Sierra games being pitched to new corporate masters at Activision

It's a tough time to be developing a game for Vivendi Games' Sierra label, the division that makes "normal" videogames -- i.e. AAA, boxed, non-MMO games for PC and consoles. That's because all of the label's titles now have to justify their existence to their soon-to-be corporate masters at Activision.

What does that mean practically? I've had numerous sources tell me that development teams on all of Vivendi's games now have to essentially pitch their projects to Activision executives. Until the merger is technically complete, work proceeds as usual, but once it's over, Activision will start making some decisions. And it seems very unlikely that everything at Sierra will keep going as it has been.

Just like when a new executive teams takes over at a film studio, some projects in development get killed and others get changed as the new folks in charge start establishing their own tastes and corporate priorities.

Vivendi's Blizzard label is, of course, quite safe from all this. The merged company is going to be called Activision Blizzard, after all. So long as "World of Warcraft" keeps printing money faster than the Fed, they'll be left alone by Activision's execs to do as they please.

But the future of the rest of Vivendi Games is quite uncertain. Even though Vivendi proper will retain a majority stake in the merged entity, Activision CEO Bobby Kotick will keep that title and his president of publishing president Mike Griffith remains in charge of all non-Blizzard games.

Activision obviously made the deal to get its hands on the biggest MMO, and really the biggest game, in the industry. Everything else is basically an afterthought. Which leaves all of those making the afterthoughts in an uncertain position.

Titles set to come out this year, like "The Bourne Conspiracy," "Prototype," "Brutal Legend," and "Ghostbusters," are probably fine since they're so far along. But those in development for 2009 and later? They'll all TBD.

Question marks include whether we'll see more games from VIvendi's costly Robert Ludlum license, or if Activision thinks its conflicts with its costly James Bond license; whether there will be a sequel to "Scarface" as expected; whether Activision will put out a sequel to "F.E.A.R." in conflict with Warner/Monolith's "Project Origin" (Vivendi retains rights to the name while Warner kept the underlying ideas); and if we'll see more games starring Crash Bandicoot or Spyro.

Also, will Vivendi's nascent Sierra Online and Vivendi Mobile divisions be allowed to continue?

It's all in Activision's hands now. Which leaves some nervous developers at Sierra.