A Short History Of Activision Blizzard

[CarverTOGV]

I really never followed this stuff that much, but this Kotick guy is by far the fastest I have ever wholeheartedly decided to hate a person without ever meeting them.

I agree completely. Halfway through the article, I lost my faith in all the game producers. Then, I discovered that I just hated Kotick and Activision.

(I will not photoshop bad pictures.)

Activision refused to tell either West or Zampella what specific acts or omissions Activision believed they had committed or what was prompting the investigation, insisting instead in Orwellian fashion that West and Zampella "already have a clear understanding of what they have or have not done." West and Zampella were told only that Activision was investigating potential "breaches of contract" and "violations" of Activision policies, and threatened that anything less than their full cooperation with the inquisition would constitute "insubordination", which itself would justify their termination.

32. Activision conducted the investigation in a manner designed to maximize the inconvenience and anxiety it would cause West and Zampella. On little notice, Activision insisted on conducting interviews over the Presidents' Day holiday weekend; West and Zampella were interrogated for over six hours in a windowless conference room; Activision investigators brought other Infinity Ward employees to tears in their questioning and accusations and threatened West and Zampella with "insubordination" if they attempted to console them; Activision's outside counsel demanded that West and Zampella surrender their personal computers, phones and communication devices to Activision for review by Activision's outside counsel and, when West and Zampella asserted their legally protected privacy rights, Activision's counsel said that doing so constituted further acts (of) insubordination.

[Hamshank]

They're there to make money that's it. They want $ and nothing is going to stop them, that's what they're there for. Get used to it because that's how every company is.

[ArcherofAiur]

They're there to make money that's it.

The old Blizzard was there to make money as well. They just did it by focusing on the long term, making a great player experience and building community confidence in their brand name.

[Iceman_jkh]

Really interesting article.
Now I feel better about NOT buying this game. Not only is it shaping up as a massive let down in terms of gameplay, but I feel that I'm doing my part in f*cking over this Kotick wanker, by withholding revenue.

[TWD]

I think everyone is pretty familiar with the shady stuff Activision has been pulling lately. However, I question the extent if any that it's actually having on Blizzard. In most of these cases Blizzard seems to be saying "we know better". This is certainly the case with integrated chat, and online replays. They're still working out the whole realid privacy thing so I can't really comment on that.

In fact the only thing I really think you could attribute to Activision is no LAN, but I think this is just a symptom of industry trends in general. Having three installments would probably also fit in this category, but I actually kinda like the idea.

I don't really care too much about what Kotick says. The fact of the matter is that he can't deliver on the most important aspect of their business. Their whole goal is to make money off established AAA titles. However, every single one they get their hands on gets run into the ground and peaks in popularity. Results are all that matters in the business world, and I don't see how they can be viable much longer when they fail so badly at their core goal. If I was Blizzard I'd be looking for a way out. It's a sinking ship.
________
Medical cannabis seeds

[ArcherofAiur]

Apply that Blizzfilter we've all developed so extremely well and you can see why I'm not at all worried. They're testing to make sure it works and see how the people feel about it. Obviously, they're going to hear the complaints and do something about it. Don't get worked up over nothing There's enough things in this world that will actually happen that should be worried about.

I want you to pay very close attention to what he did and did not say.


Did he actually say BNET would go back to the way you wanted it? Or do you just THINK he did?

[AdmiralMengsk]

They're there to make money that's it. They want $ and nothing is going to stop them, that's what they're there for. Get used to it because that's how every company is.

I don't care if every company does stuff like this to make money they are still pieces of dog shit.


Whenever I see articles, complaints, or tv spots about bad business practices there's always someone that says "Just deal with it." Well if half the population suddenly decided to become ax murderers would you "just deal with"? No you'd grab the nearest object and defend yourself. While my analogy was a bit extreme it means the same basic thing. If we don't stand up and defend ourselves(our wallets) and make it known we aren't happy with the status quo then we'll all slowly but surely turn into sheeple.

[Blazur]

Much much <3 to TeamLiquid for posting this. I've always hated Bobby Kotick and co., and long since have felt his influence was corrupting Blizzard from the inside. Ever since the merger they've been making strange decisions very unlike them. Anybody that's been following Modern Warfare 2 is aware of the fiasco between Activision and Infinity Ward, and privy to the overpriced DLC while several show-stopping bugs remain unaddressed. This post just brings to light all the bullshit that company is doing and how much of a bane on the gaming industry they are.

Screw Activision...words cannot describe my disdain for this company.

The old Blizzard was there to make money as well. They just did it by focusing on the long term, making a great player experience and building community confidence in their brand name.

I have always loved Blizzard. But my confidence in them has waned ever since the merger.

[TheEconomist]

This does not mean it will be the only option at release.

This specifically says that, like I said, just because it is so now doesn't mean anything. Taken literally this person is saying that it's possible it'll go back to the old ways. Now, apply your Blizzfilter. What happens when Blizzard speaks in absolutes? Nothing good. So, they confirm and deny things in roundabouts ways. Clearly, this all means that they're just testing and will most likely go back to the old ways if the community does, in fact, prefer it that way given sufficient time.

But, in the end, it doesn't matter. This isn't some LAN feature that Blizzard is conflicted about implementing. Online replays probably takes a lot of work to achieve, LAN can have severe profitability effects, and the Battle.net interface is an ongoing iterative process. The RealID problem is none of these. They're just testing it out now to see how people feel about it and will chose the best action. Seems pretty obvious to me. I'll throw you a bone though. There's a small chance it won't. But, surely, you agree that it's so small that it's not worth getting worked up over yet. I mean, why not just start worrying about other unlikely but hugely problematic possibilities?

[newcomplex]

/Calmly waits for Gifted to school this eschewed jumble of stupid obscuring legitimate concerns about the development of SC2.