What do you need to know
- Microsoft’s Frank X. Shaw has claimed that Sony recently lied to European Union (EU) regulators about its ongoing acquisition of Activision Blizzard.
- Specifically, Shaw says that Sony told the EU that Microsoft was unwilling to offer the PlayStation maker parity with Call of Duty, even though Microsoft had previously proposed a 10-year deal.
- Microsoft goes on to say that it wants to bring games to more people, not fewer, and that making Call of Duty exclusive to Xbox would “defy commercial logic.”
While Microsoft’s planned $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard continues to draw close scrutiny from regulators, the company has claimed that Sony, the maker of the PlayStation and one of the deal’s biggest opponents, recently lied to the European Union ( EU) about his plans for Call of Duty. While Microsoft has publicly committed to keeping the popular first-person shooter franchise on PlayStation once the merger closes, the firm says Sony has been suggesting otherwise to officials in Brussels. This news comes as EU reportedly plans to send Microsoft an antitrust warning about the deal
“I heard that Sony is informing people in Brussels that Microsoft is not willing to offer them Call of Duty parity if we acquire Activision. Nothing could be further from the truth.” wrote Frank X. Shaw, corporate vice president of communications at Microsoft. “We have made it clear that we have offered Sony a 10-year contract to give them parity in time, content, features, quality, gameplay and every other aspect of the game. We also said that we are happy to do this.” enforceable through contract, regulatory agreements or other means”.
A series often home to countless players and hundreds of millions of dollars in sales, Call of Duty is undoubtedly one of the biggest entertainment franchises in the world. Initially, Microsoft offered Sony terms to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation for three years after completing its acquisition of Activision Blizzard, which CEO Jim Ryan called it “inadequate” in a sentence. following this, Microsoft offered Sony a 10-year contract, with the two companies reportedly meeting to discuss specific details. The full outcome of these talks is unknown, but based on Shaw’s public statements, it appears that no agreement was reached.
We have made it clear that we have offered Sony a 10-year contract to give them parity in time, content, features, quality, gameplay and every other aspect of the game. We’ve also said that we’re happy to make this enforceable through contract, regulatory agreements, or other means. 2/4January 28, 2023
Microsoft has repeatedly claimed that making Call of Duty exclusive to its Xbox consoles would not be in line with its plans, with Microsoft Gaming CEO Phil Spencer stating that Microsoft is acquiring Activision Blizzard primarily for its dominant position in mobile gaming and that the company “wants to be where the gamers are, especially with franchises the size of Minecraft and Call of Duty.” In an opinion piece Microsoft President Brad Smith also wrote that making Call of Duty exclusive would be “economically irrational” as “a vital portion of Activision Blizzard’s ‘Call of Duty’ revenue comes from PlayStation game sales.” Shaw reiterates these arguments in his own comments.
“Sony is the console market leader and it would defy business logic for us to exclude PlayStation gamers from the Call of Duty ecosystem,” Shaw said. “Our goal is to bring Call of Duty and other games, like we did with Minecraft, to more people around the world so they can play where and how they want.”
Regulators are expected to make final decisions on the merger in the spring, and the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) plans to share a preliminary decision in late January or February. The EU and CMA are scheduled to deliver their verdicts on April 11 and 26, respectively.
Notably, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has already filed a lawsuit to block the deal, citing recently acquired ZeniMax’s upcoming Xbox and Windows PC exclusive games, such as Starfield and Redfall, as examples of why the company cannot be trusted. (Microsoft never committed to making these games cross-platform.) earlier this week a suggested report that the FTC timed their lawsuit to manipulate the EU and discourage the regulator from settling with Microsoft regarding its concerns about the deal.
Windows Central’s opinion
Between reports that the FTC timed its anti-merger lawsuit to manipulate the EU into avoiding deals with Microsoft and Sony outright lying about Microsoft’s planned commitments, it’s hard not to laugh at how ridiculous things have become. Assuming Shaw’s claims are true, Sony’s approach to opposing the merger has reached a new level of bad faith. It reminds me of when the company complained that Microsoft might raise Xbox prices after buying Activision Blizzardmere months later increased the cost of its own PS5 systems.
Admittedly, Microsoft may not be being honest right here. Unlike Sony, however, it’s proven to be really willing to come to the table, with the company publicly stating multiple times that it is happy to work with regulators and deal with the competition. In particular, Microsoft even entered into 10-year commitments to put Call of Duty on Steam and Nintendo Switch, showing his willingness to bring Activision’s flagship shooter to platforms other than his own. For those reasons, and because of Sony’s conduct thus far, I am strongly inclined to believe Shaw’s claim.
At the end of the day, it’s becoming increasingly clear that Sony is willing to say or do whatever it takes to obstruct the Microsoft acquisition, and that now includes outright lying to regulators. So I ask this: who is Really trying to stifle the competition?
