Activision strongly considers monthly bill for portion of Multiplayer - Games

[QUOTE=dass;30155667]To be completly honest, I think you guys exagerate alot. They aren't that bad. Sure they aren't MGS or ME or DeusEx level, but they aren't that bad either. Most of the hate is biased and fueled by other things in the end.[/QUOTE] Yes COD is that bad. Majority of people that hate it, do so for a valid reason - the Quality of the game is poor and for shallow minded gamers. Scenario: If 2K games ported the 1996 version of Duke Nukem 3D, coded a new gun into it and proclaimed the release of Duke Nukem Forever, would you pay $60 for it...EVERY YEAR too? Cuz thatts what activision are doing, using their marketing team to sugar-coat it as usual. Storyline in CoD sp is cliché to the core! Always about some American soldier saving the world. They just dress it up with cinematic gameplay... I'll go cinema if I want to watch a film, concentrate on QUALITY gameplay instead. They've been using the same graphics egine for 6 years now... I mean if you're going to do that show that you've made effort in changing/improving gameplay. Every year a CoD game comes out its just new maps and different killstreaks. How hard must it be to change a Harrier killstreak to Attack hellicopter? That small change worthy of $60? EVERY YEAR?

[QUOTE=dass;30155667]To be completly honest, I think you guys exagerate alot. They aren't that bad. Sure they aren't MGS or ME or DeusEx level, but they aren't that bad either. Most of the hate is biased and fueled by other things in the end.[/QUOTE] A game which costs $250 million to develop, distribute and so on, should not be that shit.

My dumbfuck friends will still buy it even though I'm trying my hardest to say to them not too, Activision is really pushing the envelope when it comes for money. I mean they get heaps of cash from 12 year old prepubescents and they still want more, how greedy could you fucking be? The DLC's suck ass (well not black ops, I haven't got them but played them on the 360 and they're okay and creative but MW2 really took a shit on the whole thing), the multi player is shocking with the amount of children scattered around it, not to mention fuckers who bitch about guns that kill them over and over again, the PC users always get shitted on when it comes to COD, cod4 only really gave PC users a good reason to play now it's all console exclusive and we get the DLC's last (same time as PS3 but still) and I can go on. This is really the final nail in the fucking coffin for Call Of Duty, this will be the last if not the other will be shitter than this.

[QUOTE=Contag;30155950]A game which costs $250 million to develop, distribute and so on, should not be that shit.[/QUOTE] Most of that budget goes on marketting the game. MW2 was the first time i've ever heard a game spend MORE money on marketing than the money needed to develop the game. Just shows Activision knew the games is shit and put more money into selling it.

[noparse]http://kotaku.com/5806775/how-call-of-duty-elite-works-and-why-you-might-be-paying-for-it[/noparse]

It's funny how CoD games arent even very good. It gets boring within a month

Least we still have Valve. Fuck Activi$ion

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdvY25ENOJQ[/media] oh god, the weak minded are going to be all over this

Really very stupid how this will sell a hell of a lot more copies than [img]http://www.igniq.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Witcher_2_cover_280311.jpg[/img] [img]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_dRY4v1Vvu0E/S_Vfi53ohEI/AAAAAAAAABw/XqHjfZ52YJs/s1600/jaquette-dragon-age-origins-pc-cover-avant-g.jpg[/img] etc.

and people argue that consoles are cheaper than pc's

[QUOTE=Dog;30153122]Seriously, I wouldn't be suprised if they released a console for $599 exclusively for Call of Duty.[/QUOTE] do this. we'd get a lot of shitty cod kiddies away from every other platform. that's a good thing. also i hate how activision teamed up with blizzard. blizz is my favourite game company (along with valve).

[QUOTE=JustGman;30154829]Don't they make enough money on shitty mappacks? Judging by the poll, 33 people are not the Facepunchers that automatically go "COD SO SHITTY FPS LOLOLOL 12 YEAR OLDS". You can't guarantee a game is bad if it isn't out yet.[/QUOTE] Did you have to stick your hand in the fire six times to work out that it was hot too? Most of us who bash Activision and Call of Duty aren't doing it out of "mindless hate", it's an automatic reaction that has been born of past experience. If you do something enough times and it never turns out well eventually you've got to just stop doing it. Honestly we're all just as vehemently opposed to sticking our hand in fire, but nobody wants to charge us money to do that.

[QUOTE=lemoncurry;30157060]Really very stupid how this will sell a hell of a lot more copies than [img]http://www.igniq.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Witcher_2_cover_280311.jpg[/img] [img]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_dRY4v1Vvu0E/S_Vfi53ohEI/AAAAAAAAABw/XqHjfZ52YJs/s1600/jaquette-dragon-age-origins-pc-cover-avant-g.jpg[/img] etc.[/QUOTE] Uh, those are both RPGs, and as far as i know, witcher has absolutely horrible gameplay. Not everyone likes RPGs, not everyone buys games for "story", not everyone likes that kind of combat. My automerge

[QUOTE=spanaren;30157144]Uh, those are both RPGs, and as far as i know, witcher has absolutely horrible gameplay. Not everyone likes RPGs, not everyone buys games for "story", not everyone likes that kind of combat. My automerge[/QUOTE] The witcher 2 has an incredibly long story, and certainly a shit ton more work put into it, whilst cod is a quick rehash made simply to get more money, i think the conclusion is easy. And you'd be surprised how many get the cod games for their [I]"story".[/I]

I think Duty Calls sums up my viewpoint on CoD Singleplayer. Multiplayer, well, is repetitive.

This is slimier than those stupid "online passes" some games are doing now to punish those who buy used games or rent them. I hope this works against Activision and cuts into MW3's sales, though it probably won't.

[img]http://i53.tinypic.com/15owak0.gif[/img] EDIT: My automerge :orks:

[quote]Mr. Dyer said he is "very confident" other publishers will follow Activision's lead[/quote] :gonk:

[QUOTE=TheTalon;30151685]Anyone have that HA HA HA, OH WOW picture? A monthly sub for a game that uses someone in the lobby as a host, and not any dedicated servers? For any game other than an MMO that would be absurd, even with dedicated servers[/QUOTE] To be perfectly honest, the host system in mw2 works way, way better than the dedi-server system of black ops. [editline]31st May 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Latex;30157016][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdvY25ENOJQ[/media] oh god, the weak minded are going to be all over this[/QUOTE] Ok, is this serious or not, after watching the video I seriously can't see if that guy was making fun of, or promoting it :confused:

To be honest, I find the premise of these games to be fun at least, but then it somehow managed to attract incredibly dense 13 year olds, which in turn made Activision shit all over it. Honestly, if it weren't for CoD getting so much expensive bullshit dumped on it, I don't think it would get a quarter of the hate it gets now. Also, ten hours late here but [QUOTE=Protocol7;30151677]you're just as bad for writing that post and if you have any common sense I shouldn't have to explain why[/QUOTE] Oh man I sure can't argue with you now. Really, at this point, there isn't much left to expand with graphics. Maybe physics, yeah, but not much else. Games have been focusing way too much on graphical improvements throughout the years, and now that we've pretty much hit our peak, it's high time we start focusing on new gameplay innovations and good storytelling. Just having shiny graphics won't "wow" us anymore, and while that may sound like a bad thing, it's actually a good thing. It means that more developers can potentially focus more on gameplay, plot, and weaving those two things together so that their games can surprise us with more than just realism. While that may not happen, there is a higher chance of more developers at least attempting to do these things. I'm not saying there isn't room to improve with graphics. Believe me, there certainly is. Nor am I saying that all games that push the envelope of graphics are bad. What I am saying is that technological improvements are not the issue here as you seem to be implying.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;30151142]Yeah. I remember when the gaming industry had advances, new gameplay mechanics, increasing graphics, that sort of shit. Then consoles came around. They got better and better until recently. Let's take a look at some shit. (late) 1993: [img]http://eriktwicelohaceotravez.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/doom1_01.jpg[/img] 2004: [img]http://xbox360media.ign.com/xbox360/image/article/790/790583/half-life-2-orange-box-20070521060818405.jpg[/img] 2010: [img]http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/9/2010/05/black_ops.jpg[/img] Over these past 6-7 years, things have gotten a little shinier. That's all. Before that, we were making HUGE leaps and bounds with technology and gameplay.[/QUOTE] 2011 [img]http://h7.abload.de/img/bf3-7xuee.gif[/img] Call of duty should go and die in a corner now, and let Battlefield 3 take the war-fps throne.

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;30157602]To be perfectly honest, the host system in mw2 works way, way better than the dedi-server system of black ops. [editline]31st May 2011[/editline] Ok, is this serious or not, after watching the video I seriously can't see if that guy was making fun of, or promoting it :confused:[/QUOTE] People like to bitch because you have to pay for the dedicated servers, which you would have to do anyway... Yet BF3 will have the same thing and no-one will care. Maybe it's because Dice are a good developer, so people would rather pay a sponsored server host so Dice get a cut.

[QUOTE=Legend286;30157721]People like to bitch because you have to pay for the dedicated servers, which you would have to do anyway... Yet BF3 will have the same thing and no-one will care.[/QUOTE] I didn't mind paying for a dedi-server, infact, I had one for a month. But the restrictions on the dedi, oh my god. I couldn't even start the game without having atleast 8 people or something on it, the fuck is up with that. Ive spent hours on the server without getting anyone to play with me, except for my mate. WHICH IS NOT ENOUGH TO START A FUCKING GAME.

They're running a fucking business, get over it already. If you want them to stop milking the cow stop buying the shit they sell, it's as simple as that.

And you're wrong, you wouldn't have to pay for the dedi, if they didn't make it impossible to host it yourself, because people have perfectly fine computers at home that can handle hosting a cod game.

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;30157758]And you're wrong, you wouldn't have to pay for the dedi, if they didn't make it impossible to host it yourself, because people have perfectly fine computers at home that can handle hosting a cod game.[/QUOTE] Perfectly fine for hosting < 8 players, cod's net code is worse than the engine it runs on.

[QUOTE=Legend286;30157877]Perfectly fine for hosting < 8 players, cod's net code is worse than the engine it runs on.[/QUOTE] I don't really care, I don't want no fucking "pre-match" because I don't have enough friends to play on my server.

[QUOTE=Dog;30153122]Seriously, I wouldn't be suprised if they released a console for $599 exclusively for Call of Duty.[/QUOTE] dude stfu dont give them any ideas

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;30157602]Ok, is this serious or not, after watching the video I seriously can't see if that guy was making fun of, or promoting it :confused:[/QUOTE] he seemed to have a really consistently enthusiastic tone throughout the video, I'm pretty sure no one can stay that enthusiastic for so long if they mean it

[QUOTE=devon_wargod;30162401]he seemed to have a really consistently enthusiastic tone throughout the video, I'm pretty sure no one can stay that enthusiastic for so long if they mean it[/QUOTE] Yes, but the video has activision in the end and it's also used in the kotaku article about cod elite.