Nintendo Switch isn't "technically capable" of running Call of Duty well, CMA argues

The Competition and Markets Authority in the UK says it has "seen no evidence" to suggest that Call of Duty can run well on Nintendo Switch.

On April 26, the CMA blocked Microsoft's purchase of Activision Blizzard and published its final report on the acquisition. In its findings, the CMA discussed Microsoft's deal to put Call of Duty on Nintendo consoles for 10 years - once again reiterating everyone's concerns about how well the FPS game would actually run on the Nintendo Switch.

In the final report (opens in new tab), the CMA writes: "CoD is currently available on two gaming consoles – Xbox and PlayStation. We found that these consoles compete closely with each other in terms of content, target audience, and console technology."

[Christopher]

No no no. Microsoft said they could do it and with parity to the consoles. If they say it can be done, it obviously can, even though ABK hasn't seen any point in investing in getting CoD onto the Switch at all.

Receipts on that parity comment from MS: https://www.theverge.com/20...

[porkChop]

MS never said they would bring the games to the Switch. They said they would bring COD to "Nintendo gamers". Your own link confirms that.

[-Foxtrot]

This is literally turning it into a "get out of jail free" card...

You know what they really meant

[porkChop]

If they meant the Switch they would have said the Switch. They can't talk about a system that Nintendo hasn't even announced yet. You also don't sign a 10-year agreement for a system that will be replaced by the time you even release the game. It's like common sense doesn't exist on this site.

[Christopher]

So, what other Nintendo platform will exist at the end of this year? You mean streaming, which isn't parity? I'm just saying what Microsoft was claiming and that any of us knows was just saying what they could to make the deal happen.

***It's like common sense doesn't exist on this site. ***

It's common sense that Microsoft would reveal new Nintendo hardware being released this year through this agreement and trust that it would maintain parity, though.

Oh, and just so you know, they literally discussed the Switch.

https://www.theverge.com/20...

[EverydayJoe]

Probably port the horrible Vita game to Switch

[S2Killinit]

Thats the thing with MS, everything they say is a play on words.

[jznrpg]

Oh they meant gameboy color

[-Foxtrot]

I hope they realise that it needs to be 100% parity

It needs to run the same, look the same and play the same

No cheap shortcuts, downloading big parts of the game to run it or cloud magic, it needs to be exactly like the PS and MS versions.

The funny part is, with how awful the online is on the Switch and the complete faff you've got to go through to get a online chat going, it's not really going to be the same is it.

[GotGame818]

Fortnight doesn't look the same on Switch vs Series X and PS5. Switch doesn't support 4k or Unreal Engine 5. It does run @ 60fps, which is most important. It could run on Switch. Just played Black Ops 2, and that ran on PS360.

[343_Guilty_Spark]

Christopher did you read your own link? It said Nintendo consoles with no reference to the switch.

Also CMA conveniently ignored the possibility of streaming COD, if even for just the multiplayer.

[Christopher]

What other Nintendo platform is there coming in 2023 since it would start in 2023?

[rippermcrip]

Can you read? "The Activision development team have a long history of optimizing game performance for available hardware capabilities. The Parties are confident that in addition to Warzone, CoD buy-to-play titles (e.g., CoD: Modern Warfare 2) can be optimised to run on the Nintendo Switch in a timely manner...."

[Profchaos]

Look at the Wii it's cod games were technically feature parity by be end of its run mw3 got everything that ps360 owner had outside of DLC.

We know switch isn't graphically up to snuff for mw2 today but you could scale it down to switch with some platform optimisation.

However we also have many strong indicators that we should expect new Nintendo hardware this year or next which will be more equipped to handle it (even if it will be underpowered again)

[neutralgamer1992]

fact is MS can't win the appeal against CMA. People may think appeal will go in front of a judge but in CMA's case it's different. Appeal will be handeled by CMA itself so if they block it now what makes anyone think they will all of the suddent over turn their own decision.

Also CMA's decision may play some role into what EU decides. I know to fanboys it's hard to believe but CMA has a very different process of investigation. They actually get independent opinions from all types of people (those experts in cloud based tech, those on console gaming and everything in between. That's why this decision is very serious

MS will have to pay 3 billion dollars to ABK and walk away from this deal. Even US media covering business have started to say that now. IMO no one should be allowed to buy a publisher. Leave these publishers alone and buy/support independnt devs who could benefit from extra support and resources

it favors none of us that there is one or two companies buying up publishers. MS and sony both have proven with their records they only care about themselves. Words don't mean a thing. If ms actually cared about gaming they would have released bethesda games on playstation because i believe their own actions will stand in their way of future acqusitions

EU will announce their decision next month and FTC has already stated their decision

again this shouldn't be about console wars or fanboys

please stop buying or trying to buy publishers and spend that money elsewhere. MS owns 24 studios how about spend time and effort to manage them and get your house in order

[343_Guilty_Spark]

ABK will assuredly have a great working relationship with Sony after this.

ABK could also sell portions of its studios to MSFT

MSFT doesn’t have to get all of ABK just pieces.

MSFT could also decide certain games due to regulatory requirements simply won’t appear in the UK.

Idk why you think this is over.

[neutralgamer1992]

343_Guilty_Spark

ABK will assuredly have a great working relationship with Sony after this

what does sony have to do with CMA blocking this due to future of cloud gaming? and not sure why you think that when they make most of their money from playstation
---------
ABK could also sell portions of its studios to MSFT

it will still have to go through due process. I think MS don't care as much about this deal now TBH. They are trying to save face and find a way not to pay 3 billion
-----------
MSFT doesn’t have to get all of ABK just pieces

They were asked about possibly splitting up this deal and they said no already
---------------
MSFT could also decide certain games due to regulatory requirements simply won’t appear in the UK

Not certain but all of their games related to this deal and that's not even an option. EU and FTC still haven't said ok to this deal
------------------------

Idk why you think this is over

I don't know if it's over or not but i hope this gives others a pause and reflect on what this deal could mean for gaming in general. I have no horse in this race business wise (as a gamer i want all console makers to stay away from buying up publishers)

[porkChop]

"what makes anyone think they will all of the suddent over turn their own decision."

They probably won't. It's possible but unlikely. The only thing I can think of that might change their mind would be if MS offered to not put COD on Xbox Cloud Gaming in the UK. MS would still have to honour all the 10-year agreements they signed for other cloud services, Nintendo, etc. Even then the CMA might just find another reason to reject it anyway.

[Neonridr]

who said it wouldn't be on the Switch successor that will release within the next year or so?

[sadraiden]

It's not like companies lie right? Why would a company potentially shoot themselves in the foot by saying "yeah, no, we aren't skilled enough to develop our game for the Switch"?

The reason why they haven't provided a committal answer to "why is there no CoD on Switch" is because they have nothing to gain by saying it can't, and everything to lost by committing to a "Yes" and then the game performing poorly.

[crazyCoconuts]

Kudos for CMA seeing past that ruse

[Zeref]

It would obviously be through cloud

[porkChop]

It wouldn't be for the Switch. It would be running on the next system that's launching next year. Regardless, the CMA is made up of people who don't understand game development. How would they know whether something can run or not? They've gotten both COD Mobile and COD Warzone running on phones that have dozens of apps running in the background sucking up resources.

[Jin_Sakai]

“Regardless, the CMA is made up of people who don't understand game development.”

And Microsoft is made up of people who want to take over the gaming industry.

[porkChop]

Every publisher in gaming wants to be number 1. Every major player in every industry wants to be top dog. How is that relevant to the CMA literally not understanding game development? They proposed MS buy ABK but sell the COD IP to someone else, without understanding why another publisher can't just suddenly take the IP and continue outputting the exact same games. Making a competitor is one thing, making the same game is another.

[Jin_Sakai]

“Every publisher in gaming wants to be number 1. Every major player in every industry wants to be top dog.“

But every major player doesn’t have a war chest at their disposal either.

Microsoft already has many more studios than Sony and they should focus on getting those studios in order and get some games out the door.

[343_Guilty_Spark]

Sony doesn’t want to take over gaming?

[tay8701]

I'll do you one better. MS is made up of people that are incompetent and can't get their own affairs in order. You really want them responsible for the quality of one of gamings biggest ips? I don't like COD, but fans of it should be breathing a sigh of relief right now.

[shinoff2183]

Do you know no one at the class knows game development.

[SoulWarrior]

Given MS' recent track record I don't think they understand game development either...

[porkChop]

Ok, sure? Is that low-hanging fruit supposed to be some kind of gotcha?

[SICKINDIVIDUAL]

Apparently porkchop is the only one who understands how to release a 1:1 version of current gen cod on 8 yr old tegra chipset.

He's so revolutionary it's a mystery how Nvidia hasn't hired him yet.

[porkChop]

@sick

At no point did I suggest or imply that.

[Chevalier]

"Ok, sure? Is that low-hanging fruit supposed to be some kind of gotcha?"

You do realize Xbox trying to make themselves look weak mentioned Playstation and Nintendo having better games right?! As if those games/franchises fell in their laps with no effort. Xbox mismanaged their own studios is 100% on them. It's low hanging fruit, but, Xbox makes that easy is FACT.

If its so damn easy to release COD on the Switch then why did Activision ignore 120 million gamers on the Switch? That's more potential customers than Xbox One/Series S&X combined. But suddenly they need to argue something and let's include Nintendo now?

[porkChop]

@chevalier

"why did Activision ignore 120 million gamers on the Switch?"

Isn't it obvious? Because Nintendo's fanbase traditionally don't buy nearly as many mature games, much less shooters. Activision doesn't do anything unless they think they'll make massive profits. They could have ported COD Mobile or Warzone Mobile at any point, for example, but they didn't because they don't care about Nintendo. The only reason COD would go to Nintendo platforms is because MS wanted to do it, not because Activision or Bobby cared.

[Christopher]

***because MS wanted to do it***

Solely as a means of convincing CMA and others to approve the deal.

Microsoft wanted to do this for CoD but not Halo, Forza, Redfall, etc.? Only the games that started third-party. Why do those 120 million extra gamers only matter to CoD and Minecraft? It couldn't have anything to do with an analysis of effort and cost versus profits potential on the handheld console, right? Microsoft only makes decision for the gamers, definitely not to target a specific audience like every other major publisher or to appease regulation boards when trying to buyout a $74b publisher. For the gamers.

Look, Sony isn't any more angelic in their dealings, but at least they're more honest about their dealings. We know why there's free content in Hogwarts, they paid for it. Same with CoD and FFXIV. I don't like it, but at least I'm not seeing them lie through their teeth about how they invest more in hardware for the gamers and improve BC support for the gamers when it's clearly marketing to make Sony look more greedy than Microsoft when in reality they're spending more on buying up third-party studios than Sony spends on timed exclusives and whatever FFXIV is.

I really hope this decision puts a halt on all this buyout frenzy we seem to be in. We need these healthy third party studios that make Sony and Microsoft work harder and evolve their business to match the current market trends and user demands.

[SICKINDIVIDUAL]

Again....PARITY...are you daft?

[porkChop]

No, are you? They said "full feature and content parity". That means it will have the same modes, the same maps, etc. That does not mean graphical parity or even performance parity.

[badz149]

60fps is a feature. if Fortnite can't run 60fps on the Switch, CoD definitely won't

[porkChop]

60fps is a performance figure, not a feature in the way you would traditionally describe the features of a game. But whatever, it really doesn't matter anyway.

[Crows90]

First. By claiming that nobody that you know in the CMA understand game development you are implying that you know their knowledge and based on that knowledge you are comparing your own against it and therefore making the ignorant claim that they dont know...when you dont know if they dont know.

Second, MS recent track record being low hanging fruit should be enough for most sensible gamers to not want this deal to go through. Its purely a move to remove content from gamers as a whole.

And third...theres a new nintendo console releasing in 2024?

[Chevalier]

To be fair you're harping on the CMA, but, conveniently forget the equally stupid stuff Xbox said during this whole thing. 10 years should be enough time for Playstation to make a COD competitor like it's the easiest thing to do.

Plus the whining about Playstation and Nintendo having the far better exclusives as a dumb reason why they should just buy a huge publisher. Yeah it's Playstation and Nintendo's fault for taking risk and making new IP or building on their franchises.

[gold_drake]

"Regardless, the CMA is made up of people who don't understand game development"

Microsoft is made up of people who cant make actual games for their gaming console and can only buy out franchises

[jznrpg]

MS is made up of people who don’t understand game development either . Look at the last 15 years m. They could have made games all these years instead of buying entire publishers at the last second

[sadraiden]

Source: trust me bro!

GTFO "next system launching next year"

[anast]

MS is made up of people who can't make games. They obviously don't understand game development either.

[FallenAngel1984]

I don’t there’s a big enough market on Nintendo platforms for traditional FPS games to financially justify such an endeavor

It’s a similar situation for why various JRPGs skip out on Xbox release nowadays.

[ZycoFox]

I don't get why FPS games sell so well on console anyways given the controls.. They were fairly acceptable on N64 and consoles before it because they were still quite new then, but afterwards? Nah.. Exceptions being Quake 3 on DC which could use KB & mouse. I'll have to give an FPS game a go with a controller and see how it feels these days but I Imagine it's hard to go back to.

[UltimateRacer]

The CMA are correct, if Switch was able to run COD then AB would have put COD games on it long ago.

[Strange]

Techincally able to run 10 year old CODs though I would assume.

[Knightofelemia]

Well maybe dummied down or older gen COD games.

[badz149]

sorry the Switch is not powerful enough to run the xbone version of CoD either

[Knightofelemia]

There are older generations besides XB1.

[Yui_Suzumiya]

It runs Dying Light, Doom Eternal and Bright Memory just fine

[badz149]

@Yui

Yes, with lots of compromises and 30fps. you do know the meaning of the word "parity", right?

[Aloymetal]

Things just keep getting better by the minute.

[XiNatsuDragnel]

I'm not surprised that switch users would get a nerfed game ngl

[Bathyj]

CMA calling MS out on their BS pandering.

[randomvoice]

So a lot of Xbox fans here are moaning about this deal fall through but let me ask a simple question. What is stopping MS from just blowing money to bring COD to gamepass if that is all you guys want? They can literally strike a deal with them like every other 3rd party to get it done. Yeah it will cost $$ but it won't be as expensive as blowing 69 Billion. Or is it that these fanboys just want to see game being taken away from PlayStation eventually so they get to gloat?

Honestly, I am glad this shit is blocked. This would set a precedent to have Tencent and all other big companies coming in and trying to grab all studios eventually. Build your own damn studios. 69 Billion can let you buy or poach a shit ton of talent and enough budget to fund AAA games for the next decade. Thank you CMA for not buckling under pressure.

[BLow]

I had to log back in for this, its been a while. My thoughts exactly. We can also ask, what exactly has changed since this deal is dead? You are still getting this same games lol. Nothing has changed.
So apparently, this was about taking games away from another platform. One platform in particular that makes the most money from one of the most popular franchises. Why would MS take that away after spending 70 billion dollars?
I'll say this again, you are still getting Activision games. So why y'all so mad?
We all see how MS has handled studios they have bought. Then they bought a publisher. Now they have the most studios of everyone. How about we see how the manage these studios before buying a crap ton more?
Time for me to log back out. Have fun y'all and Happy gaming.

[Hofstaderman]

But Phil Says…

[Flenter]

Can't wait to hear what "the almighty" Phil says 😄

[SICKINDIVIDUAL]

Lmao 🤣.... he's been awfully quiet lately 🤐

[Ristul]

Porting to Nintendo platforms was just one of many of Microsoft's Hail Mary's to get the deal to close, it was obvious to anyone who knows gaming. Not very realistic though, and Microsoft implied the same in the past, say one thing and then do another.

[HeliosHex]

Lol how bizarre. Nintendo over there minding their business and inadvertently got in the way of a merger.

[VariantAEC]

Oh that... that was Microsoft's fault!
If only they didn't make promises that even the most technologically illiterate politicians could easily flag as a total lie.

[rippermcrip]

CMA calls out another obvious lie. Good on them.

[JEECE]

Yep. Honestly I thought these phony "bring COD everywhere" deals would fool all the regulators, so I'm impressed that the CMA has at least a basic understanding of games. It's funny that MS is accusing them of not understanding the industry because their entire pitch was based on the theory that the CMA had only a surface-level understanding of the industry.

[gold_drake]

which is true and we all know it.

not to mention the bad online service they have.

[SpacedDuck]

It's true both from a hardware standpoint but also friends list and party standpoint.

They would need to make a Switch exclusive COD to have this make sense.

[sadraiden]

It seems like these days, the gaming industry is literally just throwing billions of dollars at the wall and hoping something sticks. No fucking shit CoD won't run well on Switch. Nintendo isn't vying to be the Cadillac of consoles. They know their niche, and they profit handsomely by sticking to it. No one is calling for CoD to be on Switch either. People for some reason want a new console with more power from Nintendo, for reasons no one has been able to effectively articulate to me.

[roboteye]

Use the power of the cloud.

Oh wait...

[HideTheGames]

If they're not able to get Redfall to run on Series X in 60 fps, how are they getting a modern CoD to run on Switch or any Nintendo console?

[aws04]

Nintendo should hire ms

[wiz7191]

I defend MS at time because I know they can do better .. buttttttt they need to forget about this deal and invest that money into AAA games that are story driven first ..

[COS]

I really thought it was a done deal, I take my crow medium well please. It seemed like they found another reason to block it, as it seems more related to MS position in cloud dominance. I think there is more at play, but we shall see.

[Binarycode]

How can you say you'll bring a game to any system when you don't own the product.

Premature microsoftation.

The buyout must not go through. sets a bad standard.

[gleepot]

"Switch can't run CoD" well yes, it could, and if it cant then it can on the cloud -- CMA proceeds to block the deal due to cloud gaming concerns

OKAY

[Yui_Suzumiya]

* looks at Doom Eternal, Bright Memory, Crysis, Wolfenstein and Dying Light *

Whatever you say, lol

[VariantAEC]

All games that look like trash on Switch... great case you're building though! /s

[Yui_Suzumiya]

Crysis looks better on Switch versus PS4 according to Digital Foundry. I can concur that it's better than the PS3 version.

[VariantAEC]

Sure dude you keep believing DF said that and even if they did. I've seen those videos before I don't think they said Crysis on Switch is better than on PS4. You might be confusing that for IQ in Alien: Isolation which is better on Switch over PS4. Even so models, grass, framerate all better on PS4 over Switch along with resolution.