PDA

View Full Version : Secondary charge to play online?


shadowrowin
07-18-2010, 10:39 PM
A friend of mine told me about this. It seems that microsoft, as well as sony, are thinking of charging people to play online games. Co-op and multi-player to be specific. It seems that noone is making money when people play online, so naturally, they must take money from us gamers anyway they can. So... they want to make us pay so the companies make more money. This leads me to ask a simple question.

ARE WE NOT ALREADY FUCKING PAYING MONEY TO PLAY ONLINE?!?!?!?!?

X-box live FUCKING COSTS MONEY!!! Are you telling me that we have to pay a second charge after paying money just to be able to use x-box live? So we pay a decent chunk of change to get access to x-box live, but oh no! You have to pay more to play your games online! :rant:


I am waiting to hear the source of this info from my friend, but if this is true, then FUCK YOU MICROSOFT. A bigger FUCK YOU to microsoft then sony since we already pay to play online for the X-box 360.

:uzi:
:AR15
:boom To hell with secondary charge!!!

Riddle_Me_This
07-18-2010, 10:43 PM
I believe it's game companies like Activision who want to charge an extra fee to play their games online, mainly Call of Duty.

x MrsMassacre x
07-18-2010, 10:46 PM
check this out

http://360junkies.com/showthread.php/1320-Evidence-that-Activision-planned-to-charge-subscription-fees-for-Call-of-Duty

shadowrowin
07-18-2010, 10:47 PM
They want money. I get that. Didnt they get money when we, you know, BOUGHT THE FUCKING GAME!?!?!?!

RaidenX52
07-18-2010, 10:52 PM
I heard EA wanted it in place. It's just to get money back from what they lose in the pre-owned market. I can't see it working out for them.

Filter x360a
07-18-2010, 11:09 PM
There's a big article in this month's OXM (Dead Rising 2 cover) about companies wanted to add an extra fee for online gaming. Whether this will be built into the cost of buying the game or a separate cost is yet to reveled, same with if this will actually happen.

YoungWarrior111
07-18-2010, 11:12 PM
I heard EA wanted it in place. It's just to get money back from what they lose in the pre-owned market. I can't see it working out for them.

EA have something similar in place, where each new game has one license for online play. The next gamertag or console (can't remember exact specifics) to use that disc must pay a fee to access online features. A bit ridiculous if you ask me. I can't see how they lose out in a pre-owned market though, as they are having their game sold multiple times for the one copy.

shadowrowin
07-18-2010, 11:12 PM
If this does actually happen. If They start charging to play online when we already have to pay to play online on X-box, I wont be buying those games. I love MW2, but I refuse to pay another fee. Its a shooter, not an MMORPG!

Corrupt.
07-18-2010, 11:29 PM
I say we just all boycott the next COD. They have been so samey since 4 anyway...

BemusedBox
07-18-2010, 11:29 PM
Its bad news EA and a few others have started allready with online acceses only with new copys other companys see this working and will look for a way to milk more money out of us.

iKiddo
07-18-2010, 11:31 PM
I say we just all boycott the next COD. They have been so samey since 4 anyway...

Don't blame Treyarch cause they do better with IW's stuff than IW.

Gun-Nut
07-18-2010, 11:39 PM
I really hope if Activision do decide to put a monthly fee on a CoD game that people actually boycott it and not say they are going to otherwise there is going to be no impact and they will keep doing it each year.

sm182
07-18-2010, 11:55 PM
I can honestly say that ANY game that requires me to pay again (on top of my Xbox Live Gold membership) to play online will not be purchased by me. I can only hope others do the same.

RaidenX52
07-18-2010, 11:59 PM
EA have something similar in place, where each new game has one license for online play. The next gamertag or console (can't remember exact specifics) to use that disc must pay a fee to access online features. A bit ridiculous if you ask me. I can't see how they lose out in a pre-owned market though, as they are having their game sold multiple times for the one copy.

They don't get the money for it though, they only get the cash from when it was first sold, any other times goes to the store selling it. That's why so many places that didn't used to have much of a selection are jumping in on it.

Sizzlebuzz
07-19-2010, 12:03 AM
Yeah, I bet many people would just stop playing altogether. Xbox people already have to pay, and PS3 people have the PS3 so they don't have to pay.

shadowrowin
07-19-2010, 12:12 AM
Activision is not losing any money at all. They knew that when they make a game online, then need to maintain the online play (the only excuse i can think of for them losing money) with updates. The fact that so many play their game is no right to nickle and dime people. They already got their money and COD IS NOT WoW!

They should know that the fans and players will turn on them in a heartbeat if they try this. They will lose money in the long run with many less people buying their games in the future.

KeepEmRolling
07-19-2010, 01:08 AM
I wouldn't pay to play a game like COD online, but I paid $10/month for almost 3 years to play PSU. That's pretty much all i played though.

Dz06lt
07-19-2010, 01:22 AM
its funny how M$ keeps "adding" features to give Gold membership value, perhaps the next step is to make a platinum level which will allow for online play. As for the OP's comments regarding Sony unless you have proof you better move on. PS already announced their premium membership and the abilty to play online is still FREE. I think the reason might have something to do with the systems they use. MS uses dedicated server system while PSN online is more of a peer server(at least i still think this is correct)

MachineZed
07-19-2010, 01:42 AM
Activision is not losing any money at all. They knew that when they make a game online, then need to maintain the online play (the only excuse i can think of for them losing money) with updates. The fact that so many play their game is no right to nickle and dime people. They already got their money and COD IS NOT WoW!

They should know that the fans and players will turn on them in a heartbeat if they try this. They will lose money in the long run with many less people buying their games in the future.

Tell that to the 5 studios Activision has closed since 2008. Of course they know that people will turn on them. Just like people don't like the fact they only give one Key away with a new purchase of a game.

DopeySO
07-19-2010, 02:21 AM
This isnt a matter of "if this happens", its a matter of "when this happens". Because its going to happen. Industry insiders have been talking about it for over a year now. Big companies are just looking for the perfect way to introduce it. As someone as said, OXM has a wonderful article on it this month if you would like to read more.

It will start with the obvious companies -Activision, EA, etc, and depending on their success other companies will follow suit.

Kramericus
07-19-2010, 02:40 AM
Makes me glad Im not much of an online player. Sounds like they are going to turn it into a real screw job soon enough here. It will work if they all do it together, it will flop if one tries to step forward and the other companies hang back IMO

Dreamer84
07-19-2010, 04:48 AM
I can honestly say that ANY game that requires me to pay again (on top of my Xbox Live Gold membership) to play online will not be purchased by me. I can only hope others do the same.

If this happens I won't bother with games anymore

Chickenpotato
07-19-2010, 04:59 AM
This is screwed up.
So you mean that the $100 we pay for say MW2, all we are buying is a crappy 2 hour single player game, and then we pay another $100 or whatever to play online.

WTF!

Kaiyo
07-19-2010, 05:03 AM
Blame COD: Black-Ops if this goes on....

tugboatman
07-19-2010, 09:43 AM
. I can't see how they lose out in a pre-owned market though, as they are having their game sold multiple times for the one copy.

Thats the problem though, the developers only get a share of the money from the first sale of the game, then if someone trades the game in all the profit from the sale of the same disc goes to the shop!

Genesis x360a
07-19-2010, 09:49 AM
Blame COD: Black-Ops if this goes on....

Why should we blame Treyarch and Black-Ops?? Please give a reason because its not there fault and i cant really this happening before or when Black-Ops is released. If anybody is to blame if this go's ahead it will be EA or Activision.

Seany Show
07-19-2010, 10:01 AM
This is screwed up.
So you mean that the $100 we pay for say MW2, all we are buying is a crappy 2 hour single player game, and then we pay another $100 or whatever to play online.

WTF!

You obviously need to shop around if you purchase games for $100. Also not sure where you are getting your figures from but $100 for online is exaggerating just abit. If Activision do implement it, it would be nearer to $5<.

SubG3nius
07-19-2010, 10:13 AM
Why should we blame Treyarch and Black-Ops?? Please give a reason because its not there fault and i cant really this happening before or when Black-Ops is released. If anybody is to blame if this go's ahead it will be EA or Activision.

Especially that scumbag Bobby Kotick.

Atrum Kardia
07-19-2010, 10:34 AM
I won't be buying any games with secondary charges. Buying games is a waste of money as it is.

Kairi
07-19-2010, 02:42 PM
Dont they already give out changes with certain games like Final Fantasy XI for example?

FRANKSEY
07-19-2010, 02:52 PM
why dont they just add a code for online included with the game that can only be redeemed once if there that worried about loosing money with pre owned games.

Kaiyo
07-19-2010, 04:06 PM
Dont they already give out changes with certain games like Final Fantasy XI for example?

Those are 360 MMOs. They already have online fees.
Also Activision wants more money, simple as that. The "new online code comes with new games and if you buy used games then want to play online must buy online code if not used code already" is already there.

shadowrowin
07-19-2010, 06:18 PM
Activision is going to lose money in the long run. I bet about half the people that play the COD games will quit if they have to pay to play online, and as time goes on, less and less people will buy the COD series.I know I will never buy another cod game if i have to pay to co-op and mp.

bLaKgRaVy
07-19-2010, 07:09 PM
There's a big article in this month's OXM (Dead Rising 2 cover) about companies wanted to add an extra fee for online gaming. Whether this will be built into the cost of buying the game or a separate cost is yet to revealed, same with if this will actually happen.

It shouldn't be built into the cost of the game. It wouldn't be fair. Not everyone plays games online, and to charge $10 extra at retail because the game has online play would make me not buy the game, as I'm sure others would too. Would it be fair if they charged $10 for Aliens vs Predator when it came out because it had multiplayer? Hell no. Everyone agrees that the multiplayer sucked, plus Rebellion isn't going to support the game anymore, 4 months after release. Or how about the broken Wolfenstein? I wouldn't have bought that if it was $10 more, either, and I've been a Wolfenstein fan since 1992.

I played MW2 for a week (probably 25 hours total) before saying goodbye to it. I've played TF:WFC, Red Dead, Wolfenstein and AvP a total of maybe 6 hours each. Gears 1 & 2 the same. I used to play the Tom Clancy games with my friends, totaling about 30-40 hours each. I don't play games online, even if there are achievements. I just don't like playing with others except my friends because there are a lot of assholes out there and I don't want to waste my time with them. Some are cool, but they are few and far between.

If they start charging us for online play, it should be separate from the cost of the game. PC games have been doing it for years with their MMORPG's. But to pay $50 to Microsoft then another $10-15 to the developer, plus however much it costs for the internet itself, it's an expensive hobby. If anything, there should be a trial period of a week to see if you actually like to play the multiplayer in a certain game. But still, I wouldn't buy it.

Or do what I do, buy new on eBay so the developer doesn't get a penny from me or buy used.

wexnlex
07-19-2010, 08:47 PM
Why pay them extra when they don't even use dedicated servers? Minus leaderbords. Anyone who would pay a fee when their own internet is the server is borderline retarded. I see MMOs and such needing a fee as the servers and databases aren't cheap but a shooter? Lol come on. Then again people will still buy it. So get ready for fees when they should be paying you.

I am talking about COD by the way. Most EA servers are on their end so the fee if buying the game used sounds fair.

I could be wrong but I think this makes sense =]

BrazorY2k
07-19-2010, 09:25 PM
I won't support that at all. If activision thinks they can coerce me into subscription fee for MW they must be pretty naive. As a PC gamer I'm already pretty pissed off I have to pay for xbl, because online play is the only xbl feature I use and that is free on PC as well as on the PS3:mad:!

iiDaRReN316x
07-20-2010, 07:55 AM
Did this with UFC

litepink
07-20-2010, 08:09 AM
Why pay them extra when they don't even use dedicated servers? Minus leaderbords. Anyone who would pay a fee when their own internet is the server is borderline retarded. I see MMOs and such needing a fee as the servers and databases aren't cheap but a shooter? Lol come on. Then again people will still buy it. So get ready for fees when they should be paying you.

I am talking about COD by the way. Most EA servers are on their end so the fee if buying the game used sounds fair.

I could be wrong but I think this makes sense =]

Activision, EA, and everyone who follows suit with these secondary charges will be investing back in their product, and not pocketing ALL OF IT. I think everyone thinks they are going to be paying for the "same old" Call of Duty but it won't be. You'll get dedicated servers, updates, leaderboards, some maps possibly, and many features that MMO's have now. Will it be worth an extra $5-$15 a month? To most people no, but that small percentage will make up for the lost game sales.

Also, it's not like these games will be COMPLETELY devoid of multiplayer, but will have just enough to "get you hooked" as the analyst in OXM stated.

mmartynn
07-20-2010, 08:29 AM
they could follow EAs route and put a one use code for online in all new games, and then charge you 1200MSPs if you got it pre-owned.
if they didnt do that and just charged per month, it wouldnt get as many sales. seems like a bad idea TBH.


and did anyone mention that phantasy star universe you had to pay to get online (and max 1250)

Gackt
07-20-2010, 08:57 AM
Activision, EA, and everyone who follows suit with these secondary charges will be investing back in their product, and not pocketing ALL OF IT. I think everyone thinks they are going to be paying for the "same old" Call of Duty but it won't be. You'll get dedicated servers, updates, leaderboards, some maps possibly, and many features that MMO's have now. Will it be worth an extra $5-$15 a month? To most people no, but that small percentage will make up for the lost game sales.

Also, it's not like these games will be COMPLETELY devoid of multiplayer, but will have just enough to "get you hooked" as the analyst in OXM stated.


How many games on 360 have dedicated servers aside from Frontlines? And I seriously doubt we will see many console games with them. Even so....developers could use in game advertising to pay for servers instead of charging gamers even more money to play online. 60 dollars for a new game should damn well cover all the costs.

Tufty
07-20-2010, 09:33 AM
I wouldn't pay to play a game if I'm paying for Xbox Live. Honestly, if Activision think that they can do this their stupid, With Infinity Ward now out of the picture, Treyarch have more power than they think. Call of Duty is the biggest franchise in the industry, if they remove Treyarch, then they have one.

I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens, if they do start charging, I'm going to stick with developers that actually car about their communities. Which is only Epic & Bungie.

shadowrowin
07-25-2010, 03:39 AM
Is there any new news on this subject?

Kramericus
07-25-2010, 04:29 AM
I wouldn't pay to play a game if I'm paying for Xbox Live. Honestly, if Activision think that they can do this their stupid, With Infinity Ward now out of the picture, Treyarch have more power than they think. Call of Duty is the biggest franchise in the industry, if they remove Treyarch, then they have one.

I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens, if they do start charging, I'm going to stick with developers that actually car about their communities. Which is only Epic & Bungie. Eh, no offense to COD but its not like it would be a difficult formula for a new developer to come in and copy for activision.

Emcee Shadow
07-25-2010, 05:07 AM
I can honestly say that ANY game that requires me to pay again (on top of my Xbox Live Gold membership) to play online will not be purchased by me. I can only hope others do the same.

I couldnt put it any better myself! If I pay for a game full price and Xbl, why the hell would i pay more!? I would Definitely not pay extra

AlberichMX
07-25-2010, 06:46 AM
they could follow EAs route and put a one use code for online in all new games, and then charge you 1200MSPs if you got it pre-owned.
if they didnt do that and just charged per month, it wouldnt get as many sales. seems like a bad idea TBH.


This. i mean, i only play Halo, Gears and few other games on-line, i don't want to pay more fees :mad:

Starstrukk X360A
07-25-2010, 08:10 AM
Activision is the only one that wants to milk people out of their money.

Hence the ten new games of each franchise a year.

mmartynn
07-25-2010, 08:45 AM
Activision is the only one that wants to milk people out of their money.

Hence the ten new games of each franchise a year.


6 of em are guitar hero games

wouldnt it be funny if they tried chargin you to play that online.

"you do not have a valid membership, please take out our morgage to get one year online play"

then you go to play online

"oh, you dont have 1 certain song everyone else does, unfortunatly, you cant play online till you buy it"

EliteShadowMan
07-25-2010, 03:11 PM
they already had it in the news section that activision wouldnt be doing it though so meh.

TsarBlandi
07-25-2010, 04:24 PM
facepalm @ another person moaning about charges, they can do what they want to be honest, if they think people are going to be willing to give them some more money, theyll charge, thats how business works

no im not happy about it either but if its worth the money ill pay for it

Menzeldinho
07-25-2010, 07:25 PM
MMO's are the only game i will pay monthly for as the developers add content in nearly weekly to make it worth your while. Games like CoD they make the money on DLC, try and get us to pay monthly.. see your numbers drop period.

Jewshie
07-25-2010, 07:35 PM
Everyone can stop moaning for the moment as Infinity Ward and Treyarch have both said they are not planing an extra fee for the soon to be released games (such as Black Ops).
But this still does not take away the possibility that more games in the future will have secondary charges.

TheVoidRose
07-26-2010, 10:20 AM
If they want to add a secondary charge, they should make DLC free. That's just getting to gredy, pay to connect to live then pay to play on live. Pay for your game, then DLC, then more to play your DLC online. Pretty soon it will start to leek into your personal lives, and then...

Tufty
07-26-2010, 10:33 AM
Eh, no offense to COD but its not like it would be a difficult formula for a new developer to come in and copy for activision.

Yeh, but if they did I bet it would be an absolute train wreck. Treyarch produced a few bad games before they made world at war, and that was only good because of Zombies.

Anyway, I'm sure some developers will be cautions to take up a contracts after the whole thing with Infinity Ward.

DigitalTru7h
07-26-2010, 02:18 PM
Report and move on.

wildlatics09
07-26-2010, 02:53 PM
If they want to add a secondary charge, they should make DLC free. That's just getting to gredy, pay to connect to live then pay to play on live. Pay for your game, then DLC, then more to play your DLC online. Pretty soon it will start to leek into your personal lives, and then...

yeah i agree we cant just splash out 40 on xbl, another 40 on the game, pay for dlc, AND NOW PAY TO PLAY THE GAME ONLINE???

but i think we should pay a little less for dlc, but still play online for free - after all were paying 40 to play online, so why cant we?

vgfanatic1
07-26-2010, 04:06 PM
I say we just all boycott the next COD. They have been so samey since 4 anyway...

Good luck trying to get all the CoD fanboys to boycott it. I know some people who are so addicted that even going to the store to buy the next game in the series is a waste of precious CoD time. In fact, someone I know, who I'm not really friendly with, asked me to go out of my way to pick it up for him, because he could rank up once or twice in the time it would take him to do it. How would have asked his friends, but they were all playing CoD. Just try to get them to stop...

And no, i'm not saying every CoD fan is like that (<flame shield) so don't be insulted if you like CoD.

Although I do agreed, if activision does begin to charge for this (would most likely be monthly fees) then I will neverm in my life, buy another game from them again. They back themselves up with the fact that live gold does not only grant multiplayer, it has other benefits as well. These include facebook, twitter, and last fm, which are all already free on the computer, and netflix, which you already have to pay extra for the membership. I can guarantee than nobody gets live for any of these things, only the multiplayer.

All because companies like Activision are so poor........