Call of Duty 7 subscription based

[quote name='Tony208']This collosal idiot that is Bobby Kotick wants to make a fps subscription based. This fucking dumbass thinks because WoW makes a lot of dough, he can do the same thing with CoD, a FPS. Huge failure

http://videogames.yahoo.com/events/...all-of-duty-fewer-music-games-planned/1389161[/QUOTE]

Maybe they're making a CoD MMO? Something like that could be fun, and I could see it being successful.

Honestly, calling him a dumbass, when he constantly makes decisions that generate tons of money for his company, is a little short-sighted. If anything, he's a very smart business man, and if he thinks he can make a CoD game that requires a subscription, and make tons of money from it, I say more power to him.

Plus, we have know way of knowing that he wants MW3 or whatever to cost $60 upfront, plus a subscription every month, for the same experience that we get now for free.

Stop the freak-out until more information is revealed.
 
Shit like this will make me stop gaming. This is just a money grab from Kotick and company as usual. If there's anyway to make more money at the expense of gamers he will try it.
 
I wouldn't buy. The MW series is the only online games I've gotten into, but even those I play pretty sparingly. Put about 3 days into MW1 over 6-8 months. Have about 1 day into MW2 since November.

I mainly prefer single player games, so I'd never do a subscription for one game. Hell, I wouldn't keep Xbox Live if the Netflix streaming didn't require a gold account.
 
Is anyone really surprised by this? Especially when it's coming from Kotick?

[quote name='Brownjohn']

Plus, we have know way of knowing that he wants MW3 or whatever to cost $60 upfront, plus a subscription every month, for the same experience that we get now for free.

[/QUOTE]


K this sounds a bit naive. We have every reason to expect a $60 game with a subscription fee in this day and age of gaming. Do you rally think they will discount the $60? They have no reason to. The legion of sheep will happily fork it over.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Brownjohn']

Plus, we have know way of knowing that he wants MW3 or whatever to cost $60 upfront, plus a subscription every month, for the same experience that we get now for free.

[/QUOTE]


K this sounds a bit naive. We have every reason to expect a $60 game with a subscription fee in this day and age of gaming. Do you rally think they will discount the $60? They have no reason to. The legion of sheep will happily fork it over.
 
[quote name='TLPRIME']Is anyone really surprised by this? Especially when it's coming from Kotick?[/QUOTE]

Nope, as it's been rumored for a long time, but that doesn't make me any least upset.
 
[quote name='J7.']Nope, as it's been rumored for a long time, but that doesn't make me any least upset.[/QUOTE]

It upsets me too. But as long as these things keep getting supported by sales in the millions it will keep happening, and it will get worse.

In a perfect world the gaming population would give a big middle finger to stuff like this and not buy it, but it will never happen.
 
[quote name='Brownjohn']Maybe they're making a CoD MMO? Something like that could be fun, and I could see it being successful.

Honestly, calling him a dumbass, when he constantly makes decisions that generate tons of money for his company, is a little short-sighted. If anything, he's a very smart business man, and if he thinks he can make a CoD game that requires a subscription, and make tons of money from it, I say more power to him.

Plus, we have know way of knowing that he wants MW3 or whatever to cost $60 upfront, plus a subscription every month, for the same experience that we get now for free.

Stop the freak-out until more information is revealed.[/QUOTE]

Dunno why a CAG is taking the other side, this is another money grab, plain and simple.
 
Bobby Kotick is a huge douche, but he's not a dumbass.

The guy makes money for his company. This is becuase he doesn't give a shit about games or gamers, only products and consumers.

His decisions are not made with your interests in mind, or even the interests of the developers of Acti's games. His only interest is in increasing shareholder revenue. Shareholders that also do not give a shit about games or gamers.

Do you really think Infinity Ward want's the CoD brand diluted with yearly sequels and spinoffs on every platform?
 
[quote name='TLPRIME']It upsets me too. But as long as these things keep getting supported by sales in the millions it will keep happening, and it will get worse.

In a perfect world the gaming population would give a big middle finger to stuff like this and not buy it, but it will never happen.[/QUOTE]

I know. It's too bad there's not more adult gamers and less naive tweens and teens. Sorry young ones, we were all there at some point.
 
What kills me is that I'm just waiting for someone to chime in and say something to the effect of, "I know this is cheapassgamer, but you guys really have that much trouble parting with a few bucks for a piece of DLC or monthly subscription?"

I'm not one to start screaming "the sky is falling" but the truth is that it's these small things that snowball down on everyone. You might be able to write off Activision's CEO but the truth is that they, and companies like EA, are trendsetters and have the highest selling games year after year. You see the big boys doing this, and it will only trickle down.
 
Well WoW was the only game that really profited for them, correct? I guess it makes sense. They'll probably charge smaller amounts say $5 a month and get away with it.
 
[quote name='Monsta Mack']Well WoW was the only game that really profited for them, correct? I guess it makes sense. They'll probably charge smaller amounts say $5 a month and get away with it.[/QUOTE]
Only if gamers are lucky. I'm willing the bet they would charge $10-$15. And I wouldn't be surprised if they had an option for a lifetime subscription for some crazy amount of cash.
 
[quote name='Tony208']Dunno why a CAG is taking the other side, this is another money grab, plain and simple.[/QUOTE]

I'm not necessarily taking the other side, I'm just suggesting that this may have a different meaning that what most people suspect

[quote name='TLPRIME']K this sounds a bit naive. We have every reason to expect a $60 game with a subscription fee in this day and age of gaming. Do you rally think they will discount the $60? They have no reason to. The legion of sheep will happily fork it over.[/QUOTE]
I said that we have no way of knowing if we'd be getting the same experience that we get now. I'm pretty sure if they do go this route, they'll charge $60 for the game, plus a subscription, but there's a good chance that it would be a different gaming experience than what he get now in MW2 or WaW.
 
[quote name='Monsta Mack']Well WoW was the only game that really profited for them, correct? I guess it makes sense. They'll probably charge smaller amounts say $5 a month and get away with it.[/QUOTE]

I don't really know what you're referring to when you say "them," but if you're talking about the whole activision-blizzard company, don't forget how much money Modern Warfare 2 made. The whole Call of Duty franchise is worth more than $1 Billion now.
 
Wouldn't affect me, as I don't really play the CoD games anyway.

Still, this can't be good for console gaming, in general. Unless, of course, it flops...which would show other companies not to pull this crap.

However, I'm sure it will be profitable for them, and that's really their bottom line.
 
[quote name='Rig']Wouldn't affect me, as I don't really play the CoD games anyway.

Still, this can't be good for console gaming, in general. Unless, of course, it flops...which would show other companies not to pull this crap.

However, I'm sure it will be profitable for them, and that's really their bottom line.[/QUOTE]
same here. But I know if this did do well it would somehow effect other games like us down the road.
 
I know that this will probably be really successful in the Military community, they play Call of Duty games religiously at every base I've been to, even if dedicated gamers snub this it will sell to somebody.
 
It's not like subscription-based FPS games haven't been tried before. Sony's Planetside, anyone? Point it, it's too early to have an opinion on this -- the trick to subscription based games like WoW is giving the subscribers their money's worth of content. WoW is continuously delivering huge amounts of shit to do. So a subscription based CoD with no more to offer than the $60 dollar games we've had so far would be bad. A CoD that essentially gives you another 30% of a game every month wouldn't be bad at all.
 
[quote name='trq']It's not like subscription-based FPS games haven't been tried before. Sony's Planetside, anyone? Point it, it's too early to have an opinion on this[/QUOTE]
No, it's not to early to have an opinion on this. We are just talking about the idea of a subscription based FPS not about how it might play.
 
I'm still waiting for the "Battle.net now has a subscription fee" shoe to drop. Seems inevitable at this point. Though I really hope I'm wrong.
 
Not really sure how this would work, but just gonna wait and see.

Can we have the option now to pay $15 a month to not play with squeaky voiced kids?
 
The Jackass in me really wants to declare a boycott on future Activision games, but I'm too stupid to abide by that. But the hell if I'm going to buy every Call of Duty which is really looking to be exploited and beaten into the ground after Guitar Hero.
 
Theres no way im paying a subscribtion fee to play something like modern warfare 2's multiplayer. very horrible compare to cod4. If they revamp the whole series and maybe turn it into something that requires some sort of team strategy then maybe it would work but still will be a long shot if any gamers are going to be interested at all.
 
[quote name='Chibi_Kaji']No, it's not to early to have an opinion on this. We are just talking about the idea of a subscription based FPS not about how it might play.[/QUOTE]

Okay, then, an *informed* opinion. Because speculating about something sans any relevant info is pointless. I mean, unless people just want to moan and groan about Activision, which is fine, but you don't exactly need breaking news for that one.
 
it's a damn good idea. as mentioned, bobby is a smart man and as a smart man he should not hesitate and go for it. it may screw several gamers but who cares for them. bobby will be making the big bucks for activision and those who are cheap will be left out.

yes to subscription call of duty 7! $5 or up, i don't care, it's going to be good! it's call of duty people, remember!
 
I wouldn't pay because I don't play COD enough to warrant it. I can see many people paying the fee though.
 
[quote name='pochaccoheaven']it's a damn good idea. as mentioned, bobby is a smart man and as a smart man he should not hesitate and go for it. it may screw several gamers but who cares for them. bobby will be making the big bucks for activision and those who are cheap will be left out. [/QUOTE]
It sounds like a great idea on paper. But there are tons of things that could go wrong with something like this.
 
[quote name='Chibi_Kaji']It sounds like a great idea on paper. But there are tons of things that could go wrong with something like this.[/QUOTE]

you never know until it's been done. so i say we should go forward and not backward. ps3/360 made high tech machines moving forward while the wii went backward with old hardware. are you people hardcore gamers or casual gamers?!
 
Yeah, I don't see how anyone can think it's a good thing or some kind of step forward?

Why would the game play any better because you have to pay to play it? Why would the community be any better? The racists, kids etc. aren't casual players most of the time in my experience. They're the multi prestige people with 100's of hours logged--and as such the people most likely to pay to play on a subscription CoD I'd think.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114'] The racists, kids etc. aren't casual players most of the time in my experience. They're the multi prestige people with 100's of hours logged--and as such the people most likely to pay to play on a subscription CoD I'd think.[/QUOTE]
Erm. I think subscription would lower the number of kids...
 
I don't see what the problem is. If the rumors are true about an MMO, well there you go. If its sub for the game as is, The free will goto addon content like maps, weapons, even game types. Stuff that's normally DLC just get packed in. They're not going to just ship Modern Warefare 2 relabled and ask for money. They'll have more there to make it worth while.

For the company it's a great idea because MOST people will go with it, kids who take mom's wallet and adults alike.

It's also possible they will have a free version of the game but subscribers get more .

Cry less.
 
Kotick> Pay a subscription to our only good game to fund crappy GH spin offs and more Tony Hawk Ride games no one asked for!

Joking aside, I'll wait and see what happens, but there's more than enough implication here to debate about already.
 
10 6 was fun for it's time (Sega Soft)

MMO FPS can be done, just no one has done it properly. Remember, EverQuest was king and all the fanboys touted the huge 500,000 suscriber base at one time. Now we see 500k is nothing compared to what WoW became
 
[quote name='pochaccoheaven']you never know until it's been done. so i say we should go forward and not backward. ps3/360 made high tech machines moving forward while the wii went backward with old hardware. are you people hardcore gamers or casual gamers?![/QUOTE]

I'm not sure how paying a subscription fee for a FPS is considered "moving forward". Moving forward for Activision maybe, as it would be sure to generate more revenue. But for gamers? Nothing involving higher costs for what will presumably be a similar product is forward movement for any consumer, IMO.

[quote name='The Crotch']Erm. I think subscription would lower the number of kids...[/QUOTE]

Not necessarily. How do you think most of the kids on XBL get their games? I can assure you it's not through regular employment (or employment at all). It's from the work of others (mom and dad) who can afford to buy games and the monthly XBL for their kids. Unfortunately, I have a feeling a subscription is more likely to reduce the number of adults who have actual bills to pay and families to provide for, than it is to reduce children (who don't pay for the games or service to begin with).
 
[quote name='pochaccoheaven']you never know until it's been done. so i say we should go forward and not backward. ps3/360 made high tech machines moving forward while the wii went backward with old hardware. are you people hardcore gamers or casual gamers?![/QUOTE]


You wanna move forward? Give me $15 a month and YOU too will be moving forward you hardcore gamer you! High tech machines is ps3/360 and wii went backward with old hardware.
 
If they really come out with a good package, make the game even more persistent than the MW games, and provide a steady stream of content, then I think a CoD MMO could be interesting. I loved PlanetSide back when it first came out. It could be awesome.

But if it's 15 bucks a month just to play Modern Warfare 3.0 then there's not a chance in hell I'll pay that.

But meh, this is all pure speculation at this point.
 
Moving forward would be not releasing a CoD game annually and instead releasing a game every few years with lengthy single player, mp without all kinds of problems, and DLC that does not cost 17% of the game's price all for $60 without fees. Weapons and skins should be free, and dlc maps should become free after 3 months. I could see them charge more for the maps before they become free for the most hardcore of players. Having them free allows a larger community to experience the entire game and doesn't segment the playing community after release.

Expansion packs should be released instead of expansion packs labeled as new games. I guess the PC community had it right to begin with when they did this type of stuff years ago.

However, the days of such quality are over thanks to asshats like Kotick.
 
[quote name='Fjordson'] I loved PlanetSide back when it first came out. It could be awesome.[/QUOTE]
Same here. I eventually gave up because of the constant spawn camping. Nothing ruined your fun like a MAX camping in the spawn room.
 
Bobby Kotick is a huge tool. He was quoted in a GI saying "if you ask me, peripherals aren't priced high enough!" In reference to dj hero's price. Or something along those lines.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']Erm. I think subscription would lower the number of kids...[/QUOTE]

I don't. They're already on Live which is a subscription service. Sure most of their parents would pony up a little more for them to play CoD.

I mean these are kids already playing M-rated games on a pay service and tossing out swear words and gay/racial slurs left and right. Clearly their parents don't give a crap and just give them what they want to get them out of their hair and keep them occupied.
 
Kotick doesn't generate any money, it's the Infinity Ward and Blizzard. I think this might backfire though, they're already paying a monthly fee for Live.
 
[quote name='J7.']Moving forward would be not releasing a CoD game annually and instead releasing a game every few years with lengthy single player, mp without all kinds of problems, and DLC that does not cost 17% of the game's price all for $60 without fees. Weapons and skins should be free, and dlc maps should become free after 3 months. I could see them charge more for the maps before they become free for the most hardcore of players. Having them free allows a larger community to experience the entire game and doesn't segment the playing community after release.

Expansion packs should be released instead of expansion packs labeled as new games. I guess the PC community had it right to begin with when they did this type of stuff years ago.

However, the days of such quality are over thanks to asshats like Kotick.[/QUOTE]

Those days are over because companies lose money that way. weapons, skins, maps, any thing they make cost shit tons of money. even if its a crappy skin. You have the labor cost , bills for the building he/she is doing it in, etc, etc. Quality cost money. They have no reason to just give stuff up at a lose of money so some people don't feel left out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top