Scott Steinberg: EA's Mud-Slinging is a 'Smart Move'

August 23, 2011 -

EA's trash-talking to Activision about its Call of Duty franchise may be frowned upon in some circles, but Scott Steinberg of TechSavvy Global sees it as a clever ploy on the company's part to draw attention to its Battlefield series.

"It reflects just how seriously Electronic Arts and Activision take the coming clash of the titans - and how much each side has invested in the conflict's outcome," Steinberg tells Industry Gamers. "Modern Warfare 3 enjoys tremendous brand recognition and a massive fan following, giving it a marked advantage over Battlefield 3 at the cash register… but Battlefield 3 may very well be the more ambitious, polished and critically-acclaimed of the two titles. Moreover, each side plans to spend well into the eight or nine figures promoting the titles, reinforcing just how high the stakes are they're playing for."

Wedbush Securities analyst Michael Pachter noted that EA may look bad, but the sassy talk is certainly garnering some interesting publicity. Marketers will tell you there's no such thing as bad publicity..

"Smart move, AND petty and unprofessional," Pachter noted, adding that Activision isn't an innocent bystander in the war of words. "That's the nature of competition. Bobby was loudly trashing BF3 at E3 (not ready on consoles, 30 frames/sec), so it's arguable that ATVI 'started it' and it's easier to take the high road when you're in first place, so they are doing so now."

Steinberg says that mud-slinging in the industry is not a new phenomenon (I can remember members of Ion Storm and id Software going at it in .plan files in the late 90's - ED.). "From a broader perspective, tasteful or no, the mudslinging means little from the perspective of semantics - subtelty's never been an industry strong suit, as gaming rivals have been hurling insults since the days of 'Genesis does what Nintendon't.' But what such smack-talk does do is galvanize attention around the coming showdown: A win-win for both sides from the perspective of pure publicity."

"Whether or not that's by design, or simply a natural outpouring of the enthusiasm and emotional investment each publisher has invested in the projects is largely irrelevant," he added. "Regardless of your appetite for name-calling, there's no denying the clear upsides gained via such scuffles, as these heated exchanges help keep both games in the headlines, and top of mind."

Source: Industry Gamers

 


Comments

Re: Scott Steinberg: EA's Mud-Slinging is a 'Smart Move'

It just depends on your preference. Battlefield is more about the environment and is slower-paced. Modern Warfare is faster-paced and is more about the combat.

Re: Scott Steinberg: EA's Mud-Slinging is a 'Smart Move'

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I respect that but I'm not entirely sure that a game session where 64 people are in combat with 64 different people (something that can't be done in Modern Warfare) could be considered "slower-paced" by any stretch of the imagination.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely loved IW's Modern Warfare and play it still but this time around I fear DICE/EA's product will trump the product from IW/Activision. Without West and Zampella, IW/Activision's product is starting at a deficiency.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
E. Zachary KnightGot that same recommendation on Twitter. So I guess that is a good sign.09/15/2014 - 8:39pm
prh99Portlandia, though I don't watch a lot of sitcoms. Heard it was good though.09/15/2014 - 8:02pm
E. Zachary KnightSitcom recommendations for someone who like Parks and Rec but hates The Office: Go.09/15/2014 - 6:08pm
NeenekoEven if they do change their policy, they can only do it moving forward and I could see the mod/pack community simply branching.09/15/2014 - 12:50pm
Michael ChandraAs for take the money and run, the guy must have a networth of 8~9 digits already.09/15/2014 - 10:33am
Michael ChandraMe, I'm more betting on some form of mod API where servers must run donations/payments through them and they take a cut.09/15/2014 - 10:32am
Michael ChandraEspecially since they want it for promoting their phones. Killing user interest is the dumbest move to make.09/15/2014 - 10:32am
Michael ChandraGiven how the EULA actively allows for LPs, I'm not sure Microsoft is ready for the backlash of disallowing that.09/15/2014 - 10:31am
Matthew Wilsonthey wont do that, the backlash would be too big.09/15/2014 - 10:25am
ConsterSleaker: how is that a flipside? Sounds to me like that's basically what Notch himself said, except rudely.09/15/2014 - 10:18am
MaskedPixelanteOn the plus side, no more lazy Minecraft LPs, since iirc Microsoft has a strict "no monetization period" policy when it comes to their stuff.09/15/2014 - 10:13am
james_fudgeBut it continues to sell on every platform it is on, so there's that09/15/2014 - 10:09am
james_fudgeOh, well that's another matter :)09/15/2014 - 10:08am
E. Zachary KnightNothing against Notch here. I think it is great that he made something so cool. I just can't understand how it is worth $2.5 bil09/15/2014 - 9:59am
InfophileWhat a world we live in: Becoming a billionaire was the easy way out for Notch.09/15/2014 - 9:42am
james_fudgelots of hate for Notch here. I don't get it. Sorry he made a game everyone loved. What a monster he is!09/15/2014 - 9:37am
SleakerOn the flipside, Notch has been a horrible CEO for Mojang, and the company has grown on sheer inertia, DESPITE being mishandled over and over.09/15/2014 - 9:33am
SleakerI can understand Notch's statements he made to Kotaku about growing bigger than he intended, and getting hate for EULA changes he didn't enact.09/15/2014 - 9:32am
MaskedPixelantehttp://pastebin.com/n1qTeikM Notch's statement about the MS acquisition. He wanted out for a long time and this was the easiest way.09/15/2014 - 9:08am
ConsterEh, I can't blame him.09/15/2014 - 9:01am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician