Another Reason why Activision Sucks

TheCorpulent1 said:
Pricing seems to be pretty standardized in the US. All new PS3 and 360 titles that I've looked at are always $60 unless they have extras like the Rock Band/Guitar Hero peripherals. Maybe they were afraid they'd create a backlash if they tried to raise the price here but figured a few extra dollars in Europe wouldn't raise too much of a fuss because it's not the primary market for them.

I don't know either, to be honest. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume Activision would price gouge, given that the head of the company is on record basically saying, "I would price gouge if I could." But I also don't know the intricacies of currency conversion or whether there would be some justifiable reason for a price increase in one specific area.
Click to expand...

I just find it odd. I mean Activsion may be run by ass hats, but they arent stupid ass hats, they know what they are doing. I really wish i knew more than speculation, id love to know the honest and true story, but i have a funny feeling thatll never see the light of day.
 
Yeah, I pretty much just answered that in the very post that you quoted. 'It's a business' =/= instant excuse and pardon from criticism for every action they take. You may think all gamers are somehow unaware that gaming business is business, and I'm sure there may be some who are, but mostly I don't think think most of them do or are totally apathetic to it.

Don't know who said it, but 'People are stupid, but probably not nearly as stupid as you think'. But, like I said, knowing that fact does not take away the act of criticism. As it shouldn't
 
Last edited:
Teardrop said:
Yeah, I pretty much just answered that in the very post that you quoted. 'It's a business' =/= instant excuse and pardon from criticism for every action they take. You may think all gamers are somehow unaware that gaming business is business, and I'm sure there may be some who are, but mostly I don't think think most of them do.

Don't know who said it, but 'People are stupid, but probably not nearly as stupid as you think'. But, like I said, knowing that fact should take away the act of criticism. As it shouldn't
Click to expand...

Iv never heard that before. Interesting way to put it.
 
Electro UK said:
Slang for the British pound sterling (£), gov'na!
Click to expand...


Oh, so its the same thing?

I watch this show all the time called Wheeler Dealers and the host will sometimes say quid then turn around and say pound and i never knew what that was and always felt really dumb. Thanks for the heads up. :up:
 
I hate Activision as much as anybody, but they didnt raise the price in Europe, "just cause". They had a reason to do such. If that was the case they would of done it everywhere(unless Activision just feels the consumers in Europe arent as bright as other consumers and felt they wouldnt notice the price hike). Gamers like to pretend that the industry isn't a business like other business and then are shocked when a video game company does something that another business would do.
Click to expand...

No idea. But if they were going to raise the price of a massively popular game, why would they not raise it in the place thats its going to be most popular, the US? There has to be more to it.
Click to expand...


To make more money.

Which leads to a 'just because' for consumers seeing the price jacked up in one region I'd say.


I really don't see a problem with this, almost every big release these days gets a collector's edition version. Also Halo 3 had it's own specially colored 360. I never feel the need to get a collector's edition, I only have one for Mortal Kombat vs. DC Universe that I got for Christmas, actually don't like it because the case looks so awkward with all my other games. Would've rather had the regular edition.
Click to expand...

But isn't MW2 getting two collector's editions?

I just find it odd. I mean Activsion may be run by ass hats, but they arent stupid ass hats, they know what they are doing. I really wish i knew more than speculation, id love to know the honest and true story, but i have a funny feeling thatll never see the light of day.
Click to expand...

I think the greed is probably making into stupid asshats.

Or crazy.

They're really throwing all they're chips on the table with the periphal thing right now. That's either crazy or stupid, depending on it's success/failure.
 
Kind of funny that No Doubt is concerned about their musical integrity, but if they didn't authorize the use of their likenesses for all the songs, that is pretty effed up.
 
Meh, No Doubt are sell outs and have been pretty much crap for years.


Activision....what can you say....you'd think they would have learned after the last incedent.
 
I'll side with activision on that one cause as far as im concerned gwen stefani can go bleep herself
 
Raiden said:
No Doubt sues Activision over Band Hero

I hope they win.
Click to expand...

Their suit sounds like it was written by an idiot who doesn't play video games. It sounds like Jack Thompson filing a lawsuit saying "I'm suing 2k games for the deaths of over 1,000,000,000 virtual characters, on behalf of said virtual characters' families." On the other hand, I hate Activision and I think they have way overmilked Guitar Hero, so I don't care who wins. Both sides will be losers in my book regardless.
 
What's the beef with Gwen Stefani?

Activision have been pricks lately, so **** them.
 
My guess is that it's nothing more than a cash grab. They probably have a hack lawyer who is hoping that the judge doesn't understand video games enough to grasp the concept of "character skins." It all comes down to how specific their contract was. It sounds to me like they simply licensed their likenesses for in-game avatars, but are trying to make the case that by showing their avatars playing other songs it's the same as if they are actually performing the songs, and Activision is using those "recordings" without permission. It's basically like if a football player sued EA because a Madden game allows him to be traded to another team, even though he has a contract with a team in real life. In other words, it's BS.
 
It's very much BS...but I don't think it's a money grab...I'm thinking it's a publicity grab after seeing how much publicity the Drunk Lemur got.
 
Well, alot of artists are doing it.

Could just be the fine print in the contract that got 'em. Didn't The Foo Fighters have a similar gripe? No lawsuit, though.
 
Yea, they griped about it...but no lawsuit.

Kotick isn't stupid, a jerk, but stupid..no. I'm sure their contracts are quite lawyer proof....these artists need to actually read what they're signing instead of just looking at the dollar signs that said company is throwing at them.
 
To me, it's like if a celebrity sued South Park or Robot Chicken for using an "unauthorized performance" on the grounds that their likeness was employed, except even dumber because they're actually getting paid already. These are digital puppets we're talking about, but they want the court to treat it like it's actually them performing, and that Activision didn't pay them for the performance. PUPPETS, PEOPLE!
 
Timstuff said:
To me, it's like if a celebrity sued South Park or Robot Chicken for using an "unauthorized performance" on the grounds that their likeness was employed, except even dumber because they're actually getting paid already. These are digital puppets we're talking about, but they want the court to treat it like it's actually them performing, and that Activision didn't pay them for the performance. PUPPETS, PEOPLE!
Click to expand...

If you're a public figure, you can legally be parodied by a show like SP or RC and not sue so long as it's not malicious or libelous in any manner.

This situation is more akin to them signing off to appear on South Park and being told they'd be used in one way and then unbeknownst to them SP makes them child molesters on the show when it airs. Granted that's more of an extreme difference than No Doubt is claiming but just doing so to emphasize the point. No Doubt should've reserved final character approval for themselves if thye were so concerned about this which I personally dont really see as being m,uch of a big thing.
 
Oh god, if they make CoD pay to play, WoW style, I will laugh my f**king ass off. The sad thing is, people are stupid enough to do it too.
 
It's hard to know how to respond to that (them charging for FPS online play). I don't mean to be doom and gloom, but seriously ppl...speak with your $$. I get you can like a franchise, but when they up the price (I'm guessing as a test) in a country, and sell like hotcakes still, then talk about additional online fees...If they keep getting away with record sales while upping the price, it's going to send the message that a franchise can get away with it if it's popular enough.

With MMO's a monthly fee is expected as it's always been a feature, but FPS's have never had online fees and it should never start up. I really hope they don't go thru with it, but if they do, and it succeeds, this is a giant step back for gaming (IMO). The day I have to pay to play an FPS online...ugh.

I just wonder if he's serious. Just mentioning that they have to know is going to receieve backlash. They wouldn't say something like that if they weren't seriously pondering it would they? I'm starting to wonder if they're purposefully trying to kill the COD franchise with the talk of 2 games a year, raising the initial price, and adding monthly fees. Just imagining buying an $70-80 COD, paying $10 a month, and finding out 6 months later a new COD is coming out and everyone jumps to it. They can't be THAT desperate for money.


Of course I have no plans to buy MW2 with all the game coming out, it's low priority to me (atleast until it goes on the greatest hits price drop). So I guess it's not a huge deal to me. It's just that something like this can start a trend in a genre.
 
Finally got Guitar Hero 5 (just for Nirvana's Teen Spirit), and imported GH:WT tracks (which I own) to it. Now I need to hunt down a code for Smash Hits so I can import that too.
 
If they move to a monthly fee for Call of Duty, Modern Warfare 2 is the last game I'll be buying in the franchse. I already pay for X-Box Live and I'm fine with that, I'm not paying an additional fee over that though for just one game. I'm cool with paying a little more for map packs and new content, but not just for the privledge of playing online, won't pay for that and the single player campaign isn't worth $60, didn't buy World at War and wouldn't buy Modern Warfare 3 is there's monthly online fee.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Zenien
Activision confirms $60 PS3 games
2 3
Replies
57
Views
6K
Avalanche
Avalanche
Superhero 101
Activision May Stop Support For PS3
Replies
24
Views
3K
Fading
Fading
Isildur´s Heir
Can someone please destroy Activision?
2 3
Replies
61
Views
6K
Havok83
Havok83

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Staff online

Members online

Total: 2,770 (members: 29, guests: 2,741)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,265
Messages
22,075,374
Members
45,874
Latest member
kedenlewis

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"