'Call of Duty' Sets Sights on a Fee

Consumers are used to paying $60 each for videogames that run on consoles like the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. Now the publisher behind the industry's biggest videogame franchise— "Call of Duty"—is about to find out whether it can get them to pay a monthly bill, too.

Activision Blizzard Inc. plans to launch an online service called Call of Duty Elite this fall that will work with the next major edition of the game, "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3," and future installments of the hyper-realistic combat-simulation game. In a move industry executives describe as a first, Activision plans to charge a monthly subscription fee for the service, which will provide extra content that isn't offered on game discs sold in stores, including downloadable map packs that give players new "Call of Duty" levels to play.

SOURCE:Link

Lord oh lord Activision. Dollar bills in your eyes you hath!

hyper-realistic combat-simulation game.

Article

This is so not fair. Their games are already so expensive.neo_87

HAha I don't even buy DLC, I think in the history of gaming I've bought maybe one or two DLC? And they think I'm going pay monthly feee for this DLC crap, maps packs and all that ****...

Seriously these devs and pubs are just getting lazy, they want money for minimal effort. Map packs should be free in the first place to help support the community. But now they want to charge monthly fees for them, crazy world they live in. And yeah they might pull it off as there's loads of suckers out there who will pay for anything. But they will not be getting not even a penny from I!!.

HAha I don't even buy DLC, I think in the history of gaming I've bought maybe one or two DLC? And they think I'm going pay monthly feee for this DLC crap, maps packs and all that ****...

Seriously these devs and pubs are just getting lazy, they want money for minimal effort. Map packs should be free in the first place to help support the community. But now they want to charge monthly fees for them, crazy world they live in. And yeah they might pull it off as there's loads of suckers out there who will pay for anything. But they will not be getting not even a penny from I!!.

ShimmerMan

It depends on the price. I can see having additional guns, perks, maps be on a subscription service of 4.99 per month at most. Anything higher is not worth it for me. the_ChEeSe_mAn2

We all knew it was coming, lets be honest.

[QUOTE="neo_87"]This is so not fair. Their games are already so expensive.FelipeInside

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="neo_87"]This is so not fair. Their games are already so expensive.neo_87

[QUOTE="the_ChEeSe_mAn2"]It depends on the price. I can see having additional guns, perks, maps be on a subscription service of 4.99 per month at most. Anything higher is not worth it for me. Travis281

Dude, it's a COMPANY.

They want to make as much money as possible.

It has nothing to do with being satisfied.

No worries. I'll be playing Gears of War 3. ;)Elann2008

Ah Elann i forgot you had an xbox! your sig changed! no Deadspace avatar anymore :P? anyway whats your xbox gamertag so i can add you up?

[QUOTE="neo_87"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"] Games will be the same price. Just that you will pay monthly to have access to all the DLCs....FelipeInside

Even if I'd play it for just one month (and I won't since I won't be getting the game), I'd still take DLCs over a monthly fee, because I know I'd be able to play it again in one or two years without worrying about extra payment.

hyper-realistic combat-simulation game

-CheeseEater-

lol wut?

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="neo_87"] Don't you think thats still unfair?DanielDust

Even if I'd play it for just one month (and I won't since I won't be getting the game), I'd still take DLCs over a monthly fee, because I know I'd be able to play it again in one or two years without worrying about extra payment.

Very true....unless they make it permanent once it's downloaded.

As in you pay monthly fees, and you can play but once you stop paying monthly fees you don't get any more updates (Maps, etc) but can still play what you have installed (same way a paid antivirus works)

[QUOTE="Article"]

hyper-realistic combat-simulation game.

mAArdman

[QUOTE="mAArdman"]

[QUOTE="Article"]

hyper-realistic combat-simulation game.

Agent_Kaliaver

Did Activision say that or the person who wrote that article....?

[QUOTE="Elann2008"]No worries. I'll be playing Gears of War 3. ;)Ownsin

Ah Elann i forgot you had an xbox! your sig changed! no Deadspace avatar anymore :P? anyway whats your xbox gamertag so i can add you up?

I'll send you a PM. :D

Edit: Eh.. Glitchspot. Can't send you a private message.. It's "spartan1down." See you on XBL when Gears of War 3 comes out. As of right now, I have no XBL sub.

i dont mean to sound like a fanboy here but,

This is one of the other reasons why Battlefield is vastly superior

i dont mean to sound like a fanboy here but,

This is one of the other reasons why Battlefield is vastly superior

sonofsmeagle

[QUOTE="Article"]

hyper-realistic combat-simulation game.

mAArdman

Ha, yeah I was gonna quote that too.

I think with any other publisher I might consider it, but you just know Activision are going to overcharge for little content. If you were paying a tiny amount of money, say maybe £2 a month, for maps (obviously only one at a time when released rather than 5 at a time), new weapons, and actual things of interest, it might not be so bad. But Activision would never do that, over 12 months they'd only be making £24 off you, and 2 map packs can earn them that much anyway. You just know it'll be about £5-£10 a month, and either completely break the game by giving people overpowered weapons, or just be a massive rip off.

HAha I don't even buy DLC, I think in the history of gaming I've bought maybe one or two DLC? And they think I'm going pay monthly feee for this DLC crap, maps packs and all that ****...

Seriously these devs and pubs are just getting lazy, they want money for minimal effort. Map packs should be free in the first place to help support the community. But now they want to charge monthly fees for them, crazy world they live in. And yeah they might pull it off as there's loads of suckers out there who will pay for anything. But they will not be getting not even a penny from I!!.

I'm not gonna buy the game if i have to pay a Monthly Fee

But whan confuses me is that they said that we will never pay to play mp Which kinda questions the validity of the article.dakan45

[QUOTE="mAArdman"]

[QUOTE="Article"]

hyper-realistic combat-simulation game.

Agent_Kaliaver

This is a good thing, it means people may start to give other fps a chance and realise CoD isn't the best one about by default.

[QUOTE="neo_87"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"] Games will be the same price. Just that you will pay monthly to have access to all the DLCs....FelipeInside

Depends on if the service is worth the fee... (I honestly do not see anywhere where this will be worth it)

$15 for anything under 10 maps is ridiculous... I mean the entire game is $60.

It is unfortunately another pure capitalist agenda here... Money, money, money!

I am still interested in the game, but I will see how this further developes before I spend another dime on COD.. (will never buy another Treyarch COD)

This is the first I've heard of it. I wasn't sold on MW3 yet anyways, but now I def won't be buying it. This is already an expensive hobby in rough economic times and this industry isn't hurting for money. My CoD boycott begins today, not that they care but it makes me feel better.

COD clrealy revolutionize the genre.dakan45

*Insert epic facepalm pic here*

No, Dakan, just...no.

Anyways, I'm not really so surprised about this, it was inevitable anyways. I just hope it stays this way though, would be really sad if they start making this monthly fee mandatory.

ITT

People defending Activision. People defending COD. People who play COD. People even discussing COD when BF3 is coming out this year.

This is a good thing, it means people may start to give other fps a chance and realise CoD isn't the best one about by default.

SapSacPrime

Realistically, I think we can expect this monthly fee to be a ripoff. After the success of MW2 and Black Ops, this will probably be a money-making move for Activision. It isn't Activision to blame if people are opening their wallets for weak sequels and PoS, shallow games. I certainly wouldn't pay money for this, but I am not going to complain about how others spend their money.

[QUOTE="SapSacPrime"]

This is a good thing, it means people may start to give other fps a chance and realise CoD isn't the best one about by default.

dakan45

I'm not gonna buy the game if i have to pay a Monthly Fee

guildclaws

While I understand that its optional. I speculate that they'll encourage players in everyway to subscribe to this. Its all about profits. So, what is in the standard free multiplayer online section? The stats and options we've come to expect in every FPS? Would Activision strip standard free multiplayer to barebones so they can say its free, while barely usable? Then, the basics we've used to suddenly requires subscription to use.

While the WSJ article gives good detail to the service, I'm weary to see what they didn't cover in the standard free multiplayer section of MW3.

I'm not hating, I'm just asking