Hold on. Hold on. I know you're already foaming at the mouth. You saw Bobby Kotick's name, Call of Duty, my Satan image, and something involving paying more money and you assumed that you'd be really angry with whatever was down here. But take a second and read his quote when he was asked by the Wall Street Journal, "If you could snap your fingers, and instantly make one change in your company, what would it be, and why?"
I would have Call of Duty be an online subscription service tomorrow. When you think about what the audience’s interests are and how you could really satisfy bigger audiences with more inspired, creative opportunities, I would love to see us have an online Call of Duty world. I think our players would just have so much of a more compelling experience.
When WSJ followed up and asked if this online subscription Call of Duty was coming Kotick answered, "Hopefully." After this he went on to claim that audiences were "clamoring for it" and that it would allow Activision the opportunity to "do a lot more to really satisfy the interest of the customers."
OK, now take into account that we've heard rumblings of a Call of Duty MMO for a while now. If this is indeed what he is talking about then it's hard to actually get angry at him for expanding the franchise into another realm. If they are simply taking their multiplayer and turning it into some sort of half-assed MMO-like service as we've also heard rumblings of then start lighting the torches. Either way, the line about satisfying the interest of the customer feels like the worst form of BS.
Bobby Kotick Wants Call of Duty Online Subscription Service [Ripten]
Matthew Razak is Destructoid's Associate editor and co-founder of film site
Flixist. He began as community member "cowzilla" and was since sequestered to write brainy features material. He lives in Los Angeles with his beautiful wife.
Likes
Games! Movies! Hats!
Meet the rest of the team
| BBcode help |
| [b]Bold text[/b] |
Bold text |
| [i]Italic text[/i] |
Italic text |
| [url]http://www.dtoid.com/[/url] |
http://www.dtoid.com |
| [url=http://www.dtoid.com/]Web link[/url] |
Web link |
|
| [img]http://www.example.com/robot.jpg[/img] |
 |
Post a comment! You can also post a photo below:
Comment with Facebook
Click connect and comment instantly!
|
Comment with Dtoid
New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds
|
82 comments | showing # 1 to 50
|
Comment with Facebook
Click connect and comment instantly!
|
Comment with Dtoid
New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds
|
Comments policy
Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?
Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!
Contest:
8:00 PM on 06.20.2010 | 
is "duck you sucker" any good? i was thinking of watching it for james coburn.
No matter how much he tries to humanize himself and present himself as someone who made it developing games... He just turns around and presents ideas like this to show what a fat headed suit he is.
"When you think about what the audience’s interests are and how you could really satisfy bigger audiences with more inspired, creative opportunities,"
Why doesn't he trying making something creative instead of CoD 2010? He has a budget, an established fanbase, and several developers in his hands... Yet for some reason innovation can't happen without a subscription? Give me a break. He's already proven he's intent on making the same bullshit over and over again anyway, so who is he trying to fool?
I mean I get it. He's a business man in it for the profit... But at the very least he could stop pretending to give a shit. It's just insulting by now.
We can only blame the people who buy all the overpriced map packs, they've showed Activision they can charge whatever they want for anything with Call of Duty on it.
As a brief aside, I recently did a survey in my school to see what was everyone's current favorite game. The most often answer was CoD6. Now, as a presumption, if I did the same survey in December what do you think they'd say regardless if THIS change goes through? Probably CoD7. THIS IS HOW BRAINWASHED SOME PEOPLE ARE.
Ex: $80 a year for each new yearly installment plus any map packs that might be released for it (let's say they promised a new map every month), etc.
If you were going to buy the games anyways, and get the map packs, you might save some cash by subscribing. Moreover, a strategy like this might suck in some of those people who don't normally spend money on add-ons such as map packs, particularly if it includes the promise of new updates on a fairly regular basis.
So long as such a strategy didn't take anything away from traditional buyers, it could work, and wouldn't necessarily be evil.
could be interesting.
so would it be like MAG, but you have to pay a subscription for it?
MMORPGs are a bit more forgiving and can take a small bit of lag and not depend on great accuracy because its playing with dice rolls and shit.
Those that charge monthly to play one Peer-to-peer RPGs or shooter can go to hell, though. Yeah, let me pay monthly for a game that never adds content. Sega tried that with Phantasy Star. Can't fool me twice.
<-- Electrium is proud to have never bought a CoD game.
This guy is really worried with our satisfaction...
And he's doing the same shit not just with CoD but all Activision-Blizzard games, including Starcraft 2.
Is this 2004?
Kotick's right, the fan bas is clamoring for a great experience, and true a subscription based COD might bring that - if he wasn't going to just take the game as it is now and just charge you to play it.
C'mon, we know this man has no good unique ideas. This whole endeavor will end up entirely unfulfilling.
are you kidding me with that vague bullsh*t? the only "inspired, creative opportunities" he's talking about are the one's that'll benefit Activision's shareholders, at the expense of the gamers.
he's pissed off that gamers, who already paid activision for their product, are still playing and enjoying the games (specifically modern warfare 1 & 2 for 360 & ps3) while not being continuously billed for the privilege. plain and simple. that gamers have already paid Activision for those games, is completely irrelevant.
now i understand it's his job to find a way to squeeze as much money from consumers as possible, but to hide behind it by spouting this horse-shit nonsense of "satisfy(ing) bigger audiences with more inspired, creative opportunities" is f*ing insulting.
hey Kotick, I'm a customer and this does not satisfy my interests... F- YOU KOTICK, F- YOU!
"I wouldn't mind this business stuff half as much if they were just honest about it. Be open and honest and just say how you're only doing this for the money. How you don't really care about the consumer after you get their cash."
I don't know why you would think Activision - or any other business - cares about anything besides your dollars. It's just about the best ways to get your moneys. Valve releases new, free content for TF2 not because they think you are all really swell guys, but because they think it'll make more people buy TF2 and any more Valve games. There's definitely value in reputation.
Which is something Kotick and Activision don't seem to understand. Valve wants your money as much as Kotick does, but Valve is (arguably) smarter about it. All this money-grubbing is going to bite him in the ass if he doesn't churn out quality products to back it up (and possibly even if he does). Believe me, if Activision is using bad business practices, they won't pay in some vague, karmic, eternal Hell, they'll pay in dollars and cents. They'll get (earn) a bad reputation, and people won't want to buy their games.