Never before I have ever been this disgusted at the filthy greedy company known as Activision. Back then, I hated Electronic Arts for their constant expansion packs for The Sims franchise, and Sports games and others like Command & Conquer, and Need for Speed. As for Activision, their Tony Hawk Ride is a failure, but sells well and they plan a sequel to continue the franchise. The only Tony Hawk games I played is the Tony Hawk Pro Skater 2 back in the day, and TH:UG. The rest I literally did not care about. It's sad that Tony Hawk Ride 2 even exists. Tony Hawk games is very notorious for its constant sequels, so I will not try to explain as much here.

Guitar Hero games with redundant instrument controllers. Each game basically has its own set of songs, and quite frankly, I don't think it's worth it. A new title "DJ Hero" came along with its DJ instrument, and later already planned a sequel: DJ Hero 2. Also, not to forget about Band Hero. To me personally, I don't see the difference between each games.

StarCraft II in three separate campaigns, each probably at a $50 price tag. I don't need to explain more. I wouldn't say the purpose of 3 stand alone campaigns are reasons because of gamers, but I'd say Activision Blizzard clearly knows StarCraft II will be successful in sales, especially in South Korea.

Call of Duty 2, in the standard of 2005, was overrated (I'd say Halo 2 is better in the console standards) but allowed the developers of Infinity Ward to become "an underdog". With the success, the Call of Duty franchise continues every year where TreyArch and IW take turns each year.
Call of Duty 2 in 2005, Call of Duty 3 in 2006 (notorious for being a failure), Call of Duty 4 in 2007 (known to raise popularity for IW), Call of Duty 5: World at War in 2008, Call of Duty 6 Modern Warfare 2 in 2009 (Which I believe was horribly rushed, especially at the short single player and an expensive "Prestige Edition" coming with worthless night vision goggles), an upcoming Call of Duty 7 set in Vietnam probably releasing this year.
Lately, there are problems with Infinity Ward and Activision, and some people were fired in Infinity Ward. Regardless, Activision allows another company to add another Call of Duty title developed by Sledgehammer Games. This doesn't end here, World at War has some map packs where one time this one deal combining all map packs in the price of half the retail price (Which the retail product has more maps and content that a few amount of maps). Modern Warfare 2 would have 5 new maps, 2 of which are copied and pasted from Call of Duty 4 with different textures (According to a graphic comparison in Game Trailers) and comes at the price of $15 (1200 Microsoft points). Despite the price and its criticism (Especially at the broken matchmaking for the new maps), 2.5 million people bought it and Activision believes the $15 price tag is too low, and may be raised to $20 with the same amount of new maps: 5. People who bought the map packs are not only in my opinion "stupid", especially those who own COD4 paid 2 maps the already own. If you are seriously considering buying map packs, go ahead waste your money. Stupid arguments against priced map packs such as "don't be poor, get a job".
Lastly, regardless how Activision, unbelievably, is filing a countersuit against Infinity Ward, Activision announced the production of "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3. Just as I predicted.

"Analyst: Activision Priced Stimulus Package Too Low" : http://xboxlive.ign.com/articles/108/1082840p1.html
This is an article in IGN, which is really hard to believe where the price tag is going.


This is extremely sad about the casual gaming generation and the future of the video game industry. People will buy content that's suppose to be free, or should come along in the disc anyways. Even if it's a piece of shit in an expensive price tag, people will still buy products distributed by Activision. It's also hard to believe that there are websites that support Activision against Infinity Ward.

As much as I agree with you Kray, all I ever see you do is complain. Where is your complaining getting you? What is it getting you? And even if I, and everyone else who agrees with you complain as well, is this going to get any of us anywhere? No.

This is just how things are, corporations like Activision and EA are evil, and there is nothing anyone can do.

Stopped reading right here. Some of my best childhood memories come from playing C&C. Just because you think you don't like some alleged oligopolistic-wannabe video game company's name doesn't mean the games weren't good, or that the company is evil.

I've been playing MW2 on my gaming PC since a week or so after it came out in November. Even though online play has a ton of downsides (hackers, spammers, jerks, etc), I will most likely be one of these "stupid" people that buys it when it comes out for PC.

Nice fragment. If a dedicated MW2 player wants to expand their choice of maps by 30% for fifteen dollars, I don't really blame them. Sure, we're all going to whine and moan about it because it's 1/4th of what we paid for the actual game, but the game was created for multiplayer, and everybody plays it for the same reason. Fifteen dollars gives WoW players around a month maximum of additional gameplay, while the same amount can extend a MW2 player's gameplay for a lot longer.

I don't see a reason to argue about it. If you don't like the price a company charges for their product, simply don't buy it.

A lot worse can be said for you asking why he is even bothering complaining and what worth it could possibly yield. For one someone like me who doesn't know all that much about games and this companies history, I am now aware of this. At least we can say he is spreading a message that some people may have not even noticed. Maybe one day something will be done and Activision can be taken down a peg for it's constant trend of watering down good games with their lazy imitation. I'm pretty sure any game Activision has produced their have been other companies who have made similar games but are better and can be taken more seriously.

Also DLK. What more is their to say? I'd imagine only some people will understand what i mean by those three letters. Nuff said.

I agree with Merrel. Companies make games to make money. If you don't like it, don't buy it. It's capitalism. Nothing "evil" about it. If people are stupid/desperate enough to spend a ton on the games, that's their problem.

You purchase what you can enjoy, and if you are someone that is suckered into buying crap, well that is your problem.

Why don't you just say "fuck it" and play their games for free? Piracy is there to counter this. SC2 maps will be with a pricetag as well BTW, what a joke.

I'm just hoping SC2 doesn't come out with "extras" that you have to purchase for $10 or so. Then I would say "Screw it all" and stop playing video games.

Sure but it would be bad ass to get PAID to have a premium map.

Brb zombie mappin'.

Command and Conquer is an amazing game...

And everyone has their own opinions about which video games sucks, and which game doesn't.
Most add-ons aren't worth buying unless they are decently cheap, or they add a lot to the game.

There's also 300 million people just in the U.S., so 2.5 million 'stupid' people isn't going to be hard to come by when it comes to buying stuff like that.

Tl;dr: Waah, shit costs money!

Deal with it.

I'll agree that some of those are dick moves, but not all of them are "evil". In particular, the stupidity of MW2's map pack can be avoided. Only two matchmaking playlists require it; all others will simply avoid the new maps if you join and don't have the pack.

As for your comments on DLC, I don't think it's evil if it's worth it. For example, Halo 3's Sandbox DLC wasn't evil. After H3's release, Bungie was quickly made aware of the capabilities of their map editor, Forge. Specifically, the community glitched the shit out of it, bypassed the budget limit, and found a way to float objects. When later DLC maps implemented immovable objects, these techniques were combined and refined to produce some of the most amazing maps I have ever seen in any console-based game with a map editor. Bungie was evidently impressed, because not only did they decide not to patch these bugs, they released a map -- Sandbox -- that acted as the perfect Forger's playground, even to the point of being well-suited for these glitches.

Another example is Halo 3's DLC map Standoff. This map is perfect in Matchmaking. I almost never see it, but on the rare occasions where its thumbnail graces my Matchmaking lobby, I am overjoyed. I have almost never had a bad match on this map. Out of all of Bungie's maps, Standoff may well be the most balanced by far. It's asskicking. It's fun. It's DLC, but it's worth it.

(The only game I've ever played with DLC that I've been able to get is Halo 3... Is this obvious?)

---

IOW, you're right about corporations being composed primarily of soulless corporate dickheads. But your condemnations are somewhat overbroad (and also common knowledge, as others have stated.)

Yeah, that's called free market. When nobody buys the products they'll make it cheaper.

Actually piracy is not the counter to expensive games, but the reason.

I didn't say the games they publish are bad. Though I do hold my opinions. I didn't say they are evil, but I am inclined to agree they are. A better word to describe them is "greedy"

I developed maps in first person shooter games before, and I have won contests. I know how balanced maps are, and I know how exactly of their value would be: none. I made maps for free, which allows players to play it for free, and I do not get paid a single penny. Knowingly that two of the five maps in the "Stimulus Package" are exact replicas of the original in Call of Duty 4, basically Infinity Ward just "copied and pasted". If the "new maps" were instead inside the game disc, the price of the retail product remains the same, no matter what. There is no value in maps, or any other content. If the game contains an open world sandbox role playing game, at launch it will remain the same price as short liner games that lasts in a few hours. The purpose of priced maps is ridiculous since Halo 2. Halo 2, I believe, originated with the map packs with a price tag. The first map pack for Halo 2 is free, but the second and beyond starts at $5 minimum. With the success in sales, Microsoft simply took that as a huge advantage towards players especially on the Xbox 360. These days, about six years or so after Halo 2's release, map packs is raised to $10, avatars, pictures, and theme packs are priced in Xbox Live. The $15 for five maps is raising the price, and Activision analysts expecting a $20 map pack remaining to contain 5 maps as the next downloadable content for Modern Warfare 2.
Soon, if map packs become this expensive, a standard edition of a retail product will become more expensive. Just a way to keep it at par.

MMORPG is a whole different level. As much as I don't like the idea of paying in any game, at least the money players paid each month is put to good use such as servers, and huge updates. Modern Warfare 2 heavily relies on peer-to-peer connections that connects players via matchmaking. That is way cheaper than dedicated servers (Yet Modern Warfare 2 is very commercially successful, resulting at least a billion dollars in sales), and yes it is horrible to play on. There are times in Modern Warfare 2 where there are heavy lag spikes. I do not necessarily see a significant change by adding a few maps. You'll never see me purchasing items with real money in MMOs though.



I did buy map packs in some games at $7 to $10, and boy do I dearly regret it. Especially in Fable II where there is absolutely no replay value (Except the coliseum) and is too easy, until you create a new character from scratch from a long way to begin playing it again, which takes up saves. I do pay, but it's literally getting out of hand now.


Yet, I make maps for free, and I'm more than happy to find people enjoying them. I take criticisms for granted to improve the faults in the maps.

I do intend to play them for free, just not piracy. And I agree, the price tag for StarCraft II maps is ridiculous.

I hope you enjoy purchasing Modern Warfare 3, and their $25+ map packs. I hate to mention this, but ever heard of the broken matchmaking for a period of time in the new map pack in Modern Warfare 2?

I do like Command and Conquer. Point is, why are there many expansions or sequels?
I have The Sims and The Sims 2, yet I am extremely annoyed at the constant expansion packs.



Lastly, I like to mention that the new game Splinter Cell Conviction came out yesterday (April 13). How is this relevant? Well, Splinter Cell Conviction will have free content released every Thursday according to the developers' messages in the main menu.

The original Command and Conquer games were great, but KrayZee is right. With each new addition to the C&C line (counting Red Alert as well) they've become increasingly silly, ridiculous, and with less effort put into it (see all the expansions).


Command & Conquer – The Covert Operations
Command & Conquer: Red Alert
Command & Conquer: Red Alert – Counterstrike
Command & Conquer: Red Alert – The Aftermath
Command & Conquer: Sole Survivor
Command & Conquer: Red Alert – Retaliation
Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun
Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun – Firestorm
Command & Conquer: Renegade
Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2
Command & Conquer: Yuri's Revenge
Command & Conquer: Generals
Command & Conquer: Generals – Zero Hour
Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars
Command & Conquer 3: Kane's Wrath
Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3
Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3 – Uprising

Out of all of these, only the first two are any good.

GRR I just accidentally deleted my post. Oh well. I'll retype it.

Yeah I just remembered that the older ones were developed by Westwood Studios, and I don't think back then they were at all apart of EA anyways.

I don't think you'd be saying things like what I bolded if you developed games for a living. People make their living off of developing games, and it takes a lot of skill to do so.

Yep. It was a pain in the ass to get into the matchmaking, but by joining a game on your previously seen players list would get you right in.

I find loopholes.

What the hell is wrong with a company being "Greedy"? That's capitalism. There's no "Evil" or "Greedy" in capitalism. If a company isn't going for maximum profit, then its shareholders are very disappointed. Don't whine about the free market (and if you do, at least do it directly, and not through Activision).

Additionally, no matter how many "extras" are added to Starcraft II, the reason's the same - people will buy it. Without Blizzard, there would be no SCII; it's their product, and they snookered all you fans into getting so excited that you're willing to buy the normal game, two expansions, some extras and some map packs. It's all your decision.

In short, there are enough actual problems with capitalism that you whining that companies want money sounds ridiculous. Guess what? If you didn't like money as much as they do, you wouldn't oppose them wanting yours!

Pretty soon they're going to add patches a day before the map pack comes out that prevents you from going online without purchasing the new maps.