So does Capcom, and yet everyone loves them.

Personally I don't care about Activision one way or another. They can keep milking Call of Duty if that's what gives them jollies, me, I'll just spend my money elsewhere.

Multiplayer, better grafix, multiplayer, less emphasis on story, multiplayer, stop relying on lore so much and let the series evolve with the times, mulitplayer, more guns and armor, multiplayer, less time designing quests and more use of Radiant quests, multiplayer, more and more waves of enemies to kill, multiplayer, preset classes cuz speccing characters is too hard, etc.

Oh, and of course, multiplayer mode. Don't take my word for it - just look at the threads.

That's exactly the point. They completely oversaturnated the market with several similiar Guitar Hero games in just one year. If they just had been a bit more cool about it, taking it slow and easy with a good release every other year or so, it would probably still be a very profitable franchise.

Besides, it was only one example, they been ruining other games too, like Prototype 2 which Povuholo mentioned. And the sales of the Tony Hawk franchise gone rapidly down too, and totally flopped with Tony Hawk: Ride nearly killing the series, but was resurrected with a downloadable "remake" earlier this year.

That said, what I dislike Activision Blizzard for the most is that they just keep dropping games, right now they pretty just focus on CoD, WoW and Spyro (Skylanders), and that's pretty much it. Both Activision and VU Games had a much wider range of games before they merged together into Activision Blizzard, now they just have these few core franchises left and that's it. For me this is quite unfortunate, as VU Games had a released a bunch of games I enjoyed greatly, like SWAT4.

There been a lot of complaints about those companies milking games too. Especially with Capcom, people complained about them milking Mega Man even back in the early 90s. Don't know how you managed to miss it, it's all over the web.

Ok.. so let's break this down...

Call of Duty invented multiplayer, apparently.
They also invented top notch graphics, apparently.
Call of Duty invented multiplayer, apparently.
Call of Duty invented having less emphasis on story, apparently.
Call of Duty invented multiplayer, apparently.
Call of Duty invented relying less on lore, apparently.
Call of Duty invented multiplayer, apparently.
Call of Duty invented guns and armor, apparently.
Call of Duty invented multiplayer, apparently.
Call of Duty invented radiant quests, apparently.
Call of Duty invented multiplayer, apparently.
Call of Duty invented giant waves of enemies, apparently.
Call of Duty invented multiplayer, apparently.
Call of Duty invented preset classes, apparently.
Call of Duty invented multiplayer, apparently.

I'm sorry to be blunt, but do you do nothing but sit down all day? Because you don't seem to have any legs to stand on.

And Rovio too, for that matter. But I think the distinction between all others and Activision is how little Activision add in their iterations, how lazy each version is, how they continue to make their customers out to be svckers. There's a fine line between repeating a winning formula and fleecing your fanbase.

Sure companies would like to have thier sales but there is an expectation managment. Bethesda doesn't expect COD like sales becuse that's not the type of games they make. Same thing can be said for pretty much every other developer. Sure there are a handful of COD clones but very few developers are trying to be "COD" in the sense of sales.

Two different markets. Were talking about console gaming here not mobile. As casual as COD may be Angry Birds is even farther out there in the casual market. No one loos at anrgy birds and thinks " Damn Rovio, they're ruining gaming", becuse they don't have that big of an impact on the type of gaming we all like to do here.

You're dealing with "couldas" and "wouldas" with no real evidence. The game mechanic aspect of Guitar Hero itself did not lend to a lot of expansion. The biggest, and perhaps the only "real" big expansion the rhythm genre could have was new instruments.

Never played either Prototype so can't comment. Tony Hawk suffered from bad design, not from over milking.

If I recall, this isn't the early 90s. Currently, I have not heard or seen people complaining that Capcom milks Mega Man.

Where was it said this is a console exclusive discussion?

Possible that all seems true if you are only 20, in such case I feel bad for their Gaming handicap, someone should hold a telethon.

Except a lot of people complain about Capcom, and several other major developers. Go around the internet. Not everyone is solely focused on Activision.

That combined with you can play angry birds for free. And even without ads, all you have to do is turn off all internet connections to your phone.

I have moved away from hating on developers specifically most of the time. A game company could do things I hate and find boring, then all the sudden do something I find fun. (For example, Capcom with Dragons Dogma). There are some CoD games I find fun, but usually only after I give the series a few years to develop into something at least a bit different.

And all the high and mighty hardcoe gamers here and around the net astonish me. Black ops II broke records, obviously they are doing something right. If its on the business side or the gaming side is irrelevant, they are making money and will continue to do so. If you don't like their games, so be it. But don't pretend like you're better because of it.

I never said any of that.

I'll concede the point that other companies milk franchises to death. That was never a point of contention. But at the same time, I don't see lots and lots of fans of those other franchises arguing that we have to have Angry Birds in the Mojave, Mario in the Capital Wasteland and Link in Tamriel. But I sure see a lot of CoD fans saying that we must have all of the features of that series in our series. So maybe that's one reason why Activision tends to get singled out a bit more than those others.

If you're happy spending your money on the latest CoD iteration, fine. Knock yourself out. But don't thumb your nose at me if I decide not to join in, and keep your franchise the hell out of mine.

I've never seen a thread made on here (just using here as an example) saying "Capcom milks X franchise."

I have seen, however, a thread about Activision milking Call of Duty.

We happen to be in one of said threads.

Designing for the lowest common denominator is a recipe for success, but not a mark of actual quality.

So... you're just blaming the company rather than the fans who are acting dumb.

Makes total sense.

I was exaggerating about everyone loving Capcom, but I have definitely never seen as much criticism directed at them as I do Activision. Certainly not here.

If I was an investor in Bethesda-Zenimax and I heard te devs or officers saying "We don't plan to meet or beat COD sales because we don't make those types of games" someone would get canned or I'm pulling out my investments

I'm not saying its quality, but it makes money and lots of it. You don't have to play their games, but lots of people do and like them. I just hate when people act all high and mighty about not playing CoD, or supporting Activision/EA. Its your own personal preference, don't pretend you're better because of it.(Not directed at you, by the way.

Investor or shareholder? Zenimax is a private company so they don't have to worry much about what shareholders have to say.

Liking the games is not the same as labeling it the best of anything.

I mean a lot of people liked ABBA, but...well...yeah...

doesn't mean we all have to sing dancing queen

I don't think my post implied that at all.

I think they were agreeing with you.

I don't mind them releasing a new entry every year from the same franchise, or milking, per se. What matters is what each new entry does on its own. And that's where Call of Duty kinda fails, with each "new" entry in the franchise coming across like a re-skinned version of the previous one.

And as a strict offline gamer, Call of Duty don't have much to offer me. Whatever happened to offline bot matches?

Sorry, but the sad truth is most "hardcoe" gamers prefer instant gratification and unnecesarily rough competition over a game with a long story, multiple quests, and an average play time of 200 hours. I prefer a longer game, but a large potion of gamers do not have the time or patience to follow suit.

Really? Well.... alright then.

I'll be over here.

The funny thing is, a lot of "hardcoe" gamers who prefer those long quests built their chops on games like Mario and Tetris, which are fairly shallow.