In an interview, Activision Chief Executive Bobby Kotick said he isn't worried about pushback from gamers about the Call of Duty Elite fee because players will still be able to compete against each other online without subscribing to the service. While he is coy about many of the offerings that will be included in the service, Mr. Kotick said Call of Duty Elite, and the customer-service operation that will be needed to support it, wouldn't be possible if the service was free. "This is an enormous investment," he said.
"Call of Duty" is in a unique position to seek a monthly fee from customers. The game's previous installment, set during the Cold War and called "Call of Duty: Black Ops," was the best-selling game last year, with global retail sales of more than $1 billion during its first six weeks on shelves.
Verno wrote on Jun 1, 2011, 15:35:
They have a plugin where if you hit another teammate, you take like 1 damage per hit so people are pretty careful. Same thing with flashing teammates. It's very chillax and no one takes it very seriously, just enough to enjoy yourself without being all "ALPHA DELTA BRAVO GOGOGOG" weird about it.
World at War is honestly much better than people give it credit for. Treyarch went all out for it too, dedicated servers, mod tools, etc. Some of the maps were brilliant. It had a shit SP campaign so a lot of people just wrote it off for some reason.
They have a plugin where if you hit another teammate, you take like 1 damage per hit so people are pretty careful.
Beamer wrote on Jun 1, 2011, 15:16:
I never found that all that true with CoD, or I just have selective memory. There was some spawn dying but it never bugged me, and I appreciated that your spawn constantly rotated.
Much worse for me was the short time I spent in MoH. You'd spawn next to someone on your team, and if a sniper was lining him up there you were. I had 3 consecutive 3 second lives before I turned it off.
Speaking of which if anyone is looking for a chill CS:S server to relax on, I found the Urban Assault servers to be pretty decent(no affiliation).
You're always a second away from some dude spawning nearby and raping you or hitting you from one a billion different firing angles in the oddly designed levels.
World at War had some pretty fun maps though.
Jerykk wrote on Jun 1, 2011, 03:53:Let me add that most you you COD haters, hate COD becuase people like me OWN YOUR ASSES when you log onto the server.
Reagle, why is it that in every single CoD-related thread, you proclaim how much ass you own? It almost makes you seem insecure about how much ass you actually own.
ASeven wrote on May 31, 2011, 21:58:
Some would consider the Bad Company series different from the BF series, like DICE itself.
You have the numbers of BF and CoD, yeah, not for ROHOS.
OMG YOU GUYS LET IT GO!
Yeah, I agree. I mean consider fallout 1 & 2. If I remember correctly, those 2 combined were less than 500k sales.
Verno wrote on Jun 1, 2011, 08:52:Yeah, I agree. I mean consider fallout 1 & 2. If I remember correctly, those 2 combined were less than 500k sales.
I don't know, I wouldn't call 500k units "indie" or unknown. It isn't what it used to be but it's not either of those things.
Verno wrote on Jun 1, 2011, 08:52:You clearly lack at comprehension and clearly have a problem with someone disliking a game you apparently swoon over. I played the mod up until they started adding tanks. I pre-ordered Ostfront and played it briefly when it came out. I didn't like it, wasnt for me...just like 90% of the other shooters out there.
That still has nothing to do with coming to the logical conclusion that the RO IP is not well known, outside hardcore gamer circles.
I don't know, I wouldn't call 500k units "indie" or unknown. It isn't what it used to be but it's not either of those things. I think it's more accurate to say that there isn't much overlap between the RO and Call of Duty demographics. The rest of this nonsense is a bunch of glorified last word stuff about a misunderstanding.
You clearly lack at comprehension and clearly have a problem with someone disliking a game you apparently swoon over. I played the mod up until they started adding tanks. I pre-ordered Ostfront and played it briefly when it came out. I didn't like it, wasnt for me...just like 90% of the other shooters out there.
That still has nothing to do with coming to the logical conclusion that the RO IP is not well known, outside hardcore gamer circles.
Mr. Tact wrote on Jun 1, 2011, 08:19:InBlack wrote on Jun 1, 2011, 07:01:I'll take that bet. There won't be LAN play, but subscription? No.
Diablo 3 will be subscription or micro-transaction based. Mark...my....words.
In any case, pay to play.
InBlack wrote on Jun 1, 2011, 07:01:I'll take that bet. There won't be LAN play, but subscription? No.
Diablo 3 will be subscription or micro-transaction based. Mark...my....words.
In any case, pay to play.
"Both the “left” and the “right” pretend they have the answer, but they are mere flippers on the same thalidomide baby, and the truth is that neither side has a clue."
- Jim Goad
Mcboinkens wrote on Jun 1, 2011, 01:29:
It looks pretty bleak, but at least paying for the service is optional. As long as "elite" payers don't get any actual advantage to the original content, I'm fine with it. If they group "Elites" together and just normal non-payers seperate through the matchmaking, then there really is no issue. They're just taking money from the rich or stupid.
ASeven wrote on May 31, 2011, 21:58:Krovven wrote on May 31, 2011, 21:32:ASeven wrote on May 31, 2011, 20:51:
BF2 was multi?
Battlefield Bad Company 1 & 2 and Battlefield 1943?
Some would consider the Bad Company series different from the BF series, like DICE itself.