Support NeoGAF

[Kiraly]

There is literally no substance to the tweet about these "commitments". Christ, you posted it! Are you now saying you're seeing things that aren't there? No formal link attached to the tweets that redirects to supplementary details, nothing of the sort. Announcing on twitter at the 11th hour. The wording for the Steam tweet didn't even make sense that's how half-assed this stunt was. And this of course is all by design. Nintendo and Steam haven't even responded it's so ridiculous. That is why this is pathetic and embarrassing for Microsoft.
.

Here is Valve's public response:

We're happy that Microsoft wants to continue using Steam to reach customers with Call of Duty when their Activision acquisition closes. Microsoft has been on Steam for a long time and we take it as a signal that they are happy with gamers reception to that and the work we are doing. Our job is to keep building valuable features for not only Microsoft but all Steam customers and partners.

Microsoft offered and even sent us a draft agreement for a long-term Call of Duty commitment but it wasn't necessary for us because a) we're not believers in requiring any partner to have an agreement that locks them to shipping games on Steam into the distant future b) Phil and the games team at Microsoft have always followed through on what they told us they would do so we trust their intentions and c) we think Microsoft has all the motivation they need to be on the platforms and devices where Call of Duty customers want to be.

Your posts are so desperate and embarrassing.

"Microsoft offered and even sent us a draft agreement for a long-term Call of Duty commitment but it wasn't necessary for us because (...) Phil and the games team at Microsoft have always followed through on what they told us they would do so we trust their intentions"

LOL

Microsoft Announces Bizarre Pledge To Bring Call of Duty To Nintendo Consoles

It's a '10-year commitment' that also includes continued support on Steam as well

kotaku.com

 

[Banjo64]

This might help with the FTC but i dont see why this deal with Nintendo and Valve would change the CMAs stance. The CMA noted that MS doesnt see Nintendo as a competition and CoD is already on Steam.

Would probably help if they made a deal with Amazon or Apple, but i guess we will never see that happen.

EGS too and GeForce Now - Microsoft are trying to turn everyone’s eye to Sony when the CMA and EU are worried about foreclosure or future entrants in to the space, infrastructure, data usage etc. If this is one of many concessions, great.

 

[reksveks]

This might help with the FTC but i dont see why this deal with Nintendo and Valve would change the CMAs stance. The CMA noted that MS doesnt see Nintendo as a competition and CoD is already on Steam.

Would probably help if they made a deal with Amazon or Apple, but i guess we will never see that happen.

I don't think Amazon and especially Apple would help too much but Nvidia is the one that I think they should sign a deal with.

Re: COD on Steam, just key to highlight that it's partially relevant but MS according to CMA could have the incentive to pull COD from Steam and remember its only just come back onto Steam iirc.

 

[phil_t98]

I hope they commit 10 years to Ouya and Stadia too.

hoping for a 3DO port to

 

[dwish]

Technically they would uphold their commitment by bringing XCloud streaming of CoD to Switch. They could put the blame on Nintendo if they are unable to work out the details of how. But I'd be surprised if this wasn't discussed between them already.

Regarding exclusives (haven't seen anyone pointing this out):
There is a difference between paying for exclusivity of a game that was scheduled to come out for other systems (announced or not) and gaining exclusivity through financing a game that otherwise wouldn't have been made at all. No matter if the financing is through studio purchase or not.

 

[Ronin_7]

Yesterday I saw prominent PS fanboy dreaming about Sony acquiring EA "out of spite"

Because that's how things works...I guess

EA doesn't seem likely but right now I won't risk any bets on it.

Who knows, this acquisition changes the game, even for Apple Google etc.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Any day @Sony wants to sit down and talk, we'll be happy to hammer out a 10-year deal for PlayStation as well.

 

[xHunter]

I don't think Amazon and especially Apple would help too much but Nvidia is the one that I think they should sign a deal with.

Re: COD on Steam, just key to highlight that it's partially relevant but MS according to CMA could have the incentive to pull COD from Steam and remember its only just come back onto Steam iirc.

Amazon or Apple would help with their case by showing that they wont shutdown future competitors. I guess you can say that Geforce Now might work too, but then again its just streaming your already owned games, so its not like the game will be available on a Nvidia storefront.

CoD on steam was always going to happen under MS since all their first party games are coming to steam. They question is whether they will in the future end all ongoing deals and pull them off competing platforms, once they have a leading multiplatform store. This is why i am not fully on board with this 10 year licenensing deal.

 

[GHG]

The steam announcement is pretty strange considering they already made a commitment to bring all their games to Steam before along with the fact that Activision had already returned to steam.

 

[The_Mike]

Being owned by MS should free the ABK devs from working on COD all the time. Being able to make other games will increase innovation compared to releasing COD sequels on a yearly schedule

Like 343 Industries and The Coalition?

Since the other topic got closed, refreshing for the new page here:

MS has made a 10 year agreement with both Nintendo and Steam to bring CoD games to both platforms.

"*something something* Microsoft won't do it after the deal"*

Some blue snake will probably up with some dumb shit like that.

But the del really makes Sony look like clowns

Microsoft exces can pat themselves on the back after this week. Brilliant effort to get this deal through.
First whole CWA thing where CWA opted to recommend the deal which is huge, since FTC wanted to look to this deal through workers lens. Then ZeniMax QA testers proceeded to create a union and Microsoft honoured the commitment to CWA.
Then there was confirmation that they offered Sony a 10-year deal. And to make them look bad they made same deal with Valve and Nintendo, and while Nintendo and Valve accepted, Sony refused to accept it. Microsoft can now use it to point to the fact that Sony was building their entire case against this deal on the back of COD series, but they now refusing pretty generous deal.

Just masterclass of PR and influencing public opinion.

Imagine Sony losing Call of duty because they don't want the deal and nintendo gets it lol.

Technically they would uphold their commitment by bringing XCloud streaming of CoD to Switch. They could put the blame on Nintendo if they are unable to work out the details of how. But I'd be surprised if this wasn't discussed between them already.

Regarding exclusives (haven't seen anyone pointing this out):
There is a difference between paying for exclusivity of a game that was scheduled to come out for other systems (announced or not) and gaining exclusivity through financing a game that otherwise wouldn't have been made at all. No matter if the financing is through studio purchase or not.

Some people in here are really doing mental gymnastics to make Spencer and Microsoft evil scumbags.

I can have a hard time seeing switch getting cod though.

I doubt the games size could fit a physical release, and does the switch even have enough space to hold a game that size?

Mirooft has to really work overtime to get a crippled cod version on switch, unless it's some gimped cod switch game.

I'd blame that solely on the limitations of the hardware.

 

[dwish]

I can have a hard time seeing switch getting cod though.

I doubt the games size could fit a physical release, and does the switch even have enough space to hold a game that size?

Mirooft has to really work overtime to get a crippled cod version on switch, unless it's some gimped cod switch game.

I'd blame that solely on the limitations of the hardware.

Or, I reiterate, they will do it through streaming, which is already done for a number of Switch games (like KH3 for instance)

 

[feynoob]

The steam announcement is pretty strange considering they already made a commitment to bring all their games to Steam before along with the fact that Activision had already returned to steam.

This is a check mate against regulators and Sony.

Getting Steam and Nintendo would drop the argument that the game would be exclusive for gamepass and Xbox. Even if Xbox does put their games on steam.

Having a 10 year contract signed means, it won't go exclusive on their system.

 

[reksveks]

Amazon or Apple would help with their case by showing that they wont shutdown future competitors. I guess you can say that Geforce Now might work too, but then again its just streaming your already owned games, so its not like the game will be available on a Nvidia storefront.

Apple probably doesn't care apart from the mobile app part and clearly the fuss isn't about that. Amazon could be an interesting one given Luna but given the FTC position on Amazon, don't think it's a high concern.

Nvidia is still one of the big players in the markets that the CMA/FTC are concerned about.

PS the Valve/Nintendo deals are largely just PR to try and single out Sony. I do not think its a huge deal ultimately.

 

[feynoob]

This is why i am not fully on board with this 10 year licenensing deal.

This is purely for strengthening their argument, while making sure the regulators and Sony argument becomes weak in the process.

They are basically using public emotions for their benefit.

 

[Three]

I doubt the games size could fit a physical release, and does the switch even have enough space to hold a game that size?

Mirooft has to really work overtime to get a crippled cod version on switch, unless it's some gimped cod switch game.

I'd blame that solely on the limitations of the hardware.

Notice they use Nintendo and not specifically Switch. Obviously any version for switch would likely have cutbacks with texture sizes anyway.

 

[GHG]

This is a check mate against regulators and Sony.

Getting Steam and Nintendo would drop the argument that the game would be exclusive for gamepass and Xbox. Even if Xbox does put their games on steam.

Having a 10 year contract signed means, it won't go exclusive on their system.

Well, no. At this stage it's nothing more than more PR for public support.

Valve have stated they aren't signing anything and as for Nintendo there's no mention of a console in the announcement nor are there any details as to how they would even go about bringing the game to their platforms (cloud, native, the mobile version?).

If they really want to make waves with the regulators then do something that would go some way to appeasing a party that has voiced concerns - for example get an agreement in place with Nvidia (assuming they are one of those aforementioned parties, it most likely is considering Stadia is no longer a factor) for GeForce Now, not only for COD but for the whole ATVI catalogue.

They are attempting to put pressure on Sony to sign whatever deal they have put on the table. The reality is that Sony don't need to do anything because it's now at a stage where if they decide to reverse what they've offered then they have a potential PR disaster on their hands (and in particular it won't sit well with regulators). The 10 year deal is the minimum Sony will get now but that's not what they even want.

 

[Loxus]

This is a check mate against regulators and Sony.

Getting Steam and Nintendo would drop the argument that the game would be exclusive for gamepass and Xbox. Even if Xbox does put their games on steam.

Having a 10 year contract signed means, it won't go exclusive on their system.

After 10 years it will become exclusive, which part of that don't you understand?

I would prefer Sony not to sign that deal.
It would be better to loose those COD fans half way through the PS5 generation that at the beginning of the PS6 generation.

For Microsoft sake, they better hope Sony doesn't come up with a COD competitor within the coming years.

 

[feynoob]

Valve have stated they aren't signing anything and as for Nintendo there's no mention of a console in the announcement nor are there any details as to how they would even go about bringing the game to their platforms (cloud, native, the mobile version?).

For current switch, it would be cloud. But next switch could handle the game.

Also Valve would more interested in having COD on their platform, as that would mean more money for them. They aren't going to say no to this opportunity.

If they really want to make waves with the regulators then do something that would go some way to appeasing a party that has voiced concerns - for example get an agreement in place with Nvidia (assuming they are one of those aforementioned parties, it most likely is considering Stadia is no longer a factor) for GeForce Now, not only for COD but for the whole ATVI catalogue.

This is the correct way of doing it.

Remember, the primary argument is the harm of consumers. By providing support for more systems, they are saying we aren't harming them.

It would make any of regulators weak, as MS is ready to offer full support for said platforms, even switch.

 

[anthony2690]

I‘d pay good money to see Jim’s head photoshopped on this….

Music for this thread.

 

[Ozzy Onya A2Z]

If this deal goes through, Jim Ryan is going to look like an absolute muppet.

Deal is done, pick your favourite muppet costume for Jim.

MS is moving like a startup disruptor. Love to see it play out.

 

[Banjo64]

Notice they use Nintendo and not specifically Switch. Obviously any version for switch would likely have cutbacks with texture sizes anyway.

Wonder if we’ll see a hybrid game with local stripped back multiplayer but cloud based campaign. Can’t lie, if this is going through it’s a positive that Nintendo will be getting CoD.

Also, could we just see Nintendo getting their own game each year based on the CoD mobile engine or something?

 

[feynoob]

After 10 years it will become exclusive, which part of that don't you understand?

10 years is enough. Nothing lasts that long, especially video games.

I would prefer Sony not to sign that deal.
It would be better to lose those COD fans half way through the PS5 generation that at the beginning of the PS6 generation.

It would be Sony loss then, if they don't sign it.

For Microsoft sake, they better hope Sony doesn't come up with a COD competitor within the coming years.

Good luck with that. Just remember to check Sony grave of shooter games, while you are waiting for them.

 

[Ozzy Onya A2Z]

The steam announcement is pretty strange considering they already made a commitment to bring all their games to Steam before along with the fact that Activision had already returned to steam.

It's glad handing in professional contract form is all. MS know how to play to the regulatory perspective, they've been around the block before.

 

[Menzies]

After 10 years it will become exclusive, which part of that don't you understand?

I would prefer Sony not to sign that deal.
It would be better to loose those COD fans half way through the PS5 generation that at the beginning of the PS6 generation.

For Microsoft sake, they better hope Sony doesn't come up with a COD competitor within the coming years.

Well, some are choosing to read it as a '10-year limit' and that after 10 years it will automatically be pulled from the platform.

That's the cynical read. Microsoft would have a choice after 10 years to assess whether continuing to grow an established IP and online community continues to be in their best interests. For the sake of the IP value and revenue earnings, you would think that's a no-brainer.

The 10-year commitment is a substantial amount of time to have your balls in a sling by regulators with massive implications by multiple jurisdictions if they fail to execute. They're also making this promise 'blind' with unforeseen hardware. Not sure what else they could hope to get that's reasonable.

 

[feynoob]

It's glad handing in professional contract form is all. MS know how to play to the regulatory perspective, they've been around the block before.

Any extra point would work in their favor. It's all about making yourself look good, in the eyes of the public.

 

[Loxus]

10 years is enough. Nothing lasts that long, especially video games.



It would be Sony loss then, if they don't sign it.



Good luck with that. Just remember to check Sony grave of shooter games, while you are waiting for them.

Sony is now diving back into Multiplayer Shooters with a new Studio.

Check Sony output of games and tell me they can't make a COD competitor.
I don't even know why Sony is stressing about losing COD when they can make they own Multiplayer Shooters and claim full revenue.

 

[Loxus]

Well, some are choosing to read it as a '10-year limit' and that after 10 years it will automatically be pulled from the platform.

That's the cynical read. Microsoft would have a choice after 10 years to assess whether continuing to grow an established IP and online community continues to be in their best interests. For the sake of the IP value and revenue earnings, you would think that's a no-brainer.

The 10-year commitment is a substantial amount of time to have your balls in a sling by regulators with massive implications by multiple jurisdictions if they fail to execute. They're also making this promise 'blind' with unforeseen hardware. Not sure what else they could hope to get that's reasonable.

Why make a deal with other platform holders to begin with if it wasn't going to be exclusive?

 

[GHG]

It would be Sony loss then, if they don't sign it.

At this stage they lose nothing by not signing. If they sign then they are essentially giving the ok signal to regulators which would make no sense considering how far things have come. They don't want the deal to go through at all and that's the hand they will continue to play until it's no longer an option.

Why make a deal with other platform holders to begin with if it wasn't going to be exclusive?

Bingo.

 

[Godot25]

Imagine Sony losing Call of duty because they don't want the deal and nintendo gets it lol.

Nah. They wont loose COD even without deal. Microsoft is not stupid to tank Call of Duty by cutting yearly revenue from series to half.
I said it from beginning. Sony wants to tank this deal because they are afraid of COD on Game Pass. The knew from day one that COD will stay on PlayStation.

 

[Godot25]

Sony is now diving back into Multiplayer Shooters with a new Studio.

Check Sony output of games and tell me they can't make a COD competitor.
I don't even know why Sony is stressing about losing COD when they can make they own Multiplayer Shooters and claim full revenue.

Yup. It is so easy to make COD competitor.
That's why companies have tried it and failed every time. Including EA with Battlefield.

I'm sure that Firesprite, consisting of 250 employees split through 5 projects can create something that will match COD from content perspective. Game that 2K people are creating.

 

[feynoob]

Sony is now diving back into Multiplayer Shooters with a new Studio.

Sony is late to the party. The market is crowded at the moment.
They would need new ideas, if they want to storm this market, and tons of content.

Check Sony output of games and tell me they can't make a COD competitor.

Output means nothing, if you can't support your games longer. That is the key point for a successful shooter game.

I don't even know why Sony is stressing about losing COD when they can make they own Multiplayer Shooters and claim full revenue.

You are a consumer. You don't have a single clue about how much money this franchise makes for Sony.
COD is making them close to what Ragnarok is making for them yearly.

 

[Loxus]

Yup. It is so easy to make COD competitor.
That's why companies have tried it and failed every time. Including EA with Battlefield.

I'm sure that Firesprite, consisting of 250 employees split through 5 projects can create something that will match COD from content perspective. Game that 2K people are creating.

And what's so special about COD compared to Battlefield beside popularity?

 

[Banjo64]

Check Sony output of games and tell me they can't make a COD competitor.

They’ve never made a single popular online shooter that’s had a significant player base. Ever. And they’ve tried. Lots.

We’re talking about a game that sells 20m copies, every single year. Not 20m every 5 years like God of War, Spider-Man or Horizon. Every year.

 

[feynoob]

At this stage they lose nothing by not signing. If they sign then they are essentially giving the ok signal to regulators which would make no sense considering how far things have come. They don't want the deal to go through at all and that's the hand they will continue to play until it's no longer an option.

Because other platforms are ready to accept MS offer.
Sony doesn't have any leverage here.
Any silly game, and they will lose.

Bingo.

Not a bingo.
Exclusives doesn't make a sense for games like COD.

 

[Loxus]

Sony is late to the party. The market is crowded at the moment.
They would need new ideas, if they want to storm this market, and tons of content.

Output means nothing, if you can't support your games longer. That is the key point for a successful shooter game.


You are a consumer. You don't have a single clue about how much money this franchise makes for Sony.
COD is making them close to what Ragnarok is making for them yearly.

How, if COD will be no longer available on PlayStation?

 

[feynoob]

How, if COD will be no longer available on PlayStation?

Because its not guaranteed COD would survive, or if Sony is going to make a new PS after that point.

 

[Clintizzle]

Yup. It is so easy to make COD competitor.
That's why companies have tried it and failed every time. Including EA with Battlefield.

I'm sure that Firesprite, consisting of 250 employees split through 5 projects can create something that will match COD from content perspective. Game that 2K people are creating.

Sony is going to show the industry how its done. R* better watch out, Sony will not need GTA anymore either.

Not a bingo.
Exclusives doesn't make a sense for games like COD.

Yo at this point you just have to let that guy push the "MS is bad narrative".

 

[Loxus]

They’ve never made a single popular online shooter that’s had a significant player base. Ever. And they’ve tried. Lots.

We’re talking about a game that sells 20m copies, every single year. Not 20m every 5 years like God of War, Spider-Man or Horizon. Every year.

Yes, let's compare a multiplat with an exclusive sales wise.

You're still missing the point.
Eventually, COD will stop releasing on PlayStation.
PlayStation can easily fill that void with their own Multiplayer Shooters.

Not much of the PlayStation user base going to run and leave the exclusives and their catalog of games anyway.

 

[Godot25]

And what's so special about COD compared to Battlefield beside popularity?

Ehh. Is that really a question?
From content standpoint, almost everything. COD MW II had campaign, multiplayer, Battle Royale and DMZ and devs even bringing Raids. BF2024 launched without campaign, and Hazard Zone was abandoned after few moths.

But outside of that, yes. Popularity is the "special" thing about COD. Popularity that was nurtured through 20 years of releasing games.

 

[Menzies]

Why make a deal with other platform holders to begin with if it wasn't going to be exclusive?

Because they recognize this isn't going through without written concessions. There was no contract written in stone between independent Activision and Sony either. In my personal opinion, 'online cross-play-multiplayer-community' Call of Duty, will be on many platforms beyond the 10 years.

 

[TheGodfather07]

They’ve never made a single popular online shooter that’s had a significant player base. Ever. And they’ve tried. Lots.

We’re talking about a game that sells 20m copies, every single year. Not 20m every 5 years like God of War, Spider-Man or Horizon. Every year.

Reading here you would think creating something to be as big as call of duty is easy. Even Microsoft couldn't do it when they already had strong fps ip like halo. Nobody can do it. If they could, you would have seen another game at the top of the charts at the end of the year, instead of call of duty every fucking year for like the last 15 years straight.

 

[Ozzy Onya A2Z]

They’ve never made a single popular online shooter that’s had a significant player base. Ever. And they’ve tried. Lots.

We’re talking about a game that sells 20m copies, every single year. Not 20m every 5 years like God of War, Spider-Man or Horizon. Every year.

Which is only half the revenue, the MTX for COD on Sony is probably way over 50% beyond annual sales, I'd hazard a guess in the 65-75% territory considering ongoing purchases.

 

[feynoob]

GHG here is Valve statement. Thought it's Kotaku.

We’re happy that Microsoft wants to continue using Steam to reach customers with Call of Duty when their Activision acquisition closes. Microsoft has been on Steam for a long time and we take it as a signal that they are happy with gamers reception to that and the work we are doing. Our job is to keep building valuable features for not only Microsoft but all Steam customers and partners.

Microsoft offered and even sent us a draft agreement for a long-term Call of Duty commitment but it wasn’t necessary for us because a) we’re not believers in requiring any partner to have an agreement that locks them to shipping games on Steam into the distant future b) Phil and the games team at Microsoft have always followed through on what they told us they would do so we trust their intentions and c) we think Microsoft has all the motivation they need to be on the platforms and devices where Call of Duty customers want to be.

Microsoft Announces Bizarre Pledge To Bring Call of Duty To Nintendo Consoles

It's a '10-year commitment' that also includes continued support on Steam as well

kotaku.com

 

[Godot25]

GHG here is Valve statement. Thought it's Kotaku.

http://[URL]https://kotaku.com/micr...utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_source=twitter

[/URL]

Gaben: "Phil and the games team at Microsoft have always followed through on what they told us they would do so we trust their intentions"
Sony: "Phil is devil in human form"

 

[Loxus]

Reading here you would think creating something to be as big as call of duty is easy. Even Microsoft couldn't do it when they already had strong fps ip like halo. Nobody can do it. If they could, you would have seen another game at the top of the charts at the end of the year, instead of call of duty every fucking year for like the last 15 years straight.

COD is only big because it's a Multiplatform game.
Comparing it to an exclusive game is dumb.

If Microsoft was to make COD exclusive in 2025, you think COD would still be doing those numbers?

 

[TheGodfather07]

COD is only big because it's a Multiplatform game.
Comparing it to an exclusive game is dumb.

If Microsoft was to make COD exclusive in 2025, you think COD would still be doing those numbers?

Yes it would. The players will go wherever it is.

 

[Banjo64]

Which is only half the revenue, the MTX for COD on Sony is probably way over 50% beyond annual sales, I'd hazard a guess in the 65-75% territory considering ongoing purchases.

Not to mention PS Plus subscribers who sub for CoD alone.

 

[SmurfMustard]

If this deal goes through, Jim Ryan is going to look like an absolute muppet.

What do you mean "going to"? I feel like he reached muppet level quite some time ago.

 

[Clintizzle]

What do you mean "going to"? I feel like he reached muppet level quite some time ago.

I can understand why people may think that. The reality is that he has made some good decisions (forced or not) for PlayStation in the recent past.

Sony's approach to the opposition of this deal is the one area where they may have fucked up a little. To everyone except Sony fanbois, Jim has made PlayStation look scared and backward making arguments that are laughable at best. Microsoft has also made some hilarious statements but thats standard for them.

 

[Interfectum]

MS: Hey Sony, want a 10 year CoD deal?
Sony: Get lost.
MS: Hey Nintendo and Steam, want a 10 year CoD deal?
Nintendo and Steam: Sure!
Sony: Wait....