Over a year after it was first announced, Microsoft’s $69 billion deal with Activision Blizzard is under scrutiny from regulators. It still seems to be creeps towards its unstoppable endbut things get very messy and incredibly silly in the process.
The latest stunt? Activision’s chief communications officer accused Sony Interactive Entertainment CEO Jim Ryan of refusing to even consider a valid agreement call of Duty on PlayStation for 10 years, apparently hoping to sabotage the greatest tech merger in history.
“I don’t want a new one call of Duty Deal,” Ryan reportedly said at a closed meeting in Brussels, Belgium last month. “I want to block your merger.”
So says Activision’s Lulu Cheng Meservey, who you may remember from previous Twitter threads like Elon Musk critics don’t have to apply (which was recently deleted), Unions are actually badAnd “Sony is “the first of us”.‘ Answering a follow-up question from The edgeTom Warren confirmed that the comment was made on February 21, the day Microsoft and Sony met In camera hearings with EU regulators.
G/O Media may receive a commission
The comment, which Sony has yet to confirm or deny, is both blatant and an unusual breach of hypersecrecy regarding what has become standard practice in the video game industry. Phil Spencer, CEO of Microsoft Gaming pushed open the door last fall when he told it The edge that his company had previously made a proposal to Sony to extend his current contract call of Duty to PlayStation. “I had no intention of commenting on what I took to be a private business discussion,” Ryan replied at the time. Meservey’s tweet yesterday was the equivalent of kicking down that door.
Continue reading: Everything that happened in the Microsoft Activision merger saga
It’s also just the latest move in a preposterous game by two tech giants vying for their position in the global gaming market by attempting to work the arbiters. The British Competition and Markets Authority, which Microsoft is accused of to be in Sony’s pocketsuggested last month to just buy every part of Activision Blizzard except that call of Duty one.
Microsoft recently responded with proposed deals to bring the blockbuster franchise to Switch and keep it on PlayStation at least 10 years. Sony countered that nothing could be stopped call of Duty from being more buggy on PlayStation than Xbox if Microsoft owns it. said microsoft well uh. Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick said the UK would “death valleyy” if it messes up the deal.
Meanwhile in the EU, Reuters recently reported that Microsoft seems poised to prevail while in the US the Federal Trade Commission still is prepares its antitrust lawsuit this appears to be designed more to extort concessions than to wreck the merger entirely. And in other big markets like Brazil, Microsoft has already established itself.
This entire process was insightful and useful in that it forced companies to reveal things they would never otherwise have, including Game Pass cannibalizes some sales on Xbox, and that Sony does not think Electronic Arts battlefield will ever really be able to compete with call of Duty. But it was also ridiculous Sideshow how much it’s about a single game and a few metrics like console market share.
Last years Modern Warfare II proved that the multiplayer shooter series remains incredibly popular and profitable. At the same time, video games have shown time and time again how foolhardy and dangerous it is to predict what gamers will want in five years. The Xbox 360 ate the PS3’s lunch. Sony returned the favor with the PS4. Everyone thought Nintendo would go out of business after the Wii U. The Switch is now the best it’s ever made. Hey wait, I have an idea. What if Microsoft just made the Switch 2 instead of Activision Blizzard?
Sony, Microsoft and Activision did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
