Why Activision dumped Sierra's games

By Robert Purchese Published 6 November, 2008

They weren't "exploitable enough".

Activision Blizzard boss Bobby Kotick has explained that various Sierra (Vivendi) games were dumped for not exhibiting "potential to be exploited every year across every platform".

Among those dropped during the Vivendi-Activision merger were Brutal Legend, Ghostbusters and 50 Cent: Blood on the Sand. Fortunately, other publishers are pecking at the remains; Atari looks poised to publish Ghostbusters and THQ will do the honours with 50 Cent.

"Why don't we start with the Vivendi Games businesses: there were a lot of different projects and businesses that we identified as not likely to achieve the profit margin potential that we look for," Kotick told investors in a financial call, painstakingly transcribed on Seeking Alpha.

"With respect to the franchises that don't have the potential to be exploited every year across every platform with clear sequel potential that can meet our objectives of over time becoming USD 100 million plus franchises, that's a strategy that has worked very well for us."

The plan is to work on titles that will still in the public eye 10 years from now. And to achieve this, Activision Blizzard has a whopping 15 properties across 70 SKUs planned for 2009 - 40 per cent more than in 2008.

Kotick said these will include new titles in the Call of Duty and Guitar Hero series, as well as film tie-ins Transformers, Wolverine, Monsters Versus Aliens and Ice Age.

There's a Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2 on the way; more James Bond and Tony Hawk outings; and the eventual release of Wolfenstein.

But Kotick also has plans for "three, maybe four exciting new intellectual properties", including Prototype, Singularity and the racing game from PGR brain-box Bizarre Creations.

Guitar Hero will naturally play a key part for Activision, too, and bigwig Mike Griffith is boisterous about the Christmas potential of Guitar Hero World Tour.

"Our retail checks indicate that the Guitar Hero World Tour band kit is outselling its only competitor by a very wide margin," said Griffith.

"The band kit launch quantities are virtually sold out across the channel and even with our manufacturers at full capacity and a continuous flow of supply throughout the quarter, we are likely to not be able to keep up with demand for the band kits this holiday."

Griffith expects rather a lot of money to be made from downloadable songs as well, with more than 25 million tracks gobbled up by fans so far. He also mentioned the possibility of selling these songs "on a subscription basis", but said little more on the matter.

Head over to our Guitar Hero World Tour review to see what all the fuss is about.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (56) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Eraysor #1 3 years ago

    Activision is the new EA.

  • PearOfAnguish #2 3 years ago

    Translation: if it's not Warcraft we don't give a fuck.


    Let's have SWAT 5, ta.
    Edited by 1 at 06/11/08 @ 13:49

  • retr0gamer #3 3 years ago

    Get rid of the interesting projects and focus on the generic tripe and licenses?

  • bitesize #4 3 years ago


    hmmmm, out of the 3 mentioned that they've dropped, i'd have probably bought 2. of the stuff mentioned that they are publishing, none have any interest for me at all. i guess i'm not really in the actiblizz target mrket then...

  • the_dudefather #5 3 years ago

    Brutal Legend: Aerosmith edition world tour 2009

  • kangarootoo #6 3 years ago

    You can't really blame them. Everyone has a job to do, and some people are employed to look at how best to make money for the company. Those people need to be part of the deal, or people would go out of business too easily for taking their eye off the money.

    Its sad I know, but games companies have to make money or they can't make games. How much money they want to make is I guess a relative thing, but it always seems a bit hollow when people comment negatively about how Activision aren't focussed on creating art, when if they were in a position to take the cash instead of the artistic kudos most of them would.

  • CJF #7 3 years ago

    More specifically, they've just mentioned 4 new IPs that they've got planned. Don't really see what people can complain about...

  • JonFE #8 3 years ago

    Suddenly the *real* reason to split StarCraft II into three separate packages one for each faction is revealed :-P

  • cyacomini #9 3 years ago

    Yipee - another Transformers game. Just what I always wanted...



    /sarcasm off

  • HermitArcader #10 3 years ago

    Post deleted at 09:17:39 22-12-2011

  • Eighthours #11 3 years ago

    Yeah, because Ghostbusters has never made any money!

  • Fab4 #12 3 years ago

    CoD:WaW becomes all too clear now.

  • miiiguel #13 3 years ago

    Activision was one of the biggest McCain donators, it surely tells something about their views. Not judging, though. Shit is what it is.

  • PlugMonkey #14 3 years ago

    Interesting. Really looking forward to Ghostbusters and Brutal Legend (assuming it ever sees the light of day). Frankly couldn't give a fuck about Transformers, Wolverine, Monsters Versus Aliens or Ice Age.

  • Thunderbolt #15 3 years ago

    miiiguel,

    Come on mate your just stirring the pot now!

    Whereas Brutal Legend looked fun it will be a pity if it doesnt find a publisher.

    The soundtrack and voice actor are awesome

  • Dan234 #16 3 years ago

    "potential to be exploited every year across every platform"

    You heard that. If it's not Madden (last two digits of current year), FIFA (last two digits of current year), or Guitar Hero: (band for this year) then it's out.
    Edited by 1 at 06/11/08 @ 14:16

  • Toothball #17 3 years ago

    Oh dear, it seems the future is nothing but sequels.

  • Weezer #18 3 years ago

    Mogs - what the fuck are you on? Making commercial decisions = killing innocent civilians?

    er...

  • miiiguel #19 3 years ago

    @Thunderbolt! : I don't know what that expression means... (shame)

    @ Mogs: That analogy is wrong in so many ways..., man. What do you want? Nationalize Activison? - it's their money, their proprety. Are you a bolchevique now? Outrageous.

  • ps3owner #20 3 years ago

    so they are going into the same direction as Hollywood.

    sequel after sequel after sequel and the a few prequels to tell the whole story, just from a different perspective and when they are done with milking it they are going to release new DLC every other week for £1 a pop...

    BORING

  • aldo_14 #21 3 years ago

    How tedious Weezer. The point is that "Oh it's the nature of the beast" is not an excuse or a defense for bogus actions or practices.

    Surely at some point, though, it's better for a company to sack people than face bankruptcy?

  • Thunderbolt #22 3 years ago

    miiiguel

    I don't know what that expression means... (shame)

    'Stir the pot -

    Someone who loves to proliferate the tension and drama between 2 or more feuding people/groups in public to get a raise of people in hopes of starting a shitstorm of drama and uncomfortable conflict, sometimes for personal gain but oftentimes just for the thrill of confrontation.'

    [link url=http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=stir+t he+pot
    ]http://ww w.urbandictionary.com/define.ph...[/link]

    There seems to be quite a lot of it in here as it is!

  • dingo75 #23 3 years ago

    The more I hear those suits that run the publishers these days the less I want to play games anymore! :p

  • miiiguel #24 3 years ago

    @Thunderbolt: I'm guilty of that often, but this wasn't one of those times. I think... (I mean, everybody loves Obama, no?)
    But I really apreciate the tip on the site! Thx a lot.

  • Thunderbolt #25 3 years ago

    miiiguel,

    Thats cool :)

    Anything is better than Bush!

  • Farfarer #26 3 years ago

    Hahah, fuck activision.

    I mean, at least they're brutally honest about it but in this instance honesty isn't something that makes me respect them any more for it.

  • Eraysor #27 3 years ago

    Suddenly the *real* reason to split StarCraft II into three separate packages one for each faction is revealed :-P

    Too fucking right! XD

  • insincere_dave #28 3 years ago

    "don't have the potential to be exploited every year across every platform"

    Good to know that original gaming is safe in the hands of these guys!

  • FooAtari #29 3 years ago

    Sad.

    In Music and Film there always seems to be room for the niche stuff that people make because they love what they are making.

    That just doesn't seem to exist in games. Its not just about making the game you want to make and making some money. It's about greed and making as much as they possibly can (huge difference there), if that means releasing the same game year in year so be it.

    I find Activisions attitude these days pretty damn Ironic considering how they came to be.

    It's pretty depressing, there are very few games that interest me in the run up to crimbo.

  • jaxon58 #30 3 years ago

    Games were dumped for not exhibiting "potential to be exploited every year across every platform".

    That makes me feel ill. The new EA indeed.

  • rock27gr #31 3 years ago

    So they're adopting the same kind of strategy that gave EA theit bad name? The one they are know abandoning in part?

    Then again, that strategy also made EA the biggest 3rd party publisher around, so...

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #32 3 years ago

    I echo Mogs' second (more sane) post.

    We all know that businesses are in it to make money. That's not what I take issue with here. He never said these games wouldn't make a profit. He said that they can't be exploited year on year!

    That's fucking atrocious and an example of why Activision and EA have turned into a bigger shower of cunts over the years.

    Thank god for digital distribution I say.

    I'm really looking forward to 2 of those games.... (you can guess which) =]

  • cam_guin #33 3 years ago

    "Transformers, Wolverine, Monsters Versus Aliens and Ice Age...Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2 on the way; more James Bond and Tony Hawk outings"

    "the eggs of numbing inevitability" I think Bill Bailey once said.

  • samaran #34 3 years ago

    fuck these guys for dropping blood in the sand. i'll happily allow someone else to exploit 6000 yen out of my bank account in exchange for that game.

  • berelain #35 3 years ago

    Shit, over-egged games coming our way, then!

  • Weezer #36 3 years ago

    Mogs, I'm not defending the guy's actions! I'm saying that comparing what he's said to Saddam Hussein's systematic gassing of innocent Kurds show a bit of a lack of compassion or understanding.

    But yes - I agree with the sentiment. It's like having triplets and only favouring the tall, pretty one 'cos it might become a rich celebrity one day... Of course, behind every great sequel is some original IP. You'd hope.
    Edited by 2 at 06/11/08 @ 15:46

  • Thalanos #37 3 years ago

    Makes you wonder how Guitar Hero ever got made.

    Edit: Oh yes, that was RedOctane, picked up by Activision when it was 'exploitable' enough.
    Edited by 1 at 06/11/08 @ 15:51

  • Freek #38 3 years ago

    It makes business sense. But shouldn't the PR department step in to make sure nobody actually goes out and explicitly starts talking about how to milk a franchise and the consumer for every last penny??

    At the very least try to avoid using the word "exploit".
    Edited by 1 at 06/11/08 @ 16:04

  • Matfink #39 3 years ago

    Call of Annualisation: IP Exploitation 09.
    Bah. Surely the millions of profit they make could shelter a few creative underdogs?

  • aldo_14 #40 3 years ago

    He's not saying that though is he aldo_14? He's saying those games can't be EXPLOITED (what a horrible, revealing word) year in year out & milked for all they're worth. He wasn't saying these games won't make money, just that they won't make the mountains of money Activision is now accustomed to. Which ultimately means less originality, less choice & less games for us gamers.

    One thing I will say in their credit is at least they've allowed some of the games to be picked up by other publishers instead of just destroying them completely.

    He's not, but neither is he really being Saddam Hussein either. Any company, like it or lump it, has a responsibility to make money for its shareholders, investors and even staff.

    Yeah, there are ethical issues in it - and the priority of jobs over xx cash is very different depending on your position - but this comes from an earnings call made after the Vivendi merger and an almost $200m loss last quarter. Of course he's going to focus on strip mining the studios for cash, he's talking to people that are only interested in it (the kind that love words like exploitation and franchise)- same as a developer hypes their game for its gameplay etc in a press conference to games journos.

    It doesn't mean I approve of dropping the games (especially not Brutal Legend) and firing people, but it doesn't make him an OMG Evil Dictator Of Capitalism either. I'm pretty sure most mergers result in jobs being lost in the aftermath (and that always sucks), but it's a bit hyperbolic to compare it to dictatorial mass murder.

  • michaelius #41 3 years ago

    At least they are honest :)

  • curtlikesmeat #42 3 years ago

    Meh, just vote with your wallet and don't by God of War 5.

  • polaris70 #43 3 years ago

    They are not only exploiting games but also us, the customer. There is no chance of me buying COD:World at War until it comes down to about £15-£20 quid. The game is nothing more than a re-skinned mod (I got bored after 4 hours) and should be charged as such. Outrageous words from Activision, the new EA.

  • neilka #44 3 years ago

    I look forward to people still talking about Monsters versus Aliens in 10 years time.

  • smelly #45 3 years ago

    >Yeah, because Ghostbusters has never made any money!

    But it cant be easily turned into a yearly franchise with regular shitty updates (which is what they want)

  • PierrePressure #46 3 years ago

    The man Kotick is quite clearly a cock.

    Capitalism at it's worst.

  • IronCladChicken #47 3 years ago

    @smelly
    I think Ghostbusters2 prooved that it could very easily be made into anoyther shitty franchise?

  • The-Bodybuilder #48 3 years ago

    Whoever said capitalism at is worst got it right. One cannot justify capitalism purely on its exist already.

    I would say I'm gonna boycott every future activision game, but thankfully, they rarely make good games to begin with.
    Yet EA are paving the way with the likes of the new fifa, deadspace and mirror's edge, all games I've personally recommended and given word of mouth to people. I hope ME sells a lot.

  • rudedudejude #49 3 years ago

    fuck off and die griffith

  • clean515 #50 3 years ago

    Brutal Legend needs a release, psychonauts was one of the best games in a long time.

    seanraaron : Haha when is the last time Atari even released a decent game ? Erm rollercoaster tycoon or fahrenheit ?

  • Lamb #51 3 years ago

    I'm not anti Activision they made some awesome games including the original Mechwarrior for the PC but so have Sierra, Space Quest, Manhunter, Heroes Quest. There are and were some great franchises that were done right but please Activision put the time and creative effort to improve on a series and give some Sierra guys and gals a chance to produce something great.

  • samadriel #52 3 years ago

    >>>"Haha when is the last time Atari even released a decent game ? Erm rollercoaster tycoon or fahrenheit ?"

    Well, The Witcher is absolutely fantastic.

    When I read that "exploitable yearly" remark, I actually thought the guy was sarcastically -mocking- corporate myopia, but no, he was just embodying it. Of course, the nature of corporations, and even corporate law, dictate that they generally have to take the 'easy path' to the money, but this only satisfies in the short term -- consider that the best and most lucrative periods in cinema have come about when film studios realise that putting out -nothing- but safe, worthless pablum leaves them with a completely empty talent pool after a few years. The mediocre 'daily bread' material has to subsidize 'experimental'/chance-taking stuff if they want to discover, nurture and KEEP the fresh talent and ideas which will provide financial security in the longer-term. The idea that you can sustain a company forever by pumping out uninspired sequels and pathetic fame-coasting licenses is nothing more than a get-rich-quick scheme.
    Of course, by the time this pisher's short-sightedness starts hurting the company, he'll already have jumped ship to another corporation, leaving shareholders in the lurch once the gamers get sick of Activision's particular strain of endless crap. Said shareholders should know better than to have sleazy leeches like this handling their cash-cow.

    Anyway! *makes a little mouth out of a 50-dollar note*

    "No cash for Activision! James keep all money! Say bye-bye, money! 'Bye-bye, Activision, bye-bye!'"
    Edited by 2 at 07/11/08 @ 05:26

  • dacicus #53 3 years ago

    Me I'd like to see liberated from the clutches of Activision Blizzard the licenses for the old Sierra quests and the ones for the city building series (Caesar, Pharaoh, Zeus and so on). And I really hope that Massivegate (the ones that developped the Ground Control series and World In Conflict will get a good buyer, or even the employees to manage to come up with the sum to buy back the studio from Activision-Blizzard).
    Except the Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2 and Wolfenstein, I'm not interested in any other release from our nice monolitic corporation. And I wouldn't be surprised to hear that Acti-Blizzard tried a hostile takeover on EA....Which actually will make things worse on a market already dominated by 4 corporated giants(Atari, Ubi, EA and Activision Blizzard).

  • Hamflank #54 3 years ago

    Cry harder, it's business, just like everything else in this world.

  • Dan234 #55 3 years ago

    FooAtari 06-Nov-08 14:44:29

    In Music and Film there always seems to be room for the niche stuff that people make because they love what they are making.

    That just doesn't seem to exist in games. Its not just about making the game you want to make and making some money. It's about greed and making as much as they possibly can (huge difference there), if that means releasing the same game year in year so be it.

    I find Activisions attitude these days pretty damn Ironic considering how they came to be.

    It's pretty depressing, there are very few games that interest me in the run up to crimbo.

    Your point is a good one but you've missed one thing. EA and Activision have turned into the Fox and Universal of video games, and like Fox and Universal they're only interested in churning out blockbusters, so don't expect anything else for them. However even Fox manages throw a bone to non-mainstream fans with Fox Searchlight. There doesn't seem to be this interest from videogame publishers.

    It can't be because the economics don't work, because they do; many small studios survive on games which appeal to the core gamer (ugh), at least until they get bought out by EA or Activision.

    Probably the industry is still too immature. It still surprises me they haven't managed to come to an agreement over pre-owned.
    Edited by 1 at 07/11/08 @ 08:59

  • Skywise #56 3 years ago

    Thanks Activision, I can't wait to play the same franchises over and over again.