MW3 may be charging an optional fee for premium content.

I posted this in the shoutbox but I thought it deserved a thread. This doesn't bother me personally because I wasn't planning on buying the game, but I know some of you are. Essentially, Activision (Kotick) are planning to charge a monthly fee that will give MW3 players premium content such as extra maps (basically replacing the map packs), and facebook integration.

Kotick's defense is that they need the fee to pay for the expense of adding the extra content to the game, which considering it's just a reskin of the previous CoD games and already costs more than most other video games, is a poor argument.

What do people think of this? If you had to pay a fee to play on the most popular maps, unlock the best guns, and play with your facebook friends (lol), would you pay it?

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

I think DLC is only acceptable if it's produced after the game was released.
I don't think you should tier up a game that already costs quite a lot, when what seems to be offered is purely arbitrary. Also if they charge a sub, they have to deliver on the new maps etc, I don't see them releasing maps so often that are good and the game will become saturated with shitty maps. Valve have been working on TF2 with new updates since it was released, all of which are free (ok so the store isn't, but it isn't necessary) and the same can be said for the rest of their online games. Activision can afford to spend on aftergame support and care, they aren't exactly poor.
I have already spoken about class systems and dont wish to derail this thread with an essay.

Absolutely atrocious.

It just makes me want BATTLEFIELD 3 more :D

gj kotick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by k, dfntyy

It just makes me want BATTLEFIELD 3 more :D

gj kotick.

---

Yeah, it seems bizarre they are doing this when it has the same release date as BF3 (both in November), just going to make lots of people change over the BF3.

I agree with the above posts

Have missed every COD after 4 and will continue while this kind of stuff carry s on :)

Problem with BF3 is, they've cut a huge (I'm talking > 50%) chunk out of their available profits by basing their new rendering engine solely on DX11, which does not run on XP.

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/oper....aspx?qprid=10
Yes, more than 50% of people on the web today are still using XP.

But not every xp machine is a gamers machine... better to look at steams survey, as most online pc gamers use steam. XP comes in at around 20% here http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey . Also most XP machines are now quite dated for playing next gen games.. so yeah.. why should they limit themselves?

I didn't point this out earlier, but..

90% of the share still in XP is from businesses, workplaces and educational institutes. And the rest of the people still running XP who are not part of this market share aren't going to be the kind of person who's going to have a DX11 compatible card (or the willingness to shell out for one).

So the whole XP doesn't support DX11, and thus noone is going to be able to play it is fairly negligent really, sure, the cards that don't support DX11 are not going to work, but to be fair, by November, not having one of these cards isn't going to be a great excuse.. a DX11 compatible card is going for £100 at the moment (iirc, do correct me if I'm wrong).

I shelled out for a whole PC for ArmA II, if I want BF3, I'll happily buy a new card (pretty much due for a new card anyway.)


tl;dr -
- XP users aren't a problem for BF3's Devs.


EDIT:

Bloody ninja'd by Hutch. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by katakuna

Problem with BF3 is, they've cut a huge (I'm talking > 50%) chunk out of their available profits by basing their new rendering engine solely on DX11, which does not run on XP.

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/oper....aspx?qprid=10
Yes, more than 50% of people on the web today are still using XP.

---

Whilst a reasonably valid argument, you have to bear in mind that those figures also include businesses, not just the consumer OS market. Many businesses around the world (including the three I have a connection to) still operate XP because it's a very secure, solid operating system that runs all the tasks a business requires.

Also, depending on the size of the business, upgrading to Vista or 7 would be an enormous cost, because they would likely have to upgrade hardware as well as software because of the operating requirements - even for a e-firm which has two computers, they are looking at an upgrade bill of around £1200 minimum, most likely more. This won't include any training costs for the new software or programs or any other associated costs with the switch (labor, advisory etc.) Obviously, new firms buying hardware now will have 7 as standard, but the vast majority that bought equipment with XP have stuck with it. And I can't imagine many companies installing BF3 onto their systems.

Much like Crysis a couple years ago, I think BF3 may be the game that gets people to buy that new set of hardware they've been saving up for :D.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ez64

Have missed every COD after 4 and will continue while this kind of stuff carry s on :)

---

Pretty much the same thing here, havent missed it either.

Though with its massive fanbase i dont think the change will affect negatively the profits which they hungrily chase

I ninjaed Oric and Vicious on the whole XP thing... Don't write such essays guys :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trigger

Pretty much the same thing here, havent missed it either.

Though with its massive fanbase i dont think the change will affect negatively the profits which they hungrily chase

---

I reckon their profit will go up. Some will not buy the game, and some won't go elite, but the amount that will go elite will be absolutly insane because CoD is one of those games which has tapped into the zombie-esque masses of people that play games now because they are cool - hence all the dull clones and remakes every year. And because these idiots love paying however much it is for a console game (I buy and play sports games like Madden and MLB The Show so I suspect I may qualify in this catagory as well :S) so they can be like 'look at me, I'm awesome', they will happily bend over backwards whilst Kotick rams his money-hoover up their backside.

EDIT: @Hutch - but ours gave more information though :) Although the steam survey was a perfect replacement. If this was a report, I know which one I'd use.

Not that much in the way of cold hard facts though. But yes, you probably explained more clearly than my "you're wrong, here's a link".

The ninja has entered.
Have a ridiculous south african rap video for your troubles.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cegdR0GiJl4

WHAT BATTLEFIELD 3 WON'T RUN ON XP?

SON OF A B***H

Back on track, more info http://kotaku.com/5806775/how-call-o...-paying-for-it

If you have a computer capable of running BF3 (meaning you've updated in the last three years), you won't still have XP. Or if you do, you're an idiot. BF3 is developed for DX11 hardware, it's not just been tacked on at the end as a selling point, which means the features of the engine rely on the new stuff that's come with DX11 and wouldn't work on DX9/10.

Also, here's the leaked trailer for CoD Elite:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpUMZGM1N7o&feature=player_embedded

TBH it looks like a good service, but one that other games (BF2, TF2) provide for free. Needless to say many people will subscribe to it.

BF2 had really good unofficial stats tracking, it's nothing new. Even if it's a good service, whats the motivation for it? It's clearly not customer based, it's all about money. Money they will make from this shovelware anyway.

What a load of shite, as if they think people are going to pay for this, console gamers maybe as they loved buying map packs they inflicted it upon pc gamers...I think if the gaming community boycott this shit and maybe they'll realise we aren't interested in funding there long term banks accounts. Maybe actually put some effort into making something decent, like steam churn out good games and add things for free i.e TF2 which has so much free content its unreal and CSS is still update regularly. I'm not going near another cod game until they make something good, black ops was a total waste...BF3 looks awesome though

Also BF3 is actually pushing gaming forward, instead of standing still and milking as much out of old engine as possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hutch

Even if it's a good service, whats the motivation for it? It's clearly not customer based, it's all about money.

---

Of course it's money, it's Activision.

the only thing that is going to put people off buying BF3 is system requirements, but I suppose most people should have a pc capable of running it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Target

the only thing that is going to put people off buying BF3 is system requirements, but I suppose most people should have a pc capable of running it

---

And I reckon that as with Crysis a couple years ago, BF3 will be the game that causes people who have been holding off a upgrade will finally purchase their stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oricalcos

And I reckon that as with Crysis a couple years ago, BF3 will be the game that causes people who have been holding off a upgrade will finally purchase their stuff.

---

With BF3 and Skyrim coming out, i'm seriously considering it.

I'm definately saving for a new card for BF3 and Skyrim.

(Lol at thread de-rail)

they are all at it. MAG (Massive Action Game)[PS3] gives you guns when you buy content and you can pay a monthly subscription for an character slot too. and then there is EAs online pass. EA are crap anyway

After seeing how CRAP every other COD dlc has been in the past, would I now end up paying more, to play with my friends (free on BF3) get guns (free on BF3), or crappy maps that are just pasted from another COD? No.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joe

After seeing how CRAP every other COD dlc has been in the past, would I now end up paying more, to play with my friends (free on BF3) get guns (free on BF3), or crappy maps that are just pasted from another COD? No.

---

This. I was already going to get BF3 before all this came out, and may have got CoD when it came down in price (wishful thinking, I know), but this just cemented it. Whilst it's obvious games companies have to act as businesses (otherwise you don't get profits to reinvest in new games and you cease to function), as with all companies, the PR implications have to be taken into account.

With Activision, it seems to be PR screw-up after PR screw-up. Yes, you can make us pay £10 for a map and yes, you can get a subscription service for things that everyone expects to be provided for free and yes, you can invent a method to render the used game market completly useless, but at the end of the day, whilst the zombied public masses are buying into this, the regular gamer fanbase is becoming disillusioned and buying products from other companies and there will come a time when the public catch onto this as well and do the same thing. I'm not saying Activision are going to die out, because with the current strength of their franchises, but after what happened to Guitar Hero, I would be worried that this will occur to other franchises and significantly weaken them as a company.