Poll: You are now the C.E.O. of Activision.

[Angry_squirrel]

Oh Christ... So many Beibers...
OT. EA MUST DIE! My hatred of Activision is second only to my hate of EA

 

[Zantos]

Smoke cigar.
Launch tactical nuclear strike on EA.
Smoke more cigars.
Pay the bloody money that IW was owed and persuade the guys that left to come back.
Offer to solve all world conflicts in massive CoD: MW lobbies instead of costly and brutal wars.
Tell Bungie to remake Halo: CE, but change nothing other than updating the graphics and voices.
Make Blizzard set up rehab centres.
Smoke another few cigars, content in the knowledge that the world is a slightly better place.
????
Profit!

 

[Engarde]

Get the guys who made World at War to make another. Shades perk was the best thing ever and nothing can ever be its equal.

Followed by money pool.

Followed by getting blizzard to undisable my wow account.

 

[Hiphophippo]

This:
"Stop releasing ludicrously priced editions of games and give the crowd what they are paying for!"

Also, backing off Blizzard and letting them do what they do best, and thereby stop annoying their rather large and informed fanbase.

They aren't that informed if they think Blizzard is totally autonomous.

That said, I chose option 1. If I'm the CEO of a billion dollar corp then I've got legions of shareholders and board members to appease. My products sell like hotcakes so I'll continue down the same path while seeking new investment opportunities.

That is exactly what I mean, Blizzard isn't autonomous, and have suffered for it. Which is why I think that Activision needs to back up a little and let Blizzard work.

You are aware, I hope, that Activision does not "own" blizzard. Vivendi owns both. They are two separate companies. Also, if Blizzard says they are autonomous then I believe them. And you know what? I don't see anything but quality from Blizzard. Them "suffering" for it, is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[Imbechile]

Buy Mojang and start pumping out Minecraft sequels every few months.
Assing more people to COD so that we could get them out faster.
Force Blizzard to make 5 more WOW expansions.
Buy Valve and put monthly subscription fees on Steam.
Release Episode 3 for good PR.

 

[natster43]

Give cod to IW, tell them to make it have a better more balanced Multiplayer, fill a few (3-6) sacks with money for the road, and quit, because I don't want to be a CEO of Activision and then I have a lot of money.

 

[Kakujin]

This:
"Stop releasing ludicrously priced editions of games and give the crowd what they are paying for!"

Also, backing off Blizzard and letting them do what they do best, and thereby stop annoying their rather large and informed fanbase.

They aren't that informed if they think Blizzard is totally autonomous.

That said, I chose option 1. If I'm the CEO of a billion dollar corp then I've got legions of shareholders and board members to appease. My products sell like hotcakes so I'll continue down the same path while seeking new investment opportunities.

That is exactly what I mean, Blizzard isn't autonomous, and have suffered for it. Which is why I think that Activision needs to back up a little and let Blizzard work.

You are aware, I hope, that Activision does not "own" blizzard. Vivendi owns both. They are two separate companies. Also, if Blizzard says they are autonomous then I believe them. And you know what? I don't see anything but quality from Blizzard. Them "suffering" for it, is in the eye of the beholder.

First, if you believe Blizzard when they say they are autonomous, why did you say they weren't in your first post?
Second, since the company is called Activision|Blizzard, not just Activision, I would not call them separate companies, and it is rather implausible that financial matters would not be handled on the property as a whole, not set to individual studios.
Third, Blizzard is still producing quality, yes. But they have stated themselves that they have been influenced and affected by the corporation in ways they were not necessarily happy with, i.e they have suffered for it. Blizzard are not allowed total freedom to do what they want and charge the way they want. At the moment quality has not suffered, but development has, and it is most likely not long until quality is compromised as well.

 

[Extraintrovert]

I chose the first option, because I am a selfish miser and would do nothing else but sit back and watch the millions *pinky raise* role in.

 

[Ldude893]

1. Record a message to fans of Activision games, apologizing for the actions and sayings of the previous regime and promising a new day for fans and developers.
2. Bring back True Crime and get True Crime: Hong Kong released.
3. Give CoD back to West and Zampella of Infinity Ward. If they don't want it, I'll cancel the series.
4. Start getting game developers to release games more slowly and put more quality into their games (get developers to aim for Valve-quality games without the Valve time)
5. Send a non-lethal letter bomb to Bobby Kotick wherever he is.
6. Abolish DRM for all Activision games.

Oh Christ... So many Beibers...

You too, huh?

 

[Adzma]

Why is there no, 'immediately shut down the COD franchise forever and focus on new IP' option?

That's what I'd do as a first order of business.

 

[Hiphophippo]

This:
"Stop releasing ludicrously priced editions of games and give the crowd what they are paying for!"

Also, backing off Blizzard and letting them do what they do best, and thereby stop annoying their rather large and informed fanbase.

They aren't that informed if they think Blizzard is totally autonomous.

That said, I chose option 1. If I'm the CEO of a billion dollar corp then I've got legions of shareholders and board members to appease. My products sell like hotcakes so I'll continue down the same path while seeking new investment opportunities.

That is exactly what I mean, Blizzard isn't autonomous, and have suffered for it. Which is why I think that Activision needs to back up a little and let Blizzard work.

You are aware, I hope, that Activision does not "own" blizzard. Vivendi owns both. They are two separate companies. Also, if Blizzard says they are autonomous then I believe them. And you know what? I don't see anything but quality from Blizzard. Them "suffering" for it, is in the eye of the beholder.

First, if you believe Blizzard when they say they are autonomous, why did you say they weren't in your first post?
Second, since the company is called Activision|Blizzard, not just Activision, I would not call them separate companies, and it is rather implausible that financial matters would not be handled on the property as a whole, not set to individual studios.
Third, Blizzard is still producing quality, yes. But they have stated themselves that they have been influenced and affected by the corporation in ways they were not necessarily happy with, i.e they have suffered for it. Blizzard are not allowed total freedom to do what they want and charge the way they want. At the moment quality has not suffered, but development has, and it is most likely not long until quality is compromised as well.

Well...your first point you've got me on. That was a typo on my part. And the company is called Activision Blizzard because Vivendi, the company that really pulls the strings uses the game developers as the namesake because name recognition sells. It really is that simple. Blizzard wanted this merger. Blizzard was hemorrhaging money before it and Vivendi, seeing a good business move, offered to help them out with money in a financial merger. They help blizzard stay in business, blizzard puts some of WoW's tremendous money gain into the collective pot. That's how financial mergers work. It would be silly of Vivendi to do anything BUT let Blizzard remain autonomous when they are bringing in so much money.

Moreover, the burden of proof is on you when you say Blizzard has said publicly that they've suffered for it. I doubt that. Can you provide a source?

 

[370999]

Continue on the present path as this is my job not a hobby and seeing as how fickle and whiney gamers are, my products still sell so why should I change?

 

[Captain Pirate]

1. Record a message to fans of Activision games, apologizing for the actions and sayings of the previous regime and promising a new day for fans and developers.
2. Bring back True Crime and get True Crime: Hong Kong released.
3. Give CoD back to West and Zampella of Infinity Ward. If they don't want it, I'll cancel the series.
4. Start getting game developers to release games more slowly and put more quality into their games (get developers to aim for Valve-quality games without the Valve time)
5. Send a non-lethal letter bomb to Bobby Kotick wherever he is.
6. Abolish DRM for all Activision games.

Pretty much this.

Especially with the whole 'Give CoD Back' thing; I think, considering each CoD is made in about a year and a half, they're damn good games.

I really enjoy them, even if a ton of The Escapist thinks they're all the same, and I think that giving Treyarch/IW double the time to develop a CoD could drastically improve the quality. Hugely longer and generally better campaigns, massive amounts of custimisation in MP, much better maps, and more of them, a Modern Warfare Zombies mode. All of this could easily be accomplished if the developers were given a huge amount more of development time, and hell, maybe Treyarch and IW could work together to make one mega-CoD every 3 or so years.

People will start buying these games like they buy Halo games; few and far between, but benchmark hits when they are released. CoD is starting to feel way too milked, making each title less significant. Extened the time between each game, and making much better games, and people will start buying them because they are amazing, and not because they are Call of Duty.

 

[kebab4you]

Right, sue Kotick for all of his god damn money(and as thus get earn some respect from people that him). Cancel all currently in development CoD games and give it back to Respawn Entertainment(while at it, give back the money they never got). Let Blizzard work 100% freely. Make sure the studios don't rush out titles, or make titles that are bland.

Hmm that´s about what I would start with and then work with what happens.

Edit; Almost forgot; When I´m about to retire, hand over Activsion to Blizzard.

 

[Thespian]

I would put "Call of Duty" into a synonym generator, take the top five results and make them new series of FPS games.

Hey, so I want money, sue me. And besides, I put all my artistic integrity into Cry of Responsibility 12

 

[kebab4you]

This:
"Stop releasing ludicrously priced editions of games and give the crowd what they are paying for!"

Also, backing off Blizzard and letting them do what they do best, and thereby stop annoying their rather large and informed fanbase.

I don't get why Blizzard doesn't just become an indie developer like Valve...you'd think they'd have enough money and support for it but eh.

Way back when they was starting out they didn't make enough from there titles alone and took the offer from Davidson & Associates which later was bought up by Vivendi before merging with Activision. They didn't really start earning tons of money before WoW came along.

 

[Zenron]

Well first of all I would have to go for a swim in my pool full of money, and then I would probably try and make a conscious effort not to ruin whatever franchises that come my way like Activision seems to be doing at the moment. I would try and think of the bigger picture and release games at a slower rate to make sure the market for it doesn't stagnate like it did for Guitar Hero.

And then I would go for another swim in my pool full of money.

 

[boag]

I Would fund Battlezone 3 and HeavyGear 3, everything else is now secondary to these 2 projects.