Entries tagged with “Guitar Hero” from Things You Don't Care About
This has also popped up for me recently because I have declined to join the Starcraft 2 bandwagon, despite the encouragement of my brother and a number of my friends, partly because I really don't want to support Activision these days, and Kotick is a large part of that. While he tries to make the point that Kotick was taken out of context and that what he was saying wasn't as bad as it is made out to be, I'm going to have to disagree and say that the context really doesn't help it all that much.
Let's just take a look at them again and I'll show you what I mean. I encourage everyone to go read Amrich's original article so you get the full context; I'm going to try to summarize it here, but just to make sure you get both sides of the argument you should read the full context.
"Take all the fun out of making video games."
The first quote Amrich goes over is this one:
Jeetil Patel, Deutsche Bank Securities - Analyst
"What do you think the retailers' willingness these days is to hold inventory on the video game side? Are they building positions today or are they still very reluctant and very careful of how they are buying?"Bobby Kotick, Activision Blizzard, Inc.
"I don't think it is specific to video games. I think that if you look at how much volatility there is in the economy and, dependent upon your view about macroeconomic picture and I think we have a real culture of thrift. And I think the goal that I had in bringing a lot of the packaged goods folks that we brought in to Activision 10 years ago was to take all the fun out of making video games.""I think we definitely have been able to instill the culture, the skepticism and pessimism and fear that you should have in an economy like we are in today. And so, while generally people talk about the recession, we are pretty good at keeping people focused on the deep depression."
Dan tries to point out that this is all about the financial side of the video game business. "Taking the fun out of making video games" was a joke that fell flat and what Kotick really means in this quote is that he wants people to treat the video game business as just that -- a business. That's all well and good, and I agree -- it is a business.
The problem is that the video game industry is not anything like the "packaged goods" business. Video games are not soft drinks or toothpaste. The product they are probably most similar to is movies, as describe in the article at Squaremans, "They Know It Doesn't Work". And, unfortunately, it seems like Kotick is driving video game production to the same place where movies are now (but more on that later).
The second paragraph is really what makes me crazy though. I understand the idea of saving for a rainy day, and sticking to budgets, and remembering that there are always going to be bad times and you need to make sure you are ready for them. That's all well and good, and I can't blame him for that. However, "keeping people focused on the deep depression" and cultivating a culture of skepticism, pessimism, and fear sounds like a good way to make everyone of your employees, especially at the low level, constantly worried that they will lose their job and be cut from the company. From Kotick's point of view, I can see what he thinks -- they'll produce their best work because they're afraid if they don't, they'll get canned.
The problem is, that is a shortsighted strategy (which is the problem I have with Kotick in general). That doesn't make people want to do good work for you -- it makes people want to work just good enough to not get fired, and as soon as a better opportunity comes along, for a company they want to work for, you lose them.
If Kotick wants to keep good talent in the future, he needs to realize that you can't lead by creating fear, uncertainty, and doubt within your own employees, especially in an industry driven by creative talent -- at least not for very long. You certainly can't lead by trying to screw over the people working for you who create the best-selling games of all time. Whether or not the allegations by ex-Infinity Ward employees are true, one thing is clear -- Kotick lost the talent that created games with billions of dollars in sales for Activision. If the allegations of the ex-Infinity Ward employees are true, he actively drove them out of the company by creating a hostile environment; however, even if Activision's claims are true, and West and Zampella were actively trying to break their contract and wiggle away from Activision, Kotick still failed to be a good leader, in convincing them that Activision was the best place for them to be.
Tony Gikas:
"[...] And a second question, if you don't mind, just your comfort level regarding pricing of some of your new games that have some expensive controllers and any feedback that you had from retail as we move through the holidays. Thanks, guys."Mike Griffith:
"[...] On the pricing, we've had for all of our launch titles in the back half of this year, some of which contain peripherals, as you point out, very strong retailer acceptance and support for all parts of our plan, including our merchandising plans, our marketing programs, and our price points."Bobby Kotick:
"And Tony, you know if it was left to me, I would raise the prices even further."
Amrich points out that from the audio, Kotick is clearly making a joke and laughing at himself -- and goes so far as to admit that it's probably not a very good joke in a recession when people are trying to save money. Okay, fair enough. It's a joke, and a bad joke, and everyone does that from time to time.
Here's the problem though; not only does it portray an insensitivity to the penny-pinching consumer, and make him seem like he's completely out-of-touch, it's an example of a guy who just doesn't seem to understand why people think he's horrible for the industry. If it was a one-off joke that went sour, okay. But the problem is that it fits a pattern of behavior where it makes it seem like he's trying to wring every last cent out of consumers with the least cost to himself; this quote came at a time when Modern Warfare 2 was going to be coming out $10 more expensive than the vast majority of other AAA titles (on PC anyway) and even worse if you were in the UK, while dramatically reducing the functionality of the product.
As a CEO, a significant portion of your job responsibility is effective communication -- you are the face of your company for many people. I have to imagine that reinforcing a bad perception is probably not a very good idea -- and I have to wonder if anyone can actually tell Kotick that he might want to be a little more careful with his language in the future.
Bobby Kotick only wants exploitable franchises
This is the quote that bothers me the most:
Jeetil Patel - Deutsche Bank
"[...] Why are you de-emphasizing some of the kind of lesser known brands and focusing on the bigger franchises out there? Is it industry that is causing that or do you think it is more strategy on your part that seems to be [winning] big? I kind of want to understand the dynamics there."
Robert A. Kotick
"With respect to the franchises that don't have the potential to be exploited every year across every platform with clear sequel potential that can meet our objectives of over time becoming $100 million plus franchises, that's a strategy that has worked very well for us. It's something that we have been very disciplined about and so while there are lots of promises for a lot of these products that we had in the portfolio, I think generally our strategy has been to focus, especially given the increase in development expenditures on the products that have those attributes and characteristics that we know if we release today, we'll be working on 10 years from now. And that has been -- you know, narrow and deep has been essential to our strategy of how you expand operating margins. The difficulty in establishing new franchises or unproven franchises as we have seen over the last 20 years, that is one of the great challenges of the business and I think that you have a less than accepting and tolerant retail environment.
Amrich's response seems to be that "exploit" in this context doesn't mean what people think. Yes, that's probably very true. That's not the problem I have with this quote though. What Kotick is basically saying is that he only wants to spend money on developing "sure things," and then developing them as much as possible.
This takes us back to something I said about the first quote. Video games are not packaged goods. Video games are a creative enterprise where a "franchise" will only get you so far if the game is crap. Once again, I'm going to point back to that Squaremans article: each game eventually has to stand on its own and at the end of the day you can't just say "only make the games that will be blockbuster successes." Eventually, people will get tired -- they will not keep buying every Guitar Hero game that comes out. When the series started, it was a new and inspired idea, and a great party game -- the problem is that if you just keep churning out new games that offer nothing new but more songs, eventually people will decide they have enough songs and just stop buying them. You can already see this trend with Guitar Hero sales.
If Kotick gets his way, he seems to only want Activision to produce games that can be cranked out every year like clockwork. In the short run, I'm sure this will be great for Activision -- Guitar Hero, Call of Duty, and other games of that ilk can crank out billions of dollars in sales before they sputter out. Not only does this disappoint me as a consumer though -- I really love seeing games that do new and interesting stuff, like Portal -- in the long run, this is going to hurt Activision. New franchises aren't going to come out of thin air, and your old ones will eventually grow stale, especially when you crank them out every year and seem to chase away the talent that gave you them in the first place. What will Activision do when Guitar Hero and Call of Duty eventually burn out, or get superseded by a product made by a company with a more innovation-friendly development process? It can coast a long time on WoW income, I suppose, but eventually, someday, that will come to an end too.
I suspect Kotick's answer would be that he'll simply buy a studio making another game he can exploit as a profitable franchise -- but after the whole debacle at Infinity Ward, how many studios are going to see Activision's umbrella as a good place to take shelter? Blizzard, I suspect, has been lucky enough to retain a lot of autonomy simply because WoW is such a cash cow -- but when the creators of the #1 selling game of all time can get the shaft, they still have to be a little nervous. I would be, anyway.
I don't want to see the video game industry turn into the parody of the film industry you see in a lot of 80s movies, with "Rocky 17" in the theatres. Unfortunately, with people like Kotick at the helm, it seems like that is likely what we'll end up with -- endless strings of sequels of declining quality. Thankfully, unlike the film industry, the video game industry is not limited by the number of theatres -- bad games can't chase good games out of the market, especially as digital distribution becomes more and more prevalent. That means that it's less likely people will continue to buy sequels just from inertia -- which is a good thing for the industry, but bad for companies that think they can survive by simply milking franchises to death.
So, to bring this all back to Amrich's assertion, that Bobby Kotick is only seen as the bad guy because his quotes have been taken out of context, I have to respectfully disagree. It's not a few verbal gaffs that make people think Kotick is a bad guy, it's his whole style of management and what it means for the hobby as a whole. I can't disagree that he's been great for Activision's bottom line, at least for now, but if he continues down the road he's on, I think our hobby -- and Activision with it -- will suffer.
Other definite highlights from the soundtrack? Well, we have "Barracuda", for my sweet 80s awesomeness (yes, I know it came out in 1977, but so did I), The Stones' Paint It Black, which was a master track and has the lovely 60s tinniness you probably didn't expect, a rerecorded master track by the remaining Sex Pistols of Anarchy in the UK, Pearl Jam's Evenflow (high school memories and a fun song to play), Holiday in Cambodia, Black Magic Woman (beautiful to play, really), Cult of Personality rerecorded by Living Colour, and, my personal favorite, the song with the best video ever made, Muse's Knights of Cydonia. That last one as the only song I actually failed on my first try though, and that's okay, because it is freakin' awesome to play (even if it is not quite as awesome as the video -- seriously, check it out).
Low points? Well, I'll definitely say I'm disappointed there's no co-op "quick play" mode like in the last ones; the co-op career mode is pretty neat, but it would be nice to be able to play all the songs in co-op, instead of just most of them. The addition of songs you can only unlock in co-op is kind of neat for me, since I definitely think playing Guitar Hero as a social game is quite possibly my favorite way to play it, but for someone who likes to play on their own, I can definitely see that being an issue. Far and away the biggest annoyance though are the three "battles" you need to fight in the game. When I read about this before it came out, it sounded okay, as long as I didn't have to do them -- I like just "playing," which is often hard enough for me as it is, without the additional pain in the butt of the battle stuff. Unfortunately, you have to play three different battles during the course of the game, and the last one is a true pain in the ass, especially because the final song is hard enough as it is. CK, who can play most of the tracks on Expert without too much trouble, still hasn't beaten the game on Hard because of this. I really wish this was an optional feature, and not a requirement.
On another note, today was the last day of the Eve Fanfest, being carried live from Reykjavik by Eve TV. The broadcast is over now (even if, I suspect, the festivities are not), but I tried to catch as much of it during the day as I could; Oveur and Hellmar's presentations, the panel discussion, and the various interviews were all really neat to see, especially since those of us who can't hop across the pond on a whim miss out on this stuff. The new pictures from the Trinity graphics update, beta footage of the "ambulation" stuff going in next year, and the plans for Eve to use MPI and other supercomputing technologies in the cluster was definitely interesting to see and hear about.
I am disappointed that they didn't have footage from the corporation and alliance discussions that went on earlier in the week, with various alliance representatives giving Q&As on their alliances, but I'm hoping that will be provided in the wrap up Spiraljunkie says is coming in a week or two. One of these days, I'd love to make it out there -- I hear Iceland is gorgeous, and meeting other Eve players and especially the devs would be great; I got a very tiny taste of that at GenCon this year, but CCP didn't have much of a presence there (and I'm still bitter I missed the CCP/White Wolf party). We'll see, I guess. Judging from the player response, Fanfest isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
A month or so ago though, CK introduced me to Guitar Hero, and that pretty much spelled the end of that snobbery. I'm not sure what it is about the game really that does it for me, but the week after I got introduced I went out and bought a used PS2 and Guitar Hero 1 & 2 (and preordered the 80s game that came out the following week). There's something about it that just latched onto me and pulled me in, to the extent that not many games do. Maybe it is that I have no actual musical talent, and this is the closest I'm ever going to get to actually playing an instrument, maybe it's the fact that Guitar Hero is a social game (something that Wil Wheaton talked about in his PAX keynote this year) and I've been starved for social activities lately, or maybe it's because the difficulties are tuned in such a way that you can rock pretty hard on a lower difficulty level, but whatever it is, I'm hooked.
It has a similar effect on my dad and my brother too -- shortly after I introduced my brother to it, I went to GenCon and he borrowed the PS2 while I was there. And then he asked to borrow it again. And so on. My dad loves to play it when he comes over here (or when I bring it over there). It really is something that you can have a lot of fun doing with friends and family, and it's almost as much fun to watch people play as it is to actually play it yourself -- it's no wonder there's a lot of bars around here that are having Guitar Hero nights now, that GenCon had a Guitar Hero tournament this year, and that I hear DJs on the radio talking about how Matthew Sweet's "Girlfriend" is a fun song to play in Guitar Hero (it is).
But here's the problem -- I suck, and I know I suck. Right now, I'm trying to go through and five-star all of the original Guitar Hero on medium. I've had the game for six weeks now, and I have coworkers who are now beating the game on expert, who started playing it after I bought it. I've tried playing on hard and....well, I really suck. I can't get the hang of moving up and down the neck of the guitar for the fifth note (I lose my place) and I still haven't quite got the hang of hammer-ons and pull-offs (I do it too fast or too slow), and double-strumming continues to elude me (screw you, Pantera). All of this means I have a hard time getting out of the first bracket of songs on hard. Meanwhile, I'm pretty sure my brother is to the point where he can start cruising through songs on hard, CK is playing "Freebird" on expert for kicks, and benoc and Pat are trying to five-star everything on expert. While I sit there and wonder my my fingers are apparently going crazy on their own and curling like an arthritic old woman. Not exactly the best feeling.
For a while, I've been stuck on "Fat Lip" -- I just couldn't seem to get the few extra points to push it from a good four-star performance to a five-star. This morning, I finally did it, and I realized that I don't really care if I suck at it. It's still a boatload of fun, and I like it when I play with other people more anyway, so who cares if I'm horrible at it. I'm sure I'll have another white whale come up before I inch my way ever closer to a five-star performance of "Bark At The Moon," but for now, I have conquered the one peak that has eluded me for so long. I'm sure I'll finally make it to that stupid Viking guitar someday, but until then, I'm okay with only presenting a challenge to small children who haven't yet memorized every single note so they can do this.
But I am a little jealous.
Feed Subscription
If you use an RSS reader, you can subscribe to a feed of all future entries tagged “Guitar Hero”.