Are you boycotting activision

[kouriichi]

I dont boycott. It doesnt get anywhere.
Even if theyer sales drop 50%, they will keep on trucking.

Notice france. They riot every few years if something isnt going right. Theyve never boycotted a single thing. Because it doesnt get anywhere. You cant try to negotiate with the corrupt. You have to overthrow them.

If you want to make a differance, form a peaceful rally outside the Activision HQ. Have the masses do the talking. Eventually, because your hampering productivity, they will give in.

 

[CaptQuakers]

I don't see the need their games are shite.

You might not like them, but they certainly aren't bad. If they were, they wouldn't have so many people playing them, right?[/quote]

It Is just my view on the matter. However just because many people play their games It doesn't make them good. Gamers are like sheep If you hype a game enough It will sell like hot cakes.

If we should boycott anyone It should be EA but that will never happen......

 

[Orwellian37]

Aside from Kotick's idiocy, the games are still (usually) good. If it's good, I buy it.

 

[Haydyn]

Wait a minute, CoD, Guitar Hero, and a wave of annoying skating games? Looks like I'm boycotting them now.

 

[Justanothergamer300]

I tried but I gave up to peer pressure and it felt sooooo good

 

[mrdude2010]

I don't agree personally with Activision, they killed two great series. Guitar Hero and Tony Hawk. Why? Because they decide to cash-cow all our beloved games by releasing new unfinished titles and expansions every 6-12 months.

I'm glad that Blizzard is telling Activision to take a hike and stay out of their business, I don't want to see an expansion for Starcraft 2 coming out every single year to kill the franchise.

thank you

dev cycles used to be a regular 3-5 year cycle minimum. obviously i can see sports games coming out on 1 year cycles with collective modifications, but a serious game like tony hawk or guitar hero deserves careful oversight and intelligent content for their dev cycles. it's only so long you can invent a bullshit story and sell your game based on the name, as they will soon learn for COD

the time between WC and SC2 was around 6 years. aside from expansions and fixes to their existing games, most of what the blizzard team was working on between SC1, WC3, WC, and SC2 was SC2, and it shows. SC2 is one of the most balanced and well made games as far as PC RTS' go: there's no "kill all" strategy that will beat everything

 

[Arizona Kyle]

Not really, why?

Sure they have horrid games like the Call of Duty series, but that's more a fault of their fans. Hell, the recent stuff from EA has offended me far worse that anything I've seen out of Activision.

the call of duty series has no where to go and i think that they know it

 

[Rednog]

Boycotting EA because of how badly Dead Space 2 treated PC users, and Boycotting Ubisoft for just repeatedly delaying their PC releases compared to console releases which makes the game suck 10x more because no one buys it for the PC and won't play the multiplayer (seriously week 1 of Splinter Cell Conviction there was no one playing the damn thing).
I'd honestly love to play their future games but I'm just fed up with the nonsense I have to deal with to get my gaming experience.

 

[NeutralDrow]

I don't think I've ever considered what games they buy. So, no, I'm not boycotting them. I might not be buying their games, but I don't even know what they're releasing.

 

[BanthaFodder]

only Activision games I buy nowadays are Call of Duty... and even THAT is subject to change if Kotick still exists by the time the next one rolls around... Black Ops was GOOD... but they could do a LOT more... they're dicks, but I only buy like one of their games every year or 2, sooooo.... yeah...

 

[Blind Sight]

Nope, but it's not like I can afford many games to begin with.

 

[LandoCristo]

Eh, I'm not actively boycotting, but since they haven't made anything that I want recently, and the last two games I bought from them (CoD: W@W and MW2 were both incredibly unbalanced gameplay wise in both Single and multiplayer) weren't much fun to me, I haven't bought any of there games in a while.

 

[Shadow-Phoenix]

Thats pretty much what activision and EA do for those plans just like in the wiki link for EA's founder Trip Hawkins: "Hawkins decided to make branding a focus and 6?9-month production timetables for games. Quality suffered as did sales."

Thats the same ideal thats been going on for the past few years, making it easy for both of them to make quick and easy money and if the sales suffer they drop the product and move onto the next like with C&C that was going well for a little while and then suddenly RA3 did poorly and then decided to make one quick sales grab by making C&C 4 which was created in an even shorter time and the end results were met with dismay and the staff were already on their way out before the game was even finished.

The same can be said with guitar hero since year after year they kept trying to produce so many expansions to make easy money rather than actually taking their time making the game somthing great and because they see the recent sales they then chose to drop it and will again most likley move onto something else.

Its true about blizzard though they are a great games company and i'm a big time C&C fan and had always held a grudge with Star Craft but upon recently playing SC2 it was created in a lengthy amount of time and came out to be one of the best rts's of all time which really tells you something they EA has overlooked upon.

 

[-Samurai-]

Nope. 99% of them time, when I buy a game, I don't look at the developer or publisher.

I don't care about their business practices. I care about wether or not they made a game that interests me, and that I'll enjoy.

 

[HotKakes]

I've pretty much followed the practice of not buying any of their "major hitters" since they always seem to be unworthy of their mainstream attention. I did once give them a chance by picking up Spider Man: Web of Shadows and immediately gave it away to someone else after playing the intro to the game. So, yeah, I guess I do boycott them but not out of spite but out of disinterest on what they normally produce. And yes, this has made me miss out on unique big hitters such as Prototype and Singularity.

 

[wildpeaks]

Not Activision (because I can't recall a reason to do so), but definitely Ubisoft (because of the DRM bs).

 

[Rienimportant]

Not really.
I mean sure, they've done some seriously annoying stuff, but I actually get more bothered by EA.
I've got 3 or 4 games that I can't play anymore because the EA download managed flips out every time I try to run my games, where as my Activision games just go along nice and easy.

Meh.

 

[Darkauthor81]

Nah, was never interested in Activision games.

I am, sadly, boycotting EA. Which hurts because I really wanted ME3 and DA2! But no, their advertising department has to be a bunch of raging incompetent %@^&*(

 

[mjc0961]

Not really. I just haven't bought any Activision games because all they seem to want to put out is Call of Duty and Guitar Hero (not so much the second anymore). I am looking forward to getting my hands on Prototype 2 next year, though.

Now, publishers I do boycott? Ubisoft and Square Enix, because while both of them might get a game out worth playing every now and then, most of the time it's more and more crap from the two of them. Well, with Ubisoft it's more mediocre stuff and Square Enix is the pusher of flat-out garbage. But still, neither company's games are usually worth my money when games are as pricey as they are and playing time is not infinite. Plus there's just about nothing I'd miss if either company went under, either. A world without a jillion Rayman ports, Final Fantasies out the wazoo, Tomb Raider, and Kane and Lynch? Sign me the fuck up please!

I'd probably be boycotting EA for all their shitty PC DRM too, but it has to be on a game by game basis because sadly, they actually got their name on some stuff that's too good for me to pass up (top of the list would be Mass Effect).