It feels like, one way or another, Microsoft will now acquire Activision Blizzard for an eye-watering $69 billion, following the outcome of US regulator the Federal Trade Commission’s failed temporary injunction attempt earlier this week. In the immediate aftermath of this week’s court ruling, the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority – the one sole regulator still seeking to block the merger – confirmed a “stay of litigation” ahead of a hearing scheduled for later this month, essentially meaning it will return to the table to discuss some form of resolution with the Redmond firm.
However, in a statement today it’s said that it “still stands” by its initial decision and that discussions with the trillion dollar titan are very much in their infancy. Microsoft has until 18th July to close the deal as part of a pre-determined deadline with Activision Blizzard, although it’s likely the two parties will extend that date now that the finish line is in sight. Nevertheless, there’s still work to be done with the CMA. Specifically, the regulator is “open” to a new investigation should the deal be restructured in a way that eases its concerns.
The CMA ruled against the merger on the basis of cloud gaming, arguing that the acquisition would “stifle competition in this growing market”. To be fair, the European Commission also flagged concerns in this area, but was satisfied with Microsoft’s decision to support rival cloud services for at least a period of ten years. A CMA spokesperson explained that while “merging parties don't have the opportunity to put forward new remedies once a final report has been issued, they can choose to restructure a deal”.
Exactly how the deal could be restructured remains to be seen, but the cynic in us believes this is merely a pantomime from the CMA in order to save face. It’s clear that the regulator was counting on support from the EC and FTC to kill this deal, but with the former giving the greenlight and the latter losing in court, we suspect it’s going to quietly back off in a way that makes it look like it enforced important concessions. Microsoft will presumably play along with the charade, of course, because in the end it’s going to get what it wants.
[source eurogamer.net]
Comments 68
The CMA trying to save face is cute. You messed up, now take the consequences on the chin. This charade is not fooling anyone. They will get some cloud concessions, worded differently to how it was before, but in reality it will be same deal repackaged
I've heard that the FTC is going to look into filing an appeal on the decision, although, I believe they only have a few days to do it. Of course, I don't really expect much change there, since the FTC didn't exactly do all too well.
If someone from 2030 went back in time and is looking at the chat, can you explain the final outcome on this please
Good. The CMA was the only regulator that got it right. The FTC botched their case, but they were not wrong.
It boggles my mind most regulators don't understand that empty ten year deals are not a proper remedy for the consolidation of power.
I hate this deal. Just make your own damn games, Microsoft
Just Stop Microsoft
@Kanji-Tatsumi they are about to with their new studios. lol
Good to see atleast one regulator not backing down from outside pressure.
@StrawberryTurtle
That's ultra sad.
I don’t know why y’all are upset. Use your phone, buy a switch, PC, streaming devices, smart TV, and or steamdeck you can use gamepass to play these games.
Microsoft is really getting games to more gamers
I'd love to see what happens when they try to buy another company after this
In many of my comments on this subject I have been saying that once the FTC case failed (and I never had a doubt that it would) that the CMA would find a way to wriggle out of their blockage. That process has now begun. Much wriggling on the part of the CMA as they attempt to appear competent. Microsoft will do something small; a token gesture that will enable the CMA to save face, but truthfully, they aligned themselves with the wrong side (Sony and the FTC), and made themselves look foolish in the process. Regardless, they will now back down and allow the deal to progress to completion...
I don't think there will be an extension. The deal will almost certainly close starting Monday. Anything the CMA negotiates will either be revealed by then or post-closing. The CMA has in the past continued their procedures even post-acquisitions, and at times forced entities to sell their acquired assets.
@StrawberryTurtle The concession being rumored right now points simply at the UK losing access to Game Pass Cloud Streaming, not something that will benefit absolutely anyone.
@StrawberryTurtle I own a PS5. I’ve owned every PS.
PS4 was by far the worst, because there was no competition. I actually believe this is good. I’m hoping that this will light a fire under Sony PlayStation.
@StrawberryTurtle are you including third-party? Because their first party was really lacking. It was also the first time they never brought out a twisted metal or socom. They also had a number of other IP’s that never came out.
During the PS3 naughty dog released 4 games
During the PS4 naughty dog released 2 games and a remaster.
@Drago201 Nothing. If anything, the flood gates are open now for pretty much anything.
Would love to know how many $ this is costing Microsoft just to get the deal over the line.
@Deshalu That's because games got harder to make, though. Surely you can appreciate that games are much bigger and more complicated now than they were during the PS3 era?
I own all current gen consoles and love them both, but this deal is not good for Microsoft, in my opinion. I don’t think some people think long term. Will having a ton of Activision/Blizzard games on Game Pass be awesome? Yes - but that’s a short term solution to a problem Microsoft hasn’t addressed yet, and that is managing their current studios. Microsoft has a hard enough time with their studios to create not only well received exclusives, but also releasing a portfolio of games regularly in general. If they add Activision/Blizzard, I can’t even begin to imagine the stress it will bring. People are going to be in for a rude awakening if they believe they are going to get amazing new exclusives on a regular basis. Expect a ton of mobile, live service, and other games of similar nature. It’s not going to be good long term (in my opinion).
Truly sad this has happened. Who’s next for Microsoft? Naughty dog? PlayStation itself?.. just buy it and shut it down Phil, that will show them. I’ll go to PC and Nintendo and make a point to never buy ANYTHING even REMOTELY tied to MS!!
@get2sammyb see you’re spinning lack of knowledge, because those studios have doubled in size since the PS3 era naughty dog used to be around 300 developers there now up to if I remember correctly 600 developers. Insomniac studios was 400 there now at 800.
Microsoft Studios, which were just recently purchased one of the Bethesda studios has 12 people in it. Collusion games has 127 developers. One of Their biggest studios which is 343 industries has around 300 developers, so does the coalition.
@StrawberryTurtle maybe people look neutral to it and say this whole deal is not a big deal without being a sony pony or xbot or nintendo fanboy?
I’m one of them and I say this whole deal is in the end not a big deal for sony but also that it’s good sony gets a little smack on their chin for once. After the xbox one debacle sony consolidated every big 3d party franchise that matters. And the money they got are now being turned into live services. And away from innovation and creative games. Absolutely not the way i’d like gaming to go. So yeah, bring on a big competitor.
And yes, i owned every sony console and the vita up to and including the ps4.
Removed - inappropriate
@Deshalu It sets a bad precedent, though, once the deal goes through. This entices Sony, as well as bigger entities (like Amazon, for example), to start looking at and purchasing more studios/publishers. This is just bad all around, because there will be more consolidation under single umbrellas, which means that games which might have been third party to be exclusive to one platform, so gamers are losing out.
@get2sammyb @StrawberryTurtle this is not a monopoly, and this does not hurt PlayStation. Even Jim Ryan agrees this doesn’t hurt PlayStation. The only thing Jim Ryan is upset about is they lose the billion dollar income from Call of Duty. But even in the court video, he even says they’ll be fine matter fact I’m pretty sure PushSquare released an article of Jim Ryan saying that they’re even stronger than Microsoft and Nintendo combined with this merger which if you think about it he ain’t lying. I’m just hoping this light a fire under PlayStation.
Removed - disrespecting others
@MasterVGuides but you failed to see they were doing this before Microsoft even started doing it. Half of you probably don’t even know who Tencent is but if you get a chance look up tTencent and see how much they actually own they’re actually in discussion with logitech to release their own console.
Amazon was already purchasing studios. even have their own app for their games.
Netflix is purchasing developers.
So is Apple and Disney. There’s even rumors of these two buying EA.
@Deshalu I never said that others weren't doing it, because it's been happening for years. However, this whole ABK thing is on another level, as ABK is probably the biggest independent third party publisher in the world, for games. MS going after them sets an even worse precedent that will involve the other big publishers.
Removed - flaming/arguing
This deal is going through.
Sony is likely already planning for the future and how to counter this with their own moves
eg: Square-Enix being bought out.
@MasterVGuides let me ask you something, do you really think that Microsoft purchasing Activision puts them in the number one spot in any of the gaming categories?
I still think Sony will be the market leader in consoles, valve market leader in PC, mobile will still be Apple or google.
All this does is push everybody to try harder to stay in the lead. Which means more better quality, quantity, and cheaper priced for consumer games
@dschons that's kinda sad
@Deshalu "are you including third-party? Because their first party was really lacking. It was also the first time they never brought out a twisted metal or socom. They also had a number of other IP’s that never came out."
I am not crazy about the PS4 gen, especially how barren it was at launch, but the PS4 gen as a whole had way more first party games than PS1 and PS2 combined. I would say it had more essential play first party games too.
PS3 had Uncharted, and Last of Us, I honestly dont consider any other first party game that gen "must plays".
PS4 ended up having Horizon, a very good Uncharted game, God of War, Spider-Man and Last of Us.
Twisted Metal and Socom might spark some nostalgia in some people, but they are far from "must play" games.
@Deshalu Game Pass might be a good deal for the consumer, but I have never liked it. I'm a big fan of physical games, despite digital encroaching to its dominance over it. Game Pass is nothing more than a glorified rental service and I still don't think it's sustainable in the long run. Games on it leave the service all the time and instead of people actually purchasing the games, all you ever hear is "I'll wait for it on Game Pass." MS has deep pockets and they know they can afford to keep shoveling money into GP.
It's part of the reason why Sony have gone on record, stating they wouldn't be able to sustain the same model. Their first party games don't go on PS+ at launch, because they would never make money from the sales the games bring.
Basically, no, I don't think this purchase will push Microsoft into the number one spot in the gaming sphere. However, the deep pockets they have make them more prone to continue gobbling up other companies, so they can try to compete with Sony and Nintendo. There's no one to blame for their third place position, other than themselves, honestly. They have the money to foster new talent/studios, but they flounder it all and don't produce megahits. Their management of their current studios isn't exactly stellar.
@Kraven this is the first thing said that I agree with 100%.
But I still think the merger is good, because hopefully a lot of you have been following Sony and Microsoft for years now and not just the last two.
Sony was literally pushing for games to be the standard price of 80 bucks, they announced within a year that the PS five was already making profit from it but yet put in cheaper heat sex and then a few months later put any more cheaper heat sink in. Sony’s PS 5 Was way weaker than the Xbox series X but Sony got a dev kit of Xbox Series consoles for MLB the show, Realize the PlayStation was a lot weaker and didn’t even have an SSD drive in it had to upgrade.
Real competition helps push that two. If you guys did the research that I’ve done on the size of studios, how many developers you need to make quality games, how many first party exclusives came out, do you find that the PS4 was really lacking
Restructure the deal = Give Crash and Spyro back to PS - you can keep the rest...
Maybe this might galvanise Sony into developing classic IPs - or they'll just keep remastering remasters to get a few quick bucks (I would say quid, but PS is American these days, isn't it?)
I don't want this to have an end! It's gonna be a running joke like Gamergate or something.
@MasterVGuides the only reason I disagreed with this is because other companies are still growing and Microsoft isn’t being successful and Microsoft has a history of selling stuff that isn’t successful even though it’s still making profit, just not enough, that’s why they’re $1 trillion company.
Microsoft has made quality games first party games, but it still hasn’t pushed people over there console because people aren’t willing to spend a bunch of money on the console when they’re already used to their titles from their other console that they already own.
So you buy some eye peas that people love you can hopefully draw people over to your console. It makes perfect sense. If the others want to remain the market leader, it pushes them to be better. I love competition.
@Deshalu lol no! These games were already on everything. It’s just now MS will have the option to make sure they’re not on everything.
I said it wouldn't make a difference. CMA still says no and don't agree so it's over.
I’ll never understand this whole “light a fire under Sony” or “Sony needs a kick in the pants” talking point. While MS basically said “Sony is kicking our butts so we have to do this” there are people out here saying Sony isn’t doing anything so maybe this will force them to do something. None of it makes any sense!
What “kick in the pants” does Sony need? What are they not doing as a gaming company that’s causing them to be a failure in your eyes? They basically have everything their competitor has plus a whole lot of their own stuff. I’m so confused by all this!
@Deshalu playstation isn't losing the income from call of duty. They will still get the same cut of every sale on the playstation store (typically 30%). The biggest change with this merger is the other part of the profit from each sale on ps store (and every other store) goes to their direct competitor xbox. The deal is strange in that it won't really negatively affect Sonys revenue that much but will be a massive boost to their rival xbox's revenue.
Without marketing rights Sony may lose a small portion of the call of duty playerbase but I think most will remain loyal. If you have or previously had a playstation and your friends are on PS, you're probably sticking with PS.
It's interesting how people here think these corporations just come in with armed thugs and suitcases of money to these developers and demand acquisitions.
Publishers/developers generally put themselves up for sale and they go to either their highest bidder or best fit so that these developers/publishers can keep the lights running (and yes, I am sure greed can be a factor as well).
This whole "consolidation" crisis people argue has more to do with the high cost of development due to gamer expectations potentially crippling studios than it really does "corporate takeovers".
Because heaven forbid a game isn't 4K/Ultra-highend graphics and star-studded voice work on my PS5/Series X/PC!
@AhmadSumadi maybe read my comment to see where Sony is heading.
@AhmadSumadi they weren’t on switch, cloud, phones, nvidia shield etc though.
@Friendly @AhmadSumadi friendly I agree with you.
Ahmad I agree with you. I agree with your statement, but what’s different from what sony is doing then Microsoft?
The end of the day, buying an exclusive for a cheaper price versus what Microsoft would have the option to (pointed out by a bunch of publishers) then buying a publisher isn’t much different. At the end of the day you’re getting exclusives. Sony’s been doing it for decades.
@Netret0120 Sony buying Square Enix basically changes nothing.
@AhmadSumadi I couldn't agree more. I think it's a point that it's repeated so often online that people take it as fact, when it couldn't be further from the case.
@get2sammyb I'm sorry Sammy but that is not the biggest issue here. Brands are really important and COD is massive I don't like COD but I know it sells big time even the entries that are still sell well.
@GamingFan4Lyf The "gamer expectations" were a self fulfilling prophecy. Nobody asked Square Enix to remaster Tomb Raider with fancy new hair physics, nor for Ellie in The Last of Us 2 to have realistic dilating pupils, or any of the mad details in Red Dead Redemption 2. But once developers set a precedent people expect it.
Also, a lot of the biggest breakout successes look like trash, by comparison. Minecraft, PUBG, Battlebit Remastered, Valheim ect. And Nintendo release games that look like they're from the PS3 era sooo...
Yay monopoly
I play all platforms, but this is terrible news for gamers.
As I don’t see it stopping here
All I know is that the comment section for any article about this on any website is pretty hilarious. People with handles like "BlisterFart69" or "xXDragonSamuraiXx" are business law experts 😂 got to love it
@Kanji-Tatsumi True, there is some aspect of self-sabotage from a publisher/developer standpoint.
Your choice of wording is the exact thing I am talking about with gamer expectations, though:
"look like they're from the PS3 era"
"look like trash"
@Snake_V5 the only thing you are correct about is that this is indeed over. The deal will close.
@Dragonsbane 😆😆😆😆
@GamingFan4Lyf Fair point, although I was being hyperbolic and referring to PUBG mainly, which was (is?) as janky as they come.
@AhmadSumadi I've asked myself this so many times.
I mean I do believe Sony will react to this purchase. Of course they will. It's inevitable. Hell I want them to if it benefits me as a consumer.
But to suggest that they are now or have been underperforming in some way recently bemuses me.
People might not like everything they do and that's absolutely okay, but that's down to personal taste and there are other platforms to go to for that very reason.
They've been kicking ass since the PS4 launched for me. I haven't been short of something epic to play since 2014.
@AhmadSumadi the fire lit under Sony is talking about their first party IP’s. You guys keep looking at the third-party, we get it they got a massive third-party exclusives that’s why we’re all OK with Xbox buying companies. Sony needs to quit buying third-party exclusives and let it remain multiplatform. Microsoft well quit buying companies, and like you said work on your IPs. Sony isn’t even releasing their ips. Where’s the new Socom, Twisted Metal, Resistance, Killzone, Factions, All-Stars, Warhawk-Starwawk, and many many others?
I love how everyone’s OK with Spider-Man going exclusive, when Spider-Man has been multi-platform for years.
Microsoft has flat out said why they didn’t buy Spider-Man.
@Mikey856 Are You gonna run Linux on that pc?
So basically Microsoft is to be punished because Sony & Nintendo have not invested as heavily into cloud gaming. Got it.
Not true, @StrawberryTurtle. The lead of the CMA is a former Sony lawyer who expressed a bias towards Sony right at the start of their process. And as for the FTC, the Judge pointed out to the FTC that they were batting for Sony and not for consumers. The CMA may have set out their argument as being based on consumers, but I highly doubt that was at the forefront of their minds. The CMA could hardly have said that they were doing this for Sony gamers, but that does not mean that the reason behind their blocking of the deal was not for that exact reason. If you research the original tweets that the CMA put out, you will see their bias towards Sony clearly on display. It was pointed out by many at the time of the tweet. I firmly believe that the CMA were doing the bidding of the FTC. Of that I have little doubt, but in doing so, they did back the wrong side of the argument. It is worth reading what the Judge said about the FTC's case. It just goes to show the personal crusade they went on, and that they had no interest at all in how it affected consumers, just Sony...
Props to the UK for standing strong despite US courts flopping and giving in to the one with more money. What else is new though?
I don't get it. First thing is why can't MS just choose not to sell to people in the UK it's what 60 million people out of 7 billion. Not a large market. It's not like they could even enforce it anyway if someone wants to buy something they will find a way to do it. Second thing. This is video games people. It's not critical to anything. You can live without video games. All for regulating stuff but real stuff. This is literally a toy. Go after Amazon they are an actual monopoly. Plus and this is the real head scratcher. We all know that Sony has way more global share on console than MS does. Even Nintendo sells more consoles. So who are they protecting here Sony? Another multinational corporation? None of it makes any sense at all if you really sit and think about it. Lots of real problems in the world governments should be working on instead of this.
Just let the deal go through. The faster y'all do that. The faster I can be playing Diablo 4 through steam, and be done with Battle.net
I have sons who are call of duty players. And they play literally Fifa, Cod and maybe 1 other game if its in vogue with their mates. I honestly don't know how they have turned out like this 😕.
Anyways my point being is that market of cod and fifa players, although lucrative. Wouldnt be my main priority if I was xbox or ps. Outside of £££ for microtransactions and regular top selling games, they offer limited engagement to the broader library and platform. My mates who used to play cod 15 years ago don't game anymore (mostly preferring golf or netflix). Where as I'm still buying games regularly.
Xbox should exit the market if the acquisition fails
Maybe I missed something. Who is the UK? Some world governing body?
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...