Disney Infinity and Disney publishing are over

Odo

Well-Known Member
#1
https://twitter.com/NESbot_feed/status/730134288159649792
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articl...inity-is-dead-as-disney-exits-game-publishing

Disney Infinity has been cancelled for good and Disney will no longer publish games.

I reckon it might be a result of Lego Dimensions hitting the market. Lego is a huge brand, although I could bet my teeth that it'd hurt Activision Skylanders much more.

Well, I'm not sure, but maybe from now on the Toy-to-life market is going to start consolidating. There are too many toys to life out there if you ask me.



That means more market for Amiibo, although Wii U doesn't help at all. Nintendo could add amiibo to mobile devices who could read NFC. They should do it, asap for the mobile titles. Amiibo could be an excellent link between mobile titles and NX titles. Focusing NX on children may help Nintendo to survive the next generation. In fact all those amiibo titles and games like federation force might be the indication that they're trying these waters, I guess.

In the end, I believe toys-to-life has no future and that's why Nintendo has to sell as many amiibos as they can as fast as they can and mobile can help them on this task. Tablets are better toys than toys themselves. I think the saturation of the market will hit Activision really hard and even though Nintendo characters have mass appeal, their audience isn't that big since Wii U and people will not keep buying Mario amiibos forever.
 

SkywardCrowbar

Twintelle's loyal Husbando
#4
I think this is short sighted on the part of Disney... A product of their greed. From what I had read, Infinity was profitable, but Disney just wanted more and more profits. It was also a huge success with their fans, and was a vehicle to turn moderately invested fans of Disney franchises into more hardcore fans. Disney could have simply scaled back their level of constant support for Infinity instead of canning it altogether.

As far as this helping other Toys-To-Life lines, I think that is absolutely the case. This means more shelf space at places like Toys R' Us where they have a dedicated section of the store for TTL products.

As far as TTL having "no future" I don't think that's true either. I doubt that any of it will be able to maintain the fever pitch that something like Amiibo had for its first year, but collector's will always be out there, and kids will always like figures to play with. I don't think Nintendo should make Amiibo the core of the long term business plan, but it's something that can enhance their brands and IP's, and make them a nice buck.
 

GamingFreak1988

The Platformer Guru
#5
might potentionally been greed as well as a whole for the toys to life thing and disney just got affected cause their ip was a lot more expensive to produce long term. activision soured quite a few people with trap team, not only with it being arguably worse quality than swapforce.. But the stunt they pulled rendering basically ALL previous versions skylanders useless for completionists. basically each game has these areas called elemental portals where you have to use a skylander of the element to get in. trap team made it so ONLY trap masters of the element to get in and on top of the standard game only coming with 1 trap master, effectively rendering all 3 earlier games skylanders useless for side area access... on top of minigames being locked to trapped villians which you needed a trap for every element of monster, though the game did come with 2 of them. you roughly had to spend over $100 on top of the base game to access just all areas of the main levels and not expansion pack areas. unless you were waiting for sales. super chargers was much better requiring only two more vehicle types and nothing more for way less to see a vast majority of the game.

i did hear people being disppointed in later disney infinity games compared to the first one.
 

Odo

Well-Known Member
#10
As far as TTL having "no future" I don't think that's true either. I doubt that any of it will be able to maintain the fever pitch that something like Amiibo had for its first year, but collector's will always be out there, and kids will always like figures to play with. I don't think Nintendo should make Amiibo the core of the long term business plan, but it's something that can enhance their brands and IP's, and make them a nice buck.
I believe toys-to-life requires mass audience, so I think Amiibo and other toys-to-life products can't be viable only as collector's products. As far as I know children are moving on from Toys-to-life really fast.

I believe in 2-3 years, this market will be dead both on the West and other markets. For me it's some sort of a new Rock Band faddish.

That's why I think Nintendo has to exploit this market asap.
 

GamingFreak1988

The Platformer Guru
#11
i play the skylander series and they're alright basic brawlers for a younger crowd when only referring to gameplay on their own. It's just they kept getting more and more expensive per yearly release. the first game it was understandable brand new genre and extra area you needed 5 more characters to see all areas of the main game.

Giants if you already had all the elements you needed absolutely nothing else but the base game cause you only needed 1 giant and it came with one.

Swapforce was a noticeable quality increase except for the wii version having a game breaking bug that soured parents a bit. though it needed several new figures to access minigames for them, otherwise you could get to a large portion of areas int he base game fine as long as you had 2 controllers with all elements.

Trap team. shut up and give us a lot of money basically for poorer quality and stripped down things that swapforce added. on top of more expensive required figures. Was absolutely no excuse for that except for greed to need 2 sets of charcters and items for base level areas.

I haven't finished super chargers but just the two vehicles seem fair enough to not be a huge sink.

Never played infinity but it always looked like a quality game for kids if willing to sink money, though that quickly worsened on later installments from what i read or particularly the second game.
 
Last edited:

SkywardCrowbar

Twintelle's loyal Husbando
#14
I believe toys-to-life requires mass audience, so I think Amiibo and other toys-to-life products can't be viable only as collector's products. As far as I know children are moving on from Toys-to-life really fast.

I believe in 2-3 years, this market will be dead both on the West and other markets. For me it's some sort of a new Rock Band faddish.

That's why I think Nintendo has to exploit this market asap.
The difference between the Rock Band fad and TTL is that TTL typically is centered around established IP's that have been associated with interactive entertainment longer. Especially with Nintendo and Amiibo's. That's actually why I was so surprised that Disney Infinity got cancelled considering it was so well regarded and that Disney apparently (I haven't played it, though I've been very tempted) did a great job of of creating a holistic universe in game with the figures.

Rock Band had no grounding. It was just Rock Band. People who love music are using a completely different entertainment medium to engage with that love. It was easier for them to ignore and/or forget about Rock Band. In that same vein, I thought it would be Skylanders who would be forced out. TTL is a marriage of traditional toys, stuff for collector's, and stuff for gamers, that when executed well from a marketing and gameplay stand point, appeals to a very wide swath of the consumer base for Nintendo, Activision, and LEGO. I really don't see this going away as a whole. I understand that the market was becoming saturated with 4 huge companies vying for only a certain amount of sales, so someone was going to be squeezed out, but I think that's a natural evolution of the market and the business, not a death knell.
 

Odo

Well-Known Member
#15
i play the skylander series and they're alright basic brawlers for a younger crowd when only referring to gameplay on their own. It's just they kept getting more and more expensive per yearly release. the first game it was understandable brand new genre and extra area you needed 5 more characters to see all areas of the main game.

Giants if you already had all the elements you needed absolutely nothing else but the base game cause you only needed 1 giant and it came with one.

Swapforce was a noticeable quality increase except for the wii version having a game breaking bug that soured parents a bit. though it needed several new figures to access minigames for them, otherwise you could get to a large portion of areas int he base game fine as long as you had 2 controllers with all elements.

Trap team. shut up and give us a lot of money basically for poorer quality and stripped down things that swapforce added. on top of more expensive required figures. Was absolutely no excuse for that except for greed to need 2 sets of charcters and items for base level areas.

I haven't finished super chargers but just the two vehicles seem fair enough to not be a huge sink.

Never played infinity but it always looked like a quality game for kids if willing to sink money, though that quickly worsened on later installments from what i read or particularly the second game.
I've seen people saying that about both Skylanders and Infinity: low quality. Even children are moving on to other sort of toys and mostly to the best toy: tablets/smartphones.

Infinity was also hurt by the biggest Disney weapon: Star Wars. This is funny but true. Many parents saw Star Wars Infinity toys as a threat to their wallets. They didn't want to buy an entire new series of toys.

Plus, new games sales for Infinity and Skylanders have dropped. It was a 4% drop in 2015. The market for they toys as a whole, even with amiibo, had a small 7% growth in 2015.

I wouldn't be surprise if Activision begins to downsize their business this year.
 

GamingFreak1988

The Platformer Guru
#17
skylander figures themselves got more expensive but the quality of paint jobs and designs actually began to worsen. in the first game they were $8.99 a pop. now they're typically $12.99 or higher for worse quality paint jobs.. :/ I'd say swap force was the pinnacle of the series it really felt like a high budget game with lots more polishing though it did have some bugs though[ not counting the wii's crash bug] though it did run sub HD on the wiiu version. But overall the series really took a down hill after swapforce on hd consoles or after giants for wii owners. super chargers for wii only owners, all they got was a racing game at full price i believe..., might've soured a lot of people initially expecting the mainline game they got the 4 previous years considering i remember seeing it get trashed on amazon by parents. All the hd consoles got the main game regardless which definitely better than trap team on its own, though its added that microtransaction thing to it that might sour people with.
 

Odo

Well-Known Member
#19
Liking the people you work with, unfortunately, does not grant them innate understanding of the video game business. "The games business is hard, especially on the console side," Seropian said. "You have to take a lot of risk, it's a long time to get a return — and you may never get the return!"

It's sad that Disney couldn't make a 10 years vision for their gaming arm. I don't understand why a company so big couldn't try more. Gaming business is tough, but they're strong. I guess making money with Marvel and Star Wars is easier.

Disney spent years losing money on video games, having invested billions and only just finally turned a profit in the last two. Investments in big new game series, like 2008's "Split/Second" and 2010's "Epic Mickey," didn't pay off. It was only "Disney Infinity," coupled with the closure of several of the studios Disney previously purchased, that helped the company finally turn the corner.

Epic Mickey didn't make money. Wow, and they made 2 of them.
 

Odo

Well-Known Member
#20
Eastman described a situation where the small studio he worked for went from being an innovation-focused development house to a family-friendly game maker to a free-to-play game maker to a mobile game maker in the course of four years, never fully digging into any one thing.

We've been witnessing this path among many studios, including big ones in Japan. We're going to see many more, I believe.

I can't wait to see how Nintendo will act when they feel the taste of mobile money. Kimishima and Co. might be traditional ones, but the board and share holders (like Disney's) love easy money.
 
Top