"Call of Duty has more players who pay-to-play online than any Facebook game," Hirshberg said, "and our players pay more per player on average than any Facebook game." Um ... duh? Hirshberg fails to make the distinction that Facebook games are free to play, and triple-A franchise games like Call of Duty cost $60 per copy. In other words, of course more CoD gamers are paying to play than Facebook gamers--they're all paying to play the game. (Well, aside from the pirates, which is sort of a given.)
Not to mention that close to 12 million Facebook gamers in the U.S. alone pay for digital goods in their favorite social games monthly, according to a PayPal study. Better yet, about 1 million of those are paying at least $50 monthly for virtual horses and other boosts. While those folks are special cases, games like Call of Duty lack the payment structure for such dedication.
Hirshberg continued to elaborate on the fact that CoD players are more engaged than Facebook gamers: "They're also more engaged - the percentage of Call of Duty's monthly unique players that play the game every day is higher than that of the top three Facebook games."
What do you think inspired Hirshberg to make these claims? Do you think the Activision exec raises a good point, or do you think these companies have reason to worry in the face of companies like Zynga? Sound of in the comments. Add Comment.