Microtransactions Come to Call of Duty

[WanderingFool]

Couldn't you already unlock custom slots through the "Prestige" system? Why add this? why not just increase the prestige cap? And you know..Encourage play and shit? or at least grinding because..thats..fun?

You can get up to 5 slots from prestige. Raising the prestige level would probably piss some people off, as well, since apparently, in Blops 2, if you reach maximum level and final prestige, everything is unlocked, from guns to camo (save DLC weapons, of course.)

Anyways, im actually surprised... its not some cheap grab at more money (well, it *IS*, but here it doesnt sell you power that give you an edge.)

 

[CardinalPiggles]

Dead Space; selling power to a demographic that wants challenge and horror.

Call of Duty; adding convenience for those willing to be milked.

Yeah, slight difference.

My only concern is will they take away custom class slots for future games. Do they go go the route that EA took with The Old Republic, where by if you're free to play you become so limited it's not even fun. I hope not.

 

[R.Nevermore]

Good on activision. No I am not being sarcastic. I like micro transactions and the more of this we get the better if you ask me. I just hope that we will see a slight drop in the cost of the games themselves one day if Devs see that micro transactions make more money than the purchasing cost. And maybe we'll see more free to play AAA games.

I've spent more on Team Fortress and Dota 2 than I ever have on skyrim or dishonoured. Micro transactions work and they make me feel like I'm truly deciding what I want. Rather than begrudgingly paying for the game, I can get excited for the purchase

 

[Me55enger]

I heard some other companies are doing a micro-transaction scheme where you can pay £35 for a whole new game.

 

[nathan-dts]

I might purchase Call of Duty DLC for once; if they sell those zombie maps, piecemeal then I'll pick them up. Never buying anything for multiplayer so haven't been able to buy them.

 

[GAunderrated]

Good on activision. No I am not being sarcastic. I like micro transactions and the more of this we get the better if you ask me. I just hope that we will see a slight drop in the cost of the games themselves one day if Devs see that micro transactions make more money than the purchasing cost. And maybe we'll see more free to play AAA games.

I've spent more on Team Fortress and Dota 2 than I ever have on skyrim or dishonoured. Micro transactions work and they make me feel like I'm truly deciding what I want. Rather than begrudgingly paying for the game, I can get excited for the purchase

You are a bit naive to think that they will drop the cost because of microtransactions. They see it as added on top of the $60 amount and all the DLC.

Your examples of TF2 and Dota2 do not apply to this situation because they are both free to play and you earn all of the equipment over time by playing the game. From experience it is easier to spend money on microtransactions when the game is free because you truly feel like you choose what to pay for.

CoD asks you to pay 60 bucks for the game, 50 bucks for optional map packs, and now microtransactions. If anything you can choose what to buy but if you want a complete game it will cost you well over 120 bucks.

 

[hobohazard]

Well, there is now no chance of the COD franchise dying in the next 3 or so years like many have predicted. A Lot of people I know who have been playing the game since the franchises beginning or COD 2 were saying that there was a chance that they might not buy the next COD game, but now with micro transactions they can settle with an much smaller user base and still make the money they have made without them (Not saying this in a negative light, more a observation then anything). The only way I could see the franchise dying at all were to be if something catastrophic were to cripple activision and finish off the remnants of infinity ward/hurt treyarch, and even then it would be easy to hand it off to a new studio with little change.

 

[hazabaza1]

At least it's not selling power. That's... well, it's not good, but it's better than it would be.

Arguably, more custom slots is essentially selling power through more capacity. The ability to switch loadouts in mid-game can be invaluable.

Still, arguable.

I highly doubt there's a situation in CoD that you couldn't cover with the, what, 5-10 initial slots?

 

[R.Nevermore]

Good on activision. No I am not being sarcastic. I like micro transactions and the more of this we get the better if you ask me. I just hope that we will see a slight drop in the cost of the games themselves one day if Devs see that micro transactions make more money than the purchasing cost. And maybe we'll see more free to play AAA games.

I've spent more on Team Fortress and Dota 2 than I ever have on skyrim or dishonoured. Micro transactions work and they make me feel like I'm truly deciding what I want. Rather than begrudgingly paying for the game, I can get excited for the purchase

You are a bit naive to think that they will drop the cost because of microtransactions. They see it as added on top of the $60 amount and all the DLC.

Your examples of TF2 and Dota2 do not apply to this situation because they are both free to play and you earn all of the equipment over time by playing the game. From experience it is easier to spend money on microtransactions when the game is free because you truly feel like you choose what to pay for.

CoD asks you to pay 60 bucks for the game, 50 bucks for optional map packs, and now microtransactions. If anything you can choose what to buy but if you want a complete game it will cost you well over 120 bucks.

I don't care for call of duty. Played it at a friends house and wasnt impressed. I wouldn't refer to this series. I just hope that activision uses them in further games.
And I can't be alone when I say that the less I pay for a game, the more im willing to spend on microtransactions. Game developers must know this, and if they do, we could see a drop in prices. Note I am NOT talking about this current CoD game.

Like i said, I am talking the near future, not the present.

 

[Korten12]

At least it's not selling power. That's... well, it's not good, but it's better than it would be.

Arguably, more custom slots is essentially selling power through more capacity. The ability to switch loadouts in mid-game can be invaluable.

Still, arguable.

I highly doubt there's a situation in CoD that you couldn't cover with the, what, 5-10 initial slots?

This. It's really a convience thing. Since there is rarely a match where you would need more than the inital 5 slots.

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

Monkey see, monkey do.

Yep. We're screwed. It's only a matter of time until they start locking essential stuff away and it becomes Pay2Win...IN A 60 BUCK GAME.

Spoiler

 

[Frezzato]

If only Activision put as much effort into the single player campaign as they do for multiplayer, I might consider purchasing an iteration of Call of Duty. I hate online shooters, which is going to make this next part weird...

Alternatively, if they dropped the single player entirely and sold the multiplayer at a reduced price, I would consider buying. Their campaigns are crap. It sounds strange, but I'm just being honest.

 

[Braedan]

I hope they start selling pay to win items. Maybe the fan backlash with finally topple COD9: MW5: BLOPS2.

 

[VladG]

You know, I'm actually kinda fine with this. It's basically very small post-launch DLC. It's cosmetic stuff, it's not buying power, it's not buying any real content. It's still fairly greedy to implement any sort of micro-transaction in a full price AAA game, but if you're going to do it... this is the least shitty way to do it.


Hell, I imagine a lot of people are actually fairly excited to get some new cosmetic stuff, and 2$ seems fairly reasonable.


Captcha "take it all" heh.

 

[Korten12]

If only Activision put as much effort into the single player campaign as they do for multiplayer, I might consider purchasing an iteration of Call of Duty. I hate online shooters, which is going to make this next part weird...

Alternatively, if they dropped the single player entirely and sold the multiplayer at a reduced price, I would consider buying. Their campaigns are crap. It sounds strange, but I'm just being honest.

Actually Blops 2 had a very good Single-player with some interesting moral choices through the game and some that are given to you in the vein of Spec Ops the line where it's doesn't tell you outright what all the choices are but you make them in game without pressing A or B. not that there isn't choices like that.

 

[Krantos]

So... It's only cosmetics and custom slots?


I can't really find too much to complain about here. It's basically the same as the TF2 hats. See, when EA usually does it, it's gameplay stuff. That's a big difference. If EA wants to restrict their microtransactions to strictly cosmetics (in games where customization is not a primary gameplay element, i.e. Sims doesn't get a free ride), I could live with that.

 

[Sniper Team 4]

See, this is the type of microtransaction that I don't understand and can't see anyone buying. I've used microtransactions in Dead Space 3--used it just last night and they saved my life and my partners--but I've never used actual cash for them. I use the Ration Seals that we get from deploying our little bots. That way, when we're stuck at a hard part and all out of med packs or that gel stuff to make more (because good lord those elite Feeders on the higher difficulties...), we trade in our coupons and get just enough stuff to recover. It actually adds something worthwhile and helpful.
But this is all just cosmetic stuff, save for the map. That I could never understand paying actual money for.

 

[Bindal]

First, the good things: You don't buy any kind of power. The only actual gameplay-affecthig stuff are the 10 extra class-slots and that is hardly a noticable advantage. Everything else? Cosmetics, and always a bunch of it. Not bad.

The bad now: Nuketown Zombies for 5$? Really? Make it at least a Nuketown bundle with Nuketown 2025 and the callcards of those maps, maybe also throw in the soundtrack of Zombies "once available"...

Still, compared to the other games offering similar things (BF3 and Dead Space 3 offer you to buy actual unlocks, SimCity is only cosmetic but highly overpriced), I would say, there isn't anything WRONG about it.
Well, maybe that it still exists, but for cosmetics only, this isn't too bad - other games offer similar priced cosmetic-only-DLCs and nobody cares (Killing Floor, for example).
So... yeah. Fine with me, as long as it stays cosmetics or addional slots. Might even buy the camo-pack for 2$ if they look anything good.

Couldn't you already unlock custom slots through the "Prestige" system? Why add this? why not just increase the prestige cap? And you know..Encourage play and shit? or at least grinding because..thats..fun?

Those are 10 ADDIONAL slots, so you can end up with up to 20. And the five you get from Prestige OVERWRITE the five default classes (two right away, three more once you reach Rank 4 after every prestige)

 

[godofallu]

This is fine. It won't hurt balance at all and people on the forums have been begging for extra classes for years.

 

[Frezzato]

If only Activision put as much effort into the single player campaign as they do for multiplayer, I might consider purchasing an iteration of Call of Duty. I hate online shooters, which is going to make this next part weird...

Alternatively, if they dropped the single player entirely and sold the multiplayer at a reduced price, I would consider buying. Their campaigns are crap. It sounds strange, but I'm just being honest.

Actually Blops 2 had a very good Single-player with some interesting moral choices through the game and smedal of honor gameome that are given to you in the vein of Spec Ops the line where it's doesn't tell you outright what all the choices are but you make them in game without pressing A or B. not that there isn't choices like that.

It's weird for me since I'm not only prior service (nothing special, just the 82nd), I'm also a fan of non-fiction military books. If any of these developers had read anything like Inside Delta Force, Spy Dust or Lone Survivor, they would realize that there are incredible true stories that would have been far easier to adapt into a game, as opposed to constantly using end-of-the-world scenarios. Unfortunately, I did play Medal of Honor: Warfighter, and it was a terrible, convoluted "interpretation" of what happened to Neil Roberts, a Navy SEAL.


Not to sound antagonistic, but, having never played BLOPS2, I'm going to guess that the main theme is an end-of-the-world scenario. Is that correct or am I way off mark?