THQ Stock Price Crashes

[Racecarlock]

Saints row is not the only series at stake here when it comes to volition. Did people forget they made freespace 2? And they really want to make freespace 3, but THQ doesn't see it as profitable. Maybe if they get snatched up by take two they could make freespace 3.

 

[Dark Prophet]

It's really sad, thanks to THQ we have S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and Metro, the Dawn of War series and Darksiders were kinda OK too but I also know that THQ has published some exceptionally shit games even more games that should have never been publised at all (go look at the THQ publishing list on wiki, it's scary as hell), so they had it goming I think.

 

[DiamanteGeeza]

I'm beginning to think a buy-out will be the best case scenario for THQ at this point.

If they sink further into debt, they'll eventually have no option than to file for chapter 11, which will involve accountants and the selling of their studios, IP, real estate, and other assets to clear their debts and wind the business down.

I can't imagine Activision would be interested - THQ doesn't compete in what's left of Activision's slate. Perhaps Activision Value might be interested in a couple of their IP?

EA? Maybe, but unlikely.

Take Two makes the most sense. Even if all they wanted to do was kill off a GTA rival, they would have the opportunity to do so very cheaply indeed...

 

[Soviet Steve]

Well, they did Homefront, they deserve this.

 

[Treblaine]

-snip-

"Oh noes, someone didn't like the game i like !!I should tell him he has bad taste."

Well, excuuuuse me princess, but when I payed 150 BGNs for it, I didn't know i was buying an expansion pack - because thats what SR3 was.It was short, the story was so overblown it felt like a Tarantino movie on steroids;the jokes wre retarded;the villians were practically interchangeble cardboard cut-outs; customization of both weapons and caharacters was an overhyped joke.
Oh, and let's not forget Gangstas in SPAAAAAAAAACE mission[what the fuck happaned to Killbane,where did he go, why did it felt like I was missing a crucial part of the story]!
SR2 was a far superior game, that was wacky whitout being idiotic.

Ok, the pun was bad, I'll give you that one.

Expansion pack: nope. Completely new engine. Completely new city. Completely new enemies. Modern Warfare 3 is an expansion pack dressed up as a sequel. SR3 is a bonafide sequel.

It was not short. I rushed through it in 80 hours.

"it felt like a Tarantino movie on steroids"

That's hardly a criticism as that is really what it sold itself as. This is what I don't get, on one hand it's an expansion pack that hardly changes anything then it changes too much.

I can't help with your poor sense of humour. At least it has a consistent tone. You know what is REALLY unfunny. Niko's cousin. Everyone around Niko. He's a cool character surrounded by annoying and trite cliches.

How the HELL were the villains interchangeable cardboard cutouts?!?!

Stoic and fiercely determined military general.

Psychotic roid-raging luchador juggernaut.

Sociopathically reserved belgian illuminati type.

I don't need to name these characters you know which are which.

The Gangstas in Space was teaching you a lesson you didn't want to learn, that it's more important to look after your friends and make peace with your enemies than be consumed by hate. Just to have fun. That's what I loved about SR3's ending, it wasn't another grim-dark annihilation of your foe in a white hot ball of fury. What's important in your friends.

Of course there was the alternate ending that you seem to have overlooked (did you really complete the game?) where you opt to abandon your friends to die and go Kill Killbane.

By all means, SR2 might be superior... but how can that POSSIBLY be a reason to welcome the end of this studio with the publisher crashing and burning. Yes they made SR3, but they also made what you consider the far superior SR2. We may never know if SR4 would have struck the right balance.

 

[Treblaine]

And I've yet to hear serious criticism of SR3 that could possibly nullify all the new content and features.

It's very buggy, for an example vehicles audibly have 200+ gears and as driving is such a core feature of the game it's pretty unacceptable. Now in a "serious" game these bugs would be rightfully called out causing consumer and critic opinion of the title to fall accordingly. SR3 knows it's buggy, knows it's inconsistent and lacks pacing, ugly and technologically lacking so forget with attempting to be even semi-serious and just go wild with zaniness as it will help mask all these problems. Back to those vehicle engine sounds, notice now how they're very quiet? Yeah.

It does all that very well. I really, really enjoyed SR3 (completed it within the last week in fact) but GTA IV quality it 'aint.

What? 200 gears? What the hell does that mean? The cars don't handle like Dirt 3 they handle like Mario Kart and that is a GOOD THING as they are making cars that are fun to control, not shitty boring realism of FUUUCK I can't get round this corner because the game cares more about downforce.

These are NOT BUGS! You know they aren't.

I'm used to playing a lot of buggy console ports on my PC and SR3 has none of those problems, it's one of the best ports I've played in years, real care has gone into the controls that are so responsive. I crashed so many vehicles and set of so many explosions I just could not get any appreciable framerate drop. Now GTA4 is a truly buggy and poorly optimised mess, it plays worse than crysis and looks no metter than consoles which doesn't look very good.

I only found one bug in SR3 and it was AWESOME. If you crouch and aim with grenade launcher then you unlock the fire-rate of the grenade launcher so it fires as fast as you can tap the button. RAIN OF GRENADES! No bad bugs.

"knows it's inconsistent"

Nothing of the sort. It's very on key with it's tone. GTA4 is tone-deaf between wackiness, melodrama then ham-fisted un-funny satire.

"knows it's... ugly and technologically lacking"

So what? It's not ugly, it just not a GRAPHICS WHORE! Gameplay first. The graphics perfectly complement the GAMEPLAY! It doesn't blow $10 million on a sunset and particle effects that don't matter to the particulars of the gameplay.

"forget with attempting to be even semi-serious"

What's this obsession with seriousness? You realise you're living in a world with games like Team Fortress 2 and Serious Sam? Where COD is mercilessly mocked for it's hyper-serious melodrama. What is a valued in a sandbox games is the freedom to go wild and do what you can't do. Seriousness fits for a Sandbox game like Red Dead Redemption considering the theme of reformed-criminal as a bounty hunter finding the righteous path. Not for a game about fighting colourful crime syndicates. This wasn't ever going to be "Goodfellas: the game". Vehicle engine sounds? This is such petty nitpicking.

"GTA IV quality it 'aint."

That's the thing, GTA4 had polish but a complete lack of content. It was a graphics and physics tech-demo with nothing to demonstrate. The weapon variety was massively under-whealming compared to Saints Row the Third and such similar missions. SR3 was not an ugly game, it was one of the better looking open-world sandbox games.

This is about CONTENT!

Why is it that Doom from 1993 has more compelling level design than Call of Duty from 2011?!? 18 years separating them. Doom had such simple 3D engine, you couldn't even have corridors on top of each other and such basic textures yet they made a labyrinth to explore and fight so many different enemies in different ways. It was one of the first FPS games and it does things that virtually no FPS bothers with today them all being corridor shooters.

Graphical quality CANNOT ADD ANYTHING TO THE GAMEPLAY!! Only multiply it. You multiply any number by zero you still have zero.

I don't care how good the graphics are in a Pixar film, it's still a film. Graphics can only enhance gameplay, not compensate for lack of gameplay.

GTA4 put graphics and fancy physics above being enjoyable to play.

This is why THQ is suffering, it makes great things and people nitpick how it isn't like over-rated shit like GTA4. Fuckign hell.

 

[Darks63]

Oh please don't let EA get the Warhammer 40k Gaming ip please oh please let someone else get it.

 

[AlwaysPractical]

In fact, that's one of the dumber arguments since developers have been landing on their feet of late.

The only real question is, when these comp[anies are picked up, who will own the rights to the franchises?

I feel a "I disagree" would have sufficed but okay. Also, if you're saying "landing on their feet" the way it's gramatically correct, aren't we both arguing for the same point? That the developer will probably be alright?

 

[Lunar Templar]

Well that didn't take long. They split on their investors, now their investors are splitting on them.

Tell that to Relic Entertainment, Vigil Games and Volition, who are all genuinely talented developers that will be affected by THQ's mismanagement.

OH NO! WE MIGHT LOSE SEQUELS TO DARKSIDERS AND SPACE MARINE?

considering THQs games where the only ones of recent memory i looked forward to. um, yeah, its kind of a big deal.

but go ahead, hold that parade in celebration of MORE people in this country who'll have to go home uncertain of how they're gonna make ends meet cause they don't have a job.

 

[Something Amyss]

I feel a "I disagree" would have sufficed but okay.

Why would I say I disagree when I don't disagree?

 

[T-004]

I'm half expecting Vince McMahon to buy them out (especially at the low,low price of $25 million) and announce a re-branding as WWE Games.

Right now I'm mildly concerned about my pre-paid DLC getting the axe :/

Once again it's a case of management screwing everybody, whilst no doubt getting a cushy job elsewhere and a nice yearly bonus

 

[Vivi22]

So Homeworld, the Dawn of War Series, Company of Heroes, Darksiders and the Metro Franchise are all mediocre to you? Or are you just being petty for the sake of it?

Darksiders and Dawn of War 2 were pretty almost the definition of mediocre really. I could never get into Company of Heroes really because the pacing was just too slow for my liking, but I'll give it credit for being way better than Dawn of War 2.

As for Metro, I'm not to worried about it if THQ goes under. Yes, Metro: 2033 was awesome, and yes, I'm looking forward to Last Light, but odds are it'll get picked up by another publisher since 4A games is privately owned and the game is. presumably, mostly finished if it is coming out in the first quarter of 2013 as planned. There wouldn't be much risk to a new publisher in picking it up which makes it something of an easy sell in that regard.

 

[Dead Seerius]

I just hope the dev studios are all picked up, and not just the IPs. Doesn't matter what you think of the games, because a "good" game is mostly subjective. For every person who can't fathom why anyone would like Saints Row, there are three others who would happily play it.

Unless a game was unanimously shit (which hasn't been the case), I don't see why anyone would be happy with Volition, Relic, and Vigil going under. There are talented people in those studios. Let's hope another publisher recognizes that.

 

[AlwaysPractical]

Why would I say I disagree when I don't disagree?

A "I think that that won't be the reason" then?

 

[Something Amyss]

Why would I say I disagree when I don't disagree?

A "I think that that won't be the reason" then?

Again, no.

I agreed with you.

 

[Cyrus Hanley]

I blame piracy and lack of DRM.

 

[LordLundar]

I'm half expecting Vince McMahon to buy them out (especially at the low,low price of $25 million) and announce a re-branding as WWE Games.

Now that thought makes an EA or Activision takeover look pleasant.