Update: Phil Spencer has issued a statement on Twitter today, promising that Xbox will honour any existing agreements while also expressing a "desire" for Call of Duty to remain on PlayStation in the future.
Original story: There's been a lot of speculation that Microsoft might be looking to make Activision Blizzard games exclusive to Xbox and PC in the future, but Sony has suggested that it "expects" Microsoft to keep making Activision titles multiplatform.
In a quote issued to The Wall Street Journal, Sony had the following to say:
"We expect that Microsoft will abide by contractual agreements and continue to ensure Activision games are multiplatform."
Now of course, the first part of that statement will likely come true. Microsoft has honoured existing agreements as part of its Bethesda acquisition so far, including a timed console exclusive deal for Deathloop on PS5, but the latter part of the quote seems much more like wishful thinking in the long run.
Sure, Microsoft might "continue to ensure Activision games are multiplatform" over the next couple of years, but what happens after those agreements have expired? It ultimately remains to be seen.
The official line from Xbox boss Phil Spencer is that "it’s not our intent to pull communities away from that platform and we remained committed to that," while a recent report from Bloomberg suggested that Microsoft will "keep making some of Activision’s games for PlayStation consoles but will also keep some content exclusive to Xbox."
What do you make of this statement from Sony? Let us know down in the comments below.
Comments 86
Yeah that doesn't make much sense. Unless this is a lifetime agreement already, why would they expect future games to be multiplatform
Would PlayStation keep them multiplat? Wouldn't even be up for debate...hell no they wouldn't
Activision has already responded and said:
"“We will honor all existing commitments post close,” “As with Microsoft’s acquisition of Minecraft, we have no intent to remove any content from platforms where it exists today.”
Basically I expect this to be the same as Bethesda. Any existing games stay. Anything new to be Xbox only unless they have a pre-existing deal OR it benefits MS/ABK.
PS signed a new COD deal a few years ago so I don't know how that stands. But it's interesting.
Well, of course Sony execs have to say that. Sony already lost 20 billion dollars in market value. Now they have to play it cool, otherwise the losses might rise.
To be fair I don't know if the second part of that quote necessarily referred to the time after contractual obligations. They could have just meant they have years behind the current contract and so we won't see exclusive COD games at least for a few years. Some day sure but I wouldn't expect it as soon as next year for example. I could be wrong though.
It's all down to agreements that were already in place, for all anyone knows playstation has some pretty long deals for certain games, maybe lifetime deal for crash, 10 year cod deal etc deals and Contracts can include anything.
F¥¢© Them All as they would do it for sure .... .... ....
Unless Sony knows something we don't, which is possible, I doubt it.
So many unknowns. We'll have a better view of everything once Starfield releases on whatever platforms it releases on this fall. If it's PC and Xbox console only, then I would expect Call of Duty to follow suit. But pretty sure Warzone will be taking the ESO route. The only other thing I will say is Sony is lucky to have a competitor like Microsoft. If the situation were reversed, absolutely everything would be pulled down, locked down and multiplats cancelled.
I'm sure Microsoft would not have dropped 70 billion dollars at Activision if there were a long term exclusivity contract between Playstation and Call of Duty.
Let's be honest: Microsoft purchased CoD. Maybe Candy Crush. The rest is just a nice little bonus.
Probably Sony's deal with Activision still has a couple more years or so.
Maybe they release still some games for PS, when sony goes back to max 3-6month timed exclusive deals.
Interesting at work this morning spoke with a couple of PS5 COD gang.
Jokingly said what you going to do in 2023 when COD is only on Xbox console and PC etc.
Which without any hesitations, they replied buy an Xbox console.
Shows the dedicated COD players which they are on console, will just switch as COD is what matters to them.
Cod will stay on ps i just can't see it being exclusive. I'm just hoping this means cod can actually be good again because vanguard is an absolute mess I've not been able to get in a decent lag free match for almost a month.
I really don’t see the annual COD releasing on Playstation after perhaps next years (so they will probably get this years and next years retail releases and that’s it). The only contracts I see with Sony and Activision are for the crappy timed exclusive modes Sony always shells out for. But how long is that contract in place? If it’s for any more than 2 years still to go; I see Microsoft giving Sony a heads up that they will honour it for now but not for the entirety.
As others have said though; no way Sony would do the same had things been reversed. They might have left Warzone multi-plat but actually I could even see them pulling that from Xbox too (or more likely; stop updating it on Xbox as opposed to pulling it completely; since the resources are already invested). Anyway guess we shall see what happens!
This is clearly something that Sony don't believe themselves and the opposite of what they'd do and what Microsoft did with Zenimax but they're saying this to calm stockholders. The acquisition will take one year and a half approximately and afterwards all the Activision Blizzard IPs will be released for Xbox/PC/Game Pass exclusively. Previous games like Warzone that still make money will still be supported, though.
Hmm so there's a risk that a large catalogue of games could just disappear from a bunch of platforms just to gain a competitive edge? One of the reasons that this was a bad deal for all gamers.
@PhileasFragg
That is called competition, timed deals, buying studios etc. is just to make your platform stronger.
If there would be no competition, it would be much worse. Just think about if there is only 1 platform, they could do what they want and charge you what they think is ok.
They're such hypocrites moneyhatting Activision to have Call of Duty benefits on PS since they don't have money for more and now they expect Microsoft to bring Call of Duty to PS5 after buying the whole company.
Until I can play FF7 Remake on my Xbox, i don't really give a **** what Sony "expects."
I expected a 5% pay raise this year. Didn't happen.
I also expected spider-man to be in an avengers game. Didn't happen (for Xbox).
@PhileasFragg certainly games currently on Playstation will not be delisted. Minecraft did not disappear. Old games from Bethesda are still in Playstation. Fallout 4 is even on PS Now. I'm sure every Activision game released on Playstation until the acquisition is done will stay at Playstation store forever.
@Banjo- they're not hypocrites. It's just business, it's not personal. In the end of the day both Sony and Microsoft just want to rise their bottomlines. Strategies may vary, we may prefer one company over the other, but big companies are not our friends. Nor enemies.
Hopefully Xbox will break CoD's annual cycle and release it every other year, in order to liberate some studios to work on other projects.
@Magabro Who said that they're my friends/enemies? That's quite childish. It's a fact that that statement is hypocritical and cynical since they really don't expect Microsoft "to continue to ensure Activision games are multiplatform".
And you can have them Sony, All you have to do in bend the knee to Phil and let Gamepass come to Playstation..
I notice a lot of comments with this "tit for tat" approach. If you truly want to game anywhere you wouldn't advocate a ton of franchises going to one place. Even if Sony would do it (and I'm sure they would) as gamers its not in any of our interests to advocate multiplatform games being exclusive to one platform.
I’m sure once the contracts are up, PlayStation will still get things like low budget titles that would also grace Nintendo platforms, but eventually the bread and butter will likely steer clear of the house Sony built.
I'm sure if sony still wants to pay for all those exclusives, ms will be more than happy to take their money.
@Alpha_Pulse "If you truly want to game anywhere.." people will, regardless of who buys what. Console wars are argued by people who have ONE console. A lot people have both, so they stay above the fray.
Contracts run out lmao
Playstation is done in about 5 years.
No call of duty
No doom
No fallout
No Skyrim
No diablo
No Wolfenstein
No overwatch
No Crash/Spyro
No elder scrolls
No Starfield
Bye bye!
@XxEvilAshxX I don't know, man... the silence from all parts regarding FF7R makes me wonder if it will ever get to XBOX at all! Well, I wouldn't hold my breath, unfortunately.
@PhileasFragg Not all gamers....I own an Xbox and a PlayStation...so how is this bad for me? Only thing changing for me is that I will get there games for no extra charge day 1 on gamepass ....nothing but a good thing for people like me
@Bmartin001 You are right: bringing GP to PS would, immediately, boost their hardware sales and benefit absolutely everybody (hell, I'd get a PS5 with GP). But yeah, it would devastate Sony's pride and I don't know if they'd be sensible enough to get over that.
All this drama and repercussion inside even the hardcore communities (which usually don't consider CoD that relevant)... now just imagine if MS keeps on their shopping spree and grab Capcom, Atlus, Square or From Soft next... It'd be insane!
Haha thy can ‘expect’ what they like. After those contracts are up it’s entirely down to Microsoft what it does, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they say COD Warfare is multi platform whilst COD yearly releases are exclusive. And SONY will lose out on a ton of money.
But this statement seems to show they are upset and worried about the new deal. Well that’s what SONY gets for having a history of tying down games and exclusive content to its platform.
@isturbo1984 Seriously? Like Microsoft has literally spelt it out multiple times, even with giant letters on a big board on stage, Starfield IS XBOX EXCLUSIVE. So PC and Xbox ONLY. Their is no need to wait to see anything…
MS can keep actiblizz and bethesda games multiplatform, but with "exclusive this and that" to xbox and pc users. MS can also hit Sony where it hurts by making multiplat games exclusive on xbox for a year and then porting them to PS, just like they do with FF.
The way I feel about this
I don't care if they keep it exclusive to Xbox or not ,it's not as if ppl can't buy game pass and play it on either console/tablet/pc/phone/soon to b TV stick/app/ quest 2 with alterations, it's not like Microsoft are forcing ppl to buy a console to play it like ps did with Spiderman /soon wolverine etc etc
@Murray Though buying up studios is anti-competitive.
Like how, until a couple of years ago, Hollywood movie studios couldn't own the theatres too as then they could decide to only show their movies in their theatres at cut rates and run others out of business.
If Google wants Activision games on it's Stadia cloud service then it could have been good business for Activision to release them there, but now they're a competitor to Xcloud then they'll think twice.
@OldgamerDave Epic bought timed exclusivity of Final Fantasy VII Remake Intergrade (16 December 2021) so we'll see after that deal is over (6 or 12 months).
Sony can 'expect' what they want. They were 'determined' to ensure that some franchises (Street Fighter, FF etc) don't come to Xbox for years if at all, happy to ensure Sony had 'extra' content in numerous multi-platform releases (Destiny getting extra strikes and content, Marvels Avengers getting 'extra' characters/DLC, CoD getting 'extra' modes, content early, XP boosts etc, etc, etc) so 'even' multi-platform games that 'should' be the same on ALL platforms were not and now they 'expect' Microsoft to spend $70bn with little/no impact to them???
Once the 'last' CoD under Activision and/or contractual obligation ends, MS need never release another CoD on PS5. They 'could' opt to indefinitely support that last MP until the last PS5 players leave but no obligation to release ANY new CoD, Spyro, Crash, Doom, Wolfenstein, Elder Scrolls etc etc game to a Sony platform ever again.
I expect Warzone and a F2P CoD multiplayer - one with seasons and updates to keep things fresh, to be available on ALL platforms. Hard to compete with all those other F2P multi-players with a 'paid' for model and CoD MP is virtually a F2P model sold with a campaign every year...
This is about Game Pass. Having 'new' Exclusive games that you can only get on Game Pass platforms - the Series consoles are 'Game Pass' platforms. To get people to subscribe and stay subscribed, they need big new games every Month. Games like MLB, Outriders etc are 'great' for Subscribers, but not going to convince PS5 owners to sign up when they can play those games on their system.
I see many looking at MSFS, FH5 and Halo, doing the maths-only would play 1.5 of those FH5 and pick up Halo on sale, MP is F2P so 'less' to 'buy' and 'own' than a year of Ultimate to 'rent'. Doesn't matter that it also allowed you to play MLB, Psychonauts 2, Outriders, B4B, Hades, the Medium etc as well as a library going back well over 20yrs worth of BC games.
Therefore they need 5+ exclusives that people want just to get them signed up to see its 'full' value. 2 PS5 exclusive games they want a year £140, 2 Xbox exclusive games £110, Game Pass Ultimate £132 so it 'seems' pretty 'close' and maybe not 'enough' to get people subscribed. Maybe why the $7.5bn Bethesda deal hasn't seen the expected Subscription growth.
Activision deal maybe won't see much 'growth' either because Sony and Sony gamers are in denial that franchises like Doom, Elder Scrolls, CoD etc are 'too big' for MS not to release - BS. They aren't 'sales' focussed, they don't 'care' too much about losing 20m sales to PS5 owners when they could add 20m+ subscribers on PC, Mobile or Xbox consoles and sell those games there - without wasting time or money porting over to PS5. The ONLY way some of these games WILL be on PS is when Sony allows a PS5 version of Game Pass - maybe won't get access to 'ALL' games (like Halo, Forza, Gears or any 'new' IPs) but a curated list of games and franchise that were on PS - games like Fallout, Elder Scrolls main games, CoD, Spyro, Crash etc.
They are also assuming that those studio's will continue crunching CoD out every year instead of being freed to make the games they 'want' as per Microsofts 'Mission' statement. Treyarch for example could make their CoD: Zombies mode into a stand-alone Zombie game without having to tie it in to WW2 and CoD freeing them to be creative with story etc. That won't be on PS5! High Moon could return to their Darkwatch IP and bring something interesting and exciting their, Infinity Ward maybe fed up with the FPS genre, maybe want to experiment with 3rd Person and break-away from a grounded military shooter after 'years' of CoD - that won't be on PS...
MS need never release a typical 'CoD' game again - one that has a campaign, new MP and maybe a co-op mode. They could just make the 'last' MP into a F2P, live service with seasons and refreshes to keep the experience going indefinitely and until Sony allow Game Pass on their platform, any 'new' game will be exclusive to game pass platforms.
For MS, its about Subscription numbers, player engagement and player retention in Game Pass. Its not about being the 'best' selling game or console (although the Console will sell well because of their investment into Game Pass) hence MS never talk about 'sales' but player 'numbers' - over 25m Subs, more than 10m played FH5 in the first week, Sea of Thieves over 23m players...
Treyarch, under Activision made the 'best' Spider-Man game that released on both platforms, but now a 'universally' loved character is kept off Xbox because of 'Sony' yet somehow they still expect things to 'remain' unchanged?? WTF!!
the key word is "ensure". This probably means, that they expect to be able to negotiate the continued presence of COD and other Activision games (not all of them, though) in the PlayStation ecosystem. Yes, if Microsoft wants to be spiteful, they could keep all of these extremely valuable franchises to themselves. luckily, Xbox is run by adults, and Microsoft is extremely good at making money. So Sony is really saying that they expect Microsoft to negotiate a deal (that will involve a lot of zeroes) to continue having especially COD on the platform. if i were Microsoft, we also have a very VERY serious talk about Final Fantasy and Persona (yes i know Sony doesn't make those games, but they sure as HELL keep them off Xbox). This is leverage, and i think Xbox will do better than simply act out of spite here.
If I were Phil Spencer I'd tell Sony to kick rocks.
@StylesT It's bad because you've had to buy two almost identical consoles to play "exclusive" games that could be multi-platform.
The thing is if Sony keep Spider-Man out of Xbox even if he's a guest or DLC and pays millions of $ just to get timed exclusivity, marketing deals and in-game benefits for third-party games they don't even own, why would Sony or any Sony fan expect Microsoft to release Starfield or Call of Duty on PS5?
The gigantic investment of acquiring Zenimax and Activision Blizzard is for Game Pass and Xbox, it's not for porting games to PS5 and give 30% of the revenue to Sony while pushing potential buyers and subscribers away. Sony pay money for third-party games to be worse or late on Xbox while Microsoft acquire studios to expand their Xbox Game Studios but at least their games can be played outside Series X/S because their business includes consoles, PC and Cloud.
These sites readers are a tiny bubble in the video game industry. One loves Banjo or Halo and the other loves Ratchet or Ghost of Tsushima but most gamers play Call of Duty, FIFA, GTA and Fortnite and will play on the platform that suits them better and it doesn't matter if it's the PS4 or the Series S.
@S1ayeR74 Yeah, seriously. You forget, Phil is a lying scumbag. Also, these rules that have been spelt out have been contradicted multiple times. I may be getting old, but my memory isn't as bad as some here.
Sony have a marketing deal and DLC exclusivity deal for COD till 2025
@trev666 "Sony have a marketing deal and DLC exclusivity deal for COD till 2025"
If that was true, Sony would have said so after (or before) seeing its stock value dropping by $20b, their biggest drop in 14 years. What they said afterwards is more wishful thinking: ""We expect that Microsoft will abide by contractual agreements and continue to ensure Activision games are multiplatform".
@Banjo- Ouch! I didn't know that! At this rate we'll get to play it along with part 2...nah, that'll be out in 2028 or something
@Banjo-
it is true
@OldgamerDave No joke, this is supposed to be a collection of remakes but I think that Xbox will get VII Remake Intergrade, which is the new-gen expanded version in 2022 or 2023, after Epic's deal ends.
@BAMozzy Exactly. I went Sony last gen with my PS4 (which I sold to get a Series S last year), and I respect their products, but you're on spot here. They're delusional, or simply desperately trying to play it cool, while crapping their pants.
@PhhhCough I understand that but a lot of people don't have both too. Just because we do doesn't mean it's a good thing. I'm lucky to have everything but I feel for those who are affected by reduced access.
The only way you'll see Activison/Blizz games after contract stuff is if PlayStation gets GamePass. Period.
That's a very vague way of trying to make it seem like all present and future Activision games will be multiplatform when it really means only present. Typical Sony...
I imagine what Sony refers to here is the exclusive mode deal for COD, which I believe is 3 games per contract. It was renewed in 2020, so 2023 will be the last contracted COD game for Sony.
Other than that, this is a damage control press release considering they lost $20 billion in stock after the news broke.
@dreadful these games will do a lot for damage for sure but not the nail in the coffin. Playstation Studios games hold up well on their own and then there's a large amount of players (core) that are big on Japanese games which PlayStation is home to. If MS bought Square that would really hurt.
@Arcnail I wonder how GamePass games work with PS though in terms of Dualsense. I imagine there would be no Dualsense support for those games unless MS actively developed a PS version for GamePass.
@blinx01 I think you’ve got it. Damage press control release and it’s talking about “contracts” which MS could just buy Sony out of if they wanted. What 1 more billion at this point?
@Alpha_Pulse I concur
@Alpha_Pulse
Game Pass already supports a variety of controllers, including DualSense with xCloud. Obviously it doesn't support the adaptive triggers etc.
If of course you mean a native Game Pass app on PS5, I think there's more chance of hell freezing over than Sony allowing that to happen.
Depends on the details of the Sony marketing deal. There might be some language that would imply that sony gets to maintain priority marketing and DLC through a certain date. If that deal was good through 2030 or something xbox might have to honor it.
Then there is the whole minecraft situation. Phil spencer probably pointed out the Call of Duty sales success when pitching the acquisition to Microsoft. The microsoft exec's might not want Phil to mess with Call of Duty at all.
They would easily make their money back without making call of duty exclusive.
If that was the case, Sony would have said it before or after their stock value dropped by $20b (biggest drop in 14 years). Even if there are contracts until 2025-2030 like two of you are suggesting, Microsoft can end them (as easy as to pay off the clause). Otherwise, they wouldn't have bothered acquiring Activision Blizzard for $68.7b. They're not stupid.
@blinx01 yeah exactly that the haptics etc.
@PhileasFragg It's bad because you've had to buy two almost identical consoles to play "exclusive" games that could be multi-platform.
NO you don't. ALL Xbox exclusives, and when they fully realise their 'cloud' service, will be available on 'ANY' Game Pass supported device - inc your Mobile. Every PS gamer probably has access to a Game Pass supported device so can play so 'don't' have to buy a similarly priced Xbox!!
You don't 'need' to buy a Series X to play those games, don't even need a Series S. Don't have to buy a MS brand product at all as your Samsung/Apple etc mobile with Android/iOS (not Windows) at the heart, use your Nintendo/PS controller etc.
When Sony buys 'exclusivity', extra content etc in multi-platform games etc, the ONLY place you can play is Playstation. Its that 'ONLY on Playstation' BS that is preventing the VAST majority (not just the Xbox console gamers) from playing those games, getting the 'same' value etc. How is it 'fair' that people paying the 'same' money for their game missing out on Game modes, characters, missions, maps/strikes etc etc etc because they are 'ONLY' on Playstation. Fair enough with their own first party studio's but paying to keep FF, Street Fighter, Spider-Man (particularly in M:A) and other 'big' franchises from Xbox let alone PC gamers too. Even if they do come eventually to PC, they are deliberately keeping franchises and content off of other platforms in multi-platform releases.
With MS, Game Pass is available on a variety of devices. Yes their games may only get a 'native' release on Series Consoles and PC's powerful enough to run the game natively, but they'll also have streaming to enable those who only have a mobile, those with an old PC or cheap laptop and those with last gen Xbox consoles to play these games from as little as £1 a month and a maximum of £11 a month.
You can get a Series S and 2yrs of GPU for £21 a month (£10 of that pays for the console - the rest is GPU) which includes Gold, EA Play, Game Pass for mobile/PC and streaming. Even before this deal and any 'impact' that has to the 'value' of Game Pass, the list of games that £21 a month for 2yrs will give you, starting with R6, ME:L, Hitman trilogy this month as well as all the games already in GP (FH5, MSFS, Halo, Psychonauts and all those fantastic BC games too), there is Fable, Starfield, Perfect Dark, Avowed, Forza Motorsport, Outer Worlds2, Redfall, Stalker 2, Scorn, Contraband, Plague Tale, Warhammer: Darktide, etc etc
PS5 £350-£450 + £70 for GT7, £70 for GoW:R, £60 for Horizon:FW as they backtracked. 12m PS5's - only 12m can play any 'exclusive'. 12m Series S/X sold - EVERY one of the 300m gamers can play. Yes if you want the 'best' console experience, then you will need a Series X - but its NOT stopping you from enjoying the game on your mobile with a DS4/5 connected and playing the game for a small monthly fee if that's all you have/can afford or 'get' as not 'everyone' can get a PS5/Series X or afford a PC to match.
@isturbo1984 You refuse to believe Phil Spencer, think he's flat out lied, which would cost him his job and affect Microsoft's share price. Are you a Sony fan by any chance who's salty? You definitely sound like one.
It is a fact that Starfield IS Xbox Exclusive. Don't cry when your proved wrong when the game isn't on anything that isn't an Xbox or a PC or is running the Xbox streaming service. Mind you by the end of this year we may be able to include the PlayStation in that lol.
Somewhere, someone inside Sony is sitting there saying "Remember when Microsoft said exclusives weren't important and wasn't part of their strategy? Why did we constantly antagonize them for that for years, again?"
I'm glad we have Sony's assurance on this. I'm also looking forward to God of War Ragnarok, Horizon Fobidden West, and GT7 in 2021!
@BAMozzy You have to admit though, even if MS went out of their way to make sure Sony had their status quo and nothing changed at all for them, there would be a delicious irony if Sony just continued money hatting their main competitor to make special content for them, ran their online services on their competitors network, and sold exclusive games made by their competitor. PS would basically be a limited edition Xbox client.
@themightyant I like how Activision (Kotick) has added the confusion of comparing it to Minecraft, implying nothing will change for Sony and Nintendo at all.
There's another fun thing that could come from this. MS could drop the price of CoD on PlayStation the first year they control it and honor those contracts to $60 to match MS standard pricing. Acti was one of those few with Sony jacking prices up to $70. That's an indirect blow to Sony's pricing model if they did that.
I wouldn't count on any future projects being multi-platform. They didn't pay nearly $70 billion for nothing. If Sony doesn't like that they should have bought Activision, and if they did I doubt they would be playing nicely with everyone else.
@Clankylad Of course Microsoft could always just refund them whatever they spent on those deals and void the prior contracts.
@Clankylad What's fair considering Sony's moneyhatting practices?
Phil’s Twitter https://twitter.com/xboxp3/status/1484273335139651585?s=21
It does say “our desire” which suggests to me that they want to leverage the IP for something.
It makes sense to me. Gamepass subscribers get the games for free but PS5 sales bring in more cash so do both. Wow should be on everything to get more money, does anyone actually buy a console just to play COD? Gamepass users get it all included while PS5 users need to pay for it. It still makes Xbox more attractive than PS5.
Also Microsoft aren't afraid of Sony anymore, they are afraid of Netflix, Google, Facebook, Amazon etc. They want Sony still in the industry so that one of the big companies I mentioned before doesn't come in and steal Microsoft's thunder. Is there room for 4 big gaming platforms?
@sirmrguitardude What MS want is people to sign up too Game Pass. All the games released under Activision, and any game they have to release contractually (like Deathloop, Ghostwire) will all be honoured.
The 'last' CoD under this will either become F2P and whatever MP that is gets built upon and supported 'indefinitely' OR the Last CoD will be a Multi-player Only game with maybe a 'Best of' CoD MP where they maybe rotate a bunch of 'remastered maps' and Classic loadouts and a 'Portal' CoD to create you own modes,
With all those maps through out the CoD history, they could rotate between CoD4 one month CoD6 the next, have one month of CoD4 weapons and loadouts on CoD11's maps - a whole massive portal of MP for ALL CoD MP fans
The 'main' MP could go Free to Play after a few years and anyone who buys Battle Pass will automatically get access to the Best of CoD modes and their 'Portal' and for those that paid for CoD, will get the first Season of Battle Pass for free...
Anything ONLINE CoD related and/or already on Playstation will remain on Playstation too. As for CoD: Zombies, I'm sure they'll support ANY CoD Zombies modes on Playstation. However, if Treyarch want to make a new Zombies game, identical to the structure of their 'CoD:Zombies' games, but without having to try and fit the plot to CoD (Nazi's, Military) that will be EXCLUSIVE to Game Pass.
Studio's like High Moon may make a new Darkwatch game, Infinity Ward may want to try a third person action adventure to break out of the FPS rut, Sledgehammer may have a third person CoD co-op spin-off idea they want to explore, Raven may be given CoD Online (MP/Warzone) to run and update, Beenox may want to make a Kart racer/smash bros game with characters from spyro, crash, banjo, conker, CoD, Halo, Doom, Wolfenstein, Quake, Perfect Dark, Hexen, fable, skyrim, gears, psychonauts, hellblade, Warcraft etc they can. All for Game Pass.
If you think MS bought Activision to keep churning out CoD every year the same way its been done for 'years', keeping all those 'creative' and Talented developers from working on 'projects' they want to crunch the annual cycle, you are WRONG.
They want to build the biggest ONLINE community where EVERYONE can play and enjoy the SAME CONTENT on ANY platform. Therefore as there is a online CoD Community, they will support those and have to go F2P to really do that LONG term. New stories and spin offs don't have to be on PS so won't be
Removed - flaming/arguing; user is banned
All very vague.
He "desires" COD to be on PlayStation.
What, Warzone? Mainline COD games? Both?
Or is he bargaining with Sony again to try and get Game Pass on PS5?
I find it all very fishy myself...
Removed - flaming/arguing
@BAMozzy They don't need to buy a publisher to bring games to their platform.
@mousieone That's one of the most carefully worded tweets i've ever seen. Could be interpreted in almost any way.
We'll have to wait and see.
@themightyant Don’t disagree with you. We will have to wait for sure.
Also it’s true you don’t spend 70 billion on something to give it away but the truth is the biggest property on the deal isn’t COD it’s King. They can afford to let COD be multi as long as the game will now have parity between the systems and reduce fees like cross play etc.
I kind of feel like this is like me expecting conjugal visits from my ex
Removed - flaming/arguing; user is banned
@isturbo1984 only way starfield is coming to PlayStation is via gamepass. That’s the end goal…gamepass on everything. And it’s going to be super interesting how fanboys on both sides react the day sony finally relents and allows gamepass on their platform. Maybe after ms buy EA.
Personally I’m not sure what I’ll do…having both a ps5 and series X. I guess I’ll sell the Xbox if gamepass is on PlayStation…though will miss smart resume.
@Bleachedsmiles Looks like that is their overall strategy. But Microsoft has been so unpredictable. and now with the Activision acquisition... my safest bet is to not bet at all. I just kinda never say never.
My end goal is to own just one viable platform. Not quite there yet... have to buy them all still. Rumor is this Xbox GP on PlayStation will be a gimped version.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...