By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Has Activision finally become worse than EA? Toys 4 Bob moved to CoD support, every Acti studio now on CoD

People are making mountains out of mole hills , would you let a part of your workforce sit idle during the downtime between game completion and the next one in what is a cyclical industry, or do you put those people onto other work that should help alleviate crunch, now until Activision say they are being absorbed into those COD studios or closed down or they get the call of duties are resumed ( pun intended) people may have a point, but only the future will tell and even then there may be other circumstances at play.

Last edited by mjk45 - on 01 May 2021

Research shows Video games  help make you smarter, so why am I an idiot

Around the Network

EA is no better or worse than any AAA publisher at this point. They're all as equally bad. EA is singled out for being one of the trendsetters of being shitty over a decade ago. Now they are all on equal footing of awfulness.



Bite my shiny metal cockpit!

AngryLittleAlchemist said:
Darwinianevolution said:

Wait, so Toys for Bob, the creators of the incredibly succesful Skylanders series, one of the most succesful and most profitable IPs of the 7th gen, and the studio that has brought Crash Bandicoot back into relevance, is now relegated to a support studio for CoD? How is that a logic business decission? How much support does CoD need to function, anyway?

They aren't the studio who did that, though. That was Vicarious Visions with their Crash Trilogy remaster. All Toys For Bob did was co-develop the port to systems outside of the Playstation 4. Crash 4, which was made by Toys for Bob, barely made any splash at all.

People acted like Activision was stupid for not bringing Crash back ... but then all people ended up doing was supporting the nostalgia product and not the actual continuation of the series. As expected. 

Everytime people on vgc and outside acts like companies are morons and they would run them much better I just sigh, because in the end it just as you put. Whatever these people say is best ends up not being the success they think it would, but they rather think companies are evil and stupid instead of looking for highest profit.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Honestly I don't care for developers being ""forced"" to work in a specific IP as long their working contracts and reasonable and respected then that's fine, it's not like they were hired to choose what to develop, they were hired to work in whatever the company seems fit

If a studio only wants to release one game let it be. For instance, Game Freak has been releasing mostly Pokemon for like 30 years and nobody really complain 

I don't like CoD and don't plan to ever play a new CoD in my life, but I guess this studio is not my posession, they have freedom to publish whatever they want if it's not for me, I will just keep ignoring it 



Estimates suggest Crash 4 sold just under 1m in its first month and would have sold even more throughout fall if it was on the new platforms. Longterm I'm sure it'll be a multi million seller whilst having a budget the fraction of a traditional AAA. But Activision are clearly only looking for cash cows and probably pumped so much money into its marketing that they artificially inflated its budget to 2/3x what it needed to be.

Maybe they'll continue with Crash/Spyro but outsource the work and be comfortable with 2-3m sellers. Otherwise I do hope they sell the IPs to another publisher who value having a diversified portfolio which tackles different age markets.



Around the Network
IcaroRibeiro said:

Honestly I don't care for developers being ""forced"" to work in a specific IP as long their working contracts and reasonable and respected then that's fine, it's not like they were hired to choose what to develop, they were hired to work in whatever the company seems fit

If a studio only wants to release one game let it be. For instance, Game Freak has been releasing mostly Pokemon for like 30 years and nobody really complain 

I don't like CoD and don't plan to ever play a new CoD in my life, but I guess this studio is not my posession, they have freedom to publish whatever they want if it's not for me, I will just keep ignoring it 

Pretty much. All of us in our work basically do what our employer asks for, and if we are unhappy we look for a better place.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."