Support NeoGAF

[adamsapple]

Profits for Xbox or the Entertainment and Devices Division?

Also what % of the business was it?

PS I kinda hope you are a MS shitposter*

* Fixed

 

[sainraja]

Starfield isn’t a live service game in a crowded live service field.

Microsoft already has the example from Halo about how a prominent GaaS franchise can decline when the base moves on. There is no way they don’t make COD a multiplatform for years to come.

Agreed.

They can take a leaf from Sony’s book and invest in making xbox the best platform to play Call of Duty. Timed DLC, early betas and Gamepass day one.

Let's not pretend that Microsoft didn't do the same with COD during the Xbox 360 generation. They laid the groundwork.

 

[C2brixx]

I wonder when other regulators will approve it then. Europe set a deadline to September I believe. Other - no idea.

The UK and Australia said they will make a decision BY September 1. Therefore their approval could come in August as well. Microsoft has representatives in all these countries talking to the authorities so they are all in sync on the timeline.

 

[Morrie’s wig shop]

Or Activision will continue to be on PlayStation across the board. Microsoft has said they will operate independently. Everything I'm reading suggests they are not going to dictate what platforms AB will publish for.

But what if that doesn’t happen, then what?
I think Cod will continue to be on PS but not forever.

 

[Topher]

But what if that doesn’t happen, then what?

Then MS will have some explaining to do.

 

[Hezekiah]

* Fixed

Wait, no GamePass plugs for us?!

 

[The_Mike]

Bull shit. Sony owns Destiny. Call of Duty is just another FPS in what is arguably the most over-saturated gaming genre. If Call of Duty was the only military FPS on the market you'd have an argument there, but it's laughable with so many other games in the genre.

Name other fps games that bring the same fps as cod.

 

[Morrie’s wig shop]

Then MS will have some explaining to do.

So they have to oblige to some kind of regulation agreement??? I’m so out of the loop with what companies are allowed or not allowed to do after a buyout.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

So they have to oblige to some kind of regulation agreement??? I’m so out of the loop with what companies are allowed or not allowed to do after a buyout.

If they made a promise to the FTC that they will release every future CoD on Playstation, and then they go on and break that promise, the FTC could sue them.

I don't think they ever made that promise.

 

[Morrie’s wig shop]

If they made a promise to the FTC that they will release every future CoD on Playstation, and then they go on and break that promise, the FTC could sue them.

I don't think they ever made that promise.

So this is all wishful thinking.
Did Microsoft ever confirm that they promised the FTC that they will continue to release COD games on the PlayStation?
Did the FTC ever confirm that Microsoft promised to keep Cod on the PlayStation?
This all sounds like a 5 year olds fantasy of the way they think things are going to play out.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

So this is all wishful thinking.
Did Microsoft ever confirm that they promised the FTC that they will continue to release COD games on the PlayStation?
Did the FTC ever confirm that Microsoft promised to keep Cod on the PlayStation?
This all sounds like a 5 year olds fantasy of the way they think things are going to play out. happening

They can do what they want after the buyout. The issue revolves around their transparency with regulators. Microsoft is trying to have a positive relationship with the FTC and the like and not being open and transparent does the opposite of that.

If you believe that Microsoft is just going to turn around and claim on a technicality that they didn't say all COD games would be on PS, then you also believe they're trying to be deceitful to get this thing through the doors

 

[CaptainSlayAHo]

We'll see. Starfield isn't an already established IP like Minecraft and COD.

They've already stated elder scrolls 6 will be pc and xbox only

 

[CaptainSlayAHo]

.

 

[Morrie’s wig shop]

They can do what they want after the buyout. The issue revolves around their transparency with regulators. Microsoft is trying to have a positive relationship with the FTC and the like and not being open and transparent does the opposite of that.

If you believe that Microsoft is just going to turn around and claim on a technicality that they didn't say all COD games would be on PS, then you also believe they're trying to be deceitful to get this thing through the doors

I get it man, we would all love it if these companies were all noble and to continue to support their competitors console with up and coming legacy titles. But Microsoft has been a company for 48 years, the FTC knows exactly who Microsoft is.

If this deal goes through sometime next month and Microsoft decides that this years COD is the last time a COD appears on a PlayStation console, the FTC isn’t going to concern themselves with it. They already approved the deal Activision is now owned by Microsoft, it’s theirs to do with what they wish.

The same goes for Bungie. I don’t care what their writing in blog posts about all of their games going on all platforms. If they decide by their next game reveal that Xbox can go fuck itself. The FTC isn’t going to concern themselves with this, the deal is done they are the ones who approved it. Sony owns Bungie it’s their company.

Now I wonder if there has been a case where the FTC approved a deal and turned around and sued afterwards?

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

Now I wonder if there has been a case where the FTC approved a deal and turned around and sued afterwards?

Well, they tried with Facebook and Whatsapp but it was not that successful. But it was mainly a political issue.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

I get it man, we would all love it if these companies were all noble and to continue to support their competitors console with up and coming legacy titles. But Microsoft has been a company for 48 years, the FTC knows exactly who Microsoft is.

If this deal goes through sometime next month and Microsoft decides that this years COD is the last time a COD appears on a PlayStation console, the FTC isn’t going to concern themselves with it. They already approved the deal Activision is now owned by Microsoft, it’s theirs to do with what they wish.

The same goes for Bungie. I don’t care what their writing in blog posts about all of their games going on all platforms. If they decide by their next game reveal that Xbox can go fuck itself. The FTC isn’t going to concern themselves with this, the deal is done they are the ones who approved it. Sony owns Bungie it’s their company.

Now I wonder if there has been a case where the FTC approved a deal and turned around and sued afterwards?

Yes, the FTC is concerned with whether Microsoft is being truthful to them or not. This shouldn't even be debateable.

 

[Topher]

So this is all wishful thinking.
Did Microsoft ever confirm that they promised the FTC that they will continue to release COD games on the PlayStation?
Did the FTC ever confirm that Microsoft promised to keep Cod on the PlayStation?
This all sounds like a 5 year olds fantasy of the way they think things are going to play out.

Why is it a five year old fantasy to believe Microsoft will do what they said they would do? And yes, MS told the FTC they would continue publishing COD for PlayStation just as they have with Minecraft.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

MS told the FTC they would continue publishing COD for PlayStation just as they have with Minecraft.

Nah, what they "promised" (and blogpost is not a binding statement at all) is to keep the games available aka "we won't remove them from PSN after the purchase". And it should not be even considered a promise because COD is set of games.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Nah, what they "promised" (and blogpost is not a binding statement at all) is to keep the games available aka "we won't remove them from PSN after the purchase". And it should not be even considered a promise because COD is set of games.

You keep getting hung up on binding statements like that's the only thing that matters

Regulators are going to remember if you bullshitted them on a technicality. Whether it's in contract or not

 

[Topher]

Nah, what they "promised" (and blogpost is not a binding statement at all) is to keep the games available aka "we won't remove them from PSN after the purchase". And it should not be even considered a promise because COD is set of games.

I'm trying to find the article where this was reported, but the publicly available documents that Microsoft submitted to the FTC specifically used Minecraft as the example they would follow.

 

[Schmick]

Nah, what they "promised" (and blogpost is not a binding statement at all) is to keep the games available aka "we won't remove them from PSN after the purchase". And it should not be even considered a promise because COD is set of games.

I think what some are trying to say is.... FTC will remember if you back down on a promise which could have an impact on the next acquisition.

 

[Morrie’s wig shop]

You keep getting hung up on binding statements like that's the only thing that matters

Regulators are going to remember if you bullshitted them on a technicality. Whether it's in contract or not

Binding statements are the only thing that hold up in court, sadly.

Who are these regulators? Have they made official statements on the deal and what Microsoft has promised in this deal to them to put people at ease.

 

[CaptainSlayAHo]

I'm trying to find the article where this was reported, but the publicly available documents that Microsoft submitted to the FTC specifically used Minecraft as the example they would follow.

And I'm sure that's how they'll treat warzone and it's expansions

I'm having an extremely difficult time seeing them put mainline games on playstation though, it's just such an easy way to draw people over in droves to their own marketplace

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Binding statements are the only thing that hold up in court, sadly.

Who are these regulators? Have they made official statements on the deal and what Microsoft has promised in this deal to them to put people at ease.

Are you the type of person that thinks the court of public opinion also doesn't matter?

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

I'm trying to find the article where this was reported, but the publicly available documents that Microsoft submitted to the FTC specifically used Minecraft as the example they would follow.

We actually don't have doocuments submitted to FTC. We have some ABK related SEC or something. But the main point about Minecraft has always been - upon the acquisition Minecraft was already available on all other platforms and later I think Switch version came (don't remember when mobile version happened).

I fully expect either Warzone F2P to come to Switch or COD Mobile. COD has too many F2P entries.

 

[Topher]

We actually don't have doocuments submitted to FTC. We have some ABK related SEC or something. But the main point about Minecraft has always been - upon the acquisition Minecraft was already available on all other platforms and later I think Switch version came (don't remember when mobile version happened).

I fully expect either Warzone F2P to come to Switch or COD Mobile.

Minecraft: Dungeons was a stand alone title which published on PlayStation as well. Same scenario.

And I'm sure that's how they'll treat warzone and it's expansions

I'm having an extremely difficult time seeing them put mainline games on playstation though, it's just such an easy way to draw people over in droves to their own marketplace

Nah.....we have the VP of the company making sweeping statements and saying they are dong this because it is the "right thing to do". I have an extremely hard time believing he says stuff like that and then yanks everything back except Warzone. No way.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Minecraft: Dungeons was a stand alone title which published on PlayStation as well. Same scenario.

And there's that legends game they recently announced

 

[Morrie’s wig shop]

I think what some are trying to say is.... FTC will remember if you back down on a promise which could have an impact on the next acquisition.

Okay then, just say this Jesus. I guess that leads to the question of, is always the same regulators?

 

[Forsythia]

Just like the bungie deal, this deal doesn't benefit us other than I'll play a couple of their games on gamepass instead of buying them on sale in a year or two.

Well it sure does benefit PC and Xbox gamers as they don't have to deal with bullshit timed exclusive DLC/modes anymore. That's an added benefit on top of Game Pass.

 

[Morrie’s wig shop]

Are you the type of person that thinks the court of public opinion also doesn't matter?

Who’s public opinion, PlayStation ONLY fans?

 

[Topher]

And there's that legends game they recently announced

Yeah....forgot about that one. If Minecraft is the template they are using then looks like PlayStation fans have little to worry about.

Who’s public opinion, PlayStation ONLY fans?

Hardly. If Microsoft does what some here are claiming then they will be raked over the coals by the gaming industry for being, at the very least, disingenuous if not being complete liars. Thankfully I think they have more integrity than some here are willing to credit them with.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Who’s public opinion, PlayStation ONLY fans?

Good lord.

Just because you win in court doesn't you're looked at favourably by the public

Likewise just because Microsoft might be right on some technicality doesn't mean they'll be looked at favourably by regulators

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

verdecrociato

What the hell is this supposed to mean?

 

[oldergamer]

Agreed.


Let's not pretend that Microsoft didn't do the same with COD during the Xbox 360 generation. They laid the groundwork.

Lets agree that MS did not pay extra for that on the 360. It was the easier of the 2 platforms, and had a unified network for distributing and selling addons. It was on xbox first because it was quick and easy.

 

[Morrie’s wig shop]

Yeah....forgot about that one. If Minecraft is the template they are using then looks like PlayStation fans have little to worry about.




Hardly. If Microsoft does what some here are claiming then they will be raked over the coals by the gaming industry for being, at the very least, disingenuous if not being complete liars. Thankfully I think they have more integrity than some here are willing to credit them with.

It’s a hard pill to swallow, but I honestly think at some point it’s only going to be Warzone, just like ESO and Fallout76. Though they did put Quake up on PSN. But what about a new quake title? There’s Overwatch and Diablo 4 also, but then what about Diablo 5?

Also I’m sure if IPs like WOW make there way over to console that it will be there on PS day and date with Xbox.
Also who is claiming they would get raked over the coals?

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Lets agree that MS did not pay extra for that on the 360. It was the easier of the 2 platforms, and had a unified network for distributing and selling addons. It was on xbox first because it was quick and easy.

That's a nice fantasy you have

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

It’s a hard pill to swallow, but I honestly think at some point it’s only going to be Warzone, just like ESO and Fallout76. Though they did put Quake up on PSN. But what about a new quake title? There’s Overwatch and Diablo 4 also, but then what about Diablo 5?

Also I’m sure if IPs like WOW make there way over to console that it will be there on PS day and date with Xbox.
Also who is claiming they would get raked over the coals?

We're talking about COD because that's the franchise they were specific with. Who knows whether Diablo 5 would be on PS or not.

 

[Topher]

It’s a hard pill to swallow, but I honestly think at some point it’s only going to be Warzone, just like ESO and Fallout76. Though they did put Quake up on PSN. But what about a new quake title? There’s Overwatch and Diablo 4 also, but then what about Diablo 5?

Microsoft has been clear that they will not be doing things like they did with Bethesda. I think all your big games that have been on PS like Overwatch, Call of Duty, and Diablo will remain on PS indefinitely.

Also I’m sure if IPs like WOW make there way over to console that it will be there on PS day and date with Xbox.
Also who is claiming they would get raked over the coals?

I'm saying it would be a PR nightmare for Microsoft. I mean.....that's obvious. People are going to say exactly what some here are saying that MS only said things in order to get past the FTC and that they were full of shit the entire time.

 

[Fess]

Microsoft has been clear that they will not be doing things like they did with Bethesda. I think all your big games that have been on PS like Overwatch, Call of Duty, and Diablo will remain on PS indefinitely.



I'm saying it would be a PR nightmare for Microsoft. I mean.....that's obvious. People are going to say exactly what some here are saying that MS only said things in order to get past the FTC and that they were full of shit the entire time.

They’ve made the promise to Sony that they’ll keep releasing popular games on PS, even after contracts are fulfilled. I haven’t seen any talk about papers sent in to the FTC though.

My guess is that COD will stay on PS, forever, and Diablo, possibly Crash. But new IPs will be exclusive to Xbox and PC, like that new survival game they talked about awhile back.

 

[sainraja]

Lets agree that MS did not pay extra for that on the 360. It was the easier of the 2 platforms, and had a unified network for distributing and selling addons. It was on xbox first because it was quick and easy.

lol. I guess you can tell yourself whatever you want. I mean, really?

Both corporations pull the same type of thing. To say one is better or worse than the other by doing it is stupid and silly.

 

[Thabass]

Mw2 to gamepass please. Microsoft can spend on my behalf.

I could be wrong, but do we need to wait for the EU confirmation before it's 100% official? I don't think MW2 on Gamepass would happen that quickly.

But hey, I've been wrong before.

 

[Ozriel]

Let's not pretend that Microsoft didn't do the same with COD during the Xbox 360 generation. They laid the groundwork.

Absolutely hilarious that you assumed I meant that in a negative way.
“Let’s not pretend…”

What I’m clearly saying is that instead of going exclusive, they could keep the game multiplatform and make the game more attractive on their platform.

 

[prinz_valium]

Microsoft has been clear that they will not be doing things like they did with Bethesda. I think all your big games that have been on PS like Overwatch, Call of Duty, and Diablo will remain on PS indefinitely.



I'm saying it would be a PR nightmare for Microsoft. I mean.....that's obvious. People are going to say exactly what some here are saying that MS only said things in order to get past the FTC and that they were full of shit the entire time.

One should never use that word. Especially not in the business world.
It's called "for the time being"

 

[Topher]

One should never use that word. Especially not in the business world.
It's called "for the time being"

Semantics

 

[prinz_valium]

Semantics

Are very important, yes

 

[Topher]

Are very important, yes

Assuming my previously statement is accurate, we do not know if there will ever be an end to AB support of PS. Thus, it is indefinite. Saying "for the time being" implies an end, but we don't know that to be true either.

 

[sainraja]

Absolutely hilarious that you assumed I meant that in a negative way.
“Let’s not pretend…”

What I’m clearly saying is that instead of going exclusive, they could keep the game multiplatform and make the game more attractive on their platform.

Didn't take that as a negative or a positive. They both have done similar things so it's part of 'their' playback. It is not a Sony or Microsoft thing so trying to highlight it as such seems silly if that isn't what you were trying to do — or wasn't your point.

 

[Goalus]

Yes, the FTC is concerned with whether Microsoft is being truthful to them or not. This shouldn't even be debateable.

As far as I know, MS has made some friends at the FTC during the past six months. Therefore I don't think they are concerned anymore.

 

[Ozriel]

Didn't take that as a negative or a positive. They both have done similar things so it's part of 'their' playback. It is not a Sony or Microsoft thing so trying to highlight it as such seems silly if that isn't what you were trying to do — or wasn't your point.

Sony has done it more recently than Microsoft, so it makes more sense to cite Sony as an example of savvy marketing. Why would I go back well over a decade ago when there are more recent examples there?

It’s OK to admit you misread the context of my post, hence your ‘let’s not pretend’ comment.

 

[Negotiator101]

It won't be held up. 12% of the market and the #3 spot after Sony and Tencent does not make MS a monopoly.

Potential is far greater than raw statistics.