Activision boss Bobby Kotick is transfixed on grabbing more cash from Microsoft's Xbox Live Gold subscription revenues - because he claims Call Of Duty is a major reason people sign up to the service.
... you're greedy enough as it is already. You want to milk more money out of your games and online gaming!? Then release your own exclusive console and keep your games exclusive to that system. Dumbass tumor.
Yea definitely agree if he starts charging theres always better games..and 360 players would have to pay even more on top of thier live subscription which would suck big time for them.
"-"We have an obligation to provide a return for our shareholders," he said, in what Joystiq describes as 'playing the dependable role of businessman'. "At the same time, I think we've probably done more to try and create innovative ways for people to pay for their games." Activision will struggle to put in place such a subscription service on Xbox Live, which has been described as a "walled garden" by many industry execs, due to its 'closed' nature to third-party revenue generation.-" I get the feeling Activision played a hand in M$ jacking up the price for XBL. This is probably the reason the rumors of a pay to play CoD died out. Kotick has lots of leverage over M$ when it comes to XBL. Threatening to make cod sub based would kill XBL numbers both in disgusted gamers and people switching over to ps3 (prolly one reason he wants to see more ps3's sold by calling out Sony to drop prices) This is why you'll see people say he's a genius. That's because he is. I hate the prick but he's a shareholder's wet dream. Uncle Bobby K saw the blackops sales and now wants moar.
Is Microsoft turn round and dissmiss them and say we allowed you to become as big as you are today! but not no more as we will not allow activision software on our hardware(can they do that) activision have lost it thats not even cheeky is fucking rude of them i would also like to see sony drop activision as kotick threated with the to remove support if they did't lower the price
/s They'd bundle it up with Live for an extra $30 and call it a "value pack". I'm not trolling, but they basically did the same thing with Monster Hunter in Japan. That and consumers have painted themselves into a corner this gen by allowing this sort of corporate bullying to flourish in the first place. Back to Castlevania now! Phenomenal game btw. A really well done multi-plat. P.S. All of you who just bought Black Ops contributed to this, and future, consumer abuse. Only power we have is with our $$$. At least I feel sound that if you look at my Trophy or Achievement list, you won't see one Activision game on them (well I did pick up WOW a bit ago to try out the 4.0 patch, but just cancelled my sub after a month of "more of the same").
I bet most people didn't even read the interview, lol.
Yup. You can expect most of the comments to be just reactions from reading the headline. =/
MS better not allow this... I did read the interview... He hasnt done nothing for the gamer that buys cod games and it wont be going to none of them...
Kotick is startin to piss me off. Greefy fat butt faced nut licking fuck. (i had to say that! xD)
It doesn't make good sense to pay either one of the two for the right to play a game that you bought, on hardware that you bought, using an internet connection that you bought. However, if you have no choice but to pay one of them, it makes more sense to pay Activision for playing COD online than it does to pay Microsoft for playing COD online. Microsoft doesn't provide servers and at least Activision does the patches.
It would be suicide for the franchise as it currently is presented to us for Activision to charge a monthly (or even a one time) fee to play online.
Say what you will but you know damn well people will go along with it. Same as how people were saying they'd never pay for XBL if the price went up. Well, guess what. They still do.
this would be hard on 360 owners since they already pay for xbl
thank god PSN is free
i disagree most of cod fan only play and buy cod games so they have more then enough money to pay of cod online fee
LMAO!!! No thanks bobby I'll be playing KILLZONE 3,SOCOM 4,and RESISTANCE 3 for free!!!!!!!!!!
PEOPLE SPAWNING DIRECTLY BEHIND YOU AFTER YOU KILL THEM?
What did you think this whole CoD subscription talk was about?
Halo is the major reason.....
People should stop buying Activision releases until this greedy pig shuts his mouth. I was suckered into buying Starcraft2 and the support around that game is so poor. Maybe he should focus on other things like bug free games before shooting off this mouth.
so this garbageass excuse of a FPS series can die off.........People actually start to think and admit that its the SAME thing EVERY single year....
I neither own a COD game nor a Madden game but I have played both and my experience with both has me presenting a hypothesis that people are getting way more bang for their buck with COD than with Madden each year. If people are gonna call out COD, they should do the same for other games with the same yearly appeal.
I think they should just do it already and add higher pricing to maps as well as add pricing to perks, guns etc. Maybe just maybe gamers will unite and take a stand afterwards. Sometimes you have to pushed to make a stand...fall in order to rise up strong...
Sure, COD is a major reason many subscribe to Live, but the fact is, Live doesn't COST Activision anything. MS foots the bill for the servers and bandwidth. You don't get something without paying anything out, and it sounds like that's what Activision wants, which is BS. Kotick should just be happy with the massive sales the series enjoys on the platform. Edit: Yes, they do already get a "modest" portion of the subscription fees. I just don't see that portion growing unless Activion incurs some actual costs. They already benefit massively from their sales on the platform, so any threats or whining are ultimately hollow.
Hmm, but does microsoft make much of a profit from Live? (not a rhetorical question, I actually don't know) It would seem good business ethic to give the developper of the game a small slice of the pie depending on popularity. Then again, neither Microsoft nor Activision are known for good business ethics.
"Because of our Blizzard experience we have an incredible understanding of how important the provision of appropriate customer service is," Kotick said, citing 2,500 World of Warcraft customer service employees for the US and Europe alone. "What we'd like to ideally see is that the investment in the subscription fees going towards the provision of a higher level of customer service [...] to see some portion of the subscription fees go towards game enhancement." Activision does enjoy a "very modest amount of the subscription fees," Kotick told us, but he's more interested in seeing any cost increase in the service go towards "directly benefitting the Call of Duty players." My understanding from that, is Activision actually does get a percentage of Live fees.
Is that what that meant? Fancy wording had me thinking that many subscriptions were just by people wanting to play Activision games. i.e. "Enjoy" meaning to receive the customers as opposed to the fees Guess the line does make more sense if it meant the fees. Ah well, good eye, sir. =)
yes they do. USD50 per year times 10 million plus user is half a billion. i bet not even ten percent of it used to maintain the server. some of them might be sent to publishers to put their game on their server or 'other kind of bribe' thats why ms having trouble trying to implement mmo. because they have to rethink the split between publisher and ms. and also the publisher wont use ms server for their game. actually live is a good bussiness plan. its not a bad bussiness ethics. it just has a weak point that hasnt been exposed yet, eg: mmo, user-created content. its very limited hence it also limits deveelopers creativity in creating new features.
But thats exactly what Kotick said in the interview.
I can't believe he's still not happy with COD's profits. What's next he'll charge COD bullet's per piece just so you can reload?
"Boohoo!.. why can't we make the same money as warcraft!" well for start you'd have to start offering a lot more content to a game besides "single player + multiplayer on relatively small maps" you will have to merge the two, and provide enough wow-factor (pun unintended) for people to actually see this move as a move forward, BY THEIR OWN MEANS. What I mean by that is, the game has to speak for itself, marketing it won't get you legendary status, but talking about massive advancements we don't even know we want yet, WILL. Word of mouth is your only friend if you want to achieve your greedy dreams Bobby.
well i think its ok if they can show the real advantage of subscription based game. which means they have to work harder to maintain their user, which can be done my more maps, more patch, more new weapon etc. and also if the subscription ended up for like 10 bucks a months, its a better deal than 60 bucks for a complete game. none of my game last 6 months.
"higher level of customer service [...] to see some portion of the subscription fees go towards game enhancement," So now Bobby boy wants someone else to pay for the shoddy products activation puts out? Fuck off. Even THQ and hell Namco puts out a higher quality product then activision..
Is he saying since Call of Duty is most popular on XBOX Live that Microsoft should provide some of its revenue back to Activision and exempt PSN and the PC? Im pretty sure Microsoft already pays a royalty in getting DLC as a timed exclusive. Microsoft built Live and people pay for the service, not just to play Activision games. Just because Call of Duty is one of the most popular games on Live doesnt mean Microsoft needs to create a different royalty structure just for them. What option does Activision have, to pull their games from Live and ignore all the games and DLC they sell on Live and the XBOX360? Seems to me they are both doing well working together and Bobby Kotick just wants more. Here's an idea, create your own online service and your own system.
"What we'd like to ideally see is that the investment in the subscription fees going towards the provision of a higher level of customer service [...] to see some portion of the subscription fees go towards game enhancement," he told Joystiq. Probably refering to the cash game that he and his investors are playing.
So he wants Microsoft to fix how it turned out on the PC?
So it's only Xbox live that Kotick wants to charge more to? Fine by me, i'll get the ps3 or pc versions of the game.
lol Only on Xbox Live hahahah , Free PSN ftw
Well, being the xbox boys claim to have the best "version" of the game...now yall asses get to pay for it too..bwahahahahahahahahahahaha ha
More like Xbox Live is giving people a reason to buy your games, thank MS and be happy you're both making profit. While your at it give Sony some of your money because their free service is giving you people to peddle your yearly pile of shit to.
Activison would have a much easier time putting this on to PSN. The thing is though PSN doesn't charge for subscription so it is much less likely (from a business stand point) that people who play on PSN would even consider paying to play it online. People would just play other shooters for free. Technically if MS didn't charge for Live then we wouldn't be having this discussion.
most of you dummies are not even reading the interview. Bobby is not really the devil you all make him out to be. If your headline swallowing would actually stop and take a pause to THINK about what you are reading you would actually notice that these news sites take everything he says and paints an "evil corporate" tone to get hits from a bunch of angry nerds. I mean does COD players really take up more than 50% of paying live players? Who knows?...But I do know for sure that businessmen like bobby have more info on that than you or me. So if it is true, why would it make sense that call of duty players should be paying out their behind to play activision games while MS gets the profit?. You are ALREADY PAYING a subscription to play Call of Duty. It's called Xbox LIVE. And you fools really think it "unfair" that activision should get some more of the share because MS is already charging you? What you fools should really be mad about is that MS is charging you AT ALL to play everyone fugging ELSES games!! Everyone is on bobby's ass because of the infinity ward thing, anyone over the age of 25 who has ever worked on a business KNOWS that anything you create within the business and with business equipment and resources BELONGS to the business. Should activision just let the infinity ward dudes run out with everything they can from the company? It doesn't work that way in ANY company unless you are not actually from the company but a sub-contracted agency who owns what they make and infinity ward wasn't. Thats why those dudes couldn't take the infinity ward name. Activision owns it. The cost of xbox live aint going nowhere into your games, it's going into facebook apps, tweeter,netflix,avatars and idiotic camera games and you call any gamer who wants to actually pay for game content an idiot? WHO is the real idiot? Paying for live is as STUPID as paying for a web-browser on your computer.
Here's the thing, it's their service and just because Activisions games are more popular on Live now doesn't mean they should be targeted because they charge a fee. If anything one would think the games would be more popular on the free services but they are not. Microsoft also opened up other revenue sources for Activision like selling DLC on Live. Just because Microsoft charges for a service they created and control doesnt mean Activision is warranted in getting more from them. If Sony wants to offer free online play through PSN then that's a win for consumers. I dont see the relevancy to why it matters to Activision. If more PC gamers buy off of Steam will Bobby Kotick then want to go after them? "anyone over the age of 25 who has ever worked on a business KNOWS that anything you create within the business and with business equipment and resources BELONGS to the business" Ok, then who owns and controls XBOX Live? In fact Microsoft handles everything on their end. I believe the Playstation 3 and PC versions are handled by Activision and could explain why Live seems more seamless from game to game and the social aspect is more user friendly. It's all built within Live. On PSN some games work better than others which doesnt always translate into the best online experience from game to game. Game and system updates are also quicker and more painless. http://kotaku.com/5402535/i... http://www.softsailor.com/n... So yes, part of those fees do indeed go into something.
This is what happens when lemmings run out and buy generic games from publishers who don't give a dam about you. M$ already charges you $59.99 a year to do what PC and PS3 gamers do for free now Actvision wants to charge you even more money on top of their $59.99 game price tag to play online. M$ needs to do away with the price tag of Xbox Live and share the advertising revenue with the publishers. If Activivison gets the most traffic then they get the biggest share of ad revenue after M$. Xbox live suscription fees, Activision micro-trans-action fee. What's next? the cable company charging you an extra $5.00 to play Call of Duty games. So far no subscription fee from Activision but the fact that they are even talking about it is PURE GREED and DISRESPECT to their gamers plus M$ has not said one word which means they don't care about their gamers either as they just want your cash. Until consolers take a stand and start publicly boycotting games and extra fees then these companies will just run over you.
I rather pay activision 10 bucks a year with the possibility of free game improvements, than MS 60 bucks a year for nothing really.
And fixing the games should remain free. People have choices now, they can buy it on various platforms, not just the XBOX360. Live was never free so its not like consumers can say they didnt know. Live has grown and Microsoft has created a money making machine for themselves but it still doesnt explain why Activision is entitled to any of those Live fees. I dont think Live fees are warranted myself, especially the increase, but i still dont see why that is relevant to Activision. Its not like Activision is giving Live gamers more features over other XBOX360 games or going above and beyond how it plays on PSN and the PC.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.