-
[Phil Spencer] Had good calls this week with leaders at Sony. I confirmed our intent to honor all existing agreements upon acquisition of Activision Blizzard and our desire to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation. Sony is an important part of our industry, and we value our relationship.
-
This thread has the same regurgitated comments as every other post about Activision. Everyone will believe what they want no matter what anyone from Microsoft says until a game is released as an exclusive.
ID: htjl7s3ID: htit1ohPhil Spencer says "It's not our intent to pull communities away from [PlayStation]" and "[it's] our desire to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation", but the response from many Xbox users effectively is "Phil Spencer is using weasel words. Don't be fooled. You can't trust him. Game will be exclusive soon enough."
I just find that funny.
ID: htiugf2I do think Call of duty will be on PS for the foreseeable future. But he used to say " exclusive are counter to what gaming is about". Before buying Bethesda and making there games exclusive. So who know what will happen.
ID: htj9h45It's because Phil can't actually say anything concrete right now. He's not allowed to. It's not their company yet. Same happened with the Bethesda deal, which had a wealth of vague statements being made before the deal finally went through.
The day the deal finally went through and ownership was complete, that's when actual concrete statements were made.
So yeah, take what Phil says now with a dump truck full of salt. He can't say what the actual plans will be until the deal goes through next year.
ID: htj8r3lHe said "I confirmed our intent to honor all EXISTING agreements upon acquisition of Activision Blizzard and our desire to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation."
Basically current agreements will not be broken but it's vague about future releases.
ID: htixz41You do realize he was basically saying the same thing with the Bethesda acquisition? And right after the deal was completed it was announced that all new releases are exclusive, barring pre-existing deals i.e. deathloop, and only current multiplat titles TES:O and F76 are remaining on playstation. Don't be surprised when next year we get a statement that all new CoDs are exclusive and warzone will remain multiplat. The only way CoD remains on playstation is if Sony has a contract with Activision already that we aren't privy to. We know they have marketing rights but we don't know for how long and if that same deal requires CoD on PS until 202X or if it is negotiated yearly.
Everything he says is going to be scrutinized and the acquisition could be cancelled if says something dumb enough to catch the attention of the FTC antitrust commission.
-
COD is just another Minecraft now for Xbox. Guaranteed bank, year in, year out.
ID: htigeqsIf theyre gonna drop it on gamepass day one every year, might as well just ask playstation users to shell out $70 every year for one game anyway.
Playstation players will pay regardless, its the best selling PS game every year
ID: htigumkYep, it's win win.
Xbox gamers don't feel screwed because the get it effectively for free as part of Gamepass (They probably get bonus stuff too like skins etc exclusive to Xbox)
PlayStation guys don't feel screwed and are just relieved they still get to play COD.
Xbox make a tonne of money.
ID: htinb3yPhil didn’t explicitly say that future Cod games will be on PlayStation.
His wording is vague enough that it could (and likely does) mean that existing Cod titles + any future games already contractually bound to be on PlayStation will be on PlayStation. Them desiring to keep Cod on PlayStation could just mean they desire to reach a deal with Sony to have Game Pass on their systems. Or simply that they desire to keep current Cod games on PlayStation. That would technically be keeping Cod on PlayStation. The wording is vague enough to allow that to be a possibility.
It’s just PR talk to not blow up the buyout before it fully goes through. They said similar things with Bethesda but once the deal is done they’ll say that future games are exclusive to devices with Game Pass.
ID: htj5g0nExactly, this is not clear cut and obviously carefully worded.
If the games were to keep releasing on PlayStation then he would have simply said so… “The future of the CoD franchise will continue to release on PlayStation as it has been”…That’s clear.
Instead he broke it up and said they will honor existing agreements and after that just expressed a “desire” to keep the games on PlayStation. He’s intentionally vague about that and could be referring to the existing games or future games that will come with conditions that have to be agreed upon. Desire = “we would like to”…not, “we will” so that decision obviously hasn’t been confirmed yet.
Losing CoD would hit Sony hard…they would lose billions in revenue and probably lose PS+ subs as well so MS holds all the cards at this point.
MS didn’t spend 70 billion just to maintain the status quo and give Sony a 30% cut of CoD’s sales. There will be some steep concessions to keep the future games on PlayStation, if it happens at all which probably isn’t too likely.ID: htinzyaYea this is still vague. This could just mean Warzone stays on PlayStation and new mainline games are exclusive.
Honestly I’m more excited about Phil talking about digging into Activison’s IPs and developing those games that were put aside for cod
ID: htiteheI'd agree if the statement wasn't deliberately vague. He could have just said: All future Call of Duty games will be on playstation. But he didn't. He talks about honoring existing agreements and a desire to have CoD on playstation.
This reminds me of the statements during Zenimax's initial purchase.
Expect all Call of Duty titles to be on playstation until 2024. After that, well I'm inclined to believe future games will be only xbox ecosystem exclusive. Unless some backdoor negotiations happen, where Playstation and Xbox decide to play nice with each other going forward.
-
I noticed the emphasis on call of duty, Phil is very careful with his words
I think its the only game that will remain multiplatform the rest will be exclusive
Its another minecraft situation
ID: htigfay"Desire" doesn't mean any guarantees either
ID: htiis57“Desire” could mean “Hey Sony, if you want COD, you have to allow Game Pass on PS”.
-
Still skeptical of the wording here honestly. Notice that it mentions existing agreements
ID: htikgem“Desire” doesn’t mean they will after existing contracts are up
ID: htil1s4Desire is one of those words that is used for when you'd love to do something, but...
ID: htirg08It’s probably more about leverage and negotiations at this point.
-
For all the shit COD gets there seems to be a lot of people up in arms all of a sudden over it’s potential exclusivity.
ID: htjv4njIt gets shit on Reddit. Just like FIFA.
Out there in the real world, there are lots of people who exclusively play just CoD or FIFA.
That is also documented by having very good sales year in year out despite all the complaints.
They might be "bad games" but no one can deny how much money they make.
ID: htj5w2pIt went from the most hated game by the community to the greatest commodity on the planet overnight
ID: htk667yThat’s because Reddit is the loud minority. Cod still sells more than any other game and it’s released yearly
-
Hey guys, we tried to keep COD on PS by trying to come to a agreement with Sony to bring Gamepass to Playstation. We we're unable to come to a agreement. Starting in the fall of 2024 the mainline COD titles will be exclusive to the Xbox/Gamepass eco-system. As a show of appreciation to all our call of duty fans on the playstation platform, WARZONE will remain F2P on ALL platforms.
Phil sometime in late summer of 2023 - Probably
ID: htinqqwPretty much lol. They could tell Sony that Xbox gets 100% of the micro transaction revenues on their platforms on top of the publisher earnings per PS5 copies sold.
ID: htj9rl5Sounds realistic.
ID: htit87rThis is the one right here folks
ID: htj63l0Ding ding ding!
-
I'd "Desire" my competitor to jump through hoops and pay extra to play my games too.
We'll see eventually what that word actually means for MS.
ID: htinrs4Yeah, this community needs to get a lot better at interpreting PR-speak. As soon as an approved statement uses words like "desire" or "our intent," all it's doing is leaving wiggle room to walk it back later. This isn't confirmation of anything.
ID: htiqibzMSFT: "Hey Sony, we'd like you to have CoD on PS and you get no cut from sales and even give us a premium to be able to sell it on your store."
Sony: "No."
MSFT: "Well, we did all we could!"
-
This is pretty funny. They’re playing Hot Potato with the blame and hoping that when the Bad Publicity phase starts, the heat will land on the other guy.
Sony wants Microsoft to have to say out loud that they’re taking Call of Duty “away” from millions of existing fans, and Microsoft wants to kick that down the road far enough that they can say something to the effect of “guys we really tried, but Sony wouldn’t play ball and we couldn’t agree on terms.”
-
I'm going to bet that this is temporary. Once the existing agreements expire, those games will probably be exclusive. At the very latest, they will become platform exclusive when it gets into being a service war (rather than a console war).
ID: htk3xvkThis is obviously the correct take. He literally says basically all this in plain English lmfao
-
very vague, can mean warzone and vanguard stay available.
ID: htjeixlI'm thinking Warzone will always be cross-platform and the stand alone games will be exclusive to Xbox.
-
This was very careful language.
A DESIRE seems like Microsoft trying to cut a deal with Sony.
I’d also say it could be that Xbox plans exclusivity for 1 year or 6 months on Xbox.
It could just be a vague way to get anti trust off their back and make Sony look good.
It could also mean Microsoft has no clue what they want to do.
Or they plan to make it exclusive but need to do a positive PR spin for the moment.
-
He’s probably leaving out details where he said we want to keep call of duty on PlayStation……. But only through GamePass
-
After reading these comments on different subs the past few days it actually makes me a bit embarrassed to call myself a gamer haha
The whole fanboy/console war thing is cringy and ridiculous
ID: htirry65 years sober, congratulations
-
Yeah Microsoft didn't spend 70 billion dollars to give PlayStation call of duty.
-
They can have COD what about Diablo 4!!!!
ID: htiiklrIf a deal was made prior to aquisition it should still be in. If not, then I think it may go both ways.
ID: htj421vYeah I don’t give a funk about COD. Diablo 4 would make me wanna buy an xbox
-
This comment is way too ambiguous. “Our desire to keep”
Sounds more like Sony needs to pay us what we want or else
-
Hearing Phil Spencer say positive things about Sony is like watching my parents get along twenty years after they got their divorce. Like, excuse me, my entire life I’ve expected you to hate each other.
-
I wonder if long term Microsoft wanna do a multiplayer standalone COD that would be multiplatform and then allow some of the studios to make a standalone awesome single player story based game. Separate them entirely. Put out a new Warzone every 3-4 years and then have a new story campaign every 2 years or something. That would be sweet actually.
-
I cant imagine a world where there is no duopoly dominating console gaming
引用元:https://www.reddit.com/r/PS5/comments/s8t888/phil_spencer_had_good_calls_this_week_with/
It’s because Phil Spencers comments are always highly PR trained vague statements. He’s still never straight up said “Bethesda games like elder scrolls will never be on PlayStation” and people still assume they won’t. Just like his statement about call of duty doesn’t make it crystal clear that it will remain on PlayStation in the future or if just the current games will be on there. People in that position speak vaguely on purpose so when the thing happens that one side doesn’t want they can say they warned you months or years ago. So people really shouldn’t even care about it until the day a game is announced for their respective console.