Who is the Best Publisher?

[Machine Man 1992]

Hypothetical scenario: You are an up and coming game designer who's just opened his own studio, so you can finally make that game you've always wanted to make. Thing is, your project is too big in scope and size to self-publish, and you need money to make it happen.

You need a publisher. You need someone to foot the bill and then get the product on store shelves. The hard part is picking which publisher to court. Which publisher won't crew you over, force you to compromise your vision in the name of broad appeal, and then cannibalize you when your product fails?

Who is the Best Publisher?

 

[Erttheking]

I'm torn between Bethesda and 2K. They've been doing right by me for awhile now, between Dishonored and X-COM Enemy Unknown.

 

[Gwen Utopia]

I'm partial to Bethesda myself. They seem to know what they're doing and aren't prone to screwing over developers.
Also, I could make sure my game gets horse armour DLC.

 

[SouthernStar]

Probably Paradox if you like very advanced RTS games. For all around quality and personal opinion Bethesda or Blizzard lol.

 

[Machine Man 1992]

Probably Paradox if you like very advanced RTS games. For all around quality and personal opinion Bethesda or Blizzard lol.

Isn't Blizzard part of Activision aka Satan, now?

 

[SouthernStar]

Probably Paradox if you like very advanced RTS games. For all around quality and personal opinion Bethesda or Blizzard lol.

Isn't Blizzard part of Activision aka Satan, now?

No not exactly.

Wikipedia - Activision and Blizzard Entertainment still exist as separate entities.[8] The holding company does not publish games under its central name and instead uses its subsidiaries to publish games, similar to how Vivendi Games operated before the merger.[9] The merger makes Activision parent company of Vivendi Games' former divisions. While Blizzard retained its autonomy and corporate leadership, other Vivendi Games divisions did not.

 

[Machine Man 1992]

Probably Paradox if you like very advanced RTS games. For all around quality and personal opinion Bethesda or Blizzard lol.

Isn't Blizzard part of Activision aka Satan, now?

No not exactly.

Wikipedia - Activision and Blizzard Entertainment still exist as separate entities.[8] The holding company does not publish games under its central name and instead uses its subsidiaries to publish games, similar to how Vivendi Games operated before the merger.[9] The merger makes Activision parent company of Vivendi Games' former divisions. While Blizzard retained its autonomy and corporate leadership, other Vivendi Games divisions did not.

So basically, Activision and Blizzard are roommates who work at the same company, but in different divisions? Weird.

I'd still steer clear of ActiBlizz on principle, buuuut, I don't have a project in need of funding. So bias.

 

[SouthernStar]

Probably Paradox if you like very advanced RTS games. For all around quality and personal opinion Bethesda or Blizzard lol.

Isn't Blizzard part of Activision aka Satan, now?

No not exactly.

Wikipedia - Activision and Blizzard Entertainment still exist as separate entities.[8] The holding company does not publish games under its central name and instead uses its subsidiaries to publish games, similar to how Vivendi Games operated before the merger.[9] The merger makes Activision parent company of Vivendi Games' former divisions. While Blizzard retained its autonomy and corporate leadership, other Vivendi Games divisions did not.

So basically, Activision and Blizzard are roommates who work at the same company, but in different divisions? Weird.

I'd still steer clear of ActiBlizz on principle, buuuut, I don't have a project in need of funding. So bias.

Have no idea these things get really complicated and I only like Blizzard for Wolrd of warcraft (Don't judge me) and Starcraft 2.

Edit - Also found this and I think this is how it happend. -

Blizzard Entertainment in Irvine, California, founded in February 1991 as Silicon & Synapse, acquired in 1998 by Vivendi, merged with Activision on July 9, 2008

 

[Anthony Corrigan]

Isn't valve a publisher?

seems you would have the best shot choosing them (unless your game had a 3 in it because valve has a superstition about the number 3 )

 

[Galen Marek]

Nintendo and/or Sony. Gief me money please. Then I can steal Nintendo (or one of their developers) and/or Naughty Dog employees to make my game.

Seriously, I'd go straight to the source, people that work that closely with the team and parent company of the console would have so much passion. What a great experience that would be.

 

[Fireface]

Gotta go with CD Projekt RED, Great publisher/developer. I am also inclined to go with Bethesda.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I think I'd go with Sony as they seem to not force you into having a certain checklist of features (like your main character has to shoot things and you have to have multiplayer). They let Team ICO do what they do (who the fuck knows what's going on with The Last Guardian though), they funded and advertised a AAA adventure game in Heavy Rain and now Beyond: Two Souls, they let thatgamecompany make stuff like Journey and Flower, big devs like Naughty Dog and Sucker Punch seem to be able to do what they want for the most part, they let a game like Sly 4 get made, they heavily marketed games like LittleBigPlanet, they published 2 freaking karting games this gen, etc. It really seems from my perspective that Sony will let you make what you want and be rather hands-off while being pretty good to you on the marketing side as well. Therefore, I feel if I went to Sony, I'd be able to make the game I wanted and have it marketed well so if the game fails, it's pretty much the game's fault instead of blaming bad marketing on the publisher (like Sega). Lastly, I would just have to make the game for one set of hardware.

 

[spartandude]

Probably Paradox if you like very advanced RTS games. For all around quality and personal opinion Bethesda or Blizzard lol.

As a developmen team Paradox is fantastic however their publishing department is terrible, constantly games that clearly arnt ready for release are pushed through leaving us with buggy messes some of which were unplayable at launch

 

[Zhukov]

Uh... 2K?

They generally seem to be pretty cool.

*que someone popping in to inform me that 2K molests kittens*

 

[octafish]

Gotta go with CD Projekt RED, Great publisher/developer. I am also inclined to go with Bethesda.

Correct me if I'm wrong but they haven't actually put money into a game that wasn't built in-house have they? Great devs, great distributors (through GOG), but I'm not sure they have stepped up to the point where you could approach them with a half finished game and ask them for money to get it done.

The only one I'd even think about getting into bed with would be Valve. Luckily I'm not a developer with a desperate need for money, just an individual with a desperate need for money.

Bethesda=Not that nice. Mind you, at least you wouldn't have to develop a game with any level of polish or QC.

 

[Chimpzy_v1legacy]

Take-Two Interactive?

They don't publish a whole lot of games per year, but what they do release is generally pretty solid. Also, they published XCOM: Enemy Unknown. And I don't remember them pulling of too much douchebaggery.

 

[Karoshi]

2K probably. Bioshock and Spec Ops: The Line were pretty cool.

Granted, I also like Ubisoft and Blizzard, but one doesn't really qualify as publisher and the other brings out a lot of mediocre titles.

 

[Iron Gix]

meh, my vote is for bethesda,atlas and nis and also 2k.
all have their up's and downs but over all i enjoy about everything they put out