
Having been frustrated in its $69 billion dollar bid to acquire Activision Blizzard in the UK, Microsoft's president, Brad Smith, is scheduled to meet with UK Chancellor Jeremy Hunt this week to plead the company's case in person. This follows the EU's acquiescence to the deal, a matter to which the UK's regulator, the Competition and Markets Authority, was quick to respond.
That's according to a new Bloomberg report (thanks, VGC), with Microsoft confirming that Smith will be in London, giving a scheduled talk on "the potential of AI and the need for thoughtful regulation of it.”
Further, private discussion on the matter of "the proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard" will take place. The meeting could well prove to be a contentious one, as Hunt has previously publicly criticized the CMA for its decision, going so far as to state that the EU was the better place to do business.
Microsoft's threatening posture is designed to intimidate, as it makes it known that "extreme" options, such as withdrawing Activision Blizzard from the UK market or bypassing the UK entirely and forging ahead with the deal without it. As VGC points out, at least in theory, even if Activision were to shut up shop and move to another European country, a distributor would still be able to sell their games in the UK. So it's an option but a double-edged one, denying the company a massive market in the process.
While it's true that countries have lined up by the dozen to wave Microsoft's deal through, the United States is having none of it either, with the FTC moving to intercept. With the US having the most robust economy in the world (not to mention all of world history) and the UK occupying a comfortable seat in that particular Top 10 list, you start to understand just why it's so important Microsoft attempt to bring the famously defiant group of islands to heel.
What do you think of this latest salvo in the ongoing Acquisition Wars? Let us know in the comments section below.
[source bloomberg.com, via videogameschronicle.com]
Comments 59
I am certain this comment section won't quickly descend into an all-out flame war. Nope not at all.
My thought is… why is an article like this on PushSquare apart from to inspire a bit of mouth-frothing?
The article doesn’t mention Sony or PlayStation one single time. This is Xbox news. I don’t think the acquisition is good news either but this article is pure flamebait, right down to the negative editorial slant.
@PegasusActual93 i have no idea what you are implying 🤣
Ignorant politicians shouldn’t be getting involved. But MS knows ignorance (plus money and threats) are their best chance of success against what is clearly an anticompetitive move.
@vyseofhr again i dont know what you are trying to say..pushsquare never engage in such shenanigans 🤣
Please stop posting this “news” that only create warfare in the comments, everything is irrelevant until a final decision is made, but of course you gotta milk this topic until the very end…
Could end up no Activision games in the UK. Sony will be mad. Look, I own all three consoles, Sony are the bosses and have been first place ever since they came swooping in with the PS1. Xbox has always been third. This deal won't change that, but in a cost of living crisis it will allow gamers more opportunities to play triple A games for cheaper.
I understand that this subject has a propensity for enflaming console war mentalities, and I get it, I'm autistic and can get fixed on one thing so much that I use to literally shake with anger when someone said Playstation was better than Dreamcast. But then my brother got me a PS1 and I learned that gaming, on any console, is still gaming. They're all amazing consoles and they have amazing games, some more than others but still, there's games. So don't let this deal blind you, worry you, or fuel your anger. Be happy with what you got.
My personal opinion however is that CMA are underestimating their power, they might just push Microsoft to remove all Activision games entirely. I know they would lose money, but it would be a power move that would turn the consumer against the CMA.
Don't worry, maybe go and prove you'll leave the UK then.
I only play Cod from Activision unless they release a new Crash or Spyro but knowing this deal it will be Xbox only so no issue for me.
Do it or do not simples geez I just want to play games
Let MS buy it so it can be over, it's going to happen anyway. Can't wait for the day I never have to hear about the acquisition again
Famously defiant! Delicious
@PegasusActual93 Your comment reflects this article perfectly...
@vyseofhr
It's just as much Playstation news as it is Xbox news. If the deal goes through many game franchises will no longer appear on Playstation so the story is very much relevant to Playstation.
Microsoft was really trying too hard to sell shooter games that I will never like them.
"Voice frustration," translation being: will attempt to buy support through the slime balls within the corrupt system that is human government who aren't already on the payroll. Corporatocracy lives on.
This isn't even a real government. No-one voted for them, and as soon as we can vote next year, they'll be gone.
An independent regulator shouldn't be swayed by them.
MS demonstrates over and over that it will abuse its market dominance. Just now there are the complaints of cloud provider that they cannot compete with MS azure because they cannot offer MS services at the same prize due to MS licensing costs. Then MS kind of threatened the UK government in the hope to get the deal pushed through. I am pretty sure a company which would not have a good leverage on the market would even try to do something like that.
How is it possible that countries think it is a good idea to allow MS to do the biggest merger in history and allow MS to grab a huge chunk of the gaming market in one bite? How is that driving innovation If there is one huge player and then a couple of smaller ones? That is really beyond me. But in the end everything is possible with enough money and only a few giga companies will survive.
"Let there be competition!" say Microsoft & Activision!
Also Activision Blizzard: You want Diablo IV or pretty much any of our classic PC titles you can only buy & install 'em via our Battle Net store launcher!🙄😂
Apart from the always online requirement of Diablo IV even for single player,honestly wary of buying it on ps4/5! What's to stop Microsoft in their current arrogant behaviour (if they beat off regulators),from claiming this to be another "indiie niche" title & pull the online plug on PS owners by rebadging any add-ons a new iteration & make Diablo exclusive?
You have Bobby Kotick giving puff-piece puppy dog eyes interviews decrying the media is out to get him & rewriting the narrative of what dodgy workplace culture after they literally outlaid millions in NDA settlements all on the basis of recouping it via the $70billion M$ cheque!
Not to mention the "donations" to US Congress politicians to wave the Murican First Flag & go after Sony!🙄
All for the IP's like COD which they attest the smaller sized Sony could "easily make a competitor" to but the monopolistic 2.4 trillion M$ can't?! It would be laughable if they hadn't already pushed their weight around to get as far as they have!
Look at Redfall - a failed original title - and ask yourself why XBox wants to acquire all of these established studios with popular IP.
Typical Microsoft, Going straight to the governments to get what they want, usually with money exchanged or threats.
What a farce this acquisition is. Microsoft just needs to take the L and go back to actually having to make their videogames.
@Zoidpilot4
I’m not sure what console wars have got to do with anything. Industry consolidation under the company that is by far the richest, and so can buy whomever they wish, is terrible for competition - which means that beyond those who can temporarily get a few games cheaper, it’s worse for everyone who enjoys gaming. It seems you have fallen for the slight of hand which is MS constantly bringing up the completely irrelevant console sales numbers. Not to mention accepted that we only need to protect any kind of competition for a pitiful 10 years.
“ The meeting could well prove to be a contentious one, as Hunt has previously publicly criticized the CMA for its decision, going so far as to state that the EU was the better place to do business.”
@get2sammyb *Smith!
@thefourfoldroot1 honestly, I disagree. But I won't debate about it. Also, you missed my point, and dont assume what my opinion is on the matter. That said, I really don't have the capacity to relate to you, and I'm enjoying playing video games too much to care.
Honestly the only people who actually want this acquisition to go through are fanboys. Any average consumer could see how one corpo purchasing another and becoming a mega corpo is bad for the one who buys the products.
It doesn't help that so far Microsoft has not had the best track record when it comes to showing off what they do with the things they purchase. An argument is made that Microsoft can finally "fix" Activision if they purchase them...but they've made no indication that they purchase companies to improve them, only to deny the competition options and rake in the money for themselves.
It's just not a good thing and it should not be allowed to pass. It sets a bad precedent that if you don't get your way the first time you just have to throw even more money at it, perhaps grease some palms behind closed doors which I bet is what the suit is trying to do with his "personal visit".
Lol I'm not getting my way so I'm gonna go complain to one of the countries leaders 😅 🙂 😌 🤣
@NinjaNicky Took me long enough to find out about that despite all the glossy previews! Don't get me wrong,the vibe seems fairly positive, but only finally saw that apparently though possible solo,its regarded that you need to team up with others to try defeat some of the higher level bosses.
Only rarely hit up Diablo 3 multiplayer,so agree its disappointing!😕 Can only imagine if the likes of Take-two are taking notes for GTA 6 merging single/multiplayer in a similar fashion!
Not to mention being a hard drive guzzler with all the online updates!
Opinion superiority is rife when it comes to this subject matter, on all sides. Thing is, Politics are dirty, so are all billionaire companies, to a degree. They take shots at each other all the time, grease hands and carry out backdoor deals. Sony and Xbox are the same in that regards. This whole high moral ground stance over a company you dislike isn't exactly immune to moral hypocrisy, it's just that a company you dislike is behind it is the reason you're angry. Why even allow it to suck the joy out of gaming? I struggle to see why anyone cares. I've got all three consoles, playstation 5 is easily the better system, but dam I love gamepass and yes, it's renting and cheap and so far the quality is no where near Sony but so what? Xbox isn't going to ever get to first place, look at the history of consoles and watch Sony dominate.
I've played games my whole life, well, almost. I have seen consoles buy exclusives and seen companies take shots at each other. You're the consumer and all they care about is your money.
I get it I guess. People grow up and gaming doesn't provide that same level of excitement it once did, people's expectations change, they scrutinise more and their tastes evolve beyond what was fun from the year before. I'm lucky that my brain is wired differently. I love video games so much, I find the joy and pleasure in every single one. I escape to their worlds, look up at the skies they've created, absorb all what they have to offer. Most importantly, I have fun.
Some gamers though, they think the gaming world needs to be like an art gallery, curated pieces of art which only resonates with their perception of what makes a game good.
And then those who actually invest negative energy into disliking a brand or company, to the point they forget or willfully ignore the fact all brands and companies are the same.
And being called a fan boy for wanting a deal that will benefit my wallet isn't fan boying, it's just a good deal.
Now I'll have arm chair experts and gaming professionals tell me why I'm wrong, declare me an xbot, or simple just go full opinion superiority. Thing is, I don't care. I just wanted to share my opinion on the matter. I do not for a second think my opinion is fact, I'm not an expert, it's just purely based on my thoughts and experience. And if it helps, I'm autistic so you can drum it up to just an autistic rant
@Zoidpilot4
Cool, have a nice day. I enjoyed almost chatting.
@ATaco
Absolutely agree. It’s so transparent.
@Gamerintent55 thanks =)
@vyseofhr You don’t think Microsoft’s threat of removing Activision’s business from the UK is relevant to PlayStation?
Look none of us like this story either, but there are aspects of it that are news-worthy, and you can always choose to not read these articles if you don’t want to know about it.
Very curious, @Khayl, as to how Microsoft are demonstrating a 'threatening posture' or indeed who or how they are being 'intimidating'? Speaking to people that may hold some influence over a stalled business deal, in order to get it going again, is hardly threatening or intimidating, it makes perfectly good business sense, and indeed, happens in both business and peoples personal lives every single day.
As for Microsoft stating (indirectly) that they may pull out of the UK in order to close the deal; this is a real possibility consequence of the deal being blocked. It makes perfect sense to point out the ramifications of another actions in the hope that that may change their mind. If you say to someone, 'Don't cross the road because there is a car coming, and you could be killed', you are not threatening or intimidating them, you are pointing out to them the possible consequence of crossing the road. It's then up to them to decide whether or not it is worth the risk to cross that road.
Also, you say the US is having none of it, without mentioning the absolute fact that the FTC is headed by Lisa Khan who is on a crusade against big tech, and has lost several cases because she hasn't got a leg to stand on, and is likely to lose this one too. I get that America is the 'big one' but pretty much expert on this matter is predicting that Microsoft will triumph when they get to Court. It's akin to me saying, 'I'm no longer going to pay my mortgage'. I can absolutely say that, but I cannot expect to remain in my house for long if I choose to do so.
Unless you actually have evidence of threatening or intimidating behaviour, don't you think it wiser to tone down the hostility towards Microsoft? All that you are doing is fanning the flames of console wars for those unable to see through what you are doing. It's not helpful or indeed clever...
@get2sammyb Its actually Activision too willing to 'Pull out' of the UK to get the deal through as don't forget its not MS aggressively seeking to take-over ABK, ABK themselves also voted unanimously to sell to MS.
Its an 'option'. If the CMA want to be 'petty' about their reasoning behind them 'blocking' the deal, then MS AND ABK together will be looking at ALL the ways they can get this deal through. They have never stated they intended to 'pull' anything from Hardware, even offering 10yr license free deals to ANYONE to alleviate 'hypothetical' what if 'scenarios' that don't currently 'exist' - if these 'fail', through pettiness, the Solutions to ease hypothetical non-existent scenarios, then they may have to consider more 'extreme' or equally as 'petty' measures - they have 'tried' to provide Solutions to ease concerns and have NO INTENTION of not selling CoD on PS5 so Sony can keep selling CoD, keep getting revenue etc. Don't forget that 40 other regions so far have passed this deal.
Of course this deal affects 'UK' gamers on BOTH Xbox/PS hardware. Sony had the option to sign a deal guaranteeing ABK games on Playstation and MS has 'never' pulled games from PS either. They may have 'cancelled' on-going development towards a Playstation release, but as it was never announced for, never completed and certainly never 'released' on Playstation, it cannot be 'pulled'. Therefore, these games - like Diablo IV, Overwatch and CoD, as well as that upcoming Crash game would still be on Playstation - basically the only games ABK make these days.
That's already been 'established' and why the CMA have NO concerns about the Physical platforms. They believe that MS owning ABK would somehow prevent Sony, Nintendo or ANY other company from 'competing' on an 'open' platform like Cloud. That somehow, them owning a 'tiny' percentage of ALL IP's, Studios etc would somehow prevent others from 'competing' with their own Cloud options.
As I said, Sony have their own IP's, Nintendo too - all massive IP's that will NEVER be on Xbox Cloud, games those Companies can use to 'compete' with - Just like Disney+ could 'compete' against Netflix, despite Netflix having over 200m subscribers (far more than Xbox Cloud gamers) and a 'big' headstart. If Sony started their OWN Cloud with their OWN exclusives, maybe also added Sony Pictures, Crunchyroll etc too in 'their' service, Sony Fanboys would probably make it the #1 service in terms of Subscriber count....
Stand strong Jim ✊🏻
#InJimWeTrust
Microsoft bigwig looking to bully and bribe UK politicians into accepting a mind-blowingly bad deal for the industry (from the POV of a consumer).
@BAMozzy imagine writing all that.
The CMA isn't being "petty". It's doing it's job.
@MattBoothDev Pretty much, but don't tell that to americans.
Next they'll start saying blocking the buyout "plays into Putin's hands" LOL.
@ThomasHL agreed on that buddy!!!! I certainly didn't vote them in....no one fecking did.....damn...the past three governments including this one were not cited in....it's ridiculous.... democracy????? It's a joke.....
@vyseofhr Agree not a fan of the blatant SEO driven articles. I get hookshot is a business but this is low quality flame bait.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/05/17/jeremy-hunt-competition-regulators-growth-microsoft/
This is the link to what Jeremy Hunt said, Jeremy Hunt can't do anything by the sounds of it and the cma have said they are sticking by their decision
Just in case anyone hasn't been following the legal proceedings closely, Microsoft can actually still close the deal without approval legally from the CMA and FTC as a last legal resort, but they would have to pay a hefty fine of anything up to £10 billion dollars.
The deal will close regardless, they just would rather get the courts to rule in their favour so they don't have to force it through and pay that fine.
Whilst I understand most of what you say, @Jamesblob, I still cannot fathom the word 'threat'. Stating your position, and what you will do as a consequence of someone's actions is not a threat, it is a statement of intent. If a waiter says to you, 'there's no steak today', and you respond with, 'well I'll have to go elsewhere then'. That's not a threat. It's merely pointing out what you will do as a consequence of there being no steak! It seems to me to be a perfectly reasonable thing to do.
Now, does what Microsoft are saying possibly apply pressure to the CMA? Absolutely! But what else would you expect Microsoft to do? They are obviously going use whatever tools they have at their disposal to get the CMA to change course. That's just good business sense. However, pointing out to the CMA that if they do resort to blocking the deal could lead to to Microsoft and ABK closing the deal anyway, and pulling out of the UK, is precisely what they should do. Can you imagine the backlash if the CMA decide to continue to block the deal, and then Microsoft pull out of the UK without having first said to the UK that this is a possible consequence? The CMA could easily turn round and say that had they known Microsoft were going to do this, that they would not have blocked the deal after all. So it makes perfect sense for Microsoft to state their position in the event of the deal being blocked within the UK. However, doing so is not a threat at all...
@MattBoothDev Just like Jim Ryan did?
Microsoft is just mad the UK thwarted their plan to buy their way to dominance and destroy competition in yet another industry. The UK did a good thing here.
@MattBoothDev Blocking something on the grounds of a Hypothetical future with no evidence or factual backing to support that reasoning is extremely Petty.
They decided that the Hardware market would NOT be negatively impacted, meaning that Sony and Nintendo can 'compete' for Hardware consumers whether MS decides not to release ABK games on their Hardware as they have their OWN IP's that will pull consumers in. Zelda, Mario, Pokemon, Uncharted, Spider-Man, Wolverine, Last of Us etc etc etc - Games those Companies can use to create their OWN streaming service to Compete - IF they believe that Cloud is the future. Games that will 'never' be on a Microsoft Cloud service.
Azure is just one option open to the likes of Sony, EA, Ubisoft, Nintendo etc - they could partner with Amazon or Google. Sony could build their OWN servers too - the same way MS has by using XB1X APU chips as 'blades' on a server. If they used their PS5 APU's, they could run every PS5 game (inc PS4 via BC) and stream to ANY device. Nothing is stopping them from 'competing' if they believe that is the 'future' of gaming. However, cloud is barely 'adequate' right now and the 'majority' of Gamers use Hardware. Those that use Cloud, use it to play games when they can't play on Hardware - not their main/primary way.
Therefore the decision to block on the grounds of 'Cloud' - which is an 'open' platform, not locked to Microsoft, and based on the tiny market share of IP's and Studios, the ONLY games MS can really offer in their service (a portion of which are ALSO available ANYWHERE and in 'competing' cloud services) are the ones they OWN, is NOT preventing Competition, not preventing anyone else from investing in Cloud services so it is extremely petty. Its like saying no-one can compete with Netflix - yet it never stopped others from jumping into Cloud services...
MS can't prevent Sony, EA, Nintendo, Embracer, TakeTwo etc etc from setting up competing Cloud services just because they now own ABK and as already stipulated, offering ANY 10yr License Free deals to any Cloud based company - after already stating that they will continue releasing and supporting ABK games on Playstation, bring them to Nintendo and continue selling on Steam too
@cburg yes, Jim Ryan personally lobbied the CMA 😂👍
@number1024 No company would ever put a "for life" clause in any contract - doesn't matter who it is.
10 years is unprecedented! It was meant to show that Microsoft is serious about putting games on other platforms.
It's only in the comments section of gaming websites that Micrsoft is only doing 10 years.
It's fine if you don't trust Micrsoft or are against the deal. The repercussions could be very interesting going forward, but I do think people are a little apocalyptic about the whole thing.
@BAMozzy And look at Netflix now. It's like a shell of what it used to be once everyone decided to offer their own services.
Plus, it's had to raise prices significantly to offer capabilities that others offer as part of the service (4K, Dolby Vision, Dolby Atmos). It only recently started to offer an ad-supported tier to try to win back subscribers.
If the CMA felt that Microsoft having so many IP under its umbrella and seemingly only offering Call of Duty to others is anti-competitive, I'd be more prone to understand the position - not this cloud argument is has made. Doesn't mean I would agree or disagree, but I'd understand it.
@GamingFan4Lyf That proves my point - being 'first' doesn't guarantee them to dominate - even with their own IP's inc those they acquired from Bethesda/ABK. Xbox Cloud is never going to offer Mario, Zelda, Pokemon etc, never offering Sony's IP's either so they can 'compete' with their OWN IP's at any time.
Its not the right time for 'others' considering they are dominating the Hardware market, don't 'need' to offer a Cloud option - especially as 'both' companies have their own solution to play 'your' games anywhere - Nintendo Switch by 'design' has that functionality and Sony offer 'Remote' play.
MS's 'Cloud' service only lets you play about half of the Game Pass Library games - not games you 'own' and have no say on when those games can be 'streamed'. You can 'buy' CoD on Xbox, but if it leaves Game Pass Cloud, you can't continue to stream with Xbox.
Its such a 'small' Library that consumers have no choice over that it makes no sense to block. They have assessed that theses games won't 'harm' competition in the Physical space yet block it on the grounds of Cloud where its an 'Open' market. MS doesn't control the internet or Streaming technology either so can't prevent others from setting up their OWN cloud service.
The reason they don't or haven't is because it doesn't factor into their Business plan yet. Its not 'worth' their time/money etc to 'compete' with MS when they are 'dominating' in Sales and users willing to spend '$70+' on a game instead of paying a 'small' monthly fee to stream a selection of games chosen by themselves.
All these PS fanboys are not going to 'miss out' on CoD, Overwatch, Diablo etc because MS has committed to bringing those games to 'every' service, every platform they can. Even though Sony 'refused' to sign a deal, MS is still committed to release CoD on Playstation so PS fanboys can still play CoD on their 'prefered' platform, Sony still gets their cut too. ALL these deals have been to bring ABK games to platforms they are NOT on - not removing them from the 'few' platforms they currently exist on. Therefore CoD will remain on Playstation, still be sold by Sony so they still get their '30%' for owning Playstation. Therefore I don't understand why Sony Fanboys are supportive of the CMA despite 40 other regions passing it.
Its more likely that Sony gamers as well as Xbox gamers in the UK could 'miss out' because of blocking. Let alone Nintendo gamers and any of those other Cloud services in the UK specifically. If Activision pulls out of the UK, then it affects ALL gamers. MS are looking to bring CoD to 'more' platforms so more gamers can play through whatever devices and/or costs they can afford. The 'best' option will still be 'premium' Hardware offering up to 4k PQ and up to 120fps performance. Cloud is 1080/60 at best and has additional lag/latency...
Doesn't seem like the CMA decision will ultimately destroy the deal. They have multiple routes mapped out already to get around their ruling if they don't reverse it.
@number1024 Because any company is going to ensure that everyone comes to the table to renegotiate deals. The repercussions of a "forever" clause is corporate legal nightmare!
It's not solely about money. It's about protection.
Microsoft would be legally bound by contract law to always provide its games to everyone else no matter what route another company makes with hardware/software.
Let's say Microsoft wants to stop doing a particular IP because the ROI is no longer worth development. Guess what, "lifetime" clause requires Microsoft to continue developing or face legal action.
If Microsoft decides to sell IP. It can't because "forever" clause.
"You said you would give us Call of Duty forever. Now you aren't!"
Or even wild scenario where a company is found to be funding child trafficking or something and Microsoft simply doesn't want to do business with them. It can't because of a "forever" clause.
It sounds crazy and greedy, but Microsoft has a lot of money and corporate lawyers would absolutely love to find a way to get a nice piece of that action - especially "breach of contract".
@djlard Your comment reflects this article perfectly...
@vyseofhr it absolutely is, you are correct, not to mention it doesn’t mention that the video out on the internet for all to see, where the CMA is not able to answer questions, their lawyers looked defeated by MS’s, even the Judge was taking shots at the CMA. Nothing made the CMA look informed, confident of their decision nor a place to do business when they got railroaded by the lawyers and judges. It looked cause it was a bunch of incompetent people making stuff up and that won’t attract others and it put blood in the water for MS’s lawyers and they took full advantage of it. As i always say, don’t take my word for it when the video is out there to see and this site should at least talk about the CMA in the correct light and not as people of credibility of claims.
@SgtTruth love the post, as that’s how i feel about it. I have all 3 consoles as i have done every generation. It’s ok to not want all 3, but it’s another thing to slander gamers, developers and media outlets cause you choose not to buy a console. It’s ok to disagree, it’s ok to make slight fun at competition. But people online take it way to serious. I wish they knew how being that negative affects their mental health. The video game business is about entertainment and joy. Not fighting with people we don’t even know cause they bough a different box to play on.
@TheCollector316 tell Apple and Google that MS bought their dominance, and destroyed the competition in the computer tech industry. Apple is now worth more than MS and has MS on the outside looking in on the mobile computing space. MS buying ABK is not going to close shop on PS, even if Jim Ryan said without COD they are done. It’s simply not true, PS is to successful to fail that easily. I wish the Big 3 to be around for a long long time and there is no reason they won’t be, fear mongering don’t stop people from buying and playing games.
@number1024 Okay, so because it's Microsoft, the company should do lifetime guarantees to have its games on Cloud services but no other publisher is required to do so?
When it comes to Cloud services, Microsoft will be acting like any other game publisher. One just needs to come to the table.
Just. Like. Any. Other. Business.
Plus, the way Microsoft games work, your saves follow you anywhere you want to go - whether you play it on GeForce Now, Boosteroid, Xbox Cloud Streaming, or an actual console.
It's fine if you don't trust Microsoft. But you are definitely targeting Microsoft and holding it to a standard that no other publisher has.
What if Ubisoft creates it's own Cloud streaming service. Should Ubisoft make lifetime contracts? Square Enix? EA? Any other major publisher?
I got a feeling Microsoft will get Activision in the end :-/ They won't be happy until they own everything to do with gaming & that means we won't own are games anymore to. What a dreadful company they are :-/
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...