Sony Says that "Nintendo younger audience" is not interested in Call of Duty.

  • 54 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for loco145
loco145

12218

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 loco145
Member since 2006 • 12218 Posts

A new internal report from MLex says this:

Microsoft's Call of Duty deal with Nintendo is misleading, Sony argues

Sony has criticized Microsoft's deal to make the game Call of Duty available on Nintendo — should its $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard be approved by regulators — as smoke and mirrors, MLex has learned.

Activision Blizzard could supply Call of Duty to Nintendo today, but doesn't, because Nintendo's younger audience is not interested in the first-person shooter and a previous version of the game on its console was a commercial flop, the arch critic of the deal says, MLex understands.

Instead of being a logical business decision, the licensing agreement is a tactic designed to make Microsoft — whose acquisition has drawn concerns in the EU, UK and US — look cooperative with regulators, the argument goes.

Furthermore, Nintendo's Switch could not run Call of Duty easily and may never be able to, Sony argues, MLex understands. Developing a version of the game compatible with the Switch could take years, making a 10-year licensing deal meaningless.

It is easier for Nintendo to enter into such an agreement, Sony says, MLex has learned. Nintendo doesn't need to worry about equal treatment for its subscription service or cloud gaming service as those are not areas where it currently competes aggressively, the argument goes.

Avatar image for simple-facts
simple-facts

2098

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#2 simple-facts
Member since 2021 • 2098 Posts

Delicious Sony tears 🤣

Avatar image for templecow90999
templecow90999

465

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#3 templecow90999
Member since 2021 • 465 Posts

Pretty sure Call of Duty sold just fine on the Wii

Avatar image for sealionact
sealionact

9003

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#4 sealionact
Member since 2014 • 9003 Posts

I mean seriously - who picked out Sony’s legal team? Some of the arguments they’ve come up with have been laughable.

Avatar image for girlusocrazy
GirlUSoCrazy

21647

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#5 GirlUSoCrazy
Member since 2015 • 21647 Posts

Maybe that why Switch is the first Nintendo console not to yet have a CoD game since the console debut of the franchise. It's possible Activision and Nintendo both saw the same thing.

Other mature games like Dark Souls might have flopped on the system too, maybe that explains why they didn't follow it up with more ports. RE7/8 weren't given native ports but just minimum effort cloud versions. Switch doesn't have any of the Yakuza games.

Anyway regardless of this, it's true we see MS making whatever concessions they can because they seem very desperate to get this deal through. Hopefully it works out for both MS and Activision/Blizzard/King.

Avatar image for silentchief
Silentchief

4934

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#6 Silentchief
Member since 2021 • 4934 Posts

COD wouldn't sell on the Switch so there not wrong.

Avatar image for blaznwiipspman1
blaznwiipspman1

14575

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7  Edited By blaznwiipspman1
Member since 2007 • 14575 Posts

these clowns keep making excuses, MS made the commitment so its coming to nintendo period. Likely it will stay on nintendo for the forseeable future too, unlike with activision who pulled CoD because it only sold a few hundred thousand copies on nintendo.

MS isn't as profit driven as other companies, they're more about building the service and the audience. They will keep the game on nintendo long term as long as the game doesn't return too bad in the negative.

Avatar image for zerothehero
ZeroTheHero

1374

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#8 ZeroTheHero
Member since 2021 • 1374 Posts

You can't have it both ways Sony is CoD a multiplat juggernaut that needs to stay independent or do gamers on one of the biggest platforms ever Nintendo switch not even care about it? Which is it Nintendo Switch is way bigger than the PS5 right now Sony which is it.

I woulda bought CoD's on the switch so I dunno why they say it won't sell on there.

Avatar image for dabear
dabear

6930

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#9 dabear
Member since 2002 • 6930 Posts

@loco145: Sony is looking more and more like they are out for their own self interests rather than "industry competition and health". There is a big difference - the former is something regulators should ignore, the latter is what is supposed to matter.

The simple truth is that the industry dictates competitors. And, the industry has decided that the current "video game consoles" that are in competition with each other are XBox, PlayStation, and Switch. Sony can bark all they want, but they do not get to dictate who is in competition with whom.

They are really looking bad now. If they are not careful, this deal will go through without a guarantee from Microsoft.

Avatar image for navyguy21
navyguy21

16858

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#10 navyguy21
Member since 2003 • 16858 Posts

There are plenty of mature games on switch that sell well.

I think COD on switch would be great for the industry even if it doesn't sell massive numbers.

There are people who would play it there, especially if it has multiplayer

Avatar image for dabear
dabear

6930

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#11 dabear
Member since 2002 • 6930 Posts
@templecow90999 said:

Pretty sure Call of Duty sold just fine on the Wii

In the Xbox, PS2, Game Cube days, most 3rd party bangers were released on all three.

Avatar image for kathaariancode
KathaarianCode

1351

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#12  Edited By KathaarianCode  Online
Member since 2022 • 1351 Posts

Sony's legal team

Mista, mista giv'us a CoD will ya?

Avatar image for templecow90999
templecow90999

465

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#13 templecow90999
Member since 2021 • 465 Posts

@dabear said:
@templecow90999 said:

Pretty sure Call of Duty sold just fine on the Wii

In the Xbox, PS2, Game Cube days, most 3rd party bangers were released on all three.

Oh yeah, I had Call of Duty Finest Hour and Big Red One on Gamecube back in the day.

I don't think Activision was happy with Nintendo having a weaker system with the Wii compared to the 360 + PS3, but the Wii still got COD3, World at War, Black Ops, Modern Warfare, and I believe Modern Warfare 3. Pretty sure all the ports came from Treyarch.

Then WiiU got Black Ops 2 and Ghosts and that was the end of it. I think Activision was pissed that it put those games on WiiU plus others like Mass Effect 3 and the system sold so poorly. Going into the Switch I believe Activision publicly said they didn't plan to support the platform.

Avatar image for mycatismilk
MyCatIsMilk

793

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#14 MyCatIsMilk
Member since 2022 • 793 Posts

I think Sony is right on this though, despite some people saying their argument is weak. It makes sense that Microsoft would use the Nintendo deal as a means to make it appear that they're cooperative, and thus making Sony look like the one's who really aren't. Furthermore, I don't see CoD doing very well on the Switch either; for one, it lacks power. And secondly, though it does have "mature" games, what were the previous numbers for CoD titles that appeared on Nintendo's older consoles? Ultimately, it would probably be beneficial if Nintendo spoke up on this matter so as to either aid Microsoft or to help Sony. I seriously doubt they care about Sony though, if they agreed to have a ten year deal with MS.

Avatar image for mesome713
Mesome713

4786

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 5

#15 Mesome713
Member since 2019 • 4786 Posts

Sony is so stupid. Microsoft isnt trying to make record breaking money with this deal, theyre trying to help the competition and give gamers more games.

Avatar image for jaydan
jaydan

7144

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16  Edited By jaydan
Member since 2015 • 7144 Posts

I thought kids were the majority that play CoD games. Sony is just mad.

I think this also says wonders that Sony has worked hard to keep 3rd-party games off other platforms.

Avatar image for Nonstop-Madness
Nonstop-Madness

11554

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#17 Nonstop-Madness
Member since 2008 • 11554 Posts

Are they wrong? Seems like a good argument tbh.

The 10 year deal, imo, is at best aimed towards next gen Nintendo hardware which is either 1) years away or 2) already in the cards for Activision. Heck, Activision could have implement Nintendo's cloud streaming solution if the Switch hardware was a problem.

Avatar image for BenjaminBanklin
BenjaminBanklin

10205

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 BenjaminBanklin
Member since 2004 • 10205 Posts

@mesome713 said:

Sony is so stupid. Microsoft isnt trying to make record breaking money with this deal, theyre trying to help the competition and give gamers more games.

LOL! Yes, Microsoft is doing this for completely altruistic purposes. 🤣 They're so benevolent.

Furthermore, Nintendo's Switch could not run Call of Duty easily and may never be able to

Not a single lie detected

Avatar image for R4gn4r0k
R4gn4r0k

42439

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#19 R4gn4r0k
Member since 2004 • 42439 Posts

Younger people buy Manhunt, GTA and COD because they want to act mature

Older people buy Pokemon, mario and Pikmin, because these are the great games we know from our youth. And they're still amazing.

Avatar image for hrt_rulz01
hrt_rulz01

21849

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20 hrt_rulz01
Member since 2006 • 21849 Posts

Lol Sony... this is getting embarrassing.

Avatar image for blaznwiipspman1
blaznwiipspman1

14575

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 blaznwiipspman1
Member since 2007 • 14575 Posts

@Nonstop-Madness said:

Are they wrong? Seems like a good argument tbh.

The 10 year deal, imo, is at best aimed towards next gen Nintendo hardware which is either 1) years away or 2) already in the cards for Activision. Heck, Activision could have implement Nintendo's cloud streaming solution if the Switch hardware was a problem.

cows are delusional...activision didn't release a single CoD on switch, and for the wii u it was a token effort with 1 game, and gamecube was also a token effort. With MS, theres a higher chance that CoD will stay on the nintendo consoles.

Avatar image for mesome713
Mesome713

4786

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 5

#22  Edited By Mesome713
Member since 2019 • 4786 Posts

@blaznwiipspman1: They even made Call of Duy for DS and Wii also. But Microsoft is gonna bring CoD to Switch. And now that we have cloud streaming well get the same single player game. Microsoft is amazing. Sony are greedy evil dictators that need to go away like Sega. Sony is trash, all they make is boring movies.

Avatar image for nintendoboy16
nintendoboy16

40218

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 14

#23 nintendoboy16
Member since 2007 • 40218 Posts

@blaznwiipspman1: Two. Ghost was on Wii U.

Avatar image for Heil68
Heil68

59363

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#24 Heil68
Member since 2004 • 59363 Posts

@silentchief said:

COD wouldn't sell on the Switch so there not wrong.

Yup.

Avatar image for nintendoboy16
nintendoboy16

40218

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 14

#25 nintendoboy16
Member since 2007 • 40218 Posts

Hey, Sony. MS already had receipts with Bayonetta. Did you forget that?

Avatar image for Archangel3371
Archangel3371

40049

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#26 Archangel3371
Member since 2004 • 40049 Posts

That is some really sad reasoning there from Sony. 😅

Avatar image for lundy86_4
lundy86_4

60150

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#27 lundy86_4
Member since 2003 • 60150 Posts

Have they ever been in a CoD lobby?

Avatar image for brimmul777
brimmul777

5713

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 49

User Lists: 2

#28 brimmul777
Member since 2011 • 5713 Posts

Sony seems desperate,it’ll argue anything even in the slightest to sway the decision in Sony’s favour. Didn’t Sony turn down a deal that Microsoft offered a 10 year CoD contract?

Avatar image for Nonstop-Madness
Nonstop-Madness

11554

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#29 Nonstop-Madness
Member since 2008 • 11554 Posts
@blaznwiipspman1 said:
@Nonstop-Madness said:

Are they wrong? Seems like a good argument tbh.

The 10 year deal, imo, is at best aimed towards next gen Nintendo hardware which is either 1) years away or 2) already in the cards for Activision. Heck, Activision could have implement Nintendo's cloud streaming solution if the Switch hardware was a problem.

cows are delusional...activision didn't release a single CoD on switch, and for the wii u it was a token effort with 1 game, and gamecube was also a token effort. With MS, theres a higher chance that CoD will stay on the nintendo consoles.

We know.

Sony's argument is WHY. Why have they not released COD on Switch?

-----

What exactly does Microsoft offer re: COD that Activision cannot currently do for Nintendo?

Cloud streaming? GamePass isn't on Switch and we know Nintendo's not interested. Nintendo also already offers cloud streaming games on Switch.

Lack of hardware power? That hasn't stopped other third party studios from delivering games like The Witcher 3 etc. Heck, why isn't COD Mobile or Warzone Mobile on Switch? A next gen console could very well be the answer and, that would be the case whether it's Microsoft or Activision that owns COD.

Lack of network infrastructure (Nintendo Online)? Microsoft isn't going to solve that.

Lack of interest in the product? Nintendo has a much larger install base than Xbox in EVERY market so why no interest? Maybe it's the audience?

It's a dog and pony show.

Avatar image for X_CAPCOM_X
X_CAPCOM_X

9452

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#30  Edited By X_CAPCOM_X
Member since 2004 • 9452 Posts
@Archangel3371 said:

That is some really sad reasoning there from Sony. 😅

Actually it's a good question they pose. AB certainly could have published CoD games on switch all of this time. Why haven't they? Regardless of what your standpoint on the deal is, it's a question worthy of entertaining.

Avatar image for blaznwiipspman1
blaznwiipspman1

14575

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31  Edited By blaznwiipspman1
Member since 2007 • 14575 Posts

@Nonstop-Madness: the why is simple, its just not profitable enough to put CoD on the switch. Thats just the bottom line. Theres lots of details, and you're probably right about all of them, but it comes down to money end of the day.

But MS is willing to build a COD for the switch, and they probably would do it as long as the game broke even, or even if it didn't as long as it didn't bleed money. Heck MS brought doom eternal over to the switch in late 2020. They brough over skyrim, and a bunch of other bethesda games.

Avatar image for HalcyonScarlet
HalcyonScarlet

12434

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#32 HalcyonScarlet
Member since 2011 • 12434 Posts

He’s right, a 10 year deal for Nintendo is meaningless, MS would likely just support Nintendo with CoD indefinitely once they start. I think MS actually like Nintendo.

Avatar image for mesome713
Mesome713

4786

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 5

#33 Mesome713
Member since 2019 • 4786 Posts

@blaznwiipspman1: Shoot, Nintendo would pay for everything. They pay all development cost.

Avatar image for blaznwiipspman1
blaznwiipspman1

14575

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 blaznwiipspman1
Member since 2007 • 14575 Posts

@mesome713: yes, I think Nintendo would probably be willing to make some sort of deal.

Avatar image for nintendoboy16
nintendoboy16

40218

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 14

#35 nintendoboy16
Member since 2007 • 40218 Posts

@X_CAPCOM_X said:
@Archangel3371 said:

That is some really sad reasoning there from Sony. 😅

Actually it's a good question they pose. AB certainly could have published CoD games on switch all of this time. Why haven't they? Regardless of what your standpoint on the deal is, it's a question worthy of entertaining.

Is it? Why did we get Bayo 3, which was part of Microsoft's receipts last week? This is Sony being out of touch about Nintendo, and it isn't the first time (I remember Jack Tretton having no kind words on the Pokemon IP and both them and EVO went all Eric Andre when Smash was pulled out).

Avatar image for Litchie
Litchie

32098

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#36 Litchie
Member since 2003 • 32098 Posts

@loco145 said:

Furthermore, Nintendo's Switch could not run Call of Duty easily and may never be able to, Sony argues, MLex understands. Developing a version of the game compatible with the Switch could take years, making a 10-year licensing deal meaningless.

The **** is that kind of argument, lol? Pretty sure Nintendo will release new hardware in the next 10 years.

Avatar image for enzyme36
enzyme36

5525

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#37 enzyme36
Member since 2007 • 5525 Posts

Hops in CoD lobby on PS5 with voicechat on...

Avatar image for sabertooth91
Sabertooth91

11

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#38  Edited By Sabertooth91
Member since 2022 • 11 Posts

Sony is so desperate its funny. Nintendo doesn't even care if it gets COD, but there you go. MS Is just covering their bases to shutdown disputes over the deal, which makes Sony even saltier. Suck it up or play.

Avatar image for X_CAPCOM_X
X_CAPCOM_X

9452

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#39 X_CAPCOM_X
Member since 2004 • 9452 Posts

@nintendoboy16: Yes. It is a relevant question to pose regardless. Why didn't Activision publish cod on switch beforehand? Stop pretending it isn't

Avatar image for nintendoboy16
nintendoboy16

40218

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 14

#40 nintendoboy16
Member since 2007 • 40218 Posts

@X_CAPCOM_X: Again, considering what we DID get on the Switch, not by Sony's out of touch view.

Avatar image for HalcyonScarlet
HalcyonScarlet

12434

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#41 HalcyonScarlet
Member since 2011 • 12434 Posts

Because kids don't play CoD?

Sony love condescending Nintendo.

In reality, this whole situation is weird. Why is Sony the one fighting for CoD, like they're entitled to it? They collect the licensing fee and as a third party, it's up to activision to decide what to do with it.

So Sony are screwing over activision... In a hopes of continually getting activisions games which were already on offer. :-S

And they don't think activision will be pissed off in any way about that?

Avatar image for simple-facts
simple-facts

2098

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#42 simple-facts
Member since 2021 • 2098 Posts

Sony say a lot of things, mostly lies

Avatar image for BIOKILLER123
BIOKILLER123

1009

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#43 BIOKILLER123
Member since 2010 • 1009 Posts

I don't even have to read Sony's stupid statement to know better. Don't they know how many kids play COD? The only reason it might not sell well on the Switch is because of Nintendo's equally dumb online service.

Avatar image for tdkmillsy
tdkmillsy

5309

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#44 tdkmillsy
Member since 2003 • 5309 Posts

Pretty sure within 10 years with will be a new Switch or 2.

Sony are losing the plot and getting quite desperate

Avatar image for Chutebox
Chutebox

49283

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#45  Edited By Chutebox
Member since 2007 • 49283 Posts

Not sure about young, but CoD has proven not to be a good seller on Nintendo.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

53402

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 86

User Lists: 2

#46  Edited By uninspiredcup
Member since 2013 • 53402 Posts

This sound derogatory, but it actually means they are based.

Avatar image for lamprey263
lamprey263

42651

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#47 lamprey263
Member since 2006 • 42651 Posts

What's funny is that the FTC is parroting Sony's characterization of Nintendo as part of their reason for holding up the acquisition.

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

61838

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 72

User Lists: 0

#48 Pedro  Online
Member since 2002 • 61838 Posts

@lamprey263 said:

What's funny is that the FTC is parroting Sony's characterization of Nintendo as part of their reason for holding up the acquisition.

It was funny seeing the EU responding to the FTC claims as being incorrect. 😂

Avatar image for Archangel3371
Archangel3371

40049

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#49 Archangel3371
Member since 2004 • 40049 Posts

Sony’s probably still bitter about Nintendo dumping their ass all those many years ago. 😅

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

61838

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 72

User Lists: 0

#50 Pedro  Online
Member since 2002 • 61838 Posts

@Archangel3371 said:

Sony’s probably still bitter about Nintendo dumping their ass all those many years ago. 😅

Are you trying to trigger folks?😎