Swift_Star
Banned
15*12 = 180
$70+60 = 130
130<180
It's still cheaper to pay por full game and plus annually.
-
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.
Bloomberg: Microsoft will keep publishing Activision titles on PlayStation
- Thread starter GrayChild
- Start date
$70+60 = 130
130<180
It's still cheaper to pay por full game and plus annually.
justiceiro
Marlboro: Other M
Yeah, yeah, just like starfield, right?
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Unless they throw out quick and dirty remasters at retail. That'll count as one of the three I reckon.
I don't do MMOs but can't you play games like 76 ? I see them in the game pass catalog. I thought you can play but need to buy the expansions
Ass of Can Whooping
Member
You don't seriously believe this do you lol
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Which part, that they will release remasters at retail ? Wasn't that in the rumor mills a couple of days back anyway that they're planning to remaster the black ops games to supplement the lack of a new release next year ?
Last edited:
Topher
Gold Member
No, nothing like Starfield at all actually. Kind of the point.
Leyasu
Banned
Fallout 76 is there, but you still need to pay to play
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Thanks, I didn't know that.
To can of ass whooping (sorry can't seem to @ using phone), this is what I was talking about:
Call of Duty Classics Reportedly Being Remastered to Make Up for Lack of Annual Releases
Call of Duty may be abandoning its annual release schedule, but reportedly, remasters of some old favorites may pick up the slack.
www.google.com
Ass of Can Whooping
Member
That you think a remaster constitutes as a replacement for a mainline title for Sony's deal
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
I would imagine any such deal constitutes a retail product, a collection of remastered games with modern MP should count as one.
Ass of Can Whooping
Member
I don't think I need to explain the cost implication between a mainline title and a remaster.
Punished Miku
Gold Member
3rd place console maker
. The leap from "Xbox has no games" to "Xbox is a monopoly" continues to break my brain.
MasterCornholio
Member
Depending on how the contract was written that could be illegal for them to do that.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
No, but then again we're talking in hypotheticals about deals and contracts right now anyway.
Ah well, I apologize if it feels like we're going in circles. I just don't feel theres any reason for the COD games not to release on GP day one after the deal closes.
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
It's not that black and white. Large mergers get shot down all the time even when other competition exists if they feel it rises to certain level. For instance AT&T and T-Mobile's merger was rejected, even though Verizon is bigger than either.3rd place console maker
The FTC is reviewing the MS/Activision merger closely. MS is not taking for granted that it will go through.
Ass of Can Whooping
Member
I mean, it should go without saying that Sony would have to be employing some backstreet lawyers if Activision could get away with giving Sony a remaster in lieu of an actual new COD title
MasterCornholio
Member
I’m pretty sure if Sony wanted it to be applied to new titles they would have it in the contract. Activision isn’t going to screw them over unless it doesn’t violate whatever contract they signed.
My personal opinion I’m pretty sure Sony wanted it with new games and not quick and dirty remasters.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Time to donate to more super pacs!
Topher
Gold Member
MasterCornholio
Member
Apparently this is Sony's legal team based on what I've read here.....
I know Sony isn’t as wealthy as Microsoft but they can certainly afford some good lawyers. If Sony wanted the deal to include remasters it would be stated in the contract. However I don’t think Sony is that dumb and instead made the deal for new titles. Plus they probably take into consideration any possible delays as well.
TheGodfather07
Member
That's the point I'm trying to make to him. I don't know what the hell he is going on about?
Swift_Star
Banned
People don’t know basic math.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Yes if that's the only one game you plan to buy and engage with absolutely nothing all year. Your math checks out.
Unfortunately the scenario itself doesn't check out for arguably 99% of people playing games.
Swift_Star
Banned
You’re moving goalposts. We’re talking about people who only play CoD. Your point is moot and adds nothing to the discussion.
It’s objectively cheaper to buy the game and pay annually to the subscription. Be it gold or plus.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
This topic is about Activision games, and there's usually more than one in a given year.
If you want to relegate Activision to just 1 game that's on you, same goes for anyone who wants to justify/count sub costs just using 1 game as a determining factor, which is an unrealistic scenario.
The original chain of quotes is filled with a lot of illegible all caps sentences anyway so it's not clear in the first place lol.
Last edited:
Swift_Star
Banned
Threes nothing to add to this conversation. Your point is still moot.
3liteDragon
Member
Lmao I thought we’ve been through this convo before.
ANIMAL1975
Member
.
Lognor
Banned
What's the reasoning behind it not being on Game Pass day one when every single other Microsoft game has been?
onesvenus
Member
That's not true.
Source: me who is playing without paying anything else at all.
ESO is the same way
dcmk7
Banned
DarkMage619
$MSFT
I was going to say I played ESO and didn't have to pay anything extra. I think it's the expansions that cost money and I believe it's just a single discounted price.
SteadyEvo
Member
Microsoft Buys Scandal-Tainted Activision in Bet on Metaverse
Microsoft Corp. plans to buy Activision Blizzard Inc. for $68.7 billion, acquiring a legendary game publisher responsible for franchises like Call of Duty and World of Warcraft, but recently roiled by claims of sexual misconduct and discrimination.www.bloomberg.com
There you go. Sony isn't going anywhere and the Playstation brand will be perfectly fine.
JIM RYAN IS GOD!
Didn’t get the memo that COD was essential to console success. Somebody contact Nintendo! They haven’t had COD in years! They’re going under
Leyasu
Banned
Ok thanks for the correction. Not long ago I was going to redeem a GPU reward for Fallout 76 with idea of starting it. When I went to redeem it, it flashed up a message that it would start a monthly payment. I quickly backed out. That was why I wrongly thought/assumed that you had to pay to play
Saber
Gold Member
I believe I said before, what I think could be a possibility. CoD worths too much money(it sells even when its bad) and Microsoft wants that return of money. The best way to regain that money is to keep the contracts with Sony(after all it still sells way way better there, going to exclusivity now would be dumb) and remain it away from GP, that way the only way to people to keep playing would still be paying for it.
Mr Moose
Member
If they don't do GamePass day one it'll be because they will have them separate from Xbox Game Studios and will remain as just Activision.
Kinda like Sony and Bungie will be.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
Significantly cheaper,I know a few people who do this and only play COD.
Banjo64
cumsessed
Can’t even name a single game worth paying for online for anymore.
Rocket League, Warzone, Apex Legends and Halo all free to play.
Regular CoD, Battlefield or Gears? No thanks.
FIFA? Possibly, but if PES can sort their shit out this year their game play has always been better than FIFA, and it’s now free to play.
Gold used to be compelling because I needed it for Halo 3 & Reach, Modern Warefare 1&2, Gears 1-3, Battlefield 3. Nowadays the best multiplayer games seem to be free to play.
Lognor
Banned
But Skyrim is also worth "too much money" and yet the spiritual successor, Starfield, will be on Game Pass day one. The next Elder Scrolls will be on Game Pass day one. Halo was on Game Pass day one. Forza was on Game Pass day one. Gears was on Game Pass day one. ALL of Microsoft's titles have been on Game Pass day one. COD will soon be a Microsoft title. So it stands to reason that it too will be on Game Pass day one.
That's a slippery slope for Microsoft to being choosing which of their games will be on Game Pass day one. People are buying Xbox consoles and signing up for Game Pass because of the Activision acquisition. And you expect Microsoft to say that they will not be on Game Pass and instead you need to pay $70 for the title? Nah. Microsoft doesn't want that blowback. They bought Activision understanding they would have to put those games on Game Pass day one. This is simple fear mongering. Yes, if you are on PC or a Playstation you will need to spend $70 for COD. Xbox owners will not. No need to spread misinformation. It won't change the tide.
MScarpa
Member
Regain that money huh? So they lost 75 billion in a couch cushion or what?
Topher
Gold Member
Why wouldn't Call of Duty be available on Game Pass for PC? Either way, Xbox fans will have to pay the monthly subscription fee or buy it outright. You make it sound like they get it for free.
Regain that money huh? So they lost 75 billion in a couch cushion or what?
That's money going to the stockholders so either way it isn't in Microsoft's bank anymore.
Saber
is saying they want a return on that investment.
Last edited:
Lognor
Banned
Yep, you're right. If you have Game Pass on PC you get to play it there for "free" day one, subject to the subscription fee. But it's silly to think Microsoft will begin to pick and choose which of their games go on Game Pass day one. Of course COD will be on Game Pass day one.Why wouldn't Call of Duty be available on Game Pass for PC? Either way, Xbox fans will have to pay the monthly subscription fee or buy it outright. You make it sound like they get it for free.
That's money going to the stockholders so either way it isn't in Microsoft's bank anymore.
MScarpa
Member
So you're saying it doesn't matter where the money went, it's just not in MS bank anymore. Am I understanding this correctly?Why wouldn't Call of Duty be available on Game Pass for PC? Either way, Xbox fans will have to pay the monthly subscription fee or buy it outright. You make it sound like they get it for free.
That's money going to the stockholders so either way it isn't in Microsoft's bank anymore.
Topher
Gold Member
That's fine. It's just not free at all.
I didn't say "it doesn't matter where the money went". I said it went (or will go) to the Activision stockholders.
Last edited:
MScarpa
Member
EITHER WAY. Try again though. People on here thinking they need to somehow recoup their money is hilarious.Why wouldn't Call of Duty be available on Game Pass for PC? Either way, Xbox fans will have to pay the monthly subscription fee or buy it outright. You make it sound like they get it for free.
That's money going to the stockholders so either way it isn't in Microsoft's bank anymore.
Ass of Can Whooping
Member
EITHER WAY. Try again though. People on here thinking they need to somehow recoup their money is hilarious.
Shouldn't you be playing some games instead of this back and forth bickering?
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked