Support NeoGAF

[Shpeshal Nick]

MS has something to gain from this, a big name game on their store. Activision has nothing to gain whatsoever from this.

Well no. Theoretically, Activision would gain sales from another storefront had this version been set up properly.

But without knowing anywhere near enough of the details (Cost to MS to get this on the store, cost to port to UWP, cost to implement xplay etc) it's too hard to know what in god's name is going on. Because every angle I try to look at this from just beggars belief.

 

[LincolnSixEcho]

Wow, that's appalling, and really unacceptable especially in the PC space. Good thing I only buy PC games on Windows Store if it's the exclusive place to buy that PC game (i.e. Killer Instinct).

 

[Head.spawn]

Rocket League isn't UWA

You are talking about XBL crossplay though.

Do PSN/XBL players get split from population on games when patches roll out? I don't see why it would be any different for UWA, it's the same backend in this case.

 

[Mass_Pincup]

Seems that goes both ways. I know Microsoft can do dumb shit, but to pay for a game to be on a store that no one will buy AND no one will be able to play online? That's next level dumb. Too dumb to believe.

At least we can found a reason for MS to pay for it even if that's an half assed attempt, I don't see any reason for Activision to randomly decide to put COD on the W10 store without any monetary incentive.

Well no. Theoretically, Activision would gain sales from another storefront had this version been set up properly.

But without knowing anywhere near enough of the details (Cost to MS to get this on the store, cost to port to UWP, cost to implement xplay etc) it's too hard to know what in god's name is going on. Because every angle I try to look at this from just beggars belief.

We already know that sales in the W10 store have been abysmal for past release, they would have more sales putting those games on GOG, Uplay and Origins before the W10 Store.

 

[SmokedMeat]

This is great news! The faster Windows 10 Store fails the better! Can't wait to see the dismal sales. Microsoft can go fuck themselves trying to fragment the PC market with their walled garden shit.

 

[Maztorre]

Well no. Theoretically, Activision would gain sales from another storefront had this version been set up properly.

But without knowing anywhere near enough of the details (Cost to MS to get this on the store, cost to port to UWP, cost to implement xplay etc) it's too hard to know what in god's name is going on. Because every angle I try to look at this from just beggars belief.

I don't know why you continue to be surprised by Microsoft's continued incompetence on the PC platform. It has been like this for a long time.

 

[Zvonimir Boban]

This is beyond ridiculous. Shame on Activision/MS/whoever else is to blame for this clusterfuck.

 

[bonesmccoy]

This won't push me toward using the WIN10 store. Like not even a little bit.

 

[Chobel]

Well no. Theoretically, Activision would gain sales from another storefront had this version been set up properly.

But without knowing anywhere near enough of the details (Cost to MS to get this on the store, cost to port to UWP, cost to implement xplay etc) it's too hard to know what in god's name is going on. Because every angle I try to look at this from just beggars belief.

But this version is not "set up properly" and this is, you know, W10 store. So this theoretical scenario is never gonna happen.

 

[LordRaptor]

Do PSN/XBL players get split from population on games when patches roll out? I don't see why it would be any different for UWA, it's the same backend in this case.

For PC <-> console interoperability?
AFAIK, yes, which is why crossplay usually happens post-launch when hotfixes and bug fixing has been done and subsequent patches are timed to account for the lag time that platform owner cert adds.

It's also why the PC version usually gets new features or events first, while console owners have to wait for platform holder content rollout day (whenever that is)

 

[LordBaztion]

the game is already running on XBL, why they wouldn't allow cross-play, at least for pve modes. I guess, Activision didn't want to add more options for this version.

Besides, what would have incentivised Activision to make that version, certainly they don't expect it to be a big seller. Maybe MS paid them but, if that is the case, why wouldn't have cross play with xbox. Probably the game was developed as UWA and that made the port cheaper.

 

[Banjo-Kazooie]

If they REALLY wanted to have this make at least a little bit of sense then they should have moneyhatted Acti to have Modern Warfare purchaseable separately om Win Store. Would have had an equally bad shitstorm but would have at least gotten some people to bite on their store heh

 

[CHC]

Unimaginably poor decision, but luckily it will be a huge failure for MS. No one uses their shitty store and this isn't going to help the issue whatsoever.

 

[Tieske]

This is pretty hilarious. Worse than GFWL in myb opinion, which was just a shit platform. This is just retarded.

 

[SmokedMeat]

What's scary is if Steam wasn't as big as it is they would've moneyhatted it as a Windows exclusive.

 

[Head.spawn]

For PC <-> console interoperability?
AFAIK, yes, which is why crossplay usually happens post-launch when hotfixes and bug fixing has been done and subsequent patches are timed to account for the lag time that platform owner cert adds.

It's also why the PC version usually gets new features or events first, while console owners have to wait for platform holder content rollout day (whenever that is)

Gotcha. I was just curious, I haven't played the console version of that game, so I wasn't sure how they went about handling it.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

I don't know why you continue to be surprised by Microsoft's continued incompetence on the PC platform. It has been like this for a long time.

I'm technically "new" to PC gaming. I say technically because I've dipped my toes in in the past but my experiences with Steam weren't great so I never went further.

But this version is not "set up properly" and this is, you know, W10 store. So this theoretic scenario is never gonna happen.

I'm aware it won't happen. I'm saying that they technically had something to gain from a proper release. It is what it is now. I'd assume that it would now be up to Microsoft to do the leg work to get this fixed. Assuming they bother. Which they probably won't.

 

[ScientificPizza]

It's on them. Microsoft didn't "have a place" for Call of Duty. They paid for it to be released on their store at all. It's contract work, and MS got exactly what they asked for. If they are sincere about their PC push, it's entirely on them to invest on it and adquire cross play. That they don't just confirms once again they do not give a shit.

that's a big fuckin leap to make

do you know any of that for a fact? can you point me to a source that microsoft paid for this?

it is absolutely not on them to invest in crossplay. it's on activision to invest in crossplay

is people's hate for microsoft so rabid that they're really willing to give activision a free pass? they didn't have to put this version of the game on the windows store. they willingly did that

 

[yatesl]

"Yo Bobby, Call of Duty games barely sell well on the PC these days. What can we do?"

"Put a Windows 10 exclusive version up"

 

[Maintenance]

they didn't have to put this version of the game on the windows store. they willingly did that

And why do you think they did that? Out of the goodness of their hearts?

 

[R_thanatos]

My heart goes out to people who attempt to download this 70GB+ game on the Windows 10 store.

Last time i checked the downloads were still quite bad

But maybe their servers won't be as busy as the steam ones ?

 

[CarbonFire]

Feel bad for anyone who gets duped into buying COD on the Windows Store. No way they put this notice front and center on the game's store page.

Lots of Windows Store refunds incoming....

 

[ScientificPizza]

And why do you think they did that? Out of the goodness of their hearts?

so because they potentially got paid that makes them releasing this version okay?

what kind of fuckin logic

 

[Tallshortman]

This is pretty hilarious. Worse than GFWL in myb opinion, which was just a shit platform. This is just retarded.

Yes it's amazing that GFWL actually had several things about it that were less shitty than the windows store.

 

[Chobel]

I'm technically "new" to PC gaming. I say technically because I've dipped my toes in in the past but my experiences with Steam weren't great so I never went further.



I'm aware it won't happen. I'm saying that they technically had something to gain from a proper release. It is what it is now. I'd assume that it would now be up to Microsoft to do the leg work to get this fixed. Assuming they bother. Which they probably won't.

So you agree that Activision has nothing to gain from this if they're not paid by MS?

 

[MUnited83]

that's a big fuckin leap to make

do you know any of that for a fact? can you point me to a source that microsoft paid for this?

it is absolutely not on them to invest in crossplay. it's on activision to invest in crossplay

is people's hate for microsoft so rabid that they're really willing to give activision a free pass? they didn't have to put this version of the game on the windows store. they willingly did that

I don't need any sources. Common sense and rational thought are more than enough. Do you really, REALLY think that Activision just randomly though " Well let's port our game to this shitty ass store that no one buys games for, port our game to UWP, rework the network capabilities to XBL instead"? That's literally impossible.

And yes, it's 100% on MS. They are the ones that contracted Activision for the W10 port. They are the ones that need to contract Activision to put crossplay in.

 

[etta]

This is great news! The faster Windows 10 Store fails the better! Can't wait to see the dismal sales. Microsoft can go fuck themselves trying to fragment the PC market with their walled garden shit.

Lol.

Everyone has a walled garden now.

 

[wapplew]

I don't need any sources. Common sense and rational thought are more than enough. Do you really, REALLY think that Activision just randomly though " Well let's port our game to this shitty ass store that no one buys games for, port our game to UWP, rework the network capabilities to XBL instead"? That's literally impossible.

And yes, it's 100% on MS. They are the ones that contracted Activision for the W10 port. They are the ones that need to contract Activision to put crossplay in.

Maybe Acti saw the impressive MAU and user engagement numbers and think it's a good investment.

 

[ScientificPizza]

I don't need any sources. Common sense and rational thought are more than enough. Do you really, REALLY think that Activision just randomly though " Well let's port our game to this shitty ass store that no one buys games for, port our game to UWP, rework the network capabilities to XBL instead"? That's literally impossible.

And yes, it's 100% on MS. They are the ones that contracted Activision for the W10 port. They are the ones that need to contract Activision to put crossplay in.

it's not literally impossible. i'm sure a deal was done to have the game in the store, though

but having a game on a store and contracting work on a game is two completely different things. and unless microsoft did that contract work inhouse, then the blame still lies at activisions feet

them (potentially) accepting a pay cheque from microsoft does not absolve them of blame for releasing this version. if anything it should make this version seem more egregious

 

[GRaider81]

Lol.

Everyone has a walled garden now.

Some have small fences with gates, others have 10ft high, 3 ft thick concrete with barbed wire.

 

[theRizzle]

that's a big fuckin leap to make

do you know any of that for a fact? can you point me to a source that microsoft paid for this?

it is absolutely not on them to invest in crossplay. it's on activision to invest in crossplay

is people's hate for microsoft so rabid that they're really willing to give activision a free pass? they didn't have to put this version of the game on the windows store. they willingly did that

that's a big fuckin leap to make

do you know any of that for a fact? can you point me to a source that activision willingly did this?

is people's hate for activision so rabid that they're really willing to give microsoft a free pass?

 

[LordBaztion]

So you agree that Activision has nothing to gain from this if they're not paid by MS?

if they were paid by MS, why wouldn't they add crossplay with xbox. Maybe that wasn't a decision of the xbox team but of the team in charge of the store. Asuming they know nothing about gaming, that would explain isolating a mp game.

 

[MUnited83]

so because they potentially got paid that makes them releasing this version okay?

what kind of fuckin logic

They released the version MS paid them for. Take it up to MS if you don't like the version they hired Acti to do.

it's not literally impossible. i'm sure a deal was done to have the game in the store, though

but having a game on a store and contracting work on a game is two completely different things. and unless microsoft did that contract work inhouse, then the blame still lies at activisions feet

them (potentially) accepting a pay cheque from microsoft does not absolve them of blame for releasing this version. if anything it should make this version seem more egregious

The only thing it makes is that MS has shitty negotiation skills.

 

[mcrommert]

I don't need any sources. Common sense and rational thought are more than enough. Do you really, REALLY think that Activision just randomly though " Well let's port our game to this shitty ass store that no one buys games for, port our game to UWP, rework the network capabilities to XBL instead"? That's literally impossible.

And yes, it's 100% on MS. They are the ones that contracted Activision for the W10 port. They are the ones that need to contract Activision to put crossplay in.

I still think thats quite an assumption at this point (we have effect not cause)

Feels slightly like a dry run at uwp porting (similar to halo 5 forge and forza free version)

But activision wants to get paid

Edit: Also zero news around this at all until the day before it launches?

 

[ScientificPizza]

that's a big fuckin leap to make

do you know any of that for a fact? can you point me to a source that activision willingly did this?

is people's hate for activision so rabid that they're really willing to give microsoft a free pass?

can i point you to activision making call of duty? i'm sure i could probably do that

can i point to activision willingly putting the game on the windows store? well, no. are insinuating that they were forced to do so against their will?

what you tried to do was cute but it really didn't work

 

[Chobel]

if they were paid by MS, why wouldn't they add crossplay with xbox. Maybe that wasn't a decision of the xbox team but of the team in charge of the store. Asuming they know nothing about gaming, that would explain isolating a mp game.

They didn't pay enough to cover crossplay.

 

[mysteriousmage09]

lmao, what a dumb decision.

 

[LordRaptor]

them (potentially) accepting a pay cheque from microsoft does not absolve them of blame for releasing this version. if anything it should make this version seem more egregious

Why?
MS have repeatedly called UWA a platform. This is the logical end result of that.
XB1 is a platform, all XB1 players play with other XB1 owners.
PS4 is a platform, all PS4 players play with other PS4 owners.
Win32 PC is a platform, all PC owners using the Win32 version play with each other.
UWA PC is a platform.

Its Activisions fault that UWA is hugely unpopular?
They should spend more money on that version to try and offset that?
XB1 owners would even want to directly play against UWA PC owners with KBM?

 

[ScientificPizza]

They released the version MS paid them for. Take it up to MS if you don't like the version they hired Acti to do.


The only thing it makes is that MS has shitty negotiation skills.

i should take it up with microsoft for the work that activision made of their own game?

great good, good stuff

 

[ScientificPizza]

Why?
MS have repeatedly called UWA a platform. This is the logical end result of that.
XB1 is a platform, all XB1 players play with other XB1 owners.
PS4 is a platform, all PS4 players play with other PS4 owners.
Win32 PC is a platform, all PC owners using the Win32 version play with each other.
UWA PC is a platform.

Its Activisions fault that UWA is hugely unpopular?
They should spend more money on that version to try and offset that?
XB1 owners would even want to directly play against UWA PC owners with KBM?

Activision do not have to develop for the UWA platform. If they are going to develop for that platform then of course they should spend the money to do so. Are you saying that it's fine for companies to not invest on versions of their games on unpopular platforms?

 

[wapplew]

They didn't pay enough to cover crossplay.

Maybe Windows store CoD owner should start a twitter campaign about it, things might change.

 

[MUnited83]

i should take it up with microsoft for the work that activision made of their own game?

great good, good stuff

They made the very version asked them to do. The version that only exists because MS asked for it. Blame MS for not making a deal that involved cross play.

 

[Trup1aya]

This is great news! The faster Windows 10 Store fails the better! Can't wait to see the dismal sales. Microsoft can go fuck themselves trying to fragment the PC market with their walled garden shit.

This comment is exactly why this move makes no sense to me.

There's no way in hell MS actually wants to fragment the market. The don't incentivize their store this way. They didn't open up XBL to crossplay for no reason.

But when a 3rd party game ships in the Win10 store w/o the feature, folks are naturally going to lable it an MS control scheme.

The smart money would be to pay Activision to add cross-play, or don't bother courting the game at all. Surely someone at MS would have foreseen the hamstringing that would occur.

 

[Stanng243]

Activision do not have to develop for the UWA platform. If they are going to develop for that platform then of course they should spend the money to do so. Are you saying that it's fine for companies to not invest on versions of their games on unpopular platforms?

Exactly. They have no incentive to invest on unpopular platforms. Tomb Raiders sales were 2% of the total on WIn10. And that's probably gone down with steam sales since then. There is 0 incentive for Activision to put out a UWA WIN10 version without incentive from Microsoft. So they put out what Microsoft paid them for.

 

[LordRaptor]

Activision do not have to develop for the UWA platform. If they are going to develop for that platform then of course they should spend the money to do so. Are you saying that it's fine for companies to not invest on versions of their games on unpopular platforms?

They spent the same amount of money on the UWA port as they did on any other port.

What you apparently want is for them to go above and beyond and spend more time and effort on the UWA version than they did on any other version by creating a cross network interoperability solution that no other platform requires.

The problem here really is that UWA is a hugely flawed and impractical idea at a deep conceptual level

 

[LordBaztion]

They didn't pay enough to cover crossplay.

I'm don't think that's the case. The game is already runing on XBL and adding crossplay with xbox would give both versions more legs. Population is problem in CoD on PC, adding the xbox player pool would be very beneficial to both Activision and MS. Probably the crossplay patch is coming afterwards.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

So you agree that Activision has nothing to gain from this if they're not paid by MS?

Huh? No. We JUST said earlier that we don't know the details of cost for any of it. Without knowing what it cost Microsoft OR activision to do this, how can we conclude anything?

We don't know how much it would cost Acti to port this so we can't know whether sales would have justified it because in its current state, no one will buy it. But a proper port? I don't see why some less hardcore PC players wouldn't have bought a proper port. Obviously not huge numbers, but enough to justify a proper port? We can't possibly know and that's the issue with too many assumptions.

 

[ScientificPizza]

They made the very version asked them to do. The version that only exists because MS asked for it. Blame MS for not making a deal that involved cross play.

So now you know the specifics of the contract work that microsoft asked for?

They spent the same amount of money on the UWA port as they did on any other port.

What you apparently want is for them to go above and beyond and spend more time and effort on the UWA version than they did on any other version by creating a cross network interoperability solution that no other platform requires.

The problem here really is that UWA is a hugely flawed and impractical idea at a deep conceptual level

Yeah, this is a good point. But activision even porting to the platform is them knowingly fracturing their PC user base. The fact that they even created this port says that that's something they're fine with doing.

 

[LordRaptor]

The game is already runing on XBL and adding crossplay with xbox would give both versions more legs.

Everything I have seen suggests to me that X1 owners do not want to play competitive FPSes against PC owners.

The fact MS have run a negative whispering campaign against the PC as a gaming platform as being a hive of cheats and piracy and everyone using a controller being a 'level playing field' for so long is just the cherry on top of the delicious ironing

 

[Gin]

first couple of pages are legendary tier on gaf LOL - good job OP