EA Slings More Mud at Activision

[Andy Shandy]

There is only one way to settle this, surely - The (almost) Notch way. Each publisher picks a game from their respectively big franchises. EA with a choice Battlefield, Sports franchises, Need For Speed, Burnout, Rock Band, Medal of Honor and Command and Conquer (oh and Dead Space 2, nearly forgot about that) to choose from. Activision with Call Of Duty, Guitar Hero, Tony Hawk and...not much else that immediately comes to mind in terms of multiplayer actually. If it comes to a tie, then a match of Team Fortress 2 settles it. Winner corporation's CEO gets to teabag the other CEO, and has bragging rights over the other company.

 

[Blaster395]

Perhaps their arguments could bring them both crashing down.

 

[RUINER ACTUAL]

I completley agree with that last paragraph. EA calling out Activision like this will help the industry grow. Stopping annual releases in this manner could kill CoD in one way or another.

 

[ShadowsofHope]

I'll only support EA in this case as they currently have Bioware under their wing, and I am a loyal Bioware fan.

Otherwise.. Fight, fight fight! I do like me some good, old fashioned corporate warfare. Really gets the blood pumping, you know?

 

[5t3v0]

I'm surprised there are even people defending Activision. Bobby Kotick's mouth has cause enough damage to that company. And I'm sorry but bringing up the Guitar Hero and Tony Hawk failures was a great point. Activision hasn't really published anything else worth playing other than CoD and that's a problem. Look at what relying on one franchise did to Square Enix.

This, actually. I think one of the only other reasons apart from CoD thats keeping activision afloat is their partnership with Blizzard, whom activision have slowly corrupted thanks to their removal of certain necessary features from Diablo III.

 

[5t3v0]

Battlefield 3= Battlefield game that takes some of the best features from the previous games, as well as many changes
COD MW3= every other COD game, but I am intreeged to find out what happens to soap.

Activision has my money/rent there.

Honestly, the original statement you made (which I fixed) seems short sighted. If you go onto battlefield centric forums there is constant bitching about how "Its Nothing like battlefield 2! ITS GOING TO BE SHIT! BURN IN HELL EA FOR NOT RE RELEASING BF2 WITH BETTER GRAPHICS!"

Battlefield 3 is an attempt to amalgamate all that they did right in the last 10 years, as well as some heavy changes which are a step forward, not a step sideways in the case of CoD.
CoD is stepping sideways because its too scared of the road ahead, its trying to dodge the bullshit that it thinks is coming its way while not actually moving forward at all.

Also, Knowing them, they won't put a resolve to soap. Im picking up MW3 as well eventually because I want to know, but they'll either kill him off disappointingly or have some really bullshit resolve, or give him nothing and he has to continue fighting in that monotonous battle that wasn't good nor believable since MW1.

 

[Thedayrecker]

EA is being a dick?

Also the it rains from the sky.

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

Two massive gaming monsters battling for the right to churn out mediocre and assembly line shooters!
Neither company releases anything decent, so who cares? Why not just ignore BOTH companies and let them go away?

 

[robert01]

I hate both companies equally because they pretty much both stand for the opposite of what I think gaming should be.

OT:

EA: This is probably another publicity stunt because well they are kinda known to do really stupid shit to publicize their games. They know that Battlefield isn't going to sell as well as CoD.
While they do make some logic regarding the quality of games that Activision has released in the past, they forget they all it takes is from one brilliant idea, and their next CoD game puts them right back into the game.

Activision:
The only real reason they are still around is because of Blizzard. Blizzard kept them going when the only thing left was CoD, they know that they aren't producing large numbers of best sellers games, that is why they are trying to take the friendly approach. They don't have the assets to back up any comments they make regarding games.

I am not taking any side because personally I don't care for either game franchise, but as a whole EA needs to stop with the shit talk. They are one of the largest game publishers in the world, and the shit they do is looked at by everyone and it reflects ALL publishers/developers and the people who play games in a negative light. But Activision needs to grow a pair and at least defend it's products. What kind of message do you think consumers are getting when they are openly attacked and they don't defend their product. Would you purchase the next game in either of those franchises? Probably not.

 

[Assassin Xaero]

This is pretty pathetic, especially since Call of Duty sucked after World at War and Battlefield... well... always sucked... And the Tony Hawk games were still good when Novalogic was making them, but once either them or Activision (probably Activision) started pushing for one every year and they were getting rushed, they went down hill...

 

[JKain]

*yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawns*
Never has my avatar felt more appropriate.

"I actually feel this kind of rhetoric is bad for our industry," Hirschberg said. "I want as many games as possible to succeed, whether we created them or not, because I want this industry to keep growing and bringing in new people."

-One of the worst forced face-turn-attempts i've seen

"Welcome to the big leagues Eric - I know you're new in the job but someone should have told you this is an competitive industry," Green said.

-1 of the most uninspired Gimmicks I've seen

"You've got every reason to be nervous. Last year Activision had a 90 [percent] share in the shooter category," he continued. "This year, Battlefield 3 is going to take you down to 60 or 70. At that rate, you'll be out of the category in 2-3 years."

-Overall i think this is one of the lamest Promos for an uninteresting feud there ever was

Professional Wrestling really is dead

 

[AlphaEcho]

Neither game looks particularly interesting, but only one of them requires me to install a bullshit, ancillary DRM client. If I were going to get either it'd be Modern Warfare. Origin can fuck itself.

The trash talk is just a PR stunt. I don't think either CEO really cares all that much about "the medium" and are both really just trying to push numbers in their own way.

If BF3 does not interest you, you have to lower your standards.

Stop being a ***** over origins, you have to install it to play BF3, you do not need to keep it. It only has to be a one time install.

 

[MASTACHIEFPWN]

Battlefield 3= Battlefield game that takes some of the best features from the previous games, as well as many changes
COD MW3= Takes the good aspects from every other COD game, but tries to impliment new features, and I am intreeged to find out what happens to soap.

Activision has my money/rent there.

Honestly, the original statement you made (which I fixed) seems short sighted. If you go onto battlefield centric forums there is constant bitching about how "Its Nothing like battlefield 2! ITS GOING TO BE SHIT! BURN IN HELL EA FOR NOT RE RELEASING BF2 WITH BETTER GRAPHICS!"

Battlefield 3 is an attempt to amalgamate all that they did right in the last 10 years, as well as some heavy changes which are a step forward, not a step sideways in the case of CoD.
CoD is stepping sideways because its too scared of the road ahead, its trying to dodge the bullshit that it thinks is coming its way while not actually moving forward at all.

Also, Knowing them, they won't put a resolve to soap. Im picking up MW3 as well eventually because I want to know, but they'll either kill him off disappointingly or have some really bullshit resolve, or give him nothing and he has to continue fighting in that monotonous battle that wasn't good nor believable since MW1.

You want to play that game, I fixed the words I never said. Trust me. All of the battlefield games I've played are similer. They might add a game mode and Jets, but that doesn't make a game. I honestly hate both of the game series', and would rather let them all burn in hell.

 

[madmatt]

What a sad, sad, sad, little man Brown is. How does waving your cock in the air contribute to anything? Why do they have to denigrate other companies, when they could work on improving their own. This is how EA got a really bad reputation that they have only recently started tackling.

 

[joshthor]

i used to defend EA. but i have no respect for them anymore. they are going at project 10 dollar the complete wrong way, they are forcing origin on the consumer and they are badmouthing other games. look. i want battlefield 3 to succeed but you are going up against MW3 and you are being dicks about it. i already hated activision, and now i hate you EA. go 2k games!

 

[Vault boy Eddie]

Just let Activision fuck themselves. The MW1 expansion, I mean, MW3 will be another shovel of dirt on Activision's attempt to bury Call of Duty's body alive.

 

[HerbertTheHamster]

Sounds like that COD kid you kill 30 times, who then kills you once and keeps bragging about it.

I guess they act like their target audience.

 

[Dragunai]

At the rate EA is putting out dick moves like Origin and Cutting the in game server select from the PC print I can already see this being a horrific slaughter where upon EA is losings its testicles to Activision.

Seeing as Kotick has been taken out back and shot I might actually start putting my support into Activision again, so long as Hirshy apologizes for Black ops and promises it won't happen again.

Also considering that MW3 will most likely be backed by Steam for multiplayer and so on, a DRM we can all accept even if we detest this shit in its entirety it's safe to say that MW3 now has the edge over BF3.

 

[aarontg]

I understand that activision has done some bad things in the past but this hate towards it is unreasonable. It would be unreasonable for any developer. Well I'll have you know EA I'll be buying both games this year and dealing with the pros and cons of both. So at least I won't be tipping the scales at all.

 

[Baresark]

I'm surprised there are even people defending Activision. Bobby Kotick's mouth has cause enough damage to that company. And I'm sorry but bringing up the Guitar Hero and Tony Hawk failures was a great point. Activision hasn't really published anything else worth playing other than CoD and that's a problem. Look at what relying on one franchise did to Square Enix.

I couldn't possibly agree more. The new fascist is in town, I guess Hitler is off the hook then. It just doesn't make sense. Really, neither company is doing anything to move the industry forward. Just because Activision called EA on it doesn't mean they are any different. I mean, one day, like all giants, they will fall(ask Nintendo and Sega) and there will be some other douche bags doing the same thing.

OT: I honestly don't think that these two companies are very competitive. There are lots of military shooters out there, they just happen to be the biggest. I don't know anyone who chose BF over CoD for any other reason than they are not the same games at all. The multiplayer is completely different, which is the main reason they even exist. I don't like CoD multiplayer, so I didn't buy it. Not because I chose one over the other, if BF didn't exist, I still wouldn't play CoD. There is plenty of room for both in the industry, and both sides have done their share of mudslinging. That is really what moving the industry forward means, people making games for a chosen group of gamers and working within that understanding.

To reiterate, the alternative to BF for me is not CoD, it's me simply not playing any multiplayer military shooters. That is reality for me, but that doesn't mean that many people won't choose to own both.