BestOfAllTime32

So Charlie, we have us confirmation. Smoke and fire and all that.

Poor COD for aligning itself with the most popular platform? More mental gymnastics there. MS is pandering to their crowd. How many people that are in to Halo don't already have one? The game was revealed a year ago, and there's already been a (broken) Halo on the cobsole. How many people that are interested in Forza don't already have an Xbox1, this is the third Forza in as many years. Maybe Gears will bring in some fence sitters. I can't imagune many hibestly wanting that Fable game after the failure that was Fable 3, and the all around terrible look to Legends. MS is just pandering to the people that already bought their console. A great conference for you, was hilarious to me. Zombies may be an FPS, but other than Destiny, it's the only FPS I play. TPS is more of the same. MS didn't sell many consoles with this conference. ​Are those salty tears I see? Anyone that disagrees that Microsoft made an amazing E3 is clearly a Sony Pony. Even us Xbox Gamers admit when PS4 does something good. In YOUR opinion Halo/Forza/Gears/Fable is an amazing e3. You are an Xbox person, so you like those franchises. You are letting your bias shine. Listening to Phil and Geoff right now, Phil just said an interesting thing, blah first party blah, we still have great third party games like Destiny (Sony marketing), Battlefront (Sony marketing), and BLACK OPS 3. Coincidence? Possibly, but it's kind of funny. Like who forgot XB1 didn't have COD after what 12 games on Xbox.

Poor COD for aligning itself with the most popular platform? More mental gymnastics there. MS is pandering to their crowd. How many people that are in to Halo don't already have one? The game was revealed a year ago, and there's already been a (broken) Halo on the cobsole. How many people that are interested in Forza don't already have an Xbox1, this is the third Forza in as many years. Maybe Gears will bring in some fence sitters. I can't imagune many hibestly wanting that Fable game after the failure that was Fable 3, and the all around terrible look to Legends. MS is just pandering to the people that already bought their console. A great conference for you, was hilarious to me. Zombies may be an FPS, but other than Destiny, it's the only FPS I play. TPS is more of the same. MS didn't sell many consoles with this conference.

COD is the biggest yearly franchise. Even in its declining state, and a shaky first time developer last year, it sold the most of any game. Very few games can top it, GTA, maybe a Skyrim successor. Fallout is a huge franchise, but it's not even close to Skyrim.

It's the old saying, where there's smoke there's fire. Each article of "proof" on their own is nothing but circumstantial evidence, but together, the case starts to mount. It wouldn't be much of an anouncement if they let it slip on a banner now would it. It's either no marketing, or Sony marketing. I can't envision ActiBlizz not getting a marketing deal for the biggest game of the year. If they announce MS marketing, why would A) anyone care, and they hide it.

There's some mental gymnastics going on in here. Of the things we have seen, not many point to Xbox marketing, if any. The banner not having Xbox on it is another clue. It's all opening up for a "surprise" e3 announcement at the sony conference. Very elaborate marketing, keeping the game in the headlines without showing any game play. Then they show the game, people get hyped up, and at the end of the video, the logo keeps them in the news again. It won't be long now though either way. We find out tomorrow. If it's not at the Xbox conference, it is pretty safe to assume at that point it will be at Sony's. Unless BO3 is skipping e3...

Hey this is actually a great thing that you reminded me of. Thanks a lot. That actually does ease my mind slightly.

Company tries to sell its game after controversial announcement, news at 11. What is he going to say, other than what he said? We were all hoping that zombies would be over the top of our expectations. Unless they go the Mordor route of just straight up not including one of the best features (nemesis system) for the old gen, that likely isn't going to happen at this point. Can't wait to get Dempsey has too many bones errors, or gspawn errors. I really don't see the point of a new console now. These consoles wouldhave to be at least 7 years old to get an exclusive zombies game. Really wish I hadn't preorder digitally...

​Exactly. Most MP players I know aren't even purchasing this game because of it being futuristic, which I say is stupid to do, but they're leaving COD behind nonetheless. Players hated Ghosts, and AW split players up, with half of the fanbase enjoying it, and the other half hating it and abandoning it. Some people had hope with BO3 being a Treyarch game, and being current-gen only, but now that's gone. To be honest, this is probably going to be a rocky launch for COD, and if this game isn't good, COD will probably have 1 or 2 more games before being done for. COD's been on decline since BO2. Ghosts burned a lot of people on the series, and as you say AW split the community. Then you have Titanfall and Destiny that are similar ideas (futuristic crap). If BO3 fails, we may not get another zombies. Activision might just guitar hero/Tony Hawk the series.

​I'm not saying you're not allowed to complain about the fact the game being cross-gen. Go right ahead, personally I think people should've moved on from last-gen ages ago and these last gen ports of current gen games are terrible. But that's besides the point. Right now many people as soon as they hear cross-gen are like: next-gen versions are being handicapped by last gen limitations guys. Truth of the matter is that game development is way more complicated to just draw simple deductions like that. One recent example of a game held back by last gen versions, is Destiny. The vault space is maxed because of ps360 versions of the game. I am incredibly bummed out by this news. I hobestly have no idea why I bought a ps4. As it is, I play daily on my ps3 (Destiny) because everyone I know plays on ps3. With BO3 being a PS3 game, that will very likely mean that the next BO/3Arc game will be a launch title, or second year title for the next gen (Ps5/XB2?) consoles. What's the point of these next gen consoles for zombie players? I've bought about 25-30 games so far for my PS4, completed maybe 6 of them, just killing time until BO3 comes out. I think I may just be other video gamed out. Just Destiny and CODZ for me from now on. I can do that on PS3... Can I get a refund on a digital preorder on PSN? Might just sell the ps4 at this point, and start a PC fund.

I am a bad guy, no offence taken. The whole reason I want to see the dlc switch is for the laughs it will provide me when people have melt downs. I have no personal cares for the dlc being a month early/late. It would help a purchase decision, not make it for me, but it (hopefully) will be hilarious if the dlc switches. It's no fun when everyone gets what is expected.

So you think that by last November, when they started selling the XB for 349, they had already cut 42 dollars. I could believe that. But when you add in two Assassins Creed games, even at a quarter value, let's call it 20 bucks, they still lost 20*2.8 million or so. Throw in the 50 dollar target gift card, and that's 70 dollars lost on an unknown amount of consoles sold (BF deal). The BOM breakdown doesn't include shipping, warehousing, or any potential retailer cut. Let's be real, they didn't cut $111 dollars in costs in one year, without a die shrink.That's 25% of the consoles price. @mocking thank you. In actual units, the gap is tiny, in a % it's quite impressive. The gap would be smallest in the US, as that's where the consoles are closest. The preorders would say something entirely different in the UK or Germany, where Sony has dominated. The US is a small market compared to the rest of the world. Individually it is the biggest market for consoles, but collectively, the rest of the world has outsold the US by almost double on the Sony side. That is where BO3 preorders will favour Sony. ​if the console had originally been selling at $500 at a zero margin, then your point would be valid. Microsoft didn't spend $500 on every xbox console they produced. far from it. honestly, they could probably sell the console for $50 and still make profit. That is just a guess. Anyway let's address your point. A) assassins creed was not produced by microsoft. MS would partner with Ubisoft for this, and ubisoft would likely get a kickback from console bundle sales. Target also would likely be a marketing partnership. neither of those things are cutting directly into MS's margins. So what we have is demand declined slightly as the console is almost 2 years old now, so whoever is in charge of analyzing pricing/promos decided to drive more units and maximize profit, they would decrease the price to drive unit sales (which has worked like a charm by the way, xbox sales have out paced ps4 sales since the price decrease in december) So yes, margins are lower now for xbox sales than they were when it was at the $500 price point, but they are FAR from losing money lol also: LMAOOOOOO!!!! i get it thoughm you are a Playstation owner, its understandable that you would be very hopeful that you won't have to wait 30 days for new dlc, but don't let that hopefulness cloud facts You must be an American *facepalm* When 300 million are considered bigger than 6 billion, only in America... Stop being retarded for the sake of it. Edit: Why is the quoting like this? MS spent 75 dollars on Kinnect, and 390 something on the XB1. They likely broke even, made a slight profit, on 500 dollar boxes, when you factor in shipping and warehousing. Cutting 150 dollars, and adding in two games, does not removing the kinnect make up for. It is absolute lunacy to suggest otherwise, and I think this is where the conversation ends. If MS sold the console at 50 bucks, the platform royalty is 7 dollars per, so do the math on how many games they would have to sell just to break even.

So you think that by last November, when they started selling the XB for 349, they had already cut 42 dollars. I could believe that. But when you add in two Assassins Creed games, even at a quarter value, let's call it 20 bucks, they still lost 20*2.8 million or so. Throw in the 50 dollar target gift card, and that's 70 dollars lost on an unknown amount of consoles sold (BF deal). The BOM breakdown doesn't include shipping, warehousing, or any potential retailer cut. Let's be real, they didn't cut $111 dollars in costs in one year, without a die shrink.That's 25% of the consoles price. @mocking thank you. In actual units, the gap is tiny, in a % it's quite impressive. The gap would be smallest in the US, as that's where the consoles are closest. The preorders would say something entirely different in the UK or Germany, where Sony has dominated. The US is a small market compared to the rest of the world. Individually it is the biggest market for consoles, but collectively, the rest of the world has outsold the US by almost double on the Sony side. That is where BO3 preorders will favour Sony.

First off, there is no real way to know if XB1 is losing MS money or not, as they bury XB in with the Android, and all other consumer devices division like the surface. All we have to do is a little common reasoning to get to MS losing money off the XB. The b.o.m breakdown of the two consoles showed MS spent more money to make the XB1, without the kinnect, than Sony did the PS4. You couple in the 50 dollars cheaper, and often a game or more bundle, it's not hard to imagine them losing money on the console, certainly last year during BF when they sold with 2 games + a 50 dollar gift card they were losing a lot of money. The retailer didn't, and would never take the hit for that, it was all MS. As for PS being a big part of Sony it is indeed. Other than insurance, and other financial investments, Sony is not a profitable company. On the other hand, they are righting the ship selling off things like the PC business, and SOE that do not make them money. @​mocking, i would love to see preorder numbers to back that up. If you are using aspecific site like Gamestop, or amazon, that is arabking, and not anumer, and therefre could be seperated by 10000000 units, or 3. It's very useless to any discussion. Not to mention any specific site would have bias to it that we would have to qualify. For example COD.com, would carry with it the bias that XB has traditionally been associated with COD, so the preorder numbers would have to account for a larger sample of XB owners being more likely to buy from COD site directly. Gamestop would be a more nuetral comparison than say walmart for example. XB is cheaper, therefore the people who would be most interested in a consol3 would be more likely to buy a game/system from walmart that is cheaper.

MS has more money than Sony, Xbox may not have more money than PS. Xbox has lost billions of dollars over its life, and there is constantly rumours MS may sell the Xbox. Befor3 anybody responds with the CEO said they're not interested in selling, of course he denied it. He isn't going to come out and say it to the public, and kill the market. We all full well believe it comes down to the money. So if Sony offers 100 million for marketing/dlc, and we go with 2:1 sales ps:xb, then I assume MS would have to come in significantly higher, possibly double. As for Acti going with MS for Ghosts and AW, there was rumour that happened before the consoles launched. A multi year renewal of their contract, 2 years is multiple years. All of the pubs were on the Xbox train before this gen started, because the original XB1 vision would have killed the used game market, and made them more money. Most obvious of this was EA, who is now in bed with Sony. Lastly, on this point, the Xbox is a money loser, the Playstation a money maker for their respective companies. Other than insurance, Sony don't have very many bright spots atm as a company. Even if the XB were to turn a profit, it would be miniscule for the company, where as Sony has every reason to prop up the PS division because it is a big part of their company. Reason 2 is strange. ActiBlizz is a multi billion dollar entity. Why have them play on a console at all, when they could just as easily brute force amazing performance of their game on a pc with a controller. Sli a couple of titan X's, throw it on 1440p, 120fps, and call it a day. Reason 3, 4, and 5 are dumb. I didn't know Amazon had the ability to sell XB digital content, but they have been selling PS stuff for a long time now. A mountain dew add that was leaked, that is currently promoting a Sony game means nothing. As for Sony being active marketing BO3, where? They have a magazine article for it, as they did the original BO, and they uploaded a youtube video or two... that is not what I consider to be advertising. This whole thing is kind of dumb. We will find out in a couple weeks.

You made a choice to get an Xbox before the dlc info was released. If you miss out, that's kind of your own fault in every sense of the word. I'm sure Activision would rather piss off the couple million Xbox owners that would buy COD, rather than the possible 8 or so on PS (if it's current gen only, let's all hope). It makes all the sense in the world to switch, and I think you guys severely overestimate the amount of people who actually bought an XB1 with COD in mind. Contributing factor sure, essential factor not so much. The only people who will be mad, are those who aassumed, and the people who are part of the competitive community, who will now be forced to buy a ps4. Few thousand people, if that. Edit: Again though it all comes down to the money. If there is more money to be made by mak8ng the switch, they will, if not then they won't. I just think you guys way over estimate the amount of people who really care, and it's only a big deal for the first dlc anyways.

​ This may be true, but from what I have seen, Sony as a whole is really hurting on the bottom line. PS4 has been a bright spot in an otherwise miserable time for them. Microsoft could easily outbid Sony if they wanted to, but whether or not they want to remains to be seen Sony is not the healthiest company for sure. But the PS division is actually important to their bottom line, where as Xbox for MS is miniscule in comparison. If one of the two companies was going to swing for the fences to propel their console, it would be sony imo. I still doubt MS lost the rights. They practically just signed the marketing contract. The only way it happened is if Activision had an opt out. It's not impossible though. 2:1 marketshare, and the company with this years marketing, if the game is PS4/XB1 only, is going to sell a ton of consoles on the back of BO3. The zombies community is so hardcore, and starved for content that a lot of them will buy whichever console has the marketing I imagine.

You're thinking of MS as a company. MS has a ton of money, but Xbox does not. The division has done nothing but lose money for most of its existence. Add that to the shrinking market share of the XB1, and a next gen only CoD could simply be too much for the XBox division to afford. That's if it's happened of course.

If the game is current gen only, I could see the bidding price being huge for the marketing rights, and that might be the reason MS lost the rights, if they did. Let's face it, 3arc is the biggest name in COD, and COD is the biggest game this side of GTA. The console that gets COD map packs month early on the first current gen only COD is going to set records in sales. If it happened to be a contract year for the marketing rights, it would be a perfect storm for Activision to make a lot more money. MS might be too close to their budget to match what Sony was willing to spend to get the rights.

There's no point in being blindly faithful. Especially after BO2. The one thing I noticed was that Lamia was wearing a shirt with Flopper on it, and yet there is no Dolphin diving in the game. Seemed interesting to me. Von was wearing a shirt with from NY to LA on it. Still have some hope zombies will be good, but the news today doesn't give me much to celebrate. Call of Destiny: Titanfall. Not sure if I should pre order or not, don't really care much about the multiplayer beta access.

I imagine if they do make the switch it is completely to sell more dlc. There is likely no numbers available to us, but I imagine the dlc being first on xbox, means it sells way more dlc on xbox. Or at least it used to, when xbox had an advantage over playstation. Now with the roles reversed, well more than reversed really, they don't want the risk of alienating the much larger fan base. It makes perfect sense, if that is the case. Every time I play zombies on ps3, less than 10% of people are playing a dlc map. No idea what the ratio is on 360, but it is likely way better than that.

At this point PS4, although if the status quo is maintained with the dlc, I may go the XB1 route. Been looking for a way to justify spending the money on One (to myself). As for hating on last gen, it's simple really. It limits the amount of things that can happen at one time (g spawn). It basically means that even if the ps4/xb1 could do 40 zombies at a time, the old consoles would hold them back from being able to do it. It's been nearly a decade, time to bury the old consoles. Also, i'm almost positive that WAW was on ps2, but didn't include the zombies mode. That would be an alright compromise imo. The last ps2 game released, I believe was fifa 13 or something crazy like that.

This is the post I wanted to quote. GAF isn't a person. It us a collection of thousands of people, what does GAF know, enough to fill an encyclopedia. In the over 2 years i've been following GAF, shinobi is always correct. It doesn't mean he is 100% right this time, but him saying something gives it a lot more credence. @Pinnaz, wow the Spiderman thing was right there. What a marvelous troll job if it comes to pass.

I will be waiting patiently for the zombies reveal. If there's exo BS, i'm out. I've played exo zombies, it sucks, lets move on. I don't know the rules on leaks, so if i'm breaking a rule please delete. There's an insider, Shinobi, on GAF, who has said that the new COD will be more or less cyborgs. Including wall running, and dashing mechanics. He called BO3, and a future setting months ago. BO2 might just be my last COD zombies. I played well over 1000 hours on each CODZ to date, and like 2 hours of exo zombies. It just isn't fun or replayable. I did enjoy AW campaign though. Seems like this might be the gateway drug to Titanfall 2, especially for PS4 owners. Edit: Figured I would dig out the quotes. Hope that's ok. They're not exoskeleton suits. Far future, soldiers get injured in battles, lose body parts. Enter robotic limbs and cybernetics (major theme). These parts give human beings faster than normal speed, strength, etc I don't know about 'jetpacks' specifically, but things like wall running, lateral dashing, yes. Probably said enough now lol. Two separate quotes, in the thread COD BO3 announced on GAF.

also consider video game sales as a whole are flat to trending downward this year. There are a lot of factors to take into account here. Personally most of my friends didn't buy advanced warfare because some hadn't upgraded their console yet and knew we wouldn't play as much until we all are on next gen consoles (which will be for this years CoD) some also avoided AW because it was not developed by Treyarch or Infinity Ward, weary of SHG's first attempt at CoD. So to say that CoD 2015 is going to sell worse than Ghosts or AW, is still a very long shot i would venture to guess. Plus it is no secret that Treyarch is by far the best out of the 3 studios in community relations, marketing, social media, etc. They are outstanding at creating unmatched hype for their CoD gamesSeems like the numbers don't back up any claim AW did well. http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2014/12/14/call-of-duty-advanced-warfare-us-retail-sales-reportedly-less-than-ghosts/ Piper Jaffray analyst Michael Olson says outright that based on the NPD data he’s seen for November, Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare has seen US retailsales decline 27% from Ghosts in 2013. Ghosts itself declined 19% from 2012′s Black Ops 2, which itself dropped 17% from 2011′s Modern Warfare 3. If you take all that data together, US retail sales of Advanced Warfare are down 49% from Modern Warfare 3. And though a rise in digital copies may be to blame for some of the disparity, Olson doesn’t believe it’s nearly enough to cover the gap. That's not exactly a good endorsement. It's impossible to guess the digital sales. Just so we are clear, i'm not wishing doom on COD. I hope 3arc gets another 30 years to make zombies. There's just very few examples of games that last as long as COD has, and they certainly don't release a game every year. Sports games are really the only thing that is comparable to Call of Duty.