Modern Warefare 3...monthly fee?

[roachcoach]

Source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...423496054.html


It's starting, activision has long bitched about not charging monthly for CoD, now they're planning to. Seems to be "optional" for now....we will see.

Hopefully it'll die a miserable death and never be spoken of again.

[jim]

The saddest thing is that in all likelihood a lot of people will happily pay

[roachcoach]

I certainly hope not. I don't have issue with a fee for MMO's, but for this....hell no.

[adz08]

As long as the normal online play part remains free then I don't see a major issues with this, it just looks the same as those limited edition versions they do for about £100, the game will be the same just the monthly fee get's you extra stuff.

Although, not sure I like the bit about the Elite subscribers get DLC, unless they mean they'll get the map packs for free?

[GheeTsar]

I think it depends on the price. If it offered enough extra over the game's vanilla content for a low enough price then I could imagine the business model could work. Judging by the price of the previous map packs, I suspect this wont be the case.

[Terbinator]

How can all the kids who fund CoD afford a monthly fee as well?

[roachcoach]

Thing is though, if the map packs are included in sub price - what happens if you stop?

Will map packs be "exclusive" to premium payers, rendering two different player bases (even more so than today)?

Lots of questions - personally I hope they jump in and get incinerated by the public that it may serve as a warning to others.

[danroyle]

Thing is though, if the map packs are included in sub price - what happens if you stop?

Will map packs be "exclusive" to premium payers, rendering two different player bases (even more so than today)?

Lots of questions - personally I hope they jump in and get incinerated by the public that it may serve as a warning to others.

That just wont happen Cod has too bigger fan base for it to fail if priced right.

Activision have muttered about this for a long while so they musty have an idea that it should work, they keep charging extortianate amounts for map packs and they keep selling so a sub service will sell too, unfortunately it will alienate alot of us from multiplayer

[GIGN]

Jesus. They really are pushing the limits of how much they can milk their cows. I wish the companies involved would die a slow, painful death, but unfortunately that won't happen.

[kalniel]

Jesus. They really are pushing the limits of how much they can milk their cows. I wish the companies involved would die a slow, painful death, but unfortunately that won't happen.

If you don't like it, don't play it. It's not exactly a life or death situation.

[chuckskull]

Here's a trailer of what you're actually paying for; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25TH_...layer_embedded

They all look like nice additions to a game, not sure I'd pay monthly for it. Personally I think they're going to need more than this to square up to BF3, on PC anyway. Might give them a leg up in the console market though, where BF3's flagship features will be curtailed by the player limits.

[Saracen]

It'll come as no surprise to anyone that knows me that my attitude to monthly fees for this are "hell will freeze over, and be re-imagined as a leisure ice-skating park, first".

I will pay a reasonable cost for a game. If it costs more than I will pay, I'll either wait for it to drop, or do without it altogether. If it's good enough, I'll buy a levels pack, etc, again if the price is right. If not, I'll do without.

I am not paying a monthly fee for access to extras. Not now, not ever.

Why? Partly, because I can see where this is going. What I expect to happen is that the raw game gets less and less specified and full-featured, and that what we are used to getting for an up-front one-off charge, we'll end up paying for in up-front charge, then having to pay it in monthly sub.

I understand why gaming companies want to change to a monthly fee, and it's entirely why I will never do it.

Any game that goes this route excludes me as a buyer, not just for the monthly fee but for buying the game in the first place. If the entire industry goes this way, I guess that makes me an ex-gamer, because as I said, hell will freeze over first. Anyone know of a good shop for ice skates?

[Saracen]

Jesus. They really are pushing the limits of how much they can milk their cows. I wish the companies involved would die a slow, painful death, but unfortunately that won't happen.

As kalniel said, don't like it, don't play/buy it. I certainly won't.

But there may well be lots of people happy to sign up and pay out. If they are, that's fine by me. Their money, their choice. My money, my choice. That's the great thing about a consumer society - we get to choose what we spend our money on, and I can certainly find other things that a given computer game .... or any computer games at all, if it comes to it.

[GIGN]

If you don't like it, don't play it. It's not exactly a life or death situation.

I feel sorry that you feel so nonchalant about the direction games are taking these days.

If I don't like it, I'll do more than just 'not play it'. I will voice, as much as I can, my disapproval of the crap they're trying to get away with these days. If no one does, then they'll just keep up with it. The best way to show them is by voting with your wallet. I hope their attempts to get more money fail miserably. But seeing how common people are so eager to part with their money... I'm not so sure.

'It's their money' isn't an argument. People should be educated about how they spend their money on video games, because they are shaping the industry (for the worse) for everyone.

[Saracen]

I feel sorry that you feel so nonchalant about the direction games are taking these days.

If I don't like it, I'll do more than just 'not play it'. I will voice, as much as I can, my disapproval of the crap they're trying to get away with these days. If no one does, then they'll just keep up with it. The best way to show them is by voting with your wallet. I hope their attempts to get more money fail miserably. But seeing how common people are so eager to part with their money... I'm not so sure.

Agreed ... but wishing they'd die is a bit much.

Their game is theirs to market as they think best. Our money is ours to spend as we think best. If you and I are right, this method will fail miserably. If it succeeds, it'll be because too many other people don't agree with us.

....

'It's their money' isn't an argument. People should be educated about how they spend their money on video games, because they are shaping the industry (for the worse) for everyone.

That's a very patronising attitude. What's to say that people need "educating"? They may be quite happy with that approach, and be prepared to pay a fee. Lots of people sign up for Sky or another subscription TV service .... and lots don't. Lots of people sign up for DVD rental libraries, and lots don't. Lots of people have their cellphone service on a monthly contract because they get value for money, and lots have it on PAYG because they get better value that way.

It's all about consumer choice. If companies read it right, they make money. If they read it wrong, they either change their tune or go broke.

I happen to agree with you that this move sucks, but it's for all of us to make up our own minds and I'm sure most people don't feel they need "educating" about it.

[Biscuit]

It'll come as no surprise to anyone that knows me that my attitude to monthly fees for this are "hell will freeze over, and be re-imagined as a leisure ice-skating park, first".

I will pay a reasonable cost for a game. If it costs more than I will pay, I'll either wait for it to drop, or do without it altogether. If it's good enough, I'll buy a levels pack, etc, again if the price is right. If not, I'll do without.

I am not paying a monthly fee for access to extras. Not now, not ever.

Why? Partly, because I can see where this is going. What I expect to happen is that the raw game gets less and less specified and full-featured, and that what we are used to getting for an up-front one-off charge, we'll end up paying for in up-front charge, then having to pay it in monthly sub.

I understand why gaming companies want to change to a monthly fee, and it's entirely why I will never do it.

Any game that goes this route excludes me as a buyer, not just for the monthly fee but for buying the game in the first place. If the entire industry goes this way, I guess that makes me an ex-gamer, because as I said, hell will freeze over first. Anyone know of a good shop for ice skates?

The only way i could see paying a monthly fee was if the original purchase was zero, or close to zero and then the regular payments where not only reasonable (e.g. resulting in a little more than the cost of a full game purchase over the course of say... 8 months) resulted in constant updates and new features. This basically means il become an ex gamer aswell as this will never happen. I think APB tried to run something like that and it all but flopped.

I feel sorry that you feel so nonchalant about the direction games are taking these days.

If I don't like it, I'll do more than just 'not play it'. I will voice, as much as I can, my disapproval of the crap they're trying to get away with these days. If no one does, then they'll just keep up with it. The best way to show them is by voting with your wallet. I hope their attempts to get more money fail miserably. But seeing how common people are so eager to part with their money... I'm not so sure.

'It's their money' isn't an argument. People should be educated about how they spend their money on video games, because they are shaping the industry (for the worse) for everyone.

Thing is hope is all you have, the COD freaks will pay the money and it will more than likely be a success. A good example of that crowds ignorance and lack of logical thinking was proved when they all bought MW2 after swearing to boycott it... Nothing we can do about it im afraid.