On IndustryGamers, EEDAR analyst Jesse Divnich examines the economic impact of Modern Warfare 2's "Stimulus Package" on consumers, business and the future of DLC. He notes that "as an economist" he's glad a publisher tested the boundaries of DLC pricing, as millions of consumers (around 25 percent of MW2 owners) proved willing to drop $15 on the map pack. He points out that "if consumers deem it unfair for companies to overcharge their products, it is similarly unfair for businesses to unknowingly under-price their products."
However, Divnich wonders about the long-term implications of continued high-priced MW2 DLC, should Activision go that route. He suggests that consumers could leave the Call of Duty "circle" for games like Battlefield: Bad Company 2, where the cost for new content over time appears to be lower. He also posits that "consumers could avoid the next iteration of the Call of Duty franchise, since again, cost of dedicated ownership is now much higher." Divnich explains that the current "situation" between Infinity Ward and Activision may cloud core consumer purchases of future DLC and the franchise, as well, compared to if everything had remained -- on the surface, at least -- hunky-dory.
Reader Comments (77)
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:06PM SSmaster said
this is the FIRST and LAST mw2 add-on I will be buying.
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:19PM Forza qC said
@vwbeetlelvr: Me too. I bought this against my better judgement because I've been hopelessly addicted to MW2 and a buddy that I play online with all the time bought it. Lesson learned. I will never buy another COD or Modern Warfare title as long as Activision is calling the shots. The new maps are terribly unbalanced (especially Salvage on Domination, A Spawn = OMGWTF Game Over) and even Crash's A Spawn is still screwed from the last MW.
I could never really figure out what was wrong with MW2 for all of the veteran players, since I never played COD4, but I really found out just how half-assed things have gotten with the FAIL that is the Stimulus Package.
Reply
I could never really figure out what was wrong with MW2 for all of the veteran players, since I never played COD4, but I really found out just how half-assed things have gotten with the FAIL that is the Stimulus Package.
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:59PM i77ogical said
I hope we can stop this trend of yelling at fellow gamers.
Yeah, some gamers bought the maps to keep up with their friends. Other gamers throw away cash on collector's editions. Still others have 4-5 titles sitting on their shelf that they haven't even put into the console, and maybe never will.
We all screw the pooch here and there. It's not like anyone can justify every single gaming purchase. Or even hardware: $99 for an Xbox wireless adapter? Really?
Reply
Yeah, some gamers bought the maps to keep up with their friends. Other gamers throw away cash on collector's editions. Still others have 4-5 titles sitting on their shelf that they haven't even put into the console, and maybe never will.
We all screw the pooch here and there. It's not like anyone can justify every single gaming purchase. Or even hardware: $99 for an Xbox wireless adapter? Really?
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 3:22PM That Burning Sensation said
Saying you bought this proves you haven't been paying attention.
Reply
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 3:33PM Mcmax3000 said
More power to the people that bought it. I was not one of them.
I haven't gotten enough enjoyment out of the MW2 multiplayer for it to be worth the money but I know a number of people that do, both on 360 that have already bought it and on PS3 that will be buying the map pack when it hits that platform.
Value is different for everyone. I don't find value in five maps for $15 but others do & if enough people are willing to pay for them at that price, I won't fault Activision for charging it.
That said, if you're one of the people that bought the map pack, you have no right to complain about the pricing of both this and future map packs.
Reply
I haven't gotten enough enjoyment out of the MW2 multiplayer for it to be worth the money but I know a number of people that do, both on 360 that have already bought it and on PS3 that will be buying the map pack when it hits that platform.
Value is different for everyone. I don't find value in five maps for $15 but others do & if enough people are willing to pay for them at that price, I won't fault Activision for charging it.
That said, if you're one of the people that bought the map pack, you have no right to complain about the pricing of both this and future map packs.
Posted: Apr 22nd 2010 1:58PM WXsniper said
That's also a quarter of the price of the game, no matter the system you bought it for.
If you count the campaign as half the price of the game, and the multiplayer as half, it's $30 each.
Divide that by the amount of maps included in the vanilla game, and it comes out to $1.875 per map. The map pack adds up to $9.375 that way, while it divides to $3 per map using the actual price of the pack.
If you add the original maps together by the $3 price—but also keeping the game at $60—that makes the vanilla multiplayer $48, but the campaign only $12, which makes no sense knowing Activision.
Reply
If you count the campaign as half the price of the game, and the multiplayer as half, it's $30 each.
Divide that by the amount of maps included in the vanilla game, and it comes out to $1.875 per map. The map pack adds up to $9.375 that way, while it divides to $3 per map using the actual price of the pack.
If you add the original maps together by the $3 price—but also keeping the game at $60—that makes the vanilla multiplayer $48, but the campaign only $12, which makes no sense knowing Activision.
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:07PM SSmaster said
This is the FIRST and last add-on for MW2 I will be buying.
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:14PM murph17 said
they are setting themselves up to discount the map pack in the future. $10? $7.50? bundled with the inevitable Map Pack 2?
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:13PM Temidien said
I was a huge CoD4 (I refuse to call it MW1) fan and admittedly poured 60+ hours into MW2, but I just can't go any further. I understand it's a business and the bottom line is important, but Activision's decisions concerning the franchise (making it even more casual-friendly, charging $15 for a map pack, inserting Michael Bay scenes into the SP, etc.) just leave a bad taste in my mouth.
Guess it's time to give Bad Company 2 an honest try.
Guess it's time to give Bad Company 2 an honest try.
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 3:26PM (Unverified) said
The sad thing is that the pinnacle of JRPGS's is Final Fantunnel 13... There's no other options.
And that's not Activision's fault; it's JRPG gamers.
Reply
And that's not Activision's fault; it's JRPG gamers.
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 3:39PM Troy Powers said
"The sad thing is that the pinnacle of FPS's is either MW2 or BFBC... There's no other options."
WTF?!!? MAG and Killzone 2 say "Eat a hot bowl of dicks." :D
Reply
WTF?!!? MAG and Killzone 2 say "Eat a hot bowl of dicks." :D
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 6:49PM Wiizer said
Guys, guys, guys...
I'm not saying that I believe *personally* that MW2 is better than other games, or that other choices aren't available to FPS gamers...
What I am saying is this:
There's two very big communities playing two games right now in the FPS genre.
Rather than go back to Halo 3, or move to other gaming communities, FPS fans have stuck with these two games over any others.
How do you think Activision thought that $15 DLC would pay off in the first place?
Even if they netted 25% of the SEVEN MILLION + people that bought the game in the first place (which they did), they were going to be making fistfuls of money.
I'm not lying to you, folks. And taking JRPG cheap shots doesn't change the truth... however hurtful that may be.
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:15PM Spike Spiegel Humble Bounty Hun said
It's just too expensive, in my opinion. I think $10 would have been more of a fair price to both Activision and consumers. There's a huge dedicated community willing to pay the price of $15, but if it keeps up people's wallets will be hurting.
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:18PM jbs1018 said
Activision's needs to do better with their next map pack to get me to drop $15. They at least need to offer five new maps as opposed to three new and two old.
It wouldn't hurt to include new weapons, titles, spec ops and/or perks, but I predict they'll take the lazy route.
It wouldn't hurt to include new weapons, titles, spec ops and/or perks, but I predict they'll take the lazy route.
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:20PM GoldandFinal said
They should be like Criterion and give us some quality free DLC so we'll be more than willing to pay for the premium stuff
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:23PM Digital Viking said
Valve and Criterion have some amazing post-launch support, I wish other developers would pick up on it.
Reply
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:21PM (Unverified) said
Why are people so flabbergasted that someone will pay $15 for a map pack when there are hundreds of thousands of people who will pay $25 for an imaginary horse...
I think the map pack's a better value...
(Note: I haven't bought either and don't plan too, they're both too expensive for what they offer, in my opinion)
I think the map pack's a better value...
(Note: I haven't bought either and don't plan too, they're both too expensive for what they offer, in my opinion)
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 3:45PM Manifest37 said
Beware Sugardaddy, some people believe that not believing in their god is worse than playing out the events in Rapelay.
Reply
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:22PM SnatchTease said
Activision wants to increase the price of games as well as DLC. Actually doing it as they have done, they want to influence other companies to jump on the price increase. In no way was the Stimulus Package worth $15, but as the article states 25% of people disagree. I have MW2, but refuse to buy any DLC for it. If not having the DLC borks multiplayer like WaW did, I'm ditching the game and the franchise altogether. Seriously people, you vote with your money, and you choose which companies you empower by what you buy. If you think Activision should suffer a slow and horrible death, so be it. I personally think it should be fast and horrible.
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:25PM Digital Viking said
It's possible that not all of the 25% are satisfied though. They expected more of the 15$, but ended up disappointed. There is also the fact that if one guy in a group buys it, he will make his friends buy it as well.
So I think it's a bit less than 25% saying "I think it was worth 15$".
Reply
So I think it's a bit less than 25% saying "I think it was worth 15$".
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:45PM SnatchTease said
@Viking, At one point they did think it was worth it. If they are disappointed in a purchase they have made, then it's on them. Instead of buying it on day one, I waited to read the reviews, most of which said "it's not really worth $15", so I didn't buy it. It's up to the consumer whether or not they make an informed purchase or if they rush right out to buy whatevergimmecallofdutyzomg.
Reply
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 3:49PM Troy Powers said
I agree. Money talks. And $15 x 25% of however many people bought MW2 is a WHOLE LOT of money saying "Thank you, sir. May I have another."
Reply
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:22PM CaptainProtonX said
The Activision "Effect" is going to spread.
By god...we're going to see $15 "expansions" out the ass by year's end.
By god...we're going to see $15 "expansions" out the ass by year's end.
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:22PM Dr Blight said
10 dollars is the most you should charge for a map pack. Lower price=more sales=more $$$ in the long run.
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:28PM Digital Viking said
Agree. Lower price also makes the consumers and fans happy, and doesn't give negative publicity like this has. It's not like they needed a high price to make the game profitable, they sold shit-tons. If they had made it even just 7$ they would have made fans happy, earned a lot of money, and maybe as much as 50% would have bought it, which makes up for the same total as the current price point.
Reply
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:25PM onan said
This is the exception and not the rule. Modern Warfare is now one of those games casuals own a platform for, like Madden. They don't care if it's 15 bucks, because it's all they play.
This will not fly with damn near any other game, save maybe Halo titles. Any publisher that gets fooled into following suit is going to get burned.
This will not fly with damn near any other game, save maybe Halo titles. Any publisher that gets fooled into following suit is going to get burned.
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:37PM deathxrebirth said
That's the point I have been trying to make myself. Anyone that is worried that this will become the norm should always remember MW2 is a unique creature. Even amongst the FPS crowd.
Sure some might *try* to follow initially, but I think they will most likely get burned.
Reply
Sure some might *try* to follow initially, but I think they will most likely get burned.
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:26PM Brok3ntoast3r said
BFBC2 FO LYFE!!!! lol anywhozzle I don't think any map pack is worth a 15 dollar price tag, they obviously made a killing off the intial sales of the game and should show the community appreciation for that and sell the map pack at 10 dollars or even 5 for that matter. I mean think back to GH for instance instead of being a awesome supplier of DLC like rock band has done for the past 3 years Activision ruins the name of GH by releasing a new game ever 6 months to a year and thus people loose interest quicker or even further than that the Tony Hawk series
I for one will not purchase this until the price is reasonable
I for one will not purchase this until the price is reasonable
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:26PM Bartoman said
I just spent $15+ on DLC, but not the "3 new maps and 2 recycled maps A.K.A. new multiplayer content" DLC, but the "A completely new and awesome story with lotsa explosions, side missions, weapons and vehicles, AND new multiplayer content" DLC.
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 5:13PM trendscenedental said
So, you bought The Secret Armory of General Knoxx?
Here come the down-votes :P
Reply
Here come the down-votes :P
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:26PM sigma8 said
The problem with any DLC, free or paid, is that it creates fragmentation in what the user-base may have. Some people may have the new maps, some may not. Each time they do this, matchmaking will become slightly more difficult as less people have the appropriate content. Alternatively, the new content may be ignored and unhosted, and people will end up feeling burned by their purchase--not the attitude you want your paying customers to have.
In the limited time DLC has been "happening", my favorite environment with it so far has been single player or party games, like Assassin's Creed 2 and Rock Band: I don't have to worry about the rest of the world buying it, yet it tangibly extends my gaming enjoyment for a small cost.
In the limited time DLC has been "happening", my favorite environment with it so far has been single player or party games, like Assassin's Creed 2 and Rock Band: I don't have to worry about the rest of the world buying it, yet it tangibly extends my gaming enjoyment for a small cost.
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 3:02PM FredFredrickson said
Totally agree. Offline DLC is one thing, but I think online DLC is a mistake. It ends up splitting the people who play online into smaller groups, and then you either have less people to play with, or you can't play with the new content you purchased.
Reply
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 3:36PM sigma8 said
Right, although I'd say they should be called single-player and multi-player, since (sadly) now we're seeing single player games with no substantial online components that require you to be online for dubious reasons (achievements or even just pure DRM).
Reply
Posted: Apr 21st 2010 2:47PM MarkHawk said
Not true, Im a long time fan that's pulled away from the game rather fast.
Featured Stories
Super Joystiq Podcast 004: 38 Studios meltdown, Gravity Rush, Civilization 5: Gods & Kings, Dragon's Dogma
Posted on May 25th 2012 3:30PM







