Michael Pachter Says Call of Duty is a Failure
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
ITT: Pachter says Pachter things.
Really, though, this isn't a surprise. It's the Christmas season - he usually posts one or two inflammatory statements every year around this time.
Really, though, this isn't a surprise. It's the Christmas season - he usually posts one or two inflammatory statements every year around this time.
Well, the thing is that Pachter wants it all- he wants a $60 price tag, monthly subscriptions AND a steady stream of map packs/DLC.
The sad thing is that there are so many gamers latched onto to the CoD/BF teats that it could actually happen that way.
The sad thing is that there are so many gamers latched onto to the CoD/BF teats that it could actually happen that way.
Activision has made Elite a free service again and gone back to offering DLC a la carte. It didn't take off because, as Pachter pointed out, Activision has conditioned its audience to expect free online play. That's going to be tough to overcome.Carrots_macduff said:
Interesting viewpoint, sir. Not a bad observation, but I think a lot of it has to do with model of game type.
Because clearly, a billion dollars is paltry. Frankly, it would be bad news to start having subscription fees at this point. I predict lots of bitching and whining followed by scores of people leaving. Pull that kind of shit and next time they release a CoD game with monthly subscription fees, they might only make 200 million.
1. Call of Duty has to compete against an existing standard of freely available server software. Free online is how they prevent users from jumping ship to games like Counter-Strike and even older CoD games that allow users to run their own dedicated servers. MMORPGs typically don't have this problem.
2. He's comparing gross per unit. This is all kinds of stupid. What really matters is net, which factors in things like cost of production and operation (and I'd bet CoD is cheaper to keep running than WoW), as well as number of units/subscriptions sold. CoD could charge six thousand dollars a month, and by his logic they'd be coming out ahead regardless of the obvious loss of their entire userbase.
3. "This multiplayer thing being free was a mistake [...] because it keeps those people from buying and playing other games." What? How did you come to this conclusion? If anything, free multiplayer frees up money so that consumers CAN buy and play other games. I can pretty much guarantee that people spending $15/month on World of Warcraft aren't in any hurry to buy other games, because they have a psychological need to play WoW and get their money's worth.
Conclusion: Pachter is still an idiot. His stuff still isn't newsworthy.
P.S. Thanks
2. He's comparing gross per unit. This is all kinds of stupid. What really matters is net, which factors in things like cost of production and operation (and I'd bet CoD is cheaper to keep running than WoW), as well as number of units/subscriptions sold. CoD could charge six thousand dollars a month, and by his logic they'd be coming out ahead regardless of the obvious loss of their entire userbase.
3. "This multiplayer thing being free was a mistake [...] because it keeps those people from buying and playing other games." What? How did you come to this conclusion? If anything, free multiplayer frees up money so that consumers CAN buy and play other games. I can pretty much guarantee that people spending $15/month on World of Warcraft aren't in any hurry to buy other games, because they have a psychological need to play WoW and get their money's worth.
Conclusion: Pachter is still an idiot. His stuff still isn't newsworthy.
P.S. Thanks
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
I'll call Call Of Duty a lot of things, but "Failure" is not one of them. It's a decent game series that's made a better-than-decent profit. Hacking off features and charging for them is a good way to alienate your fanbase, established or budding.
And it's not so much a series has been "Training" its' players a certain way that what it had attracted them in the first place. You really think COD would be as popular as it is today if they put a pay gate up as a barrier of entry? People play nothing but COD because it's popular and fun. Tons of games are fun. COD is what's popular. People attract people, and there wouldn't be people in the first place with subscription fees beyond some dedicated FPS gamers. The "Current popular game in the public conscious" would go to something else.
I'll call Call Of Duty a lot of things, but "Failure" is not one of them. It's a decent game series that's made a better-than-decent profit. Hacking off features and charging for them is a good way to alienate your fanbase, established or budding.
And it's not so much a series has been "Training" its' players a certain way that what it had attracted them in the first place. You really think COD would be as popular as it is today if they put a pay gate up as a barrier of entry? People play nothing but COD because it's popular and fun. Tons of games are fun. COD is what's popular. People attract people, and there wouldn't be people in the first place with subscription fees beyond some dedicated FPS gamers. The "Current popular game in the public conscious" would go to something else.
Someone find a way to get this guy fired from his job and put away from anything even resembling a video-game (even slot poker). He's been, for the past 2 years, trying to convince gaming companies to charge for it's online multiplayer.
I understand that "it's his job" as a market analyst who's supposed to wring every penny out of the sheep...er, customers. However, the question remains if his job is really needed and is not doing anything but a disservice? He makes predictions of companies failing, companies succeeding, and gives 'financial advise' to companies on ways to decrease their product and increase their profit.
Video games are about multiple things: innovation, creativity, artistic expression, and above-all-else they're about FUN. Pachter says they're about $$...he's a fool and he's wrong.
I understand that "it's his job" as a market analyst who's supposed to wring every penny out of the sheep...er, customers. However, the question remains if his job is really needed and is not doing anything but a disservice? He makes predictions of companies failing, companies succeeding, and gives 'financial advise' to companies on ways to decrease their product and increase their profit.
Video games are about multiple things: innovation, creativity, artistic expression, and above-all-else they're about FUN. Pachter says they're about $$...he's a fool and he's wrong.
...
Shit, if this is the future of the game industry, I think we're in for another collapse. Or, more hopefully, a grand "reckoning", if you could call it that, of consumers finally saying enough and bucking against the likes of EA and Activision and their shitty business practices.
He's right about Activision being greedy pigs, but that little comment about them buying Take-Two and that THQ is screwed sends more then a few shivers up my spine.
And as a pretty loyal Nintendo customer, I hope that what he said about Nintendo becoming "completely irrelevant" is bull, too. Seriously, they're the reason I'm a gamer today. If they folded or faded into obscurity....brrr! I don't want to think about that too much. -.-
I think he forgot an important factor to gamers: They are the the kind of anti-establishment people who protest games for doing anything like that. I think that's an important factor to consider when monitizeing.
Is he even getting paid by a publisher to spew his crap? I've never seen anything from him further than what appears to be his version of common sense, which isn't something people usually pay for. I'm beginning to think it's not so much his "job" as much as it is some kind of sick passion of his. Either that, or he's somehow managed to carve a niche out of being a video-game related douchebag.Deathfish15 said:
He says that but I have a gut feeling that Modern Warfare 4's pre-orders alone will make a tidy profit for Activision....
Yeah, but you COULD make COD cost $75 to buy it at retail, have mandatory $20 map packs, and require an online subscription service for $15 a month? More bigger numbers means better right? RIGHT!?Carrots_macduff said:
Won't somebody PLEASE think of the MONEY?!
This statement made me incredibly happy.JediMB said:
Disagree. I played WoW casually for 3 years, but I racked up 120 days on a single character. Playing casually means you play exclusively for fun and relaxation, not competitiveness or compulsively (I'm looking at you, Farmville...).
Elite and all of its stat tracking features are now free, BLOPS 2 has a season pass that buys you all the dlc at a discount.Carrots_macduff said:
OT: The one thing we can all agree that cod does right in multiplayer is the lack of any obstructions aside from actually having a copy of the game. No subscription, no online pass, just put the disk in and play.