Pachter Predicts Payments for "Premium" Call of Duty Multiplayer

[Andy Chalk]

Pachter Predicts Payments for "Premium" Call of Duty Multiplayer

Activision may not "require" people to pay for multiplayer action in Call of Duty [http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dvideogames&field-keywords=%22Call+of+Duty%22&x=0&y=0] but industry analyst Michael Pachter remains convinced that the company is feeling around for a way to make it an attractive option.

If ever there was a cash cow waiting to be milked, it's Call of Duty multiplayer. Figuring out how to turn all those millions of Modern Warriors into a paying audience without sparking a revolt the likes of which hasn't been seen since the New Coke Uprising of '85 is one of gaming's Holy Grails and while no such designs [http://www.activision], Pachter thinks they might not be telling the whole, entire truth.

"I don't want to call out any of the blog posts or tweets or statements to IGN as untruthful," Pachter told GamesIndustry [http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/pachter-cod-will-move-to-opt-in-premium-model-article]. "Rather, I think that they probably are true: Activision won't require people to play for multiplayer, but I think that they will find a way to offer a premium experience for a fee, whether that takes the form of subscription, pay-as-you-go, microtransactions for virtual goods, tournament fees or some combination."

"In my view, Activision is motivated to charge for multiplayer, has a window of opportunity to do so, and can extract greater profits if it imposes a charge," he continued. "It makes logical sense (to me at least) that given their motivation and opportunity, coupled with their past behavior, they will charge in the future. Call of Duty is the most likely candidate due to the large number of users."

It's not at all beyond the realm of possibility: Leave the multiplayer component more or less untouched, throw in a few premium extras like special weapons, uniforms, maps and the like, and then stand back and wait for the money train to pull in. Pachter acknowledged that some gamers would "revolt" but said the majority will get in line as long as Activision stays true to its word and doesn't make payments mandatory.

"I think that this is the most fair way to approach extracting value," he said, "and yes, I think it will be successful."



Permalink

 

[uppitycracker]

The only thing I've seen across multiple sites, is that there will be no charges to Black Ops or MW2. Nobody has mentioned a thing about the future of the franchise past those two titles... so I hardly think anyone is really interpreting this the right way. Will we see a subscription-based model, or a game tailored around one, past Black Ops? I think so, simply due to the wording of this all so far.

 

[BlueOnBlue]

I should ***** slap Activision for even considering this and I will definitly not be buying black ops.

 

[Jared]

They will never make it attractive to pay more to play a game which isnt an MMo...and already bought.

No matter what they say...No one is ever going to do it.

 

[Kevlar Eater]

Basically, subscribe to the "premium stuff" and your chances of winning games are better. Yeah, real attractive.

 

[Ibanez887]

I think Activison is going to, unfortunately, make bank off this. People will pay anything as long as they can be "superior" to "noobs"

 

[pneuma08]

So glad I got off the Call of Duty train. I don't have to care about any of this!

 

[Baron Khaine]

Activision doing something evil?

NO WAI.

 

[Zing]

Man Activision really need to shut Pachter up, I guarantee he's turned hundreds of people off wasting money on Black Ops, I'm not going to be buying it because of this fiasco, I just don't know what kinda shit Kotick will pull, so I'd rather not spend a hundred bucks on a game I won't play the multiplayer for.

I'll be sticking to Medal of Honor and Crysis 2 I think. It's funny when EA is the better publisher here.

 

[Sieni]

So activision is already making bazillions with the CoD games and they want more?

Greedy bastards.

 

[Ironic Pirate]

I should ***** slap Activision for even considering this and I will definitly not be buying black ops.

Buy it used, they don't profit.

And also, "premium" will get them barely any better than what it is now, and free will be much, much worse.

Although, Playstation Plus was rumored to be horrible, but it's just free stuff. It's like Sam's Club compared to Wall-mart.

But then again, the Eldritch Abomination known as Bobby Kotick wasn't involved with that...

 

[Cabisco]

I wouldn't be surpised if they started something like this, it would be a money maker for them if they promised to release now content every month. Like project ten dollar, but you have to pay ten dollars every month, for a map. Or a gun. Or a knife skin.

Sounds shit I know, but it would make them money for mimimal effort.

 

[DigitalSushi]

I should ***** slap Activision for even considering this and I will definitly not be buying black ops.

While it is activsion making the calls, this news post is with regards to Pachter and his furiously analising anything slightly game related.

Thanks Pachter, we already knew that, Activision have been harping on about that new payment plan for ages and the only thing that can stop it is the new kid at Activision.

Seriously, is CoD worth a subscription payment?, is it?

 

[TheRealGoochman]

Sigh............Activision, you need to stop doing things that make me dislike you

 

[Jaebird]

Okay, seriously--who the hell is Michael Pachter, and why should anyone care what he has to say?

 

[Icehearted]

This is what we get for paying for XBL. You let just one jerkass get away with nickel and diming you and suddenly every other jerkass want their hand in your pocket. A freebie option along with a premium is only the first step, boys and girls, I've seen this sort of thing before. The next will be to offer less and less for free, make it laggy or low maintenance, maybe riddle it with ads, but always inevitably phase it out for premium because you don't have a choice. Just like online play. The PS2 did it for free, the Dreamcast did it for free, Nintendo's Wii and DS are free, and the PSP is free. They all did just fine for free, premium is just a fancy way of saying "we've withheld features that could have easily been included without charge for people with more money than sense to spend on".

Damn it, I didn't want to get all ranty about this either...

If you've ever paid for a premium service over a free option, you've basically helped invite this. Our wallets speak louder to these people than anything else we've got.

 

[Generic_Dave]

People paid good money for horse armour in Elder Scrolls (Everyone remember the Horse Armour? Good).

This will happen. And Kotick will buy another Gold-Plated house and rocket car.

This will happen, and people will pay. Regardless of the form it takes, I would be willing to bet that it won't be a flat sub, as Patcher says.

It will be painful though, there was a time when a multi-player mode was a novelty (an on-line one even rarer). When LANs ruled and You paid for your own multi-player, it was an adendum, not core content. As multiplayer has moved into the console market and come to be seen as a "core" element of an games package. But I believe that Activision share an opinion here with Yahtzee, and that is as Mr. Crowshaw judges that a games single-player story should be worth you 60 bucks you pay...and any further play is extra.

Personally I think the alternative is to have two priced versions of the game (three even). One multi-player only, say you pick up the game for 20 bucks and then pay a sub, or the "full game" as you would now with Multi and Single play for the regular...and maybe a third Single Player only for about 30 - 40 bucks. It's fair, to everyone, you only pay for what you want...and it's transparent...but micro-transactions are certain to be the way they go because it is less transparent and harder to follow your spending. Besides, have you ever noticed that the fact that your account stores your details makes you more likely to purchase things? If you are paying a sub, that is it, micro-transactions can balloon because they are easy to put through.