   Would Microsoft sell any of their "Unpopular" IP?
  Sounds like a n00bish question, I assume. Oh well...Okay, I'm not going to ask if Microsoft would sell the rights to any of it's most popular IP (i.e. MSN, SilverLight, Visual Studio, Fable, Xbox, DirectX, etc.) because that's obviously not going to happen. So let's think of something smaller instead. Let's say I wanted to buy the rights to a game Microsoft owns that they don't really use/build upon anymore, such as Ski-Free or Azurik: Rize of Perathia; in general IP that Microsoft has put in the closet to collect dust. Do you think they would sell it (assuming you fork over enough cash)? If so, do you think they'd only sell it to a big company? I know Microsoft is really strict with their stuff, I'm quite sure. What would you say?   
  Depends on how much is enough cash [grin]On the other hand why are you interested in an IP that is owned by microsoft,I would understand if it was something known by the masses,but getting a long forgotten IP doesn't make sense to me.You could just start your own.;Quote:Original post by Black KnightDepends on how much is enough cash [grin]On the other hand why are you interested in an IP that is owned by microsoft,I would understand if it was something known by the masses,but getting a long forgotten IP doesn't make sense to me.You could just start your own.Well, a game such as Ski-Free might not be well known throuought gamers, but Azurik is only 7 years old and many gamers have been begging Amaze Entertainment and Microsoft to make a sequel for years, leading me to believe that there is a large enough fan base for it.  Even though the game managed to break even, that's still not enough intel to say it will do good either.  I understand that buying IP is a serious business in all, I'd say, "Why not give gamers what they want?"Should I expect the price to be over a $1,000,000 USD?  Or maybe like $500,000 or less?   ;  I don't believe they would license out an old IP. I know someone who ran a reasonable sized dev team that approached MS about one of their IPs but was refused. If they did the price would almost certainly be high because any deal they do must cover their high overhead costs.   ;Quote:such as Ski-Free or Azurik: Rize of Perathia; in general IP that Microsoft has put in the closet to collect dust.For those two particular games, here's a few minutes of research....Ski / SkiFree / Skiing / [other similar titles] has a long history, and obviously the gameplay itself is fair game.  Microsoft SkiFree itself was loosely based on the Activision Skiing game, which in turn was based on several similar games that appeared in geek programming magazines in the mid 1970's.  I seem to recall the same gameplay mechanic used by two young boys in England winning a contest about designing a video game back in the early 70's, they were the only one who submitted an actual video game, in Basic.  I know I saw implementations in two different game magazines back then in Fortran and Basic, and I recall seeing an implementation in the TI 99/4's little red book of video game sources back in '82 or so. Microsoft has already granted the rights for developing the game from that source to Chris Pirih, the original author of particular implementation.  You would not get those rights from Microsoft, but from Mr. Pirih.You would probably also be better off starting from scratch, not continuing a thrice-ported implementation that was originally in Fortran.Azurik: Rise of Perathia is much newer.  As always, the Action-adventure theme and the general gameplay mechanics are fair game.The game specific material was developed by Adrenium Games, which was acquired by Foundation 9 Entertainment nearly 3 years ago.If you wanted to continue that game, you would need to contact Foundation 9 Entertainment. It is very likely to involve multiple legal agreements with both Foundation 9 and with Microsoft as the publisher.For the cost and studio needs, you should be prepared with around $10M USD to cover your own development and production costs, and an appropriate group of talent who could make the game on one of today's platforms.  If you wanted them to fund a portion of the game up front you would need to bring something even more valuable to the bargaining table.Quote:Do you think they would sell it (assuming you fork over enough cash)? If so, do you think they'd only sell it to a big company? I know Microsoft is really strict with their stuff, I'm quite sure. What would you say?Which rights, exactly, would you want to purchase?  If you just want to make a game that uses the same mechanics, nothing is stoping you.If you are just wanting to continue development of the series, you would need an established studio and enough resources to see the project through to completion.  For most modern systems, the cost for development and production are on the order of $10M USD, with nearly the same again for marketing, manufacturing, distribution, and so on.  You and your lawyers would then discuss the business proposition of licensing the game.If you are asking for all rights to all future development, you would need a very large wad of cash for Azurik, probably on the order of a few hundred million dollars, or more if you wanted copies of the game source and assets.  For Ski-Free, you would likely be ignored because of a demonstrated cluelessness with regard to how legal rights work.   ;Quote:Original post by frobFor the cost and studio needs, you should be prepared with around $10M USD to cover your own development and production costs, and an appropriate group of talent who could make the game on one of today's platforms.This is a good point. MS or any other large publisher isn't going to license an IP for it to be turned into a small indie game. As part of any license deal they are going to want a royalty on every unit so they will want the game to be a big triple A title with a triple A development budget.   ;  Okay, maybe I should have said this to begin with.  I'm not really interested in buying an old IP such as Ski-Free.  It wouldn't be at all beneficial, plus clone(s) of that game has already been "gotten away" with so you'd basically be buying the name of the game IMO.  On the other hand, I am very interested in Azurik.  Yes, taking this one from zero to hero is making a really bold claim, but this is merely a futuristic idea which isn't mean to come true in the immediate future.  Sure anyone who could (even those without any programming/design skills) would happily jump at the idea of bringing back their favourite games (and it very common to hear someone say "if only I could buy the rights to game X"), but not everyone gets the entire picture of what it really costs.Quote:Original post by ObscureQuote:Original post by frobFor the cost and studio needs, you should be prepared with around $10M USD to cover your own development and production costs, and an appropriate group of talent who could make the game on one of today's platforms.This is a good point. MS or any other large publisher isn't going to license an IP for it to be turned into a small indie game. As part of any license deal they are going to want a royalty on every unit so they will want the game to be a big triple A title with a triple A development budget.Yes sir, that I'm already quite aware of.  Such a project like this I wouldn't dare attempt to buy or even build without a stable company and a large/skilled enough team to get the job done within a reasonable amount of time.  GameDev.net has already taught me not to be so naive.  But then again, I guess you could always pray for a miracle, lol!;  What's wrong with cloning ? everyone does it and it's 100% legal.If You love a game so much that you'd like to see a sequel why not make your own version.The big boys have been cloning games since the beginning of the industry.If I'm missing something then disregard my post.   ;  "Cloning" as in producing a direct copy of a game like Pacman or Mario on a different hardware platform is NOT legal without the express permission of the copyright owner or you know that the game is actually in the public domain. The same goes for doing an "unofficial sequel" using an existing game character.   ;  First I'll give a short answer, then the long answer.The short answers:Quote:What's wrong with cloning ? everyone does it and it's 100% legal.Some things may be cloned 100% legally.  Cloning other elements is 100% illegal.  In some cases the distinction between the two is extremely fine.Quote:If You love a game so much that you'd like to see a sequel why not make your own version.That falls under the 100% illegal category as a derivative work under copyright, trademark infringement, trade dress infringement, and possibly several other areas such as design rights, database rights, moral rights and 'related rights' of the artists, and more.  Do not make a sequel without permission.Quote:The big boys have been cloning games since the beginning of the industry.The big boys have armies of lawyers.Now for the longer answers.Quote:What's wrong with cloning ? everyone does it and it's 100% legal.Some of it is fair game and can be cloned directly without reservation.General game mechanics and game genre are not and may not be protected by IP law.  Those can be freely cloned, copied, imitated, and improved on.Nearly everything else is protected by IP law.  Any infringement or perceived infringement can be enough to face a lawsuit.The easiest answer is to be creative and do not infringe on other people's IP rights.  This is the safest option, and the only sanctioned one you will see on this and other development boards.The 'best' answer is to see a lawyer, and that if you feel your own creative work may potentially infringe on something, you should have one or more competent IP lawyers in the games industry discuss the situation and determine the legal risks.As for what's wrong with it, doing it intentionally is unlawful. You should not intentionally violate intellectual property rights.  There are the obvious legal ramifications.  Further, nearly everyone who uses this board earns (or will earn) their living by creating intellectual property, and as such it is offensive to offer rationalizations toward IP violations.Moving on...Quote:If You love a game so much that you'd like to see a sequel why not make your own version.There is more to IP rights than the big three of copyright, trademark, and patent.  Any recognizable and distinctive element is covered.  This includes names of characters, places, items, audio themes, and so on.  It also includes more abstract properties like the general 'look and feel' and distinctive implementation mechanics.  Copyright includes the rights to create derivative works.  Sequels are perhaps the most obvious form of derivative work, and consequently, an authorized sequel is a blatant copyright violation.The mechanics are obviously fair game.  If he wants to make a game where an avatar 'skis' down the screen, avoiding obstacles such as trees and rocks while doing tricks to earn points, there is no violation going on.  But if he directly copies the details of the Ski-Free game, including such details as the trees that burn when jumped over and the abominable snow man that can come out and eat your avatar, then he is taking a big legal risk by likely violating their rights.Similarly, if he wants to create an action-adventure game set in a 3D world that is in the same genre as "Azurik: Rise of Perathia" (and countless other games) then there is no violation.  But if he copied the maps, or city names, or character names, or countless other distinctive elements that are found withing the game, then he would be taking a huge legal risk and would likely be violating their rights.Quote:The big boys have been cloning games since the beginning of the industry.Companies invest a lot of time and money into developing intellectual property.  Consider that a AAA game costs around $10M to develop and produce, around another $10M to manufacture, distribute, advertise, and support.  The companies have invested many millions of dollars into that product, and will vigorously protect their rights in courts if necessary.It doesn't matter how close he came to copying it, if it really was a legal use, or even if the copying happened to be completely legal.  Only the courts can make the final decision on IP legality, and going through the courts is a lengthy and expensive process.It is very rare for "the big boys" to clone games in ways that violate IP laws.  They have armies of lawyers who review the games and content.They do their very best to make sure that what they do is actually legal.  I have seen many occasions where the lawyers told the game designers or artists to modify the game to avoid a potential legal violation.  Even on my current game title, we have had to submit various names to the legal department because the names we wanted to use were 'potentially' legally encumbered.They have armies of lawyers to properly defend themselves in court when lawsuits are filed against them.  And if they actually did violate the law, the lawyers are able to offer settlements to the affected parties and take steps to ensure the violations do not happen in the future.And you ended with:Quote:If I'm missing something then disregard my post.Yes, you missed something.  But please don't disregard the post. Instead please learn something about IP law and why it is best to develop your own ideas rather than copy them from other people.   