GBX has been sold to Embracer Publishing

Borderlands 3 Borderlands 3 General Discussion
#71

BTW, if you want an excellent real world analogy of where Borderlands is right now, it’s essentially in the same place as Spider Man movies.

You see, Marvel owns the Spider Man character, but Sony owns the publishing rights to Spider Man movies specifically. When Disney bought out Marvel they were still required to honor that Sony ownership of the Spider Man publishing license.

Now, in Disney’s case, Spider Man is an essential part of the MCU, so they were forced to make a deal with the Devil and pay Sony what they want to produce and release Spider Man movies for them.

The question here is, is Borderlands so essential in Embracers plans that they would also do a deal with the Devil and pay 2K what they want so 2K would continue to publish Borderlands games for them? Or, alternatively, offer 2K whatever they want to release Gearbox from that publishing contract?

Considering Pritchard’s enthusiasm for new IPs under this new agreement, I would say the odds of that are about the same as your odds of getting an 8 round per shot perfect Molten Monarch with an STNL damage annointment on your first try.

Borderlands is done. Finished. Fin.

2 Likes
#72

I like your optimism :wink:

3 Likes
#73

@moustangman I read your posts, but I am unclear on why the Borderlands franchise (or GBX) would be in any different position with respect to 2K than it already was. 2K is already paying GBX a fixed amount plus incentives or profit sharing to develop Borderlands - at least I am reasonably certain that is how development deals work. If that is incorrect, someone will correct me, I’m sure. The publisher fronts the development costs (the proportion fronted corresponds inversely to the amount of profit sharing, so the less profit sharing and incentives, the more up front, and vice versa).

2K and GBX still have every incentive to produce a profitable and commercially successful product. I don’t think that’s changed. Assuming that Embracer and 2K still want to make money off of the Borderlands franchise, that is.

But perhaps you’re making another point that I missed or didn’t understand.

#74

Because Gearbox is now owned by a publisher, and that publisher is NOT 2K. Why would a publisher want to give money to another publisher? It’s simple finances.

If Publisher gets X amount from a sale, and developer gets Y amount, why would Embracer want 2K to take X when Embracer owned Gearbox could produce a new IP instead in which case Embracer makes X+Y?

If you could make a game and sell it through me and make 10 Million, or make a slightly different game under a new name and new IP and sell it yourself and make $30 Million, which would you do?

Your resources are fixed. You can invest your time, money, and assets into either making more 2K published games or making your own self published games. It’s not hard to figure out what’s going to be done. Embracer making more games for 2K is about as likely as seeing Bethesda continuing to make more Playstation games after their current contracts are fulfilled.

2 Likes
#75

That’s true, but they will still be making money under GBX’s current business model. The sale valuation took that into account, I expect (they paid less for it than they might have if the 2K deal didn’t exist, I would guess). And when the term of the 2K/GBX publishing deal is up, Embracer would have the option to start publishing Borderlands itself - if they have the money to do that, which I assume they do.

EDIT: I’m not arguing with you, just enjoying the speculative discussion. You might be correct with what you’re saying.

1 Like
#76

This could also add merit to @LeeHarveyOswald’s entry of Embracer separating Borderlands from the rest of their titles.

1 Like
#77

@vCarpeDiemv That’s exactly what I was thinking. I think what he says in his post I linked above, responds directly to the problem/issue @moustangman indicated. That’s part of the reason I was trying to get @moustangman to tease out his thought process.

I really do think @LeeHarveyOswald might be correct with what they have said in the Bordercast news post. It makes sense in many ways.

It also explains Battleborn and Aliens: CM - Randy personally wanted/supported them. Those were huge money losers.

2 Likes
#78

I don’t see how this will matter at all. There is zero chance BL3 will ever be fixed up regardless of who owns Gearbox, and when BL4 is released, which it will be sooner rather than later, does anyone really have any expectation that it will be anything other than more half finished hot trash with endless DLC spilling out of it? Regardless of the influence of any publisher, do you really have any realistic expectation BL4 could be WORSE than this game, or any realistic expectation that anything will be made better? Just saying, I would expect “more of the same” to be the order of the day.

2 Likes
#79

GBX is also a publisher, and apparently the deal says GBX can continue to act in that role for those titles. I see no reason from the face of it why GBX’s deal with 2K would be any different. If that deal included provisions for future BL content, that would have been part of the due diligence for the Embracer deal.

I don’t know the actual details of the deal any more than anyone else, but I’m not sure I’d be so quick to jump to conclusions on the fate of a major money-making franchise just like that.

9 Likes
#80

You are so wrong…
If Gearbox was just aquired by Embracer as dev team that would be true, but Gearbox is now a part of the group, this was a full on merger. Embracer Group’s financial pool is now Gearbox’s resource as well and vice versa, so they will want to milk the cow that gives the most milk, and nothing else in Gearbox’s portfolio comes even close to Borderlands.

Borderlands as a franchise will change, but it will only grow, at least for now. Just because 2k takes 30-50% of the earnings doesn’t mean that Embracer just leaves the rest on the table because said rest would still be hundreds of millions, of which still dozens if not hundreds of millions of profit are to be cached in. What you are thinking about would be an act out of spite, not how you operate a profitable business. And Embracer wants to do just that: Profitable business.

Also, you talk as if the publishing, in which PR is a part of for 2k, isn’t worth money. Publishing a game that gets sold millions of times is expensive. And with 2k you have one of the best publishing partners in the world, with one of the best publishing networks, not just in gaming, but in entertainment.

Edit: And just to make it clear, I get that type of reaction, but if you think about the net revenue of all of Gearbox’s franchises and the way making and publishing a game works, this deal is great for everyone of the 3 involved parties. There is no loser in this deal, unless Gearbox and Embracer decide to crunch their Devs to hell and back, but that is and always was an option anyway, as depressing as that is. But that is also why I don’t think that anything major will change for Gearbox, except that they will probably open more studios or expand on existing ones.

2 Likes
#81

Pitchford, seriously why can’t people spell his name right ever? It’s not exactly a particular hard name to spell.

1 Like
#82

9 times out of 10 its just a pun to his name. Like “Pitchturd” for example xD

2 Likes
#83

I wonder how many times autocorrect has made this a thing?

#84

Often enough to still have it spell him as Pitchfork on my phone, even after 5 years on this board (technically over 6 years). Although while “Pitchford” and “Pitchfork” are at least similar, many of the less graceful names surely aren’t products of the autocorrect function, but Randy’s reputation and “colorful” personality.

Anyway, I’m pretty sure that his business partners don’t make that mistake. I have first and second names both similar to other german names and people forget my exact spelling all the time. But in professional work life - between respecting business partners - this won’t happen often. And with that I make my segway back to the topic at hand.

3 Likes
#85

I’ve seen game journalists misspell his name, it’s irritating.

That one I get, but in that case what is Pritchard supposed to mean?

#86

It is a fairly common name for those of UK descent. I can think of other associations, but those wouldn’t get past the forum’s bad word filter, so you’re on your own there.

1 Like
#87

Randy Pilchard

:fish::fish::fish::fish::fish:

1 Like
#88

That’s what we do on these forums: deep-dive breakdowns on Randy Pritchfork’s name and all the ways it can be misspelled to hilarious ends. :rofl:

And people say the forums aren’t an important part of the community any more . . . LOL

I am just teasing you folks, I have had WAY less consequential debates on here myself, so it’s not like I have room to talk.

5 Likes
#89

Or Pitchfork. It’s like Bingerding Cabbagepatch.

2 Likes
#90

Anthem and Avengers both catastrophically failed.

So did cyberpunk actually and it seems like dev think online multiplayer will be viable before even the base game is good.

If AAA studios still want to commit suicide by listening to no one, who are we to stop them?

3 Likes