Support NeoGAF

[phil_t98]

There was no deal. If there was MS as the new IP owner didn't/wouldn't renew it anyway. Unless you think Microsoft game studios games like Halo, Gears etc also had a deal which they removed.
Being able to stream games was seen as complementary to buying games back then and games you bought from most PC stores like steam were streamable by a service GFN provided.

When subscription services and exclusivity deals there took off with Gamepass and Stadia and the like paying big money for content, publishers and platform holders started to remove them. Take 2 removed some of their games because it had a Stadia deal. It will be interesting to see what they do now.
MS removed all theirs because they are competing with their own subscription and they are actively removing it from competing subscription platforms. The subscription platform wars are happening right now.

There was no deal? So they put the game on GeForce now service for free?

GeForce now is a sun service. Contracts are signed to out games on there just like ps+ and gamepass. I am guessing the contract length had needed and the game left the sefvice

 

[Banjo64]

while the thread seems focused on COD a lot I wonder what revenue Sony make from Minecraft a year?

Probably not that much, it’s only £12.99 and Sony take 30% of that. I doubt the MTX game is as strong as CoD’s either.

 

[Kagey K]

Probably not that much, it’s only £12.99 and Sony take 30% of that. I doubt the MTX game is as strong as CoD’s either.

It sells millions of copies per year. In sheer numbers Miiecraft will kill CoD. There are new 5 year olds every day.

 

[Banjo64]

It sells millions of copies per year. In sheer numbers Miiecraft will kill CoD. There are new 5 year olds every day.

CoD sells 20+ million copies annually, with a huge margin being on PS (maybe 8 million or so?), most being front loaded at full RRP.

For every 10 copies of CoD sold at £69.99 Sony are making £209.70.

For every 10 copies of Minecraft sold at £12.99 Sony are making £38.70.

There’s no chance Minecraft is making anywhere near as much.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Actually burden of proof is on you.

You keep claiming it and haven't proven it, I didn't say it launched on Cloud I said it launched on PlayStation and PC.

You need to prove it launched outside those 2 platforms.

Otherwise your point becomes invalid.

It's not on me to dispute you, it's up to you to back up your claims.

Which you can't

I provide links to outside sources on most of my claims. You cone back with "I feel" and no sources and demand we prove it?

Naaahhh man.

If you wants people to take you seriously, I suggest you learn the rules a bit better.

LawBreakers Game Ready Driver Released

Ensure you receive the definitive experience in LawBreakers, EVE: Valkyrie's ultra graphics upgrade, Fortnite's Early Access release, ARK: Survival Evolved official launch, and the release of Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice by downloading the new GeForce GTX Game Ready drivers.

www.nvidia.com

It was there dayone

 

[Kagey K]

CoD sells 20+ million copies annually, with a huge margin being on PS (maybe 8 million or so?), most being front loaded at full RRP.

For every 10 copies of CoD sold at £69.99 Sony are making £209.70.

For every 10 copies of Minecraft sold at £12.99 Sony are making £38.70.

There’s no chance Minecraft is making anywhere near as much.

Subtract the operating and development costs

You are only looking at revenue

And 3ven then they won't be too far off.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Subtract the operating and development costs

You are only looking at revenue.

Subtract development and operating costs.

Yeah true Sony must be paying a boat load to develop COD

 

[Banjo64]

Subtract the operating and development costs

You are only looking at revenue

And 3ven then they won't be too far off.

What operating and development costs do Sony have to deal with for Minecraft and CoD?

 

[Three]

Any proof of this? You suggesting that devs are putting their games on GFN without any deal/contract…this is just ridiculous.

It's not as ridiculous as you think. Devs didn't need to do anything. Read up on the "misunderstandings with GFN licences" between publishers and GFN. The business model is completely different. They had to opt out but this was the grey area to distribution. It required no dev work or new agreement. The distribution and agreement was on the stores (Steam, EGS, GoG) .

Many saw it as an increased game sale in the past without having to do anything. Somebody doesn't own your PC game or a PC. They have to buy it from the many stores you already allow your game to be sold in anyway and have those agreements with. Why wouldn't you allow a complementary service? It's an increased install base without any new distribution agreements or cost to you. No loss of sales.

Enter new subscription platform holders paying big money for content for their sub though and there is your new loss. There is your incentive to have it be streamable only on Gamepass Ultimate, Stadia, PS+ Premium or whatever for some period of time.

 

[phil_t98]

Probably not that much, it’s only £12.99 and Sony take 30% of that. I doubt the MTX game is as strong as CoD’s either.

Minecraft is the biggest selling game ever so Sony must of made a ton off it, in the last year alone Minecraft sold 38 million copies. that's on console and PC which has sold 238 million copies world wide. the pocket edition has sold 133 million, obvs Sony would never make any money on the pocket edition. how many of those 238 million are on a playstation console I don't know

 

[DarkMage619]

GFN is available in 30 countries, xCloud in 28. Look, I get it, people want to make it seem like this is beneficial and an altruistic good thing instead of a corporation looking out for itself by securing IP for their own platform. More platforms is not one of the benefits from an independent publisher becoming part of a platform holder though and all these tangents aren't necessary.

I thought we were talking about games being on more devices after a hypothetical PlayStation platform removal. Those 28 countries and all the devices were xCloud is available would be more than PlayStation consoles if we are talking about every smart phone , tablet, and PC. You brought GeForce Now into this and that isn't available on any traditional consoles when xCloud is. It doesn't even matter in this context.

I still don't hear anyone talking about MS being altruistic. I hear them saying that Game pass is a superior offering to what any other company has and it was good that they didn't raise prices on consumers. MS is putting games on the service that otherwise wouldn't be especially if competing platforms seek to block it. You are the only one I've seen talking about altruism. MS is a business and currently giving their customers a great value. Simple as that. Perhaps they look altruistic to you when compared to other companies.

 

[Three]

Actually burden of proof is on you.

You keep claiming it and haven't proven it, I didn't say it launched on Cloud I said it launched on PlayStation and PC.

You need to prove it launched outside those 2 platforms.

Otherwise your point becomes invalid.

It's not on me to dispute you, it's up to you to back up your claims.

Which you can't

I provide links to outside sources on most of my claims. You cone back with "I feel" and no sources and demand we prove it?

Naaahhh man.

If you wants people to take you seriously, I suggest you learn the rules a bit better.

"We" .
You are the one making the claim it launched on less platforms when I was on said platform at launch.

I don't need the proof, in your own words:
"Send me a link to prove the day it was added. It's super easy."

Don't try and waste my time with what I know to be bullshit

 

[Kagey K]

What operating and development costs do Sony have to deal with for Minecraft and CoD?

See how this is.

Sony is making free money with no risk. Minecaft and CoD, both Microsoft money, they reap the rewards from with no care at all.

MS has full skin in the game at all times.

 

[Banjo64]

Minecraft is the biggest selling game ever so Sony must of made a ton off it, in the last year alone Minecraft sold 38 million copies

It’s sold just shy of 240m copies.

Call of Duty as a franchise has sold 425m copies, putting it just beneath Pokémon.

There is no doubt at all that CoD makes a lot more money than Minecraft does for Sony.

 

[phil_t98]

It’s sold just shy of 240m copies.

Call of Duty as a franchise has sold 425m copies, putting it just beneath Pokémon.

There is no doubt at all that CoD makes a lot more money than Minecraft does for Sony.

Call of duty is a franchise and its different games, so you can't compare life time sales of COD games to a single game of Minecraft. yes COD makes more but the question was I wonder what. Sony make from Minecraft?

 

[Banjo64]

See how this is.

Sony is making free money with no risk. Minecaft and CoD, both Microsoft money, they reap the rewards from with no care at all.

MS has full skin in the game at all times.

Yes… the exact same as Microsoft does for every third party game published on Xbox.

Just like Microsoft is making money from Destiny 2 with every expansion that is released.

Whoopdedoo.

 

[Banjo64]

Call of duty is a franchise and its different games, so you can't compare life time sales of COD games to a single game of Minecraft. yes COD makes more but the question was I wonder what. Sony make from Minecraft?

Yeah, the answer was; ‘not that much compared to CoD’.

 

[Kagey K]

"We" .
You are the one making the claim it launched on less platforms when I was on said platform at launch.

I don't need the proof, in your own words:
"Send me a link to prove the day it was added. It's super easy."

Don't try and waste my time with what I know to be bullshit

See this is what I meant and whi I skim your posts.

You are absolutely wrong, but you keep trying to deflect, horribly.

You are wrong, bit you will never admit it, and that's fine. I'll just keep skimming you.

 

[Three]

I thought we were talking about games being on more devices after a hypothetical PlayStation platform removal. Those 28 countries and all the devices were xCloud is available would be more than PlayStation consoles if we are talking about every smart phone , tablet, and PC. You brought GeForce Now into this and that isn't available on any traditional consoles when xCloud is. It doesn't even matter in this context.

I mean you said this:

"I'd also speculate that Game pass streaming is available in more places than GeForce Now so my point that the streaming will reach more devices still remains."

Now what are we discussing, about hypothetical what?
PS+GFN < Xbox+xCloud?

 

[phil_t98]

Yeah, the answer was; ‘not that much compared to CoD’.

but that's not what I asked, you just jumped in console warring

 

[Three]

See this is what I meant and whi I skim your posts.

You are absolutely wrong, but you keep trying to deflect, horribly.

You are wrong, bit you will never admit it, and that's fine. I'll just keep skimming you.

So prove it. You are the one suggesting I'm wrong and it's super easy to send a link. It's you who is having a hard time accepting that it released on more platforms before. So you create your own reality and don't prove what you're trying to say.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

but that's not what I asked, you just jumped in console warring

How is that answer console warring

 

[phil_t98]

How is that answer console warring

because I didn't ask about call of duty sale and he turned it into Sony make more money from Cod. the question was never about Cod

 

[Banjo64]

but that's not what I asked, you just jumped in console warring

How is that console warring?

As soon as you actual bots don’t like what you read, you just default to ‘u R a WaRRier’. You need your annual service lad.

 

[phil_t98]

How is that console warring?

As soon as you actual bots don’t like what you read, you just default to ‘u R a WaRRier’. You need your annual service lad.

again the question was just about Minecrft not Call of duty

 

[PaintTinJr]

Buying exclusive content has been a cornerstone of the industry since it's beginning, buying exclusivity is one of the core pillars that has allowed Sony to assert its quote unquote market dominance for multiple generations.

The issue here isn't that Microsoft are buying activision, if Sony had the capital, they would have done the same sooner. They were in the running to buy zenimax just like multiple other studios as well, for example.

Despite all of the above, saying that a deal should not be allowed to go through to maintain a status quo completely defeats the point of competition in the first place.

But that is something that the regulators have to decide.

Buying timed exclusivity with a platform's stake holders - which any entrant could achieve, say if Intel joined the market next year with an ARC console, buying deals would easily be in their budget

The previous deals by MSFT were in reach of their market players like Sony, EA, Ubisoft or Activision to buy Minecraft, Bethesda, Bungie. This deal is such a thin end of the wedge that most companies in the world couldn't consider the deal. It is a totally different beast like someone buying AT&T before the US government split it into two companies. But yeah, keep comparing it to today's norms of buying timed console exclusion, with PC release too, it's only $70b, right?

 

[Banjo64]

again the question was just about Minecrft not Call of duty

THIS THREAD IS ABOUT ACTIVISION AND CALL OF DUTY YOU DOLT. READ THE FUCKING TITLE.

 

[phil_t98]

THIS THREAD IS ABOUT ACTIVISION AND CALL OF DUTY YOU DOLT. READ THE FUCKING TITLE.

yes and I asked the question in the FUCKIN thread I wonder how much Sony makes of minecraft

 

[Kagey K]

So prove it. You are the one suggesting I'm wrong and it's super easy to send a link. It's you who is having a hard time accepting that it released on more platforms before. So you create your own reality and don't prove what you're trying to say.

Ok I'm going to have fun now.

Repeat you favorite arguements with proof

1. Hellblade us launching on less systems.

2. Microsoft is buying thier way into success.


I will let you pick 3, but bring facts.

 

[PaintTinJr]

Read your own previous post. Xbox 360 was getting more players online than PS3 was, that’s an example of it right there. Yes 2013 that was coming to the end of the that generations life and they had the stats to show more online players for Xbox at the time. Add to the fact you said they PS3 would have more online players because it was free online but yet Xbox still had more players.

Also from a previous post of yours again you said that PlayStation had marketing rights for cod for 2 decades which is wrong beach’s that generation Xbox has the marketing rights for the whole gen.

I haven't read the article going by the headline, but just because the US gamers "preferred" to play on 360 that year in the NPD data doesn't mean the PS3's aren't connect to the internet, and doesn't mean that in 2012 or 2006 the data is the same. You are arguing in bad faith to project something you want to be true.

 

[Banjo64]

yes and I asked the question in the FUCKIN thread I wonder how much Sony makes of minecraft

In a thread about ACTIVISION and MICROSOFT. Fuckin’ thread police calling me a warrior for staying on topic when you are bringing up PS and Minecraft

 

[Three]

There was no deal? So they put the game on GeForce now service for free?

GeForce now is a sun service. Contracts are signed to out games on there just like ps+ and gamepass. I am guessing the contract length had needed and the game left the sefvice

Yes there was no deal. No money exchange. The geforce now service isn't a multigame subscription. GFN is a subscription that lets you stream games you bought on Steam, GoG etc. It's nothing like gamepass or PS+. There wasn't a deal that said we will allow you to offer this game on a subscription for this period and we get so and so amount from you. They didn't get money from GFN. They just got it from the store they already sold in. They just opted in to GFN. A lot began to opt out because getting paychecks from subscription platform holders who offered streaming became lucrative.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

because I didn't ask about call of duty sale and he turned it into Sony make more money from Cod. the question was never about Cod

No one knows how much. That's why CODs a good comparator. You not liking his answer isn't console warring.

 

[Kagey K]

I haven't read the article going by the headline, but just because the US gamers "preferred" to play on 360 that year in the NPD data doesn't mean the PS3's aren't connect to the internet, and doesn't mean that in 2012 or 2006 the data is the same. You are arguing in bad faith to project something you want to be true.

I think it was as of that day on that date over 50% pregfered Xbox Live. Prove me wrong.

 

[Kagey K]

Ok I'm going to have fun now.

Repeat you favorite arguements with proof

1. Hellblade us launching on less systems.

2. Microsoft is buying thier way into success.


I will let you pick 3, but bring facts.

I knew it.

 

[phil_t98]

No one knows how much. That's why CODs a good comparator. You not liking his answer isn't console warring.

right the thread is about Activision, my point was that Minecraft is a Microsoft franchise and been kept on PS and Sony still making a ton of money off it. like I said in the last year alone 38 million copies of the game have been sold and a good portion of them will still be on PS consoles add that to the copies already on PS and I bet Sony is making a tidy sum still. As I said in previous post Microsoft has said COD will remain on PS for at least 6 years

 

[phil_t98]

I haven't read the article going by the headline, but just because the US gamers "preferred" to play on 360 that year in the NPD data doesn't mean the PS3's aren't connect to the internet, and doesn't mean that in 2012 or 2006 the data is the same. You are arguing in bad faith to project something you want to be true.

you surmised with bringing up no data to back it up, I provided you with some data that shows more players online with xbox360 but you say its wrong

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

right the thread is about Activision, my point was that Minecraft is a Microsoft franchise and been kept on PS and Sony still making a ton of money off it. like I said in the last year alone 38 million copies of the game have been sold and a good portion of them will still be on PS consoles add that to the copies already on PS and I bet Sony is making a tidy sum still. As I said in previous post Microsoft has said COD will remain on PS for at least 6 years

Okay but what is your actual point?

Minecraft is making no where close to COD annually. Its not even comparable.

 

[The_Mike]

Ok I'm going to have fun now.

Repeat you favorite arguements with proof

1. Hellblade us launching on less systems.

2. Microsoft is buying thier way into success.


I will let you pick 3, but bring facts.

I knew it.

Why do you quote yourself and say you knew it?

Hopefully you know what you are talking about, although it's a rarity in modern times.

 

[Kagey K]

you surmised with bringing up no data to back it up, I provided you with some data that shows more players online with xbox360 but you say its wrong

Thaysxalways the pattern. It's up to you to proce them wrong so the can just deny it.

Don't ask them for facts though.

It's just "I feel like"

 

[Kagey K]

Why do you quote yourself and say you knew it?

Hopefully you know what you are talking about, although it's a rarity in modern times.

I did it cuz the idiot hit me with a lol reaction, which told me he wasn't going to respond.

 

[The_Mike]

I did it cuz the idiot hit me with a lol reaction, which told me he wasn't going to respond.

Ah okay.

Theres so many people on my ignore list in here that it can get a little confusing.

Could have worded a little better tho so it made more sense lol.

 

[Three]

I did it cuz the idiot hit me with a lol reaction, which told me he wasn't going to respond.

That "idiot" responded with an lol because you are the one disputing that it was on more platforms with

"it wasn't on Geforce Now at launch but I can't prove it, you do it, it's super easy"

And some other ridiculous nonsense about "MS buying their way to success" which I have no idea where that even came from.

 

[PaintTinJr]

you surmised with bringing up no data to back it up, I provided you with some data that shows more players online with xbox360 but you say its wrong

The word "played" is smack bang in there. But okay let's run the numbers

By then 80m units had been shipped to retail by each. RRoD and YLoD probably damaging Xbox more for those first 1-3years of sales (PS3 slims were regular under 4% failure AFAIK), but let's even the playing field and say that each had sold 60m units to consumers that were operational - which is overly fair to xbox.

Split by regions of the world, the US is about 1/3 orf the market IIRC. so that's 20m consumers. reported Live figures topped out below 45m,before reporting stopped, so probably looking at 2/3 of that 20m having a silver or gold account.

if 2/3 of that 13-14m are Gold subs in the US, then that gives about 10m on line Live players - that could potentially play CoD in the US in 2013 - and scaling by the 50% more, would mean PS3 had 6-7m on their service playing in the US. A 4m user difference.
/edit
Even if I've under tracked by 100% in PS3's favour, so real difference was 8m in the US, and not bolstered by free Gold weekends with a beta for Halo or Gears, etc., 8m isn't a lot spread across the rest of the world, and still won't prove you right IMO

You honestly think PS3 didn't have an extra 4m players than 360 across all the other regions of the world that PS3 dominanted, even though the barrier to entry on PS3 was just a PSN account (email address) and access to broadband - no sub fee required.

Dream on, you are still projecting the US is the world, it isn't, and my original point is good IMHO.

 

[Ozriel]

GFN is available in 30 countries, xCloud in 28. Look, I get it, people want to make it seem like this is beneficial and an altruistic good thing instead of a corporation looking out for itself by securing IP for their own platform. More platforms is not one of the benefits from an independent publisher becoming part of a platform holder though and all these tangents aren't necessary.

But all this is irrelevant since neither Bethesda nor Activision games were on GeForce Now prior to acquisition. So your argument that games will be taken from that particular service holds no water at all.

 

[DenchDeckard]

Everyone having fun in here?

....So will this be the argument for the next 20 years once we are all old and nearly dead...How microsoft were so mean to Sony and are the bad guys in gaming because they bought Acti/Blizz?

Sony and MS are just as bad as each other in my opinion....theres no difference in who owns who. They both pay money to keep games off other platforms.

Microsoft will end up owning who they own and sony will own who they own and games will be exclusive either way.

I dont get the point in being so angry and wound up about it all. Just buy every console or a PC and play everything you want to play and stop whinging.

 

[Three]

But all this is irrelevant since neither Bethesda nor Activision games were on GeForce Now prior to acquisition. So your argument that games will be taken from that particular service holds no water at all.

I was responding to somebody who speculated that xCloud is available in more countries and therefore it's still more availability. Me pointing out that GFN is available in more countries had nothing to do with ABK and Bethesda removing their games before acquisition.

I think their removal was spurred on by spending and acquisitions from multigame subscription providers like Stadia, Gamepass, PS Now/Premium etc. It's another major source of revenue for publishers now instead of just game sales from Steam, Epic, which GFN relied on. We are in a multigame subscription war now. I'm sure Sony will no longer provide it either and has recently removed GoW because they will push their subs but their situation is slightly different to Google and MS in that they weren't pushing subs as much as the others in the past. I'm sure from June this year onwards there is a bigger focus on that.

 

[phil_t98]

The word "played" is smack bang in there. But okay let's run the numbers

By then 80m units had been shipped to retail by each. RRoD and YLoD probably damaging Xbox more for those first 1-3years of sales (PS3 slims were regular under 4% failure AFAIK), but let's even the playing field and say that each had sold 60m units to consumers that were operational - which is overly fair to xbox.

Split by regions of the world, the US is about 1/3 orf the market IIRC. so that's 20m consumers. reported Live figures topped out below 45m,before reporting stopped, so probably looking at 2/3 of that 20m having a silver or gold account.

if 2/3 of that 13-14m are Gold subs in the US, then that gives about 10m on line Live players - that could potentially play CoD in the US in 2013 - and scaling by the 50% more, would mean PS3 had 6-7m on their service playing in the US. A 4m user difference.
/edit
Even if I've under tracked by 100% in PS3's favour, so real difference was 8m in the US, and not bolstered by free Gold weekends with a beta for Halo or Gears, etc., 8m isn't a lot spread across the rest of the world, and still won't prove you right IMO

You honestly think PS3 didn't have an extra 4m players than 360 across all the other regions of the world that PS3 dominanted, even though the barrier to entry on PS3 was just a PSN account (email address) and access to broadband - no sub fee required.

Dream on, you are still projecting the US is the world, it isn't, and my original point is good IMHO.

November game sales: 360 outsells PS3, Modern Warfare 2 sells six million - PC World Australia

Microsoft overtakes Sony in console sales, Nintendo remains on top

www.pcworld.idg.com.au

huge sales advantage for 360 over ps3 there

another google of modern warfare 3 sales results in this

More copies of Modern Warfare 3 were sold on Xbox 360 than on PlayStation 3 - 59 per cent to 41 per cent.

there is more to google if you want but you can see sales higher on one console than the other so it would suggest more players online



with you RROD don't forget that they offer a huge warranty for people to get it fixed for FREE so not everybody went and bought a new console as people say.
I did have a RROD on a console and got it repaired, I also bought a second 360 for playing upstairs

 

[phil_t98]

Okay but what is your actual point?

Minecraft is making no where close to COD annually. Its not even comparable.

my point is Microsoft have said they don't plan to remove COD in the near future and they have Minecraft as a point to show they still keep games on PS

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

Everyone having fun in here?

....So will this be the argument for the next 20 years once we are all old and nearly dead...How microsoft were so mean to Sony and are the bad guys in gaming because they bought Acti/Blizz?

Sony and MS are just as bad as each other in my opinion....theres no difference in who owns who. They both pay money to keep games off other platforms.

Microsoft will end up owning who they own and sony will own who they own and games will be exclusive either way.

I dont get the point in being so angry and wound up about it all. Just buy every console or a PC and play everything you want to play and stop whinging.

There is a certain subset of “gamers” who pledge their undying allegiance to one plastic box and live or die on the metacritic scores of their games and want to come here and puff up their chests claiming they own the best plastic box and ridicule others for not following their lead.

Its not about the gaming to have fun for them.

If that group of people is so super concerned about MS making COD exclusive go buy a Series S for $249 with an extra included controller and play COD