Top
180°

Are Multiplayer Fees On The Horizon?

Virtual Reality:

"The problem for publishers is, they’ve stumbled into a vast wellspring of value, but they haven’t yet figured out how to monetize it. Multiplayer modes increase the recurring worth of games. No longer do we expect to play games for a mere 10-20 hours and then never touch them again. We expect them to entertain us for that long, and then to continue to entertain us for months and years afterwards by allowing us to play with our friends online. We expect, in other words, that games provide ever increasing amounts of value.

And yet, up until now, we haven’t been expected to pay for this value. Even though multiplayer vastly increases the worth of a game to consumers, publishers haven’t forced us to pony up for it. But with multiplayer becoming the primary mode of gameplay for many games, this model is probably on its last legs."

Read Full Story >>
virtualrealityblog.com
The story is too old to be commented.
nadiap2835d ago

I think we'll definitely see them... there's no way companies are gonna pass up that kind of money.

cobraagent2835d ago

MS made a lot of money out of XBOX live and so did Blizzard out of WoW.
Activision is up next

bubbyjoan2835d ago

yep, followed by everyone else. /mourn my wallet :(

rdgneoz32835d ago

MMO's have charged for playing for years, MS charging for live is just stupid. Reason why MMOs tend to get away with it, is because the create new content / raids to extend the game play and are free (besides the monthly subscription and expansions). For WoW, the Lich King expansion has had a bunch of raids and instances added to it since it first started. Burning Crusade had a ton of content added to it throughout its life as well.

Only way other multiplayer games (non MMOs) could get away with it with their player base not minding too much, would be to deliver new content continuously for free. But I don't see COD giving away 15 dollar map packs for free anytime soon.

And seeing as FFXIV (subscription based) was somewhat blocked from the 360 due to a a closed environment for Xbox Live, "they want to have a closed environment for Xbox Live" - http://www.eurogamer.net/ar... , it might be tricky with others.

karl2835d ago

soo can we blame this on MS aswell?

evrfighter2835d ago (Edited 2835d ago )

MMO's get away with it due to hardware and bandwidth one needs when you're playing in a server with thousands of people.

but to pay to play on a peer2peer server or an GSP server is just ridiculous. On the pc side most teams and alot of people do pay on a monthly basis for their own server for practices, matches, or pubs already.

a game is doomed to fail if they wish to try it as an experiment. god help the poor souls of the dev's who's game is sent out to die.

the only pro I'll give console gamers is that they don't know any better when it comes to MMO's. They believe it should be free as most are kids that don't have credit cards. With that in mind there's no need to worry about multiplayer fees.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2835d ago
tinybigman2835d ago

I like single player experience more then competitive online play. Its bad enough they already charge for dlc now you wanna charge for me to play online if I feel the need to.

I don't do it with Live and I sure as hell won't be doing it with this if it comes true.

Jerkstore812835d ago

If that happens, it will kill console gaming. The majority of console gamers aren't going to pay a subscription per game to play online.

Lightsaber2835d ago

I dont think this would work. One XBL already has a fee to play online. I dont think there are to many games that plays would even bother to play online you add another fee to it. Maybe Halo, CoD and gears could get away with it. I think most players would drop ther gold memberships. The sales of DCL would fall drastically. Even on the PSN were its free to play how many people would pay 10-15 a month to play CoD and then buy all the map packs ? If you are willing to paying that how many game would you pay it for ? I have around 30-40 games that I can play online. If it was 10 dollars per game it be 300-400 dollars a month. Hell if I had to pay a fee to play online I would not even own half of those games.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2835d ago
alphakennybody2835d ago (Edited 2835d ago )

if acti pulls it off with COD(I have no doubt about it, since sheep will always be sheep), EA and others will too start asking for fees with teir key Ip.

beavis4play2835d ago (Edited 2835d ago )

it's the gamers you have to worry about acting like "sheep".
too many younger people who don't understand how to prioritize their finances (or handle money in general) will probably pay. so will the adults with no lives who stay shut in their homes/apartments.......which will then lead to EA and other devs charging for their online play.
as i stated below - this can only work if people are dumb enough to pay. and judging from how many are paying for xbox gold membership or playstation plus.....this is going to happen.

i know i won't pay. i would suggest everyone else do the same.

claterz2835d ago

"the only way activision "pulls it off" is if people start paying"
Of course people are going to pay for it, if they introduce fees to CoD pretty much every single CoD player will sign up, they just gotta ask their parents to use the credit card lol.

oldjadedgamer2835d ago

If that happens, I can't say I enjoy MW2 enough to pay double for online play. Probably won't renew live then. Just have to force myself to finish FF13.

matthewschrager2835d ago

Yeah, I wonder how many people will feel the same. It could really backfire if many do... but I don't think it will. Of course, a lot of this depends on the exact pricing scheme.

PirateThom2835d ago (Edited 2835d ago )

"Greed, for lack of a better word, is good."

And, in this case, I think it may well benefit everyone more if it does backfire to the point it will be very damaging to the people who bring these changes, initially, but then the industry will see a recovery as companies try to figure more innovative ways to keep us playing.

Honestly, as big as the video game industry is, I think it's heading towards an 80's style crash, it's because too big and too money focused rather than software focused.

tdrules2835d ago (Edited 2835d ago )

you won't be paying for what you already have, you will be paying for consistent new features.
Imagine for example, the past two CODs never happened, instead you paid a subscription since COD4 in 2007, and you received WaW and MW2 as well as every map pack as part of your subscription

Imperator2835d ago

While that would be great, I seriously doubt Activision would do that. They'd probably charge per game.

MysticStrummer2835d ago (Edited 2835d ago )

No way it's worth a monthly fee to get what you're talking about. Not to me anyway. If I'm paying a monthly fee there'd better be a huge persistent world with many factions to join and many classes to level up. Not to mention a large amount of customizing options for your character, both in looks and abilities.

asyouburn2835d ago

i don't like Mdub, so good for me!

midgard2292835d ago

and thus the end of online gaming comes. its cool i like split screen better anyway :)

and damn its gonna suk for Xbox users, jus wouldnt be right if they charge for online play then have to pay for activision etc.

in MMO's it makes sense and is fine aslong as tons of content updates are made and maintained, but to charge just to play is just stupid.

shooters should never have to be pay to play, nor shud fighters

matthewschrager2835d ago

But really, what's the difference between an MMO and COD multiplayer? They both offer you endless amounts of replayability, and it's that replayability that you get charged for. Also, if games get subscription fees, then developers can afford to push out "tons of content updates." In that way, it's kind of a win-win.

Of course, whether or not it's worth it depends on the actual price.

asyouburn2835d ago

you can get mmo's practically free, and COD costs 60 bucks up front. i dont think kotick is gonna wanna lose that initial 60

Show all comments (70)
The story is too old to be commented.