Why the hate on Activision?

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 3:56 am

To players? No.

To companies who see each consecutive CoD game breaking sales records? Yes.
Call of Duty is not the gold standard for game design, game mechanics, story, music, art, etc, etc.

There's a difference between being a gold standard and being simply easy to copy.
User avatar
Rudy Paint fingers
 
Posts: 3416
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 1:52 am

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:42 pm

Call of Duty is not the gold standard for game design, game mechanics, story, music, art, etc, etc.

There's a difference between being a gold standard and being simply easy to copy.

The only gold outfits like EA and Activision care about is what's in their bank accounts. And as long as repackaging the same game and selling it as a brand new game every few months continues to keep that gold flowing in ever-increasing amounts, what do they care?
User avatar
Nicole Elocin
 
Posts: 3390
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 9:12 am

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:04 pm

The only gold outfits like EA and Activision care about is what's in their bank accounts. And as long as repackaging the same game and selling it as a brand new game every few months continues to keep that gold flowing in ever-increasing amounts, what do they care?
I'm not sure I ever said anything to the contrary...
User avatar
ZANEY82
 
Posts: 3314
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 3:10 am

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 10:14 am

They did. Starting at COD4MW

Except Call of Duty 4 never set "the gold standard." Many first person shooters play much differently than Call of Duty, and did more for the genre than Call of Duty ever did, such as Halo and Counter Strike.

Those were revolutionary, and set the "gold standard" that many games have tried to mimic in some fashion ever since.
User avatar
Mrs Pooh
 
Posts: 3340
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:30 pm

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:23 pm

"Gold Standard" in this case likely means "Sells the best and makes the most money". In that case Call of Duty is the Gold Standard.
User avatar
elliot mudd
 
Posts: 3426
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 8:56 am

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 12:30 pm

"Gold Standard" in this case likely means "Sells the best and makes the most money". In that case Call of Duty is the Gold Standard.
Except Call of Duty: Black OPs II hasn't even beaten Halo 3 or Kinect Adventures in sales yet. On 360 alone anyway.
User avatar
lexy
 
Posts: 3439
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 6:37 pm

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 3:23 am

Seeing as I don't necessarily play any games they publish, I don't know/think much of them, but I see a lot of people, and some "gaming vets" who don't like them.

Why?
Some dislike them for milking and/or destroying several game franchises to death, like Guitar Hero. Some dislike them for shutting down several game development studios, like Bizarre Creations. And some dislike them for having the most successful pop games out there (Call of Duty & World of Warcraft), cause being popular is "bad".
User avatar
Princess Johnson
 
Posts: 3435
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 5:44 pm

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 6:50 am

Some dislike them for milking and/or destroying several game franchises to death, like Guitar Hero
There's not a lot you can actually do with Guitar Hero...
User avatar
Adrian Morales
 
Posts: 3474
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 3:19 am

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 7:54 am

There's not a lot you can actually do with Guitar Hero...
They could have put the developers on a different project though instead of shutting them down when GH wasn't profitable anymore.

Same happened with many other companies, like Radical Entertainment. They were shut down after the release of Prototype 2. Activision thought the series was done so the dev team was tossed away. Now there's no chance of there ever being a patch for the PC version which is pretty broken. Not that Activision bothered to patch the original.
User avatar
Baby K(:
 
Posts: 3395
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 9:07 pm

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 5:27 am

Some dislike them for milking and/or destroying several game franchises to death, like Guitar Hero. Some dislike them for shutting down several game development studios, like Bizarre Creations. And some dislike them for having the most successful pop games out there (Call of Duty & World of Warcraft), cause being popular is "bad".
There was a time when Activision meant action. Like Mechwarrior, Heavy Gear, Battlezone, Jedi Knight... The good old days.
User avatar
Raymond J. Ramirez
 
Posts: 3390
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 8:28 am

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 3:52 am

They could have put the developers on a different project though instead of shutting them down when GH wasn't profitable anymore.

Same happened with many other companies, like Radical Entertainment. They were shut down after the release of Prototype 2. Activision thought the series was done so the dev team was tossed away. Now there's no chance of there ever being a patch for the PC version which is pretty broken. Not that Activision bothered to patch the original.
What's your point? The portion I quoted was not talking about shutting down a studio, it was about milking/destroying a franchise. Your response to my response is hardly relevant, aside from mentioning the patch, but even then just barely relevant.

There was a time when Activision meant action. Like Mechwarrior, Heavy Gear, Battlezone, Jedi Knight... The good old days.
Activision has had several "action" games in the past two years alone.
User avatar
Portions
 
Posts: 3499
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:47 am

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:45 pm

Some dislike them for milking and/or destroying several game franchises to death, like Guitar Hero. Some dislike them for shutting down several game development studios, like Bizarre Creations. And some dislike them for having the most successful pop games out there (Call of Duty & World of Warcraft), cause being popular is "bad".

I also think there are some who see THQ going under, and other smaller developers struggling, and see a future where the only way you'll be able to get anything besides the latest incarnation of CoD/WoW/Madden/FIFA/... is to invest in Kickstarter projects. So they lash out at the two companies that are guaranteed to survive any downturn in the industry, who just so happen to be the two companies that have done more than anyone else to create the current situation.
User avatar
RObert loVes MOmmy
 
Posts: 3432
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:12 am

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 3:48 am

There was a time when Activision meant action. Like Mechwarrior, Heavy Gear, Battlezone, Jedi Knight... The good old days.

That, but really I just kind of ignore Activision now. Making more money somehow seems to make companies try to refine business models to the point of just trying to make more and more cash, and no longer caring at all about a quality product. This is not to say that the games they make aren't fun, but they could be so much better, and many people would rather have quality over quantity.
User avatar
Tiffany Holmes
 
Posts: 3351
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 2:28 am

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 7:44 pm

What's your point? The portion I quoted was not talking about shutting down a studio, it was about milking/destroying a franchise. Your response to my response is hardly relevant, aside from mentioning the patch, but even then just barely relevant.
He's saying that Activision likes to milk a studio for all it's worth and then shut it down once the franchise that they were acquired for stops making money.
User avatar
Kayleigh Mcneil
 
Posts: 3352
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 7:32 am

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:26 pm

That, but really I just kind of ignore Activision now. Making more money somehow seems to make companies try to refine business models to the point of just trying to make more and more cash, and no longer caring at all about a quality product. This is not to say that the games they make are fun, but they could be so much better, and many people would rather have quality over quantity.
Exactly - Actiblizzard are in a position to fund the future of gaming for the next ten years, as indeed they both used to do, but now all they do is churn out the same franchise over and over like a pale copy of EA. That waste of potential is what's so disappointing, ultimately.
User avatar
John Moore
 
Posts: 3294
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2007 8:18 am

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 3:21 pm

All of your favorite compan?es always talk about COD. That's what I mean by Gold Standard. When a company thinks about making a game (developing or publishing) COD gets brought up. What company wouldn't want their game to take CODs place as current reigning king.

Activision also owns the IP rights to the memo gold standard.. WoW.
User avatar
Gemma Archer
 
Posts: 3492
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 12:02 am

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 6:46 am

He's saying that Activision likes to milk a studio for all it's worth and then shut it down once the franchise that they were acquired for stops making money.
Yet that's not what he said. And why wouldn't Activision milk what at the time was one of the hottest casual games? And let's be fair here, people are pointing fingers at Activision, yet where are the complaints that Rovio produces almost nothing more than Angry Birds since 2009?

All of your favorite compan?es always talk about COD. That's what I mean by Gold Standard. When a company thinks about making a game (developing or publishing) COD gets brought up. What company wouldn't want to take CODs place as current reigning king.
Please show non-FPS company examples. Actual citations would be lovely.
User avatar
kirsty joanne hines
 
Posts: 3361
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 10:06 am

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 7:56 pm

What company wouldn't want to take CODs place as current reigning king.
King of what, though? In the race to the bottom there are no winners.
User avatar
OnlyDumazzapplyhere
 
Posts: 3445
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 12:43 am

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:57 am

All of your favorite compan?es always talk about COD. That's what I mean by Gold Standard. When a company thinks about making a game (developing or publishing) COD gets brought up. What company wouldn't want to take CODs place as current reigning king.

Take a look at the suggestion threads for Fallout 4 and future TES titles right here on this forum. A large proportion of the suggestions made are by new forum members, and boil down to turning both series into CoD clones with post-apocalyptic or medieval fantasy themes.
User avatar
rae.x
 
Posts: 3326
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 2:13 pm

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 6:51 am

Take a look at the suggestion threads for Fallout 4 and future TES titles right here on this forum. A large proportion of the suggestions made are by new forum members, and boil down to turning both series into CoD clones with post-apocalyptic or medieval fantasy themes.
How so?
User avatar
gemma
 
Posts: 3441
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 7:10 am

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 6:16 pm

Exactly - Actiblizzard are in a position to fund the future of gaming for the next ten years, as indeed they both used to do, but now all they do is churn out the same franchise over and over like a pale copy of EA. That waste of potential is what's so disappointing, ultimately.
I guess it was only a matter of time before the gaming industry got on the wagon with the film, television, and music industries. The problem is that people buy it, so it just reinforces the behavior. If people refused to watch "Here's This Ridiculous Person Again In Their Fourth Reality TV Show" then they'd stop making episodes, but it's cheap to make and it appeals to enough viewers to make it extremely profitable and low-risk, so here we are. As long as re-hashed crap sells there will be re-hashed crap. :biggrin: If people are willing to hand them money for very little new product then I guess I can't blame them for taking it.
User avatar
Kellymarie Heppell
 
Posts: 3456
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:37 am

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:03 am


King of what, though? In the race to the bottom there are no winners.
King of commercial video games, King of the video game marketing. Being the center of discussion in the video game industry. They set a really really really high bar for other video games.

Yet that's not what he said. And why wouldn't Activision milk what at the time was one of the hottest casual games? And let's be fair here, people are pointing fingers at Activision, yet where are the complaints that Rovio produces almost nothing more than Angry Birds since 2009?


Please show non-FPS company examples. Actual citations would be lovely.
Is like to, I'd have to go through my favs, as long as link isn't broken since it was fav'd. But I'm on a tablet and it would be a hassle to.

Actually, would a Beth dev be able to comment on this? Come, take part in community discussion.
User avatar
Penny Flame
 
Posts: 3336
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 1:53 am

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 12:02 pm

Yet that's not what he said. And why wouldn't Activision milk what at the time was one of the hottest casual games? And let's be fair here, people are pointing fingers at Activision, yet where are the complaints that Rovio produces almost nothing more than Angry Birds since 2009?

Activision targets the console market, while Rovio's main target is mobile devices. There's a lot of overlap between the two and the line between them gets blurrier every day, but for the time being they're still two distinct markets.
User avatar
Matt Fletcher
 
Posts: 3355
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 3:48 am

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:28 pm

Activision targets the console market, while Rovio's main target is mobile devices. There's a lot of overlap between the two and the line between them gets blurrier every day, but for the time being they're still two distinct markets.
The market isn't the point.

Rovio is still milking Angry Birds as much as Activision is milking Call of Duty but there's not a single peep from one of you. Many of you are targeting Activision just because it's the "in" thing to do, but couldn't give two craps that many, many other companies have been milking many, many other franchises for decades. How often do non-Final Fantasy named titles get passed out of SquarEnix's door, or when it was just Squaresoft? How many Pokemon games are there? Mario? Zelda? Tetrist gets remade by seemingly everyone and none of you bat an eyelash. So why is Activision the witch being put on the stake?

Let's take Capcom, on just the 360 and see what we come up with:

Three Dead Rising games
Two Devil May Cry games
Three Lost Planet games
Three MotoGP games
Four Resident Evil games
Four Street Fighter games
Two Marvel vs Capcom games

They had five, five other single none established IP games. 26 total games in 2012 and 21 of them were either new IPs that got sequels or established IPs with new sequels.
User avatar
sarah
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 1:53 pm

Post » Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:06 am

King of commercial video games, King of the video game marketing. Being the center of discussion in the video game industry. They set a really really really high bar for other video games.
Only those who want to emulate their shallow success. And not every developer does, thankfully.

At least none of the ones I pay attention to.
User avatar
Phillip Brunyee
 
Posts: 3510
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:43 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Othor Games