Ar¢tos
Member
I'm sure all mobile Activision games, including COD mobile, can be ported to switch quickly.Because the switch already has a bunch of Activision games on it
oh wait...
I'm sure all mobile Activision games, including COD mobile, can be ported to switch quickly.Because the switch already has a bunch of Activision games on it
oh wait...
I think keeping COD until at least 2034 is worth a lot more money to Sony than maybe 1 or 2 Crash and Tony Hawk games.Sony got the end of the stick thanks to the jim shenanigans
can't stopping laughing at this
People need to stop with this damage control… Blizz releases are huge… it is a big loss for Sony. Jimbo decided to go for the “block the merger” strategy and it failed miserably. At least they got COD in the end. It could have been much worse.Diablo 4 which is on PlayStation just came out and we won't see another one anytime soon, Overwatch seems to be dying and all their other games (except CoD) are available only on PC or mobile (Warcraft, StarCraft, Hearthstone etc).
I wouldn't make a big problem out of it. CoD was the only thing that matters, CoD was the only thing PlayStation needed.
We already got the ultimate Tony Hawk game in 1+2, fantastic Crash and Spyro remakes, and I think by the middling nature of Crash 4 we can't really expect a lot from it going forward.Guitar Hero: dead
Tony Hawk: MIA, probably dead
World of Warcraft: Never on console, no Xbox nor PS
Starcraft: Only once on console... Nintendo 64
Candy Crush Saga: Never on consoles
Spyro: MIA
Overwatch: F2P GaaS, so probably stays multiplatform
Diablo: Diablo IV made huge numbers... It would be counter-productive to keep it Xbox exclusive, but, hey. "Case by case basis", as Spencer said
Crash: Active IP... yay.
Jimbo got owned. PWNED, even. I can't see him recovering from this. He'll look at himself in the mirror and cry, ashamed of his words and deeds. "I let Guitar Hero slip from my fingers!", he'll say, sobbing.
What are those "huge releases"?People need to stop with this damage control… Blizz releases are huge… it is a big loss for Sony. Jimbo decided to go for the “block the merger” strategy and it failed miserably. At least they got COD in the end. It could have been much worse.
Are you stupid? Did you read the tweet? They were never "getting them all." Only existing games until 2027- it was a shit deal either way.Sony shot themselves in the foot lol. Could've got it all but threw a shitfit instead. Oh well, hope they're happy with just CoD
There's a galaxy sitting between your two assumptions and you know it. Playing the fool here does nothing. I've already explained that the games can be rebuilt if Microsoft want to invent the time and money - and they evidently do - and I've explained that crossplay is only a requirement if Nintendo wants it. In the event that Nintendo do want it, there's little in Call of Duty's multiplayer that can't be achieved on the Switch as is if the content is remade accordingly. This is part where you start arguing symantics, conflating presentation with features using quotation marks.
Guitar Hero: dead
Tony Hawk: MIA, probably dead
World of Warcraft: Never on console, no Xbox nor PS
Starcraft: Only once on console... Nintendo 64
Candy Crush Saga: Never on consoles
Spyro: MIA
Overwatch: F2P GaaS, so probably stays multiplatform
Diablo: Diablo IV made huge numbers... It would be counter-productive to keep it Xbox exclusive, but, hey. "Case by case basis", as Spencer said
Crash: Active IP... yay.
Jimbo got owned. PWNED, even. I can't see him recovering from this. He'll look at himself in the mirror and cry, ashamed of his words and deeds. "I let Guitar Hero slip from my fingers!", he'll say, sobbing.
More games for more people on more platforms actually.So you’re making the assumption, all the while denouncing his, by stating that Nintendo will waive parity clauses?
You don’t know any of that either lol. You read the new agreement just like everyone else.
Anyone cheering this on is approved of major corporate consolidation. Multiplatform franchises will now become exclusives for either platform. Now Sony will choose to retaliate. Less games for everyone.
Yay?
I think keeping COD until at least 2034 is worth a lot more money to Sony than maybe 1 or 2 Crash and Tony Hawk games.
People need to stop with this damage control… Blizz releases are huge… it is a big loss for Sony. Jimbo decided to go for the “block the merger” strategy and it failed miserably. At least they got COD in the end. It could have been much worse.
They have that rumored survival game coming out, given the popularity of the survival genre that's probably going to be a big hit.2027? Seems Sony just got got. They already released overwatch 2 and diablo 4. No way there will be anything significant by then. That and the wording means MS loopholes themselves into scenario where they technically could just delay games passed that date and skip PS with nothing at all.
I can understand before the agreement some gamers think MS would hoard COD all to themselves even though it’s pretty obvious it’s such a cash cow of course MS isn’t going to cut the cord.Not gonna happen. They didn’t even need to sign that binding deal with Sony. Really don’t know why they would tie their hands like that. But the intention was always to release COD on PS.
If that was the case they would have done it alreadyI'm sure all mobile Activision games, including COD mobile, can be ported to switch quickly.
That face gets me every time.
We don't know whats in the works, Blizzard is working on some survival game or something for instance. If they manage to pull off what they did with wow and overwatch (make their genres casual friendly) it could be successful, going on current form it's a long shot but if you never take the shot you can never hit the bullseye.Diablo 4 which is on PlayStation just came out and we won't see another one anytime soon, Overwatch seems to be dying and all their other games (except CoD) are available only on PC or mobile (Warcraft, StarCraft, Hearthstone etc).
I wouldn't make a big problem out of it. CoD was the only thing that matters, CoD was the only thing PlayStation needed.
MS gets 70%. Sony will be the one getting the 30% e-store cut.30% of everything bought on the Sony platform will go to MS. I think it is smart to keep CoD multiplatform. Tons of money for everyone to make.
Hopefully that will get Jim fired. Fucking around thinking he is big shit telling them he will stop the merger as if he owns both companies.
MS gets 70%. Sony will be the one getting the 30% e-store cut.
Every dollar Sony makes on Activision games, MS will more than double it.
can't stopping laughing at this
MS will still make more money of it than Sony. The better Activision games sell on Sony the more money MS makes.M$ has to pay all of the development and production costs/salaries for these games. Sony just takes a quiet 30% without any overhead or investment.
Were these games on Nintendo before? Nope!
That judge was either incompetent or had some "lobbying" going on to come to this other conclusion and following the mimimi statements of MS.This just further proves how Nintendo is an indirect competitor to MS where as Sony is a direct competitor.
In what way?This just further proves how Nintendo is an indirect competitor to MS where as Sony is a direct competitor.
Do you expect Switch to be the baseline target spec for Mortal Kombat One?So let me get this right, first I say Nintendo isn’t getting the same game, get called on it because the agreement states native versions with feature and content parity, so I take the logical conclusion that it becomes the new baseline target spec, and you say it’s a disastrous take because signed agreements are for idiots and Nintendo is getting a different game?
Can’t keep up. Native, content and feature parity means not a cloud version and it absolutely means crossplay.
Fortnite has crossplay so don’t give me that BS about “walled gardens”
It does have a bunch of Activision games.Because the switch already has a bunch of Activision games on it
oh wait...
I’m on my phone and dont want to look for it (if I was on my home laptop I would) but just reverently (yesterday) in one of these threads there was proof of email from Spencer’s o Jim Ryan in May 2022 where Spencer offered Sony all Activision games till 2027. It looks like it was revised at some point to 10 years for COD only.Do we know exactly what the original deal was that included all games?
I read, and I can't recall exactly where now... so maybe I'm just confusing things, but the initial deal that was offered wasn't 10 years, and when they changed it to 10 years, MS wanted to keep all profits from MTX, etc. (I think from a cloud perspective), so even Microsoft would have turned that version of the deal down if the shoe was on the other foot.
Crash BandicootIt does have a bunch of Activision games.
This one? Whenever he opens his mouth its a hurl of shit.Both him and Phil don't believe his lies Spencer need to shut the fuck up.Jimbo messed this one up badly.
"Direct competitors are companies that offer the same product (or service) offering as you. However, indirect competition is somewhat different. They are businesses whose product (or service) offerings are different from yours, but could satisfy your customer's needs, and possibly achieve the same goals".In what way?
Do you expect Switch to be the baseline target spec for Mortal Kombat One?
It does have a bunch of Activision games.
Series X version running in the cloud??Call of duty is struggling with putting out a game every year as is. I'm going to laugh if this agreement with Nintendo completely degrades the quality of of cod because they can't keep up. They already have all their studios working on call of duty; where are all these extra people going to come from to put out a nintendo version?
Nope. Thread and article title is wrong. That's not what was offered to ANY company. NO company was offered all AB content.This is hilarious! Initially MS was offering them the same deal they offered to Nintendo (ALL Activision/Blizzard content for 10 years).