PDA

View Full Version : Activision cements their place as the new king douchebags.



noble
12-15-2008, 06:44 PM
Remember all those games that Activision dropped that had us all scratching our heads?

Brutal Legend, Ghostbusters, F.E.A.R, and the list goes on and on.

A lot of people(myself included), wondered if there was something wrong with these games.

Turns out not so much.

Game Informer(the new issue) finally revealed the reason Activision dropped these games like yesterday's dirty laundry.

They dropped them and I quote; "Because they didn't seem like games they could exploit with sequel after sequel in the future"


Ugh.

I hate this company for what they did to Guitar Hero, and them dropping what seemed to be some really triple A titles, and leaving them with an uncertain future, really didn't help that opinion.

This though...not wanting to release a game that might be the next Bioshock(I'm just giving an example here), because you don't know if you can exploit it for future sequels.

What a bunch of dicks.

Slewo.O
12-15-2008, 06:46 PM
What the hell? Did they seriously say exploit for future sequels?

Akira
12-15-2008, 06:48 PM
Meh, it's their choice to do with the IPs what they want. And when new IPs don't sell (EA is just shy of committing seppekku over the Mirror's Edge sales) you can't blame them. Douchey would be just letting the IPs whither on the vine and block other companies from doing anything with them. They made a business decision that made sense to them in this climate, but didn't stop others from making the games. Not douchy in my book. Shortsighted, but not douchy.

NickT
12-15-2008, 06:49 PM
What did they do to Guitar Hero?

Casali
12-15-2008, 06:56 PM
Yeah, I remember seeing something about this on Kotaku a while back. The comments got really heated about how shitty Activision is for doing this.

But yeah, the fact that Activision basically said that they want nothing but games that require incremental changes to sell new units along the lines of Madden and, to a lesser extent, the WWE games is so incredibly short-sighted, yet completely consistant. Low risk/high reward is the gold standard in gaming development, and nothing us fanboys say about it will change Activision's mind, despite their position as the deep pockets that could fund serious innovation.

Casali
12-15-2008, 07:01 PM
What did they do to Guitar Hero?

If I remember correctly (which is about 50/50 nowadays), they tried to turn it into the type of game they were looking for.

Activision and the original developers clashed something serious about the direction of the game. Activision wanted incremental changes without serious innovation and were slow on offering DLC, despite claiming to offer robust DLC. The developers wanted innovation and a steady stream of DLC, which they got when they created Rock Band.

Had Activision not been a bag of dicks, there might not have been a Rock Band. There would have been Guitar Hero World Tour with robust DLC and serious thought behind new features instead of crappy "bosses" and a ganked user-created content tool.

Supreme Convoy
12-15-2008, 07:07 PM
It's hard to imagine a developer not to think up of a sequel for Brutal Legend, that looks fun! And Ghostbusters seems like a no-brainer... sequel or not.

noble
12-15-2008, 07:22 PM
What did they do to Guitar Hero?

The same thing they did to Tony Hawk.

Kept churning out sequel after sequel until it was nothing but a pile of crap.

They have 9! guitar hero sequel/spin-offs planned for 09 already.

And the fact that the gameplay just can't measure up to the old HMX guitar hero's really isn't helping them.

costello
12-15-2008, 07:37 PM
What did they do to Guitar Hero?

Cockblocking RB guitars kept me from buying GH3, which is stupid because I eventually wanted a 2nd guitar.

TheKraken
12-15-2008, 07:49 PM
The same thing they did to Tony Hawk.

Kept churning out sequel after sequel until it was nothing but a pile of crap.

They have 9! guitar hero sequel/spin-offs planned for 09 already.

And the fact that the gameplay just can't measure up to the old HMX guitar hero's really isn't helping them.

What's the source on the 9 GH games? I find that really hard to believe...

Bill!
12-15-2008, 07:56 PM
Ah well. Activision is a really shit company anyway. I can easily do without them.

Joe Henderson
12-15-2008, 07:59 PM
I wouldn't call them douchebags. Just very shortsighted and a bit stupid.

Wigner's Friend
12-15-2008, 08:04 PM
No one shall outdouche King Douchebag.

noble
12-15-2008, 08:54 PM
What's the source on the 9 GH games? I find that really hard to believe...

Kotaku was reporting it early in the fall.

I don't know all of them but GH5, Gh Metallica, there's another on tour for the DS, and there's been talk of GH Van Halen, and there was another stand alone band game but I'm drawing a blank right now.

noble
12-15-2008, 08:54 PM
No one shall outdouche King Douchebag.

Actually that was EA circa three years ago, and I believe they've surpassed them at this point.

noble
12-15-2008, 08:59 PM
Found it.

Sorry it was 2010 not 2009, but there are at least three coming next year with Metallica, on tour, and GH5.
This is from Kotaku :


And You Think There Are Too Many Guitar Hero Games NOW?
By Luke Plunkett, 10:30 PM on Mon Sep 15 2008, 6,070 views
Wait til you see the future! During their analyst's day conference call earlier today, Activision announced their intent to run the Guitar Hero brand into the ground. While Bobby Kotick said in May that they want to continue to "expand" the franchise, they've today got specific, saying that means they want 3x the number of Guitar Hero games on the market in 2010, by bringing in more and more developers to work on the series. Yeah. Three times. There'll have been three Guitar Hero games in 2008 by the time Christmas rolls around, so you do the math. Guitar Hero: Timbaland, coming soon!

Hock
12-15-2008, 09:00 PM
Meh, it's their choice to do with the IPs what they want. And when new IPs don't sell (EA is just shy of committing seppekku over the Mirror's Edge sales) you can't blame them. Douchey would be just letting the IPs whither on the vine and block other companies from doing anything with them. They made a business decision that made sense to them in this climate, but didn't stop others from making the games. Not douchy in my book. Shortsighted, but not douchy.

Ghostbusters is hardly a new IP.

JEK
12-15-2008, 09:01 PM
i am in complete agreement with Activision, i refuse to do anything that doesn't have sequel value to it.

Shawn_Kehoe
12-15-2008, 09:16 PM
Remember all those games that Activision dropped that had us all scratching our heads?

Brutal Legend, Ghostbusters, F.E.A.R, and the list goes on and on.

A lot of people(myself included), wondered if there was something wrong with these games.

Turns out not so much.

Game Informer(the new issue) finally revealed the reason Activision dropped these games like yesterday's dirty laundry.

They dropped them and I quote; "Because they didn't seem like games they could exploit with sequel after sequel in the future"


Ugh.

I hate this company for what they did to Guitar Hero, and them dropping what seemed to be some really triple A titles, and leaving them with an uncertain future, really didn't help that opinion.

This though...not wanting to release a game that might be the next Bioshock(I'm just giving an example here), because you don't know if you can exploit it for future sequels.

What a bunch of dicks.

My buddy has a theory that whenever a company becomes the #1 3rd party publisher, absolute evil takes over.

The good news is that EA is recovering from their time as Darth Vader nicely, with Dead Space, Mirror's Edge and now Brutal Legend to their name ... not to mention Rock Band and the Valve games.

Shawn

TheKraken
12-15-2008, 09:21 PM
Found it.

Sorry it was 2010 not 2009, but there are at least three coming next year with Metallica, on tour, and GH5.
This is from Kotaku :


And You Think There Are Too Many Guitar Hero Games NOW?
By Luke Plunkett, 10:30 PM on Mon Sep 15 2008, 6,070 views
Wait til you see the future! During their analyst's day conference call earlier today, Activision announced their intent to run the Guitar Hero brand into the ground. While Bobby Kotick said in May that they want to continue to "expand" the franchise, they've today got specific, saying that means they want 3x the number of Guitar Hero games on the market in 2010, by bringing in more and more developers to work on the series. Yeah. Three times. There'll have been three Guitar Hero games in 2008 by the time Christmas rolls around, so you do the math. Guitar Hero: Timbaland, coming soon!

Crazy. Not owning a DS and not hating the last couple GHs the way some do, I could be ok with that. I wouldn't buy them all, of course, but variety is nice. But then again, the track list for WT was pretty lackluster. The songs are all that matter. If I liked the track list enough, I'd be willing to try any of the music games, I'm not adhering to a particular brand.

Whip
12-15-2008, 09:54 PM
NINE Guitar Hero games for one year alone? What the fuck. Talk about milking a cow.

And fuck them for cancelling Ghostbusters.

noble
12-16-2008, 04:34 AM
If I remember correctly (which is about 50/50 nowadays), they tried to turn it into the type of game they were looking for.

Activision and the original developers clashed something serious about the direction of the game. Activision wanted incremental changes without serious innovation and were slow on offering DLC, despite claiming to offer robust DLC. The developers wanted innovation and a steady stream of DLC, which they got when they created Rock Band.

Had Activision not been a bag of dicks, there might not have been a Rock Band. There would have been Guitar Hero World Tour with robust DLC and serious thought behind new features instead of crappy "bosses" and a ganked user-created content tool.

Totally agree.

Can you imagine how big the Guitar hero franchise would be right now, if HMX had stayed with the series and done with it what they've done with Rock Band?

I love Rock Band don't get me wrong, but it's a shame that HMX had to take two steps backwards because the general public doesn't realize these are the guys that made GH1, 2 and Rocks the 80's.

It gets so frustrating when I hear people say that Rock band is just stealing all their ideas from Guitar Hero, and not realize that they created Guitar Hero.

Now they have to compete against the very name brand they created.

Oh well, what can you do? :)

Akira
12-16-2008, 05:16 AM
Ghostbusters is hardly a new IP.

For all intents and purposes it is. When was the last Ghostbusters movie? The last video game? 5 console generations ago. about 75% of the audience for games today (kids 18 and under) either don't know or don't care about Ghostbusters.

Cth
12-16-2008, 06:18 AM
Imagine a Ghostbusters MMO.

Everyone has their HQs, you get random calls, and everyone races out to the scene. Add in some Sim City type stuff by expanding franchises.

Boost the 'spirit activity' during months like October and plan a big event.

Something like Stay Puft shows up that requires LOTS of proton blasts, etc.

TheKraken
12-16-2008, 06:26 AM
For all intents and purposes it is. When was the last Ghostbusters movie? The last video game? 5 console generations ago. about 75% of the audience for games today (kids 18 and under) either don't know or don't care about Ghostbusters.

That's mostly true, but I think today's kids probably know Ghostbusters better than you think. After all, some of their parents are our age, and we love it. :)

Stark Raving
12-16-2008, 07:10 AM
Umm...

Halo?
Resident Evil?
Final Fantasy?
Mario?
GTA?
Devil May Cry?
Call Of Duty?




Bueller?

Scotty
12-16-2008, 07:37 AM
What's the problem with a company try to use a business plan to have a continued stream of revenue?

CWebb
12-16-2008, 07:42 AM
Damn. Both Brutal Legend and Ghostbusters looked like a lot of fun.

noble
12-16-2008, 07:42 AM
What's the problem with a company try to use a business plan to have a continued stream of revenue?

When you're passing on solid IP's just because you don't think you can milk them for all their worth?

I know companies are in it for the bottom line, but that just seems to be beyond stupid to me.

Yeah it might just be a one time selling thing, but imagine if Brutal Legend was next years Bioshock(sales and recognition wise I mean, not tone).

With this line of thinking, if Activision had control of Bioshock they would have shelved it and we might never have gotten a fantastic game.

Under Activisions rule we're not going to get anything new. Just games that are sequels of sequels, and the same old crap shoveled out year after year.

I liked Tony Hawk. By Tony hawk 5 I was sick of it.

noble
12-16-2008, 07:44 AM
Damn. Both Brutal Legend and Ghostbusters looked like a lot of fun.

They are both still coming out.

Atari picked up Ghostbusters, and EA now has Brutal Legend, so no worries there.

It's just there was a lot of buzz and excitement surrounding both these games (and others that Activision dropped), and the reason has finally came out why they dropped them.


For a while there it was unclear if Ghostbusters, or Brutal Legend would ever see the light of day, and that very well could happen to some of the other games that Activision dropped.

Scotty
12-16-2008, 07:47 AM
When you're passing on solid IP's just because you don't think you can milk them for all their worth?

I know companies are in it for the bottom line, but that just seems to be beyond stupid to me.

Yeah it might just be a one time selling thing, but imagine if Brutal Legend was next years Bioshock(sales and recognition wise I mean, not tone).

With this line of thinking, if Activision had control of Bioshock they would have shelved it and we might never have gotten a fantastic game.

Under Activisions rule we're not going to get anything new. Just games that are sequels of sequels, and the same old crap shoveled out year after year.

I liked Tony Hawk. By Tony hawk 5 I was sick of it.

This is just one game company with one model. If the game solid it'll find a way to get published. But I'm not ready to knock Activision because they dropped Ghostbusters. Totally their call to make, they got obligations to maintain and if they feel they can't do that with a Ghostbusters line (which I disagree if it sells like hotcakes there's sequels to do) then so be it, let someone else reap the rewards.

Rosdower 3.0
12-16-2008, 07:48 AM
What did they do to Guitar Hero?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Th02lJDM8BM

Rosdower 3.0
12-16-2008, 07:49 AM
Honestly as long as Brutal Legend and Ghostbusters get made...that makes me happy. :)

Rosdower 3.0
12-16-2008, 07:52 AM
Damn. Both Brutal Legend and Ghostbusters looked like a lot of fun.

they are still being made...just under a different company now :)

TheKraken
12-16-2008, 07:56 AM
When you're passing on solid IP's just because you don't think you can milk them for all their worth?

I know companies are in it for the bottom line, but that just seems to be beyond stupid to me.

Yeah it might just be a one time selling thing, but imagine if Brutal Legend was next years Bioshock(sales and recognition wise I mean, not tone).

With this line of thinking, if Activision had control of Bioshock they would have shelved it and we might never have gotten a fantastic game.

Under Activisions rule we're not going to get anything new. Just games that are sequels of sequels, and the same old crap shoveled out year after year.

I liked Tony Hawk. By Tony hawk 5 I was sick of it.

These things are expensive to make and expensive to buy and the economy's in the toilet. Faulting them for only wanting to release games that are guaranteed not to tank in this climate is kind of silly. Yes, Brutal Legend could be the next Bioshock, or it might be the next Shadow of the Colossus, and amazing game largely ignored by the buying public. I can't fault them for being overly cautious right now. As long as the games find a publisher, everything works out. And if Activision misses the boat on enough hits, it could inspire them to take more chances.

Blane
12-16-2008, 07:59 AM
Marvel needs to not be involved with Activision at all. Seriously, in comparison to other companies, they make really really bad games.

noble
12-16-2008, 08:00 AM
These things are expensive to make and expensive to buy and the economy's in the toilet. Faulting them for only wanting to release games that are guaranteed not to tank in this climate is kind of silly. Yes, Brutal Legend could be the next Bioshock, or it might be the next Shadow of the Colossus, and amazing game largely ignored by the buying public. I can't fault them for being overly cautious right now. As long as the games find a publisher, everything works out. And if Activision misses the boat on enough hits, it could inspire them to take more chances.

Yeah there was a happy ending with Brutal and Ghostbusters, but what if they hadn't been picked up by other publishers?

That's the whole point of my labeling them as such.

Again I understand the reasoning, but as a gamer it infuriates me to no end.

killingyouguy
12-16-2008, 08:23 AM
Unfortunately with rapidly expanding costs, major video game companies are going the way of major studios. It's cheaper to repackage a slightly alterned product and call it a sequel on top of the fact that it has a built in audience. Though I'd say gamers are a savvier bunch than your average blockbuster audience.

CWebb
12-16-2008, 09:21 AM
They are both still coming out.

Atari picked up Ghostbusters, and EA now has Brutal Legend, so no worries there.
Very nice. At least the situation's not all bad.