Who is More MONEY HUNGRY?? EA or Activision??

[SenRaq]

Simple question. With the recent announcement of the Rockband price in Europe, and Activision's long list of GH games that will come out this year, which company is more concerned about money, and less about the games and the people who play these games?

[Fwishart]

Wouldn't it be more fair to say "Which companies stock-holders like to make more money on their investments?"

[Vandyan]

A year ago I would have said EA hands down, not even close. Now Im not so sure. Im withholding my opinion on the whole Euro thing until I find out more information. These companies arent stupid, they know this price was going to be murdered from a PR standpoint. I have a hard time believing they would price it so ridiculously high unless they had to do so to turn a profit. It makes no sense otherwise.

With as well as EA handled the RMA process of the faulty Rock Band equipment, they earned a good deal of the respect I had lost for them back. They didnt have to do that, it cost them a ton of money, and they did it anyhow.

Activision lost a lot of my respect with their handling of the PS3 GH / Rock Band peripheral issue. That was just pure spite and greed fueled.

So, I am going to abstain and call it a draw for now, until I get more details on the Euro Rock Band release and why it costs so much.

[barbaraann72]

I played Ultima Online for years... so I voted EA. :(

[CM_Drunk]

Well, neither one is a charity. And unless you guys know something I dont, the only other GH games Ive heard coming are Aerosmith and 4. But....In my experience it would prob be EA.

[Destnaru]

I have to vote for Activision just based on past experience.
They are true market whores and now even more so since they are consistently losing market share with Guitar Hero due of the popularity of Rock Band.
Just my opinion.

[Zeleii]

Simple, Activision. GH makes a bucket off on senior AND new players alike. Rock Band price in Europe is what in US dollars? I wouldn't know but I am sure it completely fair.

As for DLC Harmonix releases steady and quality DLC offering a wide variety of DLC as well. This diversity creates a decent income. But the quality of the DLC also show that Harmonix is truly worried about the player, not thier money.

Most fun song for me as of yet = Free
Most critically acclaimed song by the community = Shockwave 1$

BTW, ever go to Guitar Hero forums? You players whining about DLC non stop? No? That's what I thougt. Activision will release DLC every NOW and THEN, at an increased price that of Rock Bands DLC.



Also Activision is a sequel whore, they create very abysmal sequels that aren't very memorable.

EA on the other hand, only case I can remember of a bad sequel is sports games they release, but I don't like sports besides hockey eh? And other than a GH name one game that has had the following that most EA games lately have had?

I can start by naming a few EA games...

GTA4
Army of Two (Which is great if I must say)
Warhammer Online
Mercenaries 2
Mass Effect

Activision is just releasing abysmal games.

BTW only sucessful thing Blizzard-Activision has going for it is it's WoW revenue, which is just nothing but money hunger. There are many better MMOs out there for free even *cough*Guild Wars*cough* but that's just me.

Final Note: Activision dug a deeper hole when they let Blizzard buy them out...
I hate Blizzard

[jake18oly]

I would have to say Activision. I don't like the way they are whoring out the Guitar Hero Franchise. They are going to run it into the ground. Rock Band is a much better game in my opinion and I think the Guitar Hero games are going to continue to get worse.

[oohwha]

In before the lock.

Activi$ion is currently the more greedy of the 2 b@st@rds :)


Poor developers get caught up in the crappy greed practices of the publishers that hire them :(

[ZortheConqueror]

The correct answer is Germany.

[ASPSAX]

To everyone calling companies "money hungry" or "greedy," you have no right unless you sincerely would not try to make as much money as you possibly could (and if you're one of those "nice" people then you're a rarity). Everyone pretends to be Mother Teresa until they actually have to put their money where their mouth is.

[Vandyan]

While I agree that they are in the business of making money, there is a point where it becomes immoral of you are really ripping people off, or making promises to make sales and then not delivering. I understand these are not charities that exist to feed our gaming fix, but its still not ok to be spiteful and price gouge.

Since Im one of those idiots that will actually hand the money back to the cashiere and tell them they made a mistake if they give me too much change, I guess I have the right. :) Money doesnt buy happiness, and Id much rather have a clean conscience than a few extra dollars in my pocket.

[Fwishart]

To everyone calling companies "money hungry" or "greedy," you have no right unless you sincerely would not try to make as much money as you possibly could (and if you're one of those "nice" people then you're a rarity). Everyone pretends to be Mother Teresa until they actually have to put their money where their mouth is.

I agree. Its just buisness.

[Destnaru]

To everyone calling companies "money hungry" or "greedy," you have no right unless you sincerely would not try to make as much money as you possibly could (and if you're one of those "nice" people then you're a rarity). Everyone pretends to be Mother Teresa until they actually have to put their money where their mouth is.

there are ways of conducting business that don't involve using the Machiavellian principles as a bible.
Companies that do that earn a well deserved bad reputation.
Activision just happens to be one of them in my opinion.

[Chthonic]

Gibson

/thread

[nicko68]

and now even more so since they are consistently losing market share with Guitar Hero due of the popularity of Rock Band.


Do you have a source to back this up? It seems to me that GH still has the name recognition, and is popping up everywhere.

[nicko68]

there are ways of conducting business that don't involve using the Machiavellian principles as a bible.
Companies that do that earn a well deserved bad reputation.
Activision just happens to be one of them in my opinion.

I think most companies, when they reach a certain size and have shareholders to answer to, start adopting these principles. It's a shame, really.

[Vandyan]

GH still has overall better sales numbers so far (although at half the price thats not surprising), but there is no question that Rock Band is stealing market share.

[LZ_69]

Bill Gates is trying to take over the world!!!:eek: Run for hills!!!:p

[Destnaru]

Do you have a source to back this up? It seems to me that GH still has the name recognition, and is popping up everywhere.

I can't help but notice that you conveniently omitted the "Just my opinion" part from the quotation.
LOL

[LZ_69]

Bottom line, businesses all of them and I mean ALL OF THEM, not just the videogame industry are out to make money! as much as they can, nothing else!! if they are not, then those are called non-profit organizations.

[SenRaq]

Why is the term "money hungry" seen in a negative light? We all have to eat right?

[KEWB]

A year ago I would have said EA hands down, not even close. Now Im not so sure. Im withholding my opinion on the whole Euro thing until I find out more information. These companies arent stupid, they know this price was going to be murdered from a PR standpoint. I have a hard time believing they would price it so ridiculously high unless they had to do so to turn a profit. It makes no sense otherwise.

With as well as EA handled the RMA process of the faulty Rock Band equipment, they earned a good deal of the respect I had lost for them back. They didnt have to do that, it cost them a ton of money, and they did it anyhow.

Activision lost a lot of my respect with their handling of the PS3 GH / Rock Band peripheral issue. That was just pure spite and greed fueled.

So, I am going to abstain and call it a draw for now, until I get more details on the Euro Rock Band release and why it costs so much.

That's just about the exact post I was going to make. However, I think that the recent behaviors of Activision and EA have pushed Activision into the winning spot on this poll. I've come across a lot of bull crap in stores and on the net with the Guitar Hero logo slapped on it. They're going to milk that franchise for all it's worth just drowning people in GH merchandise until everybody's completely sick of it. Then they're gonna toss the GH franchise to the side and make more Tony Hawk games, which are all going to be pretty much the same, just with different titles.

[TakeABow]

They are both major corporations, so they are both money hungry.

Do I think that GHIII is a game designed to be profitable moreso than fun? Yes. I think Rock Band is designed to be fun moreso that profitable. But both companies are out to make money overall.

[KEWB]

Bottom line, businesses all of them and I mean ALL OF THEM, not just the videogame industry are out to make money! as much as they can, nothing else!! if they are not, then those are called non-profit organizations.

That's true. But what I think this poll is really getting at is who's trying to get money by trying to entice people into buying crappy merchandise, as opposed to who's trying to make money by building and keeping a strong fan base by standing behind their products.

[Hindesite]

The bais on these forums is going to be towards Activision being the greater of two evils, since the majority of Rock Band fans are previous Guitar Hero fans and Activision is now sequel-killing Guitar Hero.

That said, I'd easily put EA up as the bigger of the money whores. EA has done nearly as many sports games as Square has done Final Fantasies, and that's just for one sports franchise, take your pick... EA has the uncanny ability to release the same sports game every year and somehow get away with it every time on a maximum of 1 or 2 changes/upgrades. No complaints from gamers...

Every good game I can think of that's come out with EA's label stamped on it hasn't even been developed by EA, it's just been published by them, and in nearly every case the developers have reported not being able to reach the full potential of their vision for the game due to their publisher being too strict on deadlines, limitations, etc.

Yet still, somehow, EA still manages to get more credit from the gaming community then they deserve. If not for the games they've only published (which pisses me off, because the community should be singing the developer's praises, not EA's) but even sometimes for games EA had no involvement in. Mass Effect? That's Bioware, and so far it's only ever been published by Microsoft. GTA 4? That's all Rockstar Games, no one else. Zero involvement from EA. So why have they been mentioned in this thread as gaming gems from EA? I couldn't tell you, but somehow EA does it.

Don't be blinded by Activisons involvement with the Guitar Hero series now, it's a much lesser evil compared to the things EA has done to the industry.

[KEWB]

Yet still, somehow, EA still manages to get more credit from the gaming community then they deserve. If not for the games they've only published (which pisses me off, because the community should be singing the developer's praises, not EA's) but even sometimes for games EA had no involvement in. Mass Effect? That's Bioware, and so far it's only ever been published by Microsoft. GTA 4? That's all Rockstar Games, no one else. Zero involvement from EA. So why have they been mentioned in this thread as gaming gems from EA? I couldn't tell you, but somehow EA does it.

Ummm..... who exactly has been giving credit of Mass Effect and GTA to EA? I'd love to know some of your sources for those 2 lovely pieces of information.