Lionhead: The inside story

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

Quote

 

By Wesley Yin-Poole Published 12/05/2016

 

In October 2008, Microsoft released Lionhead's Fable 2 to critical and commercial acclaim. At a launch party an emotional Peter Molyneux held aloft glowing reviews and praised the exhausted team of developers who had spent the previous four years pouring everything they had into the game. Fable 2 would go on to win a BAFTA and become the best-selling role-playing game for the Xbox 360. Lionhead was on top of the world.

 

Seven-and-a-half years later, Lionhead's 100 or so staff were called to its in-house cafe for a meeting. There, Hanno Lemke, General Manager of Microsoft Studios Europe, announced that Fable Legends was cancelled and Lionhead would close. The famed studio Peter Molyneux co-founded nearly 20 years ago was dead.

 

The inside story of how Lionhead rose and fell is difficult but also important. Those who worked there describe a studio high on the fumes of furious creativity, a place where mind-numbing failure would often accompany agenda-setting success. They describe a fiercely British culture that benefited - and suffered - from an American overlord hell bent on winning the console war. And they describe a studio created in the image of a man who inspires as much as he frustrates. It's a complicated story. But it's one worth telling.

 

Continues...

 

Great read. Absolutely disgusting attitude re: Fable 3's cover

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Looks like in many extents they got the RARE treatment...

 

Worried for Remedy next, while they aren't 1st party the amount of money MS must have spent advertising QB and doing all the live cutscenes can't be getting a massive return on sales so far. Game deserves a bit better for the ambition involved, but the market does what the market does...

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

1 hour ago, Audioboxer said:

Looks like in many extents they got the RARE treatment...

 

Worried for Remedy next, while they aren't 1st party the amount of money MS must have spent advertising QB and doing all the live cutscenes can't be getting a massive return on sales so far. Game deserves a bit better for the ambition involved, but the market does what the market does...

Which is ironic, considering they consciousnessly wanted to avoid a repeat of that blunder.

 

The contract they made during Fable 2 really came back to haunt them though. That and Kinect just took them down a road they should never have went on. Not surprising with the pushy ways MS insists on including their newest tech, even if a game doesn't need or fit in with that tech.

 

I seriously hope Remedy distance themselves from MS, ASAP!

[George P Global Moderator]

It sounds to me like Lionheads problem was lionhead itself, even before MS bought it someone else was going to, they had too many cooks in the kitchen and so on.  Even after MS bought it, they had a good run with fable till Peter does what Peter does and they try to do more than they can actually do, the fans caught on years ago.

 

Had it been managed better from the start it'd probably still be around, and even on it's own.   Studios come and go, it's part of the market itself, there's a lengthy list of things, if you can't keep putting out a good title every 2-4 years then you're doomed.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

1 hour ago, George P said:

It sounds to me like Lionheads problem was lionhead itself, even before MS bought it someone else was going to, they had too many cooks in the kitchen and so on.  Even after MS bought it, they had a good run with fable till Peter does what Peter does and they try to do more than they can actually do, the fans caught on years ago.

 

Had it been managed better from the start it'd probably still be around, and even on it's own.   Studios come and go, it's part of the market itself, there's a lengthy list of things, if you can't keep putting out a good title every 2-4 years then you're doomed.

And MS denying a black female character on the box art? That one at least is on MS.

[madd-hatter]

That is a long article.

 

I read every word. Suggested read.

[George P Global Moderator]

52 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

And MS denying a black female character on the box art? That one at least is on MS.

I'm not denying that one, just saying, it sounded like a hot mess before anyone was thinking about buying it.  If it was run right from the get go it would have stayed by itself, as a 3rd party.   For all this "fear" you two have about Remedy, which I don't quite understand, they're run/managed fine, and produce good games.  The fact MS is the only one willing to publish something like QB, which tried something new and probably inflated the budget in doing so, doesn't mean they're joined at the hip, only that MS knows they have a solid 3rd party developer and they're willing to spend extra when some other publishers would probably say no.

 

Regardless, lionhead coming and going is just another one on the long list, thq, silicon knights, and who knows how many others.   I figure at some point MS will, if Phil feels the need to, spin up a new studio to make a real Fable 4, and not another moba/4-vs-1 co-op/MP only thing that probably wouldn't have done well anyways, I think it was smart to can fable legends.     If they're not going to give us a true Fable 4 RPG then they shouldn't bother.

 

And on that note, had they started work on Fable 4 I could see a group coming out and arguing "not another sequel".    *shrug*

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

Let's not kid ourselves that the reason QB is on MS platforms is because only MS would publish it. MS paid for the exclusivity, just like they did with AW. As for our comments, I can only assume AB and I are on the same wave length when it comes to thinking about how much they've spent and the potential layoffs. As Epic made clear, $100 million and a non-seller is enough to sink them, even with their publishing and engine licensing security. Remedy can't afford to do the same. How the studio is run is anyone's guess, because I do not think there has ever been a deep insight to that?

 

Lionhead "coming and going" shows how much you care though, especially for a company so important to the UK dev scene. "Spinning up" another studio is also naive of you to think that they can just easily replicate what made the studio special for MS to buy them in the first place, or what made Lionhead's IP great. It's made clear that with Molyneux's new responsibilities in EU studios and his work on Kinect took him away from development. The article goes into as much detail about Fable 3's and Lionheads problems without him leading. It's not because it wasn't "run right". Even with their antics at the beginning, MS fell in love with their work, so it couldn't have been that unappealing!

[Vandalsquad]

On 14 May 2016 at 10:10 PM, Andrew said:

Continues...

 

Great read. Absolutely disgusting attitude re: Fable 3's cover

Not bowing to political correctness and knowing what sells best? That's just good marketing as sad as it is. They're invested in this and want a return.

 

While you scream **** you back at the employer keeping the lights on over the phone? Sounds professional as hell from lionshead that does.. Surprised he didn't get fired on the spot.

[George P Global Moderator]

10 hours ago, Andrew said:

Let's not kid ourselves that the reason QB is on MS platforms is because only MS would publish it. MS paid for the exclusivity, just like they did with AW. As for our comments, I can only assume AB and I are on the same wave length when it comes to thinking about how much they've spent and the potential layoffs. As Epic made clear, $100 million and a non-seller is enough to sink them, even with their publishing and engine licensing security. Remedy can't afford to do the same. How the studio is run is anyone's guess, because I do not think there has ever been a deep insight to that?

 

Lionhead "coming and going" shows how much you care though, especially for a company so important to the UK dev scene. "Spinning up" another studio is also naive of you to think that they can just easily replicate what made the studio special for MS to buy them in the first place, or what made Lionhead's IP great. It's made clear that with Molyneux's new responsibilities in EU studios and his work on Kinect took him away from development. The article goes into as much detail about Fable 3's and Lionheads problems without him leading. It's not because it wasn't "run right". Even with their antics at the beginning, MS fell in love with their work, so it couldn't have been that unappealing!

The fact MS is willing to pay extra for QB or for AW shows the faith they have in Remedy where other publishers didn't seem to want to, otherwise Remedy had more then enough chances to push AW, especially, out to other publishers but no one picked it up.  They demoed a early version of the game years before the deal with MS happened, that in my mind, says it all.      You're assuming Remedy didn't try to get anyone else to work with them on QB, I'm betting they did, the fact it's exclusive, not really that exclusive though, is because when you have to pay extra to get something of this scope made, it's only right for the publisher to want to get as much out of it as they can.   For MS that's Xbox and Windows, simple business here.

 

And sorry for not caring enough for lionhead, I wasn't employed by them, I liked their games sure, but lots of studios with talent and rich IP come and go, or get bought by someone bigger and more or less vanish.  I'm sure MS fell in love with their work, but at the end of the day, they saw a smart business opportunity, and took it.  Why let someone else, like Ubisoft come in and buy it if they could get it first and have all the IP to themselves?

 

As far as spinning up a studio, it's not about replicating lionhead, though I bet if they did decide to spin up a studio to do another fable game they could get many of the original devs back, that's often the case, 343i has loads of original halo devs, the coalition has a good chunk of gears devs from epic.   And since when is just repeating or replicating what was done before what anyone here wants?  Whenever a sequel comes out yet again, you complain,  when said sequel is more of the same thing, you complain.  You want originality, and that's good, so do I, so what's naïve of me to think a new studio, with new blood, could make a good fable 4 exactly?  

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

3 hours ago, George P said:

The fact MS is willing to pay extra for QB or for AW shows the faith they have in Remedy where other publishers didn't seem to want to, otherwise Remedy had more then enough chances to push AW, especially, out to other publishers but no one picked it up.  They demoed a early version of the game years before the deal with MS happened, that in my mind, says it all.      You're assuming Remedy didn't try to get anyone else to work with them on QB, I'm betting they did, the fact it's exclusive, not really that exclusive though, is because when you have to pay extra to get something of this scope made, it's only right for the publisher to want to get as much out of it as they can.   For MS that's Xbox and Windows, simple business here.

 

And sorry for not caring enough for lionhead, I wasn't employed by them, I liked their games sure, but lots of studios with talent and rich IP come and go, or get bought by someone bigger and more or less vanish.  I'm sure MS fell in love with their work, but at the end of the day, they saw a smart business opportunity, and took it.  Why let someone else, like Ubisoft come in and buy it if they could get it first and have all the IP to themselves?

 

As far as spinning up a studio, it's not about replicating lionhead, though I bet if they did decide to spin up a studio to do another fable game they could get many of the original devs back, that's often the case, 343i has loads of original halo devs, the coalition has a good chunk of gears devs from epic.   And since when is just repeating or replicating what was done before what anyone here wants?  Whenever a sequel comes out yet again, you complain,  when said sequel is more of the same thing, you complain.  You want originality, and that's good, so do I, so what's naïve of me to think a new studio, with new blood, could make a good fable 4 exactly?  

Nonsense. Remedy have never claimed to have issues with publishment. AW was in development hell, not publisher hell. And QB is not re-inventing the wheel; a time-bending machanic, story driven game? Sounds very familiar...We live in a world with David Cage games. If they can be picked up, so can Remedy's.

 

The real reason is because MS paid for them:

 

Quote

 

CGM: In terms of working with Microsoft, what keeps you coming back and making exclusive titles for them?

 

TP: We have a long relationship with Microsoft. Remedy is an independent company – we’re not owned by Microsoft – but we’ve been working with Microsoft for ten years. Like every relationship you have your ups and downs. But we know each other. Microsoft wants a Remedy game. They want story driven games that we do well. They like to focus on the story, and that’s great. We look at Quantum’s marketing, (it’s something I’ve been involved in) and it’s great stuff. There are trailers,  there’s TV ads, lots of visibility in print and online, and these sorts of things are what a big publisher can do, which is awesome. [Microsoft’s team is] working long hours and weeks, and there are big events for Quantum in specifically Brazil and that’s awesome to see. Microsoft knows what they’re going to get with a Remedy game and that’s awesome.

 

http://www.cgmagonline.com/2016/04/16/interview-thomas-puha-remedy-entertainment-quantum-break-microsoft-xbox-one-pc/

 

AW was all set to be a PC exclusive game before MS paid for 360 exclusivity. Ever notice that when the exclusive period was up, they didn't need a publisher for the PC port? If you wanted to white knight your current publisher, that interview would have been a perfect place to do so. "Why do you keep working with MS exclusively", "because they are the only publisher who believed in our original IP etc etc". Instead we got facts, not brown nosing.

 

Let me be clear, I'm not saying that Lionhead or MS should have passed up on the deal, over say Ubisoft. I do think the contract was unreasonable, but other factors which I already quote were the downfalls.

 

You make it sound so easy to just get people to do what you want. It really is naive. Those people have already left and moved on to other places. Some of them could return, but the big names who created the IP left years ago. And I'm glad you brought up 343/TC because they are the perfect examples of just throwing money at something and not managing to capture the essence of the series. They are close, but by no means on par.

 

And I don't "complain" about sequels because they are sequels, nor do I complain if they are too similar either. I complain about churning out nothing but the same game year after year and not providing anything new. There was a topic on Neogaf recently which broke down all the exclusives last generation and it is night and day between MS and Sony. Up to 2010 MS is going strong, then it falls off a cliff. While Sony in comparison was pretty consistent throughout on numbers, and some of their biggest IP at the end of the generation. MS had Halo 1 remake going up against UC3 for god sake.

 

3 hours ago, Vandalsquad said:

Not bowing to political correctness and knowing what sells best? That's just good marketing as sad as it is. They're invested in this and want a return.

 

While you scream **** you back at the employer keeping the lights on over the phone? Sounds professional as hell from lionshead that does.. Surprised he didn't get fired on the spot.

 

I don't know if you picked up on the detail in the article, but the person in question is Glaswegian It's either OTT description of what happened, or because...he's Glaswegian We don't beat around the bush in this town! And again, maybe it's a UK thing, but management aren't exactly prim and proper, which I very much doubt many game studios are anyway. He was clearly in the upper hand if what he said is how it happened. You don't fire the people who make you money.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Kotaku have ran a big story here Andy

 

http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2016/06/09/how-fable-legends-took-down-lionhead

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

Can you give me the TLDR, I hate Kotaku and giving them clicks

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

1 minute ago, Andrew said:

Can you give me the TLDR, I hate Kotaku and giving them clicks

Phil Spencer screwed everything up, then left. Done a Don Mattrick. Burn the ship, let it sink and then leave. Then the numbers about Windows Store underperforming massively.

 

Guess Phil wanted to add to his PS Home legacy. 

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

58 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

Phil Spencer screwed everything up, then left. Done a Don Mattrick. Burn the ship, let it sink and then leave. Then the numbers about Windows Store underperforming massively.

 

Guess Phil wanted to add to his PS Home legacy. 

Why they hired him to begin with, I'll never understand

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

8 minutes ago, Andrew said:

Why they hired him to begin with, I'll never understand

Cause PS Home was amazing. Still stand by my non-misguided defence.