In response to Warner Music CEO Edgar Bronfman's notion that videogame companies may not be paying enough for licensed music, Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick bites back.
In a recent interview with the Wall Street Journal, Kotick takes off the gloves and calls the comments not "respectful of how much we've done to bring new audiences into the market."
"When you look at the impact it can have on an Aerosmith, Van Halen, or Metallica," he says, "it's really significant, so much so that you sort of question whether or not, in the case of those kinds of products, you should be paying any money at all and whether it should be the reverse."
Damn, Kotick -- way to bust out the pimp hand, son. In support of his assertion, the CEO notes the fat sacks of cash the recent Guitar Hero: Aerosmith had made for the aging rockers.
You know, now that I think about it, maybe Activision Blizzard should be paying us for playing their games, God damn it. OK, that doesn't make any sense -- but these bill collectors won't stop calling and I'm totally desperate.
[Via Gamasutra]
Contest:
2:26 PM on 09.26.2008 | 
And now that Warner is starting to be a bunch of cocks by saying that they're going to increase their licensing rate to any rhythm game, that's even more opportunity for lesser known bands to get some advertisements via rhythm games.
And the studios aren't?? As I mentioned, Activision has already said that they're going to raise their rates to license their artists to rhythm games. Is that not greedy as well? Don't just accuse Activision of greed when there's more than enough to go around.
Meanwhile, struggling bands who would love to give their music to Activision/EA for free (and who deserve the advertising) are being ignored.
"Where you at bitch!?"
I'm out makin' yo money!
"That's right grandma!"
I'm sure EA would love to know their title and DLC is helping cover the cost of the competitions' game.