Medal of Honor Sales Are Not Amazing

[Antari]

Marketting hype is now almost a certain garentee to a bad game. If they have to tell the entire world its the best thing since sliced bread, it probably isn't. I don't see COD doing all that well either. Most gamers are getting a little bored with fps. And if they aren't bored with them, they already have 25 of them to choose from. EA obviously wasn't thinking about anything but a big paycheck at the end of the road.

 

[SelectivelyEvil13]

I don't have much to say about this, other than you have an impressive vocabulary.

Thank you for the compliment.

The trouble with EA is that it's originality is starting to stagnate a bit. It seems to be releasing cookie-cutter games, if you'll pardon the expression.

What it needs is distance away from Activision. To be seen as an alternative here's some ways they should be able to accomplish this.

Public Relations + Marketing: EA has a huge headstart on Activision here. Bobby Kotick at Activision is seen as a money grubbing devil at best - so perhaps cutting the price of their games by £5 / £10 would be great for pissing the guy off and enticing the cash strapped to buy.

Game making - A little more innovation is needed, not follow-the-leader. Games like Mass Effect are a great start, or a remake of the Amiga game Walker. Which was a far more brutal version of Mechwarrior of it's day. Or space shooters - but learning to stay away from the over-saturated Space Marine theme.

Indie-nurturing and Licensing - Nuture indie-developers, with AAA games in a decline, the indie and up-and-coming developers are looking to clean up. It may also be worth a merger with 505 Games because they seem to be coming out with some interesting ideas for games.

Downloadable Content: Make it free or cheaper - this will make buying the game a little more tempting. Especially when someone's on a budget.

That's all I can think of right now.

That is an excellent highlight of various facets that EA needs to capitalize on to get the necessary advantage over Activision. With Kotick practically exhaling vitriol with every public statement, EA really should learn to that they can step up to look like the "good guys" by comparison. Not only should they distance them from a public relations perspective, but their philosophy on games in general. There needs to be a creative surge towards a different direction than Activision so the EA product stands out to the average consumer. I would bet most people who never heard much of this new Medal of Honor glanced at the back pictures and assumed it was a Modern Warfare copycat.

Your final point is interesting as well because EA is probably using their online code model with new games to try and incetivize people to buy a new copy of Medal of Honor in order to receive free maps in November. This is another aspect where EA could build trust with the consumer. In all likelihood, that code will get the first map pack free but nothing more. But what if those who purchased a new copy of an EA title could use that code to at least get special discounts on future DLC for a game, or even better as you stated, some free content. Given the outrageous cost that has been set through precedence by Activision with Modern Warfare, such an online code model could prove efficacious in creating not only first time customers, but long-term, loyal ones as well.

 

[BiggityB05]

Too many people trying to do the same thing. Everyone is bored with the middle east.

Afghanistan is technically not Middle East.
And to my knowledge there hasn't been a game set there until now.

Hey EA why not make up a war?

Like ArmA and ArmA 2?

Why not make a game based during the Cold War but a different timeline where Russia and the US actually fight?

Like Operation Flashpoint: Cold War Crisis, or even Black Ops to some extent?

Or what about the future with a war between the US and China?

Like Battlefield 2? Or Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising?

maybe WWII ended differently

Like Turning Point: Fall of Liberty?

Just give us something new and exciting.

Everything has been done already.

Im sorry let me rephrase....How about someone make a GOOD game with those things. All those games you mentioned are lousy. There are no tiple A titles with those themes. And yes Afghanistan is roped into the middle east label

 

[Get_A_Grip_]

They tried to take on both CoD: Black Ops and Halo Reach.
Of course they were going to fail.

 

[katsumoto03]

Orly?

I completely expected this. Everyone who wants a fancy shooter is already saving up for Blackops.

 

[BiggityB05]

1.5 mil sales in it's first several weeks, isn't bad at all. The franchise hasn't had much airtime lately, versus say CoD being rammed down our throats every couple seconds. I enjoyed the hell out of the beta (though, I didn't play the 2nd beta where they supposedly worked on hit detection...good thing, that was one of my only real beefs). I don't play CoD though, so I can't really compare the two.

I would disagree with the airtime factor, I have seen 3 or 4 times more MoH commercials/ads than Reach or Black Ops commercials/ads. It been nothing but MoH during the MLB playoffs, Monday Night Football, it everywhere.

 

[ImprovizoR]

Surprising. I didn't think they'll sell over a million.

 

[BiggityB05]

I would disagree with the airtime factor, I have seen 3 or 4 times more MoH commercials/ads than Reach or Black Ops commercials/ads. It been nothing but MoH during the MLB playoffs, Monday Night Football, it everywhere.

Nah, I meant with how frequently they launch a new IP, there's almost always a new CoD commercial coming around. Didn't really explain that much though, you're right EA put some serious money into promoting MoH this time around.

Oh ok, yea thats true, MoH hasnt released anything since what '07? 3 years is a long time between releases, especially when a new CoD and Halo are coming out every year. The video game industry has a short memory. Gotta keep your brand out there or else people will forget about it. I think Splinter Cell had a little bit of that problem with the delay between Double Agent and Conviction.

 

[Gunner 51]

The trouble with EA is that it's originality is starting to stagnate a bit. It seems to be releasing cookie-cutter games, if you'll pardon the expression.

What it needs is distance away from Activision. To be seen as an alternative here's some ways they should be able to accomplish this.

Public Relations + Marketing: EA has a huge headstart on Activision here. Bobby Kotick at Activision is seen as a money grubbing devil at best - so perhaps cutting the price of their games by £5 / £10 would be great for pissing the guy off and enticing the cash strapped to buy.

Game making - A little more innovation is needed, not follow-the-leader. Games like Mass Effect are a great start, or a remake of the Amiga game Walker. Which was a far more brutal version of Mechwarrior of it's day. Or space shooters - but learning to stay away from the over-saturated Space Marine theme.

Indie-nurturing and Licensing - Nuture indie-developers, with AAA games in a decline, the indie and up-and-coming developers are looking to clean up. It may also be worth a merger with 505 Games because they seem to be coming out with some interesting ideas for games.

Downloadable Content: Make it free or cheaper - this will make buying the game a little more tempting. Especially when someone's on a budget.

That's all I can think of right now.

That is an excellent highlight of various facets that EA needs to capitalize on to get the necessary advantage over Activision. With Kotick practically exhaling vitriol with every public statement, EA really should learn to that they can step up to look like the "good guys" by comparison. Not only should they distance them from a public relations perspective, but their philosophy on games in general. There needs to be a creative surge towards a different direction than Activision so the EA product stands out to the average consumer. I would bet most people who never heard much of this new Medal of Honor glanced at the back pictures and assumed it was a Modern Warfare copycat.

Your final point is interesting as well because EA is probably using their online code model with new games to try and incetivize people to buy a new copy of Medal of Honor in order to receive free maps in November. This is another aspect where EA could build trust with the consumer. In all likelihood, that code will get the first map pack free but nothing more. But what if those who purchased a new copy of an EA title could use that code to at least get special discounts on future DLC for a game, or even better as you stated, some free content. Given the outrageous cost that has been set through precedence by Activision with Modern Warfare, such an online code model could prove efficacious in creating not only first time customers, but long-term, loyal ones as well.

Project: Ten Dollar was a fine bit of thinking on EA's part to get customers away from Activision. But I say the project can be taken slightly further as you'd mentioned in your post - Staged DLC is a bloody fine idea, sir. Why make the code good for only one use, eh?

OK, I know the project was originally intended to reward first hand buyers. But why not reward everyone who plays with an EA product with free DLC. It's something of a Loss Leader tactic - but if anyone can pull it off, it's going to be EA. (With their PR advantage)

The DLC itself won't be making a profit - but who can argue with a cheaper second hand game with free DLC compared to a first hand game.

Something like this will knock Activision out of it's boots. EA will looked upon as the good guys who give value for money. This may not solve how to get money from second hand sales (which isn't really theirs to start with IMO) - but it would deny Activision money.

Instead of trying to punish the likes of Gamestop, Game and Gamestation - the publishers and developers should be trying to woo the gamer like they always have, like they should. Because together, they have FAR more money than any retailer. And as the saying goes - you catch more bees with honey than vinegar.

 

[SelectivelyEvil13]

Project: Ten Dollar was a fine bit of thinking on EA's part to get customers away from Activision. But I say the project can be taken slightly further as you'd mentioned in your post - Staged DLC is a bloody fine idea, sir. Why make the code good for only one use, eh?

OK, I know the project was originally intended to reward first hand buyers. But why not reward everyone who plays with an EA product with free DLC. It's something of a Loss Leader tactic - but if anyone can pull it off, it's going to be EA. (With their PR advantage)

The DLC itself won't be making a profit - but who can argue with a cheaper second hand game with free DLC compared to a first hand game.

Something like this will knock Activision out of it's boots. EA will looked upon as the good guys who give value for money. This may not solve how to get money from second hand sales (which isn't really theirs to start with IMO) - but it would deny Activision money.

Instead of trying to punish the likes of Gamestop, Game and Gamestation - the publishers and developers should be trying to woo the gamer like they always have, like they should. Because together, they have FAR more money than any retailer. And as the saying goes - you catch more bees with honey than vinegar.

Transitioning Project Ten Dollar towards the general audience would be a brilliant maneuver!

EA would be capable of building a fantastic reputation supported by a loyal base of fans. By establishing a model where the customer is rewarded through future support, EA would expand far beyond the perception of that company releasing yearly franchise updates. Not only could EA surpass Activision, but they could transform that EA logo into a quality seal that all gaming platforms clamor for because it would equate to a solid product that would rake in sales.

The public relations nightmare that is Bobby Kotick alone shuttles EA ahead of the pack. In order to combat the bastion of comfort Activision sits atop with successful series like Call of Duty or Blizzard's World of Warcraft, EA has to redefine their planned approach by being the company customers can rely on. Medal of Honor has proven just how crucial differentiation from the competition, and future titles like the KOTOR MMORPG will also need to utilize every possible advantage against the collective Activision.

 

[legion431]

Wait, so selling 1.5 million goddamn copies isn't impressive enough?

The games industry has an even more warped view of success than I thought. What happened to the days of a game selling one million copies total was a good feat?

It's a much larger medium than you'd expect.

 

[BenzSmoke]

That's what you get for riding the coat tales of Modern Warfare, instead of finding your own way.

 

[Trogdor1138]

Wait, so selling 1.5 million goddamn copies isn't impressive enough?

The games industry has an even more warped view of success than I thought. What happened to the days of a game selling one million copies total was a good feat?

It's a much larger medium than you'd expect.

I know how big the medium is, I still think 1.5 million copies after 5 days is pretty impressive by any standards, especially for a game myself and others didn't think looked terribly good in the first place. I mean sure it isn't as big as their "competitors" but it's still a great amount of copies sold, especially since they were half way to their goal of getting a sequel after five days.

 

[Gunner 51]

Transitioning Project Ten Dollar towards the general audience would be a brilliant maneuver!

EA would be capable of building a fantastic reputation supported by a loyal base of fans. By establishing a model where the customer is rewarded through future support, EA would expand far beyond the perception of that company releasing yearly franchise updates. Not only could EA surpass Activision, but they could transform that EA logo into a quality seal that all gaming platforms clamor for because it would equate to a solid product that would rake in sales.

The public relations nightmare that is Bobby Kotick alone shuttles EA ahead of the pack. In order to combat the bastion of comfort Activision sits atop with successful series like Call of Duty or Blizzard's World of Warcraft, EA has to redefine their planned approach by being the company customers can rely on. Medal of Honor has proven just how crucial differentiation from the competition, and future titles like the KOTOR MMORPG will also need to utilize every possible advantage against the collective Activision.

While taking Project Ten Dollar even further will give EA a big enough edge to take on Activision. Bobby Kotick seems to be the wild card - the longer it takes Activision to get rid of him, the better EA will look. Because I can imagine Mr Kotick getting more and more greedy and frenzied the more success EA get.

If EA start producing games which aren't clones of Activision's games - they can be seen as a viable alternative to the Wallet Hurters at Acti-Blizz.

Afterthought: if/when Mr Kotick messes up the CoD franchise - will he be transferred to Blizzard and mess things up from there?

 

[SelectivelyEvil13]

While taking Project Ten Dollar even further will give EA a big enough edge to take on Activision. Bobby Kotick seems to be the wild card - the longer it takes Activision to get rid of him, the better EA will look. Because I can imagine Mr Kotick getting more and more greedy and frenzied the more success EA get.

If EA start producing games which aren't clones of Activision's games - they can be seen as a viable alternative to the Wallet Hurters at Acti-Blizz.

Afterthought: if/when Mr Kotick messes up the CoD franchise - will he be transferred to Blizzard and mess things up from there?

EA has proven through precedent that they are not locked into backing a single game model with their varied titles and franchises as well as games like Mirror's Edge, an atypical first person game for instance. They have to take not only innovation further to distance themselves from Activision games, but they must also incorporate all of their available assets. Licenses such as those for the Lord of the Rings are exemplify possible gems if an appropriate project was handed over to a competent developer.

By not restricting to franchises alone and branching out through creativity, EA will differentiate its practices from Activision, which will help translate into an image geared towards fresh experiences instead of either simply rehashing or cloning another game. Singularity shows how Activision's policy can backfire because here is a fun enough game that simply falls for being a Bioshock clone built up to be another franchise.

Kotick does also presents an interesting twist because he is so good at blatantly posing as the "bad guy" in any given PR situation.

 

[Gunner 51]

EA has proven through precedent that they are not locked into backing a single game model with their varied titles and franchises as well as games like Mirror's Edge, an atypical first person game for instance. They have to take not only innovation further to distance themselves from Activision games, but they must also incorporate all of their available assets. Licenses such as those for the Lord of the Rings are exemplify possible gems if an appropriate project was handed over to a competent developer.

By not restricting to franchises alone and branching out through creativity, EA will differentiate its practices from Activision, which will help translate into an image geared towards fresh experiences instead of either simply rehashing or cloning another game. Singularity shows how Activision's policy can backfire because here is a fun enough game that simply falls for being a Bioshock clone built up to be another franchise.

Kotick does also presents an interesting twist because he is so good at blatantly posing as the "bad guy" in any given PR situation.

EA carry on taking risks with games like Mirror's Edge, the whole thing will ultimately pay off. Especially when Activision keep churning out Space Marine 17 in a market already saturated with similar games. From what I've seen of the opinion from this website alone - people are getting a bit bored of FPS: The Space Marine Simulator type games.

The strange thing is that EA have the know-how to make great games, but lack the budget. Activision has the budget, but not the know-how to make great games. If these two combined forces, I can see one of two things happening.

If Bobby Kotick is still on the scene, things will carry on the way they are. With games not offering much value for money and being horribly expensive at that. Without a competing company - gamers would have no alternative to this. Effectively stagnating the entire gaming world.

If Bobby goes, EA would have more money at it's disposal and can afford to take bigger risks yet. This will offer gamers far more choice as more developers will be allowed to put in what they want rather than what would sell. If the new EA/Acti company wanted to rely upon franchises - they could dust off some of the old ones like the Mechwarrior universe to alleviate the FPS over-saturation.

But all this is dependent on the Activision CEOs getting rid of Bobby Kotick. He's the one guy who could seriously screw the entire gaming world - more than Michael Atkinson, Keith Vaz or Jack Thompson out there.

 

[MarsProbe]

Not wanting to say something that's probably already been said 118 times already, but this isn't really surprising. Releasing a modern military FPS within a month of a potentially much more popular modern military FPS at time when there also many other more distinct games vying for peoples attention (and money)?

Not exactly an unexpected development.