Support NeoGAF

[Dyno]

This is the slyest of moneyhats! A veritable stealth hood in moneyhat form.

Check my post history if you care: my loathing of Bobby Fucking Kotick (tm) is on display. This however changes things. This is so bad that it's actually getting good. You can be repulsed by evil but then see something that blows through your expectations to the point where respect is building.

Bobby's evil, to be sure, but now I see just how gloriously evil that fuck is. Wow. How can anyone who desires money so much, and can fight for it so effectively, not deserve it in the end?

And so now let's bring Infinity Ward into this. Did they get wind of the new deal? Did they demand a cut? Did this have anything to do with the defection and subsequent gutting of the team?

 

[mj1108]

Reading the OP, I ask myself what Microsoft would get - other than negative press coverage - from raising the subscription fee. It is their service and it is their platform at the end of the day, it's not like Kotick has any say in LIVE policy-making, so why would Microsoft play ball with this? This is why I doubt Activision had a direct role in triggering the increase. It must have been decided in Redmond, and Activision got wind of the news and negotiated something in part-exchange (e.g. DLC exclusivity and marketing primarily for the 360).

All that Microsoft has to say when questioned about it is "We have all these new services! We now have Kinect!, gotta pay for it somehow, etc..etc..", which I think they've actually done already.

 

[Goodacre0081]

So the $10 hike for the U.S market is enough to keep Activision happy? I know the U.S. is a huge market, but is that enough? Wouldn't they be happier with charging for COD MP across all market and all platforms?

If this hike was across all the markets, I can see this theory working out. As is? Not so much.

i don't think activision will be happy until everyone who buys gaming related products is slapped with a CoD tax.

 

[Baha]

They're looking out for their jobs first and foremost and their jobs depend on advertising revenue....so you won't see anything hardhitting on any developers/publishers in fear of pissing them off and dropping their ad revenue stream/access to early builds/early review copies, etc...

Then again, it's been said that even a bad review can tarnish a relationship.

It depends on where their ad revenues or loyalties lie. The gaming press is capable of shitting on their advertisers for hits, I've seen them do it time and time again. Whether it's Sony for the leap year bug, MS for the red ring of death or Nintendo for wii remotes flying into TVs or being a fad (yeah they went there, set up shop and occasionally visit during the summer).

 

[Prophet Steve]

This is the slyest of moneyhats! A veritable stealth hood in moneyhat form.

Check my post history if you care: my loathing of Bobby Fucking Kotick (tm) is on display. This however changes things. This is so bad that it's actually getting good. You can be repulsed by evil but then see something that blows through your expectations to the point where respect is building.

Bobby's evil, to be sure, but now I see just how gloriously evil that fuck is. Wow. How can anyone who desires money so much, and can fight for it so effectively, not deserve it in the end?

And so now let's bring Infinity Ward into this. Did they get wind of the new deal? Did they demand a cut? Did this have anything to do with the defection and subsequent gutting of the team?

Now, that´s evil.

 

[jmdajr]

 

[Calion]

Wow. I thought I couldn't hate Activision any more. This is sickening if true.

 

[PSGames]

$10 x the number of gold subscriptions = $$$$$$$$$$ What makes this sweeter for Activision is that they're making money off of all the people NOT playing CoD. Even though the price hike just went into effect, does anyone know about how many Gold members there are potentially now?

Ironically I nearly bought a renewal card last night for my XBL subscription... kind of glad I didn't end up doing it now, if this is all indeed true.

Why are people assuming the entire 10 bucks goes to activision? They were already getting money before the hike hence the free map packs announced at E3. And you better believe MS isn't giving them a cut of every xbl member. MS can easily seperate which gold members play cod and which ones don't.

 

[TheOddOne]

Reading the OP, I ask myself what Microsoft would get - other than negative press coverage - from raising the subscription fee. It is their service and it is their platform at the end of the day, it's not like Kotick has any say in LIVE policy-making, so why would Microsoft play ball with this? This is why I doubt Activision had a direct role in triggering the increase. It must have been decided in Redmond, and Activision got wind of the news and negotiated something in part-exchange (e.g. DLC exclusivity and marketing primarily for the 360).

Whats even weirder is that Kotick and Mattrick has been seen more and more together.

They where at San Francisco's Web 2.0 Summit together. Then you also have to factor in the Bungie/Activision deal.

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

Great job, Nuclear Muffin, if will be interesting watching how this develops.

Mind you, Live subscribers are probably already subsidizing Microsoft's partners such as Netflix and ESPN even if they don't use those features (or indeed, can't use them), but more transparency in this area is definitely required.

 

[Baha]

Kotaku is blog. An aggregate site. No one should have a beef with them as long as they give credit to whoever they got their media, or stories from.

And gaming journalists, well like I said, I don't know what the fuck they are. I don't think finding this shit out is part of their job description.

MS & Activision. Yes, fuck them.

It really should be if they're going to carry a title like that, unless we collectively decide to call them something else.

 

[BGBW]

It sounds like it's time for GAF to start-up the gaming equivalent of a University's socialist newspaper to hand out to the participants of E3.

 

[Polk]

It really should be if they're going to carry a title like that, unless we collectively decide to call them something else.

Reporters maybe?

 

[quickwhips]

I don't get the problem. If you setup a 4 player family plan with your friends its only 25 dollars a person a year. I just did this and let them raise the prices as long as they keep the family plan the same.

 

[mattiewheels]

Come on, there has to be at least one game journalist out there that takes their job seriously enough to not be afraid of losing access to Activision. Right?

I hope someone actually gives a shit about pursuing this one.

 

[Hubba-EX]

Why the hate for Activision? Like any company it is in their intrest to make as much money. It is MS that should have told them to fuck off.

 

[PhatSaqs]

All this to get temp exclusive rights to map packs? LOL. Do people really base a buying decision on that?

 

[Trojita]

Why the hate for Activision? Like any company it is in their intrest to make as much money. It is MS that should have told them to fuck off.

Oh Junior, you so crazy.

 

[verbum]

Reading the OP, I ask myself what Microsoft would get - other than negative press coverage - from raising the subscription fee. It is their service and it is their platform at the end of the day, it's not like Kotick has any say in LIVE policy-making, so why would Microsoft play ball with this? This is why I doubt Activision had a direct role in triggering the increase. It must have been decided in Redmond, and Activision got wind of the news and negotiated something in part-exchange (e.g. DLC exclusivity and marketing primarily for the 360).

I think ESPN on Live triggered the rise in subscription prices. I imagine ESPN gets a monthly fee, just like they get from the cable companies.

I was looking through Activision's annual report for 2010. In the exepected increase in revenue section, they did not mention that they expected increased revenue from console online services, but mainly from WOW online services.
http://www.wikinvest.com/stock/Activision_Blizzard_%28ATVI%29/Filing/10-K/2010/10-K/D9943662#ds11401_item_8._financial_statements_and_supplementary_data

 

[Hugbot]

I don't get the problem. If you setup a 4 player family plan with your friends its only 25 dollars a person a year. I just did this and let them raise the prices as long as they keep the family plan the same.

That isn't practical for everyone and also isn't what people are concerned about here.

All this to get temp exclusive rights to map packs? LOL. Do people really base a buying decision on that?

Among other things that make the 360 look like the lead SKU by a country mile, yeah. You want to be "the" console to get huge release like this on, timed exclusives are one way you build that gap.

 

[MirageDwarf]

Activision is striving on exploitation and fucking others so that at the end of the day top management earns millions for themselves.

This sudden change of a heart about not even trying to charge for online and let go potentially millions of dollars is hard to accept.

Unlike some people, I don't think all $10 is going to Activision but modest amount is.

 

[teruterubozu]

I think ESPN on Live triggered the rise in subscription prices. I imagine ESPN gets a monthly fee, just like they get from the cable companies.

I was looking through Activision's annual report for 2010. In the exepected increase in revenue section, they did not mention that they expected increased revenue from console online services, but mainly from WOW online services.
http://www.wikinvest.com/stock/Activision_Blizzard_%28ATVI%29/Filing/10-K/2010/10-K/D9943662#ds11401_item_8._financial_statements_and_supplementary_data

Yeah. If this doesn't appear in their quarterly financial filings then it's a non-story.

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

I don't get the problem. If you setup a 4 player family plan with your friends its only 25 dollars a person a year.

The problem is people should know what exactly they are paying for so that they could make an informed decision whether to separate with their money or not.

Why the hate for Activision? Like any company it is in their intrest to make as much money. It is MS that should have told them to fuck off.

It's a bit more complex than that, isn't it? Didn't you just say that it's in every company's interest to make as much money as possible? Microsoft also has a lot to gain from a close relationship with the world's biggest publisher and a lot to lose if their telling Activision to fuck off damages that relationship.

 

[Mrbob]

Shouldn't be any shock, between all of Kotick's comments and the price hike it is easy to put the pieces together. Nice detective work showing it all Nuclear Muffin. I saw a comment about the DLC exclusivity announced before the 10 dollar price increase meaning the two aren't linked, but they easily could be connected. These deals don't just get done in a month. I'm sure conversations have been going on with MS for possibly years, ever since Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare exploded out of the gate on Live. If Call of Duty games create over 50 percent of Xbox Live traffic, then Activision probably should get a cut of the action. However I don't agree with MS increasing the cost to the consumer to pay for it. Especially for the 50 percent like me who don't like Call of Duty games. I find it interesting that Xbox Live Gold is tied so heavily onto Call of Duty. If the franchise crashes so could Gold accounts.

 

[shintoki]

Wouldn't surprise me. Activision wants a piece of the cake. COD is the beard and butter of XBL.

 

[RBH]

Great work, OP.

Fuck you, Activision, and fuck you, MS.

.

 

[verbum]

Yeah. If this doesn't appear in their quarterly financial filings then it's a non-story.

I'm not saying that, but it doesn't sound like an established plan to increase revenue. It could be so recent they haven't been required disclose it or it could be hidden in a reduction of their license fees to make Xbox 360 games. No telling at this point. But I do think ESPN will be the biggest cost increase for Live this year.

 

[butts]

Hell, they should bump the XBL subscription to $70 and then make CoD map packs from now on free to all platforms. I'm all for that!!!

 

[sixteen-bit]

Hell, they should bump the XBL subscription to $70 and then make CoD map packs from now on free to all platforms. I'm all for that!!!

Wouldn't that screw more people than it helps?

 

[Neuromancer]

Damn fine detective work here, damn fine work.

 

[teruterubozu]

I'm not saying that, but it doesn't sound like an established plan to increase revenue. It could be so recent they haven't been required disclose it or it could be hidden in a reduction of their license fees to make Xbox 360 games. No telling at this point. But I do think ESPN will be the biggest cost increase for Live this year.

Well, I'm saying that (it wasn't sarcasm). They would have to reveal this "Xbox Live" income in their quarterly filings, BY LAW. If not, then tin-hatters will need to go to the next level of conspiracy and say Activision is hiding sufficient income from the SEC.

A real story would be chasing after the money-trail, not stringing together quotes.

 

[Owzers]

Wouldn't that screw more people than it helps?

It's best not to think about it.

 

[clav]

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.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Are you guys crazy? The only one directly responsible for the hike is MS.

 

[brain_stew]

You underestimate the leverage that Activision has here. Incredibly, there are FOUR Call of Duty games in the Xbox Live Top 10.

Microsoft can't simply tell them to fuck off. Just like they had to accomodate EA's demands in 2004, they've gotta bend over for Activision now too.

Of course they can. Activision aren't about to give up 10+ million sales per year.

 

[Salacious Crumb]

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.

So what are people outside the US paying the extra cash for?

 

[butts]

Wouldn't that screw more people than it helps?

I know, but then I wouldn't have to pay for the packs. Offload it to people willing to pay for that sort of thing.





and yea I'm just kidding

 

[clav]

So what are people outside the US paying the extra cash for?

The hike from the US and because MS can with a side excuse of the dwindling value of the American dollar.

You honestly think it's not from ad-free Facebook/Twitter/ESPN3 (and possibly mismanagement and unwillingness to cut corners in profit/salaries?)

 

[Polk]

So what are people outside the US paying the extra cash for?

They aren't? Well, I think there was some increase in UK, but it had more to do with how price in UK was lower than in Euro countries.

 

[Neuromancer]

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.

Well even if that's true it's still shitty since I don't care about sports or ESPN so why should I have to pay extra?

 

[clav]

Well even if that's true it's still shitty since I don't care about sports or ESPN so why should I have to pay extra?

MS is the price setter.

 

[Neuromancer]

MS is the price setter.

But it's still shitty.

 

[Littleberu]

Well even if that's true it's still shitty since I don't care about sports or ESPN so why should I have to pay extra?

Why should Microsoft care if you should or shouldn't? They haven't announced why they increased the price for that exact reason.

 

[Diablohead]

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.

If I had a choice of staring at a few minutes of adverts or a few minutes of "please wait" screen filler, i'd not give two shits for having adverts instead.

Now if the please wait screen was completely void and the next programme started quickly i'd support it.

 

[KongRudi]

Speaking of which, I wonder if Activision are receiving a portion of Sony's Playstation Plus subscription fees? (maybe pressure from Activision to receive payment for driving traffic was part of the reason why it was launched in the first place? - just a thought! I'm not accusing anyone of anything, just an off the cuff thought!)

Probably not, I'm pretty sure that Sony only pays the content providers.. :-/
If you're not putting content into the plus-package, you do not get paid any percentage of the plus membership-revenue.

As for the topic at hand, it's much better that Activision gets the money than Microsoft.
Afterall they're the ones who paid to make it a good game (or content provider, if you will) while all Microsoft do is to deactivate your access to the content Activision made, and provide access to what's really a chatroom for 60$ a year. :-/

 

[OrangeYouGlad]

So what are people outside the US paying the extra cash for?

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.

 

[Ruprit]

Reporters maybe?

Professional enthusiast.

 

[DKo5]

LOL at anyone thinking ATVI had a say in MS increasing the price, or that the "modest subscription fees" refers to the price hike in any way

 

[butter_stick]

I love the loaded thread title.

"I've got too much time on my hands" would have been sufficient.

 

[Ploid 3.0]

Great job, Nuclear Muffin, if will be interesting watching how this develops.

Mind you, Live subscribers are probably already subsidizing Microsoft's partners such as Netflix and ESPN even if they don't use those features (or indeed, can't use them), but more transparency in this area is definitely required.

If you have Live Gold you get netflix for free?