Microsoft Has Made a '10-Year Commitment' to Bring Call of Duty to Nintendo Consoles

Xbox boss Phil Spencer shared the news on Twitter alongside confirming Microsoft will continue to offer Call of Duty titles on Steam after the deal has closed as well.

The story is too old to be commented.
Lifexline62d ago

This would make it harder for Sony and anyone else to argue against this. This would give players multiple choices to choose from as far as console or pc to play from. They are really working overtime to get this deal through it’s smart to extend the deal to Nintendo and steam and bypass Sony.

sparky7762d ago

Yep, Sony's main argument was that gamers would have less choice this just proves the opposite.

shinoff218362d ago

This is well after the fact. Ms with their history though. They still probably lying through their corporate teeth. Let's be honest here

sparky7762d ago

Of course they could be lying just like Sony lied about believing in generations. But at least for 10yrs they will have to do it if it's in writing.

Crows9062d ago

They still have less choice.

VenomUK62d ago (Edited 62d ago )

Very shrewd move! Xbox wants to fight.

Call of Duty is the third party highlight of the PlayStation & Xbox calendar. By giving it away 'free' with Game Pass it diminishes the value of paying for it on PlayStation. Microsoft now offering to bring it to a format that doesn't need it and is not part of its ecosystem is interesting because it promotes the idea of choice.

But at the end of the 10 year period it will mean Microsoft will have taken the leading WRPG franchise, Elder Scrolls, and the leading FPS franchise, Call of Duty, away from the platform most people were choosing to play them on.

S2Killinit62d ago

Doesnt prove anything, the contract is what is important. At what cost are MS selling Sony the license? For how long? What happens when the deal expires? Can MS refuse to extend? Can they increase price astronomically? Can they provide an inferior version to other platforms? Ect… the devil is in the details as they say.

darthv7262d ago

If Gabe Newell says its good... it must be good:
"We’re happy that Microsoft wants to continue using Steam to reach customers with Call of Duty when their Activision acquisition closes. Microsoft has been on Steam for a long time and we take it as a signal that they are happy with gamers reception to that and the work we are doing. Our job is to keep building valuable features for not only Microsoft but all Steam customers and partners.

Microsoft offered and even sent us a draft agreement for a long-term Call of Duty commitment but it wasn’t necessary for us because a) we’re not believers in requiring any partner to have an agreement that locks them to shipping games on Steam into the distant future b) Phil and the games team at Microsoft have always followed through on what they told us they would do so we trust their intentions and c) we think Microsoft has all the motivation they need to be on the platforms and devices where Call of Duty customers want to be."

wiz719161d ago

@S2 going by recent acquisitions they made and games they kept multiplatform , when have they ever force company’s to prioritize Microsoft Consoles and makes Sonys less inferior ?? Even though the Series X have the more horsepower.

Sonic188161d ago (Edited 61d ago )

Microsoft is definitely lying 🤥 😒 COD would go to Steam anyway 😂

fr0sty61d ago

COD won't be relevant in 10 years... You can only regurgitate the same old game so many times.

anubusgold61d ago

@Crows90 No most call of duty games are on steam for purchase and have been for years.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 61d ago
SlothLordPootus62d ago

The question is why didnt microsoft extend the same offer to Sony and Nintendo as it did to Steam? I thought Phil said they planned to release on PS "as long as there's a playstation to ship to"

gangsta_red62d ago

MS did offer the same deal to Sony. Sony has remained quiet on that deal because they hope and are fighting for the acquisition not to go through.

darthv7262d ago

Uhhh.... they did. And Ryan wasn't interested. They may have to eat crow over that one.

S2Killinit62d ago

We dont know the details of the deal offered to Sony actually.

gangsta_red62d ago (Edited 62d ago )


It was a 10 year deal that would include same day releases and parity across all system. I really don't know what more details you would want.

SlothLordPootus62d ago

@gangsta and darth No. They offered a 10 year deal, which is NOT what Steam is getting. There's no expiration on Steam.

sinspirit62d ago (Edited 62d ago )

If the replies read Ryan's words. He took the deal that MS had offered for the 3 years. But, he was expressing his opinion that it's still an inadequate deal and there should be more years. So, it's not Sony preventing any time extensions like they keep inferring

AmUnRa61d ago

You are right, thats exactly what he said the no voters you got are in denail...

JackBNimble61d ago

I'm sure that there will be room for Sony to negotiate in a decade.
That's assuming they even agree to the 10 year deal, which it doesn't look like they will considering they remained silent about it.

Babadook761d ago (Edited 61d ago )

No offer would be acceptable unless it guarantees that the ps version isn’t paired back (including performance) more than previously. This offer won’t have that important factor.


+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 61d ago
-Foxtrot62d ago

“This would make it harder for Sony and anyone else to argue against this“

Well yeah why do you think they’ve done this

derek62d ago

@Lifexline this is a nothing offer, there is nothing stopping Activision from putting COD on Nintendo right now, lol. Steam? It was always going to go on Steam. This is a full court press pr campaign to sway the ftc. See if it works.

CobraKai62d ago

Well wouldn’t this nullify Microsoft’s defense that Sony has better quality first party exclusives?

Xx_Pistol_xX61d ago

So in trying to look positive they're going to bring COD to a underpowered platform with a user base that doesn't play COD. And you don't see a issue. They could spend that money on developing a better game.

sinspirit61d ago

Kinda goes to show they will do what they can to make the acquisition happen no matter the cost or waste of resources. Which isn't a good sign. And, a monopoly ruling should be decided on merit and past history. Not good feels and sudden willingness to push pro-consumer policies during the actual acquisition.

This acquisition is so much bigger than CoD and people don't seem to pay attention to that. CoD is just the biggest most consistent series. That's it.

Lifexline61d ago

How old are you 10? Do you not realize how business works I wonder how old the majority of you are here you act like little kids. Of course this is all a show to get this through I didn’t think it was necessary to point the obvious out but I guess it is.

All they care about is money Microsoft , Sony, and Nintendo. So if bringing call of duty to 100 million more people by bringing it to the switch they will do it in a heartbeat. It’s all about money business they don’t care about you I didn’t think it was something I had to point out to an adult. Plus you don’t know how call of duty will perform on a Nintendo platform you do not see the future but I bet you at least a cool million out of those 100 million people will buy it and try it and that’s money.

SeTTriP61d ago

COD isn't big on Nintendo it's a inferior product that pose no threat to m$ what so ever.its not a choice but a copout.who the hell wants COD on Nintendo after having it on better hardware?

Just let the deal go through already, $70 billion and about 10 more to greases palms it's to much money to be made even by the middle man, the deal will go through, and Sony can stomp they ass with COD.

King_Noctis61d ago

As things stand right now, do people have a choice to play COD on the Switch?

And how do you know that future Nintendo hardware won’t be able to handle COD?

TricksterArrow61d ago

“Here, you can have this game. But only Xbox has high fidelity mode and performance mode. There will be no crossplay, as Xbox is the only platform that contains a number of exclusive DLCs some of which are free of charge for those with GamePass.”

blacktiger61d ago (Edited 61d ago )

Nope, that's not a good argument. And anti-trust doesn't mean that. Microsoft still have to show more than that.
Remember before that there was no deal so Microsoft has to show more.

neutralgamer199261d ago

Please approve this deal and keep call of duty and let Sony by Square, Enix and Capcom we will see how others like it then. MS already bought Bethesda and made their games exclusives and activision offers a lot more than just COD

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 61d ago

More powerful Switch confirmed!

Jin_Sakai62d ago

“More powerful Switch confirmed.”

“Microsoft Has Made a '10-Year Commitment' to Bring Call of Duty to Nintendo Consoles,

“Starting With Switch”

RaidenBlack62d ago

Please be the case ...
But how much more powerful?
Switch Pro, if still continuing the same form factor, will be as powerful as the PS4?
MWII already looks exactly like MW'19, result of it being cross-gen as well.
So ... will the cross-gen phase still continue for CoD even though if future console CoD are still made for PS5|XSX|SwitchPro only?
Or will future Nintendo CoDs be separate version/release? Similar to the Wii versions?

Profchaos62d ago (Edited 62d ago )

I'd like to see a total switch revision while keeping the portable form factor new games that don't have to be made for the original switch but just a more powerful switch 2.

I fear if it's a simple switch pro we will be hamstrung by switch 1.

Also if they are Wii style cods I actually replayed a few of them recently and the last couple they made seriously impressed me it's almost a suprise they didn't keep them going on other last gen systems which were capable of running them to as everything was there

sinspirit61d ago


Same. I want the form factor and general idea to stay the same. I just want the dock to include beefier hardware to allow smart apps coming from the dock even while the console is in handheld mode. While also doubling as bring back the wireless screen sharing feature of the Wii U. This would allow Wii U ports to be the same and bring back the usefulness and innovation of that feature.

Neonridr61d ago

if the Switch 2 can be what the Steam Deck is at the bare minimum, it'll be able to play the other versions just at some lower settings.

Asplundh62d ago

Nah it's just going to be a very poor quality version for the Switch.

Crows9062d ago

Guess you didn't realize the streaming is available.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 61d ago
Iceman100x62d ago ShowReplies(9)
TheExecutioner62d ago

If Microsoft or Sony make another major acquisition. it will be disastrous for the players. Assume Sony acquired the Take Two and Grand Theft Auto series.

Sonyslave362d ago

Lol you don’t have worry about Sony getting Take two or Ea can’t afford them. Sony I think going to grab square Enix next out of all the pub but not sure if FF is worth 7 or 8bil.

TheExecutioner62d ago

They can purchase Take-Two if a deal is struck and Sony wishes to do so, applied to Square Enix, forget how much it will cost Microsoft and Sony are giants they can buy both companies combined. My main concern is when a franchise is removed from one console and made exclusive to another. In the short term, you probably find a marathon talk and nonsense comments like the one you said, however in the long term it's a loss.

Orchard62d ago

“They can purchase Take-Two if a deal is struck”

Why would Take2 agree to a deal that results in them selling for below what they’re worth? Obviously that won’t happen when they can just not sell or sell to a company who is willing to pay their true valuation.

TheExecutioner62d ago


I said "struck" means both parties agreed to the deal. I did not they can buy it forcibly

tay870162d ago

dont think take 2 is looking to sell though. ea is out of their price range. id say they are likely to try and aquire majority ownership of the square enix japan studios, that wouldnt cost nearly as much. id also like them to try and grab capcom and CDPR. maybe try to increase their shares of fromsoftware as well.

darkrider62d ago

It worth more. Just look how much some cry by not having those games, even if they sell badly on that console

shinoff218362d ago (Edited 62d ago )

If destiny was worth 7 bill

Square certainly is plus their catalogue is deep. I'd put squares catalogue up against Bethesda. Square would win. And I don't even really care for newer final fantasy.

Crows9062d ago

That's not the point. He said imagine. So here we only need to be afraid of MS because of their wallet?

How nice it is when your platform of choice decides to be the most anti consumer in all years of gaming combined.

derek62d ago

@Sonyslave3 talk big now, Sony absolutely could afford Take Two, if they wanted to be sold which I doubt.

JackBNimble61d ago

Anyone who thinks take2 would sell is not thinking straight. GTA5 made $1Billion in the first 3 days it released.
GTA5 is still a cash cow and no one with any sense at all would sell.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 61d ago
Orchard62d ago (Edited 62d ago )

Literally no chance of Sony acquiring Take2. You’re talking about making an acquisition that is 20-25% of Sonys market cap at any given time - not PlayStation, but Sony all up.

They don’t have the money for that.

TheExecutioner62d ago

I'm sure you googled the wrong information. Furthermore, you have a misunderstanding of how the business operates.

KwietStorm_BLM62d ago

Take Two is absolutely not anywhere near 20-25% of Sony Corporation lol. It's closer to 5% than 20.

62d ago
Asplundh62d ago (Edited 62d ago )

Take Two is worth 17 Billion
Sony is worth 101.5 Billion

No Sony isn't going to throw that large of an amount of money to buy Take Two. People can be spiteful about it, but the fact is Sony can't reasonably afford big studios.

derek62d ago

@Orchard you clearly have no understanding of what deals can and cannot be made. There have been companies who have bought companies worth more than they are, get real. Sony absolutely could buy Take-Two there is nothing financially stopping them from doing so they can definitely raise the funds. I don't think Sony wants to buy and I don't think Take-Two would be interested in selling.

BehindTheRows62d ago (Edited 62d ago )

As usual, you don't know what you're talking about. Take Two is not 25% of Sony's worth.

Orchard61d ago

@TheExecutioner Apparently you don't know much about business either since you can't provide any contradictory evidence and believe that T2 are going to sell for below what they're valued at. If that's the case, why don't MS or Tencent or someone just buy them today? Rockstar Games, 2K and Zynga at below market value sounds like a great bargain!

@Behind I said 20-25%, which is where they typically land. Right now, their stock tanked yesterday, so they're sitting at about 16-17% of Sony's worth - still way too big for a Sony acquisition.

@derek There's no scenario where T2 sells for below what they are worth, shareholders wouldn't allow it - it's not like the company is struggling. Sorry but, and you can mark my words on this, we will never see Sony acquire Take2 with their current financial standing. If their market cap goes 5-10x, maybe.

@Kwietstorm 5% would put them at 5bn, T2 are worth way over 5bn dollars.

DigitalDaniel61d ago

Anyone who thinks Sony will cough up money for Take-Two are seriously fooling themselves. Sony is more than Playstation. Multiple divisions like movies, music, electronics, finance etc. The cash on hand is not earmarked for Playstation and could put the whole company at risk financially.

Even if they somehow did the most unlikely thing and bought Take-two, there wouldn't be any real benefit for Playstation users. GTA/RDR is too big for just one platform, same as CoD for Xbox. It doesn't make any sense financially to go exclusive. And it's not like Rockstar spits out games either.

I wouldn't be surprised if Sony bought Square Enix or Capcom. But Take-two?
Not a snowballs chance in hell

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 61d ago
Kurt Russell62d ago

Everyone Focus on Microsoft and Sony, but ignore the real monopoly purchases. Tencent and Embracer group are the ones buying up everything.

blackblades62d ago (Edited 62d ago )

Who cares, only a small tiny bit of y'all keep bringing them up. They don't have a console why should we worry about them. When they make a console and make every thing exclusive then I'll focus on them

MadLad62d ago


Tencent is worrisome because there's big potential for a lot of games getting even worse ithe microtransactions; and the idea of of more censorship due to the Chinese government.

Embracer isn't much of a threat. I actually think they're good for the market. They're mainly aiming at more mid-tier and indie devs. They only work on a handful of "AAA" at a time. They're basically a much more financially stable Focus Entertainment.

shinoff218362d ago

Tencemt and embrace are atleast still making multiplatform games. Not taking away from other consoles. I'd take embracer buying Activision over ms anyway

shinoff218362d ago (Edited 62d ago )


We're already their with microstransactions. Just about every game has the dumb sh. Your about 5 10 years to late

MadLad62d ago (Edited 62d ago )


I mean, I do realize that microtransactions are already pretty bad in many games.
I just feel that Tencent is trying to actively push the market into an entire pay to win strategy. Free to play system at a premium retail price to boot.
And again, the very real potential of seeing games being censored while they have stakes in many developers.

China really is trying to take over the Western game market.

And I highly disagree about Tencent being a better choice to acquire a company like Acti/Blizz than someone like Microsoft.
Tencent focuses purely on profit. The big three knows the games they release are reflective of their platforms.

CR7JUVE189762d ago

Until Tencent and Embracer Group have their own consoles or digital platform, I'm not terribly worried about that, to be honest.

Orchard61d ago

@Kurt Tencent in particular is worrisome IMO. I'd much rather be forced into buying a console from Sony/MS/Nintendo to play a franchise/IP than ever end up in a situation where a substantial amount of our games are designed and developed by a company with such strong ties to the CCP - even if they don't have their own console (which they will some day).

DOMination-61d ago

It's stupid to dismiss either.

Their end goals almost certainly involves a console or htier own subscription service.

Consolidation is better than fragmentation imo