Support NeoGAF

[sainraja]

Free To Play games are games with you can play fully from start to end without need to pay it.
Of course it can have a grind and slowly progression but everything is there to you free to play.

Just look at Fortnite, Freefire, Warframe, Saint Seiya Awakening, Genshin Impact, etc... they are all F2P.

I even give Super Mario Run example of what it not F2P... in that game you have 1 world you can try and play for free... after that you need to pay for the other worlds.... that is not F2P.

Destiny play for free is like Super Mario Run except that you are even more limited or with content removed.... you can play fully the base game or any of its expansions... you can play some activities, locations, etc.

When you can play just a part of the game no matter how much of it we call it Trial...
There is Demos too but the difference is that Demo doesn't exactly has the same that will be shipped on the final game and it is done in development time to test features.
Trial is exactly the same final game limited by what you can do just like Destiny.

Destiny 2 has a Trial version.

Well, you can say it's a hybrid. But I get your point — I am just saying that Bungie basically categorizes it as F2P and so do most people.
So that is why I was saying if you want to making a distinction, then calling it a hybrid F2P might be more accurate although I am sure someone can poke holes into that as well.

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

Because last gen had more users, compared to x360.
X360 is what made the franchise popular. Without that, it wouldn't have been popular at all.

Last gen did not have more users.

 

[ethomaz]

Well, you can say it's a hybrid. But I get your point — I am just saying that Bungie basically categorizes it as F2P and so do most people.
So that is why I was saying if you want to making a distinction, then calling it a hybrid F2P might be more accurate although I am sure someone can poke holes into that as well.

Bungie categorizes it as "Play for Free".
That is exactly my point.
"Play for Free" used to be called "Pay to Play" but they decided to change a bit the model with some free parts and reached that weird "Play for Free" name.

I will use a quote from the Steam forum for another game:

Free - Everything is presented to you for free.
Free to Play - You can play it for free but has micro-transactions.
Play for Free - Was once pay to play/buy to play but has since changed business model and is now a free to play game, but they are differentiating it by having "Play for Free" there to let people know.

"Free" vs. "Free to Play" vs. "Play for Free!" :: Steam Community

steamcommunity.com

Stem used to have separably tags for "Free to Play" and "Play for Free" but publishers probably had issues with that lol

Bungie calls Destiny "Play for Free" not "Free to Play".

 

[sainraja]

Bungie categorizes it as "Play for Free".
That is exactly my point.
"Play for Free" used to be called "Pay to Play" but they decided to change a bit the model with some free parts and reached that weird "Play for Free" name.

I will use a quote from the Steam forum for another game:

Free - Everything is presented to you for free.
Free to Play - You can play it for free but has micro-transactions.
Play for Free - Was once pay to play/buy to play but has since changed business model and is now a free to play game, but they are differentiating it by having "Play for Free" there to let people know.

"Free" vs. "Free to Play" vs. "Play for Free!" :: Steam Community

steamcommunity.com

Stem used to have separably tags for "Free to Play" and "Play for Free" but publishers probably had issues with that lol

Bungie calls Destiny "Play for Free" not "Free to Play".

Ah, you're right. I thought when they announced it in a TWAB they called it free to play but fair enough. In the Destiny 2 player community, everyone just says free to play for what its worth.

EDIT
Went back to check the blog post and it looks the media just decided to refer to it as Free to Play. But I mean, Play for Free or Free to Play.....it's pretty much the same. You are free to play the game or you can play the game for free and purchase additional content to play.

 

[kingfey]

It should go without saying, but you do know PlayStation does not just mean PS5?

current gen is ps5.

Also, PS4 isn't going to disappear, although I understand with your head in Microsoft's camp, you don't understand that consoles can and are supported for many years after a new console has been released.

Next gen games, dont support old gen. it can be supported up to 3 years by big games, but that is it.

In your world, when PS5s are readily available, all PS4s will be disabled which is clearly not going to happen.

Ps5 is the one that will get next gen games, not ps4. Starfield is next gen console game. It wont come to xbox one. For MS, those numbers are useless for that game, unless they sub to gamepass ultimate, and play it using xcloud. Sony doesnt have that option.

CoD for PS3 was released 3 years after the PS4 was released, that's without Covid, and it being a completely different Architecture.

That is the maximum support big games games can give to old gen. At most rare case, its 4 year. but that is it. So far, we are in the 2nd year now.

You think CoD isn't going to be released for longer on PS4 this time round with everything going on in the World?

3 year maximum release for next gen. Old gen would be lucky to handle new games so far. They couldnt handle cyberpunk2077, which was almost a next gen game. If games are that powerful, Developers would have to cut off old gen support.

Ultimately, what you flawed logic and xbox cool-aid is saying is you think Microsoft are all idiots, willing to throw money away.

You are fundementally ignoring Gamepass and steam.

MS main goal is to increase gamepass. And to do that, is to put the hottest game in the world on that service. By putting it on Playstation console, they are losing gamepass users. They wouldnt have bought activision, if they didnt care about increasing gamepass users. They even bought bethesda for that reason, and signed a deal with EA. MS is all in on gamepass.

Its not xbox kool-aid. Any person with a brain can see that. You guys choose to ignore that.

Of course they CAN, but evidence proves that CoD is a console game these days.

Facts back this up, not your fanboy wet dreams.

Again, this is not fanboism. Its the reality.

I would have agreed with you, IF xbox didnt have PC support. If xbox didnt have gamepass. In that case, I would have backed you up. But that is not the case. MS has gamepass, which has monthly revenue. They support PC platform, and put their games on Steam. These are what will offset the revenue loss from the playstation consoles.

Then there is the new gen numbers. Ps5 is at 17m. Xsx/Xss are at 12m. Ps5 forecast numbers is around 13m. If we go by this forecast, the ps5 would have 43m by 2024. That is if the shortages doesnt get worse. Whatever revenue comes from these numbers, MS can get it from steam, and gamepass users.

 

[kingfey]

Nobody said that, in fact Activision, MS and Spencer said the opposite

The deal is not done. They cannot talk about exclusivity as of now. Same thing with bethesda. Until MS owns activision officially, they can not talk about exclusivity.

 

[kingfey]

The PTSD is real...saw a topic saying "BREAKING: Sony is acquiring..." and thought it was something new. Didn't occur to me you guys were still bumping this, lmao.

I wish something gets acquired now. More anger posts about how acquisition is not fair, and ruins gaming.

 

[kingfey]

Bungie categorizes it as "Play for Free".
That is exactly my point.
"Play for Free" used to be called "Pay to Play" but they decided to change a bit the model with some free parts and reached that weird "Play for Free" name.

There are tons of games with f2p model. Then there is freemium. Destiny 2 falls on that category. People just use it as f2p, because they play it for free. In reality, you have to buy the dlc, and other contents. Same as fortnite.

Incase people dont know what freemium is, here is what it means.
Freemium is a business model in which a company offers basic or limited features to users at no cost and then charges a premium for supplemental or advanced features

Destiny 2. fortnite falls on that category.

 

[Kerotan]

I keep reading BREAKING thinking there's a new acquisition every time..

Same lol. The mods should remove the breaking.

 

[yurinka]

The deal is not done. They cannot talk about exclusivity as of now. Same thing with bethesda. Until MS owns activision officially, they can not talk about exclusivity.

He obviously can talk about exclusivity, in the same way he mentioned when announced the acquisition or before cloing them that they will put their games on Game Pass as soon as possible both for Bethesda and for ABK.

Or in the same way that when announcing the Bungie Sony also said that Bungie now will be under SIE but as a separate multiplatform publisher who will continue selfpublishing their games and that will share their knowledge, expertise, tools and data with the PS Studios teams, and that will adapt Bungie's IPs to movies or tv shows.

If there would be any monopoly concerns (that isn't the case) if something would be with Sony than MS since they are market leaders in many areas and not MS. MS said what are their plans, if you think they are lying to their investors and to the regulators and that they will do the opposite then this is another thing.

 

[DJ12]

zzz

For arguments sake.

CoD breakdown right now (Not real numbers BTW):

xbox

20 million

PC:

40 million

PlayStation:

70 Million.

What you think is going to happen when PS4 is dropped from CoD:

xbox

40 million

PC:

70 million

PS5:

20 million (Assuming the amount available in a few years is still this low)

What will happen in reality (Being generous):

xbox:

25 million

PC:

75~80 million

PS5:

20 million

You seem to think that PlayStation owners are only interested in CoD. Nothing else is really compelling in MS's entire roster of games to cause anyone to switch that only games on PlayStation. Only the tiny portion of people that are hardcore CoD players will move. Should MS prove they are infact stupid and pull CoD from PlayStation, then it's more likely Battlefield or Destiny suddenly becomes the MP game of choice for CoD players than switching where they play.

GamePass is not attractive to me as a PC gamer. Most of it is utter garbage, what's good I'd sooner pay for as I would buy the DLC so may as well own the game and get the "Ultimate" version anyway. I'd sooner sub to UBI Play.

In your alternate reality though, I'm pretty sure this will be an outrageous statement.

But anyway, you still believe that Microsoft is only interested in the xbox cash burning project so there is little more to say to you about this.

You're deluded, stupid, trolling or a combination of all three.

I will look for you in the requested bans section when you are proven wrong, but for now

 

[Bo_Hazem]

For arguments sake.

CoD breakdown right now (Not real numbers BTW):

xbox

20 million

PC:

40 million

PlayStation:

70 Million.

What you think is going to happen when PS4 is dropped from CoD:

xbox

40 million

PC:

70 million

PS5:

20 million (Assuming the amount available in a few years is still this low)

What will happen in reality (Being generous):

xbox:

25 million

PC:

75~80 million

PS5:

20 million

You seem to think that PlayStation owners are only interested in CoD. Nothing else is really compelling in MS's entire roster of games to cause anyone to switch that only games on PlayStation. Only the tiny portion of people that are hardcore CoD players will move. Should MS prove they are infact stupid and pull CoD from PlayStation, then it's more likely Battlefield or Destiny suddenly becomes the MP game of choice for CoD players than switching where they play.

GamePass is not attractive to me as a PC gamer. Most of it is utter garbage, what's good I'd sooner pay for as I would buy the DLC so may as well own the game and get the "Ultimate" version anyway. I'd sooner sub to UBI Play.

In your alternate reality though, I'm pretty sure this will be an outrageous statement.

But anyway, you still believe that Microsoft is only interested in the xbox cash burning project so there is little more to say to you about this.

You're deluded, stupid, trolling or a combination of all three.

I will look for you in the requested bans section when you are proven wrong, but for now

Exactly that, casuals will just go for Battlefield 2042 and it's suddenly the leading FPS game. If someone would argue that it's garbage, then so is COD Vanguard.

And if Deviation Games make a great game, or any of the upcoming FPS, they'll just go for it.

It's not MGS, Final Fantasy, or any other masterpeice with deep story that you can't just let go. I remember when MGS3 was rumores to be Xbox exclusive that I was willing to buy and Xbox just to play it.

Also despite it's doing great overall, if compared to PUBG and Fortnite it's literally a midget in terms of playerbase. Actually Genshin exclusivity to PS is a much more impactful move than COD to MS.

 

[kingfey]

If there would be any monopoly concerns (that isn't the case) if something would be with Sony than MS since they are market leaders in many areas and not MS. MS said what are their plans, if you think they are lying to their investors and to the regulators and that they will do the opposite then this is another thing

MS isnt monopoly position with Activision buy out. There are tons of publishers out there.

Monopoly isn't just market share, its about control of the industry, which MS doesnt have it.

Spencer clearly stated contractual agreement. He never said future games, but contractual agreement.

As long as he honors that agreement, he good to go.

If he said future games, then yes. He would have to put them on Playstation. But he didn't say that.

 

[yurinka]

Spencer clearly stated contractual agreement. He never said future games, but contractual agreement.

As long as he honors that agreement, he good to go.

If he said future games, then yes. He would have to put them on Playstation. But he didn't say that.

He, Activision and MS never said that their support for the other platform will only be limited to honor pending agreements.
They are two separated things: one to honor these agreeements. Another one they wanted to continue publishing on these platforms (not limited to the games with these agreements, but also releasing their post acquisition new games/dlc/updates as are doing wih Mojang and Bethesda).

Even when he mentioned both things in this tweet, notice that with the AND he's talking about two things and that he commits to both of them:

 

[The_Mike]

There are tons of games with f2p model. Then there is freemium. Destiny 2 falls on that category. People just use it as f2p, because they play it for free. In reality, you have to buy the dlc, and other contents. Same as fortnite.

Incase people dont know what freemium is, here is what it means.
Freemium is a business model in which a company offers basic or limited features to users at no cost and then charges a premium for supplemental or advanced features

Destiny 2. fortnite falls on that category.

If we stretch the term this much, then there's no free to play games at all.

 

[kingfey]

He, Activision and MS never said that their support for the other platform will only be limited to honor pending agreements.
They are two separated things: one to honor these agreeements. Another one they wanted to continue publishing on these platforms (not limited to the games with these agreements, but also releasing their post acquisition new games/dlc/updates as are doing wih Mojang and Bethesda).

Even when he mentioned both things in this tweet, notice that with the AND he's talking about two things and that he commits to both of them:

He stated here, that he will honor the contractual agreement Sony had with Activision. There are no future call of duty on that article, just the contractual agreement.

Until that deal is done, Call of duty won't leave Playstation. Once it's done, it will be bethesda treatment.

Phil is careful with his words here.

 

[Swift_Star]

The PTSD is real...saw a topic saying "BREAKING: Sony is acquiring..." and thought it was something new. Didn't occur to me you guys were still bumping this, lmao.

I feel like this is bigger for a select few than the A/B acquisition.

 

[Swift_Star]

For arguments sake.

CoD breakdown right now (Not real numbers BTW):

xbox

20 million

PC:

40 million

PlayStation:

70 Million.

What you think is going to happen when PS4 is dropped from CoD:

xbox

40 million

PC:

70 million

PS5:

20 million (Assuming the amount available in a few years is still this low)

What will happen in reality (Being generous):

xbox:

25 million

PC:

75~80 million

PS5:

20 million

You seem to think that PlayStation owners are only interested in CoD. Nothing else is really compelling in MS's entire roster of games to cause anyone to switch that only games on PlayStation. Only the tiny portion of people that are hardcore CoD players will move. Should MS prove they are infact stupid and pull CoD from PlayStation, then it's more likely Battlefield or Destiny suddenly becomes the MP game of choice for CoD players than switching where they play.

GamePass is not attractive to me as a PC gamer. Most of it is utter garbage, what's good I'd sooner pay for as I would buy the DLC so may as well own the game and get the "Ultimate" version anyway. I'd sooner sub to UBI Play.

In your alternate reality though, I'm pretty sure this will be an outrageous statement.

But anyway, you still believe that Microsoft is only interested in the xbox cash burning project so there is little more to say to you about this.

You're deluded, stupid, trolling or a combination of all three.

I will look for you in the requested bans section when you are proven wrong, but for now

I find really amusing that some really believe people will follow CoD like it’s some kind of cult.

 

[ethomaz]

This tweet was shocking.

If MS didn't want to break and pay the contractual fine for small title like Deathloop or Tokyo Something... imagine a big contractual fine with CoD
Or course he will honor the contract lol

It is not like he needs to talk with Sony or something like that.
It is a contract and he can break it since he pays the contractual fine... if he don't want to pay it then he has to launch the games listed in the contract on PS.

 

[ethomaz]

I find really amusing that some really believe people will follow CoD like it’s some kind of cult.

I have no ideia either.
What will probably happen after CoD become exclusive is a big drop in population because PlayStation is the biggest part of CoD players nowdays.

We can estimate a drop in 30% of CoD sales... or even more.

 

[DarkMage619]

I find really amusing that some really believe people will follow CoD like it’s some kind of cult.

It shouldn't be too surprising that people will go to the platforms that has game they want to play. People had no problem leaving the Xbox ecosystem when X1 came out. Not everyone will absolutely refuse to play a game unless it's on PlayStation, especially fans of the game. Thankfully with regards to CoD you won't ever have to buy an Xbox to play the game you just might not find it on PlayStation at some future point in time.

 

[Swift_Star]

It shouldn't be too surprising that people will go to the platforms that has game they want to play. People had no problem leaving the Xbox ecosystem when X1 came out. Not everyone will absolutely refuse to play a game unless it's on PlayStation, especially fans of the game. Thankfully with regards to CoD you won't ever have to buy an Xbox to play the game you just might not find it on PlayStation at some future point in time.

Oh yeah, let’s see how that will fare half into the generation.

 

[kingfey]

I have no ideia either.
What will probably happen after CoD become exclusive is a big drop in population because PlayStation is the biggest part of CoD players nowdays.

We can estimate a drop in 30% of CoD sales... or even more.

People like COD like crazy.

For example, if Sony bought square Enix, most of square fans will buy ps5.

 

[The_Mike]

If a person owns a ps5 and 95 percentage of the time he or her plays cod, its more likely they buy an Xbox or play on pc than saying "oh well, I'm just going to play god of war instead".

People buy the system where the games they want to play are. Isn't that what we always say on Gaf?

 

[ethomaz]

People like COD like crazy.

For example, if Sony bought square Enix, most of square fans will buy ps5.

Err most Square fans already buys PlayStation… I don’t hunk that is a good analogy.

Sony buying Square won’t affect that much.

 

[kingfey]

Err most Square fans already buys PlayStation… I don’t hunk that is a good analogy.

Sony buying Square won’t affect that much.

It will affect square fans from Nintendo, pc and Xbox users.
People usually buy consoles for the games. If they can't find that game on that console, they will get the one, which has those games.

Case in point, Spiderman. People bought ps4 exclusively for Spiderman.

 

[yurinka]

This tweet was shocking.

If MS didn't want to break and pay the contractual fine for small title like Deathloop or Tokyo Something... imagine a big contractual fine with CoD
Or course he will honor the contract lol

It is not like he needs to talk with Sony or something like that.
It is a contract and he can break it since he pays the contractual fine... if he don't want to pay it then he has to launch the games listed in the contract on PS.

But the thing is that if they would really want to make CoD and the other Mojang, Bethesda and ABK games Xbox console exclusive after remaining deals are complete they would say it clearly.

But it isn't what they say botth publicly and directly to investors and regulators in legal documents, they say that want tot keep CoD on PS, that want to keep supporting the communities they have in other platforms, that their strategy isn't to make future games exclusive but instead release their game 'first or better' on their platform and so on. They don't have any reason to lie their investors and regulators. They would have bigger problems with them than with Sony.

It will affect square fans from Nintendo, pc and Xbox users.

Pretty likely if Sony would buy Capcom or Square would keep them to continue as a multiplatform publisher, as happened with Mojang, Bethesda, ABK or Bungie. Other than maybe exclusive for game subs, or to have some timed exclusivity for games or dlcs, or maybe some very rare case of a exclusivity from time to time things would continue pretty much the same than before the acquisition.

They buy these companies to get their revenue and profit, secure their content against other acquisitions and get some side benefits like including their games on GP for MS, or to use their IPs for movies/tv shows/anime for Sony, future new IPs, etc. Their revenue and profit is bigger, and their brand value is bigger if these brands are available everywhere.

In the past MS Gaming division and SIE were focused on their consoles only, and now they are opening to the other gaming markets, even rival consoles, as hey grow and as the AAA budgets keep rising.

 

[kingfey]

But it isn't what they say botth publicly and directly to investors and regulators in legal documents, they say that want tot keep CoD on PS, that want to keep supporting the communities they have in other platforms, that their strategy isn't to make future games exclusive but instead release their game 'first or better' on their platform and so on. They don't have any reason to lie their investors and regulators. They would have bigger problems with them than with Sony.

Support titles, doesnt translate in to future titles.

Phil is clearly talking about the existence deal, which he has to honor it. At one point in his tweet, did he mention future games. Just supporting existing games.

"Had good calls this week with leaders at Sony. I confirmed our intent to honor all existing agreements upon acquisition of Activision Blizzard and our desire to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation. Sony is an important part of our industry, and we value our relationship." This is what he stated.

Look at "and our desire keep Call of Duty on PlayStation". He never said future at all. He also stated "keep", which means every call of duty games that have been on the service.

He is very careful about his words.

 

[kingfey]

Pretty likely if Sony would buy Capcom or Square would keep them to continue as a multiplatform publisher, as happened with Mojang, Bethesda, ABK or Bungie. Other than maybe exclusive for game subs, or to have some timed exclusivity for games or dlcs, or maybe some very rare case of a exclusivity from time to time things would continue pretty much the same than before the acquisition.

They buy these companies to get their revenue and profit, secure their content against other acquisitions and get some side benefits like including their games on GP for MS, or to use their IPs for movies/tv shows/anime for Sony, future new IPs, etc. Their revenue and profit is bigger, and their brand value is bigger if these brands are available everywhere.

They wont do that. This is not bungie, which asked for autonomy. This is square Enix, which has valuable IPs.
Only way it can be platform, if square asks for that.

 

[yurinka]

Support titles, doesnt translate in to future titles.

Phil is clearly talking about the existence deal, which he has to honor it. At one point in his tweet, did he mention future games. Just supporting existing games.

"Had good calls this week with leaders at Sony. I confirmed our intent to honor all existing agreements upon acquisition of Activision Blizzard and our desire to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation. Sony is an important part of our industry, and we value our relationship." This is what he stated.

Look at "and our desire keep Call of Duty on PlayStation". He never said future at all. He also stated "keep", which means every call of duty games that have been on the service.

He is very careful about his words.

He never mentions existing games, he says Call of Duty, which is the series and includes future games beyond existing deals. In other places when they talked about this for ABK or Bethesda they mentioned "future projects", "post close", "in the long run".

For MS it would be so dumb to lose over half of the revenue that CoD makes outside mobile. They will continue getting the PS money as they do with Minecraft.

The last thing MS will want will be to have spent $70B and see a huge portion of the CoD players moving to Destiny or the next IPs that Bungie will release a year or two, or to the new game that the COD BO guys are making for Sony, or to the game that the others former Bungie games are doing for Sony etc.

 

[Alphagear]

As one door closes another opens as they say.

This will only encourage rivals like EA to push their FPS games on Playstation.

There are always alternatives.

Personally there isn't a single Western game which will ever push me towards Xbox.

Japanese games is another matter.

 

[Thirty7ven]

If a person owns a ps5 and 95 percentage of the time he or her plays cod, its more likely they buy an Xbox or play on pc than saying "oh well, I'm just going to play god of war instead".

People buy the system where the games they want to play are. Isn't that what we always say on Gaf?

Cod will keep coming out on PS5, there’s no reason for COD only players on PlayStation to care.

In any case why should we care about people that play COD almost exclusively? Gotta be almost brain dead to be that kind of player, not to mention such a player is worthless for the rest of developers.

Seems to me like there’s a lot of fan fiction going on and it’s going to be funny reading gaf a few years from now on.

 

[kingfey]

He never mentions existing games, he says Call of Duty, which is the series and includes future games beyond existing deals. In other places when they talked about this for ABK or Bethesda they mentioned "future projects", "post close", "in the long run".

He said "Keep". That is existence games. Just like Bethesda games.

For MS it would be so dumb to lose over half of the revenue that CoD makes outside mobile. They will continue getting the PS money as they do with Minecraft.

Call of duty isnt same popular as minecraft. Minecraft alone sold 240m copies, also the Minecraft Chinese Edition, a free version of the game, has amassed 400 million downloads since 2017. That is the power of Minecraft, which call of duty doesn't have.

Minecraft also serves as educational game, which MS can make money from education department, from 1st grade to college level. That is the power of Minecraft.

And as for sales, MS has Steam and Gamepass. Both will cover the lost sales.

MS is thinking about gamepass. And they cant increase those numbers fast, without big hits like COD being exclusive to that service.

 

[adamsapple]

I find really amusing that some really believe people will follow CoD like it’s some kind of cult.

No one has the notion that 100% of PS CoD userbase will migrate to the Xbox after they stop making new CoD games on PS platforms.

But a certain percentage will. That much is a given and shouldn't really be a surprising statement. It's happened before, it'll happen again.

 

[kingfey]

Cod will keep coming out on PS5, there’s no reason for COD only players on PlayStation to care.

In any case why should we care about people that play COD almost exclusively? Gotta be almost brain dead to be that kind of player, not to mention such a player is worthless for the rest of developers.

Seems to me like there’s a lot of fan fiction going on and it’s going to be funny reading gaf a few years from now on.

Just like how starfield was, and future bethesda.

We are in the same cycle again. People wont learn, until MS shows the exclusive tag, on their E3.

 

[Swift_Star]

Just like how starfield was, and future bethesda.

We are in the same cycle again. People wont learn, until MS shows the exclusive tag, on their E3.

At this point, who cares? Someone else will fill the gap.

 

[adamsapple]

Cod will keep coming out on PS5, there’s no reason for COD only players on PlayStation to care.

In any case why should we care about people that play COD almost exclusively? Gotta be almost brain dead to be that kind of player, not to mention such a player is worthless for the rest of developers.

Seems to me like there’s a lot of fan fiction going on and it’s going to be funny reading gaf a few years from now on.

On the bolded part I most certainly agree.

At this point, who cares? Someone else will fill the gap.

Clearly some users care, this thread has a few examples.

 

[ChiefDada]

For MS it would be so dumb to lose over half of the revenue that CoD makes outside mobile. They will continue getting the PS money as they do with Minecraft.

Truer words have never been typed. King/Candy Crush is practically carrying all of Activision/Blizzard on it's back. Had it not been for the King Division, the 2021 financial results would have been universally panned. CoD is in decline; to further inflict additional setbacks for the franchise by walling off their largest console base would be just about the dumbest thing Microsoft could do. They should, and will, treat CoD the same way Sony is handling the Destiny IP.

 

[kingfey]

At this point, who cares? Someone else will fill the gap.

No one will argue about that. Sony found their gem already, with GOT. They can also expand Horizon universe, and add more stuff to it.
They have compelling games on their hand.

 

[Swift_Star]

On the bolded part I most certainly agree.



Clearly some users care, this thread has a few examples.

Those who care are free to either buy Xboxes or keeping worrying about stuff out of their control. I couldn’t care less. Someone else will fill the gap.

 

[adamsapple]

Those who care are free to either buy Xboxes or keeping worrying about stuff out of their control. I couldn’t care less. Someone else will fill the gap.

That is the right attitude, we don't have a monogamous relation with these consoles, we can always buy the other one too lol.

 

[The_Mike]

Cod will keep coming out on PS5, there’s no reason for COD only players on PlayStation to care.

In any case why should we care about people that play COD almost exclusively? Gotta be almost brain dead to be that kind of player, not to mention such a player is worthless for the rest of developers.

Seems to me like there’s a lot of fan fiction going on and it’s going to be funny reading gaf a few years from now on.

Of course cod will continue to release on ps5 after Microsoft spend 70 bn on them

 

[Bo_Hazem]

People like COD like crazy.

For example, if Sony bought square Enix, most of square fans will buy ps5.

Most of Square Enix fans already bought PS4/5, you seem to forget about how many SE exclusives are on PS already and since decades. Maybe try another publisher as an example? Ubisoft?

 

[kingfey]

Most of Square Enix fans already bought PS4/5, you seem to forget about how many SE exclusives are on PS already amd since decades. Maybe try another publisher as an example? Ubisoft?

There is no need for that. You kinda provided the best example. Just like how some SE games are exclusive to PS led to people buying the console, MS would get those COD gamers.

 

[Bo_Hazem]

There is no need for that. You kinda provided the best example. Just like how some SE games are exclusive to PS led to people buying the console, MS would get those COD gamers.

Problem with CoD is it's in decline amd replaceable. Story-driven games are not. MGS fans would buy an xbox/PC if it was exclusive to Xbox/PC, I'll be one to play on my PC.

There are many good FPS out there, some don't show on sales charts. Hell Let Loose is another example of solid fps. There are plenty of games that will fill the gap, as it's not the leading FPS by any means. Leading FPS games are PUBG, Fortnite, Apex Legends and all of them aren't listed.

 

[kingfey]

Problem with CoD is it's in decline amd replaceable. Story-driven games are not. MGS fans would buy an xbox/PC if it was exclusive to Xbox/PC, I'll be one to play on my PC.

There are many good FPS out there, some don't show on sales charts. Hell Let Loose is another example of solid fps. There are plenty of games that will fill the gap, as it's not the leading FPS by any means. Leading FPS games are PUBG, Fortnite, Apex Legends and all of them aren't listed.

Its because of the yearly releases. People are tired of that. If it was 2 years release period, old COD fans here would buy those games in heart beat. Since it would take 2-3 years to polish the game. One title per 2 year, and 2-3 studio working on that franchise, instead of everyone.

Last COD was cold war, and it sold 30m. But that was mainly due it being somewhat stable state, compared to vanguard, which has tons issues.

Most shooter games arent COD sadly. There is reason why COD is popular, and that is their MP mode, plus the zombie mode.

 

[Rykan]

Problem with CoD is it's in decline amd replaceable. Story-driven games are not. MGS fans would buy an xbox/PC if it was exclusive to Xbox/PC, I'll be one to play on my PC.

There are many good FPS out there, some don't show on sales charts. Hell Let Loose is another example of solid fps. There are plenty of games that will fill the gap, as it's not the leading FPS by any means. Leading FPS games are PUBG, Fortnite, Apex Legends and all of them aren't listed.

CoD is not in decline. Just because they had one year with lesser sales doesn't mean that the series as a whole is declining. It's going to be back on top again with the release of MW2.

 

[Thirty7ven]

Of course cod will continue to release on ps5 after Microsoft spend 70 bn on them

It was said by Phil Spencer. Don’t worry, he was very specific about call of duty, which means other games will stop coming to PS5, so you can feel better about it.

That said, I really don’t give a shit about COD… and that’s from the heart, purely talking business and referencing Phil Spencer himself.

 

[The_Mike]

It was said by Phil Spencer. Don’t worry, he was very specific about call of duty, which means other games will stop coming to PS5, so you can feel better about it.

That said, I really don’t give a shit about COD… and that’s from the heart, purely talking business and referencing Phil Spencer himself.

Yeah, like he did with Bethesda.
Until the deal went through.

He said they will honor sonys contracts and won't split the cod community.

But the community gets split annually because of a new release, so given how he poorly use wording it's likely he means "current" communities for the games already released.

 

[Thirty7ven]

Yeah, like he did with Bethesda.
Until the deal went through.

He said they will honor sonys contracts and won't split the cod community.

But the community gets split annually because of a new release, so given how he poorly use wording it's likely he means "current" communities for the games already released.

I’m just reading what he wrote, and he made a distinction between honoring contracts - like it was with Bethesda, and in the case of COD it means marketing rights for the next few games probably - and his desire to keep COD on PlayStation.

Here’s what I’m not going to do, I won’t be here making a fool of myself by saying Phil Spencer doesn’t know what he writes. Like you are.

And for Sony? If it still gets Warzone 2 and MW2? Lol, who cares, it basically becomes a problem for PS6 not PS5.

Who knows what happens until then.