Activision shuts down Bizarre Creations

[BrerLappin]

What Activision has done is nothing short of diabolical - after the success of Black Ops, it has amazed me that they've done this.

Thats probably one of the reasons why tbh. I.e: Rake in truckloads of money from BLOPS, but you cant fire the dev team who made blops as youll need them for the next map pack, so lets see, fire those guys who made those unsuccessful games, that way we get to keep more money from blops with less wages to pay. Huzza for Koprick and Co. Bunch of cunts. Activision - Stifling creativity since 1999

[moosegrinder]

There was no store presence and no instore advertising for either game. NONE. Stores are driven by wheeling and dealing the marketing departments of the publishers. Why do you think we had Kinect shoved down our necks walking by Game? Activision didn't want to cough up the money for in store marketing, and it's hurt the games. Acti don't give a flying fuck* because they have Black Ops. It's up to the publisher to make their games known, Activision fucked these AND singularity in the arse.

*Ok, that's a bit black and white, but my points still stand.

[The Sarge]

There was no store presence and no instore advertising for either game. NONE. Stores are driven by wheeling and dealing the marketing departments of the publishers. Why do you think we had Kinect shoved down our necks walking by Game? Activision didn't want to cough up the money for in store marketing, and it's hurt the games. Acti don't give a flying fuck* because they have Black Ops. It's up to the publisher to make their games known, Activision fucked these AND singularity in the arse.

*Ok, that's a bit black and white, but my points still stand.

Totally agree, I had to tell a fanatic Bond fan there was a 360 game out as he had no idea thanks to the visible lack of advertising or in store copies. (something I noticed yesterday in HMV, they didn't have a single copy but were more than happy to order them in. )

Blur was advertised* by HMV in store, Game and GS for whatever reason appeared to almost boycott the release. Weren't there rumours about Acti forcing them to sell it at £44.99 or something?

* Well, a few A4 posters. Hardly the kind of advertising you'd expect for a AAA release but it was something.

[moosegrinder]

They can't force them to sell it for anything, they can bump the cost price up. More likely it was that and Game said "Ok, fuck you, we'll buy 3 copies and put it out at £44.99. Cheers, bye."

In all honesty I don't know if we'll find out why they fucked over Blur. Unless someone works for Bizarre, Activision or Game group that can spill the beans it's all guess work.

[Padlocked]

90 day notice period for Bizzare staff.

It's a 90 day consultancy period, which is the legal process they need to follow when making redundancies of this volume. During that time, there /should/ be lots of activity going on to support the staff, see if they can be redeployed, assists them in finding new jobs and all that jazz.

Unless Activision offer enhanced terms, they'll get one weeks pay for each year they've worked there, up to a maximum of something like £300 per week, when they leave.

So, what the staff need to do - immediately - is a) not get sacked and b) play the process out. Stretch the dates out as much as they can, play the game, get those 3 months of pay packets in plus the severance and try to line up another job ready.

[masterhand]

I really wish I could find that post I made on whatever forum at the time of the Activision purchase that's basically predicting what this is now.

[ras el hanout]

I think both Blur and Split Second had pretty poor sales; even combined, it wouldn't have been very good. I seem to recall that Blur had pretty heavy advertising as well, so I don't think the problem was Activision not spending.

That Bond game, though - I don't recall seeing a single advert for that, and even the box looked incredibly cheap and nondescript. It seems madness to pay for Daniel Craig, Joss Stone, and an actual Bond scriptwriter, commission a top-tier developer, and then put it out in a year with no Bond film and no advertising. The lack of a Bond film isn't Activision or Bizarre's fault, but they could have plugged it a bit more.

But according to all the reviews it was rubbish.

This is why the chinese are eating us alive. Some guys who since PGR2 have been getting worse and worserer are sacked and we're all crying.

[RubberJohnny]

Kotick is really shitty at his job

No, the problem isn't that Kotick is "greedy." The problem is that he's awful at his job. He's bereft of ideas, he doesn't understand his customers, and he has no sense of public relations. According to Kotick's Forbes profile, he makes just under a million bucks and takes home a total of about fifteen million in benefits and bonuses. I think that's pretty standard for companies this size. But for that kind of money, Activision should be getting someone remarkable. If you're going to take the budget of a mid-size game and give it to one guy, every single year, then the person cashing the checks should be bringing something amazing to the table. There are hundreds of thousands of talented business majors in the world that would love a crack at a high-paying, high-profile job like this, and Activision should make sure they're getting the best of the best. The CEO needs to be smarter than the other contenders, have a deeper understanding of the industry, be great with his employees, and have a silver tongue in public. Mr. Kotick has none of these qualities.

You might argue that, "If he wasn't making money they would fire him, therefore he's good at his job." But in business things aren't nearly that simple. Sure, the company is making money, but I think it could be making a lot more if the CEO knew what he was doing. You can't look at alternate histories and see that the company would make more or less if it was doing different things. If all you want is for Activision-Blizzard to make money - any money - then they could fire Kotick and hire a desk lamp, because Blizzard was an unstoppable cash-generating dynamo before Kotick ever sat down in the CEO chair. The question isn't, "Are they making money?" but "Would they be making more money with someone else's ideas and leadership?"

Another thing to remember is that getting rid of your CEO is usually a negative thing for a publicly held company. It hurts the stock price and makes the board look bad, so there are reasons they might hang onto Kotick even if the board was unhappy with his performance. The point is, the fact that he has a job isn't proof that he's any good at it or that someone else couldn't do a lot better. Activision deserves more for its fifteen million bucks. So do gamers.

[Philly]

i liked The Club too, proper old skool score game Poor Bizarre.

[TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap]

Blur may not be advertised widely enough, but let's not forget that it didn't exactly set the world on fire. With Metacritic scores in the low 80s it could pass as a decent but pretty unremarkable game. The fact that the game has a big following here doesn't mean it struck a chord with 'the mainstream'.

[squirtle]

But according to all the reviews it was rubbish.

This is why the chinese are eating us alive. Some guys who since PGR2 have been getting worse and worserer are sacked and we're all crying.

A few people on here have enjoyed it, but irrespective of that, why would you release it four days before the massive sales black hole that is Call of Duty, which Activision also produce? It's totally fucking illogical to think that Bloodstone had any kind of chance in the gaming market with COD on the way.

Also, if they knew that it wasn't exactly as good as hoped, why didn't they just put it back to the beginning of next year and allow the devs time to polish it up?

It's fucking stupid business acumen if you ask me.

I really hope someone else picks them up, or Microsoft do, as I really want to see another PGR.

[RubberJohnny]

Blur may not be advertised widely enough, but let's not forget that it didn't exactly set the world on fire. With Metacritic scores in the low 80s it could pass as a decent but pretty unremarkable game. The fact that the game has a big following here doesn't mean it struck a chord with 'the mainstream'.

Low 80s is decent and unremarkable now?

[TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap]

Low 80s is decent and unremarkable now?

On Metacritic it is, because it includes all the 'whoop whoop 100/100' scores that always pop up from some reviewers the moment a game boots up in the first place.

[wev]

Low 80s is decent and unremarkable now?

It shouldn't be, but "8/10" is last gens "7/10" as far as I can tell

[Yobo Ahoy]

Case in point: I wonder if Bizarre are getting this treatment cos they flat out refused to make the NASCAR game that Activision wanted after they acquired the license.

NASCAR being so amazing British and culturally rich after all.

Admittedly this is the first I've heard of this so I don't know how much of this is true, but if so then that was a ridiculously stupid stance by Bizarre. They were bought to be Activision's racing studio, and they throw a tantrum when asked to do Nascar? That's the difference between being an independent and being a dev owned by one of the biggest publishers in the world, suck it up.

It doesn't matter about it not being British. EA have been making FIFA games since 1993 and I'm sure the US sales were small fry compared to the UK's until relatively recently.

[FuntimeDave]

Oh and typically lovely timing from Activision, just before xmas. Dickheads.

This. I know business is business sometimes but fuck me these companies have enough cash to show a little heart to the lower level peeps. Thoughts to those famalies that are going affected by this - I don't know them - think I played Blur with one of the level designers through Hooded Claw - but it must be horrible to be loosing your job in the current climate and in this market as well.

[Quest]

Admittedly this is the first I've heard of this so I don't know how much of this is true, but if so then that was a ridiculously stupid stance by Bizarre. They were bought to be Activision's racing studio, and they throw a tantrum when asked to do Nascar? That's the difference between being an independent and being a dev owned by one of the biggest publishers in the world, suck it up.

If you're a subservient wimp, maybe, but I'd rather see Bizarre close their doors than end up churning out shit they have no love for. Good on 'em for telling Kotick where to stick his Nascar license.

[Dudley]

Admittedly this is the first I've heard of this so I don't know how much of this is true, but if so then that was a ridiculously stupid stance by Bizarre. They were bought to be Activision's racing studio, and they throw a tantrum when asked to do Nascar? That's the difference between being an independent and being a dev owned by one of the biggest publishers in the world, suck it up.

It doesn't matter about it not being British. EA have been making FIFA games since 1993 and I'm sure the US sales were small fry compared to the UK's until relatively recently.

More specifically, EA Canada have been making them.

[The Bag]

Kotick is really shitty at his job

One issue with that article is he thinks Activision hired Kotick, Kotick was the head of a group that bought Activision in 1990. No problems with the he's shit at his job angle.

[K]

If you're a subservient wimp, maybe, but I'd rather see Bizarre close their doors than end up churning out shit they have no love for. Good on 'em for telling Kotick where to stick his Nascar license.

Yeah, well done to the management of Bizarre Creations for putting all of their employees out of a job because they were picky about the kind of driving games they wanted to make.

[ras el hanout]

A few people on here have enjoyed it, but irrespective of that, why would you release it four days before the massive sales black hole that is Call of Duty, which Activision also produce? It's totally fucking illogical to think that Bloodstone had any kind of chance in the gaming market with COD on the way.

Also, if they knew that it wasn't exactly as good as hoped, why didn't they just put it back to the beginning of next year and allow the devs time to polish it up?

It's fucking stupid business acumen if you ask me.

I really hope someone else picks them up, or Microsoft do, as I really want to see another PGR.

See you say irrespective but I don't think you can say that. The game wasn't very good, the game they made before that wasn't very good. They seem to have been getting worse for a while. How long do they have to go on making not very good games before we don't care if they all get the sack.

Somebody said "Oh no this shows how crap the british game industry is!"

Surely it would be worse if devs were kept funded because they made great games 7 years ago.

If there recent games had been smash hits or even great games I'm sure they wouldn't have all be fired.

[Corleth the Fey]

If Activision wanted Blur to 'do a Call of Duty' then why the hell have they only given it one shot? It took Call of Duty four games (plus other versions 'Big Red One' etc) to get there. An improved sequel released at the right time with great word of mouth buzz from the first game could have got there. It's just a terrible waste.

[ras el hanout]

If Activision wanted Blur to 'do a Call of Duty' then why the hell have they only given it one shot? It took Call of Duty four games (plus other versions 'Big Red One' etc) to get there. An improved sequel released at the right time with great word of mouth buzz from the first game could have got there. It's just a terrible waste.

What exactly are we lamenting here? I mean what are we going to miss out on.

Bizarre were all about MSR/PGR. That's what they did. But nobody was anticipating a new PGR. Bizarre tried things that weren't PGR and they didn't go down too well.

The only sad thing is there probably won't be a new PGR but nobody expected one.

I struggle to understand the grief on display.

[K]

If Activision wanted Blur to 'do a Call of Duty' then why the hell have they only given it one shot? It took Call of Duty four games (plus other versions 'Big Red One' etc) to get there. An improved sequel released at the right time with great word of mouth buzz from the first game could have got there. It's just a terrible waste.

Surely it took Call of Duty one game to do a Call of Duty, the game in question being 'Call of Duty'? They didn't make Call of Duty: United Offensive, and Call of Duty: Finest Hour, and Call of Duty 2 and Call of Duty: Big Red One because the first Call of Duty was a disappointing game that very few people bought that the publisher nevertheless took pity on, they made all those sequels because Call of Duty was a brilliant game that sold shitloads.

[ras el hanout]

Yeah, well done to the management of Bizarre Creations for putting all of their employees out of a job because they were picky about the kind of driving games they wanted to make.

Listen Kevin, it's terribly sad people are being sacked but it's not really. You seem more concerned with their employment that with the games they make. That's good of you on a human level I guess, but take it to the Employment folder, this is the videogame thread.

[Corleth the Fey]

See you say irrespective but I don't think you can say that. The game wasn't very good, the game they made before that wasn't very good. They seem to have been getting worse for a while. How long do they have to go on making not very good games before we don't care if they all get the sack.

Somebody said "Oh no this shows how crap the british game industry is!"

Surely it would be worse if devs were kept funded because they made great games 7 years ago.

If there recent games had been smash hits or even great games I'm sure they wouldn't have all be fired.

I haven't read a great ramone post in a long time. Care to leave the forum, permeantly?

[Padlocked]

If Activision wanted Blur to 'do a Call of Duty' then why the hell have they only given it one shot? It took Call of Duty four games (plus other versions 'Big Red One' etc) to get there. An improved sequel released at the right time with great word of mouth buzz from the first game could have got there. It's just a terrible waste.

Er, it took CoD 4 games to be a mahoosive inter-galactic hit, yeah. But the previous games - right back to the first one on PC - were mahoosive hits in their own right.

What did Blur manage, again?

[ras el hanout]

I haven't read a great ramone post in a long time. Care to leave the forum, permeantly?

You can't spell permeantly without MEAN. Stop being mean.

[SeanR]

What exactly are we lamenting here? I mean what are we going to miss out on.

Bizarre were all about MSR/PGR. That's what they did. But nobody was anticipating a new PGR. Bizarre tried things that weren't PGR and they didn't go down too well.

The only sad thing is there probably won't be a new PGR but nobody expected one.

I struggle to understand the grief on display.

is the word "or" missing between two of those sentences?

like so:

Bizarre were all about MSR/PGR. That's what they did.

But nobody was anticipating a new PGR.

OR

Bizarre tried things that weren't PGR and they didn't go down too well.

Because, surely it's the later that was to blame for any perceived "failure" on the part of Blur. They tried to give people what they thought they wanted. Turns out they wanted PGR5.

also, it got confused with* Split/Second wink.gif

* mistaken for

[Ferine]

So, how long does Robomodo have given that Tony Hawk Shred sold 5000 copies in its first week of release in the US?

(To be honest I thought they'd already been closed. And I had no idea Shred was out.)