Activision vs. EA (Let the Battle Begin)

I'll never understand why people can't simply get along. I mean, is it that hard to hold back snide remarks about someone else? What drives people to pick a fight with someone who never provoked anything in the first place?

As the title above states, I am talking about the comments made by Activision CEO Bobby Kotick about EA's company and developers. It all began during an interview with EDGE magazine with Kotick. He stated that they've had such success because Activision has let its internally owned studios retain their identity. Unlike EA he says who "will buy a developer and rename it EA whatever, EA Florida, EA New Jersey, etc."

Kotick says that they enjoy the fact that each of their studios have their own culture. This statement is interesting, considering how at the first sign of individuality from Infinity Ward, Activision turned on them. As said by EA's Jeff Brown, VP of Communications "Kotick's relationship with studio talent is well documented in litigation."

He goes on to say that Activision's success is based on three series: World of Warcraft, Guitar Hero, and Call of Duty. Continuing on, he says that Kotick had absolutely nothing to do with WoW and instead only reaped the benefits after merging with Blizzard's parent company Vivendi Games. This statement is in fact the truest of the bunch. Blizzard created WoW and championed its success. It is only by the merger that Activision has come to call it its own.

As for Guitar Hero, the franchise is collapsing in on itself, as Activision has no doubt realized, calling for a lesser number of GH games to be released this year. The only franchise that Activision has had a immense amount of success with is - of course - Call of Duty. Even the legal actions against IW can't stop the bullet train that is Call of Duty. The newest title, Call of Duty: Black Ops, looks to be even bigger than Modern Warfare 2.

In the interest of fairness, Activision has many other licenses that if treated properly could be given the level of success that its other franchises have. Recently the company released Spiderman: Shattered Dimensions which got decent reviews. The company is also preparing to release two James Bond games later in November (GoldenEye and Blood Stone).

Despite EA having many studios with the EA "Location" name tag, you don't hear nearly as much bad press about EA as you do Activision. Despite not having a unique name or something like that EA usually releases quality titles that sell relatively well and they don't have any of public opinion that Activision has. EA is respected by people a lot more than Activision is by both developers and gamers. They are wonderful publishing partners, stated such by high end developers such as Valve - who have released both Left 4 Dead games as well as the Orange Box under EA - and Bioware - who released Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age under EA.

In the end it seems like Kotick feels the need to brag about Activision's success so the company can seem better than it really is. If he were confident in how his company were doing he wouldn't feel the need to bring others down beneath him. In fact, by doing what he is doing now, he's doing the reverse: bringing himself down with unfounded statements while the other companies reply with the truth.