| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
sabas123
Netherlands3122 Posts
On April 28 2013 23:34 Nachtwind wrote: For any one that is more interessted in the history you go here http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=128252 a quote from kotick in there wow thanks for that read. its fucking disguisting, it exetly kinda did reminded me about the mafia. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18840 Posts
On April 29 2013 04:42 mordk wrote: It still doesn't matter. There is a demand for this type of game, no matter how terrible a different segment of the gamer population thinks it is. As long as such demand exists, there will be those supplying the goods, and since that demand is large, they'll do well, that is all. There is no blame in milking demanding customers, it's the way business is done that is all. If you want to target a different audience with your business, making more unique experiences etc, that's great, but that doesn't mean you can fault Activision for seeking a more economically rewarding approach. lol, it's clear that you feel some need to defend this multimillion dollar company from dissenting opinions on the internet, but, to use your tired business 101 logic, as a consumer, it is my right to say, "I don't like the way Activision does business." It is that simple. You can tell me that they're filling in market space all you want, but that does little in the way of discounting the notion that mega companies like Activision and EA play a huge agential role in shaping that market space in the first place. Bobby Kotick just got an 800% raise; I don't think he needs mordk's advocacy on the TL forums. I'm sure he appreciates it though. @Jonny, yeah, I'm hoping that the developer space changes soon so that the risk in putting time and effort into "the next big game" without the backing of a mega-company becomes more feasible. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
AnomalySC2
United States2073 Posts
On April 29 2013 05:00 sabas123 wrote: wow thanks for that read. its fucking disguisting, it exetly kinda did reminded me about the mafia. Honestly I never understood how EA kept winning the "worst company in america" award over Activision. Then I realized Acti aren't ever a choice. I wonder how THAT happened :D | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On April 29 2013 05:00 farvacola wrote: lol, it's clear that you feel some need to defend this multimillion dollar company from dissenting opinions on the internet, but, to use your tired business 101 logic, as a consumer, it is my right to say, "I don't like the way Activision does business." It is that simple. You can tell me that they're filling in market space all you want, but that does little in the way of discounting the notion that mega companies like Activision and EA play a huge agential role in shaping that market space in the first place. Bobby Kotick just got an 800% raise; I don't think he needs mordk's advocacy on the TL forums. I'm sure he appreciates it though. @Jonny, yeah, I'm hoping that the developer space changes soon so that the risk in putting time and effort into "the next big game" without the backing of a mega-company becomes more feasible. That's partially why kickstarter works - a lot of the risk is shifted to the gamers that donate. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18840 Posts
On April 29 2013 05:06 JonnyBNoHo wrote: That's partially why kickstarter works - a lot of the risk is shifted to the gamers that donate. Absolutely, that's why I think anyone who takes issue with the biggies in the gaming industry ought to support these sorts of third-party operations. There is still the technological resource gap though, which is where I'm hoping the changes come from. | ||
|
Dapper_Cad
United Kingdom964 Posts
| ||
|
Timerly
Germany511 Posts
What baffles me is that he apparently gets credit for their stock performance. Blizzard has been working on SC2 and D3 forever and they are kept on a long leash by him. WoW has been running since way before he took over. ActiBlizz just happens to own Blizzard. Kotick coincides with stock performance but apparently that's enough for the board to approve ludicrous compensation while his developers work 14h+ constant crunch. | ||
|
Teddyman
Finland362 Posts
On April 29 2013 05:15 Timerly wrote: Kotick hasn't developed a single "100$ million franchise with annual sequel potential" in five years as CEO (Skylanders = Spyro IP). I can't wait for WoW's cashflow to slow down enough while at the same time CoD finally is behind us to see what's going to happen. So far as CEO he's been riding on things that came before him and finally introducing new IPs this year (probably Titan + X) will be the real test. For me he's only proven he can make sure they dish out annual CoDs. What baffles me is that he apparently gets credit for their stock performance. Blizzard has been working on SC2 and D3 forever and they are kept on a long leash by him. WoW has been running since way before he took over. ActiBlizz just happens to own Blizzard. Kotick coincides with stock performance but apparently that's enough for the board to approve ludicrous compensation while his developers work 14h+ constant crunch. Hasn't he been the CEO since 1991? | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17079 Posts
and we are now in an era where game companies are folding left and right, ATVI has managed to keep layoffs to a minimum. i'm surprised a company this big.. is still good at "keeping its ear to the ground". Kotick deserves credit for this. Kotick is also keenly aware of just how crappy in general the economy is for non-essential crap like video games and blockbuster movies. As long as Morhaime and Blizzard continue to have the level of autonomy they've had from 1995 to 2013.. then i'm happy with ATVI. | ||
|
Cloak
United States816 Posts
On April 29 2013 00:55 iSTime wrote: If the CEO is significantly overpaid relative to his value, maybe you should short Activision's stock. Since it's so obvious that they're overpaying someone who provides little value, and underpaying the people who add real value to the company, it can't continue to outperform other companies for very long. Unless, of course, you're not so confident and you're just talking out of your ass. Then don't short the stock. Market value is perception, not reality. The other business leaders circle jerk each other (perhaps justifiably so in this climate) and trust the persona of Bobby Kotick. The day other CEOs and their analysts view him as a detriment is the day I short Actvision-Blizzard. | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On April 29 2013 05:07 farvacola wrote: Absolutely, that's why I think anyone who takes issue with the biggies in the gaming industry ought to support these sorts of third-party operations. There is still the technological resource gap though, which is where I'm hoping the changes come from. Absolutely. Same goes for banks - if you hate them you better damn well belong to an alternative! I was hoping this kind of stuff would get a boost from the JOBS Act but the regulation writing has taken a back seat to finishing Dodd-Frank. | ||
|
Elairec
United States410 Posts
He has been CEO of Activision since 91, but the combined companies since 2008. It's amazing that back in 2009 Forbes reported his salary was 954k and here only 4 years later it's 8.33 mil? I wish I had those kinds of raises - not complaining though, I have a neutral opinion on this. | ||
|
Fyodor
Canada971 Posts
On April 29 2013 04:36 farvacola wrote: You are forgetting a key demographic, one that is easily manipulated and mostly unaware of what makes games "good". This group would be the parents of gamer kids, and once you realize how many 8-16 year old's and their parents are a huge part of the reason Activision and EA are as big as they are today, this "don't blame the company, blame the gamer" mentality becomes a lot less meaningful. As the gaming industry grew, my generation and the one before it had a fairer hand in dictating what "quality" meant in terms of gaming. With far fewer commercials, GameSpot bundles, and, most importantly, a wide and disparate business environment, small time developers had the luxury of trying things out and seeing if the public would enjoy them without the looming threat of corporate take-over or the necessity of bombing the public with massive advertising campaigns. Though things like Kickstarter and the growing indie game scene speaks to this trend in a contemporary sense, they are orders of magnitude smaller and less influential than Activision/EA, and it should be clear that these huge companies success is due to more than simply the fandom of the masses. Nah, your post is completely myopic when it comes to the history of video games. Today is the high point of history in terms of quality standards for video games. Back in the 70s/80s there was (practically) no internet to inform yourself on a video game's quality. Shelf space in big chains guaranteed success more than anything else. EA dominated shelf space. They pumped out "shovelware" which were extremely low budget games designed to gouge up all the shelf space and make sure everyone was walking out with an EA game. This lead to a market crash because consumers became disappointed by the value proposition of video games. Today most people already know what game they want to buy before even getting to the store. It doesn't matter how many space inavders clones there are on the shelf if what you want is GTAIV. EA abandoned that shovelware strategy a while ago. Focusing on quality titles and improving working conditions. I understand why Call of Duty is a limited game. Why it popular with some people while it isn't with some other people. What you cannot say is that it is Low Quality. The studios that pump out these games are fully staffed. The games cost millions to make and are generally well received by critics. Yes the multiplayer is cheap and most experienced players understand that having people spawn at random places is a mechanism to reward bad players with free kills on unsuspecting players with their backs turned. The maps are also designed so that no matter where you are you can get shot from multiple angles. I get that it is a bit vain to enjoy those games. The fact is that the CoD games are made to be enjoyed by semi-casual gamers and it achieves that goal extremely well and with outstanding consistency.It's also a fact that more casual players play less and don't take their improvement seriously. That makes it so they demand less change because they don't have as much time to adapt to it. The games need to be fun right away and have minimal learning curve. The important question is: Can serious gaming co-exist with Call of Duty? The answer is YES. A lot of high-budget, high-creativity titles are coming out. Portal, Heavy Rain, Shadow of the Colossus, GTA series, etc. Then there are titles like ARMA and Battlefield. They are less arcade, steeper learning curve. Starcraft 2 fits in here. Now there's the indie scene which is stronger than it ever was. Meatboy, FEZ, Minecraft, Cave Story(More of a pioneer), VVVVVV and the other humble bundle games. | ||
|
EvilTeletubby
Baltimore, USA22258 Posts
| ||
|
Dapper_Cad
United Kingdom964 Posts
I feel this is a relevant discussion: NSFW The following transcript was written for your convinience. It contains racist epithets which I chose to delete to avoid any possibility of thread derailment. It also contains many other swear words so I spoilered it. + Show Spoiler + WALLACE: "Man, these shits is right yo.'" POOT: "mmm hmmm" WALLACE: "Good with the hotsauce too though" POOT: "Mos' definately." WALLACE: "Yo D, you want some nuggets?" D'ANGELO: "Naa, go ahead man." WALLACE: "Man. Whoever invented these? He off the hook." POOT: "What?" WALLACE: "Mother fucker got the bone all the way out the damn chicken. 'Till he came along n*****s been chewing on drum sticks and shit getting their fingers all greasy. He said 'later for the bone', let's nugget that meat up and make some real money." POOT: "You think the man got paid?" WALLACE: "Who?" POOT: "The man who invented these." WALLACE: "Shit, he richer than a motherfucker." D'ANGELO: "Why? You think he get a percentage?" WALLACE: "...Why not? D'ANGELO: "N***** please, the man who invented them things, just some sad ass down at the basement of Mcdonalds, thinking up some shit to make some money for the real players" POOT: "Naa man that ain't right." D'ANGELO: "Fuck right. It aint' about right, it's about money. Now you think Ronald Mcdonald gonna go down that basement and say 'Hey mr. nugget, you the bomb, we selling chicken faster than you can tear the bone out, so I'm gonna write my clowny ass name on this fat ass check for you"? ... Shit. Man, the n***** who invented them things still working in the basement for regular wage thinking up some shit to make the fries taste better or some shit like that. Believe." WALLACE: "Still had the idea though." | ||
|
CuSToM
United States1478 Posts
On April 29 2013 05:02 Doodsmack wrote: So CoD landed in his lap and he probably thinks he's hot shit lol. Kinda like how the Super Bowl landed in Flacco's lap and then he got an absurd raise. Lots of people get too much credit for their luck. that is a really, really bad analogy. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18840 Posts
On April 29 2013 05:36 Fyodor wrote: + Show Spoiler + On April 29 2013 04:36 farvacola wrote: You are forgetting a key demographic, one that is easily manipulated and mostly unaware of what makes games "good". This group would be the parents of gamer kids, and once you realize how many 8-16 year old's and their parents are a huge part of the reason Activision and EA are as big as they are today, this "don't blame the company, blame the gamer" mentality becomes a lot less meaningful. As the gaming industry grew, my generation and the one before it had a fairer hand in dictating what "quality" meant in terms of gaming. With far fewer commercials, GameSpot bundles, and, most importantly, a wide and disparate business environment, small time developers had the luxury of trying things out and seeing if the public would enjoy them without the looming threat of corporate take-over or the necessity of bombing the public with massive advertising campaigns. Though things like Kickstarter and the growing indie game scene speaks to this trend in a contemporary sense, they are orders of magnitude smaller and less influential than Activision/EA, and it should be clear that these huge companies success is due to more than simply the fandom of the masses. Nah, your post is completely myopic when it comes to the history of video games. Today is the high point of history in terms of quality standards for video games. Back in the 70s/80s there was (practically) no internet to inform yourself on a video game's quality. Shelf space in big chains guaranteed success more than anything else. EA dominated shelf space. They pumped out "shovelware" which were extremely low budget games designed to gouge up all the shelf space and make sure everyone was walking out with an EA game. This lead to a market crash because consumers became disappointed by the value proposition of video games. Today most people already know what game they want to buy before even getting to the store. It doesn't matter how many space inavders clones there are on the shelf if what you want is GTAIV. EA abandoned that shovelware strategy a while ago. Focusing on quality titles and improving working conditions. I understand why Call of Duty is a limited game. Why it popular with some people while it isn't with some other people. What you cannot say is that it is Low Quality. The studios that pump out these games are fully staffed. The games cost millions to make and are generally well received by critics. Yes the multiplayer is cheap and most experienced players understand that having people spawn at random places is a mechanism to reward bad players with free kills on unsuspecting players with their backs turned. The maps are also designed so that no matter where you are you can get shot from multiple angles. I get that it is a bit vain to enjoy those games. The fact is that the CoD games are made to be enjoyed by semi-casual gamers and it achieves that goal extremely well and with outstanding consistency.It's also a fact that more casual players play less and don't take their improvement seriously. That makes it so they demand less change because they don't have as much time to adapt to it. The games need to be fun right away and have minimal learning curve. The important question is: Can serious gaming co-exist with Call of Duty? The answer is YES. A lot of high-budget, high-creativity titles are coming out. Portal, Heavy Rain, Shadow of the Colossus, GTA series, etc. Then there are titles like ARMA and Battlefield. They are less arcade, steeper learning curve. Starcraft 2 fits in here. Now there's the indie scene which is stronger than it ever was. Meatboy, FEZ, Minecraft, Cave Story(More of a pioneer), VVVVVV and the other humble bundle games. So, you've established that EA has a history of producing shitty content, even all the way back to the shovelware days. That's great. Pursuits of Trip Hawkins aside, I never said that there weren't ANY good games being produced during the rise of the mega gaming conglomerates. In fact, each of those titles you listed are great examples of how games turn out better when not developed beneath the girth of an Activision or EA. Valve, Rockstar, and Quantic Dream (Team Ico under Sony is a different story) are all great examples of how being a third-party developer can allow one to do cool things with game design that would otherwise be considered "too risky". Furthermore, it's funny you mention indie game developers as evidence that the scene is ok when Markus Petrsson, the creator of Minecraft, has even been quoted as saying, "EA releases an 'indie bundle'? That's not how that works, EA," he said, "Indies are saving gaming. EA is methodically destroying it." | ||
|
Euronyme
Sweden3804 Posts
| ||
|
cLAN.Anax
United States2847 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Other Games |
|
Wardi Open
StarCraft2.fi
Replay Cast
The PondCast
OSC
Demi vs Mixu
Nicoract vs TBD
Babymarine vs MindelVK
ForJumy vs TBD
Shameless vs Percival
Replay Cast
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
SC Evo League
BSL 21
Sziky vs OyAji
Gypsy vs eOnzErG
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
