Update: Well, we don't need to speculate any longer! The Verge's Tom Warren has shared a couple of the emails in question, revealing parts of the exchange between Phil Spencer and Jim Ryan from back in mid-2022.
The email from Ryan (dated May 26th, 2022) is extensive, suggesting in his counterproposal that all Activision games should be made available on PlayStation as part of a "lengthy" commitment, as well as the fact that they shouldn't be subject to "unequal treatment in subscription services". He then also references the "equal treatment of Bethesda games", advising this would be a "logical subject for the parties to discuss" as part of a separate agreement.
In response, Xbox boss Phil Spencer had the following to say in August 2022:
"Thanks for your response. As I stated to you in my emails and on our calls, Sony is an important distributor of Activision content, and we would like to find a way to maintain that relationship once we've closed the Activision acquisition.
I continue to stand behind the written agreement I sent you on January 31, 2022 with my signature memorializing our commitment to Sony. The agreement would keep all existing Activision console titles on Sony, including future versions in the Call of Duty franchise or any other current Activision franchise on Sony, through December 31, 2027. That includes content and feature parity, as well as making it clear that we would not feature any timed-exclusive releases of such content on Xbox consoles.
It is hard to align the principles set out in your email of May 26, 2022 with Sony's leading role in the market. As I said before, we believe that keeping these titles on Sony, as we did with Minecraft, is the right thing for the industry and for gamers."
You can take a look at these emails for yourself in the tweets below:
Original story: We've been hearing for a long time now that Sony is heavily opposed to Microsoft's attempted takeover of Activision Blizzard, but according to an old email from January 2022, that didn't originally seem to be the case.
In that email, PlayStation boss Jim Ryan stated that he felt the brand would be "more than OK" after the acquisition went through, and he didn't think that Xbox and Activision would make Call of Duty exclusive.
So, what happened? Ryan explained as part of this week's FTC hearing that it was an email from Xbox boss Phil Spencer in August of 2022 that supposedly "set alarm bells ringing" inside of Sony.
There's no word on what was included in this email, but we do know that Phil Spencer originally reached out to Jim Ryan in May 2022 with a list of games that Xbox would commit to keeping on PlayStation, which promoted Sony to issue a counterproposal. Spencer then responded in August with the email that caused alarm at Sony.
Perhaps we'll find out what was included in that email at some point, but for now, we'll have to play the guessing game. In any case, Sony remains very much against the idea of the takeover - as confirmed by Jim Ryan this week.
"We believe that Microsoft intends to use Call of Duty to disadvantage PlayStation in terms of the availability or the manner in which the game is made available on PlayStation consoles, and to drive PlayStation gamers to the Xbox platforms, specifically Game Pass.”
Ready for all this to be over? We are too! Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.
[source ign.com]
Comments 55
I've gotta say, does anyone know if Jim is coming or going?
One foot on a plane the other dancing around emails, is he just a confused person!? It's like he can't stand up, he's like a chocolate Teapot, ultimately useless? Won't list publishers, doesn't acknowledge Nintendo in the console space? Jim is getting like a certain republican, he needs fact checking constantly!! Lie upon Lie, then he chooses not to back up his lies?
He continues to insult the intelligence of anyone willing to listen.
Im curious what was in this email from Phil Spencer, but like the article suggests, we may never know.
@Ep_13 very well said. I don’t know what he’s talking about anymore because he goes back and fourth on everything.
Insert ‘well, we’re waiting’ meme on Jim to reveal what was in the email.
"...and to drive PlayStation gamers to the Xbox platforms, specifically Game Pass."
Well, obviously what was in that email was that CoD would join Game Pass day one.
I am also certain he is no fan of CoD going to Switch. Even if just 1% of the CoD audience decides to play on Switch, that is still 1% of a gigantic share of their mtx revenue.
Didn't Jim say though "this email worried me as it for example mentioned Overwatch but not Overwatch 2" - when Overwatch 1 has gone bye bye and 2 is basically considered an update to 1?
So Overwatch is Overwatch - there is no "2" in most terms now, hence it not being called that on the email...
This is like the commercial version of divorce court.
BTW, both MS and Activision stock is up, a sign even investors think the FTC is losing their case.
The fact that the FTC is using Sony/Jim Ryan testimony as a case against this acquisition is utterly ridiculous. I thought this was the Fair Trade Commission. Obviously not. Lina Khan is an embarrassment to America.
@Kaloudz I can imagine Jim stomping his feet and crying in the corner when the deal goes through. He'll be saying ''it's not fair only I can have exclusives'' like a spoilt child.
@Kaloudz Alzheimer's is a helluva drug, Jim.
Was going to post something angry about Jim but you know what? I won't.
I think this man has zero credibility and deserves 0 respect from the gaming community. I personally don't think you guys should post any of the diarrhea that comes out of this man's mouth
@EvilSilentFrame it was their putting Call of Duty® on game pass
I'm sure that it's just a coincidence that Ryan is in Japan right now, and so was unable to be at the FTC Court hearing in person. I mean, obviously, there was no way that he could have postponed his trip to Japan. Or is it just the case that the ABK acquisition just isn't something that Sony are worried about..? His presence in Japan certainly doesn't give that impression. Or was it a case that he was fearful of taking the stand, and worried that some of his er, less truthful, comments might not stand up to scrutiny...
I heard from an anonymous friend in the FTC that the e-mail contained an animated gif file depicting a cartoon Phil Spencer defecating all over a bunch of Playstation 5s
@Kaloudz "He knows it. He's just playing stupid. For all the whining he did last year, this "email" or it's contents". I think Jim Ryan is confusing everyone. He's just dancing around.
Article has been updated! We actually know what was said in these exchanges now.
Wow that email from Jim is bad.
"We want all ABK games for a really, really long time. We don't want any to be on Game Pass and they must have no exclusive content despite us doing that for years. We also want Bethesda games too, and btw cancel the CoD marketing deal as it costs a lot and you're going to give us it all anyway!"
After reading the email: I'm sorry, Jimmy Boyo got upset because Phil was going to treat Sony kinder with CoD than Sony does Xbox?
All this whole fiasco, phil is treating you like a Best bud Jim.
So it wasn't just about Call of Duty after all.
Jim just wants his cake, like anything you can't have everything. I mean, if you have warranted reasons then fair enough, but you can't just expect a competitor to put their now "exclusives" on your platform. Sony definitely wouldn't be doing that. Phil should have requested a bunch of games in return.
@Kaloudz when it does go through all he needs to do is use his noggin. He has Bungie in his arsenal and if anyone is going to put up any competition in the FPS space against CoD and BF I think Bungie could do it.
Yeah that email is very very unreasonable. My counter is I want everything… right…
I would actually support it if he agreed to putting some of the PlayStation Studios content over to Xbox with feature parity (obviously not haptics and adaptive trigger unless MS made a controller). That should have been Phil’s counter.
Glad this e-mail exchange is out there.
I am sure the opposition will argue that Jim was right because 5 years is too short - they argue a 10-year pledge as too short ("only 10 years" they say).
No company is going to put a lifetime pledge in writing - ever. Phil would lose his job if he said "forever".
Even Sony saying that Bungie is "independent" isn't a pledge to another company that they will make games for [x] platform for life. It's just that Bungie can decide for itself.
People want to say it's some nefarious attempt at winning favor ("because....Bethesda"), but this e-mail exchange shows that Phil still wants Sony to be a viable platform for the success of Activision games. 5 years may have been some kind of industry standard. 10 years is probably as far as legal would allow him to commit.
I don't blame Jim for wanting to protect the vast amounts of money Sony has been making off Call of Duty from an independent Activision - he wouldn't be doing his job otherwise - but this really makes him look like an [expletive].
So I have to preface this and say: I don’t like or trust Phil Spencer any more than Jim Ryan. I think too many people idolize Phil and think he’s “just like them” and too many demonize everything Ryan does. They’re both crappy execs in the pursuit of more money, and too many fanboys on both the Sony and MS side have blown a lot of this hearing out of proportion.
But this? This is ridiculous. Spencer was cordial in his email and offered a lot to PlayStation. I don’t see how this email could possibly be so offensive to Ryan.
I feel like this is the first we have heard about “other activision console games” being part of the dealings.
However if Sony didn’t agree to them; and the court focuses on COD; then those other games may be exclusive sooner than 2027. Who knows though. Not me.
Also that December 2027 date would set them up nicely to begin the next console generation with a strong exclusive library.
This is a drastically different tone than Cryin Ryan has been publicly displaying. I can see both viewpoints. But Ryan expecting a 'status quo maintained' agreement is rather absurd.
Drama at this point. The bottom line in this whole saga has to be, if this goes through is it going to trigger industry consolidation ie Sony acquire Square Enix, MS then acquire another and so on so forth.
If the answer is yes, this shouldnt go through, if its no then its fine.
The real problem is you cant know the answer without it going through to find out and that should be a concern for gamers, those on both sides and the neutrals.
Industry consolidation will hurt gaming.
@Kaloudz the funniest part is COD has been at the forefront of all of this yet its them gaining Kyng that was probably the biggest draw for the acquisition bid.
People are too obsessed with Call of Duty.
"The agreement would keep all existing Activision console titles on Sony, including future versions in the Call of Duty franchise or any other current Activision franchise on Sony, through December 31, 2027."
Wow.... this is a lot more inclusive than I expected. This means if there was any new Crash, Spyro or Tony Hawk game by 2027, it would be on PlayStation too.
I guess what Jim didn't like was the 2027 cutoff date? Or maybe he knows about some new IP ABK is working on he really wanted to launch on PlayStation?
@EvenStephen7 Well said. Both of them are corporate tyrants, but this email on Jim has me really looking at him with the grandest of contempt. How greedy and who in the hell does he think he is by telling Xbox what to do with their potential IPs. Wow....just wow!
@NEStalgia Is that why it's awesome? But really, though. You and I were eagerly awaiting this court hearing as far back as a year ago, just for all this industry crap to be dragged out into the light. I just wanna know, is it everything you hoped it would be?
Little Jimmy decided sometime after the Bungie deal closed that screw it we should mess around with the deal. The obvious intent on Microsoft’s part is that they would renegotiate a deal that would reflect how the market looks at that time.
What Phil said the other day is that contingent upon Sony agreeing to have COD on Xbox, they will release on PlayStation. So nothing has changed. Good stuff, poor Jimmy.
It’s like he woke up and realized one day that his player base will be feeding the looming Game Pass machine. Or someone told him “hey you realize that with each COD on PS, Game Pass will get a ton of money right?”
How did you not know that on day one Jimbo? Oh well. Now he’s in Japan, and I’m sure Sony fans are hoping that he buys Square Enix or something. And… keeps the status quo? Lol. Square Enix is a cool company but a lame buy for Sony.
I assume this is all a case of personal opinion vs professional. Seems like, to me, his has no personal fears regarding the ABK deal; but, his employers opinion (Sony corp) is the deal should be blocked. Of course, he's going to do everything in his power to block the deal.
"I want your house", Jim said.
"You have a bigger house. You can stay at the guests room, same size as mine, for a while. What do I get in return?", Phil asked.
"You can use my garden's toilet next time you visit New York", Jim replied.
@BRT15 Actually Jim Ryan has very high credibility in the industry, look at how much money he’s made for Sony and how he’s successfully launched another console for them. He is doing his job well for a moron everyone hates apparently. He’s only doing his job trying to block the merger, Spencer would be doing exactly the same if he was in Jim’s position.
@SplooshDmg This is the best E3 since 2017! So many huge reveals, surprises, cringe moments, so much hype. Let's do this EVERY year!
So, according to his email, he wanted every future Activision title on PlayStation reguardless of franchise, which sounds fine until you realise this would mean MS could never have Activision studio develop an Halo, have Toys4Bob make a Conker because it would have to be on PS too.
I mean ... Can you blame the man?
What if Microsoft adds all CoD in-game items for free on Game pass? Why would I pay 30~70$ for a season pass when I can pay 15$ a month to play all the content CoD offers on Xbox? I would play GoW on PS, but the moment I have the urge to play some CoD it's Xbox all the way. And I can even play other exclusives for the same price! Starfield is coming, that alone will take a lot of my time. Add CoD. Add the fest if the things that are coming. Aside from the time I would spend playing Spider Man 2 or other exclusives I'll be staying on Xbox for a long long time
Kinda strong move for Xbox tbh.
I read both emails. Phil is coherent and straightforward. I read Jim's email objectively just to know what he says privately. I noticed the typical attitude of someone that is requesting things unilaterally, not caring about what the other part wants and urging Phil to agree so that his team can prepare the final document very quickly for Phil to sign before he can regret anything. Thanks heaven Phil is not stupid.
I like the part where Jim talks about equal distribution on subscription services.
I read it as if you are going to release ABK games on Game Pass day and date they need to release on PS+ day and date too
Sony wanted no ABK games on Game Pass, no price difference and no exclusive content for a long time. Sony also proposed a separate Zenimax agreement.
Sony asked for more than what they got from ABK before the acquisition, as they had to pay for exclusive content. They paid for something that deliberately hurts Xbox gamers and now they want Microsoft to be all accommodating.
Phil's replies acknowledge Sony's dominance but he's too polite (or intelligent) to remember Jim of Sony's anti-competitive practices regarding Call of Duty, not to mention the exclusion deals for Zenimax/Bethesda's games.
Sony is the market leader and is anti-competitive, so they don't need to be assisted but controlled..
No matter how you look at it, Sony is hypocritical, shameless and a fouled player in the console market.
Sorry to disappoint you Sony but if you ever kill Xbox as you somewhat killed Dreamcast, I'm not buying your consoles but a PC.
I feel so bad for the people attending this hearing. 70 minutes of watching Jim talk on video? I could barely take the 3 minutes during the Showcase! Then they have to endure Bobby after that? I thought cruel and unusual punishment was constitutionally forbidden.
At a surface level I see what Jim was uncomfortable with in Phil's reply, it was worded very vaguely and hard to pin down specifically what was being stated. It hints at the idea of not revoking games that are already on the platform until '27 and doesn't speak clearly about future games other than CoD.
However, that was reason to go into deeper negotiations and call more meetings to pin down details, not to fly around the world telling governments to block the bogeyman. Given that Jim's earlier messages with Deering suggest both recognized this early on and from conversations with MS and ABK as a play for King and mobile not as a play for CoD and harming PS5, in their own words, I fail to see how based on Phil's email Jim felt suddenly so concerned that he basically ended all negotiations and cried wolf. Especially after how his email basically demanded nothing short of forfeiting any and all benefits to MS in owning ABK at all, in perpetuity.
I also noted that Phil's email reads like an email written by one manager to another. Jim's email starts in legal terms with Activision Blizzard ("Activision") implying his letter was written by Sony legal council, not by Jim, at all.
The whole saga seems as though it began as cordial negotiations, then Sony legal stepped in with excessive demands, and when Phil hinted that the negotiation wasn't likely to result in totally caving to all demands, negotiation was simply halted and turned into regulatory tort instead.
Yes, Phil was being cagey. He probably WAS hiding details behind his chosen words. But instead of drilling into that to pin down what would be agreed to with fuller negotiating, Jim (or Sony legal?) just went all or nothing and shut down the negotiation. Reminds me of Nintendo's Yamauchi and Squaresoft.
@SacredPYRO Except IIRC MS offered CoD Day and date for PS+ as well and Sony was not interested. When this requested "equal treatment" on subscriptions, it apparently didn't mean "if you release it on your subscription you must also release it on ours" and apparently means "We don't want to release it on our subscription therefore you may not release it on yours."
Microsoft is committed to keeping Activision content on playstation??? I can see where the alarm bells are coming from. It would hurt his pathetic block attempt.
@NEStalgia "Hey Phil, you know that company you want to buy with ungodly sums of cash"
"Yes Jim"
"Well, when you do buy it, you have to run it how I want it ran"
The entitlement is crazy! Who is buying ABK again? Surprised how "nice" MS is to Sony. Set off alarm bells? If the shoe was on the other foot, well, I think Sony would have had no mercy! The FTC playing along is even crazier imo.
Are you not entertained? Love the transparency
Imagine trying to help out the market leader while calling yourself the federal trade commission, especially as the boss for the market leader admits how they simply want to stifle competition.
What an embarrassment. Some people need to resign.
NEStalgia wrote:
NES, that quotation answers your own question, Phil only wrote what he's willing to do. There is no ambiguity. The beginning of his email is basically, "Stop repeating the same thing over and over because this is what I'm going to do." Besides, why does he need to tell Jim (or his lawyer) what he will do in the future? Imagine Sony being asked by Microsoft about what they will do with their studios in 2035.
As you said, Sony were excessively demanding and pestering Microsoft about their self interest and then lied to the regulators and played the victim. Didn't Sony say that Microsoft were harassing them? These emails reveal the opposite. I'm sure that Phil is happier about the trials than about having to hear Jim crying and complaining indefinitely.
Jim is a traitor because the day after the announcement, he called Phil about Call of Duty, then the admitted that he wasn't worried about Call of Duty and that he trusted Phil and after that, he started his world tour lying about Microsoft's intentions while hiding Sony's contracts and his own face in Japan at the last minute.
Wow, ftc and sony are finished. What a non-argument
The cheek ofit ..even asking for the Bethesda games to not be exclusive ..
Tbh, I find MS' approach to be logical. Sony is lucky they plan on putting games on PS, at all.
@NEStalgia We're going to have a new category at the Keighleys this year, 'Best Legal Testimony'. It's going to be a tough one to decide a winner, but it certainly won't be Jim.
@SplooshDmg That one I think will be pretty easy to predict. Everyone at FTC v Microsoft Corporation has really done an outstanding performance, it's all top notch, it really should be celebrated for what it is, but, when push comes to shove the obvious winner for this year is going to have to be Yuji Naka from Naka v Japan. It's just such a powerful, memorable performance that needs to be celebrated. I'm looking forward to him taking the stage for his acceptance speech in 15-25 years.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...