• Bobby Kotick wanted to play Battlefield 3, EA didn't let him.
    112 replies, posted
Pff, he'd probably get in there, look at the keyboard and ask where the analogue sticks were.
Jesus Kotick you retard, if you want to steal ideas you don't make it fucking obvious and try to barge your way in to steal some gameplay feature ideas
[QUOTE=nige111;30350980]Pff, he'd probably get in there, look at the keyboard and ask where the analogue sticks were.[/QUOTE] He'd watch someone else play and just write down all the features that cod doesn't have then leave, next day "Call of Duty: Modern Battlefield" is announced.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;30351440]Jesus Kotick you retard, if you want to steal ideas you don't make it fucking obvious and try to barge your way in to steal some gameplay feature ideas[/QUOTE] Next thing you know, he'll make call of duty heroes and make a cash shop that's even more of a rip off.
The COD team can't actually create anything new to expand future installments of the franchise to more open areas, since the Quake 3 engine can only go so far. Dunno what DICE is worried about :v:
[QUOTE=MasterG;30350126]Games shouldn't be treated purely as a business, they should be treated as a hobby or an art form too. Kotick's mentality is entirely business, demand and supply, elasticity and opportunity costs. Gaming shouldn't be a venture one partakes in purely to make money.[/QUOTE] Kotick is the CEO. It is literally his job to make sure they are profitable so people don't have to lose their jobs and so Activision can stick around. It is the designers, programmers, and artists job to treat it as a game, or as art. (not a hobby, it's a job for these guys) Not the CEO's. I don't like Kotick as much as the next guy (even though most of the "dumb" things he has said has been out of context), but...they aren't indie people. The leader of Activision can't treat something that costs 20+ million dollars for just an [i]average[/i] game (way way more for a AAA title like Call of Duty) as a [i]"hobby"[/i]. Come on now. [quote]The COD team can't actually create anything new to expand future installments of the franchise to more open areas, since the Quake 3 engine can only go so far. Dunno what DICE is worried about [/quote] The engine COD uses is so different from the stock id Tech engine used in Q3 that it's not funny. It's heavily modified (to the point that it's called the "IW Engine"). Engines can be expanded upon, new features added. The only "limitation" is how much money Activision wants to invest in improving said engine.
[QUOTE=Nikota;30351888]Next thing you know, he'll make call of duty heroes and make a cash shop that's even more of a rip off.[/QUOTE] except it'll all be £40 a month
In a few years you will all be crying about how bad Battlefield is because they started appealing more to consoles after seeing success.
[QUOTE=lulzbocksV2;30352187]In a few years you will all be crying about how bad Battlefield is because they started appealing more to consoles after seeing success.[/QUOTE] Except they already appealed to consoles and even with a console centric title like Bad Company 2 it was still played more and received most of its success on PC? Battlefield 3 is PC first as well so... I think you maybe underestimate how big the Battlefield franchise is on PC. o.o
[QUOTE=lulzbocksV2;30352187]In a few years you will all be crying about how bad Battlefield is because they started appealing more to consoles after seeing success.[/QUOTE] If they release a reskinned Battlefield game every year that looks and plays exactly the same for 60$ and with at least three very small map packs for 15$ each, sure.
I have a feeling he wouldn't know how to play even if he's allowed in.
[QUOTE=lulzbocksV2;30352187]In a few years you will all be crying about how bad Battlefield is because they started appealing more to consoles after seeing success.[/QUOTE] Regardless. The majority of sales for battlefield bad company 2 were for PC.
[QUOTE=PacificV2;30349622]Not a classy move EA.[/QUOTE] U tell em Pacman
[QUOTE=lulzbocksV2;30352187]In a few years you will all be crying about how bad Battlefield is because they started appealing more to consoles after seeing success.[/QUOTE] Actually I'd like to see a PC and WiiU release. Shitstorm of incredible proportions.
Can't wait for Modern Warfare 3, because MW2 was simply brilliant, despite some of the lame spam tactics. Though Battlefield 3 also looks great if not the best online shooter, but then again I haven't seen any MW3 gameplay or anything.
[QUOTE=Blackbird88;30349108]I thought he hated games :confused:[/QUOTE] He probably hates games with reasonable prices that also sell good.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;30349291]I'd let Kotick cut in front of me in a line. Dudes fucking strapped with cash.[/QUOTE] he made 5.5 million dollars in 2010
I [I]highly [/I]doubt anyone from EA went over to MW3...
[QUOTE=Bat-shit;30352945]Can't wait for Modern Warfare 3, because MW2 was simply brilliant, despite some of the lame spam tactics. Though Battlefield 3 also looks great if not the best online shooter, but then again I haven't seen any MW3 gameplay or anything.[/QUOTE] If what you mean by brilliant is rehash of CoD 4 then yes I guess it is
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;30355504]If what you mean by brilliant is rehash of CoD 4 then yes I guess it is[/QUOTE] Well MW2 as a whole was pretty cool, the short musics during gameplay, killstreaks, cool maps and the environment damaging etc. And also, my definite favorite was the [b]THERMAL BARRET[/b] I mean god damn it looked cool and when you shoot it, just BLAM BLAM BLAM! I remember I blasted 5 people off the face of the earth with it, then called down a fucking PREDATOR MISSILE, [b]BOOM[/b] few people dead, then a little more BLAM BLAM with the motherfucking [b]THERMAL BARRET[/b], and then.. CHOPPER GUNNER I rained [b]HELL[/b] down on my enemies! Needless to say it was a good moment in MW2, 24 kills and at the final minute I died a hero.
[QUOTE=Hakita;30349076]He should wait like everyone else :colbert:[/QUOTE] Many people are allowed to cut lines on game conventions. There's like a hierarchy among press and such. Depending on the type of convention it's Visitors <lowly press < common press < big shot press (IGN etc). CEO's have all access as far as i can tell. Unless they don't like the guy in particular ofcourse.
I think he should have been allowed to play.
Well considering that the representative of BF3 at E3 nastily, but awesomely hinted at how BF wouldn't have a stupid paid service, I don't know why they would let him in.
[QUOTE=Bat-shit;30355657]Well MW2 as a whole was pretty cool, the short musics during gameplay, killstreaks, cool maps and the environment damaging etc. And also, my definite favorite was the [b]THERMAL BARRET[/b] I mean god damn it looked cool and when you shoot it, just BLAM BLAM BLAM! I remember I blasted 5 people off the face of the earth with it, then called down a fucking PREDATOR MISSILE, [b]BOOM[/b] few people dead, then a little more BLAM BLAM with the motherfucking [b]THERMAL BARRET[/b], and then.. CHOPPER GUNNER I rained [b]HELL[/b] down on my enemies! Needless to say it was a good moment in MW2, 24 kills and at the final minute I died a hero.[/QUOTE] And this is exactly what I hated about it, the whole thing just revolved around killstreaks, CoD 4 way great as it focused on the players skill and had the killstreaks as a side reward to give your team a bit fo support. MW2 however just revolved around killstreaks and over powered weapons, [editline]9th June 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=jaredop;30356097]I think he should have been allowed to play.[/QUOTE] Because letting your competitor (the same one that is trying to sue them) get game ideas from you is a great idea.
[QUOTE=PacificV2;30349622]Not a classy move EA.[/QUOTE] Actually it was very classy in business and fairness, The woman skipped an entire fucking line of people just to see if EA will allow them in, EA was fair not allowing her (and Bobby Kotick) in, in which she kicked up a shit because she thought that working for Activision and going up to it's main rival will just allow them in after skipping an entire line. From a business standpoint, it's hilarious why you think it's wrong, He's the CEO of Activision, EA is creating something that already has a big fanbase and is said to be going up against Activision. Most likely even if he genuinely liked Battlefield 3 that he would in no doubt incorporate it into his own franchise.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;30356289]And this is exactly what I hated about it, the whole thing just revolved around killstreaks, CoD 4 way great as it focused on the players skill and had the killstreaks as a side reward to give your team a bit fo support. MW2 however just revolved around killstreaks and over powered weapons[/QUOTE] Well the entertainment value was pretty good, and that's all that matters to me in gaming. But it didn't last for long in MW2/BlackOps, much like in all games they get repetitive whether you like it or not
[QUOTE=Keyblockor;30356447]Actually it was very classy in business and fairness, The woman skipped an entire fucking line of people just to see if EA will allow them in, EA was fair not allowing her (and Bobby Kotick) in, in which she kicked up a shit because she thought that working for Activision and going up to it's main rival will just allow them in after skipping an entire line. From a business standpoint, it's hilarious why you think it's wrong, He's the CEO of Activision, EA is creating something that already has a big fanbase and is said to be going up against Activision. Most likely even if he genuinely liked Battlefield 3 that he would in no doubt incorporate it into his own franchise.[/QUOTE] you guys keep forgetting that Bobby Kotick has absolutely no control over the game what-so-ever he works in management for a publishing company and the only time he actually sees the game is when the developer brings in their progress to show to the board and that's about it all this hate over bobby kotick is really only because for some really odd reason they've decided to let him represent activision how much of call of duty can you "blame" on him? not much at all.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;30356289] Because letting your competitor (the same one that is trying to sue them) get game ideas from you is a great idea.[/QUOTE] Because it's like they can't get this information anywhere else in extreme detail, or from another employee, or from the open beta, or when it releases. It isn't a real story, says the "social media guy" from activision. [img]http://gyazo.com/db3d81beec9329cdf3aa960898bc2401.png[/img]
[QUOTE=thisispain;30356557] how much of call of duty can you "blame" on him? not much at all.[/QUOTE] The DLC? The re-skin minimal effort shitting out of new games every year? :frog: there is [b]plenty[/b] to blame on him.
[QUOTE=thisispain;30356557]you guys keep forgetting that Bobby Kotick has absolutely no control over the game what-so-ever he works in management for a publishing company and the only time he actually sees the game is when the developer brings in their progress to show to the board and that's about it all this hate over bobby kotick is really only because for some really odd reason they've decided to let him represent activision how much of call of duty can you "blame" on him? not much at all.[/QUOTE] Most of the problems with cod are down to horrible business decisions, never mind the fact that activision are trying to sue EA
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.