What a lot of you fail to realize is that Blizzard and Activision are quite clearly separate entities.
What you fail to realize is that they aren't.
Pulled from Blizzard's own site, mind you:
" Headquartered in Irvine, Calif., Blizzard Entertainment, a division of Activision Blizzard, was founded in 1991 under the name Silicon & Synapse by Allen Adham, President & CEO Michael Morhaime, and Executive Vice President Frank Pearce. "
Morhaime reports to Kotick in some way, shape, or form, as Kotick is the CEO of Activision-Blizzard. If big daddy Levy says Kotick can't touch Morhaime, that's one thing. Whatever is drawn up in terms of agreements for the Activision-Blizzard section of Viv is another.
Blizzard which was part of the Vivendi before Activision was even part of the picture is not ruled by Kotick. It may seem like that for all intent and purposes but they are singing their own tunes. It's like when my security company was released from a 4 year contract and a new company was taking over. My current site managers (the people paying the bills) asked if I would join the new security company and remain at their building. So I was "rehired" so to speak but remained at the same exact location. Everything that I accumulated during my time with "A" company switched over to "B" company and there is nothing "B" company can do or say to me as long as the site managers are holding the cards.
Now if this can happen for a security officer at a office building, what in the world makes you think anything has or will change at Blizzard when they have done their jobs to the fullest satisfaction of their "site managers"? AKA the real bosses Vivendi. Furthermore one look at the name, Activision Blizzard, will tell you that this is equal ground both CEOs are standing on. I'm sure Morhaime is just peachy running things at Blizzard and could care less about a PR spot as head CEO of a merged division with little to no creative control. Do you really think for a minute Kotick has the authority to fire Morhaime? Or Moraime has to go through the newly named CEO to talk to the people he's been working for since 1998? Yeah......keep believing that.
Reading comprehension ftl. Highlighted area of concern.
Comparing your personal company to any other is in vain- all companies are structured differently. However, chain of command is something that exists in every company, organization, society...
There are always multiple pipelines that run through organizations. IT, legal, human resources etc. And any one individual might have a handful of bosses. Where lines tend to merge is higher in the corporate structure, where a more relaxed work environment is always cultivated in these industry giants.
We know from where we sit that Blizzard is one of Activision-Blizzard's few assets that the holding company doesn't completely control. So you nailed the independency portion of things. However, we do know that the one CEO sits higher on the corporate structure than another, and knowing chain of commands, we can safely conclude that somewhere, somehow, Morhaime hands some sort of report through Kotick, but never the inverse.
Keep believing in those superficial gestures all you want. My main point is (and the point of this topic) that Kotick can say whatever he wants, but it does not reflect on Blizzard, nor does it hold any bearing on what direction they will take on their future developments. That call is for Morhaime to make, of course with the blessings of Viv.
Now Kotick's statements by far have more bearing on how things pan out with Activision. And that's because he seems to be talking more in terms of a publisher's viewpoint. You know, numbers, sales and untapped markets. His visions reach into the realm of profits, not creativity.
Who said anything about creativity? Blizzard maintains its independence in this regard (already established this?). You yourself admit to Kotick speaking with authority on a publisher's viewpoint: ie profits. Being a holding company and all, would this not suggest Morhaime hands a financial report to Kotick? Holy sharkbites batman. Doesn't this mean 'Blizzard' and 'Blizzard-Activision' are *clearly not* seperate entities? They're linked pal. It's in the title of all places.
We can digress this further if you'd like, or we can acknowledge that Blizzard, being owned by Vivendi, has someone who calls the shots. When things are on path, Blizzard sings its own tune. If things stopped being 'on path', we can almost expect to see a change in the landscape with where the orders originate, and where they land.
That is exactly right, and we're not saying NO to save WoW, because it is already a lost cause. We are saying NO to dissuade the next group of greedy suits who decide to emulate Blizzard and Cryptic, etc. We can prevent some of the future games from spewing this crap, but the sooner we start saying no, the better the results will be. So - Stand up, pull up your pants, and walk away. - MMO_Doubter
WoW has been obsolete for the past 2 years... now it's just an entry level MMO that draws new people into the genre due to it's low system requirements, and easy play.
Yeah... In what world are you living in? Name a single game that has been released that has stepped upto the pate and delievered pushing WoW to a obsolete status. And we might want to notify them 11 million + people playing WoW that they are playing a obsolete game.
you are just mad cause it's true.... and before shooting off every other mmo that just came out, why don't you give them a few years like WoW has had to build up that many players...
There are about 6 billion + people in the world. There are enough people online to keep many different platforms running in the gaming industry. I don't think that social network games will kill PC/Console MMOs nor do I think that social network games will be more or less popular in the future. I think MMOs will change when some newer technology comes out that makes playing them a much different experience like a virtual suit or goggles or a new virtual world which at this point have not gotten much better in the past ten years. Therefore I think WOW is safe and so are social networking games. Maybe in 20 years or so virtual reality will be mainstream but I doubt it. We should have had people on Mars already with as much money as the US has spent on wars. The gaming industry is the same way. Innovation now is kind of stagnant and money is being wasted on bad projects.
The guy that wrote the report has no idea what he's talking about. Thats what you get when you have someone from a 'generic' business background write about a topic such as this.
July 8, 2008 - Activision has announced that stockholders have approved the merger between it and Vivendi Games to form Activision Blizzard at a special meeting today. The deal is expected to close on or around July 9, 2008, and the total transaction will amount to $18.9 billion US dollars.
Although merger plans were announced on December 2, 2007, the joint venture would not be official until Activision's investors green lit the merger. In addition, the European Commision had to decide the merger did not constitute a monopoly. Once the deal is complete, Vivendi Games, parent company to Blizzard Entertainment and Sierra, will become the wholly-owned subsidiary of Santa Monica, California-based Activision; though Vivendi, parent company of Vivendi Games, will own approximately a 52% stake in Activision Blizzard.
When everything becomes official, top-selling franchises such as Guitar Hero, Call of Duty, World of Warcraft, StarCraft, Diablo and more will all be housed under the banner of one company. This would make Activision Blizzard the largest 3rd party videogame publisher in the world.
As reported back in December 2007, Activision CEO Robert Kotick will become the company's new President and CEO, with Vivendi's current CEO, Bruce Hack, serving as the company's Vice-Chairman and Chief Corporate Officer.
Comments
What you fail to realize is that they aren't.
Pulled from Blizzard's own site, mind you:
" Headquartered in Irvine, Calif., Blizzard Entertainment, a division of Activision Blizzard, was founded in 1991 under the name Silicon & Synapse by Allen Adham, President & CEO Michael Morhaime, and Executive Vice President Frank Pearce. "
Morhaime reports to Kotick in some way, shape, or form, as Kotick is the CEO of Activision-Blizzard. If big daddy Levy says Kotick can't touch Morhaime, that's one thing. Whatever is drawn up in terms of agreements for the Activision-Blizzard section of Viv is another.
Blizzard which was part of the Vivendi before Activision was even part of the picture is not ruled by Kotick. It may seem like that for all intent and purposes but they are singing their own tunes. It's like when my security company was released from a 4 year contract and a new company was taking over. My current site managers (the people paying the bills) asked if I would join the new security company and remain at their building. So I was "rehired" so to speak but remained at the same exact location. Everything that I accumulated during my time with "A" company switched over to "B" company and there is nothing "B" company can do or say to me as long as the site managers are holding the cards.
Now if this can happen for a security officer at a office building, what in the world makes you think anything has or will change at Blizzard when they have done their jobs to the fullest satisfaction of their "site managers"? AKA the real bosses Vivendi. Furthermore one look at the name, Activision Blizzard, will tell you that this is equal ground both CEOs are standing on. I'm sure Morhaime is just peachy running things at Blizzard and could care less about a PR spot as head CEO of a merged division with little to no creative control. Do you really think for a minute Kotick has the authority to fire Morhaime? Or Moraime has to go through the newly named CEO to talk to the people he's been working for since 1998? Yeah......keep believing that.
Reading comprehension ftl. Highlighted area of concern.
Comparing your personal company to any other is in vain- all companies are structured differently. However, chain of command is something that exists in every company, organization, society...
There are always multiple pipelines that run through organizations. IT, legal, human resources etc. And any one individual might have a handful of bosses. Where lines tend to merge is higher in the corporate structure, where a more relaxed work environment is always cultivated in these industry giants.
We know from where we sit that Blizzard is one of Activision-Blizzard's few assets that the holding company doesn't completely control. So you nailed the independency portion of things. However, we do know that the one CEO sits higher on the corporate structure than another, and knowing chain of commands, we can safely conclude that somewhere, somehow, Morhaime hands some sort of report through Kotick, but never the inverse.
Keep believing in those superficial gestures all you want. My main point is (and the point of this topic) that Kotick can say whatever he wants, but it does not reflect on Blizzard, nor does it hold any bearing on what direction they will take on their future developments. That call is for Morhaime to make, of course with the blessings of Viv.
Now Kotick's statements by far have more bearing on how things pan out with Activision. And that's because he seems to be talking more in terms of a publisher's viewpoint. You know, numbers, sales and untapped markets. His visions reach into the realm of profits, not creativity.
Who said anything about creativity? Blizzard maintains its independence in this regard (already established this?). You yourself admit to Kotick speaking with authority on a publisher's viewpoint: ie profits. Being a holding company and all, would this not suggest Morhaime hands a financial report to Kotick? Holy sharkbites batman. Doesn't this mean 'Blizzard' and 'Blizzard-Activision' are *clearly not* seperate entities? They're linked pal. It's in the title of all places.
We can digress this further if you'd like, or we can acknowledge that Blizzard, being owned by Vivendi, has someone who calls the shots. When things are on path, Blizzard sings its own tune. If things stopped being 'on path', we can almost expect to see a change in the landscape with where the orders originate, and where they land.
That is exactly right, and we're not saying NO to save WoW, because it is already a lost cause. We are saying NO to dissuade the next group of greedy suits who decide to emulate Blizzard and Cryptic, etc.
We can prevent some of the future games from spewing this crap, but the sooner we start saying no, the better the results will be.
So - Stand up, pull up your pants, and walk away.
- MMO_Doubter
Yeah... In what world are you living in? Name a single game that has been released that has stepped upto the pate and delievered pushing WoW to a obsolete status. And we might want to notify them 11 million + people playing WoW that they are playing a obsolete game.
you are just mad cause it's true.... and before shooting off every other mmo that just came out, why don't you give them a few years like WoW has had to build up that many players...
There are about 6 billion + people in the world. There are enough people online to keep many different platforms running in the gaming industry. I don't think that social network games will kill PC/Console MMOs nor do I think that social network games will be more or less popular in the future. I think MMOs will change when some newer technology comes out that makes playing them a much different experience like a virtual suit or goggles or a new virtual world which at this point have not gotten much better in the past ten years. Therefore I think WOW is safe and so are social networking games. Maybe in 20 years or so virtual reality will be mainstream but I doubt it. We should have had people on Mars already with as much money as the US has spent on wars. The gaming industry is the same way. Innovation now is kind of stagnant and money is being wasted on bad projects.
I really wouldn't be surprised.
I don't know about the end of the world with WoW. UO is still a popular game, and fun, after all of the years it has been around.
The guy that wrote the report has no idea what he's talking about. Thats what you get when you have someone from a 'generic' business background write about a topic such as this.
- Shijeer
I am just citing this to everyone http://wii.ign.com/articles/887/887251p1.html
Activision/Vivendi Games Merger Approved
Stockholders support Activision Blizzard venture.
by Jimmy Thang
July 8, 2008 - Activision has announced that stockholders have approved the merger between it and Vivendi Games to form Activision Blizzard at a special meeting today. The deal is expected to close on or around July 9, 2008, and the total transaction will amount to $18.9 billion US dollars.
Although merger plans were announced on December 2, 2007, the joint venture would not be official until Activision's investors green lit the merger. In addition, the European Commision had to decide the merger did not constitute a monopoly. Once the deal is complete, Vivendi Games, parent company to Blizzard Entertainment and Sierra, will become the wholly-owned subsidiary of Santa Monica, California-based Activision; though Vivendi, parent company of Vivendi Games, will own approximately a 52% stake in Activision Blizzard.
When everything becomes official, top-selling franchises such as Guitar Hero, Call of Duty, World of Warcraft, StarCraft, Diablo and more will all be housed under the banner of one company. This would make Activision Blizzard the largest 3rd party videogame publisher in the world.
As reported back in December 2007, Activision CEO Robert Kotick will become the company's new President and CEO, with Vivendi's current CEO, Bruce Hack, serving as the company's Vice-Chairman and Chief Corporate Officer.