Call of Duty moving to a fee based F2P MMO style billing setup

itbewilly

http://www.atomicgamer.com/news/3390/call-of-dutys-new-monthly-fee

 

Im curious what you all think of the current changes being discussed concerning a fee based option for Call of Duty.Me...It doesn't surprise me with it being Activision and all.I mean they probably see the millions of WoW users and think that Call of Duty will have the same success.I do think its crafty how they label it as "optional" but then go on to say people paying the monthly fees will have access to new maps and what not.Thats not optional.

Optional would be having a free to play option with map packs available.This new pricing plan will charge $5-$7 dollars a month apparently if not more and all you get is some web based features,social media crap and access to said maps.So from i take from this is instead of just paying $15 for a map pack(or whatever they are now days) once and having them forever you will be expected to pay a monthly fee and continue paying that fee to access some maps.

I thought it would be nice to see what you guys think.Im guessing most people here wont have or see an issue with this considering most mmo's cost $10-$15 a month to play anyways but if you look at the console gamers i think this could kill the CoD franchise.Xbox players already pay for XBL.Some Sony players pay for the Playstation Plus and now they are trying to force monthly fees for an fps on gamers as well.I dont see it ending well but then again i could be wrong.

Sorry if this was already posted somewhere. I didnt see it so i made a topic on it myself

SyrusSyi

Well that sucks ballls like reallly.........................................

Swollen_Beef

$15 for a map pack that comes out maybe 4 times a year = $60

$7/mo for free map packs over that same year = $84

 

 

The sad thing is, console players will eat this up thinking $7 < $15

Can we have another 1983 please?

XxGrimmxX

Wow I bet the number of people doing this on the Xbox 360 is going to be extremely low.

Tyrxz

The thing is that you can still play the MP part as you've always done, but you only have to pay for EXTRA stuff if you want it. Doubt it'll change the regular multiplayerexperience. If you don't like the Elite stuff, don't butyit, that's how I see it. Or just play Battlefield 3

SyrusSyi

Yeah i hate Battlefield 3 was suppose to be amazing ..............but i like the modern warfare series :P so i guess il have to pay

Hiperzone

good luck getting my money activision.... god damn greedy bastards. I miss the days where maps were free and the community could build and release them. Ho the joy.

SyrusSyi

I mean i could see the 7 dollers a month if they relased like 2 maps per month or even just 1 but................. just like a couple maps every couple months thats gay

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Vyeth

I'd pay a sub IF the core game was completely free.. I mean just like a F2P FPS where I can download the client and play online absolutely free (no single player though).. However, when did these pigs think it was a good idea to charge extra money for next to nothing?

It's obvious they have taken note to the success of F2P games or they wouldn't have labeled it as such, but don't they understand that the core game in F2P FPS games are free?

Gimme an online version for free and sure, i'd throw ya some money for maps.. If I buy that box (as I have done many years before) a single payment for maps and packs is what I expect..

 

EDIT: Upon further review, it seems that the core game will be free however this is for the asian market? In that case, I really don't care..

Precusor

Is this a joke?

Swollen_Beef

Originally posted by Vyeth

I'd pay a sub IF the core game was completely free.. I mean just like a F2P FPS where I can download the client and play online absolutely free (no single player though).. However, when did these pigs think it was a good idea to charge extra money for next to nothing?

It's obvious they have taken note to the success of F2P games or they wouldn't have labeled it as such, but don't they understand that the core game in F2P FPS games are free?

Gimme an online version for free and sure, i'd throw ya some money for maps.. If I buy that box (as I have done many years before) a single payment for maps and packs is what I expect..

 

EDIT: Upon further review, it seems that the core game will be free however this is for the asian market? In that case, I really don't care..

But in America, its okay to charge $60 up front plus a monthly fee with only a 7 day "free" trial. 

But people will say, "Man, i really like the COD fanchise. Okay... i guess i'll pay it. Dont really want to, but i really liked your past games." 

No one can just say No anymore.

 

edit: Actually, if said subscription meant that no one under the age of 17 is allowed in, then they might have something there.

itbewilly

I just think this will either hurt the CoD franchise or it will end up being bad for gaming as a whole.If they succeed with this "premium content" pricing plan then other companies will see its success and instead of having an option to buy map packs occasionally we will be forced to pay a premium fee for those new maps.

It won't be much an issue at first because everyone will be enjoying the new game and its new maps but what happens a month or so in.More imporantly what happens for arguement sake if the "core version" of the game only has 4-6 maps to access but the "premium version" has an additional 8-10? You see my point? If they are going to keep charging $60  for the game then i hope at least the core side of the game has more then a month or two worth of enjoyment.

Learning from past experience with MMO's when ever a game offer's a "Free to Play" version and a "Premium Subscription" based option in any game the Free to Play version ends up being very limited in one way or another.Some games charge for additonal quest packs for the F2P users for example. I just hope CoD doesnt start down the same path is all.

skyexile

who gives a shit, MW2 and BO were terrible anyway. Guess what? this ones going to be terrible too.

itbewilly

Originally posted by skyexile

who gives a shit, MW2 and BO were terrible anyway. Guess what? this ones going to be terrible too.

WTF does this have to do with what i posted? If you dont care there are plenty of other topics for you to post on.Be a good little troll and move along.I posted on the fact that Activision is trying to implement mmo style monthly pricing plans on a mediocre at best FPS franchise and you come back talking about how MW2 and BO are terrible. Way to miss the entire point of the post.

Warmaker

Activision are some greedy a** b*stards, that's for sure.  Glad the last COD game I liked and played was MW1.

It falls now to EA (b*stards themselves) and DICE with BF3.  I've been a longtime fan of the core BF series (not bothering with console originated and oriented Bad Company series).

Distopia

Originally posted by DanMcC

I'm glad I stuck with DICE through thick and thin. I've played BF2 (and a little Bad Company) on the PC for years and now I get to play their next game without being tarnished by the Call of Duty franchise. By the way ... the Frostbite 2 engine is going to blow MW3 back to hell. BF3 will be the new standard while MW3 (and future releases) will be the same game as it always was.

Yeah I agree, been with them since 1942, Vietnam, BF2 and 2142. Great games all around, with their existence there's no reason to play COD IMO.

alakram

Then we all should buy battlefield series instead of call of duty series. Teach them a lesson

fatboy21007

i never played call of duty, but hearing them taking a normal single player game with multiplayer options and slaping subs on it , that will just kill that game forgood and make alot of folks angry. personally i have been playing battalefield bad company 2 since i released and i love it and i cant wait for bf3.

SyrusSyi

I do think it is very silly to put a sub fee on one of the biggest franchases that and consle has .  maybe if they came out with 4 maps or more a month,.....

Slampig

I think it is a load of BS. I don't have a problem paying for a monthly sub for an MMO or two but not for an FPS. I don't play CoD on Xbox as I have always prefered the PC for my shooters, but come on... A monthly sub for CoD? Hogwash! And one other thing, how many maps are they going to be pumping out each month? If you pay and get 5 maps and that is it it just doesn't seem worth it.

rojoArcueid

lol these companies are smoking something really weird ultimately....  a monthly payment for some extra features and maps? yeah, right... nothing was wrong with buying map pack content for a set price.... monthly fees to play certain maps is way too ridiculous?

no offense but whoever is giving these ideas to activision should go die alone.... LOL monthly fees to MW3 map content, im still LMFAO at activision

 

Edit:  and still they want to keep the box at $60 bucks.... lol,  activision why dont you put a pantyhose on your face and steal a bank instead?  cos im not paying you montly for maps

Resterz

Perhaps if they add  great character customization, and a ton of weapons, and bring something new and entertaining to the table. Otherwise I just don't think it will be worth it. Why do I feel like this will only end in tears?

Palebane

Can't say I didn't see this coming. I will have no part of it.

 

On second thought, if they managed to do a really really great game with many features that I like, I might be willing to try it, though I admit I have very little faith at this point.

dinams

They only do this because they know there are morons that can not say "Enough" to the unlimited greedy of activision and will ALWAYS buy any shit they put out

 

BF3 is the way to go

rojoArcueid

Originally posted by Resterz

Perhaps if they add  great character customization, and a ton of weapons, and bring something new and entertaining to the table. Otherwise I just don't think it will be worth it. Why do I feel like this will only end in tears?

to all those features you mentioned i would add a persistent FPS world with encounters of maybe 500 vs 500 people fighting all together?  dont get me wrong but that would be more realistic and chaotic than the typical nonsense of modern battles that cant hold more than 16 players at a time (some fps have 32, but still low)

and still i think its not worth it