Activision: Blockbuster games should be 70 pounds or more.

they won't. Activision doesn't have anything to say about how Blizzard operates. Blizz is completely independent from Activision. Rememeber it was Blizzard (or to be specific their parent company) who bought Activision, not the other way around. I'm sure Activision would love to get their hands on Blizzard, but they can't, Vivendi won't let them

AdrianWerner

Um... StarCraft II is coming out in three pieces. If this was the old Blizzard, it would have been one. Blizzard's mantra for the longest time is "when its done it comes out." Now its "we will finish a part of it, release it, then start working on the next part."

foxhound_fox

I disagree. This way the game wouldn't be out till 2013, so it wouldn't be made in the first place. Blizzard would just make a game in their old s.tyle: short campaigns for three races and then start releasing add-ons. I don't see how the new aproach has anything to do with Activision (other than a need to blame them for everything wrong). You don't like it..blame Blizzard, there's no indication this has anything to do with Activision

AdrianWerner

Hasn't the game been in production for five years already? And wasn't Diablo II delayed for nearly three years? The new Blizzard under Activision is not the same as the old one... and their new "strategy" is very fishy... given they would gladly have given us gamers all that content for $50 10 years ago.

foxhound_fox

The ironic thing is this would suck, but people wouldn't be complaining.

I can't believe 8 pages has gone by and no one has realized it's not Activision that said this :lol:

Deering is an accountant. He's not in the business of making or even selling games. He just looks at the $. There was a time when games, even blockbusters didn't cost very much to develop, could sell several millions, and publishers would rake in the cash. These days, due to inflation and other factors, more complicated hardware, more manpower/hours. Games aren't as proffitable as they once were. To be as proffitable, they would have to cost more. Simple as that Deering is NOT saying that's what is going to happen.

With that said i'm not sure he knows all of what he's talking about anyway. It's not like MW2 was in development for 5 years built from the ground up. It's just CoD4 with a very shiny, nice, new coat of paint. Not very costly compared to another high profile game like a GTAIV

the new EA.......stereointegrity

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]Not shocked. I understand the games are expensive, but they better have a damn good game to sell it for 70 bucks. I wouldn't spend 70 bucks on THe Orange Box which many would agree is one of the best deals in gaming. foxhound_fox

I can't believe 8 pages has gone by and no one has realized it's not Activision that said this :lol:

Deering is an accountant. He's not in the business of making or even selling games. He just looks at the $. There was a time when games, even blockbusters didn't cost very much to develop, could sell several millions, and publishers would rake in the cash. These days, due to inflation and other factors, more complicated hardware, more manpower/hours. Games aren't as proffitable as they once were. To be as proffitable, they would have to cost more. Simple as that Deering is NOT saying that's what is going to happen.

With that said i'm not sure he knows all of what he's talking about anyway. It's not like MW2 was in development for 5 years built from the ground up. It's just CoD4 with a very shiny, nice, new coat of paint. Not very costly compared to another high profile game like a GTAIV

I can't believe 8 pages has gone by and no one has realized it's not Activision that said this :lol:

Deering is an accountant. He's not in the business of making or even selling games. He just looks at the $. There was a time when games, even blockbusters didn't cost very much to develop, could sell several millions, and publishers would rake in the cash. These days, due to inflation and other factors, more complicated hardware, more manpower/hours. Games aren't as proffitable as they once were. To be as proffitable, they would have to cost more. Simple as that Deering is NOT saying that's what is going to happen.

With that said i'm not sure he knows all of what he's talking about anyway. It's not like MW2 was in development for 5 years built from the ground up. It's just CoD4 with a very shiny, nice, new coat of paint. Not very costly compared to another high profile game like a GTAIV

Couth_

hmm they are already doing it.. look at pc version.. its $60 instead of the normal price of$50 for a new game..

http://www.gamestop.com/Catalog/ProductDetails.aspx?product_id=74786

ppl are complaining because they are actually going thru with this in the uk (not $100+ but still more than the normal price) and they are afraid that it might happen in the us if this succeeds..

It's for activision to die.

It can't be repeated enough, if you buy Modern Warfare 2 at its new pricepoint, you are an idiot who ruins **** for everyone and will be hated and frowned upon by all. I recommend buying the thing used.

I can't believe 8 pages has gone by and no one has realized it's not Activision that said this :lol:

Deering is an accountant. He's not in the business of making or even selling games. He just looks at the $. There was a time when games, even blockbusters didn't cost very much to develop, could sell several millions, and publishers would rake in the cash. These days, due to inflation and other factors, more complicated hardware, more manpower/hours. Games aren't as proffitable as they once were. To be as proffitable, they would have to cost more. Simple as that Deering is NOT saying that's what is going to happen.

With that said i'm not sure he knows all of what he's talking about anyway. It's not like MW2 was in development for 5 years built from the ground up. It's just CoD4 with a very shiny, nice, new coat of paint. Not very costly compared to another high profile game like a GTAIV

Couth_

though i was going to get MW2 first day it gets released but changed my mind.. If activision believes that games should cost more just cause previous titles in the series were good, am sorry but i wont support their published titles..

I hope many other gamers do the same and dont rush out getting the game upon release cause that would be a bad signal to all publishers in making them believe we 'gamers' accept to pay more for games..

though i was going to get MW2 first day it gets released but changed my mind.. If activision believes that games should cost more just cause previous titles in the series were good, am sorry but i wont support their published titles..

I hope many other gamers do the same and dont rush out getting the game upon release cause that would be a bad signal to all publishers in making them believe we 'gamers' accept to pay more for games..

Malta_1980

Just buy it Used

I'm buying the limited edition just to piss some people off. Also, the price hasn't changed a bit here. :D

Why do casual gamers keep buying into Activision? They seem to believe that they are completely immune from competition. This is probably true because people buy their games without end.

Ever since they took over Blizzard they have believed they are invincible.

Its sickening.

Wow awesome plan, I'm sure they didn't factor in the part of torrents.JigglyWiggly_

[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]Wow awesome plan, I'm sure they didn't factor in the part of torrents.markop2003

I actually found this at the MW2 boards, but it will be seen more here. Story:

"Modern Warfare 2 and the UK have been strange bedfellows in the media lately, with news that Activision will raise the price of the game to £54.99 (nearly $90). According to game industry mogul (and former Sony Europe boss) Chris Deering, the price hike isn't high enough. Deering tells MCV that blockbuster games simply aren't being produced efficiently enough, saying that the price of such games would actually have to cruise up to £70 ($115!) in order to support the industry as they once did.

That said, Deering realizes that there is "a psychological glass ceiling" for the amount consumers are willing to spend, and notes, "Consumers won't spend more, but to write the game, publishers are having to spend more than ever before. That's the key problem."

Of course, the flipside of this is that game prices could be lower if they were produced more efficiently -- or if the games market grew large enough to support the industry by buying more copies. But $115 games? Ouch."

Link

So what are your thoughts on this? I know how I feel about this :evil:

70 pounds ($115)? Yikes, that's too much, man! But, I do understand what Deering is saying now that I think about it. So much work is being put into a game now these days, it's almost like making an interactive holywood movie. Well, I dunno if what I said is a bit of a strech, but think about it, guys. You have to pay a person to write a story for a AAA game, hire actors for voicing, etc. But back at the days, gaming was not as expensive because they never require in depth work. I guess it's because of people's high expectations for games now these days, I dunno. With better graphics, a good storyline, good voicework, etc. it just all adds up. But how long can this keep up? Maybe I am seeing things out of proportion, maybe I am misanalyzing. What are your thoughts?

[QUOTE="Nonstop-Madness"]what ? are they insane ? No one would ever pay that much for 1 game. heretrix

True. Also Street Fighter 2 and Virtua Racing on Megadrive cost almost $100 each :?

Ok, thats enough. Screw you Activision, and your overrated Call of Dutyz!!!

Seriously. I bet MW 2 would still sell like hell in the UK if it were £70.

Greedy b******s....

$70 is eccentric, in my opinion.

70 pounds is ridiculous.

I knew it....Video games are doomed. It's just a matter of time. I'm suprised activision isn't including just one multiplayer map, and making us buy the rest individually for $10 a piece. :|MortalDecay

Hopefully someone from Activision doesn't read that or you just gave them a "great" idea.

[QUOTE="Couth_"]

I can't believe 8 pages has gone by and no one has realized it's not Activision that said this :lol:

Deering is an accountant. He's not in the business of making or even selling games. He just looks at the $. There was a time when games, even blockbusters didn't cost very much to develop, could sell several millions, and publishers would rake in the cash. These days, due to inflation and other factors, more complicated hardware, more manpower/hours. Games aren't as proffitable as they once were. To be as proffitable, they would have to cost more. Simple as that Deering is NOT saying that's what is going to happen.

With that said i'm not sure he knows all of what he's talking about anyway. It's not like MW2 was in development for 5 years built from the ground up. It's just CoD4 with a very shiny, nice, new coat of paint. Not very costly compared to another high profile game like a GTAIV

MortalDecay

Why do casual gamers keep buying into Activision? They seem to believe that they are completely immune from competition. This is probably true because people buy their games without end.

Ever since they took over Blizzard they have believed they are invincible.

Its sickening.

Wasdie

It's the other way around. Vivendi/Blizz are the big bosses. I think what ruined Blizzard was all the millions pouring in from wow every month. Once you get a taste of that kind of money, you keep wanting more, and more and more. You can't blame them though, they are a company and if you owned a gaming company you would be wishing you were in their shoes.

Nothing stupid coming from Activision shocks me anymore. I've become desensitized to their particular brand of moronic blather.

Go ahead Activision, price away! You'll kill your standing in the market and make the world a better place.

ok i know its a bash thread against activision but im starting to wondering if the 10 years lifecycle sony claim for the ps3 is because of the money it take to create AAA title this gen . what do you think ?legol1

Actually several developers have made it clear that they need this generation to go longer than normal to recoup increased dev costs. Both because of higher costs to make the games, and longer time spent per game.

The Sony 10 year cycle is nothing new, they had the same plan for their last two consoles as well, and I doubt we'll wait 10 years for new consoles. We'll not be seeing new consoles in the next year or two either though.

Nothing stupid coming from Activision shocks me anymore. I've become desensitized to their particular brand of moronic blather.

Go ahead Activision, price away! You'll kill your standing in the market and make the world a better place.

santoron

[QUOTE="MortalDecay"][QUOTE="Couth_"]

I can't believe 8 pages has gone by and no one has realized it's not Activision that said this :lol:

Deering is an accountant. He's not in the business of making or even selling games. He just looks at the $. There was a time when games, even blockbusters didn't cost very much to develop, could sell several millions, and publishers would rake in the cash. These days, due to inflation and other factors, more complicated hardware, more manpower/hours. Games aren't as proffitable as they once were. To be as proffitable, they would have to cost more. Simple as that Deering is NOT saying that's what is going to happen.

With that said i'm not sure he knows all of what he's talking about anyway. It's not like MW2 was in development for 5 years built from the ground up. It's just CoD4 with a very shiny, nice, new coat of paint. Not very costly compared to another high profile game like a GTAIV

Couth_

*raises hand* I was one of the people that didn't read the article, I know, shame on me. But to be fair, I was a little bedheaded when I got online. But now that I read the article, I made another perspective about it and I can understand the reason for the price increase, but I think it's a little unreasonable. But, that's the price for games being bigger and better. I wonder if we are gonna start seeing signs of the gaming industry collapsing on it's own weight anytime soon. Maybe it's just me. But, I think Activision raising the price for their games in the U.K. is a little iunreasonable. And I also heard that they're gonna charge the PC version of MW2 to $60, which I knew it was gonna hapen sooner or later with PC Games, but found it ironic a bit that Activision are the first to make this move.

yes if you wanna kill gaming then thats the way to go. also how exactly are publishers spending more? especially activison? cod MW2 is MW1 with new maps etc.

sikanderahmed

People keep blabberig about ethics. Don't like, don't buy it.

Why the hell are we paying £55 for MW2 and American still has to pay £40? The sad truth is that idiots will still pay for this because its COD.

Why the hell are we paying £55 for MW2 and American still has to pay £40? The sad truth is that idiots will still pay for this because its COD.

clyde46

hey you know whats funny guys?EA used to make me facepalm/roll eyes....but with activision I think I'm gonna throw up.truly disgusting.how is anyone gonna justice paying 110$ for a rehash game from a rehash dev thjat does nothing but make sequels.lacksavision literally is an abomination that needs to be thrown into the sun/buried alive/feed to the lions!

Activision's only blockbuster game is COD. So this £70 should have no effect on them.

what ? are they insane ? No one would ever pay that much for 1 game. Nonstop-Madness