• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Activision directly responsible for $10 XBL price hike?

D

Dunlop

Member
I doubt activision has that kind of power as there games sell a shitton on the 360...so they would both lose if there was no CoD on the 360

It's not impossible though and if it's true..so what? The fact is MS raised the price, what difference does it make where the money goes? If it is too high then you do not resub
 
B

butter_stick

Banned
So let's imagine the scenario

Bobby: Give us some XBL money
XBL Head Asshole: No
Bobby: ....OK, we're gonna go...PS3...exclu....OK, never mind!

There's no reason at all why Microsoft would willingly give money to Activision when their service is the number one thing driving COD sales in the first place.
 
L

luxarific

Nork unification denier
Ploid 3.0 said:
If you have Live Gold you get netflix for free?
Click to expand...

No, you have to be a Netflix subscriber. The only benefit 360 Netflix had over PS3 Netflix was that you didn't need a disk, but that advantage is gone now.
 
R

REMEMBER CITADEL

Banned
claviertekky said:
Honestly, I think the cynical OP is wrong here.

If anyone's used the ESPN3 app for the XBOX 360, you would know that as how the app works right now as there are zero ads.

ZERO. When commercial breaks occur, ESPN plays a please wait screen until the game comes back on.

That's where I think the $10 goes. How can you offer commercial free sports programming when the PC/Mac counterpart does?

You guys are crazy. If anyone's to blame, it's definitely MS.
Click to expand...

That might be true, but it's certainly worth investigating and getting an official confirmation.

Not that it changes much, in the end it's still the question of whether you feel like you're getting your money's worth, but there should really be more transparency about such things.
 
D

Dunlop

Member
luxarific said:
No, you have to be a Netflix subscriber. The only benefit 360 Netflix had over PS3 Netflix was that you didn't need a disk, but that advantage is gone now.
Click to expand...


made worse by the fact that the PS3 is the better Netflix client

That might be true, but it's certainly worth investigating and getting an official confirmation.

Not that it changes much, in the end it's still the question of whether you feel like you're getting your money's worth, but there should really be more transparency about such things
Click to expand...

why?
 
P

POWERSPHERE

Banned
Australians don't get any of those benefits. We get foxtel cable TV thru live, but have to have gold and a $20 per month sub fee.

Live is bullshit.

Also for people crying about a games 'journalist' to get onto this, please show me these 'journalists' as I only see games reviewers. You don't see movie reviewers calling themselves Film Journalists. Least I hope not.
 
B

butter_stick

Banned
Logical people: Microsoft raised the price because it's been the same for 5 years and they think they can get away with it.

Internet posters: OMG CONSPIRACY
 
D

distrbnce

Banned
luxarific said:
No, you have to be a Netflix subscriber. The only benefit 360 Netflix had over PS3 Netflix was that you didn't need a disk, but that advantage is gone now.
Click to expand...

Another advantage bought by Microsoft.
 
quickwhips

quickwhips

Member
REMEMBER CITADEL said:
That might be true, but it's certainly worth investigating and getting an official confirmation.

Not that it changes much, in the end it's still the question of whether you feel like you're getting your money's worth, but there should really be more transparency about such things.
Click to expand...

This is a rumor but alot of people are stating that its fact. I mean the title is something you would see on fox fucking news. Question mark and all.
 
J

John

Member
butter_stick said:
Logical people: Microsoft raised the price because it's been the same for 5 years and they think they can get away with it.

Internet posters: OMG CONSPIRACY
Click to expand...
you can stop trying any time bro
 
N

Najaf

Member
butter_stick said:
Logical people: Microsoft raised the price because it's been the same for 5 years and they think they can get away with it.

Internet posters: OMG CONSPIRACY
Click to expand...


Also, with inflation taken into consideration, Microsoft was making a hell of a lot less money off of the $50 a month ago than five years ago.
 
P

POWERSPHERE

Banned
quickwhips said:
This is a rumor but alot of people are stating that its fact. I mean the title is something you would see on fox fucking news. Question mark and all.
Click to expand...
Yeah the mega corporate big money GAF news team should try harder...
 
H

Hey You

Member
Fuck that.

Oh wait, 3 months & 1 year subscriptions didn't go up in price here in Canada, so I don't really care.

As long as I'm getting everything I got before Activision got a cut, I don't really care.
 
B

butter_stick

Banned
John said:
you can stop trying any time bro
Click to expand...

Trying to be logical?

It's far more likely Kotick was referencing whatever money they got from Microsoft in exchange for COD map exclusivity for however many months than Microsoft are directly giving them a percentage of each monthly XBL fee. Especially when most people probably haven't even felt the effects of the $10 increase yet.
 
D

Dunlop

Member
REMEMBER CITADEL said:
Why is it worth investigating or why should there be more transparency?
Click to expand...


Both, whether they use the money for money hats to hire interns to wipe their asses, the cost of the service is the same.

You are a person who purchased a box to plug into your TV for entertainment, you do not sit on their board. They do not owe you an explanation, if the cost is deemed to high you simply do not resub.
 
D

distrbnce

Banned
Najaf said:
Also, with inflation taken into consideration, Microsoft was making a hell of a lot less money off of the $50 a month ago than five years ago.
Click to expand...

Er, while at the same time, they're taking a hell of a lot more than anybody else.
 
D

Durante

Member
Very interesting. It's hard to dismiss it as a conspiracy theory -- if the Kotick quote from Nov 12 is accurate, it's basically a direct confirmation.
 
T

teruterubozu

Member
Durante said:
Very interesting. It's hard to dismiss it as a conspiracy theory -- if the Kotick quote from Nov 12 is accurate, it's basically a direct confirmation.
Click to expand...

:lol

So Activision is hiding a significant "Xbox Live" income in their quarterly filings (which can be viewed very easily) from their shareholders and the SEC and Microsoft is in cahoots?

Everyone loves quotes but nobody investigates the money trail.
 
D

durrrrrrrrrr

Member
butter_stick said:
Logical people: Microsoft raised the price because it's been the same for 5 years and they think they can get away with it.

Internet posters: OMG CONSPIRACY
Click to expand...
thank you. at least one person in here isn't a complete lunatic.

good for Activision and Kotick. i don't buy their games or play on xbla, but these guys are really 1 step ahead of everyone else in the west.
 
Z

zeelman

Member
Anerythristic said:
This is plausible but I have to laugh at all the people thinking Activisons "threat" was PS3 exclusivity if they were not paid.
Click to expand...

Yeah, why would Activision want to give up such a huge source of revenue?
 
A

aegies

Member
distrbnce said:
Another advantage bought by Microsoft.
Click to expand...

Microsoft didn't pay for the Netflix exclusive. Or at least, that's not why it landed on 360 first. There's a great story there that hopefully can be told at some point.
 
P

Polk

Member
Anerythristic said:
This is plausible but I have to laugh at all the people thinking Activisons "threat" was PS3 exclusivity if they were not paid.
Click to expand...
Going PS3 only would be ridiculous but changing to advertise COD with PS3 and lack of exclusive dlc priority could hurt MS sales.
 
D

Dunlop

Member
aegies said:
Microsoft didn't pay for the Netflix exclusive. Or at least, that's not why it landed on 360 first. There's a great story there that hopefully can be told at some point.
Click to expand...

I thought they did at the time, was a great move either way
 
M

Massa

Member
aegies said:
Microsoft didn't pay for the Netflix exclusive. Or at least, that's not why it landed on 360 first. There's a great story there that hopefully can be told at some point.
Click to expand...

Are you referring to this?
 
R

REMEMBER CITADEL

Banned
Dunlop said:
Both, whether they use the money for money hats to hire interns to wipe their asses, the cost of the service is the same.
Click to expand...

I agree with that, I just said the very same thing a couple of posts ago:

claviertekky said:
Not that it changes much, in the end it's still the question of whether you feel like you're getting your money's worth, but there should really be more transparency about such things.
Click to expand...

Now, why do I think it's worth investigating. Like the OP's detective work has shown, there have been some really interesting coincidences and strange statements coming from Activision recently. Serious journalists should be able to spot those things and make proper inquiries. Of course, the completely wrong thing to do would be to blow this out of proportion with sensationalistic claims and then ask questions later.

And transparency is always good. People have the right to know what they're paying for with their money. Personally, it wouldn't make a difference to me, but some people, for instance, are opposed to giving any money to Activision. Others only want to pay for things that they're actually using, even though they're probably paying for some services they're not really using even now.

Really, if this theory is proven to be right (I'm not entirely buying it, but like I said, there's no harm in asking), and with all the problems Microsoft has had with MMO makers, maybe it's time to revise Live subscription policies. I'm not at all suggesting dropping paid subscriptions altogether (because, let's face it, that's not going to happen), but maybe they should introduce an option of paying a low fee for the basic service (say, $20 a year) and then various micro-subscriptions on top of that for games and/or services that you actually intend to use.
 
Reallink

Reallink

Member
butter_stick said:
Logical people: Microsoft raised the price because it's been the same for 5 years and they think they can get away with it.

Internet posters: OMG CONSPIRACY
Click to expand...

Wow you a dumbass, their ad and marketplace revenue (which didn't 6 or 7 years ago) offsets inflation and service fees 1000 fold.
 
S

snap0212

Member
TheNiX said:
US and Mexico were the only places to get a 12 month hike. UK and Canada had their monthly prices go up by $1.

Canadians have been paying $59.99 since the start of the service.

List of sub prices increased.
Click to expand...
The price went up for me as well and I live in Europe. They now want 60€ (more than $80) even though I don't have Last.FM, ESPN, or Netflix.

Najaf said:
Also, with inflation taken into consideration, Microsoft was making a hell of a lot less money off of the $50 a month ago than five years ago.
Click to expand...
I really, really doubt that. Webspace and server costs were way higher in 2002 than they are now. Inflation would justify the price incease if we weren't talking about technology that gets cheaper and cheaper and cheaper every year.
 
B

butter_stick

Banned
Microsoft probably pay for things like map exclusivity, as well as various other XBL things like Netflix, ESPN or whatever, and with that increased spending they raised the price of the service. You can look at it as Activision is responsible if you want, seeing as Microsoft probably paid them fairly handsomely for COD map exclusivity, but it's never going to be the simple "let's give them a percentage of the fee" style situation people seem to want to be outraged about.

Reallink said:
Wow you a dumbass, their ad and marketplace revenue (which didn't 6 or 7 years ago) offsets inflation and service fees 1000 fold.
Click to expand...

...where did I say anything about inflation? I said they raised it because they thought the market would accept it. When you have $50 for years, bumping it by $10 probably isn't going to lose you a lot of customers but will make you a fair bit more money, which covers their spending on exclusivity deals as well as helping make the service more profitable. Herp derp?
 
T

teruterubozu

Member
REMEMBER CITADEL said:
I agree with that, I just said the very same thing a couple of posts ago:



Now, why do I think it's worth investigating. Like the OP's detective work has shown, there have been some really interesting coincidences and strange statements coming from Activision recently. Serious journalists should be able to spot those things and make proper inquiries. Of course, the completely wrong thing to do would be to blow this out of proportion with sensationalistic claims and then ask questions later.

And transparency is always good. People have the right to know what they're paying for with their money. Personally, it wouldn't make a difference to me, but some people, for instance, are opposed to giving any money to Activision. Others only want to pay for things that they're actually using, even though they're probably paying for some services they're not really using even now.

Really, if this theory is proven to be right (I'm not entirely buying it, but like I said, there's no harm in asking), and with all the problems Microsoft has had with MMO makers, maybe it's time to revise Live subscription policies. I'm not at all suggesting dropping paid subscriptions altogether (because, let's face it, that's not going to happen), but maybe they should introduce an option of paying a low fee for the basic service (say, $20 a year) and then various micro-subscriptions on top of that for games and/or services that you actually intend to use.
Click to expand...

For the umpteenth time, it's easy to investigate. You look at Activision's quarterly financial filings for this supposed "Xbox Live" income. There isn't. So does that mean Activision's hiding income from the SEC and its shareholders? Does that mean Microsoft is in cahoots and also not reporting this deal? I highly fucking doubt it.
 
R

REMEMBER CITADEL

Banned
teruterubozu said:
For the umpteenth time, it's easy to investigate. You look at Activision's quarterly financial filings for this supposed "Xbox Live" income. There isn't. So does that mean Activision's hiding income from the SEC and its shareholders? Does that mean Microsoft is in cahoots and also not reporting this deal? I highly fucking doubt it.
Click to expand...

True, but why wait until the next quarterly report if you can politely ask some questions now? Depending on when this alleged deal came to being, it wouldn't necessarily be included in the last report.
 
M

Massa

Member
teruterubozu said:
For the umpteenth time, it's easy to investigate. You look at Activision's quarterly financial filings for this supposed "Xbox Live" income. There isn't. So does that mean Activision's hiding income from the SEC and its shareholders? Does that mean Microsoft is in cahoots and also not reporting this deal? I highly fucking doubt it.
Click to expand...

There are many ways Microsoft can "pay" Activision: advertising their games, lower licensing fees, etc.

Microsoft can't just write a check to Activision every month because then every other publisher would come knocking on their door.
 
F

FreedomFrisbee

Member
See, the thing is that Microsoft uses that money to pay for all the servers and updates and other Live related stuff they do. Is Activision providing those services? No, Microsoft is. If Microsoft were to compensate Activision for attracting people to the service or something, then they'd have to compensate everyone. This is probably a case of Kotick just not understanding what he's talking about. He probably thinks that Activision is far more integral to Live or something. Or just not realizing what people are paying for when they pay for Live. If he really wanted to get a cut of the revenue, then he could just tack $5 onto CoD multiplayer. Period. Then PS3 and 360 would both have to pay.
 
T

teruterubozu

Member
REMEMBER CITADEL said:
True, but why wait until the next quarterly report if you can politely ask some questions now? Depending on when this alleged deal came to being, it wouldn't necessarily be included in the last report.
Click to expand...

And keep it a secret to shareholders when they flout COD numbers? Why would they hide this incredible deal? It makes no sense whatsoever.

Massa said:
There are many ways Microsoft can "pay" Activision: advertising their games, lower licensing fees, etc.
Click to expand...

So BOTH companies are going to fudge their numbers? What's the point?
 
R

REMEMBER CITADEL

Banned
Massa said:
There are many ways Microsoft can "pay" Activision: advertising their games, lower licensing fees, etc.
Click to expand...

But if it's not a direct revenue stream percentage, you could argue that the price hike has nothing to do with Activision. Microsoft simply wants more money and what they do with it afterward is their business.
 
D

Dead Man

Member
quickwhips said:
This is a rumor but alot of people are stating that its fact. I mean the title is something you would see on fox fucking news. Question mark and all.
Click to expand...
So a direct statement would be better as a thread title? I don't understand.
 
M

Massa

Member
REMEMBER CITADEL said:
But if it's not a direct revenue stream percentage, you could argue that the price hike has nothing to do with Activision. Microsoft simply wants more money and what they do with it afterward is their business.
Click to expand...

Oh, I don't think people should directly blame Activision for any price hike on a service provided by Microsoft.

Even if Activision is indirectly involved by asking for money/benefits it's still 100% Microsoft's decision how much to charge and how to use their subscription money.
 
C

Chrange

Banned
The idea of Activision being behind it seems ludicrous as the price hike only actually happened in some areas. There was no increase at all in the yearly sub in Canada, for example.

Price corrections happen, especially when a service hasn't changed price in eight years.
 
M

Mandoric

Banned
claviertekky said:
Honestly, I think the cynical OP is wrong here.

If anyone's used the ESPN3 app for the XBOX 360, you would know that as how the app works right now as there are zero ads.

ZERO. When commercial breaks occur, ESPN plays a please wait screen until the game comes back on.

That's where I think the $10 goes. How can you offer commercial free sports programming when the PC/Mac counterpart does?
Click to expand...

Can't speak for all providers, but on my local Comcast the PC streams are also ad-free.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Original Xbox Co-creator Mocks Activision CEO Bobby Kotick After Now Being Bought By Microsoft
Game Dev
34
3K
newtypepilot replied
  • Locked
Sony Really Is Concerned About Microsoft's Xbox Strategy Following the Activision Blizzard Buyout
7
2K
Flutta replied
Internal emails reveal that Activision was briefed on Nintendo Switch 2 last year, similar to PS4/Xbox One in performance
Hardware Hype Platform 2
55
3K
Fake replied
Bobby Kotick is leaving Activision Blizzard on December 29th
2 3 4
183
10K
HeisenbergFX4 replied
Price Adjustments for Activision Games in Multiple Steam Stores Following Microsoft's Acquisition (Confirmed in Brazil, Argentina, and Indonesia)
News Business Sales-Age 2 3 4 5
216
13K
chilichote replied
Top Bottom