Sony calls Microsoft offer to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation for three extra years "inadequate"

[m3tavision]

Yeah, PlayStation CEO was just telling everyone to buy a XSX, because he is NOT committed to multi-players FPS games...

 

[Puiu]

Yeah, PlayStation CEO was just telling everyone to buy a XSX, because he is NOT committed to multi-players FPS games...

Being committed to making first party multiplayer FPS games or not is irrelevant. Saying that they won't forsake first party AAA single player games is actually a really good thing applauded by most gamers.

But, that being said, the COD franchise is without a doubt a system seller, especially in the US. Loosing such a big franchise will hurt Sony in the US a lot.

 

[passwordistaco]

But, that being said, the COD franchise is without a doubt a system seller, especially in the US. Loosing such a big franchise will hurt Sony in the US a lot.

That's a Sony problem, not a market problem. Nobody is keeping Sony from making a multiplayer FPS, and they could release it before COD potentially leaves Playstation. They just can't be bothered and would rather complain than compete.

 

[Puiu]

That's a Sony problem, not a market problem. Nobody is keeping Sony from making a multiplayer FPS, and they could release it before COD potentially leaves Playstation. They just can't be bothered and would rather complain than compete.

It is 100% a market problem since consumers will be restricted. As for the "they can't be bothered", that's not true. Sony made plenty of FPS games, but getting a franchise at COD's level takes a lot more than just making a good game.

There are also some rumours of a new SOCOM game being worked on.

 

[Watzupken]

I seriously don’t see the problem when Sony themselves are soaking up a lot of game studios to create exclusive titles. At least in the case of MS buying over Activision, the game still exists on PC. For Sony, it is only in recent years before the PS exclusive games ever appear on another platform that is not a PS. Which I guess is one of the reasons why PS always outsell XB.
And the irony is while Sony is complaining about losing revenue and buyers for PS, I can’t even find a PS that is at MSRP. Sony is busy cutting cost on the console, while at the same time, increasing prices. But the fundamental problem I believe is that a substantial number of people who wanted to buy a PS5 since launch, still can’t get one. So where will the game revenue come from when the consoles are sitting a a scalpers’ store/ home?

 

[passwordistaco]

...but getting a franchise at COD's level takes a lot more than just making a good game.

There are also some rumours of a new SOCOM game being worked on.

Yes, it would probably take a lot of QA and refinement before release to make sure a game is great. "Release now, patch later" is unlikely to challenge a market leader (even if it is the leader's release strategy). It will also take a huge marketing push. All of which Sony could do.

Sony doesn't think it could make a Call of Duty rival

Sony has voiced its apprehensions over the Microsoft Activision deal to Brazil's Administrative Council for Economic Defense (CADE), one of many competition regulators from across the globe...

www.techspot.com

"Sony told the CADE that while AAA games on Call of Duty's production scale can come from a few other companies such as itself..." (emphasis added). "Call of Duty's fanbase is so entrenched that even if another publisher made a similar game, it couldn't reproduce the Call of Duty brand." Bullshit. It's hard, not impossible.

You know who we haven't heard from in this dispute? Nintendo. Poor Nintendo must not have the resources to challenge the Activision purchase, because they don't have Call of Duty.

 

[moon982]

Microsoft's holding games hostage doesn't piss me off as a PC gamer.

either way , I still get my games.

if I had to guess, they'll make cod limited exclusive to encourage xbox, then maintain that dominant number-one uberbase

The problem is Call of Duty came out on the xbox first than after got ported over to playstation. They are just mad it is not a xbox only.

 

[Bp968]

Sony has some the most technically gifted studios in existence under their banner and can't make an FPS game? thats sad is what it is.

killzone, resistance, mag,...they could easily bankroll a top tier experience and lock it down on playstation just to spite microsoft but they'd rather cry, whine and rehash tlou again.

they legit have bungie who made Halo and still dont know what to do, thats honestly shameful.

The difference is sony cant lock a MP title down to a sony platform only, it won't have a large enough player base. Its why nearly all their exclusives are single player titles.

I agree with the other posters: sony can go suck an egg. When they release bloodborne and ghosts of tishushimi (sp?) For xbox and PC they can come back and cry again and maybe we will listen.

When the systems were drastically different they had an excuse for exclusives other than the obvious intention to drive people to their console. Now with the consoles essentially being low to mid grade PCs that excuse is dead. Now exclusives are entirely used as crowbars to force players into their ecosystem(s). If what MS is doing is against the rules then sony and nintendo are repeat offenders to an extreme degree. MS is hugely generous to gamers right now compared to either other console maker so good luck turning MS into the bad guy Sony.

Maybe the loss will force sony to keep offering more of their exclusives to PC since few of us PC gamers are wiling to spend 500+ on a new console to play a handful of exclusives.

 

[Bp968]

I did not have Epic in mind when I wrote this, but Game Pass, which is actually very popular. Microsoft, shortly after buying some of the largest developers in the world, quickly dropped their games on Game Pass to bolster its library. MS obviously wants the premier monthly subscription service for games. Sony is now working on their own version of Game Pass, but it's going to be quite the uphill battle.

For the right kind of gamer game pass is amazing. Its also wonderful for lan parties. We have a yearly lan party at my house (going on 12-14 years now!) And we use gamepass to cheaply get access to a large pile of multiplayer games we can all play. We sign up for a month or two every year.

If I didnt have 1200+ steam games and an easy 200+ on my "need to play" list id probably keep it subbed all year. If your a new PC or xbox gamer its even more useful since you get a huge library right off the bat without spending another 500-1000$ for 10-20 games for your new system.

 

[hwertz]

"Microsoft's defense was to deny its purchase would damage the industry, accuse Sony of being afraid of Game Pass, and call the company hypocritical in light of its own exclusivity deals."
This. Sony has loads of exclusivity deals, and I'm quite sure they've bought studios in the past and immediately made the next games from them PS-only. Hypocrites.

 

[McMurdeR]

If these were in anyway essential services I'd say Sony has a point. But it's just games. Microsoft can never monopolise it. Anyone can make a new console, games, or new ips.

 

[kira setsu]

If these were in anyway essential services I'd say Sony has a point. But it's just games. Microsoft can never monopolise it. Anyone can make a new console, games, or new ips.

exactly, just try to make something better than cod

take the deal, use those years to make a competitor, release it on playstation and pc, hope it becomes a massive success then watch microsoft beg for it.

a lot of "if's" but for crying out loud at least try,

 

[m3tavision]

Yes, it would probably take a lot of QA and refinement before release to make sure a game is great. "Release now, patch later" is unlikely to challenge a market leader (even if it is the leader's release strategy). It will also take a huge marketing push. All of which Sony could do.

Sony doesn't think it could make a Call of Duty rival

Sony has voiced its apprehensions over the Microsoft Activision deal to Brazil's Administrative Council for Economic Defense (CADE), one of many competition regulators from across the globe...

www.techspot.com

"Sony told the CADE that while AAA games on Call of Duty's production scale can come from a few other companies such as itself..." (emphasis added). "Call of Duty's fanbase is so entrenched that even if another publisher made a similar game, it couldn't reproduce the Call of Duty brand." Bullshit. It's hard, not impossible.

You know who we haven't heard from in this dispute? Nintendo. Poor Nintendo must not have the resources to challenge the Activision purchase, because they don't have Call of Duty.

IMO, Nintendo is for little kids, or adolescent adults who have never outgrown their kiddie phase and learned to move to advanced multi-player, or adult level games. They stuck in an arcade universe.. playing cartoon games.

 

[Puiu]

I seriously don’t see the problem when Sony themselves are soaking up a lot of game studios to create exclusive titles. At least in the case of MS buying over Activision, the game still exists on PC. For Sony, it is only in recent years before the PS exclusive games ever appear on another platform that is not a PS. Which I guess is one of the reasons why PS always outsell XB.
And the irony is while Sony is complaining about losing revenue and buyers for PS, I can’t even find a PS that is at MSRP. Sony is busy cutting cost on the console, while at the same time, increasing prices. But the fundamental problem I believe is that a substantial number of people who wanted to buy a PS5 since launch, still can’t get one. So where will the game revenue come from when the consoles are sitting a a scalpers’ store/ home?

The difference is that Sony isn't taking the biggest FPS franchise and banning it on playstation. (I doubt that any future Destiny 3 game would be Sony exclusive)

 

[toooooot]

Spencer pretty much said he will let Sony have it for the next 3 years and then it will be whatever MS will decide it to be. MS could ask a huge amount from Sony to let them have cod on PS. And Sony would definitely pay. That is why Sony is so unhappy with what Spencer said.

 

[toooooot]

IMO, Nintendo is for little kids, or adolescent adults who have never outgrown their kiddie phase and learned to move to advanced multi-player, or adult level games. They stuck in an arcade universe.. playing cartoon games.

Arcade games are relaxing. When you are very tired or dont want to move gears in your head, arcade games are it.

 

[Prosercunus]

Does CoD still have the same kinda pull and reputation that it did 10 years ago?

I think so. There's always going to be a segment of "basic ***** gamers" that play the popular IP and never change.

 

[m3tavision]

Arcade games are relaxing. When you are very tired or dont want to move gears in your head, arcade games are it.

Right... Nintendo is easy relaxing games. Not a market pusher like XSX, or PS5...!

 

[Bp968]

If these were in anyway essential services I'd say Sony has a point. But it's just games. Microsoft can never monopolise it. Anyone can make a new console, games, or new ips.

I agree. Ive noticed over the past 10 or so years that term "monopoly" is getting tossed about quite a bit more freely then I believe is truly appropriate.

The telephone company was a monopoly. The power company *is* a monopoly, you can't really get your power from anyone else (unless you own your home and have a decent location for solar and batteries, but thats a fairly new change).

 

[HeeeF]

IMO, Nintendo is for little kids, or adolescent adults who have never outgrown their kiddie phase and learned to move to advanced multi-player, or adult level games. They stuck in an arcade universe.. playing cartoon games.

Lmao this comment is so unnecessary! just let people have fun! Nintendo excels in portable handheld consoles that just so happen to have video-out functionality. You can begin to complain about 'kiddie games' when you can take a triple-A Playstation/Xbox title on-the-go, which does not exist (Vita died long ago) and I don't accept cloud as a substitute as it is only viable for a select few. Also if you bring up Steam Deck, well, it's not available in a lot of countries and has a long way to go in terms of battery life. After all, it is just a PC.

 

[Puiu]

IMO, Nintendo is for little kids, or adolescent adults who have never outgrown their kiddie phase and learned to move to advanced multi-player, or adult level games. They stuck in an arcade universe.. playing cartoon games.

Games are for everyone. The whole "games for kids" doesn't work in this day and age anymore.

 

[m3tavision]

Lmao this comment is so unnecessary! just let people have fun! Nintendo excels in portable handheld consoles that just so happen to have video-out functionality. You can begin to complain about 'kiddie games' when you can take a triple-A Playstation/Xbox title on-the-go, which does not exist (Vita died long ago) and I don't accept cloud as a substitute as it is only viable for a select few. Also if you bring up Steam Deck, well, it's not available in a lot of countries and has a long way to go in terms of battery life. After all, it is just a PC.

Let me clarify that for you...

Arcade graphics = kiddie games... Donkey Kong was 40 years ago... & nobody is building a simulator for Mario Cart either, because Nintendo is what you throw at children, while adults grow up at some point and graduate to challenging multiplayer games.

BTW... I have never seen an adult game on the go...! However, I do see adults use laptops to game with when they are not on the go...

Just pointing out the obvious..

 

[Puiu]

Let me clarify that for you...

Arcade graphics = kiddie games... Donkey Kong was 40 years ago... & nobody is building a simulator for Mario Cart either, because Nintendo is what you throw at children, while adults grow up at some point and graduate to challenging multiplayer games.

BTW... I have never seen an adult game on the go...! However, I do see adults use laptops to game with when they are not on the go...

Just pointing out the obvious..

I can assure you that the number of people who care about multiplayer is very low amongst casual gamers. and emulators for mario cart already exist

 

[m3tavision]

I can assure you that the number of people who care about multiplayer is very low amongst casual gamers. and emulators for mario cart already exist

Casual gamers are phone gamers and handhelds, they don't have game chairs, or one of the new game consoles or play Call of Duty...

They save their games, because they play single player arcade games. They don't even need the internet to play...

 

[Puiu]

Casual gamers are phone gamers and handhelds, they don't have game chairs, or one of the new game consoles or play Call of Duty...

They save their games, because they play single player arcade games. They don't even need the internet to play...

Casual gamers are not limited to handhelds and phones. They use PCs, laptops and consoles just like everybody else.

They just don't care about being ultra competitive and just play for fun for a few minutes or hours per week. You know... they do it casually.

For example, my brother is definitely 100% extremely not a gamer, but he does casually play with his wife or me for a few minutes from time to time. (PS4 couch play like MK or racing game, or a small phone game)