According to Wedbush Securities video game industry analyst Michael Pachter, you will be paying to play Call of Duty games in the future.
Yesterday, along with the dismantling on the Guitar Hero franchise, Activision announced the establishment of Project Beachhead, a studio focused on "on the delivery, digitally, of new, innovative Call of Duty content and services" that will "enable tens of millions of players around the world to continue to enjoy the experience that Call of Duty offers." While Activision didn't go into practical detail about what that will mean for gamers, Pachter says it all adds up to pay-for-play CoD.
"Project Beachhead absolutely is charging for multiplayer," Pachter said. "I'm certain to my core."
"Activision said they are working on 'value added, premium content that is exclusive,'" Pachter said. "How do you exclude people unless you do it on the basis of whether they pay or not? What are you going to have a bouncer in front of the club where you play the content? The only way it's exclusive is if it excludes non-paying members," Pachter added.
When asked how a pay-for-it Call of Duty game would work, Pachter offered this:
"The exclusive content could be pay as you go, or monthly. Let's say Project Beachhead comes up with 'Call of Duty Universe,' and it launches with Modern Warfare 3 and they say 'if you join here's all the exclusive content and exclusive weapons and we'll charge you a dollar a piece.' Or If they say, 'for $5 a month you get unlimited weapons and all the map packs we bring out for Modern Warfare in perpetuity,' a lot of people will say, 'I'm going to buy three map packs for 15 dollars anyway, so for $60 a year, I'm getting all the unlimited weapons and achievements,' so they could do that. I don't know if that's what they're going to choose to do. I'd say $5 a month is reasonable, though."
Pachter is watching for people to switch consoles if one "side" starts charging and the other remains free. "What will be interesting is to see if it spurs PS3 sales when people switch over," Pachter said.
So what do you guys think? Would you be willing to pay extra for Call of Duty content? Or would you feel more like you're being nickled and dimed to death if you have to pay for both Xbox Live and for Call of Duty?
Comments are Closed
Comments
Displaying 21–40 of 213
1123456789103
ALEXMANSON
ACTIVISON can suck my balls if they do that plus they wont see another dime out of my pocket!!!!!!!!!!! >:(
EarstotheGround
As a business, Activision is well within its rights to consider implementing this 'fee' for MP - Hell, Im sure shareholders are demanding it, and Kotick is only earning his paycheque.
As gamers however, we realize the power lies in our numbers (aka revenue in Activision speak) and we need only vote with our wallets. A bad year for a major gaming franchise like CoD will reflect heavily on a company's bottom line and in all likelihood the Mgmt Team responsible for said decisions will be given the heave ho and shown the exit door - such is the fickleness of wallstreet investors. You only need to have the discipline to ride out a cycle or two.
IMO, Multiplayer FPS games like CoD rely on hardcore gamers to maintain a critical mass of users online (that then draws in their groups of friends and casual gamers). This core group migrates from game to game - franchise to franchise, year over year.
At $60 a year for Multi Player (at $5/ month), and as a long time CoD fan, I might consider it for a month or so - play the hell out of it as I might a RENTAL and move on and buy another game for the same investment. I would also consider alternating my yearly purchase with other 'no fee' publishers and games like Battlefield Bad Company 2 which seems by all accounts to be a better game overall than BLOPS.
I suspect Activision will also lose a lot of the casual gamers, groups of friends and a decent % of their hardcore audience to other games.
Once a franchise loses its 'it' factor - its as good as dead and Activision and the mgmt team should be very careful with how they choose to proceed. Their futures depend on it - we'll just be playing another game.
(NLO)FragEm_All
First off they take are Private servers Away and give us this crap were going to pick the best server for you, which the servers they pic for me are crap. Now they want to make a pay to play COD come on. I am a PS3 user and I have fun not paying for my online play. I feel sorry or the Xbox360 users that pay a monthly fee just to play thier games and now if the pay to play hits like it hits all pay to play games theyll be paying $10 a month to play COD I would be Really upset.
Cryptomaster420
looks like treyarch or activision maybe the next Realtime Worlds if u get my drift i say we gather all COD fans and start a protest outside Activision
"Call of Duty needs to stay free to play"!
Cryptomaster420
hell no i won't pay for this crap for this one reason MW2 is hack fest 24/7
10th hackers and in bops 15th hackers lagswitches rapid fire controllers
im gonna stick it to them !
who wants to help me boycott this idea pay 2 play COD games
Team209
haha good thing im looking forward to homefront.. black ops online sucks.. not sure about MW3 but i hated MW2.. until black ops came out.. now i love MW2.. long live 4, WaW and MW2!
cooperjs1
That's ok. Battlefield 3 comes out this year, too. So long Call of Duty. It's been real.
Zzanzabar
I have a simple question...How many of you would pay for COD if ALL of your online games had a pay to play multiplayer? If this was the industry NORM instead of just one company. Before you answer remember, many gamers chose a system that made online multiplayer access available ONLY if you payed for it and is making MILLIONS per year (Microsoft) while another system offered the same thing for FREE yet now feels it has lost out on 'free' revenue and now wants its buyers to shell out money for a 'PLUS' online feature (Sony). I suspect that Activision thinks it KNOWS its audience and will try and convince the other companies to follow its 'lead', which they will certainly do if Activision is even remotely successful in this.
There have been numerous 'take backs' in the gaming industry in the past decade and this is just ONE of them they are trying to implement. I remember when games came with complete instruction manuals, now if you want details you have to buy a 'hint' guide for $20. Map packs where pleasant additions, not major money sinks. NEVER underestimate the willingness of a gamer to shell out money for things that should be free (a lesson that Sony is belatedly learning about the PS3).
carlos0981
As much as I love my 360 and XBL, but as soon as Microsoft started charging to play online, I knew that some greedy little suit will come up with the idea of pay-to-play for a non-MMO. I mean, I saw this coming from a mile away, and of course it had to be Bobby Kotex from Retardavision.
But, what I can't believe, at all, is that there are people that are actually considering going along with this and paying in order to play COD. That is just efing stupid, this will ruin the gaming industry if it happens, and we will have no one else to blame but ourselves, and by ourselves I mean all those idiots who went along with this.
DoctorQuark
Pay to play Call of Duty? No thanks. I don't make enough money to afford paying for ragequit fodder, anyways. I've always preferred other FPS series myself, so if this is Activision's way of making me quit CoD for good, then they're succeeding with flying colors.
myauctionpal
Where is the Unlike Button might be time to leave COD and play something else until you people work on your servers, the way you start the game, timing out every other game and the cheating players online you need to back Off! We paid $60 for the game plus extra for bone us map packs! Greedy is an understatement! The Fall of Duty began when Black Ops was released since they still haven't gotten it right, there is a lot more games out there that actually want my business.
JonTheValiant
If we are going to pay $5/month for Call of Duty, for crying out loud, at least fix the spawning.......spawning in the line of sight or next to the enemy is getting pretty EFFing old
lildemon
alot of company's know they lose alot in making game's that after a while they crash so to say if they do add on's better be real cheap or free....
lildemon
every company will be doing this soon enough what you think it's only actavision
Illinois Broski
I think Activision is seriously overestimating the loyalty of COD fans. I consider myself an in between average and hardcore and I wouldn't even think of paying to play COD. Black Ops was over rated and definitely not worth a subscription fee (I know subscription fees are for future COD games). Even if MW3 is better than Black Ops, I wouldn't want to pay 10 or 15 dollars a month to play a shooter, especially since I hardly have time to play while in school. If it were 10 or 15 bucks, that would be 120-180 dollars a year just to play one game! I honestly believe they'd hurt or even kill the franchise with a subscription fee. That would just open the doors for other great shooters like Bad Company or Halo to take over as the most popular shooter on Live and PSN.
BYRQN
YUP THE COD DAYS R OVER, IM A PS3 PLAYER, AN THIS MEANS SINCE 360 USERS ALREADY PAY MICROSOFT FOR THEIR GOLD SUBS, THEY GOTTA PAY ACTIVISION EXTRA?? LOL THATS GOOD,, TEACHES EM FOR BUYIN THE DLC A MONTH B4 PS3 PLAYERS GET IT. FYI IF THEY DO CHARGE ONLINE PLAY FOR BLK OPS. IM BREAKING MY DISC AND GIVING MY 24/7 ATTN TO BATTLEFIELD 2 AN VET. NAM AND BTF 3 HAHA "BIG MISTAKE ACTIVISION UR GONNA LOSE ATLEAST 800,000 PLAYERS. SERVES U RYTE SLIME BALLS
tisoyboy2
I'm a big fan of CoD, but I will people need to stop purchasing the game when they start this. Bobby Kotick (CEO for Activision) already admitted that they are responsible for the $10 increase in the XBL fee. A lot of people thought it was Microsoft when they added ESPN, Facebook and Last FM but it wasn't. XBL has over 25 million subscribers. That is 250 million dollars EXTRA for the year. Microsoft did agree to this so they could get DLC exclusives. I don't think it is limited to Activision with these payoffs. I believe it involves Kaos Studios and maybe even Crytek as well.
Supporting info: Link to interview with Bobby Kotick of Activision.
http://n4g.com/news/652757/x bl-10-price-hike-was-caused-by -activision
guitargodmister
now i see why they are allowing modern warfare 2 to be hacked to oblivion. so that everyone moves to play there newest product. Blackops. soon the same will happen to backops so everone WON'T GO PAY FOR THERE NEWEST CATASTROPHY>.
amazonqueen27
They are not talking about paying for exclusives, technically we do that now. The monthly fee will cover the multi-player aspect of COD along with the membership fee you pay for whatever console you are using.
Back in May 2010, my husband and I came across an article about EA charging $10 to use multi player content in their sports game and we new this would happen eventually. And in a way it has already started with the one time use code that started coming in games to ensure that even if you sell it back the next person either doesn't get a code (ex. lego rock band) or has to pay for a new one (ex. need for speed: hot pursuit, the sims 3.)
"To access this content players use the in-game one-time-use registration code. Players that do not have a code can purchase an Online Pass for 800 Microsoft Points on Xbox LIVE Marketplace and $9.99 on the PlayStation Network."
But here is the biggest problem with this idea. Console game creators making console games like PC games. Pc games have long had subscriptions and one time use codes and a no return policy. Trying to do that with a console game could end the life of a title, a series, or even a company.
I play PC games and console games (and handheld games) and I have come to the understanding the console gamers (for the most part) don't want to be PC gamers. Pc gamers are willing to pay $15 a month on top of the initial $39 or $49 they pay for a game because that is the experience that they enjoy. At the cost of upgrading your PC often to keep it reliveant.
Console players have tolerated the jump from $49 to $59 for a game with the new generation of games and even deal the the membership "programs" that the consoles have in place so that we can play a game anyway. Then there was the DLC that was already on the game that we have to pay for. Now to have to pay to get online with your Friends which is what the whole new generation of games is supposed to be based on is BS.
BUT, If one game falls to this tactical ploy others will follow, they always do. And people that use to by console games will slowly stop and Video games will die faster that Hip Hop.
(if activistion hate EA so much, Why are they trying to be just like them?)
http://www.engadget.com/2010 /05/11/ea-sports-to-charge-use d-game-buyers-10-to-unlock-bas ic-online/
http://xbox360.ign.com/artic les/113/1135254p1.html
guitargodmister
WHY would i want to pay for jenky dissconnections? hosting our own matches? or playing in matches where people are hacking the ever living (word that G4 wont let me say for good reason) out of my game? this is equal to horse defficate! everyone MUST STRIKE THIS ! EVERYONE QUIT IF THEY CHARGE. is it not enough that they are the highest grossing game ever? are they not happy with there ULTAMATE profits? they can stuff there game up there (word that G4 wont let me say for good reason) . im gona just play starcraft 2 mini user created games.
Displaying 21–40 of 213
1123456789103