Results 1 to 20 of 24
Thread: EA vs. Activision: the PR War
21-08-2011, 12:04 AM #1
EA vs. Activision: the PR War
Anyone have any thoughts on the ongoing PR spat between the two re: BF3/MW3?
I have to say that I find EA's continued trash-talking offputting. Not merely in that I think it's undignified and unnecessary, but also because it's so obviously crafted to appeal to, well, the market they're aiming at. It's not a genuine expression of anything, merely part of the marketing plan. It's all well and good to criticise Activision for attempting to take the high ground here in light of their passive-agressive statements in the past, but nonetheless it is the high ground and to my eyes Activision comes out of this affair looking rather better than EA does.
Last edited by Rii; 21-08-2011 at 12:14 AM.
21-08-2011, 12:14 AM #2
21-08-2011, 12:19 AM #3
21-08-2011, 12:22 AM #4
21-08-2011, 12:27 AM #5
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 (PS3, Xbox 360, PC)
Skylanders: Spyro's Adventure (PS3, Xbox 360, Wii, 3DS, PC)
X-Men: Destiny (PS3, Xbox 360, Wii, DS)
Spider-Man: Edge of Time (PS3, Xbox 360, Wii, 3DS, DS)
Goldeneye 007: Reloaded (PS3, Xbox 360)
Generator Rex: Agent of Providence (PS3, Xbox 360, Wii, 3DS)
Cabela's Big Game Hunter 2012 (PS3, Xbox 360, Wii)
Prototype 2 (PS3, Xbox 360, PC)
so this year the only big hitter is MW3 and maybe Golden Eye...
If MW3 flomps (doubtfull but if BC3 is good... very possible it will not be another MW2) i have no idea what activision will do. They can suck off Blizzard which will of course make money but one would have to ask why would they allow it... they should go independent.
21-08-2011, 12:27 AM #6
21-08-2011, 12:29 AM #7
21-08-2011, 12:33 AM #8
21-08-2011, 12:42 AM #9
DICE was bought by EA in 2004, and aside from Mirror's Edge, has made basically nothing except sequels for the BF series which it originally developed in 2003.
Funny enough, all three of those games you mentioned were made for consoles first and were subsequently ported to the PC.
21-08-2011, 07:52 AM #10
EA are a 'better' publisher than Activision. If you look at their catalogue from the past few years, you'll see more unique and interesting (Not necessarily great) games than you would from Actisuck or Ubisuck.
21-08-2011, 09:26 AM #11
You guys do realise they've probably made a deal to do this on purpose, right? It generates publicity for BOTH of the games, pushes people in each camp to extremes (they're probably not going to buy the competing game anyway, so you might as well make sure you have as many pre-orders as possible) and allows them both to show off and go "We're not like other companies".
21-08-2011, 09:31 AM #12
If they’re smart, they’ll work together to nurture this insane us vs. them mentality and ride it all the way to the bank. Who else but gamers would claim “my monolithic corporation is better than yours!”
21-08-2011, 09:38 AM #13DICE's strength is the Battlefield series, why should EA change that?
21-08-2011, 09:39 AM #14
21-08-2011, 09:45 AM #15
21-08-2011, 10:23 AM #16
Have you ever noticed that fast food chains are drawn together and enjoy being near to each other? That's because this increases the number of customers. More chains in one area gives the customer choice (between fast food joints) and she is more likely to forget alternatives (home cooking, restaurants).
I'm with R-F in thinking that the same principle is at play here. An artificial dispute between EA and Activision draws our attention to those two shooters, away from other good games and genres, we create forum threads, we talk about it...
21-08-2011, 10:40 AM #17
CoD stands on its own. They don't need to release footage, they don't need to release screenshots every week. Actikissmyarse can just say "We're making a new Call of Duty. It's out on this date. Buy it for an inflated price." and you'll have millions lining up outside of shops everywhere just to get their greasy mitts on the game. If you don't believe me, just look at when they announced it. Roughly six months before release date. Most games get a year or two of buzz-building, don't they? CoD gets six months.
What are EA doing? Proving that BF3 is a looker, that it can be funny, that it is bigger than CoD, at least in player size. We PC gamers are generally immune to that as we have different requirements and 'tastes' when it comes to online shooters. CoD has been successful on PC, yes, but nothing like it has with consoles. Looking at Steam, Modern Warfare 2 currently has more players than Black Ops (25k vs 18k). I would wager it's the opposite on the 360/PS3 with BO having the most players. BC2 has something like 9k at the moment, but TF2 has a staggering 70k players online. That's more than the Call of Duty series combined.
21-08-2011, 10:50 AM #18
EA's trash-talking is clearly a PR exercise. And maybe it's a good one and will succeed in attracting some of CoD's vast hordes of aggressive male teenagers. But for my part, speaking as someone who is uncommitted but inclined to preference EA over Activision and Battlefield over CoD, I find it all rather offputting. EA are making Activision look good here. And that takes some doing.
21-08-2011, 10:51 AM #19
21-08-2011, 11:27 AM #20