Age of Kotick

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

erztez:

tryx3:

Rage.

Okay, tell me this. Have you played mass effect? Any game with a sequel?

Okay, lets talk mass effect. Would you seriously think it's fair to only pay 60$ for both one and two? The same damn thing applies to starcraft, and almost every sequel. If you played starcraft 2, you know damn well that it's a long game, and isn't easily finished in a single sitting.

And getting angry about removing lan? come on, it's not that big of a deal, and i'm sure it'll be back, along with a plethora of old bnet 1.0 features soon.

Yes...yes I did.
And you know what? ME and ME2 were two separate games. SC2 and the ExPs aren't, thus rendering your point invalid. Let me make myself clearer...ME2 works fine without ME...HotS will most definitely NOT work right without SC2.
And no, it's not easily finished in a single sitting. But that's mostly because the cutscenes take FOREVER. I got the "Hurry up, it's raid night" achievement on Brutal, so...counting only game play, it's easy enough. (And no, I'm not admitting to buying the game a friend of mine managed to snag a few for almost nothing and was giving them away left and right. Paid exactly $0,tax incl. for it.)

No, LAN won't be back. They quite clearly stated several times that they have no INTENTION of bringing it back. Also, if you want to bring it back, why exactly did you take it away in the first place? Ditto for bnet 1.0...
As a matter of fact, the lack of a LAN mode IS a big goddamn deal, I actually like the occasional LAN party, having everyone have to go online to play is NOT my idea of a fun saturday evening...
Any game that requires internet connection to work in single-player/local network is bad. BAAAAAAAAAD.
Oh well, there's always the nice people who say "Arrrrrrr!" a lot, and they already made a few nice attempts at emulating a bnet 2.0 server. LAN soon enough, just not from ActiBLizz.

Alright, LAN, I had no idea on what they said, you win there.

I don't honestly see how making everyone go online for it is really that great of a deal, it really isn't.

I can maybe see your point on how the story line works, but from what i've read, almost everyone says they're going to be expansion prices, so whats the big deal?

And, are you saying you don't like marveling at the amazing CGI that was the cutscenes? Or are you talking about the ones with the in game engine? The in game ones, I can understand, yea, but it helps to build on the story, why it's called campaigned. To be honest, I wouldn't feel right paying 60$ for some 45 missions, that would probably offer more hours than you can imagine worth of play time.

Cousin_IT:

Therumancer:

Believe it or not, but there was a time when businesses were content to make money, and didn't have to gouge maximum profits out of every little thing that they did.

no there wasn't. The only reason you might choose not to squeeze something for additional revenue is because not squeezing it will ultimately make more.

That's both true and untrue at the same time. It has always been one of the goals of a business to make as much money as possible, but that "one of" bit is key. It used to be okay for a corporation to have multiple goals. Like, a restaurant could want to make really good food and make lots of money. A corporation could plan to pay their employees well and make lots of money.

Sadly, today's corporate attitude doesn't allow that. If your singular and all consuming goal isn't to ship every possible penny at every possible second off to Wall Street, you're doing it wrong.

The problem with Bobby Kotick and Activision is that they're proud of their transformation into a soulless money printing machine. They're in the process of learning a lesson that EA had to learn nearly a decade ago, that people don't actually like that. That maybe it's a good idea to keep your goddamned mouth shut about it, and maybe even dull the edges a bit for PR purposes on occasion.

That's actually kinda why I think people around here are practically waiting in line for a chance to slobber all over Valve's cock. Valve has managed to keep the dual goals of both making shit tons of money and making awesome video games, something which is extremely rare in a company of Valve's size.

mjc0961:
So how long do you think it will be before Kotick makes an ass out of himself with some kind of reply to this article?

3...2...1...GO!

erztez:

SimuLord:

Quaidis:

erztez:

Quaidis:

Shamus Young:

This week John Funk said in his Twitter feed, "Let's be honest here. We could write the news story 'Bobby Kotick Opens Door for Old Lady' and people would *still* be furious with him."

That's because he kicked the old lady through the door for having grandchildren that play videogames, then stole her purse to make a point.

Either way, enjoying article. Getting through all the links took me a while.

Actually, he bought the door, kicked the lady through it, then sued her for property damage, then stole her purse.

Ah, that does make more sense than what I heard. But I swore it had something to do with the lady's grandchildren playing video games...

That's Jack Thompson, not Kotick ;)

Nah, Thompson would've sued the lady for walking too fast and thus endangering the younger generation by displaying reckless disregard for her own safety. Also, for displaying too much ankle, and thus arousing said younger generation.

If a kid helped an old lady across the street, Thompson would invoke Frogger and claim the kid was trying to get the lady killed in traffic.

tryx3:

dathwampeer:

tryx3:

Hot damn, another chance to use this. What am I at now, like 5?

image

Ahem.

You have to understand : Indie = risk. FPS = low risk. Lower the risk, lower the return, but theres still going to be a good return.
Lower the risk, longer the life of the company. The company obviously won't prosper, but they won't instantly die out, it'll go rather slowly.

I've seen you use that comic before. It's irrelevant for one massive reason.

I never said 'am I the only one?' or indicated in anyway that I thought I was being original in saying what I did.

Plus I just hate that comic series.

It's pretentia.... It's over 9000.

As for you're comment. I'll direct you to the last part of my post.

I understand that it's safe.

I'd just rather they spend at-least some of their enormous budget on funding some smaller companies with a bit of a different idea.

So to summarise... Read better?

Saw the word sheep, buzz went off, had to post, add to my count of that, then to not appear as an ass, give some sort of reasoning to it, and bam. That's how I make one of those posts.
You must see, that when I see the word sheep, my brain is flooded with stimuli, and all of the sudden, I have to post that.

You have to understand, the count is everything. And i'm somewhere in the 5-6 range now.

You can blame whoever posted it first, they started me on this.

Wait, you've seen me use it before? Awesome sauce, i've trained myself to find sheep so well now.

Also: You hate it? I don't read it, so no sweat off my back.

You must see, it's pretentiousness is essential to it's existence (The comic) Its a never ending loop, so long as people use the word sheep, so long as this comic will be relevant in my mind. Am I probably wrong? Hell yes I am, does the count mean everything now that I made my own game out of it? You bet so.

But the 'sheep' sentence was part of a joke... I even semi-speech marked it.

Just read peoples posts though. If you just switch off at the word 'sheep' I can't be the only person you've said this to unjustly. I mean, what if they were having a discussion about agriculture?

I've seen you use it on a few people. That's the reason I know about the comic. I went to the comics site and looked around a bit there. Read about 30 pages and just left. It's such a pompous comic. It's existence is reliant on acting pretentious towards other pretentious people. The hypocrisy just makes me want to bang a kettle on my head. Ironic or not. It's still fucking retarded.

tryx3:

Alright, LAN, I had no idea on what they said, you win there.

I don't honestly see how making everyone go online for it is really that great of a deal, it really isn't.

I can maybe see your point on how the story line works, but from what i've read, almost everyone says they're going to be expansion prices, so whats the big deal?

And, are you saying you don't like marveling at the amazing CGI that was the cutscenes? Or are you talking about the ones with the in game engine? The in game ones, I can understand, yea, but it helps to build on the story, why it's called campaigned. To be honest, I wouldn't feel right paying 60$ for some 45 missions, that would probably offer more hours than you can imagine worth of play time.

It's only a big deal because it isn't necessary for any sensible reason. It's just a BS move by ActiBlizz to monopolize the server distribution.

Yeah, everyone says that, and when ActiBlizz releases a price plan, I'll believe it. They're not giving me much cause for optimism though.

Yes, the CGI was amazing, all what, 10 minutes of it? The ingame stuff was bearable, but WAY too protracted, Raynor was really starting to get on my nerves at the end. On the other hand the AWESOME cutscene when you choose the 'toss side in the colony missions redeems all that.

And no, wouldn't have to be 45 missions for the price of one.

I'd be a happy camper if they released 3 games with 3 campaigns each, and each of the games had 27 missions total.
I'd gladly pay full price for THAT.
It's the fact that we get horribly crippled MP with little to no support from the devs(1.1.0 was a joke that should result in the QA manager getting drawn and quartered, and 1.1.1 just fixed the worst blunders of 1.1.0), and a lot of promises for fixes to come "soon". Personally, I translate "soon" as "after Heart of the Swarm and Left Testicle of Tassadar come out, so we won't have to balance the whole thing three times".
I played WoW for 4 years, EQ for 6...son, I can imagine of LOT of hours of playtime:P

erztez:

tryx3:

Alright, LAN, I had no idea on what they said, you win there.

I don't honestly see how making everyone go online for it is really that great of a deal, it really isn't.

I can maybe see your point on how the story line works, but from what i've read, almost everyone says they're going to be expansion prices, so whats the big deal?

And, are you saying you don't like marveling at the amazing CGI that was the cutscenes? Or are you talking about the ones with the in game engine? The in game ones, I can understand, yea, but it helps to build on the story, why it's called campaigned. To be honest, I wouldn't feel right paying 60$ for some 45 missions, that would probably offer more hours than you can imagine worth of play time.

It's only a big deal because it isn't necessary for any sensible reason. It's just a BS move by ActiBlizz to monopolize the server distribution.

Yeah, everyone says that, and when ActiBlizz releases a price plan, I'll believe it. They're not giving me much cause for optimism though.

Yes, the CGI was amazing, all what, 10 minutes of it? The ingame stuff was bearable, but WAY too protracted, Raynor was really starting to get on my nerves at the end. On the other hand the AWESOME cutscene when you choose the 'toss side in the colony missions redeems all that.

And no, wouldn't have to be 45 missions for the price of one.

I'd be a happy camper if they released 3 games with 3 campaigns each, and each of the games had 27 missions total.
I'd gladly pay full price for THAT.
It's the fact that we get horribly crippled MP with little to no support from the devs(1.1.0 was a joke that should result in the QA manager getting drawn and quartered, and 1.1.1 just fixed the worst blunders of 1.1.0), and a lot of promises for fixes to come "soon". Personally, I translate "soon" as "after Heart of the Swarm and Left Testicle of Tassadar come out, so we won't have to balance the whole thing three times".
I played WoW for 4 years, EQ for 6...son, I can imagine of LOT of hours of playtime:P

Your tassadar line really made me laugh, and now I get your point, completely understandable.

In your mind, would a quick recap at the start of each of the expansions aid with that problem?

he's like every other CEO of every other major corporation. why should we be surprised by his ineptitude? so many of these guys are hopelessly out of touch with their customer base. the mass amounts of money they make has never been indicative of performance. there's a problem with corporations in general with how they behave, not just Mr. Kotick.

dathwampeer:

tryx3:

dathwampeer:

I've seen you use that comic before. It's irrelevant for one massive reason.

I never said 'am I the only one?' or indicated in anyway that I thought I was being original in saying what I did.

Plus I just hate that comic series.

It's pretentia.... It's over 9000.

As for you're comment. I'll direct you to the last part of my post.

So to summarise... Read better?

Saw the word sheep, buzz went off, had to post, add to my count of that, then to not appear as an ass, give some sort of reasoning to it, and bam. That's how I make one of those posts.
You must see, that when I see the word sheep, my brain is flooded with stimuli, and all of the sudden, I have to post that.

You have to understand, the count is everything. And i'm somewhere in the 5-6 range now.

You can blame whoever posted it first, they started me on this.

Wait, you've seen me use it before? Awesome sauce, i've trained myself to find sheep so well now.

Also: You hate it? I don't read it, so no sweat off my back.

You must see, it's pretentiousness is essential to it's existence (The comic) Its a never ending loop, so long as people use the word sheep, so long as this comic will be relevant in my mind. Am I probably wrong? Hell yes I am, does the count mean everything now that I made my own game out of it? You bet so.

But the 'sheep' sentence was part of a joke... I even semi-speech marked it.

Just read peoples posts though. If you just switch off at the word 'sheep' I can't be the only person you've said this to unjustly. I mean, what if they were having a discussion about agriculture?

I've seen you use it on a few people. That's the reason I know about the comic. I went to the comics site and looked around a bit there. Read about 30 pages and just left. It's such a pompous comic. It's existence is reliant on acting pretentious towards other pretentious people. The hypocrisy just makes me want to bang a kettle on my head. Ironic or not. It's still fucking retarded.

Think i'm going to stop playing that game, or have to scan for the word sheep better now, I shant abuse the patriot act.
And yea, I'll admit to one other error with though, mostly it was in movie bob discussions, where it was accurate 50-85% of the time. If only applied to bob, or bob uber fan boys.

My apologies then.

SimuLord:

erztez:

SimuLord:

Quaidis:

erztez:

Quaidis:

Shamus Young:

This week John Funk said in his Twitter feed, "Let's be honest here. We could write the news story 'Bobby Kotick Opens Door for Old Lady' and people would *still* be furious with him."

That's because he kicked the old lady through the door for having grandchildren that play videogames, then stole her purse to make a point.

Either way, enjoying article. Getting through all the links took me a while.

Actually, he bought the door, kicked the lady through it, then sued her for property damage, then stole her purse.

Ah, that does make more sense than what I heard. But I swore it had something to do with the lady's grandchildren playing video games...

That's Jack Thompson, not Kotick ;)

Nah, Thompson would've sued the lady for walking too fast and thus endangering the younger generation by displaying reckless disregard for her own safety. Also, for displaying too much ankle, and thus arousing said younger generation.

If a kid helped an old lady across the street, Thompson would invoke Frogger and claim the kid was trying to get the lady killed in traffic.

Thompson! I almost forgot how much I hated him in all these conspiracy theories about Kotick.

I honestly think Thompson would have tried to sue the makers of GTA for somehow convincing a child through game play to help an old lady across the street, and thus trying to get her hit by a run away car that some crack addict stole. Even if there was no such car, and no such addict. But Frogger would be a good secondary scapegoat. Anything to get the extremists in a buzz against the video game industry.

Maybe the old lady that Kotick tried to kick through the door was mother to a disgruntled employee. That way he can use the lawsuit against her for property damage to further blackmail the employee into not getting paid the bonuses for their latest game release.

He is ignorant in the fact that his things sell because they are all thats left. They sucked the life out of indi companies who did great work, but putting forth unreasonable demands and abusing their creativity for their own gains. Like allot of awesomebands who lose everything and have to call it quits due to shit contracts and misuse by their lables, Like the dead kennedys losing all their songs via contract.

the best games that will ever come out would have financial backing from big corps with little strings attached to give them the room to grow. Not being "exploited" (their phrasing) but being sold fairly. winning over hearts and minds like valve does. Its an artistic product where the devs at least want to be remembered and applauded instead of cashing fat paychecks made of the blood and sweat of the people who over pay to get their games "finished"( ie all dlc downloaded) product.

or at least it used to be

erztez:

amaranth_dru:

...And one can't milk Blizzard forever... they're bound to die out some day, just like everything else.

I keep telling people that WoW is reaching the end of it's shelf life, and SC2 is already rotten.
Hell, ActiBLizz is telling people that WoW is going to start winding down in a few years.
Why does everyone think that WoW and CoD and GH and...'eh, no idea...are enough to keep a monster like ActiBlizz afloat?
It's a rule of any organism, if you don't grow, you die.

Mario and Pokemon, two of the most successful game series in the world. Hardly any noticeable growth over a period of almost 30 years. Grow? Rehash, rehash, rehash, rehash and rehash. What's Activision doing? same thing. Copy+paste a bland generic shooter over and over. Release veiled album packs as "NEW GAMES!" and so on. As long as every XXXULTRASNIPER and AMERICANBRAHWEED93 will keep shelling out 60 bucks for latest rehash of the month, companies like Activision will get by just fine. Why in the world would they ever try to sell games to anybody but the gamer who happens to make out society's lowest common denominator?

tryx3:

Your tassadar line really made me laugh, and now I get your point, completely understandable.

In your mind, would a quick recap at the start of each of the expansions aid with that problem?

You know what? Yeah, price them as expansions and do that, it'll be fine.
Also, don't wait with balancing, took you 6 months to fix DKs in WoW, and that's an MMO.
Please don't take a year to balance MMM in SC2...Not that I don't use it every chance I get, it's just that I'd gladly lay down the sword of rushing with basic units and WINNING EVERY DAMN TIME, if only the other guy had to do the same.
Right now, playing fair in SC2 gets you killed. Playing ZERG gets you raped.
Fix that and I'll withdraw my objections to SC2.
Changes nothing about my overall stance towards ActiBlizz though, they'll have to do a lot more than fix their own bloody mistakes for that.
I'm thinking Bob+Car battery+Clamps+National TV ad time.

Quaidis:

Thompson! I almost forgot how much I hated him in all these conspiracy theories about Kotick.

I honestly think Thompson would have tried to sue the makers of GTA for somehow convincing a child through game play to help an old lady across the street, and thus trying to get her hit by a run away car that some crack addict stole. Even if there was no such car, and no such addict. But Frogger would be a good secondary scapegoat. Anything to get the extremists in a buzz against the video game industry.

Maybe the granny that Kotick tried to kick through the door was mother to a disgruntled employee? That way he can use the lawsuit against her for property damage to further blackmail the employee into not getting paid the bonuses for their latest game release.

Actually, Thompson would've sued if there was no lady. He would've sued if there was no child. He would've sued if there was no street. Hell he'd have sued if there was no video game. The only thing that would stop Thompson from suing would be if there was no Thompson.

Nah, Kotick had all the employees families move to an undisclosed location (read: dungeon under ActiBlizz HQ) a long, long time ago.

llagrok:

Mario and Pokemon, two of the most successful game series in the world. Hardly any noticeable growth over a period of almost 30 years. Grow? Rehash, rehash, rehash, rehash and rehash. What's Activision doing? same thing. Copy+paste a bland generic shooter over and over. Release veiled album packs as "NEW GAMES!" and so on. As long as every XXXULTRASNIPER and AMERICANBRAHWEED93 will keep shelling out 60 bucks for latest rehash of the month, companies like Activision will get by just fine. Why in the world would they ever try to sell games to anybody but the gamer who happens to make out society's lowest common denominator?

Sure, Nintendo, but they STARTED with their business model like this:P Also, they sell toys, not games(no, Wii is NOT a current generation console, take out the hardware and you barely get a last generation smartphone).

12 year olds and frat boys can collectively suck it, as far as I'm concerned. Selling to the lowest common denominator is fine, but you inevitably get down to the level of your customer base being too retarded to understand a controller(Nintendo already rented a room there).

Jonci:
Someone please email this article to the Activision board of chairmen. Plant the seed to the end of Kotick!

image

OT: Kotick is a train wreck i cant believe Activision cares that much about their reputation to drop him.That guy needs a one way ticket to the north pole he can milk anything he wants there to death....

Hey remember when EA was the big evil of gaming? They barely changed since then, but they've done quite a few quiet, subtle marketing stunts (yeah not really sure how 'quiet' and 'subtle' apply to 'stunts') and managed to become at worst 'acceptable' in the gamers' minds. Of course they couldn't have done it if their number one competitor's CEO didn't have his foot surgically stuffed in his mouth.

So if you need to work at an enormous heartless moneymaking corporation... go for EA.

The Random One:
Hey remember when EA was the big evil of gaming? They barely changed since then, but they've done quite a few quiet, subtle marketing stunts (yeah not really sure how 'quiet' and 'subtle' apply to 'stunts') and managed to become at worst 'acceptable' in the gamers' minds. Of course they couldn't have done it if their number one competitor's CEO didn't have his foot surgically stuffed in his mouth.

So if you need to work at an enormous heartless moneymaking corporation... go for EA.

Amen.
They may be Evil, but they're OUR Evil.
ActiBlizz is an unholy hybrid of Satan and Steve Jobs sans the marketing ability.

I still think the interplay between the big two was very interesting...

I remember when EA was the big horrible developer... There was a time when EA was the bane of the gaming world's existence, and Activision were like quiet little tinkerers next to this behemoth that was EA..

We were all calling for the downfall of Riccietello, and EA was innundated with seething hate from the internet masses...

And then a curious thing happened.. EA started taking interesting chances.. it started to show a sense of humor in its marketing.. And at the exact same time, Kotick stood up and literally started stealing the "Evil Corporate Empire" limelight from EA.. And all Riccietello had to do to erase years of bad press, was to quietly point at Kotick from across the room and mutter "Man, that guy's crazy."

Kotick is the best thing that ever happened to EA.

Altorin:

Kotick is the best thing that ever happened to EA.

Hell, Bob would make Umbrella Corp. look good.
And you wouldn't have to point across the room and mutter, then man wears the crazy like a badge.

image
Godammit Shamus, give me a reason to disagree with you.

That was brilliant, Shamus. I'd love if the share holders got wind of this and decided that early retirement for Bob would suit him....

Kotick epitomizes what is wrong with the coporate structure and CEOs that are not doing their job properly: There is no accountability.

All companies want to make money, but Kotick makes this inherent goal of business into an effrontery to all potential consumers of his company. He is not simply greedy, but he has the position and means to advertise his avarice.

Openly confirming that only games that can be exploited franchises will be used pretty much pegs his motives for the company to in turn exploit the consumer until people finally cease their support. Sadly, this is pretty much a pipe-dream.

His ineptitude with public relations culminates into a wholly awful representative for Kim Jong Il, let alone a corporation. That pompous man-child with the plastic guitar? Yeah, he's the paragon of the trolling, belligerent, and bilious twats that pollute online games (like Call of Duty in fact...).

erztez:

amaranth_dru:

...And one can't milk Blizzard forever... they're bound to die out some day, just like everything else.

I keep telling people that WoW is reaching the end of it's shelf life, and SC2 is already rotten.
Hell, ActiBLizz is telling people that WoW is going to start winding down in a few years.
Why does everyone think that WoW and CoD and GH and...'eh, no idea...are enough to keep a monster like ActiBlizz afloat?
It's a rule of any organism, if you don't grow, you die.

I'm a WoW fan, but even I know its reaching its terminal phase. I think they have room for one more xpac after Cataclysm. And then what? World Of Starcraft? And when was the last time they came up with something new? Diablo 3 is still going to be Diablo, Starcraft 2 is still Starcraft with better graphics and a few new updates. So what next? A reboot of Blackthorne? Another Lost Vikings? Perhaps I'm asking too much to say that the gaming industry can't live forever off of past glories. And people like Kotick are the cancer.

Atmos Duality:
My problem with the man is that despite all of his outward greed (which is apparently the sole driving force in a capitalist economy

It's more complicated than that. To crib from Hesiod:

Hesiod's Works and Days:
So, after all, there was not one kind of Strife alone, but all over the earth there are two. As for the one, a man would praise her when he came to understand her; but the other is blameworthy: and they are wholly different in nature.
For one fosters evil war and battle, being cruel: her no man loves; but perforce, through the will of the deathless gods, men pay harsh Strife her honour due.
But the other (...) is far kinder to men. She stirs up even the shiftless to toil; for a man grows eager to work when he considers his neighbour, a rich man who hastens to plough and plant and put his house in good order; and neighbour vies with his neighbour as he hurries after wealth. This Strife is wholesome for men.

It's good to be a bit greedy, it gives one incentive to work hard. It's rapacious greed that's the problem, and that's the sin that Kotick is guilty of. In addition to several others. I could make an argument for sloth and pride without even trying, but that's another story.

Problem is, the situation with the games industry is a different market than for any "consumable" product you can name. Take, for example, detergent. You have a few name brands - four or five, maybe more, I don't really know. You have a bunch of outlying brands, with store or minor names. They aren't as well known, or as popular. Thing is, they're all making detergent, and if one brand tries something outrageous, it's not hard to switch to another. This keeps the producers in line.

With games, it's different. The games industry isn't catering to one consumer base - it's catering to dozens of different groups that like different things. A lot of the time these interests cross over. But each product is sold to a market category - say, the people who like military shooters.

Thing is, games are a lot more differentiated within their market groups than comestibles. Where the difference between soaps may not even be noticable, the difference between an AAA- and a B-list game, in terms of polish and support; and crucially for many people in terms of the multiplayer pool, is huge.

The games industry is a collection of monopolies. There tends to be just one person sitting on top of a given genre, a given market, with everybody else crowded around at the bottom trying to whack him off. This is ESPECIALLY true of the mega-sellers: Call of Duty, Halo, and World of Warcraft each dominate their respective field. And it's a lot easier to knock off the leader of a singleplayer market than that of a multiplayer one - take the MMO field over the past 6 years as an example.

Sometimes, as with the competition between Guitar Hero and Rock Band, a real market develops. And, as with proper markets in other industries, the competition has kept Activision more honest than otherwise. Customers stopped buying the dozens of Guitar Hero clones that they've shoved out the door recently. I count fifteen core games in the Guitar Hero series, thirteen of them made in the same period that Harmonix made just six. The customers have a choice here. And they're choosing, and Activision is hurting. They're going to change their business model in this area, or they're going to lose.

To summarize (with added spice):

Call of Duty is an example of what happens when a series gains a genre or market monopoly: A field day of profiteering.

World of Warcraft is becoming similar. Activision are masters of profiteering, and they will do so wherever they have influence.

Guitar Hero/Rock Band are an example of an open market killing a profiteering attitude.

Now, I expect that Call of Duty will soon be dethroned. Medal of Honor is a serious contender, and depending on which way the reviews swing, it could establish itself in the same position Harmonix' series holds. Similarly, the prior Infinity Ward presidents could knock Activision's cash cow off its perch - all it takes is a worthy alternative product within the same genre/market to get the rats to leave the ship.
And when Activision's cash cows are down... there follows Activision, and its scummy CEO with it.

By far the biggest problem with Koltic, I think, is the way he treats everyone in the industry, whether it be competition, business partners, employees, or even customers. I could pull up a dozen quotes for each of them, neverminding the major things like the Infinity Ward fiasco and the flame war going on between him and Tim Schafer. Now I wouldn't expect anyone to just lie down and take it when someone publically calls you out (Though Schafer says he meant it to be off-record), but Kolticks response, well...says a lot about the man.

"Schafer was taking too long and Brutal Legend looked sucky anyways."

Oh boy, where to start? Alright, first off, if a CEO doesn't like where a project is going and decides to cancel it, then alright. But when Brutal Legend got picked up by EA, Activision sued Double Fine. Now come on, don't tell me Koltick didn't have anything to do with that, he had to have some kind of input in that being CEO. And the act itself is just...someone else put it best. It's like if you divorced your spouse and then sued them when they found someone else. What the hell did you think an independent studio was going to do? You may have been willing to publish it, but it was still THEIR game. If you decide you don't want it, they have every right to take it to someone else.

Second off, Koltick is entitled to his opinion on Brutal Legend, but it still strikes me as odd that he would call the game sucky when it clearly inspired Guitar Hero: Warriors of Rock, a game published by his own company.

Third, is it just me or does Koltick not respond well to criticism? I know I just said a minute ago that I don't expect anyone to lie down and let someone dump on you, but you don't have to do it publically. Or you could at least present your response in a more professional way.

This man just...gah! It's not even that Activision is a bad company, they have published several games that I like. But this man is the worst game company CEO since Bernie Stolar from Sega in the late 90's. (For a good description of THAT asshole, take a look at the sixth paragraph of this TV tropes page.)

Formica Archonis:

It's good to be a bit greedy, it gives one incentive to work hard. It's rapacious greed that's the problem, and that's the sin that Kotick is guilty of. In addition to several others. I could make an argument for sloth and pride without even trying, but that's another story.

I know, I know...without self-interest, we really wouldn't have much of a will, would we?
Besides, I was being mostly facetious with the greed statement.

I think that they should fire him. His public relations already make the board look bad, and I'm sure that removing the cause of hate would bring some gamers back, because there probable are some people who don't buy from Activision because of the way he's running it

I could understand holding on to someone like him if he's a smaller fry and you use him as a stunt to bring media attention in, but not as the face of the company. I'm about to watch Human Centipede and I'd rather see that in charge of Activision than Mr. Kotick :P

I speak for not only myself for many gamers I'm sure when we say "WoW fees are fine, but charge me for multiplayer (especially if you're already paying for Xbox live) and I'm done with you"

I knew Kotick was bananas, but this just cemented it.

A lot of people give Kotick a hard time for being "greedy." By greedy I assume they mean he wants his company to make more money. This is not something we should be angry about. As the chief executive officer of a muiltibillion-dollar company, it's his job to be greedy. That's why they hired him. Being angry about a CEO being greedy is like getting mad at a heavy metal band for playing electric guitars and being loud. Do you think Valve software puts games on deep discount because they love us? They do it because they can make more money when they occasionally go after the cheapskates and bargain hounds. And that's fine.

The difference being, Valve does not have open contempt for video games. Valve likes video games and likes making them; Kotick hates games, hates his customers and hates his employees (as evidenced by his nearly obsessive search for ways to screw them all over). Valve may not do everything out of the goodness of their hearts, but it's hard to deny that they actually care about putting out a good product and treating their employees with some basic respect. Kotick knows less about video games than Roger Ebert, with the difference that Ebert is not actively trying to destroy the medium.

I hate Kotick as much as the next guy, and agree with 95% of this article, but I have to point out:


You might argue that, "If he wasn't making money they would fire him, therefore he's good at his job." But in business things aren't nearly that simple. Sure, the company is making money, but I think it could be making a lot more if the CEO knew what he was doing. You can't look at alternate histories and see that the company would make more or less if it was doing different things. If all you want is for Activision-Blizzard to make money - any money - then they could fire Kotick and hire a desk lamp, because Blizzard was an unstoppable cash-generating dynamo before Kotick ever sat down in the CEO chair. The question isn't, "Are they making money?" but "Would they be making more money with someone else's ideas and leadership?"

Seems like some question-dodging on the part of the writer. If the entire article is about the effectiveness of the CEO at helming the company, then, sorry, but the question is 'are they making money' -- or at least, 'are they making more money than they were before Kotick came along'.

His turrets-syndrome PR, his one-note business practices, all of that takes a back-seat to the cold hard finances. Without that data to back up your claim that he 'doesn't know what he's doing', you might as well be my Grandpa, ranting and raving about how Obama is 'steering this country to hell'.

And for the record, I don't know whether or not their profits have gone up or down -- I'm just saying it's definitely an area where the article's argument could potentially be strengthened.

------------

Otherwise a damned-good case for why the guy is completely rotten in the eyes of 'potential Activision customers'.

Onyx Oblivion:
They hired Dan Amrich as a public relations manager.

http://www.giantbomb.com/dan-amrich/72-83285/

Reading his blog really calms me down when I start hating Activision.

I just read his blog and it is awesome... but also damn you for directing me there _

I watched the Black Ops customization video and now I badly want it...

Create an online petition to have him fired and boycott all Activision games.

Boycotts and petitions ALWAYS work. Gamers never say one thing then do another!

Oh wait.

See, Kotick is a douche and he doesn't care because it doesn't stop anyone from buying the games. I bet he could get a kitten, drown it in the sink and film it and put it on the internet for everyone to see and people would still go out and buy Call of Duty.

Hey, he gets away with all that shit.

That in itself is genius.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 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
Register for a free account here