Personally I would rather no one did, I can't say i've enjoyed any of their games so far and overall they have just had a certain level of a cheap/flimsy feeling to them.

 But if I had to guess, they will end up on either EA's or Activision's independant partner programs.

One thing to remember in all of this.. NCSoft retained many of the visionaries and doers from Cryptic when they split, the company has never been the same since. Whatever they do in the future will never be the same, 2 games later they've more than proved that.

What made Cryptic Cryptic has long since seived off to others. Right now they are a severely watered down version of what could have been a world class development team.

Edited for typo

Originally posted by Kabaal

One thing to remember in all of this.. NCSoft retained many of the visionaries and doers from Cryptic when they split, the company has never been the same since. Whatever they do in the future will never be the same, 2 games later they've more than proved that.

 

What made Cryptic Cryptic has long since seived off to others. Right now they are a severely watered down version of what could have been a world class development team.

I agree with this wholeheartedly.  It is a shame to see this happen to any company, but really Cryptic has no one to blame but themselves.  You will reap what you sow when you release incomplete games with content at inflated prices.  They will be lucky to have anyone buy them or even invest.  Those negative launch reviews of STO (and continued issues) will still be fresh in the minds of potential buyers.

Turbine are owned by Warner, so they are more than capable of affording any price that Atari sticks on Cryptic.

However, I think a more likely suitor than any in the article is Ubisoft. It may sound like a wild card but...

They have recently formed an online division with the intention of moving back into MMOs in the long run, initially starting with simpler brower games.

Not only do Ubisoft have the cash and the desire to head in that direction but they also have nothing like Cryptic in their current portfolio of studios and assets.

The engine that Cryptic has is unique, Ubisoft would benefit from its purchase, the IPs do not compete with any Ubisoft IPs, meaning they would add value rather than devalue anything and whatever faults you find with Cryptic, there is a lot of experience in developing and operating online games which again Ubisoft has very little of currently.

Originally posted by Tardcore

Maybe these guys could get some use out of Cryptic

I would really love to treat this question with the seriousness it deserves, but after watching Cryptic half ass their way through two IPs I dearly love for the sake of their assembly line MMO manufactuing scheme, I can't help but hope they don't get a buyer at all but instead just sink into oblivion. Fail companies should fail.

 

made me laugh ^

Originally posted by bobfish

The engine that Cryptic has is unique, Ubisoft would benefit from its purchase, the IPs do not compete with any Ubisoft IPs, meaning they would add value rather than devalue anything and whatever faults you find with Cryptic, there is a lot of experience in developing and operating online games which again Ubisoft has very little of currently.

It may be unique but unfortunately it is one that cannot handle more than over 2 or 3 hundred per instance. That doesn't add any value for their prospects as an mmo company but rather give them value for offline games with online portions.

Didnt even know they were selling, guess i wont retry STO again til i know whos claws will get into it XD

As for who id like to buy them, id say Activision cause in my eyes they are the only ones i feel could make something successful out of them. That and they have deep pockets XD

Originally posted by Dragonantis

As for who id like to buy them, id say Activision cause in my eyes they are the only ones i feel could make something successful out of them. That and they have deep pockets XD

Activision made some decent SP RTS Star Trek games back in the day.  I actually fire up ST: Armada II every once in a while.  At least they have experience in making decent games based on the Trek IP.

Isn't Activision part of Blizzard now though?

Originally posted by ShardWarrior

Originally posted by Dragonantis

As for who id like to buy them, id say Activision cause in my eyes they are the only ones i feel could make something successful out of them. That and they have deep pockets XD

Activision made some decent SP RTS Star Trek games back in the day.  I actually fire up ST: Armada II every once in a while.  At least they have experience in making decent games based on the Trek IP.

 

Isn't Activision part of Blizzard now though?

Ya they merged with Blizzard a few years ago, having a parent company like Activison Blizzard can only be a great thing, but then again, every developer company wants parents like them XD

Well if EA buys it, Cryptic's games will likely follow the path of Earth & Beyond, just a measure to get competition out of the way of their pet projects. Ubisoft might not be bad, they might take them to F2P which seems more their market, but I have to agree, as far as STO goes, Activision might do better making the game what it should have been. Who's to say where it will go though, Maybe the President will buy it since it seems to need a bailout.

I'm one of the rare losers out there who enjoy cryptic's games.  As a father (soon to be of 2) and a student AND someone who holds down a full time job, their emphasis on the casual gamer appeals to me. That being said , I feel the same way about Turbine (or Time Warner, WB or whatever).  I think it would be a natural partnership. Especially sine the boys at Turbine already have some experience with a CORPG D&D title and with Cryptic soon to produce NW.

Probably some Korean company. Star Trek Online with Diamonds. Buy your Diamonds to buff your starship! Ten dollar on PayPal last long time, we love you long time. Engage.

Originally posted by Xondar123

How about Cryptic just dies?

They have a poor business model, develop bad games, have stupid executives.

I don't think they deserve to exist anymore.

My thoughts exactly.

Bad dev houses should perish.  The lazy ignorant managers that railroad good projects into the ground on the backs of their slaves...err...employees, do not deserve a paycheck.

I only hope the employees who aren't burnt out find a better place to work when the pinkslips start dropping.

Either SOE or EA would likely be the kiss of Death... Look at Vanguard, Planetside and some of the others(not to mention the abonimation that was the NGE), SOE likes to milk games for all they are worth, but has a past history of not really investing many resources in new studio games.  EA on the other hand, doesn't really have a pleasant history where online games are concerned. Anyone else still have a sour taste in their mouth about their handling of Earth and Beyond?

At least Turbine, for all their faults(which are legion...Remember how they axed Asherons Call2, right after selling us an expansion?...)  is more likely to invest some resources into the games in question. Especially if they can adapt them to their "Freemium" business model.

Originally posted by Gkarn

When I read the title I said SOE.

 

SOE are NOT gong to start parting with lots of cash.  Not with some rather nasty court cases looming over their bank balance.  They may end up selling assets to cover some of the costs.

Originally posted by Bob_Blawblaw

Originally posted by Xondar123

How about Cryptic just dies?

They have a poor business model, develop bad games, have stupid executives.

I don't think they deserve to exist anymore.

My thoughts exactly.

Bad dev houses should perish.  The lazy ignorant managers that railroad good projects into the ground on the backs of their slaves...err...employees, do not deserve a paycheck.

I only hope the employees who aren't burnt out find a better place to work when the pinkslips start dropping.

 Is it really just or smart to berate a company just because of it's leaders?  I say if the company is salvagable then salvage it.  If you have quality employees then utilize them.  They have experience so they have the potential to put out some quality products.

I'm more concerned as to what the future of Neverwibnter will hold.  Is Atari gonna drop it and be left with Cryptic or will Atari let Cryptic finish it and then replace Cryptic to let another company maintain and improve upon it or will they start anew with a DnD online game version. 

Originally posted by Wolfhammer

Originally posted by Gkarn

When I read the title I said SOE.

 

SOE are NOT gong to start parting with lots of cash.  Not with some rather nasty court cases looming over their bank balance.  They may end up selling assets to cover some of the costs.

If money was a problem they would have never bought the other POS games in their library. And you are assuming buying Cryptic will be a ton of money. Buying Cryptic might be a take over the payments type plan.

Originally posted by darlok6666

 Is it really just or smart to berate a company just because of it's leaders?  I say if the company is salvagable then salvage it.  If you have quality employees then utilize them.  They have experience so they have the potential to put out some quality products. 

Depends on your defninition of "quality".  Personally, I would not call CO or STO "quality" products.  I will say Cryptic does have a top notch art department.  One of the only saving graces of STO is the beautiful visuals IMO.

I would imagine the employees will land on their feet at another development firm.  At this point, it may be best to disolve Cryptic studios.  Their reputation for lackluster games will preceed them no matter what.

SOE.

They need a few more 'quality' games to pad the Station Access Pass.

Originally posted by darlok6666

Originally posted by Bob_Blawblaw

Originally posted by Xondar123

How about Cryptic just dies?

They have a poor business model, develop bad games, have stupid executives.

I don't think they deserve to exist anymore.

My thoughts exactly.

Bad dev houses should perish.  The lazy ignorant managers that railroad good projects into the ground on the backs of their slaves...err...employees, do not deserve a paycheck.

I only hope the employees who aren't burnt out find a better place to work when the pinkslips start dropping.

 Is it really just or smart to berate a company just because of it's leaders?  I say if the company is salvagable then salvage it.  If you have quality employees then utilize them.  They have experience so they have the potential to put out some quality products.

I'm more concerned as to what the future of Neverwibnter will hold.  Is Atari gonna drop it and be left with Cryptic or will Atari let Cryptic finish it and then replace Cryptic to let another company maintain and improve upon it or will they start anew with a DnD online game version. 

The company derives it's value from it's leadership. It's core values, it's pipeline practices, it's fiscal practices, and it's culture.  You can have all the best artists and programmers in the world, but if you consistantly under schedule, and over work your employees, all the while not delivering a product they can be proud of (which is why they get into games in the first place... certainly not for the money or the hours), productivity is going to flop. Why do you think there's such a high churn in games, while management seems to stick around for a long time?

Consistantly bad games = bad management. Not bad workers.