Are you boycotting activision

[Jacob Lucas]

Short answer yes.

Long answer no.

 

[maddawg IAJI]

Why the heck would I boycott them? Ya, I don't like Bobby Kotick or a lot of the things they do, but they provide me with decent games and therefore I'm going to continue to buy their games.

 

[Raylas]

If they screw up Prototype 2 or Diablo 3, those bastards are dead to me forever! I don't usually buy Activision's games, mostly for the fact that those games are complete and utter cow shit.

 

[Kadoodle]

My two least favorite companies are EA and Activision. They're both huge corporations, and they both employ asshole tactics to get their money. The difference between the two is that EA actually makes a good game every so often.


And lets face it: Activision would be dead without COD.

 

[dWintermut3]

I have friends that work for an activision-owned studio, so I really would feel crappy boycotting them entirely.

Also, I don't know what they've done except read the market.

It's not a news flash that re-tread tedious crud sells better in the market at large than ground-breaking innovative gaming. More people are willing to pay for Call of Duty 47: Modern helicopter mechanic than for an indy experimental title.

Don't blame Activision for reading market trends and trying to maximize profits. That's what companies are FOR. The point of a corporation is to make money.

If we have a problem with it we have only ourselves to blame for sucking up pablum. Boycotting activision would be shooting yourself in the foot to spite your leg if you enjoy the games they put out, if you don't, there's a massive indy community now thanks to new ways of publishing content and the magic that is the XBLA and Steam, buy indy if you want to see a change, but if you enjoy what the major studios are pushing out, and you know what, I often do, go for it.

 

[Whitenail]

I suppose I haven't, between Guitar Hero and Black Ops. I'm aware that they stinge out developers on well-deserved dosh and Bobby Kotick's apparently the spawn of Satan but the way I see it they're no more evil than any other company that ever got anywhere.

 

[Chibz]

If we have a problem with it we have only ourselves to blame for sucking up pablum. Boycotting activision would be shooting yourself in the foot to spite your leg if you enjoy the games they put out, if you don't, there's a massive indy community now thanks to new ways of publishing content and the magic that is the XBLA and Steam, buy indy if you want to see a change, but if you enjoy what the major studios are pushing out, and you know what, I often do, go for it.

There's a VERY large area between "Call of Duty 53" and "Experimental Indie Title". What Activision releases is shovelware pure and simple. They're milking all their franchaises literally to death, to make short term profits. And once (for example) call of duty is no longer profitable (Due to their own poor business decisions) they'll drop it like that. *Finger snap*

This is no way to run a business, and this is not a business I will support.

 

[darksakul]

I never was interested in Activision games to begin with.
Only Activision game I own, Guitar Hero Metallica was given to me as a gift because my friends knew I was a Metallica fan.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

No I have no reason to.

 

[qazmatoz]

I am for their lack of respect towards games as a meaningful medium. It's the same as I would never go see a film like Paul Blart or anything that Adam Sandler does anymore.

 

[Smooth Operator]

I'd love to boycot Activision itself, problem is they are at the helm of good developers and they only get money through Activision.

The other problem is Activision will be the last to suffer if the cash flow stops, they don't mind putting all of their subordinates on the streets just to make a buck or two extra.

But I don't buy all that many of their games, the only ones in recent years were CoD games, but now that they killed off Infinity Ward they probably can't make even a single decent one.

 

[dWintermut3]

I never was interested in Activision games to begin with.
Only Activision game I own, Guitar Hero Metallica was given to me as a gift because my friends knew I was a Metallica fan.

If we have a problem with it we have only ourselves to blame for sucking up pablum. Boycotting activision would be shooting yourself in the foot to spite your leg if you enjoy the games they put out, if you don't, there's a massive indy community now thanks to new ways of publishing content and the magic that is the XBLA and Steam, buy indy if you want to see a change, but if you enjoy what the major studios are pushing out, and you know what, I often do, go for it.

There's a VERY large area between "Call of Duty 53" and "Experimental Indie Title". What Activision releases is shovelware pure and simple. They're milking all their franchaises literally to death, to make short term profits. And once (for example) call of duty is no longer profitable (Due to their own poor business decisions) they'll drop it like that. *Finger snap*

This is no way to run a business, and this is not a business I will support.

You have a point, of course, but on the other hand some surprisingly innovative-but-still mainstream titles have come out of activision, like Singularity.

I did simplify, of course, and other publishers are proving you can be judicious in your use of a license and make serious bank with it (bungee, bioware, both have been careful not to oversell a good thing with Halo:reach being the confirmed last Halo title and Mass Effect being confirmed at three titles in a trilogy and no direct sequels).

In the end burnout will show them that it's not a good way to do business, and I am leery of picking up activision titles because they do tend to be fairly derivative. But it is cutting off your nose to spite your face not to buy a game you're interested in just because of who made it.


Recent events have also shown companies that they can parcel out a license slowly and get far more milage. Fallout3 and New Vegas proved that it's possible to necro a series from a beloved part of gaming history into a worldwide bestseller IF and only if you back it up with quality. I'd be surprised if no one in the gaming business learned a big lesson there. Especially because the Fallout series was at risk of being over-exploited (lackluster releases of tactics and BoS put the series down for a good long time) and was resurrected because of attention to quality.

 

[superbatranger]

I don't consciously boycott Activision. If they put out a poorly made product, I won't buy it. If it's fun for me, then maybe I'll buy it. Simple.

 

[teqrevisited]

I stopped with CoD4 and since then nothing they've published / developed has interested me enough to even consider buying it.

Kotick's all-consuming greed has a hand in it too.

 

[darksakul]

You have a point, of course, but on the other hand some surprisingly innovative-but-still mainstream titles have come out of activision, like Singularity.

I did simplify, of course, and other publishers are proving you can be judicious in your use of a license and make serious bank with it (bungee, bioware, both have been careful not to oversell a good thing with Halo:reach being the confirmed last Halo title and Mass Effect being confirmed at three titles in a trilogy and no direct sequels).

In the end burnout will show them that it's not a good way to do business, and I am leery of picking up activision titles because they do tend to be fairly derivative. But it is cutting off your nose to spite your face not to buy a game you're interested in just because of who made it.

Recent events have also shown companies that they can parcel out a license slowly and get far more milage. Fallout3 and New Vegas proved that it's possible to necro a series from a beloved part of gaming history into a worldwide bestseller IF and only if you back it up with quality. I'd be surprised if no one in the gaming business learned a big lesson there. Especially because the Fallout series was at risk of being over-exploited (lackluster releases of tactics and BoS put the series down for a good long time) and was resurrected because of attention to quality.

I do not get it, how I am included in that statement? Only reason I have that Guitar hero game was because it was a gift. I am not going to be so callous when my friends think, how he is a Metallica fan, he might like this; to reject their kindness and getting me a gift.
I just plain never had any real interest in Activision titles, ever. Ever since the early PS1 days I felt that Activision games was too flashy with no substance or miss the point of the genre the game was in. Before PS1, if Activision existed, I never notice or did not care enough to notice. If it was not for the media and people pointing out Activision products to me, Activision would be one of those companies that would be lost to obscurity. I would honestly cared more in who made the foam cups my McDonald's Sweet tea came in, than a game developer who I feel isn't worth my effort noticing.

So am I boycotting Activision? For me to boycott them, I have to care about them first, I have to invest time and energy so they be detected on my radar first. Such as I almost forgot that Activision published Infinity Ward's Modern Warfare 2, that is how low Activision is on my priorities and my radar of noticing.

 

[dWintermut3]

You have a point, of course, but on the other hand some surprisingly innovative-but-still mainstream titles have come out of activision, like Singularity.

I did simplify, of course, and other publishers are proving you can be judicious in your use of a license and make serious bank with it (bungee, bioware, both have been careful not to oversell a good thing with Halo:reach being the confirmed last Halo title and Mass Effect being confirmed at three titles in a trilogy and no direct sequels).

In the end burnout will show them that it's not a good way to do business, and I am leery of picking up activision titles because they do tend to be fairly derivative. But it is cutting off your nose to spite your face not to buy a game you're interested in just because of who made it.

Recent events have also shown companies that they can parcel out a license slowly and get far more milage. Fallout3 and New Vegas proved that it's possible to necro a series from a beloved part of gaming history into a worldwide bestseller IF and only if you back it up with quality. I'd be surprised if no one in the gaming business learned a big lesson there. Especially because the Fallout series was at risk of being over-exploited (lackluster releases of tactics and BoS put the series down for a good long time) and was resurrected because of attention to quality.

I do not get it, how I am included in that statement? Only reason I have that Guitar hero game was because it was a gift. I am not going to be so callous when my friends think, how he is a Metallica fan, he might like this; to reject their kindness and getting me a gift.
I just plain never had any real interest in Activision titles, ever. Ever since the early PS1 days I felt that Activision games was too flashy with no substance or miss the point of the genre the game was in. Before PS1, if Activision existed, I never notice or did not care enough to notice. If it was not for the media and people pointing out Activision products to me, Activision would be one of those companies that would be lost to obscurity. I would honestly cared more in who made the foam cups my McDonald's Sweet tea came in, than a game developer who I feel isn't worth my effort noticing.

So am I boycotting Activision? For me to boycott them, I have to care about them first, I have to invest time and energy so they be detected on my radar first. Such as I almost forgot that Activision published Infinity Ward's Modern Warfare 2, that is how low Activision is on my priorities and my radar of noticing.

That's basically what I mean.

"boycott" implies wanting to buy something but not for a political/moral reason. If you have no interest in activision games it's not a boycott, it's just, not buying things you aren't interested in.

If you are interested in the games it's stupid, IMHO, not to buy them just because Activision published them. You're punishing yourself and the development studio more than activision.

 

[darksakul]

That's basically what I mean.

"boycott" implies wanting to buy something but not for a political/moral reason. If you have no interest in activision games it's not a boycott, it's just, not buying things you aren't interested in.

If you are interested in the games it's stupid, IMHO, not to buy them just because Activision published them. You're punishing yourself and the development studio more than Activision.

Okay I see your point now.

To me Activision is so lack-luster to me, I am surprised they are still in business. I do feel pitty on those smaller game studios, the independent guys, those go unnoticed for different reasons that Activsions mainstream titles. Sadly with Indie titles unless you read about it somewhere, or heard of it by word of mouth, you never will know about that indie game. To me surprisingly alot of Indie games are quite imaginative, more innovative that Nintendo thinks/pretends to be with a small fraction of the resources and 10 time the passion in their work. That deserves its own thread.

 

[MoNKeyYy]

In short, yes. In french, oui. In long and spanish, CIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII.

Activision are assholes. I'm not a fan of EA either. But Activision in worse. And Bobby Kotick can suck a big fat evil money grubbing dick.

 

[dWintermut3]

That's basically what I mean.

"boycott" implies wanting to buy something but not for a political/moral reason. If you have no interest in activision games it's not a boycott, it's just, not buying things you aren't interested in.

If you are interested in the games it's stupid, IMHO, not to buy them just because Activision published them. You're punishing yourself and the development studio more than Activision.

Okay I see your point now.

To me Activision is so lack-luster to me, I am surprised they are still in business. I do feel pitty on those smaller game studios, the independent guys, those go unnoticed for different reasons that Activsions mainstream titles. Sadly with Indie titles unless you read about it somewhere, or heard of it by word of mouth, you never will know about that indie game. To me surprisingly alot of Indie games are quite imaginative, more innovative that Nintendo thinks/pretends to be with a small fraction of the resources and 10 time the passion in their work. That deserves its own thread.

As an aside, I find the "new releases" and "best sellers" section of Steam is very good for finding new indy games. It's how I found out about Gratuitous Space Battles, Guns of Icarus, Racettear and several other games I've enjoyed immensely. Okay Guns of Icarus was a bit short, but still I'll buy anything steampunk it's just a weakness I have. The "under 5 dollars" and "under 10 dollars" searches are also great for finding indy gold.

Also, flash gaming sites. Oh where would indy devs be without them. Yes in many cases the "full version" they're proffering is actually an iPhone or Android app but still, it's one of the last refuges of the clever programmer.

 

[blankedboy]

I've been boycotting Activision since before I knew they were evil.
I've been boycotting them because they're games suck

You clearly haven't played Pitfall: The Mayan Adventure.
That game was awesome ^^