By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
youarebadatgames on 19 July 2010
Edit Thread
cr00mz said:
selnor said:
cr00mz said:
FlyingLotus said:
chocoloco said:

Well I quite paying for live when I got bored of the last call of duty and I kept telling my friends that the next version I would buy for PS3 so I could play on multiple accounts for free.

Anyways if the subscription to Activision is true there is even more reason for me to buy the game for PS3 because I am not going to pay twice for one service.


Why would you pay for CoD subscription servise at all? this is leaing video games down a bad road.

i would asume for the same reason anyone pays for xbox live subscription or any random fee based MMO

You cannot say paying for Live is the same as paying for MMO.

Xbox Live has so much to it, and so much more advanced than it's competitors that it's easy to see

1. where the money goes ( R&D)

2. Access to very impressive Live applications. 

i doubt anyone would pay for live subscription if a silver account would give access to online gaming. So basically live and fee based MMO are the same. you pay to play online.

As always, it depends on the value.  If silver account let you play online but had no moderators, no reporting, no stat collection, no matchmaking, and no voice chat while gold had all that then people would certainly pay for that.  Same reason why people pay to play in CEVO, or pay for reserve slots on servers, or any other thing - the perceived value.  Frankly, there doesn't seem to be ANY value added to what activision is asking for, they are like a drug dealer - they just want to get people hooked and then get them to pay.  Well, for most people money is still more important than gaming.  Not to mention there are 100x more FPSs out there that are just as good, if not better than MW.  Here's hoping SC2 turns out to be ok, otherwise it will be a sad day when even Blizzard falls to Kotick's money grubbing ass.