
The European Commission is the latest authority to launch a deeper investigation into Microsoft's acquisition of Activision Blizzard, with the region now looking at all aspects of the deal. The EU has set itself a March 2023 deadline to make a call on the merger, and Microsoft could then be asked to make concessions regarding the acquisition depending on how things go.
Even at the time of the EU's announcement though — months before the investigation wraps up — Microsoft has already responded to proceedings. The company is keen to stress that it wants to make games more accessible overall, not less. Here's what a Microsoft spokesperson told Engadget about the deal:
"We’re continuing to work with the European Commission on next steps and to address any valid marketplace concerns, [...] Sony, as the industry leader, says it is worried about Call of Duty, but we’ve said we are committed to making the same game available on the same day on both Xbox and PlayStation. We want people to have more access to games, not less."
This broadly follows Xbox's response to other authorities who are also looking into the ActiBlizz deal. It's been well-documented that the UK CMA has concerns over the merger, and that whole back-and-forth has delivered some spicy comments from all sides, including Xbox.
In the meantime, we'll continue to focus on the gaming side of things; we just want this thing wrapped up so Microsoft can begin building out its Activision Blizzard portfolio on Xbox Game Pass!
Should the EU have any concerns over the deal? Or is it all being overblown? Let us know your thoughts.
[source engadget.com]
Comments 29
I just don't know what more Microsoft can really do to nail it home that Sony won't lose Call of Duty.
Bottom line: Sony doesn't care about Call of Duty, it cares about the dominance it has had with Call of Duty as the premiere console for CoD content.
I just want Prototype 3.
Yet Again, the same 'criticisms' of Microsoft's purchase of ABK. That they'll restrict and block people from playing video games on their choice of system... when it's clearly Sony exaggerating the impact of it to make it sound like 80% of the games sold every year are Call Of Duty on PS4/PS5, and the other 20% are everyone else.
FFS, We know from other articles that Sony demanded Microsoft don't give themselves early access swag or XGP access and perks for an indefinite period, having made a clause in their contract Microsoft must follow...
But Sony continue to drag Microsoft's name through the dirt to get them to sit down with them and offer them 'kindly' absolute control of Call Of Duty until the heat death of the universe in exchange for telling the regulators the deal is good.
It's like a certain situation in Russia. Capitulate and give them far more than they deserve or they'll continue to beat the war drums.
@GamingFan4Lyf It's never been just about CoD or Sony. It's about Microsoft, the 3rd richest company in the world by market cap, 4th biggest game publisher in the world by revenue, buying the 6th largest publishers in the world by revenue. If they DIDN'T look into it carefully they wouldn't be doing their job.
I expect it to go through, but I hope there will be some sort of terms to prevent exclusivity en-masse, aside from COD.
Gaming should be for as many as possible whenever possible.
From a purely selfish perspective, I hope the deal goes through. I’ve been avoiding Activision Blizzard titles in the hope that they become available on Gamepass.
I went straight from XB360 to Series X (didn’t really do any gaming for years, so didn’t have an Xbox One or PS4) so I’ve got a LOT of Call of Duty to catch up on. Fingers crossed it goes through next year.
@themightyant Wrong. It's ALL about Call Of Duty. You look at Sony's statements when they come out, every few words is about Call Of Duty, and how it's market dominance is 'unparalleled'.
This is the same Sony who penned a deal to get the next Final Fantasy on a six month exclusivity deal and still holds FF7 Remake to ransom. But that's never brought up.
They can clearly do something like that, but Microsoft are breaking the law to buy out Call Of... Ahem, I mean ActiBlizz.
I honestly think Microsoft should abandon the Activision purchase. If they can't even get CoD exclusive nor even more importantly, on Game Pass, it's not going to help them much. They would be better off spending that money elsewhere.
If they did, I bet you that Sony would swoop in and 'save' ABK from bankruptcy due to the fact the company would tank in value, and the first thing they'd do would be to restrict Call Of Duty on Microsoft in some way.
@GamingFan4Lyf in the end of the day it's about money , sony knows how much cod brings in with the exclusive stuff ,they been doing it long enough to know and they know how much they will lose and it's that they can't stand and the fact that ppl ( a hell of alot ) will jump to one console just to get the exclusive stuff
It was always going to go this way. It was never going to just sail through. This is why they always said from the beginning the deal would not close until summer next year. March should be interesting
@ValentineMeikin You're missing 3 simple facts:
1) I'm not defending Sony's anti-consumer practices. I don't like them either. FF7R etc. should be on more platforms.
2) Sony doing exclusivity deals isn't anti-competitive there is nothing stopping Microsoft doing EXACTLY the same, it's a relatively level playing field. (In reality they do many paid exclusives too, just usually on smaller titles for Game Pass for 3-12 months exclusivity). Exclusivity deals can be anti-consumer, but that's not the same thing as anti-competitive.
3) The difference with the ABK deal is that this IS an unlevel playing field as Microsoft are one of a handful of companies in the world who can do a deal like this, and with them putting all their first party games on Game Pass Day 1 are able to offer a value proposition almost no one else can. THAT is anti-competitive, as they are leveraging their unequalled buying power to do it. This is exactly what these commissions are set up to prevent, hence why the deal is rightly being investigated carefully.
If the deal is quashed somehow it would be funny if Microsoft give Actiblizzard a shed ton of cash to keep all Actiblizzard products away from Sony.
@GamingFan4Lyf I honestly expect, if this deal does fail, Xbox will simply go at it the PS way, since that would be the regulatory agency message, and outbid Sony going forward for marketing deals on CoD and many other big third party IPs.
Wow this is beginning to become a strong dose of deja vu, same article, same statements, same responses every week.
Both Sony and Microsoft keep banging on about call of duty but if you read the EU commissions statement it's not just about call of duty.
But when Sony do this all the time it's ok? Talk about double standard.
Honestly just do your checks and balances in the background and stop announcing things lol. Just so bored if this topic. Do what you gotta do, talk to each other as it has always been the practice and let us know the outcome. It's always been expected for 2023, they knew that phase 2 was going to happen, Brazil and Saudi Arabia was likely unexpected to go as fast. I'm going to do my part and not read or comment on these articles no more until it's actually an outcome announcement
@themightyant negotiating timed exclusivity using the leverage of the console market leader is not a level playing field. Xbox would have to pay a lot more for those same deals to lure developers away from that leading platform. It IS anticompetitive for Sony to use their position as console market lead to strong arm developers away from xbox and game pass. Sony uses their position to keep xbox down, the only recourse is for MS to use their money, one way or another. Either pay more for the same timed deal, or buy it outright.
Let's try this in reverse. You say "there is nothing stopping Microsoft doing EXACTLY the same." But what if they did? What if they used their money, the way Sony uses their market strength, to just outbid Sony for all exclusivity deals? Wouldn't that be anticompetitive too? So what's the difference? How could Sony compete if Xbox just moneyhats exclusivity on all 3rd party?
Should a company the size of MS just not be allowed to do business? Someone was going to buy ABK. They were for sale. MS didn't force this on them, their toxic workplace did. Should MS be penalized for being one of the handful of entities who can afford it? If it's down to Google, Apple, Amazon, MS, Tencent, as the only companies with enough cash to do the deal, who among that group would be any different than MS?
Is the only option to kill ABK and break it up so that no one can own it? Would that even be good for the individual studios or the industry at large? CoD and Candy Crush might be the only things that survive that. That would suck.
@TheIronChimp it would cost them too much. 70% of COD console sales are on Playstation.
@Kaloudz n4g... Oh boy thats like the official ps fan community.... They critisize anything microsoft while you rarely see any negative articles about sony and if they made one you get the how good sony are and how so holy they should be treated.....
I hate PS fanboys auch annoying blind fans they are remind me of iphone fans
@GuyinPA75
When has Sony bought one of the biggest publisher in the world?
Or is Housemarque and Bluepoint at the same scale as Activision-Blizzard?
Ah yeah accessing more games, such as me being able to use play Starfield on PS5? Or Hellblade 2?
I’m sure Call of Duty will remain on PS5 for a few years, but I’m also sure all other games will become Xbox exclusives.
I’m fine with the deal going through since I own both consoles, so it’s a win for me, but I don’t buy Microsoft’s talk about “We want people to have more access to games, not less”, because they have already proven otherwise.
Been tempted to buy shares in Activision. At the mo they’re about $71 per share. Microsoft have said if/wen the deal goes thro they’ll pay $93 per share!! The worry is if the deal doesn’t go thro they’ll drop to about $60 per share.
@jordan1992
About 70% of CoD: Warzone Players are from Consoles
PlayStation. 42.1%
Xbox. 25.6%
PC. 28.4%
The buying of Activision blizzard isn't about the dominance of the game with playstation to try and gain the players to move to Xbox to gain the exclusive it's about been able to create better all round games for all, it's nothing but a business they want to make money but from all platforms including mobile phones, nothing to do with the cod itself but the designers the software designer's and so on to maybe make a better game than cod itself. No one was stopping Sony from getting there finger in the pie they had the opportunity to buy Activision but I guess Microsoft were just better at speaking the sale
The more due diligence the better. I'm sick of big companies buying up other big companies when it's the customers, and smaller players who lose.
You can have Activison games on Game Pass without them needing to buy the company. What does the gaming public get from larger and larger monopolies?
CunningPig wrote:
Yes and no. Every deal is different. It's true SOME deals, especially new AAA, might be based on how many potential Day 1 sales they are taking off other platforms, hence Xbox with a smaller market share might have to pay more. At the same time we learned from Epic v Apple documents and have seen it in some PS+ payment & Capcom leaks that many of these deals are based on number of expected downloads, therefore in other cases Xbox would pay less for a game on Game Pass as there are effectively giving away less copies than they would on PS. Win some, lose some.
Regardless I said RELATIVELY level playing field. It's never going to be 100% even. The key point is there is nothing stopping Microsoft, or anyone else, doing this. That is open competition.
Good question. The KEY difference would be IF Microsoft was doing it in such a way that prevented smaller companies from competing. Would they just be spending WAY over the odds in a manner that limits fair competition or paying a fair market value. It's a complex issue but that is one of the things antitrust and anti-competitive commissions are looking for.
Again good question. No one is stopping MS doing business but it is the SCALE of the business they are looking into. It may be that the commissions would want ABK broken up, as often happens in M&A, to prevent one company getting too strong. This is the point of them. While understandably unpopular here with many Xbox owners the EC commission is rightly just doing their job correctly here. A merging of the #4 & #6 publishers to potentially become #2 IS precisely the sort of thing they should be investigating in depth. Take our bias out of it and i'm sure you can see that makes sense. MS are aware of it and knew how long it would take, hence they initially suggested it might take over a year and complete in 2023. I still expect that to happen, but hope there may be some safeguards to prevent walled gardens being too severe in future.
A fatalistic view. ABK is much more than these two. Far more likely is in other caring hands the IP they have let languish to concentrate on so few, especially COD, would be allowed to flourish. Everything from Crash Bandicoot, Guitar Hero, THPS, True Crime/Sleeping Dogs, Pitfall, Tenchu, & Zork (one of my early favourites) might have a chance to rise unshackled by a publisher obsessed with annual COD releases. More likely that would be great!
@XboxDmC there’s no way Sony could afford $68 billion!! Sony are worth about $98 billion, Microsoft are worth over $2 trillion!!
@ValentineMeikin There is a big difference between holding FF and FF7R to timed exclusive deal (something MS brough on themself by shunning the JRPG market for years calling it dead and only changing their mind when Phil saw the $ they were missing out on when it got a resurgence) and MS potentially removing CoD from PlayStation completely.
You're also comparing FF7R which has sold 3m copies after 2years? And CoD thats just made $1bn in a week.
Neither practice is in the interests of the consumer but MS could easily put this to bed by just making it legally binding they wont pull CoD from PS. They wont though, the "we want more players to access games" rings hollow when another game from a publisher they bought out, Bethesdas Starfield is Xbox exclusive. So much for wanting more players to access games.
Seems like Sony is the only company pushing to give people less access to games, restricting everything to their platform whenever they can get away with it.
That, and if they're the "market leader," then why do we need to go out of our way to protect them? Sounds like they're doing just fine, and will continue to be fine.
I mean, it's kinda the same crap as with Bethesda though from memory 🤔 Phil said stuff like "This isn't about taking games away from players and communities" and "We want more people to have access to games" but that essentially backflipped after the Acquisition went through 🤷♂️
I'm tired of this *****, let it happen, bar Microsoft from buying out entire PUBLISHERS afterwards (Individual Studios are fine, as has always been the norm) and let's move the f*ck on already 😒
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...