Activision and Sony

A

agrindinger

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
150
So apparently Activision has threatened to stop all game manufacturing for Sony consoles as early as 2010. I say this will be the blow that will finally bring Sony to its knees and hopefully get them out as a console maker. They have great games I just think that with their history of hardware they need to step down.
 
Their history of Hardware, like MS's 30% failure rates. lol,dude your a dumbass if you want Sony to get out of the console business. Do you relize that would leave just MS and Nintendo and MS would pretty much do whatever they want as far as quality control and what not.

Activision is just trying to help push Sony to drop the price on the PS3 cuz in turn more PS3's will sell and Activision's software will follow.

Wow stupist post on the [H] I've ever read.


Here's the link
http://kotaku.com/5296566/activision-threatens-to-stop-supporting-sony-consoles
 
Last edited:
agrindinger - how about we stick to only vitamins in the morning and lay off the stupid pills. activision knows a price cut is in the works, they know that the increase sales will generate more revenue for them *cough*modern warfare 2*cough*. activision is turning into EA with moves such as dropping ghostbusters cause a sequel couldn't be pumped out in 9 months, and dropping brutal legend and now suing EA over its potential release. sony could so easily turn this into a positive thing and come out looking like such the good guy with this it makes me wonder if they really paid activision to make those statements. sony isn't going anywhere and neither is activision. this is some kind of PR move (possibly a form of viral marketing) to get people talking about sony and activision. nobody is going anywhere, go on about your day and do everyone a favor and don't give this topic another thought.
 
people play cool please , anyone is entitled to his own opinion even if you find it stupid.
 
With the history of consoles they need to step down? Wtf? What the hell does that mean? Sony had some if not the most successful game consoles ever released and the amount of failures in minimalistic compared to others...

Here's the link to the actual article if you want to skip past the flamebait...

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1428744
 
Multi console future please. It can be sony sega and atari, or MS nintendo and coleco for all I care, I just want competition.
 
Rehevkor said:
Allow me to be the first to say: no great loss.
Click to expand...

Right...

"the world's largest third-party publisher"

As Technoob pointed out COD/MW and Guitar Hero are two of the most successful franchises this generation. MW2 is looking to beat out Halo3 and GTA for the most successful launch and considering how well COD4 and 5 have done it wouldn't be surprising if it succeeds.

It may not be the end of the world for PS3, but it would be the beginning of the end.
 
Psychotext said:
It's bullshit posturing. Nothing to be concerned about.
Click to expand...

We have a winner.

Do ppl really think they'd withdraw from 22million+ potential customers? Dream on. Like has been said they are just trying to lean on Sony to increase the 22million.
 
Psychotext said:
It's bullshit posturing. Nothing to be concerned about.
Click to expand...

Since Activision/Blizzard is quite possibly a larger entity than even EA after the merger, Sony should be concerned that the company is threatening to drop support. They could lose a lot of business if Activision games stop appearing on their consoles.
 
arr4ws said:
people play cool please , anyone is entitled to his own opinion even if you find it stupid.
Click to expand...

Yah, but when its this stupid, its fair game.
Stupid on an epic scale, even 4chan /b/ stupid.
 
agrindinger said:
So apparently Activision has threatened to stop all game manufacturing for Sony consoles as early as 2010. I say this will be the blow that will finally bring Sony to its knees and hopefully get them out as a console maker. They have great games I just think that with their history of hardware they need to step down.
Click to expand...

Having one console is stupid. We would be stuck in a netbook world.

"Why advance when we can make lots of money selling the same crap with different colors?" This is gonna be the mindset of the dominant company.

Having a company hold back potential technological progress does not help the world. I guess you can go enjoy halo while the rest of us enjoy every exclusive on each console.
 
To me it really just seems like Activision doing a PR push to get Sony to drop the price. I doubt they'd stop supporting the Playstation brand entirely. However, that said.. this sounds like the Gamecube thing all over again. Or EA to Dreamcast.

Engadget said:
He says Activision paid $500 million in royalties to Sony last year...
Click to expand...

o_O
 
Last edited:
Sony has to stay in the console market so they can force everyone to buy Ultraviolet-ray discs in 3 years.
 
theNoid said:
To me it really just seems like Activision doing a PR push to get Sony to drop the price. I doubt they'd stop supporting the Playstation brand entirely. However, that said.. this sounds like the Gamecube thing all over again. Or EA to Dreamcast.
Click to expand...

The difference with EA and DC is that EA never supported the machine to start with anyway. I was gutted the latest Fifa was never gonna hit DC at the time, that could have been sweet.
 
The threat is really for future games from Activision/Blizzard. New COD and GH will come out, but after this year they are unsure if it's worth it. According to that Activision guy, PS3 takes more money from his company and returns less than the 360. He's unsure it's worth the effort, and with the way things are going, he doesn't see the PS3 being a worthwhile option to support in the coming years.

It would be a huge loss to virtually get Guitar Hero, COD and other activision/blizz franchises as xbox exclusives.
 
well if I read the article correctly he said "if you look at 2010 and 2011" that to me means that he would have to actually see the sales for that time period to make a decision. They have already made the investment making Modern Warfare 2 and the newest GH so this would only affect future titles not the ones already in the pipeline.

I do like the fact that he is complaining about the return on investment when his company was showing a profit of $189 million in one quarter ( if this continues this way for the first 3 quarters and the 4th is higher like it always is from x-mas they are looking at a Billion in profit this year ) I am sure that some of this revenue is generated by sales on Sony platforms. I can see that they are making less money per unit on the Sony platform, but they are stil making money on it. How much is saved on the development of a game like MW2 compared to the lost revenue of the sales for that platform? ( I do know not all of the Activision titles will sell any where near the numbers of the COD series) Maybe they are just trying to fire the entire staff in charge of Sony Development and are looking to blame someone since they are clearly not suffering in this ecconomy like some others are.
 
Technoob said:
Maybe not to you, but you really think losing Guitar Hero and COD/MW just to name two wouldn't be devastating to any console?
Click to expand...

i couldnt give a toss about those two games and i have a ps3. COD? LOL Arma 2 please. i wish more people take note of other FPS games besides COD.. ahh well have fun with MW2 lads
 
You might not care much about those title, but it'll be a huge blow for the PS3 if it lost 'em, those are 2 big franchises. As for FPS games, it's not just about how the game plays, it's about the community it has, Modern Warfare has a huge community that would result in a better multiplayer experience.

I'm a PS3 owner myself btw (going to get the other consoles soon) and prefer to play games on the PS3 (just more used to the controller). Anyway, as I said earlier, I doubt such thing would happen.
 
jonneymendoza said:
i couldnt give a toss about those two games and i have a ps3. COD? LOL Arma 2 please. i wish more people take note of other FPS games besides COD.. ahh well have fun with MW2 lads
Click to expand...

I'm sure sony shares your feelings about multimillion selling franchises. They'd much rather have Arma, a niche game that will sell a few hundred thousand copies.
 
cutting the price before a hardware redesign would likely hurt Sony more than it would help. At the current sale price vs. production cost, the PS3 is selling well enough for Sony to be comfortable. A hardware refresh will likely make production cheaper and off-set a price reduction----so then it would be feasible. If Sony dropped the price on the current hardware, the boost in sales may not make up for the extra money lost.

A price cut on the current hardware could actually sink the PS3. From a company posting losses in an economic climate such as this, Sony cannot afford to be super aggressive.

I'm not sure what got into Activision's cereal that morning, but they are really overstepping themselves. They are one of the few companies right now that are posting consecutive profits. I guess they feel cool being a bully when they've got some of the best selling games on the planet. Especially since Microsoft hasn't exactly ran the most perfect ship this generation either, Activision needs to quit boohooing and get back to thinking about how they can get a chunk in the Japanese market and quit focusing on the U.S. It might be the biggest market, but its not the only market. A smarter company would say, damn, how can we evolve to make money off other markets in a time like this?

People also need to realize that yes, Sony has traditionally won and they aren't winning right now, but so what? That doesn't mean they aren't doing fine. This isn't a SEGA situation here. the attitude seems to be that if you aren't winning in this current climate, you should just cut things loose. But...when things eventually get better again, you are going to wish you still had that other source of revenue.

and finally, is a price drop really needed? I mean, again the PS3 is selling quite well at its current price point. Have a look at this:


By Adam Frucci, 2:00 PM on Tue Apr 14 2009

With the price of Wii Motion Plus bringing the cost of a full Wiimote to a whopping $80, we thought we'd reexamine the true cost of buying a console today. Which is truly the cheapest?

We're going to pretend we're either a family of four or an apartment that wants a system loaded up with four controllers. We'll assume you want to be able to recharge your controllers rather than wasting money on disposable batteries, and we'll pick the model of each console that we'd recommend to a family member asking us for advice. We'll also factor in the cost of 2 games, because nobody buys a console without a game.

So what's the true cost of going out and buying a system today? Let's find out.

Playstation 3
Cost of console: $400 (80GB)
Cost of 3 extra controllers: $43 x 3 = $129
Cost of charging station: $25
Cost of 2 games: $120
Cost of HDMI cable: $3

Total: $677

Wii
Cost of console: $250
Cost of 3 extra controllers: $36 x 3 = $108
Cost of 3 Nunchuks: $18 x 3 = $54
Cost of 4 Wii Motion Pluses: $20 x 4 = $80
Cost of charging station w/ 4 rechargeable batteries: $49
Cost of 2 games: $100
SD card: $12 (8GB)

Total: $653

Xbox 360
Cost of console: $300 (60GB)
Cost of 3 extra controllers: $37 x 3 = $111
Cost of 2 rechargeable batteries: $12 x 2 = $24
Cost of recharging station w/ 2 rechargeable batteries: $30
Cost of 2 games: $120
Cost of Xbox Live membership: $43 (13 months)

Total: $628

As you can see, the prices of all three consoles are incredibly close, and you can obviously fiddle with these configurations to change them. If you only want 2 controllers and are planning to only play Wii Sports, the Wii is still the cheapest, but a fully-loaded Xbox 360 with a year of Live is actually cheaper than the fully-loaded Wii (although it's the only console without WiFi, so add $80 if you really need that). And the PS3 is surprisingly close in price, thanks to its controllers having built-in batteries and its free online service. The Nintendo controller scheme really rockets it up in price, and it's pretty amazing that a Wii with 4 controllers is only $24 less than a PS3 with 4 controllers.

So really, it comes down to what you want in a console. But it's surprising to see that, in real-world prices, all three systems will set you back about the same amount
Click to expand...
 
Why didn't they get a HDMI cable for the 360? The 60gb doesn't come with one.

Also, 4 controllers? Real world? Give me a break.
 
Psychotext said:
Why didn't they get a HDMI cable for the 360? The 60gb doesn't come with one.
Click to expand...

This.

Also, who needs a $25 charging station for the PS3 when you can just buy an extra USB cable in addition to the one that comes with it for a couple dollars?
 
Psychotext said:
Why didn't they get a HDMI cable for the 360? The 60gb doesn't come with one.

Also, 4 controllers? Real world? Give me a break.
Click to expand...

Signal said:
This.

Also, who needs a $25 charging station for the PS3 when you can just buy an extra USB cable in addition to the one that comes with it for a couple dollars?
Click to expand...

Because they are wanting the numbers to back up their piece. In addition I've never put a SD card anywhere near my Wii...another pointless extra on the list.

The most unrealistic part of it? Two worthwhile games for the Wii :D
 
Part of really wants to see this happen. The Dreamcast cas been far too long without justice.....:cool:
 
Part of the hurdle, as someone was able to price the above, is the up front cost is more important. If you take a look at the NPD numbers you can see that price does matter. I rarely see anyone buying a console with 4 controllers, 4 of this, and etc all at the time of purchase. Most can be purchased at a later date If anyone finds value in that feature.

Not to mention, as people already pointed out above, the recharging station may be unnecessary for the PS3 and at the same time the Xbox utilizes standard AA bateries so you can buy any rechargable battery solution. Not to mention XBox is available in arcade, without a HD, where as Sony has HD capacities exceeding any xbox. On a similar note do we start adding Natal and other solutions to the cost of the PS3 and Xbox 360 when they release as they provide similar capabilities as the wii? Personaly I don't think so, but I'm sure someone will.

Another example is for the Wii I have yet to play online or purchase items that would require the SD card, and I know a few people with xboxes that don't go online with the xbox (ie single player only use, casual gamer, with no broadband). The same can also be said for me personally I have poor wireless reception in the entertainment room so for me to do it right I would need to buy the LAN adapter for the wii. Even though this lan adapter is missing, I don't think it should be included as not everyone utilizes that feature.

Simply upgrading all consoles to the highest model to base prices is something you typically don't see as a norm for the typical consumer. I'm sure, for example, if they offered an xbox 360 with 4 years live bundled for 50% of MSRP prices (example +$100 vs +$200 to the base console), I'm sure the vast majority would choose the cheaper option now even though they are spending more money later.

Bundling of extra hardware might benefit some, but not everyone needs them so it may just end up an extra cost with no value. For example I already own a stand alone Blu-Ray player, however if I want to purchase a PS3 for gaming I'm forced to pay for that feature when I would never use it.
 
Last edited:
agrindinger said:
So apparently Activision has threatened to stop all game manufacturing for Sony consoles as early as 2010. I say this will be the blow that will finally bring Sony to its knees and hopefully get them out as a console maker. They have great games I just think that with their history of hardware they need to step down.
Click to expand...

Ignorance+++
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top