Call of Duty’s origins of being the ‘under dog’ are laughable when compared to its current status. After Medal of Honour flooded the market with World War 2 shooters, often replicating over and over, Infinity Ward came to be. What followed was a revolution.
Discover the impact of Microsoft's decision to include Call Of Duty in Game Pass. Explore the pros and cons and speculate about future changes.
We've put together 5 reasons why we believe the arrival of the Call of Duty franchise on Xbox Game Pass will be a big deal for Microsoft.
Microsoft will reportedly add new tiers and pricing to its Xbox Game Pass subscription with the addition of Call of Duty to its game catalog.
CoD is just a way of raising the prices and pushing people into paying more for Game Pass. It’s losing its value and the day 1 first party games aren’t really worth it anymore.
yes, because people were sold on the promise of one price, activision games included, now they want another whole tier to include cod,
not what people initially brought into, (well gamepass had many subs even before Activision, but you get my point)
So, One more lie, to add to the stack of lies, perpetrated by these scumbags,
jin_sakai probably think this ones the nail in the coffin, id tend to agree
Sony better take notes and rethink their future plans.
this really couldn’t get worse..
If you pay attention to the target audience of this so called gaming service it all starts making sense and MS is doing exactly what they r supposed to do to get their money back ... if you really understand the reasoning of the lower side of the spectrum of the cod players MS has found its gold vein ... we r in business territory as entertainment is long deceased on the MS vocabulary.
If they’re as stupid as to make it more than $5/month increase from the highest tier I’d laugh my ass off.
That would be a way of getting to say they kept the promise of all games on GamePass without cannibalizing their sales
Making gamepass worse value by making it more expensive, as well as CoD losing Xbox sales and PlayStation gamers will want it less if Xbox gamers are getting it for "free".
Takes real talent to damage 2 things with one move.
Call of Duty needs to be taken down a notch, its too popular for its own damn good. So yeah, it seems like MS is going to help make that happen. So good job, I guess?
If they price it so high that people won't want it, they won't sign up so MS won't lose out on sales. Not all of those bad things will happen, just some of them
Really? You think CoD on PS would sell less cause Xbox gamers get access thru gamepass? I doubt that. COD fanbase is huge they're gonna play where they want to play and not care how the next person got it
I ended my subscription right around when they announced the purchase of Activision/Blizzard.
No offense but I'm not paying a subscription fee to get the worst 3rd party publishers games for free. It's like paying a monthly fee to only eat at Chili's or Applebee's while everyone else is having all the amazing food.
My hope was Gamepass would bring more games like Grounded or Hi-Fi Rush. We have all seen how that's going.
I'll never spend another dollar on an Xbox service ever again after the recent studio closures. I've defended them on here and elsewhere but they don't deserve any trust from any consumer at this point.
And soon you will have the option to opt for the Sports package, but if you want sports you also need to pay for the weather package.
As Ive said since this thing was introduced. Prepare to get nickel and dimed.
They do that that'll be the end of them. They're not that crazy. Only way that would work is if you could build a game pass package $5 sports, $5 shooter, $5 rpg, etc. But even then it's bad business for MS cause ppl that only play sports and shooters would get it cheaper compared to an all game bundle and they'd lose money.
@Jin Sakai
But you're totally fine with paying for psn with no day 1, 1st party...
The PSN essential value you get with base online access is unparalleled, puts Xbox core to shame. The PSN extra package however seems to be diminishing in value as it probably should. With any luck we'll have people buying their frickin games again as these sub services lose popularity
@Coconut not gonna lie I wanna start buying games again lol. (I do but not day 1 releases) I still feel bad for not buying Ori 2. Had it not release day 1 on GP I would've bought. So if they move day 1 titles to a new tier (which I'm not subbing to) I'd buy the games I really want day 1. While the ones I want to play but not badly I'd wait til it's available on the lower tier to play.
@InUrFoxHole
oh come on, There was a time Xbox fans were ok with just paying for the right to play online without getting anything for it.
He's fine with paying for better games. Xbox ain't got it. Redfall day one enjoy....
Nah I disagree, the value of GP has been crazy they were screwing themselves for quick subscriber gain. I always felt the day 1 releases would eventually stop and they only did it to get ppl to sub faster. That's why it quickly surpassed PS sub. Now that they hit a ceiling and picked up Activision they can only A. Take away the day 1 releases and hope the sub count remain or B. Increase the cost and hope they keep the sub count. Seem they went with
C. Add a new tier which is likely a mix of A and B.
If the new tier is only Activision games and they leave ultimate alone I'll be happy. I don't play COD so
Did you say that when Sony raised the price of PS+ and didn’t offer anything to justify the increase? I doubt it…
if they add more top tier games , more value and charge more for this tier, cool thats just normal business and an option for its users. how does that affect you or us in any way. there is still a cheap option and so on. and yea over time we did expect it to eventually go up a few bucks. every other company has but now its a problem when ms does it?
anyone who thought microsoft was a good idea for leading the industry into a period of better games doesn't know Microsoft...
gotta make back that money somehow. but its definitely a scummy move before cod comes to gamepass haha.
Similar kind of thing happened back when Starfield came out.
The dollar new accounts for a month, trials, various promotions kinda dried up as they finally had a big game coming, following a price hike in July. But reception was eh.
And they haven't delivered on letting us cloud stream our owned library yet either.
I think you're hitting on the core issue with Starfield. All of this breaks down of they can't make good games. Whether you're leasing or selling to one platform or multiple, the games gotta be good. That's the thing that's absolutely bonkers about this whole thing: making good games has been Microsoft's Achilles heel for many years now
Where did they promise allowing you to cloud stream your owned library? Lol anything downloaded to your console you can play remotely anywhere. Don't recall them making that promise.
New tier for gamepass solely due yo call of duty is a garbage move though. They keep shooting themselves in the foot
@catastrophe
They said it June 2022
https://news.xbox.com/en-us...
"We’re excited to share that later this year, it’s our intent to roll out the ability for Xbox Game Pass Ultimate members to play, from the cloud, select games they already own or have purchased outside the Xbox Game Pass library."
It doesn't surprise me, it's very clear that MS is trying as hard as possible to recover all the money spent on Activision and Bethesda, they will do whatever they can, doesn't matter if people will like ir or not, as long as the higher ups see money arriving, it's all fair game
Pretty much Xbox wrote a cheque that Microsoft can't cash.
Inflated metrics egos and a belief that they could get the casual gamer playing hardcore titles via cloud on mobiles really lead them to belive they were in a better position than the reality.
I don't believe gamepass was ever that strong with many gamers likely signing up multiple fake emails for the dollar trials over and over boosting that count along with Xbox live gold hacks and other methods of getting gamepass for next to no money a month have been well known and exploited for years.
Microsoft have a belief that everyone's grandma wants to play halo on a mobile if they could just reach them because they played Wii bowling once so they must want to play halo
While a rumour cant say Id be surprised if true.
Certain other subscription services I sub to have increased in price while adding nothing and we expect theyre potentially offering up the biggest game of every year and its back catalog for "free"?
But I'd happily skip it if there are options (or upgrade for a month for the campaign)
People expect the price of games to stay the same forever so why wouldn't they expect the same for subscription services?
Price increases are fine. As long as they make sense. Games at 60 was a good price point. Things don't have to go up in price just because.
I used to buy some games at 60...how many do I buy at 70? None. It's a loss for the industry. The higher the price the likelihood sales won't be as high. For $10 more they lost $60.
Same thing with subscriptions. As long as it's affordable people will set it and forget it. If it stops being affordable people will be more picky...so a price increase of $5 could net them a loss of millions.
Let's be honest, nobody wants prices to increase. I personally have always thought that $40 was the perfect price and never liked it when they increased it to $50 for the PS2 generation and then $60 for the PS3. The $60 price did hold on for a good while though.
Same with sub services. The whole appeal is 'the best deal in gaming' mantra people love to chant, but we all know that they will increase the price eventually especially if they are putting CoD that will actually sell a ton even at that $70 price point.
call of duty united offensive was my fave. Shoutout ot the Foy map!
call of duty 2 is my personal favourite cod game. I must have played through that game 20 times.
They have come a long way from a largely unknown developer doing a WW2 shooter to the best selling franchise around.
There used to be a time when people said Medal of Honor and Halo were kings of the FPS genre. My how things changed.
On that note I salute Call of Duty for helping put an end to the swarm of WWII shooters that used to flood the market.
The opening paragraph is worded fairly frivolously. It says that MoH did WW2 "over and over" again, which is true, but that's exactly what CoD did from its inception in 2003 up until 2007 when CoD4 released. Not to mention Infinity Ward was founded by ex-EA LA devs who previously worked on MoH Allied Assault and prior titles, and it shows with some of the aspects of gameplay in the original CoD.
Grant Collier, ex-Founder of Infinity Ward, said years ago in an interview that they wanted to do a modern warfare game from the get-go, but it was Activision who told them to make a WW2 game. When CoD did as well as it did, a sequel was ordered, and once again IW was told to do a WW2 game. After that, Grant and his crew were adamant that their next game would be a game with a modern backdrop, and they were given the extra time to make it, which is why in 2006 CoD3 was developed by Treyarch (Treyarch was given less than a year to make this game solely for the purpose of a new CoD being released every year) and CoD4 would release the following year.