Nice Guys Come in Last

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Nice Guys Come in Last

Activision isn't evil - but playing nice won't always win you the prom queen.

Read Full Article

The bigger a company becomes, the more it must feed.

It's true. They do what they must to make money. They aren't kicking puppies, but I agree sometimes they can pull a fast one hear and there just for more cash.

Business is business. Catering to a select few people when you have the possibility to be selling to the masses, well, that makes the select few the jerks.

How come no one mentions the blizzard part when they are taking part in acts of douchebaggery? It's like starcraft is something seperate and wonderful.

I have no problems with a company making money, it's what they're made to do. What I do have a problem with, however, is when a company just makes the same damn game a thousand times. I get the feeling that Activision is going to become the new Nintendo, just pumping out the same tired old franchises over and over again. But there in lies the problem: their rabid fan base will keep eating this crap up. How different is Modern Warfare 2 going to be from CoD4? A few new levels, maybe a new gun or two, but in the end it's still "point gun, shoot bad-guy, win game" nonsense. The Guitar Hero and Rock Band deal can only go on for so long before people, hopefully, realize "hey, they just charged me $60 for a few songs...only 3 of which I actually like!".

We live in a capitalist society, yes they are the big bad wolf of faceless gaming corporations at the moment but unfortunately there will always be one. Its how the system works

Activision is the new EA, while EA is... well, still EA.

I understand what you're saying, but pre merger Blizzard and Valve, ID and Ubisoft are all very successful companies, but they're not complete bastards, while I understand business is business, you can be successful and not Satan Incarnate. Aggressively suing people, hypocrisy and underhand business practices are just bad, they don't need to do it, they just do for thee sake of it I think.

They're clever, I'll give them that. Doesn't mean I have to like it though.

Let's face it they only get away with a lot of the shit they do because we as consumers let them. The pricing of modern warfare 2 in the uk is ridiculous but they'll get away with it because people will still buy it and from then on that's the price you'll always pay. And it won't be activisions fault it'll be all the muppets who rushed out and got it day of release.

Activision are rich bastards, so they must be doing something right.

Keen marketing tactics and being a dick are two different things, they're being dicks right now because they lack the particular competition to make them give a shit about their customers; Right now Activision has a monopoly on some of the greatest-selling games out there, with nothing to challenge them they're obviously going to get cocky, and I'll cite the PS3 in reagards to where said cockyness leads.

But, really, nice guys finish last because they stop and take their time to recieve something far more worth while then "First Place"; your assumption that monetary value outweights the creation of a great game is a foolish one at that. Money can neither garner the true respect of others nor can it inspire the masses, nor will it make your memory linger in future generations... At least in a favourable manner.

The main problem I have had with activision's business practices is that they have been trying to ensure video game developers to fail and disappear. Not many video game publishers would honestly go that far to prevent a video game developer like double fine to create a single video game.

You are right that the company isn't evil, the company does what it does to please its shareholders and to be profitable. It doesn't care about the consumers because they are only a publisher. They don't make video games they work with companies that make video games. However when your company starts to create unemployment and doesn't want other people in the world to succeed that is when the company is hurting the video game industry and is also creating a monopoly through its power.

Casual Shinji:
The bigger a company becomes, the more it must feed.

thats so true, look at microsft.

bjj hero:
How come no one mentions the blizzard part when they are taking part in acts of douchebaggery? It's like starcraft is something seperate and wonderful.

Blizzard is run by "nerds". Activision is run by suits.
Most gamers see the people at Blizzard as one of them.

i can understand there a business and a good one at that, I'm still gonna hate them tho, if thats cause im jealous of their success or the fact that they can be complete arseholes sometimes...alot of the time...

i like moaning and hating, their a perfect target

They do what they do to make money... I just wish that they would do it without stomping on everyone else's feet.

LaBambaMan:
I have no problems with a company making money, it's what they're made to do. What I do have a problem with, however, is when a company just makes the same damn game a thousand times. I get the feeling that Activision is going to become the new Nintendo, just pumping out the same tired old franchises over and over again. But there in lies the problem: their rabid fan base will keep eating this crap up. How different is Modern Warfare 2 going to be from CoD4? A few new levels, maybe a new gun or two, but in the end it's still "point gun, shoot bad-guy, win game" nonsense. The Guitar Hero and Rock Band deal can only go on for so long before people, hopefully, realize "hey, they just charged me $60 for a few songs...only 3 of which I actually like!".

So who is to blame? Is it the company who sees a market and caters to it? Or is it the market itself that gobbles these up like Pac-Man on speed? Do you honestly believe that if people stopped buying every GH they spit out they would keep making them? Sounds to me like you are pointing a finger. And when you do there is 3 pointing back at you.

Have you forgotten that you do have a choice. That you don't have to buy COD MW 2 at $100. That there is no-one forcing you to buy every last GH. If you choose to then you can't go back and blame the company who made it. They didn't break into your house steal the money from your wallet and leave a game under your pillow. You walk into a store look at the selection of games and decide which ones you want to buy. The only thing they did was try and make their games look more appealing. Just like every other company no matter how big or small.

They make guitar hero I can never hate them

*Points to Valve*

You can be huge and still remain popular with your customers.

Chaos Marine:
*Points to Valve*

You can be huge and still remain popular with your customers.

I agree.
They are nice big company, but I love everything that comes out of it and they don't need cheap tricks to win us over or take our money

squid5580:

LaBambaMan:
I have no problems with a company making money, it's what they're made to do. What I do have a problem with, however, is when a company just makes the same damn game a thousand times. I get the feeling that Activision is going to become the new Nintendo, just pumping out the same tired old franchises over and over again. But there in lies the problem: their rabid fan base will keep eating this crap up. How different is Modern Warfare 2 going to be from CoD4? A few new levels, maybe a new gun or two, but in the end it's still "point gun, shoot bad-guy, win game" nonsense. The Guitar Hero and Rock Band deal can only go on for so long before people, hopefully, realize "hey, they just charged me $60 for a few songs...only 3 of which I actually like!".

So who is to blame? Is it the company who sees a market and caters to it? Or is it the market itself that gobbles these up like Pac-Man on speed? Do you honestly believe that if people stopped buying every GH they spit out they would keep making them? Sounds to me like you are pointing a finger. And when you do there is 3 pointing back at you.

Have you forgotten that you do have a choice. That you don't have to buy COD MW 2 at $100. That there is no-one forcing you to buy every last GH. If you choose to then you can't go back and blame the company who made it. They didn't break into your house steal the money from your wallet and leave a game under your pillow. You walk into a store look at the selection of games and decide which ones you want to buy. The only thing they did was try and make their games look more appealing. Just like every other company no matter how big or small.

Alright, first thing's first. I don't appreciate the attack on my character here, it's just not called for.

Now, to get to your comments. I don't buy any of those games, in fact I don't even own a current generation console. I'll play a few games of GH at my buddy's house because he downloaded songs we actually like, but I wouldn't ever pay for something like that because I actually play guitar. No sense in my buying a game where I can play guitar and letting all the money I spent on guitars, an amp, and pedals go to waste.

In understand full-well that people have the choice to buy these games, and if they do that's fine and dandy let them make the mistakes. My problem is with game companies who just make the same game with minor changes every time. It's not even like they're just "playing it safe", they're pandering to a crowd who's never had the chance to be exposed to something else because the only games that get any recognition or talked about are the Halos of the world. I was thrilled when I actually saw ads for Sins of a Solar Empire in PC Gamer a year or two back, because I feel the strategy market is being neglected for the "run-and-gun" crowd.

What I don't understand about your argument is that you seem to believe that I supported them at some point, and makes me wonder if you actually took the time to read my post. I was a little excited when CoD4 came out because it wasn't world war fucking two again, it was different. Then I read about it and realized it was pretty much the same game in a different war, and I automatically said "Well, that's not worth the money then". At the very end of my post I make the remark that hopefully people will stop buying the GH and RB games and realize they're getting scammed, indicating that yes I do believe that if people stop buying into the fads and such that the game companies will be forced to actually be creative and make good games instead of milking franchises like Nintendo and LucasArts do.

I wait for the day the hang from the gallows for what they've done to Call of Duty. They traded in great strategic gameplay, for run-and-gun, doom-esque shittery that shouldn't be called gameplay. Play call of duty 3, fine game, not that many times where i've died and argued against it with my TV, but in WaW, in which i thought they would fix from the debacle that was CoD 4, Everything was still there, AND MORE! They actually got worse, which is the soul reason i only play the co-op anymore. If there is no "Spetznaz zombies" in the newest abortion they're coming out with, then i'm not buying any more call of duties.

I can't say I blame Activision, a publicly traded company with stockholders, for trying to deliver shareholder value. Considering how badly the industry's been beaten up over the past year---ERTS (EA's stock) is down over 50% since this day last year---for Activision to actually deliver value to investors is one of the miracles of the recession.

As I often say when people bash a company for putting profit over "creativity" (whatever that is supposed to mean), I say buy stock in the company and see how fast it changes your tune. This goes for most "evil" companies (disclosure: I own stock in Microsoft). Buy MSFT. Buy EA or Activision or fill-in-the-blank evil company here. And when your stock goes down in a bear market, see if you can resist the temptation to say "screw originality, for Christ's sake, release something that will sell!"

LaBambaMan:

squid5580:

LaBambaMan:
I have no problems with a company making money, it's what they're made to do. What I do have a problem with, however, is when a company just makes the same damn game a thousand times. I get the feeling that Activision is going to become the new Nintendo, just pumping out the same tired old franchises over and over again. But there in lies the problem: their rabid fan base will keep eating this crap up. How different is Modern Warfare 2 going to be from CoD4? A few new levels, maybe a new gun or two, but in the end it's still "point gun, shoot bad-guy, win game" nonsense. The Guitar Hero and Rock Band deal can only go on for so long before people, hopefully, realize "hey, they just charged me $60 for a few songs...only 3 of which I actually like!".

So who is to blame? Is it the company who sees a market and caters to it? Or is it the market itself that gobbles these up like Pac-Man on speed? Do you honestly believe that if people stopped buying every GH they spit out they would keep making them? Sounds to me like you are pointing a finger. And when you do there is 3 pointing back at you.

Have you forgotten that you do have a choice. That you don't have to buy COD MW 2 at $100. That there is no-one forcing you to buy every last GH. If you choose to then you can't go back and blame the company who made it. They didn't break into your house steal the money from your wallet and leave a game under your pillow. You walk into a store look at the selection of games and decide which ones you want to buy. The only thing they did was try and make their games look more appealing. Just like every other company no matter how big or small.

Alright, first thing's first. I don't appreciate the attack on my character here, it's just not called for.

Now, to get to your comments. I don't buy any of those games, in fact I don't even own a current generation console. I'll play a few games of GH at my buddy's house because he downloaded songs we actually like, but I wouldn't ever pay for something like that because I actually play guitar. No sense in my buying a game where I can play guitar and letting all the money I spent on guitars, an amp, and pedals go to waste.

In understand full-well that people have the choice to buy these games, and if they do that's fine and dandy let them make the mistakes. My problem is with game companies who just make the same game with minor changes every time. It's not even like they're just "playing it safe", they're pandering to a crowd who's never had the chance to be exposed to something else because the only games that get any recognition or talked about are the Halos of the world. I was thrilled when I actually saw ads for Sins of a Solar Empire in PC Gamer a year or two back, because I feel the strategy market is being neglected for the "run-and-gun" crowd.

What I don't understand about your argument is that you seem to believe that I supported them at some point, and makes me wonder if you actually took the time to read my post. I was a little excited when CoD4 came out because it wasn't world war fucking two again, it was different. Then I read about it and realized it was pretty much the same game in a different war, and I automatically said "Well, that's not worth the money then". At the very end of my post I make the remark that hopefully people will stop buying the GH and RB games and realize they're getting scammed, indicating that yes I do believe that if people stop buying into the fads and such that the game companies will be forced to actually be creative and make good games instead of milking franchises like Nintendo and LucasArts do.

What attack on your character? Disagreeing with you is not attacking you. Make a fist then point a finger and then count how many are pointed back at you. Unless of course you lost some in an accident then I do apologize.

As for the rest the point still is no matter if they release game after game and change nothing and people still rush to the stores and buy them whose fault is it? The market decides what they want. The millions of gamers decide what they want. Do I want more innovative games? Hell yes. I just can't expect my feelings to influence the millions of others who seem to disagree with me. And I can't expect a company whose sole purpose is to make money to listen to me over the millions of other voices. So I have to take what I can get. And tell them this is what I want the only way they will listen. With my wallet.

NASDAQ:ATVI $11.54/share. Trending up since May, but it looks like they've started a small pullback recently. Hm.. looking more closely, it looks like the stock may be setting up to form a double bottom at about $11.30 or so.. if it does that within the next couple of days and starts to turn, I think I'm going to get in on that, even though it is a little higher than the stuff I normally play. Earnings are on August 5th, and announcing movie deals around now suggests to me that their earnings aren't going to be shabby.

All in my opinion, of course. I'm not a professional financial advisor. Always do your own due diligence and never trade money you're not willing to lose.

DemetriTheGreek:

Casual Shinji:
The bigger a company becomes, the more it must feed.

thats so true, look at microsft.

*coughs loudly* Apple, IBM, GlaxoSmithKline, Cadburys, Rowntrees.

Ethics and big business are rarely good bedfellows.

At least they are making games which are at least decent to excellent quality behind them, despite the damm money milking. but hey, that's just life.

OK, this may be because out of my last 20-odd posts, over a dozen are in a WWII thread, but..... you could make the same arguments to defend the Nazis.

The story is old as time, frankly - the son of a bitch always one step ahead not because he's a hard worker, or because he's particularly smart. He's just takes it, whatever _it_ is. Call it aggressive, smart or mean it is the b-line to success. It makes you competitive and able to withstand the harsh realities of an unforgiving corporate climate. It's the difference between a peck on the cheek and sleeping with the prom queen. It's the disparity between driving a BMW and a Hyundai. It's getting the Glengary leads, and some coffee.

(...)

Evil? I dunno, maybe. Bullies for sure, but also cunning, devious, unapologetic, aggressive and successful.

Word for word, you could apply the same reasoning to Hitler and the Nazis. They DID manage to take power and entice an entire nation to almost conquer almost an entire continent. They weren't particularly smart or hard working, but definitely aggressive in every field, they were highly competitive as a political party and used underhanded tactics to bring down their opposition. Cunning, devious, unapologetic aggressive and successful, same story, all applies to dear old asshole Adolf and his crew of evil goons.

You make a cogent, relativist, economic point, but when the situation is picked apart, what they're doing is still very wrong.

Strategia:
OK, this may be because out of my last 20-odd posts, over a dozen are in a WWII thread, but..... you could make the same arguments to defend the Nazis.

The story is old as time, frankly - the son of a bitch always one step ahead not because he's a hard worker, or because he's particularly smart. He's just takes it, whatever _it_ is. Call it aggressive, smart or mean it is the b-line to success. It makes you competitive and able to withstand the harsh realities of an unforgiving corporate climate. It's the difference between a peck on the cheek and sleeping with the prom queen. It's the disparity between driving a BMW and a Hyundai. It's getting the Glengary leads, and some coffee.

(...)

Evil? I dunno, maybe. Bullies for sure, but also cunning, devious, unapologetic, aggressive and successful.

Word for word, you could apply the same reasoning to Hitler and the Nazis. They DID manage to take power and entice an entire nation to almost conquer almost an entire continent. They weren't particularly smart or hard working, but definitely aggressive in every field, they were highly competitive as a political party and used underhanded tactics to bring down their opposition. Cunning, devious, unapologetic aggressive and successful, same story, all applies to dear old asshole Adolf and his crew of evil goons.

You make a cogent, relativist, economic point, but when the situation is picked apart, what they're doing is still very wrong.

Damn, Godwin's Law could not have stucken harder!

Though I do end up agreeing with a lot of what you're saying, just because Activision is being successful and earning lots of money, that does not mean that everything they do is excusable or "right" for that matter. You can be king of the world and have all the POWAH, but just make sure your subjects aren't "talking" about you.

EDIT: I still revel in the hypocricy of Activision saying "We may have to stop supporting the PS3 if they don't drop the price" and then they come back with hiking the price of MW2 to nearly double in the UK on the standard edition of the game. Ohhhhhh, hypocricy can be fun sometimes.

Strategia:
OK, this may be because out of my last 20-odd posts, over a dozen are in a WWII thread, but..... you could make the same arguments to defend the Nazis.

The story is old as time, frankly - the son of a bitch always one step ahead not because he's a hard worker, or because he's particularly smart. He's just takes it, whatever _it_ is. Call it aggressive, smart or mean it is the b-line to success. It makes you competitive and able to withstand the harsh realities of an unforgiving corporate climate. It's the difference between a peck on the cheek and sleeping with the prom queen. It's the disparity between driving a BMW and a Hyundai. It's getting the Glengary leads, and some coffee.

(...)

Evil? I dunno, maybe. Bullies for sure, but also cunning, devious, unapologetic, aggressive and successful.

Word for word, you could apply the same reasoning to Hitler and the Nazis. They DID manage to take power and entice an entire nation to almost conquer almost an entire continent. They weren't particularly smart or hard working, but definitely aggressive in every field, they were highly competitive as a political party and used underhanded tactics to bring down their opposition. Cunning, devious, unapologetic aggressive and successful, same story, all applies to dear old asshole Adolf and his crew of evil goons.

You make a cogent, relativist, economic point, but when the situation is picked apart, what they're doing is still very wrong.

Yeah, but when everybody's placed artificial restrictions on themselves, the people who don't place these restrictions on themselves are going to have a much easier time becoming successful.

The same way you applied this article to Hitler, you can apply it to something like spawn camping. It's just somebody playing by the rules, but not burdening themselves with extra rules. The point of and FPS is (usually) to kill the other person more times than they kill you, not to run around and come up with awesome tactical plans. If someone can win by shooting you as you respawn, and their not cheating, then it's a legitimate strategy. People will hate you, though, because they have the notion that the point of the game is something other than simply getting more kills.

It scales upwards, too. The point of politics is (usually) to become the most influential person around. We, however, place restrictions on ourselves, like not simply killing the people in our way. Those extra restrictions are not actual rules, though. Killing millions in a massive, world war to take over the planet is going to get you desposed by the people who stop themselves from doing the same, but if you're successful, people can't really say your bad at politics because you just became the most powerful and sucecssful political figure ever. It's not like Hitler hacked the universe and godmoded his way through WWII by himself, so what he was doing was one option out of many that he could have chosen to raise Germany's stuatus in the world.

Before you start talking about the tragic event so the Holocaust, I'm not saying that it didn't happen, or that people didn't suffer, just that waging war is simply ine method out of many when it comes to gaining political power.

Activision is doing to the gamer demographic what Nintendo is doing to the what Nintendo is doing to everyone, they are targeting the broadest audience possible and not following the established business model. If people are upset with Activision be like me and don't buy their games, but you can't say their doing anything wrong.

I am tired of this " they are a company, they are suppost to shit all over you" line. No thats not how it works, they make the stuff, and I buy the stuff with my money, charging me twice as much for the same stuff is just being a greedy arse.

An arsehole is an arsehole, the fact they are making money by screwing you over doesn't strike me as a good excuse.

And yet, when they have milked all their current IP into the absolute ground, as they are already doing, and when they have driven away all their creative talent, as they are already doing, they will cease to make any money off the derivative crap they continue to publish.

Carpetbagging is a bad way to do business if you intend to stick around as company. People forgive, they do not forget.

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here