Ar¢tos
Member
I'm sure all mobile Activision games, including COD mobile, can be ported to switch quickly.
-
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.
Microsoft’s 10-Year COD Agreement with Nintendo Covers All Future Activision Blizzard Releases, Only COD for Sony
- Thread starter GigaBowser
- Start date
- Business Analysis
- Status
Ansphn
Member
Hilarious all this hype about PlayStation's big loss cause they won't get Activision games except COD when all Activision makes is COD. I don't even see Activision making games for Nintendo like people think. We will start to see so many people leave due to Microsoft only wanting contract work from Developer unless it's different for Activision.
Tal Shiar Agent
Member
I think keeping COD until at least 2034 is worth a lot more money to Sony than maybe 1 or 2 Crash and Tony Hawk games.Sony got the end of the stick thanks to the jim shenanigans
VitoNotVito
Member
Diablo 4 which is on PlayStation just came out and we won't see another one anytime soon, Overwatch seems to be dying and all their other games (except CoD) are available only on PC or mobile (Warcraft, StarCraft, Hearthstone etc).
I wouldn't make a big problem out of it. CoD was the only thing that matters, CoD was the only thing PlayStation needed.
I wouldn't make a big problem out of it. CoD was the only thing that matters, CoD was the only thing PlayStation needed.
DenSho
Neo Member
Guitar Hero: dead
Tony Hawk: MIA, probably dead
World of Warcraft: Never on console, no Xbox nor PS
Starcraft: Only once on console... Nintendo 64
Candy Crush Saga: Never on consoles
Spyro: MIA
Overwatch: F2P GaaS, so probably stays multiplatform
Diablo: Diablo IV made huge numbers... It would be counter-productive to keep it Xbox exclusive, but, hey. "Case by case basis", as Spencer said
Crash: Active IP... yay.
Jimbo got owned. PWNED, even. I can't see him recovering from this. He'll look at himself in the mirror and cry, ashamed of his words and deeds. "I let Guitar Hero slip from my fingers!", he'll say, sobbing.
TheDreadLord
Member
People need to stop with this damage control… Blizz releases are huge… it is a big loss for Sony. Jimbo decided to go for the “block the merger” strategy and it failed miserably. At least they got COD in the end. It could have been much worse.
Tal Shiar Agent
Member
We already got the ultimate Tony Hawk game in 1+2, fantastic Crash and Spyro remakes, and I think by the middling nature of Crash 4 we can't really expect a lot from it going forward.
VitoNotVito
Member
What are those "huge releases"?
Like I've said,t here are only 2 games they have on consoles: Overwatch and Diablo.
The former is quickly fading, the latter is already on PlayStation.
People needs stop the bs.
Are you stupid? Did you read the tweet? They were never "getting them all." Only existing games until 2027- it was a shit deal either way.Sony shot themselves in the foot lol. Could've got it all but threw a shitfit instead. Oh well, hope they're happy with just CoD
Disco Dave
Member
Nintendo have responded to "watered down COD" claims by commissioning development for a "watered down Mario" game for XBox.
Lupin25
Member
So you’re making the assumption, all the while denouncing his, by stating that Nintendo will waive parity clauses?
You don’t know any of that either lol. You read the new agreement just like everyone else.
Anyone cheering this on is approved of major corporate consolidation. Multiplatform franchises will now become exclusives for either platform. Now Sony will choose to retaliate. Less games for everyone.
Yay?
Last edited:
lastmessiah
Member
More games for more people on more platforms actually.
SkylineRKR
Member
Yeah I think so too. We saw a few TH games in the last decade and only the last one was very good but a remake of the first 2 which is all most fans needed. They can remake 3 perhaps and thats sort of it for the franchise.
CoD is in decline too, with even IW dropping the ball on MW imho. But it comes out each year and does still generate numbers.
Doom85
Member
For consoles, Diablo……and? There’s no damage control if you can’t specify this huge loss but just throw out, “no, trust me, guys, they lost a lot……exactly what, well, why do I need to go into specifics?”
GetInTheRobot
Banned
They have that rumored survival game coming out, given the popularity of the survival genre that's probably going to be a big hit.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
I can understand before the agreement some gamers think MS would hoard COD all to themselves even though it’s pretty obvious it’s such a cash cow of course MS isn’t going to cut the cord.
But with the 10 year deal, there’s still gamers thinking MS will sabotage the PS version on purpose during the deal?
That’s like saying Sony making Xbox and Switch versions of The Show, they’ll purposely gimp them.
Makes no sense.
For some reason, people dont understand that even competitors can chum up for sake of the greater good. Even TV and cellphone makers would supply chipsets in competing brands when you’d think they tell them to get lost and find their own parts.
Last edited:
Mephisto40
Member
If that was the case they would have done it already
FoxMcChief
Gold Member
That face gets me every time.
We don't know whats in the works, Blizzard is working on some survival game or something for instance. If they manage to pull off what they did with wow and overwatch (make their genres casual friendly) it could be successful, going on current form it's a long shot but if you never take the shot you can never hit the bullseye.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
MS gets 70%. Sony will be the one getting the 30% e-store cut.
Every dollar Sony makes on Activision games, MS will more than double it.
Bumblebeetuna
Member
Jimbo fucked around and found out.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Are Gaffers just being idiots today or what? What Activision games are we really talking about that Nintendo will get, that Sony wouldn't get?
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
M$ has to pay all of the development and production costs/salaries for these games. Sony just takes a quiet 30% without any overhead or investment.
Robbinhood
Banned
tryDEATH
Member
This is one of those take this and stfu before I change my mind deals.
Once MS beat the FTC this "goodwill" gestures if you can call it that was the best Sony was going to get as they are single-handedly responsible for this deal dragging on and complicating. I would still like to see more details, because I believe they even forced Sony into conceding and allowing this years CoD on launching on GamePass instead of when the marketing deal expires next year.
This was the worse possible outcome for Sony, Jim, and Playstation gamers who will now miss out on many more games.
Once MS beat the FTC this "goodwill" gestures if you can call it that was the best Sony was going to get as they are single-handedly responsible for this deal dragging on and complicating. I would still like to see more details, because I believe they even forced Sony into conceding and allowing this years CoD on launching on GamePass instead of when the marketing deal expires next year.
This was the worse possible outcome for Sony, Jim, and Playstation gamers who will now miss out on many more games.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
MS will still make more money of it than Sony. The better Activision games sell on Sony the more money MS makes.
Del_X
Member
Were these games on Nintendo before? Nope!
ChorizoPicozo
Member
Good
sainraja
Member
Do we know exactly what the original deal was that included all games?
I read, and I can't recall exactly where now... so maybe I'm just confusing things, but the initial deal that was offered wasn't 10 years, and when they changed it to 10 years, MS wanted to keep all profits from MTX, etc. (I think from a cloud perspective), so even Microsoft would have turned that version of the deal down if the shoe was on the other foot.
I read, and I can't recall exactly where now... so maybe I'm just confusing things, but the initial deal that was offered wasn't 10 years, and when they changed it to 10 years, MS wanted to keep all profits from MTX, etc. (I think from a cloud perspective), so even Microsoft would have turned that version of the deal down if the shoe was on the other foot.
Last edited:
crackajack
Member
That judge was either incompetent or had some "lobbying" going on to come to this other conclusion and following the mimimi statements of MS.
FTC at least put on some show, while still continue to fail allowing Disney, Google and facebo.. Meta to become way too big. Buying Fox, Youtube and whatsapp and stuff like that, should never have been allowed. But the real spineless people sit in the EU, always whining about too big tech and whatnot but allowing stuff like this to happen, while siding with the CMA might have actually done something. Preventing MS from acquiring altogether OR if they allow it force them to invest heavily in start ups. Instead of allowing a giant buying themselves to the top, force them to spent that money on new jobs, building new studios all over the world, making more games, more actual competition.
EverydayBeast
thinks Halo Infinite is a new graphical benchmark
We’re days or weeks away from a cod 2023 announcement.
Woopah
Member
In what way?
Do you expect Switch to be the baseline target spec for Mortal Kombat One?
It does have a bunch of Activision games.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
I’m on my phone and dont want to look for it (if I was on my home laptop I would) but just reverently (yesterday) in one of these threads there was proof of email from Spencer’s o Jim Ryan in May 2022 where Spencer offered Sony all Activision games till 2027. It looks like it was revised at some point to 10 years for COD only.
Last edited:
Mephisto40
Member
Crash Bandicoot
Diablo 3
Tony Hawks 1 & 2
Spyro
That's literally it, it has literally none of the games that make activision the biggest chunk of their revenue
FeralEcho
Member
This one? Whenever he opens his mouth its a hurl of shit.Both him and Phil don't believe his lies Spencer need to shut the fuck up.
Kerotan
Member
"Direct competitors are companies that offer the same product (or service) offering as you. However, indirect competition is somewhat different. They are businesses whose product (or service) offerings are different from yours, but could satisfy your customer's needs, and possibly achieve the same goals".
If MS considered Nintendo direct competition they'd wouldn't offer them anymore then they are offering Sony. They're giving Sony the bare minimum.
djjinx2
Member
Series X version running in the cloud??
Long Far Gone
Member
CoD is not just 'only CoD for Sony'. That game makes bank, so much money for Sony, it is ludicrous. Everything else is chaff, let's be honest, and that's coming from someone who is lukewarm regarding the franchise. What this buys Sony is time, time to develop some sort of in-house rival product, unlikely given Sony's past history, or time for the CoD franchise to peter out, again, fairly unlikely. Basically, Bungie is going to have to deliver the goods for Sony or they are f***ked.
Rykan
Member
Nope. Thread and article title is wrong. That's not what was offered to ANY company. NO company was offered all AB content.
It's crazy how this narrative is now being formed because some "GaMe JourNaliSt" can't do his job properly.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked