Support NeoGAF

[Elbereth]

Glad that we are reaching a conclusion.

Played the most recent CODs on PS.

Now, if future CODs are day one on Gamepass, then I will be playing on PC via GP Ultimate. (GP until 2026).

 

[Negotiator101]

I am going to assume once this deal closes, all COD games will be game pass within 1 week or so if closing the deal.

I do wonder about the price of Xbox game pass though. once they drop whole Activision games on Xbox / PC, I wonder if it will be the same price as before.

Assume? It's a done deal, the CMA is just saving face by hanging on.

Actually read your post wrong, but probably will be a while before they go on GP.

 

[skit_data]

Nah mate Jim Ryan aint got the minerals, Big Phils ruthless, men want to be him and woman want to be with him.

*For representations sake I'll add some women also want to be him and some men wants to be inside of him

 

[aliadiere25]

Imagine paying 69 billion and your games still aren't exclusive.

 

[Jboemios]

But the CMA can still block it.
GAF specialist told me that

 

[tryDEATH]

That's not true, all of the regulators that passed were based on the remedies MS had, such as the 10 year plan. imagine getting approved, and then MS says oh ya we aren't doing the 10 year plan after all. Good luck.

PS didn't have a contract and they were by far the largest consumer of CoD and all passed the deal including the CMA with out deal breaking concerns.

 

[C2brixx]

Jimbo played this perfectly, forced them to make a 10- year deals after initially being offered nothing, then a 3 year deal, and now 10.

The future will be interesting, i have little hope it will be positive

I don't know man. This only makes CoD a bigger game than it already is. CoD will be everywhere with a pretty much unlimited development budget. Whatever Sony was plan on doing as an answer to CoD won't get the support if CoD is still available on the platform.

 

[Fitzchiv]

Oh they were "aggressive" before but nothing out of industry norm. Sony will be more likely to buy bigger studios/publishers now. And besides consoles this will also make sure that other players like tencent will buy bigger than ever before.

Sony are as beholden to shareholders as MS are, so it will need to represent value in that sense.

I've no idea what they're saying about where they generate growth, but typically M&A attracts a specific group of investors.

 

[HerjansEagleFeeder]

What are the chances Sony will try and develop their own COD now?

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

But the CMA can still block it.
GAF specialist told me that

They got two choices: a) run with things, b) get ghosted.

 

[Fredrik]

Do we know a length of this contrac?

Seems odd they didn’t mention that in the tweet

Forever there is a Playstation?
I don’t see why they would ever remove the game from PS. They get the cake and can eat it now. The can keep boasting about having games day 1 on Gamepass without tanking game sales since they’ll keep selling as usual on the biggest platform, keeps the economy functional.

 

[Cornbread78]

So, is Wed the day we finally get the SEGA announcement?

 

[aliadiere25]

What are the chances Sony will try and develop their own COD now?

It's possible. COD won't be around forever, and their games have declined in terms of gameplay.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

What does a much more aggressive Sony look like?

This whole process has shown exactly how aggressive Sony have been for a long time.

Aggressive how? In preventing 3P games going to Game Pass? Actually turns out it's Microsoft who prevents 3P games tied to a Game Pass deal go to competing services like PS+. That's in addition to things like MS having embargo periods for 3P game reveals at their shows to announce other consoles, while Sony and Nintendo have no such embargos.

Or the whole "Sony buying up 3P exclusivity around the industry" rumor from Imran Khan that was always sketchy even back then? Well unless you count a handful of mainline Final Fantasy games, smaller AA 3P indies and a couple AA Bethesda games as "buying up 3P exclusivity around the entire industry", then that rumor was BS. There is not even substantial evidence about Sony going after timed exclusivity for Starfield, just hearsay from Microsoft.

I imagine when people say a "much more aggressive" Sony, they mean one actually making 3P deals with other publishers besides just Square-Enix, possibly acquiring a couple of 3P publishers to secure those relationships, and invest in & buy shares in many of the other AAA and AA 3P devs and pubs in the market. Plus probably target other strategic partnerships like with EA & Battlefield for example.

 

[C2brixx]

But the CMA can still block it.
GAF specialist told me that

Don't make fun of those posters. They are keeping the suspense.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

1: Phil Spencer made that oath, not Microsoft. Remember when the FTC pressed him on binding MS to statements? He admitted right there that he could not bind MS as a corporation. So Phil Spencer made an oath; that doesn't mean Microsoft have made the same oath.

2: The oath was just WRT bringing COD out to PlayStation. Nothing really about the terms & conditions of how the game actually comes to PlayStation platforms, or how much it'll cost Sony to get certain access to the game. All of that could and likely is (IMO) unfavorable for them here.

The optics of Microsoft making a legally binding agreement that went backwards from previous agreements and statements would be awful at this stage with everything fresh on the mind

In fact, I doubt Sony would have signed it if the contract was worse than what was already offered

 

[tmlDan]

I don't know man. This only makes CoD a bigger game than it already is. CoD will be everywhere with a pretty much unlimited development budget. Whatever Sony was plan on doing as an answer to CoD won't get the support if CoD is still available on the platform.

So you'd rather they settled for no deal or 3 years? this give them time to make up lost revenue through their own ip or others.

COD isn't undefeatable, MS could fumble that bag.

 

[TheDreadLord]

people thinking that Sony got a better deal with this agreement than what was previously offered are completely delusional

 

[DAHGAMING]

*For representations sake I'll add some women also want to be him and some men wants to be inside of him

Quality haha, sorry if I have offended anybody with my old ancient ways.

 

[Ansphn]

Xbox going 3rd party after Microsoft sees the money coming from COD on PlayStation.

 

[Fitzchiv]

Aggressive how? In preventing 3P games going to Game Pass? Actually turns out it's Microsoft who prevents 3P games tied to a Game Pass deal go to competing services like PS+. That's in addition to things like MS having embargo periods for 3P game reveals at their shows to announce other consoles, while Sony and Nintendo have no such embargos.

Or the whole "Sony buying up 3P exclusivity around the industry" rumor from Imran Khan that was always sketchy even back then? Well unless you count a handful of mainline Final Fantasy games, smaller AA 3P indies and a couple AA Bethesda games as "buying up 3P exclusivity around the entire industry", then that rumor was BS. There is not even substantial evidence about Sony going after timed exclusivity for Starfield, just hearsay from Microsoft.

I imagine when people say a "much more aggressive" Sony, they mean one actually making 3P deals with other publishers besides just Square-Enix, possibly acquiring a couple of 3P publishers to secure those relationships, and invest in & buy shares in many of the other AAA and AA 3P devs and pubs in the market. Plus probably target other strategic partnerships like with EA & Battlefield for example.

Didn't this process expose they were locking down Starfield until MS acquired Zenimax?

Come on, objectively any of us can look at this and see Sony are incredibly successful and are so because of some highly aggressive commercial behaviour. MS are exactly as aggressive, if not moreso, elsewhere.

It seems you're positioning aggression as acquisition, so see my other point on that: fair enough, if that's what their shareholders want. You can't invest huge sums into organic growth AND acquisitions unless you've got large cash reserves, and if you do your shareholders are probably asking why they don't get better dividends.

 

[RyanEvans21]

people thinking that Sony got a better deal with this agreement than what was previously offered are completely delusional

Better than nothing

 

[Spyxos]

Be funny if Sony actually pulls off their own COD studio in the next 10 years, while a $2 trillion company could not. All MS did with $69 billion was get marketing rights for COD.

EA has tried it for years with Battlefield and Titanfall and Medal of Honor. We all know how it ended. The same with Gta, many have also tried to have their own version. These games are not easy to copy.

 

[ReBurn]

Care to explain how it will be fine? Because most people are soo naive that they think everything will stay the same except they get some more games in their subscription. This will lead in a massive shit in the industry one way or another and the same people cheering for this acquisitions will have melt downs with the next.

I never said it would stay the same. I said it would be ok. This Is just video games.

 

[Elios83]

It's the safest thing they could do at this point even if Microsoft committed in court.
It will allow them to not lose the COD revenues in the short while they pursue other strategies for the long term.

 

[TheInfamousKira]

I'm so glad I won the autism lottery and am solely interested in games and studios that hardly ever get involved in The Great Console Wars as a pawn. I'm entangled with the hobby to a point that the constant nail biting over whether or not I need to get a new Console because GameX is exclusive or whatever would suck.

Everything I play ends up either being multi platform, exclusive to what I own, or is so old that the argument becomes irrelevant.

I mean, I understand that it's all connected and big dev purchases and demographic shifting could Have major repercussions in the future, but I remain cautiously amused.

 

[aliadiere25]

people thinking that Sony got a better deal with this agreement than what was previously offered are completely delusional

Sony doesn't need COD to survive. Also, COD won't be around forever. And if we're being honest, COD has been going downhill for quite some time.

 

[Syphon Filter]

What bout the other titles? Makes you wonder if MS keeps them solely, would be a big blow to sony.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Be funny if Sony actually pulls off their own COD studio in the next 10 years, while a $2 trillion company could not. All MS did with $69 billion was get marketing rights for COD.

And the ability to foreclose COD on PlayStation consoles before Sony sufficiently has a replacement for COD, because Microsoft's real intentions aren't to use PlayStation (or Nintendo, for that matter) as revenue banks in perpetuity. They want PlayStation out of the console market and want to shift gaming to a model they can dominate with their resources and lead in areas like cloud networking & services, and need big IP like COD to do it.

This is a pretty dangerous outcome for Sony here IMO and they need more bargaining chips to leverage with to stead off Microsoft's non-merit based domination efforts as much as possible.

What bout the other titles? Makes you wonder if MS keeps them solely, would be a big blow to sony.

This, too. There's nothing here WRT other ABK games, just COD. As if COD's the only thing ABK have :/

 

[Zok310]

EA has tried it for years with Battlefield and Titanfall and Medal of Honor. We all know how it ended. The same with Gta, many have also tried to have their own version. These games are not easy to copy.

Apex, fortnite came after COD and they generate tons of rev. BF was established before COD, its just that most of Dice talent have moved on from EA and Dice. That will happen to COD at some point. Flood the market with clones that are good and they can pull in that revenue all the same.

 

[Spyxos]

Apex, fortnite came after COD and they generate tons of rev. BF was established before COD, its just that most of Dice talent have moved on from EA and Dice. That will happen to COD at some point. Flood the market with clones that are good and they can pull in that revenue all the same.

They are not cod competitors.

 

[rofif]

Sony lost a lot of good look with this whole deal.
They played weak and they look weak because of that.
Fuck call of duty anyway. They could make better games than cod.

And m$ is the worst and continues to be the devil. GP is devaluing the industry and will ruin the industry. It makes no sense to put a lot of money in GP games because it's not selling. Just like netflix.
Sony created their success. M$ is buying their "success"... YAY SUCH EQUAL MARKET OPPORTUNITY

 

[Zok310]

They are not cod competitors.

Nope, but they keep players coming back season after season.

 

[Spyxos]

Nope, but they keep players coming back season after season.

Sure, only I think they are different players. The people who buy the latest cod for 80 euros every year are not the same people who play f2p games.

 

[C2brixx]

Xbox going 3rd party after Microsoft sees the money coming from COD on PlayStation.

Microsoft is big enough they don't have to choose between being only a 3rd party publisher or having their own hardware platform. Why do they make Surface computers? My guess is they want devices where they control the hardware and software instead of HP,Dell,Lenovo, etc. who add all kinds of bloatware. Xbox hardware is the same as Surface PCs. Microsoft controls the software and hardware experience.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

It's the safest thing they could do at this point even if Microsoft committed in court.
It will allow them to not lose the COD revenues in the short while they pursue other strategies for the long term.

Microsoft didn't commit in court; Phil Spencer committed in court.

The FTC established that Phil Spencer could not make statements that bound Microsoft to his own testimony. Meaning when the judge asked Phil about COD on PlayStation, that was not a statement Microsoft was bound by, either.

Which made that whole question from the judge look absolutely stupid, it's like she pretended to forget about a facet of the legal process just to let Good Guy Phil™ score brownie points.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Sony lost a lot of good look with this whole deal.
They played weak and they look weak because of that.

How so?

Sony got better terms over time. They can’t control what regulators will or won’t decide on.

So in terms of what Sony could control out of this, they played the right cards for them.

 

[Zok310]

Sure, only I think they are different players. The people who buy the latest cod for 80 euros every year are not the same people who play f2p games.

But consistent live service revenue is my point, it dont have to be a cod killer is my point.

 

[havoc00]

Nope, but they keep players coming back season after season.

Xdefiant is the true cod killer !!

 

[aliadiere25]

Sony lost a lot of good look with this whole deal.
They played weak and they look weak because of that.
Fuck call of duty anyway. They could make better games than cod.

And m$ is the worst and continues to be the devil. GP is devaluing the industry and will ruin the industry. It makes no sense to put a lot of money in GP games because it's not selling. Just like netflix.
Sony created their success. M$ is buying their "success"... YAY SUCH EQUAL MARKET OPPORTUNITY

How does Sony look weak from this?

They're still getting COD and they didn't need to spend 69 billion to do it. Microsoft is the one who look weak.

 

[rofif]

How so?

Sony got better terms over time. They can’t control what regulators will or won’t decide on.

So in terms of what Sony could control out of this, they played the right cards for them.

It is obvious they held out with shows and announcements. They wanted to look weak for the ftc.
Well... at least they kinda got what they wanted, so maybe it was worth it

 

[ZoukGalaxy]

"We look forward to a future where players globally have more choice to play their favorite games."

Can I play Starfield on PS5 then, dear hypocrite Phil ?

 

[Zok310]

Xdefiant is the true cod killer !!

Doubth under Ubi they will allow that game to grow to reach that point, Ubi drops the ball a hell of a lot more than Acti does with their games.

 

[rofif]

"We look forward to a future where players globally have more choice to play their favorite games."

Can I play Starfield on PS5 then, dear hypocrite Phil ?

Salesman Phill is always lying.
WE ALL PLAY WE ALL WIN - people eat his shit up

 

[Topher]

But the CMA can still block it.
GAF specialist told me that

Factually they can. CMA blocking has nothing to do with Sony.

 

[havoc00]

What a wild ride

 

[gow3isben]

Sony don't hide your acquisitions any more.

It is time for PUNISHED SONY.

Announce Square next week then From in a month.

Then announce CDPR and Capcom in 2024

Throw in Remedy and some other ones in the mix as well.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

I think a lot of people are excited about this because they are hoping MS will be more active with dormant Activision ips, or at least re mastering the ips there is a lot of potential to re boot or remaster or offer collections of these games strictly for gp content this is why as a Xbox fan am a bit hyped for this if ms follows though.

It’s kind of like people hoping banjo kazooie will come back

No, you’re getting more CoD out of this deal…just now on GP

 

[ReBurn]

The former, unless MS plans to significantly raise GP prices

Cord cutting streaming services happens all the time. What’s to stop a CoD only player from getting GP in November alone each year?

Nothing. But hardcore CoD players are probably going to buy the game anyway since it would be stupid to spend $200 a year for one game you can get for $70. On the other hand, there may be many people who wouldn't pay $70 for CoD would subscribe for a month for $20 to play the game. That's the bread and butter revenue. Twenty bucks from people like those is better than $0 from them.

The thing about it is that it doesn't have to be either or. Game pass gives people options.

 

[Kataploom]

I expect a much more aggressive sony after this and in the end all consumers will lose.

An even more aggressive? That's like... Kinda hard to do, they already gave MS the excuse with exclusivity deals, now MS will buy hardware manufacturers or whatever lol