Support NeoGAF

[poppabk]

how many of you guys even play call of duty here? or even any activision games at all? i havent played an activision game since modern warfare 2.

I haven't played a CoD since the original Black Ops 2. I have played Candy Crush more recently than any Activision game. I would play through the campaigns if they came to gamepass though.

 

[DarkMage619]

how many of you guys even play call of duty here? or even any activision games at all? i havent played an activision game since modern warfare 2.

I play Diablo and played World of Warcraft for years. I'm positive Diablo would go into Game pass and I'm curious to see how World of Warcraft will be integrated.

 

[adamsapple]

how many of you guys even play call of duty here? or even any activision games at all? i havent played an activision game since modern warfare 2.

I'll be playing a lot more of them when they start dropping on game pass on top of what I already play.

 

[PaintTinJr]

We never had a $1T company because $1T used to represent a significantly higher amount of wealth than it did before 30 years of printing money. Microsoft In 1999 is a trillion dollar company in today's dollars.

I'm pretty sure the low inflation for those years already bakes that into relative amounts - so you'd probably need to give me a little maths example that shows why that is true.

Assuming that was true, how is it that by percentage-of-wealth the distribution continues to get worse, when if that being true would suggest things have got better - with superior distribution.

Everything over those 30years has been impacted by inflation, but they've also been degraded by materials and quality- whether it be less milk coco in chocolate or voids in steel - so any comparison that doesn't conclude the top 1% have continued to take more and get wealthier in real terms seems false to me. I mean are you saying that Microsoft have lost relative wealth since 1999?

 

[TheGodfather07]

I'll be playing a lot more of them when they start dropping on game pass on top of what I already play.

the cod campaigns are short right? i might play them when they land on gamepass. though i hear cod 4 is still the best one to this day. really good campaign that was. which other ones are good?

 

[adamsapple]

the cod campaigns are short right? i might play them when they land on gamepass. though i hear cod 4 is still the best one to this day. really good campaign that was.

I will continue to champion Infinite Warfare as the best campaign in the modern CoDs. Plus you won't have to download 150GB like the last couple.

Give it a shot (if it ever comes to a service!)

 

[TheGodfather07]

I will continue to champion Infinite Warfare as the best campaign in the modern CoDs. Plus you won't have to download 150GB like the last couple.

Give it a shot (if it ever comes to a service!)

once the acquisition clears, wont they all end up on gamepass? the entire bethesda catalogue is on there. i expect the same for activision.

 

[mansoor1980]

 

[fred420170]

Charging for online would not have either.

how many of you guys even play call of duty here? or even any activision games at all? i havent played an activision game since modern warfare 2.

I haven't played a single COD game since MW3. I don't play FPS on consoles in general and my PC right now is not that strong and I mainly use Mac anyway.

 

[adamsapple]

once the acquisition clears, wont they all end up on gamepass? the entire bethesda catalogue is on there. i expect the same for activision.

Until it actually happens, anything is possible.

 

[Bernardougf]

Microsoft's share price would take a hit. But the "$2T company" would be able to recover from an overvalued acquisition.

Microsoft would not be bleeding money, they just wouldn't make as much.


It's a weird hypothetical because Sony would be putting a shotgun in their mouth hoping the pellets take out Microsoft behind them.

And even so you have people here saying its IMPOSSIBLE for MS to make COD exclusive ... people that Okeyd your very post. It would Definitely NEVER HAPPEN!

You can only choose one ...
1 - its impossible for MS to make COD exclusive because would demage the brand and make the aquisition pointless therefore demaging the xbox business beyond repair (not MS of course)

In this case it makes perfect sense for sony to take the hit and tank COD so they can sink XBOX even more

Sony would not die and would "kill" their biggest competition

2 - MS can make COD exlcusive if they really wanted ... it would not kill the brand or demage xbox, it would lessing the money made (same as bethesda games by the way) aiming is this case to bring more users for the xbox platform, and they would not bleed money as you said it.

........


All of this is hypothesis of course, but people have to be coherent, people saying its impossible for MS to make COD exclusive because would cause some insane repercussions to the brands (cod/xbox) when also saying is ludicrous for sony to not accept COD anymore because would harm them and do nothing to xbox are trying to make two opposing points without any cohesive argument
..........

Sony is not MS friends and vice versa... they are here to make money and the lesser the competition the better as MS well know

 

[fred420170]

I took a break after MW3 many years ago. I picked up MW2 when it came out and love it, matter of fact almost knocked out the season 3 battle pass this past weekend since it was a double xp weekend. I think the hate comes from people that play it every single year non-stop and expect some huge change.

 

[Thirty7ven]

 

[DryvBy]

Fish.gif

 

[Bernardougf]

Shareholders are given Nadella pretty wide range in terms of his actions in regards to xbox because it is currently a single digit part of the business and may still be if Bing and Azure grows. If they don't, I think it's going to be 12% of the MS annual business.

Short summary, shareholders don't particularly care yet. How many questions have MS answered about xbox in the last 1-2 years worth of earnings call?

People keep purposely forgetting that MS made bethesda games exclusive and in game pass... loosing a lot of money since they sell a lot more historically on playstations in the console space.. and shareholders did fuck all

Is just amazing how something that is happening before their eyes with bethesda is being brushed aside as something "completely" different.

 

[reksveks]

Moving on from the weird hypotheticals about Sony refusing to host Activision, and assuming that no one raising a complaint.



https://www.ft.com/content/be838956-7038-4179-8a1c-851b83048d5d

Is just amazing how something that is happening before their eyes with bethesdais being brushed aside as something "completely" different.

So you are agreeing that shareholders don't give a fuck?

 

[Baki]

Shareholders are given Nadella pretty wide range in terms of his actions in regards to xbox because it is currently a single digit part of the business and may still be if Bing and Azure grows. If they don't, I think it's going to be 12% of the MS annual business.

Short summary, shareholders don't particularly care yet. How many questions have MS answered about xbox in the last 1-2 years worth of earnings call?

Board and management will care about Xbox as they've just invested $80B into that department. All eyes on Phil. He will get the boot if this Xbox revenue decline continues. I think it's likely that they are already planning to have the ABK team take control of Xbox.

 

[Bernardougf]

Moving on from the weird hypotheticals about Sony refusing to host Activision, and assuming that no one raising a complaint.



https://www.ft.com/content/be838956-7038-4179-8a1c-851b83048d5d


So you are agreeing that shareholders don't give a fuck?

Yep

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

PSA: I didn't know there was some kind of kink of women being stuck in mud.

 

[feynoob]

1 - its impossible for MS to make COD exclusive because would demage the brand and make the aquisition pointless therefore demaging the xbox business beyond repair (not MS of course)

In this case it makes perfect sense for sony to take the hit and tank COD so they can sink XBOX even more

Sony would not die and would "kill" their biggest competition

Stupid argument

2 - MS can make COD exlcusive if they really wanted ... it would not kill the brand or demage xbox, it would lessing the money made (same as bethesda games by the way) aiming is this case to bring more users for the xbox platform, and they would not bleed money as you said it.

Another stupid argument.

MS is a business. They arent running a charity here. Look at this chart here. Activision made 924m from Sony, while Sony made 396m from activision. MS will lose those money by making the game exclusive. They get close to that money yearly.

Making COD exclusive will make them lose money that they were getting from PS, and in turn will also damage PS who will now lose up to 396m worth of sales from activision. That money is enough for Sony to make exclusive games and 3rd party deals for their platform. Its a money, which they dont have to make games to get that money.

Both platforms will lose money, which would have benefited their platform.

Maybe stop using dumb logic, and try to see this from a business prespective.

 

[feynoob]

Moving on from the weird hypotheticals about Sony refusing to host Activision, and assuming that no one raising a complaint.



https://www.ft.com/content/be838956-7038-4179-8a1c-851b83048d5d

At least ftc is usefull for something.

 

[adamsapple]

At least ftc is usefull for something.

It's for avoiding an EU probe, don't think FTC has to do anything with it.

FT = Financial Times.

 

[reksveks]

Board and management will care about Xbox as they've just invested $80B into that department. All eyes on Phil. He will get the boot if this Xbox revenue decline continues. I think it's likely that they are already planning to have the ABK team take control of Xbox.

Yep, they will have invested 80bn when the deal completes. Not currently invested, being a bit pedantic.

They will have to probably break it out of MPC but it's not going to be a huge issue. Xbox revenue will obviously increase due to them accounting the ABK revenue but there will be fuller analysis further down the road. It will be interesting to see what the mobile app store is branded as and which segment it will fall into.

 

[ToadMan]

Not since the moment they removed console SLC. And in fact even then their conclusion was that PS would die without COD on Playstation. Not Microsoft lol

The reasons they removed the console SLC corrects your misunderstanding.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Fish.gif

What's that smell?

Corruption.

 

[reksveks]

At least ftc is usefull for something.

adamsapple is right here, it's the EC that is pressuring MS to do something

 

[mansoor1980]

that has nothing to do with xbox gaming division in general

 

[feynoob]

It's for avoiding an EU probe, don't think FTC has to do anything with it.

FT = Financial Times.

adamsapple is right here, it's the EC that is pressuring MS to do something

Need to pay attention to short names more.

 

[ToadMan]

Sony has flat out said if CoD goes exclusive, it will ruin them. They've even gone as far as to say a slightly worse version of CoD would lead to their ruin.

And yet

Their [Sony] 1st party content is killer and doing really well. That is why their 1st party content doing good could be used as ammo as to why the deal should go through.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

The reasons they removed the console SLC correct your misunderstanding.

The reasons they removed it is because it would not make sense to remove COD (it generates a lot of revenue on Playstation). But by and large, it would have affected Playstation more than Xbox. Nowhere near "mortal wound" or anything for Microsoft though.

I do find it fascinating that people still cling to the idea that Playstation is somehow in a position of power regarding that deal. Yes, by removing COD from Playstation, Microsoft would lose some money and devaluate COD IP by it would not affect mobile market or PC market that much anyway.

 

[feynoob]

And yet

First point is Sony argument to regulators, 2nd is his point.

Sony needs COD money, because it allows them to invest on their business. Yearly money from COD helps them make those games.

It would have been expensive for Sony to make those games, if it werent for games like COD, fifa and Gtav printing them out insane money for their platform. All these 3 games needs PS+ account to play the online mode, which is extra revenue for them.

 

[adamsapple]

What's that smell?

Corruption.

Just a few more days until CMA becomes a corrupt organization as well

 

[DeepEnigma]

Just a few more days until CMA becomes a corrupt organization as well

Who's taking a top position in the CMA from MS that happened to work on this deal?

 

[feynoob]

Who's taking a top position in the CMA from MS?

You

 

[ToadMan]

how many of you guys even play call of duty here? or even any activision games at all? i havent played an activision game since modern warfare 2.

I bought the MW remake a couple of years back.

But the bloat made me uninstall it and I didn’t get MW2 2022 because of that.

I would usually buy the IW CODs - but with Warzone packed in, I can’t be bothered to download it all.

 

[DeepEnigma]

You

 

[PaintTinJr]

Assuming the deal goes through, it will be interesting if PlayStation will be able to exercise its right to disable crossplay with xbox for CoD - to avoid propping up the other platform's multiplayer scene for 10year - and if they did that, and Microsoft then withdrew CoD from PlayStation what the regulator response would be.

Obviously it would be a "move" by PlayStation they wouldn't have done to an independent ATVI, but as they have been against the deal for justified reasons, it being forced on them by regulators knowing the damage the acquisition can do to their business it would be interesting to see how they'd remedy that situation. Forcing PlayStation to enable crossplay and kill their COD revenues by a thousand cuts, or force Microsoft to honour the multiplatform commitment at the expense of killing Xbox's CoD scene would be n interesting decision for them to make IMO.

 

[Bernardougf]

Stupid argument

Another stupid argument.

MS is a business. They arent running a charity here. Look at this chart here. Activision made 924m from Sony, while Sony made 396m from activision. MS will lose those money by making the game exclusive. They get close to that money yearly.

Making COD exclusive will make them lose money that they were getting from PS, and in turn will also damage PS who will now lose up to 396m worth of sales from activision. That money is enough for Sony to make exclusive games and 3rd party deals for their platform. Its a money, which they dont have to make games to get that money.

Both platforms will lose money, which would have benefited their platform.

Maybe stop using dumb logic, and try to see this from a business prespective.

Calling me dumb or stupid is never going to change the fact that they did exactly the same thing with bethesda losing millions of dollars in revenue that would came from selling the game on playstation ... its a fact... they lost money and will continue to loose money not selling future bethesda games on playstation ... is less then COD ? Sure ... are you a share holder and/or executive that know from inside their strategies and what kind of money they are willing to accept loosing to boost xbox hardware marketshare ? Are you ? No.. so fuck you with your condescending superior tone ..

 

[Varteras]

Some of you need to stop putting so much dick in your posts and leave some for your pants. Take it from me. I miss him so much

 

[SportsFan581]

But going beyond that, CMA analysis implies that MS and Sony will exist in a symbiotic relationship when it comes to revenue from COD... that seems reasonable.

Which leads us to the conclusion that the net result is the status quo as it is today. If Sony and MS are happy with their relative positions then the status quo is good for them I guess - whether that is good for consumers remains to be seen.

It changes the revenue picture of the big three though, which should be good for the consumers in the end. Even with CoD staying multi-platform, the MS gaming division will be infused with revenue and profit which should make them more competitive in the space overall. They won't be the poor division looking for handouts from other divisions which should alter some of the investment choices they make, etc.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Even with CoD staying multi-platform, the MS gaming division will be infused with revenue and profit which should make them more competitive in the space overall. They won't be the poor division looking for handouts from other divisions which should alter some of the investment choices they make, etc.

That assumes their acquisition leads to more profits. Part of MS strategy is to subsidize via GamePass, so other divisions will need to help even more so now that 10,000 extra devs are on the payroll

 

[SportsFan581]

That assumes their acquisition leads to more profits. Part of MS strategy is to subsidize via GamePass, so other divisions will need to help even more so now that 10,000 extra devs are on the payroll

ABK is profitable just on their MTX revenue alone and MS will still have sales on PS + Xbox/PC users without GP. There is just no way to look at this deal that doesn't result in MS's gaming division gaining profit, substantially so.

 

[Varteras]

ABK is profitable just on their MTX revenue alone and MS will still have sales on PS + Xbox/PC users without GP.

Absolutely expect Sony to go out of their way to reduce the importance of CoD on PS.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

ABK is profitable just on their MTX revenue alone and MS will still have sales on PS + Xbox/PC users without GP. There is just no way to look at this deal that doesn't result in MS's gaming division gaining profit, substantially so.

If they keep the status quo they gain profit, but they will shift everything over to GamePass and that lessens the amount of profit they could gain otherwise

The other problem is they are spending $70b in cash provided by other divisions to buy them. How long will it take for them to recoup that 70B with the added profit from Activision? A very long time

 

[SportsFan581]

If they keep the status quo they gain profit, but they will shift everything over to GamePass and that lessens the amount of profit they could gain otherwise

The other problem is they are spending $70b in cash provided by other divisions to buy them. How long will it take for them to recoup that 70B with the added profit from Activision? A very long time

Not that again. That's not how corporations look at assets. ABK stands to be a much more profitable source of revenue than cash in a drawer (even with the favorable interest rates of today) even more so in the light of rampant inflation which devalues cash on hand, ABK has real-world value. The premium they paid over the market value is the investment on top, but even that is partially absorbed by the fact that share prices were down due to the scandal at the time.

The majority of ABK's revenue is MTX based, maximizing the amount of players playing should boost that not lower it, ABK was basically the perfect company for the GP model.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Not that again. That's not how corporations look at assets. ABK stands to be a much more profitable source of revenue than cash in a drawer (even with the favorable interest rates of today) even more so in the light of rampant inflation which devalues cash on hand, ABK has real-world value. The premium they paid over the market value is the investment on top, but even that is partially absorbed by the fact that share prices were down due to the scandal at the time.

The majority of ABK's revenue is MTX based, maximizing the amount of players playing should boost that not lower it, ABK was basically the perfect company for the GP model.

There are plenty of other useful means of deploying that cash

They could pay a dividend. They could buyback shares. They could pay down debt. They could acquire a different company.

It’s not a “cash or Activision” situation.

And by them sabotaging Activision business model for GamePass, the price being paid for lesser profits makes the deal that much worse

 

[feynoob]

Calling me dumb or stupid is never going to change the fact that they did exactly the same thing with bethesda losing millions of dollars in revenue that would came from selling the game on playstation ... its a fact... they lost money and will continue to loose money not selling future bethesda games on playstation ... is less then COD ? Sure ... are you a share holder and/or executive that know from inside their strategies and what kind of money they are willing to accept loosing to boost xbox hardware marketshare ? Are you ? No.. so fuck you with your condescending superior tone ..

Bethesda doesnt print that money yearly. Their entire revenue is $510m anually.
Sony doesnt lose much money from them.

COD does print insane amount of money on PS yearly. PS+ alone brings more money for them.
If COD has 20m players, and 10m players are on PS, they will need to have PS+ for online mode. That is $600m just from PS+ sale, not counting the game sales. That is more than Zenimax yearly revenue, just from online mode.

That is how big the game is on PS, and how much money Sony is earning from COD.

 

[SportsFan581]

And by them sabotaging Activision business model for GamePass, the price being paid for lesser profits makes the deal that much worse

It remains to be seen how much GP could/would lower sales of a title like this anyway, but the one thing is for certain in order for GP to have a noticeable impact on a title with this kind of broad appeal they would have to be gaining a lot of subscribers there, at which point they don't care. If GP can't grow and isn't something the broader market is interested in, than it can't really hurt CoD sales.

Certainly people considering doing the 3yr Gold to GP conversion should get on that because those kind of repeatable promotions for the service may go away. Them trying to ensure that the per user revenue for GP is closer to the $10/$15/mo. asking price would be the primary change I would expect following the closure of this deal. The primary discount that might stick will be the forthcoming family plan.

 

[feynoob]

There are plenty of other useful means of deploying that cash

They could pay a dividend. They could buyback shares. They could pay down debt. They could acquire a different company.

It’s not a “cash or Activision” situation.

And by them sabotaging Activision business model for GamePass, the price being paid for lesser profits makes the deal that much worse

Activision is business opportunity for MS outside of console gaming.

https://www.polygon.com/22917625/microsoft-activision-blizzard-metaverse-satya-nadella

Plus the rest, which you already know.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Activision is business opportunity for MS outside of console gaming.

https://www.polygon.com/22917625/microsoft-activision-blizzard-metaverse-satya-nadella

Plus the rest, which you already know.

The metaverse, that’s something I haven’t heard a lot about since Zuckerberg laid off thousands of employees chasing that fad