[PLEASE READ STAFF POST] Microsoft says they have committed to Sony that they will keep Call of Duty and other titles on Playstation "beyond the existing agreement and into the future so that Sony fans can continue to enjoy the games they love."

[TheBrightestSun]

@Doncabesa

If they fix Activision Blizzard they have some insane talent and incredible IPs to work with. That’s the main hope for me.

Blizzard is a huge treasure trove.

[Deadwing88]

@TheBrightestSun

A lot of neat features comes from the Creation Engine that BGS uses. Even The Outer Worlds did not feel the same as other BGS games.

Yeah… Josh Sawyer consistently heaps praise on the Creative Engine… he’s been rather critical of Unreal, that it isn’t entirely suited to the development process of a open world RPG.

[Shpeshal_Nick]

@Staffy

But I wonder, could it also because before a deal is closed they are not allowed to make a definitive statement

You hit the nail on the head here.

Which I said back when this deal was first announced

They can’t say anything concrete until it’s done.

[Shpeshal_Nick]

@Xplainin

Theres no way MS dont keep them multiplatform after putting that out. The hate they would get for not sticking by it is something new MS just would not do.

I suspect that as they continue to get bigger and bigger and acquire more and more, the “media hate” and “social media backlash” will matter less and less to them

[Mort]

@Doncabesa

If they fix Activision Blizzard they have some insane talent and incredible IPs to work with. That’s the main hope for me.

Yeah, I guess so. But if the CoD-factory keeps on going we might not see much of that. Let’s hope MS is less hands-off with this acquisition and steps in properly to sort that mess out.

As it stands though, I get more good games out of Obsidian alone than the whole of Acti-Blizz… lol.

[Doncabesa (Jesse Norris)]

@Mort

Yeah, I guess so. But if the CoD-factory keeps on going we might not see much of that. Let’s hope MS is less hands-off with this acquisition and steps in properly to sort that mess out.

As it stands though, I get more good games out of Obsidian alone than the whole of Acti-Blizz… lol.

Zero chance it happens, it only happened because ABK was so reliant on growth that way. Xbox is very much not and they will take their time rebuilding just how that publishing arm works. Zero chance cod stays as broken development wise as it is now. Phil already hinting at all the IP he would love to see being worked on and whatnot gives me hope.

[Proven]

Richard Hoeg

I agree with this

[Mort]

@Doncabesa

Zero chance it happens, it only happened because ABK was so reliant on growth that way. Xbox is very much not and they will take their time rebuilding just how that publishing arm works. Zero chance cod stays as broken development wise as it is now. Phil already hinting at all the IP he would love to see being worked on and whatnot gives me hope.

It would be great to see! I’m not convinced yet, but I certainly hope for the best.

[PashaPlays]

@Shpeshal_Nick

I mean it’s english isn’t it?

“making them available”. Making what available? Existing games? New games? Old games? Some games? Only Call of Duty games? Which Call of Duty games? Only Infinity Ward ones?

Again, why not just say “All new Activision Blizzard games in development both now and in the future will continue to remain multiplatform as they have been to this point”. That seems WAY more clear cut to me. But maybe that’s just me.

The wording they’re using is leaving them soooooo much wriggle room and there’s no way it’s not intentional.

Initially while reading about the statement from MS I was under the impression that MS made some concrete statement about releasing all future games from ABK on PlayStation, but after actually reading the blog I came away with the exact same conclusion as you.

If someone writes “Suzi went to a store and bought some groceries. Then she brought them back home.” I feel like it’s quite easy to understand that “them” in the second sentence is direct reference to the groceries that she acquired during that trip, and not about all groceries she will ever buy in the future.

Same thing here, the MS blog states:

“To be clear, Microsoft will continue to make Call of Duty and other popular Activision Blizzard titles available on PlayStation through the term of any existing agreement with Activision. And we have committed to Sony that we will also make them available on PlayStation beyond the existing agreement and into the future so that Sony fans can continue to enjoy the games they love.”

The “them” in the second sentence is a very obvious reference to titles mentioned in the first, that is titles that are under an existing agreement with Activision, and not all future releases.

This new statement from MS is just nothing new in my opinion, in fact if you re-read Phil Spencer tweet about having a call with Sony, it is shockingly similar to what we have here.

It almost feels like people see the word “future” in that blog post and that somehow gets auto-corrected in their brain to read “future titles”, which leads them into interpreting the message in a different way.

[TheBrightestSun]

@Doncabesa

Zero chance it happens, it only happened because ABK was so reliant on growth that way. Xbox is very much not and they will take their time rebuilding just how that publishing arm works. Zero chance cod stays as broken development wise as it is now. Phil already hinting at all the IP he would love to see being worked on and whatnot gives me hope.

The problem is that just like with a lot of GaaS it requires a lot of staff to work on those games. I mean will they retire Warzone or will support it for some years? And then there is Warzone 2. We won’t be able to get anything from those COD studios for the next 5 years at least.

Blizzard is in much better situation though.

@Proven

I agree with this

I don’t because HoegLaw relies too much on that “microtransaction” argument. There is Warzone already and Warzone 2 is coming. He is kinda similar to Grubb with his Game Pass with only first party titles on Playstation argument. COD campaign is not required to be released on other platform. Does COD mainline have a multiplayer or the content goes straight to Warzone?

[pg2g]

I think this is ultimately the right choice and one supported by whatever analysis they have done. The math they did with Zenimax suggested they’d be down $500 million. The math with Activision is simply not the same. You don’t just throw away ~2 billion (my guess) of revenue.

[Doncabesa (Jesse Norris)]

@TheBrightestSun

I don’t because HoegLaw relies too much on that “microtransaction” argument. There is Warzone already and Warzone 2 is coming. He is kinda similar to Grubb with his Game Pass with only first party titles on Playstation argument. COD campaign is not required to be released on other platform. Does COD mainline have a multiplayer or the content goes straight to Warzone?

Yeah I think a dev like Raven will primarily stay on Warzone but they won’t require 10 devs always working full time on a yearly cod release. IW and Treyarch doing bi-annual releases in a more sustainable fashion frees up so many teams to work on other stuff right away.

[Sydle]

Big picture, thinking over the course of this generation and through the next into the 2030s, it’s a smart play by Microsoft to extend their games and services onto more platforms now.

It serves several purposes:

Build Brand Awareness Globally. All of Microsoft’s newly acquired games will eventually require Microsoft / Xbox accounts. It gets Xbox more players and it gets the brand out there on games played by millions globally on Nintendo and PlayStation consoles in regions where the Xbox brand has struggled to grow. Want info on WoW, CoD, OW, etc.? Then tune into Xbox events and news. Want to try out any of those games on the go? Try Game Pass on your laptop and/or Mobile. This will snowball over enough time and may make people think twice before their next console purchase.

Increase Engagement for Franchise Growth. Keeps more players engaged on big franchises to make sure they stay big franchises and leaves less room for emerging franchises to take a foothold. Again, over enough time, as game streaming takes its foothold, those communities could naturally migrate to Game Pass on their PCs, phones, and TVs. Why risk shrinking them? Why leave any gaps on PlayStation that may make it easier for their upcoming GaaS titles to succeed?

Make it Tough for Competing Streaming Services. A stronger combination of Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony in the short term means less options and gamer time for competition like Apple, Netflix, and Meta.

Get Less Scrutiny on More Acquisitions. My reaction to today’s news was wildly different than most. If Microsoft plays their cards right now, while consoles still matter, they gain the advantages above, while also taking less scrutiny when they inevitably scoop up more studios and publishers worldwide. I think another publisher before ABK is totally int he cards. I have very little doubt that Xbox will be number one in gaming revenue through acquisitions by the close of this decade. That promise to bring games to multiple platforms means less and less as streaming subscriptions grow over the next 10 years.

Big Picture. Fast forward to 2030 and you want to play a ABK game and you know it’s available on your phone, TV, or laptop without the need for a console or $70 purchase. Do you really believe most people are still considering buying a $500 console and planning to spend $70 per game when they can get tons of stuff from a Game Pass subscription on devices they already own? That migration to streaming services is going to happen. Not quickly, but it’s happening, and Microsoft has put itself in a position to be the leader of that landscape, with no signs they are done building for the future.

[BRiT]

@Proven

Im going to remove the slow down

[Knottian (Daniel)]

@BRiT

Believe me… we’re all thinking that…

[power]

ActiBliz goes multiplat, King goes exclusive.

[saintsflow20]

@Charga

I get some people in here are frustrated but you can’t be serious with this take. Call of Duty is a massive get for Game Pass, People go nuts when games like Outriders, B4B, R6 Extraction, A Plague Tale hit GP day 1 even though those games are still on PlayStation, but Call of Duty isn’t a needle mover

The type of casuals I am talking about, don’t even know what any of those are. I am even halfway convinced they do not know what Game Pass is yet. I am talking about the types who’s sole gaming experiences are picking up the yearly CoD and some sports games and maybe playing 20 hours worth in of those games a year. These people are the bulk of CoD’s sales.

[Helios1]

@Doncabesa

I simply do not understand the logic behind this line of thinking. They’re spending more than ever on the platform, how does that hurt you investing in it as a customer?

It’s the resentment of being treated like second class citizens because one side money hats for exclusivity while Xbox supposedly is giving their own first party games to rivals

That being said after really REALLY thinking about it something seems very off

People can say what they want but MS are absolutely masters of crafting words and statements

“Make available”

“Well we never said we’d put new games on Playstation”

[Helios1]

@Charga

I get some people in here are frustrated but you can’t be serious with this take. Call of Duty is a massive get for Game Pass, People go nuts when games like Outriders, B4B, R6 Extraction, A Plague Tale hit GP day 1 even though those games are still on PlayStation, but Call of Duty isn’t a needle mover

Bruh I don’t know anyone who was going nuts over Rainbow Six Extraction, that game was hot smelly doo doo butt cakes and even Ubisoft knew it hence why they took the check from MS

[pg2g]

There is a not so far off future where most gamers will be doing most of their gaming on subscription services. Having CoD (and other large IP) exclusive to your subscription service is major.