PAX East 2011: Activision Doesn't Run Internal Studios With Iron Fist

Saucycarpdog

New member
Sep 30, 2009
3,258
0
0
Because Activision is so cheap, maybe this is their positive image campaign. Let all the developers who are paid by and work for Activision tell people how nice Activision is.

Cause you know, the guy who's paycheck comes from Activision could totally speak his mind if he wanted to.
 

snfonseka

New member
Oct 13, 2010
198
0
0
Good for him (the developer). But we can't say the same thing based on "we hear". Can we?
Besides he is working for Activision now, so can we hope for a honest opinion? :p
 

LtFerret

New member
Jun 4, 2009
268
0
0
So I guess all the folks at Infinity Ward left because Activison was too fucking nice to them.
 

GeorgW

ALL GLORY TO ME!
Aug 27, 2010
4,806
0
0
Interesting. I don't exactly know how reliable this source is, and I don't care. There's only one solution. Fire Kotick. Sure, Activision may be nice people *cough*Doubt it.*cough* but it's Kotick we all hate, right?
 

Jumplion

New member
Mar 10, 2008
7,873
0
0
believer258 said:
...As for Guitar Hero - I thought that was going to be a big fad when it got as popular as it did. When the "cool kids" think something's cool, they generally don't follow it for too long. And the geeks tired of it before they did, that and everyone's Guitar Hero wallet dried up...
I really don't think that Guitar Hero, or the whole music genre thing, was a fad and I don't really understand why some people keep saying that. Music games are good party games and they introduce people to new music and bands. I wouldn't know half the classic rock songs if it weren't for Guitar Hero and Rock Band. The primary reason why it is in a slow decline is because Activision kept slapping on sequel after sequel, with more and more plastic peripherals, with less and less DLC support. Couple this with few competitors in the genre (and to be honest, the genre hasn't really moved forward much, what else can they do?), and the whole music genre in general stagnates. It's a shame, I think.
 

Sylocat

Sci-Fi & Shakespeare
Nov 13, 2007
2,122
0
0
The_root_of_all_evil said:
Sylocat said:
Oh, and in case you've all forgotten: Raven just laid off a quarter of their staff.
Where do you think the chairs came from?
Well, at least Activision practices recycling...
 

Vohn_exel

Residential Idiot
Oct 24, 2008
1,357
0
0
The_root_of_all_evil said:
tautologico said:
True. Media outlets will run stories about the last quote from Kotick, or Activision closing another studio, because they know it'll have an audience. In an ideal world, people would then think for themselves and not just jump at easy "Activision is evil" conclusions. But the world is far from ideal...
Which sort of directly counters this exact report, doesn't it?

Also, if Activision aren't evil, why have we already had so much evidence? Is it because of Kotick's shenanigans? If so, then it's still a good reason to have him ousted.

Does seem a little weird having a conference about how Activision are REALLY NICE PEOPLE TO WORK FOR though.

I mean, why would they say that normally?
This. Seriously, my bosses don't even read this website and I wouldn't say anything bad about them here. They were either under the gun or under the buck when they said this, IMO. I mean seriously, no one's gonna bad mouth their creator. Even if what they say is true, can you really expect there to be some kind of conference about how working for them sucks?
 

bjj hero

New member
Feb 4, 2009
3,180
0
0
These people are in the pay of Activision. Unless you are planning to hand in your resignation you will not talk to the media about how shit your employer is. It is the quickest way to get fired or even sued.

This is nothing but PR for Activision.
 

UnravThreads

New member
Aug 10, 2009
809
0
0
Psychotic-ishSOB said:
It's not that Activision's evil: it's that they're stupid. Kotick has terrible business sense. I hate him becuase he's an idiot who has no business in a creative industry. For example: DJ Hero came out in 2009, was a slow burner, eventually selling millions of copies months after it came out. People had fun with a new peripheral and game.

Then in 2010: THEY RELEASE THE FUCKIN SEQUEL! PEOPLE JUST BOUGHT THE GAME RETARDS, THEY CAN'T AFFORD ANOTHER ONE!!!
Millions? I think you'll find it surpassed 1.2 million, but likely hasn't got too near 2m. That figure? July 2010, so 10 months (Roughly) after release.

As for the cost, I don't think that ever truly mattered. The price plummeted across the board because it wasn't selling. DH2 released in October '10, a year after the first, so again I think the price point isn't that relevant, especially as it released as a game-only edition too.

Really, though, DJ Hero was a game that just didn't have the appeal of the other two 'Hero' franchises. Something like it would have been a slow burner anyway, but there was no real need for the sequel as DJ Hero itself could have simply been supported by DLC packs at an arguably lower cost (At least to the developer).

But back to the topic: Activision blow. I've got a few of their iPod/iPhone games, and they're the most half-arsed ports I've played in a long while.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
It's like this, Activision is doubtlessly a great company to work for until they come for you. I'm sure Infinity Ward thought they were great with those huge bonuses they thought they were going to get, before the thugs showed up to eject them....

Of course none of this matters since this is a "dog and pony show" at a public convention.

Activision has a bad reputation, and is currently one of the most maligned groups in the game industry. Having taken that title from EA... which in part managed to get some relief from their criticism BECAUSE Activision started becoming the focus of people's ire (or so it seemed to me).

Truthfully, getting some of your employees to come out and say "oh yeah this is great, your wrong about our bosses" in a public event, where they probably got to hand pick who is representing the company to begn with, doesn't really mean much.

If a company like Activision wants to see it's reputation change, it's going to have to change in a way that is meaningful to us consumers. That's going to mean tangible results we see with things like games and pricing, our concern about developers largely coming down to the games themselves. I mean it's nice to put on the show, but when you've got bad blood about Activision running point on a $10 price hike for PC games, not to mention being a pretty substantial offender when it comes to DLC like overpriced map packs and such.

If Activision wants to overcome consumers viewing it as a ridiculously greedy, evil corperate empire, then it needs to stop acting like one. Nobody begrudges Activision making money, I mean it is a business, but the extent to which it's been stooping has gotten kind of crazy.... and as far as Bobby Kotick goes, no amount of damage control is liable to redeem him in the eyes of the customers that Activision seems to be becoming concerned about. If Activision wants to convince people that it's not a bad place to work, or has "turned over a new leaf" that's going to probably mean getting a new "face" for the company. As long as Bobby's face is the one we see when it comes to Activision and it's policies, I really don't think we'll see any radical changes in how people view the company. I mean there is no way the things he has said over the years can be undone. Maybe he makes a lot of money, and is a good manager, but he's a PR nightmare.

In the end though I think the bottom line is that the same trends that have been fueling Activision are liable to continue. Sure the company would like to have a bette reputation with the consumers, but in the end it's reputation has not affected it's bottom line or abillity to move units so far. Other than endorsements from hand picked employees at industry events and such, I'm not sure we're even going to see all that much of an effort to change their reputation.
 

Ldude893

New member
Apr 2, 2010
4,114
0
0
I'd say something about this, but I think the posts before me said it all for me. I think the employees in the panel are just the few of Activision's employees who actually get treated well.
Activision currently owns 13 different game studios. The people on the panel represent only 3 of them, and each studio has its own large team of game devs. I'm sure the other developers would have different opinions regarding the company and Bobby Kotick. The people from Infinity Ward, for example.
 

Reaganomics

Russian Roulette Runner-up
Jun 14, 2010
44
0
0
So developers held a conference attended by media that reports on games and did not to badmouth their boss and the company they work for...

I am shocked. It is almost like they want a job to go to on Monday.
/sarcasm
 

risenbone

New member
Sep 3, 2010
84
0
0
The problem with Activision these days is the same problem EA had/still has for the most part. That is they no longer produce anything they are publishers first and foremost living off the creative efforts of others. They are no longer the young creative team that brought out those cool games of days gone by all those guys have left and been replaced with more conservitive business men who are more into creative account keeping and convulated contracts where evan a wiff of developer disatisfaction/disention is enough for them to let loose the dogs of litagation.

It would appear that there are only two ways to avoid such controls one is to produce smallish releases that don't cost alot to make and bring in decent returns like those dev houses in the panel and the other is to make so much money that your responsible for almost half of Activisions total revenue aka Blizzard.

Thats just how it looks to me on the outside looking in and for sure Activision isn't the only one however they are the one who it would appear to weild the bigger influence on what gets made and what doesn't hence why it is targetted by so many who are disalusioned by whats coming out of the AAA studio's these days.