Premium Call of Duty Content "In the Pipeline"
- Thread starter Tom Goldman
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Logical fallacy. Again, assuming you lose nothing by not paying - that is, the experience you have online if you don't pay a dime is exactly the same as the experience you have now - then this is more like saying, "I'll sell you a CD, or you could pay a bit more and get a rare limited edition collector's case instead." Which... is perfectly ethical.stinkychops said:
You are paying more, you are getting more. Or are you telling me gamers have become so spoiled that we feel entitled to get more for free?
Meh can Bobby Kotick just die already (what? you were all thinking it!). New Call of Duty every month? well i don't need you anymore Call of Duty i have Halo: Reach and it's much more fun than CoD because realism is overrated.
Seriously, people? I mean, yes, Activision are complete and utter tools, but this premium content statement is really nothing too special. I mean, they aren't saying they're going to input a monthly fee or anything.
Wow.
You are evil.
I thought the rumours were false.
Thanks.
Did you just seriously compare my fav franchise in the world to those two movies?The_root_of_all_evil said:
Wow.
You are evil.
I thought the rumours were false.
John, John, you just phrased everything I wanted to say more coherently than I could've ever done.John Funk said:
Thanks.
I am speaking purely conceptually here. What I say is conditional on the idea that a company will follow through on its words as stated.Mornelithe said:
If a company offers a premium service with additional content at a higher fee, while retaining the Vanilla service as-is without change, then there is nothing wrong with the idea.
If Activision did not offer the same service for free, or if they took features out to give to the Premium base, then this would no longer be the situation I'm discussing, would it?
Im quite sure Kotick is the Devil....
Im sure many other types of games could go into a pay2play style...if it had depth and all that jazz (Bethesda...Im looking at you...would pay some cold hard cash for a multiplayer of your games...)
Srsly now cant we let the MMOs and the FPS be...well you know on different fences unless they are added together for that purpose!
Im sure many other types of games could go into a pay2play style...if it had depth and all that jazz (Bethesda...Im looking at you...would pay some cold hard cash for a multiplayer of your games...)
Srsly now cant we let the MMOs and the FPS be...well you know on different fences unless they are added together for that purpose!
True Evil only shows up when needed.JourneyThroughHell said:
Given the previous years actions by a certain group of people, I believe that's a very optimistic assumption.John Funk said:
Most of us would assume that manuals for games were a free extra included in the price. We've already seen the radical shrinkage of those. Same goes for install limits, customisation, server use, anonymity, support, etc.
As has been seen in the Airlines as of late, you CAN get a good deal with extras to be paid for, Gran Canaria for £24? Sign me up! until you find out that food, luggage, transport, service etc. are all added extras.
If we're buying extras, then fine - although other companies do that for "free" for PR - but paying extra for things that were originally part of the deal is... very underhanded.
The other point is that you are creating a two-tier economy in the game, and that NEVER works, apart from to fill the coffers of those that sell "Win" buttons.
Oh yes, "As we look into the future, there are new and innovative service offerings that could give players more choice," he said. "What we're not going to do is take anything away from players that they used to get today for the price they get it for today. I don't think that would be a good and smart business decision."
Translation: if you want the new stuff, ya gotta pay. Otherwise your going to find yourself not just wearing last years fashion, but also using obsolete weapons, classes and equipment.
Basically playing a crippled game, like the free-to-play bioshock 2 multiplayer.
Translation: if you want the new stuff, ya gotta pay. Otherwise your going to find yourself not just wearing last years fashion, but also using obsolete weapons, classes and equipment.
Basically playing a crippled game, like the free-to-play bioshock 2 multiplayer.
I say we celebrate the recently gone Fireworks night by enacting our own gunpowder plot!
Who's with me?
Who's with me?
Know what? Whatever. Let Activision do their little thing. Let Activision win the 'biggest dickhead in the room' competition they're so desperately trying to win.
I don't actually mind paying $20 dollars for a map pack, or $10 for a weapon/character customization pack via Steam.
Provided they're suitibly big enough. If they want $6.50 for a map, they're going to have a lot of angry customers on their hands.
I don't actually mind paying $20 dollars for a map pack, or $10 for a weapon/character customization pack via Steam.
Provided they're suitibly big enough. If they want $6.50 for a map, they're going to have a lot of angry customers on their hands.
With a series with a multiplayer that is apparently so good already, subsequent iterations are simply going to start with less features, ones that would have been standard in the previous generation, and charge additionally for them. That's how all these schemes work. It's horrific when compared to, say, Valve's own stuff, or even Halo 3 that came with HUGE game customisation options and even a level editor, encouraging people to play the game in more ways.John Funk said:
What makes CoD so special that it can charge a premium service for what is quite simply a polished fps deathmatch game with a couple of objective modes thrown in? Should Starcraft 2 have a premium level, with access to more maps and units? Isn't that what expansions are for?
