Simple; because if they are open and honest about it the facts are readily at the fingertips of anyone who wants to make an informed decision, and therefore they aren't deceiving anyone. It is apparent to all who can read how Activision are doing things, and therefore they aren't cheating the customers like Ubisoft or EALA are prone to doing.

But we're still getting [censored] on...

That's what you think, but not necessarily what everyone thinks.

To be honest if I think about the time I've for example spent playing Fallout 3 and how many books and movies I would have to buy to get the same entertainment value, it seems to me that many AAA titles are sold below their worth.
So if you look at how many hours many people spend playing CoD I don't find it surprising at all that Activision would like to see more revenue for that.

What planet are you on that charging ten bucks extra for MW2 on PC is not "cheating customers"? A game that runs on the same engine as MW1, with many of the same graphics and features; and yet their excuse is that it costs more to develop these sort of games? That is not deceiving anyone?

And please don't go on a long tirade about smart business sense and how Activision is justified for everything they do; I don't want to hear facts, I want to hear an opinion. By your logic then, a murderer who admits his crime is a paragon, just because he isn't deceiving the judge/jury?

Yeah, but you have to upgrade your hardware to play the latest games more often than your TV to watch the latest movies.



I don't think that this money-grubbing is a reasonable progression of the video game market. Maybe it is "good" in the short run for the shareholders, but it is not healthy for the consumer, for the long run, nor for the employees who develop the game.

What? A top of the line entertainment center costs a [censored] ton more than several years worth of hardware.
Of course I can watch movies on some crappy old TV, but I can also play games on a crappy PC with reduced visuals.
Also you really haven't had to upgrade your PC in a long time to get grafics equal to consoles, especially considering how long this console generation is lasting.

And if I add up my gaming hardware and games I still am cheaper hourwise than with movies alone. Let's assume I play 10 hours every week and keep my gaming rig for 2 years. That's about 1040 hours worth of entertainment. Now calculate how many bluray movies I would have to buy to get an equal amount of entertainment.

And how many games would you have to buy in 2 years to get 1040 hours of playtime? If I buy a $15-20 blu-ray of a 2 hour movie that I'd probably re-watch, it's certainly better than a $60 game with a lame storyline that I will beat in 10 hours and never touch it again.

Just like there are good and bad movies, there are also good and bad games. Except with games you are paying 3x the price so it's a higher gamble.

Considering the time you can invest in multiplayer games, MMO's and the hundreds of hours you can play something like GTA4 and Fallout3, not nearly as many.
If you divide the costs for a console over it's lifecycle it costs next to nothing. And a PC that can play all current games is not that huge of an investment either.

Hardware is simply not a valid factor. That would be like telling a gas station that they should sell you gas cheaper because your car is so expensive.

The earth, I should think. You do not seem to grasp the meaning of the word "cheating", it doesn't mean "Doing something that someone doesn't approve of". It means acting in a subversive manner in order to procure certain advantages without drawing attention to the fact.

Saying "Hey, we'll charge $60 for MW2 from now on!" and then charging that is not cheating anyone. If the pricing label in the store said $50 but your account was stilled charged $60, THAT would constitute cheating the customer.

All the cards are on the table, there is no concealing of any facts, and the customers are to be expected to be fully in the clear as to what is going on.

In other words; it cannot possibly be cheating.



I don't know from where you get your information, but didn't Modern Warfare 2 cost more to develop than Modern Warfare 1?



So you admit that?



No, a murderer has broken the law, Activision hasn't.

People don't find enjoyment in MW2. The game is just soo competitive that you keep playing it; Trying to get a higher score then your friends.. As I said before "I play MW2 a-lot, and I am hating every moment of it."

You're right - it's more like daylight robbery! :laugh:

Strange definition of robbery; one party sells a product at a price that they want for it to a second party who buys it at a price they are willing to pay for it, and the product then becomes the property of the second party, while the money becomes the property of the first party. Both before and after, both parties were entirely aware of what they had to bring to the table for the agreement to be finalized.

I don't think my legal studies gave any indication that your definition is the right one, I'm afraid.

Believe it or not, just because that's what you do, doesn't mean that everyone plays a game they "hate" a lot just because they need a better score then their friends. I play MW2, because I find it amusing. Mostly just peoples reactions. ^_^

And, if you hate every moment of your game time in MW2....you should probably stop playing it, yeah?

How about the definition for irony, did they teach you that one?

I'm afraid you're about a decade too late; just saying "Ooooh, I was being ironic, honestly!" whenever you made a googly stopped working when the 90's ended.

It's common sense. Also, right from the horse's mouth:


Common sense dictates that these "$100 million franchises" are meant to make the most profit as possible, so why spend more money rebuilding an engine that you can just reuse? If you look at a video of MW1 compared to MW2, can you really tell the difference besides the HUD and whatever map you're on?

The way you argue your points like a broken record on a video game forum, I'm really beginning to suspect you are just trying to get a rise out of people. :shrug:

What's the problem with reusing their assets? That's not something new or uncommon. And Modern Warfare 2 development did cost more than $40 million, that's nothing to sneeze at. A grafics engine is not necessarily the most costly part of a game's development(licensing the Unreal 3 engine for example can cost about $1 million, depending on the features you need). Also if you're gonna develop your engine you better use it in more than one game.

I'm sure we can both agree to leave this issue at this point, seeing as how it has obviously become rather too personal.

Have a pleasant evening!

lol I can see you know everything... :goodjob:

Why is it okay that Activision jacks prices up on PC Modern Warfare 2 yet Valve are suddenly monsters for their European prices?

Why is it okay that Activision do whatever it wants, ruin as many game series as it wants, and gives customers [censored] deals and thats OKAY as long as it tells us what its doing?

Activision is systematically demolishing its franchises and its just okay as long as they tell us?

Its as simple as this: I hate Activision. I'd hate them regardless of what they tell us, because I can see poor quality and bad customer service for myself, and that's all I need to see. Except for Blizzard. They still make great games.

Nobody is saying Valve are monsters. Valve is a company, that's the point we were trying to make. They're not evil, but they also aren't knights in shining armor either. Both are companies out to make money. And I hate neither Activision-Blizzard or Valve. On the contrary I have a great deal of respect for succesful companies.


When Activision starts making less revenue and isn't publisher #1 anymore, then we can talk about them having ruined their game series. So far it doesn't look like they'll be leaving the #1 spot soon.


You know what's easier then to hate them? Just don't buy their games. Let them do their thing and just buy games from developers/publishers you like. It's just pointless to be angry and hateful about something if you can't or won't do anything about it anyways.

And for the record Activision doesn't make any games, it publishes them. Blizzard is a subsidiary of Activision-Blizzard, just like Infinity Ward, Treyarch and any other of Activision-Blizzard's studios.

Best decision I made in my life was to abide by that line right there.

Its not as if I'm sitting behind my desk just raging at the screen, you know.

As if I didn't already know that. I just mentioned Blizzard as a separate entity so that you know I wasn't saying I hated Activision Blizzard. No, its just Activision.

In addition, being a publisher puts them in far more of a power position over their studios and the quality of their games because Activision gets to decide when to green light it and what goes in the game at all depending on how much money they think it'll cost them and how much the game can make. They are just as much to blame as the developers when it comes to low quality games.

Why, that is the whole point. See, Valve aren't monsters, and neither are Activision. However, you want to depict Activision as evil overlords while you are quite ready to excuse even worse conduct from Valve simply because you like them better.

You can't both approve and disapprove of shady business activity, you either like it or you don't, you can't just make excuses for it when one company is involved and then point out how absolutely devilish it is when another company does it.



Because as long as the players have the facts, they can make an informed decision. You can choose not to pay the increased prices, or you can choose to do so, but there is no excuse for not knowing about them.



Well, it's their property. If they can't do as they wish with it, who has that right?



And as some people here are pointing out, perhaps hatred isn't really the most fitting or appropriate response to a small increase in prices.

You said you hate them
Atleast to me, hate is a pretty strong emotion.


Sure you can partially blame them for a studios failure. But it works both ways and if a studio succeeds then you would need to give credit to Activision-Blizzard. So if Blizzard makes a good game that would also be partly Activisions responsibility
And considering their sales and metacritic numbers Activision-Blizzard isn't doing too shabby on the quality or atleast popularity of their games.

Now just to be clear, I haven't bought a single Activision-Blizzard game in years(it's that easy!), they have no games that really interest me. But that doesn't instantly mean to me all their games are bad, I just have a different taste in games.