Snarky New Ad Says Xbox Isn't Allowed To Advertise Destiny

Snarky New Xbox Ad Says They're Not Allowed To Advertise Destiny

You might have seen commercials for Destiny, the upcoming sci-fi shooter that will be out for multiple platforms next week. You might have noticed that all of these commercials talk about the PlayStation version of the game. This is because Activision and Sony are getting all buddy-buddy on the marketing campaign, with the folks behind Destiny offering all sorts of "exclusive" content for PlayStation owners.

Microsoft's response? This cheeky series of advertisements, first posted on the Xbox UK Twitter and Facebook accounts, that claims they're making a Destiny-themed fragrance. They're not. The website, which is linked in UK magazine ads, just takes you to a British pre-order page for the game on Xbox.

But what's interesting here is that dig at Activision. "Thing is, we didn't have permission to run adverts for the game. So we didn't." Strange, right? Assuming this is true — and why would they write something like that if it wasn't? — it's fun to see a company like Microsoft calling Activision out for partnering with Sony on what's surely going to be a huge game all around. I love it when corporations fight one another.

Destiny comes out on Tuesday. The Destiny Fragrance does not.


    How is it any different than the FIFA ads that only mention the XBox version? This is pretty common practice these days.

      Well you see it's a problem in this case because it doesn't benefit Microsoft.

        might also have something to do with the fact that Bungie went from being Microsoft first party to now snubbing them lol

          Yeah I can see that haha, in other news Destiny is available to predownload now yay!

            Kinda excited now thats it's so close. i wasn't interested untill now and its a bit late to pre order lol.

      FIFA is a long established franchise with a history of being on pretty much every platform under the sun whereas Destiny is an entirely new franchise with no set precedent for platform availability. So only seeing Destiny advertising with PlayStation always attached could lead less informed people to think it's a PlayStation exclusive.
      I mean for people like you and me it's a non-issue, we already know what platforms it's on. But the less informed public is becoming a bigger and bigger part of gaming as it becomes more mainstream, so things like this could possibly start being a bigger issue.

      Because they're hypocrites? I dunno. Maybe they're especially petulant and winy in this instance because it's going to be a pretty huge title and they really wish they'd secured that deal for themselves. Also, jilted ex syndrome - Bungie is MS's ex, in this instance.

        Wow... funny thing is I think it will have a better fanbase on Xbox one, I struggled to get good games on the Ps4 beta, seems like Sony owners still don't get how headsets work... didn't check what it was like in the last days...

          The better fan base of adolescent boys utter their first profanities and racial taunts.

            You just described me.. but my parents bought me a PS4.

        If I was a betting man I would say it wasn't that Microsoft wasn't able to secure the deal Sony got, but rather Activision going straight to Sony with the deal, on the pretence that Bungie were reaching out to a new hardware platform and didn't need to market as heavily to xbox fans that have already been playing Bungie games for a decade.

          Hm. Feels kinda tinfoil-hat, but it's so damn cynical, which always improves the odds.

            Eh, I was just thinking if I was Activision I would have done it that way. If you think about it, Xbox fans don't need to have the next Bungie game marketed to them, they're going to buy it anyway. Xbox fans have been following Destiny before it even had a name. It makes business sense to me to push hard to the Sony platform since there's never been a Bungie game there yet. That's how I would do it, but then again I don't have a clue about running corporations.

            Either way, it's been a very successful campaign because, while there's never been a Bungie game on Playstation, a lot of Sony fans already feel sentimental about the franchise.

      Yeah, I'm quite sure that Microsoft and Activision have a similar deal with COD, as Activision and Sony have with Destiny.

    It's still an advert for the game. I don't think any such deal existed.

      I think the point of difference is they're not using any of the posters or trailers that Activision is clearly supplying to Sony.

    Yeah did they not have permission to run ads until a few days from release or did they just break a deal for a chance to make a snarky ad?

    I'm going to guess that they just couldn't use any of the games imagery in their pre-launch advertising so this was their workaround

    Last edited 06/09/14 9:42 am

    Incoming "exclusive only on xbox" Tomb Raider ads.

    Haha. Microsoft gets all this bullcrap about buy COD on Xbox and receive map packs a month early, Sony just casually goes with it.

    Now Sony gets the exclusives for a new game from the same company and micrsoft finds a way to bitch about it.

      You have a very short term memory, keep in mind Sony unprofessionally slandered Microsoft at E3 when they first revealed their consoles, as far as I'm concerned Sony are the bitches on this one

        In your world, "slandering" means telling the truth about how easy it is to share games on the PS4, not needing a daily internet connection to play offline single player games, not having an unpopular DRM, having a $100 cheaper product etc.

        OK.... Good luck in bizarrro Earth.

          Actually the PS4 does need a Daily internet connection to play EA games or the machine becomes a Brick. Understand I am fully blaming EA for this not Sony.

          Sony I'm blaming their crappy website for having the wrong PSUPDATE file on their own damn website. I had to get the file from another site outside of Sony to get the actual right file.

            That's EA's fault and they do it everywhere even mobile phone games that don't need it, so why are you raising it here at all?

              Because it is the exact opposite of what Sony claimed. If EA can make Sony PS4s need an internet connection or brick themselves it means anybody can.

                That is stupid of you to say that.

                According to you, the recipient of "The Worst Company in America" award for 2012 and 2013 does something reprehensible and you hold another organisation responsible for it.

                You are an idiot.

                  I'm an Idiot? Because EA can force a PS4 into Daily online checks something Sony Claimed was not needed.

                  Surely Sony as the Platform holder could prevent EA from forcing these daily checks upon us, but they've chosen not to. This means that whenever somebody feels like it at Sony Daily logins can become required.

                  To be blatantly obvious and to read between the lines for you. Sony won't make you do Daily Check ins, but every other software company on the planet can, allowing Sony to do the exact thing people screamed bloody murder about when Microsoft tried to do it.

                  So I will admit that perhaps I'm Paranoid, that I believe the Software companies are looking for ways to shaft us without us noticing as much. So does presenting proof that the system works contrary to what Sony claims when third parties want it to make me an Idiot? I guess to you it does.

                  I'm just saying we need to call out EA now, before everybody starts doing this sort of crap. Because Sony obviously have let them do it, showing that they don't Care or that this is all working as intended.

          Actually, with Xbox's family sharing plan at the time Somy made that video, sharing a game was easier than actually having to hand someone the box. Technically you didn't have to even be I the same state, or country as someone to lend them a game.

            You KNOW that wasn't the point. There were plans in place to stop people from sharing physical copies of their games with their friends. It wasn't about handing consoles over. It was about handing discs over and not having the system stop them from playing it because it's tied to another account etc.

            I don't think it is reasonable to give credit to someone for something that is completely vague in its specification on what it has on offer. Microsoft never clarified what that service was offering exactly nor did it clarify what a "family" was and how it would be defined.

        There's a big difference between a playful exposure of something the opposition does poorly and snarkily griping about something the opposition has beaten you at. It's called being a sore loser and that's not what Sony was doing when they teased MS about their DRM policies.

      Because yeah you know it all started with the COD map packs on 360 and not with EA and Sony games all the way back on the PS2...

      I hate who started it arguments but if your going to make one - be accurate.

      Last edited 06/09/14 11:17 am

      The cod maps were not exclusive for an entire year.

    Microsoft have had a similar deal with Activision for Call of Duty for years, maybe they feel jilted that they sent their lovely new daughter on a date with Sony instead.

    Snarky is definitely the right word, and this is on top of Microsoft plonking down money for exclusivity on games multiple times.

    Someone accuse a media outlet of bias and taking money from someone. It's the best way to respond to these things.

    Microsoft should just buy Sony, it's not like they don't make 20 times the profit more each quarter than them. Then they could advertise Destiny all they want.

      If they could buy just the gaming division sure, but the rest of any is a sinking ship.

        Lots of IP there though. Microsoft luuurve that IP.

        Sony's current market capitalisation is a bit over US$20B. Microsoft's market cap is roughly US$378B, with cash reserves of around US$85B. MS could buy Sony four times over if they really wanted to (ignoring the inevitable stock jump on attempted acquisition.)

          MS could buy Sony four times over if they really wanted to

          They can't. There are antitrust laws preventing monopolistic practice like this. Otherwise, every market will be dominated by a single gorilla that ate progressively smaller ones. Microsoft buying Sony will be bad for everyone but Microsoft.

            How is MS buying Sony a monopoly? It's not like MS makes TVs or Sony makes OS's, nor are they the only 2 console makers. Corporate law being what it is if MS made an offer it would be illegal for the board of directors to refuse given the super boost to shareholders pockets it would make.

            And I never said it would be good for anyone, well maybe me, cause then I wouldn't have to put up with as much fanboy crap from either side again, and I'd laugh at the ironic end to the console wars.

              That's the same argument made by US landline ISPs, they ostensibly don't compete in the same areas so should be allowed to merge. It's horseshit and only the result of deliberate market manipulation.

              A combined Sony/Microsoft would be for all intents and purposes, a monopoly of the console market as competition from Nintendo and other companies like Ouya is nominal at best.

              Corporate law being what it is if MS made an offer it would be illegal for the board of directors to refuse

              That's not true and an oversimplification. While the board certainly has a commitment to its shareholders, there are many caveats precisely to prevent situations like leveraged buyout. The company's management also has a degree of autonomy conditional upon them making money. Tim Cook caused something of a stir when he said not everything is about the ROI and if investors don't approve of unprofitable initiatives like green energy or serving the impaired, they should get out of Apple stock.

            Anticompetition laws are not applied with any great level of consistency. The existence of Nintendo (and their success with the Wii) could be taken by the relevant bodies as a sign that the purchase would not be sufficiently anticompetitive so as to require the purchase to be blocked.

            However, I agree it's not going to happen. Sony as a whole isn't exactly making great gobs of cash right now, and I'm sure MS can think of better ways to spend that $85M. Mainly, I was saying that they could if they wanted to.

            It's strange to realise that Microsoft, as a company, is over fifteen times as large as Sony, despite the latter's much more diverse market coverage.

    This makes me laugh. Microsoft have some of the most anti-competitive practices around. What about the CoD adverts?

    Pot meet kettle.


    I have noticed a passive aggressive angle to some of Microsoft's advertising. The Pawn Stars advert comes to mind, and selling anti-Google mugs and tee shirts in their online store.

    Unless I'm just oblivious to any advertising from Sony there is a difference I've noticed between Sony and Microsoft ads.

    On Microsoft ads that are clearly "MICROSOFT! XBOX! MICROSOFT!" there is a final screen of the ad which a "fine print" type thing where it says "also on PlayStation"

    However on Destiny ads (saw one on TV last night) that opened with "PLAYSTATION!" and closed with "PLAYSTATION!". I saw no mention of "also on Xbox"

    That's a dick move by Sony and Activision if you ask me. I've seen the Destiny ad on A&E quite a few times and it never made any mention that Destiny would be on the Xbox 360 and Xbox One. It was all PlayStation focused. Granted, they did the same with Call of Duty, but at least Microsoft and Xbox acknowledged that Call of Duty would also be released on the PlayStation and allowed Sony to produce ads for it if they chose to.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now