On the one hand this seems to fly in the face of studio's and Bioshock franchise's critical and financial success. Why would Ken Levine close up what is essentially his production house? Two interesting things to take away from this:
1) 2K still retains control of the Bioshock IP. That means if they want to they can pull the same trick as with Bioshock 2 - where the game was developed by 2K Marin, not Irrational and Ken Levine. Granted - I fall into being one of those folks who thought Bioshock 2 was a good sequel, so I am not critical of this yet. I just bring it up because the next time a Bioshock fan complains that a new sequel "isn't as good without Ken Levine's input" or some-such, there's no reason to complain.
2) Levine says he wants to go back to a smaller studio with narrative driven story-games. I think this hints at something that's been going on behind the scenes for a long time when it comes to Bioshock and Bioshock Infinite - that there was the expectation that Levine could brilliantly repeat what he did after the first game. That there was pressure to make a certain type of game, but that along the way what Ken/Irrational wanted and what they thought would be successful didn't sync. It sort of boils down to the idea of the artistic vision (Levine's) versus commercial success (2K's) that happens.
Despite it's high praise, Infinite does seem to be two different games blended together at times - FPS and Narrative adventure. In light of this, I can't help but wonder about all the delays and different "game-play" previews we saw over the span of 3 years before release. Add to this the fact that we are back in Rapture for the DLCs, and I can 't help further feel like it there was a sort of "closing the door" feel for Levine/Irrational combined with a little fan pressure to finish out the series in familiar ground.
I wish these guys the best of luck and success. I'll be curious to know what the next "thoughtful narrative game" they make looks like.
BIOSHOCK INFINITE sold 3.7 million copies in its first two months on sale (before the financial year closed). Unfortunately, this was not enough to make up for either a bad year for Take Two (they made a loss that year, though clearly not the following one given GTA5's success) or for INFINITE's estimated $150 million budget (twice that of SKYRIM) or its five years (!) in development. The game may have been a big hit, but it needed to be an astronomical, smashing-records-all-the-way hit to really justify its costs, and it didn't do that.
Clearly Take Two values Levine's talent which is why they've given him an opportunity to carry on with them in a smaller capacity, but I think the way this has been presented in some quarters - Levine sacked 150+ people so he could indulge himself with smaller, artier projects - is not accurate. I think it's questionable if Take Two would have kept Irrational going and certainly wouldn't have tolerated another development process like INFINITE's again.
Take Two are making a habit of this. 2K Marin effectively shut down a couple of months ago after the under-performance of THE BUREAU (another game that was in development for years and years). Take Two need to do better project oversight or get more studios on board like Firaxis and Rockstar, whom they can trust to get on with projects without that level of oversight.
Not disagreeing with that take, I guess my point is this information starts to trip wires about that 5 year and $150 million budget when it comes to Levine, Irrational, and Take Two.
It was a similar problem - as you pointed out with 2K Marin and The Bureau. In both cases, I think it was about a lack of proper goal - if that applies to oversight that's understood. In the case of The Bureau it was attempt to stick with the mythology of a venerated franchise (X-Com) in an attempt to make it more commercial appealing FPS which then morphed into other types of games - either from corporate fiat or developer design I don't know. You could have just shaved the XCOM tag off and made the game you originally wanted to - but would it have been profitable?
In the case of Bioshock Infinite, my point is that Levine's "wanting to go with smaller projects idea" now reflects that I don't think he was ever comfortable with the way the game was developing once they revealed it in 2010. Too much hype; maybe too much ambition to outdo the first game. The fact that the game changed so many times - first it was about Columbia and American exceptionalism; then it was about the factions; then it was about Victorian occultism/mysticism; and then it was quantum mechanics and Elizabeth. There were too many protestations that "we didn't want to go back to Rapture; we wanted something different." And yet the end result is that the story will wind up back in Rapture when it could have done so many other things.
I think Levine kept changing the goals - be it for technology or artistic reasons I am unsure - and Take Two let him do it all on the promise that Infinite was going to be cash cow for them. I guess the right term would be oversight on Levine and the studio's development. The fact that several members of the development team left while the game was still being made (including the Art director and Creative director who had been with Levine from the start) for under vague reasons doesn't help. This isn't to say there was vocal disagreement, I just can't help but feel they left because Levine wasn't allowing for other input that didn't match his "vision."
Mind you - I thought Bioshock Infinite was a great game. It wasn't what I thought it would be - but it was interesting and different in some cool ways. But there's been a puzzling feeling that something was "off" about how the game came together. I think there have been some good reviews that can explain better than I the goods and bads of the game. This announcement, at least, sheds some insight on that feeling.
Good article on Ken Levine and Irrational and it's development process. It's a little over dramatic, but generally insightful: Here.
I think it hits my concerns better than my ramblings in this thread about what the studio and Bioshock Infinite must have been going through.
Another interesting article on the Irrational Studio demise and Bioshock Infinite process from Polygon: Here
Some thoughts:
Werthead mentioned that part of the problem was likely lack of oversight on the development process - spot on there. The fact that you didn't hire someone to get things in order for release until 2012 (almost 4 years into the process) doesn't speak well of good business management skills for the studio. I am under the impression from this article it could've gone on another 5 years without release otherwise. Although it isn't said overtly, it seems a miracle the game ever made it to a March 2013 release as it was.
The fact that you dropped and redid parts of the game just reaffirms what I mentioned earlier - Ken Levine was constantly reinventing without someone to rein him and that proved difficult to make a cohesive, successful product.
Finally, my take away is that - no matter how awesome or praised it is - Bioshock Infinite sunk Irrational. Whether that is because of design blunders; lack of a multi-player mode; poor management; or Levine's over-ambitious artistic vision it made the game a commercial failure with poor follow-up. The fact that Levine was clearly burned out by the process doesn't help; at least I get the feeling now that the studio's closure would've happened anyway without his approval in the long run.
One question that remains not wholly answered is why Levine could not have left Irrational to set up a new, 15-person team elsewhere. By most accounts, the majority of INFINITE's team did not work on BIOSHOCK anyway, so staff turn-over at the studio (as at most) was fairly high.
The answer would appear to be that Take-Two belived that Levine WAS Irrational, which itself is an, erm, irrational viewpoint. For most people Peter Molyneux WAS Bullfrog and WAS Lionhead and both teams survived (at least for a few years) his departure.
Levine taking his core team off to make his narratively experimental game whilst the rest of Irrational made a relatively fast-turnaround BIOSHOCK INFINITE 2 to help offset the costs of the original would appear to have been a viable strategy, and certainly worked with BIOSHOCK/BIOSHOCK 2 (BIOSHOCK 2 seems to have been reasonably well-received and sold well even without Levine's input). It's curious that this question has not come up more.
The answer would appear to be that Take-Two belived that Levine WAS Irrational, which itself is an, erm, irrational viewpoint.
Levine taking his core team off to make his narratively experimental game whilst the rest of Irrational made a relatively fast-turnaround BIOSHOCK INFINITE 2 to help offset the costs of the original would appear to have been a viable strategy, and certainly worked with BIOSHOCK/BIOSHOCK 2.
While I don't want to judge Take-Two too harshly without further insight into their side of the story, I think your take is likely spot-on. There was earlier articles on the web that implied Levine was ready to leave and shut-down Irrational and go independent entirely. It was Take-Two's view that he was the "money-maker" on game development that seems to have been the key to them wanting him to stay. Most anybody else, the impression is, can be replaceable in their eyes for the next game he builds.
I can't help but read into all this that Levine wanted the Irrational folks to have a "smooth, positive exit" from the company. And Take-Two not simply getting in there are messing with it may have been part of that process. As I said earlier, based on Bioshock Infinite's overall commercial failure vs. cost, I think the studio was sliding down. The fact that Levine chose to end sooner rather than let Take-Two do the chopping later. Look at 2K Marin for example - after The Bureau the studio was essentially shutdown/folded into the now nebulous, dead-end 2K San Francisco.
I wouldn't rule out the second point you make about developing a Bioshock Infinite 2 without Levine. The reality is that Take-Two owns the IP and can do whatever it wants. It just seems this particular move was partly caused by Levine's own issues with doing anything related to Bioshock anymore. It's quite possible that they will re-hire/extend offers to many of those folks down the line. I think the only question would be interest. Whereas Bishock's success clearly setup interest in a sequel - whether you liked Bioshock 2 or not, has Bioshock Infinite setup enough interest for a sequel as well? The latest DLC coming in late March may help enhance that interest, although personally I would like to return to Columbia rather than continue to rehash Rapture for another perspective.