• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Disney Infinity Canceled; Disney Exits Console Publishing; Avalanche Shut [Statement]

FyreWulff

Member
Problem seems to be that they probably have too much hubris to just settle for building towards becoming a legitimate gaming publisher capable of leveraging their properties on their own. Instead of following in WB's footsteps in really breaking into the industry (which is weird to say, considering it's generally the other way around in other stuff) by making/publishing a lot of smaller/simpler stuff until they could get to the point where they had groomed a number of internal studios capable of producing well regarded adaptations of their properties, they rebooted/consolidated their gaming division and almost immediately threw a lot of money into working on a massively bloated toys to life project that tried to cram multiple genres down into a single game all to try and drink the milkshake of a much simpler (and probably significantly cheaper) product. And when it became clear that it wasn't the success they anticipated, they ran.

There's an interesting comparison in how Marvel similarly kept trying to break into the tabletop RPG market (even as recently as a few years ago), which made a lot of sense given tabletop gaming and comics generally overlap in their markets and frequently share the same space. Then,even when they'd find relative success in doing so, they'd always bail within a short time because it didn't meet their expectation of success of matching the industry leader (re: Dungeons & Dragons) in an industry where even the most popular/successful alternatives are still typically in a very very very distance second.

Yeah, that's another thing. Disney just wants to enter at the top end and win. For what it's worth, Activision started small and worked their way into what they are today. Their leader, Kotick, was a developer that used to work the trenches, and invested in Activision solely because he was a fan of their games at a time they were teetering on bankruptcy.


Nintendo was already a toy maker and a video game maker. Amiibo plays to both their strengths and institutional knowledge.
 

Danneee

Member
Does this mean Capcom has a shot at Marvel Vs. Capcom 4 now?

First thing that popped into my head. I want to be able to buy the Marvel vs Capcom games on PSN:(

Shame on all the folks losing their jobs.
Plus I'm thinking their licensing will be too expensive and games with their license will be crap because all of the budget sinking into securing the license.
 

ramparter

Banned
Well this sucks. I just got into collecting these and playing the game like, last week. I probably bought 40ish characters, all the 2.0 and 3.0 playsets. I thought to myself, I can always use these characters (at least in toy box) as long as this is a thing.

And now it's not a thing.

I wonder, do you think the figures will accrue value as they become more rare? I wonder if I'm sitting on the next Beanie Baby treasure chest.

Or did I just spend a ton of money on a bunch of toys which are going to be essentially useless after I grow bored of 3.0?
Looool dude this things are gonna worth a lot!!
 

Kathian

Banned
Battlefront must have been a big driver of the licencing decision. On Infinity it always struck me that Disney were doing a lot to promote and keep it on shelves but I never heard anyone really going for them.

Another negative is there's likely just less and less kids in the console space.
 

Gameboy415

Member
Only figures from the new Alice movie and Finding Dory stuff in June. Everything else was scrapped or just cancelled.


****

But yeah.
Despite buying them from day one, my biggest disappointment was that it lacked an identity. You had a game called Disney Infinity, yet everything around Disney was quite finite and limited.

1.0 was basically Pixar, 2.0 was Marvel and 3.0 was Star Wars. All locked into their respective stuff. The playsets weren't even compatible between releases.

3.0 at least introduced a Diablo-clone of sorts that allowed to mix figures and had a basic story too. That should've been day one and by 3.0 considerably expanded.

Completely agree with the bolded part!
I was really excited by the concept when it was first announced but then 1.0 came out and it turns out all of the playsets are based on Pixar and Live-Action films? Ugh.
I would've loved to see a playset based on DuckTales, Aladdin, or even an original story about Mickey and his friends!

I started collecting DI figures when all the 2.0 stuff was 50% off at Target early last year and have since picked up every 1.0 & 2.0 figure and am only missing about a dozen 3.0 figures.
I was expecting to see more classic Disney characters released in the future (Goofy, Scrooge McDuck, etc.) and was curious to see what the new Star Wars set would be (Maybe a Rebels or Rogue One playset?) so it's disappointing that the franchise is going to end with 2 sets I have very little interest in buying (Live-Action Alice and yet another Pixar set). :(
 
It's not the same Avalanche... Do you really believe Just Cause is by Disney?

No, of course not. :p

Just that 5am haze causing the idiotic thought that perhaps Avalanche was at some point acquired by Disney but the studio still had the freedom to work on projects for other publishers such as Square Enix.
 
Wow, I thought they were doing well?!! O_O

Anything one can infer about other t2l games?
LEGO Dimensions sets have had tons of discounts lately. The last wave came out today and debuted at most retail for $8.49 instead of the $15 MSRP. Maybe it doesn't mean anything, maybe we'll never see LEGO Dimensions 2.
 
Did a quick count with my S Pen:

aiylZZY.jpg


Green means I already own it.
Orange means I'll get it.
Grey means I have no plans to get them (I'm omitting crystal variants). Though not seen I plan to get Baloo, the finding Dory playset, Alice and Hatter

G: 38
O: 39 + 5 (15 of which will be from playsets)
G: 20 + 1

There were over 100 figures?

So I roughly have 40% of the figures and plan to get another 40%. Comparatively 20% seems small to finish it off but that's still like $160 considering if I can get the figures half off.

Surprisingly I have the most of Marvel though that's my least favorite property of the four. Best Buy was selling figures for $2.80 a piece during a winter sale. I also got Hulk for $5 and the other 5 core Avengers for $20 in a clearance 360 special pack that came with the starter kit and two Blind box packs. Both Hulk and Ultra were $4 new.

Honestly the fact that all of my figures were purchased at least 50% off isn't a great sign. Though the same can be said for my Skylanders and Lego Dimension figures.

The fact that 85% of my non-Animal Crossing Amiibo collection was bought at regular price (almost all at Best Buy so 20% GCU except for store exclusives and one Toad from Target) speaks to how smart Nintendo was to not overstock despite all the protests of them leaving money on the table.

I'm trained to pick up something so it doesn't go out of stock. If it stays in stock I'll just wait for a sale. Hence why most of my Animal Crossing Amiibos were bought new for less than $4 and the highest were $6.67. I have all of them.
 

Kathian

Banned
I think amiibo will ultimately be the last one standing. Nintendo's games are functional and profitable even without amiibo, but Disney and the others build games specifically for their figures. If their figures stop selling, so will their games.

This seems to be the issue. The figures here brought in cash but the I software costs gobbled it up. Definitely an issue for Lego and Skylanders.

Nintendo meanwhile is just using Amiibo to increase revenues on software they are already selling. Expect their sales to more or less rotate around new releases but I don't see any reason they would be forced to drop Amiibo.
 
I feel Nintendo, while doing VERY well, have really miscalculated and managed the AC amiibo series.

The cards did really well, but the way they did the figures just felt poorly done. For example; despite New Leaf being a major seller, how many people know any character originating from the game aside from Isabelle?

I think they should've started small, with just Isabelle, Tome Nook, K.K. Slider, and Mr. Resetti, and waited and looked at how those performed. Releasing the line with amiibo Festival was also a major mistake the cards would've sufficed I'm sure to play it), and the game was rated VERY poorly also.

I also think they just unloaded so many characters in so little time. Unless they did initially sold uber well out of the gate, this seemed like a BIG mistake, not to mention severe overstock (likely to not make the same mistake they did with the Smash line), but honestly, it's better to undership than overship, you get more demand and you don't risk making less money from discounted sales.

I think Pokemon, when ever it happens, will start with key names from the original 151 (Pikachu, Charizard, Mewtwo, etc) with some for Sun & Moon (the new starters, a 3-pack would be perfect), but no more. I don't think folks will rush to stores to buy a Garborder amiibo for instance.

But the AC mistake hopefully won't be an issue in the long-term. I think Nintendo will just let the current stock sell before doing anything else with it for now. Was any other AC amiibo announced still to release?

Kirby should do good. Starting at only four and all (maybe sans Waddle Dee. poor guy) are very iconic in the franchise and are going to tie-in with a really good mainline game with Robobot.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Marvel MCU movies managed directly, brought under the same roof with years of struggles to wrestle them away from multiple companies, now their gaming publishing arm is going on the opposite direction? Puzzling...
 
I feel Nintendo, while doing VERY well, have really miscalculated and managed the AC amiibo series.

The cards did really well, but the way they did the figures just felt poorly done. For example; despite New Leaf being a major seller, how many people know any character originating from the game aside from Isabelle?

I think they should've started small, with just Isabelle, Tome Nook, K.K. Slider, and Mr. Resetti, and waited and looked at how those performed. Releasing the line with amiibo Festival was also a major mistake the cards would've sufficed I'm sure to play it), and the game was rated VERY poorly also.

I also think they just unloaded so many characters in so little time. Unless they did initially sold uber well out of the gate, this seemed like a BIG mistake, not to mention severe overstock (likely to not make the same mistake they did with the Smash line), but honestly, it's better to undership than overship, you get more demand and you don't risk making less money from discounted sales.

I think Pokemon, when ever it happens, will start with key names from the original 151 (Pikachu, Charizard, Mewtwo, etc) with some for Sun & Moon (the new starters, a 3-pack would be perfect), but no more. I don't think folks will rush to stores to buy a Garborder amiibo for instance.

But the AC mistake hopefully won't be an issue in the long-term. I think Nintendo will just let the current stock sell before doing anything else with it for now. Was any other AC amiibo announced still to release?

Kirby should do good. Starting at only four and all (maybe sans Waddle Dee. poor guy) are very iconic in the franchise and are going to tie-in with a really good mainline game with Robobot.

Agreed, I do worry that Nintendo is producing way too many of these and for characters that are quite niche. I'm often seeing big price drops on those characters.
 
Shazaam, out of work just like that. If anyone needs a 3D/2D artist contractor, I have lots of free time now! Drop me a line.

https://www.artstation.com/artist/mutatedjellyfish

And thanks for playing, everyone. We were far from perfect, but we really did try.

Mate I loved the series, I just wish that disney weren't impatient in the gaming sector. Its crazy how out of touch they are in that regard...

hope you find work soon
 

casiopao

Member
Agreed, I do worry that Nintendo is producing way too many of these and for characters that are quite niche. I'm often seeing big price drops on those characters.

Nahh i won't worry about it here. Ac amiibo underperforming is easily caused by how bad animal festival did.

If u check Splatoon and mario Party, they seems to be doing well all around. The thing Ninty need to focus again is making great product and then linking them to the amiibo.^~^
 

Sterok

Member
Amiibo sales are determined by how good the associated game is. Smash is great, so the Smash amiibos sold great. Same with Splatoon. Mario Party 10 is okay, and the Super Mario amiibos sold okay. Happy Home Designer is fine, and the cards sold fine. Amiibo Festival is garbage, so no one wants those amiibos. There's a clear correlation there.
 
Such a shame for employees losing there jobs in a flash...Hope Mutatedjellyfish finds a position sooner rather than later.

I honestly had no idea they were struggling
 
I'm not sure that was ever an issue for the series. I can't think of a single major Star Wars or usable Marvel character that hasn't gotten a figure, and there have been plenty of classic Disney characters released alongside the more current crop.

The princesses are a huge part of disney and their animated movies.

In 3 games
No Snow White
No Cinderella
No Sleeping Beauty but the live action version on Maleficent nobody wanted.
No Belle or Beast
No Little Mermaid
Rapunzel was noticeably missing Flynn
Aladdin and Jasmine noticeably missing Genie
Alice stuck with movie version.
No Tiana

Tinkerbell but no Peter Pan or Hook
No Lion King
No Pocahontas
No Hercules
Mulan with nobody else.

Games were just a series of roster hyping by
john vignocchi always followed by disappointments.


And Marvel was freaking awful with there selections. Why was White Tiger, Captain Marvel and Wasp all locked away as NPCs?
Especially white Tiger as the Spider-Man set was low on characters had no females and she is like 2nd in command on the first 2 seasons of the show the set is based on
 
Amiibo sales are determined by how good the associated game is. Smash is great, so the Smash amiibos sold great. Same with Splatoon. Mario Party 10 is okay, and the Super Mario amiibos sold okay. Happy Home Designer is fine, and the cards sold fine. Amiibo Festival is garbage, so do one wants those amiibos. There's a clear correlation there.

No there isn't. The Animal Crossing stuff works for both games. Also the all the Amiibo double as special Rare cards that invite villagers you can't get normally in game. So instead of blindly tryout to get a character like Isabelle or Nook to invite them over you could buy the Amiibo. The cards have also really done well in Japan as opposed to be wildly successful worldwide.

Splatoon Amiibo are getting heavily discount and are at clearance at Gamepad right now and were $4 at Best Buy last week.

It has more to do with not overstocking figures.
 
The princesses are a huge part of disney and their animated movies.

In 3 games
No Snow White
No Cinderella
No Sleeping Beauty but the live action version on Maleficent nobody wanted.
No Belle or Beast
No Little Mermaid
Rapunzel was noticeably missing Flynn
Aladdin and Jasmine noticeably missing Genie
Alice stuck with movie version.
No Tiana

Tinkerbell but no Peter Pan or Hook
No Lion King
No Pocahontas
No Hercules
Mulan with nobody else.

Games were just a series of roster hyping by
john vignocchi always followed by disappointments.


And Marvel was freaking awful with there selections. Why was White Tiger, Captain Marvel and Wasp all locked away as NPCs?
Especially white Tiger as the Spider-Man set was low on characters had no females and she is like 2nd in command on the first 2 seasons of the show the set is based on

The problem is the market is kids and the older Disney properties, while still popular, aren't expected to sell as well as figures for current properties. So Disney lined up releases with movies, although that was hit and miss (Cinderella anyone?).

Wasp we could have expected to get alongside the next Ant-Man movie, Captain Marvel the same.

I completely agree the lack of Disney Princesses was a huge mistake. If you want to broaden your market, that's a massive opportunity right there. Each version of the game should have had a new Princesses playset.

However, in all of this, there was a limit to how many figures they could flood the market with. They chose to go with the zeitgeist, rather than nostalgia. I think that was a sensible decision...to a degree; and to be honest, Infinity was doing well enough for any normal business, just not well enough for Disney.
 
Amiibo sales are determined by how good the associated game is. Smash is great, so the Smash amiibos sold great. Same with Splatoon. Mario Party 10 is okay, and the Super Mario amiibos sold okay. Happy Home Designer is fine, and the cards sold fine. Amiibo Festival is garbage, so no one wants those amiibos. There's a clear correlation there.

I'd be interested to see a sales breakdown of Smash figures, because I see lots of heavy discounting on those. Did every character need a figure in the quantities produced? Maybe they're less popular here in the UK.
 
I'm still convinced Gravity Falls was meant to be in this at some point, given all the hints and it being the only course in that racing expansion without any playable characters to go alongside it.

It wouldn't have saved Disney Infinity, but goddamn would it have made me happy.

I get that it probably wasn't in Avalanche's control much, but Guardians of the Galaxy or Inside Out having so many characters is still weird given how many big name characters still never made it in like Goofy or for Marvel Strange and Captain Marvel when they would've already known they're getting their own films. Similarly it's surreal Frozen never got a playset after 1.0 where it had well and truly set itself as a huge money maker. It doesn't make much sense from a marketing sense and looking at it all up Star Wars really does look like the only aspect of Infinity who's representation was more or less on point while still leaving room for more characters. I'd say sans Ultron (seriously who gives a shit about him) the Marvel additions for 3.0 were better, though given Marvel's huge roster even excluding Fantastic Four and X-Men there could've been more there for girls.

Pirates in the first game is fine but instead of Sully (nothing against Monsters U but it's very weird even as a recent film at the time it got headlined) and Mr. Incredible (and I say this as a huge fan of the film, but why was such an old character in a marketing focused game featured way before the sequel got greenlit?), I'd have had Mickey (make a playset for him naturally) and Woody alongside Depp. Good way of representing the three different aspects of 1.0 (Disney, PIXAR and their live-action fare). Also lets them get the Mickey iconic hitters out of the way instead of winding up in the situation we're at now where Goofy, Pluto and Pete lost out to fucking Lone Ranger characters, instead of getting into the weirder stuff right from the get go. Woody is similarly more or less PIXAR's mascot so.

2.0 had two different starter bundles (the one I picked up was the Marvel-themed one), but I think having just one like 1.0 where it features say... Iron Man, Stitch and Merida could've similarly been a 'hey, here's a taste of Marvel, Disney and PIXAR, if you bought this for Stitch kids but wound up liking Iron Man why not try out the Marvel line' would've been better marketing. Same story for 3.0, and while I dig Clone Wars if it had to be a Star Wars-only bundle, wouldn't Luke and Leia (or Yoda and Darth Vader for maximum iconic-ness) made more sense to grab people's attention in a store?

Coulda Shoulda Woulda, but as someone who was having a lot of fun this past month trying out Infinity and was looking forward to where things went this year due to 3.0 not getting an immediate sequel, some mistakes could've been easily avoided simply through marketing. At least the figurines look nice?
 

SpotAnime

Member
It's probably been mentioned, but the free Cartwheel app gets you 75% OFF all Disney Infinity 1.0 and 2.0 figures at Target. Plus they price match Amazon and the coupon stacks on top of that.

Yep, was going to mention this but my Target only had 3.0 figures in stock, so it might be a stretch to find much of anything from the earlier releases now. But, great deal if you do.
 

AHA-Lambda

Member
LEGO Dimensions sets have had tons of discounts lately. The last wave came out today and debuted at most retail for $8.49 instead of the $15 MSRP. Maybe it doesn't mean anything, maybe we'll never see LEGO Dimensions 2.

Skylanders still doing well?

I can't believe a game like this that's Disney themed would fail frankly, well so soon anyway =/
 

Flintty

Member
Sad news, two of my kids started these games as of Christmas, for Marvel and Star Wars.

There's nothing stopping them from licensing it out to another developer though right? Maybe? :(
 

jroc74

Phone reception is more important to me than human rights
Well this is shocking news to me.

I thought Disney IP, characters were gold mines for TTL. I never played Infinity but I do have Universe. I thought Infinity was like an expanded version of Universe.

I like Universe.

What the hell happened?
 

jariw

Member
Skylanders still doing well?

I can't believe a game like this that's Disney themed would fail frankly, well so soon anyway =/

Disney has no experience of long-term software development, and that's required to beat Skylanders, which is the established T2L platform. Similarly, Disney closed the studio that made Epic Mickey, when Epic Mickey 2 failed.
 

Aesthet1c

Member
Man what a bummer. My kids love this game. They still play it all the time, and they always get excited for new figures.

The game wasn't great, but it felt like they were getting somewhere with 3.0. Guess we will never see where it could have gone.

Good luck to all the Avalanche employees, hope they all land on their feet soon.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
I feel Nintendo, while doing VERY well, have really miscalculated and managed the AC amiibo series.

The cards did really well, but the way they did the figures just felt poorly done. For example; despite New Leaf being a major seller, how many people know any character originating from the game aside from Isabelle?

I think they should've started small, with just Isabelle, Tome Nook, K.K. Slider, and Mr. Resetti, and waited and looked at how those performed. Releasing the line with amiibo Festival was also a major mistake the cards would've sufficed I'm sure to play it), and the game was rated VERY poorly also.

I also think they just unloaded so many characters in so little time. Unless they did initially sold uber well out of the gate, this seemed like a BIG mistake, not to mention severe overstock (likely to not make the same mistake they did with the Smash line), but honestly, it's better to undership than overship, you get more demand and you don't risk making less money from discounted sales.

I think Pokemon, when ever it happens, will start with key names from the original 151 (Pikachu, Charizard, Mewtwo, etc) with some for Sun & Moon (the new starters, a 3-pack would be perfect), but no more. I don't think folks will rush to stores to buy a Garborder amiibo for instance.

But the AC mistake hopefully won't be an issue in the long-term. I think Nintendo will just let the current stock sell before doing anything else with it for now. Was any other AC amiibo announced still to release?

Kirby should do good. Starting at only four and all (maybe sans Waddle Dee. poor guy) are very iconic in the franchise and are going to tie-in with a really good mainline game with Robobot.

Having an actual (not board game) Animal Crossing game that would have released with the Amiibo characters would have gone a long way.
 
Skylanders still doing well?

I believe this years game sold the least of any Skylanders title, but this year had more competition. So it's tough to know what caused the poor sales. Lack of interest in Skylanders, the competition, a less liked game concept...or all three.

Disney has no experience of long-term software development, and that's required to beat Skylanders, which is the established T2L platform. Similarly, Disney closed the studio that made Epic Mickey, when Epic Mickey 2 failed.

Disney were beating Skylanders. Infinity was the top selling T2L. It just didn't sell enough (to keep shareholders happy).

"All of that Star Wars has helped drive Disney’s bottom line. According to Pachter’s estimates, Disney has sold over $200 million of Disney Infinity Star Wars games and toys this fall. That has catapulted Disney DIS -5.16% ahead of Activision Blizzard’s ATVI -1.99% Skylanders franchise and the new Warner Bros. TWX 0.86% Games’ LEGO Dimensions game in the lucrative toys-to-life category. Pachter estimates Skylanders and LEGO Dimensions each generated $150 million in sales this fall."

http://fortune.com/2015/12/30/star-wars-video-game-sales/
 

Isurus

Member
This really sucks, as it's my autistic daughter's favorite game and really what got her into Disney. I guess it wasn't selling as well as I thought, because I figured it printed money. Very disappointing.
 

RexNovis

Banned
Shazaam, out of work just like that. If anyone needs a 3D/2D artist contractor, I have lots of free time now! Drop me a line.

https://www.artstation.com/artist/mutatedjellyfish

And thanks for playing, everyone. We were far from perfect, but we really did try.

Godspeed to you and all your coworkers finding a new place of work. I hope wherever you end up next allows y'all to stretch your legs a bit more and gives you more creative freedom.
 
Top Bottom