Acti-Blizz: More Games, More Sequels

[DoctorFinger]

Activision Blizzard held their quarterly conference call yesterday, and delivered a full box of fresh ammunition for the Acti-Blizz haters in the audience.

First, an analyst asked CEO Bobby Kotick why the newly merged company didn't take all of Vivendi's properties with them, referring to games like Brutal Legend, 50 Cent, Riddick and Ghostbusters who were left without publishers after the merger. The short answer: those properties were not looked at as mega franchises. The games Activision Blizzard didn’t pick up, he said, “don’t have the potential to be exploited every year on every platform with clear sequel potential and have the potential to become $100 million dollar franchises. … I think, generally, our strategy has been to focus… on the products that have those attributes and characteristics, the products that we know [that] if we release them today, we’ll be working on them 10 years from now.”Next publishing boss Mike Griffith spoke about the increase in SKUs for 2009 over this year: 70 more SKUs representing a 40% increase. Now that doesn't mean 70 more titles - each version of a game gets it's own SKU - but it indicates a significant jump in overall output. Some of those games will be original IPs - Singularity, Prototype and Bizarre Creation's new racing title - but there will be a lot of sequels and adaptations in the mix as well.

Sources - Joystiq (http://www.joystiq.com/2008/11/05/activisions-09-lineup-70-larger-call-of-duty-titles-and-gui/); MTV Multiplayer (http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/11/05/why-activision-let-go-of-ghostbusters-and-50-cent-games/).

[Ancalagon]

Yeah, those Starcraft sequels, they had nothing to do with this change in policy. Oh, nothing at all.

[roboninja]

Can Activision actually screw up Blizzard? We will have to see, but they sure do seem to be trying.

[Deadend]

Can Activision actually screw up Blizzard? We will have to see, but they sure do seem to be trying.

No... this is in line with Blizzard. Blizzard just does this slower than Activison, but it does have only 3 franchises over a 15 year or so period.

[Shrinn]

Is it just me or did Activision get extremely ballsy around the time it acquired Blizzard.

All these things generally frowned upon in gaming culture, yearly carbon copy sequels, milking franchises, lack of new ip... They're nearly bragging about the fact that these concepts with negative connotations are being focused on.

[Cyndair]

No... this is in line with Blizzard. Blizzard just does this slower than Activison, but it does have only 3 franchises over a 15 year or so period.

Sure, but that is still different than splitting one game into three and releasing each yearly...

[GigaFuzz]

Sure, but that is still different than splitting one game into three and releasing each yearly...

Would you prefer it if they cut out two thirds of the content and released it as one game?

[Cyndair]

Would you prefer it if they cut out two thirds of the content and released it as one game?

If it meant three shorter campaigns, one for each race, with a number of missions comparable to the original Starcraft, then yes I certainly would.

[Crowe]

If it meant three shorter campaigns, one for each race, with a number of missions comparable to the original Starcraft, then yes I certainly would.

Thankfully they are not doing this.

30-40 missions over 3 campaign and all in one game.

or

90 missions over 3 campaigns/ One full Campaign and 2 priced as ex-packs.

I personally prefer the latter, more Starcraft is never a bad thing. And it's easy to put faith in a developer that knows how to deliver.

[Kelegacy]

At least their honest and say if they can't exploit them, they don't want them.

Which is fucking scary.

[Doctor Setebos]

Isn't Activision the company that last year came right out and said they plan to "exploit" every IP they have?

EDIT: Yep, it was Activision.

http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2007/20071205.jpg

[Goronmon]

Can Activision actually screw up Blizzard? We will have to see, but they sure do seem to be trying.I've yet to hear anything around Blizzard being affected by the merger. These are all obviously non-Blizzard titles and until I hear otherwise, I'm just not going to bother worrying about it.

[KingGorilla]

Did anyone ask why the company will not publish Brutal Legend, but will also not release Double Fine so that it can be somewhere else.

I will reiterate. John Carmak is at EA because he sees EA as a friendlier publishing partner for his games; let that sink in.

[Ancalagon]

I will reiterate. John Carmak is at EA because he sees EA as a friendlier publishing partner for his games; let that sink in.

It does say a lot about Activision, I agree.

[menage]

First, an analyst asked CEO Bobby Kotick why the newly merged company didn't take all of Vivendi's properties with them, referring to games like Brutal Legend, 50 Cent, Riddick and Ghostbusters who were left without publishers after the merger. The short answer: those properties were not looked at as mega franchises.

Pfffff.

So money over quality then is it? It looks like they're the new old EA.

I would buy Riddick and even Brutal Legend (if it's good) in a heartbeat.

[Cyndair]

Thankfully they are not doing this.

30-40 missions over 3 campaign and all in one game.

or

90 missions over 3 campaigns/ One full Campaign and 2 priced as ex-packs.

I personally prefer the latter, more Starcraft is never a bad thing. And it's easy to put faith in a developer that knows how to deliver.

I'd be inclined to agree with you but I can't see myself sitting there and playing through 30 straight Terran missions or 30 straight zerg missions. I'm going to want to change it up more often and try a different race. Under this new model I won't be able to do that unless I wait 3 years and drop 150 bucks.

[itchyeyes]

Pfffff.

So money over quality then is it? It looks like they're the new old EA.

I would buy Riddick and even Brutal Legend (if it's good) in a heartbeat.
To be fair, he is talking to an analyst. You don't talk about innovative and unique titles with analysts, those are things that they neither understand nor care about. Instead you talk about things like revenue and profit margins, which is essentially what he's doing here.

Not saying I disagree that they're the new old EA, just that the situation over there probably isn't quite as bad as that quote makes it look.

[menage]

To be fair, he is talking to an analyst. You don't talk about innovative and unique titles with analysts, those are things that they neither understand nor care about. Instead you talk about things like revenue and profit margins, which is essentially what he's doing here.

Not saying I disagree that they're the new old EA, just that the situation over there probably isn't quite as bad as that quote makes it look.

Maybe. Activision has never really appealed to me as a gamer anyway. I have zero games from them. With those named titles theyy could have sold me a few, but that doesn't seem to be in the cards.

Just like I haven't bought an EA game in a couple of years. But I'm very interested in what they're doing now.

[itchyeyes]

Yeah, those Starcraft sequels, they had nothing to do with this change in policy. Oh, nothing at all.
For the love of God people, we've already been over this ad nauseum (http://www.colonyofgamers.com/cogforums/showthread.php?t=966&highlight=starcraft). If you really want to keep flogging that dead horse at least keep it in one place.

[Ancalagon]

To be fair, he is talking to an analyst. You don't talk about innovative and unique titles with analysts, those are things that they neither understand nor care about. Instead you talk about things like revenue and profit margins, which is essentially what he's doing here.

Not saying I disagree that they're the new old EA, just that the situation over there probably isn't quite as bad as that quote makes it look.

I understand that, but instead of saying, "We are looking to enhance brand recognition and loyalty, customer satisfaction etc by making good quality original IP, heck or even good quality sequels or additions to existing franchises", or other marketing bullshit which an analyst would understand, he uses the word "exploit"

Using the word "exploit" instead of "utilize" is what does it for me, essentially.

[Xydarc]

Pfffff.

So money over quality then is it? It looks like they're the new old EA.

I would buy Riddick and even Brutal Legend (if it's good) in a heartbeat.
Took the words right outta my mouth.

[MagGnome]

90 missions over 3 campaigns/ One full Campaign and 2 priced as ex-packs.

"Priced as expansion packs" means $40 in Blizzard land.

Oh the savings. ;)


Well at least they are upfront and honest about what douchebags they are.

The line about "exploiting" their franchises says it all.

[Nikjitsu]

I will not forgive acti-blizz if I don't get to play ghostbusters.:mad:

[J Arcane]

Yup folks, just like I said over at IM, ActiBlizz is the new EA.

Guitar Hero gets a new game every week, Starcraft gets splintered into three, Diablo threatens to go "episodic" and revamps the graphics to look more like WoW, Call of Duty to continue until the end of time . . . .

In some ways they're worse, honestly. They've been this shit for years, it's just that now they have the money to really run everything they touch into the ground.

[Ancalagon]

For the love of God people, we've already been over this ad nauseum (http://www.colonyofgamers.com/cogforums/showthread.php?t=966&highlight=starcraft). If you really want to keep flogging that dead horse at least keep it in one place.

So I'm not allowed to not believe their PR? Sorry, I dont. I think there are elements of truth in it and they will still make good games, but as with most expansions, the goal is cash related.

[Variable Gear]

Blizzavision fucking sucks.

[tombofsoldier]

Aaaand the greatest game company in history goes to shit. At least Valve hasn't been sold.

[Doctor Setebos]

Hmmm. Activision. Blizzard.

Actard.

[Disgustipated]

Yup folks, just like I said over at IM, ActiBlizz is the new EA.

Guitar Hero gets a new game every week, Starcraft gets splintered into three, Diablo threatens to go "episodic" and revamps the graphics to look more like WoW, Call of Duty to continue until the end of time . . . .

In some ways they're worse, honestly. They've been this shit for years, it's just that now they have the money to really run everything they touch into the ground.

Wow, because nobody said it before you? Damn man, you're definitely the originator of the "Activision is the new EA" phrase! :cool:

[Blue]

If I don't get my Ghostbusters I'm going to drive to their headquarters and attempt to open some sort of portal to a dark dark world.

[Doctor Setebos]

If I don't get my Ghostbusters I'm going to drive to their headquarters and attempt to open some sort of portal to a dark dark world.They already have one of those. In fact, I believe they have two. It was the gateway to that dark, shadowy realm that suggested they split Starcraft II into three separate games, so, yeah, it's probably pretty evil.

[That Darn Kat]

Isn't Activision the company that last year came right out and said they plan to "exploit" every IP they have?

EDIT: Yep, it was Activision.

-a very amusing PA strip-
I came here to ask if it was necessary for them to use the word "exploited" but apparently it's their thing. Maybe they should consider hiring a (new) PR guy with the oodles of money they'll make exploiting franchises.

[Blue]

They already have one of those. In fact, I believe they have two. It was the gateway to that dark, shadowy realm that suggested they split Starcraft II into three separate games, so, yeah, it's probably pretty evil.

Maybe I could find a dimension filled with sunshine and unicorns. Perhaps that will best thwart their evil taint.

[Purple Santa]

Can Activision actually screw up Blizzard? We will have to see, but they sure do seem to be trying.
Yes. We really don't need to wait. They are stating it loud and clear. Understandable they wish to "exploit" their properties to the best of their ability to make profit. Just hope they realize that's a good way to run it into the ground as well. But look at the games they are exploiting...they sell well..real well...and is it possible they won't sell in the next two years? It's depressing to read they will "exploit" their properties but as long as fans of those franchises still buy them with reckless abandon...
Maybe. Activision has never really appealed to me as a gamer anyway. I have zero games from them. With those named titles theyy could have sold me a few, but that doesn't seem to be in the cards.

Just like I haven't bought an EA game in a couple of years. But I'm very interested in what they're doing now.
Try Dead Space if you haven't. Rent if need be. Or wait till it's come down in price. It's worth playing.

I will not forgive acti-blizz if I don't get to play ghostbusters.:mad:
Well you will get to play Ghostbusters. Just not with acti-blizz as the publisher :p

Maybe I could find a dimension filled with sunshine and unicorns. Perhaps that will best thwart their evil taint.

No unicorns and sunshine?? I was told and sold on the idea CoG would be all about unicorns and sunshine. I've been had. A pig and a poke i've been sold...

[Blue]

No unicorns and sunshine?? I was told and sold on the idea CoG would be all about unicorns and sunshine. I've been had. A pig and a poke i've been sold...

Yeah, we don't have that kind of resources just yet. We were mostly just trying to get ADDGirl over here through you and your love of the unicorn sunshine factor.

[Goronmon]

Aaaand the greatest game company in history goes to shit. At least Valve hasn't been sold.Until Blizzard starts putting out shitting games, I'd hold off on the "gone to shit" stuff. I mean, if it's the idea of the "money-grab" turning you off, then Blizzard was "shit" back when they started working on World of Warcraft.

[bean]

Fuck them for not funding Brutal Legend.

[menage]

Try Dead Space if you haven't. Rent if need be. Or wait till it's come down in price. It's worth playing.


I plan to, but I'm holding of on that one until there's a dry spell again. So many games at the moment, it would be shooting myself in the foot if I play them all in 3 weeks time. And the girlfriend is pretty cool about me buying stuff, but there is a limit.

Looks like a stellar budget purchase in a couple of months.