Wed, Nov 24, 2010 | 07:36 GMT
Acti: “We will never, ever charge for CoD multiplayer”
Got that?
Activision has sought to put an end to Call of Duty multiplayer subscription rumours once and for all, telling IndustryGamers that the firm will absolutely never put a cost on the shooter’s online play.
“Are we going to be charging for multiplayer? The answer is no,” said CEO Eric Hirshberg.
“The experience you have out of the box, connecting with the online community to play Call of Duty is absolutely integral to the experience and we’ll never charge for that. It’s not going to be something we’ll attempt to monetize; it’s part of the package.”
The exec added: “Nothing we or anyone else tries is going to work if it doesn’t have tremendous value for people and add a tremendous value to the gaming experience. He’s probably looking at meta-trends in the world and in culture about online services and new ways things should be monetized from Netflix to cloud-based computing.
“So there are certainly a lot of behavioral shifts towards long-standing online relationships… But at the end of the day, all I’m trying to get across is I can unequivocally say we will never, ever charge for the multiplayer.”
Fin. Stop it, OK?
16 
Posted in: Action, Activision Blizzard, Hot, PC, PS3, Shooter, Xbox 360
Tags: Black Ops, call of duty, Eric Hirshberg
16 comments
#1
Gekidami
24/11/10, 7:43 am
Off topic, but did i just see something about a new KZ3 trailer, which disappeared?
#2
Razor
24/11/10, 8:40 am
Oh dear…did Pat screw up, vis a vis KZ3?
#3
Patrick Garratt
24/11/10, 8:41 am
*whistles*
#4
freedoms_stain
24/11/10, 9:27 am
All they have to do is keep charging over the odds for their map packs and they essentially are in all but name.
#5
Blerk
24/11/10, 9:35 am
They didn’t say they wouldn’t charge for something else, though.
#6
onlineatron
24/11/10, 9:49 am
@1 The trailer went up, was old, was pulled.
*I was there maaaaaaaaaaaan*
#7
endgame
24/11/10, 10:42 am
sure they won’t. just like they r not releasing overcharged unfinished copy/paste products.
#8
G1GAHURTZ
24/11/10, 10:54 am
Don’t believe the hype.
#9
DSB
24/11/10, 1:38 pm
The sad thing is, as clear as all of those statements might be, people still won’t get it.
It’s a bit like talking to people who think the moonlanding was faked or that someone blew up the world trade center.
#10
AHA-Lambda
25/11/10, 11:46 pm
there’s a rumour on gaf right now that they wont charge for CoD because MS is giving acti money from the XBL price hikes =/
shocking stuff if true and apparently kotick did admit recently that they do get a cut of some kind from xbl now
#11
Erthazus
26/11/10, 12:08 am
AHA-Lambda,
“there’s a rumour on gaf right now that they wont charge for CoD because MS is giving acti money from the XBL price hikes =/
shocking stuff if true and apparently kotick did admit recently that they do get a cut of some kind from xbl now”
thats why maps are exclusive.
Kotick is such a COCKSUCKER… If thats true, than what MS is thinking…
#12
DSB
26/11/10, 1:40 am
Yeah because multi-national corporations are both easily blackmailed, and eager to share their profits with the parties they do business with.
And Activision would wave goodbye to the biggest market they have for their flagship title, unless Microsoft paid them not to. Highly likely!
Here’s the real world scoop: It’s a publicly traded company. As such, they are required by law to account for every dollar and cent they make at least once a year – In other words, they’re not legally able to participate in secret global conspiracies.
Gotta love the internet, there’s simply no limit to the crap people will believe.
Did you know that Queen Elizabeth the Second is actually a space lizard controlling every major event in international politics?
#13
RETARDED VIKING
26/11/10, 1:51 am
*GASP* that explains everything!!!
#14
Psychotext
26/11/10, 1:57 am
“Did you know that Queen Elizabeth the Second is actually a space lizard controlling every major event in international politics?”
That’s fucking horseshit. She’s a ninja squirrel who solves crimes on the weekend.
#15
ruckus
26/11/10, 2:14 am
no but… Prince Charles is the anti-christ!_! /whispers
#16
DaMan
26/11/10, 3:34 am
^that wouldn’t be a bad thing.