so what else are they going to try to "monetize"?

[FieryTrainwreck]

'Free' online multiplayer isn't at all, every server out there is getting paid for by someone whether it's groups of friends, clans or server companies farming out advertising space in games. Publishers are moving to try and cut these people out of the equation by running their own account servers, game servers and matchmaking. Fine, but ultimately it leaves us to pick up the funding gap.

I don't like this, it removes options from players and is ultimately going to end up hurting us. I'm quite happy to donate to a clan's servers pot as it I get a say in what and how it's run, as well being part of a community. The way it's going we're still going to be paying our money, but the publisher will dictate everything. It sucks, but there you go.

Fair enough; multiplayer isn't precisely "free", but you also get my meaning. I could launch into an entirely separate tirade about how they're phasing out local multiplayer in favor of exclusively online options that require various costly bits, but that would be fairly disingenuous on my part.

Anyways, there's really no doubting that the publishers gaining control of these previously "civilian"-held portions of online multiplayer is only going to jack up the price. They're certainly not trying to take all this shit over so they can cut us a better deal.

 

[Antiparticle]

I'm still waiting for Microsoft to start charging money for sending messages or starting parties on Xbox LIVE.
Actually, by 2020 we'll probably all be paying for every email we send.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

SNIP

I cannot for the life of me understand kotic. Does he realise hes a complete asshole or does he live in ignorant bliss to his own douchbaggery. Some part of me is appauled at the notion he doesnt wake up in the morning and feel guilty for being a complete money grabbing asshole. This guy is just pure greed in human form. I for one propose a boycott. Is there a facebook group? This guy needs a good kick in the money sacks to teach him the consumer doesnt just take obvious assholery laying down.

 

[socialtangent]

I seriously hope that nobody pays the subscription fee just so Kotick gets to know his role. But I know that people will, and that will just encourage him.

Unfortunately, I fear that people would be willing to pay for CoD subscriptions. Especially all those annoying twelve year-old kids who have parents with disposable income. Look at how many people are coughing up $15 for mediocre maps in MW2. They're ridiculously expensive as far as DLC is concerned, but people still pay for it. I just hope that people realize that CoD subscriptions won't be the blissful utopia that Kotick is promising and don't pay up.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

You cant blame Kotick for doing his job. He's not there to be your friend or to entertain you. His job is to increase profits for the shareholders.

I can't stand this attitude. If a man willingly enters into a job that forces him to be a complete fucking full-time shithead, I reserve the right to hate his guts and spew all kinds of bile in his general direction. The attitude of resigned acceptance is exactly what horrible people depend on for their continued success.

I'll admit that he's the inevitable final product of the corporate system, but that doesn't excuse his behavior. Plenty of intelligent and resourceful people are well aware of the incredible short-term gains made by aggressively (and morally compromised) business tactics - and they opt not to participate because they don't want to become Bobby. They don't want to be hated.

Saying nasty things about Kotick fulfills an important role in the process; there has to be, at the very least, that vocal disdain as disincentive. Otherwise, the douche goes to bed every night thinking he's a perfectly well-liked person. He's certainly welcome to place zero importance on public opinion, as I'm sure he does, but that's another choice he has to make.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

That's really my point. The man wouldn't be so hated if his decisions didn't make Activision bags of cash. If they didn't turn a profit he'd be laughed out of a job and the world would go on turning. Dont blame him, blame his customers.

Your point seems to be "don't hate the player, hate the game". I don't subscribe to that philosophy at all. I think it's a cop-out used by assholes (not you) to justify any and all behavior that isn't explicitly illegal. It works in defense of companies that pollute the environment, exploit third world countries, and regularly ripoff consumers. It's thug logic, might makes right, etc. I will obviously hate on the system that promotes or enables such behavior, but I'm not going to spare the participants.

 

[AcheronRaene]

Ammunition, obviously. You want to shoot enemies in your first-person shooter? Get out the money!

Funny thing is that some guys have already tried it once (although in a free-to-download game). It didn't exactly work.

Although i wouldn't worry about it too much. We are nearing the moment when gamers are fed up with that bullshit and large corporations in that sphere will start losing millions of dollars. Remember the Comic Crash of 1994? Same thing here. I hope.

I forsee, and hope for the same thing. Comics are great again because of the crash. It forces companies to change and adapt.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

I guess that's where we'll just have to agree to disagree. As long as he isn't hurting anyone (and being a pain in the ass doesn't count, sadly) he's free to do whatever he feels will make him the most money. You believe it's a flaw in the capitalist system, while I see it as one of it's strengths.

I'm fine with disagreement.

I don't agree that he's not hurting anyone. If you're someone who currently games on a budget (most Americans, at this point), an egomaniac CEO attempting to cram as many new streams of revenue as possible into existing gaming structures will, in fact, hurt you. He's going to take ever-more money out of your pocket for providing the exact same product.

You know there are people at Activision calculating how many users will be forced out by the increased cost of a subscription model - and they've decided those customers are expendable. All good and proper, from a strictly capitalist point of view. That's no real consolation to the folks who will no longer be able to play CoD.

I think capitalism is a very necessary evil, but I also think we're regularly taking it too far at this point. It's becoming less of a motivational force and more of an exploitative scourge on the now-nonexistent middle class. Eventually, it will be up to customers to reel in this sort of over-the-top behavior by acknowledging that sometimes, yes, people are too greedy.

Also, i'm not saying that you shouldn't hate him, as much as I'm saying that it isn't rational to hate him exclusively. The people who make his ideas profitable are just as much to blame as him, arguably more so.

No worries there. I've got plenty of disdain for the fools who support this jackass.

 

[Freshman]

in game chat? Not sure how successful that would be but... It did make me think about games workshop wanting 50 bucks for 5 terminators, and how that is basically bullshit, but then i realized that, because they always were 50 bucks (at least since i started playing 40K), it never occurred to me how much i hate them for it.

 

[Freshman]

I seriously hope that nobody pays the subscription fee just so Kotick gets to know his role. But I know that people will, and that will just encourage him.

I would like to encourage all members of the escapist at this time to:
1.) don;t pay for that shit
2.) if you know somebody who will be paying for it, go to that persons house and break there Xbox. (I mean like open it up and break it, to void the warranty) tell them you are just saving them money in the long run
3.) rule number three is like rule number two.