| > starting up a new studio is hard, and having money makes it harder. But Lego is not just big business throwing money at a goal. They have a long history of games, and were probably more involved than just selling out a license. > Google tried this. Amazon tried this. Microsoft has tried it a bunch of times. They all tried with new unknown franchises. Lego is a well known name, and the games for them are more advertisement than a money-grab. As long as it's good enough and makes a break even in costs, they will be fine, I guess. Lego is one of the few companies, probably even the only one in the world at the moment, who should have the best preconditions to not catastrophically fail with this. > Otherwise find a bunch of Lego fan gamers and hire them to make experimental games for half a decade. That smells like the road to fail. They should start simple and conservative, build the studio, teams and collect expertise, just make new classical Lego-games. After some years and 2-3 games, when they established themselves, they can start experimenting. Also, there are already experimental Lego Games. Most of them were not that well received, because experimenting is hard, especially if you compete with Minecraft and Roblox. |
Their costs a lot of money, has bad scripts, old scipts are thrown away. And everything I saw (usually gave up fast) seems to have this "cheap CGI" feel. Yet supposedly it costed a lot of money to make.