UltimateOtaku91

So basically they are admitting that after 10 years they will most likely make call of duty xbox console exclusive.

Already played the game when it first came out and its an amazing game, much much better than the first game personally in every aspect and much more to do with town building, bounties and tactical skirmishes. Plus its hack and slash.

Xbox players are in for a treat.

@Tharsman Atelier is a fantastic game and should be enjoyed by a lot more than it should, other big games that I personally believe people on xbox would enjoy are the Trails of cold steel and YS games.

But I definitely wouldn't recommend most of what NIS bring out such as disgaea, neptunia and games like fairy fencer and mugen souls. They are very niche even on playstation and not the best type of games to get xbox players into JRPG's

@Tharsman it's a strange one as I remember when SMT V came out the PS4 version was mentioned in the games code. Plus I wouldn't rule out Microsoft paying for this as they did say they were working with a lot of Japanese partners.

Its always a guessing game with atlus and square enix to why their games go to one console and not the other etc, and I doubt we will ever get to the bottom of it.

If true then it seems Microsoft have most likely paid for exclusivity or for playstation exclusion, as playstation 4/5 isn't mentioned in that image. Either that or Nintendo had a requirement in their original contract to exclude playstation, so nothing stopping these games coming to xbox.

Maybe in retaliation to playstation nabbing persona 6 as an exclusive, we will have to wait and see, unless this a fake.

This man is Legendary and fully deserves the award.

@Martsmall I'm not saying they don't think the deal would be good in general, but just adding a reason why they wouldn't be against it, they have something to possibly gain from the deal but absolutely nothing to lose, if that makes sense.

Mario Kart 8 deluxe is starting to feel stagnant to me now, so this is coming out at the right time and actually looks like decent fun. But I'm hoping the characters don't cost too much and the battle pass is quite generous to players.

I can't see any third party developers/studios being against the deal at all, and why would they? With Sony saving the millions they usually spend on call of duty, these developers are hoping sony now turn their attention and money towards them, something similar to what EA said about the deal about Battlefield getting more attention.

Luckily it's on gamepass as I wouldn't want to pay £60 for this and then more on battle passes, suicide squad got a lot of hate and so should this really.

Coming to playstation plus as well so this game should see a sharp rise in players. Probably more than it did at launch.

@Moonglow ah I see that's would make sense, maybe under Microsoft ownership they will change that in the future.

I'm surprised not to see Diablo 4 on this list, I thought diablo was a massive series on PC.

This and Exoprimal should flop hard and deservedly so.

It's a live service game so makes sense to boost the player count.

So where's the image of a playstation 4/5 and nintendo switch? Or do they want the public to think its not on those consoles.

Oh it's cuckoo lulu again, every time she puts out a tweet she loses a few brain cells.

Keep in mind Ni No Kuni 2 has a totally different combat system to the first game. This one is hack and slash with a set party and no monster collecting/evolving like the first game. But to me that only makes this game even better.

@relaxplease

How about not basing it on a real life city?

How about a big map with 4 sectors each with their own biomes. A city area, snowy area, swampy area and maybe a sandy area etc similar to fantasy games.

Octopath Traveler 2, Hogwarts Legacy and Samurai Maiden on PS5

And Metroid Prime Remastered and Fire Emblem Engage on the switch

Team ninja nailed it with this one, makes the hype increase for the Ruroni game.

@themightyant it's also on playstation plus extra 😉

@Tharsman By risk I meant from Bethesda point of view, a risk for them to make exclusive as its one of their bigger games which would bring in a lot of guaranteed sales.

@Jaxx420 starfield would be more of a risk to make timed exclusive at the time due to it being Bethesda's main title on the scale of fallout and elder scrolls games. Whilst Deathloop and Ghostwire were new smaller experimental IP's. It would of cost sony a tonne load to land starfield as an exclusive.

It's funny how many say sony were trying to get starfield as an exclusive, yet theres no facts or statements to back that up. It was a journalist on twitter from "Kinda Funny" who has 57k followers who made that rumour and everyone just believes it.

Was planning to start it next week but seeing the reviews and comments on here I might give it a pass. Sounds like it needs some updates.

On PS5 i will be playing Wild Hearts which I'm finding more fun than monster hunter at the moment, but I'm finding it hard to find other players. Also my copy of Octopath Traveler 2 should come today so I'm looking forward to starting that.

On Switch I will be playing some Kirby return to dreamland and Fire Emblem Engage, I've also bought Harvestella which I may start today.

Halo infinite also had problems getting splitscreen to work and cancelled it altogether in the end, so it's definitely not a third party problem with split memory. To me the series S is holding the X back, obviously the X is capable of more features and can run certain tasks better, one of them being splitscreen play.

The baldur gates devs should just release the game on xbox day one and patch in the splitscreen later on if they can.

First Avengers, then Gotham Knights and now this, these studios making bland live service games using the DC/Marvel popularity to drive its sales. Why can't we get decent single player games like the old arkham games, spiderman and deadpool etc

Hopefully the iron man game doesn't follow the live service route.

@Kaloudz exactly, I couldn't imagine sony (or anyone) paying that kind of money to get a game on a subscription service and Microsoft probably know this. This deal is all about bolstering gamepass and becoming an even bigger subscription service and thats why Sony are against it to me. If microsoft said we won't put in onto gamepass you'd bet sony would sign it straight away.

@Jarobusa the deal won't be denied, at worse there will just be concessions made.

But if that 1% chance it does get denied then you would guarantee Activision will switch marketing rights over to xbox. Maybe Activision should give sony a little warning about that?

@Jarobusa depends how long Microsoft have told them the deal is there to sign. The regulators may end up telling sony to sign the deal as its not going to end in their favour, before Microsoft withdraws the contract.

But I think Microsoft will leave that contract on the table anyway as they don't want to lose that revenue it would bring in, atleast not whilst Sony are the market leader by a huge margin.

@Dezzy70 some actual advertising would help no? Sony have been pushing ads like crazy lately especially with the life size models around the globe and ads during champions league games which are watched by millions in Europe, also on buses and billboards in the UK. But there's nothing from Microsoft.

Sony are going to wait to see what the regulators say first, if its seems negative for them then they will then sign the deal. But at the moment they aren't jumping the gun too soon, they are waiting to see how it all plays out.

Also if its full parity then can sony can request to have it on playstation plus day one? Or would Microsoft all of a sudden have a problem with that.

For me soul hackers 2 was a bit disappointing, the dungeons (especially the axis/soul matrix) are some of the blandest designs I've seen from Atlus. Story is still good though and the combat is fun so still worth a try.

Call of duty in what form? Warzone? Mobile? Or the main series games?

@Fenbops if you put me on ignore then I wouldn't see your comments either...... 😏

@Kaloudz that would all depend on Microsoft, if microsoft deemed sony buying square enix as having a major effect on their revenue then yeah I'd expect them to contest the deal. Or Microsoft may think pffft we hardly get anything from sqaure enix games anyway so let sony have them.

That's the thing with all these acquisitions large and small, they can be contested but it's just if it's worth it, and with ABK sony obviously think it's worth it.

@uptownsoul yep, the same people jumping for joy when xbox bought Bethesda, when xbox bought ABK, when xbox got tomb raider timed exclusivity. The same people who also constantly bash playstation for sqaure enix deals.

@uptownsoul I can't believe people think nintendo and Sony are competitors 😑

If they weren't competitors then why did nintendo have to pay to have octopath traveler 1 as a timed exclusive to begin with? Why did nintendo pay to have monster hunter rise as a timed exclusive?

@Moonglow I agree that Nintendo isn't a factor in the Activision case due to call of duty not being on their consoles so why would they care. But if Sony or Microsoft were to buy square enix or capcom then I'd guarantee nintnedo would be there trying to stop the deal.

@Kaloudz Sony could of contested the Bethesda deal if they wanted but for some reason they didn't, with ABK it's different as it involves call of duty which brings playstation revenue of over a billion. Its all about the money, if call of duty had been on Nintendo all these years and brought them similar revenue then they would also be against the deal, massive multiplayer games are more important than single player games due to the money they bring in, a game on playstation or Nintendo could sell 20 million copies and still not bring in what call of duty does yearly. That's why playstation didnt care about the Bethesda deal, although their fan base did.

@Kaloudz Microsoft explained the case by case and basically they meant only online multiplayer games like elder scrolls online and fallout 76 that reached a wider community.

@Moonglow originally I wasn't talking about ABK, I was talking about in general they are competitors in the same market in reference to octopath traveler. You're the one who brought up the ABK deal.

@Banjo- there's nothing to report is what I meant, it's known to everyone straight away in trailers that they are playstation timed exclusives or exclusive add on content. They weren't exactly trying to hide it. Paying for open timed exclusivity is different from paying for xbox exclusion behind the scenes.

@Banjo- yes because that's resident evil document was the only reported case of sony paying for xbox exclusion (gamepass) and the only reason it was reported was because it was leaked. From the original comment you made I thought you were referencing deals like that and not the normal timed exclusive deals sony do.

@Moonglow in terms of ABK yes as its all about call of duty which is not on nintendo consoles. If the case was about apex legends, minecraft, or Square enix games then Nintendo would definitely be brought up in the case and be against the deal.

@Banjo- it was secret because it wasn't public knowledge, we all found out because it was leaked, do you know what it means when something gets leaked? They call it a leak as it was meant to be a secret at that time.

@uptownsoul I know, the hypocrisy is unreal. They also seem to forget games like the medium, tomb raider, stalker 2, high on life, roblox, ark 2, the gunk and many more that they have paid millions for timed deals.

@Banjo- so the resident evil game is literally the only reported case of sony secretly paying for xbox exclusion. The rest are either timed deals in which xbox dabble a lot in too or exclusive perks for a multiplayer game. Both of which are known to everyone including the public, from trailers etc.