Another OT question out of interest - Do you have any problem with quoting or the smilies? Sometimes when I'm try to use them I just get sent up to the top of the page.... or is it my connection that is to blame.

Does Firaxis have the kind of money necessary to buy the franchise?

Probably, if they all wanted to work for free for a few years...

Sorry, but your post, Spatula, makes no sense to me.

Spatula's masterclass in understanding what she says.

Lesson 1: Spatula will always write in what is linguistically known as a 'complex sentence' (a sentence composing of one part that can stand on its own and another that can't). This is because she rambles on with no thought for proper structuring.

Lesson 2: Spatula will often have the mistaken assumption that because she can understand what she has written everyone else can.

Lesson 3: Spatula reads books full of fancy-sounding sentences, and so replicates their structure in her own writings.

Deciphiring the aformentioned post

"Just out of interest, how long does a thread have to lie unreplied to before someone bringing it back up is a nuisance?"

"Just out of interest, how old most a dormant thread (have no new replies in it) be before 'bumping' it becomes an official annoyance?"

And if you still don't understand it, then I'm afraid I can't simplify it further.

Ahh, now I see. It was the 'nuisance' that messed it up for me, I confused it with nuance. I apologize, I should have checked the dictionary first.

The problem with not bringing old posts up is that people will complain that the topics already exist...

Sorry, but your post, Spatula, makes no sense to me.

Another OT question out of interest - Do you have any problem with quoting or the smilies? Sometimes when I'm try to use them I just get sent up to the top of the page.... or is it my connection that is to blame.


Loppan Torkel...lest I am mistaken, you cannot post smilies in "quick reply" mode. In order to use the smilies you must click either "post reply" or "go advanced" below the "quick reply".

here are a few screenshots... :)

which brings you here...

or here...

The problem occurs sometimes when I press on a smilie or the quotesign, in the advanced-mode, but thanks anyway :goodjob:

Sometime it works, sometime it doesn't, no biggie, just wondering...

DanQ at Apolyton writes in a news bulletin of Jan 19:


A report in the most recent PC Gamer (PCG) magazine is speculating that Take2, the publishers of the Max Payne and infamous Grand Theft Auto series, has purchased the ownership rights to the Civilization franchise from Atari. While the sale of the series is public knowledge, the identity of its new owner is not as Atari refuses to disclose it and the party in question has as of yet not come forward declaring this new acquisition. News of this comment was first filed with the German-language CivIII fansite Civ3.de last week from a PCG reader in the United States.

You can't post smilies in Quick Reply mode? :)

Um... Apparently you can. As this and the previous post were both written with quickly reply. :crazyeye:

All you have to do is know the UBB code for the smilies that you want to use. :whipped:

:D


- Sirian

Take Two, eh? That's a bit of a surprise. But they've published good stuff.

Just not what I think of when I think of Civ.

Will this impact the direction? Will they turn Civ into a cash cow, or will they innovate with every sequal?

This is still not official though. But if it is them it is a surprise.
And I'm not really firmilliar to how they operate, so I donno what to expect.

I've heard more bad stuff about Atari than Take Two, so it shouldn't be that bad.
At least it's not EA....hopefully.