Michael Pachter Says Call of Duty is a Failure

Beautiful End

New member
Feb 15, 2011
1,755
0
0
*AHEM*


Towards the end of it. Thank you.

But seriously, I know more money is always better but...they've sold quite their share of copies so far. It's not even a month since the game came out. So yeah, there's that.
 

YuheJi

New member
Mar 17, 2009
927
0
0
LG Jargon said:
New Frontiersman said:
LG Jargon said:
And as a pretty loyal Nintendo customer, I hope that what he said about Nintendo becoming "completely irrelevant" is bull, too. Seriously, they're the reason I'm a gamer today. If they folded or faded into obscurity....brrr! I don't want to think about that too much. -.-
Don't worry about it. Pachter's been predicting Nintendo's downfall for years, he hasn't been right yet. I don't think I've seen a prediction of his that has come true about anything, let alone Nintendo.
Phew! I was more than a little worried. I could kiss you....I won't, but...you get what I'm saying. >.>;;

tautologico said:
LG Jargon said:
"Prediction: The next Bungie game will be single-player only; the multiplayer aspect of that game will be subscription only," he said. "Activision's going to try it, because they're greedy pigs, and they're bold."

Pachter also predicted that Nintendo will become "completely irrelevant" with the Wii U, that Activision will buy Take-Two and that THQ is pretty much screwed.
...

Shit, if this is the future of the game industry, I think we're in for another collapse. Or, more hopefully, a grand "reckoning", if you could call it that, of consumers finally saying enough and bucking against the likes of EA and Activision and their shitty business practices.

He's right about Activision being greedy pigs, but that little comment about them buying Take-Two and that THQ is screwed sends more then a few shivers up my spine.
Unfortunately the situation for THQ is looking quite dire, and you don't need to be an "analyst" to see that.
Urgh...I hate to ask this, since I don't want to instigate something, but...how so? I mean, what makes you figure that? Most of their games seem popular enough to keep them afloat, and they just got done with that Humble THQ Bundle. I'm sure they're not in too dire of a situation...right?
THQ is not doing well at all. They've been consistently losing money over the past few years on almost all of their products. Look it up on any gaming website. Most of their games are losing them money (outside of Saints Row and Dawn of War, I think...)
 

hazabaza1

Want Skyrim. Want. Do want.
Nov 26, 2008
9,612
0
0
Except that this guy is pretty much always fucking wrong.
Oh Pachter, you so silly.
 

AstaresPanda

New member
Nov 5, 2009
441
0
0
This guy needs a good swift back hand. Greedy mother F**ker, its people like him who are the reason why THQ are going to crap. People who dont know crap about games and just want £££$$$$. Then again he said THQ was going to be dead by now months ago on GameTrailers. This guy claims for example game localisation was pointless, his example was a Turkish blizz ppls translating it from english - turkish. Basically degrading and telling these ppl that their job was pointless. Coz nothing pulls you into a games world better then crappy translations "all your base are belong to us".
http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/dhhvik/pach-attack--mobile-war---local-core
So be belittles somones job and goes further to say just coz its in turkey they are even more worthless. Makes me hate this prick even more watching this vid again.

As long as THQ lives long enough for Dawn of War 3 im happy.

these studios need to be more like valve, sure they may not make as much money but that overwhelming respect and love they have from the gaming community is worth way more in the long run of things. They have respect for the gamer and not just trying to milking crappy yearly games.
 

lRookiel

Lord of Infinite Grins
Jun 30, 2011
2,821
0
0
GenGenners said:
Activision will buy Take-Two?

*Shivers*

Don't scare us with your nightmares!
XCOM: MODERN WARFARE! LESS ALIENS MORE ZOMBIES!

WITH ADDED BROWN! BUY NOW £100

lol :3

OT: I don't think Call of duty is a failure, I think it sucks but no way is it a failure. If it was a failure then we would have more original titles by now. -.-
 

Saika Renegade

New member
Nov 18, 2009
298
0
0
It's a failure only in that it doesn't exploit the consumer shamelessly for maximum profit for minimum effort. All about efficiency, and not a word on the substance of a game. That says a lot, frankly.
 

Denamic

New member
Aug 19, 2009
3,804
0
0
He's totally right.
The game you buy should actually be a demo/trial version, and you should have to pay at least twice the cost of the original game to have the full experience. Triple if possible. And make patches cost money while still being mandatory for online play. Also make your online game account have a subscription fee, with data wipes should you fail to meet a payment.
 

Legion

Were it so easy
Oct 2, 2008
7,190
0
0
It's funny because a game can make $1 billion in 15 days and gaming is still seen as something for kids and "losers". So either there are far too many kids playing these games, or there are a lot of "losers" in the world.
 

SniperMacFox

Suffer not the Flamer to live
Jun 26, 2009
234
0
0
Twilight_guy said:
I think he forgot an important factor to gamers: They are the the kind of anti-establishment people who protest games for doing anything like that. I think that's an important factor to consider when monitizeing.
If gamers were an anti-establishment group then fanboys wouldn't exist. As a community, gamers become dedicated to companies and franchises, which isn't a bad thing but means we would follow with a company we trusted. When Activision announced CoD: Elite, gamers hated that they were selling game info similar to the free Halo Waypoint system, yet it sold bucket-loads from its customers, still owning over two million season pass owners.

Pachter's viewing gaming purely from a financial perspective, which is an interesting way of predicting the future of a mainly profit-based medium. I think he's got a point with how the Wii U's going to face problems when the other new consoles launch, the rise of digital downloads and subscription services being the better way of getting cash from your audience (WoW's not the biggest MMO because of its competitive pricing).

You may not agree with him personally (I don't agree with him entirely) but I do agree as predictions go it's fairly reasonable to predict that publishers will turn towards whatever makes them the most money.
 

Genocidicles

New member
Sep 13, 2012
1,747
0
0
God I really don't like where gaming is going. I kind of hope we have another crash, just to teach these corporate fucks a lesson.
 

kyoodle

New member
Dec 4, 2009
103
0
0
The idea of 2K being consumed by Activision is genuinely upsetting!

This man likes to exaggerate: the Wii U probably won't be as ubiquitous as the Wii but the only way Nintendo could become irrelevant is if all the Mario and Zelda fans mysteriously disappeared, and the fact that CoD could be more financial successful doesn't make it a failure.

As for THQ all he had to do was check their stock price.

Captcha: Mark it zero.
 

fix-the-spade

New member
Feb 25, 2008
8,639
0
0
triorph said:
There's no way CoD would be the behemoth it is now if it charged for subscriptions. Its a complete fallacy to assume that success under current conditions would happen if you made them harsher.
Serious thought now.

Call of Duty almost does work on a subscription basis already. If you want to keep up to date in the multiplayer, you'll be handing out another ten bucks every couple of months for one of the four or five map packs that rolls along, or you'll be paying $50 a year to subscribe to Elite.

When millions of players are paying $100-120 per year in stages to keep playing the 'full' game, jacking it up to $180 via some kind of subscription suddenly doesn't seem a huge stretch. Not that this is a good thing.
 

nodlimax

New member
Feb 8, 2012
191
0
0
Well, I predict and hope that people like Pachter and Companies like Activision and EA will become obsolete in the future. Interesting gaming ideas are more concentrated around indy developers or smaller dev studios that use crowdfunding.

And if you look at these studios and projects you can clearly see that most of these devs don't really aim for high profits but rather look to make great games. The money is used to create great and fun games. It's not the other way around (make a game to make profit).

Awesome games will only be made by developers that have a positive work environment that gives them freedom as artists. Companies like Activision can't provide this kind of work environment.

Let's see what's going to happen within the next 2 years. I don't think it will go so well for the big players in gaming business...
 

veloper

New member
Jan 20, 2009
4,597
0
0
fix-the-spade said:
triorph said:
There's no way CoD would be the behemoth it is now if it charged for subscriptions. Its a complete fallacy to assume that success under current conditions would happen if you made them harsher.
Serious thought now.

Call of Duty almost does work on a subscription basis already. If you want to keep up to date in the multiplayer, you'll be handing out another ten bucks every couple of months for one of the four or five map packs that rolls along, or you'll be paying $50 a year to subscribe to Elite.

When millions of players are paying $100-120 per year in stages to keep playing the 'full' game, jacking it up to $180 via some kind of subscription suddenly doesn't seem a huge stretch. Not that this is a good thing.
Basicly Activision is already doing with COD what Pachter says he wants them to do, only a bit more subtly and a bit cheaper.

Pachter's last remaining point doesn't hold water either. Activision won't lose any sleep over their players not wanting to play anything else, because that's money for the competition.
If Bob is hooked on WOW and COD then that is pure gold.
If he also bought Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3, then there's nothing more Blizzard/Activision could want from him.