Top
130°

Activision CEO taunts EA, talks up "Skylanders"

Activision Blizzard Chief Executive Bobby Kotick told Reuters that stores may face a shortage of its new children's game this holiday season and tried to cast doubt on a rival's upcoming game that analysts say could eat into Activision's user base.

Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
T9002972d ago (Edited 2972d ago )

Lol Activisions 2nd biggest title COD is for childeren :P Plenty of kids are going to be playing that game.

NYC_Gamer2972d ago

i really doubt star wars will bring in much profit based on it's cost.....plus they have to pay license fees.

Venjense2972d ago

I think EAs main priority is to destabilize WoW hold on the MMO market and if all it needs are 500 000 consistent subscribers it will probably at least break even.

Sure Lucas get a (big) cut of the profits but EA still profits nonetheless financially and marketshare wise.

Squatch832972d ago

Skylanders could only be an Activision game.

Having to buy extra toys to beat the game fully, smells of rip off, smells like Activision.

lorianguy2972d ago

Activision, rip-off and daylight robbery all go together like bread, jam and butter.

WhiteLightning2972d ago

...and yet reviewers have given the game good reviews, how can you give a game where you need to buy new gimmicks to unlock more content in the game a good score is beyond me.

I mean your supposed to review the game "Spyros SKYLANDERS adventure" and yet it never played like a Spyro game so how did it still get a good score.

Honestly I hope ND buy Spyro off them along with Crash. I'd rather have ND hang onto the rights then a company who are going to treat the franchise like crap, ND are the only developer who can make a Spyro game like the old days.

WhiteLightning2972d ago

Yeah I know....but Insomniac said they don't want nothing to do with Spyro anymore, it's been stated many times (keep up) so I mentioned the second best choice....NaughtyDog

STONEY42972d ago (Edited 2972d ago )

World of Warcraft was way before Acti-Blizzard, so I have no idea where Kotick's attitude about how "hard" it is to pull off a successful MMO without the "tech" is coming from. He talks like he was there during development.

SKUD2972d ago

Agree. IMO, WOW (Blizzard) saved Activision financially with the merger.

enfestid2972d ago

Yup, exactly. Hell, they took the Blizzard name instead of Sierra/Vivendi because Blizzard was pretty much the only successful company or subsidiary of that massive merger (Activision just had name-recognition).

Then they got rid of all their under-performing licenses and have relied on World of Warcraft and Call of Duty since then (as well as Tony Hawk and Guitar Hero before they massacred those franchises, too).

STONEY42972d ago (Edited 2972d ago )

I remember how pissed I was when Activision shut down the master servers for a bunch of games after that merge. Like Tribes and AvP2. ESPECIALLY AvP2, it had about 20 or so full 16 player servers at any given time, even at the hours where players dropped in most games.

Pretty good for a 2001 game that no one really talks about, some modern games die completely within months. It was my favorite multiplayer game for a really long time. Sure, a community server patch was made within a month, but the server list was now a pain to use and a lot of the people were gone. That was my starting point for disliking Activision.

-Gespenst-2972d ago

Grrr get your hands off my Spyro you evil greedy bastard.

Show all comments (18)