• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PlayStation: Xbox's Call of Duty offer was "inadequate on many levels"

DaGwaphics

Member
Which part of what I wrote didn't happen? Did Phil deny offering only 3 more years after the agreement ends?

The imaginary part where he said one thing to regulators and did something else with Sony. That's the problem. LOL

In reality he offered Sony a firm commitment that in his words was far beyond the industry standard. These lifetime contracts you imagine just don't exist, otherwise Sony would have one in place for CoD already.
 
Last edited:

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
That's some big assumptions right there. More than likely the letter just removed the advantages for PS and leveled the field with Xbox. Obviously, any roadblocks for GP inclusion would be removed as well. Which Ryan probably wasn't happy about.
Totally.

Where’s Jim Ryan and the other Sony execs the past 8 years going back to PS4 launch when Sony scooped up marketing deals, dlc and beta timed exclusivity complaining how bad it is?

Nowhere to be found.

When they got the goods paying money to lock things up they go on stage when they did E3 with a big smile on their face promoting COD. And MS couldn’t do anything about it, nor did anyone publicly complain the top selling shooter has marketing deals where Xbox has to wait it out.
 

yurinka

Member
Which obviously they aren't going to do. And again, for the hundredth time, just because the letter of intent had a limit in years that doesn't equate to future agreements being off the table. It's normal for these things to be done for a limited term, just like Sony was already doing with Activision (they don't have a forever deal for those games right now either).
Jimbo got really pissed off enough to make this public statement, which if it would have made it for nothing it would piss off MS and would risk the future of PS on CoD.

Jimbo said that the offer MS did to keep CoD for 3 years more on PS before going exclusive was 'inappropiate in multiple ways', I assume implying it was only this 3 years with no possibility to extend them later and that maybe MS was even asking for abusive conditions to do so and that the real objective of MS was to get the good PR and image for regulators now to get the acquisition closed and after that, in the future, announce that CoD goes exclusive, maybe even saying that they offered Sony to keep it there but that Sony didn't accepted it or something like that.

Where’s Jim Ryan and the other Sony execs the past 8 years going back to PS4 launch when Sony scooped up marketing deals, dlc and beta timed exclusivity complaining how bad it is?

Nowhere to be found.
The marketing deal between Sony and Capcom for RE Village got leaked, and the one from the Sony side who signed it was Jim Ryan. So I assume he's the one who signs all this kind of deals, at least the marketing deals (which include betas, bundles, vr etc)/the one Sony has with CoD.

Jim didn't complain about MS signing marketing deals, dlc and beta timed exclusivity. He said that had to clarify that what MS offered them regarding is not what MS has been saying (even saying that signed it).

He clarified that MS's plan is to make it exclusive and that they only got an offer 'inappropiate in multiple ways' to keep it on PS only 3 extra years more after their current ABK+Sony deal ends.

Jimbo, as CEO in public company, when someone else lies saying his company signed an important deal even in legally binding documents for regulators and market analysts he should clarify it. Because it could affect Sony's stocks and also to their relationship with regulators.
 
Last edited:
If it would make you happier pretend I said only for 3 more years. But since you asked, in the grand scheme of consoles and console games, 3 years is a very short time. In the MS world, it is about 1/3 to 1/2 the time it takes to make one Halo game. So not long at all.

Three years is a long time in the gaming industry and especially for a deal that was offered with seemingly nothing in return. I don't care about the time it takes to make a game, we're not talking about that.

CoD on PlayStation for five more years is essentially the end of the generation. It's not a "really short time".

Of course, this is all besides the fact that claiming they offered CoD for "several years beyond the existing agreement" is not a lie, it's literally exactly what Jimmy claimed in his PR.
 

NickFire

Member
The imaginary part where he said one thing to regulators and did something else with Sony. That's the problem. LOL

In reality he offered Sony a firm commitment that in his words was far beyond the industry standard. These lifetime contracts you imagine just don't exist, otherwise Sony would have one in place for CoD already.
Try to be objective once in a while. There was no imaginary part. I didn't say he told the regulators something and Sony something else. I said in the PR they said they were committed. And that honest people may take issue with the lack of information about the commitment being limited in scope that was not disclosed. Just because you have no issue with that, which is fine, does not mean what I wrote was imaginary.
 

DaGwaphics

Member
Jimbo got really pissed off enough to make this public statement, which if it would have made it for nothing it would piss off MS and would risk the future of PS on CoD.

Jimbo said that the offer MS did to keep CoD for 3 years more on PS before going exclusive was 'inappropiate in multiple ways', I assume implying it was only this 3 years with no possibility to extend them later and that maybe MS was even asking for abusive conditions to do so and that the real objective of MS was to get the good PR and image for regulators now to get the acquisition closed and after that, in the future, announce that CoD goes exclusive, maybe even saying that they offered Sony to keep it there but that Sony didn't accepted it or something like that.

It's likely PR BS. I doubt MS put anything draconian in a letter that was meant to assuage concerns about the deal. You've got to actually think for a minute.

In Sony's view the ability for CoD to be available on GP is "inappropriate", go figure.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
3 more years guaranteed.
We don't even know what the PS6 will be or whether it will be successful - why would MS promise to support unknown hardware with an unknown install base?
All this panic for COD.

Minecraft is still on Ps systems. MS never yanked the rug from PS gamers.

The games sell so well MS will likely keep selling COD on PS while reversing the content timed deals so Xbox gamers get it. And also at some point out COD in GP. As for PS gamers if they want COD it’ll still be there to buy.
 

NickFire

Member
Three years is a long time in the gaming industry and especially for a deal that was offered with seemingly nothing in return. I don't care about the time it takes to make a game, we're not talking about that.

CoD on PlayStation for five more years is essentially the end of the generation. It's not a "really short time".

Of course, this is all besides the fact that claiming they offered CoD for "several years beyond the existing agreement" is not a lie, it's literally exactly what Jimmy claimed in his PR.
I agree to disagree on whether 3 more years is a long or short time in this industry. But I would completely agree with the suggestion that the extension offer would probably correlate with the expected end of the generation. Based on objective length and my subjective belief that MS is planning to really start reaping the biggest GP rewards around that timeframe.

the part where you claimed lies were told?

How about quoting that part?
 

DaGwaphics

Member
And that honest people may take issue with the lack of information about the commitment being limited in scope that was not disclosed.

I guess these "honest" people were already kept up at night out of fear that Activision might pull CoD from PS. There was a chance of that happening even sooner.

Happy Cracking Up GIF by Regal
 

yurinka

Member
That's some big assumptions right there. More than likely the letter just removed the advantages for PS and leveled the field with Xbox. Obviously, any roadblocks for GP inclusion would be removed as well. Which Ryan probably wasn't happy about.
I assume that Jimbo -and everybody- expected that if MS buys ABK then MS obviously would get this advantages of having them the marketing, exclusive betas, exclusive bundles, maybe timed exclusives for DLCs, locking it from appearing in non-MS game subs etc. And that this (plus to get the yearly ABK revenue and profits, teams and IPs) is mainly why MS bought them.

The roadblocks to include CoD on GP (like these other preferences) only affect the games already signed with Sony, which seems are already published ones plus according to rumors apparently the next 3 games. In RE Village that meant that for at least around 15 months after launch it couldn't appear in non-Sony game subs and that if Sony asked them to negotiate (giving Sony preference in related negotiations including first and last offer) to put it in a Sony game sub then it would expand and obviously it would expand if Sony signs to put the game on their sub.

Meaning that for games already included in the current ABK+Sony deal will be able to be in GP around 15 months after their release. And future CoD games not included in this deal could be there day one, and MS will be able to get their marketing, bundles, etc.

Ryan knew that because he signed that deal with ABK, or at least he signed the similar deal with RE Village. So what made him angry and find it 'inappropiate in multiple ways' should be something else.

I assume it's that MS told him "CoD will go exclusive once the Sony+ABK deal ends and if you want to get CoD 3 years more -with no option to extend it- this are my conditions: sign that you'll release all future Bungie, ND and SSM games on Xbox, pay me a gazillion dollars and make me a blowjob. Signed, Phil" and Jimbo told them "Oh, fuck you. Signed, Jimbo" (I'm kidding)

And then MS went to the press, to their corporate blog and to the regulators to say they planned to keep CoD on PS, that had a signed agreement with Sony about it, etc. If MS would have been honest and would have said to everybody 'we'll make CoD exclusive after its deal with Sony ends' or "after the deal we'll keep it 3 years more on PS and later will go exclusive" (and to sign this without demanding too much money for it) then I assume Jimbo wouldn't have said anything.
 
Last edited:

DaGwaphics

Member
I assume it's that MS told him "CoD will go exclusive once the Sony+ABK deal ends and if you want to get CoD 3 years more -with no option to extend it- this are my conditions: sign that you'll release all future Bungie, ND and SSM games on Xbox, pay me a gazillion dollars and make me a blowjob. Signed, Phil" and Jimbo told them "Oh, fuck you. Signed, Jimbo" (I'm kidding)

And then MS went to the press, to their corporate blog and to the regulators to say they planned to keep CoD on PS, that had a signed agreement with Sony about it, etc.

Ryan Gosling Lol GIF


Okay sure. Everyone is free to assume whatever they want.

Somehow I doubt that the company trying to get WW government clearance on a huge acquisition is going to go in and start making ultimatums before the deal has even closed. That's just me.
 
Last edited:

yurinka

Member
Ryan Gosling Lol GIF


Okay sure. Everyone is free to assume whatever they want.

Somehow I doubt that the company trying get WW government clearance on a huge acquisition is going to go in and start making ultimatums before the deal has even closed. That's just me.
Well, the corporate world is a jungle. Many executives are fucking phycopathic sharks who mercylessly fight for power inside and outside their company and perform any dirty trick they can to get more power.

I think that what it would be smarter for MS would be to get the benefits we mentioned but to keep releasing CoD and their other big ABK IPs on PS for at least this generation or maybe beyond without asking anything for it (because PS generates a big chunk of ABK's revenue and profit), like with Minecraft. Pretty much what MS mentioned publicly multiple times.

And then, somewhere in the next gen many years after they closed the acquisition and once they analized the impact of their 'day one on PC' strategy affected ABK's revenue and profit and also to GP or Xbox with several games, to decide if to make these games Xbox console exclusive or not (I bet that they'd continue in Minecraft mode because I think that the portion of the GP revenue increase wouldn't compensate the revenues they'd lose not from Xbox+PC sold copies but also from all PS revenue, so they'd try to compensate with PS revenue the decrease in XB+PC game sales).
 
Last edited:

DaGwaphics

Member
Well, the corporate world is a jungle. Many executives are fucking phycopathic sharks who mercylessly fight for power inside and outside their company and perform any dirty trick they can to get more power.

Even the most ruthless of CEOs would not show their hand in this situation, at this time. If Spencer did anything even remotely close to what you assume, I guess I'll have to reevaluate my opinion of him as head of Xbox. LOL
 

StormCell

Member
Playstation fans can believe whatever they like, but this purely Jim Ryan making an argument in bad faith over an IP that Sony clearly doesn't want to lose due to the impact it could have on hardware sales. They would buy Activision themselves if it made good financial sense to do it, and they would give zero f-bombs about Xbox gamers (and even less so Switch players) about making Activision/Blizzard IPs Playstation exclusives. They would do about the absolute minimum (honoring existing agreements) and jack diddly beyond that.

And Playstation fans know this. Sony pays money to block content on other consoles all the damn diddly time.
 
For some reason, I misread that as "Call of Duty is inadequate on so many levels" and was about to post how much I agree with that statement as someone who stopped playing the games some 5 or 6 years ago then realised that isn't what they actually said. Still wanted to say it though.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Instead of Sony being a whiny little bitch, maybe the 3rdPersonStation can get back to being a PlayStation and have one of their very competent gane studios make an FPS.
That’s why they are moaning.

They shoved all eggs into one basket with SP narratives. That’s why they rushed to buy Bungie after MS bought Activision.

When MS did some marketing deals with COD during PS3 days notice how no Sony exec complained. They had so many FPS shooters they didn’t care. But when they all fizzled out that’s when they opened up the coffers with PS4 COD deals since it launched 8 years ago.

Sony loves eating up deals with all kinds of games, but when it goes the other way you get their fearless leader publicly complaining.

Gamers should already knows MS is very liberal with their games. Minecraft is still on all systems. It’s such a good money maker they never delisted it from competing systems.
 
There's also the possibility that Game Pass didn't even exist the last time Sony re-upped their marketing deal for CoD, or that Sony didn't believe MS would ever actually purchase ABK so didn't think they needed to pay for a GP blocking clause.
 

Dolomite

Member
Lmao I expect the same unmitigated outrage when Bungie's IP is exclusive to PS. Surely Jimbo, in his outstanding integrity will make sure a company who was owned and baptized in MS releases thier titles on other Platforms
 
Last edited:

tmlDan

Member
Are we supposed to feel sorry for Sony or something?
Sony hoarded tons of franchises over the years - and I was forced to buy their consoles on multiple occasions because of that - despite absolutely hating their controller, install process, and garbage online service.
so did MS...

Episode 2 Whatever GIF
 

CatLady

Selfishly plays on Xbox Purr-ies X
Sony loves eating up deals with all kinds of games, but when it goes the other way you get their fearless leader publicly complaining.
I read about Ryan's statement the other day and here's what I don't understand: why in the world do Sony/Ryan believe they have the right to make demands of Xbox and Phil Spencer?

What does Xbox get in return? I'm guessing Phil was making the offer to look good to regulators and hoping Sony would not try to interfere. But where does Ryan get off saying the offer is inadequate, like he's the one holding all the cards. I really don't understand what's going on here.
 

Hendrick's

If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
I read about Ryan's statement the other day and here's what I don't understand: why in the world do Sony/Ryan believe they have the right to make demands of Xbox and Phil Spencer?

What does Xbox get in return? I'm guessing Phil was making the offer to look good to regulators and hoping Sony would not try to interfere. But where does Ryan get off saying the offer is inadequate, like he's the one holding all the cards. I really don't understand what's going on here.
Welcome back. Did you appeal your ban or something?
 

DaGwaphics

Member
I read about Ryan's statement the other day and here's what I don't understand: why in the world do Sony/Ryan believe they have the right to make demands of Xbox and Phil Spencer?

What does Xbox get in return? I'm guessing Phil was making the offer to look good to regulators and hoping Sony would not try to interfere. But where does Ryan get off saying the offer is inadequate, like he's the one holding all the cards. I really don't understand what's going on here.

It just comes off as a PR stunt designed to create any kind of stir among consumers that they can as a last ditch effort to get the deal blocked.
 
Last edited:

HeisenbergFX4

Gold Member
I read about Ryan's statement the other day and here's what I don't understand: why in the world do Sony/Ryan believe they have the right to make demands of Xbox and Phil Spencer?

What does Xbox get in return? I'm guessing Phil was making the offer to look good to regulators and hoping Sony would not try to interfere. But where does Ryan get off saying the offer is inadequate, like he's the one holding all the cards. I really don't understand what's going on here.
It just comes off as a PR stunt designed to create any kind of stir among consumers that they can as a last ditch effort to get the deal blocked.
Exactly

Its all theatrics from both sides to gain any edge in this acquisition

And WB CatLady CatLady
 
Last edited:
I read about Ryan's statement the other day and here's what I don't understand: why in the world do Sony/Ryan believe they have the right to make demands of Xbox and Phil Spencer?

What does Xbox get in return? I'm guessing Phil was making the offer to look good to regulators and hoping Sony would not try to interfere. But where does Ryan get off saying the offer is inadequate, like he's the one holding all the cards. I really don't understand what's going on here.
Joe Biden Politics GIF by The Democrats
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
I read about Ryan's statement the other day and here's what I don't understand: why in the world do Sony/Ryan believe they have the right to make demands of Xbox and Phil Spencer?

What does Xbox get in return? I'm guessing Phil was making the offer to look good to regulators and hoping Sony would not try to interfere. But where does Ryan get off saying the offer is inadequate, like he's the one holding all the cards. I really don't understand what's going on here.

They have no standing to do so. Jim is a rich UK business man, he's flexing his UK chops and getting CMA to repeat his talking points.
 
The future is clear. If Sony wants to keep getting Call of Duty, a future Microsoft IP, they will have to pay for it to come to their platform. I like that type of dealing with Sony. Sony has been pretty cutthroat for years, and there are times where Microsoft just needs to return the favor. It's not a personal thing, it's just business. Sony was already paying for COD. Now they can pay for a different reason via a multi-year licensing deals with the parent company for Call of Duty.
 

CatLady

Selfishly plays on Xbox Purr-ies X
Eyo welcome back sweetpea
Don't give me that sweetpea shit. Where's your green hat, you phony! I spoke with Phil, and he was so proud of your ambassador work he was even thinking of using Xbox is Best Box as their new slogan. He wanted to get you TWO pairs of green socks AND a 1-month free Game Pass card!!!

Instead, you go running right back to your old Blue Snake clan
 
Don't give me that sweetpea shit. Where's your green hat, you phony! I spoke with Phil, and he was so proud of your ambassador work he was even thinking of using Xbox is Best Box as their new slogan. He wanted to get you TWO pairs of green socks AND a 1-month free Game Pass card!!!

Instead, you go running right back to your old Blue Snake clan

Don't be like that chicken. It was a moment of weakness.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Don't give me that sweetpea shit. Where's your green hat, you phony! I spoke with Phil, and he was so proud of your ambassador work he was even thinking of using Xbox is Best Box as their new slogan. He wanted to get you TWO pairs of green socks AND a 1-month free Game Pass card!!!

Instead, you go running right back to your old Blue Snake clan
Don't be like that chicken. It was a moment of weakness.

Man....I've missed this.

Season 9 Yes GIF by Friends
 

Markio128

Member
The funny thing is, most COD fans that I know barely bother with any other games, so I doubt it’ll have a big impact on Gamepass because it’ll be cheaper to buy the COD game than to sub to the service 😂
 
Last edited:

DaGwaphics

Member
Don't give me that sweetpea shit. Where's your green hat, you phony! I spoke with Phil, and he was so proud of your ambassador work he was even thinking of using Xbox is Best Box as their new slogan. He wanted to get you TWO pairs of green socks AND a 1-month free Game Pass card!!!

Don't talk about the perks of our imaginary jobs with MS, that's against the rules. :messenger_tears_of_joy: But hey, if this is a real thing, someone please sign me up somewhere for realz.

Seriously, MS, if you are hiring random forum posters please give DaGwaphics (aka SportsFan581 ) a shot. Would be absolute dream job. I have no shame.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom