Support NeoGAF

[James Sawyer Ford]

I gave him a C merely based on my speculation that the GAAS initiatives he championed are going to have negative long term ramifications.

So far your speculation is false, Helldivers 2 has already paid for the development of multiple GaaS titles and they could all fail and still be profitable with HD2 revenue

 

[Topher]

It’s not about agreeing or disagreeing I’m just laying out facts

Sure it is. I have my own opinion based on the facts we have discussed and that opinion doesn't line up with yours. Let it go.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Sure it is. I have my own opinion based on the facts we have discussed and that opinion doesn't line up with yours. Let it go.

the only facts you have are that Sony isn’t giving you information years in advance

That has nothing to do with the end results, it’s a marketing choice

 

[Klayzer]

• Bungled the push back for the ABK purchase

Bungled? He played it perfectly. Microsoft had to give up many concessions just to get the deal approved.

It's inarguable that Xbox is weaker because of it. Jim was able to get a favorable deal, for Playstation concerning COD.

 

[Topher]

the only facts you have are that Sony isn’t giving you information years in advance

That has nothing to do with the end results, it’s a marketing choice

 

[bender]

So far your speculation is false, Helldivers 2 has already paid for the development of multiple GaaS titles and they could all fail and still be profitable with HD2 revenue

It very well could be but it's far too early to tell. I'm talking about the long term which is why I specifically said "long term ramifications".

 

[Arsic]

C. Just like Phil.

Difference is Jim didn’t let any major brand franchise die under his reign. He didn’t make the console irrelevant.

I still want a ps5 pro and a ps6. I like some games will come to pc later on but not everything and not immediately.

PS plus continues to get better. They have a diverse portfolio of very good games and studios. They lack in the MP space aside from helldivers 2.

 

[TGO]

S Tier without a doubt. He finally brought games to PC.

That benefited the PS5 and the PlayStation Userbase.....how?
The revenue from them ports aren't enough for anything and are just enough to say they made profit.

 

[ZehDon]

Bungled? He played it perfectly...

The deal went through, which was not his objective, so he clearly didn't play it "perfectly". Microsoft gave Ryan the same COD deal as they gave everyone else. Had Ryan gone for their initial offer and not objected to merger, that would've been "favourable" as then only Sony would've had a written contract guaranteeing them COD with platform parity. Considering COD exclusivity apparently wasn't on the table for Microsoft at any stage, Ryan's options were to either block it or set Sony up in a unique position. After the dust settled, everyone gets the same thing and Microsoft gets to cash those cheques. So, no, Ryan bungled the push back.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

It very well could be but it's far too early to tell. I'm talking about the long term which is why I specifically said "long term ramifications".

What’s the long term issues? These teams are all isolated to GaaS, it’s not like the SP studios are really at risk; they even specifically cancelled them at Insomniac and ND

 

[//DEVIL//]

Gets an S from me for this.

As I said, it kinda depends on which side you look at it.

as PC gamer ? you sure i couldnt agree more. port them all.

but as a console gamer or in general ? Not so much.

How the industry is going to expand and grow if everything is going to be played on PC ? Each system should have its unique games. just like how Mobile games have its own games, same should be for consoles and PC. at least in my opinion its one way to expand the market.

There is a reason why this industry its going to shit. and its because of guys like him.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

The deal went through, which was not his objective, so he clearly didn't play it "perfectly". Microsoft gave Ryan the same COD deal as they gave everyone else. Had Ryan gone for their initial offer and not objected to merger, that would've been "favourable" as then only Sony would've had a written contract guaranteeing them COD with platform parity. Considering COD exclusivity apparently wasn't on the table for Microsoft at any stage, Ryan's options were to either block it or set Sony up in a unique position. After the dust settled, everyone gets the same thing and Microsoft gets to cash those cheques. So, no, Ryan bungled the push back.

The day 1 deal was through the original marketing agreement…then only a few years… then 10+ years…

He got the best alternative absent a block, which wasn’t likely given the lobbying money MS has

I’d hardly call that a “bungle”…the 10 year deal basically forced MS to go third party across the board to be fair to other studios

 

[Gamerguy84]

Weirdly he will be known as the guy that took MS to the woodshed.

 

[Klayzer]

The deal went through, which was not his objective, so he clearly didn't play it "perfectly". Microsoft gave Ryan the same COD deal as they gave everyone else. Had Ryan gone for their initial offer and not objected to merger, that would've been "favourable" as then only Sony would've had a written contract guaranteeing them COD with platform parity. Considering COD exclusivity apparently wasn't on the table for Microsoft at any stage, Ryan's options were to either block it or set Sony up in a unique position. After the dust settled, everyone gets the same thing and Microsoft gets to cash those cheques. So, no, Ryan bungled the push back.

Disagree. Jim knew ultimately, the deal was going to go through no matter how much Sony protested. The stall tactics, to get Microsoft to air their dirty laundry was great buisness acumen IMO.

The deal took years to get approved, while making Microsoft look terrible with public opinion.

I know it's difficult for you to give credit to Playstation because of your Xbox bias, but come on. I'm not even talking about the other concessions, with regards to the EU stuff.

 

[ZehDon]

... I know it's difficult for you to give credit to Playstation because of your Xbox bias...

Cool, we're done. Best of luck, friend.

 

[bender]

What’s the long term issues? These teams are all isolated to GaaS, it’s not like the SP studios are really at risk; they even specifically cancelled them at Insomniac and ND

Having a healthy portfolio. Teams might be isolated but funding all comes from the same place. It remains to be seen if those allocated funds would have been better served elsewhere. Thinking that Helldivers success means the strategy as a whole is successful is shortsighted. We don't know how that game is going to perform in the long run and I'm not sure how much insight we on how it performs related to MTX. Maybe they'll continue to buck the trend and have more hits, but even a one in ten success rate is wildly successful in that space.

Jim Ryan deserves his flowers for overseeing some of the more successful years of Playstation but one does have to wonder what the future holds with some of the recent decisions (Bungie, PC porting, filling content gaps with remaster after remaster, larger focus on blockbuster titles, etc.) and failures (PSVR2, Naught Dog's recent output or lack thereof). Sony's also heavily invested in Marvel and again, I wonder if we'll start to see fatigue in those titles like moviegoers did.

Anecdotal and all, but I've been in the Playstation ecosystem since the beginning and this is the least interested I've been in what Sony is delivering. I try not to argue against the decision making of late as they've been successful, but I do think they are due to stumble in the near future. Luckily for them, Microsoft is largely incompetent and aren't positioned to take advantage of those stumbles.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

The deal went through, which was not his objective, so he clearly didn't play it "perfectly". Microsoft gave Ryan the same COD deal as they gave everyone else. Had Ryan gone for their initial offer and not objected to merger, that would've been "favourable" as then only Sony would've had a written contract guaranteeing them COD with platform parity. Considering COD exclusivity apparently wasn't on the table for Microsoft at any stage, Ryan's options were to either block it or set Sony up in a unique position. After the dust settled, everyone gets the same thing and Microsoft gets to cash those cheques. So, no, Ryan bungled the push back.

This is revisionist history and a bald faced lie

MS was going to take CoD exclusive immediately when the marketing deal Activision had with Sony expired. Confirmed by the leaked internal emails

 

[Valedix]

push for live service and drm = fuck this guy

 

[Klayzer]

This is revisionist history and a bald faced lie

MS was going to take CoD exclusive immediately when the marketing deal Activision had with Sony expired. Confirmed by the leaked internal emails

The leaked emails, showed exactly what Microsoft was trying to do. This revisionists history is laughably stupid.

 

[ZehDon]

This is revisionist history and a bald faced lie

MS was going to take CoD exclusive immediately when the marketing deal Activision had with Sony expired. Confirmed by the leaked internal emails

Rather than just assuming the worst, that someone is deliberately lying, maybe take a step back, breathe a little, and then explain how they're wrong because, sometimes, people aren't always privy to everything. For example, in this case, I can't actually recall seeing any leaked emails from Microsoft where they internally discussed deliberately lying to the regulators about their exclusive intentions for Call of Duty. However, I can recall a leaked email from Jim Ryan explaining he never believed Call of Duty was going exclusive after his initial discussions with Microsoft. Can you show me the internal Microsoft email you're referring to? The FTC concluded the opposite of what you're stating here.

 

[ergem]

I’m an xbox fanboy but Jim Ryan proved to be the better CEO than Uncle Phil. Uncle Phil destroyed the xbox brand for good while Jim Ryan achieved great success for Playstation.

 

[Topher]

This is revisionist history and a bald faced lie

MS was going to take CoD exclusive immediately when the marketing deal Activision had with Sony expired. Confirmed by the leaked internal emails

That's not true. Microsoft offered Sony a three year deal initially, which Jim Ryan rejected, and then later offered a ten year deal. All those deals were offered as a means of making approval by regulators easier. None of it jives with this notion that MS was going to take COD exclusive the moment the marketing deal expired.

The leaked emails, showed exactly what Microsoft was trying to do. This revisionists history is laughably stupid.

What leaked emails are we talking about here?

 

[Punished Miku]

Rather than just assuming the worst, that someone is deliberately lying, maybe take a step back, breathe a little, and then explain how they're wrong because, sometimes, people aren't always privy to everything. For example, in this case, I can't actually recall seeing any leaked emails from Microsoft where they internally discussed deliberately lying to the regulators about their exclusive intentions for Call of Duty. However, I can recall a leaked email from Jim Ryan explaining he never believed Call of Duty was going exclusive after his initial discussions with Microsoft. Can you show me the internal Microsoft email you're referring to? The FTC concluded the opposite of what you're stating here.

Pretty much. Not that I have any desire to relive this whole debate. But there was never going to be a situation where CoD was going to be exclusive. They announced their intentions to treat it multiplat like Minecraft on the day the merger was announced. If any CEO came out with something meaningful it was the Ubisoft CEO. About the only thing MS lost other than their sanity was cloud gaming rights for 10-15 years for CoD.

 

[Beechos]

Opposite of Spencer business wise a+, gamerwise prob a d.

 

[Nonehxc]

Fuck him he's a cunt

Press F to Pay Respects to Ass

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

-"let the games do our talking"
wat games jimbo!?¡?
-The xbox games coming to Play Station

 

[Unknown?]

Not sure on a letter grade but better than Andrew House for sure.

House had a lot of studios shut down under his watch and didn't invest in more. Jim really got into beefing up their portfolio and bought some really great studios.

 

[bitbydeath]

The deal went through, which was not his objective, so he clearly didn't play it "perfectly". Microsoft gave Ryan the same COD deal as they gave everyone else. Had Ryan gone for their initial offer and not objected to merger, that would've been "favourable" as then only Sony would've had a written contract guaranteeing them COD with platform parity. Considering COD exclusivity apparently wasn't on the table for Microsoft at any stage, Ryan's options were to either block it or set Sony up in a unique position. After the dust settled, everyone gets the same thing and Microsoft gets to cash those cheques. So, no, Ryan bungled the push back.

MS going third party (the actual development of MS games for PS5) started right after Sony and MS come to an agreement on the ABK deal.

 

[BaneIsPain]

it could be worse, still relying on success of ps4 and microsoft fumbled. can't forgive Japan studio closure

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Having a healthy portfolio. Teams might be isolated but funding all comes from the same place. It remains to be seen if those allocated funds would have been better served elsewhere. Thinking that Helldivers success means the strategy as a whole is successful is shortsighted. We don't know how that game is going to perform in the long run and I'm not sure how much insight we on how it performs related to MTX. Maybe they'll continue to buck the trend and have more hits, but even a one in ten success rate is wildly successful in that space.

Jim Ryan deserves his flowers for overseeing some of the more successful years of Playstation but one does have to wonder what the future holds with some of the recent decisions (Bungie, PC porting, filling content gaps with remaster after remaster, larger focus on blockbuster titles, etc.) and failures (PSVR2, Naught Dog's recent output or lack thereof). Sony's also heavily invested in Marvel and again, I wonder if we'll start to see fatigue in those titles like moviegoers did.

Anecdotal and all, but I've been in the Playstation ecosystem since the beginning and this is the least interested I've been in what Sony is delivering. I try not to argue against the decision making of late as they've been successful, but I do think they are due to stumble in the near future. Luckily for them, Microsoft is largely incompetent and aren't positioned to take advantage of those stumbles.

A healthy and diverse portfolio includes Live Service. Sony completely abandoned it during the PS4 era and that was a big mistake.

They are simply adding GaaS to their lineup of titles, by investing in exterior studios, and so far Helldivers 2 has proven that getting into live service is worthwhile. We don't need to know how Helldivers will do in the long-term, even if it fails it's sold like 10M copies or more already and has more than recoup the cost of investment for multiple failed Live Service games while still retaining a healthy profit.

I've been in the playstation ecosystem since the original PS1 era and their PS5 strategy is the most balanced and healthy it's ever been from an exclusive standpoint. They hit the ground running with PS5 and haven't really missed on any of their years. Some have been lighter than others, but most years have had some really big exclusive games. PS4 had nowhere near that kind of brisk support into the latter half of the generation mostly.

 

[bender]

A healthy and diverse portfolio includes Live Service. Sony completely abandoned it during the PS4 era and that was a big mistake.

They are simply adding GaaS to their lineup of titles, by investing in exterior studios, and so far Helldivers 2 has proven that getting into live service is worthwhile. We don't need to know how Helldivers will do in the long-term, even if it fails it's sold like 10M copies or more already and has more than recoup the cost of investment for multiple failed Live Service games while still retaining a healthy profit.

I've been in the playstation ecosystem since the original PS1 era and their PS5 strategy is the most balanced and healthy it's ever been from an exclusive standpoint. They hit the ground running with PS5 and haven't really missed on any of their years. Some have been lighter than others, but most years have had some really big exclusive games. PS4 had nowhere near that kind of brisk support into the latter half of the generation mostly.

I think you are far too eager to declare a victory when no one will really know until five or ten years down the line. A lot of that benchmark is going to come of Bungie's output which Helldivers success can't offset. I'm comfortable with my speculation and I'll happily eat crow if I'm wrong.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Pretty much. Not that I have any desire to relive this whole debate. But there was never going to be a situation where CoD was going to be exclusive. They announced their intentions to treat it multiplat like Minecraft on the day the merger was announced. If any CEO came out with something meaningful it was the Ubisoft CEO. About the only thing MS lost other than their sanity was cloud gaming rights for 10-15 years for CoD.

We know that it's never a good idea to trust Microsoft at their word. Phil talks in doublespeak all the time. There's emails flying out about Matt Booty about what a great wonderful opportunity it would be to buy out the industry and push Sony out of business. As a thought experiment. Tee Hee.

But yeah, I believe that taking CoD exclusive over the long term absolutely is their intention. Perhaps not immediately, but I still believe that CoD and their other first party games will become exclusive and MS is just playing the long-game. Microsoft believes everything will move to the Cloud, and with Cloud, they can keep their walled gardens on their own service.

And it was a real possibility that Microsoft was going to only allow it to be third party until next-generation when everything resets. But it became clear that was going to become a sticky subject with regulators and they pivoted. Why else would they only commit to 10 years? They specifically said that was enough time for Sony to make their own CoD competitor (even though MS couldn't do that with their own IP in Halo for 15 years)

 

[Danjin44]

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

I think you are far too eager to declare a victory when no one will really know until five or ten years down the line. A lot of that benchmark is going to come of Bungie's output which Helldivers success can't offset. I'm comfortable with my speculation and I'll happily eat crow if I'm wrong.

Victory, in the eyes of Sony, only needs 1 big Live Service game to make sense. Like I said, it's the Venture Capital strategy. I think that multiple failures are part of their calculation when entering into Live Service but having a handful that really gain traction, are well receive by fans and critics, and also sell well is the part of having a healthy and diverse portfolio of games.

Under Andrew House, they completely abandoned an entire genre which was a mistake. Lots of PS fans loved the Live Service titles on the previous playstations

 

[FIREKNIGHT2029]

From a shareholder perspective he’s S-tier. As a gamer though I’d give him a B. I love the games that released under his tenure and Playstation is more successful than ever. The problem is I hate quiet Sony has been since Jim took over. I also hate the closure of studios like Japan Studio and the focus on GAAS game which led to ND and some other studio’s games getting cancelled.

I’d like to see Playstation get back to their roots under a new CEO and I’d also like to see them focus on the types of games that made them the juggernaut that they are now. They can still make live service games but they should get their new studios and partners to make them and not try to turn their top studios like ND and Insomniac into GAAS gaming studios.

 

[yamaci17]

I'm gonna say B, playstation kinda losing steam and his misplanning seem to be the culprit
but PC ports are a bonus so he's average in my opinion

 

[bender]

Victory, in the eyes of Sony, only needs 1 big Live Service game to make sense. Like I said, it's the Venture Capital strategy. I think that multiple failures are part of their calculation when entering into Live Service but having a handful that really gain traction, are well receive by fans and critics, and also sell well is the part of having a healthy and diverse portfolio of games.

Under Andrew House, they completely abandoned an entire genre which was a mistake. Lots of PS fans loved the Live Service titles on the previous playstations

With the Bungie acquisition, I think they'll need more than one to hit or at least one to hit that is more aggressively monetized than Helldivers. I still think chasing live service is a fools errand and all you need to do is look at the history of Fortnite to see why. It was a base build horde shooter before they decided to rip off PUBG on a whim and that's where they found their success. And as a platform holder, I'm not sure I'd feel the need to chase those trends as the successful games will end up on your platform anyway. Let others take the risk. That's not abandoning the genre and there is something to be said about stick with what you are good at instead of chasing trends (like trying to create a Halo killer only for COD to come along and take the crown in large part because it was available to much larger audiences).

 

[Topher]

Not sure on a letter grade but better than Andrew House for sure.

House had a lot of studios shut down under his watch and didn't invest in more. Jim really got into beefing up their portfolio and bought some really great studios.

House had two studios close during his tenture. Evolution Studios and Guerrila Cambridge. Ryan closed Manchester Studio and Pixelopus. Also, pretty much gutted Japan Studio and made the remains part of Team Asobi.

Disregard the above. nial corrected me

Ryan definitely brought in a lot of studios though.

 

[zokie]

shareholder will love him
but me as a playstation customer since PS1 ......................... nope , as some of his decisions make my blood pressure rise

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

With the Bungie acquisition, I think they'll need more than one to hit or at least one to hit that is more aggressively monetized than Helldivers. I still think chasing live service is a fools errand and all you need to do is look at the history of Fortnite to see why. It was a base build horde shooter before they decided to rip off PUBG on a whim and that's where they found their success. And as a platform holder, I'm not sure I'd feel the need to chase those trends as the successful games will end up on your platform anyway. Let others take the risk. That's not abandoning the genre and there is something to be said about stick with what you are good at instead of chasing trends (like trying to create a Halo killer only for COD to come along and take the crown in large part because it was available to much larger audiences).

The hope would that Bungie would be self sustainable with their own IP since they are established. But for their other efforts like Helldivers 2, Fairgame$, and Concord they can experiment with new IP and hope one of them does well. If after repeated attempts, they may close some of the studios as a result.

My definition of success isn't modeled after something like Fortnite. If they can get to that level of success, I'm sure they'd love it, but the baseline for success to me is that these games:

1) Overall provide a healthy profit margin (some successes, some failures, but overall)
2) Diversify the lineup
3) Make Playstation a more attractive place to play for certain types of gamers
4) Stabilize recurring cashflows to smooth earnings across the entire set of SIE studios

And again - it brings them back to the model they had in the PS2 and PS3 era that they gave up on with PS4. Not everything will succeed, but Sony is rightfully trying to capture a corner of this market.

 

[Klayzer]

That's not true. Microsoft offered Sony a three year deal initially, which Jim Ryan rejected, and then later offered a ten year deal. All those deals were offered as a means of making approval by regulators easier. None of it jives with this notion that MS was going to take COD exclusive the moment the marketing deal expired.



What leaked emails are we talking about here?

The "we are in a unique position to spend Sony out of buisness" email by Booty.

 

[Gamer_By_Proxy]

Imo he hit it on all cylinders except 1. He killed it with the 1st/2nd/3rd party releases, great job with the TV shows and Movies. Put Xbox out of its misery. But the live service push and bungie purchase is questionable at best and I’m glad they’re scaling back on all that.

 

[Topher]

The "we are in a unique position to spend Sony out of buisness" email by Booty.

That was an email from five years ago, long before the ABK deal. Had nothing to do with Call of Duty.

 

[bender]

The hope would that Bungie would be self sustainable with their own IP since they are established. But for their other efforts like Helldivers 2, Fairgame$, and Concord they can experiment with new IP and hope one of them does well. If after repeated attempts, they may close some of the studios as a result.

My definition of success isn't modeled after something like Fortnite. If they can get to that level of success, I'm sure they'd love it, but the baseline for success to me is that these games:

1) Overall provide a healthy profit margin (some successes, some failures, but overall)
2) Diversify the lineup
3) Make Playstation a more attractive place to play for certain types of gamers
4) Stabilize recurring cashflows to smooth earnings across the entire set of SIE studios

And again - it brings them back to the model they had in the PS2 and PS3 era that they gave up on with PS4. Not everything will succeed, but Sony is rightfully trying to capture a corner of this market.

The Bungie purchase was made for more reasons than just their own games. Bungie was brought in to fill some rather large knowledge gaps in Playstation's quest for GAAS. I'm not ready to buy into the narrative that Sony regrets the purchase as a whole, but I do think it is fair that they are second guessing the purchase price. The push for GAAS is pure trend chasing with a touch of hubris to try and offset the expense of modern game development. Fortnite makes a lot of money. We make great games. Why can't we make the next Fortnite? It's why we saw things like TLOU Online go through so many changes before being cancelled and why you don't see McDonald's serving sushi. The problem with chasing GAAS is how hard it is to predict what will catch on. It's why I mentioned Fortnite which would have already been forgotten about had Epic not done a quick and dirty PUBG rip-off to invigorate their audience (and kudos to them for being so agile).

And I think fundamentally where I disagree with you is the need for Sony to be in that space when the space is going to end up on their platform anyway. You don't need to have your fingers in every pie.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

The Bungie purchase was made for more reasons than just their own games. Bungie was brought in to fill some rather large knowledge gaps in Playstation's quest for GAAS. I'm not ready to buy into the narrative that Sony regrets the purchase as a whole, but I do think it is fair that they are second guessing the purchase price. The push for GAAS is pure trend chasing with a touch of hubris to try and offset the expense of modern game development. Fortnite makes a lot of money. We make great games. Why can't we make the next Fortnite? It's why we saw things like TLOU Online go through so many changes before being cancelled and why you don't see McDonald's serving sushi. The problem with chasing GAAS is how hard it is to predict what will catch on. It's why I mentioned Fortnite which would have already been forgotten about had Epic not done a quick and dirty PUBG rip-off to invigorate their audience (and kudos to them for being so agile).

And I think fundamentally where I disagree with you is the need for Sony to be in that space when the space is going to end up on their platform anyway. You don't need to have your fingers in every pie.

I don’t think Sony needs to be in the space but I think they are better off being in it in some capacity. And I don’t think they are chasing trends. Helldivers 2 is doing its own thing.

MP games aren’t some new thing.

Sony probably regrets the price they paid for Bungie but the reasons still exist for them to be purchased. It just may be a longer road to get them to where they want to be, and may even involve some downsizing along the way.

Any company purchased two years ago in gaming was wildly overvalued anyhow.

 

[nial]

House had two studios close during his tenture. Evolution Studios and Guerrila Cambridge. Ryan closed Manchester Studio and Pixelopus. Also, pretty much gutted Japan Studio and made the remains part of Team Asobi.

Ryan definitely brought in a lot of studios though.

Zipper Interactive, Bigbig Studios and Studio Liverpool, too.
WWS Japan Studio was a whole different beast, tho, so I wouldn't entirely count that one (for reasons that would require a long, overly detailed post).

 

[Sushi_Combo]

Slightly above Phil Spender but he had a lot of great momentum from Ps4 that simply just continued to expand, especially during the lockdowns.
Personally haven't been wowed by any of the first party output this generation imo.

 

[Topher]

Zipper Interactive, Bigbig Studios and Studio Liverpool, too.
WWS Japan Studio was a whole different beast, tho, so I wouldn't entirely count that one (for reasons that would require a long, overly detailed post).

Ah....you are correct. I got my dates mixed up on when House became CEO of SCE.

 

[Klayzer]

That was an email from five years ago, long before the ABK deal. Had nothing to do with Call of Duty.

So a clear pattern of buying some of the biggest publishers, has nothing to do with what Booty said.

Fact of the matter, do you know when those negotiations started for Actvision? If so, I would like to know. You act like you have some inside information.

 

[yurinka]

S, he has been the most successful CEO for any console maker in gaming history, not only in revenue, profits or active userbase, and many other metrics related to his console.

He faced covid and MS buying ABK. He managed to not only continue getting CoD, but also the rest of the MS games, making them to bend the knee and start publishing even the XGS on PS. He also very successfully expanded to GaaS with (at least so far) MLB, GT7, Destiny 2 and Helldivers 2, to PC and cinema/tv show. Broke GOTY awards record with TLOU2. Broke fastest selling records with TLOU2, GoWR, Spider-Man 2 and Helldivers 2. Grew all their teams and acquired many great or useful ones. Also did cleaned the house restructuring Japan Studio and shutting down Pixel Opus and London Studio. Spent record investments on 1st party games, 2nd party games and 3rd party exclusives. Also highly improved their game subs in many ways and merged them, plus the quality of the PS cloud gaming streaming quality highly improved too.

He also started to work on an expansion to Asian and mobile with the ports, but did make deals with a ton of key Asian, Chinese, Korean or Japanese devs to grow in Asia not only in console, but also in PC and mobile, since many of these devs are working to adapt Sony IPs to mobile, something that will be key in the future, like to have PS cloud there and in smart tvs, something they are also working on.

He left PS in the top of the market and gaming history, and growing in console, shooters, MP/GaaS, PC, mobile, movie/tv shows, game subs, cloud gaming, hardware sales, software sales, 1P sales and so on. So at least during some years will continue growing.

Fact of the matter, do you know when those negotiations started for Actvision? If so, I would like to know. You act like you have some inside information.

As I remember Kotick (or Spenccer) mentioned the date in an interview. As I remember the talks started 2-3 days after that mail that "leaked" Phil Spencer sent to their employees where he said that "MS was going to reconsider their relationship with Activision Blizzard" after the scandal created a big controversy in the news.

Before that, Kotick unsuccessfully tried to sell ABK to others like Facebook.

Edit: found this https://web.archive.org/web/2022012...misconduct-fallout-at-gamemaker?sref=uE15RiYa