• MattMk2 - January 7, 2011 10:52 p.m.

    SINGULARITY!!!! BUY IT!!! NOW!!!! THERE IS STILL TIME!!! Anywho, wait, Singularity is only $20 with free shipping?!? ZOMG Heres a link, click, buy, love!
  • MaelstromB - January 7, 2011 10:48 p.m.

    All great points, and the author is right on with his assessment of the company. However, said predictions for Activision's future aside, David failed to mention, and consider, what could possibly be THE most important point -- If Activision ever hopes to truly reinvent, rebound, and revitalize their brand for the foreseeable future, in the eyes of their shareholders & consumers alike, they will need to push for the resignation of Bobby Kotick from his position as CEO. That is, if they have any intention of diverting themselves from the current path toward systematic implosion. They can accomplish the former by recruiting someone who will not be afraid to become a catalyst for the metamorphosis of an industry which thrives entirely on the founding principle of creativity -- (Apparently, Kotick must have skimmed past that bit of business 101 while attending school). Someone with a fresh set of eyes on the company's long-term goals, aspirations, and most importantly, perceived personality within the industry, will prove to be their most worthwhile long-term asset. If they make that one significant change, their brand, image and identity could easily turn around within the following two years. Like David mentioned, look no further than how EA Games handled their difficult realization, and ultimate transition, into a significantly more progressive, hands-off approach with their studios. So YES -- it IS possible, Activision, and it IS absolutely necessary, if you ever hope to revitalize your standing as the interactive media publisher that we all came to appreciate during the early and late 90's. But... you've also got to want change. Let us just hope it happens before you hit "rock bottom."
  • billywitchdr - January 7, 2011 10:15 p.m.

    That front page pic is EPIC!!!!! Oh, and as for the article, yeah. activision sucks and needs to come up with something new. Yup.
  • FriendlyFire - January 7, 2011 9:58 p.m.

    I don't think any of this is going to happen. Just like EA before them, the only thing that will make them change their strategy is a big fat drop in profits that sends them into emergency mode as they try to avoid sinking entirely. If Activision is so blind as to rely entirely on CoD and Blizzard, the following will quickly show up: 1) Treyarch is devoid of original ideas. At best they can mimic what Infinity Ward did, but with them gone CoD is bound to be just recycled over and over. 2) WoW will eventually falter. I'm not saying when, but every game, even huge MMOs like that, end up dying. It wasn't all that long ago that people thought EverQuest was the unchallenged king that would never ever disappear, and now a sequel later it's a fairly average MMO that mostly disappear from the radar of everyone. 3) Blizzard and Activision are separate entities. If Vivendi sees that Activision is bringing absolutely nothing to the table and is merely whoring out Blizzard and trying to attract some of its success... Well, they might find it better to just part ways. Point 3 is the key: remember that when they merged, Activision had a sizable stable of franchises that worked well, namely Guitar Hero, Tony Hawk, id games and Call of Duty. That made the merger enticing. Now? Not so much. If CoD goes down, this might end up like the AOL and Times Warner merger.
  • soren7550 - January 7, 2011 9:45 p.m.

    @Bloodstorm - My thoughts exactly. If they were to annihilate Bobby Kotick, not only would the world rejoice, people's beef with Activision would be ever so greatly reduced. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if double rainbows and smiley suns popped up everywhere.
  • Hellhog - January 7, 2011 9:42 p.m.

    Amongst the big 3 third party publishers, they all anger me. I respect Dan Amrich a lot but I swear he is just putting spin on most of the stuff. I respect Kotick, as a business man, I understand it is a business. At the same time, Activision, EA, and Ubisoft are doing enough to each anger me. Activision is relying on CoD. I'm bored of CoD after CoD4 (which was my first CoD). I refuse to buy CoD games anymore BlOps was fun but only worth the rent. Unfortunately, Activision doesn't advertise a single other game except GH. I only know about them because of One Of Swords. What I respect about them? They said they don't need an Online Pass system, but instead need to make their games of greater value. EA has annoyed me too. I don't buy used games on principal but I disagree with the Online Pass. It hurts rentals, friends borowing, and multiple accounts on one box. Not to mention great games that could use more work, Bad Company 2 and MoH for example. I really enjoyed them but there was lacking polish that could have been done. Oh, and what I really hate about EA, microtransactions from spending a buck on stats or for single items to unlock early keys. I hate their nickel and dime policy for DLC and Online Pass. Oh yea, don't remind me about their comment on how they are no longer going to do single player only experiences. Last is Ubisoft, what they are doing to anger me? Well, they give better Collector's Editions to Europe, I don't understand why they don't give the same to everyone world wide. Also, they are ditching their hardcore. Tom Clancy was the best brand name in video games years ago. Splinter Cell was amazing until nextgen hit and they started trying to appeal to the mainstream killing what made Splinter Cell great and unique. Rainbow Six has had no info about another title in 3 years, whats going on? Ghost Recon, well they are finally doing something but where is it? Ubi loves to delay games or not even talk about them or make them. Not to mention killing the brand name with EndWar and HAWX. Either way, the big 3 are not evil but just bad business practice (Activision ditching all titles not called CoD, EA nickel and diming, and Ubisoft casualizing all hardcore games and delaying them). Who does this leave?
  • Glides - January 7, 2011 9:34 p.m.

    But the two Modern Warfare games were incredible. Probably Singularity was good too, though I haven't played it. Other than that, Activision sucks very much right now.
  • Ilyere - January 7, 2011 9:11 p.m.

    The CoD franchise is becoming more and more like Madden, isn't it?
  • shadowreaper72 - January 7, 2011 8:50 p.m.

    As much as I would love to see Bobby Koticks reign end I dont think COD is going anywhere anytime soon.
  • Kieran712 - January 7, 2011 8:21 p.m.

    I just wish Activision would take note of EA's style. EA have FIFA. If they wanted to do the COD tactic on that they could but no their smarter than that, they branch out (Dead Space) and keep other series running (Burnout) Now just think, Activision in the running style if EA how good would that be? ReCAPTCHA - secluded Bandana... Snake?
  • skeletalbutton - January 7, 2011 8:15 p.m.

    The sad thing is, no matter how bad Call of Duty gets, I don't know anyone who would stop buying them. They just seem like a required part of human life by now, like air.
  • 510BrotherPanda - January 7, 2011 7:55 p.m.

    @Pruman > No matter what happens to their other games, they have WoW backstopping their idiocy You made it sound like how the governments are OK with funding Uwe Boll movies. Nice! > EA's break from the sequel cycle resulted in Dead Space. There's no reason Activision can't do similar Well, Dave... EA is shipping out Dead Space 2 very soon... Sure hope it doesn't fall into the same "sequel cycle" it was attempting to break...
  • doominatorx6 - January 7, 2011 7:48 p.m.

    Activi$ion just takes something good and exploits the hell out of it for maximum cash money. While running the franchise into the ground. See two once-dominant series for example: Guitar Hero and Tony Hawk. Undoubtably, COD is next. Something tells me Black Ops was the last "good" COD game (considering MW2 was ASS), and the next COD will have some kind of peripheral.
  • celticsfan645 - January 7, 2011 7:29 p.m.

    Also, wait at least three years, then put Neversoft back on Tony Hawk. Give them two years to develope, and sell. Boom. I just saved the Tony Hawk franchise
  • celticsfan645 - January 7, 2011 7:25 p.m.

    Yeah, now EA is the one with variety
  • elilupe - January 7, 2011 7:24 p.m.

    Ahh remember when EA was the big evil company and Activision was a up-and-coming creative developer? How times change...
  • EliteM0nk3y - January 7, 2011 7:20 p.m.

    Well they allowed a sequel to [Prototype], which is coming out in 2012, 3 years after the first one. I call that a start. It's funny, Activision has pretty much become the company it wanted to get away from when it was founded (look at the history of Activision and you will know what I mean).
  • Innounci - January 7, 2011 7:12 p.m.

    hey Kotick...if Activision fails, we're not bailing you out...
  • KaiokenKid - January 7, 2011 7:03 p.m.

    I cant wait for the eventual forced resignation of Bobby Kotick by their share holders or however the hell he can be forced out of office.
  • lilspooky - January 7, 2011 7:03 p.m.

    Activision is dead to me.

Showing 21-40 of 58 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000


Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.