Tom Henderson - Sony’s marketing deal for CoD lasts until 2025 or 2026

mckmas8808 said:
How much of a PR nightmare would it be to break that fine. And would it be worth it?
Click to expand...
I frankly dont know. I do know that gamers switch console loyalties every gen. They understand full well what exclusives means. We had MS own timed exclusive DLC rights for an entire gen before Sony took over the DLC rights and there was no outrage. People get that its just business.

I dont know. I wish I could make sense of this. I just cant. I see that UBisoft is willing to sell itself for just $8 billion and Im baffled that Sony paid $3.5 billion for one studio and maybe two IPs. I am baffled that MS paid $70 billion for COD knowing full well they couldnt put it on gamepass, let alone make it exclusive for pretty much the remainder of this generation. If the idea was to buy Activision studios for their expertise and IPs then clearly Ubisoft was much cheaper. 10x cheaper with even more IPs and studios. If the idea was to buy Activision to pressure Sony into allowing gamepass or to knock Sony out of the console market then why honor the contracts? If you are going to war then go to war, why be afraid of a lawsuit? If the goal was to get more gamepass content, why invest $70 billion in publisher that makes one console game a year and then not have that game on gamepass when Ubisoft couldve given you 3-4 games a year for just $8 billion. Again, Im trying to understand the purchase. I dont know why MS did this and Im trying to figure out which one of these reasons makes sense and I cant make sense of any of them.\

EDIT: Maybe its the long term move by Satya who wants to take over whatever he can before Tencent takes over everything, but again, Ubisoft for $8 billion, Crystal Dynamics and Square Enix Montreal studios went for just $300 million, Capcom can be had for $5 billion, Square Enix's market cap is $6 billion. They couldve even acquired all these companies and even take2 for $18 billion before they bought zynga and still have $40 billion to spare.
 
Last edited:
Darsxx82 said:
That due to the agreement between SONY-ACtivision the CODs of 2022 and 2024 can not be launched in Gamepass day one does not mean that they can arrive 1 year later which is what SONY imposes in its exclusivity clauses. That is, at the end of 2023 MWII can be launched in Gamepass and in 2025 surely you can already have in the catalog both MWII, COD 2024 and COD 2025 that this one should no longer have a problem to launch day one.

It seems that someone is wanting to believe that MS will not be able to take advantage of the acquisition of Activision until 2025. :messenger_tears_of_joy::messenger_tears_of_joy:

Acti-Blz is not just COD, it is much more. Nothing would prevent that when the acquisition is closed, all the past catalog of ACT-Blz (which is a huge) will be launched at once to Gamepass and that its next releases, beyond COd, can arrive day one also to the service of MS (Diablo IV?, the new IP?)
Click to expand...

The reason this is hard to believe is because if the contract only covered the first year of a release then we could have easily gotten COD games on GamePass by now. But we haven't.

So either those contracts cover all CODs released during the tenure of the contract being active, or.....

BeardGawd said:
What's also interesting is the rights of 1st refusal for 1 year after release. So they obviously are aware it can still wind up on a competing subscriptiom service but they just want rights of first refusal incase they want to match whatever the other offer is to keep it on PS Now, Plus, etc... Perhaps MS could make the terms unpalatable for Sony and they refuse.
Click to expand...

...they could in fact be re-upping the exclusivity of marketing rights for the COD games once the one year is up. I don't know how much that would cost them per game, but it's probably not much more than what MS paid for GotG to come to GamePass, maybe less.
 
DeepEnigma said:
Just taking a page out of your PS shade book. I'm sorry you fell for the Bungie bait, hook, line and sinker.

Pick yourself up and brush yourself off *pats you on the ass* you got this next time, kid.
Click to expand...
I have no fucking idea what you mean and I am sure you are not following me in my comment. I know your shtick is to be the thread joker but I will try again to make effort for those who are reading at least.

Devotion and the other devs that Sony is working with to make next GaaS projects have a lot of pressure because so many Sony guys are taunting that they will create the next "CoD killer". Being a CoD killer is a lot of pressure and requires a lot to prove as CoD is not the only the big fish or even the biggest. Fortnite and Apex and the other huge GaaS represent also a huge challenge for Sony to have stable place and a good share of the pie.

I know your comment about Halo is hollow , but this proves that even a huge name is not enough to break and make a stable presence. Sea of thieves took I believe several years to have huge crowd, but it was a nightmare when it was released.
 
SlimySnake said:
Is this speculation even warranted now that MS has confirmed that they will honor Sony's contracts?

Regardless, I speculated last year why MS didnt go out and get the biggest games of the year during the empty first 10 months before Forza and Halo showed up on the service. The biggest games they had were Outriders and MLB. Thats it. No RE8, no Far Cry 6, No Guardians, not even It Takes Two. It cant be because they couldnt afford it. They have 25 million monthly subscribers pumping in hundreds of millions per month. I think its entirely possible the Sony has signed deals with publishers preventing games from showing up on Gamepass. We know this to be true for RE8 thanks to the leaks.
Click to expand...

For games that have marketing deals with Sony, obviously. But Sony doesn't have marketing rights for every game. As far as Game Pass is concerned, Phil Spencer said they were not burning money for Game Pass. To get major AAA games on the service that's pretty much what they would have to do.
 
DeepEnigma said:
Just taking a page out of your PS shade book. I'm sorry you fell for the Bungie bait, hook, line and sinker.

Pick yourself up and brush yourself off *pats you on the ass* you got this next time, kid.
Click to expand...
iSHHgEZ.gif

Lol.
 
Vognerful said:
I have no fucking idea what you mean and I am sure you are not following me in my comment. I know your shtick is to be the thread joker but I will try again to make effort for those who are reading at least.

Devotion and the other devs that Sony is working with to make next GaaS projects have a lot of pressure because so many Sony guys are taunting that they will create the next "CoD killer". Being a CoD killer is a lot of pressure and requires a lot to prove as CoD is not the only the big fish or even the biggest. Fortnite and Apex and the other huge GaaS represent also a huge challenge for Sony to have stable place and a good share of the pie.

I know your comment about Halo is hollow , but this proves that even a huge name is not enough to break and make a stable presence. Sea of thieves took I believe several years to have huge crowd, but it was a nightmare when it was released.
Click to expand...
Destiny is a well known and very popular IP. It does alright for itself.

And my original comment still stands. He tried being cheeky with smaller studios in contrast to Activision, I asked if he forgot about Bungie, which has a well known pedigree in making very good shooters with excellent gunplay.

I am sorry if that offends you. And it was NOT shade towards Xbox, but how derpy tits flip flop based on brand affection.
 
DeepEnigma said:
Destiny is a well known and very popular IP. It does alright for itself.

And my original comment still stands. He tried being cheeky with smaller studios in contrast to Activision, I asked if he forgot about Bungie, which has a well known pedigree in making very good shooters with excellent gunplay.

I am sorry if that offends you. And it was NOT shade towards Xbox, but how derpy tits flip flop based on brand affection.
Click to expand...
I don't see him being cheeky at all. We have been told here many times that since devotion are basically ex CoD devs they are very capable of making the next CoD game for Sony.

I was not discussing Bungie specifically, but their competition is still not easy.

As for not throwing shade, your gotcha response was to pick an artifact from your fossil drawer. Were you that hardcore at PS2 times ?
 
Vognerful said:
I don't see him being cheeky at all. We have been told here many times that since devotion are basically ex CoD devs they are very capable of making the next CoD game for Sony.

I was not discussing Bungie specifically, but their competition is still not easy.

As for not throwing shade, your gotcha response was to pick an artifact from your fossil drawer. Were you that hardcore at PS2 times ?
Click to expand...
Nah, I never really played the PS2 outside of some games here and there. Hardcore PC gaming that entire gen, and always my main platform.

I also don't know how you don't see it as cheeky with the "cod killer" meme. Bungie is still relevant to the conversation over those studios if we are going to talk about well established and competent franchises/gameplay pedigree.
 
Last edited:
thicc_girls_are_teh_best said:
The reason this is hard to believe is because if the contract only covered the first year of a release then we could have easily gotten COD games on GamePass by now. But we haven't.

So either those contracts cover all CODs released during the tenure of the contract being active, or.....



...they could in fact be re-upping the exclusivity of marketing rights for the COD games once the one year is up. I don't know how much that would cost them per game, but it's probably not much more than what MS paid for GotG to come to GamePass, maybe less.
Click to expand...

Remind me but did Bethesda games join game pass after or before the acquisition?

As for adding more years to the "exclusivity", maybe Microsoft would not mind since it is basically free money for them.
 
Wow some people are living in fantasy land.... Thinking Microsoft can just shred contracts and walk away and nothing will happen. People really don't know how things work at this level of business? Why do you think it is going to take years for Microsoft to buy them?
There is a million hoops, contracts, lawyers and fine print to go through. They are not going to shred that up for some fanboy talking point or not sell their game on the biggest selling console.
How many millions do they want to throw away to just fanboy war 😂
 
SlimySnake said:
I still dont understand why you would spend $70 billion for CoD only to "honor" the agreement. Every contract has a fine if you break it. Just pay that fine even if for whatever reason its in the hundreds of millions. You paid billions for cod on gamepass on day one. If that cant happen until 2026, whats the point?

This is the time to sell consoles. Have people pick up an Xbox instead of a PS. By 2026, it would already be too late.
Click to expand...
Yes your right break contracts just for one game and put the trust companies have in you down the drain.
 
SlimySnake said:
Microsoft is risking $70 billion of their own money for this. Im sure their lawyers knew about any Sony contracts. All Im saying is that a) a $70 billion purchase doesnt make sense if you cant put it on gamepass let alone make it exclusive and b) you buy a company to do with it as you please. otherwise, they wouldve just signed new contracts.
Click to expand...
I think a lot of people don't understand the purchase. They bought the company because it makes a shitload of money. They bought Minecraft for the same reason and it had no exclusivity deal and wasn't on gamepass until its sales were dropping last year.

What MS expect to do with Activision is likely the same. Make a shitload of money from things like Candy Crush and Warzone. It's about buying players. Maybe even Advertise to the playerbase with other franchises in it. Like MC in Minecraft, Aloy in Fortnite. It's about access to the already established audience and sales, not console wars and exclusives. If MS made Minecraft or CoD exclusive it would lose a big established revenue stream. Maybe later down the line when/if sales decline but not now.
 
Rumpleforeskin said:
Somone should ask Hoeg Law about this - an actual legal expert and not some Twitter journo.
Click to expand...
He's a small business lawyer in suburban Detroit... people acting like this guy knows everything about anything legal is sort of ridiculous. Even experts on a very specific type of law will disagree, as none of it is some exact science.

He provides a more educated perspective than most random people but he's given way too much credit IMO.
 
IntentionalPun said:
He's a small business lawyer in suburban Detroit... people acting like this guy knows everything about anything legal is sort of ridiculous. Even experts on a very specific type of law will disagree, as none of it is some exact science.

He provides a more educated perspective than most random people but he's given way too much credit IMO.
Click to expand...
You are right. This not to discredit the guy as he provide a lot of insight into law for us. But we should be wary what we take for absolute from him.
 
IntentionalPun said:
He's a small business lawyer in suburban Detroit... people acting like this guy knows everything about anything legal is sort of ridiculous. Even experts on a very specific type of law will disagree, as none of it is some exact science.

He provides a more educated perspective than most random people but he's given way too much credit IMO.
Click to expand...

Even if he's not the cream of the legal crop, he's going to know a hell of a lot more than GAF regulars and blue checkmarks on Twitter.
 
akaFullmetal said:
Wow some people are living in fantasy land.... Thinking Microsoft can just shred contracts and walk away and nothing will happen. People really don't know how things work at this level of business? Why do you think it is going to take years for Microsoft to buy them?
There is a million hoops, contracts, lawyers and fine print to go through. They are not going to shred that up for some fanboy talking point or not sell their game on the biggest selling console.
How many millions do they want to throw away to just fanboy war 😂
Click to expand...
They paid $70 billion. Money isn't an issue at all.
All comes down to PR and goodwill if they do stuff and how their legal opionon is on the contracts.

The most likely scenario is, building and marketing a Activison subscription service is just not worth is, so they just wait until the contracts expire and include day1 on GamePass.
 
SlimySnake said:
I still dont understand why you would spend $70 billion for CoD only to "honor" the agreement. Every contract has a fine if you break it. Just pay that fine even if for whatever reason its in the hundreds of millions. You paid billions for cod on gamepass on day one. If that cant happen until 2026, whats the point?

This is the time to sell consoles. Have people pick up an Xbox instead of a PS. By 2026, it would already be too late.
Click to expand...
sure, go ahead and break contracts. Don't go expecting other companies or people will work with you if you don't honor your contracts.
Think, people, THINK.
You can't go breaching contracts left and right and hope for the best.
This is business.
 
Rumpleforeskin said:
Even if he's not the cream of the legal crop, he's going to know a hell of a lot more than GAF regulars and blue checkmarks on Twitter.
Click to expand...
There are over a million lawyers in the US alone... there's plenty of lawyers chiming in on forums/twitter who just aren't using their creds to make money posting entertainment videos.

I like some of his videos but it just gets silly when people act like his opinions are gospel.
 
Imagine a company making an unprecedented purchase in an industry, which was immediately thrust into politics/major news as being heavily investigated by the FTC and other agencies/congress itself...

Now imagine that company making clear public promises to not violate contracts with companies who are competitors once the acquisition goes through... even going as far as calling that company to say it, and making it known publicly they did that.

Now imagine them breaking those contracts after clearly using the idea they won't for PR purposes to combat news about the feds eyeing the deal.

You guys are crazy if you think MS will have any room to break contracts. It's bare minimum what they'll have to promise the FTC for the sale to go through, let alone European and other regulators.

Now can they try to re-negotiate contracts? Sure... but that's different.. MS would have to give something to Sony to get back some rights they contractually don't have due to what Activision agreed to.

#NotALawyerJustNotStupid
 
Last edited:
prinz_valium said:
They paid $70 billion. Money isn't an issue at all.
All comes down to PR and goodwill if they do stuff and how their legal opionon is on the contracts.

The most likely scenario is, building and marketing a Activison subscription service is just not worth is, so they just wait until the contracts expire and include day1 on GamePass.
Click to expand...

Which is exactly what Phil Spencer said they were going to do: honor the existing contracts. I really don't know what there is to debate about this. It is just a matter of waiting and seeing how it all plays out while the contracts are still valid.
 
thicc_girls_are_teh_best said:
The reason this is hard to believe is because if the contract only covered the first year of a release then we could have easily gotten COD games on GamePass by now. But we haven't.

So either those contracts cover all CODs released during the tenure of the contract being active, or.....
Click to expand...

It's not that hard to believe when it comes to games that stay high on the XBOX sales Top charts (at a full price) for several years.

Activision's interest has surely been more in continuing to sell than in launching it to Gamepass.

The opposite would be to believe that Sony paid for no COD past or present and every Act-Blz game past and present (none of their other games have been released on Gamepass) to be released on the service.

Sorry, I find it hard to believe something like that 😅
 
Last edited:
nominedomine said:
MS was forced to go all in after they overcommitted to Gamepass with Day 1 games promises, etc. Their internal studios couldn't deliver the amount of games needed to grow the service and third party publishers won't easily be persuaded to put their games day one on any service (unless they are sure the game is a a guaranteed flop).

I get what Phil Spencer did, he had absolutely nothing and had to sell Nadella on this Gamepass pipedream so he wouldn't be replaced for his mismanagement of the Xbox division. This is who Phil Spencer is, a salesman, someone who is constantly overpromising and underdelivering. The fall of Netflix is exposing that being first in this sort of market ain't that much of an advantage.

Not to mention that F2P is a proven and much more successful business model for GaaS games.
Click to expand...



You've got a lot of ideas there that don't seem logical.

1). MS is spending more money than they ever have to bolster GP because somehow it isn't working.

Who knows for sure, but I tend to think that the sudden influx in spending from MS is a sign that the internal markers for GP look quite good, allowing them to be as bullish as they have been.

2). That GP is desperate for more content because they are not growing.

Over the last two years we know that YoY growth was almost 40% per year.

3). FTP is a proven and very successful business model for anything.

While you've got big hits that print money, you do have to keep in mind that the greatest majority of FTP games are failures that lose money.
 
DaGwaphics said:
You've got a lot of ideas there that don't seem logical.

1). MS is spending more money than they ever have to bolster GP because somehow it isn't working.

Who knows for sure, but I tend to think that the sudden influx in spending from MS is a sign that the internal markers for GP look quite good, allowing them to be as bullish as they have been.

2). That GP is desperate for more content because they are not growing.

Over the last two years we know that YoY growth was almost 40% per year.

3). FTP is a proven and very successful business model for anything.

While you've got big hits that print money, you do have to keep in mind that the greatest majority of FTP games are failures that lose money.
Click to expand...
You still give MS and Phil Spencer the benefit of the doubt, I don't and I don't see why anyone would at this point.

As for your third point, you must be in denial. Just look at Genshin Impact, Warzone, Fortnite, Apex... F2P is where the bulk of the console gaming money is being made and F2P is the most incompatible model with charging monthly for a game library.

The idea that the future of everything is a subscription is dated already, it doesn't work for everything.
 
Last edited:
thicc_girls_are_teh_best said:
The reason this is hard to believe is because if the contract only covered the first year of a release then we could have easily gotten COD games on GamePass by now. But we haven't.

So either those contracts cover all CODs released during the tenure of the contract being active, or.....
Click to expand...

That's just not how Gamepass works... we have no idea if Activision was ever interested in putting games on GP... or if what they wanted to be paid for it was something MS was willing to do.

Vast majority of games have never been on Gamepass... lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Pragmata Releases 2026 | State of Play 2025
News  2 3
143
2K
Ian Henry replied
Ominusha Way of The Sword Releases 2026 | Summer Game Fest 2025
News  2
59
991
FinalBossWithTheMostPower replied
  • Poll
Switch 2 2025/Early 2026 Game Lineup Sees Update
Poll Business Sales-Age  2
66
2K
Generic replied
Tom Henderson says the Splinter cell remake looks genuinely impressive
Rumor  2
69
989
KiteGr replied
Tom Henderson: The next The Crew game has been greenlit at Ubisoft
Rumor 
8
201
Shubh_C63 replied
Top Bottom