D&D Video Gaming News - Hasbro sues for breach of contact by Atari

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

elawai posted this thread on the Software/Video Game forum, but it appears most people don't go there often enough to notice this yet. I think this is a topic of general RPG interest on EN World, and so I decided to "replicate" it here. (It already found its way into the EN World News, though when I checked, it seemed a little hard to notice due to formatting issues.)

Article: Fraud and Breach Complaint Filed Against Atari Over Dungeons & Dragons License - Yahoo! Finance

Dungeons & Dragons is owned by Hasbro's wholly-owned subsidiary Wizards of the Coast, who discovered earlier this year that Atari may have entered into an unauthorized sublicensing relationship with Namco Bandai Partners (NBP) for the Dungeons & Dragons digital game rights. NBP is a competitor for both Wizards of the Coast and Hasbro, and such an agreement is prohibited under the contract between Hasbro and Atari.


"While unfortunate that we had to take this action, it is crucial for us to protect the Dungeons & Dragons brand," said Greg Leeds, President of Wizards of the Coast. "We have been working for several months now to reach resolution with Atari, and they have left us with no other choice than to pursue legal action."

It doesn't seem that we can expect new D&D games as long as this lawsuit is still going on. I wonder a little if the sublicensing deal is also the reason there wasn't anything in the works.

 

[vagabundo]

Atari has been limping along for a while now. They might settle this one - although they have been in talks with them over this.

The death throws of a large company can be very messy - just look at SCO...

Hopefully a quick settlement and then licence to a decent Publisher.

 

[elawai]

Update

Update:

Hasbro and Atari in Dungeons & Dragons fight - Yahoo! Finance

Atari's response:

"Hasbro has resorted to these meritless allegations, in an apparent attempt to unfairly take back rights granted to Atari," Atari said in the statement. "Atari has sought to resolve the matter without cooperation from Hasbro. We regret that our longtime partner has decided to pursue this action."

Here's what I think is missing from Atari's response:

They DID NOT say:
1) The termination of this agreement would hurt us because we have games in development.
2) The deal with Bandai does not break the agreement.

Hasbro/WoTC was very specific about the breach, Atari did not respond in kind. I think there's also a strong indication that Atari does not have any new games coming out for the D&D license (just the continuation of D&D Online perhaps?).

As much as I don't like EA, they do have Bioware and Mythic Entertainment in their stable - both of which would put out great D&D games, and I would love them to get their hands on this license. Certainly, they can't do worse then Atari has with the license.

 

[vagabundo]

I think Bioware has said they wouldn't do DND anymore, they want to create their own IP. EA could pressure them, but EA has been taking a more hands off approach to their studios recently.

 

[elawai]

I think Bioware has said they wouldn't do DND anymore, they want to create their own IP. EA could pressure them, but EA has been taking a more hands off approach to their studios recently.

Bioware used to work under the Interplay umbrella but couldn't continue under that license after Interplay lost the rights.

Bioware did license under Atari for Neverwinter Nights. I think this relationship really soured them towards making licensed games for awhile - therefore, the Bioware-owned IPs were developed (Jade Empire, Dragon Age). Also, Bioware went under the EA publishing umbrella in 2008 - so no second publisher for them anyways.

Bioware is working on a licensed game (Star Wars Old Republic MMO) so they don't seem to have a current policy against licensed products. I think they have a problem with bad relationships. If the relationship between Bioware and Hasbro/WoTC changes, perhaps there is a chance they would do D&D games again.

However, Hasbro has to win the rights back first; and then, secondly, license EA to produce D&D games. It's a lot of ifs. And one of those ifs might concern whether that relationship can be fixed to the point where Bioware enjoys making D&D games again.

I don't think Bioware is the only company that could put out a decent 4e D&D game. At this point, it doesn't look like Atari is going to publish one soon, so we can only hope the agreement is terminated and the rights go to anyone who wants to make a decent game.

BTW, it looks like Atari has the D&D digital rights through 2017. Turbine (DDO) has filed suit against Atari. Rumors are Atari want to give Cryptic Games (Champions Online) a shot at a D&D MMO. No news on a single player or a multiplayer game (non-massive, persistent world) it seems.

 

[Derren]

Why would anyone make a D&D game anyway now?

4E doesn't have any fluff at all and the setting many people are used to were completely destroyed. It doesn't offer any advantages besides the D&D name.

And as disadvantages you have Hasbro/WotC meddleing with the development. Not to mention that the 4E combat system is hard to do in a real time way.

So, why go through all this trouble when you instead can make your own setting or just license some russian fantasy book (which costs much less)?

 

[Amadeus Windfall]

Why would anyone make a D&D game anyway now?

4E doesn't have any fluff at all and the setting many people are used to were completely destroyed. It doesn't offer any advantages besides the D&D name.

And as disadvantages you have Hasbro/WotC meddleing with the development. Not to mention that the 4E combat system is hard to do in a real time way.

So, why go through all this trouble when you instead can make your own setting or just license some russian fantasy book (which costs much less)?

a) The D&D name is worth money.
b) 4e does have fluff, it's just not centred around a central defined setting.
c) The Realms do still exist, and still has marketing appeal and fans. There's also Eberron, Dark Sun, and the bits of fluff from the core books.
d) Who cares if it's hard to do in a real-time way? Have the battles be turn-based on a grid, ala Final Fantasy Tactics or Disgaea. It'd work really well, play to 4e's strengths, and frankly I don't see why D&D games need to be in real-time.

 

[Derren]

a) The D&D name is worth money.
b) 4e does have fluff, it's just not centred around a central defined setting.
c) The Realms do still exist, and still has marketing appeal and fans. There's also Eberron, Dark Sun, and the bits of fluff from the core books.
d) Who cares if it's hard to do in a real-time way? Have the battles be turn-based on a grid, ala Final Fantasy Tactics or Disgaea. It'd work really well, play to 4e's strengths, and frankly I don't see why D&D games need to be in real-time.

a) Apparently not so much, considering how successfull other settings are (either completely new or book adaptions)
b) Yet exactly this kind of fluff is needed
c) FR is mostly unrecognizable for D&D video gamer now and the other settings are unknown
d) Wouldn't sell.

 

[Garmorn]

Advantages of 4e for online world are:

Name/Brand recognition.
Per developed worlds.
A large PC game fan base.
A fully developed combat system start with.
Few if any very difficult spells to program.

If the game can be designed close enough to the PnP version you will have a large group of player that already know quite a bit about the system and can teach others (that helps attract and retain players). You could use the ever growing PnP system to constantly update and expand player options. 4e might be close enough to allow direct input of new classes and power built as formula (these would probably only be close to but not excatly like the PnP ones.).

 

[Silverblade The Ench]

I'd kill for a single player, turn based D&D game
look at how big Dragon Age has been...