Off Topic

[Master]

In fairness there were some third party characters, such as Big Daddy from Bioshock, Dante from DMC, and Raiden from MGS, alongside I think a Tekken character, though the specifics elude me.

[saerleiya]

Did Ubisoft refuse Sony to use Rayman in Battle Royale? Or maybe is Sony considering that Rayman is becoming more popular than before so they couldn't include it in the game?

In fact, I prefer to see Rayman as an old video game character (1995), even older than Spyro (1998) and Crash (1996) but his image has changed a lot during the end the last decade, first with RRR series, and now the Rayman from RO and RL. Which attitude and image would you give to him in Battle Royale as most people nowadays are knowing him for his wackiness more than for the first three canon games?

[OCG]

I like Rayman's wackiness from RO. Infact that is my favourite Rayman because he is so funny. Same goes for Globox.

[Master]

We're opposites in that case, personally, I don’t like how wacky he acts in RO, and I’m glad they’re toning it down for Legends, though Globox still seems to be same old, still, at least he’s trying to be consistent with his personality for once.

[OCG]

Would you like Rayman's personality to be same like in Rayman 2 again?

[Master]

Not wholly, his Rayman 2 personality was a little too grown up for my tastes, I think a blending of his more mature personality with his humorous traits from R3 and RO could do the job well.

[OCG]

Well, that would be nice compromise so everyone would agree.

[sergiomonty]

Rayman is not in All-Stars because he is not a PlayStation exclusive character.

Big Daddy wasn't a Playstation character, to begin with...

[OCG]

Many people keep saying that Spyro, Crash an Rayman were not included because they are not Sony exclusives (well best Crash and Spyro games were exclusives but new ones are not), and I always point out at Big Daddy like others said here. Real Reason is that SuperBot was a lazy developer and cheap so they did not want to pay UbiSoft and Activision (current Crash and Spyro owners) to use those characters. No wonder why they went bankrupt. LOL, they only made only one game in their career and it was not that good.

[Rayfist]

Anyways, E3 is tomorrow- I'll be at school during it sadly

[OCG]

Bring headphones and Android phone with flash player and fast gprs internet and you are ready for it, or you can fake you are sick and go home. I remember doing stuff like that in past as a kid so I could play video games
Ah childhood, I want you back.

[spiraldoor]

Real Reason is that SuperBot was a lazy developer and cheap so they did not want to pay UbiSoft and Activision (current Crash and Spyro owners) to use those characters.

Do you really think SuperBot had any part in those discussions?

[OCG]

Activision wanted to bring Crash in All-Stars because they saw it as a good chance of returning him but SuperBot did not want to pay since they thought it was too much. So they could afford Big Daddy and not Crash??? That makes no sense.

[sergiomonty]

E3 starts tomorrow, baby!! make your bets here, ladies and gentlemen!

[saerleiya]

Did Ubisoft refuse Sony to use Rayman in Battle Royale? Or maybe is Sony considering that Rayman is becoming more popular than before so they couldn't include it in the game?

In fact, I prefer to see Rayman as an old video game character (1995), even older than Spyro (1998) and Crash (1996) but his image has changed a lot during the end the last decade, first with RRR series, and now the Rayman from RO and RL. Which attitude and image would you give to him in Battle Royale as most people nowadays are knowing him for his wackiness more than for the first three canon games?

[Master]

Activision wanted to bring Crash in All-Stars because they saw it as a good chance of returning him but SuperBot did not want to pay since they thought it was too much. So they could afford Big Daddy and not Crash??? That makes no sense.

Where'd you read this? I haven't heard anything of the sort, could you provide a source?

A quick Google found me this: http://www.siliconera.com/2012/11/08/pl ... velopment/

Did you try for Crash Bandicoot at all? Crash was so synonymous with the PlayStation brand early on even though he’s at Activision now.

Yeah. I have to say it’s not that Superbot is some independent developer chasing down third-party characters. This is a negotiation that happens on a much higher level than Superbot, with Sony and Activision, these two giant companies.

And I completely understand how big and important a character like Crash is to the PlayStation universe. We want to make it clear to fans that we understand how important a character Crash is to the PlayStation universe. Obviously, we try everything in our power to try and get characters like Crash.

[OCG]

http://beefjack.com/news/superbot-expla ... le-royale/

They tried to said this in a nicest way: "If we must pay to use character, we wont."
So just because they had to pay they did not include him? I bet same can be said for Rayman too.
And I asked Activision on twitter before reading that article, and they told me that SuperBot did not want to let Activision have profit for game so that was problem. I can bet same thing was problem with UbiSoft and Krome Studios.

[Master]

Ah, again though:

We obviously know at SuperBot and at Sony how important various characters are to the game, Crash Bandicoot in particular. We got this question at San Diego Comic Con and my president, Chan Park, gave a very good answer: ‘It takes two to tangle’. We know the fans want Crash. We want Crash. Crash is not owned by Sony. So it is a negotiation between Sony and the IP holders for all of the characters that exist in the game. We’re very interested in making that happen but it’s not for free. I do want the fans out there to know that obviously we recognized the interest in Crash and characters like Crash

It seems it is Sony at fault here, not Superbot.

[OCG]

Ah, again though:

We’re very interested in making that happen but it’s not for free

This proves they are cheap and not ready to pay the IP holders. Just because it's not free they wont put it???

[Master]

Ah, again though:

We’re very interested in making that happen but it’s not for free

This proves they are cheap and not ready to pay the IP holders. Just because it's not free they wont put it???

How does that imply they're behind payments? It is a comment on their situation, not an admission.

You have to remember, All Stars was the first time Sony were trying this out, sure, the Smash Bro's formula served Ninty well, but this wasn't Ninty's market, it was Sony's, its gaming crowd is different, true, it was filled with many who'd love the idea of having Crash, but given how crafty Activision is, I'd think they'd value him at a high price, now given that this was a first time for Sony, perhaps they didn't want to dole out too much, lest the game tank, and thus they suffer heavy losses.
Heck, none of the third party characters originate from the three big third party western publishers (EA, Activision and UbiSoft), now that I think about it.