Amazon Acquires Video Gaming Studio Double Helix Games

Amazon Acquires Video Gaming Studio Double Helix Games(techcrunch.com)

72 points by hornokplease 12 years ago | 37 comments

cwyers 12 years ago |

The article says Double Helix is being acquired for "both talent and IP," which... I can't fathom what IP Double Helix owns, unless it's IP from a game or games that haven't been released or even announced yet. They've worked on mostly licensed games, and I don't think Shiny owned the Earthworm Jim IP when the merger happened.

As for this rumored $300 Amazon console... huh? That's more than a 360, which still is getting some new games and has a massive back catalog. It's more than a WiiU, which has support of some of the most popular video game IP ever and some really good first-party developers and is still struggling from lack of third-party support. An Amazon console priced like a Ouya and targeting that niche, I can see. But a full-priced console? It's going to take far more than one AAA developer that has focused almost entirely on licensed IP to support that.

xutopia 12 years ago | |

I believe the most likely thing to happen is Amazon undercutting others. 300$ for an Amazon console makes no sense.

CamperBob2 12 years ago | |

More likely Amazon's planning an Onlive-like service. It would be a better fit for their cloud-based services approach.

cwyers 12 years ago | | |

They do have AppStream, and they do target it for gaming applications, but according to the FAQ:

http://aws.amazon.com/appstream/faqs/

"Applications that have extremely low tolerance for latency are not recommended for streaming. Examples include first person shooters or player vs. player fighting games."

And AppStream seems to require applications that are specifically written for it, so they still have the same problem with third-party support. And if it's a primarily streaming-based gaming console, the idea that it would cost $300 makes even less sense.

andrey-p 12 years ago |

I've always felt a bit awkward about people from Shiny, who used to create ridiculously creative games back in the day, churning out games based on Hollywood film franchises. I'm not really sure how to feel about this development, too.

(Note: I haven't played anything from Double Helix's current output, so I could be very wrong about feeling awkward here.)

mathattack 12 years ago | |

Perhaps if they have equity they don't feel too bad about the decision. :-)

Sometimes a commercial tie-in can mean the difference between ten thousand playing your game and ten million.

boroadlkjq 12 years ago |

Has Double Helix done anything really good? Last time I heard they tried to remake Killer Instinct into a cheap cash in where you have to pay to buy characters.

jwcooper 12 years ago | |

Killer Instinct is pretty popular, and fairly well reviewed. It did go with a model similar to League of Legends where you can play it for free, but then buy each character, or buy a pack of characters[1]. It's not a terrible model if it's priced fairly and balanced well. The characters do seem a little expensive, but if you play each one for more than a few hours, it's probably worth it in the end.

The worst offenders are games like Forza that are a $60 up front purchase, and then also have micro-transactions to buy cars (you can also grind many hours away to get them).

I believe Double Helix also has a game called Strider (related to the original arcade game of the same name somehow)[2] coming out soon that is somewhat anticipated.

[1] http://killerinstinct.wikia.com/wiki/Killer_Instinct_(Xbox_O... [2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strider_(2014_video_game)

fooqux 12 years ago | | |

I feel it is disingenuous to compare this to League of Legends' model. The big difference is that in LoL, you can buy characters with in-game currency earned from playing the game. The only thing you can't buy with earned currency are cosmetic skins for your characters. So while you might not look as fancy, you're never at a tactical disadvantage in-game just because you haven't sunk a wad of cash into it.

KI:3, if I remember right, only gives you two characters to play for free, and doesn't stop opponents with bought characters from playing you. I presume KI, like most fighting games, have attempted to balance the characters; this may alleviate the point somewhat. But typically they never get the balance quite right for all skill levels. That is, Alice and Bob might be equal at the top-level competitive play (and even that is a stretch in most games) but at the beginner's tier, Bob is way stronger. A great example of this is strong & slow characters versus weak & fast characters. The faster characters are typically better for beginners as they're better for button mashing and missing an attack isn't as detrimental to your health bar.

incision 12 years ago |

Sad to realize the studio behind Messiah [0] and Earthworm Jim [1] has ended up specializing in shoveling out licensed trash [2][3].

0: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messiah_(video_game)

1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthworm_jim

2: http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/battleship

3: http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/gi-joe-the-rise-of-c...

TronPaul_ 12 years ago |

If Amazon wants to "compete directly with Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo," they'll need to do more than make an Android console. If they can't get cross platform titles, then all they are is an overpriced Ouya.

hershel 12 years ago |

One interesting part of the story is amazon having a sub $300 console that competes directly with Sony and Microsoft.

My guess about that that it would be:

(a) a console financed by ads or amazon product sales on the tv

(b)A weaker console with quality content being offered through cloud gaming

And my guess that the price would be substantially less than $300.

Does anybody have other rumors or guesses about that ?

rottyguy 12 years ago |

Seems like Google and Amazon are building similar companies baselined on revenues from disparate sources (AMZN: Merchandise/GOOG:Search -- realize this is not the complete picture but certainly the starting point). Interesting to see these types of companies emerge (ones willing to dilute/evolve from their original core competancy in order to sustain). Will traditional (large) companies do the same?

makmanalp 12 years ago | |

I'd go as far as suggesting that google actually makes the most cash from advertising, and all their other products are to show more users more ads.

I think this kind of generalization is not surprising and used to be the standard back in the day. Nokia at various points made rubber boots, paper, cables and telegraphs, tires, robotics, power generator components, gas masks, chemicals, televisions, telephone exchanges, etc. Mitsubishi did coal mining, insurance, banking, trade, optics and a ton of other things. Sony does life insurance and banking.

InclinedPlane 12 years ago | |

Amazon is already a far more diversified company than google. Google's revenue breaks down into: search, network (backbone ISP), and "other". Under "other" is gmail, gdocs, youtube, android, everything that isn't search. Google is very, very bad at productizing and monetiziation. They are even worse at maintaining customer relations with anyone other than advertisers. The same is not true of amazon, who began as a bookstore and have only become more and more diversified over time.

Pxtl 12 years ago | |

Has Google moved into the gaming industry at all? I've always thought the lack of Google gaming assets was surprising given the popularity of Android games.

Pxl_Buzzard 12 years ago | | |

Ingress[1] is a real-world game created by a startup within Google.

[1] https://www.ingress.com/

confluence 12 years ago |

Amazon is eating the world. I can't wait until they start producing TV shows and movies like Netflix. The game is on.

CmonDev 12 years ago |

"As you can tell by the titles, it specializes in large-scale action games based on blockbuster franchises." - makes me sad when companies have to do this to survive :(.