Activision To "Monetize" Call of Duty Online Play

With Call of Duty: World at War set to hit store shelves this November, Activision has been making plans to monetize the online component of the game. "Infinity Ward-developed CoD4 has paid downloadable maps available on digital storefronts, but with CoD5, developed by Activision studio Treyarch, downloadable content will be a considerably bigger priority. Griffith added that Activision 'plans to increase online monetization' with CoD5, offering '3x the amount of content available for download and premium content called Day One Advantage.'" Activision also announced that for Call of Duty 6 they will be going back to Infinity Ward for development, the company who developed the first, second, and fourth offerings in the series. Treyarch made the third and fifth installments.

Comments

Day One Advantage

[afidel]

So basically they unbundled the stuff that should have come with the game and charge you extra for it, I love the new freaking game industry.... It's like they see the money that Blizzard is making and just figure, hey it's online so it MUST be a license to print money. What crap. What they fail to realize is that Blizzard made money online for a long time without raping the customer. Hell they still make money off the Diablo model to this day.

Re:Day One Advantage

[Renraku]

If they want me to pay monthly for a game, its not out of my budget.

Nor is it out of the budget of MOST dedicated gamers.

However, they have to earn it. I don't consider 'Gun +1' to be worthy of buying. So count that out. If they REALLY want my money, what they can do is give my characters a chance to build up. Not just unlock items. Even farther, I demand moderation and active cheat protection..not just a program that loads into the background if any, but a fast and timely response to banning cheaters. Lets go another step, since I like money..I want free content. New maps semi-regularly, maybe new talents, new customization options, etc, for free. I'll pay for an expansion in the future, if it offers a LOT of content.

But I expect that a LOT of content also be released, over time, for free, if I'm paying monthly for the game.

Oh, CoD3 was made by a different company

[creature124]

I suppose that explains why CoD3 was so horrible. I suppose that means we will be waiting till CoD6 to get another CoD game worth playing.

Re:word play

[xSauronx]

you think bowling is expensive, you should see what i spend for heroin!

sorry, not interested

[DragonTHC]

They're trying to run a racket on console gamers.

PC gamers do not put up with these bullshit tactics.

If this game is going to make you pay for all the content, they had better sell the game at a very steep discount. I'm talking $19.99 for nextgen consoles. Anything more would be offensive and unethical.

This is part of the reason why I don't play mmo games. I'm not paying for content that should be in the game, and I'm not paying to play.

I forsaw this years ago when I first heard about DLC. This is an unethical attempt to rob their customers by nickel and diming them for content that is already on their disc but cannot be used due to this shit.

I hope they get sued for putting the Day One DLC on the disc. Simple explanation is, I've paid for this game and I can't use the stuff on the disc because EA is charging ransom for it.

Good night gaming.

Re:sorry, not interested

[grahamd0]

I forsaw this years ago when I first heard about DLC. This is an unethical attempt to rob their customers by nickel and diming them for content that is already on their disc but cannot be used due to this shit.

I disagree. Downloadable content is a great idea, assuming a full game is shipped in the first place.

For example, take Forza Motorsport 2. It would be hard to argue that they sold an incomplete game. It has a dozen or more distinct tracks, each with several variations, as well as hundreds of cars.

Every few months they release a new car pack with 10-12 new cars for ~$5. I'm happy to pay for them, because I get new content that revitalizes an already awesome game.

It would be another story if they sold a $60 game with 10 cars and made you pay for the rest, but to suggest that game publishers and developers can't charge money for new content is ridiculous.

Re:word play

[Goldberg's Pants]

I loathe that damn word, "monetize". The software industry is without a doubt the greediest industry in the world. I mean the movie industry have tried, with DIVX, to make you pay every time you watch a movie, but that failed miserably.

The software industry, though, has a customer base largely filled with suckers who pay for an account on an online service, and who then pay for content that should have been in the game in the first place in many cases. Almost the entire industry is fueled by greed, treats their customers like thieves with increasingly intrusive and restrictive DRM, and comes up with more and more ways to fleece the consumer.

Valve have the right idea. Treat the customers decently. The content updates for TF2, they've already said they're being forced to charge for them on the Xbox even though they don't want too. The PC versions will remain free, as Valve believe in not fleecing their customers. Same goes for Stardock. Galactic Civilizations 2 has received two expansions, but they've added SO much stuff for free. The upcoming 2.0 patch includes some fairly major additions. Far beyond what you could ever expect for free from the likes of Activision.

It's nice to know there are a few holdouts who seem to believe in putting the experience and the games above the financial avarice of the likes of Activision and EA.