Kotick is an asshole

[Pandonetho]

Hey Zero, where did you find that picture of DemolitionSquid from?

[Gifted]

Let me put it this way: all of your points are good and valid if you're looking at the industry from the outside. Yes, your brother may be in the industry but an AP isn't exactly the best way to find out about something either. He's either seen the bad and is keeping quiet about it because a paycheck is on the line (which I doubt) or he hasn't seen everything that goes on.

I've seen the industry from the inside, I know a lot of what happens behind closed doors. I won't name names, times, or details because that would be unprofessional in the extreme, but let's just say I have a firsthand experience with Vivendi Universal and the way they do business.

So taking a perspective from inside the games industry, or ANY industry that is run by stockholders, I can tell you with 100% confidence that just because something seems to be working right now doesn't mean it can't change in a heartbeat. Allow me to use one tiny example, one that is relevant to our discussion. Vivendi Universal shut down Sierra Entertainment. Sierra was in the red, yes, but it wasn't that large of a loss. Within a year at most they would have been back in the black and doing fine. Somebody in Vivendi, or in the stockholders circle, decided it was best to close down Sierra.



The reputation and history of success of Sierra didn't stop Vivendi Universal from shutting down one of the biggest names from the golden early days of PC gaming. What makes you think that they'll have any qualms about telling Blizzard what to do if things turn a little south?

Even if they have sworn to never interfere with Blizzard, even if they could, or would, somehow stand up to a room full of angry stockholders if said stockholders demanded a change in Blizzard, none of that really matters. What matters is that we have a man in charge of a games company who has said he is "instilling a culture of “scepticism, pessimism, and fear” amongst the company’s staff based around the economic depression and an incentive program that rewards “profit and nothing else”."

When a man like that is in charge of a company with that much public awareness and that much money involved, the ideas can spread to other companies. It can spread to stockholders. It can spread, heaven forbid, into Blizzard. I'm not saying it has happened. I'm not even saying it will necessarily happen. I'm just saying that if you think it can't happen you really have no clue how the games industry works.

Let's just be happy Blizzard is doing status quo right now and hope that it stays that way for as long as humanly possible. Right now they and Valve are the only games companies who seem to actually care about integrity and games, and not just the bottom line.

I like talking to you, we discuss things instead of debate things. It's also interesting as it seems we both have experience in the industry. Mine does involve direct interaction with Vivendi as well. *chuckles*

Anywho, I think we're pretty much on the same page at this point. There is a point where Sierra's reputation did go downhill slightly as the games they produced didn't have the same public response it used to have.. but the reputation that you reference is spot on. In short, they closed them down because no matter what happened in the past, they had issues in the present and there was a high risk ratio in the future. I've heard that from an accounting friend who got removed from that company. The information received was second hand. I wouldn't base that as fact, but it's what I'd consider above average speculation based on the knowledge they had.

But I digress. Onto Kotick... if Blizzard went south in a likewise manner, I completely agree that unsatisfyable decisions could be made. That's a "what if" scenario though. At this time, the signs point to success and I feel no need to stress on the conversation until things change.

Let's face it, there is nothing that you and I can do on a Starcraft Legacy forum other than discuss it. If we did do something, it would involve actions that are uninformed with lacking evidence and lacking information.

In short, while we may not like the information we're presented with about Senior Business Physco #1, we have no power at this time to do something efficiently. This is why I'm not stressing over it, the skies not falling yet and even if it were, I have to accept the fact that as an individual, I lack the tools to fix a problem that might not even exist yet. This is why I have the opinion/relaxed attitude on the subject I have. Even if all the worst speculation is "OMG TRUEZ!" right now... do I as an individual have any power whatsoever to fix it? Nope. I'd rather worry about diapers and scanning for SC2 info

[DemolitionSquid]

Right now they and Valve are the only games companies who seem to actually care about integrity and games, and not just the bottom line.

I just felt the need to add Bioware to that list.

[Cheesenium]

I really doubt that Kotick gonna leave Blizzard alone.From what he have done to IW,same thing will happen to Blizzard.This guy wants money,not quality games.He will squeeze every drop out of each developer.So,once Kotick is in Blizzard,SC2,D3 and WoW is gone.They are all screwed.

He or Microsoft have pretty much screw up Infinity Ward,as MW2 is an abomination now.No dedicated servers,IWNet(gawd,P2P for a FPS?),no modding,no free DLC and you have to pay through your nose for 3 maps are the main problems of this game.In short,the game have no reliable system for MP or you can say,no MP at all.Whats more,they charge a 60USD price tag on this piece of crap.

Plus,with their ridiculous attitude on the PC gamers with extreme lack of communications(even a delay rumor took 2 weeks for them to say something) and nothing is done for the lack of dedicated servers problem.

They dont even give a damn on the PC audience that made them famous.

I have never seen a company that treat their audience like shit.Seems like Kotick only want money from these people.

Hence,MW2 is the fail game of 2009.

I really hope SC2 is not affected by Kotick.And,hell no,im not gonna see SC2 as the fail game of the year 2010/2011.

[Norfindel]

[*]I think that all opinions, whether I agree with them or not in the industry have a purpose. Kotick's purpose is to keep the stockholders going. What a "public" opinion when reading this is to immediately assume that the entire company will be moneygrubbing when that's not the case. Activision is a business first and foremost. Good games mean good business. Every producer at Activision (who is NOT a low man on the totem pole) that I've met are VERY passionate about the games they produce. My theory is, if the people who have their elbows deep in the games are passionate, THEY are the people who hold the industry's future... just because the man says that business comes first.. doesn't mean that he doesn't understand that good products sell more products. In this case, while I may percieve Kotick as the person who could be "evil"... he serves a purpose. He keeps the money going into the business so that those passionate individuals can make solid games.

This only assures that the current economic model is a bomb operated by a bunch of random asylum-grade madmen, waiting the right time to explode, and sink the humanity still deeper into the whirlpool of endless misery.

[Gifted]

@Demosquid: Bioware.. win. Agreed

I really doubt that Kotick gonna leave Blizzard alone.

Do you have a source for that or is that purely your own speculation based on media articles that quote a few choice phrases

From what he have done to IW,same thing will happen to Blizzard.

Two different scenarios. IW was a company that had a niche market that was shrinking. They attempted to get money out of it because unfortunately the truth is the company was going in the red. Blizzard is one of the VERY few companies that is nowhere near the red and has a business plan over the next few years to continue their success.

This guy wants money,not quality games.

There is no reason to make them mutually exclusive. Good games make good money, good money allows more good games. Kotick is business minded, he knows that if another company has a plan that works wonders for money, changing that with the statistics at this time would make less money.

He will squeeze every drop out of each developer.So,once Kotick is in Blizzard,SC2,D3 and WoW is gone.They are all screwed.

I believe this is purely false speculation rampantly fed by an increasing emotional pessimism. Look at it logically. Killing SC2, D3 and WoW would remove a LOT of money. This would be bad business. Keeping them going and keeping blizzard in the good means more money. There is NO REASON that "good business" and "good games" are not compatible. In fact, they are VERY compatible. Need I point out the slew of Activision games on the consoles that have won rewards while he's been in office? Whether you like or dislike them, it doesn't change the fact that they sell well, they have people who enjoy them well, and the industry celebrates their success.

Cheese, I want to say I see more emotional than logic in your opinion. There is nothing wrong with that... but I just want to state that a person who wants a business to succeed doesn't necessarily want to make poor decisions that would remove income. Good games sell, making good games makes good money. We don't even have any source stating how he actually runs the company.. only what he's said to the public. I understand MW2 is in a state you're not happy with, but that doesn't mean that they bastardize a game like Guitar Hero. Think logically about it and calm some emotions

This only assures that the current economic model is a bomb operated by a bunch of random asylum-grade madmen, waiting the right time to explode, and sink the humanity still deeper into the whirlpool of endless misery.

Melodramatic, pessimistic and yet poetic all at the same time

The reason I disagree with small little stints like this is that it seems the intent is to find others who say "YES! You're right! This stinks!" but contributes no new information to the conversation. He is not insane or "asylum-grade". The only reason you see endless misery is that you choose not to look at the endless happiness that has to exist as a counterpoint.

We're talking about Kotick, not economic stability, Please stay on topic.

[Zero]

Do you have a source for that or is that purely your own speculation based on media articles that quote a few choice phrasesTwo different scenarios. IW was a company that had a niche market that was shrinking. They attempted to get money out of it because unfortunately the truth is the company was going in the red. Blizzard is one of the VERY few companies that is nowhere near the red and has a business plan over the next few years to continue their success.There is no reason to make them mutually exclusive. Good games make good money, good money allows more good games. Kotick is business minded, he knows that if another company has a plan that works wonders for money, changing that with the statistics at this time would make less money. I believe this is purely false speculation rampantly fed by an increasing emotional pessimism. Look at it logically. Killing SC2, D3 and WoW would remove a LOT of money. This would be bad business. Keeping them going and keeping blizzard in the good means more money. There is NO REASON that "good business" and "good games" are not compatible. In fact, they are VERY compatible. Need I point out the slew of Activision games on the consoles that have won rewards while he's been in office? Whether you like or dislike them, it doesn't change the fact that they sell well, they have people who enjoy them well, and the industry celebrates their success.

Very true. As big as StarCraft and WarCraft games are on the worldwide gaming competitions, if Kotick were to mess with Blizzard, and incur the wrath of everyone associated with it, he would lose an incredibly ridiculous amount of money. So business-wise, I agree that his money-grubbiness would prevent him from screwing with Blizzard, but you can't disagree that his bold words indicate that he's not the sharpest guy around and is prone to making really stupid mistakes.

[Gifted]

That depends on what you mean by the term "mistake". That's a term based on perception afterall. If he makes a decision that has a low short term gain but detriments the long term gain... some could view that as a mistake by some but a success by others. The gaming industry is a fickle one where the general public wants to hold onto ideals of passion instead of view it as a business model. It's not a bad thing to do that as well, as it has a high percentage of people who believe in the product they work on unlike other industries.

Maybe the largest mistake is that he opened his mouth... *shrugs* that's a common mistake for men with big egos, and he's in a position to justify that ego. But then again... if the shareholders confidence improved by him saying that, and that's more money to the company and more job security for it's individuals, that small "mistake" could come with some good benefits. It's about weighing pros and cons, not good or bad in my eyes. I'll agree that if I were in his position, I wouldn't place that public image of myself. It's not a mistake in my eyes, just something we'd do differently if placed with the choice.

Though the articles we have may paint him as not a sharp guy, we have to admit that he's the president of one of the biggest players in the industry... I don't believe I'm in a position to judge him by the small amount of irrelevant information provided. His actions in my eyes speak louder than his words. His company makes games from passionate developers. The games more often than not are of a high quality to the niche that they aim for. I don't care if he comes out of the closet and says "Nuke a gay whale for Christ!", if his company provides good products, I'll judge Activision (the company) by the products they create and the means which they create it. I already know many of the peopled there and know they're passionate and treated well. There is no such "fear" or "anxiety" around the office you don't find in any other game company. It's placed there by the passion of the individuals, not by the iron fist of a keiser president. And I'm content to say that I appreciate their work.

It's not like we're re-entering the Atari Game saturation era of the 80s these days. They aren't producing "ET"s or anything. I'm sure others may agree but that's my perception at least

FINAL DISCLAIMER: I'm not saying people shouldn't hold the same opinion as me, that's far from my point. If you guys want to storm Activision with pitchforks and torches, by all means. (Just avoid my brother on the way in, I love the guy)

[trace wm]

You people still think highly of Valve after how they've handled L4D/L4D2?

I love the Half-Lifes as much as anyone but my faith has been shaken just a tad.

[Norfindel]

Melodramatic, pessimistic and yet poetic all at the same time

The reason I disagree with small little stints like this is that it seems the intent is to find others who say "YES! You're right! This stinks!" but contributes no new information to the conversation. He is not insane or "asylum-grade". The only reason you see endless misery is that you choose not to look at the endless happiness that has to exist as a counterpoint.

I was talking more about the stockholders and the stock market, and how crazy is all that.

We're talking about Kotick, not economic stability, Please stay on topic.

But... we're in the offtopic lounge