Bloomberg: Microsoft will keep publishing Activision titles on PlayStation

Time will only tell. But forget about having much optimizations for the PS5 hardware or any exclusive extras.
 
Kinda reads like "well keep supporting [the existing] titles on PlayStation" without really coming out and saying future games will be exclusive to Xbox.

Exactly what they said about Bethesda. Which is why the Elder Scrolls Online is still getting content updates and new DLC on PlayStation.
 
Last edited:
Modern Warfare and Black Ops will be Xbox and PC exclusive. All the experimental COD games like Vanguard and Future Warfare that most people disliked will be on PlayStation.
 
61q9df.jpg
 
Andodalf said:
Vanguard was the best selling game in the Us this year. Cold War was #2.

Modern warfare 2 will be bigger than either.
Click to expand...
I get that and of course MW2 will be bigger than CW and Vanguard. What I'm saying is most Call of Duty players are on Warzone not on Vanguard MP. MP aspect of CoD has been on a downwards, that doesn't mean the game won't sell. It sells anyway because of it's deep integration with Warzone more so than the MP. I hope they can bring out a solid MP but we'll see.
 
I can see either way being profitable to MS.

Keeping games multiplat may get them less GP subscriptions and console sales, but they'll still get to sell games at full price like any independent publisher like Ubi or EA.

Time will tell which path MS will choose, but I don't really see Playstation getting cock-blocked TOO much with these recent acquisitions. I mean, I really doubt that TES, Starfield and Fallout are going to be Xbox exclusives forever; there's just too much money to be made in other platforms. Other than that, maybe Game Pass on PS is not really a pipe dream, just saying...
 
That sounds like an explicit confirmation that their intention is to keep ABK as an autonomous subsidiary in order not to run into regulatory issues.

And lets face it, if they stated up-front their intention was to make CoD exclusive, that would look explicitly anti-competitive to the extent that it'd definitely legitimize objections to the deal on those grounds.

Also. As I noted in another post the annual release + season pass strategy really does not work within Gamepass. Because it turns the offer into "buy a subscription and then buy another subscription!" Whilst severely distracting from all other similar product on the service for a month every year...

To be honest, the more I think about it, the worse a deal it looks for MS. The whole structure of Activision is so geared around this specific launch cadence I cannot imagine it not simply resulting in a severe loss of revenue for the unit as a whole. I really do not see a scenario where it makes CoD bigger and more profitable.
 
Last edited:
jshackles said:
Kinda reads like "well keep supporting [the existing] titles on PlayStation" without really coming out and saying future games will be exclusive to Xbox.

Exactly what they said about Bethesda. Which is why the Elder Scrolls Online is still getting content updates and new DLC on PlayStation.
Click to expand...

I agree, actually it's a smart move to enlarge the Game Pass library, getting ready for the arrival of Spartacus
 
Lol let's not do this again after Bethesda. Microsoft will continue to have Call of Duty Warzone on PS platform. Just like Elder Scrolls Online will continue to be on PS platforms. But say goodbye to the annual Call of Duty games after 2023 or the sequel to Warzone.
 
KAL2006 said:
Lol let's not do this again after Bethesda. Microsoft will continue to have Call of Duty Warzone on PS platform. Just like Elder Scrolls Online will continue to be on PS platforms. But say goodbye to the annual Call of Duty games after 2023 or the sequel to Warzone.
Click to expand...

I agree, but objectively don't you see that this as potentially disastrous for earnings from the franchise?

Just consider how they've had to massage Halo Infinite as a product to make it work within GamePass...
 
Last edited:
GrayChild said:
www.bloomberg.com

Microsoft Buys Scandal-Tainted Activision in Bet on Metaverse

Microsoft Corp. plans to buy Activision Blizzard Inc. for $68.7 billion, acquiring a legendary game publisher responsible for franchises like Call of Duty and World of Warcraft, but recently roiled by claims of sexual misconduct and discrimination.
www.bloomberg.com www.bloomberg.com



There you go. Sony isn't going anywhere and the Playstation brand will be perfectly fine.

JIM RYAN IS GOD!
Click to expand...
All this means is that annual COD will continue on Playstation. It's a common sense, on the other hand, shiny new projects will get heavily prioritized for Xbox if they release them for Playstation. Not a good news for Sony fans no matter how you cut it.
 
Where's the memento meme of the guy raising l, don't trust what Phil says.

In other words: Not their intent, but you know, if they don't agree to have Game Pass on PS then what can we do, right?
 
Another fucking 18mths of back and forth bickering about the nuances of every interview.

After 2023, the only COD on playstation will be warzone, and every future activision title will on xbox/PC only. It shouldn't really effect the majority of PS owners on here as they all have 1$£euro Gamepass subs on their PCs
 
Clear said:
That sounds like an explicit confirmation that their intention is to keep ABK as an autonomous subsidiary in order not to run into regulatory issues.

And lets face it, if they stated up-front their intention was to make CoD exclusive, that would look explicitly anti-competitive to the extent that it'd definitely legitimize objections to the deal on those grounds.

Also. As I noted in another post the annual release + season pass strategy really does not work within Gamepass. Because it turns the offer into "buy a subscription and then buy another subscription!" Whilst severely distracting from all other similar product on the service for a month every year...

To be honest, the more I think about it, the worse a deal it looks for MS. The whole structure of Activision is so geared around this specific launch cadence I cannot imagine it not simply resulting in a severe loss of revenue for the unit as a whole. I really do not see a scenario where it makes CoD bigger and more profitable.
Click to expand...

I don't think making COD bigger and more profitable is a consideration here for MS.

I think MS will just include COD + the season pass content free with GamePass. The annual cadence of COD releases benefits GamePass, because now they can take advantage of the prestige and clout of this colossal franchise to drive GP subs and spend less on buying timed GP content from third-party publishers.

They want as many gamers across Xbox, PC and PS on their GP service, and even the idea that they can and will buy up more publishers is a message to PS and Switch gamers that they should move to Xbox/PC if they really want to play all the games they love and that the GP service will give them a better deal (arguably) than they're enjoying currently.

If COD drops in profitability with this move, it's less of an issue for MS if it drives up GP subs and also reduces the need for them to buy up new GP content from third parties. The cumulation of those cost savings together with increased sub revenue should offset it to a large extent.
 
Clear said:
I agree, but objectively don't you see that this as potentially disastrous for earnings from the franchise?

Just consider how they've had to massage Halo Infinite as a product to make it work within GamePass...
Click to expand...

Microsoft are playing the long game they will continue to eat costs just like they do with Gamepass. Mark my words Call of Duty 2023 will be the last Call of Duty to release on PlayStation.
 
Even if they do keep Call Of Duty on PS the casuals will face the choice of paying £70 or getting it on Gamepass with whatever offer is available at the time.
It will be a no brainer for most gamers.

What this actually does is show a huge platform differentiation, that's the point Microsoft are making with this acquisition.
 
mansoor1980 said:
so why they fork over 70 billion ?
Click to expand...

Been reading more about the deal via BBC. The reason they paid that sort of money was:

Microsoft claims it will help them grow their gaming business across mobile, PC and consoles along with providing building blocks for the metaverse.

Key words there are the metaverse and mobile. People still don't understand how much money FB (now Meta), Microsoft and Epic are investing in the metaverse. The metaverse isn't some small VR project and It'll be as revolutionary as the internet or social media, but to be a big player in the metaverse they need content that is going to pull people in.

The mobile market is a lot bigger than the console market. In 2021 global consumer spending in gaming apps reached a staggering $133 billion and now Microsoft has a big slice of that pie. With this purchase Microsoft now owns King. That means they also own Candy Crush, which last year was still one of the highest earning mobile games on both Andriod and iOS.

Console and PC gaming will only be marginally important to Microsoft. Metaverse and mobile are where the real money is and where they'll recoup most of this 70bn.
 
Last edited:
I can't believe Sony is letting Microsoft continue to do this to them. Mojang, Bethesda, and now Activision. Sony has not responded in any meaningful fashion. They bought Insomniac and the Returnal devs, but those are very small in comparison. Sony not really using their war chest.
 
KAL2006 said:
Microsoft are playing the long game they will continue to eat costs just like they do with Gamepass. Mark my words Call of Duty 2023 will be the last Call of Duty to release on PlayStation.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be so sure. As I say my perspective is based on the existing dev pipeline they have for CoD, and I have to admit to being at a loss as to how they can maintain it without losing a lot of their audience.

Not to mention how severely GP release devalues the campaign element compared to the multiplayer segments. And this is an important thing because the campaign has always driven initial buy-in, so its relative value as part of the whole CoD package (as in opportunity cost versus revenue attained) is kinda central to the entire publishing strategy. You minimize the annual campaign, and CoD is no longer CoD... its just another service FPS title.
 
SlimeGooGoo said:
As I said on the Bethesda thread, franchises not historically associated with Xbox will keep being released on all platforms.

New IPs will probably be Xbox + Windows exclusive only.
Click to expand...
So you think the next Elder Scrolls game will be on all platforms then?
 
This is pr bullshit. They will keep cod on ps til next June when the deal is finalized. Then it's good by.

And forget about overwatch, Diablo, or any other IP. That's MS exclusive without even an attempt to try it on ps.
 
Clear said:
I wouldn't be so sure. As I say my perspective is based on the existing dev pipeline they have for CoD, and I have to admit to being at a loss as to how they can maintain it without losing a lot of their audience.

Not to mention how severely GP release devalues the campaign element compared to the multiplayer segments. And this is an important thing because the campaign has always driven initial buy-in, so its relative value as part of the whole CoD package (as in opportunity cost versus revenue attained) is kinda central to the entire publishing strategy. You minimize the annual campaign, and CoD is no longer CoD... its just another service FPS title.
Click to expand...

They will maintain it by having Warzone continue to be on PlayStation. While new yearly COD games release on Xbox/PC. If not 2023 by 2024 you won't see a new COD game on PS5. The argument about Campaign can be said about any singleplauer game in Gamepass.
 
"Communities" is the key word here. Note that they didn't say "games" or "future titles."

Hard to say exactly what this wishy-washy phrasing means, but to me it reads like they're planning to continue supporting GaaS titles that are already on Playstation. Don't think it says anything meaningful about whether the first post-acquisition Call of Duty or whatever will show up on the PS5.
 
So even Jeff fucking Gertsmann is not to happy nor thinks this is a good move for Microsoft with all the good will they have built up image wise.





Mainly about Bobby Kottick.

Thought this was the best thing I;ve seen:

FJZh_rgUYAM2wmj
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Microsoft seemingly releasing everything in Spring on PlayStation; store saturation?
2 3 4 5
210
9K
SneakersSO replied
Microsoft, Activision Deny Report Regarding Financial Performance
Business Hardware  2 3
131
11K
Jaybe replied
Chris Dring: Microsoft was the No.1 games publisher in the world last month | 64% of spend on Microsoft games in December came on PlayStation devices
News Business Sales-Age  3 4 5 6 7
329
14K
Topher replied
  • Poll
PlayStation owners only: What Microsoft games would you actually buy?
2 3 4 5
232
10K
foamdino replied
  • Poll
What effect will the recent PlayStation Plus price increases have on you?
2 3 4
152
3K
SpokkX replied
Top Bottom