• 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.

Sony signs agreement with MS to keep COD on PS

budgetgamer

Neo Member
I'm expecting something aggresive from Microsoft after the starfield exclusive to Xbox anyway its good for players and an opportunity for both companies to take COD to new heights
 

Zok310

Banned
How do you reach that conclusion?

All games for 4 years (when Diablo is already out for this gen) vs. COD for 10 years.

COD for 10 years is far, far, far away the better deal.
Yup, dont know why people are trying to spin this as a gotcha from phil.
Jim knows people wont leave PS for Diablo, Crash and Sypro, so why pay MS a 70% split on those games, games that launch once a generation and only have them for 4 years?
When he can just get cod for 10. Slam dunk for Jim imo, thats what he wanted.

On top of that the contract shows that ms does want to foreclose PlayStation because of all the content they just lost as a trade off to keep cod.
 
Last edited:

JohnnyFootball

GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
How do you reach that conclusion?

All games for 4 years (when Diablo is already out for this gen) vs. COD for 10 years.

COD for 10 years is far, far, far away the better deal.
This is my thoughts, too. Sony gets CoD for an extra 7 years. Sony would like make more revenue in 1 year from CoD than any other Activision franchise combined.

It was a no-brainer for Sony and MS too. If Diablo IV was a year out and that became Xbox exclusive that would sting a little for Sony but other than that, there isn't a single Activision franchise that Sony will miss all that much.
 
Last edited:

zedinen

Member
Jim Ryan is the best thing to happen to Sony since the Walkman


dzSbnAP.jpg





Sony 's market value dropped $20 billion in a single day.

The pandemic and its associated lockdowns disrupted the PS5 production; Xbox Series was outselling the PS5, Microsoft bought ZeniMax, ABK and had no intentions of stopping

Time is much more valuable than money. Jim 'bought time' and scored a massive win on multiple fronts



Then

Sony cuts PS5 production again as chip shortages and shipment issues bite (Nov 11, 2021)

Sony loses $20 billion in market value after Microsoft's massive deal to buy Activision Blizzard knocks its shares (Jan 19, 2022)

Nadella: "Microsoft should not need to make any formal concessions to win regulatory approval for the deal (Feb 3, 2022)"

Nadella:"Xbox has taken market share globally for 2 quarters in a row (Apr 26, 2022)"

Nadella:"Xbox has been the “market leader in North America for 3 quarters in a row (Jul 26, 2022)"

Sony calls Microsoft’s 3-year Call of Duty sharing offer “inadequate (Sep 7, 2022)”

Spencer: “Microsoft won't press pause on acquisitions (Sep 16, 2022)“



Now

FTC sues to block Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard (Dec 8, 2022)

PS5 Sales Hit Historical Numbers in the US (Feb 2023)

Smith:”Sony has an 80% market share in Europe"

PS5 Sales Continue to Break Records in the US (Mar 2023)

PS5 Just Sold More Units In A Single Quarter Than Any Other Console Ever (Jan - Mar 2023)

Microsoft’s Activision Blizzard acquisition blocked by CMA (Apr 26, 2023)

Microsoft boss warns Rishi Sunak it's a “bad day for Britain” (Apr 27, 2023)

Microsoft’s UK Blackmail Showcases Big Tech’s Threat to Democracies Worldwide (Apr 27, 2023)

Microsoft's veiled threats to the UK over Activision reveal a lot (Apr 28, 2023)

Sony posts record operating profit on great PS5 sales (Apr 28, 2023)

Sony eyes finance unit listing, doubles down on entertainment (May 18, 2023)

“We (Microsoft) are in a very unique position to be able to go spend Sony out of business (Jun 26, 2023)”

Nadella testifies in trial over Activision merger that Call of Duty will ‘100%’ stay on PlayStation (Jun 29, 2023)

PlayStation maker Sony upgraded to Buy at Goldman Sachs (Jul 13, 2023)

Microsoft Agrees to Keep ‘Call of Duty’ on PlayStation. The deal is for 10 years (Jul 16, 2023)
 
Last edited:

THE DUCK

voted poster of the decade by bots
Yup, dont know why people are trying to spin this as a gotcha from phil.
Jim knows people wont leave PS for Diablo, Crash and Sypro, so why pay MS a 70% split on those games, games that launch once a generation and only have them for 4 years?
When he can just get cod for 10. Slam dunk for Jim imo, thats what he wanted.

On top of that the contract shows that ms does want to foreclose PlayStation because of all the content they just lost as a trade off to keep cod.

None of this is a slam dunk, 10 years will go by pretty fast and then no more COD For Sony. Plus losing all other Activision titles is a negative, I wouldn't spin that as a positive either.
Of course MS wants to shrink Sony's business.....how else would they grow their share? Shakes head in disbelief.
 

Zok310

Banned
None of this is a slam dunk, 10 years will go by pretty fast and then no more COD For Sony. Plus losing all other Activision titles is a negative, I wouldn't spin that as a positive either.
Of course MS wants to shrink Sony's business.....how else would they grow their share? Shakes head in disbelief.
A hell of a lot can happen in 10 years.
 
None of this is a slam dunk, 10 years will go by pretty fast and then no more COD For Sony. Plus losing all other Activision titles is a negative, I wouldn't spin that as a positive either.
Of course MS wants to shrink Sony's business.....how else would they grow their share? Shakes head in disbelief.
And there's the fact that CoD being owned by Microsoft means it is essentially exclusive anyway. CoD players (on console) go where the best experience is.
 

THE DUCK

voted poster of the decade by bots
A hell of a lot can happen in 10 years.

Your right, Sony could fold after launching a horrible PS6. Or MS could bow out of the hardware market and sell only "enhanced PC's" with an xbox overlay.
Or Nintendo could launch a new console with 25FL of power and take over the universe.
 
10 years of letting the smaller guy reap the benefits of your user base has to sting a little bit. Every copy sold is money in Microsoft’s pocket to money hat third party titles.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
10 years of letting the smaller guy reap the benefits of your user base has to sting a little bit. Every copy sold is money in Microsoft’s pocket to money hat third party titles.
I thought the split is 70/30, but someone said yesterday Activision had an 80/20 split for COD. SO that means for every $ COD sells on PS, MS gets 80% of it (or 4x what Sony gets).

Who cares if Sony gets COD. MS doesn't care either. They signed a 10 year deal with Sony for more COD on PS and they didn't have to do it as the FTC already bailed and it doesn't look like the CMA cares about a Sony 10 year deal either in order to approve.

MS would rather make quadruple the revenue than Sony on every copy and mtx and DLC of COD on PS systems. It's a good win for everyone because PS gamers get COD for another 10 years (by that time PS6 will be out and PS7 will be around the corner with rumoured specs) and MS gets money too since they own the franchise.

As a gamer its great. Hell, even Nintendo Switch gamers will get COD. So unless someone only cares about corporations' balance sheets like an accountant as a who's who and who gets what, who cares. Everyone gets COD.
 
Last edited:

Dolomite

Member
How do you reach that conclusion?

All games for 4 years (when Diablo is already out for this gen) vs. COD for 10 years.

COD for 10 years is far, far, far away the better deal.
Disagree. Blizzard has Soo many IP's that are prime for sequels or full reboots. Activision has a full Library of IP's no longer taking the back seat to resources pulled for annual COD releases
 

Topher

Gold Member
Disagree. Blizzard has Soo many IP's that are prime for sequels or full reboots. Activision has a full Library of IP's no longer taking the back seat to resources pulled for annual COD releases

That's all fine, but none of that would do Sony any good when the cutoff date is 2027 for any of that dormant IP. And if you think Microsoft is going to inject a ton of cash into ABK just to resurrect old IPs then I'm afraid you are going to be very disappointed.

Call of Duty for 10 years is the much better deal from a financial perspective. That's simply a fact.

As I pointed out earlier...

Clearly. COD has been the number one selling game in the United States for the past 8 of the last 10 years (probably longer). The two years they were not number one, they were number two. And those two games that outsold COD was RDR 2 in 2018 and GTA V in 2013. And some here think losing out on 7 years of COD is worth whatever else AB has through 2027?

dave chappelle drugs GIF
 
Last edited:

DownTheRabbitHole

Neo Member
I actually think the deal Jim got was actually pretty good, the rest of those games aren't system sellers and Playstation doesn't need to be in business with Microsoft if they don't have to be. Are the rest of those games going to sell more on Xbox, PC and Switch now that they're not on Playstation, I doubt it. Without Playstation its lost revenue

Just think if Jim dipped into the IP bag properly , he has most of those games covered and more. He has about 7 years to come up with a COD rival. I have more faith in Jim to deliver than Lies From Phil.
 
I'd love to see GP on PlayStation eventually. Imagine Microsoft stop making consoles, sell GP subs/ + controllers for various platforms and just cream in the cash on software.

I guess that would be the day I return to building a gaming PC. This post made me stop to think for a moment, looking to the horizon of uncertainty...
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
It was never gonna be exclusive anyway so its irrelevant
Exactly. All this fear of no more cod as if MS was going to cut the cord on a cash cow franchise. Not gonna happen.

Ok, maybe if activision releases a remake of vigilante 8 it might be an Xbox/pc exclusive for laughs but not COD.

Considering MS offered a 10 year Cod deal goes to show MS cares more about gamers playing cod raking in the cash than cutting the cord. Who cares which platform it is. If they were that serious about banishing cod from PS they would never offered it, nor kept the offer on the table when it looked more and more likely MS was going to beat FTC and CMA no problem.
 

wolffy66

Member
Exactly. All this fear of no more cod as if MS was going to cut the cord on a cash cow franchise. Not gonna happen.

Ok, maybe if activision releases a remake of vigilante 8 it might be an Xbox/pc exclusive for laughs but not COD.

Considering MS offered a 10 year Cod deal goes to show MS cares more about gamers playing cod raking in the cash than cutting the cord. Who cares which platform it is. If they were that serious about banishing cod from PS they would never offered it, nor kept the offer on the table when it looked more and more likely MS was going to beat FTC and CMA no problem.
They were offering it as many places as they could find. It was always for revenue from COD.
 

FrankWza

Member
Sure it was, it's too much revenue to lose. Way too much
For Xbox division sure. But they were able to purchase Activision because they're backed by microsoft. So it's nowhere near too much money to lose. They just got out maneuvered. Again.
 

wolffy66

Member
For Xbox division sure. But they were able to purchase Activision because they're backed by microsoft. So it's nowhere near too much money to lose. They just got out maneuvered. Again.
Nah that's a very poor business decision. It's just too much money and there's no path to the deal being profitable on xbox sales.

Be it xbox or MS, they still expect it to make money. Xbox doesn't have the user base to make up for lost sales to PS and they couldn't expect enough new xbox sales to make up the difference either.

Again there's a reason they are signing deals for cod everywhere they can...revenue.
 

Yoda

Member
Wonder if CoD will still be the cash cow in a decade. I remember how long it took ActivisionBlizzard to milk WoW to death, I suspect that'll happen to CoD well.
 

dbilyliker

Member
Can anyone tell me, did sony lose?
I'm confused.
I can't play those fps games but I'm curious about this...this "war"(?).
 
Last edited:

Ozzie666

Member
I still think one of these companies is going to get their hands on Valve eventually. That really would really be a big move and maybe cheaper?

Please unplug me from the matrix if COD is still relevant in 10 years.
 

Fabieter

Member
I still think one of these companies is going to get their hands on Valve eventually. That really would really be a big move and maybe cheaper?

Please unplug me from the matrix if COD is still relevant in 10 years.

Valve is private and I doubt gabe will ever sell.
 

blakdecaf

Member
I guess that would be the day I return to building a gaming PC. This post made me stop to think for a moment, looking to the horizon of uncertainty...

It’s definitely a possibility. How much cash would Microsoft make/ save without making a console. Billions. Let someone else do it, and instead own the software and cloud service.
 
Last edited:

SkylineRKR

Member
That's all fine, but none of that would do Sony any good when the cutoff date is 2027 for any of that dormant IP. And if you think Microsoft is going to inject a ton of cash into ABK just to resurrect old IPs then I'm afraid you are going to be very disappointed.

Call of Duty for 10 years is the much better deal from a financial perspective. That's simply a fact.

As I pointed out earlier...

I think so too. Diablo IV is just out, and probably will be the only Diablo for a decade. CoD is an annual franchise so it means 10 CoD games and even if it isn't the franchise it once was, it still a massive seller each year. I don't see how this is a worse deal than just 4 years of CoD along with Crash Bandicoot, Tony Hawk etc which might or might not see sequels in the foreseeable future let alone setting charts on fire and being system sellers.
 

StueyDuck

Member
Damn...so Sony ends up with a worse deal than originally intended. There's a lesson buried somewhere in this saga




the lesson is not to fight apparently? to let global tech companies become monopolies?

Say what you will about Jim but he did exactly what he was supposed to do, literally everyone caved in and accepted the brib... gifts that Microsoft sent them to make sure this had little to no friction.

the lesson we learnt here is that money will always win and the Law will gladly kowtow to big tech so long as their pockets are lined nicely and it doesn't affect them personally.

Basically the lesson is the end is coming and there's nothing anyone can do
 
the lesson is not to fight apparently? to let global tech companies become monopolies?

Say what you will about Jim but he did exactly what he was supposed to do, literally everyone caved in and accepted the brib... gifts that Microsoft sent them to make sure this had little to no friction.

the lesson we learnt here is that money will always win and the Law will gladly kowtow to big tech so long as their pockets are lined nicely and it doesn't affect them personally.

Basically the lesson is the end is coming and there's nothing anyone can do
Microsoft is a monopoly? Of what?
 

Dolomite

Member
the lesson is not to fight apparently? to let global tech companies become monopolies?

Say what you will about Jim but he did exactly what he was supposed to do, literally everyone caved in and accepted the brib... gifts that Microsoft sent them to make sure this had little to no friction.

the lesson we learnt here is that money will always win and the Law will gladly kowtow to big tech so long as their pockets are lined nicely and it doesn't affect them personally.

Basically the lesson is the end is coming and there's nothing anyone can do
I'd argue that the lesson is negotiation > litigation
 
Top Bottom