Activision Unveils New Call of Duty Online Service

Antari

Music Slave
Nov 4, 2009
2,246
0
0
Thyunda said:

Fuck that

Won't stop me buying the game, but I certainly won't be paying no subscription fee. Whose bright idea was it to start making us pay to get special league tables? Still, I guess a thousand Christmases just got easier for two thousand parents.
And you are the reason why this sort of thing is happening. Your still going to buy the game? Convincing them they've done a good job?
 

hawkeye52

New member
Jul 17, 2009
760
0
0
So they are now making people pay for features that were free for everyone back in every other call of duty and now they are making people pay for maps every month instead of releasing map packs. just wow that is just appaling
 

Ickorus

New member
Mar 9, 2009
2,887
0
0
This really doesn't affect me in the slightest as I don't intend to buy any more CoD games after the steaming shit that is Black Op's but I gotta put one point forward:

Logan Westbrook said:
In an interview, Activision CEO Bobby Kotick defended the subscription fee, saying that Elite was a major undertaking, and it wouldn't be able to offer the same level of support if it was completely free.
Makes you wonder how Valve manages it.
 

Thyunda

New member
May 4, 2009
2,955
0
0
Antari said:
Thyunda said:

Fuck that

Won't stop me buying the game, but I certainly won't be paying no subscription fee. Whose bright idea was it to start making us pay to get special league tables? Still, I guess a thousand Christmases just got easier for two thousand parents.
And you are the reason why this sort of thing is happening. Your still going to buy the game? Convincing them they've done a good job?
Modern Warfare 3 looks beast. 'Elite' doesn't. So I will buy one, and not the other. I'm not going to punish the developer for what's shaping up to be a decent game. And I'm certainly not cheating myself out of it just because they're offering some of the content for extra money. If everybody bought the game, and nobody subscribed, they'd cancel that service and also encourage new things. Already MW3 looks like a huge jump away from MW2, which was essentially the same as the original.
 

tehroc

New member
Jul 6, 2009
1,293
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.
Activision has everything on their radar, the key to success is stay ahead of trends. F2P is the future of gaming and it's already here.
 

42

Australian Justice
Jan 30, 2010
697
0
0
Pay for stats? and Pay for groups? What the hell activision? are you really all out of money because you keep blowing it all on franchises you've run into the ground? 15 bucks for map packs is as far as ill ever go in terms of paying for something in CoD, but to pay for STATS? something which one of your brand new developers did for free for a previous franchise known as halo? I'm sorry but im calling it, this is going to fail from the kick off. no one in there right mind would pay just to see statistics and groups.

the meeting probably went something like this:

Bobby Kotick: So are there anyways we can milk more money today gents?
Board Member 1: release new property and take risks in developing new concepts?
Board Member 2: Nah man thats gay lets make em pay for stats in CoD
Board Member 1: make them pay for something other companies have done for free in the past?
Board Member 3,4,5,6 + Kotick: YEAAAAAH PAY FOR COD STATS ITS AWESOME

and the board member 1 resigned out of utter depression for working with a bunch of ridiculous RETARDS.

paying for a subscription service that comprises completely of statistics and the ability to join a group is just stupid, and no matter how they try and put it they will of course release Premium Maps for subscribers only.

Dont take from anything ive said that i hate CoD, because i dont, i actually enjoy it, but its this stuff thats making Battlefield 3 look like the november shooter im going to pay for. Nuff said.
 

Antari

Music Slave
Nov 4, 2009
2,246
0
0
Thyunda said:
Antari said:
Thyunda said:

Fuck that

Won't stop me buying the game, but I certainly won't be paying no subscription fee. Whose bright idea was it to start making us pay to get special league tables? Still, I guess a thousand Christmases just got easier for two thousand parents.
And you are the reason why this sort of thing is happening. Your still going to buy the game? Convincing them they've done a good job?
Modern Warfare 3 looks beast. 'Elite' doesn't. So I will buy one, and not the other. I'm not going to punish the developer for what's shaping up to be a decent game. And I'm certainly not cheating myself out of it just because they're offering some of the content for extra money. If everybody bought the game, and nobody subscribed, they'd cancel that service and also encourage new things. Already MW3 looks like a huge jump away from MW2, which was essentially the same as the original.
Its not a point of cheating yourself out of a game. Your purchase is the only way you can influence that company's future decisions. If you buy the game any decisions attached with that game will be attached to the purchase. Even if you don't get the subscription buying the game says to activision you don't nessisarily mind where they are going. As much as I may want to play a game, I will not support in any way companies that make these sorts of bad decisions.

I do hope you go for MW3 or in general any other game than COD Elite. Activision needs to see some serious damage to sales figures before they are going to get the message that this sort of thing is not the new trend, and could mark the end of series' that attempt it.
 

Thyunda

New member
May 4, 2009
2,955
0
0
Antari said:
le argument
I'm perfectly happy to deny them subscription fees. I have no particular desire to have that content for those extra dollars. So I won't pay for it. If everybody bought MW3 and did not pay the subscription, they'd be providing software for absolutely nobody. It costs money to develop and put out that software. Since people were clearly happier with buying (overpriced) map packs every now and then, they're more likely to go back to that model.
 

beema

New member
Aug 19, 2009
944
0
0
I guess this is for console players, but I'd still like to point out that I can already do all of those things for free on Steam.

Also, why the hell is every company out there trying to make their own social network? Guess what, people already have social networks and they don't want to have to join another one to do the same shit within another segment of people. Why not just integrate CoD with Facebook or something? Everybody seeing how successful Facebook is and trying to make their own Facebook is completely preposterous.
 

jackanderson

New member
Sep 7, 2008
703
0
0
So our worst nightmares are actually coming true? Good God, what did we do to deserve this!? (looks at Black Ops sales numbers) Ohhhhh!!! Yeah, that makes sense.

Well, I'm done with this franchise. I'll rent it to complete the single player (seeing as it should be easily completeable in about, oooh, 4 hours) and then that's it. Why should I have to pay for sh*t that I can get for free elsewhere? In the previous game of the same freakin' franchise, no less! I'll just have to look elsewhere for my big Winter shooter fix.

Oh haaaaiii, Battlefield 3! Didn't see you there!
 

-Samurai-

New member
Oct 8, 2009
2,294
0
0
Wow. That video was hilarious. The thing it is promoting, however, is stupid.

It'll sell millions.
 

Furioso

New member
Jun 16, 2009
7,981
0
0
Who has two thumbs and will not be buying into this crap? THIS GUY!
Can we just put Bobby away somewhere where he won't hurt those around him? Like a tiny island?
 

Antari

Music Slave
Nov 4, 2009
2,246
0
0
Thyunda said:
Antari said:
le argument
I'm perfectly happy to deny them subscription fees. I have no particular desire to have that content for those extra dollars. So I won't pay for it. If everybody bought MW3 and did not pay the subscription, they'd be providing software for absolutely nobody. It costs money to develop and put out that software. Since people were clearly happier with buying (overpriced) map packs every now and then, they're more likely to go back to that model.
Personally I'd avoid anything they release all together. Support their competitors who aren't moving into the Extra-Greed round. As an older gamer I can say I am not happier paying for DLC. I'm used to something called an expansion. That has alot more than 2-3 tiny additions. And they are starting to get the message that most people don't like DLC in its current form. Thats why your seeing them grab for your wallet in new ways, like stats tracking.

Any purchase from the company will only encourage this sort of monumental stupidity from boardrooms. Because when it comes to the paperwork they look at, a sale = "Great job you did everything perfectly!"
 

MetroidNut

New member
Sep 2, 2009
969
0
0
And so it begins. Give it another three years and Activision will be charging for multiplayer - the depressing part is that people will keep playing, and their profits will skyrocket. But hey - all I care about is Battlefield 3.

Furioso said:
Who has two thumbs and will not be buying into this crap? THIS GUY!
I...I am impressed.
 

Grey_Focks

New member
Jan 12, 2010
1,969
0
0
eh, I honestly stopped caring about CoD when BlOps turned out to be.... disappointing, to say the least. I still might get this, but I'll never get that Elite thing, and Battlefield 3 takes priority by a mile.

And actvision, please, please don't do any of this crap with Diablo 3. Please?
 

Thyunda

New member
May 4, 2009
2,955
0
0
Antari said:
Thyunda said:
Antari said:
le argument
I'm perfectly happy to deny them subscription fees. I have no particular desire to have that content for those extra dollars. So I won't pay for it. If everybody bought MW3 and did not pay the subscription, they'd be providing software for absolutely nobody. It costs money to develop and put out that software. Since people were clearly happier with buying (overpriced) map packs every now and then, they're more likely to go back to that model.
Personally I'd avoid anything they release all together. Support their competitors who aren't moving into the Extra-Greed round. As an older gamer I can say I am not happier paying for DLC. I'm used to something called an expansion. That has alot more than 2-3 tiny additions. And they are starting to get the message that most people don't like DLC in its current form. Thats why your seeing them grab for your wallet in new ways, like stats tracking.

Any purchase from the company will only encourage this sort of monumental stupidity from boardrooms. Because when it comes to the paperwork they look at, a sale = "Great job you did everything perfectly!"
Now I don't have beef with DLC. Especially not in role-playing games and such. I follow Valve's new philosophy - that games are interactive platforms, as opposed to narratives. I would rather pay for new quest chains in Fallout: New Vegas every now and then, instead of clearing out the whole game and waiting for the sequel...which would use the same engine and all sorts.
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
tehroc said:
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.
Activision has everything on their radar, the key to success is stay ahead of trends. F2P is the future of gaming and it's already here.
No it isn't (the future of gaming). And believe me, Ghost Recon will have had no effect on what they decide to do with CoD.

What they're actually doing is much closer to a standard MMO payment model, not a F2P one.