Warlord Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 Well folks, after much speculation as to who legally owns the rights to X-Com, it would appear that they rest with none other than Atari. A search of the Atari website indeed shows that X-Com: UFO Defense, X-Com: Terror From The Deep, X-Com Apocalypse, X-Com: Interceptor, and X-Com: Enforcer are all carried under their support section. For those of you interested in checking it out, or needing support for any of these games, go to the Atari website. Atari PC and DOS titles support page I don't know how much support, if any, you will receive from them however, due to the age of these games. If anyone decides to contact them, please post the results here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mouse Nightshirt Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 Knowing the history of Atari, I can see a slight glimmer of hope for X-Com yet. Atari have long had a history of reviving old games, and I wonder if the possibilty of them reviving the series is quite high. I wrote a question in their forums, explaining the situation, and asking i they were going to further the series. You'll find it here: https://www.ataricommunity.com/forums/showt...threadid=303876 I sit in hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strong Bob Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 I've saved the topic in my favorites. I'll be checking regularly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 Mouse... you do realise you dissed Hasbro when you should have been dissing Infogrames too don't you? There is also one other major problem with this glimmer of hope... her's an equation to exoplain it for you: Atari == Infogrames == Atari Head on over to the main Atari page at https://www.atari.com to find out a little more. In fact, the Atari parent company is "Infogrames Entertainment SA" apparently. Who can say "Let's cash in on a good brand name and hope it sells some more crap!"... c'mon, I want chanting going on all aroudn the world so that they realle pee their pants in terror! Of course, it might not be that bad, but the last game I saw published by Infogrames (yonder "parent company") was the extremely buggy Master of Orion 3 - a large cowpat on the welly of humanity from what I could see ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Araanor Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 Chances aren't too bad with Infogrames, they've shown interest in making niche games like giving the go for MOO3 and now the soon-to-be-released Greyhawk: Temple of Elemental Evil (D&D RPG not set in FR and is turn-based). As far as publishers go, they're not a pitch black evil like Electronic Arts or a mass of incompetence like Interplay. As for the Atari thing, they bought the name some time back but adopted it recently as a face everywhere else outside of France. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 that as it may be... the fact that they have already canned two x-com games doesn't hold in their favour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Demi-Godly One Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 Yeah, but the games were not canned because of ratings, but a loss of a company. So it might make a comback. But then again I doubt they will care how they were cancelled, just the fact that they were. So that gives it the chance of being turned down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mouse Nightshirt Posted June 28, 2003 Report Share Posted June 28, 2003 If you read the interview with Dave Ellis, you wouls unfortunately see that Genesis and Alliance can never be continued, due to legal reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ion Mage Posted June 28, 2003 Report Share Posted June 28, 2003 Where'd it say that, exactly? Quote, please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MicahDG Posted June 29, 2003 Report Share Posted June 29, 2003 From:https://dynamic3.gamespy.com/~thelastoutpos...icle.php?art=59 As I understand it, in order to write off those losses, they had to cancel the projects the studio was working on and never use the code, art, and so on that was produced for those projects. What that means is that Genesis was dead and had to remain so, legally, in order for the company to write off their losses.I'm pretty sure that this carries over to Infogrames now that they own Hasbro's properties. And here:https://dynamic3.gamespy.com/~thelastoutpos...ct=ST&f=5&t=212 Re: reviving Genesis As I understand corporate law in general (and this situation specifically), the design document, art, and code generated for Genesis cannot be reused by Hasbro or, by extension, Infogrames. That doesn't mean that a very similar game couldn't be produced--it just means that (to quote Khan) the "data and material concerning the project called...Genesis" cannot be used ever again. Of course (for the reasons stated above) you shouldn't hold your breath for such a game. Infogrames just doesn't seem to be interested at this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Araanor Posted June 29, 2003 Report Share Posted June 29, 2003 Doesn't change the viability of the X-Com license in itself... Interceptor and Enforcer did enough on that front though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 29, 2003 Report Share Posted June 29, 2003 Doesn't change the viability of the X-Com license in itself... Interceptor and Enforcer did enough on that front though... No. Both games tried to take broaden the franchise and delve into other areas. Naturally all "hardcore followers" of anyhting fear change. Personally, I enjoyed Interceptor as it was quite a good flight sim and Enforcer gave me hours of mindless blasting in the X-COM Universe. Now you can't honestly say that before Enforcer that whilst X-COM fans may have been blasting away at aliens on games such as Half Life that they never once wished they were Chrysalids or Mutons being shot to bits? To produce something the same as UFO or Apocalypse was the job of Genesis, and the fact that it was canned was the fault of the $uit$ and not the fault of the game designers who tried their best to keep it on track. It's all there in the interview. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Araanor Posted June 29, 2003 Report Share Posted June 29, 2003 No? You're missing my point, they didn't sell well ergo the license doesn't look very viable in corporate eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted July 4, 2003 Report Share Posted July 4, 2003 I think it's more to do with corporations being thicker than two very short-yet-thick planks made of quite dense oak than any sales ratings. A look into certain places such as "Top 100 games of all time" (covered by any games magazine you care to name in the past ten years) would put UFO in the top ten or at least the top 25 on most occasions I can remember. When poeple talk about classic games, X-COM frequently comes up. Everyone who's played strategy games on a PC has heard of X-COM at least in passing in my experience. The series remains popular, yet the people in charge are out of touch with their public. We all know that a remake of UFO would be an instant hit. They cannot be hiding behind sales figures for their sole excuse, as it doesn't make any sense unless they really are that dense. Not that I'm trying to attack any company (haven't named any names yet) in particular, but when creating games for gamers, it pays to listen to the crowds. Poor sales figures on a resource management/flight sim and a 3rd person shooter versus a huge demand for another UFO-like game which would undoubtedly get mammoth coverage from all games magazines and gaming sites at no extra cost?... Poor sales figures cannot the sole factor here. It's not like Atari/Infogranny are short of a little cash. Indeed, the cost to make a half-decent remake of UFO would be somewhere in the region of (roughly) £60k - £100k bearing in mind that you wouldn't have to do any marketing and you wouldn't have to make it the most technologically and graphically superior game for it to be a hit. There's something else going on and I guess we won't find out for some time what it is. Sorry, but I just don't buy poor sale figures making an entire brand unviable when it would take such a miniscule amount of effort in comparison to almost any other game in production today to make the best game since... erm... well... UFO, if I have to be honest Stick 35 game designers in a room with the right equiment and £100k, covering wages too. You only need to sell 2857 at £35 each to break even. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Araanor Posted July 5, 2003 Report Share Posted July 5, 2003 They cannot be hiding behind sales figures for their sole excuse, as it doesn't make any sense unless they really are that dense. I'm afraid I can't rule out that they are that dense. As I said, I think IG are one of the better choices among the big boys. But they may have burned themselves on MOO3... In a similar fashion, if Aftermath flops they could look at it and conclude that there isn't a high demand for the type of game. As you can see, I don't put much trust in the publishers. Too many suits who doesn't understand the market are in deciding positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted July 5, 2003 Report Share Posted July 5, 2003 Indeed. It would help if they actually took an intrest in gaming before running games publishing companies eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrysalid_zombie Posted July 5, 2003 Report Share Posted July 5, 2003 I've said it a million times when babbling to myself in a sugar induced haze, and I'll say it a further time in an understandable way to you lot! The small companies will make a come back soon! It's already started... Lets have a look at some small companies and their games - Introversion - Uplink This is a brilliant hacking game, and has a small cult following (I even write fan fiction for this thing! ). They started selling this thing from their homes with an online ordering system. It's now in the shops and has made them a few pennies Check it out if you get the chance. Codo Games - Laser Squad Nemesis We all know it by now! Look at them! No major publisher, but they've broken new grounds in terms of both game play and server technology. I can't wait for infogrammes to go crawling to them and ask them to help make a server system for their latest crappy game effort Moonpod games - Starscape An arcade shooter with resource management? A mix of Asteroids and base building? What the heck? How does it work? Beats me, but it does! I'm on the demo right now and enjoying it, I'm thinking of buying it too... Anyhow, I'd also like to say that Introversion and Moonpod are both UK based. Spooky huh? Maybe us Brits will finally get a bleeding look in when it comes to game production. Take that Nintendo! To summerise? The big companies not only suck, they have competition! Go small companies go!! You don't need publishers as much thanks to the internet! Anyone know of others? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Veteran Posted July 9, 2003 Report Share Posted July 9, 2003 Bad news, or good news depending on what you think of Infogrames... :hmmm: I just contacted the patent office and the XCom trade mark IS still registered to Infogrames... (Yeah I know Atari-Infogrames, Infogrames-Atari. That's the whole point) Good news though... Anyone who wants to harass them can now go straight to their agents... Rouse & Co International Pembroke House, Pembroke Street, Oxford, OX1 1BP That's the UK slution. For those of you in the states there's this to amuse yourselves with... Infogrames Interactive Inc 417 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America Obvious enough but that's for those of you want to lynch someone and don't have the adress... The XCom trademark was first used on 30.08.1995 but wasn't registered until 21.02.1996. Now is the interesting bit... The XCom trademark was renewed on 31.10.2001 and it was assigned again on 28.03.2001 Assigned to what though? Was this one of the lost games? Alliance perhaps? That would be my guess at least. Whatever that means though, Infogrames owns the XCom trademark and will do for another three years until they have to decide whether to renew it or not. For now though, that's where it lies. Quite what happened to Firaxis owning it is a mystery! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Posted July 10, 2003 Report Share Posted July 10, 2003 Hmm... very interesting Vet. So what happens if they don't renew it? The rights are just open to anyone, and they can make whatever X-COM thing they want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Veteran Posted July 10, 2003 Report Share Posted July 10, 2003 If Infogramnes was not to renew this next time then anyone else could purchase the XCom trademark and, with it, the rights to all of the games ever made... However, Infogrames would be informed that the license was nearing its end several months before it terminated in order to make the decision of whether to renew it or not. If it is not renewed by anyone then it becomes freeware. ie. legally downloadable, copyable and tradeable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strong Bob Posted July 10, 2003 Report Share Posted July 10, 2003 Argh! I dunno about the rest of you, but this is pretty bad news to me. X-COM games are already plagued enough by piracy. Goddamn, if people would just buy the damn game maybe Infogrames/Atari wouldn't be ignoring it so much! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mouse Nightshirt Posted July 19, 2003 Report Share Posted July 19, 2003 If the Trademark is up, could we, as a group, under the name of X-Com Tactical command, buy the rights for it, and possible pass it on to a willing developer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Veteran Posted July 19, 2003 Report Share Posted July 19, 2003 If it was then we could have done but for now It's still owned by them legally... In three years if we're all still here then who knows we could put some cash together In fact in three years from now I'm going to have about fifty grand so I may just buy it myself I AM XCOM!!!!! lol! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now