At this point removing the PS5 from the equation shouldn’t impact anything since it’s being constrained by the chip shortage.
This console isn’t the PS4 with a massive player base and will never be at this point. Microsoft has a way bigger share of the market with Xbox + PC + cloud, playstation is meaningless.
Why are folks just pretending like Phil’s tweets saying otherwise never happened? CoD will remain multiplat.
Assurances doesn’t neccessarily mean they are having to concede anything
Could be asking if they were planning on pulling all content from other places or planning on jacking prices up etc rather than “you gotta keep making these games for everyone”
Until 2023 yes, after it? Only Warzone 2.
Those “assurances” could mean literally anything. His follow up tweets are incredibly vague as well and could also mean pretty much anything. Also, if you read a lot of his other tweets, he seems to lie constantly. Not shocking since he’s a politician, but trying to infer great meaning from what he says seems like a waste of time to me.
Regardless, I don’t think they would give up control of their rights to determine IP exclusivity without explicitly being told to do so. I could see them “expressing their desires” to keep it multiplatform, but outright saying “yes we will in perpetuity” seems like something they and their lawyers would shy away from.
It would be like going on a job interview and saying “Oh, I would be willing to work unlimited overtime!” before they even asked you about it. 
I think they’ll be releasing the multiplayer version of CoD on everything they can anyway, so none of this probably matters in the long run. I guess we’ll find out in a few to 12 months.
I think most people here have heard about it and read it, but most aren’t drawing the same definitive conclusions you seem to be. You’ve been pretty condescending about this whole thing btw.
That Phil tweet is PR Hall of fame worthy because it could absolutely mean anything.
No, because the same arguments could be done for Sony with Spiderman, Street fighter and all the timed exclusives sigled for its platform. It’s the business, nothing more and XBOX It could buy another big publisher and remaining the third actor into the scene. All Platforms are trying to be the best Place to play.
If MS has to give assurances that means they are conceding something that an otherwise more aggressive MS would not want to concede. Especially when read in conjunction with Sony’s comment and Phil’s comment. People here can desperately nitpick what Phil said and try to twist it to mean whatever they want, but the direct and common sense reading is far and away the most aligned with his intention.
I’ll add that MS doesn’t need CoD exclusive to pull those gamers into their ecosystem either, contrary to popular belief.
No, those assurances could be absolutely anything and you’re making assumptions
The truth is none of us know anything beyond Xbox and Phil keeping contracts in place and CoD on PS until at least 2023
See Ken Buck’s tweet that I cited earlier in the thread (not too many posts up). He says MS gave him specific assurances related to access to titles (not access to the ecosystem, access to specific titles) as well as marketplace competition. Take that along with Phil saying CoD will remain on PlayStation and Sony’s comments saying the same thing.
Now it could be that MS had no intention of ever making CoD exclusive in the first place, but I would highly doubt that (for same reasons Grubb noted where he references the decision making with Zenimax deal).
Thanks. I saw it shortly after posting and deleted the post, but you’re too fast for me. 
I had seen that, I just thought your reference to “congress” meant actual congress in some kind of hearing, not a conversation with an individual congressman.
Xbox not putting call of duty on a single platform is not the difference between this deal being passed or not, sorry.
What is this blanket assertion based on, specifically? Hoeg disagrees and he would know better than us…
He is basing his opinion on Phil Spencer’s tweet nothing else.
Ha, I felt bad after seeing you deleted the question. 
Worth remember is he is the central player here wrt how the regs the FTC follows end up looking, so he isn’t a random rep in this context.
All this tells me is you have never watched any of his podcast appearances or channel vids related to the topic and somehow think you can speak for him anyhow…
I actually have and he has never definitively made any statements like you continue to claim he has. He thinks call of duty could be multiplat based on what Phil Spencer has tweeted and that’s it.
No he says repeatedly that he is confident the plain reading of the tweet is the correct one and he is in no way, shape or form only gleaning that position just from a single tweet as you claim.