Activision Unveils New Call of Duty Online Service

Meggiepants

Not a pigeon roost
Jan 19, 2010
2,536
0
0
If they really don't change the core game, then I shouldn't think people should be worried.

Of course, then you have to trust a huge billion dollar company to do something that isn't in the best interest of their pocketbooks.... so yeah.

Honestly though, I'm sure they'll think of the backlash before they do anything rash to the core gameplay.
 

TheComfyChair

New member
Sep 17, 2010
240
0
0
It's still going to be the same old PoS CoD :) So don't worry kiddos, your 4th reskin is still available for you to play.

On the topic of reskins, does it count as a reskin if it's the exact same game? check out the end of that trailer to see the mw3 footage. Or should i say mw2? I can't tell.
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
tehroc said:
Ubisoft forced Activision's hand announcing Ghost Recon Online as a F2P FPS. Which could end up being a better game, as the Tom Clancey games seem to be far more tactical.
I doubt Activision even has it on its radar. Ubisoft don't have that kind of weight behind them, and that little F2P thing especially doesn't.

OT: If anyone pays for it, I will laugh at them. I mean, I will be choking on tears of laughter.

You can't claim something's a massive undertaking when the only features you've bothered to tell people about are ones that other people offer quite easily for free.
 

JourneyThroughHell

New member
Sep 21, 2009
5,010
0
0
Wait... So the combat record stuff might now be paid?

Seriously, that is the only thing that makes me a little uneasy about the whole thing. I ain't paying 8 bucks a month either way.

However, the way Bowling puts it, this looks like it's going to be DLC maps, character customization and hats. Don't see what the big deal is.
 

TheComfyChair

New member
Sep 17, 2010
240
0
0
Woodsey said:
tehroc said:
Ubisoft forced Activision's hand announcing Ghost Recon Online as a F2P FPS. Which could end up being a better game, as the Tom Clancey games seem to be far more tactical.
I doubt Activision even has it on its radar. Ubisoft don't have that kind of weight behind them, and that little F2P thing especially doesn't.

OT: If anyone pays for it, I will laugh at them. I mean, I will be choking on tears of laughter.
With a name like 'elite' it's going for the 12 year old audience. A smart move considering CoD itself is primarily played by the 12 year old audience.
 

Temah

New member
Dec 5, 2010
98
0
0
To be honest the video looked more interesting than the feature itself, gg Kotick
 

-Torchedini-

Gone Bonzo
Dec 28, 2009
222
0
0
This shit just confirms that ID is actively trying to fuck up the community.
MW1 was great, MW2 was good but a few annoyances.
MW3 will be tested before I even buy it. This crap should be free.
Brink does it for free. (even though it isnt online yet) Battlefield too in some degree.
Bungie does it for free. And most of this stuff is free with black ops. Exept the whole friends stuff.

And this

Sevre said:
I have no doubt they're going to be getting a lot of subscribers but $8 a month is pretty expensive for what you're getting. I mean, I could be farming troll ears for that amount, they'll need to throw in something more appealing than that to pull me in.
You get almost nothing.
 

Baresark

New member
Dec 19, 2010
3,908
0
0
LoL, it's digital Mercantilism. They will pay a fee (read: tariff), and they will get favored content (read: customer protection). This is epic fail actually. Especially since the content is stripped down anyway and only offers the same modes on the same maps for an extended period of time. Anyone who buys into this is kinda retarded. So maybe they will get rid of the map packs for sale thing, but this will make customers pay more for the good in the long run.

Look at it this way: Black Ops has been out for 8 months now. There are two map packs in that time. That means that if they were to do something similar to what they seem to be describing (though the details are completely sketchy, so it's all speculation at this time), how could the charge a monthly fee of $8 under the current release schedule and have customers not be paying more than they are now for just buying separate map packs. That would make a map pack $32 ($8*4 months). Or, would they be releasing like a map a month... which works out to the same kind of cost to schedule ratio.

They would have to significantly turn up software output for it to be worth while. Also, as one poster pointed out, they are going to strip the free one down. It won't even track your stats anymore? That is asinine. I gotta say, I do see Battlefield 3 picking up in popularity at this news, at least on the PC.

They will surely sell a whole lot of copies of MW3, and initially the service will probably do pretty decent. But after a couple of months, I think you would see a lot fewer people willing to pay for more of the same stuff from month to month. Then, keeping the pay service going, between running servers, stat updating, and that combined with less income to that end of the service, it will most likely become a liability. But, they have more money than god at this time. So, as bad business goes, they will lose on one end as long as the other end is doing well. It's still just bad business.
 

Quesa

New member
Jul 8, 2009
329
0
0
I'll be fascinated to know what "you won't have to pay it to play online" means. If it ends up meaning "you can join random games but can't group with friends" or something along those lines I'm sure it'd go over real well.
 

Delusibeta

Reachin' out...
Mar 7, 2010
2,594
0
0
I really can't see Activision doing anything with it that Bungie hasn't already done with the Halo games. And Bungie's subscription service (which only increases your File Share by four times and gives you 5 SD minutes of uploads to Bungie.net per month) is only $8/year, while I hear that Activision wants $8/month.

I really hopes this bites Activision in the ass, but I can't see that happening. Too many blind fratboys.
 

icame

New member
Aug 4, 2010
2,649
0
0
Didn't buy Black ops, and this solidifies a non-purchase for MW3. Oh hi there Battlefield 3...
 

AndyFromMonday

New member
Feb 5, 2009
3,921
0
0
So besides the 60 dollars you have to pay for the game you're going to have to dish out even more for services that are readily available right now? That's a fucking rip off. Giving Activision's previous track record I'm fairly sure they're going to continue selling map packs at £15 which is even more bullshit. How are people falling for this? Why the fuck are so many idiots continuously supporting this piece of shit game?
 

Gralian

Me, I'm Counting
Sep 24, 2008
1,789
0
0
It's official: They've run Call of Duty into the ground.

I find it rather hilarious that one or two years ago Activision were making firm promises that they'd never charge for a subscription for Call of Duty multiplayer. I don't care that "Elite" is separate from the game itself, it still amounts to the same thing in my eyes.

In other news, Heart of the Swarm will require players to purchase cut-scenes...
 

Jamash

Top Todger
Jun 25, 2008
3,641
0
0
Activision must have some pretty big tricks up it's sleeve to neutralise the hackers which plague COD.

I mean, as it stands at the moment they don't have to do anything to ensure that nobody cheats and everybody plays a fair game, because nobody is paying for their service, but once they start charging people a subscription they'll have to actively hunt and ban anyone who cheats to ensure that the majority of their customers get the service they pay for.

I can imagine the Elite COD service will run normally like any multiplayer game should, while the free service will degrade into a anarchic laggy hack-fest with no rules or enforcement whatsoever.

Will Activision also be running their own servers to ensure their subscribers will be able to use their service in the event of another PSN outage, or would they force Sony to refund a portion of the fee... and what about scheduled PSN maintenance sessions?

A company undertakes a lot of responsibility and expectation once they start charging people a subscription, it will be interesting to see how Activision lives up it's part of the bargain (or more likely dodges it with small print and legalese).
 

nyttyn

New member
Sep 9, 2008
134
0
0
If I wasn't so busy laughing my ass off, there would not be enough hands or faces to sufficentally facepalm at this.
 

ChupathingyX

New member
Jun 8, 2010
3,716
0
0
So you have to pay just to be able to create clans?

Didn't Resistance: Fall of Man have clans but....you know, for free?

I'm sorry but this thing just doesn't make sense, I know they're trying to make money but this is just stupid.