Not even close to the truth. Activision was never in major peril. They choose to make the move after CoD had already become a great success. They were not doing fantastically because Tony Hawk reached saturation and they destroyed that series. Then they murdered the GH brand by releasing too many titles too quickly.

I can't think of time where Activision was ever in a spot like THQ who recently went bankrupt.

I agree the blockbuster model is bad for gaming, but not because of low quality but how it has driven up costs and put many good and talented studios out of business.

quote:
but what good game has Activision financed with CoD money?

There's no way to prove direct causation with how their money is spent, but we do know they make a lot more than they could have ever spent on the development and marketing of each entry. Whether other Activision games are to you liking isn't really relevant, it still has brought more games to all. It's my personal speculation, but I don't think Bungie would making a big game with Activision if not for the incredible amount of cash that CoD has brought in.

Here's a list to all they've developed. LINK

This post was edited on 1/5/13 at 10:50 am

3 ...

Report Post

Posted by BaddestAndvari

That Overweight Racist State

Member since Mar 2011

18313 posts

Posted on 1/5/13 at 11:01 am to oauron

and if not for consoles I don't think Square Enix would be around either.. Square was going downhill fast, Enix came in as the saviors, but Enix had only survived off of the extreme success on the Playstation..

and then FFX and FXII REALLY benefited from the ps2.. and even though the game has gotten awful reviews, the FF13 series is still selling insane numbers..

That being said, while their Final Fantasy franchises aren't the greatest - Square Enix has some of the best story driven games on the market.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by tigergamedev

Seattle, WA

Member since Oct 2012

15 posts

Posted on 1/5/13 at 1:13 pm to oauron

quote:
I agree the blockbuster model is bad for gaming, but not because of low quality but how it has driven up costs and put many good and talented studios out of business.

I don't think its necessarily the blockbuster model that has driven costs up, but rather the increasing complexity and time required to produce high-quality assets. And that complexity and time cuts across all platforms, PC and console, alike.

So while PC acolytes like to say that without consoles, graphics would be better (and there is no debate they could be better....for now), in practice, they probably wouldn't improve all that much. After all, basically all they really want is for devs to take advantage of DX11 and OpenGL 4 tech, but devs still wouldn't have because (until recently) the market saturation of that tech was relatively low.

Sadly for devs, the cost of making AAA quality titles is about to go through the roof.

Ultimately, I believe that consoles represent a forcing function on the industry as a whole. Big studios are starting to move towards next-gen development as we speak and the availability of popular, extremely powerful consoles simply speed and incentivize that movement.

Also, people who say that the next-gen consoles won't look as good top of the line gaming PCs right now are retarded. And wrong. You can't compare PC specs and console specs apples to apples, because graphics and "computational power" don't work that way. Plus all of the theorized specs for PS4 and 720 are bullshite anyway

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by tom

Baton Rouge

Member since Jun 2007

8176 posts

Posted on 1/5/13 at 3:00 pm to oauron

quote:
I can't think of time where Activision was ever in a spot like THQ who recently went bankrupt.

THQ was such a clusterfrick that noone would even buy them. Congrats to Activision for failing at a time when other game companies had more capital to waste.

quote:
I agree the blockbuster model is bad for gaming, but not because of low quality but how it has driven up costs and put many good and talented studios out of business.

It is not due to low quality graphics. It is due to low quality writing. There is no creativity in any of the big studios. They want to make money the surest way they can. By selling the same thing over and over to anyone dumb enough to buy it.

quote:
Here's a list to all they've developed. LINK

Not a single good game on that list from the 2010s. Could be a coincidence... but it isn't. The vast majority of those games are just rehashes of rehashes (crash bandicoot nitro kart 2? are you shitting me?) or dull attempts to capitalize on subpar movies/tv (bond, spiderman, transformers, family guy, generator rex).

0 ...

Report Post

Gaming Board - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board