-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Pachter Attacks Your Sensibilities (Again): Online Multi To Be Subscription Based
- Thread starter Ca1amity
- Start date
CecilRousso
Member
That crazy guy said:
That is really stupid beyond belief. I can accept them complaining about used game sales having an impact on new game sales, but now the satisifaction of a new game purchase is bad for used game sales? :lol
Shouldn´t GT5 come with a subscription then? Isn´t there enough singleplayer content in that game that the fans of it will never ever need another game?
Beer Monkey
Member
freddy said:
Well there's this guy in the industry, his name is Bobby Kotick, you might have heard his name.
He's whining and crying about the fact that he is Microsoft and Sony's bitch and doesn't get to to what he wants, so his proposed solution is that EVERYBODY NEEDS TO GO BACK TO PC GAMING WHERE HE IS ALLOWED TO TRY TO CHARGE A FEE. His 'solution' is that Dell and HP make PCs that can 'attach to TV's and that then he can destroy this whole pesky console business that has made him hundreds of millions of dollars (which makes him the chump that is dying to kill the goose that lays him golden eggs).
Given that there isn't any console online-multiplayer franchise bigger than some game called Call of Somethingorother, and that the guy who controls that franchise is pissing and moaning about Microsoft and Sony and talking about trying to get all the Call of Somethingorother gamers to switch to PC so he can charge them, these threads are all handwringing moronic bullshit.
SuicideUZI
Member
Melfice7 said:
same here, I dunno what fantasy world Pachter and Kodick like to think we live in where everyone is a millionaire and can afford to pay $60 for a game, another $60 in DLC by the time the game's life has run out as well as paying a subscription fee the whole time, but in the real world most people aren't willing to spend that kind of money. I personally refuse to even spend $60 for a game out of principle, which has made most of my money for games go to Steam, and I know a lot of people who wont even pay the $50 per year Live fee much less a separate sub fee for every online game
Unknown One
Member
MW2 already pissed off PC gamers with P2P gaming. I think Bobby Kotick is seeking to piss even more of them off with PC subscription fees.Beer Monkey said:
Around the globe it is a substitute for paying retail. (In asia this is popular)
They do not purchase the game, then pay for online too.
Monetisation is not inevitable. Patches has a terrible track record and knows little of the industry he is an expert in. Being in the finance and related industries, this is generally the first requirement for any potential employee.
They do not purchase the game, then pay for online too.
Monetisation is not inevitable. Patches has a terrible track record and knows little of the industry he is an expert in. Being in the finance and related industries, this is generally the first requirement for any potential employee.
SuicideUZI
Member
AdrianWerner said:
and add to the fact that console multiplayer is P2P compared to PC multiplayer where most games have dedicated servers available, it is pretty ridiculous.
I really don't see it taking off tho, someone like Activision will try it but then the masses will just move on to the competition that doesn't charge an extra fee, which is fine by me, let their greed get the best of them
CecilRousso
Member
But as said before in other threads, let Activision try this. It would be great fun to watch both the CoD series and Mr. Kotick come crashing down. :lol
Baron Doggystyle von Woof
Member
I will stop playing online if this happens. With the technology we got today, the internet speeds we have. Why the fucks should we pay for online? Just give us dedicated servers. Most people got enough bandwith anyways.
Lagspike_exe
Member
shaft said:
Son of Godzilla
Banned
Patcher is suffering under some inane notion that multiplayer gaming is what is causing sales to dwindle, and not the fact that people just buy less games as their libraries are established. He actually cited Red Dead Redemption multiplayer as a reason people aren't buying new releases, seemingly oblivious to the fact that it is a new release.
Petrae
Member
When (if) this happens, it'll be the last straw for me. Retrogaming for the win.
- No DLC bullcrap
- No online fees or ISP requirements
- $60+ price tags only for collectible/rare games
- Consoles that actually work, despite being old(er)
This generation is awful. Not without its high points, but still the biggest comedy of errors to plague this industry since 1983. There will be no "next gen" for me, because the precedent for screwing the consumer is already in place.
- No DLC bullcrap
- No online fees or ISP requirements
- $60+ price tags only for collectible/rare games
- Consoles that actually work, despite being old(er)
This generation is awful. Not without its high points, but still the biggest comedy of errors to plague this industry since 1983. There will be no "next gen" for me, because the precedent for screwing the consumer is already in place.
freddy said:
I see parroting as being reflexive as opposed to giving thought behind it and then saying it. I think Pachter is doing the later, because companies don't just want to do it, but intend to. There are things companies say that Pachter doesn't say, because he doesn't think it's going to happen.
I doubt it. Wedbush Morgan would have quite the scandal on their hands. It would also end the sweetest job ever for him. I mean, who doesn't want to get paid to make video game predictions. I'm not saying it's easy, I'm just saying it's awesome.
swanlee597
Banned
Has anything he has ever said actually really come true in the end? I know this is a side gig for him but he really needs to retire from video game predictions cause he sucks at them. Where's the WII HD again?
Hate to break it to many of you, but Microsoft has been charging for online play for years and the vast majority of you are quite happy about paying the fee...
I don't see how this is any different.
Simple fact is, when MS posts profits that great, every publisher will want a piece of that pie.
I don't see how this is any different.
Simple fact is, when MS posts profits that great, every publisher will want a piece of that pie.
H_Prestige
Banned
Subscription fees within subscription fees within subscription fees within subscription fees within subscription fees within.....
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Malvolio said:
Welcome to capitalism for companies 101
. Of course the same textbook for consumers would demand content for free maybe or other niceties (which are still not fair for the other side) .Neuromancer
Member
Never mind
corrosivefrost
Member
ZealousD said:
I originally read this as "Pachter is a predator." :lol
Gotta agree with this. Microsoft sells a service that allows people to play games online. Making their customers pay them for online and then paying EA or Activision for online just isn't going to work. It's one thing when it's for A title, like with FFXI. But for it to become general policy, it just means that they're no longer providing the service they've convinced everybody to pay for.Beer Monkey said:
For Sony, free online multiplayer is a HUGE part of their online package, their big advantage against Xbox Live. Having publishers come in and implement subscription fees across the board completely destroys their online business model.
There's just no way either company would allow it.
MetatronM said:
Unless the pressure/bitching reach a critical mass and Microsoft (or Sony with their premium) start giving publishers a piece of the pie. The second that happens the price for Live goes up to pass the loss along to the consumer and all the XBLA defenders will say "$10-20 more per year for this awesome service is totally worth it". The whole thing gets legitimized within half a console cycle and another nail is struck in the coffin.
If either MS or Sony (or hell, even Nintendo), make a live gold-esque system, where the suscription money is shared with the publisher of the game, in a proportional way to total hours played, everyone would be happy.
Except for the consumers. But at least the MS consumers are happy paying for multiplayer. They wouldn't really notice anything, except for the vanishing free live gold offers.
Not really. It is a hassle for the user to pay separated fees per title or maybe per publisher.
The more natural thing would be for MS to share the Live Gold fee with publishers. It even makes sense; MS is charging you to access the multiplayer modes of games the publishers created. So the publishers are adding value for something only MS ever sees return from.
That way, every publisher would have a strong economic incentive to make compelling multiplayer experiences, so their titles would be the more played, and therefore taking a bigger part of the Live Gold fee.
And the user would only have to pay one fee, then the money would flow to the parties that actually made the game. APB shows that charging per title won't work for traditional, non MMO titles.
Except for the consumers. But at least the MS consumers are happy paying for multiplayer. They wouldn't really notice anything, except for the vanishing free live gold offers.
Draft said:
Not really. It is a hassle for the user to pay separated fees per title or maybe per publisher.
The more natural thing would be for MS to share the Live Gold fee with publishers. It even makes sense; MS is charging you to access the multiplayer modes of games the publishers created. So the publishers are adding value for something only MS ever sees return from.
That way, every publisher would have a strong economic incentive to make compelling multiplayer experiences, so their titles would be the more played, and therefore taking a bigger part of the Live Gold fee.
And the user would only have to pay one fee, then the money would flow to the parties that actually made the game. APB shows that charging per title won't work for traditional, non MMO titles.
Vigilant Walrus
Member
Ca1amity said:
Im just going to stick with PC. It's so awesome that it's a free and open platform. The fact that it's open means that there will always be alternatives and companies like Valve, Arenanet(Guild Wars), high-rez(Global Agenda) and such that will make great games without fees.
As long as the games don't have a cost of maintenance, there will be those free uplifted games by awesome.
So it's not going to happe. It's free stuff like CS that set the bar 10 years today, and still shifts us into what a good deal is.
Alien Swarm is completely free and it's a great deal for them too. They might force this on console(its a possibility) and it might be a norm, but it's nice to know that one will be home free.
Ofc the big games would probably have sub on PC too. But TBH I thought Call of Duty and the others became really boring a long time ago. The last competitive shooter that truly impressed me(even though TF2 was fun) was Battlefield 2, over 5 years ago. I have not really seen any meaningful technologica advancement since then that impressed me with that smooth gameplay, big ass maps, insane vehicles(choppers, carriers, tanks, jeeps) and 64 players with unlockable weapons(years before COD4) and all that. Not a perfect game, but it would be a shame to see the next Battlefield.. Battlefield 3... the real sequel, with a fee.
I hope APB showed, that you get your fingers burned. I hoped HGL showed you get fingers burned if you also only do it halfway. High-Rez realised this quicky, and dropped the monthly fee within a few months to go F2P on everything.
As long as the PC has games like WoW were you get obscene amount of content.. untold amounts of content. for your 50 cents you spent on that game, you get incredible amount of gameplay and entertainment(if you enjoy it). That game cant really be beat in pure value, IMO.
And I think people who have really gotten into MMO totally get this, and many of us now understand that fees can help shape a game. That's also why, that for as good as a game like Guild Wars 2 looks, it's not run and will not be run on magic post-launch. It's a real game that needs real income, and people who live in a magical mystery land need to realise this before "Anet lied to us and are greedy!!!11".
The scary thing about MW2 was that it had scaled so much back on the features, and it still dictated the standard. They went from 60 players to 32, they removed leaning, they stopped dedicated servers and killed their dedicated and large mod community - I mean, these are not just controvertial changes, thats downright doing it wrong no matter how you slice it, but people still made that the game of the year in terms of sales.
The next wave of F2P games should be awesome. I have high hopes for Vindictus( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SeVRBmXgYTE ) and C9( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zp15Uz3LYcY )