Support NeoGAF

[SenjutsuSage]

Call of Duty is referred to as a title, so hence forth when Call of Duty is referred to it means the IP not specific games. They also explicitly mention removing it from PlayStation being the concern, OBVIOUSLY they aren't referring to the games Activision are contractually obliged to make for PlayStation, MS will really love the marketing costs of these games considering Sony are going to pay for it though.

Self explanatory I would've thought.

Call of Duty the IP as previously established will continue on PlayStation after Sony's agreement with Activision is finished. Is the cope that when the agreement is over, that this is saying they will not remove the games people have already paid for? Get a grip.

Seriously.

To summarise for the hard of coping:

CoD NOT exclusive
CoD NOT being pulled from PlayStation beyond any agreements.
CoD POTENTIALLY going to more platforms
MS doing it for all gamers (MONEY) not just the small percentage available from their own ecosystem.

Next up, Starfield or whatever it's called.

XBox first, PS GotY edition the year after. Mark my words.

I love how in a blog that is focused entirely on Activision Blizzard, a deal they want regulators across the world to approve, you found a way to bring in Starfield, a game that's from Bethesda, is tied to an acquisition in which Microsoft knew didn't carry anywhere near the same regulatory risk, to make this wild assumption. Reach of the thread. Let's clap for this man.

 

[Swift_Star]

I expect Matter IP be multiplatform (and GaaS titles in general) as considering that Bungie even made a FAQ regarding that addressing exclusivity question - not contractual obligations and support - they might be. Though I don't expect Bungie making a lot of games in general - they 600+ already on Destiny already.

So it's only multiplat if it's a Sony acquisition. Got it.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

Why didn't they just say that from the beginning? That Bungie deal must have scared Phil.

This has NOTHING to do with Bungie and Sony. Microsoft literally laughed that one off. This is purely about the unthinkable of Microsoft acquiring Activision Blizzard prior to Jan. 18th, and trying to ensure the deal is approved. Regulators are what scares Microsoft.

 

[Elios83]

Microsoft tries to win over regulators for its massive Activision Blizzard deal | CNN Business

Microsoft is trying to persuade regulators to approve its $68.7 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard with a series of new app store commitments that it says will put the company “on the right side of history” as policymakers worldwide debate new laws to force competition open in digital...

edition.cnn.com

Separately, Microsoft said it has committed to Sony that popular franchises it acquires from Activision Blizzard will remain available on PlayStation under Activision's existing deal with Sony, and that it has offered to extend the deal on a "multiyear basis." The existing deal with Sony runs until 2024, Smith said.

So they're even offering Sony to actually renew their current deal (expiring in 2024) for multiple years

Thag pretty much has to seal the deal for the US govt on this aqcusistion then right? Hard to argue against it at this point

This is still going to get a lot of scrutiny.
It might become the scapegoat case to actually write the laws of future fair competition over contents and services for all the high tech companies.
Microsoft is not dumb, they're not going against their own interests for nothing, they just see these concessions as a fair price to pay compared to the long term reward which they think is going to be a leadership position in services and contents.
Regulators are not dumb either, they know that if a company is offering something is because they see a bigger gain elsewhere and they're going to investigate into the implications as well.
Microsoft just wants to put themselves in a good position proving their good faith.

In any case those people who thought that Microsoft buying Activision was a deal done with no consequences have been proven to be totally wrong.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

All future COD titles will be on PS. All sequels to popular ActiBlizz titles (eg: Diablo) that currently on PS will continue to be on PS. Everything else no guarantees. PS customers cant be harmed if they are exclusive to MS platforms because they never had those games in the first place.

Nah, Diablo 4 might be available but it really depends if it skips PS4 or not. Because it was originally announced to PS4 too right?

So they're even offering Sony to actually renew their current deal (expiring in 2024) for multiple years

We tried, but they did not like our terms

 

[Swift_Star]

At this point, I'd say there's a big chance this deal won't go through.

 

[Menzies]

MS would never destroy COD's reputation by limiting access to streaming on PS5. There's this thing called the internet where bad news travels fast. A couple million people tweeting about the experience in a single day would turn 80B into about 20B overnight.

I'd say this is correct for the here and now.

Though I do wonder if the architecture of the PS6 and Xbox 'who-the-fuck-knows' are wildly different, what happens then? Does MS spend internal resources developing on a wildly different system?

More things to ponder.

 

[kingfey]

At this point, I'd say there's a big chance this deal won't go through.

It will go. FTC is just playing around with this one.

MS have a big defense. DISNEY. As long as that one exist, FTC can't legally stop this acquisition.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Hey adamsapple give it up. COD will be multiplat. What they do with Blizzard and the COD devs in future will be interesting to see.

Yeah; as interesting as some of the counter-arguments have been, safest approach for now is to assume COD, Overwatch, Diablo, Crash, Spyro etc. will be multi-console until when or even if Microsoft states explicitly otherwise.

Which won't be for a long time, if ever. Regardless, I think everyone should be interested in what new games (sequels, new IP) they come with; the latter in particular still having a high likelihood of being Xbox/PC-exclusive for people who are wondering about things on that front.

Trying to argue the semantics of the wording beyond the most obvious takeaway the average person will have, is fruitless at this time for all parties.

 

[adamsapple]

At this point, I'd say there's a big chance this deal won't go through.

They're changing their approach to messaging just to make sure the deal goes through.

I think odds are high it will, but who knows.

 

[Yoboman]

I thought more people having access to games was a good thing? Seems like there's some unhappy people in this thread

I said this would happen. FTC and Sony going openly multiplat with Bungie were the 1-2 punch to make MS's approach look untenable

Expect this to be the precedent going forward for any of them buying a publisher, there will be an expectation to maintain multiplatforn development where it exists

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

It will go. FTC is just playing around with this one.

MS have a big defense. DISNEY. As long as that one exist, FTC can't legally stop this acquisition.

Lol you're still using Disney like it matters.

The reason they even posted this in the first place is because they're worried it won't go through.

 

[GHG]

I don't want to have to buy four different gaming systems to have the option to play anything I want, I don't think that's too hard to understand? In fact, I'd go further - I don't understand why anyone would want exclusives…

And I do own all 4 btw, so I don't spite myself because something isn't on my preferred hardware.

I don't have to buy four tvs to watch movies, or four sets of speaker to listen to music, or four ovens to cook four different meals, etc.

If you want a platform it's for the games.

It's a minor inconvenience but anyone who actually enjoys this hobby wouldn't see it as such, it's one of the quirks.

And by the way, if you were a cooking enthusiast you would have more than one type of oven.

It will go. FTC is just playing around with this one.

MS have a big defense. DISNEY. As long as that one exist, FTC can't legally stop this acquisition.

Are you an adult?

Do you really think Microsoft can plead their case by saying "but but Disney"?

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

All future COD titles will be on PS. All sequels to popular ActiBlizz titles (eg: Diablo) that currently on PS will continue to be on PS. Everything else no guarantees. PS customers cant be harmed if they are exclusive to MS platforms because they never had those games in the first place.

Pretty much, though I suspect part of this also means Sony won't be pulling anymore exclusivity deals like SFV and KOTOR remake; IP that either had initial legacy on Xbox or were clearly multiplat for a long time, or multiplat with playerbase majority for prior entries on Xbox platforms (i.e 360 with SFIV).

Because if the point is to mitigate fans of established IP with known multi-console history from feeling miffed due to those games being locked away to a specific console going forward, that initiative should be industry-wide among all the platform holders IMHO, not just one.

 

[Elios83]

At this point, I'd say there's a big chance this deal won't go through.

It will be approved with tons of asterisks and MS might be forced to accept even more concessions compared to what they're offering on their own.
At that point if MS doesn't agree things might get ugly and go into court or they might drop the deal like nVidia did with ARM.
But I think it won't happen, they'll just be regulated on fair competition, they won't be able to use the Activision games to damage competition and that's it.

 

[Hawking Radiation]

Can we just get back to talking about games.

We've got Elden Ring, Horizon Forbidden West and GT7 coming soon. I'd like to see more articles on these games.

MS said this, Sony said that is all well and good but it get's tiring to see threads on what these suits are saying in interviews.

 

[Aguero9320]

If you want a platform it's for the games.

It's a minor inconvenience but anyone who actually enjoys this hobby wouldn't see it as such, it's one of the quirks.

And by the way, if you were a cooking enthusiast you would have more than one type of oven.

I do actually, three, but that tramples on my point (regular, June and Microwave) And a sous vide…

Anyway, I don't think we're really disagreeing - it is an inconvenience, and if could be removed I'd like it to be. I can't remember the last console I didn't own tbh, but a one controller, one library, one hdmi future is the utopia for me.

I'd also like a Movies Anywhere kind of service, to bring together everything I'd bought of the Xbox, PlayStation and Nintendo stores…

 

[nikos]

Does anybody honestly think Microsoft would give up multi-platform Call of Duty revenue?

 

[ethomaz]

".....on PlayStation through the term of any existing agreement with Activision. And we have committed to Sony that we will also make them available on PlayStation beyond the existing agreement and into the future so that Sony fans can continue to enjoy the games they love. We are also interested in taking similar steps to support Nintendo's successful platform. We believe this is the right thing for the industry, for gamers and for..."

Most of the conversation was centered on COD. Not every IP that Act/Blizz has will be multi-platform. But in that paragraph they say it in plain english that any popular games in addition to COD will be.

Yeap it seems a lot of readers are not seeking the change in message.

Before it was only "honor the existing agreements".

What happened in the last weeks to change the tone?

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

Can we just get back to talking about games.

We've got Elden Ring, Horizon Forbidden West and GT7 coming soon. I'd like to see more articles on these games.

MS said this, Sony said that is all well and good but it get's tiring to see threads on what these suits are saying in interviews.

While I agree with your sentiment wholeheartedly, this is a thread specifically talking about the MS-Acti-COD thing. To see talk about games, you can visit those game-specific threads at the click of a mouse.

 

[Mattyp]

Can they afford not to? Xbox team doesn't have the funds for all these purchases. I'd imagine the resources were taken from Microsoft Corporate. They need to make the money back and COD is a big selling franchise (Somehow).

Did anyone here pass grade 3 maths? If I see another need to make the money back I'm going to put a bullet in my head.

 

[Yoboman]

Nah, Diablo 4 might be available but it really depends if it skips PS4 or not. Because it was originally announced to PS4 too right?


We tried, but they did not like our terms

That sort of changing of terms, or making Gamepass a mandatory is exactly the sort of thing the FTC will review and won't take lightly.

I suggest you look into product tying

Certain tying arrangements are illegal in the United States under both the Sherman Antitrust Act,[2] and Section 3 of the Clayton Act.[3] A tying arrangement is defined as "an agreement by a party to sell one product but only on the condition that the buyer also purchases a different (or tied) product, or at least agrees he will not purchase the product from any other supplier."[4] Tying may be the action of several companies as well as the work of just one firm. Success on a tying claim typically requires proof of four elements: (1) two separate products or services are involved; (2) the purchase of the tying product is conditioned on the additional purchase of the tied product; (3) the seller has sufficient market power in the market for the tying product; (4) a not insubstantial amount of interstate commerce in the tied product market is affected.[5

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Microsoft tries to win over regulators for its massive Activision Blizzard deal | CNN Business

Microsoft is trying to persuade regulators to approve its $68.7 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard with a series of new app store commitments that it says will put the company “on the right side of history” as policymakers worldwide debate new laws to force competition open in digital...

edition.cnn.com

So they're even offering Sony to actually renew their current deal (expiring in 2024) for multiple years

Isn't the Sony/Activision deal WRT lead marketing rights and timed exclusive content? There's zero way Microsoft are willing to offer Sony that on top of the games still coming to PlayStation, surely.

If so.....yeesh. At this point there's like three players at the table: Xbox, GamePass, and Microsoft. And it looks like Xbox might be getting the short end of the stick.

They're changing their approach to messaging just to make sure the deal goes through.

I think odds are high it will, but who knows.

If it doesn't, that frees up $66 billion for them to spend on other things (they'd have to pay Activision-Blizzard $3 billion for time spent on the deal ultimately not going through, or something to that effect).

I'm sure they have a contingency plan in place the deal doesn't go through, I just hope in the near-term that includes some of the other known 1P games (besides Starfield and Forza 8) coming out relatively soon, like the next 1-2 years. Sony's release lineup is pretty crazy this year and that'll only amplify in 2023 with games like Spiderman 2 and probably (at last) TLOU2 Factions. Nothing 1P on Microsoft's side has been confirmed beyond 2022, or even been given specific release years/windows to my knowledge.

 

[adamsapple]

Yeap it seems a lot of readers are not seeking the change in message.

Before it was only "honor the existing agreements".

What happened in the last weeks to change the tone?

Nothing, it's the same message that things that will be there will remain there in the future with no actual commitments made towards development of new games.

Same message just presented in a neater wrapper to show the FTC.

 

[assurdum]

They said exactly the same thing about Bethesda games and magically Starfield (which was initially multiplat) it's become Xbox exclusive. I stopped to believe to them.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

They said the exactly same thing about Bethesda and magically Starfield (which was initially multiplat) it's become Xbox exclusive. MS already said the same shit before the contract was closed. Stop to believe to them.

No they didn't, especially not as a direct post to the FTC

You think they're going to play sly with regulators?

 

[assurdum]

No they didn't, especially not as a direct post to the FTC

You think they're going to play sly with regulators?

You have a short memory. Google it. Same identical bullshit.

 

[Swift_Star]

It will go. FTC is just playing around with this one.

MS have a big defense. DISNEY. As long as that one exist, FTC can't legally stop this acquisition.

One of those things are not like the others.

 

[WoodyStare]

You'll get your CoD on PS5.

But, MS is going to have a 4k rule 34 splash screen when you load the game of Master Chief's big 13 inch dick pounding Crash Bandicoot in the ass hole whilst Spyro the Dragon lies spread eagle getting ran like a train by 4 COG soldiers.

Pick your poison.

 

[kingfey]

Are you an adult?

Do you really think Microsoft can plead their case by saying "but but Disney"?

It seems you dont understand the magnitude of the Disney deal. That deal shouldnt have been approved in the 1st place. Because of that, Disney now owns tons of big entertainment IPs.

if FTC refuses this deal, they will be playing favoritism, and MS can sue them legally.

 

[kingfey]

One of those things are not like the others.

Disney now owns star wars, marvel entertainment, and fox universe. And ftc let them own fox.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

You have a short memory. Google it. Same identical bullshit.

They didn't. Go book an appointment with a neurologist

 

[DJ12]

They said exactly the same thing about Bethesda games and magically Starfield (which was initially multiplat) it's become Xbox exclusive. I stopped to believe to them.

They also specifically listed "Game Pass" in the list of exclusive platforms......

An insider has said he knows MS have already asked Sony if game pass can be on PlayStation.

I'm not sure why some are resistant to let go of their console warrior past. MS has dropped it like it's hot.

They cannot wait for the green light to take PlayStation owners money.

 

[assurdum]

They didn't. Go book an appointment with a neurologist

https://www.gematsu.com/2021/03/mic...but-goal-is-exclusive-games-on-xbox-game-pass

 

[Zok310]

Jim cant keep winning. Xbox twitter today, oof. How you buy a pub and still gotta put your shit on PlayStation.........

Y'll keep dying on that Halo blade, keep capping for a $2 trillion company.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

https://www.gematsu.com/2021/03/mic...but-goal-is-exclusive-games-on-xbox-game-pass

Do you even read your own links?

 

[DJ12]

https://www.gematsu.com/2021/03/mic...but-goal-is-exclusive-games-on-xbox-game-pass

Goal is exclusive games on xbox.... GAME PASS, not xbox.

They don't give a shit what it's on, as long as it's from a gamepass sub.

 

[GHG]

It seems you dont understand the magnitude of the Disney deal. That deal shouldnt have been approved in the 1st place. Because of that, Disney now owns tons of big entertainment IPs.

if FTC refuses this deal, they will be playing favoritism, and MS can sue them legally.

Dealing with the FTC is serious, especially if it goes to court. Using childish Neogaf style defence arguments wont fly.

Oh and give me a break about Microsoft suing the FTC. They will appeal the decision if it goes against them and that's about it.

 

[Warnen]

Good call let ps5 keep getting cod so so t let's Xbox have the superior destiny

 

[assurdum]

Do you even read your own links?

That's what they said after the deal was closed but checks what they claimed before the Bethesda contract was defined:

https://www.techradar.com/news/bethesda-games-will-get-preferential-treatment-on-xbox-series-x

 

[kingfey]

Dealing with the FTC is serious, especially if it goes to court. Using childish Neogaf style defence arguments wont fly.

Oh and give me a break about Microsoft suing the FTC. They will appeal the decision if it goes against them and that's about it.

This isnt your typical neogaf respond.

FTC set themself up with this one. Disney deal is much bigger issue in the entertainment industry, compared to MS getting Activision for gaming industry. Even with activision deal, MS cant stop Sony global market dominance, 3rd party timed exclusive deals. They dont have a bigger power like disney have.

MS has an actual appeal with this one.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

That's what they said after the deal was closed but looked what they said before the contract was defined:

https://www.techradar.com/news/bethesda-games-will-get-preferential-treatment-on-xbox-series-x

They are literally telling the FTC, that COD and other popular franchises will continue on PS. They never, ever did that with the Zenimax deal.

What part of that are you not grasping? This isn't vague PR bullshit for us in an interview. They are directly addressing the FTC here.

 

[GHG]

This isnt your typical neogaf respond.

FTC set themself up with this one. Disney deal is much bigger issue in the entertainment industry, compared to MS getting Activision for gaming industry. Even with activision deal, MS cant stop Sony global market dominance, 3rd party timed exclusive deals. They dont have a bigger power like disney have.

MS has an actual appeal with this one.

This is all so laughable.

You really think Microsoft's lawyers, who will undoubtedly be some of the best in the business, will type up a defence that consists of "but Disney!" while knowing full well that every case is dealt with on individual merit?

And there's no need to appeal yet so settle down. If there is reason to appeal you'd know about it because the only party doing the suing will be the FTC.

 

[assurdum]

They are literally telling the FTC, that COD and other popular franchises will continue on PS. They never, ever did that with the Zenimax deal.

What part of that are you not grasping? This isn't vague PR bullshit for us in an interview. They are directly addressing the FTC here.

You told me if I read my link but did you have read the premise from the op claim ?:
Today we're announcing a new set of Open App Store Principles that will apply to the Microsoft Store on Windows and to the next-generation marketplaces we will build for games

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

This isnt your typical neogaf respond.

FTC set themself up with this one. Disney deal is much bigger issue in the entertainment industry, compared to MS getting Activision for gaming industry. Even with activision deal, MS cant stop Sony global market dominance, 3rd party timed exclusive deals. They dont have a bigger power like disney have.

MS has an actual appeal with this one.

If MS appeals you can be sure as shit they're not going to make a stupid case like that. This isn't a classroom. They'll be laughed out of the room if they did that

 

[NEbeast]

I like how biassed all the industry is towards Japanese companies and against Ms in particular.

When Xbox almost disappeared last gen thanks to Mattrick almost single handledly killed the brand and Sony reign the entire gen nobody bats an eye.

MS become competetivie and suddenly everyone and their mothers seem to care about competence and monopolies and what not.

Yet we didn't saw so much fuzz when Sony money hatted all big third party titles for some times exclusive shit (just a refresher, Starfield would come out only on PlaySation at launch) and only on PS DLCs and such.

Sony dominated so hard that they took away with making games $70 (€80) at launch a thing.

But you know, the problem is MS and now everyone needs to lose their minds because having a $15/month subscription with a plethora of games AAA, AA and indies alike is obviously bad for the consumer and paying $70 for each game upfront is healthy.

Quit crying. MS would have done the same if they won last gen. The fact both are playing nice is good for the industry. MS don't need you to whiteknight for them.

 

[adamsapple]

Jim cant keep winning. Xbox twitter today, oof. How you buy a pub and still gotta put your shit on PlayStation.........

Y'll keep dying on that Halo blade, keep capping for a $2 trillion company.

They are literally telling the FTC, that COD and other popular franchises will continue on PS. They never, ever did that with the Zenimax deal.

What part of that are you not grasping? This isn't vague PR bullshit for us in an interview. They are directly addressing the FTC here.

* Continue to be available. Not necessarily get new releases.

I hope this gets clarified before Q4 2023.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

You told me if I read my link but did you have read this from the op?:
Today we're announcing a new set of Open App Store Principles that will apply to the Microsoft Store on Windows and to the next-generation marketplaces we will build for games

So you haven't read anything then

First, some commentators have asked whether we will continue to make popular content like Activision's Call of Duty available on competing platforms like Sony's PlayStation. The obvious concern is that Microsoft could make this title available exclusively on the Xbox console, undermining opportunities for Sony PlayStation users.

To be clear, Microsoft will continue to make Call of Duty and other popular Activision Blizzard titles available on PlayStation through the term of any existing agreement with Activision. And we have committed to Sony that we will also make them available on PlayStation beyond the existing agreement and into the future so that Sony fans can continue to enjoy the games they love. We are also interested in taking similar steps to support Nintendo's successful platform. We believe this is the right thing for the industry, for gamers and for our business.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

* Continue to be available. Not necessarily get new releases.

I hope this gets clarified before Q4 2023.

*Will make availlable

We've already repeated this constantly but no one wants to address this simple point. Do you honestly, seriously believe Microsoft is going to go down the route of intentially misleading regulators?

 

[kingfey]

If MS appeals you can be sure as shit they're not going to make a stupid case like that. This isn't a classroom. They'll be laughed out of the room if they did that

Yeah right. And we should say Disney deal was good. Nothing to worry about it.