Activision Defends Call of Duty Elite

[Atmos Duality]

There's also the problem of: once this starts, where does it end? Will we end up in a situation where we cannot even play online without paying?

I think that's Activision's goal; to have a Golden Goose that can actually begin to compare with their sister company's (Blizzard's WoW).

 

[Still Life]

I saw the single player E3 demo, and it was really underwhelming. So far, I'm finding MW3 underwhelming given all the information released.

I sincerely hope this isn't actually the case.

 

[Baneat]

All of those features are in Black Ops already

You're adding nothing to us and packaging it as generosity.

 

[Laser Priest]

Essentially it's Bungie.net and Halo's Service Records with a monthly fee.

 

[Spencer Petersen]

When has segregating a community based on paid features ever improved a product? All I see is a way to divide the community and making sure that people keep paying for a service which will receive no later support or updates until the new rendition next year.

So I guess the logic is that the free service will be equivalent to other top multiplayer games, but then whats the point of buying the new game if it only beats the competition when you add the "extra" service. Its like adding a subscription to MW2 that you can only get if you buy another copy.

But I guess this is the reward for the fanbase which made the last 4 games a success. Hey fans, I know we made record profits off the last 4 games and still haven't added crucial balance tweaks or updated content in all that time, so heres the deal. We are giving you a service you have to pay extra for to stay competitively relevant and enjoy your game! Now you can give us more money and we can still continue to abandon our releases, leave massive exploits open for abuse, make contrived excuses for why you are fighting Russian military in 2011 and refuse to provide necessary content patches to keep the game from stagnating after a month. Everybody wins!

 

[duchaked]

I remember Machinima doing a video where they first talked about Elite and what it offered, quoting Activision saying no one else was offering it...and in the background they suddenly changed it to them scrolling the Bungie.net website

but honestly, even if I were more into the COD multiplayer like I was always for Halo, I'm still not interested in tournaments and stuff (prob cuz I'm not that good loll) so I'll have to pass

 

[HentMas]

Oh fuck off Bobby Kotick, you greedy ****. You already stooge tens of millions of sheep every year for their $60USD, the least you could do is make this bloody thing free, like Halo did with Waypoint. I get that business is about monetising things, but there is such a thing as too goddamned far.

read the FAQ, it says it right there that its going to be free, like waypoint
just read the FAQ please

 

[HentMas]

Essentially it's Bungie.net and Halo's Service Records with a monthly fee.

no its not, read the FAQ please it says it right there, its going to be free, the charge is for extras inside the service, not for the BUNGIE.NET service

 

[-Samurai-]

There is still absolutely no way I'm ever going to download it, just because I disagree with Elite in concept. We bought the game, now give us what we paid for.

You would be getting what you paid for; The non-premium services.

OT: I don't see what the big problem is. You either pay for it, or you don't. I won't be getting it(unless they offer something that I want, obviously}, but I won't be protesting outside of Activision corporate office either.

 

[Puzzlenaut]

There is still absolutely no way I'm ever going to download it, just because I disagree with Elite in concept. We bought the game, now give us what we paid for.

You would be getting what you paid for; The non-premium services.

OT: I don't see what the big problem is. You either pay for it, or you don't. I won't be getting it(unless they offer something that I want, obviously}, but I won't be protesting outside of Activision corporate office either.

The problem is knowing that miuch of the content will have been made at the expense of the initial game at the same time. Which comes back to the whole "release-day-DLC" issue again.

 

[HentMas]

When has segregating a community based on paid features ever improved a product? All I see is a way to divide the community and making sure that people keep paying for a service which will receive no later support or updates until the new rendition next year.

no, one is segregating anything, they are using the service like BUNGIE.NET, they are using the same system, then there will be an option to pay a subscription so you can compete in tournaments, get the map packs for free, and other extras, there is no segregation of any kind of service, read the FAQ, they haven't even said what they are going to charge for, they are just saying what they are not going to charge for, once again READ THE FAQ

So I guess the logic is that the free service will be equivalent to other top multi player games, but then whats the point of buying the new game if it only beats the competition when you add the "extra" service. Its like adding a subscription to MW2 that you can only get if you buy another copy.

now you´ve got it, they are implementing a stat tracking system and a lot of things "Like" most other games out there, whats the point of buying a new game?? well, because you like the franchise or the story or something around that field, but since you are doing this post my guess is you don´t like COD and hate Activision... OK, maybe not Activision but Bobby Kotick, for many of us that do like the game and the series this service seems like an overdue idea being realized with a lot of improvements for a paid service... which may or may not be worth 5-8 bucks a month, that depends entirely of the guy paying.

But I guess this is the reward for the fan base which made the last 4 games a success. Hey fans, I know we made record profits off the last 4 games and still haven't added crucial balance tweaks or updated content in all that time, so heres the deal. We are giving you a service you have to pay extra for to stay competitively relevant and enjoy your game! Now you can give us more money and we can still continue to abandon our releases, leave massive exploits open for abuse, make contrived excuses for why you are fighting Russian military in 2011 and refuse to provide necessary content patches to keep the game from stagnating after a month. Everybody wins!

... thats how you see the call of duty series? damn, i cant argue with that because its just your opinion, but there are a lot of things wrong with the statement, but whatever.

i´ll just say this, "make contrived excuses for why you are fighting Russian military" well, i guess you are right! COD IS a bad game, because now the enemy to fight is KOREA!, or perhaps more Germans? i know i know! a space race that has come to conquer earth!!!!

until an FPS comes with an original idea, i don´t think you can hold the originality of the enemies against the game, i AM bored of the usual enemies, but i enjoyed the MW series and the story is bearable, there are points on brilliance in there, its neither twilight nor Lord of the Rings, but maybe its "Little Women", not a stroke of brilliance and the next step in writing, but a good story that manages to catch your attention.

 

[HentMas]

You haven't been dealing with Activision very long have you? Sure its free, for now. This is exactly the sort of thing Activision has been doing for the past few years. Testing the waters of what they can get away with. Well the rest of us are drawing a line. If you want to praise them, go ahead. I don't think you'll find a lot of people to agree with you here.

"test the waters" yes, like charging an extra 10 bucks for a game that was initially going to cost 60, thats a management call, it comes down exclusively to Kotick

but this is not the same deal, its a service that everyone else and their dog are already putting out there, not something new, the precedent is that they know everyone else gave it for free, so they have to give it for free or no one will take the service, business wise it would be a terrible idea to do that

then what line are you drawing? the line where you wont get a service that is completely free because they "might" charge you for it later??? thats... kind of weird ain´t it? "i don´t like this company so i´m not going to accept the free stuff they are offering me because they are probably giving the stuff for free to charge me for it" what kind of train of thought is more probable? "they are giving free stuff so that you can try the program and they will charge for more stuff that is going to be awesome" or "they are giving free stuff to get you hooked and then they are going to charge you for the free stuff they gave you"? even if the latter is the case you can always, you know, say no and not buy it

The problem is knowing that miuch of the content will have been made at the expense of the initial game at the same time. Which comes back to the whole "release-day-DLC" issue again.

but they are not taking anything from the game, the game is finished, boxed, sent to you, then the DLC which almost always are map packs for this game are made and sold, the "Elite" has being confirmed to be an outside the box stats tracking page like BUNGIE.NET, the next tier,"Elite +" to give it a name will give you those maps regardless inside the subscription fee, with other features that haven't being announced yet, it makes no sense to think that they are taking anything from the game with this business idea, because its an on-line only service to "add" to the "experience", not the "game mechanics".

 

[Puzzlenaut]

You haven't been dealing with Activision very long have you? Sure its free, for now. This is exactly the sort of thing Activision has been doing for the past few years. Testing the waters of what they can get away with. Well the rest of us are drawing a line. If you want to praise them, go ahead. I don't think you'll find a lot of people to agree with you here.

"test the waters" yes, like charging an extra 10 bucks for a game that was initially going to cost 60, thats a management call, it comes down exclusively to Kotick

but this is not the same deal, its a service that everyone else and their dog are already putting out there, not something new, the precedent is that they know everyone else gave it for free, so they have to give it for free or no one will take the service, business wise it would be a terrible idea to do that

then what line are you drawing? the line where you wont get a service that is completely free because they "might" charge you for it later??? thats... kind of weird ain´t it? "i don´t like this company so i´m not going to accept the free stuff they are offering me because they are probably giving the stuff for free to charge me for it" what kind of train of thought is more probable? "they are giving free stuff so that you can try the program and they will charge for more stuff that is going to be awesome" or "they are giving free stuff to get you hooked and then they are going to charge you for the free stuff they gave you"? even if the latter is the case you can always, you know, say no and not buy it

The problem is knowing that miuch of the content will have been made at the expense of the initial game at the same time. Which comes back to the whole "release-day-DLC" issue again.

but they are not taking anything from the game, the game is finished, boxed, sent to you, then the DLC which almost always are map packs for this game are made and sold, the "Elite" has being confirmed to be an outside the box stats tracking page like BUNGIE.NET, the next tier,"Elite +" to give it a name will give you those maps regardless inside the subscription fee, with other features that haven't being announced yet, it makes no sense to think that they are taking anything from the game with this business idea, because its an on-line only service to "add" to the "experience", not the "game mechanics".

I promise you that at least some of the content (I'm talking maps mainly here; I can accept the other software-type stuff) will be made at the same time as the actual game and then withdrawn from the content, actively detracting from the quality of the game that you have just shelled out £45 to buy.

 

[HentMas]

I promise you that at least some of the content (I'm talking maps mainly here; I can accept the other software-type stuff) will be made at the same time as the actual game and then withdrawn from the content, actively detracting from the quality of the game that you have just shelled out £45 to buy.

well yes, i do believe that its going to be made at the same time as the main game, but the thing is that Activision... or in this case Infinity Ward haves several people working on the game, lets say the coders finish coding for the maps that are going to be in the box, then they send their finished work to the art department, what do they do? stop working and give themselves a pat on the back? no, that would be wasting resources, they start the code for the DLC, then the art department finishes their work and are free, at that time the DLC is finished and they are able to send it to art, so on so forth until they finish the DLC packs, take a break and start the next game, this takes place in several cycles, like your regular chain assembling, it would be a waste to keep the talent doing nothing while waiting for the game to be finished.

so no, i dont think its "actively detracting from the quality of the game" because in the end they would be doing nothing but waiting for the game to be finished.

 

[Antari]

You haven't been dealing with Activision very long have you? Sure its free, for now. This is exactly the sort of thing Activision has been doing for the past few years. Testing the waters of what they can get away with. Well the rest of us are drawing a line. If you want to praise them, go ahead. I don't think you'll find a lot of people to agree with you here.

"test the waters" yes, like charging an extra 10 bucks for a game that was initially going to cost 60, thats a management call, it comes down exclusively to Kotick

but this is not the same deal, its a service that everyone else and their dog are already putting out there, not something new, the precedent is that they know everyone else gave it for free, so they have to give it for free or no one will take the service, business wise it would be a terrible idea to do that

then what line are you drawing? the line where you wont get a service that is completely free because they "might" charge you for it later??? thats... kind of weird ain´t it? "i don´t like this company so i´m not going to accept the free stuff they are offering me because they are probably giving the stuff for free to charge me for it" what kind of train of thought is more probable? "they are giving free stuff so that you can try the program and they will charge for more stuff that is going to be awesome" or "they are giving free stuff to get you hooked and then they are going to charge you for the free stuff they gave you"? even if the latter is the case you can always, you know, say no and not buy it

Since I'm entirely uninterested in anything they release its not so weird. I don't want any free stuff from Activision, I don't want any paid stuff from them either, because its all crap. And I refuse to pay for it, or even use their "free for now" services.

 

[General Vengeance]

There is still absolutely no way I'm ever going to download it, just because I disagree with Elite in concept. We bought the game, now give us what we paid for.

I don't want to be given only half the game.

I couldn't agree more. This kind of shit has got to stop, in all games with the exception of MMO's that advertise a monthly fee. Gaming has gone to hell over the last several years with these additional features that require gamers to pay for them.

The only ones that are going to ensure that the companies greed stays in check are the gamers themselves and simply refuse to get sucked in and buy it.

 

[-Samurai-]

There is still absolutely no way I'm ever going to download it, just because I disagree with Elite in concept. We bought the game, now give us what we paid for.

You would be getting what you paid for; The non-premium services.

OT: I don't see what the big problem is. You either pay for it, or you don't. I won't be getting it(unless they offer something that I want, obviously}, but I won't be protesting outside of Activision corporate office either.

The problem is knowing that miuch of the content will have been made at the expense of the initial game at the same time. Which comes back to the whole "release-day-DLC" issue again.

Not at all. You're getting the same things you always received from the CoD series, and more by way of group making and clan hangouts and all that. All that stuff is free, and is available from the get-go to non-Elite subscribers, according to the FAQ.

They haven't said what the premium services are. Only that the stuff that's usually free is still free.

And as far as day 1 DLC; What do people expect devs to do in the time between the game being finished, and having it rated, put on to disks, packaged, shipped, and finally, released? They don't cut stuff for day 1 DLC. They just keep working in the time between the finished product goes out their door, and into your hands.

 

[Pigeon_Grenade]

There is still absolutely no way I'm ever going to download it, just because I disagree with Elite in concept. We bought the game, now give us what we paid for.

There's also the problem of: once this starts, where does it end? Will we end up in a situation where we cannot even play online without paying?

I like Call of Duty as much as the next guy (maybe more than the next guy seeing as we're on the CoD-phobic Escapist), but if I'm dishing out £45 for it, I don't want to be given only half the game.

i See it in a Different Fashion, like them Adding In Guns or tech For Elite Subscribed Players that Non Paid players Wont have Access too, and starting a environment where, in order to fight on level with them, you need to shell out the Sub fee every month