Activision's announcement of the "Call of Duty: Elite" service has highlighted a somewhat recent and somewhat disturbing trend amongst game developers: charge consumers extra for content that was clearly intended to be included in the game. This post discusses Elite, Project Ten Dollar, and what these two services mean for consumers. A few days ago Activision announced that they’re going to be introducing a new “elite” service. The service would offer gamers the ability to keep track of their overall gaming statistics, join groups of gamers with other similar interests, and join a clan consisting of a small amount of friends. The service is also said to offer extra security measures for subscribers. I’m not sure exactly what the specifics on those security measurements are, but it’s probably going to be in the form of dedicated servers.
In 2009, EA began enacting what it called “Project Ten Dollar”, which was a way to try and encourage gamers to buy EA titles new rather than used. New copies of games would include one-time-use codes for downloadable content. Those that bought the games used would have to pay an additional fee in order to get that same content that owners of new copies had access to. The catch is that both of these ideas cost consumers extra money on top of the amount that the consumers pay for the game. In the case of Call of Duty: Elite, consumers will have to pay an extra monthly fee in order to have access to the service. In the case of Project Ten Dollar, consumers will have to pay an extra $10 to get the downloadable content. These are only two instances of a somewhat disturbing trend where game producers have been thinking of new ways to increase the costs of games without directly increasing the initial cost. Yet there is a difference between the two strategies and the ultimate goals of the two companies. EA’s Project Ten Dollar is specifically designed to give EA (and the companies that develop games for EA) a way to receive money from sales of used games. Video game retail stores like GameStop push the used gaming market since they see a much larger profit from used games than new games. However, this cuts the game developers and producers short, since no part of the sale of used games goes to the people who actually made the game. On the other hand, Call of Duty: Elite is designed to make more money off of an already profitable venture. It’s not a new idea (Bungie, the company that developed the Halo series, released the exact same idea in the form of Bungie Pro), but it’s the first time that the Call of Duty series will offer premium content outside of one-time-payment DLCs. The only saving grace in either side is that the consumer still has a choice. If the consumer doesn’t believe that the DLC offered in Project Ten Dollar is worth the price, the consumer can choose not to pay the $10. If the consumer feels that the services offered in Elite are worth the monthly subscription, the consumer does not have to pay the extra amount. …right now. I have to add that on because things could very easily tip the other way. For example, Activision could decide that only people who pay for the “Elite” service should be allowed to access the multiplayer for the Call of Duty series. It seems an unlikely maneuver now, but it is entirely possible. This would mean that in addition to the $60 a consumer pays for a new game (and the $60-$70 per year that an Xbox 360 gamer pays for an Xbox Live Gold account in order to play games online), the consumer will have to pay an additional $5 - $15 per month in order to play Call of Duty online. It would be an idiotic decision from a business standpoint, but companies like Activision and EA have a history of shortsightedness. Activision might (falsely) believe that consumers would be willing to pay any amount for Call of Duty’s multiplayer service over competing games (such as EA’s Medal of Honor or Battlefield series). As long as consumers are still allowed to play a fully functioning game with a few minor elements not included, I have no problem with companies like Activision and EA creating these types of services. However, when the content excluded is pivotal to the player’s ability to play (and/or enjoy) the game, then I take issue. So far that hasn’t happened yet, but it’s entirely possible in the near future.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
The Legendary Carmine
Andrew Clayton (a.k.a. The Legendary Carmine) is SSG's Executive Editor. He toils at the stone to make sure this site brings its readers valuable content on a daily basis. Like what we do? Want to see more? Donate to the site using the button below!
Archives
July 2015
|