Sounds good. Looks like all is going to plan. Sony/Jimbo can moan/cry won’t do them any good it seem.
They Sony / Jimbo Cryan is trying so very hard, they literally throwing everything they can to try to stop the deal. It’s probably their last Hail Mary attempt. Saying anything and everything, some of which make little sense.
1 Like
This is getting wild to me. I always figured MS and Sony had a pretty good working relationship behind the scenes. This seems to be really scorched Earth and it’s hard to see cooperation continuing in the future.
I wonder what MS is looking for with their subpoena? If it were me I’d be looking for anything that might expose a strategy of trying to “starve Xbox/Microsoft for content.” I think it’s pretty obvious to the enthusiasts out there it was Sony’s intention to bury Xbox once and for all with a really aggressive series of exclusive deals with developers and publishers that are typically very much so third party or MS leaning… Bethesda with Deathloop, Ghost Wire and the apparent run at Starfield seem like an obvious target to me.
I would think it would be pretty damaging for Sony both from a PR and regulatory perspective to be caught red handed doing something like that.
1 Like
I think there’s always been some animosity between the 2, but nothing at this level. I think the tide changed once Jim Ryan became head honcho. Sony and Microsoft used to do light jabs at one another, but nothing compared to the level Jim Ryan has done since he’s been in charge. I think Phil and Andrew House probably had friendly rivalry, but I don’t think I can say the same about Phil and Jim.
This is literal war in the corporate sense. Sony / Jim is trying to stop this deal, if successful will hurt MS/Xbox. I can’t see cooperation in the future. Exisiting deal sure, new deals? no, can’t see that. Phil will remember this.
1 Like
i suspect not beeing the #1 platform for Cod (and shooters subsequently) threatens Sonys profitability in a significant way. so they get nervous.
1 Like
Not for free, regulators forcing Microsoft to lose money on something makes no sense. If Sony wants CoD day 1, they have to pay as Microsoft has already offered to put it in the service with their contracts.
2 Likes
That is such a shitty trade.
3 Likes
They needed to respond to the false accusations. This isn’t about the EC, whom I’m sure have everything they need, including whatever proposed contracts MS has given to Sony and others. This is about not influencing the decision of the CMA or giving ammo to the FTC.
They used to, at least before Jim Ryan. I remember seeing behind the scenes photos of Phil Spencer hanging out with Reggie Fils-Aimé and Shawn Layden at events. They were just people doing the same for their respective companies, they were there because they all appreciated gaming. They wanted what was best for their own respective platforms, sure, so there was some competitiveness - but there wasn’t the same level of animosity there is now. I think Sony has changed quite a bit under Jim Ryan, and we might see a lot of that unfold over the next decade and it’s not necessarily for the better. Either way, all the nice talk went out the window once Ryan realised he might be able to stop the Activision deal.
4 Likes
Microsoft should change cod to free 2 play overall and have the way to get the new multiplayer maps available via a Ultimate Battlepass(Warzone Battlepass & Multiplayer Maps Battlepass Together) and a 60 dollar bi-yearly Expansion(Campaign/Title Update/that includes Season 1 Ultimate Battlepass) warzone would still keep its own separate battle pass for those who just play Warzone that way they can hire or buy a support studio or two to help with the multiplayer/Warzone parts of the game and free up the teams to make other games alongside the bi-yearly campaigns.
If Microsoft is not allowed to have call of duty in the game pass this format would have better optics and they’ll still make tons of money since you’re adding a whole new platform. They could also give away the expansion as a perk of game pass or give game pass members a coupon (or reward for being a paying Gamepass member for a certain amount of time)once every two years to cover the price of the campaign or people could use the perk/reward to pay toward buying another title.
Call of Duty should be it’s own publisher or they should make a separate publisher (by name only that distributes multi-platform and multiplayer multi-platform games) so there will be no confusion going forward. Every other publishing arm or studio should straight up be Xbox Game Studios even though they will keep being managed and structured as if they were being run independently.
Xbox gaming studios needs to be on the title screen of every game that is exclusive to the Xbox ecosystem. The messaging is bad and has to be fixed in 2023 with Nintendo or Sony you don’t have these questions even with second-party games Nintendo or S.I.E pops up when the game first pops up so you would think they are first-party and know they are exclusive.
They also need to be clear about where you can play Xbox Ecosystem titles not on any device you own. It needs to be known you can play on any mobile device any web browser, Xcloud, Pc and Xbox consoles. Maybe they need to have one Game Pass direct and show people the different ways to access the content and how to differentiate what games can be played on those different devices. Then talk to devs about some of the bigger non Xbox Studio games coming to Game Pass this year. No, Phil Spencer, Sarah Bond, Aaron Greenberg, Pete Hines, or Major Nelson let the people who work on the different access points of Gamepass explain it just like they did with dev diaries.
1 Like
Or better yet, see through Sony’s bullshit and approve the acquisition with no restrictions. 
I know but that’s not Sony’s decision and I can’t see Microsoft agreeing to that. Would be a bad decision in my opinion.
Agreed.
2 Likes
I mean I cant blame Jim for trying, its his job but its also a bad look
I mean even if there’s a 5% chance of success to block Sony would go all in and try but its backfiring now with the subpoena they were slapped with
1 Like
Not anything new in the article, but gamerant just put this out:
1 Like
Rule of article headline questions dictate the answer is No. The article wrongly says the answer is Yes. Its such a bad article.
10 Likes
I see Bungie has dropped Destiny Beyond Light onto PS plus this month.
If I recall, Bungie is supposed to be autonomous? But we all know this is not true. Why aren’t the destiny expansions on Xbox live gold or GamePass ?
As soon as the Bungie deal was confirmed, Destiny content left GamePass, and the destiny content on PC GamePass didnt last long soon after.
Why is Sony, the market leader, allowed to basically do whatever they want but Microsoft isn’t allowed to have exclusives ?
Logic has been defied throughout this whole process, and I hate to use the term but this is clown world territory 
Microsoft shouldn’t need to give a 10 year deal for anything, they should be allowed to make CoD or anything else for that matter exclusive if they so desire, if they own the IP.
22 Likes
I just see it as part of the price, the “10” year thing is the cost. Lubricant on the wang of destiny penetrating the butthole of Playstation.
I also say anyone who claims “removing it” from Playstation isnt financially viable is full of shit. So Microsoft can’t do without $750m every 2 years because its UnSuStAiNaBlE…but can shell out $69B when the opportunity arises?
They’re spending $69B, but they’re spending one asset (cash) into another (video games publisher with strong brands). Diminishing the value of the newly acquired asset would be brazen in case they need to sell the asset.
COD comes with a huge online multiplayer crossplay community. Removing the Playstation community could also diminish the experience for Xbox only owners if they play with Playstation friends. COD will simply be treated like Minecraft by Microsoft, ie. not as console wars ammo. And Minecraft Legends is coming out on all relevant platforms this year.
But we don’t need governments to impose that. The calculus should be done by MS and MS only. Video games are not essential goods and the market remains highly fragmented.
1 Like
The other thing with COD, aside from a whole discussion around affordability etc. is that by virtue of COD being on nearly every platform you deny a competitor a place to build and foster a real competitor. Pull COD off PlayStation and you give someone else a large market, plus demand from a platform holder, to create a true alternative competitor.
If COD is everywhere, a full priced experience, readily available on streaming services, a hard drive space hog, full of grind challenges etc. it’s that much harder to snag the audience away.
To me it’s not really about the money to be made on PlayStation, which is obviously nice on it’s own. It’s a security move to help secure the value of the IP into the future.
4 Likes