It was one of the biggest news from E3 this year, even if it was overshadowed by other mammoth announcements.
For years, Microsoft fans have enjoyed timed exclusivity for all Call of Duty downloadable content. The expansions always came first to the Xbox platform.
But Sony has staged a coup this year; the reversal is in full effect: DLC for the upcoming Black Ops III will debut on PlayStation platforms, and so will the multiplayer beta. So, how did Activision end up teaming with Sony? PlayStation VP of Publisher & Developer Relations Adam Boyes tells GameSpot that Destiny may have paved the way:
"Well, I think the first thing was we've had a great relationship with Activision around Destiny. And I'm a huge fan of that."
PlayStation fans get Destiny content first, and Sony even said several times that they were treating Destiny like a first-part title. As for Black Ops III , Boyes said Sony "fell in love instantly:"
"As soon as I started playing it, I said, 'This feels incredible! You can wallride!' It's just so smooth; it's almost like poetic. And so obviously, we just continued talking with our partners at Activision and worked something out. And now we've got I think a great benefit to all the gamers."
Well, that's for damn sure. Black Ops III will launch for PlayStation 4, Xbox One and PC on November 6.
Related Game(s): Call of Duty: Black Ops III
So what he's really saying is he did this for business purposes and nothing more. I can't believe he said Sony did this for "all gamers" as this is clearly only beneficial to ps4 owners.
I mean I could careless, but the hidden agenda is clear as f*$%! Exclusive nonsense needs to end though
Obviously it's for business purposes and I don't know what "hidden agenda" you're talking about. Activision is partnering with the company that has sold the most consoles this generation and Sony can now say they're the "go to" platform for one of the most popular gaming franchises in the world. It's a win-win for both companies and a smart business move that could be seen a mile away.
I don't think the agenda is "hidden". Securing a portion of the market it kinda business 101. And creating "synergy" is important. (Partnering with other businesses for mutual benefit)
Last edited by Underdog15 on 6/30/2015 9:55:16 AM
I agree that it's "kinda business 101", to borrow your phrase, Underdog, but why is it "just business 101" now that Sony is doing it, when it was evil underhanded scheming when MS buys timed exclusive content? I'm asking generally, not in response to anything you specifically have said in the past.
We should all be consistent in our outrage, or lack thereof. Personally I couldn't care less as Call of Duty sucks donkey butt, but kudos to Sony for making the deal.
I've never been outraged by it. Even with the Tomb Raider stuff, I've been saying, "meh we'll get it eventually".
Besides, Microsoft has it's own partnerships, just like in the past when MS had timed exclusivity, Sony had it's own separate partnerships too.
I know you haven't, which is why I said I was speaking generally. Lots of people here and elsewhere get so up in arms about this sort of stuff, especially when Tomb Raider became a timed exclusive. I always found it silly.
If you can convince the publisher of a multi-billion dollar franchise to hook you up with exclusive content, timed or otherwise, you do that every single time unless you're a company of morons. It doesn't make you evil, it makes you smart.
Also I'd just like to add that I don't think this timed exclusivity stuff is great for gaming as a whole but I can't deny that it's a smart business move.
So what he's really saying is he did this for business purposes and nothing more. I can't believe he said Sony did this for "all gamers" as this is clearly only beneficial to ps4 owners.
I mean I could careless, but the hidden agenda is clear as f*$%! Exclusive nonsense needs to end though
But…i only care about the single player…
said no one in the last 10 some odd years lol
I couldnt careless about so thus is a big meh to me
Personally i couldn't give two morning turds about timed DLC content that's going to be released else where eventually anyway.
Imo this isn't a win, it's just a waste of SONY money that could have been spent on something more worthwhile. People would still lap this DLC up regardless whether it's six months earlier or six months later because it's Call of Duty DLC and millions play the game so i personally don't see too much bragging rights coming from it.
There are millions of people who are super into Call of Duty. Super into it like they're going to get the next installment on whatever platform gets the DLC first.
Hopefully the days of Call of Duty being relevant at all are coming to a close, but for now it's still huge, and it still drives console sales, so it's smart business to try and lock up what exclusivity you can with these titles.
Of course the fans will get it regardless but if you're a big CoD fan (and there are many) and you're considering upgrading to one of the new consoles this could just swing it. Of course it depends on how much it cost Sony but all in all it's probably a solid business move.
Waste of money? Lol, love or hate cod, it sells millions and millions.
The days game houses put people before business went over a decade ago. Of course it's always about cash, yes they have a fan base and yes they have to strike a balance between making money and giving the fans what they really want. … And if millions want cod then it's a no brainer.
Just because a small amount of gamers believe that they're the majority, doesn't make it fact. It's like when people go on about boycotting games to show then a lesson, lol.. Kids!
I've never been outraged by it. Even with the Tomb Raider stuff, I've been saying, "meh we'll get it eventually".
Besides, Microsoft has it's own partnerships, just like in the past when MS had timed exclusivity, Sony had it's own separate partnerships too.
But…i only care about the single player…
I agree that it's "kinda business 101", to borrow your phrase, Underdog, but why is it "just business 101" now that Sony is doing it, when it was evil underhanded scheming when MS buys timed exclusive content? I'm asking generally, not in response to anything you specifically have said in the past.
We should all be consistent in our outrage, or lack thereof. Personally I couldn't care less as Call of Duty sucks donkey butt, but kudos to Sony for making the deal.
So what he's really saying is he did this for business purposes and nothing more. I can't believe he said Sony did this for "all gamers" as this is clearly only beneficial to ps4 owners.
I mean I could careless, but the hidden agenda is clear as f*$%! Exclusive nonsense needs to end though
So what he's really saying is he did this for business purposes and nothing more. I can't believe he said Sony did this for "all gamers" as this is clearly only beneficial to ps4 owners.
I mean I could careless, but the hidden agenda is clear as f*$%! Exclusive nonsense needs to end though
Obviously it's for business purposes and I don't know what "hidden agenda" you're talking about. Activision is partnering with the company that has sold the most consoles this generation and Sony can now say they're the "go to" platform for one of the most popular gaming franchises in the world. It's a win-win for both companies and a smart business move that could be seen a mile away.
I know you haven't, which is why I said I was speaking generally. Lots of people here and elsewhere get so up in arms about this sort of stuff, especially when Tomb Raider became a timed exclusive. I always found it silly.
If you can convince the publisher of a multi-billion dollar franchise to hook you up with exclusive content, timed or otherwise, you do that every single time unless you're a company of morons. It doesn't make you evil, it makes you smart.
Also I'd just like to add that I don't think this timed exclusivity stuff is great for gaming as a whole but I can't deny that it's a smart business move.
I don't think the agenda is "hidden". Securing a portion of the market it kinda business 101. And creating "synergy" is important. (Partnering with other businesses for mutual benefit)
Last edited by Underdog15 on 6/30/2015 9:55:16 AM
Of course the fans will get it regardless but if you're a big CoD fan (and there are many) and you're considering upgrading to one of the new consoles this could just swing it. Of course it depends on how much it cost Sony but all in all it's probably a solid business move.
I couldnt careless about so thus is a big meh to me
Waste of money? Lol, love or hate cod, it sells millions and millions.
The days game houses put people before business went over a decade ago. Of course it's always about cash, yes they have a fan base and yes they have to strike a balance between making money and giving the fans what they really want. … And if millions want cod then it's a no brainer.
Just because a small amount of gamers believe that they're the majority, doesn't make it fact. It's like when people go on about boycotting games to show then a lesson, lol.. Kids!
There are millions of people who are super into Call of Duty. Super into it like they're going to get the next installment on whatever platform gets the DLC first.
Hopefully the days of Call of Duty being relevant at all are coming to a close, but for now it's still huge, and it still drives console sales, so it's smart business to try and lock up what exclusivity you can with these titles.
said no one in the last 10 some odd years lol
Personally i couldn't give two morning turds about timed DLC content that's going to be released else where eventually anyway.
Imo this isn't a win, it's just a waste of SONY money that could have been spent on something more worthwhile. People would still lap this DLC up regardless whether it's six months earlier or six months later because it's Call of Duty DLC and millions play the game so i personally don't see too much bragging rights coming from it.