Just thinking about this, I think this is the 3rd time I can recall Codemasters being rebranded. http://gaming.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=8888 Not entirely bothered, but not really all that fussed with their new logo either. Ho hum!
How much were you paid ? :icon_bigg lol Just having a snoop at their new logo on the website, it does look better on the site, but not the one they are using elsewhere: http://www.codemasters.co.uk/index.php?territory=EnglishUK I still don't see what was wrong with the last motif.... or the one from the 80's to be honest lol
I didn't want to ask as I like Sega and Codemasters. Never realised there was any bad bloody between them? Are we going back a bit here?
No, they also have another one either just prior or after this one. But, now that you mention this one I make it 4 rebrands I have seen with them.
I'm pretty sure they have only had the 2 + this new one logo. The early logo as above and the Codemasters one they had since the early 90s and kept up until last week.
Well basicly they screwed them over in the Megadrive generation by releasing games without paying any license costs. A case went to court and strangely they won the case. Next they made ASSLOADS of money with the Micro Machines games on the Megadrive (and SMS and GG for that matter) and the Saturn generation starts; They basicly tell SEGA to go **** themselves with their system by jumping ship to the PSX very early on and cancelling all developments. Three years later they announce Colin Mcrae 2.0 for the Dreamcast, finish (or nearly finish) it and wait for Sony to come along. They (Sony) offer a couple of thousand dollars with an underhand deal and CodeMasters (always on the lookout for these cheap deals) joyfully cancel the title, never to be seen again. I could go on.. Now I know business is business, but this cheap 'give us a few bucks and we we'll do everything you say' attitude really disgusts me. I'm surprised they also do Xbox games now. Guess Sony didn't pay them enough anymore..shows how loyal they are.
All the Codemaster games on the Megadrive I have seen do have Licenced by Sega Enterprises on them, I know that there was a spat between Galoob, Cameria and Codemasters over royalty payments but I am sure that is not what you are talking about? At the end of the day if a console maker waves a large cheque in front of you then you are likely to take it, Rockstar do this all the time with their games, how many of their games have been Playstation exclusive (for at least a year?). The trick is not to make sure you only make games for one console as you never know what might happen (just think Sqaure would have gone bust if they kept with Nintendo....). Codemasters probably did the sums and if they earnt more money from doing an exclusive with Sony rather then doing the game on the PS2 and DC then so be it.
Quite. It's called capitalism, I really can't knock Codemasters for doing what they judged was in their best interest. I doubt they decided to spite Sega just for the hell of it, that's bad business. I'm pretty sure they were involved in unlicensed NES games as well, by the way.
Plus you never can tell what was being discussed by said parties at the time. It might not have been quite as one sided as it appears. Codemasters might have been a cheap ass company back in the 80's and early 90's, but not these days.
Or Nintendo could have sold more units and fared quite better in the console races that took place after Square left. Square games have always been system seller, don't forget that.
A strange confused hatred there. Codemasters took on Nintendo because they forced developers into harsh, restrictive and unfairly high licensing costs and that should earn them more respect than anything. By the time the Mega Drive was released Codemasters were licensees of Sega and released Pete Sampras Tennis and their Micro Machines games under license from Sega. If you doubt this is true then check out the game boxes, which all state this fact. In terms of the Saturn and Dreamcast, can you really criticise them for not supporting them when sales would be questionable? To quote: ""Following careful consideration, including consultation with external parties, any further development on the Dreamcast version of Colin McRae Rally 2.0 and any future projects on the aforementioned platform has ceased. We continue to optimise resources by focusing teams on appropriate platforms."" Fair enough, I think. Where is the proof that Sony paid them off for the PS2 exclusive? You're letting anger cloud your judgement. Codemasters are a good company.
While it may seem like a 'rant from a pissed off SEGA fanboy' (and I can see why you might think so, but bear with me) it really is more than that. The case SEGA vs Codemasters was featured in the gaming press (we're talking '92 here before any of the MM were released). I could scan the article when I have the time. Codemasters just didn't want to pay any license costs and used a work-around to get the games working on the Megadrive. A six month war between Codemasters and SEGA followed. The judge decided in favour of them and that opened the gates for Codemasters as well as developers such as Accolade to publish their titles. It's like this; You run a successful bakery and someone comes in with a homebrew recipe for brownies. You love how they taste so you offer the guy a deal. He makes loads of money and makes a great living out of them as you sell them for him. You're happy to have such excellent brownies in your assortment and he's happy because he makes loads of money.Three years later a new bakery opens. But wait, your brownies fail to come in! The guy ran off to the new bakery because they offer $0.05 more a brownie. A clever business decision by him? Certainly. A big kick in the knackers for your bakery? Definitely. As for Saturn development there was NO reason for Codemasters to have any doubts of sales during that period. Hell, Bitmap Brothers released Z as one of the final PAL releases in '98 while the format was already phased out! (and don't forget about Sillicon Dreams, Virigin or GT interactive who all did releases till late in the Saturn lifespan) There was never a chance of the Micro Machines V3 game selling badly on the Saturn. They just said 'fuck it' and went for the big money. Finally, about Colin Mcrae 2.0; take a good look at the market, the time and the state of development it was in and think hard. Do I really have to explain this? Come on... You see, I understand how business works; but that doesn't mean I have to like it. Codemasters always went for the 'easy' money (and they still do, judging by the tired line-up, which mostly consists of age-old licenses and genre rehashes, the same goes for SEGA but we'll come to that). There's nothing wrong with that, but again, that doesn't mean I have to like it. You know, it still pisses me off that SEGA Europe killed No cliché back in the day and I'm more of a 1986-2001 Sega freak than a fan of the chimps that run the company these days..but that's another story.
