Support NeoGAF

[Roronoa Zoro]

I was and will always stay on Playstation, but people have to realize that this is the end of new Call of Duty games on Playstation. Phil is not lying, he means that they will not pull the plug on Warzone on Playstation and also keep it updated there (which makes sense for a free to play game), but he is not talking about future games.

I am not interested in CoD, so it is not a loss for me, but fans who really want to play the future titles either have to have a good enough PC to run them or buy a XBOX.

It is similar to Sony, they making exclusive titles for Playstation so that you have to buy on their console and bring in the money. They will only later release their games on PC, because their profit is less on PC, because it's not their system. Microsoft don't care if you buy on XBOX or PC, because they own both, but they will not sell on Playstation because they would need to share some of the profits with Sony.

They have to share profits with Steam on PC if you buy through them

 

[HoofHearted]

Phil's going to be saying a lot of nice, warm things that are designed to calm everyone down, and most importantly, reassure the regulators that MS are in no way trying to build a monopoly. It'll be a different story next year.

 

[Dr Bass]

How would they be losing money? Are you expecting them to take a lot of returns of the previous games? Every CoD sale MS makes is them making money. MS has 2 things now: The asset that is Activsion/Blizard they just bought and a revenue stream that comes from the games. The asset is valued at $68 billion. If they really wanted to, they could sell it off down the road and still have pocketed all the revenue they made along the way as well as the money from selling the asset itself.

So not selling their games on Playstation won't 'LOSE' MS money, but they won't make as much as they could if they did. Same dilema they ran into with Starfield and ES6.

Man ...

Last one and then it might be another time for a break.

Activision is not necessarily an "asset." They have nearly 10,000 employees. Even making a low ball assumption of 10k a month per employee (if they are mostly software people thats a WAY low ball guess if you factor in salaries, benefits, payroll taxes etc, 10k a month is way way below market) thats nearly 100 million dollars a month in new employee expenses.

Activision will not have a 68 billion dollar value to other buyers unless their performance drastically improves. Has anyone here not been reading the news about Vanguard over the past few weeks? It seems like it. They are on a heavy decline, and Microsoft paid a premium. There was no other large corporation on the planet that wanted them, so no, they can't just go sell them again if they want to for the same amount. There are no buyers!

Call of Duty Vanguard sales numbers and player count in 2022 aren't good news

Call of Duty Vanguard may have been one of the better releases of 2021, but the early promise has quickly started to fade, affecting sales and player count.

www.sportskeeda.com

Modern Warfare 2 Reportedly Releasing Early Due To Poor Vanguard Sales

The insider also claims that a "big" Warzone update will follow soon after!

www.dualshockers.com

Poor Call Of Duty: Vanguard sales have pushed forward 2022 game says insider

A new rumour suggests that this year’s Call Of Duty could release in October following a summer reveal.

metro.co.uk

'Call Of Duty: Vanguard' sales are down 40 per cent compared to last year

'Call of Duty: Vanguard' sales are down 40 per cent but it's still riding high.

www.nme.com

Sounds like a ride any forward thinking company should be hitching their wagon to! Hint: This is why Activision wanted to bail.

Also, the current value Activision has is because it's a multiplatform company that sells to anyone, and everyone, just about everywhere. If you all of a sudden yank that from the more popular platforms, yes some people will follow, but my personal guess is that by far most won't. Which means all of a sudden that multiplatform game is much smaller and way less valuable. It's damn obvious if you aren't tied to the outcome of this acquisition. People want great games and the sum of a platform's parts will ALWAYS be more important than one game as a whole. And by the numbers we've seen so far it seems to have sold quite a bit more on PS vs Xbox, so MS would have to count on people leaving an entire platform for one declining game. Again ... visionary? This reminds me more of that video of Michael Jackson shopping ... where he just has way too much cash to blow so he buys every ridiculous thing that falls into his line of sight.

Anyway, I think that's all for me for a little bit, this board is just waaaaay too centered again on console warring. Have fun!

 

[On Demand]

'Probably'? I mean maybe? But '5 years' would be from the date they signed it. Which 'Probably' wasn't 3 days ago. One thing I can say for sure. Phil Spencer knows how many years they would have to put CoD on Playstation. And he paid $68 million for the company.

Sony first got the COD deal in 2015 with Black Ops 3. That lasted the whole generation.

I assume Sony definitely did another contract with Activision for this new generation. COD will be on PlayStation for several years and it has nothing to do with MS.

 

[Megatron]

Man ...

Last one and then it might be another time for a break.

Activision is not necessarily an "asset." They have nearly 10,000 employees. Even making a low ball assumption of 10k a month per employee (if they are mostly software people thats a WAY low ball guess if you factor in salaries, benefits, payroll taxes etc, 10k a month is way way below market) thats nearly 100 million dollars a month in new employee expenses.

Activision will not have a 68 billion dollar value to other buyers unless their performance drastically improves. Has anyone here not been reading the news about Vanguard over the past few weeks? It seems like it. They are on a heavy decline, and Microsoft paid a premium. There was no other large corporation on the planet that wanted them, so no, they can't just go sell them again if they want to for the same amount. There are no buyers!

Call of Duty Vanguard sales numbers and player count in 2022 aren't good news

Call of Duty Vanguard may have been one of the better releases of 2021, but the early promise has quickly started to fade, affecting sales and player count.

www.sportskeeda.com

Modern Warfare 2 Reportedly Releasing Early Due To Poor Vanguard Sales

The insider also claims that a "big" Warzone update will follow soon after!

www.dualshockers.com

Poor Call Of Duty: Vanguard sales have pushed forward 2022 game says insider

A new rumour suggests that this year’s Call Of Duty could release in October following a summer reveal.

metro.co.uk

'Call Of Duty: Vanguard' sales are down 40 per cent compared to last year

'Call of Duty: Vanguard' sales are down 40 per cent but it's still riding high.

www.nme.com

Sounds like a ride any forward thinking company should be hitching their wagon to! Hint: This is why Activision wanted to bail.

Also, the current value Activision has is because it's a multiplatform company that sells to anyone, and everyone, just about everywhere. If you all of a sudden yank that from the more popular platforms, yes some people will follow, but my personal guess is that by far most won't. Which means all of a sudden that multiplatform game is much smaller and way less valuable. It's damn obvious if you aren't tied to the outcome of this acquisition. People want great games and the sum of a platform's parts will ALWAYS be more important than one game as a whole. And by the numbers we've seen so far it seems to have sold quite a bit more on PS vs Xbox, so MS would have to count on people leaving an entire platform for one declining game. Again ... visionary? This reminds me more of that video of Michael Jackson shopping ... where he just has way too much cash to blow so he buys every ridiculous thing that falls into his line of sight.

Anyway, I think that's all for me for a little bit, this board is just waaaaay too centered again on console warring. Have fun!

Very interesting post. Thank you for taking the time to respond.

I will say that basing Call of Duty's appeal on Vanguard is maybe not the best approach. It was developed by what, the C team? D team? Wait for Modern Warfare 2 and see how that performs. And what about Warzone? My understanding is that is doing exceptionally well, no?

 

[Toni]

Warzone…

PSN monthly active user monies....

Cut the cash flow of your Sugar Daddy or keep making monies with a daddy made of Sugar?

Which is more enticing?

 

[NickFire]

I’m starting to have doubts on my initial belief they are all in on exclusive still. The article about content war, the most recent Phil statement, a tweet posted in this thread, and the sheer money at stake has me wondering. Is this about dominating console sales, or is this a return to its roots in software in a way? MS didn’t just spend a ton on this. They also just gave 10 million casuals (minimum, and possibly wildly underestimated) a reason to subscribe to game pass. Even consoles that don’t have the bells and whistles to run some games could theoretically stream them. If one console doesn’t want it because it would overlap with sales of 3rd party games that release on gp, well good luck explaining to customers why there’s no duty anymore.

So, is it possible, did they just brute force gp onto PS?

 

[Megatron]

Sony first got the COD deal in 2015 with Black Ops 3. That lasted the whole generation.

I assume Sony definitely did another contract with Activision for this new generation. COD will be on PlayStation for several years and it has nothing to do with MS.

'The whole generation'? You JUST said five years. I think it's ok to admit none of us know how long these things go for, but it's probably not for the whole gen. Remember, Phil DOES know how long the contract goes for, and he thought it was worth paying $68 billion for. I'm guessing the contracts don't go that long. I've heard 2023 or 2024. But I guess we will see.

 

[Lognor]

You still have not realized that Gamepass is MS gaming now, not Xbox. If MS could strike a deal with Sony to have the Playstation get an App, they would not hesitate. Would give them access to tens of millions of additional subscribers, just like that.

But would Sony go for it? Even if they did, it would probably take time for the to happen since Phil previously said they are focused on growing game pass elsewhere. Game pass on ps would not be a priority for them.

I think if Sony allows game pass on ps is the only way cod stays on ps.

 

[Sosokrates]

I mean their shtick this whole time has been they don't care where you game as long as it's within our ecosystem.

They're not looking at it as an opportunity to poach users, they're looking at it as an opportunity to get access to an established install base. Well if Sony says no then poaching users is the other route

But the choices Xbox makes helps determines userbases.
Not only will putting xbox first party on PS5 increase the PS5s install base but it will decrease Xbox's userbase.

There are multiple scenarios:

Scenario A:
an XGS only version of gamepass comes to PS5, PS5 would likely see similar success as the PS4, as a single console owner there would be little point in getting a series console.
It would be a stab in the back of every series owner, which would result in lower sales, maybe 30-50million which would result in less overall income from game and microtransaction from xbox.

Scenario B:
Microsoft keep the path there on, service games like warzone stay multiplat, new games are exclusive to xbox, cloud + PC, xbox series sales florish because of this, an installbase of 90+million,

Scenario A makes a zero sense.

 

[M16]

Based on financial estimates if CoD goes full exclusive, the worst case is ... 260 million a year. Could be as low as 87 million.

Sony to lose $260 million a year if Call of Duty goes Xbox exclusive

Sony will lose up to an estimated $260 million a year if Call of Duty leaves PlayStation and becomes a full Xbox exclusive.

www.tweaktown.com

So between .33% - 1% annual revenue hit. It's absolutely nothing given how the rest of their platform is growing. Again, much ado about nothing.

lol no. they'll lose much more with a bunch of owners fleeing to xbox, which is gonna happen anyways, when COD hits gamepass.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

How would they be losing money? Are you expecting them to take a lot of returns of the previous games? Every CoD sale MS makes is them making money. MS has 2 things now: The asset that is Activsion/Blizard they just bought and a revenue stream that comes from the games. The asset is valued at $68 billion. If they really wanted to, they could sell it off down the road and still have pocketed all the revenue they made along the way as well as the money from selling the asset itself.

So not selling their games on Playstation won't 'LOSE' MS money, but they won't make as much as they could if they did. Same dilema they ran into with Starfield and ES6.

Yup.

And what will help offset some of the lost revenue from cutting off PS is that MS will now get:

- 100% of all Activision digital revenue on Xbox
- 70% of revenue from Steam sales
- Most of the revenue from a disc purchase
- This applies to games and all the mtx
- And also whatever digital games and mtx are still selling on PS (legacy), MS gets 70% of that too. And for PS discs, Sony gets maybe $5 royalty off it. Woop-dee-doo

So going forward, any Activision sales still on PS systems, MS will make more money off it than Sony.

 

[On Demand]

'The whole generation'? You JUST said five years. I think it's ok to admit none of us know how long these things go for, but it's probably not for the whole gen. Remember, Phil DOES know how long the contract goes for, and he thought it was worth paying $68 billion for. I'm guessing the contracts don't go that long. I've heard 2023 or 2024. But I guess we will see.

Yes the whole generation. When did PS5 launch? Damn dude.

 

[Lognor]

Yes the whole generation. When did PS5 launch? Damn dude.

I see you're in the denial phase

 

[StreetsofBeige]

lol no. they'll lose much more with a bunch of owners fleeing to xbox, which is gonna happen anyways, when COD hits gamepass.

True.

And besides what kind of analysts projects $87M to $260M. That's got to be the widest net ever. lol

 

[On Demand]

I see you're in the denial phase

Denial phase? It seems you aren’t understanding my post correctly either.

I’m just speaking on Sony’s COD marketing deals. I don’t believe anything Phil Spencer says. I’m going by real tangible thing. Not PR word play.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

But the choices Xbox makes helps determines userbases.
Not only will putting xbox first party on PS5 increase the PS5s install base but it will decrease Xbox's userbase.

There are multiple scenarios:

Scenario A:
an XGS only version of gamepass comes to PS5, PS5 would likely see similar success as the PS4, as a single console owner there would be little point in getting a series console.
It would be a stab in the back of every series owner, which would result in lower sales, maybe 30-50million which would result in less overall income from game and microtransaction from xbox.

Scenario B:
Microsoft keep the path there on, service games like warzone stay multiplat, new games are exclusive to xbox, cloud + PC, xbox series sales florish because of this, an installbase of 90+million,

Scenario A makes a zero sense.

They managed 50 million with a really pathetic lineup last gen. Honestly, I think they looked at it this way, because again they're ultimately looking to grow game pass, not their series consoles. That's just a gateway to game pass.

They can either keep it exclusive to their already established install base, and poach the 10 - 20 or whatever million people who want to play COD from PS. Or they can make gamepass available to 100 million PS gamers. They'll get both the COD users and the non-cod users right there.

Either way there are two pathways and they have the leverage at the negotiation table. Both options make sense to me barring all the difficulties of getting gamepass on PS, because I don't know how that would work.

 

[NickFire]

But the choices Xbox makes helps determines userbases.
Not only will putting xbox first party on PS5 increase the PS5s install base but it will decrease Xbox's userbase.

There are multiple scenarios:

Scenario A:
an XGS only version of gamepass comes to PS5, PS5 would likely see similar success as the PS4, as a single console owner there would be little point in getting a series console.
It would be a stab in the back of every series owner, which would result in lower sales, maybe 30-50million which would result in less overall income from game and microtransaction from xbox.

Scenario B:
Microsoft keep the path there on, service games like warzone stay multiplat, new games are exclusive to xbox, cloud + PC, xbox series sales florish because of this, an installbase of 90+million,

Scenario A makes a zero sense.

How would it stab series owners in the back? The player base would increase for them to matchmaker with. And MS would be making way more money from those who didn’t migrate unless Sony tanked so bad it would be probably bought out by someone else. 70% of current install base (it’s cross gen) would exceed 100% of those ingrained in PSN. Plus they avoid losses that a 70 bill company would take by cutting off most of its current console audience.

 

[Megatron]

Denial phase? It seems you aren’t understanding my post correctly either.

I’m just speaking on Sony’s COD marketing deals. I don’t believe anything Phil Spencer says. I’m going by real tangible thing. Not PR word play.

Sure but.... you don't have any idea how long those deals go for. Just because the deal went all of last generation doesn't mean there was one singular deal with that language in it. It is far more likely it was for x number of years and maybe/probably was renewed at some point before the generation carried over.

I mean, believe whatever you want, that's fine, nobody can tell you for sure one way or another, but I personally will be very surprised if people can still buy Call of Duty games after 2024 on PS5. If they can play it after 2024, I think it will be on gamepass.

 

[Warnen]

PSN monthly active user monies....

Cut the cash flow of your Sugar Daddy or keep making monies with a daddy made of Sugar?

Which is more enticing?

Dude could have easily said all new cod will be on Ps5 but left it a vague as possible. Really gonna pretend this same shit didn’t happen a year ago.

 

[Sosokrates]

They managed 50 million with a really pathetic lineup last gen. Honestly, I think they looked at it this way, because again they're ultimately looking to grow game pass, not their series consoles. That's just a gateway to game pass.

They can either keep it exclusive to their already established install base, and poach the 10 - 20 or whatever million people who want to play COD from PS. Or they can make gamepass available to 100 million PS gamers. They'll get both the COD users and the non-cod users right there.

Either way there are two pathways and they have the leverage at the negotiation table. Both options make sense to me barring all the difficulties of getting gamepass on PS, because I don't know how that would work.

I dont think putting gamepass on PS5 would grow gamepass, it would just shift the gamepass subscribers from xbox consoles to ps5, it would also take away other profit made on xbox and the investment in the xbox series.
If it was Microsofts goal to put everything on PS5, they would not of done the series consoles in the first place.

Also I dont think dont think sony will want gamepass, it will take away from there subscription and there game sales, I think sony has no problem just continuing what they have been doing so far, even with the loss of acti-blizz + zenimax I still they will sell a lot of consoles and do well.

 

[NickFire]

I dont think putting gamepass on PS5 would grow gamepass, it would just shift the gamepass subscribers from xbox consoles to ps5, it would also take away other profit made on xbox and the investment in the xbox series.
If it was Microsofts goal to put everything on PS5, they would not of done the series consoles in the first place.

Also I dont think dont think sony will want gamepass, it will take away from there subscription and there game sales, I think sony has no problem just continuing what they have been doing so far, even with the loss of acti-blizz + zenimax I still they will sell a lot of consoles and do well.

Thing is though, GP would probably be PS4 too. That’s a big, giant audience pool sitting there in the age where consoles can’t be made fast enough. And how many of them would also be interested in a port of games only available on pc previously?

 

[On Demand]

Sure but.... you don't have any idea how long those deals go for. Just because the deal went all of last generation doesn't mean there was one singular deal with that language in it. It is far more likely it was for x number of years and maybe/probably was renewed at some point before the generation carried over.

I mean, believe whatever you want, that's fine, nobody can tell you for sure one way or another, but I personally will be very surprised if people can still buy Call of Duty games after 2024 on PS5. If they can play it after 2024, I think it will be on gamepass.

It could of been renewed again after they first got the deal in 2015 yes. All we can go by is how long did they actually have the deal with PS4. That happened to be 5 years.

So logically Sony would of course continue this deal with PS5.

Anything else is speculation. I’m going by what actually happened.

Could I be wrong? I don’t really care. I haven’t bought a COD game in years. Either way I don’t trust what Phil Spencer saying.


And lol at GP being on PlayStation. Where do these ideas come. Sony has their own service to sell.

 

[Sosokrates]

How would it stab series owners in the back? The player base would increase for them to matchmaker with. And MS would be making way more money from those who didn’t migrate unless Sony tanked so bad it would be probably bought out by someone else. 70% of current install base (it’s cross gen) would exceed 100% of those ingrained in PSN. Plus they avoid losses that a 70 bill company would take by cutting off most of its current console audience.

Because it takes away the main reason to own any console, exclusive games.

Every console Ive brought was because of the games I could only play on that console. I even got an xbox one to play sea of thieves and quantum break. If those games where on PS4 I would of not gotten a Xbox one. If I can play starfield, hellblade 2, fable etc on PS5 theres no point in owning my XSX.

 

[SF Kosmo]

They'll keep Warzone on PlayStation and probably CoD 2022, but after that I doubt it. Otherwise, really what's the point?

 

[NickFire]

Because it takes away the main reason to own any console, exclusive games.

Every console Ive brought was because of the games I could only play on that console. I even got an xbox one to play sea of thieves and quantum break. If those games where on PS4 I would of not gotten a Xbox one. If I can play starfield, hellblade 2, fable etc on PS5 theres no point in owning my XSX.

All that messaging about bringing gamers together. Check. Always ensuring Xbox consoles is best place to play. Check with extra perks. All That money from 120 million PS4s already in the wild. Hmmm. All that money if they ported a console version of Wow to every console still in use potentially. Holy crap.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

I dont think putting gamepass on PS5 would grow gamepass, it would just shift the gamepass subscribers from xbox consoles to ps5, it would also take away other profit made on xbox and the investment in the xbox series.
If it was Microsofts goal to put everything on PS5, they would not of done the series consoles in the first place.

Also I dont think dont think sony will want gamepass, it will take away from there subscription and there game sales, I think sony has no problem just continuing what they have been doing so far, even with the loss of acti-blizz + zenimax I still they will sell a lot of consoles and do well.

It absolutely would grow gamepass. They have close to 3x the install base. (including PS4 I mean) It's not Microsoft's goal to put everything on PS. It's Microsoft's goal to get gamepass into everything, just like they've done with all their other software services. Again the consoles are just one gateway to that service, but it is their most popular and the easiest to integrate since it's their own platform.

Before this acquisition, I would have said no they wouldn't, but now they're in a dilemma, and I've said this before but they can't compete with Microsoft in this content war. It will drain them. If they don't realize that then well good luck to them.

 

[Punished Miku]

GP will never be on PS. Period.

MS will be fine holding onto the Call of Duty IP and every E3 telling everyone its free on GP. Theyll still take your $70 on PS but remind you every year what you're missing on value. Maybe some timed DLC in favor of Xbox too.

They don't have to pull the rug out from CoD loyalists. They can take their time and slowly convince them that there's a lot to gain from switching. Their assets will still stay valuable and they don't really lose much money on the end honestly.

Im calling it now.

 

[Sosokrates]

All that messaging about bringing gamers together. Check. Always ensuring Xbox consoles is best place to play. Check with extra perks. All That money from 120 million PS4s already in the wild. Hmmm. All that money if they ported a console version of Wow to every console still in use potentially. Holy crap.

I see your points but I think it would make them less money because it would cannibalise there xbox console side of the business, as far huge install bases they are better off having xcloud on smart TVs and $60 streaming stick , controller + 3months gamepass bundle.

 

[NickFire]

It absolutely would grow gamepass. They have close to 3x the install base. (including PS4 I mean) It's not Microsoft's goal to put everything on PS. It's Microsoft's goal to get gamepass into everything, just like they've done with all their other software services. Again the consoles are just one gateway to that service, but it is their most popular and the easiest to integrate since it's their own platform.

Before this acquisition, I would have said no they wouldn't, but now they're in a dilemma, and I've said this before but they can't compete with Microsoft in this content war. It will drain them. If they don't realize that then well good luck to them.

Having thought this over, I’m now convinced Bethesda was to add content. Activision was to add content, and to buy their way into a massive user base in an indirect way.

 

[Sosokrates]

GP will never be on PS. Period.

MS will be fine holding onto the Call of Duty IP and every E3 telling everyone its free on GP. Theyll still take your $70 on PS but remind you every year what you're missing on value. Maybe some timed DLC in favor of Xbox too.

They don't have to pull the rug out from CoD loyalists. They can take their time and slowly convince them that there's a lot to gain from switching. Their assets will still stay valuable and they don't really lose much money on the end honestly.

Im calling it now.

Yes I can see that. Having it on gamepass is almost as good as being exclusive.

 

[Mabdia]

You know what? I really hope that they don't. MS should teach Sony again how important is a exclusive game.

And since Sony decided to go multiplataform with some games, why not go full PC already?!

In the past years Sony is trying to burn all the bridges that they spend over 20 years to build. Sometime that fire that they are using will burn them. And with Activision and Bethesda belonging to MS, it looks closer than ever.

 

[Punished Miku]

Yes I can see that. Having it on gamepass is almost as good as being exclusive.

Exactly. It just highlights the contrast every year.

And on top of that, they still get all other Activision IP and Blizzard and don't really have to put any of that on PS. CoD is kind of a unique phenomenon like Minecraft.

 

[NickFire]

GP will never be on PS. Period.

MS will be fine holding onto the Call of Duty IP and every E3 telling everyone its free on GP. Theyll still take your $70 on PS but remind you every year what you're missing on value. Maybe some timed DLC in favor of Xbox too.

They don't have to pull the rug out from CoD loyalists. They can take their time and slowly convince them that there's a lot to gain from switching. Their assets will still stay valuable and they don't really lose much money on the end honestly.

Im calling it now.

What is the possible business rationale for that plan? Slowly increasing market share on quarterly reports is great. Adding 20 million full paying subs in a year is legendary on them.

 

[Punished Miku]

What is the possible business rationale for that plan? Slowly increasing market share on quarterly reports is great. Adding 20 million full paying subs in a year is legendary on them.

I could be wrong but I'm publicly making my prediction that they're playing a long game. I can be called out if I'm wrong, which is totally possible!

I think they don't want to destroy the CoD community or Sony.

 

[demonstr8]

Creating thread after thread on this is pointless. Just assume that any new Call of Duty will no longer be on PlayStation from this point forward as the worst case scenario and that at most Sony has some kind of deal for the next couple of years - probably at max 3 - that will mean they release the next 3 on PS5 as the best case scenario. Either way, it's over no matter what an executive tweets.

 

[Plantoid]

GP will never be on PS. Period.

MS will be fine holding onto the Call of Duty IP and every E3 telling everyone its free on GP. Theyll still take your $70 on PS but remind you every year what you're missing on value. Maybe some timed DLC in favor of Xbox too.

They don't have to pull the rug out from CoD loyalists. They can take their time and slowly convince them that there's a lot to gain from switching. Their assets will still stay valuable and they don't really lose much money on the end honestly.

Im calling it now.

This scenario is my number #2 most possible

My number #1 is cod until 2023 and warzone keep on playstation, after 2023 just warzone stays...

 

[AmuroChan]

MS: Our desire is to keep CoD on PlayStation, but if our desire changes, we have a backup plan which is to put Candy Crush on PlayStation.

 

[NickFire]

I could be wrong but I'm publicly making my prediction that they're playing a long game. I can be called out if I'm wrong, which is totally possible!

I think they don't want to destroy the CoD community or Sony.

Quite literally, the only way you are wrong is if I was wrong until a little while ago. I thought the exact same thing as you. Then I asked myself what if Phil isn’t giving us lip service with the last message about desiring to keep cod on PS. If he is being sincere, what would that mean. And in my mind it would mean he came up with a Brilliant way to increase their market share (and send gp subs through the roof) on software, while basically forcing his vision of connecting gamers Or words to that effect from earlier times.

 

[Sosokrates]

This scenario is my number #2 most possible

My number #1 is cod until 2023 and warzone keep on playstation, after 2023 just warzone stays...

Yeah same here yours and Punished Miku scenarios seem most likely imo.

 

[Punished Miku]

Quite literally, the only way you are wrong is if I was wrong until a little while ago. I thought the exact same thing as you. Then I asked myself what if Phil isn’t giving us lip service with the last message about desiring to keep cod on PS. If he is being sincere, what would that mean. And in my mind it would mean he came up with a Brilliant way to increase their market share (and send gp subs through the roof) on software, while basically forcing his vision of connecting gamers Or words to that effect from earlier times.

It makes sense and is an intriguing idea. I just think there is literally 0% chance of GP ever being on PS. They're launching Spartacus soon. Just not ever gonna happen.

 

[DangerDiabolik]

 

[NickFire]

It makes sense and is an intriguing idea. I just think there is literally 0% chance of GP ever being on PS. They're launching Spartacus soon. Just not ever gonna happen.

I felt the same too on that reason for Sony to say no. But I remembered a little known game called Fortnite, which ended up forcing Sony to do crossplay because of backlash. At least it seemed that way at the time.

 

[Dusktildawn48]

CoD is the one IP that Microsoft has gotten with these deals that I feel needs to stay multiplatform.

 

[Punished Miku]

I felt the same too on that reason for Sony to say no. But I remembered a little known game called Fortnite, which ended up forcing Sony to do crossplay because of backlash. At least it seemed that way at the time.

I just think its game over for Sony if they do that and its not a reasonable request. They'd sooner merge with a bigger company than put GP on PS IMHO.

 

[NickFire]

I just think its game over for Sony if they do that and its not a reasonable request. They'd sooner merge with a bigger company than put GP on PS IMHO.

I think that’s a stretch. They’d be making money too. Lots in fact. More risky than before of course In terms of threat from MS. But that’s no reason to quit.

 

[TheGreatMusashi]

I’m not a console war type of guy, I end up buying them all and having a good time. I mostly played on PS4 last generation but I think I’ll always hold a little bit of a grudge about how aggressive Sony was in the Dreamcast days. While it wouldn’t make any sense financially, it would be pretty funny if COD was an Xbox exclusive but I can’t get greedy. The Zenimax acquisition dried those tears. This is fucking crazy though. Feels like Microsoft is pardoning Sony at this point. Curious to see what Sony does. I hope it’s not through acquisition but original IP, they have the Japanese card, play that shit. I loved importing weird PS1 games and the output of Japanese developers on PSN was great in the PS3 days. I’d go for another Tokyo Jungle, how ‘bout you?

 

[lastmessiah]

I’m not a console war type of guy, I end up buying them all and having a good time. I mostly played on PS4 last generation but I think I’ll always hold a little bit of a grudge about how aggressive Sony was in the Dreamcast days. While it wouldn’t make any sense financially, it would be pretty funny if COD was an Xbox exclusive but I can’t get greedy. The Zenimax acquisition dried those tears. This is fucking crazy though. Feels like Microsoft is pardoning Sony at this point. Curious to see what Sony does. I hope it’s not through acquisition but original IP, they have the Japanese card, play that shit. I loved importing weird PS1 games and the output of Japanese developers on PSN was great in the PS3 days. I’d go for another Tokyo Jungle, how ‘bout you?

Sony does NOT have the Japanese card. The gaming division is a Western division based in California that gave up on the Japanese market long ago.

 

[Megatron]

And lol at GP being on PlayStation. Where do these ideas come. Sony has their own service to sell.

Isn't EA's service on Playstation?

 

[adamsapple]