" Kotick wants a World of Duty. Make me wonder who would bite. "

Bobby Fuck-face's greed is truly breathtaking.  
 
He's just presided over the biggest "entrainment launch in history" that has grossed BILLIONS of dollar's.  He has personally profited from this by selling his Activison shares on the back of this success to the tune of 12 MILLION Dollars. 
 
All he can talk about is making even more money.  What he's basicly saying here is Microsoft is getting a big uplift in subscriptions from people playing our game and I want a peace of that.  If Microsoft wont cut me a piece of the money pie then I'll start my own bakery! 
 
He's also saying, "hey gamers I think you are mugs". You pay $ 60.00 a pop to play our game (£45.00 over here in the UK which works out at 67.40 USD!) and that is all you pay (baring DLC).  I'm not happy with that. I want to make you pay more. I want to make you pay me by the month to carry on paying for my game and if I could get away with it I'd make you pay BY THE HOUR! 
 
This man is a cold hearted bastard. I truly feel sorry for this man and pray that one day God will open his soul up to something other than money so hey may see there is more to life than pure profit.   
 
For now the only thing I can say about the man is something I rarely ever ever say.   
 
That man is a C@^t.

His job is not to care about video games.  His job is to care how the company makes money and his one source of that is any idea he can pull out of his ass to change the revenue streams Activision sees every year.
 
Any backlash against Kotick comes from people who simply don't understand who Kotick is and what he does there.  He isn't forcing anything on anybody (well except his employees because that's business management) and so we as gamers have nothing to worry about. 

Three words: 
 
Worst. Idea. Ever.

" The only shooter I want to see made into an MMO is Left 4 Dead. Just thinking about playing a l4d where I get to customize my survivor, upgrade skills and stat's via an RPG leveling up system (think Borderlands only more complex and in a fun game), while constantly trying to survive a giant open world city. That is my dream MMO.   God I wish Valve would make that. I would literally give Gabe Newel my left nut for that game to get made. Why he would want my left nut I do not know. But if it got me that game made and a free life time subscription to it(It is my left nut after all) I would ask where the chopping block is because I'm ready. "

" Bobby Kotick is the best! Numero uno! "

Viva Kotick!!!!!

"You know what, every Kotick interview would be exactly the same even if, instead of answering questions, he'd just sing the theme song to the Apprentice every time. "

i say the next MW will have some form of pay to play service attached to it. i think MMO is the wrong choice of words. its not going to be world of call of duty, its going to be the same multiplayer shooter we are all playing now, the only difference is you will be paying 10 to 15 bucks a month for it. and you know what? people will pay for it. sure maybe it wont be super popular like MW2 is now, but people out there will shell out the bucks to play it online. it will be the first step in a much larger venture. if its sucessful. you can bet your sweet ass other companys will follow suit.

" i say the next MW will have some form of pay to play service attached to it. i think MMO is the wrong choice of words. its not going to be world of call of duty, its going to be the same multiplayer shooter we are all playing now, the only difference is you will be paying 10 to 15 bucks a month for it. and you know what? people will pay for it. sure maybe it wont be super popular like MW2 is now, but people out there will shell out the bucks to play it online. it will be the first step in a much larger venture. if its sucessful. you can bet your sweet ass other companys will follow suit. "

I will never pay a monthly fee just to play online, this will not change my mind especially since I never liked CoD from 4 and onward in the first place 1/2 where good (I haven't played 3 since it wasn't on pc and the wii version didn't have online.

Oh yeah, this will go over well. 
 
 Lesee, X360 will not have anyone making an extra buck on their turf, proof by SE's attempt at another MMO on their console.
 
PS3 users are used to not having to pay for online service capabilities, the only one's who do, probably are too busy playing the games in which they pay for NOT CoD.
 
And we already know about how pissed the PC gamers are at Kotick.
 
So who the fuck is going to subscribe to this again?

You don't get anything? We buy your fucking games, asshole. 

I have to wonder if Activision's board of investors know full well that Activision's current profitability is not sustainable. Barring another Guitar Hero, Call of Duty, or World of Warcraft-level of franchise emerging, they are going nowhere but down in the next few years. Sure they'll always be profitable, but the amount of money they saw in 2007-2009 is never going to be matched unless they get some NEW franchises. World of Warcraft is at record low subscription rates, no one plays Hero games anymore, and there are multiple other franchises cutting into CoD's player base these days, and they don't even have their lead devs anymore. They will have no trouble turning big profits for the foreseeable future, but I just don't see where their next mega-franchise is going to emerge from while they milk all their other ones dry.

Call of Duty:Massive Warfare

" *In bad Assassin's Creed Italian accent* "Money, money!" "

"I totally want to pay $15 a month to have my sexuality and my mother's sexual history brought into question by 9-year-olds after they shoot me in the back from across the map.  That sounds like a blast, Activision.  Where can I sign up? "

Bobby Kotick is the epitome of the greedy asshole CEO. He must spend every day in his office thinking "How can I make even MORE money off of video games?" He's like George Lucas, fuck the fans, bring in the cash.

A subscription-based Call of Duty sounds pretty good to me. Think about it, thye multiplayer is popular because of :
 
1) Shooting Mechanics
2) Character progression
 
Shooting mechanics work regardless of the payment system, and character progression stands to be significantly improved by a subscription. Constant income means developers can reasonably implement a constant stream of free content, vastly extending and improving character progression.
 
TL,DR: A subscription CoD is probably a better game than a one-and-done CoD.
 
P.S. Would everyone quit hating on Bobby Kotick for a couple seconds and THINK? He's the CEO of a company, it's his job to make good business decisions like this one.  If you don't want an MMO, just don't buy it. It's not evil, anti-consumer, or in any way bad to offer a product for sale.
 
Seriously, the verbal diarrhea pouring fourth from the community is embarassing.

" @Jeust said:

" Bobby Kotick is the best! Numero uno! "

Viva Kotick!!!!!

"

Pay even more money for Call of Duty!? SIGN ME THE EFF UP! Thanks Kotick, you are my hero! 

I LOVE YOU, BOBBY KOTICK!!

" A subscription-based Call of Duty sounds pretty good to me. Think about it, thye multiplayer is popular because of :  1) Shooting Mechanics2) Character progression  Shooting mechanics work regardless of the payment system, and character progression stands to be significantly improved by a subscription. Constant income means developers can reasonably implement a constant stream of free content, vastly extending and improving character progression.  TL,DR: A subscription CoD is probably a better game than a one-and-done CoD.  P.S. Would everyone quit hating on Bobby Kotick for a couple seconds and THINK? He's the CEO of a company, it's his job to make good business decisions like this one.  If you don't want an MMO, just don't buy it. It's not evil, anti-consumer, or in any way bad to offer a product for sale. Seriously, the verbal diarrhea pouring fourth from the community is embarassing. "

This guy really hates gamers.

If it plays like CoD4 I'm down...

He can keep his idea of "compelling experience." MMO? Aside from making something much like MAG, I can't really see a CoD MMO outside the idea of: take the regular Call of Duty online formula and slap on a subscription fee."

How do you imagine Bobby Kotick does business meetings? I imagine he sits on an ivory throne wearing a crimson cape and top hat while drinking blood from a human skull.

I'd like to know where they get that 60% figure. Probably Kotick's ass. I'll buy that 60% of  xbox live users have COD played on their profiles, but I seriously doubt that's the main reason over half the service signed up. Plus, you can't really... track or quantify that kindof stuff. It's just all guessing. 
 
  
Also yeah, allow me to mirror people's thoughts in saying that paying monthly to play a game where people will cheat openly and blatantly while calling you a faggot is a really bad idea for a game. Also the only way they could get away for something like this is either on a PC or maybe the PS3. But PS3 users would probably wonder why they'd pay for COD monthly when you can just buy SOCOM (I guess 4 would be out at this point), or y'know older COD games once and never pay again. Xbox users won't pay twice. Either activision gets their own platform... or this'll be done in the next generation, and by then I'll have probably outgrown that kind of game anyway.

This has failure written all over it.

If I was to play a COD MMO, I'd play as a human soldier with some kind of gun.

" @ip007:  Sorry 'bout trolling...but Kotick = Cat in Russian  (phonetics) Ko-Tick does not equal Ko-sh-ka "

Oooooooohhhhh, now I get the reason behind all of Activisions craziness. Bobby Kotick is actually mentally handicap, but they dont really need to have someone retarded running their company. I mean, I can say things that are just as stupid as "60% of xbox live users subscribe only because of call of duty" and I'm not even retarded. Here, let me give it a try: "........................................". Wait, I was wrong, there isnt any possible way I can come up with anything as retarded as that.

" A subscription-based Call of Duty sounds pretty good to me. Think about it, thye multiplayer is popular because of :  1) Shooting Mechanics2) Character progression  Shooting mechanics work regardless of the payment system, and character progression stands to be significantly improved by a subscription. Constant income means developers can reasonably implement a constant stream of free content, vastly extending and improving character progression.  TL,DR: A subscription CoD is probably a better game than a one-and-done CoD.  P.S. Would everyone quit hating on Bobby Kotick for a couple seconds and THINK? He's the CEO of a company, it's his job to make good business decisions like this one.  If you don't want an MMO, just don't buy it. It's not evil, anti-consumer, or in any way bad to offer a product for sale. Seriously, the verbal diarrhea pouring fourth from the community is embarassing. "

if they could do it correctly no cutting corners but how would it be done would it be like a huge hub world and queuing up for matches or would it be like open world war conquest style with factions and what not idk it could work

So the only reason there would ever be a Call Of Duty MMO is so Activision gets money? If so, it will be terrible.

The idea sounds pretty retarded 
 
Then again, I wouldn't need to pay for a new COD game every year. 
  
But then again, Kotick can suck my balls.

Let's see how much more hate I can garner by trying to argue a point...
 
@Jethuty:   I like to think I'm none of the above. I've yet to see anyone apply an ounce of logic trying to explain why a subscription based CoD must be bad, and why good business practices make Bobby Kotick evil. If you would like to try and argue either of these points rather than just flaming me, you're perfectly welcome to.
 
 @Korwin: I suppose "free" is the wrong term to use, but I think you understand my meaning. A $10-$15 subscription for a constant stream of new maps, modes, and progression content (more levels, guns, perks) sounds pretty good to me, and more appealing than just buying a couple of $15 map packs.
 
@DiegoBittermen: Yes, a good business decision to pursue a subscription-based business model. I'm actually not sure what you're trying to argue here. As I said, if you don't want this game, you don't have to buy it. If you feel that this game is a key part of an evolving genre that you cannot bear to miss out on, then obviously you do want it. Or you could just be trolling, but I don't feel that blindly insulting people is condusive to an informative and meaningful debate.

Please no.

MMOs suck, last time I checked only one was still doing great. Many have tried but hit a wall of Warcraft. Bless them, keep trying developers, but you can count me out.

" Kotick wants a World of Duty. Make me wonder who would bite. "

Call of Duty:  The MMO.  The first MMO to be based on p2p connections!  XD

Everything this guy says just further convinces me he knows nothing about the way video games actually work.