Activision's 09 lineup 40% larger: Call of Duty 'titles' and Guitar Hero 'releases'

Do you really think that the makers of Guitar Hero will ever realize that quality>quantity?

Quality isn't affected by how many games a publisher backs. They could put out 5 or put out 150. It's the devs that fuck things up if they rush. Publishers (Activision/Blizzard) just pay the bills.

Hence Infinity Ward making golden wonders, and Treyarch just rehashes.

Do you really think that Activision is the "maker" of Guitar Hero?

Do people not understand the business model of the industry...?

Not exactly true.

The publisher pays the bills, and consequently, has the ability to greatly effect how a final product turns out. What if AB decided to roll two studios together, and have that entity focus on one game as opposed to two?

The developers would have more manpower to develop and polish a game, less advertising money could spend promoting a single game as opposed to three, and a game could be produced in less time.

While your right that a developer has a lot to do with how the final product turns out, the publisher can also do a lot of things to help the process along. Jamming more games into a crowded market is not helping the industry or the publisher.

If I were asked by a non-gamer what game they should buy, it should be AB's goal to be a publisher that makes me say "Buy whatever game has an Activision logo on it"

I was talking about the actual developers (Neversoft) not Activision. And either way I don't think Activision is going to do anything to stop them. I know Activision doesn't make them, but with developers like Neversoft making millions on what is essentially the same game, it gives other developers the sense that they don't have to put effort into making a game. This is the reason that Wii Sports 2 is out while there is no sequel to much better games such as Okami and Psychonauts.

"The developers would have more manpower to develop and polish a game, less advertising money could spend promoting a single game as opposed to three, and a game could be produced in less time."

Quite the opposite, as EA has proved lately. The more titles you put out, the more money you have to play with, the more money you can throw at ambitious projects. Basically look at it as an investment tool. If you have 15 development companies, the ones with actual talent can get more financial backing. The less than stellar devs (Neversoft), you give an editing job. Since people are guaranteed to purchase Fight Night Round 4, you can get away with putting less talented programmers on that case. Versus say, Dead Space... Where if you put it in novice hands, you end up with Silent Hill: Homecoming. Both Fight Night and Dead Space will make you money and you have steady income. Unfortunately, this is the route that Squareso... Square-Enix has taken as of late. More titles for a steady stream of income so they can really focus resources on their flagship, Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest.

Just think of it like acting. You do the artsy movie, then you do the safe movie... Then you do the crap movie that your friend says you owe him one. *looks to the audience*

While your (generally) right about the fact that the more titles one publishes, the more money one has to play with, its not always a good idea in the long run. We'll use your example of EA.

It seems to me that Activision is following the business plan EA was using roughly three years ago: produce squeals of games based on existing franchises. This business model was good at producing a "safe" stream of revenue.

Unfortunately, this business model eventually dilutes the products it deals with. Thats why EA has changed their strategy a few years ago, and we are starting to see games like Dead Space and Mirror's Edge. The well that they were tapping was running dry.

Its also probably a big reason as to why the Beatles are choosing Rock Band over Gutiar Hero. The Beatles brand is obviously very important to the owners, and they want it to be used in a game that in unique, and not see it given some kind of generic treatment and thrown onto a shelf. This is a great coup for RB, as people will be willing to but the game over say, an Aero Smith themed game
A.)Because of the Beatles, and
B.) Because the game will (theoretically) not be the standard guitar game.

Activision can make money producing games that marginally improve on the same formula, and that will most likely make them money. I think though, that they will run into the same problem EA did and eventually be forced to make similar changes. I think they know that to. I think that Activision merging with Blizzard was an effort to try to steer themselves away from the path that they seem to be going down.

I'm not trying to say that squeals are a bad thing, but 70 sku's in one year seems incredibly excessive, and I think a lot of that money could go into producing unique IP's as opposed to the next Guitar Hero spin off; which is why I said Quality over Quantity in my first post.

Oh, and I think Activision has enough money to bankroll more than sequels and spin offs.

I find the CoD:WaW beta fun.
Its just CoD4, but new maps and some new things to do.

But yes..

70 new titles, 50 GH titles, 10 CoD, and 10 random sports. Indeed.

http://www.joystiq.com/2008/10/30/riddick-remake-and-maybe-ghostbusters-go-to-atari/

i agree

That, and a new Marvel UA game are really the only things I'm looking forward to from Activision.

Um Goldeneye 2 has already been made

It's called Goldeneye: Rouge Agent

..and it kinda sucks