PlayStation: Xbox's Call of Duty offer was "inadequate on many levels"

I wonder how many years Sony has guaranteed destiny on Xbox 😆

After almost 20 years of Call of Duty on PlayStation, their proposal was inadequate on many levels and failed to take account of the impact on our gamers

Yeah no shit Jimbo, you think YOU be the one to call the shots 😆 frankly Jimbo and playsation should be happy that they are getting COD at all.

Microsoft could be a lot more aggressive if they wanted, they could literally moneyhat everything if they wanted.


Lol at Phil too pretending to be friend of PlayStation, at some point you can't be on the fence. Sony's and Microsoft goals just clash to much for it not to be all out war 😆
 
not in their initial statements and the several years statement came out afterwards.

They lied until they were exposed, why are you defending a mega corp its weird.
Why do we care if two mega corps are having business disagreements? Oh that's right, because that's what forums like this were made for. Acting like we have no preference over who "wins" or "loses" is just disingenuous.
 
Once again, Phil Spencer caught speaking out both sides of his mouth. His rhetoric sounds very consumer friendly, but he says different things behind closed doors.
Microsoft are taking games away from gamers. To date. Sony have not done that. Those who cheer on the big Microsoft acquisitions are blind fanboys who don't really care about gaming as a whole.
If Sony start doing that shit too, they'll get the same crap from me as wellZ
 
Imagine believing a false equivalence buying a publisher to 3rd party timed exclusives

Imagine thinking a first party studio would owe anything beyond any agreements.

Activision are ready to become MS first party, offering any years beyond agreement is generous in itself already.
 
Will Xbox be able to produce the same quality CoD without the PS gamer market and 100% reliance on GamePass?

Doubt Reaction GIF
How does losing PS playerbase change the quality of talent at studios like Infinity Ward or Treyarch? That makes no sense.
 
Phil is a phony and blatantly lies about almost everything he says.

All he cares about are "services" and "value".

Yet all of Microsofts studios are in development hell under his watch, and games announced 3-4 years ago have zero gameplay footage to show for.
He didn't lie 3 years can mean several, this is sour grapes from Ryan because Phil's not bending over for him 😅 seriously this Jim Ryan is delusional 🙄 Microsoft do business and they do it well, they are laying out crazy money and he thinks they won't use it as a weapon against its competitors?
 
I guess anyone who thought COD was going to be available on PS consoles forever should start eating crow now. You'll have until the end of the decade at best, but the clocks ticking and it waits for no one. Will Sony be able to produce a COD killer before then?

Doubt Reaction GIF
They got Bungie who is making games for Xbox. If Sony says anything to conflict with that, then they probably have stipulations that they can cancel their buyout and once again be independent.
 
I'll only say about this.. Do you guys remember when Microsoft was pushing really hard for crossplay?.. yeah..this thing about making CoD exclusive to Xbox ecosystem now might go against those previous statements.
 
Imagine thinking a first party studio would owe anything beyond any agreements.

Activision are ready to become MS first party, offering any years beyond agreement is generous in itself already.
I never understood the opposing arguments. If I buy a home that had tenants living in it, I am entitled to evict them or keep them, but that is my choice. Why should Microsoft be forced to continue give concessions to Sony after purchasing Activision?
 
Confused here, that's 5 years COD will be on PS5+ by that time it could be dead 😂

They also still get there exclusive deal for the next 2 years.

I guess it's the exclusive stuff not being allowed past 2024? That's the issue here.
 
Last edited:
Time for Jim to buy Take Two.

Microsoft should just support COD on PS5 and use exclusivity as a key selling point for the next generation.
 
Last edited:
Imagine thinking a first party studio would owe anything beyond any agreements.

Activision are ready to become MS first party, offering any years beyond agreement is generous in itself already.
This is exactly why anti-competition laws are in place. With this information coming to light, the U.K. are increasingly unlikely to approve the deal.
 
Why do we care if two mega corps are having business disagreements? Oh that's right, because that's what forums like this were made for. Acting like we have no preference over who "wins" or "loses" is just disingenuous.
Huh? are you reading? There's a difference between praising scummy mega corps rather than justifying it cause you love Daddy Phil.

Same goes for the LoU remake price, the PS increased prices, lack of 1440p support - diff is at least Sony is being upfront about them.
 
we say this, but how do you know that? how do you know it wasn't Squares decision?

There have been many cases where they just choose to put it only on PS, also games like SF5 were partly funded by PS - you can thank them for some things even existing.
lol ok buddy SF4 has like 5 editions but you think the 5th game wouldnt exist without Sonys help ok 🙄
 
Why should Microsoft publish their first party IPs on a rival format at all?

It definitely isn't the same as Sony paying SE to keep Final Fantasy exclusive, because that's a third party multiplatform franchise. The norm is for third party games to be multiplatform and first party games not to be.
 
That's exactly what the OP says. Three years after the current agreement ends. So if the current agreement is valid for another 2 years, then another 3 years on top of that for a total of 5 years.
With content and feature parity as well, it's a great deal but Ryan wants more 😆
 
Jim Ryan finally grew some balls and decided that it was time to not let Microsoft create the entire narrative.

Took some time but here we are.

He's doing this for obvious reasons related to the regulators I mean.
 
How does losing PS playerbase change the quality of talent at studios like Infinity Ward or Treyarch? That makes no sense.

Because cutting off their largest consumer base dramatically limits the budget for the next franchise installment. It's such a simple calculus I can't believe you even asked that question.
 
This is from the guy who paid Capcom extra money to keep RE7 off of Gamepass, still won't let FF7 Remake on Xbox and recorded record profits last quarter and jacked the price up on the console, all while remaking games for a third time and charging an extra $10

Jimbo is a failure and the PlayStation brand is floundering.
 
Last edited:
This is exactly why anti-competition laws are in place. With this information coming to light, the U.K. are increasingly unlikely to approve the deal.

Anti competition laws are in place to stop one consoles first party to keep creating games on a rival platform for 3~5~8 more years ? 🤔

With content and feature parity as well, it's a great deal but Ryan wants more 😆

He doesn't just want it more, he wants it more on so many levels.
 
What's funny as fuck is that PlayStation and Jim would never give MS or Nintendo that courtesy of 3 years. They would announce an exclusive cod game without owning the company. Shittiest gaming company for real.
 
Last edited:
what Jim is big mad over is "Last week, Xbox revealed that it had "provided a signed agreement to Sony to guarantee Call of Duty on PlayStation, with feature and content parity, for at least several more years" beyond Sony's existing contract with Activision. Xbox said this offer "goes well beyond typical gaming industry agreements."
 
Last edited:
After almost 20 years of Call of Duty on PlayStation, their proposal was inadequate on many levels and failed to take account of the impact on our gamers

Says the guy who is preventing mainline Final Fantasy games from going to Xbox.
 
Top Bottom