"Oh no, what's Bobby said now?"

By Johnny Minkley Published 4 October, 2010

The Kotick conundrum.

The headline, I'm told, became an all-too-regular mantra for Activision's beleaguered communications team long ago.

Surely, you might wonder, the people charged with maintaining the public image of a giant global business would have tried one way or another to get him to put a sock in it before more feet found their way into the big mouth of Bobby Kotick.

That said, while the odd gaffe might cause a temporary headache for the PR department, the Activision Blizzard CEO's reputation as a bit of a loose cannon has over the years generally been cause for the occasional rolling of eyes rather than heads.

This is, after all, the man who in 1991 picked up an ailing company riddled with $30m of debt, and steered it through a remarkable transformation to become the world's biggest third-party games publisher, along the way producing some of the biggest and best-loved brands in entertainment. Few people in business will ever match that.

But the aggressive, attacking tone of more recent remarks betrays an odd petulance that has surprised even those paid to douse the flames every time a B-bomb explodes in Activision's face.

The latest controversy comes by way of an interview with Edge magazine, in which EA, the creators of Call of Duty, and development darling Tim Schafer all receive a verbal volley from the Bobby-gun.

1

Viewed in isolation, are his comments - hitting back atSchafer's public insult, saying he feels "betrayed" by former employees, and criticising EA's business model - so unreasonable?

Hardly. He likely never did meet Schafer; EA vs. Activision is a long-boring clash of cultures and tit-for-tat willy-waving; and, as I'll come to, there are two sides to the Infinity Ward story.

But understood in the context of the events of this year in particular, they are not, to say the least, going to help.

The headline to the other big gaming interview Kotick agreed to over the summer, with Kotaku, captures the state of play: "A delightful chat with the most hated man in videogames".

You can see why, under the circumstances, the PR department thought it would be a good idea to place a couple of articles to 'set the record straight' and 'show the real Bobby'.

Unfortunately, as well as someone who clearly isn't the game-ignorant, consumer-loathing suit of caricature, he also likes to bitch about the competition. And, whatever one thinks of the press, it's obvious which bits are going to make the news.

2

So as the media soap opera rolls on, the interesting question has become not what he's said, but why?

Activision sources I've spoken to this past week acknowledge that Kotick has for some time been stung by the assumption that he has no interest in the medium that has made him his considerable fortune.

But that doesn't explain the scarcely believable decision to respond to an off-the-cuff insult (Schafer's "total prick" comment) with the straight-faced official release: "Bobby has always been passionate about games and loves the videogame industry."

Such a bewilderingly unnecessary action serves only to makes Kotick look vulnerable. And in a billions-of-dollars business, you can bank on any sign of weakness to be exploited by the competition.

Which is exactly what EA did through PR boss Jeff Brown's withering retort to Kotick's latest criticisms.

"His company is based on three game franchises - one is a fantastic persistent world he had nothing to do with; one is in steep decline; and the third is in the process of being destroyed by Kotick's own hubris." Ouch.

You don't need to be an Activision Blizzard shareholder to know which games he was referring to. But it's the final comment that will hurt the most - and EA knows it.

Kotick's Achilles' heel is the subject he has been most vilified for, and feels most painfully misrepresented over: Infinity Ward.

As one senior source put it to me: "Bobby was always a loose canon in respect of keeping secrets, revealing stuff in analyst calls that just wasn't ready to be announced. He's used to saying things without consulting the rest of the organisation."

But the build-up to and fallout from his sacking of Infinity Ward's Jason West and Vince Zampella was another matter.

"Bobby was very cut up about Infinity Ward - it's a two-sided story," says the insider. "Activision in the end acted too quickly, but equally Infinity Ward had behaved so extremely and inappropriately, what did they expect?"

The source claims Infinity Ward's bosses had for some time been "nasty" towards the "Activision machine", refusing to work with certain staff while becoming increasingly "diva-like" in their demands.

The success of Call of Duty, it is alleged, "went to their heads so they started treating the publisher like s*** and doing things that were inappropriate". In other words: "If they didn't like you, you were moved off [their titles]".

3

The friction is said to stem back to a disagreement over the direction of the Call of Duty brand after the second instalment. Activision wanted to turn it into an annual franchise and IW refused to play ball - with Treyarch enlisted to plug the gap.

It's believed the pair could have quit after the original Modern Warfare, only staying after they got "everything they wanted".

But by the time of Modern Warfare 2's release, this tension had grown into a full-blown - and ultimately unresolvable - power-struggle over the $3bn COD brand, which paved the way for the studio bosses' dramatic sacking.

Kotick sees this as a betrayal because he took a risk and backed the duo following the release of Medal of Honor: Allied Assault in 2002. Zampella and West wanted out of their relationship with EA and Activision offered them sanctuary, funding the project that became Call of Duty.

None of which is to absolve Activision of blame in the matter: rather to suggest the blame most likely lies on both sides.

4

Critics of Zampella and West now see them exploiting the (well-earned, in fairness) power they have accrued as game makers to play Activision and EA off each other and secure a new deal with their old publisher on their own terms.

Which gives EA the easiest of retorts every time Kotick calls into question its relationship with developers - hence Brown's statement. In essence: "Good luck with Modern Warfare 3, mate (LOL!!!)". (The schadenfreude is of course tinged with EA's still-raw recollection of its own hard-to-shake 'Evil Empire' reputation.)

As chief executive of a huge enterprise, his responsibility to shareholders will by definition put him at odds with gamers. But to suggest Kotick is not therefore passionate about the games industry seems to me wrong-headed and unfair.

The real problem is, as Sony president Howard Stringer nailed it: "He likes to make a lot of noise".

As the longest-serving CEO of a leading publisher, Bobby Kotick is also one of the most successful individuals in gaming.

But the one lesson he has apparently still to learn is that you can make all the noise you want, but the best way to silence critics is to keep on making great, successful games.

And with the future of previous safe bets like Guitar Hero and Call of Duty by no means certain, there ought to be plenty to keep him occupied.

Picture of Johnny.

About Johnny Minkley

Johnny Minkley is a veteran games writer and broadcaster, former editor of Eurogamer TV, VP of gaming charity SpecialEffect, and hopeless social media addict.

Read more articles from Johnny by visiting the Johnny Minkley archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (74) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Deckard1 #1 2 years ago

    He looks like Tony Blair with downs syndrome in that picture.

  • kinky_mong #2 2 years ago

    He sure is an ugly Alfred E. Neuman looking motherfucker.

  • smoothpete #3 2 years ago

    He looks like he could eat a warm poo and still be smiling

  • levitate #4 2 years ago

    Oh look, Kotick's the new design for xenomorphs in Alien 5.

  • Sunyavadin #5 2 years ago

    Have Mad Magazine sued his face for copyright infringement?

  • Tonne #6 2 years ago

    he looks like a serial killer about to snap

  • RobotRocker #7 2 years ago

    The Edge Magazine comments? Well gee, isnt it quite the coincidence that Guitar Hero: Wariors Of Rock is out the same week as the new issue of Edge.

    Before that? He made the comments about selling CG Cut-scenes as a movie, separately from the game. But wait a second! Wasnt TGS on that week? Where Activision did not have a presence? Sure was a handy way to keep Activision in the news that week, and you know that Starcraft II was just after being released a week or two back, yeah?

    He's just obscenely good at the PR Game and knows to get maximum publicity by using his own reputation. He is the Michael O' Leary (Ryanair CEO/Complete and utter git) of video games. He has the same habbit of putting his foot in it as O' Leary does but it keeps them, and more importantly, the company in the news. Stealth marketing.

  • richarddavies #8 2 years ago

    If im honest that article has described the Infinity ward hula in probably the most adult way i've read up to yet. Telling both sides of the story well. Makes Bobby's actions seem quite less cock like. He still looks like a bellend though.

  • DAN.E.B #9 2 years ago

    Be sure to tune in tomorrow folks! for more kotick related !craziness!!

    What will he say next?

    does anyone give a fuck?

  • Cronan #10 2 years ago

    I think he's dreamy. I'd like to eat his liver with some fava beans and a nice Chianti.

  • beastmaster #11 2 years ago

    So, a bit from the Edge article & a summary from other websites? I'm getting a bit fed up of it all.

    Still, he's got a game to plug & EG need to keep us entertained.

    I also think if Teyarch (can't be bothered to check spelling) do MW3, it'll be better than 2.

  • Cronan #12 2 years ago

    That's right, neg the cannibal, I call that discrimination.

  • SteveHolt #13 2 years ago

    "Karma police, arrest this man
    He talks in maths
    He buzzes like a fridge
    He's like a detuned radio"

  • geeza2020 #14 2 years ago

    I find it hard to ever have any sympathy for someone who believes in "yearly franchises".

    How's about a little creativity and originality? No? Does anyone at Activision even understand these words?

    Euurgh, I'm sick of even thinking about this shit anymore.

  • X201 #15 2 years ago

    Can we take it as read then, that Activision won't be publishing Minkley's Meat Ceiling?

  • Machetazo #16 2 years ago

    Not quite what I was expecting, judging bythe title, but, I liked that the author found senior Acti-sources, to present more of Kotick's side on the CoD organisational woes, amongst other things.

  • rivuzu #17 2 years ago

    I like the article. A summarised revision of the recent happenings, and not providing the seemingly one-sided story of "Bobby Kotick, Motormouth Bastard!" or "Campella/West QQing after Kotick /ragefire's from Activision!".

    Unfortunately, he knows the Market. Yearly releases are ways for him to sell the same content, over and over again, with only a few superficial changes. Look at the Fifa games - they've been doing it for years now, and are a fine example of how to milk your target base; the gamers out there who, frankly, don't care who said what, so long as they get a new game.

    So, like I said, I like the article. It's a shame the context is about mismanagement and his seemingly intentional path to becoming the most "hated" person in gaming. Won't even scratch Activisions profit margins though.

  • Tinrib72 #18 2 years ago

    So...Kotick needs a hug then?

  • TopKatt #19 2 years ago

    Wow, no-ones said "cunt" yet.

  • ubergine #20 2 years ago

    "As chief executive of a huge enterprise, his responsibility to shareholders will by definition put him at odds with gamers."

    Oh come on. I'm glad to see an article that's at least ATTEMPTING to give a more rounded approach to Donkey Kotick, but to suggest you can mitigate his braying and, more so, the two-dimensional actions of his company (for which he, by definition, must be held responsible) by saying he's responsible to shareholders is just garbage. I get annoyed by certain aspects of what Nintendo, Microsoft, most certainly Sony do and so on (as software developers / publishers) but no one has managed the strike after strike after strike that Kotick has in recent years. EA finally lost their evil empire tag after modelling themselves on Ubisoft, a company which (at the time) had annual franchises as well as new IP on a scheduled basis. This model lead to love and respect from gamers for Ubisoft, and I believe that it began to work for EA when Dead Space and Mirror's Edge came out.
    Bobby Kotick is the modern Trip Hawkins. You CAN serve your shareholders without being a total prick about it. It's called thinking ahead, and thinking broadly. Saturating a market to kill it's interest in Guitar Hero isn't thinking at all. The dealing with Infinity Ward, however they justify it, was horrendously botched. I do not buy Activision games at all (just like I didn't buy EA for the longest time) and Bobby Kotick and his perverse corporate culture is the reason for that. Shareholders take note.

  • Ryboy #21 2 years ago

    Wait for it... CUUUUUUUUUUUUUUNT!

  • dadrester #22 2 years ago

    I think I'm the only one in the world that quite likes old Bobbsy.

  • Branoic #23 2 years ago

    +1 for Tony Blair with Downs. Also, a bit of Jack Nicholson's Joker smile goin on there.

  • BabyJesus #24 2 years ago

    I thought he was a cunt before IW drama - Do I get a cookie?

  • Phishfood #25 2 years ago

    It kind of sounds like Activision wanted to make a new Modern Warfare anually with Treyarch filling in the gaps but Infinity Ward didn't want it that way.

  • kangarootoo #26 2 years ago

    @ubergine

    You say the beholden to shareholder things doesn't excuse his behaviour, and cite EA as an example, but it could be suggested that the new more friendly EA aren't at the top anymore for that reason. Activision are financially number one of the independants, and its a little trite for any of us to act like Kotick doesn't know how to make money (or indeed that we could have made the GH franchise more profitable for longer).

    I'm not saying any of this is good, but what we have seen consistently with independant publishers, including EA for a time, is that the one at the top oftenm has the worst public persona. Maybe that is entirely because of their actions, but I'm also inclined to believe that we simply don't like whoever is at the top (mostly the former though).


    As for not liking them, I'm not sure the shareholders care. And I bet EA would swap their new friendly status for the sort of profits they used to make with barely a moment to think about it.

  • Smoped #27 2 years ago

    I don't really buy the Bobby as a Malcolm McLaren-type-angle. I don't think him saying something stupid/offensive/weird in a mag or a website has any effect on the sales or visibility of, say, guitar hero. He's not identified in the minds of the public with the games his company publishes, and thus any publicity his antics create does not benefit the games Activision publishes.

  • Iain815 #28 2 years ago

    EG, you can now buy me a new monitor, having I just put my fist through it after seeing that cunts face.

  • Iain815 #29 2 years ago

    Also, speaking of cunt, anyone notice it was cut from Hot Fuzz on ITV the other night?

    Bastards.

  • beastmaster #30 2 years ago

    He's about as popular as Jar Jar Binks.

  • telboy007 #31 2 years ago

    What I want to know is if Activision will still send me those patches for scores in the Atari 2600 games on games room.
    Edited by telboy007 at 04/10/10 @ 15:52

  • Darknight #32 2 years ago

    EG should ask him to attend the expo next year. At best we would all gain an understanding of why he's such a bellend, and at worst we would all get the opportunity to pelt him with rotten fruit for an afternoon!
    Edited by Darknight at 04/10/10 @ 16:09

  • local_celebrity #33 2 years ago

    LEAVE BOBBY ALONE!

    You're just hatin on him cuz he's a good-looking guy and makes a lot of money.
    Edited by local_celebrity at 04/10/10 @ 18:16

  • darkmorgado #34 2 years ago

    God, just seeing Kuntick's face makes me angry.

    Most. Punchable. Face. EVAH.

  • rIchba5tard #35 2 years ago

    Bobby is a fucking coward & cocksucker,that's it for now.

  • Ryboy #36 2 years ago

    "You're just hatin on him coz he's a good-looking guy..."

    Baaaaaaamuhahahahahahhahahhahhahhaaaaaahhhahahhahahhahhahhahhahahahahhaaaaaaahahhhhhhahhahhahaaaaaa!!!!!

  • rivuzu #37 2 years ago

    Shame you guys are just jumping on the bandwagon now. Yes, he's not a nice chap, but calling him names doesn't really make you guys look any more mature and that. Just a bit sad.

  • RealityCheque #38 2 years ago

    His face scares me.

  • Kami #39 2 years ago

    Bobby is very good at what he does, but he is probably one of those people who needs a really good PR team, and for a while - just like Sony during the early days of the PS3 - they've dropped the ball a bit and his aggressive, business-like, take-no-prisoners attitude and general disrespect for his customers has been allowed to take centre stage. Whilst we know most execs are like this, they do their damnedest to make sure the public don't get to see it - or at least have a clean-up crew on standby to mop up the fallout.

    The problem is I actually believe these days Kotick enjoys the evil image he has earned for himself - and one he is more than willing to play off for a few extra column inches. That, for me, is a sign that something is either not right at Activision or not right with Bobby himself and shows that something needs work within the organisation.

    That said, as much as he enjoys the evil image, we gamers equally love to hate him for it - which is fine and dandy, but it comes to a point when that image ends up costing more than necessary, something Kotick has yet to learn. There are plenty of examples - EA is clearly the most readily-available comparison - where they could soften their image.

    It's just hard to shake off the feeling Kotick is getting a real kick and thrill from his bad-boy image, rather than focusing on more important things...

  • hiddenranbir #40 2 years ago

    Thanks for your opinion Johnny.

    Btw, who is Johnny?!

  • Kain201 #41 2 years ago

    That face... Quick! Nuke it from Orbit!

  • darkmorgado #42 2 years ago

    "He's the best there is at what he does, but what he does isn't very nice."

    /snikt

  • Gromit #43 2 years ago

    If Kotick is the petulent child we are led to believe him to be, then why hasn't he bleated about all of the wrongs IW committed in a tit-for-tat type response?

    I know there is a legal case on-going but we have only really heard about one side in this case.

    I dunno, it seems like everyone has been "poor IW" and "bad BK (the pantomime villain)" - there has been no sense of balance.

  • darkmorgado #44 2 years ago

    If Kotick is the petulent child we are led to believe him to be, then why hasn't he bleated about all of the wrongs IW committed in a tit-for-tat type response?

    Erm, he has. It was in the EDGE interview that EG so liberally borrowed from for articles last week.

    Basically, he says that they attempted to use company assets for personal leverage.
    Edited by darkmorgado at 04/10/10 @ 16:49

  • Concrete #45 2 years ago

    Hang on, this means that Kotick was in charge of Activision when they released Mechwarrior 2 and Battlezone? Ok, he can have a little bit of leeway, as they were both utterly awesome/ahead of their time.

  • BillPoon #46 2 years ago

    http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/...

  • darkmorgado #47 2 years ago

    @Billpoon

    LOL. +1

  • dadrester #48 2 years ago

    "Thanks for your opinion Johnny.

    Btw, who is Johnny?! "

    have a look at some of the Eurogamer TV episodes. He presents them.

  • ubergine #49 2 years ago

    @kangarootoo

    EA were in decline after years of chasing short term profits and an increase in communication among their consumers via this new thing, the Internet. Corporations do not change their culture due to a flight of whimsy! Look what it took to unseat Ken Kutaragi.
    I'd class Activision shares as high risk. People could lose interest in CoD without the Infinity Ward iterations, we'll have to see how IW2 fares. World of Warcraft, like any fad, could be superceded anytime. I don't predict growth for Guitar Hero.

    Despite the chickenshit nature of most gamers (eg Modern Warfare 2 "boycotters" there on day one) having endless bad press and word of mouth does eventually affect your bottom line!

  • darkmorgado #50 2 years ago

    @noface

    ....Rammstein?

  • coolbritannia #51 2 years ago

    I didn't read this article, enough with the tabloid shit EG, please....

  • darkmorgado #52 2 years ago

    @noface

    Haha, it does indeed :-)

    I'll have to track him down, he sounds interesting and I enjoy a bit of interesting music (never been a fan of rap/hip-hop though, with the exception of Saul Williams). Currently enjoying Trent Reznors soundtrack to the Social Network movie. Brilliant.

    Anyway, enough of that tangent...
    Edited by darkmorgado at 04/10/10 @ 18:14

  • mkreku #53 2 years ago

    He's riding on Blizzard's success and is referred to as being successful. It annoys me.

  • Lunastra78 #54 2 years ago

    Kotick and his customers deserve each other.

  • Daeltaja #55 2 years ago

    Looks like an Alice in Wonderland character.

  • Trikk #56 2 years ago

    I used to be like "FUCK YEAH! ACTIVISION!" when I saw a preview or trailer for a new game that looked interesting, because Activision used to mean long-term support and all the updates and new maps that you needed.

    Bobby Kotick simply removed the "YEAH!" and replaced continuous development with stripped out features resold as DLC.

    EA used to be the faceless behemoth publisher that ruined anything they got their hands on, and while that hasn't changed that much, since Activision are so much worse now than EA ever was, it makes EA look good in comparison.

  • dadrester #57 2 years ago

    But Trikk, Bobby Kotick has been CEO of Activision since February 1991. Which games from before then with "long-term support and all the updates and new maps that you needed" are you talking about?!

  • alcides #58 2 years ago

    STOP trolling on that topic, EG!!!

  • Woffls #59 2 years ago

    Finally, an attempt to portray the side of a story that people are seemingly so ready to ignore. It is entirely feasible that West and Zampella became big-headed and started making demands, and that's just not how business works. It's a team effort, and they shouldn't get special treatment just because their game sells better than the other studios' work.

    EA have been on the way back up for a couple of years now, all it took was for Call of Duty and Guitar Hero to peak. EA have very solid foundations now, and this next rise to the top spot might be their last for a long time.

  • Collymilad #60 2 years ago

    The guys an ass.

    He's a film exec in the games industry. No amount of backtracking - though I can't see him even making any effort on that, he seems to pride himself on being a dick - now will change my perception of him.

    Also, screw all the "I'm too mature to say anything about him" comments. Well done, you almost fooled people. People who make comments like that (sadly in the majority in the wider world) are the same people who say "that's life" when everyone gets screwed by some corp, and that's why nothing ever changes. People who whine about people like kotick aren't idiots who want a perfect world, they are just people who want a bit of fairness and consideration. Not too much to ask, they aren't doing us a favour, they give us games and we pay them.

    Edited by Collymilad at 04/10/10 @ 22:56

  • BillyBrush #61 2 years ago

    I think the issue is all the sites will rip bits out of interviews and present them out of context...this is how news works, it's how videogame news works. All in all that Edge interview isn't that inflammatory, it just contains the odd nugget. In that interview he also revealed he tried to get an Amiga500 console put together...which would have been an absolute blinder imo...I think ole Bob's a bit misunderstood, his best course of action would just be to never speak to any press at all.

  • Bremenacht #62 2 years ago

    As chief executive of a huge enterprise, his responsibility to shareholders will by definition put him at odds with gamers. But to suggest Kotick is not therefore passionate about the games industry seems to me wrong-headed and unfair.

    Ok - what evidence is there to suggest he is passionate about delivering quality gaming? I think most people assume he's passionate about the games industry, on the basis that it's something that makes his shareholders and his board pots of money - just one reason why he's not Mr.Popular.

    If he was as overtly enthusiastic about creating new IP and delivering new ideas as he is about promoting his biggest cash generators, he'd get a lot less stick.

  • JBlokeUK #63 2 years ago

    This the first time I've seen a photo of him. Looks like a right smug git.

    Am getting a bit fed up of hearing about his ramblings though.

  • Butr0sButr0s #64 2 years ago

    After reading this I felt compelled as a long time gamer to post my first Eurogamer comment. Now comes the tough part of cobbling together a reply that doesn't read like a rant.

    First off - I have to say, you're site has been surprising me lately Euro. After using it as a second or third source for reviews you've slowly worked you're way up the ladder and recently replaced IGN as my default location for game news. However, I was a bit let down at this article, it felt like you were throwing softballs - sort of the CSPAN version of Kotick news compared to the hot blooded O'Rielly I was expecting.

    I have to say - I refuse to purchase a productthat Kotick is a part of. People can change and I'll can't say I won't in the future, but pending some huge reversal in practice and an open letter to the community, I think the chances of that are slim to none. What breaks my heart is the fact that blizzard was perhaps my favorite PC company and I was really looking forward to SCII, then the usual chop factory machine that is Activision got a hold of it and put it on the assembly line with the rest of the their products.

    There's a difference between wanting to make money and wanting to milk your customers. Companies like valve need to make money, but they don't cut corners and go the extra mile to deliver the best product possible. Did you have to release the Orange box in that form or price? Nope, but they knew the gamers would love them for it.

    What happens with Activision games are the opposite. They get chopped up, with less content, and the price is higher than the competition. $60 price points. Yearly franchise spawns. 'Premium' download content. Locking users out of content (I'm looking at you Blizzard, it took less then a month for you to change your tune on 'we'll allow users to upload maps to the store as well'). These are simply not choices that make me feel like you are doing this because you love gamers. These are choices that say you love dollar signs above everything.

    So - the only power I have as a gamer, and a consumer, is just to avoid those products altogether, no matter how painful.

  • djed #65 2 years ago

    Too...many...paragraphs...

  • Beano #66 2 years ago

    The article is much to long. Let me rewrite it for you:

    "Kotick is evil and likes to eat small children for breakfast while mastubating."

  • SAMagic #67 2 years ago

    EA vs. Activision is a long-boring clash of cultures and tit-for-tat willy-waving
    ... Literally?

  • kangarootoo #68 2 years ago

    @ubergine

    "I'd class Activision shares as high risk"

    This is armchair analysis at its very best. This is what makes me say things like "its a little trite for any of us to act like Kotick doesn't know how to make money (or indeed that we could have made the GH franchise more profitable for longer)".

    "having endless bad press and word of mouth does eventually affect your bottom line!"

    Well no doubt, but that depends on the kind of bad press. Bobby Kotick ebing a bit of a nob isn't the kind of bad press that most gamers really care about. They aren't being asked to go to his birthday party, they are being asked to buy games. And if gamers liike a particular titles, principles will rarely stand in the way of them playing it. All of this recent "BK is a c*nt" stuff means little to anyone outside of specislist forum pages. You think the millions of gamers that queued to buy MW2 could even pick BK out in a crowd?


    And you class Activision shares as high risk, but Reuters recommend you buy them. How do you figure that one?

    http://uk.reuters.com/business/quotes/ov...

  • dadrester #69 2 years ago

    That's exactly what people on here seem to forget. The gamers on forums that follow games related news (the 'hardcore' if you will) are not the target demographic. Not by a long shot. We're an easy sell. Make a good game and chances are we'll try it out. It's the hundreds of thousands of people who just want to buy what's a safe bet, what their mates are playing, what they've heard of on TV. It's Braid vs.Modern Warfare 2. I own both, my brother has never heard of Braid. Probably the same people who would rather sit down and watch X-factor than try The Wire, or would prefer watching hot tub time machine over enter the void.

    That's not to say MW2 is shit, or X-factor has any less value as an entertainment product than the wire, or enter the void somehow deserves to exist more than hot tub time machine does. It's just that they are products that are designed for a mass market. Easy to consume, (relatively) low risk to produce and will capture a much larger audience.

    In fact my analogy of hot tub time machine is probably wrong... maybe something like the new star trek film, would be more apt. it's not like Activision games are notoriously bad. In fact for the most part they're pretty good. I think kangarootoo summed it up best with They aren't being asked to go to his birthday party, they are being asked to buy games


    [edit] besides. without mass market yearly sequels, how would we ever get to feel superior to the common man? huh?!
    Edited by dadrester at 05/10/10 @ 13:56

  • actionfitz #70 2 years ago

    ""His company is based on three game franchises - one is a fantastic persistent world he had nothing to do with; one is in steep decline; and the third is in the process of being destroyed by Kotick's own hubris."

    Motherfuckin Zing!
    hehe.
    Bob got pwned right there - to use the parlance of our times.
    ^^

  • ProGrasTiNation #71 2 years ago

    Bobby who????

  • ProGrasTiNation #72 2 years ago

    Eurogamer i love reading your articles but fuck this dude doesn't deserve the press time he gets

  • 3william56 #73 2 years ago

    "his responsibility to shareholders will by definition put him at odds with gamers"

    It's this attitude that makes the problem, because it's wrong.

    His responsibility to shareholders is to make money. In a media empire, he does that by making games people want to buy. Which is exactly what gamers want. When he's at odds with gamers, the games don't sell, and shareholders don't make money. The only "at odds" you can have is Nintendo-esque pursuit of "casual" over "hardcore" giving high selling [sometimes] sh*t games, but that's not where Acti makes it's money - as EA point out, their big cash comes from the hardcore WoW and CoD crowd.

    He should be pumping the devs for better and cheaper product, getting in new talent, and pushing consumers for higher prices. All of these can legitimately make a manager unpopular. But that's not the complaint with BK.

    He treats his costumers with contempt, insults the producers of his product, p*sses his core audience off, alienates talent, and in the process damages shareholder revenues. On this, everyone [except Bob] is aligned. It's not only ego, it's corporate incompetance, and if I was a shareholder, I'd want this behaviour stopped.

  • kongzi #74 2 years ago

    Kotick is gettin Arab money!
    I think the marketing folks at Activision love that they have an outspoken boss that pisses people off all the time.. there's no publicity like bad publicity.