Call of Duty to get WoW-Like Subscriptions?

[cieply]

When I read this I think of team fortress 2. So much new content, new weapons, hats, balancing and tweaking YEARS after I bought the game... God I love valve so much.

Well wow got subscriptions to pay for big servers (theoretically) yet Guild Wars managed to survive with no sunscriptions...

I think activision i biting off more then they can chew, thy're greedy bastards and their greed will be their undoing. As for DLC - I guess people will learn to live with that if it won't affect balance in the game. As for the rest, they can go suck a cock.

 

[cieply]

Before everyone goes on and starts shouting gloom and doom lets look at this logically. If Activision actually supports Call of Duty with regularly content patches then a sucription system might be worth it, BUT we're talking about ACTUAL content here, not just a couple of weapons and skin changes. That definitely would not warrent a sub cost. Now if Activision and IW actually launch new modes, missions, content, etc on a regular basis like Blizzard does then a base cost of say $5-$10 a month might be worth it for the die hard CoD player.

That said I would never support a forced subscription method. If it's implemented it should be completely optional.

Team Fortress 2

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

See, this is what you get for encouraging them.

 

[Tairan]

Aww, damnit.
This sucks.
If they do this, a lot of people will actually buy it.
Soon enough we'll be paying subscriptions for most of our games.
Hopefully that won't happen.

well if it does happen a lot of people will be pissed off and wont be able to afford to be gamers anymore...

 

[Chipperz]

Well wow got subscriptions to pay for big servers (theoretically) yet Guild Wars managed to survive with no sunscriptions...

I think that has a lot to do with the way the games are set up - Guild Wars only has more than 5 players on a single map in towns, which may help with the server load/sizes. That's pure conjecture of course, but it'd be my guess.

OT - I'd love to meet someone who demanded to pay a subscription fee for Call of Duty's multiplayer. This does look more like people would be willing to pay for DLC packs and more content/game modes, though.

 

[Enzeru92]

You damn money whores!!! i just finished paying WoW and now they expect me to pay subscription fees for a FPS like Modern Warfare

 

[Bassman_2]

Sadly, one person cannot unite the whole world to boycott Activision products and show them what's what. One foot is all it takes though to kick their ass, though.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

I would like to go on the record as saying I fucking called it [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/6.155369#3792847].

 

[Georgeman]

Yay for more milking! Congratulations Activision for scaring off new potential customers just to milk every last drop from your loyal fanbase. I will enjoy seeing the Call of Duty franchise crash and burn. Same case with Guitar Hero.

As for demand to pay by gamers? I call that a lie. The same kind of lie as "The PC version of Modern Warfare 2 will be the most content-rich one".

 

[Treblaine]

I'm sorry but who the fuck would pay so much for a game at launch price and then a monthly fee on top...

... for 9 vs 9 multiplayer?

Look, the WoW model works because it has a VAST amount of content and is ADDICTIVE as hell and no COD game has ever lived up to that. It is a short and sweet game, the multiplayer you will keep coming back to but not THAT much and not for that long.

I mean Activision have been releasing a COD game steadily every year since 2005 (alternating between IW and Treyarch), is that not a steady revenue flow? I mean COD4 is still selling for £30 on Steam.

WoW subscription fee is justified by the amount of time spent on the game and the interactivity with SO MANY other people. That is just not what you get with COD, especially Modern Warfare 2.

If they try this then there is NO REASON not to pirate it, I'm sorry, there just isn't a single moral reason that you should respect such an amoral corporation.

Please, someone buy out IW... anyone... even MICROSOFT could do a better job!

 

[w-Jinksy]

congrats activision youve sucessfully topped EA in being the absolute most dickish game developers, even EA would look at this and think "wow what a bunch of dicks".

whatever who in their right mind would pay an extra charge to play on a shooter thats basically the same as those who have come before it? and what would they offer you anyway look at how huge the world is for wow and all the stuff cod would basically be like having what 5 more guns and a couple of new maps.

I give up with activision first the price jacks then dissing out the ps3 and now this, their now standing on the chair and in the noose what stunt will they pull that'll kick the chair out from beneath them i wonder.

 

[Quadtrix]

God, they just love to be hated, don't they? They know people are stupid enough to keep buying their games no matter what, so they don't have anything to worry about.

 

[Jenkins]

you know what, I think the gaming industry needs to collapse on itself so it can rebuild they are only getting this greedy because its the only industry to flourish in the economic problems. once they start feeling the pinch, then they will tone it down a bit.

 

[God's Clown]

I want to know who is talking to, because no gamer alive is demanding to have to pay to play their games online. It works for MMO's, MMO's have a LOT of content, and is constantly updated. That will not work for a FPS game, they will never be able to update the game fast enough, and the content will never be challenging enough to hold people over longer then a day.

Do these people not understand most people don't have money to throw around? We are in/just got out of a recession in the USA, so a lot of people are busy buying you know, food, paying bills, things like that.

If they charge people to play online with Diablo 3, it is over for activision/blizzard. I will go down there myself and curse them all to death.

 

[MrSnugglesworth]

Bad, but not surprising.

 

[Slycne]

What? I'm sorry. Paying for additional content, it's almost like that's the basics of economics. They are not saying they want to start charging for what you already have, that would be a really stupid business decision and despite whatever else you might think of them they do want to make money. You buy new games all the time, sequels, DLC and MMOs continue to pay for new content. That's all their saying.

If the content they are offering is not worth the price of subscription then don't buy it, simple as that. You all realize you have the power in this right? If you don't buy they don't make money, if they don't make money they either need to change or go out of business. So quit with all the bitching, seriously.

 

[scotth266]

You know what?

Everyone knows that I've been playing Devil's Advocate for Activision. I have defended legitimate statements like the "pessimism and fear" bit, I have demonstrated how a lot of their wackiness is merely truth put badly.

Spoiler: But this, this is madness.

How the hell does this compute? It's illogical to want to pay for features previously offered for free.

EDIT: To be clear, I'm questioning how the Activision people arrived at this line of thought. It's only good business for them to try and eke out dollars from the gaming community, but to think that people would WANT to pay for the same features they've previously gotten for free is a bit odd to say the least.

If they try to follow through with it and succeed, that'll be because apparently they were correct about it. So if you don't like it, don't buy or pirate any game that features such a system. Nuff' said, really.

 

[Slycne]

As much as I dislike piracy it would be incredibly awesome for Activision's sales to flatline under the poison of a million torrents...

Or even better if millions of dollars were spent on competitors games. Piracy just tells them it's still popular and they just need to figure out how to further discourage it usually at the expense of legal consumers. You're not sending the message you think you are.

 

[samsonguy920]

Okay, I'm confused. They yank dedicated servers for Modern Warfare 2, but now they want people to pay monthly to play it online. Wow, I may as well pay to have my knees smashed. This guy is seriously talking out of his ass, and if Kotick wants to save his cashcow, he really needs to find a new CFO. I can barely afford one subscription game, and I am not about to spend extra on a laggy and hackable game that will not get the services that a subscription game deserves. I say give it 6 months, when sales plummet and people are going to Gamestop in droves to exchange their MW2 for Dragon Age or L4D2, hopefully this moron gets a clue.
Now, on the other hand, I wouldnt mind seeing more FPSMMO's, but just taking MW2's multiplayer and charging monthly for it does not make it a FPSMMO. May as well open a can of tuna and throw it in a bowl and call that a casserole.