[QUOTE="The_Capitalist"]
Throughout the Internet, gamers bash Activision for no good reason, doing it only because it's "cool" to express an intense dislike for Activision and everything Call of Duty. While there have been many occassions where criticism of Activision is warranted (like back when it was announced that the PC version of MW2 won't be getting dedicated servers), much of it is generally unwarrated, even unnecessary, driven only by herd behavior and an intense desire to see Activision fail.
In order to justify why they hate Activision, gamers often mention the number of franchises Activision has milked and how studios are shut down for subpar performance after their key franchises have been milked to the limit. Ironically, many other publishers (EA, cough, cough) are guilty of such practices too. So why did everyone repimand Activision when it shut down Bizarre after Blur's failure last year? Two years ago, EA shut down Pandemic after The Saboteur flopped.
It's just the cycle of the business. Why should Activision continue to pay the salaries of programmers, artists, and HR personal when some of these people were partially responsible for a commercial failure? Video game development thrives on research and development, and if there aren't enough viable projects to keep them occupied, why not lay them off? Yes, layoffs are very sad, but so is life.
Additionally, people accuse Activision of milking Call of Duty dry, offering no new gameplay mechanics or innovations for the past three four titles while charging $15 for map packs. Gamers have demonstrated that they are willing and able to pay for the same game each year, so why not milk them? If I were in such a position, I would do the very same thing. It makes the gamers happy, it makes the shareholders happy, and the developers get to keep their jobs.
As a university student enrolled in a business school, I applaud Activision for finding a product where they can derive more cyclical revenue from. In the entertainment industry, a product that can deliver steady and even returns every year is usually envied. In short, Activision has created a product that sells like toothpaste.
The hate against Activision is driven by the collective disappointment of some gamers who dislike how commercialism of the gaming industry has brought down great studios, dumbed down games, and encouraged other such unscrupulous practices. But, if some of you feel so strongly about Activision as you claim, then maybe you should stop buying Call of Duty and encourage your friends to do the same.
I probably won't be buying MW3 when it comes out, but the general disdain for Activision is shocking. They're just another business with the aim of making money. After all, most development houses, aspiring modders, etc. are all in it for the money, too. And Activision has been successful so far. What's wrong with that?
DraugenCP
First of all 'others do it too' is never a good argument to dismiss criticism. Whois to say thatthe critics of Activision do not feel about EA the same way? I know I do. In fact, EA might be worse in this respect.
Secondly, there are two ways of looking at Activision: the first and, within the context of this forum, most important one is looking at it from a gamer's perspective. From this angle, it is undeniable that Activision embodies like few other companies the stagnation of the industry, unwilling to take risks or innovate, and resorting to rather cheap tactics to get more money from their customers.
That doesn't mean that, from a business point of view, Activision is doing a great job. I can fully understand that you, as a business school student, admire how Activision manages to maximise profits within such a rapidly changing industry. You must bear in mind, however, that the majority of us are not businessmen, but simple video game aficionados who just like to see a company make good games and support products without trying to get the last penny out of our pockets. In this sense, we are in our right to criticise Activision from a pure aesthetic point of view: they do not represent the same interests as we do. Again, what they do is logical from a business point of view, but that doesn't mean that we have to like it.
You must also realise that the people that post here are nearly all people who are seriously into video games (or 'hardcore' if you will), and as such we cannot be held accountable for what the general public seemingly wants. Yes, money is a voting ballot and if there are enough people willing to cough up $15 for a few extra maps then it's understandable that Activision makes them. This doesn't mean that it's a good development for the industry, though, nor that we have to be happy that these things are happening more and more. Because as everyone should know, the fact that a lot of people want something doesn't automatically make it good. It's a grave misconception that the majority is always right. Their will will be carried out, but that doesn't necessarily justify it from an aesthetic point of view. Just look at democracy.
Finally, it's so easy dismiss something as just 'a bunch of people trying to be cool'. Sure, there are a lot of people out there who jump the bandwagon without really knowing what's going on, but if there wasn't an actual problem at the core, there would be no bandwagon to begin with.
I appreciate everyone who is talking from a gamer perspective but you know he is right and I think its just flat out ignorant to pretend anything is done without the intention of making money. IT IS ALL MONEY. No one goes and works a job for the sole reason of liking it and says "no no, don't pay me, I'm here for the love of it". That's not how reality works, you do something because you like it AND because they pay you. Do I like corporate business practice? Not a tiny tiny bit. But that's not relevant to how it has to be so its best to just deal or find ways to not support corporate.
I am also of the opinion that its not up to me to dictate what is healthy for the development of games. Its for the game developers to dictate. Its for the game developers to lead the charge if they have a problem. You are responsible for you, you can't disctate how others operate. If they themselves don't want to work to fix development issues, I don't see how my 2 cents is going to really help, matter or be relevant.
If people want change its in the best interest of everyone to get educated. That said video games is not the area of life most people care to become educated on.
Log in to comment