Bitmap Frogs
Mr. Community
In their recent financial report, they disclosed that in 2018 they had 38 million active players and in 2021 they went down to 27 million although revenue is up.
Last edited:
Good News.In their recent financial report, they disclosed that in 2018 they had 38 million active players and in 2021 they went down to 27 million although revenue is up.
Isn't this partially due to losing Destiny?
Probably the part in the article that states that revenue went up..Great work there bobby! Really justifying your 200 million bonus!!
So? If they retained those players would it have been even higher and does it really justify that big a pay bonus? Especially when there's data that high paying CEOs perform worse.Probably the part in the article that states that revenue went up..
Misleading thread title - it's just Blizzard games that lose their playerbase, which shouldn't be a surprise given their output in recent years. As far as Acti's condition goes, CoD games are dong exceptionally well, Warzone alone has tens of millions of playerbase.
I can confirm this. It was the same for me for many years. But, I'm finally free to shit on other games. At least they don't have a subscription.It would be more, but WoW players have a sort of collective Stockholm syndrome.
There is no bigger fan base on the planet that will endlessly whine about how shit a game is while paying monthly to play it than WoW fans.
OP says “Revenue is up”, and nothing else matters to board members and shareholders unless he does something so bad that it’s a PR nightmare.Why does Bobby have a job?
His decisions basically seem to be:
- Call of Duty
- Milk Blizzard fans
Unless I'm missing some big brain moves by the CEO literally anyone on this forum could do that same job.
Why does Bobby have a job?
His decisions basically seem to be:
- Call of Duty
- Milk Blizzard fans
Unless I'm missing some big brain moves by the CEO literally anyone on this forum could do that same job.
CEO's don't just do "big brain moves", they have daily responsibilities and need to drive these "big brain movies" or decisions and ensure that the company not only accomplishes them but does so cost effectively.Why does Bobby have a job?
His decisions basically seem to be:
- Call of Duty
- Milk Blizzard fans
Unless I'm missing some big brain moves by the CEO literally anyone on this forum could do that same job.
Not that I think he should have got such such a large bonus. His bonus had nothing to do with blizzard's active players metric. Because having less players who already bought your game continue to potentially play your game for free isn't that interesting big picture. Revenue and stock of the overall company being up is.Great work there bobby! Really justifying your 200 million bonus!!
My birthday present when I was 8 or 9. Thanks for that flashback.Hey Activision, bring back River Raid and all will be forgiven (for one purchase)
In their recent financial report, they disclosed that in 2018 they had 38 million active players and in 2021 they went down to 27 million although revenue is up.
I know lol it was a throw away comment. My general opinion is that a truly visionary ceo/company would be able to spot gaps in the market and fill them with new ips and grow there portfolio of games. Alternatively they could attempt to grow there franchises instead of immediately killing them. Call of duty itself took 4 attempts to be a mega hit. Today it wouldn't get a chance it's cut cut cut unless your a mega hit out the gate.( crash bandicoot RIP again)CEO's don't just do "big brain moves", they have daily responsibilities and need to drive these "big brain movies" or decisions and ensure that the company not only accomplishes them but does so cost effectively.
Most people on this forum would make horrible CEOs, because they'd be too scared to lay people off , would focus money on non lucrative endeavors, would shift too many things for the benefit of the consumer, and/or just wouldn't have the skills to actually be any sort of manager.
Not that I think he should have got such such a large bonus. His bonus had nothing to do with blizzard's active players metric. Because having less players who already bought your game continue to potentially play your game for free isn't that interesting big picture. Revenue and stock of the overall company being up is.
The CEO goal isn't to create new IPs or to create large portfolio of games though. It's to increase the value of the company and help ensure it's future. Having a lot of games that sell okay isn't really desirable. Each new project introduces risk and the reward has to be worth it that they put up tens of millions of dollars up front to make it. The reward has to outweigh risk. It's why a lot of companies will spin-off/sell-off divisions that are profitable. They rather just make a profit on the sale and focus on more rewarding businesses than to allocate their finite funds into high risk low reward projects(investments). Activision seem more interested in capitalizing on trends with promising prospects than to find market "gaps" or to offer a big range of games. For example, there's RTS genre that isn't getting a lot of games made for it. It's not a very promising market and people aren't making a lot of those games. There's still money to be made if you can be good at it. But adding a few million to your bottom line after putting in the same amount of time/money/effort isn't as worthwhile as potentially adding hundreds of millions or even a billion to your bottom line by putting the money elsewhere. For someone who just loves making games or doesn't have a lot of money that's great. But for a big multi billion dollar company trying to double, triple in size, it's not worth the effort/money/risk.I know lol it was a throw away comment. My general opinion is that a truly visionary ceo/company would be able to spot gaps in the market and fill them with new ips and grow there portfolio of games. Alternatively they could attempt to grow there franchises instead of immediately killing them. Call of duty itself took 4 attempts to be a mega hit. Today it wouldn't get a chance it's cut cut cut unless your a mega hit out the gate.( crash bandicoot RIP again)
Basically what Sony and Nintendo have done this gen
Activision seem completely incapable of moving beyond call of duty and their blizzard games.( I won't comment on their mobile games as I know very little about them)
I know at the end of the day the shareholders are happy ( although seriously not about Bobby's bonus) and they can sit cosy on the call of duty- blizzard cash cow but I would like to think they could move beyond that.
Good post I think we're on the same page lol. Let me explain myself my better.The CEO goal isn't to create new IPs or to create large portfolio of games though. It's to increase the value of the company and help ensure it's future. Having a lot of games that sell okay isn't really desirable. Each new project introduces risk and the reward has to be worth it that they put up tens of millions of dollars up front to make it. The reward has to outweigh risk. It's why a lot of companies will spin-off/sell-off divisions that are profitable. They rather just make a profit on the sale and focus on more rewarding businesses than to allocate their finite funds into high risk low reward projects(investments). Activision seem more interested in capitalizing on trends with promising prospects than to find market "gaps" or to offer a big range of games. For example, there's RTS genre that isn't getting a lot of games made for it. It's not a very promising market and people aren't making a lot of those games. There's still money to be made if you can be good at it. But adding a few million to your bottom line after putting in the same amount of time/money/effort isn't as worthwhile as potentially adding hundreds of millions or even a billion to your bottom line by putting the money elsewhere. For someone who just loves making games or doesn't have a lot of money that's great. But for a big multi billion dollar company trying to double, triple in size, it's not worth the effort/money/risk.
Activision never really had that many franchises. They have a long history of just making licensed games. Sony creates new IPs but they also abandon IPs too. Nintendo doesn't really create new IPs and they don't really focus on all of them. There hasn't really been an Fzero game for a while, and I don't think you'll see another kid icarus game for a while. Sometimes your IPs aren't worth investing in anymore. Neither of them really just fill in gaps. If anything it seems like Microsoft does that a lot more considering they are creating such a wide range of games nowadays that aren't necessarily very popular genres. Sony gutting Japan Studio is probably an example of them being closer to Activision nowadays as the reasoning was that they weren't profitable enough.
With all that said, I do think they should take more risks though. They don't need to have a big list of games or fill in the gaps. But they should still try to find the next big thing. Either way what they are doing, seem to be working.