Activision Is Platform Agnostic, Says Kotick

[JDKJ]

While i dont like Kotick this is a good attitude for a company to have, even if he only believes this because he can make more profit out of it.

I find 'xxx console only' games just tend to piss off a lot of people.

Is there any better reason for a ceo of a company to believe that? He does run a company not the toyshop at the north pole. What is with "they make games so they shouldn't worry about profits" mentality?? What makes developing games any different from any other company?

That's the part I never get with so many posters here who act as if a business' interest in making a profit is one of the Seven Deadly Sins. As if they're talking about the Red Cross or the Salvation Army or some other non-profit charitable organization. It's a business. They're in the business of business. Profit is their business.

 

[JoshGod]

While i dont like Kotick this is a good attitude for a company to have, even if he only believes this because he can make more profit out of it.

I find 'xxx console only' games just tend to piss off a lot of people.

Is there any better reason for a ceo of a company to believe that? He does run a company not the toyshop at the north pole. What is with "they make games so they shouldn't worry about profits" mentality?? What makes developing games any different from any other company?

It doesn't however there's a difference between making a profit and just being a douche about it.

 

[Marowit]

Translation:

'We'll develop for whatever platform that has the most users, and then port to other lesser-used platforms - you see, I love money.'

 

[JDKJ]

anyone else thinks this is a most obvious statement?

Bullshit. I've heard (never wasted the money on) the PC version of MW2 and BLops were horrid console ports, and if they don't play favorites, why does 360 always get everything first? Hmm?

Activision plays favorites to whoever gives them more money. Microsoft pays for the timed exclusives

and its probably the cheapest to develop on the 360 first and port it, than to waste money co-developing for each platform. Highly doubt its due to favoritism tbh. But hey you could be right too ^-^

How so? I thought it was the publishers who paid the console makers for the privilege of using the platform (in the form of fees and percentage of sales, etc.). Exclusive distribution usually costs the distributee, not the distributor.

 

[JDKJ]

While i dont like Kotick this is a good attitude for a company to have, even if he only believes this because he can make more profit out of it.

I find 'xxx console only' games just tend to piss off a lot of people.

Is there any better reason for a ceo of a company to believe that? He does run a company not the toyshop at the north pole. What is with "they make games so they shouldn't worry about profits" mentality?? What makes developing games any different from any other company?

It doesn't however there's a difference between making a profit and just being a douche about it.

If he's making a profit, so what that he's a douche about it? You think his shareholders care more about the profit or that he's a douche about it? I'm guessing that they care more about the profit.

 

[Smooth Operator]

I don't think his willingness to sell out was ever in question, we know his soul already belongs to Lucifer so anything after that is just silly.

I only wonder why Call of Farmville wasn't made yet.

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

Kotick said that as long as a device had a processor and a display, and was capable of delivering an experience that Activision's audience would enjoy, then the publisher was willing to invest in it.

I'm not here to suggest that Activision's audience is easy to please. Not at all. All I'm saying is simply that as soon as they figure out a way to award killstreaks for completing equations, we can expect CoD: Graphing Calculator edition to hit the shelves sometime soon.

Also whoever writes Kotick's statements needs to be fired if he thinks this is what 'agnostic' means.

 

[DTWolfwood]

anyone else thinks this is a most obvious statement?

Bullshit. I've heard (never wasted the money on) the PC version of MW2 and BLops were horrid console ports, and if they don't play favorites, why does 360 always get everything first? Hmm?

Activision plays favorites to whoever gives them more money. Microsoft pays for the timed exclusives

and its probably the cheapest to develop on the 360 first and port it, than to waste money co-developing for each platform. Highly doubt its due to favoritism tbh. But hey you could be right too ^-^

How so? I thought it was the publishers who paid the console makers for the privilege of using the platform (in the form of fees and percentage of sales, etc.). Exclusive distribution usually costs the distributee, not the distributor.

well if that is the case, Kotick is a liar. then again thats not a big surprise either lol

 

[JoshGod]

While i dont like Kotick this is a good attitude for a company to have, even if he only believes this because he can make more profit out of it.

I find 'xxx console only' games just tend to piss off a lot of people.

Is there any better reason for a ceo of a company to believe that? He does run a company not the toyshop at the north pole. What is with "they make games so they shouldn't worry about profits" mentality?? What makes developing games any different from any other company?

It doesn't however there's a difference between making a profit and just being a douche about it.

If he's making a profit, so what that he's a douche about it? You think his shareholders care more about the profit or that he's a douche about it? I'm guessing that they care more about the profit.

What about customers? After all what is a business without its customers? Seriously its in his best interest (yes profit) to at least cut down on the bullshit let alone see to the decreasing quality in their games.

 

[Hypertion]

i have to say on the Black ops being made for XBOX360 line that in a sense it makes sense TO focus on the xbox. however not for the reasons of microsofts fanbase but because a Cross Platform game that runs its Cross componets in Multiplayer rather than simply Being avilable the game must usually focus on the lowest common denominator. The Xbox360 when compaired to those evil monolithic looking gaming PCs or the PS3 is the weakest of the group. as a result an efforts made to make the games componets rum as smoothly on the Xbox as the other systems will to some degree lessen the game for the other systems which can handle more. in additon theres little reason to completly remake the game for each system simply for graphics and adding anything other than better graphics to the other systems versions would prevent Cross platform Multiplayer.

In simple terms. A Game that is TRUELY CROSSPLATFORM will be designed to run best using a standpoint of the weakest of the Platforms from a hardware standpoint, The Xbox360...

now... if any of this is true, or im completly off i will either accept my Prize for being smarter than the average monkey, or will become your "i'm so wrong" slave.

i would like to say my laptop in there as a gaming syste, but this thing is really too low a line for modern gaming sadly. Its 5 years old after all, and was never a gaming system to begin with.

 

[JDKJ]

You can't fault Kotick for having an Active vision.

You put the "pun" in "punishing."

 

[JDKJ]

While i dont like Kotick this is a good attitude for a company to have, even if he only believes this because he can make more profit out of it.

I find 'xxx console only' games just tend to piss off a lot of people.

Is there any better reason for a ceo of a company to believe that? He does run a company not the toyshop at the north pole. What is with "they make games so they shouldn't worry about profits" mentality?? What makes developing games any different from any other company?

It doesn't however there's a difference between making a profit and just being a douche about it.

If he's making a profit, so what that he's a douche about it? You think his shareholders care more about the profit or that he's a douche about it? I'm guessing that they care more about the profit.

What about customers? After all what is a business without its customers? Seriously its in his best interest (yes profit) to at least cut down on the bullshit let alone see to the decreasing quality in their games.

That's what I suspect may be the problem. That the customers somehow see themselves as the objective of the business' existence. They're not. They're only the means by which the business gets to its objective. As long as they continue to provide that means, the business, truth be told, could care less about the customers.

 

[Delock]

I don't think 'agnostic' means what you think it means.

No, I'm pretty sure he got it right. After all, how Activision has handled the developers underneath them will make you doubt the belief in a (benevolent) God.

 

[wadark]

Seems like the gaming community has such a terrible perception of Kotick that they will manage to make anything he says a negative thing. I'm pretty sure that at this point he could say that Activision's next game will include a free year's supply of chocolate and he would still be hated for it.

Here's a freaking news flash. Videogames are still a business, a venture designed to make money, and Bobby Kotick is CEO (read: chief money-maker) of a video game company. Yes, he is trying to find ways to make money. Calling him out like this:

You see I read this and Ijust picture him rubbing his hands together, dollar signs in his eyes.

"What else can I leech the lifeblood out of today?"

doesn't accomplish anything. If the company still makes good games, than who cares. If they don't, or if they stop making good games, then don't buy their games.

Rule number one of entertainment industries: People vote with their wallets.

 

[squid5580]

While i dont like Kotick this is a good attitude for a company to have, even if he only believes this because he can make more profit out of it.

I find 'xxx console only' games just tend to piss off a lot of people.

Is there any better reason for a ceo of a company to believe that? He does run a company not the toyshop at the north pole. What is with "they make games so they shouldn't worry about profits" mentality?? What makes developing games any different from any other company?

It doesn't however there's a difference between making a profit and just being a douche about it.

Well then try focusing your anger at the people who deserve it. And that is not Bobby. That is the "journalists" who insist on quoting him everytime he says it like it is. Cuz I really hate to be the one to say it but a CEO of any company anywhere saying "I want to make money" is not newsworthy. And they are being far more douchey by using these catchy headlines to villify Bobby to get more hits which equals ad revenue.

Oh crap I meant to say don't look at the man behind the curtain.

 

[KaosuHamoni]

My first thought: "So, Satan doesn't know if God exists or not... Well..."

Seriously though. Shut up Kotick.

 

[archvile93]

While i dont like Kotick this is a good attitude for a company to have, even if he only believes this because he can make more profit out of it.

I find 'xxx console only' games just tend to piss off a lot of people.

Is there any better reason for a ceo of a company to believe that? He does run a company not the toyshop at the north pole. What is with "they make games so they shouldn't worry about profits" mentality?? What makes developing games any different from any other company?

That's the part I never get with so many posters here who act as if a business' interest in making a profit is one of the Seven Deadly Sins. As if they're talking about the Red Cross or the Salvation Army or some other non-profit charitable organization. It's a business. They're in the business of business. Profit is their business.

There is such a thing as corporate responsibility though. It is not all about profits, and trying to scrape in every last penny using methods that would make even Spongebob's Mr. Krabs cringe in disgust. Did you ever stop and wonder what mainly caused the great depression? The stock market crashing under the massive weight of speculation was only a small part of it.

 

[archvile93]

Lousy double posts.