​

UPDATE:
Brad Smith, Microsoft's president, has tweeted out about the confusion regarding the titles which will be shared on Nintendo consoles, clarifying that it's only Call of Duty and not other Xbox titles like his original tweet made it believe:

​

Original post:
Microsoft's president, Brad Smith, has announced that Microsoft signed off a 10-year agreement to bring Xbox titles to Nintendo consoles, like the Call of Duty franchise, which was announced some months ago as well. With this deal, Microsoft aims to bring content and feature parity to all of the titles released across both Xbox and Nintendo, which means the same game on either console will have the same content.

Nintendo users might recall back in the Wii era that games of the Call of Duty franchise on their console had a huge amount of content absent from their version, primarily all of the DLC for each and every COD game release on the Wii, some maps being absent and smaller maps/online matches. This even extended to some of the WiiU titles as well when it comes to missing DLC that the other main releases in Xbox and PlayStation had throughout their lifespan.

With this, It's great news for Nintendo gamers that wish to have a whole new range of titles to play, which were previously Xbox exclusives, and Call of Duty fans can now relive their old online matches from the Wii and Wii U era back once Microsoft starts rolling out new COD titles with content parity for Nintendo consoles.

​

 

[x65943]

This contract isn't worth the paper its printed on.

By the time Nintendo releases a console capable of running recent COD games, then the agreement period will be over.

Exact reason why the switch hasn't had any COD games on the switch because its been proven that its not worth the time and money to have a dedicated team to make a version for nintendo consoles, because they dont sell enough to make it worthwhile.

And saying that, when nintendo DO release its "next gen" console, we all know that it, again will be cheap hardware with some gimmick so the fanboys think its now the only "innovative, fun" way to play games and masks the fact its just a slightly beefed up PS4/XBX1. Then and only then, Nintendo just might get COD games, but highly likely they'll be old ports from the past 2x gen consoles ago.

Make note, the WiiU was the same gen console to rival the PS4/XBX1, but it failed epically because of its cheap inferior hardware. NOT what nintendo claimed, gamers didn't know the WiiU was a new console, they thought it was a Wii add on.

So Nintendo releases its new next gen console (this putting them +1 gen ahead of Sony/Microsoft).

Nintendo are going to need a new console very soon if they plan to ever try remain in the market, when all devs have ran out of their older/retro titles that nintendo, again failed to get, or Nintendo themselves have ran out of titles they have lazily ported over, or release as a very basic game and later bring new content, that you'd expect buying a "new" game, as DLC.

Devs will very unlikely support nintendo with its current new titles, as constantly proven everytime, yet nintendo keep promising to improve better third party support.

Then we laugh at this contract because we know how big COD games and their updates can be, we all know how cheap Nintendo are when it comes to providing internal storage, same as its games media format.

They simply refuse to provide todays basics for internal storage, yup, they're cheap skates that offer still in 2023 a massive piss take, 32GB and if you're to require more, which you obviously will, Nintendo have passed that expense onto the consumer forcing them to pay to add storage to play their shit games.

Then we move over to the devs, Nintendo don't care as well, when it comes to choosing its games media format, they always pick the format that is cheaper for them.

Small game cartridges are OK for Nintendo games, because their games are relatively small in size, if devs want to release a game that is pretty large in size then that costs them more.

Same with the GC mini DVD, enough storage for Nintendo to put its games on, but third parties had to pay out to release games on multiple discs or avoid the console (which most did).

Wii, games moved over to either BlueRay or HDDVD, games were moving forward, thus getting bigger, nintendo recycle the GC with a gimmick controller.

Sure, it was a success for them, but it was littered with shovelware crap titles and lacked the AAA third party titles, hence Nintendo promising again better third party support.

WiiU, well pointless bothering with that console.

Switch, again just shows how its expense is put onto the customer/dev, so do devs decide to opt in with its big games and pay for expensive carts or force the customer to sit downloading massive updates that takes ages on the switch due to, yup shit hardware.

So, this contract is as much use as the paper I use to wipe my arse.

I asked ChatGPT to summarize

The statement expresses skepticism towards Nintendo's ability to compete in the gaming market due to their history of cheap hardware and lack of support from developers. It suggests that even if Nintendo releases a new console capable of running popular games like Call of Duty, it will likely be outdated and unappealing to gamers. Additionally, the statement criticizes Nintendo's storage options and choice of game media format, which it claims puts an undue burden on customers and developers. Overall, the statement concludes that the contract being discussed is worthless, given Nintendo's current position in the industry

 

[osaka35]

I mean, by the time this agreement is finalized, the next nintendo device will have come out. so. fingers crossed nintendo discoveres nvme exist and is cheap enough.

 

[Bladexdsl]

no one wants to play COD on the shitty tablet switch hardware so this deal is useless

 

[K3Nv2]

Call of duty still has fans?

 

[Noctosphere]

Call of duty still has fans?

i guess there are still 12-years old fans, although there are more haters than fans in this world

 

[K3Nv2]

i guess there are still 12-years old fans, although there are more haters than fans in this world

The fact it just cycles mobile options and calls it a $70 AAA titles is more than enough of a reason to hate on it.

 

[BigOnYa]

Boo! Brad Smith, I want Fallout!

 

[raxadian]

A shame, the first Gen Xbox titles actually would run well on the Switch.

 

[HideoKojima]

Bad move and won't last 10 years

 

[Guacaholey]

Money talks, hombre. Aren't Nintendo gameware pieces present in those mobile game playing devices that sometimes make calls?

Mobile games print money. There are going to be whales who put hundreds or thousands in for a couple rare characters.

Still waiting for the punch line!!

The punchline is 720p 30 FPS with graphics that look like they're from a GameCube game.

Post automatically merged: Feb 25, 2023

This contract isn't worth the paper its printed on.

By the time Nintendo releases a console capable of running recent COD games, then the agreement period will be over.

Exact reason why the switch hasn't had any COD games on the switch because its been proven that its not worth the time and money to have a dedicated team to make a version for nintendo consoles, because they dont sell enough to make it worthwhile.

And saying that, when nintendo DO release its "next gen" console, we all know that it, again will be cheap hardware with some gimmick so the fanboys think its now the only "innovative, fun" way to play games and masks the fact its just a slightly beefed up PS4/XBX1. Then and only then, Nintendo just might get COD games, but highly likely they'll be old ports from the past 2x gen consoles ago.

Make note, the WiiU was the same gen console to rival the PS4/XBX1, but it failed epically because of its cheap inferior hardware. NOT what nintendo claimed, gamers didn't know the WiiU was a new console, they thought it was a Wii add on.

So Nintendo releases its new next gen console (this putting them +1 gen ahead of Sony/Microsoft).

Nintendo are going to need a new console very soon if they plan to ever try remain in the market, when all devs have ran out of their older/retro titles that nintendo, again failed to get, or Nintendo themselves have ran out of titles they have lazily ported over, or release as a very basic game and later bring new content, that you'd expect buying a "new" game, as DLC.

Devs will very unlikely support nintendo with its current new titles, as constantly proven everytime, yet nintendo keep promising to improve better third party support.

Then we laugh at this contract because we know how big COD games and their updates can be, we all know how cheap Nintendo are when it comes to providing internal storage, same as its games media format.

They simply refuse to provide todays basics for internal storage, yup, they're cheap skates that offer still in 2023 a massive piss take, 32GB and if you're to require more, which you obviously will, Nintendo have passed that expense onto the consumer forcing them to pay to add storage to play their shit games.

Then we move over to the devs, Nintendo don't care as well, when it comes to choosing its games media format, they always pick the format that is cheaper for them.

Small game cartridges are OK for Nintendo games, because their games are relatively small in size, if devs want to release a game that is pretty large in size then that costs them more.

Same with the GC mini DVD, enough storage for Nintendo to put its games on, but third parties had to pay out to release games on multiple discs or avoid the console (which most did).

Wii, games moved over to either BlueRay or HDDVD, games were moving forward, thus getting bigger, nintendo recycle the GC with a gimmick controller.

Sure, it was a success for them, but it was littered with shovelware crap titles and lacked the AAA third party titles, hence Nintendo promising again better third party support.

WiiU, well pointless bothering with that console.

Switch, again just shows how its expense is put onto the customer/dev, so do devs decide to opt in with its big games and pay for expensive carts or force the customer to sit downloading massive updates that takes ages on the switch due to, yup shit hardware.

So, this contract is as much use as the paper I use to wipe my arse.

Look at Doom Eternal and Apex Legends. Aure they don't look fantastic but they run very well. There's no reason similar concessions couldn't be made to get COD multiplayer running. I wouldn't expect Warzone to run well, cause that's much bigger than multiplayer with several times as many players.

 

[BlueFox gui]

Don't mess with us CoD fans, all 3 of us

 

[Hells Malice]

Brad Smith is like the most generic name I can think of

Anyway if I can motion control shoot things i'd be down but I feel like the wii era of Call of Duty will always be the pinnacle

Though hey at least they're still look like the wii era

Post automatically merged: Feb 25, 2023

Don't mess with us CoD fans, all 3 of us

dead franchise

(there's also like 50k~ other players across the other 50 games and PC is likely a dwarfed minority behind console players for Call of Duty in particular)

 

[Spider_Man]

I asked ChatGPT to summarize

The statement expresses skepticism towards Nintendo's ability to compete in the gaming market due to their history of cheap hardware and lack of support from developers. It suggests that even if Nintendo releases a new console capable of running popular games like Call of Duty, it will likely be outdated and unappealing to gamers. Additionally, the statement criticizes Nintendo's storage options and choice of game media format, which it claims puts an undue burden on customers and developers. Overall, the statement concludes that the contract being discussed is worthless, given Nintendo's current position in the industry

But isnt the the issue with nintendo, all they care about is making sure its own titles have domination over the market, best way to ensure this is to do exactly what they have been doing and restrict its competition.

So this contract is not worth the paper its printed on, Nintendo have not had any COD games on the switch, even before Microsoft took over, and by the time Nintendo catch up with the last gen consoles (which the Switch is already +1 gen above PS4/XBX1), there's going to be a few years left of said contract.....

And we all know for a FACT!!! Nintendo are not going to release its next gen console to rival the PS5/XBX SX, so will this contract continue when all they can do is either:

Pay more to make a dedicated version of its current new title for Nintendo (When past has proven its never returned the sales profit)
Port its older titles that will again risk selling poor not only for been an old port, but it been Nintendo

I used to love Nintendo, but now all they seem to care about it making cheap shit seem better than it is, and why would I want to invest in a "New" console to play games I already own... Nintendo fans have proven over the decades that they are blind and willing to defend Nintendo, no matter what, and I am sure in this site/forum we can see all these "fanboys" contradict themselves.

I've said for a long time, Nintendo should just stop making consoles and focus on making its games more public rather than hating its fans, that make its games look and run better via emulation. They stopped "innovating2" years ago, even back on the N64 they just proved that others could come along and do a better job.

Now, if "others" are doing something better, then they are not "innovative", just recycling old tech that we have been there and done that already.

But in the end, the fans hate this game (so they claimed, this and GTA) so it won't matter if the contract expires before Nintendo catch up.

 

[x65943]

But isnt the the issue with nintendo, all they care about is making sure its own titles have domination over the market, best way to ensure this is to do exactly what they have been doing and restrict its competition.

So this contract is not worth the paper its printed on, Nintendo have not had any COD games on the switch, even before Microsoft took over, and by the time Nintendo catch up with the last gen consoles (which the Switch is already +1 gen above PS4/XBX1), there's going to be a few years left of said contract.....

And we all know for a FACT!!! Nintendo are not going to release its next gen console to rival the PS5/XBX SX, so will this contract continue when all they can do is either:

Pay more to make a dedicated version of its current new title for Nintendo (When past has proven its never returned the sales profit)
Port its older titles that will again risk selling poor not only for been an old port, but it been Nintendo

I used to love Nintendo, but now all they seem to care about it making cheap shit seem better than it is, and why would I want to invest in a "New" console to play games I already own... Nintendo fans have proven over the decades that they are blind and willing to defend Nintendo, no matter what, and I am sure in this site/forum we can see all these "fanboys" contradict themselves.

I've said for a long time, Nintendo should just stop making consoles and focus on making its games more public rather than hating its fans, that make its games look and run better via emulation. They stopped "innovating2" years ago, even back on the N64 they just proved that others could come along and do a better job.

Now, if "others" are doing something better, then they are not "innovative", just recycling old tech that we have been there and done that already.

But in the end, the fans hate this game (so they claimed, this and GTA) so it won't matter if the contract expires before Nintendo catch up.

From a business standpoint what they are doing makes sense, and I like their products

I hope they continue to make consoles forever because we saw what happens to a studio once they go game only (Sega)

I don't own any Xbox or Sony products and those things don't appeal to me at all - I would rather have affordable and fun products like made by Nintendo

I am actually really happy with where the company is atm

 

[Nincompoopdo]

CoD games don't sell on Nintendo consoles. It's a family console, people bought it to play Mario and Zelda games.

MS is just trying to gain support from the industry for their acquisition - this is a PR petition announcement for Nintendo's support.

 

[x65943]

CoD games don't sell on Nintendo consoles. It's a family console, people bought it to play Mario and Zelda games.

MS is just trying to gain support from the industry for their acquisition - this is a PR petition announcement for Nintendo's support.

Black ops for Wii sold over a million copies

 

[Dax_Fame]

Think of it this way, playing on the Switch will cut down on tweaking the settings sweats use for maximum performance ... Except the performance will still be poor Lol

 

[Cha0tic]

Dang see a lot of comments like who plays cod or who cares its on the switch.
Sure will most of us use it? Probably not but its still awesome to see, I personally think its good news even though I wont play it. Last time I saw cod on nintendo was the wii

 

[dmace81]

If they brought back remastered black ops with lots of different control options including motion controls like how metroid prime is id buy it.

Post automatically merged: Feb 26, 2023

Dang see a lot of comments like who plays cod or who cares its on the switch.
Sure will most of us use it? Probably not but its still awesome to see, I personally think its good news even though I wont play it. Last time I saw cod on nintendo was the wii

My first cod game was black ops on wii actually. lol

 

[mightymuffy]

If anything Nvidia signing on the dotted line is the more meaningful here - 10 years on a rival service, but in reality neither signature is gonna change Sony's stance. Only leaving CoD off Game Pass, or allowing the same amount of the franchise on Plus will sway Sony: the former surely ain't gonna happen, the latter - well MS might just have to cave in on that one, or the deal might not go through ..but if they did agree, the deal wouldn't be worth that amount of money.. so it's a catch 22! This one ain't finished yet folks!