A new statement shared with The Verge has revealed that Microsoft and Sony signed an agreement back in January to keep the Call of Duty series on PlayStation hardware for "several more years" after any current contracts expire. The news follows a statement from the UK government that it may need more time to investigate Microsoft's proposed $69 billion acquisition of Activision over fears the deal could harm "recent and future rivals in multi-game subscription services and cloud gaming".
In full, Microsoft's new statement reads: "In January, we provided a signed agreement to Sony to guarantee Call of Duty on PlayStation, with feature and content parity, for at least several more years beyond the current Sony contract, an offer that goes well beyond typical gaming industry agreements." This means future Call of Duty titles won't have any content exclusive to Microsoft platforms, and they'll release on the same day and date on Sony machines.
However, the wording is just ambiguous enough to suggest the FPS franchise could one day become exclusive to Microsoft hardware. It's not publicly known how long Sony's current contracts with Activision last, and then to have the games continue to release on PlayStation "for several more years" suggests there could be an expiry date attached to the agreement. Microsoft has already confirmed the Call of Duty series — along with Diablo and Overwatch — will be bundled into Game Pass, while PlayStation users will, of course, have to pay full price. Whether this happens as soon as the deal closes or not remains to be seen.
Microsoft has stated time and time again it won't be pulling the Call of Duty series off PlayStation systems, and this agreement — addressed to Jim Ryan from Xbox boss Phil Spencer — essentially sees that promise put in writing. The big sticking point of Microsoft's Activision buyout does indeed appear to be what happens with the Call of Duty franchise, and with the likes of Crash Bandicoot and Tony Hawk's Pro Skater not mentioned, it wouldn't come as a surprise if they become exclusive.
Sony argues the Call of Duty series "influences [a] users' console choice" and wouldn't be "able to rival it" with a game of its own. "Even in a bad year, players remain loyal to the brand and continue to buy the game," the company argues. This agreement was made at the very start of the year, but Sony clearly still sees the acquisition as a threat despite the promise of Call of Duty for the immediate years to come.
Oh so now it's changed to several years lol
Their wording on these deals just keeps on changing and sending mixed messages all the time (just like with Bethesda). Basically they wanted the FTC to believe it would stay on playstation forever to get the deal done but sony weren't stupid enough to sign that original agreement and has resulted in them (sony) throwing a strop.
Or, I might be wrong, he says "with feature and content parity, for at least several more years beyond the current Sony contract"
That could mean it still comes to playstation after that agreement, but not with the same features and content parity as xbox, so basically after a few years it may become either timed exclusive or have exclusive modes and content to xbox, but will still always be on playstation.
Yet again though, not 100% clear message sent
I hope the Uk regulators stop this deal I don’t trust Microsoft.
The acquisition is alot bigger than just call of duty lol
Sony pooping thereselves over all that money cod makes for them..
Nice to have the games day 1 on gamepass for Xbox owners
Funny how they keep mentioning cod but haven’t mentioned any of the other games.that makes it sound like those WILL be exclusive to Xbox. Microsoft are the snakes in the grass
@Artois2 Why shouldnt they make them exclusive if they own them? Somehow I don't think you would mind if playstation did it....like they do
"We won't be able to rival it so we won't even try. Killzone? Socom? Resistance? Maybe even MAG?
Nah, there's no market for that. Everyone wants over the shoulder narrative driven cinematic experiences now."
The deal should be for every Acti-Bliz IP and game and for life, not just "several years". If they signed this they're stupid AF.
This deal needs to go ahead so everyone can move on from COD and Microsoft can mourn the cash they wasted.
@StylesT You're not concerned at all about the direction gaming is heading in? I just don't see how developers produce amazing AAA games if nobody even needs to buy their games. Microsoft is probably not making profits right now and to make up for that they will eventually increase their service price or introduce a ton of microtransactions into their games. Even now I'm hearing stuff like "Well, I won't be buying this game because it might come to GamePass in a year." I just think this is going to really hurt gaming in the longrun. I don't want every game to be a live service one.
After all this, wouldn’t be surprised if people are Call of Duty fatigued just by the amount of news on it and its next entries are nowhere near as popular.
Now that would be hilarious.
@4kgk2 This is procedure more than anything, they don't have the power to block the purchase. This is an American company buying another American company, the FTC are the only ones that can block the purchase.
On PlayStation day one or not, there are so many ways Microsoft can be anti-competitive with Activision-Blizzard games while trying to fool us into thinking they are the "pro-consumer" "good guys."
They should've done something similar with the elder scrolls games, i don't wanna miss the next Skyrim 😢😢
Sony should make another Killzone. Would everyone please promise to buy it so they make it. I want another Killzone.
@StylesT it’ll be funny when Sony eventually buy Square Enix and make everything exclusive. That’ll be okay according to the same people complaining about this 🤣
Sony should just let call of duty go and focus on something else.
They should buy either EA or ubisoft and counter it with making assassins creed, dragon age etc exclusive or get the fifa license and make that exclusive, that would guarantee they stay the European console of choice.
@StylesT They are not comparative. If you would like to provide an example of Sony purchasing an entire publisher, one that housed multiple studios under it's umbrella that had a history of making successful multiplatform games, and then announced they were going to gatekeep them to their ecosystem going forward, I'm all ears.
In fact, provide me with one acquisition they made where the developer was in the process of making a big AAA game scheduled for both systems, and then scrapped it's release on Xbox?
This is weird and actually puts a different spin on things, although I suppose “several years” is a long ass time.
Providing a signed agreement is not quite the same as both parties signing an agreements is it?
But presuming this is just misleading wording from MS, it just goes to underline Sony‘a point about the importance of the franchise on PlayStation, and also makes clear that MS can decide not to renew the agreement at any time, and so their promise of the franchise being on Platstation is a time limited one.
They also haven’t stated how it would be provided (I.e. will Sony need to agree to let Gamepass on their system?)
Not the best stance for MS. Yet again.
The fact is they know they aren’t providing Sony with any type of good deal because they will not allow it on PS Extra day one I’m sure.
@Intr1n5ic Because they can't afford to do it..but we all know ps would most likely make them exclusive and the people moaning here would have no problem
@StylesT why shouldn't Sony make destiny exclusive now that they own it lol
@Would_you_kindly They could for all I care lol
Nintendo smashes xbox in both hardware and software sales without call of duty....
PlayStation will be fine.
Im just going to assume no Activision games will release on Sony or Nintendo systems once the purchase gets approved going by Microsoft deteriorating PR speak.
@StylesT don't think Phil Spencer would be very happy as it seems to be one of his favourite games
@UltimateOtaku91 That would be funny if Sony bought EA… you know for certain two things would happen
@Would_you_kindly He has a ps5 so he will be fine
@Bleachedsmiles You know that for certain why, have they done it previously?
It sound fishy couple of years.what happened when its expired🤔.word up son
@Enigk i doubt the money Microsoft spent is anything to mourn over.That like accidentally leaving money in your pants and it getting ruined in the washing machine. Sad, but nothing to mourn over.
@Bleachedsmiles they would do the exact same thing xbox are doing with Activision/Bethesda, and thats making all single player games exclusive and existing multiplayer ip's multiplatform, for now.
So mass effect and dragon age would be exclusive and no one could moan
@UltimateOtaku91 "They should buy either EA or ubisoft and counter it with making assassins creed, dragon age etc exclusive"
I thought they barely had money and just scrape by? isn't that the reason why they had to raise the price of PS5? I refuse to believe that it was because of greed, that's factually impossible!?
Also them buying one of those giant companies now would be a even bigger middle finger then the one we previously received.
@UltimateOtaku91 if they got the FIFA license. FIFA isn't gonna let Sony keep that exclusive. Just like MLB isn't their license be exclusive anymore
@Intr1n5ic has Sony ever in PlayStation history shown it cares about being seen as ‘pro consumer’ or showed ‘concern’ about games not still coming to other consoles, or ‘content parity’?
Look at what they’ve been doing just having the marketing rights to cod.
@StylesT yeah that’s fine, it’s the way they are wording it. Oh look we are the good guys we will allow other consoles to keep cod, aren’t we pro consumer. Which is a joke considering they are frigging Microsoft.yet all the Xbox fanboys come on here time and time again to lord it up and celebrate there hero the good guy Uncle Phil. Who would lie to his own mother
@AverageGamer ea have broken ties with fifa. So fifa have no say what so ever
@Artois2 Which why I said FIFA license
@UltimateOtaku91 Nintendo have properties and IP that rival CoD. Sony doesn't tho... As great as Uncharted and GoD of war is... they sell peanuts compared to pokemon and CoD.
@StylesT I am certain plenty of people here would be equally concerned either way, and about most of 'Big Business'... Amazon, Apple, Google etc. along with Microsoft
Deals like this absolutely rub the majority the wrong way and for good reason.
@UltimateOtaku91 MS aren’t making all single player games exclusive. You already know cod is still coming with all features to PlayStation - this includes single player.
This month you’re getting deathloop on psplus extra - a single player game from Bethesda
You’ll likely get ghost wire Tokyo on extra too
You’ll likely still be getting the Indiana jones game in developement
And, let’s be real fair here, Xbox hasn’t yet had a single exclusive game out of any of these deals - They’ve put more games out on PlayStation than they have Xbox. How confident are we really that Phil Spencer will keep the likes of doom etc off PlayStation?
@Would_you_kindly CoD unfortunately makes a lot more money for PS than most of Activision's other games.
It's why it's such a huge talking point.
I mean, CoD hasn't been anything special for years.
@AverageGamer my apologies though you were discussing ea
Deathloop and Tokyo already have exclusivity deals put in place before MS brought Bethesda. Poor choices to say that they are still giving PS games.
Phil also confirmed bot long ago that Indiana is not coming to PS anymore.
@Bleachedsmiles they have yet to deny an established franchise game to playstation to be fair, but they haven't really outputted that many since their company buyout frenzy, so it's hard to tell if they'll stay true to that.
@Bleachedsmiles So them allowing Destiny and Bungies future content to remain multiplatform isn't pro consumer or showing concern for the games fanbase on another system?
"Look at what they’ve been doing just having the marketing rights to cod."
Did they begin doing this before or after MS payed for 5 years of COD exclusivity... remind me?
@Juanalf I know…poor suffering Sony. Since the news broke of the price rise they’ve already announced buying another studio and paying for yet more exclusive content of 3rd party multi platform games. I think they have some sort of addiction…keep spending money this year whilst ‘struggling’ to remain in profit. They’ll be on the streets in no time.
Ironically, Sony stole the exclusivity from MS in the first place, when MS basically took the bundle rights away for FIFA, doing a deal with EA to bundle Xboxes with it.
@Balosi You mean like Elder Scrolls 6 being exclusive to Xbox?
They've also pretty much said (although not directly) that Fallout won't be on PS anymore as well.
@Intr1n5ic Nah, you’re comparing a f2p game that was already on all platforms…and revenue comes from microtransactions. How much props keeping that multi platform would you like them to get?
It’s no different than fallout 76 and elder scrolls online staying on PlayStation - it’s low baring fruit.
Sony should have demanded that previously multiplatform franchises should always release on PlayStation too.
@SolaceCreed Oh I know. It was just funny to me that someone would use COD marketing rights of all things to make a point, when MS did it first.
@Bleachedsmiles Deathloop and Ghostwire were existing deals, and call of duty is being used as leverage to get the deal done and is primarily more a multiplayer game than a single player game.
There hasn't been a new Bethesda game released yet outside of those current deals, but there's one coming... Starfield. And guess what, it's not on playstation and neither is Redfall.
@Intr1n5ic you’re right. 360 gen Xbox was a lot more aggressive with marketing…and had the cod marketing (which is why they both know how valuable having that marketing is for their platforms)…they would have map packs early. Never once did Xbox lock away features though for the PlayStation version - you had no years exclusivity of spec ops etc on 360
I'm one of those gamers where I buy Cod every year but if it becomes exclusive to Xbox then I will live without it, it's no issue.
@StylesT like they do ? Don't see destiny being exclusive to ps ,so what do you mean
@SolaceCreed elder scrolls 6 isn’t coming out for like 15years…do you have any idea what the gaming landscape will look like then? Either Xbox will be on PlayStation or Xbox will own PlayStation…either way stop concerning yourself about elder scrolls 6 exclusivity - it’s meaningless
@Juanalf sony do have money lol they aren't struggling to get by as the proof is their with buying more studios and paying for more marketing deals and timed exclusives and the production of the PSVR2.
But they are still a business at the end of the day, they can't keep selling there console for hardly any profit as the cost of components increases due to inflation, just because they have billions doesn't mean they should sell their products at either a loss or for peanuts of a profit.
At the end of the Day, MS didn't have to make any promises or guarantees to Sony. I bet MS had no say over Sony's decision to purchase Bungie and potentially take Destiny away from Xbox - a 'rival' First Person Shooter to Call of Duty.
Bungie is a 'Publisher' - hence the cost relative to Insomniac - and self publish since gainig independence from A/B. They are a First Person Developer with a Rival Multi-player to Call of Duty that is now 'owned' by Sony and they too could take Destiny or whatever other games Bungie goes on to make (even in the Destiny universe) exclusive to Playstation if it suited Sony best (inc PR)
Its not as if CoD IS the ONLY FPS with a Multi-player on the market and in fact, its player base has been falling too as people migrate to other options - inc all those Free to play options like Apex, Fortnite, PUBG, Valorant etc etc
Called it, Crash Bandicoot, Spyro, Tony Hawk, Skylanders, Guitar Hero are pretty much done on Playstation
I can see MS letting COD stay as long as Sony drops the cross play fee they charge publishers
@UltimateOtaku91 They’re not established ip. They’ve never been on PlayStation have no legacy on PlayStation. And, frankly, good… we all want competition to drive gaming forward, like it or not xbox has to have some exclusives for competition. There has to be some value there. If I was Phil Spencer I’d be announcing everything going forward as exclusive and force gamepass onto PlayStation…and if I was Jim Ryan I’d work out a way to get gamepass onto PlayStation…before gamepass ends up not needing PlayStation because you can get it on your smart tv as standard
@tallythwack that's because Bungie wanted to remain multiplatform and it was a condition
I’ll say what I did over on the Xbox sister site:
Microsoft isn’t going to say what will happen in years regarding CoD’s placement on platforms, even if they legally could (like all of us I haven’t read the paperwork on what they legally can say until the deal is completed).
The reason they won’t say what will happen in years to come, is simply they don’t know.
Because it’s either going to be:
A) Microsoft gains enough of an install base, so Xcloud, consoles, etc. to make it worthwhile losing out on micro transactions and purchases on Sony’s platform. Thus they take it from said platform and gain CoD player base with no loss.
B) They struggle to keep up with the markets Sony wins them in, and they keep it multi platform, looking both consumer friendly and keeping all the profits.
Either way, by not saying what they might wish to happen, they get to say they meant it all along and look rosy either way.
Either they take over Sony and have a franchise ready to go to seal the deal, or they don’t and milk profits from their competitions install base either way.
Like how Sony will now make money off every Xbox season Pass of Destiny that’s purchased. Yet so will Xbox.
Either way Microsoft win. Just like either way with Destiny Sony wins.
Except financially, CoD is historically a lot larger of a win. Especially when including Warzone transactions.
@UltimateOtaku91 heh that’s pretty interesting your comment about ‘just cause Sony have billions they shouldn’t sell their console at a loss’…yet gave MS no credit for not raising the price of Xbox because of all the money they have…
@UltimateOtaku91 Playstation isn't Nintendo, Playstation has nothing that can come close to Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, Animal Crossing
There's so much money on the table with this deal that it makes my head spin.😵💫
I mean I can't blame Sony for not wanting this to go through. The rest of Activision Blizzard's catalog Sony could stand to lose but COD is a completely different story. Losing COD would completely cripple Playstation's profits not to the point that they cease to function, but essentially guarantee they will never be the leading platform again.
On the other hand, I don't blame Microsoft for going after Activision Blizzard as COD on Game Pass is going to dramatically boost their subscription numbers. The question is will it be enough of an enormous bump to make Game Pass profitable? If the answer is yes, COD can and will go exclusive at some point. However if the answer is no, Microsoft kind of has to keep it on Playstation to make up for the cost of development, marketing, loss of sales on Xbox, etc.
The interesting thing about this whole ordeal is that both sides kind of need to have the other in order for both to survive now. It's definitely been a fascinating look behind the curtain that's for sure.
@hoffa007 It makes no sense for cod to ever be exclusive to Xbox…just like Minecraft didn’t. It’s too big.
Xbox doesn’t lose out - the value isn’t in the game being exclusive it’s in the marketing rights…Xbox will have those marketing rights.
And Xbox will be able to market that cod comes with your gamepass sub…or you can pay £60 (as I don’t think they’ll have it as £70) to keep playing on PlayStation.
Every micotransaction that is sold on every platform goes to MS regardless
@UltimateOtaku91 I don't think Ubisoft is a great choice. Some of Sony's games already share a lot in common to Assassin's Creed but far more polished like GoT for example.
The best buy for them is to pick someone that makes something different. Since MS is about to own the most popular shooter, Sony would be better off aiming at the most popular of another genre instead.
EA isn't bad to have popular shooters of their own but won't get CoD numbers and Dragon Age could complete against Elder Scrolls. Imo they should snatch themselves up the most popular JRPGs
@Bleachedsmiles They haven't raised the price of it yet, their statement was "we have no plans". Of course why would they, there's no demand for it and they're not selling out. I can go anywhere, at least here in the UK, and buy one right now if I wanted to.
This has nothing to do with them being pro consumer, it just makes no business sense to increase the price of a product that isn't as popular and has excess stock sitting on shelves.
@StylesT No one would mind if the aquisition was like Bungie, let the remain independent and fully multi-platform and just reap the profits.
@Intr1n5ic It’s very doubtful they will…but who knows. Nintendo said the same and it’s the number one selling console across the world
Also, there must be some demand for Xbox…why do you think Sony didn’t raise the price in the states?
Of course the messaging is pro consumer…it doesn’t matter the reason. The fact still is the price isn’t going up - which is pro consumer.
Like you’ve literally just said Sony is pro consumer for allowing destiny to stay on Xbox - again it didn’t matter the reason…you didn’t suggest it was because it’s a f2p game and they earn more for it being on all platforms, or that Bungie insisted on it. It’s the message that matters - ‘Xbox still gets to play it’ that’s pro consumer.
i don't see call of duty not being on playstation. ms makes money selling the game on ps5, and a game like cod needs a bigger user base for the game to thrive. making a mp heavy game like cod exclusive would be foolish.
To me it sounds like PlayStation owners don’t have to worry for at least 5 years, or likely the full life of the PS5.
It's already been in production for a while now. So it's unlikely to take them 15years to make it 😂.
And Microsoft habe already confirmed it won't be on Playstation. You don't actually keep up to date with the news.
@SolaceCreed of course I do…elder scrolls 6 was announced over 4 years ago… they’re still not even past the concept stages. Star field has been delayed. Fallout 5 is next. Then the real work begins on Elder scrolls - that game isn’t coming out for a very long time…you’re not going to need an Xbox console to play it, I feel confident in that
They won't be able to buy Sony, they make up more than 10% of Japans technology industry and only 10% is allowed to be owned by an foriegn company. It's a law in Japan. Now Nintendo could buy Sony if they could afford it.
You have to admit xbox are being more than fair on their part so don't see a problem...
@Deljo The problem is marketing rights…always has been.
@Bleachedsmiles I didn't say there was no demand for it in the states, Xbox has led in sales over there for years, but globally the demand isn't comparable.
I guarantee you the shareholders of a trillion dollar company weren't sitting around having a conversation about what's best for gamers, they would have been more concerned about raising prices in markets where their console isn't selling.
@Bleachedsmiles yeah but they paid a sh%t load of money for those rights so fair enough.
Bethesda only announced Fallout 5 recently and that it'd be out after ES6. Not before.
@Dr_Luigi if Europeans authorities are scrutinizing this deal they just have to claim the deal represent unfair competition forcing M$ to offer a fair deal.
I wonder what Microsoft got in return for this…? Since it wasn’t that Sony wouldn’t fight the acquisition. Maybe the whole Bungie remaining independent thing was part of it? But probably not; Xbox always seems to get the short end of the deals they make!
Crazy how Sony seems to get it’s cake and eat it too. I don’t understand what Xbox gets out of all of this. If they want to keep it multi-platform because it makes financial sense then sure go ahead but why the need to sign an agreement when Sony is going to cry about it anyway?
@Deljo nah, us console gamers are just focusing on cod…MS get so much more than that out of this deal though - they get huge gains in the mobile market that will end up making them billions
If they just wanted cod they should have spent a billion on getting the market rights for the remainder of this gen…would have been a lot easier and allowed it on gamepass day 1 no doubt
If they can't make something to rival CoD then they shouldn't try.
Let it go and use this as an opportunity to cultivate new communities around these gaas games that they've got coming in the next few years.
Invest in or acquire Square Enix and put FF XIV on PS Plus Extra. Launch Bungie's next title on it. Put Destiny on it.
There are plenty of ways to make PS Plus more appealing, and to keep people invested in the PS platform in general.
CoD would be a loss, no doubt. They'll probably never again be able to match the income it generates with a single title/IP.
But Sony will just have to get creative to minimise the loss. They have until the start of next gen to figure it out, because I'd be surprised if CoD is not exclusive to Xbox by then.
Edit: The days of being the leading platform might be coming to an end, but that does not mean the end of everything.
@Intr1n5ic and yet they’re not raising it in the states and keeping it the same in other countries…they’re keeping it the same price throughout… and now offering a new family and friends plan for gamepass.
They’re not talking about what’s best for gamers, non of them are. But that doesn’t change the fact that the message of not rising the cost of something compared to the message of we are raising the cost of something, is more pro consumer. You can say it’s because of this this and this…the reason doesn’t matter, it’s still benefitting YOU the gamer.
@SolaceCreed Oh I didn’t mention Microsoft buying Sony. Sorry if you’re mistaken. And I’m aware of the Japanese law, as many here don’t stop repeating sound bites they know about Japan. They never keep mentioning the cultures obsession with young school girls in skirts though. Haha.
I think the sentence that I caused confusion with is when I mentioned them taking over Sony. I meant taking over as in beating them so to speak with sales figures and install base in all markets.
Sorry for any confusion!
@TheElectroFunky I see the confusion now, when you said "taking over" you meant "overtaking"
@Bleachedsmiles I'll look out for your comments if they eventually reach the gamepass subscription target they would have set out in its inception, and what happens after that with its costs to the consumer going forward.
@theheadofabroom Correct! Again my apologies, I won’t edit it as that only deletes what I’ve wrote and causes more confusing for everyone reading the thread.
I dictate a lot to my phone due to nerve damage, so I should probably check the result more often. As they way I talk doesn’t always read right!
because they need it , despite what some ppl think , sony exclusives can’t hold playstation on its own . majority of playstations sales and revenue are because of third party and multiplayers , not their “genre defining, world class , revolutionary, cinematic , deep , progressive “ interactive movies .
It's going to be wild when CoD drops off massively in sales because so few Xbox and PC players will be buying it.
@UltimateOtaku91 Nintendo will soon have cod when this deal goes through
@Martsmall no way, it struggles to run most modern games as is. Call of duty mobile maybe....
Maybe Microsoft know more
@Intr1n5ic That’s cool…as long as you can point out where I’ve ever said the price of gamepass won’t rise or the price of the console won’t ever rise
I expect gamepass price to rise at some point…as the value increases because they finally start delivering on the promise of day1 AAA games…at some point I feel it’s a certainty.
But then with the introduction of things like family pass, I imagine a tier will also come out just focused on the cloud at a cheaper entrance price… there’s always going to be options there and, importantly, the right value proposition
I don't think it really matters at this point. From what I can see, a good percentage of Call Of Duty games these days have either been remastered, or are Warzone, and sometimes a combination of the two. I think the obvious answer is they are trying to push the series into the one central point, and taking what they can from it until the interest in paid Call Of Duty games wanes enough that the battle royale is the selling point.
Either way, Microsoft wants every dollar to go through them instead of someone else.
I know Microsoft is engaging in predatory pricing but Sony can't expect people to happily pay 70 for games like Last of Is Remake or Returnal when Microsoft is gonna be giving literally the biggest game in terms of sales at no extra cost
@Bleachedsmiles those modes that were exclusive to playstation were crap maps wouldve been a much much better exclusive lol
@ATaco Got so sick of that on PS4 now they continue it on PS5 and actually praise those casual games, ironically Tlou remake launch.😆
@Would_you_kindly the spec ops modes for cod they had a year exclusivity on? That was really good in co op from the little I played of it. And I loved spec ops mode back in the 360 days…specially in split screen
@Martsmall well overwatch and diablo are already on switch and so is crash bandicoot, but call of duty is a different beast altogether, the file size for starters just wouldn't work for the switch. Thats why I believe it will be the mobile version, or maybe a cloud version at best
@Martsmall not the newer ones , maybe a port of cod mobile & / or mw & mw2 remastered though
@Bleachedsmiles I didn't say you did, i'm just excited to read about how "pro consumer" it's going to be.
@Bleachedsmiles spec ops for modern warfare 2 was alot of fun in splitscreen ,thought the mode in mw2019 was rubbish though & frustratingly difficult lol
@Martsmall do really want to see what pos cod comes from a switch version with how underpowered that thing is?
@Intr1n5ic Yeah but it then comes down to the value proposition of gamepass once they do eventually raise the price right? Don't forget, Sony has added to that value by pushing the price point for new releases at £70...so if you're getting AAA games like cod, like starfield, forza, gears, ect on it day 1 as part of your subscription the value to the subscriber increases. If you're still just getting the promise of those games coming then yeah, a price rise today of gamepass should get a backlash...especially against the backdrop of a global financial crisis. A backlash of gamepass increasing its price in a even a years time though? Depends on how much, and if we're still struggling to afford even turning on our consoles.
But yeah, all subscription services increase in price eventually...that's not unprecedented. How many times did the price of plus increase last gen?
@Would_you_kindly had so much fun playing co op split screen on 360...that's why I'm personally disappointed halo infinite has ditched it's split screen plans. Always good times with mates
Xbox P.R./Blog statement: "Gaming for All!! COD still multiformat""** See regulators,its cool!
Also Xbox/Gamer Phil: ** For now...but screw Diablo,Tony Hawk,Crash,Spyro,GUN,or any other IP's we'll pick up. Mwhahaha,all your Playstation bases belong to us!! 🙄
It's clear this will be Zenimax all over again as various contracts/commitments are seen out future other games will get quietly cancelled ala Starfield & be XB/PC/Gamepass exclusives.
Gaming for all* so long as you have a XB/PC & M$ Account which we try to strongarm on you just to login to Win 10/11!!
@StylesT ugh ppl still believe gamepass is actually good for the industry lmao. Yeah cod is already crap just wait till it's on gamepass day 1 and the quality is only gonna get worse. If no one buys it and gets it "free" they won't put effort into it. Gamepass is a good deal for sheep. I let mine expire. It's not that good. It will one day ruin the industry with lower quality games. Great quality equals support. Equals God of War and more like that. I'd rather pay for God of War and support my fav games then gamepass. My real life friends who told me to get gamepass I told the same thing after having gamepass since Feb of this year. Bunch of indie games and some are good but after playing the halos and gears and some others gamepass doesn't beat premium at all. All gens (minus vita) and well over hundreds upon hundreds of games and I own over 600 and can find over a hundred more I haven't played and wanted to buy
@XenonKnight not for me I don't own a switch so makes no diffrent but gd cause it will make money
@KaijuKaiser exactly gamepass is actually gonna be bad for the Industry but xbots can't see that
How many more agreements is microsoft willing to sign just to get this passed? Are they willing to sign 10 years or more agreements with Nintendo & Sony?
@Fenbops square Enix ips are literally Sony tho, final fantasy and dragon quest and more all made there name with ps so they would be going home
@Martsmall I own a Switch Lite for a portable but I will not go anywhere near a cod for it.
What are they willing to give up when the EU says no way to this?
@Bleachedsmiles I love how xbots wanna act like deathloop and ghost wire are yalls exclusives and were getting them lmao no. We had those exclusive deals done before xbox bought Bethesda so we're not getting them from Xbox lmao yall are getting them from us!
@SerJosh97 Bro they just paid to keep them off xbox for a year they didn't buy them.
@Robocod You know what Xbox gamers love...they love it when games they used to get like street fighter and final fantasy were made exclusive to PS4. They love it now that Spiderman license games are no longer on Xbox. They really love it when AAA third party games get exclusive content on PlayStation yet they're charged the same price for their games.
They especially love that they won't get to reap the rewards of the Bethesda over a year after because PlayStation has year long timed exclusivity on Bethesda games... they're kicking themselves the same thing didn't get to happen with starfield.
Jesus, it's like you guys don't want Xbox competitive this gen. That you want sony having no competition so they get to raise console and game prices more - they've literally told you it's because of Xbox the price of the ps5 is staying the same in the states. They've literally added extra value to their subscription services because of Xbox. They may one day even offer us free cloud saves! Can you imagine?...or what about cross platform games...so you don't have to buy the same game again on pc? Could happen...especially as we get close to day and date releases.
How have you gone so long without already having a Hotmail account?
@Teddie-bear I know alot of ppl hate EA but that would be a good get for Sony. Madden sales and microtransactions. Battlefield to compete against cod on xbox. Bf is better anyway. Apex legends money lol and dragon age and mass effect rpgs plus Star wars jedi series from respawn. I'd prefer both square Enix or ubisoft but ea wouldn't be bad lol
@Blackbluto lmao. Exclusives are exclusives not what you said. So you follow the Xbox article that came out saying Sony blocks games on gamepass. No its called EXCLUSIVITY. Sony has had exclusives literally forever.
@SerJosh97 I've never seen one 'xbot' act like deathloop and ghostwrite are their exclusives...everybody is aware that Sony paid for a years exclusivity on them...and planned to do the same with starfield, and no doubt fallout elder Scrolls etc.
I think Microsoft buying Activision is terrible for the industry as a whole, but I mean, Nintendo leads everyone without Call of Duty so...
I'm still gutted Microsoft owns Bethesda, inXile and Obsidian. They own most of the major Western RPG devs.
Nintendo is fine without cod and new ea sport games, why sony whining about this?
Calls others sheep...continues with standard fanboy nonsense haha
@wiiware Sony doesn’t mind keeping Final Fantasy off Xbox so why should Xbox be concerned with Sony’s uneasiness regarding COD? Turnabout is fair play where I’m from.
@Bleachedsmiles I haven’t heard of that either. Where’s this guy from? The looney bin?
@Fenbops if you look at how much COD sells and how much all of Square Enix's games put together make, perhaps you can comprehend why the comparison doesn't work.
@UltimateOtaku91 They don't have the money to buy EA or Ubisoft 😂
@AdamNovice By that logic xbox players are long overdue Street fighter 5 and FF7 remake
@Shepherd_Tallon Call of duty will never be exclusive to Xbox period like do none of you know how business works? Microsoft gain nothing from making a multiplayer game as big as cod exclusive, they'd lose money.
Doesn't sony have that one 2nd party studio working on a fps and how do not know its not a Socom reboot?
And why should they just stop at just a Socom reboot? Why not a Resistance reboot?
@riceNpea would a Killzone reboot even sell the numbers sony would need it to?
@SerJosh97 God of war is garbage how are you gonna insinuate that is quality? They couldn't even be bothered to make more than one death animation for kratos in that overrated snoozefest, just another generic third person action adventure, when games like that and tlou are seen as revolutionary and a game like days gone is seen as bad you know you got poor taste
@Blackbluto They paid to take out the trash, should keep them on PlayStation they both look like mediocre snoozefests one seems like if they just took dishonored gameplay systems and quantum break or leap elements whatever that trash movie game is called
@Slippship Just ignore the xbots.
@UltimateOtaku91 Not clear? Microsoft literally signed ANOTHER contract that says it will be on PlayStation for longer than it was already contracted to be and has to continue to have parity.
Activision was either going to be sold or die. Microsoft wants people playing anything anywhere anytime. They would probably love to stop making hardware.
If Sony bought them 99% of people here wouldn't have an issue with it. Even without Activision Sony will eventually be unable to compete due to embracer group...
They are the world's largest publisher & gaming ip holder in the world. They are also not a game company which likely means they want some sweet MTX money like mobile style.
You care way too much on the box you play on. The most ironic thing is Sony has been treating gamers like garbage for the last 6 or so years. If you pay attention you will see a clear pattern.
You know like raising game prices to $70 despite making record profits even at $60. Forget special editions? Forget dlc? If games are making RECORD profits then raising the prices just means they want record record profits.
How about Sony even with inflation still making a profit on each console they sell. They also just removed more of the heatsink and are risking cooling, performance and longevity to make more profit. Removing 1 copper heat pipe is worth enough money over 250k units to add 1/6 more profit per unit and that's not including the price hike.
Wake up.. these are corporations not your buddies. They want money from you.
@d0x360 Do you even own a ps4 or ps5? Are you here to push xbox on playstation gamers?
@KaijuKaiser Xbots care about clout and nothing else, and sadly this seems to be mirrored by Microsoft who want to be number one no matter how much the cost or damage it does.
@XenonKnight yes because surely everyone who thinks Sony is acting ridiculous is an "xbot" which is the dumbest fanboy insult... Ever.
I have owned every Sony console ever. That includes a ps5. I have tons of games across their platforms... I'd just rather embracer group the largest publisher ever despite being unknown and still unknown to 99% of people who game..
Also getting upset over call of duty? Seriously?
The worst part of Sony's letter is it literally shows that they make 3rd parties sign contracts that say games must be better or have parity.
That means if a game could look better on a different platform the developers aren't allowed to take advantage of the hardware. It MUST match the PlayStation version.
'Sony argues the Call of Duty series "influences [a] users' console choice" and wouldn't be "able to rival it" with a game of its own.'
So Sony can't be bothered to try and rival it? Is that right? When Nintendo made an exclusive deal with Capcom to get Final Fight on the SNES, Sega made their own, Streets of Rage for the Mega Drive, to compete. Sony have Killzone and could make other shooters if they wanted to. Are they admitting their games aren't good enough if they "can't compete" with CoD?
@XenonKnight I have ever Sony console including ps5 which I said. Try reading the entire comment.
I came here to read the article. Then I saw these ridiculous comments.
Im a gamer. I play on all 3 platforms and PC.
@Sqush-Pare rofl omg just look up embracer group and gaze upon the end of gaming.
@Slippship I'm in the wrong forum....why because i am not a hardcore biased PlayStation fanboy?
Sorry that a few of us who own both consoles are getting in the way of the hypocritical circle jerk where you bash Xbox;)
@d0x360 I own a PS4 Pro/PS5, Switch Lite and XBox Series X. If you do own a PS4 tell us your psn. And a crap box called a pc(amd r5 3600 and amd 5700 gpu) I never use.
@XenonKnight bro I'm not here to push any platform. I game. Look for yourself. My GT on steam, epic, Xbox, PlayStation etc is d0x360.
It's not my primary because I know I'll get tons of spam just like the last time I was accused of being a fanboy and not owning this or that.
I want what's best for the gaming ecosystem and it's not embracer group. Nobody else could have bought Activision.
It's so funny that Sony has bought tons of developers, exclusive rights, ip, etc but Microsoft does it and you freak out? Why?
You people need to focus more on actually playing games instead of platforms. It's better trust me.
Buy an Xbox and a PS5. Or one of them and build a PC. There is zero reason to limit yourself and insult people who don't JUST play on a Sony box.
I deeply apologize to you and my ps1-4 and 4 pro and ps5... Even the PSP & Vita.. I've created on you. I buy some games on Xbox and some on PC and EVERY exclusive Sony has ever made... Omg
EA is a bigger evil then embracer group.
@StylesT you're only in the wrong forum if you don't like hearing differing opinions on Microsoft/gamepass, this is a PlayStation centric website after all.
Here something for you to think about who is the one thats guilty of Sherman Antitrust Act!?
@Slippship @Sqush-Pare that's a load of crap. It's a Sony centric news website... That doesn't ban gamepass talk.
Has the site ever written an article that mentioned it? I hope not based on your restrictions. Wow.. that's all I can handle for 1 day and it's been like 6 min.
@SlippShip wow... If you own both of 1 and a PC it's because your parents bought it? My parents haven't bought me anything gaming related since the PlayStation. I bought a Saturn, Dreamcast and PS2 with paper route money because kids used to do that job.
You write this message of peace then throw in your platform not PlayStation insult at the same time. Bravo sir.
@Slippship I believe you believe that pat's on head
@Slippship no bud... I was quoting your post. You said that immediately after saying can't we all just get along.
Allot of you people make multi platform owners not want to engage with the community or visit the site at all.
I love my PS5. I said I wouldn't buy TLOU again... I didn't even make it to hour 10 of the 12 bour countdown timer. If that's not showing them love what is?
I'm also paid up on the highest plus tier until end of 2024... But yeah I just hate it. I'm gonna go put it outside with a free sign.
There is zero reason for the attitudes to anyone with a different opinion.
@d0x360 Why are you OK with a company that is guilty of the Sherman Antitrust Act buying Activision?
@Sqush-Pare Got no problem....I am just aware for the majority here moaning, that they wouldn't have the slightest issue if it was Sony buying Activision....
@XenonKnight probably because the CEO, CFO.. hell the entire executive team has changed. The e entire culture of the company has changed multiple times.
Also because I'm not 5.
All of you take care and continue chasing away the evil people who also like the same games as you. Why get along? Oh and I've already gotten 5 messages on PSN but I wanted to show you something because you keep assuming about people.
Don't hurt yourselves with all the anger. Take breaks.
@SerJosh97 ‘square Enix ips are literally Sony tho, final fantasy and dragon quest’
Yes because those games have never been on Nintendo consoles or handhelds and games like Triangle Strategy and Octopath Traveler don’t exist.
The Switch is underpowered and that's why they need to do switch pro.
@d0x360 I know, I was just pointing out you'd be unlikely to get the same overwhelming support here as you would on an Xbox focused website. Personally I prefer PlayStation and I like physical games (a dying breed I know). My latest is TLOU-P1 which was waiting for me on my doormat when I got home from work, you can't beat that feeling when it comes to games in my opinion.
@StylesT Totally agree. That's just the way it is. Ofcourse it would be s system seller. That's the whole point lol
@d0x360 Hey. I come in peace. Just wanted to know if the weight reduction in the 3rd edition of the PS5 is due to the cooling system being reduced. I haven't read specifically it was that? I know that's what they did the first time round. Could you give more details please.👍
@Discol76 Your going to have to wait for a youtube teardown to find out. But it likely has less copper.
There's a lot I could say here about how I think Sony is in the wrong, but I'll just say this;
I would buy a new Resistance game in a heart beat. I would love to eventually play another Killzone. And I'd buy, play, complete, and plat both long before I did the same for another COD.
@StylesT Of course I would mind, personally. (I mind with Final Fantasy)
The only games I don't mind being "exclusive" are first party games actually made by the studio in house.
I hate timed exclusivity, and I hate when a third party game is exclusive. There's just no need.
@ScepticDK You know you can just add that troll to ignore?
@XenonKnight that's why I've told everyone here to promise to buy it!
Removed - flaming/arguing
MS are looking to make all the top games Gamepass subscription exclusive. They don’t care about Sony selling something for £70 as they know they are investing billions in subsidising people away from that model (before racking up prices, obviously).
The fact that you can listen to music on the radio and not just Spotify does not mean they could not be watched for potential monopolistic practices if they start buying everyone; the fact movies are in cinemas doesn’t mean Netflix etc couldn’t be looked at if they start buying everyone; the fact CoD is (temporarily) on PlayStation doesn’t mean Gamepass cannot be looked at for monopolistic practices if they start buying other streaming platforms or all of the biggest content before anyone else can subsidise a foothold.
Sony know this, and it sounds like some regulators are starting to acknowledge that Gamepass is it’s own platform seperate from any console, and should hopefully move to stop any monopoly by any company looking to buy up all the big rights /studios /publishers.
@Bleachedsmiles I think the issue is more that ‘he- the competitor’ can choose to keep doom off of other platforms, not Bethesda as a third party to both companies. This is where the competition factor is questionable vs paying and competing for timed exclusives.
On mass across a large number of already existing IP’s, that already have significant fan bases, It’s easy to see why that’s an issue from a regulatory perspective. You are buying players, and removing the ability to chose.
Timed exclusives with third parties, and developing new IP with studios you own / purchase is in my eyes fair competition. Starfield for example (even though it was slated to release on PlayStation) Is a new IP, from a company that Microsoft own, it doesn’t have an existing fan base and Microsoft have created this in house. There can be no argument with that.
It’s the existing IP, fan bases and the power to control those that doesn’t sit right
Phil Spencer is pro gamer and wants everyone playing. Microsoft did the same with Minecraft and COD will be the same.
@Danimal25 perfectly worded 😀
Resulting to calling everyone kid or child etc.... which going by your history is your MO....standard behaviour of someone with an inferiority complex.
Why would I need any sort of comeback? Your own words expose you.
I hope you can find someone on your mental
level to have an e-battle with...so you can get all that rage out the only place you feel comfortable.... from the safety of behind a screen.
Good luck Champ.
In fairness, @Artois2, Sony are the ones that have raised concerns over CoD in particular. It is CoD that seems to be ringing the alarm bells for Sony in particular, so that is why the emphasis is on that game in particular....
Destiny may not be exclusive, @tallythwack, but the PlayStation does more often than not have exclusive Destiny Raids, or bits of DLC. These are often locked to the PlayStation for multiple years too. It meant that those playing on the Xbox were paying (when it was a game you bought) the same price as those playing on the PlayStation, but were actually getting less content. Now that Sony owns Bungie, I can see even more of that kind of thing happening, which as they now own the company, I have no problem with, but it's not right to assume there to be parity between Destiny on the PlayStation and the Xbox...
@Danimal25 So far we’ve not seen that from MS…maybe we will see they lock established ip as exclusive. The only ones we’ve seen do that so far has been Sony. So then if Sony are doing that with ip that has been established multi platform…then maybe the perimeters of what is competitive changes?
So far we’ve also seen from Sony the locking of a years worth timed exclusivity with new ip. And timed and full exclusivity of additional content in 3rd party multi platform games…this does not ensure parity. This directly ensures ‘’worse terms’ for the competition that the UK board apparently now has a problem with over the possibility of MS doing the same. That to me is pretty crazy.
Tbh as a gamer I’d rather games be actually exclusive than see one platform buy a years exclusivity over the other. I’m lucky enough to own all platforms…I don’t need to miss out on anything. But gamers aren’t really winning with these deals - the ones that get it a year early usually get the version that comes with bugs. Could have had that money spent on actual exclusives that add actual long term value to their console purchase.
Those that have to wait a year are basically being told they’re not as valued to the publisher but give me your money anyway. Don’t get to enjoy the hype or the moment.
And let’s be honest, paying to keep a game off another console for a year is pretty petty and slimy tactic.
Exclusivity you at least know where you stand. Yeah it would suck for PlayStation only gamers if doom is now only available on Xbox. It sucked for Xbox only owners that sf, ff, and spiderman games (look up how many spiderman games the 360 got), we’re only on PlayStation.
I just hope whatever MS decide to do with existing ip they’re clear about it…if it’s exclusive then say it’s exclusive
@Fiendish-Beaver Yeah I honestly don’t know why anyone could automatically assume Sony would offer parity to destiny
Nothing Sony has shown had told me they’re interested in parity between the two consoles
@StylesT was it ,and thats a fact is it,its just ive read that Sony stated it would remain multiplatform ,or are you just quoting what others have said ?
@Fiendish-Beaver and you know there will be parity between all cod versions ,because what ,ms said so....😂😂
Sony need to realise that microsoft now have the more powerful console at a cheaper price (globally) and now owns the worlds most popular game series/developers. It's clear we are finally seeing MS use their vast wealth and unmatchable profits as a company to stich up the market. We always knew this would happen, it was always a matter of time. Sony should be really worried, they have incredible devs and games but MS is in the business of creating and maintaining monopolies. Sony can't afford to loose what little good will they have when going up against the largest company on earth
@Bleachedsmiles Are you completely ignorant to what Microsoft do? Everything you're saying is also being done by them, and has been done previously on multiple systems.
Did you watch the Xbox/Bethesda showcase in June, did you happen to notice how many games shown that night began with the words "Console launch exclusive". That's MS paying developers to keep new and established ip off Playstation for an undisclosed period of time. They also paid for some of them to not announce what was coming to PlayStation until at least 48hrs after the show.
This is my main issue with all of this, people can't see past the value on offer in this moment in time to consider how damaging a service like gamepass could potentially be for the industry going forward. Everyone is too busy clapping about how wonderful it is that a trillion dollar corporation is going around spending billions on developers and ip's because they currently get to play whatever's on offer for 10 bucks a month.
It's not just about the price increases that will inevitably happen, what's concerning to me is how something like this could end up being detrimental to all areas of gaming and development.
For example, how will it impact the quality of what's produced if the goal ends up being to get games out as fast as possible for their service, or they start severely capping the cost of development to provide a better return on the cheaper entry to play them. How will it impact the consumer if they decide to go all digital one day via gamepass, removing the option of owning physical content and completely eliminating the second hand market. Or imagine a scenario like we now have with Netflix, where the cheapest option, which isn't particularly cheap, only allows you to play on one device in 720p, but with the added bonus of advertisements and a microtransaction shop for every game.
These things aren't beyond the realm of possibility, and if it ever comes to fruition we'll be s**t out of luck because they'll now own a sizeable chunk of the industry and its catalogue.
And for the record, I don't think any company doing this is good for gaming, including Sony, but it's Microsoft that concerns me more then others because of their history, their obscene amounts of excess capital, and their push to put everything on a subscription service.
Everybody already knows about their culture though, very few of those games make it through to the Western Market though
How much would you take for the PC? And are you in the states?
@Intr1n5ic What established IPs we’re shown as being console launch exclusive at the June event?
I did notice that Xbox is finally getting persona games…
Oh no, did MS want an announcement on their stage to gain some attention before it being announced as coming to PlayStation too?…that’s completely comparable to Sonys marketing deals. As is having new indie games timed exclusive for windows of what? 3 months…totally compared to having AAA year long timed exclusivity.
You guys seem to carry this paranoia about Xbox whilst choosing to ignore what’s going on with the gaming landscape as whole everywhere. Case in point, you’re concerned about what gamepass will mean for physical??? And what impact it will have on the second hand market??… you realise Sony started this gen releasing a digital only console right? You understand why they would do that right? - that digital sales are far higher than physical sales now…. You realise how things have changed from the start of last gen? The second hand market and physical sales are ultimately going to be left behind by the vast majority of players regardless of gamepass - just as the vast majority stream music and movies now. That’s just the way technology evolves. Next gen the landscape is going to look different again…and will be more catered towards easy access of games. It won’t remove the option of physical content completely …just as Spotify hasn’t removed the option of owning physical albums completely.
Instead of worrying about how gamepass could possibly negatively effect gaming in 7+years time…have you ever once thought about how gaming could be positively effected? Have you ever once imagined how if a service like xcloud keeps evolving it would mean not having to spend £500 as a barrier of entry to play these games. Days of 2year old consoles having price rises would never happen. Never having to wait for game downloads, never having to wait for patches to download. Never having to uninstall games to make room for new ones. Never having to pay £100s to increase harddrive size. Not having to make a choose between visuals and resolution!
It would also mean publishers don’t have to take greater risks on new more innovative ip…won’t have to spend millions marketing and getting the games produced/packaged/put on store shelves.
It would mean more indie games affording to put out their games. It would mean more AAA studios being able to take risks and put out different games.
These things are already starting to happen. Look at Obsidians next Xbox game Pentiment - a AAA studio doesn’t get to put out a game like that without a service like gamepass behind it.
Look at kojimas xbox game…the cloud allowing him more freedom in creativity to bring us something new.
You can dwell in fear of what gamepass means to gaming if you like. But there’s plenty of positives it can bring to ensure gaming grows too.
Also…paranoid about quality and games being rushed out? Why??! Has gamepass shown you a drop in quality and rushed out releases? They had more day 1 releases titles in the GOTY conversations last year than any other. They’ve had no AAA games this year because they’ve delayed them.
Even halo infinite had a years extra delay. Had one of the biggest budgets ever behind it. It’s quality on release had nothing to do with it being on a subscription…had everything to do with 343 and poor management.
@OrtadragoonX not selling things, BestBuy will sell you a pc.
Wooh this comment section was a doozy to read through.
On my end I’ve got a few observations.
1. Sony should have seen this coming years ago. Microsoft has always been the equivalent of the pre-WWII United States. Sleeping, but with enormous potential to outspend and out produce everyone else. Xbox was mainly the dream of the original design team (who wanted to bring PC gaming to the living room; the original prototypes were tested in 1999) and then Bill Gates. After it underperformed against Sony succeeding Microsoft corporate leadership always looked at the Xbox program as a side show. But that has changed in the past five years due to the record profits gaming is bringing it. The industry as a whole has taken the crown away from the film industry. The money is in games.
2. Microsoft’s long term goal is Gamepass. Everything orbits around Gamepass. Microsoft would offer Gamepass to PlayStation players in a heart beat if Sony would allow it. The key here isn’t to really ruin Sony but more to get content for Gamepass. If push comes to shove, Sony could probably tell Microsoft that they will allow a more limited version of Gamepass on PS hardware and the guys at Microsoft would giggle like school girls and release it the next day. That’s the platform now. Not the Xbox. There’s a reason Sony is trying to build its own Gamepass with PS Plus Extra. Because it is, for better or worse, the future of gaming.
Eh I’d rather build my own but I’m still waiting for component prices to decrease.
Reason I asked was because you sounded like you didn’t want it and would let it go for a good price.
@OrtadragoonX This is NOT the place to talk about buying pc parts.
@Intr1n5ic scared that Xbox will own a sizeable chunk of the industry and it’s catalogue??! Jesus man, you really do live in fear huh. Be more concerned about gaming if we’re still playing that same IPs by the time your dooms day happens. Personally I’d hope this gen will bring about some new ip. Some new franchises, rather than just regurgitating the old.
Also, imagine the cheapest option only allows to to play games at a lower quality?…we have that now without the need of a subscription service. It’s called the Xbox series s! It’s called crossgen games!!! So if we’re getting that with hardware today…why are you worried about getting the option with subscription services in the future?? Today is showing you that without subscription services the future of gaming would still get cheaper entry level options! 🤦🏻♂️
I wouldnt call Spencer pro-gamer. No corporate executive is truly pro-consumer at their core. They can’t be; it’s a conflict of interest.
It’s more accurate to describe him as a visionary and a smart businessman. But the fact that he grew up as a gamer certainly helps him cultivate his vision.
By comparison, Jim Ryan is much older having been with Sony since the early 1990s in a variety of roles at different divisions. He’s not really much of a gamer and fundamentally misunderstands gamers. He’s not a visionary. I’m not talking down about the guy, but he just wants the PS to be profitable. Not to redefine the medium like Spencer does.
Phil Spencer wants a legacy. He wants to be talked about with the same energy as guys like Yamauchi, or Kalinske, or Kaz Hirai. He wants to redefine the industry so that he is never forgotten.
Which to me explains why Microsoft has been much more innovative in the past five years than Sony has.
@OrtadragoonX Sony should be looking at old IPs to reboot and setup new dev studio to do so. Sony needs to bring out the games. Disney loves money Sony should buy the rights to do it own Indiana Jones game and buy the rights to use other Disney IPs for games.
Hey hey calm down brother (or sister). No need for hostility. We are all gamers here.
But you’re right this comment section isn’t the place for such things.
I think Sony needs to take a look at how they recovered from the PS3 fiasco. They aren’t in those dire conditions but they need to look back at how they turned the PS3 around. A variety of genres, a healthy balance between multiplayer and single player, and approving more experimental AA titles.
While I loved the PS4 one thing that disappointed me was that Sony gave up on everything except for third person over the shoulder cinematic single player games.
In the late PS3 era they were releasing truly off the wall stuff and had a good balance between competitive multiplayer and single player experiences.
They need to get back to that.
And there's people who work for Microsoft in the XBox Division why don't they Poach key people to setup new studios and screw over XBox. They could hire away alot of key Activision people and leave things hard for them to get thing out on time and what Activision will have alot less value after the buyout fully goes through.
It's time for Sony to play hard ball with Microsoft. Get the Japan Fair Trade Commission and Prime Minister Fumio Kishida Involved in this.
@OrtadragoonX Why not reboot Wild Arms as a AA title?
@OrtadragoonX excellent reply and couldn’t agree more with your comments. Jim Ryan feels wrong for the job and I still can’t wait for the PS5 to stretch its legs like the PS4 has, unbelievably at times!
There are alot of old Sony IPs that could be rebooted as good AA titles.
@Bleachedsmiles "What established IPs we’re shown as being console launch exclusive at the June event?"
"Oh no, did MS want an announcement on their stage to gain some attention before it being announced as coming to PlayStation too?"
No, they wanted to create the illusion that it was only coming to Xbox. Remember when timed exclusives were called timed exclusives, before MS changed the wording to Console launch exclusive to confuse consumers back in 2017?
"You realise Sony started this gen releasing a digital only console right?"
Yes, to offer an OPTION for the already announced digital only Series S, again something MS did first.
"Have you ever once imagined how if a service like xcloud keeps evolving it would mean not having to spend £500 as a barrier of entry to play these games."
What would I be playing them on exactly, because there must be some form of hardware barrier to entry that's going to cost me.
"It would also mean publishers don’t have to take greater risks on new more innovative ip…won’t have to spend millions marketing and getting the games produced/packaged/put on store shelves."
Wow, that sounds fantastic, I had no idea production, marketing and packaging had an impact on creative and innovative ideas.
"These things are already starting to happen. Look at Obsidians next Xbox game Pentiment - a AAA studio doesn’t get to put out a game like that without a service like gamepass behind it."
You realise why that got made right, why gamepass is also filled with indie games, because the turnover is faster and the production cost or purchase cost is significantly less. They also help pad out the service, although I'm sure individuals like you believe MS do it because they deeply care about indie development.
"Look at kojimas xbox game…the cloud allowing him more freedom in creativity to bring us something new."
Ahh yes, because there was no freedom or creativity afforded to him by Sony in the completely unique Death's Stranding. I'm glad the cloud is going to allow him to express himself.
"Also…paranoid about quality and games being rushed out? Why??! Has gamepass shown you a drop in quality and rushed out releases?"
Probably best to excuse that garbage Halo. It's obvious that some of the decisions taken in that game were made to benefit a long term plan on gamepass. Who oversees and manages 343 btw? Who tells them what's expected from the end product they're making?. It's cute that you're trying to remove the responsibility MS has over the managment and direction of the teams they're purchasing. Sony were recently shown footage on how development was progressing on the Kotor remake, they immediately had the team developing it removed and replaced after what they were shown. Remember that super group of devs MS put together to create Perfect Dark that started falling apart within one year, with many of them citing major issues from above with regards to structure and direction before quitting.
I can't offer any further examples of quality from Xbox yet because they haven't released anything, unless you're referring to the games that were already deep in development before MS bought them and slapped a we made this label on them.
@Bleachedsmiles "Scared that Xbox will own a sizeable chunk of the industry and it’s catalogue??! Jesus man, you really do live in fear huh."
Is that irrational, considering what's happening, where a company with unmatched wealth and a history of lawsuits from governments and competing companies over monopolisation, are attempting to buy up huge sections of a market to lock them in to a service?
No point arguing with people with blinkers on that can't see that both Sony and MS pull this sort of crap all the time. No matter who went first.
MS and Sony (particularly MS) need to stop buying studios up. Between them two, Embracer and Tencent, there'll be no indies left.
@AverageGamer The money may be a drop in the ocean for Microsoft but it could cost Phil Spencer his job.
@SolaceCreed I actually don't mind these conversations but I completely agree with you.
@Intr1n5ic lol Ark??? Out of ‘all the console launch exclusives’ announced? Ok yeah, how dare they get timed exclusivity for a GAAS game - ps only owners definitely win there!
‘Create the illusion’…we’re talking about persona right? The games that were exclusive to PlayStation platforms for GENERATIONS…and you’re upset they wanted 48hrs to get the message out those games are coming to Xbox before that message gets over shadowed that they’re also coming to Nintendo and PlayStation too? Wow that’s some insecurities right there…
Wait, you think the ps5 digital was designed and released because Xbox announced the series s??? I’m not sure that’s how it really works
The whole point of gamepass is removing barriers of entry - this is why Xbox is putting so much effort in offering gamepass outside of the constraints of an Xbox… you have the option of digesting it the same way you can Netflix - through an app on any technology that supports it. The technology that supports it is only going to grow as the gen goes on. Next gen the barrier of entry to play gamepass isn’t going to be a £500 console…it’s already not.
Of course the production of games has an impact on game design. On devs being able to take risks. You of course already know that marketing budgets are taken into account. That it costs money producing these physical packages, storing them, shipping them, paying all that work on that.
Just do the tiniest bit of reading to learn about Pentiment…what it meant to the dev, and why it’s being made - it’s not because MS insisted obsidian work on an indie game, behave.
I didn’t say Sony didn’t allow kojima creativity…that’s your insecurities coming out again. I said cloud gaming is offering him creativity. One doesn’t cancel out the other. The cloud is allowing him to bring out something new - a new experience for gamers should be a good thing.
The main complaints levelled at halo are towards the f2p portions of the game that functions outside of gamepass.
But it’s hilarious that you think I remove Phil Spencer’s responsibility over the state of halo when I’ve been called a pony before now on pure Xbox for questioning phils management. Good job 👍
Bingo! You can’t offer concerns over quality yet…must make you wonder why you spend so much effort being concerned over something that hasn’t happened yet…one may almost call you paranoid…
But I do enjoy how you guys speak like you thought every Xbox first party game was a 10/10 before the existence of gamepass 👍
It’s all irrational. You’re scared that ‘Xbox has no games’ suddenly has games? Yet you’re fine with PlayStation having exclusives?
You’re concerned about the harm gamepass will do to the gaming industry…yet at the same time concerned you can’t trade in your games??!
Look at it like this, are Google a struggling company? Did stadia take over the world and destroy gaming for you?
If people don’t like something they don’t part money for it. People seem to like gamepass though…but you know the best benefit of a subscription service? It’s not a huge upfront investment…it’s a monthly one. You don’t like it? Don’t like the quality it puts out? Then you simply hit this button called ‘cancel subscription’…and because it’s so easy to hit that button do you think that’s more or less incentive to put out quality games?
@Luigia Minecraft was already developed for & announced for playstation when Microsoft bought it
@SolaceCreed There’s no blinkers here friend.
Just trying to have a logical balanced conversation with someone who so far is concerned gamepass will one day offer a cheaper version where games look worse - like we’re not already seeing that with hardware and crossgen games.
Also concerned that gamepass will harm the gaming industry…yet at the same time concerned that they wont be able to trade in games.
And who still isn’t over Xbox ‘pretending’ they had exclusivity over a persona game for 48hrs…that was exclusive to a PlayStation platform for years.
Just another day in paradise
@Bleachedsmiles if the future of gaming becomes subscription services & cloud gaming they'll have a complete foothold on the industry with their unmatchable wealth & their Azure cloud servers
@Would_you_kindly Sony already uses their Azure servers don’t they?
Also, if subscription and cloud gaming becomes the future of gaming (which it ultimately one day will) you know what will happen?…more alternative subscription and cloud gaming services. Maybe Sony and Nintendo will have to change at that point…maybe they’ll become 3rd party publishers like sega. But what wont happen is gamepass being the only option. Not a chance.
They can have all the wealth they want, they still need a decent product with decent management behind it.
And like I said, gamers can vote with their wallets.
@Bleachedsmiles I don't think you understand what insecurity means, or the irony of calling someone else insecure while coming across very defensive.
"Wait, you think the ps5 digital was designed and released because Xbox announced the series s??? I’m not sure that’s how it really works"
Why, because removing a disk drive and altering the shape of a plastic cover aren't something that could be decided at short notice?
"The whole point of gamepass is removing barriers of entry - this is why Xbox is putting so much effort in offering gamepass outside of the constraints of an Xbox… you have the option of digesting it the same way you can Netflix - through an app on any technology that supports it."
Which incur costs to access. What hardware can I currently enjoy Netflix on that doesn't have a barrier to entry.
"Just do the tiniest bit of reading to learn about Pentiment…what it meant to the dev, and why it’s being made - it’s not because MS insisted obsidian work on an indie game, behave."
I didn't say it was, I said it was greenlit because it would have been significantly cheaper and quicker to develop. It's a niche low cost game that will help pad out their service.
"Bingo! You can’t offer concerns over quality yet."
You were quick to highlight Halo and remove it from the topic of conversation when you first asked me because you knew it was the glaringly obvious example. That is my example of concerns over quality, their biggest ip on their new system being complete garbage.
"But I do enjoy how you guys speak like you thought every Xbox first party game was a 10/10 before the existence of gamepass"
Who are "you guys"? and what do you know of my opinion on Xbox games before gamepass?
"It’s all irrational. You’re scared that ‘Xbox has no games’ suddenly has games?"
Does it? I'm still waiting to see or play them. Hopefully 2023 will be the year we were told 2022 was going to be and give me a reason to buy a Series X.
"You’re concerned about the harm gamepass will do to the gaming industry…yet at the same time concerned you can’t trade in your games??!"
Yes. What about that confuses you?
"Look at it like this, are Google a struggling company? Did stadia take over the world and destroy gaming for you?"
They were too late to the game and began horribly. They certainly had the money to be competitive but didn't have the following, brand, catalogue or developers on board to make an impact. The advertising for it was terrible, it launched with technical issues from resolution to server problems, and it had a very limited library of games.
"but you know the best benefit of a subscription service? It’s not a huge upfront investment…it’s a monthly one. You don’t like it? Don’t like the quality it puts out? Then you simply hit this button called ‘cancel subscription’…and because it’s so easy to hit that button do you think that’s more or less incentive to put out quality games?"
Has the cancel button incentivised Netflix to put out better quality, or has it motivated them to increase prices and clamp down on things like account sharing? Luckily for us Netflix didn't have the financial clout to go around buying up huge sections of the film and tv industry because that would have been terrible for the consumer....hold on a second.
That would be a good choice. Legend of Dragoon is another highly neglected IP. And Parapa the Rapper.
@Intr1n5ic nah that’s not me being defensive…that’s me pointing out holes in your logic. It’s nothing personal this end at all.
The differences with the ps5 digital isn’t just the removal of the disc drive.
Ah, you’re doing the whole ‘moving the goalposts’ thing huh… yes, gamepass will need some form of technology to work on. The point was you wont be required to spend £500 on a new console to have access to it - as you know. Odds are you didn’t buy your tv for the Netflix app…Netflix just happened to come with it - that’s what they want with gamepass… odds are you will already have the technology available to you right this very second that is capable of running the gamepass app.
Correct. Pentiment is a niche game…it’s not going to be selling gamepass subs. MS/phil Spencer will of course know this. But again, you’re doing the moving goalposts thing… The point was gamepass allows for the investment in these niche games as they’re lower risk than they would be publishing them physical. It’s very doubtful they’ll be a physical release of Pentiment…which will prove the point that’s trying to be made to you.
I was indeed the first to highlight halo. Your concerns were games being rushed out and quality on gamepass…fact is, so far you only have halo to point to - a game that got delayed a whole year…it wasn’t rushed. A game that gamepass had no effect on quality or budget …it had a huge budget. A game that is the product of 343 and bad management…just like halo 5 and the master chief collection was before it.
The most vocal backlash though that it’s getting is mainly focused on its f2p multiplayer and how that as a live service game is being handled - this is a game that exists outside of any subscription service. Nothing to do with gamepass.
What confuses me about you concerned how gamepass is harming the gaming industry…yet also concerned you won’t be able to trade in your games? …hmmm
I’d love to see the numbers of trade ins since £70 games
The cancel button…as well as all the other subscription services like prime, nowtv, Disney+, has no doubt contributed in Netflix investing more and more in their own exclusive content in effort to keep subscribers.
I do find it funny that you’re ‘concerned’ today on gamepass clamping down on subscription sharing the week they announce a family and friends package…
I also find it funny that you guys that are so concerned about gamepass being so successful that it results in the way you play games…are also ‘concerned’ about the quality of games on gamepass…concerned that games are rushed to be on the service…yet also ‘concerned’ you’re still waiting for games to come to the service…
You’re all over the place friend.
This is a mistake. Microsoft just want to get the deal through. They will revert to monopolistic practices once they can.
@Nem Your right, but signed agreements have to be honored or Sony can sue. Microsoft has never given up there monopolistic practices.
I think things are going to get ugly when the EU antitrust regulators start looking at this buyout.
Yeah, Sony first party first person shooters blow. Resistance, the halo killer, yeah right, whatever the other 2 i can't even remember. There's a reason they haven't had any of the 3 come back. They were awful.
Kill Zone was another. Can't be bothered to look the 3rd one up. Maybe that's it?
Happy for any friends that still enjoy Call of Duty. I've never cared for the franchise personally.
@Intr1n5ic "You were quick to highlight Halo"
It's a peeve of mine when people use Halo Infinite as an example of reduced quality as a direct result of Game Pass.
Halo has been poorer quality ever since 343i took over, about ten years ago. It's represented in the Metacritic scores, if you want a less biased metric.
And stuff like releasing with missing features, less maps, tons of microtransaction BS, and everything that is essentially wrong with Infinite, was also true of Halo 5, which launched before Game Pass was a thing.
MS and 343i just butchered Halo with incompetence.
@SmoothlyRough Killzone and Resistance scored better than most COD games.
I think Modern Warfare 1 and 2 are the only really high rated COD games.
CODs success isn't due to an unmatchable quality, it's due to an unmatchable connection to the zeitgeist. COD is a known quantity and people find comfort in that.
@Bleachedsmiles "The differences with the ps5 digital isn’t just the removal of the disc drive"
What else is different?
"Ah, you’re doing the whole ‘moving the goalposts’ thing huh"
What goalpost did I move? I said to you several comments back that there will always be some form of hardware barrier to entry that's going to incur costs. Why you keep using the £500 figure as a metric I don't know, the cost to access gamepass hasn't been anywhere near that since it's launch over 5 years ago.
"The point was gamepass allows for the investment in these niche games as they’re lower risk than they would be publishing them physical."
Of course they're going to invest in that type of game, it's cheaper and has a much shorter development cycle, they can throw it straight on gamepass to buff the numbers of their library. Expect a lot more of that type of development going forward, great if it produces quality, not so great if produces crap or slows the development of bigger projects. Strange how Pentiment and Grounded are coming along well but the development of Avowed is a complete mess.
"Your concerns were games being rushed out and quality on gamepass…fact is, so far you only have halo to point to - a game that got delayed a whole year…it wasn’t rushed."
Those were my concerns going forward, as I originally said. "How will it impact the quality of what's produced if the GOAL ENDS UP BEING to get games out as fast as possible for their service, or they start severely capping the cost of development to provide a better return on the cheaper entry to play them."
Was Halo rushed or underfunded, no. Do I think it's inclusion on a subscription service instead of being solely made for full retail hindered its quality and design choices, yes.
Again, I can't give you any further examples of product quality yet because they haven't released any other first party exclusives besides Halo and Forza in the first two years of this generation.
"What confuses me about you concerned how gamepass is harming the gaming industry…yet also concerned you won’t be able to trade in your games? …hmmm
I’d love to see the numbers of trade ins since £70 games"
A second hand market is beneficial for a ton of business's on the high street and it also helps those with less money to purchase games that they can't afford at launch. And before you tell me that gamepass is helping those same people, over the last couple of years I've heard with increasing frequency, I'm not going to buy that game because it will probably be free on gamepass one day. That mindset is far more damaging to the industry than people choosing to utilise a second hand market to sell their bought games. And the talk about the £70 price point is tiresome at this point, it's been two years since the increase, get over it. People act as if it's never been done before. Ocarina Of Time cost me £65 for the N64 24 years ago. I haven't paid £70 for any game this gen and I've bought all of them on launch day except Miles Morales.
"The cancel button…as well as all the other subscription services like prime, nowtv, Disney+, has no doubt contributed in Netflix investing more and more in their own exclusive content in effort to keep subscribers."
Okay, but has it incentivised them to put out better quality, which is what you originally insinuated. I think most people would agree that the quality of their output has dropped off significantly.
@Bleachedsmiles "I do find it funny that you’re ‘concerned’ today on gamepass clamping down on subscription sharing the week they announce a family and friends package…"
I'm not concerned about what gamepass are clamping down on today. My whole point from the beginning was watch what happens when they reach their target number of subs.
"I also find it funny that you guys that are so concerned about gamepass being so successful that it results in the way you play games…are also ‘concerned’ about the quality of games on gamepass…concerned that games are rushed to be on the service…yet also ‘concerned’ you’re still waiting for games to come to the service…
You’re all over the place friend."
Again, who are "you guys?"
I'm not waiting for any game to come to the service, I said I'm waiting for a game that makes me want to invest in a Series X, because it currently doesn't have one. My concerns about how a subscription only model could potentially harm future development isn't because I have any interest in one day using gamepass, I don't. I'm far more concerned about the effect it could have on the industry as a whole.
I think you have to take companies at their word until they go back on it, @tallythwack. They have said this to the regulators, and that means that were they to do something different then when they try to get another deal through the regulators, it makes getting that next deal through far less certain, as them their word would not be seen as worth taking.
In many ways though, this is Sony's own shoddy deals coming back to bite them. For about a decade now, the PlayStation has had the superior version of CoD, despite those on the Xbox paying exactly the same price for the game. In all honesty, if I were Xbox, I would be allowing those playing on the Xbox to have the superior version. It seems odd to me that they are not entertaining this notion. If I were Sony, I'd be doing much the same with Destiny...
@Intr1n5ic Well different ssd is probably the most costly one.
Why do I keep using the £500 figure when talking about barrier of entry? Because when I spoke of the barrier of entry for gamepass it was in reference to the possible benefits subscription services could bring (as you’re focused on the negatives)…amongst that list of benefits was the removal of having to pay £500 for the hardware to play new games. You then moved the goal posts…took it out of its context, and turned it into me claiming there would be no barrier at all so you could say…”but but what about the cost of”…
There’s always going to be some barrier of entry - paying for the sub, paying for electricity… but the point was you won’t need new expensive hardware to play new games.
N64 games were expensive because of the silicon in the cartridges. PlayStation first party ps5 games are expensive because?… they’re crossgen games. Sony is literally charging for pc settings…and then releasing pc versions with more settings at a cheaper price. That’s why Sony charging for £70 is harder to defend than way back with games like Virtua racing on the mega drive came out at £70.
Games don’t get put on gamepass for free. Look into how much money these devs are getting from MS. Also devs get paid per milestone of downloads/players. End of the day, if the service is bad for devs they can opt out of putting their content on gamepass…nobody is forcing them.
They can’t however prevent you from trading in your games.
I’m not saying you’re wrong to trade in your games…just pointing out there’s a bit of hypocrisy there that you’re so concerned what gamepass/subscriptions will do to harm gaming…yet you want to keep the option of something that’s directly proven to harm gaming.
Quality is subjective. Netflix have just wrapped up Better call saul…invested 6 seasons in it. To me it’ll probably be the best thing I’ll watch this year.
But let’s not over look that their exclusive content contributes to the likes of Prime investing in exclusive content (you probably wouldn’t get things like The Boys without that investment). Or Disney + bringing things like Pinocchio straight to the service. Or investing in the awesome Beatles abbey road sessions documentary.
Yes, your whole point has been ‘what ifs’…mainly unfounded. And a waste of energy.
Of course you don’t actually have an Xbox or gamepass subscription… I never for one second thought you did
I don't care. I'm much more interested in seeing what Sony and Bungie make.
@Bleachedsmiles "Well different ssd is probably the most costly one."
The PS5 disk version and digital version have the exact same ssd. Do you even know what you're arguing at this point?
"amongst that list of benefits was the removal of having to pay £500 for the hardware to play new games."
But it's never been £500 to play new games, unless we're going back to the PS3.
"Look into how much money these devs are getting from MS. Also devs get paid per milestone of downloads/players."
Nobody knows how much they get paid because MS don't disclose that information, and the being paid per download/player is false information. I'm assuming you're referring to the payment model they used based on "usage" when they first launched which a lot of devs weren't receptive to and instead wanted to be paid upfront. What "usage" means today or how devs get paid is guesswork because they don't release any financial reports detailing it.
"N64 games were expensive because of the silicon in the cartridges. PlayStation first party ps5 games are expensive because?"
Because of 24 years of inflation. Because it costs more than ever to produce videogames. Because the PS5 version is superior to the PS4 version and requires more work. Because there wasn't a rise in videogame cost for over 10 years despite everything involved in creating them increasing.
"Quality is subjective"
Of course, but the discourse around how poor their content has become is a widely spoken about issue. I happen to think Better Call Saul and the latest series of Stranger Things were both great, but I'm not blind to how many people are jumping ship and citing their output as a contributing factor.
Throwing Prime and Disney in to the conversation is comparing apples and oranges. It's like the people who argue and complain about why Sony don't just do what MS are doing, ignoring the fact it's a company with 1/16 the market cap valuation. Why doesn't billion dollar company just do what trillion dollar company is doing...duh
"Of course you don’t actually have an Xbox or gamepass subscription… I never for one second thought you did"
You're on a Playstation fan centric news site arguing that what MS are doing is great for the industry. Your first comment when you joined here was about how great gamepass is, 15 months later you're still regurgitating the same nonsense and trying to argue the same points. You were even talking about £70 games 15 months ago. In fact, I've seen you contribute negativity here so regularly that it wouldn't surprise me at this point if you turned out to be in the Xbox ambassador program, being given shiny rewards to go around different social media sites telling people how incredible the MS ecosystem is.
You may think my what if's have been a waste of energy, but at least I haven't been singing from the same hymn sheet for a year and a half.
Im always surprised when people talk about billion dollar companies as if they are here to safe the gaming industry. MS is showing its nice face for a while untill the competition is gone. The American and Chinese are just as dangerous.
@Intr1n5ic Ah you're correct, it's the series s that has the smaller harddrive compared to the series x. Both ps5 consoles have 667gb of available space.
What you're not correct in is that the ps5 digital was a direct response to the series s...it's a response to the market. Microsoft and gamepass aren't leading where the market goes...they just realised where it's going earlier than Sony has.
You're offered a dedicated digital console because the markets moving more towards digital sales. You're getting pc ports, more focus on subscription services, more focus on mobile support and games as a service, because that's where the markets going. With or without gamepass the market is moving towards more focus on streaming content.
Heh how much more work do you think ps5 versions of cross gen games need to warrant a £10 extra price difference?
Why do you think publishers that aren't billion dollar companies are not raising the price of their games to £70? Aren't charging £10 for upgrades?
How big do you think the market was 5 generations back compared to how it is today?
If it's the cost of game production then why aren't Sony's games £70 across the board?
Has less work gone into pc releases with all their additional graphical options and and support for various hardware?
If I was talking about £70 games and questioning the reasoning for that 15 months ago...and still doing now, then it probably means we still are being asked to pay £70 for cross gen games without any valid reasons given.
Yep you got me, I'm Phil Spencer. Actually, if I was I'd probably be telling you how great PlayStation is right now wouldn't I?
No, every comment I've made on here and pure Xbox has been balanced without bias. Its just well....Sony just seems to attract negative news this gen so far...far more so than MS...the comments reflect that. But you're welcome to go through all my messages on pure Xbox too if it makes you feel any better...bit odd, but whatever helps you out.
We could maybe report him for trolling to microsoft so he gets kicked out of the Xbox ambassador program.
@Bleachedsmiles "What you're not correct in is that the ps5 digital was a direct response to the series s...it's a response to the market."
I disagree. I think they saw the MS announcements and knew they needed a cheaper alternative to compete with the S.
"Microsoft and gamepass aren't leading where the market goes...they just realised where it's going earlier than Sony has."
More specifically, they were the only company with the infrastructure and capital to absorb the enormous financial losses a subscription service incurs during it's growth phase, which they are still in after 5 years. It's not yet profitable and is in Phils own words "sustainable" currently.
"Heh how much more work do you think ps5 versions of cross gen games need to warrant a £10 extra price difference?"
Well, there would be added work for increased asset design and use in game, as well as the rendering involved for all of it at higher resolutions. Added work that goes in to how the game utilises a completely different hard drive and memory system. Added work that goes in to haptic implementation and controller feedback. Added work that goes in to optimisation so that the game can run at a higher framerate, and then the added bug testing that's required with all of those changes between the two versions. That's a brief list of added work, I'm sure there's a lot more.
"Has less work gone into pc releases with all their additional graphical options and and support for various hardware?"
No, but it's a very different market that doesn't suffer a lot of the costs involved with development and distribution in the same way the console market does.
"If it's the cost of game production then why aren't Sony's games £70 across the board?"
Because not all games cost the same to produce???
"If I was talking about £70 games and questioning the reasoning for that 15 months ago...and still doing now, then it probably means we still are being asked to pay £70 for cross gen games without any valid reasons given."
I gave you some reasons, but you can continue to sound like a broken record for another 15 months if you like.
"No, every comment I've made on here and pure Xbox has been balanced without bias."
You joined a playstation site to routinely inform everyone about how fantastic gamepass is, and have been very defensive in your views on it when met with opposition ever since. You also regularly comment negatively in a lot of what gets published here. I wouldn't say your contributions are without bias.
"Sony just seems to attract negative news this gen so far...far more so than MS...the comments reflect that."
Which is really strange right?, it's almost as if there's been a concerted effort to s**t on everything they do and blow everything out of proportion. When you look past that though you'll find a system that's still leading in hardware sales, still leading in software sales, sells out almost immediately everywhere when available, and a system that has been putting out some fantastic first party games on a regular basis since launch.
@Bleachedsmiles "But you're welcome to go through all my messages on pure Xbox too if it makes you feel any better"
I've never visited pure Xbox. For some reason I've never felt the need to go over there and contribute negatively or talk about things like how great Sony's first party offerings have been so far this gen.
@Intr1n5ic Well of course you haven't visited pure Xbox...you don't own an Xbox or subscribe to gamepass...they sure do take up a lot of your thoughts though...
I thought sony had a subscription service too... But gamepass isn't sustainable anyway, so stop worrying so much about it!
Not all games cost the same to produce? Why are all Sony's £70?
Ah...you're one of those...
Psst Gamepass is fantastic! 😘
@Royalblues Yeah next year is going to be interesting. I reckon Spiderman 2 is a pretty certain release...and wouldn't be surprised if we see at least one of Sony's GAAS games...I mean the last of us multiplayer is a pretty safe bet.
And of course their deals with Square will do some of the heavy lifting next year with forsaken, FF games
@Bleachedsmiles "Well of course you haven't visited pure Xbox...you don't own an Xbox or subscribe to gamepass...they sure do take up a lot of your thoughts though."
Nah, not really. Only when I have to constantly read about it from commenters on a Playstation site.
"Not all games cost the same to produce? Why are all Sony's £70?"
They're not. Miles Morales was £60.
"Psst Gamepass is fantastic!"
So are new first party games.
Who signs (provides a signed agreement. It doesn’t say it s both party agreement) an ‘agreement’ as vague as ‘several more years’ and for what reason?
Title is misleading. Where does it state that Sony signed? Spencer says it’s an offer 😅
Source article on the verge says it’s ‘a written letter (from Spencer) to PlayStation head Jim Ryan ‘
@Bleachedsmiles sorry for the late reply my man - Yeah I don’t completely disagree with what you are saying and I’m certainly not saying you are incorrect. I have both consoles and genuinely consider myself a fanboy of neither, I play where it works best for me. But It’s of course possible that I’m more biased than I think I am.
I think it’s just dependant on someones perspective. I personally see a year or two exclusivity deal with third parties less damaging to the industry than someone just buying the third party. Permanent exclusives in my mind cultivate from IP’s that studios create in house - eg God of war, halo, gears - it shouldn’t be cultivated by hoarding existing IP’s on mass (add up the IP’s involved in the Bethesda and Activision deals and it’s a VAST number). I don’t have a problem with starfield, it’s a new IP which Microsoft have now developed.
I will admit though the certainty of what is available and where is very desirable but I really don’t believe that’s what we are going to get.
I think the main thing to highlight - and my biggest bugbear with this topic - is that nobody here is the good guy, They are all here to make money - which is why regulators need to exist. Phil seems a great guy, I don’t believe he intends any damage to the industry - but - leaders change and that doesn’t mean that Microsoft won’t seek to longer term for their own gain.
I think what ‘works best for the industry’ and what ‘works best for gamers’ doesn’t always go hand in hand. For me, timed exclusivity consisting of anything over a year is just an archaic tactic that I’d really like to see us move away from. Gamers don’t really win here (of course those that get the game earlier benefit…till the next game they have to wait an extra year for), we’re just basically being told one set of gamers is valued over the other.
With actual third party exclusives it brings more value to a platform, has a better chance of growing a platforms install base…which then leads to said platforms ecosystem also growing…which then leads to bigger investments…which then leads to gamers of said platform reaping more rewards.
A years timed though…I just find it more alienating. I’ve all platforms, so it’s not like I have to miss out. But I do find myself thinking…ok, I could get say Deathloop today…or i could wait a year and get possibly a more polished version…with possible additional content…by which point there’s no longer any buzz around the game.
If I’ve just the one platform, that’s being asked to wait an extra year, I’m likely going to be thinking screw those guys…otherwise I’m waiting a year to be charged £70/60 for something that by that point is probably £20/15 on the other platform.
I think there’s valid point to known 3rd party ip being made exclusive or timed exclusive to one platform - I don’t think it should be a case of either or…I don’t think any exclusivity should be attached.
But even in that waters get muddied. Take spiderman. The licence of spiderman has been in multi platform games since as far back as I can remember on the NES. The Xbox has had loads of spiderman games. The spiderman games on PlayStation are first party…so it can’t be expected they not be exclusive. But the existence of spiderman has been present on everything.
In this case it would be cool if MS could make their own spiderman game for Xbox gamers…but they can’t, because Sony has made a deal with Disney for those marvel rights for spiderman games…and now doing the same with wolverine.
So then you get to a point where it comes down to alls fair in love and war. Sometimes we’ll think we’re winning and get established franchises like street fighter exclusive…sometimes we’ll end up losing and get established franchises like elder scrolls possibly taken away. It’s all business… you just gotta hope alternatives are invested in, or barriers of entry to play another platforms games are lowered.
Tap here to load 234 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...