Four Player Co-Op 12.08.09: Medal of Honor, ECA, Glitch-bans, and Franchise Scheduling

Posted by Rod Oracheski on 12.08.2009

Can the ECA recover from its recent scandal? Is Microsoft right to suspend those using the Javelin glitch in Modern Warfare 2? How often should franchises see a new title? This week in Four Player Co-Op, 411 staffers handle those questions and more.

Todd Vote has joined the game.
Lee Price has joined the game.
Joshua Richey has joined the game.
Rod Oracheski has joined the game.

QUESTION ONE: The ECA came under fire for what many see as anti-consumer practices, a situation that wasn't made better by the response of organization president Hal Halpin. What should they have done and can they recover from this?

Todd Vote

Wow… just wow. They should shut down, or change the name of the company and start over completely. I don't think there will be a way to wash this nasty taste out of consumer's mouths aside from offering them all free HD TV's. The ECA screwed the pooch here, and that is all there is to it. What could they have done differently? It seems like a simple explanation of what was going on would have went a long way in fixing things here.

Lee Price

What they should have done is never removed phone cancellations for ECA accounts in the first place, as well as notifying each and every member to the changes in their Terms of Service, not only for the moral reasons that the company apparently stands for, but also to cover their own arses should a situation like the one they are facing now present itself.

As for recovery, first and foremost is implementing a better form of account cancellation, be it the old phone system or an online form. Nobody sends letters anymore, and it is disgraceful that you are essentially being asked to pay to cancel an account in the first place. After that, better communication with the consumers they supposedly work to represent is a must. Banning people from their forums and stone walling their questions make an entire community angry and that will only damage the organization. A monthly email, or something to that effect, informing users of any changes to their accounts in advance would be a good idea too.

Joshua Richey

Can they recover from this? I don't think so. What the ECA did, and what Hal Halpin said is shady business 101. They've now got the 'scam' label on them, and once you've got that, there's no getting rid of it. This all could have been avoided had they just made it easy for their customers to cancel their memberships. Instead, they chose to make things as difficult as they could for the people they're supposed to be there for. Tsk,tsk, ECA.

Rod Oracheski

First off, they should have had a much better response when the issue first came to light. If they'd been publicly contrite from the start instead of locking down their forums and banning 'malcontents' who wanted answers, it wouldn't have become anywhere near the issue that it is. For a consumer advocacy group to behave with such disdain for their own membership is laughable.

How do they recover? I don't think they can. The ridiculous 'send us a letter' policy was bad enough, but when they went into damage control they just kept stacking wood on the fire. I can't imagine how anyone who's taken in the whole thing could ever be convinced to support the organization again, unless there's a wholesale change of command - from the top all the way down to the site's moderators. Closing registration, then secretly opening it only to those who promise to support the ECA? How can a consumer advocacy group honestly expect to get away with doing these things?

---

QUESTION TWO: Gamers using the Javelin glitch in Modern Warfare 2 are risking a suspension of anywhere from 24 hours to 14 days, according to Xbox Live enforcement head Stephen Toulouse. Do you agree with the practice of banning, albeit temporarily, gamers for using glitches and exploits, and is it an effective deterrent?

Todd Vote

I do agree with this. Exploiting glitches is the same as cheating in my eyes. Granted these glitches are available to anyone playing the game whom is ranked high enough to rock the javelin, but it doesn't change that it is cheating. My question is: how are they catching these people? Is it if you just happened to be in a game with an IW dev? How can they know if people are exploiting this glitch if they don't catch them in the act? I would say the first priority should be fixing the glitch then worry about a punishment.

Lee Price

While I don't use glitches and the like online, and can find them a bit annoying, I don't think banning a user is the right thing to do if they exploit it. After all the real issue is that there is an exploitable glitch in the first place, which places some of the blame on Infinity Ward's shoulders until they patch it. If it was straight up cheating then sure ban them all you like. But a glitch, even something that perhaps shouldn't be exploited or makes the game less fun when it is, is the fault of the developer first and foremost so they need to get it fixed so it becomes a non issue.

As for the deterrent issue, I can't think of any better way to deter someone from doing something in a game than banning them, so I figure if that's probably the best way to go for cheaters, but perhaps a bit excessive for glitch exploiters. Perhaps have them booted from whatever match they exploit the glitch in until they find a group that's happy with it, or stop altogether?

Joshua Richey

I've not had anyone do the 'Javelin Glitch' in any of my games, but I would approve of a temporary ban if someone was excessively using it. 24-48 hours should be the max though. To be banned for two weeks because you capitalized on a flaw in the games design seems silly. But I do think that the threat of a ban could prevent some people from using it.

Rod Oracheski

If you can't do the time, don't do the crime, right? I'm glad they started suspending the accounts of those abusing the Javelin glitch, as it was - while hilarious in private matches - ruining the 'real' games, particularly Headquarters and Domination. With the numbers of glitchers falling dramatically after they kicked in with the suspensions, I don't think there's any way to argue that it isn't a highly effective deterrent. Infinity Ward is laying out bans to those who abuse it in the PC version, so I don't expect the Javelin glitch to be as widespread in the future.

---

QUESTION THREE: Take Two doesn't believe the GTA series needs to be an annual release, while Activision - with the addition of an additional developer - might be moving the Call of Duty franchise into more than a 'game a year' release schedule. What do you feel is the best release schedule for major franchises like these?

Todd Vote

It's been said by millions of people before me, but ever other year would be fine with DLC updates the way GTA IV has done. There is no reason that we need a new COD every year, and the same can be said for any franchise. Look to film with the Saw franchise. Is it still making money? Yes, but the majority of Saw fans now have given up on the franchise, citing it as watered down, and just not good anymore. If game developers think they are destined for the same fate with overkill, then they probably deserve it.

Lee Price

Major franchises should feel like the name suggests, which means every game should be something to look forward to because you know the time and effort has gone into making a quality product. Turning the CoD franchise into the FPS equivalent of FIFA and Madden is really not the way to go in my view.

Activision have already gone down this road before with the Guitar Hero franchise and all that happens is that gamers get burnt out on the genre in question and the quality of the title decreases. Take Two definitely have the right idea I think, companies should release games when the quality is where it needs to be, not to milk their cash cow dry.

Joshua Richey

I applaud Take Two for coming out and saying this. We don't need a game every single year. Let the anticipation build up like the old days. You start releasing them every year and then you eventually begin to devalue the appreciation of the games. Would Metal Gear games be as exciting and as "can't miss" if they were released as frequently as Guitar Hero games? I doubt it. Part of what makes those games great is that it's a good two years or so before we even see something as small as screenshot. Give the developers as long as they need to make quality games. Let the demand for the games sequel build up, then release it.

Rod Oracheski

I think that a major franchise needs to get a new title every two to two-and-a-half years or so, but I don't think a yearly release is necessarily off the mark if you have two teams working on alternating games. Two things to consider though: the quality of the game must stay high, and successive games can't start to feel too familiar. Guitar Hero, for example. The quality of games remained fairly high, but it all started to feel like 'more of the same' after two or three quick releases. Then there's Call of Duty. With two developers on the franchise the quality hasn't really suffered, but they're starting to fall into that 'more of the same' trap.

You can't stretch the wait out too longer either, of course. Don't put out a sequel for three or more years and gamers - a fickle crowd at the best of times - tend to forget about the franchise as new games draw their attention.

---

QUESTION FOUR: The Medal of Honor franchise will get a reboot with a Fall 2010 release of Medal of Honor - a modern-day shooter set in Afghanistan. What's your take - good move or not?

Todd Vote

It was bound to happen. With the success of Call of Duty 4 and other recent titles making the jump to more current events and storylines, it was bound to happen that the rest of the pack would try it out. Now having it set in an area where there is still a war going on is a bit insensitive. People cried out about Six Days in Fallujah, why is this okay?

Lee Price

Talking about a franchise that was great for a while before burning itself out, we have Medal of Honor. Firstly the reboot issue as a whole, perhaps not the best move right now seeing as how CoD is so dominant right now, plus they are apparently looking to saturate the market with war games if the above news item is to be believed. However, if EA can offer something that can set itself apart from the CoD games, they may stand a chance of reviving the ailing franchise.

That brings me into the Afghanistan issue. Its a brave move on EA's part, that's for sure. They are going to have to deal with their fair share of complaints if they are dealing with an ongoing war rather than one that's over or has moved to the back of public consciousness. This gives me the distinct feeling that EA will go the bull-headed patriotism route to avoid any potential backlash with the new MoH game, which is fine except its nothing different to what they've done before. It will be interesting to see what direction they take and how brave they are about it, that's for sure.

Joshua Richey

After the success of Modern Warfare, I'm surprised it took this long for EA to get the ball rolling on this. I say it's a good business move. People are tired of the WWII FPS's, so it makes all the sense in the world for EA to reboot the franchise as a modern day shooter. Setting it during Afghanistan does nothing but make it more realistic.

Rod Oracheski

On one hand it's a good move, as I doubt there are many gamers out there still just dying to play another World War II shooter. On the other hand, why do the exact same thing Call of Duty already did? EA would maybe have been better served by finding a different theater for the Medal of Honor series' reboot. Do something in South America, Africa, Japan - anywhere but the Middle East. I mean how long until we're sick to death of 'those' games too? It's the nature of the industry, I suppose. Someone has success by doing a game a certain way, and suddenly everyone has to try it for themselves.

---

QUESTION FIVE: The PSP GO is under fire again, but this time it's not the price of the hardware that's being criticized. Traveller's Tale's Jon Burton said that without a cut in the price of downloadable software, the system will die. True or false - and why?

Todd Vote

If some of the things he is saying are true, then yes it will start to piss people off. I'm starting to think the PSP Go is the most ill-thought out game machine in a long time. They are already working on a UMD drive for it, and people keep complaining about the lack of UMD support. It could very well be true that the system is in for trouble.

Lee Price

Die may be a strong assertion, but it will definitely suffer, so I'd say true to an extent. There is simply no excuse for downloadable software to cost as much as a physical copy. There are no manufacturing costs for a start, as well as no gaming stores to bump up the prices to the point where they can make a profit too. All you need to really do is make the game and maintain the platforms through which it can be obtained. Services like iTunes have shown us that a digital copy of something should cost less than a physical, an album on the service costs half that of a physical copy. Perhaps the games market should reflect this too, especially as we move into the apparent age of digital distribution.

Joshua Richey

This is a very tricky situtation for Sony. On one hand, Burton is right. Sony needs to give more incentive for GO-owners to purchase their games digitally. Cheaper prices would do just that. However, on the other hand, you can't lower the price of the software for the GO because that would come off as a slap in the face to the non-GO PSP owners. It's kind of the same problem that Microsoft is having with their Games on Demand feature on Xbox Live. When the games are the same price to download as they are to go to the store and buy, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to the consumer.

Rod Oracheski

I doubt it'll just die, as Sony seems willing to keep taking a beating on it for as long as it takes, but it's definitely not going to be doing gangbusters at retail with these kind of prices. Sony's planning for the PSP GO thus far has been puzzling, but I don't think the platform's in danger of dying.

---

BONUS QUESTION: Sony's recovery plan now hinges around a unified online service that will deliver Sony's movies, games, and music - a plan they believe can outdo Apple's iTunes network. Does Sony have what it takes, and is this their best path to recovery?

Todd Vote

Their best path for recovery would be to stop being so damn arrogant and start working for the customer again instead of themselves. Think about it, in the past couple years Sony has met every criticism with basically saying the consumers do not get it, or something along the lines of passing the buck. People pick up on these things, and eventually they are going to start looking elsewhere for their electronic needs. This Sony store idea may be sound, but I don't think it is the "be all end all" solution. In addition, why do they have to compare it to iTunes? Why not just let it stand on it's own merit.

Lee Price

Competing against Apple now that their hardware has become so ingrained in the public's mind is a bad move in most respects I'd say. The only real positive that I can see coming out of it is some competition with Apple causing some price wars, as Apple has a virtual monopoly on this sort of online service right now. The only real reason why an average customer is going to convert is for the ability to store their own user-generated content onto their accounts via videos and the like. Its an ambitious project that's for sure, creating essentially a Sony-fied mash-up of iTunes and YouTube, and Sony have a track record of failing to deliver this sort of service in recent times despite all their bluster about it. Having said that, if Sony are to become as reliant on providing digital content rather than physical in the future, then perhaps its the best move the company can make to keep control of their products. If they can pull it off that is.

Joshua Richey

It's best that Sony not start putting unrealistic expectations upon themselves. It's one thing to say that they think they could be successful at this, it's another thing entirely to say that they can outdo iTunes. Sony is already well on their path to recovery. Lowering the cost of the PS3 has been a tremendous success. They're moving units, they're selling software, things are on the up-and-up. Personally, I think they just need to focus on improving their online community and making great games; because that's what it's all about.

Rod Oracheski

They drop the price of their console, roll out a new (and much better) advertising blitz, and suddenly the arrogant Sony of old is back? Sony has talked up this 'Matrix-like' online network in the past, the first time was prior to the launch of the PS2. They need to stop talking and just deliver on this stuff. With some of Sony's decisions with the PSP GO, they'll probably stick this new Sony-centric Store in Home somewhere.

Is this their best route back to profitability? I'd say it's better than their focus on 3DTV, but probably not the safest bet they could have made. They need to keep cutting costs, streamlining hardware divisions, and putting out quality product - that's how they'll dig out of a huge hole, not going all in on crazy bets.

---

That's it for another week of Four Player Co-Op. If you have any questions you'd like to have asked, feel free to drop it into the comments.