PlatinumGames, developers behind games such as Bayonetta, Nier, Astral Chain, and other renowned action games, is fed up with dealing with publishers. Last May, the company's CEO discussed PlatinumGames's issues with not being able to control their own IP's, with titles like The Wonderful 101 being stuck on the Nintendo Wii U, or SEGA standing in the way of future entries in franchises like Bayonetta or Vanquish. Platinum planned to change things, and move towards self-publishing their games in the future, following the release of Bayonetta 3, which is currently being published by Nintendo. It looks like the famed developer now has everything they need to self-publish, after receiving a capital investment from Tencent Holdings, a Chinese firm, and the largest gaming company in the world. Previously, they've invested in or owned shares of companies like Epic Games, Activision Blizzard, Riot Games, and Ubisoft. Platinum's CEO, Kenichi Sato, claims that PlatinumGames will remain independent and will continue their current operations as they have in the past, using the partnership in order to break into the self-publishing world, allowing for their games to reach a wider global audience.

Source

 

[Deleted User]

Maybe every game company should be investing in mining bitcoins.

Conspiracy: "Modern" games need high system specs not because the games themselves need that much, but because they mine bitcoins in the background when you are playing, thus it does not matter whether you pirate or not, they always get money.

 

[Ev1l0rd]

Hrm, neat.

Hoping that P* gets to make some cool titles.

Remember, it's unlikely this will impact their works much. P* isn't known for making multiplayer games, which is what Tencent has previously received flak for (seriously, a lot of the drama with Tencent can be summarized by "people in online multiplayer games say things Tencent doesn't like"). They're the studio that makes flashy action games with good single player experiences. So I wouldn't say I mind it.

 

[Kadji]

I am missing the most important information:
Did Tencent buy shares from Platinum? And if yes, how many?

I would not be worried to much.
First of all: Platinum is a japanese company. Japan and China are not best friends, it is very much in Platinums interest to keep control over their Studio. They don't want to lose face, especially if they are "overtaken" by a Chinese company. They don't just care about money.

With Epic, ActivisionBlizzard and so on the situation is a bit different: They don't have the mentality of "loosing face" (it's mostly an asian thing). So they don't care how bad they look to the outsiders when they follow the stuff Tencent demands from them. They just care about money.

Or are there japanese Companys that just follow Tencent's orders? I don't realy know of any...

 

[Bladexdsl]

Bayonetta 3 cover art?

it's the movie they made

 

[Ev1l0rd]

Also, I feel it's important to keep in mind that Tencent usually doesn't censor international releases of games from Studios that they fund. I know there's a few examples out there, but those are publisher laziness of not wanting to do separate versions for their games/filter stuff out purely for their Chinese audiences alone.

Ironically, we can point to Fortnite for an example of a game released in China through Tencent. In the chinese version, everything with skulls is removed from the game or highly censored, there is pretty much an "auto-win" situation if you survive long enough and there's a hard 3 hour per day playing cap. Stupid, but keep in mind that these aren't in the international version. The only thing that was changed to my knowledge in the international releases that could be construed as Tencent censoring Fortnite was the change of the skull icon for kills to a crosshair, but that might also just have been done for cleaner UI purposes/the entire aesthethic Fortnite likes to go for not really having a skull icon fit their HUD.

 

[mario5555]

Exactly, at this point Microsoft would've been a much better option and they would've let Platinum keep releasing their games on all platforms.

Yeah because Scalebound worked out so well.....

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2017-01-09-microsoft-kills-scalebound

I wonder why they didn't get a deal with Nintendo? Maybe they were asking for too much money?

No disrepect, but re-read what you wrote.

They want to self-publish on multiple platforms. Nintendo giving them money would lock them into an exclusivity deal WITH (wait for it...) Nintendo. Defeating the purpose of self-publishing to begin with.


------------

If anyone has been paying attention. A lot of the Platinum vets have been leaving (some even going back to work with Capcom, see RE2/3 remakes) so all is not right with them. If they can't find some way forward they'll get absorbed or lose their way, go bankrupt or go away in less than a decade.

Time will tell if this was a good or bad thing for them, who knows.

 

[Xzi]

Yeah because Scalebound worked out so well.....

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2017-01-09-microsoft-kills-scalebound

Well if they were just looking for investors to self-publish though, that's an entirely different thing. No way money from Tencent doesn't come with strings attached.

 

[Borgman2018]

Tencent, like most companies, wouldn't invest in anything unless they had something to gain.

Yes, money.

Exactly, at this point Microsoft would've been a much better option and they would've let Platinum keep releasing their games on all platforms.

Really? Going with Microsoft, AKA the destroyer of game studios, would have been a much better option? What happened with Scalebound was not enough?

You guys are getting blinded by nationalism/politics, there's no other way to explain such bad takes.

 

[Xzi]

Microsoft, AKA the destroyer of game studios

That title belongs to EA.

You guys are getting blinded by nationalism/politics, there's no other way to explain such bad takes.

Ties to the Chinese government are definitely not a positive thing, but I wouldn't want Zynga buying up game studios either. Mobile gaming needs to just stay in its own lane before it ruins the entire industry.

 

[Borgman2018]

That title belongs to EA.

And Microsoft comes as a close second.

Ties to the Chinese government are definitely not a positive thing, but I wouldn't want Zynga buying up game studios either. Mobile gaming needs to just stay in its own lane before it ruins the entire industry.

Tencent's money didn't ruin Epic Games; they didn't start to make mobile games, on the contrary, it allowed them to compete with Steam, prompting Steam to lower the cut taken from developers, I see this as a net positive.

 

[Xzi]

And Microsoft comes as a close second.

Nah that'd probably be Activision. Microsoft is way down on the list and has made plenty of smart decisions lately.

Tencent's money didn't ruin Epic Games; they didn't start to make mobile games

Lol true, Epic had already ruined themselves before Tencent came along. Their modern games are bad, even if not quite on par with P2W mobile garbage.

it allowed them to compete with Steam, prompting Steam to lower the cut taken from developers, I see this as a net positive.

Epic already had the money to compete with Steam before Tencent. Extra funds or no, however, they clearly don't have the desire to put much effort into improving EGS, which is why they'll never truly be able to compete with Steam.

Oh and Valve didn't change the base cut they take, it only scales with higher sales now. Not that it makes any difference, Tencent Timmy has no problem selling through the PS or Xbox stores which also take 30%. It's all performative bullshit; of course you can and should take a lower cut if you're providing absolutely no added value to the customer whatsoever. Based on the quality of service Epic provides with EGS, they should take 2% at most.

 

[Borgman2018]

Lol true, Epic had already ruined themselves before Tencent came along. Their modern games are bad, even if not quite on par with P2W mobile garbage.

Sure, and Unreal Engine is niche stuff that's definitely not the industry standard.

Tencent Timmy has no problem selling through the PS or Xbox stores which also take 30%.

What? In this case Timmy is the one that has to pay, he's not the one taking the cut. When you're buying something you can't decide how much will you pay. It's only when you're selling that you can make the price.

It's all performative bullshit;

Then why the other players don't perform?

of course you can and should take a lower cut if you're providing absolutely no added value to the customer whatsoever. Based on the quality of service Epic provides with EGS, they should take 2% at most.

Yeah sure, because Steam adds 30% of value to consumers.