• Bobby Kotick wanted to play Battlefield 3, EA didn't let him.
    112 replies, posted
[QUOTE=kenji;30356618]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] what the fuck didn't you read what i said he's hardly involved with any of that at all take your :frog: elsewhere
[QUOTE=that1dude24;30356600]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] I thought it was a bit weird that he would actually go somewhere full of common gaming scum.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;30356643]Most of the problems with cod are down to horrible business decisions, never mind the fact that activision are trying to sue EA[/QUOTE] he doesn't make business decisions either, the board does he's the executor of the board, basically the board's bitch
[QUOTE=PacificV2;30349622]Not a classy move EA.[/QUOTE] I like how this got 77 disagrees. It was rude, childish and idiotic. My respect for EA went down considerably, whatever Kotick might have said or done (and don't give me the "Everyone waits in line" bullcrap, only some wait in line, a tonne of people get to play it without having to wait in any line).
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;30356643]Most of the problems with cod are down to horrible business decisions, never mind the fact that activision are trying to sue EA[/QUOTE] They're good business decisions so far. Good for the consumer? Not so much.
I like how people are defending kotick, because he does what a "businessman" is supposed to do but when he tries to spy on a rival company and isn't allowed, which is exactly what a rival company should do in a situation like that, you freak out.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;30356705]I like how people are defending kotick, because he does what a "businessman" is supposed to do but when he tries to spy on a rival company and isn't allowed, which is exactly what a rival company should do in a situation like that, you freak out.[/QUOTE] spy on a rival company, hahha if they wanted to spy on a rival company they wouldn't send in the CEO to waltz in, that's not how it works
Also I don't like Kotick either, but all this hate is retarded. What you think you become and stay CEO of a company with friendship and love? No. He's CEO because he maximises profits and is damn good at what he does, in fact you should respect him more than most because he's honest. All other CEOs do the same, just that they do it behind your back without telling you (this goes for Valve too, see hats).
[QUOTE=that1dude24;30356698]They're good business decisions so far. Good for the consumer? Not so much.[/QUOTE] Which is why public companies are always the worst when it comes to gaming.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;30356705]I like how people are defending kotick, because he does what a "businessman" is supposed to do but when he tries to spy on a rival company and isn't allowed, which is exactly what a rival company should do in a situation like that, you freak out.[/QUOTE] Yeah they'd totally need to send the CEO to spy. They'd just send a reporter (or just someone who can analyze a game better than Kotick) if they wanted to spy.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;30356705]I like how people are defending kotick, because he does what a "businessman" is supposed to do but when he tries to spy on a rival company and isn't allowed, which is exactly what a rival company should do in a situation like that, you freak out.[/QUOTE] What could he conceivably do? He makes decisions, he doesn't come up with them. The entire conference is going to be repeated ad nauseum in a huge number of websites, it's going open beta pretty soon, and it releases in just a few months. It'd be more a matter of principle if it were true. [QUOTE=acds;30356741]Also I don't like Kotick either, but all this hate is retarded. What you think you become and stay CEO of a company with friendship and love? No. He's CEO because he maximises profits and is damn good at what he does, in fact you should respect him more than most because he's honest. All other CEOs do the same, just that they do it behind your back without telling you (this goes for Valve too, see hats).[/QUOTE] Not quite, Kotick is legally required to maximize profits for his shareholders, a private company like valve isn't required to do anything.
[QUOTE=thisispain;30356671]what the fuck didn't you read what i said he's hardly involved with any of that at all take your :frog: elsewhere[/QUOTE] I thought kotick was the guy who decides what game to develop and how much cash you put into development, and how much in advertisement, and when to release said game, and how much it would cost, and how many dlcs it should have etc. or at least he has a significant influence on these decisions.
looks like kotick knows BF3 is a Call of duty killer
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;30356808]I thought kotick was the guy who decides what game to develop and how much cash you put into development, and how much in advertisement, and when to release said game, and how much it would cost, and how many dlcs it should have etc. or at least he has a significant influence on these decisions.[/QUOTE] no not at all, if anything that's the board but i doubt it. they don't know about this stuff, activision is a gigantic company with thousands of people who coordinate decisions like that. kotick's job is to make sure they play nice and work together. like i said, the only time the board sees stuff related to the game is when they get progress reports. the only thing they are interested in is how much money comes in each month. the rest of it lies with the company below.
[QUOTE=thisispain;30356870]no not at all, if anything that's the board but i doubt it. they don't know about this stuff, activision is a gigantic company with thousands of people who coordinate decisions like that. kotick's job is to make sure they play nice and work together. like i said, the only time the board sees stuff related to the game is when they get progress reports. the only thing they are interested in is how much money comes in each month. the rest of it lies with the company below.[/QUOTE] How the fuck does seeing the game has anything to do with what I said? Also "spying on rival company", nah I'm sure his sole purpose was to play the game :downs:
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;30356941]How the fuck does seeing the game has anything to do with what I said? Also "spying on rival company", nah I'm sure his sole purpose was to play the game :downs:[/QUOTE] pff whatever stubborn stan
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;30356941]Also "spying on rival company", nah I'm sure his sole purpose was to play the game :downs:[/QUOTE] Do you seriously think that if Activision wanted to send someone to get ideas for CoD from BF3, they would send Kotick?
Comedy Gold.
[QUOTE=thisispain;30357120]pff whatever stubborn stan[/QUOTE] No, seriously what the fuck are you talking about? Wouldn't the CEO be involved in decisions on how much money and time do they put into developing a product that his company wants to sell? What the fuck does not being involved in the actual development of the product has to do with all that? [QUOTE=Megafanx13;30357157]Do you seriously think that if Activision wanted to send someone to get ideas for CoD from BF3, they would send Kotick?[/QUOTE] Do you seriously think he just wanted to play the game? He wanted to know what to expect. It's not like he wanted to break into a saferoom mission impossible style.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;30357216]No, seriously what the fuck are you talking about? Wouldn't the CEO be involved in decisions on how much money and time do they put into developing a product that his company wants to sell? What the fuck does not being involved in the actual development of the product has to do with all that?[/QUOTE] no if you don't wanna listen i'm not gonna tell you stubborn stan :colbert:
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;30357216]Do you seriously think he just wanted to play the game? He wanted to know what to expect. It's not like he wanted to break into a saferoom mission impossible style.[/QUOTE] Well okay, but this is sort of like if McDonalds refused to serve the CEO of Burger King because they thought he/she would try to figure out how they make burgers. Either way, Activision is saying this didn't happen, so I wouldn't be too confident in this story anyway.
[QUOTE=thisispain;30357254]no if you don't wanna listen i'm not gonna tell you stubborn stan :colbert:[/QUOTE] Just answer the fucking question "stubborn stan": Wouldn't the CEO be involved in decisions on how much money and time do they put into developing a product that his company wants to sell?
win for EA
Strange how this conversation goes on even though it has been revealed to be fake. If I was someone at EA, however, and Kotick came up to me to see BF3, I would totally show him Duty Calls just to piss him off. If I could plan it out, I'd change what the title screen looked like.
How come most people here think that Kotick himself actually wanted to take this time to inspect the new ideas BF3 had to offer? He probably just wanted to have the ability to geniunely say that he tried BF3 and thought it was rubbish (as opposed to saying it's rubbish without even trying it, thereby his statement would have no backup), kind of like what he said in an interview recently about how BF3 wasn't really a threat or competitor to MW3.
[QUOTE=thisispain;30357254]no if you don't wanna listen i'm not gonna tell you stubborn stan :colbert:[/QUOTE] Still, some of the things he says are rage inducing.
Activision-Blizzard is now easily my least favorite game company. They all seem like a bunch of douchebags.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;30349291]I'd let Kotick cut in front of me in a line. Dudes fucking strapped with cash.[/QUOTE] That's an arguement [I]not[/I] to let him cut in front of you. It would force him to [I]use[/I] that cash, if you know what I mean.
Man, if Kotick went as far as to try and see what he's up against up close, he must realise that MW3 isnt gonna be as good, have you seen the vids of mw3? Call of duty has become such a piece of shit that I'm not even dissapointed that it's the same game as mw2 just nerfed and diff guns, I just odnt care anymore. Even if DICE made another game with Frostbite 1.5 I wouldnt be dissappointed, but they brought out the big guns with Frostbite 2.0 which is gonna be fuckin awesome with massive buildings being completely destoryed. I'm gettin as kiddy as an 8 year old who just discovered his first boner at how good bf3 is gonna be.
[QUOTE=geoface;30360707]Man, if Kotick went as far as to try and see what he's up against up close, he must realise that MW3 isnt gonna be as good, have you seen the vids of mw3? Call of duty has become such a piece of shit that I'm not even dissapointed that it's the same game as mw2 just nerfed and diff guns, I just odnt care anymore. Even if DICE made another game with Frostbite 1.5 I wouldnt be dissappointed, but they brought out the big guns with Frostbite 2.0 which is gonna be fuckin awesome with massive buildings being completely destoryed. I'm gettin as kiddy as an 8 year old who just discovered his first boner at how good bf3 is gonna be.[/QUOTE] The MW3 gameplay was boring, tedious and unoriginal. It looked exactly like both its predecessors without hardly introducing anything new. Even the e3 Kinect demonstrations kept my attention longer .
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.