Personally, since I don't play COD games nowadays, pretty much any Sony's 1st party game would do.

However, in reality, this ain't gonna happen. Warzone will stay multi-plat as is, just like Minecraft did, but regular, future COD games? They didn't make the biggest acquisition in history to hand it to their biggest competitor. In fact, I can see them making some huge incentives in WZ via Gamepass for the PS players to either switch platforms (and I don't mean XBOX only, it could be any MS platform) or pay a monthly subscription.

I wish I was wrong as I'm all for muli-plat releases and cross-play, but just looking at the future Bethesda's roadmap, in few years Sony will be out of the picture. MS simply bets everything on Gamepass and they'll make damn sure that fans of the IPs they own will have no choice but join the GP. It's a simple economy of scale. 

Their integrity
...
Jokes aside, Sony has the teams, and the talent to make games that are better then COD of duty
The nintendo Switch hasn't gotten a single call of duty game and has done just fine

Nintendo’s business model doesn’t depend on robust 3rd party support, they sell hardware with large profit margins and focus on first party software that is somewhat less resource intensive and also suitable for larger audiences 

Sony sells hardware at a loss or break even, and pursues a first party strategy of extremely high budget productions that frequently dabble in graphic violence or other mature themes that make them ill suited for younger audiences. 

Sony needs the third party sales much more than Nintendo, which is why continued losses on that front would force Sony to have to reevaluate their console and software strategy. Even the threat of not having something like call of duty is much more impactful for Sony than it ever was for Nintendo 

Well that's not entirely true anymore

I think we can all agree that with the switch and even the 3ds, nintendo's 3rd party relations have gotten way better.

Can you imagine where they would be if the switch had the same 3rd party offerings as the wii and wii U?

Sure, they may not "depend" on 3rd parties as much as Sony, but I see a lot of people complain about droughts on the switch, which could suggest that people do want more games from 3rd parties on the system (persona 5).

And lets pretend for a moment that ninendo's next console is capable enough to run ps5/xsx games. People are going to want 3rd parties on the system. People say ninty don't rely on 3rd parties as much, but is that because they aren't getting as much, would that change if they were?

Agree. It took Nintendo a long time to be (let's say) independent and successful and has taken occasional huge losses in the process. This rollercoaster of their roadmap didn't come cheap.

Sony, on the other hand, never had to worry about it. With 95% of AAA games coming to their platforms and with excellent 1st party titles, picking a Sony console was no-brainer from the consumer perspective. You could have the best of both worlds ... the safe choice if you will. Now if you take one of the best selling games away from their platform, the average Joe will at least start reevaluating his consumer decisions.  

I'm curious, why do you think Minecraft Dungeons was released on Playstation? I feel like people often just skip over that or treat it as a one off anomaly. 

Regarding the bold Microsoft themselves have to make sense of the fact that Call of Duty without the Playstation fanbase may very see huge declines and risk being replaced by a competitor. A damaged brand bring gamepass less value than a highly valuable one. COD could be a poster boy of Gamepass every year if they're able to maintain its standing and that longterm can be way healthier than throwing its future popularity into question through an aggressive cutting of its audience. Many of whom simply will not purchase a new console or turn into PC gamers over night.

So for MS you don't spend 70bn on assets  to drive the value of those assets down the drain through alienating the audience, reducing the financial return of each entry and giving boom to their competitors. Rise of the Tomb Raider was likely a major lesson for both Microsoft and Crystal Dynamics, when exclusives don't make sense it damages the title in question and doesn't bring the rewards you would hope. We will be 4 CODs down the road (on PS5) before MS likely has freedom to make it exclusive and it'd risk causing irreversable damage to the brand to spend 4 years of a generation with exclusive marketing building an audience heavily leaning towards one platform and then suddenly flipping that on its head/ saying F you to all of those users you attracted to Playstation through the first half of a generation.  

MS will make a ton of money from selling COD on Playsation and they can perform their objective of pulling people to Gamepass with all manor of incentives relating to the franchise (Day one Gamepass, early/exclusive DLC etc/Exclusive marketing). Full exclusivity is always a possibility, but people shouldn't assume it be the default. Disney has Disney+ but it stills sells its movies on Apple TV and Video Prime. Exclusivity would have been the default before MS decided on this new direction (gaming on every device/all connected via your Gamepass sub) but prior to this new direction, a purchase like Activision wouldn't of made any sense and the 70b is truly about more than COD or competing against playstation (metaverse/mobile gaming etc)

Horizon and GOW should be included as well to make the deal fair. Also whatever Naughy Dog is working on and Ghost of Tsushima 1 and 2 (when that gets out). If MS is generous they also allow Spyro/Crash on PS5.

If Sony had to make a concession for COD (I'm not sure on that, and I take Phil's tweet at face value), I'd happily say any third party exclusive that has been money hatted (FF16 for example). Particularly with big Publishers like Square Enix, the gamers simply do not benefit from money hatting. FF16 was always going to be made and was always going to have the finacial support its needed. Gamers don't benefit from it not being on Xbox other than the reality that it will afford the PS5 version a bit more time to optimise/fix bugs.

Money

Days Gone. It's on Unreal Engine 4 anyway, and it gives the game more sales which I'm sure Sony would like to see since they didn't greenlight a sequel. Haven't played the game (own it on PC), but I think that a lot of people could experience it, give it a new lease on life, and maybe Sony would end up greenlighting a sequel for the fans.