COD online to be subscription-based?

By Robert Purchese Published 17 June, 2009

MMO chatter resurfaces with survey.

Activision may be considering a subscription-based multiplayer option for the Call of Duty series.

The service would be "in addition" to features the series offers today, according to a mysterious survey drudged up by Destructoid. In other words: you wouldn't lose, only gain.

The paid-for service "may" offer early access to content like map packs and betas; increase character customisation options; add enhanced statistic-tracking and community features; include exclusive in-game modes and challenges; and open a suite of team-management services for competitive play.

Examples given are persistent attributes that carry over from game to game, War Rooms to meet and plan in and exclusive tournaments and leagues.

These will be paid for monthly, quarterly or yearly, or included with Special Edition versions of the game at retail. The survey asks, "How likely are you to purchase or subscribe to this online service when the next Call of Duty game comes out?"

Activision told Eurogamer it does not comment on rumour and speculation.

But it's not the first time Activision has mulled over the idea of a more ambitious online approach for Call of Duty - a series that has an already popular and robust multiplayer segment.

"When you think about other properties that we own and control like Call of Duty, and what would be the natural evolution of a property like Call of Duty into a massively multiplayer environment, and how do you monetise that, the same rules apply," said Kotick in March 2008, leaking learning from talks with Blizzard while the pair discussed mergers.

Modern Warfare 2, the sixth Call of Duty game, is developed by Infinity Ward and due out 10th November for PC, PS3 and Xbox 360. We stuffed the gamepages below with tons of E3 content. Go check. Now, soldier!

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds. @Clert on Twitter.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (55) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • mashk #1 3 years ago

    They can fuck off.

  • local_celebrity #2 3 years ago

    What money-guzzling cuntrags. They're still high off the fact that they made gazillions from the shittiest map pack ever (for COD4) and now they've got a taste for it. Someone needs to call an airstrike on Bobby Kotik's yacht immediately.

  • SPKRFCKR #3 3 years ago

    I really dont think this would work. I certainly wont be paying monthly.

  • videogangs #4 3 years ago

    If they brought out a standalone multiplayer package with an incredibly robust list of features, gametypes, new maps, and it genuinely felt like value for money, I'd be all for it.

    Having put hundreds of hours into CoD 1 and 2 playing competetively in Clanbase and EnemyDown leagues, I've sunk money and dedication into CoD before and this wouldn't feel any different.

    I cannot stress enough though, for this idea to work it can't just be a tacked on multiplayer mode- this would have to be a standalone, ongoing, self sufficient, supported and updated package. Definately something that would work on the PC, but I can see this having a much more negative reaction when considered ontop of Xbox Live subscriptions.
    Edited by videogangs at 17/06/09 @ 10:55

  • Dizzy #5 3 years ago

    >Someone needs to call an airstrike on Bobby Kotik's yacht immediately.

    Seems like my underwater knife fighting skills will finally come in handy.

  • bluem4gic #6 3 years ago

    I will the first to say they can fuck off the current setup is fine thank you very much no more money from me

  • Triggerhappytel #7 3 years ago

    I wouldn't put it past Activision with their abhorrent business model, but while I expect to buy MW2 at some point (maybe not at launch) I won't be buying into any of this bullshit. I'll be too busy playing Uncharted 2 or MAG online for free...

  • Bealsy #8 3 years ago

    Surely this would only be for PC and not for us XBL paying gold subscribers? If its not they can officially do one.

  • AphoticCosmos #9 3 years ago

    Take a great formula and ruin it completely. Now there's a surprise.

    Methinks this is ActiBlizz being douches again.

  • M_of_the_sys #10 3 years ago

    @bluem4gic

    I think you'll find that mashk was the first to say that. :p

  • Widge #11 3 years ago

    there is not enough "fuck off" in the world for this

    the amount of things you subscribe to is stacking up TOO MUCH

  • local_celebrity #12 3 years ago

    Bobby Kotick would monetize the fillings in his grandmother's teeth if he could. The cunt.

  • Bilbo_bobbins #13 3 years ago

    I wouldn't pay for extra stuff if it comes free in the end. What is the point in that.

    IW and Activision can eff off . I would rather they just did a multiplayer game with out the single player. I would pay a normal price for that.

  • neil_likes_bums #14 3 years ago

    After much consideration, my only reponse to this is as follows:

    Suck my balls

  • anomagnus #15 3 years ago

    I always wondered if it would be possible to create a 'mmo-lite' shooter

    Admittedly, i thought more along the lines of gears.

    I picture a much simpler system of skills and talents. Use a sniper rifle long enough, and you become better at it, specializing all the way down a tree to become a master sniper. No points or shit, just choices at certain levels on abilities. The more you use a weapon, the less options you have in others. Same for brawlers. You could pick up new weapons and armour.

    In COD, i suppose it could work.

    I love the thought of a 40 man 'raid' that was filled with fps/ 3rd person shooter action.

  • Chaser #16 3 years ago

    fail

  • phycus #17 3 years ago

    very bad juju

  • holloguts #18 3 years ago

    Nice way to kill the series. I would NEVER subscribe to any game on a monthly or similar subscription to play, never mind just to get extra content to be available as long as you subscribe. This is just HIRE EXTRA CONTENT rather than buying it.

    The greed really takes over when something becomes popular.

  • Bursiene #19 3 years ago

    GREEDY C*NTS!

  • outy #20 3 years ago

    Read the post again, the additional features are entirely optional.. multiplayer COD will still be free.

  • M_of_the_sys #21 3 years ago

    The paid-for service "may" offer early access to content like map packs and betas; increase character customisation options; add enhanced statistic-tracking and community features; include exclusive in-game modes and challenges; and open a suite of team-management services for competitive play.

    You're losing out on nothing. You will still get what you'd normally get for free. You pay for early access and extra features.

  • Venkman90 #22 3 years ago

    Considering RSV2 has massive customisation, why would they need to charge for that?

    They can fuck right off, paying for early access is just greedy and alienates those who don't want to be ripped off.
    Edited by Venkman90 at 17/06/09 @ 11:38

  • DrDamn #23 3 years ago

    I think some knowledge of what it would actually entail is important before passing judgement. It would need to be over and above what other games without a sub offer though.

    Interesting side note. MW2 has an RRP of £55.

  • Triggerhappytel #24 3 years ago

    "Interesting side note. MW2 has an RRP of £55."

    That's because ActiBlizz know people will buy it in droves regardless. It'll probably be £45-50 in shops and £40 on the Interweb. EA used to make their games £3-5 more expensive all the time, but I don't think they do that any more.


    Also, despite none of us liking these proposals, I bet there are enough buyers to have probably a million subscribe to this and make it very worth ActiBlizz's while. CoD has a massive dumb chav audience, and I bet this really works for Acti.

  • M_of_the_sys #25 3 years ago

    If subscribing meant I'm free of annoying little kids with headsets who are better than me then I would subscribe. :p

  • sneetch #26 3 years ago

    @mashk
    They can fuck off.

    Those were my exact thoughts too.

    I don't see any of their proposed possible features being worth a monthly fee. Some of them sound a lot like the free Steam community features or just slight variations on what people do on clan sites anyway.

    "War Rooms to meet and plan in" for example, back in my clan days (back in CS) we "met and planned" on a password locked sever, it seems more practical to me, you're going to be playing a particular map so you plan and practice on the actual map.

    Rather than attempt to charge a monthly fee for this I think it would make more sense to include a one use licence key for this service in the games to ensure people buy the game new and don't trade it in.

  • DUFFKING #27 3 years ago

    I would quite happily never pay monthly for an MP portion as generic as flawed and generic and CoD's. It would have to be different in every way :)

  • sneetch #28 3 years ago

    @Milky1985
    Good for them, they just lost a sale until the price drops to normal PC prices.

    That's the 360/PS3 price. The PC price is £39.99.

  • S0L0man #29 3 years ago

    First of all FUCK RIGHT OFF!!

    COD already disadvantages low ranked players by denying them access to some of the most useful perks in the game, 3 frags, bomb squad, claymores, uav-jammer etc.

    It would be completely unfair for those paying extra to have additional advantages over non subscribers with say enhanced accuracy on specialied weapons, unique perks or early access to higher ranked perks etc.

    I suppose they could separate the communities but I cant see that happening. look how much Ubisoft fucked up their GRAW games with their DLC packs. Those with the packs could only play with those who didnt have the packs only when those who didn't have the packs hosted the game.

    COD should be about player skill, good communications and team tactics not about those willing to pay more to get a better advantage.

  • carlitoswagon #30 3 years ago

    @local_celebrity

    Nice initial retort! I agree 100%. What the fuck are they thinking, money grabbing cock suckers. Sounds like a fucking rip off. I'd be amazed if this could be good value for money.

    The shite thing is that I'll probably be one of the stupid cunts who buys into it!! :(

    Actually, no. They can lick my balls dry!!

  • Corben_Dallas #31 3 years ago

    Activision can fuck right off.

    they already have one of the best selling games every year plus most ppl also but the DL Map packs.

    But as for turning into a Monthly subs for the right to play they can fuck off. Not interested in games that try to drain(SUCK THE LIFE OUT OF GAMERS) all time and money from gamers.

  • RedPanda #32 3 years ago

    Post deleted at 14:31:59 28-01-2012

  • thegogsunit #33 3 years ago

    release the dogs

  • laudy #34 3 years ago


    I already pay a Broadband provider.

    I don't own a 360 (well, I did, but it passed away, poor case of RRoD) so I don't pay for online services because online services are something i already pay for.

    I don't pay for online gaming on my ps3 (no...it's not as good as xbox live, but it doesn't cost me £40 a year)

    So, in answer to the question from the survey:

    Q: "How likely are you to purchase or subscribe to this online service when the next Call of Duty game comes out?"

    A: About as likely as my patent for microwaveable ice-cream actually getting a patent number.

  • An1m4l #35 3 years ago

    But i hope they leave enough room for my fist, cause im gonna ram it into their stomachs, and break their GODDAMN SPINE!!!

  • theiceman #36 3 years ago

    They can fuck off and die!!
    There is no way i'm gonna spend for extra content.
    I'll pay for the DLC but that's it, the money grabbing fuckers can go and use a famas on themselves

    /goes off and plays W@W

  • layleeloo #37 3 years ago

    If people wanted to be ripped off they would play shit like WoW. (Withdrawal of Wealth)

  • TitusCrow #38 3 years ago

    when i read this i nearly vomited with rage, then tried to strangle my monitor. I stopped as i realised we would both be loosers.

    there is no way in hell ill be staying silent and taking this crap. What were they thinking the tossers? * wonders how to put fist down acctablizz throat by email*

  • The_Inquisitor #39 3 years ago

    If they go ahead with it, I'll find something else to occupy my time. Maybe Halo has a chance of once again reigning the online sphere.

  • Spekingur #40 3 years ago

    What the heck happened at Activision HQs?

    They should just not even think about doing something like this for MW2. I much rather would want them to think about a specific CoD Online (only) title.

  • Fab4 #41 3 years ago

    In other words "Bend over and think of your country of origin".

  • trooperdx3117 #42 3 years ago

    The ironic thing about this whole proposal is that its unfeasable since Activision insist on peddling out a new Call of Duty every year

  • FooAtari #43 3 years ago

    This is Activision. Are people actually surpirsed by this?

  • sneetch #44 3 years ago

    @RedPanda
    mmmm, whining about something you know next to nothing solid about. 10/10

    Some of us are capable of reading the article and the survey and realising that we wouldn't be willing to pay for what's proposed.

  • deathdealer619 #45 3 years ago

    they are having a fucking laugh!

  • mega7ech #46 3 years ago

    RedPanda 0/10

  • RedSparrows #47 3 years ago

    CoD can go screw itself anyway.

  • ISmoke #48 3 years ago

    S0L0man, CoD4s multiplayer was fairly balanced. You get a majority of usefull perks straight away (stopping power, deep impact, C4, steady aim) The rest of the real usefull stuff is unlocked by lv.27

    OT- No Activision. No.

  • Antigone05 #49 3 years ago

    Got this message from FourZeroTwo aka Robert Bowling today regarding this :



    We would never implement that in our games, including Modern Warfare 2. That has nothing to do with Infinity Ward.

  • RedPanda #50 3 years ago

    Post deleted at 14:31:59 28-01-2012

  • retrogamesdude #51 3 years ago

    Fuck Off Activision you greedy pigs! The current set up is fine, stop trying to flece us of more money.
    Activision is becomeing the new EA!

  • onyx_elite #52 3 years ago

    I know this might seem off the point a little but has anyone actually seen MW2 referred to as COD at all? I mean ever? Just because it's a sequel to COD4:MW doesn't automatically make it COD6:MW2. I think it represents a point at which the IW games are going to take a definite route away from the now rather poultry offerings from Treyarch.

    I just found it odd that we'd all assumed it'd be called COD. Because I've never seen that mentioned anywhere. It's not COD6, it's MW2.

  • Nill #53 3 years ago

    Really, how out of touch are they? Has to be some of the lamest ideas I've heard for something wanting subscriptions.

    Make a proper MMOFPS if you want subscriptions, although it'd probably be a bad idea to do on CoD's expense.

  • nottingham01 #54 3 years ago

    fuck you activision .nob heads

  • sneetch #55 3 years ago

    @RedPanda
    and some of us are willing to take it all with a pinch of salt and wait and see what the real facts are?

    its like the fucking BBC Have Your Say in here some days :-/

    even going by what the article says the gist i get is this: 'you'll still get the same old same old MP, but if you want you can pay a monthly subscription for a bit extra IF YOU REALLY WANT'

    how the fuck is that going to piss me off? i might decide to pay it or i might be all OK, i'll just stick with what i know for free?

    if they'd said 'you're paying monthly for all MP' then i might be a bit outraged like the cunts going 'fuck you' but the rumours suggest this isn't the case.

    get a fucking life.

    Jesus, you seem to be the angriest one here by far. The idea of paying a subscription for what is proposed in this article (rumour or not) is what prompted the "fuck off". In my case was a "fuck off" of disbelief - the same kind of amused "fuck off" I think every time some electronics salesman tries to sell me insurance or extended coverage that will cost more than the original product - as in, I can't believe that they'd even consider trying to turn the string of trivial bullshit they listed into a service that they charge for. Am I pissed off? No, I'll buy the game and enjoy it like I did COD4. Will I subscribe to a piss-poor service like the one described here (which may possibly include the option to test their products for them)? No they can fuck off. Did I have difficulty typing "fuck off" because my fists were clenched in rage? Naw.

    Oh and "get a fucking life" is hilarious coming from someone who felt the need to angrily post in defence of something he knows nothing about when his main objection is that no-one knows anything about it. You're a poster child for irony.

    Edit: btw when I said some of us have read the survey I meant it look at the screenies at the bottom, perhaps fake, but I doubt that and if they are true they can take the kind of reaction in this thread as a solid "Definitely will not subscribe":

    http://www.gossipgamers.com/activision-s...
    Edited by sneetch at 18/06/09 @ 12:23