Support NeoGAF

[lastmessiah]

What would gamepass look like on playstation? Every single Microsoft I.P releasing day and date? Elder scrolls? Doom? Halo? State of Decay etc? Then there would be no need for Xbox hardware because you could just buy a Playstation and have your cake and eat it. Also, Sony would see that as well and would agree to having it for sure as it would pave the way to total dominance in the console hardware space. Or would it just be streaming? Even just streaming could quite easily cause their console sales to fall of a cliff.

Am I missing something here because gamepass on Playstation and Xbox consoles doesn't seem to fit imo. I don't think that that is Microsofts end game.

Game Pass is never coming to PS. People aren't thinking straight.

 

[Leyasu]

Game Pass is never coming to PS. People aren't thinking straight.

I tend to agree. I don't believe for one minute it is being used as a bargaining chip at all. Seems to me that Phil says platforms where gamepass is available is nothing more than a bullsit justification for keeping their new I.Ps exclusive. When he shouldn't have to justify anything.

 

[TGO]

I'm confused. I thought Sony guys don't give a fuck about Activision or Call of Duty. They don't care about that "casual" shit. So why is this thread so long?

Phil's english isn't that good so a few of his fan's translated it for us.... several times...

Syphon filter
SOCOM
Resistance
Killzone
Haze
Mag

Yep any day now their Halo killer is coming (20 years later still fat zeros)

Wait...Syphon Filter & SOCOM were Halo Killers?

 

[adamsapple]

English isn't that good so a few of his fan's translated it for us.... several times...

Wait...Syphon Filter & SOCOM was a Halo Killers?

Yeah, 989 went back in time to make Syphon Filter so they could kill Halo in the womb

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

What would gamepass look like on playstation? Every single Microsoft I.P releasing day and date? Elder scrolls? Doom? Halo? State of Decay etc? Then there would be no need for Xbox hardware because you could just buy a Playstation and have your cake and eat it. Also, Sony would see that as well and would agree to having it for sure as it would pave the way to total dominance in the console hardware space. Or would it just be streaming? Even just streaming could quite easily cause their console sales to fall of a cliff.

Am I missing something here because gamepass on Playstation and Xbox consoles doesn't seem to fit imo. I don't think that that is Microsofts end game.

I'm in the camp of it's something Xbox wants to do. They'd rather sell you a gamepass instead of a console, and it's easier to bring game pass to you instead of having to convince you to buy an Xbox, and then convince you to sub on top of that. I think we just need to look at PS as another avenue of growth for them.

But yeah there are a lot of issues which have to be solved at the table no doubt.

How would third-party games work? You're now giving PS gamers access to their games instead of buying them so how would they be compensated for those losses? Assuming it's not just a streaming platform there's the issue of Xbox live/psn, but apparently Minecraft only needs you to create a Microsoft account. You don't even need to go through Xbox live. So maybe you'd just need the Microsoft account to access game pass but multiplayer would just go through PSN with crossplay?

Sony is a whole other issue if they agree to it or not. If rumors are to be believed they already rejected it once. I think part of it comes down to stubbornness though since they didn't even want the EA sub at first either. Obviously there's Spartacus too

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

Syphon filter
SOCOM
Resistance
Killzone
Haze
Mag

Yep any day now their Halo killer is coming (20 years later still fat zeros)

All of the following is IMO.

Killzone 2 and 3 were better than the Halo's at the time.

Socom,Syphon Filter and MAG are different types of games that shouldn't be compared, but many prefer Socom over Halo.

Some could make the argument that the Resistance games are better but I wouldn't agree.

 

[NickFire]

What would gamepass look like on playstation? Every single Microsoft I.P releasing day and date? Elder scrolls? Doom? Halo? State of Decay etc? Then there would be no need for Xbox hardware because you could just buy a Playstation and have your cake and eat it. Also, Sony would see that as well and would agree to having it for sure as it would pave the way to total dominance in the console hardware space. Or would it just be streaming? Even just streaming could quite easily cause their console sales to fall of a cliff.

Am I missing something here because gamepass on Playstation and Xbox consoles doesn't seem to fit imo. I don't think that that is Microsofts end game.

I doubt the games would be day and date. They’d keep them first and better (perks) on Xbox I bet. It would be an obvious Trojan horse to sway people to their internal eco system over time. Sony is going to resist I bet, and will double down on exclusives. But I can’t see them letting COD go once any deals are up without giving it a try. Too risky. Like they followed MS before is how this plays out, referring to crossplay, and charging for online (not for altruistic reasons of course), and mlb to be able to keep valuable license. MS wins regardless if people stay or go. Either 70% for those who stay PS, or 100% from those who don’t.

Im speculating as much as anyone else. Who knows. Maybe they just want to bet all that money on way more. I doubt it with the numbers at stake, this ain’t 10 million a year money. But maybe.

 

[Leyasu]

I'm in the camp of it's something Xbox wants to do. They'd rather sell you a gamepass instead of a console, and it's easier to bring game pass to you instead of having to convince you to come to biy an Xbox, and then convince you to sub on top of that. I think we just need to look at PS as another avenue of growth for them.

But yeah there are a lot of issues which have to be solved at the table no doubt.

How would third-party games work? You're now giving PS gamers access to your games instead of buying them so how would they be compensated for those losses? Assuming it's not just a streaming platform, then there's issue of Xbox live/psn, but apparently, Minecraft only needs you to create a Microsoft account. You don't need to go through Xbox live, so maybe you'd just need the Microsoft account to access game pass but multiplayer games would just go through PSN with crossplay?

Sony is a whole other issue if they agree to it or not. If rumors are to be believed they already rejected it once. I think part of it comes down to stubbornness though since they didn't even want the EA sub at first either. Obviously there's Spartacus too

I don't know man.

I don't think that they want to ditch their hardware business when all of the monies are theirs when you are in their ecosystem. I can't imagine for one second that the Microsoft board not only didn't pick up on the fact that gp on playstation would be the death of their console hardware, but also just left an avenue open to billions in revenue going straight to another company in that scenario. I just cant see them voting yes to something like that.

 

[Jigsaah]

I'm just curious. Couldn't this argument be made about ANY game released on Xbox? If it's just about money why wouldn't MS put all their games on PlayStation and be done with it? Isn't part of the reason PlayStation is successful is because of the games you can play on the system? If those games are not on the system any longer why would you buy the PlayStation? If games like Skyrim, Doom, Call of Duty and Diablo aren't on PlayStation but are on Xbox why would you avoid the Xbox?

In addition has MS ever indicated they are hurting for cash? Why would you spend 70 billion dollars to bolster a platform you don't own? I can totally see Call of Duty going exclusively to the Xbox ecosystem. If you want to play the games badly enough there will be plenty of places to play it even if you refuse to buy an Xbox console. It's all part of business.

I don't think you can compare "ANY game" to COD. Love it or hate it, it still performs at the #1 spot year after year. You can't say that about any other game. Mainly because most games aren't yearly releases with the exception of sports games. Taking COD from Playstation isn't enough to lure most people to Xbox. That's why I specifically mention "COD Heads", people who live and breathe COD. That may be a significant amount of people, but many more will stick with PS5 for the other exclusives they have.

I will agree that Microsoft isn't exactly hurting for money, but it's simply bad business to not make good on your investment. Microsoft isn't a charity case. They will want to make that money back. The question is, how will they do it?

 

[Leyasu]

I doubt the games would be day and date. They’d keep them first and better (perks) on Xbox I bet. It would be an obvious Trojan horse to sway people to their internal eco system over time. Sony is going to resist I bet, and will double down on exclusives. But I can’t see them letting COD go once any deals are up without giving it a try. Too risky. Like they followed MS before is how this plays out, referring to crossplay, and charging for online (not for altruistic reasons of course), and mlb to be able to keep valuable license. MS wins regardless if people stay or go. Either 70% for those who stay PS, or 100% from those who don’t.

Im speculating as much as anyone else. Who knows. Maybe they just want to bet all that money on way more. I doubt it with the numbers at stake, this ain’t 10 million a year money. But maybe.

Even with MS games releasing 1 yr later, you would be feasting non-stop if everything was on playstation. Xbox would be dead.

 

[Shmunter]

What would gamepass look like on playstation? Every single Microsoft I.P releasing day and date? Elder scrolls? Doom? Halo? State of Decay etc? Then there would be no need for Xbox hardware because you could just buy a Playstation and have your cake and eat it. Also, Sony would see that as well and would agree to having it for sure as it would pave the way to total dominance in the console hardware space. Or would it just be streaming? Even just streaming could quite easily cause their console sales to fall of a cliff.

Am I missing something here because gamepass on Playstation and Xbox consoles doesn't seem to fit imo. I don't think that that is Microsofts end game.

Microsoft is working towards dominating the market. Part of such a strategy is to undercut and put competition out of business. Pulling content from Sony is the obvious solution, but it’s not an overnight move due to the install base and the massive losses it would incur for ms to cut off sales there.

No doubt it’s the end game, but it will be transitory - chipping away a bit at a time. Cannot see gamepass on ps. And streaming is just too amusing to even consider as a proposal.

Sony has time to do something, just as they did with the PS3 disaster. Question is, are they competent enough to do so. Watering down their brand by going pc multi-platform and sticking to cross gen seems to be the opposite of what should be happening at a time like this.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

I doubt the games would be day and date. They’d keep them first and better (perks) on Xbox I bet. It would be an obvious Trojan horse to sway people to their internal eco system over time. Sony is going to resist I bet, and will double down on exclusives. But I can’t see them letting COD go once any deals are up without giving it a try. Too risky. Like they followed MS before is how this plays out, referring to crossplay, and charging for online (not for altruistic reasons of course), and mlb to be able to keep valuable license. MS wins regardless if people stay or go. Either 70% for those who stay PS, or 100% from those who don’t.

Im speculating as much as anyone else. Who knows. Maybe they just want to bet all that money on way more. I doubt it with the numbers at stake, this ain’t 10 million a year money. But maybe.

See I don't think they'd do that. If they put game pass on PS and we sub to it there, we're their customers at that point. Treating a portion of their subscribers as second class citizens because they're not using their hardware just doesn't seem like something the current MS would do. I don't think it'd be good PR at least anyway, for both Sony and MS

 

[Mister Wolf]

Call Of Duty will be multiplatform. Overwatch 2 will be exclusive. Diablo 4 will be exclusive as well.

 

[DJ12]

Call Of Duty will be multiplatform. Overwatch 2 will be exclusive. Diablo 4 will be exclusive as well.

Gamepass exclusives.....

 

[The_Mike]

50% of all cod sales are on ps. Cutting off your nose to spite your face if otherwise. Good for fanboys, illogical in business.

Yeah, just like Bethesda.

Oh wait.

It is logical for business.

I've been on this forum for many years. I was lurking for even longer. Everyone said no one wanted to buy an Xbox, because either:

A. They have no games.
B. You can play their games on a PC.

Now Microsoft are acquiring big companies which has big franchises, and now they can pull out big exclusives.

With your logic, then it doesn't make sense from a business statement that God of war, spider man etc are exclusives and not on Xbox, because Sony are leaving money on the table.

It's about making the Xbox more lucrative. Companies aren't fanboys. Companies are about making money.

If these exclusives continued to be multi platform, then the Xbox brand would be completely obsolete.

By your logic, then all games should be multi platform. I do agree, this would be the perfect world,but we ain't living in a perfect world.

We live in a world that's driven about making a living.

People seem to forget the bigger picture.

The Bethesda acquisition might not be able to get their money worth back by being exclusive. The same to Activision Blizzard.

But it is a bolster to make the Xbox brand as a whole more strong and bigger, and in the long run these acquisitions will add to the bigger picture to why you should choose Xbox, or a PC, over PlayStation.

The biggest winners of all are the pc players at the moment, that gets both xbox and PlayStation exclusives on their platform.

Who cares if the ports comes later. You save yourself money from hardware you can spend on software anyway until the game you want arrives.

Especially pc players who cares about graphics and peripherals as fast frame rate etc.

 

[Shmunter]

Yeah, just like Bethesda.

Oh wait.

It is logical for business.

I've been on this forum for many years. I was lurking for even longer. Everyone said no one wanted to buy an Xbox, because either:

A. They have no games.
B. You can play their games on a PC.

Now Microsoft are acquiring big companies which has big franchises, and now they can pull out big exclusives.

With your logic, then it doesn't make sense from a business statement that God of war, spider man etc are exclusives and not on Xbox, because Sony are leaving money on the table.

It's about making the Xbox more lucrative. Companies aren't fanboys. Companies are about making money.

If these exclusives continued to be multi platform, then the Xbox brand would be completely obsolete.

By your logic, then all games should be multi platform. I do agree, this would be the perfect world,but we ain't living in a perfect world.

We live in a world that's driven about making a living.

People seem to forget the bigger picture.

The Bethesda acquisition might not be able to get their money worth back by being exclusive. The same to Activision Blizzard.

But it is a bolster to make the Xbox brand as a whole more strong and bigger, and in the long run these acquisitions will add to the bigger picture to why you should choose Xbox, or a PC, over PlayStation.

The biggest winners of all are the pc players at the moment, that gets both xbox and PlayStation exclusives on their platform.

Who cares if the ports comes later. You save yourself money from hardware you can spend on software anyway until the game you want arrives.

Especially pc players who cares about graphics and peripherals as fast frame rate etc.

Organic IP’s already exclusive are not equivalent to investing in existing ip’s based on earning valuation, only to gut the value by 50% post purchase.

Over time there is potential to move things, but it’s not an overnight pulling of a Band-Aid. Especially when it is not just exclusivity as the single fighting ground any longer - it’s gamepass value vs bespoke sale.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

Organic IP’s already exclusive are not equivalent to investing in existing ip’s based on earning valuation, only to gut the value by 50% post purchase.

Over time there is potential to to move things, but it’s not an overnight pulling of a Band-Aid. Especially when it is not just exclusivity as the single fighting ground any longer - it’s gamepass value vs bespoke sale.

Agreed they don't have to remove it all together just incentivize players on Xbox

Put the game on Gamepass and give Xbox players in game advantages in double XP or something cool and the hardcore COD crowd will move.

Especially grabbing the Series S at $299 and maybe less by then

 

[PharaoTutAnchAmun]

Are you suggesting MS wants to semi-go multiplatform?
Next you'll be saying they've created a separate division outside of the Xbox brand to handle that stuff
Let me guess, Phil will be in charge

Thats already the chase, Phil spencer is now the CAO of Microsoft gaming, another one is now the leader of Xboxgaming

 

[Syphon Filter]

Syphon filter
SOCOM
Resistance
Killzone
Haze
Mag

Yep any day now their Halo killer is coming (20 years later still fat zeros)

Killzone and Haze were the only ones being compared to Halo, not sure where you got the others from. btw Halo killed itself, Halo is now irrelevant ever since Bungie left it.

 

[HoofHearted]

The most insane thing about this is that Phil is openly saying that he wont bring games to other platforms, he's only interested in services. Like I dont understand how this man can compile and accumulate so much talent, and still is mostly concerned about the method of fucking delivery. He can be Mozart but he wants to be the postman.

I will never understand Microsoft's obsession with services instead of products. Your product is what you should be proud of. Your product is the art. Your service is just a service like catering or waitering or butlering. If Sony and Nintendo call his bluff and he keeps Starfield, Elder Scrolls, CoD, Fallout, Doom all on Xbox then he wouldve cut down that game's audience by half. Maybe more if the people dont migrate. And for what? All to get gamepass on Playstation? Who gives a shit. lmao. I am so confused.

It's art man. That's the full experience. Gamepass is not an experience. It's just delivery. It's digornos.

Because Microsoft’s core business model is services.. it’s all about recurring revenue and has been their core business model for years now… It all started with Office 365, and has expanded into every aspect of Microsoft’s business segments. Gaming is just the latest segment to now have focus.

It’s not about Xbox, PCs, or even PS. Those are simply the distribution channels. In a few years - those channels will be different…

The Service IS the platform …

 

[Aenima]

Call Of Duty will be multiplatform. Overwatch 2 will be exclusive. Diablo 4 will be exclusive as well.

This is what i think will happen. COD userbase on playstation is just too big, MS has more to gain by keeping it multiplat and cash in all the sales and MTX from playstation players, than keeping it exclusive reducing the value and playerbase of the franshise in half just to gain a bit of marketshare.
Battlefield would easely take over as the most popular FPS, that if EA dont keep messing up the Battlefield games.

I keep seeing ppl bringing Bethesda examples, but is a complete different scenario. Starfield is a new IP, has no Playstation history. Elder Scrolls has a bigger history with xbox, i think only Skyrim was popular on PS consoles, but its mainly a PC game where the mod community keep those games alive and going for years.

Those games being exclusive does not impact the franshises as much as COD being exclusive.

At the end of the day we all have to wait and see.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

Sony to lose $260 million a year if Call of Duty goes Xbox exclusive
And that is without PS+ subscribers that pay just to play COD

COD userbase on playstation is just too big, MS has more to gain by keeping it multiplat and cash in all the sales and MTX from playstation players, than keeping it exclusive reducing the value and playerbase of the franshise in half just to gain a bit of marketshare.

Would they? It is a trade off between building your own community (Game Pass community) vs supporting Sony becaues let's be honest there - for the company at scale of MS they can write off any profits if it allows them to push their masterplan.
Pretty sure they did not spend 70b on profits from MTX

 

[Aenima]

Sony to lose $260 million a year if Call of Duty goes Xbox exclusive
And that is without PS+ subscribers that pay just to play COD


Would they? It is a trade off between building your own community (Game Pass community) vs supporting Sony becaues let's be honest there - for the company at scale of MS they can write off any profits if it allows them to push their masterplan.
Pretty sure they did not spend 70b on profits from MTX

As i mentioned Battlefield would easely take over as the most popular FPS. Is not like COD is the only FPS around. Thers a reason MS keeps Minecraft multiplatform as well. The money Sony would lose if COD goes exclusive is a hipotetical scenario where no PS player would replace COD for Battlefield or any other FPS.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

As i mentioned Battlefiel would easely take over as the most popular FPS. Is not like COD is the only FPS around. Thers a reason MS keeps Minecraft multiplatform as well.

Battlefield has been easily taking over COD for years already Backwards

 

[clarky]

Day 4 still going round in circles.

You don't increase market share by putting your biggest IP on you competitors box. Won't happen over night but it will happen.

Sticking a few extra skins and charms on Xbox as some have suggested won't do that either, stop fooling yourselves.

Ask yourself this. If this hadn't happened and it was Sony who had bought say Take Two, would GTA6 and the next version of GTA online come to Xbox ? Not a chance in hell.


Crystal ball prediction: You can bet your ass there's some sort of deal with Netflix coming with Sony, I'd say this is one of many moves against that. Sony & Netflix vs MS & Gamepass could have been about an even race before this week, now I'm not so sure.

As i mentioned Battlefiel would easely take over as the most popular FPS. Is not like COD is the only FPS around. Thers a reason MS keeps Minecraft multiplatform as well.

Good one, have you played the latest battlefield? The franchise is on life support at this point. Not saying it can't be saved but EA are doing a great job in making it irrelevant.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

As i mentioned Battlefiel would easely take over as the most popular FPS. Is not like COD is the only FPS around. Thers a reason MS keeps Minecraft multiplatform as well.

They need to assume they could lose Battlefield too. if it ever becomes more popular than COD then all the more reason

 

[12Dannu123]

Day 4 still going round in circles.

You don't increase market share by putting your biggest IP on you competitors box. Won't happen over night but it will happen.

Sticking a few extra skins and charms on Xbox as some have suggested won't do that either, stop fooling yourselves.

Ask yourself this. If this hadn't happened and it was Sony who had bought say Take Two, would GTA6 and the next version of GTA online come to Xbox ? Not a chance in hell.


Crystal ball prediction: You can bet your ass there's some sort of deal with Netflix coming with Sony, I'd say this is one of many moves against that. Sony & Netflix vs MS & Gamepass could have been about an even race before this week, now I'm not so sure.


Good one, have you played the latest battlefield? The franchise is on life support at this point. Not saying it can't be saved but EA are doing a great job in making it irrelevant.

What benefit will Netflix provide against Game Pass? Last I heard they don't control their infrastructure to maintain a Cloud gaming service at scale. There's a reason why PSNow only has a 5 Million cap.

 

[clarky]

What benefit will Netflix provide against Game Pass? Last I heard they don't control their infrastructure to maintain a Cloud gaming service at scale. There's a reason why PSNow only has a 5 Million cap.

Did not know that i thought game streaming was in their future plans. They seem like the perfect fit to me, I mean they are on practically every new tv and device sold these days.

 

[Lognor]

All of the following is IMO.

Killzone 2 and 3 were better than the Halo's at the time.

Socom,Syphon Filter and MAG are different types of games that shouldn't be compared, but many prefer Socom over Halo.

Some could make the argument that the Resistance games are better but I wouldn't agree.

Weird opinion. The killzone games were trash. I remember getting the ps3 game and being excited to play based on the previews but it was absolute trash. Resistance was MUCH better.

I don't even recall killzone having multi player. They probably did and I probably played them but they must have been completely forgettable. And none of my friends were playing killzone online. They were all playing halo. Weird...

 

[Represent.]

 

[MonarchJT]

Activision, MS and Spencer said they will keep the ABK IPs on the platforms where they already are. Spencer specifically mentioned CoD, and they did use the Minecraft (which got all its post acquisition games released on PS) as example in the SEC filing (legal document for their investors, regulators, analysts, they won't lie them).

Plus on top of that, they had pending marketing/exclusivity deals with Sony, I assume most of them for CoD games, that they publicly commited to honor as they also said and did in the previous MS acquisitions.

this marketing contract usually are 3 or 4 years ....i don't see a reality where Ms isn't using an acquisition of 70b of the most played fps game for a position of power against Sony. It is objectively unrealistic to think so. Microsoft is not a charity company and above all it has nothing to give to Sony as the latter has never lost the opportunity to dry games from Xbox platform.

 

[clarky]

Weird opinion. The killzone games were trash. I remember getting the ps3 game and being excited to play based on the previews but it was absolute trash. Resistance was MUCH better.

I don't even recall killzone having multi player. They probably did and I probably played them but they must have been completely forgettable. And none of my friends were playing killzone online. They were all playing halo. Weird...

One of them did have a fairly active MP think it was 3 maybe i don't recall, but yeah never set the world on fire. I always found those games to look good, but play like shit. Very clunky and "heavy" for want of a better term.

Like you said i found resistance better, but never played the MP side of things for very long.

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

Weird opinion. The killzone games were trash. I remember getting the ps3 game and being excited to play based on the previews but it was absolute trash. Resistance was MUCH better.

I don't even recall killzone having multi player. They probably did and I probably played them but they must have been completely forgettable. And none of my friends were playing killzone online. They were all playing halo. Weird...

Guy says the games are trash but.... didn’t know they had multiplayer.

What a

 

[TheAmazingSpiderMan]

Some of the takes in this thread is hilarious, you sound so sure as if MS have personally told you their plans with this.

The next 18 months is gonna be hilarious.

 

[clarky]

Some of the takes in this thread is hilarious, you sound so sure as if MS have personally told you their plans with this.

The next 18 months is gonna be hilarious.

It's called speculation its fun. Get used to it, because like you say there's going to be a whole year of going round and round in circles.. This time next year we'll all be absolutely sick of it.

Really is the biggest bomb dropped I've ever witnessed in all my years of gaming though, and i've been around since the very start. Shame it wasn't live on stage at E3 though that would have been fun.

 

[DarkMage619]

I don't think you can compare "ANY game" to COD. Love it or hate it, it still performs at the #1 spot year after year. You can't say that about any other game. Mainly because most games aren't yearly releases with the exception of sports games. Taking COD from Playstation isn't enough to lure most people to Xbox. That's why I specifically mention "COD Heads", people who live and breathe COD. That may be a significant amount of people, but many more will stick with PS5 for the other exclusives they have.

I will agree that Microsoft isn't exactly hurting for money, but it's simply bad business to not make good on your investment. Microsoft isn't a charity case. They will want to make that money back. The question is, how will they do it?

See that is the thing. Now we are saying COD won't convince people to buy an Xbox, Diablo won't convince people to buy an Xbox, Elder Scrolls won't convince people to buy an Xbox, Fallout won't convince people to buy an Xbox, Doom won't convince people to buy an Xbox. Pretty sure at some point there is enough content outside of PlayStation to make getting an Xbox worthwhile. Otherwise we are making the argument that no matter what games are on Xbox people aren't interested and I don't believe that at all.

MS WILL be able to make back their money and they won't need the PlayStation to do it. They can do it by bringing loads of content to Xbox ecosystem and making sure they are providing their customers with the best value. They are playing the long game and there is no rush to make additional money now. Their purchase of Activision was not just money that disappeared it was invested in to their internal studios. The real waste would be to use that development power to make PlayStation more attractive.

 

[01011001]

Shame it wasn't live on stage at E3 though that would have been fun.

imagine if E3 2022 was gonna happen,
-MS Press Conference...
-lights go dark...
-Splash screen with announcer voice: "Xbox Console Exclusive"
-First Person Shooter gameplay shown, no HUD, no familiar faces
-People on the main character's squad die around him
-flash grenade, everything white
-hand grabs main character on the shoulder, turns him around...
-it is Cpt. Price!
-"STAND UP SOLDIER!"

-"Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2" logo shown, "Fall 2023"

after that Phil Spencer on stage announcing Activision Blizzard is now part of Xbox

that shit would have literally broken the internet.

 

[AnotherDayAnotherDollar]

All of the following is IMO.

Killzone 2 and 3 were better than the Halo's at the time.

Socom,Syphon Filter and MAG are different types of games that shouldn't be compared, but many prefer Socom over Halo.

Some could make the argument that the Resistance games are better but I wouldn't agree.

I mean everybody is entitled to their opinion, but you are in the minority here methinks. You are right that only Haze and Killzone were ever spoken as "Halo" killers. They both failed miserably, but the others were never referred to as Halo Killers.

Not saying this is what you are alluding to here, but when it comes to what Sony should try to bring back from the dead.

Killzone - I really enjoyed Killzone 2. Multiplayer was legit fun, lack of co op sucked, but the game did well to live up to that E3 trailer. I also enjoyed the campaign, but then I started playing COD MW2 and I forgot Killzone 2 existed. I did not enjoy any of the other Killzone entries.
SOCOM - Zipper is dead so who would make SOCOM? SOCOM 2 was the best in the series, but I also enjoyed SOCOM 1 and SOCOM 3. This was my go to shooter before, of course, COD ate its lunch. SOCOM 4 does not exist. I repeat there are only 3 SOCOM games in existence.
Resistance - Resistance kinda sucked IMO. Resistance 2 and 3 were good though, but IMO I would rather IGs keeps bringing us those AAA Marvel Games. Waste of talent if they go make Resistance.
MAG sucked, no thank you. I only played the Beta and hated it.
I don't even remember if I played Haze. I think I played the demo and I thought it sucked a lot and I wanted nothing to do with it.
Warhawk was a lot of fun. I wasn't that good at the game, but I had a blast.

I would say Warhawk would benefit the most for a revival without a doubt. Don't do the sequel like Starhawk though because that was garbage. After that I would say Killzone simply because I didn't really like Horizon 1, so GG working on Killzone would be okay with me. I also don't know who I would trust to do SOCOM right and I like I said would rather Insomniac Games keep working on them Marvel games. Syphon Filter remake from Bend can also wash the bad Days Gone taste off from my mind.

 

[01011001]

All of the following is IMO.

Killzone 2 and 3 were better than the Halo's at the time.

I too love shooters with awful controls and corridor levels!

for real Killzone is just Call of Duty in space with worse controls and framerate

 

[clarky]

If they bring anything back my wish would be Syphon filter. i know its not an fps but 1+2 were awesome back in the day.

 

[oldergamer]

It looks that way. But while I was not on this forum at the time of the Bethesda acquisition I've looked and there were countless people saying that the AAA Bethesda games (Starfield, Elder Scrolls, etc.) would stay multi platform because of their huge sales potential. And that has not turned out to be the case. So here we have another acquisition with huge AAA games and some folks are making the same argument. Most of us know how this turns out.

We can certainly play the wait and see case, but it will lead to disappointment for a ton of people. Let's just say it's a good thing that you already own an Xbox Series console.

Starfield is a unknown, unproven property. Cod is a known property generating revenue on playstation. Theres a big difference in why one can avoid playstation and the other can't.

 

[ChiefDada]

MS WILL be able to make back their money and they won't need the PlayStation to do it. They can do it by bringing loads of content to Xbox ecosystem and making sure they are providing their customers with the best value. They are playing the long game and there is no rush to make additional money now. Their purchase of Activision was not just money that disappeared it was invested in to their internal studios. The real waste would be to use that development power to make PlayStation more attractive.

Can you provide high level example with numbers to support your stance so others can have a better understanding?


This is false, and is the exact opposite of what actually happened (inorganic growth via acquisition). The money is used to pay Activision shareholders for transfer of ownership. For all intents and purposes, that money does disappear as it was used to make Activision/Blizzard a Microsoft company. Any investment for future projects will require additional money that has nothing to do with the $70 billion.

 

[01011001]

Starfield is a unknown, unproven property. Cod is a known property generating revenue on playstation. Theres a big difference in why one can avoid playstation and the other can't.

??? that makes zero sense... the other way around would be way more logical. a new IP needs any help it gets, a known IP does not need any help and draws in players automatically...

also Elder Scrolls will also be exclusive, so how does your logic work there?

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I too love shooters with awful controls and corridor levels!

for real Killzone is just Call of Duty in space with worse controls and framerate

Also everything is brown and there is 150+ ms of input lag for no reason

Your character is also for some reason 3 feet tall which makes cinematics in first person hilarious because everyone is a giant or something and also it makes shooting really awkward

 

[01011001]

Also everything is brown and there is 150+ ms of input lag for no reason

Your character is also for some reason 3 feet tall which makes cinematics in first person hilarious because everyone is a giant or something and also it makes shooting really awkward

well there is a reason why there is lag. they are clearly pre rendering frames in order to smooth out hard frame drops...
the PS3 can barely run that game, even with all that it still drops into the mid 20s all the time... imagine how it would run without it

Killzone 3 has vastly reduced the amount of CPU and GPU heavy stuff in order to get rid of the need for that and have less latency (but it's still higher than a well made 30fps shooter)

 

[MonarchJT]

Can you provide high level example with numbers to support your stance so others can have a better understanding?


This is false, and is the exact opposite of what actually happened (inorganic growth via acquisition). The money is used to pay Activision shareholders for transfer of ownership. For all intents and purposes, that money does disappear as it was used to make Activision/Blizzard a Microsoft company. Any investment for future projects will require additional money that has nothing to do with the $70 billion.

you buy assets Ms bought a company that was valued around 50b ....buing assets is safer and smarter (if it help your business) than leave money in bank. Ms is a trillion dollar company and if compared to what Sony could spend (was 14 b spanned in 3 years for the entire company their capital?) the amount of money seems immense ..... for a company like Ms it is more than acceptable.
Ms isn't Sony and the non-existence of the mythical warchest was a meme generated by fanboys to mock Xbox now it's clear that the two company are economically in diffent league

 

[BeforeU]

What would gamepass look like on playstation? Every single Microsoft I.P releasing day and date? Elder scrolls? Doom? Halo? State of Decay etc? Then there would be no need for Xbox hardware because you could just buy a Playstation and have your cake and eat it. Also, Sony would see that as well and would agree to having it for sure as it would pave the way to total dominance in the console hardware space. Or would it just be streaming? Even just streaming could quite easily cause their console sales to fall of a cliff.

Am I missing something here because gamepass on Playstation and Xbox consoles doesn't seem to fit imo. I don't think that that is Microsofts end game.

The problem what most of you not realizing is selling a piece of plastic is not increasing their bottom line business. Consoles are and has always been low margin business, they are not iPhones. Infact initially companies have to eat up cost, its not unheard of.

Where ultimately both Sony and Microsoft makes money is selling software via their store, live/psn+ service and licensing cut from 3rd party publishers.

Now ask yourself, if you are able to sell your subscription on another platform without doing any R&D that goes behind every new console. Why in the world would you not want to? lol

 

[ChiefDada]

you buy assets Ms bought a company that was valued around 50b ....buing assets is safer and smarter (if it help your business) than leave money in bank. Ms is a trillion dollar company and if compared to what Sony could spend (was 14 b spanned in 3 years for the entire company their capital?) the amount of money seems immense ..... for a company like Ms it is more than acceptable.
Ms isn't Sony and the non-existence of the mythical warchest was a meme generated by fanboys to mock Xbox now it's clear that the two company are economically in diffent league

I think you're saying because Microsoft has more money than Sony, they can afford to take more risk?

Sorry, I don't really understand much of this. Perhaps due to language barrier?

 

[MonarchJT]

I think you're saying because Microsoft has more money than Sony, they can afford to take more risk?

Sorry, I don't really understand much of this. Perhaps due to language barrier?

yes probably language barrier sorry what i'm saying is that even if it is true that the 70b acquisition may seem huge they actually bought some assets that are valued that money....they didn't actually lose that money because they might actually resell

 

[Shmunter]

yes probably language barrier sorry what i'm saying is that even if it is true that the 70b acquisition may seem huge they actually bought some assets that are valued that money....they didn't actually lose that money because they might actually resell

What assets would Activision have? Land, buildings? Unlikely for a company producing virtual goods like software, certainly no physical stock on hand.

These sorts of things are valued based on earnings and ip value…all goodwill.