Not exactly a shocking realization that Phil regards exclusive content as a way to sell consoles and subscriptions…
Sure the dream of “no barriers” in terms of availability is good pr… but it’s never going to happen.
1 Like
They can win a lot in that fight - as it effectively damages everything that Sony has achieved over the last 20 years at once and makes things difficult for Sony. It also does help that Xbox is clearly offering a better value and stronger in USA with the loudest internet community.
There are literally no barriers if you have TV or browser…Sony (and arguably Nintendo) are the barriers.
I 100% agree… and Nintendo/Sony are never going to lift those barriers on a console level.
Basically. 5 years in this business is nothing…its 3 more mainline CoD games at the most. Sony wants it in writing, because genuinely with gamepass and Xcloud…theres a very big likelyhood that buying Call of Duty for $70 ends up the least common way to play it…and when you diminish that market, you can excise it from other platforms. Bear in mind, Microsoft can use any reason to pull CoD off Playstation…not being economically viable is a genuine reason.
LOL.
There’s also reason to suggest that consoles may not be even a significant portion of gaming in 10 years. With the way streaming continues and now the majority of platform holders do not require a console at all to play games (Netflix, Google, Amazon, Xbox, GeForce, Apple, soon Tencent). There ahould not be any promise to any single platform at all.
You don’t think the majority of PS CoD players will buy it no problem? If Sony had their own Game Pass, like with their own exclusives on it I bet they would want CoD on their service too. But that is one thing I know for sure MS would never agree to.
Hoping for some positive updates these coming months about CMA and anyone else investigating it. I really wish we’d have a estimate of when the deal likely closes, because then we’d know when to expect MW2 on Game Pass, well, assuming no unpleasant surprises are in Sony’s contract but I doubt ABK would agree to something like blocking Game Pass like what happened with RE Village.
Im confident as long as CoDs are $70 it wont really grow (compared to when its $60) So if you want to cap those at 15 million copies for Playstation thats it.
Whereas i can see gamepass reaching triple digits this generation…and every subscriber will get a copy and about 75% of those will play it.
So im of the opinion by the time those 3 years expire we could see a gap of 50 million copies between those platforms.
And yeah Microsoft will ask themselves which is easier…to sell 15m copies on Playstation and make just over $1B or make the game exclusive and get another 10m subscribers, make another $1B and generally raise the status of Xbox and Gamepass overall.
1 Like
Yeah, I feel like sometimes people maybe aren’t thinking this all the way through. All Game Pass on PlayStation would do is instantly make Xbox obsolete as a hardware platform. Maybe some people would welcome that? but personally it’s not something I want or would root for.
5 Likes
They should actually ask PS+ on Xbox, because Xbox is a superior platform and ecosystem.
1 Like
FWIW I have never seen a single person argue for native Game Pass on Switch or PS. It’s always been streaming.
1 Like
Interesting take. I don’t really agree with the basic premise that those questions were one-sided and biased, I thought they were perfectly fair questions to ask and gave Phil Spencer an opportunity to address Sony’s grievances.
But on top of that I will say the way the questions were asked, it ended up being a pretty great advertising for Game Pass. Not only did the journalist implicitly endorse Game Pass by saying he himself was a subscriber, but he also presented a great value proposition (free vs $70) to a not insignificant number of viewers, many of who may well not be aware of Game Pass to begin with.
So all-in-all a win for Xbox if you ask me.
5 Likes
Think Jez is being over-dramatic again “I think this can go all the way to court”
No Jez…go to court with who? Sony who have no legal standing? Regulators who know they’d lose badly in a court battle and would end up wasting time and money on a losing case?
Seriously bad take is bad
I’ve come to the conclusion that MS made a good faith offer to Sony and that after 3 years rather than yank COD off Playstation, MS would like to sit down and negotiate a new deal for a few more years for COD on Playstation, they do the same thing with Minecraft. Its all about having leverage and the biggest bargaining chips
This idea of a “consent decree” that MS would have to make COD on Playstation is one of the biggest myths and piles of crap
No, regulators don’t have the ability to tell Microsoft “hey you have to make COD for Playstation” that’s absolutely something MS can squash in court
Ports cost money, time, there is no scenario where MS would have to foot the bill to make a product that would benefit their competitor, that’s the exact opposite of competition …are regulators going to foot the bill for making a Playstation version of COD? No? Then it isn’t happening and it would absolutely go up in flames in the court room.
If MS continues COD on Playstation it’ll absolutely be because they want to and not because anyone is forcing them to.
3 Likes
So the CMA is mainly worried about the PS6 apparently…
So this individual Tae Kim posted this and I thought it looked like something that should get laughed out of court, they are straight up just trying to protect Sony’s market leader position.
6 Likes
Terrible argument. If Microsoft owns CoD and theres nothing on paper preventing it, why shouldnt they pull it. Its no different then any other game.
Every time Sony money hats something its no less trying to sway customers towards them.
It is the same CMA document that we have seen. Not sure what Tae Kim is trying to sell here as news though.
Microsoft should stop trying to appease Sony as it certainly does not work and only makes Sony more emboldened. Granted media seems to be not on Sony’s side but I am afraid that Microsoft might go to greater length to appease Sony than it is necessary. Would be very annoying. They should have not offered anything to Sony in the first place as by being IP holder they have 0 obligations to offer anything to the competitor.
Would be neat if Microsoft retracted their offer to Sony under the premise that Sony did not agree that. And then it would put pressure on Sony from their fans to agree to Microsoft’s demands.
6 Likes
The arguments from the CMA in stage 1 are just potential issues. In stage 2 they have to take an in depth look and actually see if those could be realised. Microsoft would love for this to be their biggest issue as even if every playstation gamer who buys COD on a regular basis switched over it wouldn’t make the console bases next gen very uneven. It could be argued it would actually level the playing field and make it a more competitive environment
2 Likes
Microsoft should not care if base is even or not with Playstation. In fact they should (and they will) aim to surpass Sony (granted they kinda gave a hint regarding that in their response to Sony).
But the gaming market is changing so it won’t stay Sony vs Nintendo vs Microsoft forever. New players will arrive. We competition on PC even, we have handheld competition growing, home devices are also becoming more and more diverse.
Unlike the previous handheld generation (PSP, DS era) now handhelds are essentially PCs and with the games coming to mobile and as you can run them on PC, the situation is much more interesting. Hell, even new Warzone has crossprogression across PC, mobile and consoles.
I feel this argument loses its legs since Nintendo has been fine without having call of duty for generations. However, it prob would hurt Sony since at the moment they do have a good portion of the crowd that mainly play FPS and sports games.
2 Likes
It would obviously hurt Sony because some chunk of users will 100% switch to Xbox. But “hurting” competition is a very moot point because if you open that can of worms, Sony will damage itself.
1 Like