reinking
Gold Member
From your lips to Phil's ears.Have you seen League of Legends on Game Pass? All Characters unlocked.
Overwatch 2 and World of Warcraft will be similar when it's on Game Pass.
From your lips to Phil's ears.Have you seen League of Legends on Game Pass? All Characters unlocked.
Overwatch 2 and World of Warcraft will be similar when it's on Game Pass.
They keep gaining the money from the games they sell on playstation, and bring the better deal to game pass.I wonder what they will do if COD players remain on playstation.
Maybe they will make Cod $80 on PS5 $60 on Xbox?, or maybe missing modes on the PS version? etc.
I think how nice they will play will be determined by how much success they get.
They have a contract in place and MS said it would honor all existing contract, said contract might not allow mw2 in gp for a few yearsAnd?
That's an exclusive deal, this is a marketing deal has nothing to do with GP, all COD will be on GP Phil literally just said it.They have a contract in place and MS said it would honor all existing contract, said contract might not allow mw2 in gp for a few years
MS owns the studio behind deadloop, and yet its only on ps right now, not xbox, due to a existing contract. Heck, deathloop is coming to sonys extra sub before gamepass lol
I wonder what they will do if COD players remain on playstation.
Maybe they will make Cod $80 on PS5 $60 on Xbox?, or maybe missing modes on the PS version? etc.
I think how nice they will play will be determined by how much success they get.
So, they wanted to keep Starfield exclusive. With COD, they might actually be sincere in saying that COD will remain on all platforms etc etc.Anyone know why they couldn't talk about Starfield before the deal closed, but now they can tell us their plans for Activision games before the deal closes?
Like with all things, im keeping expectations in check to not be dissapointed, if it happens, awesome, i would love to get mw2 as soon as deal closes, but not holding my breathThat's an exclusive deal, this is a marketing deal has nothing to do with GP, all COD will be on GP Phil literally just said it.
I doubt that MS will care too much since they'll be making money from the game regardless. I imagine that all marketing for Call of Duty after the deal has gone through will contain Xbox logos and the 'play with game pass' and everything else that comes with it.I wonder what they will do if COD players remain on playstation.
Maybe they will make Cod $80 on PS5 $60 on Xbox?, or maybe missing modes on the PS version? etc.
I think how nice they will play will be determined by how much success they get.
Well unless Sony had explicitly stated with the Activision deal that COD couldn't go to GP (Which I doubt given they had no idea Microsoft would acquire Activision) it should just be a formality as long as the deal goes through.Like with all things, im keeping expectations in check to not be dissapointed, if it happens, awesome, i would love to get mw2 as soon as deal closes, but not holding my breath
Gamepass will be CODpass and indies.
Have to invest in a $300-$600 console first. Then there is the potential for sunk cost fallacy in abandoning the PS platform.I can't imagine CoD players not jumping over to Xbox.
Buying the game for $70 on PlayStation versus having it on Game Pass is a good enough reason. If Microsoft needs to twist the knife they certainly can, through timed exclusive new content and full exclusive cross over stuff with their other ip.
A Doom themed map pack would be pretty cool.
$70 in ps and included in gp is enough
There might be even more incentives than that, early betas, more free stuff etc. But cod players still remain on ps.... I mean MS still gets money from them, win win
I can't imagine CoD players not jumping over to Xbox.
Buying the game for $70 on PlayStation versus having it on Game Pass is a good enough reason. If Microsoft needs to twist the knife they certainly can, through timed exclusive new content and full exclusive cross over stuff with their other ip.
A Doom themed map pack would be pretty cool.
I doubt that MS will care too much since they'll be making money from the game regardless. I imagine that all marketing for Call of Duty after the deal has gone through will contain Xbox logos and the 'play with game pass' and everything else that comes with it.
A lot of casual gamers will probably just buy an Xbox because they'll believe that's where the game will play best through marketing (even though we all know that it's PC!).
Well unless Sony had explicitly stated with the Activision deal that COD couldn't go to GP (Which I doubt given they had no idea Microsoft would acquire Activision) it should just be a formality as long as the deal goes through.
This is what will be their strongest pull, access all call of duty's for monthly fee and potentially have early access, extra content or even the game added day one on gamepass.They didn't just acquire Activision to not have their IPs on Gamepass.
This acquisition was ALL about Gamepass dude. They will be there day one.
I can't see that to be honest, given what Phil just said I'd think it's not the case.Even if they didn't amend it for gamepass they'll most likely have something that covers subscription services
I think new ones will be on GP because they'd get a lot of backThere's no clarification if these are just the legacy/old games in the respective IPs (COD especially), or new releases. I would think with a statement like this, they'd want to definitively clear the air because there is a ton of people out there (myself included) looking at the logistics of them putting new COD releases on GamePass and seeing how it doesn't make sense from a financial POV.
COD Warzone OTOH, makes sense. Overwatch II makes sense given it's now F2P. Diablo IV I assume makes sense but I don't know if that's a F2P. Even if not, though, it's not a big seller the way COD is. But yeah, I think the only thing we can take from today's statement is that legacy COD games will be in GamePass and that was a foregone conclusion. If Phil Spencer meant new COD releases, I believe he would have explicitly stated that to clear any doubts.
Have to invest in a $300-$600 console first. Then there is the potential for sunk cost fallacy in abandoning the PS platform.
Personally have both and have no problem with Xbox being my COD/GP machine.
I can't see that to be honest, given what Phil just said I'd think it's not the case.
They get money from both, nothing better than that, you will never get everyone to switchI guess it will be a balance of making money via playstation vs bring playstation players over to gamepass/xbox
Its tricky stuff. Because while they would make like $40 for cod sale on playstation, if they could get that playstation cod player on xbox they could make even more.
I guess it will be a balance of making money via playstation vs bring playstation players over to gamepass/xbox
Its tricky stuff. Because while they would make like $40 for cod sale on playstation, if they could get that playstation cod player on xbox they could make even more.
They get money from both, nothing better than that, you will never get everyone to switch
This is why xbox as a whole, is no longer about selling 1 console, its getting you in, in any way possible, even if its only $1 while streaming to your phone
Its still more money than they would be getting from people that would never switch or buy an xbox console
Steam.It would be better for Microsoft if gamers were on xbox,cloud or PC because they would get 100% of any digital transaction, if the gamer is on playstation sony gets a cut.
This is cool and all, but I feel like this blog post was more for the PR of the regulators than it was for announcing anything useful to us plebs.
Gamepass question, is the dlc for fallout 4 included on pc?
Sorry have been out getting my workout in wasn't just not answering youSo I'm guessing Call of Duty but nothing else?
They've said in the past that all first party titles would be on Gamepass. So this isn't exactly news. This is just them trying to make nice with the regulators.why not both.gif
They've said in the past that all first party titles would be on Gamepass. So this isn't exactly news. This is just them trying to make nice with the regulators.
Do it before MW2. I don't wanna spend 70$![]()
They're willing to take the hit on the initial sale to get the recurring revenue. If you think of the gamer who only plays COD and they play all year then the "free on Gamepass" customer is worth $180 per year or more if they play online. Then there's still season pass and DLC purchases that don't go away. If the only game someone plays is this one then they should just buy it outright.Putting CoD on gamepass is a really bad idea. We have seen from Halo and Forza sales or lack thereof that putting games on gamepass directly affects their game sales. CoD is an expensive game to make every year. Activision has said ALL their studios work on CoD now. Last gen it used to be three studios making one CoD game every 3 years with Raven helping out. Now ALL studios are helping out because these games have campagn, coop and mp modes that keep getting bigger.
I wouldnt be surprised if every game costs $100 million a year. MW2 probably cost more. Nvm the fact that these games are cash cows that literally generate all of Activisions revenue and profits. Putting these games on gamepass is going to increase gamepass revenue but at the cost of yearly guaranteed revenue that comes with being the best selling game year after year.
We have seen that making expensive shows available on services isnt profitable. Disney is losing almost a billion every year despite the fact they have almost 150 million subs. HBO lost billions and had to literally shelve movies after cancelling dozens of shows and shifted back to the theater release model. Turns out putting your $200 million movie on a $10 service was not a good idea.
I get that MS is willing to take these losses because their end game sees them hit 100-200 million subs, but take one look at how Netflix stock crashed the moment they started losing subscribers even though they were at 200 million, and how Disney is losing a billion despite 150 million subs and you have to wonder if this fucking business is worth it. Especially when the theater model for Disney was working so damn well. Marvel, Star Wars, Pixar were printing money. Billions in profits every year. Why change? Why change CoD?
Putting CoD on gamepass is a really bad idea. We have seen from Halo and Forza sales or lack thereof that putting games on gamepass directly affects their game sales. CoD is an expensive game to make every year. Activision has said ALL their studios work on CoD now. Last gen it used to be three studios making one CoD game every 3 years with Raven helping out. Now ALL studios are helping out because these games have campagn, coop and mp modes that keep getting bigger.
I wouldnt be surprised if every game costs $100 million a year. MW2 probably cost more. Nvm the fact that these games are cash cows that literally generate all of Activisions revenue and profits. Putting these games on gamepass is going to increase gamepass revenue but at the cost of yearly guaranteed revenue that comes with being the best selling game year after year.
We have seen that making expensive shows available on services isnt profitable. Disney is losing almost a billion every year despite the fact they have almost 150 million subs. HBO lost billions and had to literally shelve movies after cancelling dozens of shows and shifted back to the theater release model. Turns out putting your $200 million movie on a $10 service was not a good idea.
I get that MS is willing to take these losses because their end game sees them hit 100-200 million subs, but take one look at how Netflix stock crashed the moment they started losing subscribers even though they were at 200 million, and how Disney is losing a billion despite 150 million subs and you have to wonder if this fucking business is worth it. Especially when the theater model for Disney was working so damn well. Marvel, Star Wars, Pixar were printing money. Billions in profits every year. Why change? Why change CoD?
Purchase COD for $70 annually on PlayStation or subscribe to Xbox/PC GamePass and have access to every COD game ever made + every COD game releasing in the future (probably with perks like early/discounted DLC and exclusive content). This will make the console purchasing decision much easier for parents deciding on which box to get for their child on Christmas or for friends deciding which platform to play on together.
They didn't just acquire Activision to not have their IPs on Gamepass.
This acquisition was ALL about Gamepass dude. They will be there day one.
You're making an argument but ignoring the most likely price that will be paid IMO. Realistically, anyone who only plays Duty saves by buying the game outright. The price would be 70 plus 60 (annual gold or ps+) = 130, versus 180.Game Pass is $10 a month, $120 a year. Call of Duty is $70 on Playstation (and Sony takes a 30% cut). The average person who buys Call of Duty every year is looking at that like "Do I want to pay $70 for this one game on PlayStation? Or do I want to pay $10 a month to play this game and hundreds of others on Xbox?". And they'll probably pick the Xbox / subscription route. Microsoft makes $49 one time on the PlayStation version, or potentially makes $10 a month for forever the other way. I'd say 99% of people play Call of Duty online, so that's another factor ($9.99 a month for PlayStation Plus Essential, or only $5 more for Game Pass Ultimate at $14.99) which furthers the value proposition.
Yes, direct sales will suffer for this. Of course they will - a lot of people will see the value in just subscribing to Game Pass instead of buying one game for $70. But, overall, revenue will increase and that's all Microsoft really cares about.
This is the real reason. Microsoft wants that top console spot. If you're buying a game console just to play the latest Call of Duty game, you're looking at either
Even taking this out for a year makes the whole thing a wash. Unless you count all the other games that might release on Game Pass that year, or all the back catalog of games. In one scenario, you're getting a single game. In the other, you're getting hundreds. Guess which one little Tommy's mom is going to pick when it's Christmas...
- PlayStation 5 ($499.99) + PlayStation Plus Essential (one month, $9.99) + Call of Duty ($69.99) = $579.97
- Xbox Series X ($499.99) + Game Pass Ultimate (one month, $14.99) = $514.98 (11% less than PS5 option)
- Xbox Series S ($299.99) + Game Pass Ultimate (one month, $14.99) = $314.98 (46% less than PS5 option)
Just COD though. Wonder what that means for all the other properties.![]()
Plus assuring COD remains on PS
![]()
From all the anti-game pass folks here, it's only $1 for three years for ultimate. So that would be the absolute cheapest option.You're making an argument but ignoring the most likely price that will be paid IMO. Realistically, anyone who only plays Duty saves by buying the game outright. The price would be 70 plus 60 (annual gold or ps+) = 130, versus 180.
Well, if that promo is still available when Duty becomes day 1, then yes, that would be the cheapest option for 3 years of playing only Duty. But technically the price would be 60.33 per year since you need to sub for 3 years to convert if I remember correctly. Still cheaper than 130 per year though.From all the anti-game pass folks here, it's only $1 for three years for ultimate. So that would be the absolute cheapest option.