By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
UK Regulator Drops Concerns Over Call of Duty on PlayStation, to Focus on Cloud Streaming

UK Regulator Drops Concerns Over Call of Duty on PlayStation, to Focus on Cloud Streaming - News

by William D'Angelo , posted on 24 March 2023 / 5,712 Views

The UK regulator, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), has published an addendum to its provisional findings on Microsoft's Activision Blizzard acquisition and has now narrowed its scope of concerns.

The CMA has received new evidence that has led it to conclude that if the acquisition is approved it won't significantly lessen competition in the video game console market in the UK. The new evidence shows that Microsoft would lose significant money if it were to make Call of Duty exclusive to Xbox consoles and this would incentivize Microsoft to continue to release Call of Duty games on PlayStation consoles.

"We appreciate the CMA’s rigorous and thorough evaluation of the evidence and welcome its updated provisional findings," said the corporate vice president and deputy general counsel for Microsoft Rima Alaily in a statement sent to The Verge. "This deal will provide more players with more choice in how they play Call of Duty and their favourite games. We look forward to working with the CMA to resolve any outstanding concerns."

UK Regulator Drops Concerns Over Call of Duty on PlayStation, to Focus on Cloud Streaming

"The CMA has received a significant amount of new evidence in response to its original provisional findings," reads the press release from the CMA.

"Having considered this new evidence carefully, together with the wide range of information gathered before those provisional findings were issued, the CMA inquiry group has updated its provisional findings and reached the provisional conclusion that, overall, the transaction will not result in a substantial lessening of competition in relation to console gaming in the UK.

"The most significant new evidence provided to the CMA relates to Microsoft’s financial incentives to make Activision’s games, including Call of Duty (CoD), exclusive to its own consoles. While the CMA’s original analysis indicated that this strategy would be profitable under most scenarios, new data (which provides better insight into the actual purchasing behaviour of CoD gamers) indicates that this strategy would be significantly loss-making under any plausible scenario.

"On this basis, the updated analysis now shows that it would not be commercially beneficial to Microsoft to make CoD exclusive to Xbox following the deal, but that Microsoft will instead still have the incentive to continue to make the game available on PlayStation."

UK Regulator Drops Concerns Over Call of Duty on PlayStation, to Focus on Cloud Streaming

The CMA still has concerns related to cloud gaming services, where it will continue to carefully consider responses provided in its original provisional findings. The CMA will issue its final report by April 26, 2023.

"Provisional findings are a key aspect of the merger process and are explicitly designed to give the businesses involved, and any interested third parties, the chance to respond with new evidence before we make a final decision," said Martin Coleman, the chair of the independent panel of experts conducting this investigation.

"Having considered the additional evidence provided, we have now provisionally concluded that the merger will not result in a substantial lessening of competition in console gaming services because the cost to Microsoft of withholding Call of Duty from PlayStation would outweigh any gains from taking such action.

"Our provisional view that this deal raises concerns in the cloud gaming market is not affected by today’s announcement. Our investigation remains on course for completion by the end of April."

UK Regulator Drops Concerns Over Call of Duty on PlayStation, to Focus on Cloud Streaming

There was a report earlier this week that Microsoft's remedies to the European Commission include concerns over cloud streaming, but makes no mention of video game console rival, Sony with its PlayStation.

The lack of any remedies related to PlayStation suggests the regulator no longer has any concerns about competition in the video game console market.

Microsoft has recently signed multiple 10-year deals to bring Xbox games on PC to three cloud streaming services - Nvidia's GeForce NowBoosteroid, and Ubitus. Microsoft has also signed a 10-year deal with Nintendo to release Call of Duty on Nintendo consoles on day one with full content parity.


A life-long and avid gamer, William D'Angelo was first introduced to VGChartz in 2007. After years of supporting the site, he was brought on in 2010 as a junior analyst, working his way up to lead analyst in 2012 and taking over the hardware estimates in 2017. He has expanded his involvement in the gaming community by producing content on his own YouTube channel and Twitch channel. You can contact the author on Twitter @TrunksWD.


More Articles

108 Comments
aTokenYeti (on 24 March 2023)

This is a massive legal victory for Microsoft because the CMA almost never contradicts provisional findings. The arguments Sony was making were simply untenable and unrealistic.

The chances of this deal going through now are massively increased. The FTC will be under immense pressure to cut a deal before getting humiliated in court

  • +20
Imaginedvl aTokenYeti (on 24 March 2023)

yah the deal is going through, CMA was really the only big road block. Very happy about this.

  • +14
Libara (on 24 March 2023)

CMA took their time but eventually decided to do what's right for the consumer and not sony.

  • +17
Ashadelo (on 24 March 2023)

Diablo 4 gamepass we are waiting for you

  • +14
shikamaru317 Ashadelo (on 24 March 2023)

It might just close in time, CMA and EC should approve next month, and then the rest of the regulators like the Chinese one which were said to be waiting on CMA or EC with plans to copy their decision will quickly decide. The last hurdle remains the FTC with their plans to sue to stop the deal, if they give up it could definitely close by late May/early June, in time for a day one Gamepass release on Diablo 4.

  • +5
smroadkill15 (on 24 March 2023)

Huge victory for MS. This was the biggest hurdle they had to overcome and now they have. Chances of it going through has increased significantly.

  • +13
NobleTeam360 (on 24 March 2023)

So the deal is definitely passing the Cma for sure.

  • +8
ice NobleTeam360 (on 24 March 2023)

hey Noble, big fan

  • +3
NobleTeam360 ice (on 24 March 2023)

Shower me in roses then 🙂

  • +4
ice NobleTeam360 (on 24 March 2023)

I'll shower you in something...

  • +4
NobleTeam360 ice (on 24 March 2023)

….. Alright I’m out.

  • +4
Mike321 ice (on 24 March 2023)

Wait for me I'm coming too

  • +4
ice Mike321 (on 24 March 2023)

Hell yeah, we'll all go to KFC after for a post-workout meal

  • +7
G2ThaUNiT Mike321 (on 24 March 2023)

A wild Mike has appeared!

  • +4
LudicrousSpeed (on 25 March 2023)

Finally they see some reason

  • +3
pikashoe (on 24 March 2023)

I don't think sony fans should be too disappointed by this. I think in the long run they will benefit from this because sony do some of there best work when put under pressure

  • +3
shikamaru317 pikashoe (on 24 March 2023)

On top of that, there is no chance that Xbox doesn't release CoD on PS5, the acquisition cost way too much for them to skip the platform that generates the most CoD sales by far. So not only does Sony have years to develop their own CoD competitor, but they keep getting CoD itself in the meantime, it's a win/win for them.

  • +6
DonFerrari shikamaru317 (on 24 March 2023)
  • -22
Signalstar shikamaru317 (on 24 March 2023)

How is it a win/win when MS can pull all other Acti/Blizzard games from PlayStation whenever they want like they did with future Bethesda games?

  • +1
dane007 Signalstar (on 24 March 2023)

Well Sony only cared about cod which they will get forever. Plus Sony gamers can still play those other games without having to buy an xbox.. Still a win for both sides

  • +2
EpicRandy Signalstar (on 24 March 2023)

Diablo 4 will be out for Ps5 and Diablo 5 is 10years+ away by the Ip's standard. Overwatch 2 just released, the 3 is probably not going to get released this gen either. With Spyro and Crash MS does have more incentive than many other Ips to keep multiplat, but even then a new title is nothing certain nor is their power anything of worry for Sony. A new Guitar Hero would certainly still be multiplat as it is all about explosive momentum. StarCraft may eventually come to Xbox with MS current handling of the Age franchise but it would never have done so with independent ABK. Same for WoW.

So what is Sony really losing here?

  • +4
shikamaru317 Signalstar (on 24 March 2023)

Just because they can doesn't mean they will. $67b is alot of money, ABK made just $1.5b in profit and $7b in revenue last year and that was with all releases being multiplat. CoD in particular apparently sells more copies on PS than it does on Xbox+PC combined. They will pay off the acquisition much, much faster by keeping most ABK games multiplat for at least the remainder of this generation.

Meanwhile the surveys that both Microsoft and the CMA commissioned showed that very few CoD fans on PS would switch to Xbox or PC if Microsoft made CoD exclusive to Xbox and PC. MS would be losing more than half of CoD's revenue for only around 25% of PS CoD fans dropping PS to move to Xbox or PC. It's just too little gain for too little reward this gen. More might switch if Xbox makes CoD exclusive to Xbox and PC from the beginning of next gen, but there is no guarantee Xbox will do that even then, and even if they do, it still gives Sony 6 years or so to continue to strengthen their own first party with acquisitions and expansion and develop their own CoD competitor.

On top of that, Xbox has stated that they want to acquire more studios and possibly even publishers after ABK. They stand a far greater chance of the regulators approving more acquisitions if they live up to their assurances that CoD will remain multiplat.

  • +6
ConservagameR shikamaru317 (on 25 March 2023)

But like you said, for now, at least until next gen.

How many gaming companies and franchises can MS gobble up before 2028 or around that time when next gen launches?
Then if MS decides they have enough that they can do what they want for the most part, so screw multiplatform, then what?
If most if not all of Zenimax, ABK, and whatever else they buy becomes Game Pass exclusive, then what?
Is Sony going to be able to make their own version of every single one of those games, and by 2030? 2035? 2040? Ever?

Just remember, XB has lost MS billions upon billions of dollars, and MS just kept funding it, and they've said recently, all the way from the top, that they're playing the long game, so you don't think MS would be willing to lose billions more to eventually create an extremely strong walled garden?

  • -8
dane007 ConservagameR (on 25 March 2023)

Cod will never be exclusive. Sony won't have to worry.. I would hope ms buys capcom, Sega or even 2k or even ubisoft or even mistwalker. I would love square enix but with their recent hate towards xbox that's highly unlikely they will say yes to a buyout.

Its about time Sony has competiton. Competition brings better stuff for gamers. Sony can easily create a gamepass lookalike. It's just up to sony whether they think its worth it or not

  • +3
ConservagameR dane007 (on 25 March 2023)

You mean like how Sony only ever makes or buys exclusivity?

It is about time someone stepped up to Sony, but we don't let competitors use enhancement drugs to win. That's seen as unfair and is grounds for disqualification.

Companies don't make things that aren't worth it. People buy things that are worth it. If Sony isn't making a Game Pass clone, there's good reason for it right now.

  • -6
EpicRandy ConservagameR (on 25 March 2023)

That's some fearmongering.

How many gaming companies and franchises can MS gobble up before 2028 or around that time when next gen launches?
None that would not be reviewed by regulation.

Then if MS decides they have enough that they can do what they want for the most part, so screw multiplatform, then what?
very much unlikely and it is only a slippery slope argument. If we let MS do A then they will do B and C and D and then MS will bite you in the rear and you will wish you stopped A.

If most if not all of Zenimax, ABK, and whatever else they buy becomes Game Pass exclusive, then what?
Same slippery slope.

Is Sony going to be able to make their own version of every single one of those games, and by 2030? 2035? 2040? Ever?
Let alone that this context for Sony is the result of a series of slippery slope arguments. At no point in time would MS create an anti-competitive market because they would then be forced, by the very same regulator scrutinizing this case, to divest. Regulator don't need a merger to scrutinize things and take legal action. So Sony will always be able to compete and if they fall out of the market it will be most likely from their own doing.


Just remember, XB has lost MS billions upon billions of dollars, and MS just kept funding it, and they've said recently, all the way from the top, that they're playing the long game, so you don't think MS would be willing to lose billions more to eventually create an extremely strong walled garden?
Last we heard from this is from the Epic vs Apple case and it only stated Microsoft never made a profit on Xbox hardware. Xbox overall generate net income pretty much every year and have done so for a very long time at least to my knowledge. Last we heard for GamePass it was also profitable. But if you have better source feel free to share.

  • +6
ConservagameR EpicRandy (on 26 March 2023)

Then passed by regulators because, PS is better at gaming in someway yet so they're not even, never mind MS is still Trillions ahead in worth.
Let's not take useless things like money into account though right. This is a $70 billion acquisition we're talking about after all.

Slippery slope, or 180's?
Phil says don't fear prices aren't going up like others who say they have to, only to shortly later explain they have to go up as well but we'll pad it with a holiday sale beforehand.
Phil says XB is all about BC. Then BC stops way early because XB isn't really all about BC once it get's a little tough, like making games.
Phil says XB is all about cross play and sharing, only to then say some Zenimax games will be exclusive, and now ABK.

We'll buy everything and give it away dirt cheap, while you try and do what we should've been doing the last 20 years, ok?
That COD deal sucked but this deal is AMAZING, eh Jim!

Dane007 sent me an article showing XB was losing billions with 360 but that it didn't matter because MS made that much in like a month or a quarter back then with other non XB products so no big deal. The article said it like that too. No big.
It's not like the CEO came out and said they're backing XB hardcore now and are in it for the long haul..

  • -10
EpicRandy ConservagameR (on 27 March 2023)

Then passed by regulators because, PS is better at gaming in someway yet so they're not even, never mind MS is still Trillions ahead in worth.
Let's not take useless things like money into account though right. This is a $70 billion acquisition we're talking about after all.

The only thing that interest the regulator in the end is the state of competitiveness in every market impacted by merger. This as nothing to do with the buying entity financial capacity or the amount associated with the merger as they themselves means nothing to the end result competitiveness of the markets. However both of those value certainly increase scrutiny from regulator as we've seen extensively here.

Slippery slope, or 180's? [...]
Your argument were slippery slopes, absolutely no doubt about it. changing subject will not change this fact.

Dane007 sent me an article showing XB was losing billions with 360 but that it didn't matter because MS made that much in like a month or a quarter back then with other non XB products so no big deal. The article said it like that too. No big.
It's not like the CEO came out and said they're backing XB hardcore now and are in it for the long haul..

Those article were from 2006 and 2008 respectively, so 1 and 3 years into the 360 generation and would include the investment to fix the RROD for the later. They do not apply to the financial status at the end of the 360 life and even less so to the Xbox division today. Let alone that selling hardware at a loss is a practice first known and documented to have been used by Sony with the PS2 and that to this day Sony's PS3 is still the unmatched king in that regards taking up to 300$/unit loss at release.

  • +1
ConservagameR EpicRandy (on 27 March 2023)

Well when your companies actions have been consistent slippery slopes, it's hard not to assume slippery slopes.
Unless words or actions mean nothing, in which case..

  • -3
EpicRandy ConservagameR (on 28 March 2023)

Well when your arguments have been consistently and conveniently crafted with a partisan take against one company, Its hard to attach any value to them.
Unless you would use facts for a change, in which case..

  • +3
ConservagameR EpicRandy (on 28 March 2023)

In which case.. you'd just come up with another poor excuse to cover for your beloved XB.
I'm not the one who admitted taking the side of MS. That was you. So I guess your takes meant nothing than?

  • -3
EpicRandy ConservagameR (on 28 March 2023)

And again no facts only attacks, I do not share your dichotomic warring view of the video game market. If I take issue with something here it is poorly made arguments that don't rely on facts or that rely on such twisted and/or out of context ones that they don't do justice to reality.
And where I'm supposed to have admitted to taking the side of MS, or is it another case of you twisting reality to cater to your agenda. And most of my arguments rely on facts and those have value regardless of my supposed bias.
EX: you said MS lost billions upon billions with Xbox and pointed Dane argument for the source.
I pointed the articles in Dane's argument are very old and don't apply today.
Did I mention that cause I have an agenda? Not matter the answer you come up with the fact still remains that those doesn't apply today.

  • +3
ConservagameR EpicRandy (on 28 March 2023)

EpicRandy in reply to ConservagameR (2 days ago)

You want to focus on impact on Sony, I focus on the benefits to Xbox


This is from the other article, Microsoft: 10 Years is Long Enough for Sony to Develop an Alternative to Call of Duty - News

  • -3
EpicRandy ConservagameR (on 28 March 2023)

Tank for proving my point that you twist fact to cater to your agenda. You obviously and conveniently left out most of the quote which is : " You want to focus on impact on Sony, I focus on the benefits to Xbox, competition in general, worker condition inside ABK, possibility of Ips revival amongst others."
Meaning that while you focus on a supposed console war I view the deal as MS upping their game with many benefits all around.
I can quote myself in other discussion saying that I would support such action by Sony too "I welcome every acquisition and reaction from the competition" "Sure I might end up, as a consumer, on the losing side of some deal but never will I hold it against any entity for fighting for themselves. " said in the "where-do-you-stand-on-microsoft-buying-activisionblizzard" thread

  • +2
ConservagameR EpicRandy (on 28 March 2023)

Obviously and conveniently, yes. So would you care to explain:

Where's your facts proving the acquisition will only be positive or guaranteed more positive than negative?
Where's your facts proving MS will fix the many employee problems ABK continues to have?

And where do I say I'm solely on Sony's side and think MS can't do anything right?

  • -2
EpicRandy ConservagameR (on 28 March 2023)

Where's your facts proving the acquisition will only be positive. Never claimed it was only positive.

guaranteed more positive than negative?
Maybe the fact the plaintiffs are very scarce.
And the facts MS proposed mitigation to the worst of possible impact.
And the facts that many other negatives are no different than already common practice in the industry.
And the facts that and increase in competition is to be expected as a result.
And the facts that the most vocal plaintiff saw pretty much all their argument tossed aside by most regulators.

Where's your facts proving MS will fix the many employee problems ABK continues to have?
The simple fact that the possibility of a change is better than status quo supported by reports of working condition prior to the deal announcement and effort by ABK to crush any unions efforts.
The fact that MS is more open to unions than ABK.
The fact that unions across the US and EU have voiced their support of the deal.
The fact that MS is consistently ranking as a top employer for worker condition year after year.

And I said the argument you use and the way use them shows a very strong agenda on your part. This does not entail you would outright say you're solely on Sony's side.

  • +1
ConservagameR EpicRandy (on 29 March 2023)

I don't see any negatives in there, only a minor mention that there may be some. Looks like only positives. Not surprising since you said you're only focusing on the benefits for XB.

Those are not facts as to the outcome. Assuming there will be a certain outcome does not make that assumption a fact, and pretending like the fact, that someone made the assumption, counts as a fact, shows a very strong agenda on your part.

You're taking available information, and guessing at the future with it, so how is that any different? Because it's you making the assumption and not me?

  • -5
EpicRandy ConservagameR (on 29 March 2023)

I don't see any negatives in there, only a minor mention that there may be some.
What I needed to list those now and not just recognize there are? sound much like a fishing expedition to me but ok. So far there's only 2 main drawbacks or negative points to this acquisition that have been identified by regulators and/or exposed by competitor to which I agree they are.
1) The lost of ABK as a independent entity
2) The potential decrease in overall competitiveness in the emergent cloud gaming market.

Regarding 1. there are many negatives points depending on how granular you want to go but only 1 have been identified as contentious by the competition and 1 regulator (FTC). Which is the potential total or partial loss of access to CoD for competitor. Which have been ruled has highly unlikely by both the EU and CMA even when not taking into account the proposed mitigation by MS and knowing MS actually did this with other less renowned Ips.

Regarding 2. this have been identified by the FTC, CMA and EU and so far MS have proposed quite extensive mitigation. I lack data to judge by myself how much of a negative this is so I'll wait for the final judgement of at least the CMA or EU to forge my own opinions on how serious it is/was a concern.

Not surprising since you said you're only focusing on the benefits for XB.
Which is a biased assumptions based on a already proven conveniently cut down quote

Those are not facts as to the outcome. Assuming there will be a certain outcome does not make that assumption a fact
Never painted my argument as factual I said I rely on fact to make my argument. So we agree here.

and pretending like the fact, that someone made the assumption, counts as a fact, shows a very strong agenda on your part.
I did not do that either, so far the only fact you seems to rely on to show my supposed agenda is the fact I don't agree to your arguments/conclusion.

You're taking available information, and guessing at the future with it, so how is that any different?
I'm taking information as it is and put particular emphasis to make certain I don't interpret/use/related to it in a biased way, your taking it as you would like it to be. Maybe it is wrong of me or maybe not to assume you have a agenda against MS or pro Sony but you use argument fallacies with quite staggering consistency:

  • You conveniently cut down quote or only use convenient interpretation of a quote or take quote out of context to support your argument. This is called confirmation bias fallacy.
  • You use slippery slope fallacy to try prove a point.
  • You also often make argument that suggest a negative point without actually making one like "Let's not take useless things like money into account though right. This is a $70 billion acquisition we're talking about after all." this is called fallacy of innuendo.
  • you often change subject when confronted on your argument like earlier in the conversation when I pointed your argument as being slippery slope to which you replied :"Slippery slope, or 180's? [...]". this is called a red herring fallacy
  • +1
ConservagameR EpicRandy (on 30 March 2023)

-The cut down quote was only to save time and led to the same outcome anyway, one you clearly didn't see coming, so no confirmation bias fallacy.
-You also use poor information to make your assumptions. I could also easily say they're slippery as well, but would they be? Yours weren't all slippery, so I won't be pretending as well.
-You are often making points that would be positive for XB, which you admitted to doing. My points all have merit. If you're going to compare, take it all into account and adjust accordingly. The regulators clearly did a poor job of that. Those idiots think MS only cares about making money when it comes to XB.
-Just because you call some points slippery slope doesn't mean they are. If I'm questioning it, and you're not taking that into consideration, that's not my problem. If you're disagreeing and are positive you're right, since you're so positive for XB, then we simply disagree then.

No point in going over the rest as they are just more disagreement, like the other conversations, and like those other conversations, probably best we agree to disagree and you stated there.

  • -2
EpicRandy ConservagameR (on 30 March 2023)

-The cut down quote was only to save time and led to the same outcome anyway, one you clearly didn't see coming, so no confirmation bias fallacy.
Except your cut down version change the meaning of it and the actual context of the original quote actually goes against what you try to portray so yes this is 100% confirmation bias fallacy

You also use poor information to make your assumptions. I could also easily say they're slippery as well, but would they be? Yours weren't all slippery, so I won't be pretending as well.
Then point which one are poor and state why they are, so we can debate them on the merits and if you make good point I will take it into consideration, but until you do that this statement is only akin to what you would want the situation to be it and not as it is, so it as no value.

You are often making points that would be positive for XB
And this is wrong to you? should everyone overlook any positivity for Xbox in your mind? Or do you think because somebody make a positive point for one actor it makes them automatically biased toward them? If that's the case I guess I'm biased towards every actor in the industry third-party included. Again I did not judge you on your position but by the way your making your arguments which clear shows they have very little substance to them and fueled mainly by belief and emotional response and not from a critical thinking point of view.

. If you're going to compare, take it all into account and adjust accordingly.
That's just a lazy argument to make as I am already taking everything of substance into account here and judged the benefits outweighed the negatives. What have you done outside of insinuating evil intent in MS action. You even made me list the negatives for you. Have you listed the positives and negatives? And sorry to break it to you but "MS have too much money" and variation of this that you seems to be fond of is in no way a negative or positive in and of itself.

The regulators clearly did a poor job of that. Those idiots think MS only cares about making money when it comes to XB.
Really? all the regulators? So now your placing yourself above regulators? your beliefs outweigh their findings? Care to prove your point? Link to industry expert opinion? Something ... anything? That's a big enough subject to make your own thread about it, I'm waiting for it in the forums.

Just because you call some points slippery slope doesn't mean they are. If I'm questioning it, and you're not taking that into consideration, that's not my problem. If you're disagreeing and are positive you're right, since you're so positive for XB, then we simply disagree then.
I have pointed to them exactly and explained why they were to which you did not question but tried to change subject.

Anyway as far as I'm concern this conversation is over it as gone long enough, the article is long dead and the subjects to which you try to steer the conversation to are large enough to merits there own thread.

  • +1
ConservagameR EpicRandy (on 30 March 2023)

The more you spin, the more you seem to write. Not surprised.

I'm not interested in your agenda. Try and convince someone else because you're not fooling me.

  • -6
EpicRandy ConservagameR (on 30 March 2023)

"The more you spin, the more you seem to write. Not surprised."
a lie can be told in one sentence, but the truth often requires a whole book. So yes to factually take down your lazy biased and fallacious arguments it takes a lot of writing.

  • +1
ConservagameR EpicRandy (on 30 March 2023)

Lies, upon lies, upon lies, like a house of cards.

Some stacks just keep getting taller and taller.

  • -5
EpicRandy ConservagameR (on 30 March 2023)

You can keep telling that to yourself as much as you want it doesn't make it true. Funny how you can never substantiate your claim though.

  • +1
ConservagameR EpicRandy (on 30 March 2023)

Odd how you never find my explanations valid. I guess I just have zero merit in life. Maybe I should start telling myself that?

  • -5
EpicRandy ConservagameR (on 30 March 2023)

Odd how you never find my explanations valid.
That's the crux of the issue, you make claims and proceed to not substantiate those with evidence or explanation instead you make other claims and the cycle repeat.

I guess I just have zero merit in life. Maybe I should start telling myself that?
It's either passive aggressive or victim fallacy or appeal to pity which is another fallacy. Just substantiate your claims.

  • +1
ConservagameR EpicRandy (on 30 March 2023)

Neither do you, as I've said, so you're just as bad if that's how you see it.
Again, what's the point if nothing I ever say is good enough for you?

Yet you continue. Almost like an abusive drunk who won't stop beating his wife because he's too drunk to understand or care.

  • -6
EpicRandy ConservagameR (on 30 March 2023)

I have substantiated plenty of my statement you just ignore those. It takes two to make a debate but you crossed the line of decency here.

  • +1
ConservagameR EpicRandy (on 30 March 2023)

Well see now that's even more clear.
You explain but I ignore.
I explain but you know I'm wrong.

I can only make sense of that mindset if you're drunk. Otherwise you can't be genuine or are abusive, which is just sad.

  • -5
EpicRandy ConservagameR (on 30 March 2023)

Resolving to personal attack is also a fallacy, it is unnecessary, uncalled for and again unsubstantiated.

  • +1
ConservagameR EpicRandy (on 30 March 2023)

I guess you could also be The Analyst but then that would mean.. these blue pills..

  • -5
EpicRandy ConservagameR (on 30 March 2023)

Cause comparing me to a movie villain is supposed to be better or more meaningful?

  • +1
scrapking ConservagameR (on 26 March 2023)

Probably not many more. Given all the regulator scrutiny over buying ABK, they'll probably have to take a break now for several years before any signifiant purchases.

  • +1
scrapking Signalstar (on 26 March 2023)

They could happen. And if it does, Sony could blame themselves for focusing their attention (and therefore media and regulator attention too) solely on Call of Duty.

That said, I don't think it will happen. Minecraft wasn't made exclusive. Psychonauts wasn't made exclusive. Fallout 76 and Elder Scrolls Online have continued to receive updates on every system they've come out on. Doom Eternal got a comprehensive free PS5 update, one that would likely have cost $10 had it been a Sony game.

My guess is that ABK franchises will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for multiplatform suitability. Perhaps the next Spyro will come to Nintendo and Xbox. Perhaps the next Crash or Tony Hawk will come to PS and Xbox. That kind of thing.

  • +2
tslog (on 24 March 2023)

So all those liars who said that this would make Xbox a “monopoly” were outrageous liars.
Anyone honest knew this deal would make Xbox & Sony roughly equal.

Interesting if they will feel ashamed. I don’t think they will. They want to keep lying.
Jim Ryan lies were completely fruitless. Sucks to be him.

  • +1
2zosteven tslog (on 24 March 2023)

Sony will still be ahead after this deal wraps up, Now Take2 would have been a different story! almost everyone plays GTA!

  • 0
Qwark 2zosteven (on 25 March 2023)

Microsoft basically has unlimited funds and has already said that this won't be their last acquisition. So they are probably already looking what to buy next. EA, Take 2 or CDPR are all good investments.

  • -1
2zosteven Qwark (on 25 March 2023)

Take2 would change the game!

  • +4
Qwark 2zosteven (on 26 March 2023)

So would EA don't underestimate how big sportgames are.

  • -3
scrapking Qwark (on 26 March 2023)

And don't underestimate the ability to bring back something good, like Medal of Honour, or Battlefield Bad Company, to create a competitor to CoD.

Also, EA has sooooo many franchises with deep nostalgia attached to them that could be reworked to be successful today. Ones that stand out for me include:

  • the "Strike" series (Desert Strike, Jungle Strike, etc.)
  • Road Rash
  • Burnout (imagine porting it to the Forza Horizon engine!)
  • Army of Two
  • Mercenaries (seriously, bring this back!)
  • SSX

    Everyone will have their own list of beloved EA games that have potential to be successful today with proper care and attention. The point is that their back catalogue is pretty epic, actually.

    But Take2 or EA is too big to be purchased by Microsoft, if the ABK deal goes through. Post-ABK, Microsoft will only be able to buy very small studios, at least for a while, IMO.

  • 0
EpicRandy tslog (on 24 March 2023)

I would say there's a lot of passionate and emotional response based either on willfully or unknowingly wrong assumption. That's true with every fan group and on both side here. No need to assume one's mens rea and call anyone a liar or that they should be ashamed.
If you ask the definition of monopoly to 30 user you'd probably get 30 variations.

But yeah Jim Ryan effort were fruitless here but it sure doesn't sucks to be him. He lost this round for sure let see how he respond.

  • +1
Qwark EpicRandy (on 25 March 2023)

Sint has 5 billion reserved for acquisitions for the entire company (not just PS), that won't even let them buy Square or Capcom.

I don't think Sony can compete with MS when it comes to buying big gaming companies. A company like CDPR/Bungee really is the biggest they could buy, with those companies probably deciding a lot of the terms.

Sony will probably try to buy:

  • Deviation games
  • Studio making Stellar Blade
  • They might also go for Bloober Team

    Perhaps they will take a minority share in both Capcom and Square, but I don't think they can afford either.

  • +1
EpicRandy Qwark (on 25 March 2023)

I would not discard Sony's ability to make large aquisition. AMD announced their intention to buy Xilinx for $35B when they themselves were valued at like $50-60B by doing a mostly stock transaction. Sony is Worth close to $110B so they should be able to make large tranasaction should they have the will to do so. Company like EA is definitlty not out of Sony's reach would they go all in.

  • +1
Qwark EpicRandy (on 25 March 2023)

From a financial point of view they could, however the shareholders of Sony have reserved a budget of 5 billion for acquisitions.

It isn't realistic to expect they would fly with making an acquisition that's ten times as big, or even one that's twice as big, which would be needed for smaller established publishers.

Sony isn't into mega acquisitions, which also has a bit to do with it not being an American company, since they are in general more willing to fork over much more money for acquisitions.

  • +1
EpicRandy Qwark (on 25 March 2023)

We agree it's unlikely but the fact they set aside $5B for acquisition as more to do with announcing their color as of today than their actual limit, it does not mean much to measure their overall acquisition potential.

  • +2
G2ThaUNiT (on 26 March 2023)

This entire ordeal has definitely shown how too emotionally invested we as gamers get into stupid crap like this lol.

  • 0
JackHandy (on 25 March 2023)

Everyone, clam down. Let's remember we're all brothers and sisters here. We're all gamers, and we should be sticking together, no matter what flag we subscribe to. Try to remember that there are real people on the other side of these little square boxes, and be polite... please! lol

  • 0
Ayla (on 24 March 2023)

A good day for Microsoft, America and freedom. Tencent is the real enemy.

  • -7
Qwark Ayla (on 25 March 2023)

To whom, what kind of real negative impact have they made on the gaming industry. Practices like loot boxes etc. existed long before them. Or is it simply because they are a Chinese company and with China being the new Soviet Union it's automatically evil.

  • 0
shikamaru317 Qwark (on 26 March 2023)

Well, the Chinese government does require all Chinese companies, including Tiktok owner ByteDance and Tencent, to hand over any data they collect about their users to the Chinese government. It's why there is currently talk in the US congress of banning Tiktok in the US (it was already banned on government devices back in 2020 I believe, the article I found about it said that Canada and the EU had also already banned Tiktok on Government devices back in 2020).

  • 0
DonFerrari (on 24 March 2023)

So CMA wasn't bought out by Sony, who could guess?

  • -7
dane007 DonFerrari (on 24 March 2023)

It's more like cma saw the proper evidence not the ones that sony was giving them before. I wonder if the lost of games that sony koneyhatted helped as well

  • +6
ConservagameR dane007 (on 25 March 2023)

Their conclusion is plain stupidity though and shows they don't have a clue how the console industry works.

Does the CMA not know about this company called PS, owned by Sony, who has a ton of exclusives that are a big reason why the PS brand is so strong?
Are they not aware of the fact that by making those games non exclusive, Sony would make way more money (in the short term)?
Care to explain to everyone why PS has any exclusives at all then?

COD isn't a problem under MS because making it exclusive makes no sense because they wouldn't make as much money?
How about Zenimax exclusives now or in the future? How about any of the other AB franchise exclusives now or in the future?
Why is Halo, Gears, and Forza still exclusive if MS would make more money by having them be multiplatform?

Most important, isn't it XB who's lost billions and billions over the years yet MS keeps funding it anyway? Yet the CMA thinks making COD exclusive and losing hundreds of millions or more would be a problem for MS?

Siding with MS here is fine if they can make a reasonable argument, but this explanation as to why is just boneheaded.

  • -8
dane007 ConservagameR (on 25 March 2023)

There's no franchise in the gaming industry that can make billions every year with their new game.. Hence why cod can never be exclusive. As for other other games from zenimax, ms has honored those that were signed prior to the buy out. Games like eso, fallout and starfield takes ages to make and won't make billions of dollars the way cod does. So having those not on ps console won't hurt ms financially. However thoseg games will help gamepass gogrow which is what ms wants. Just look candy crush makes a dhittv one of money and plus cod will do too. That can help ms keep gepass price the same and then can help them invest to the studios that they will have after abk is finalised.


Sony also alot during the majority of ps3 life cycle.

What about all the third party that sony money hats for generations to comes. They been doing that since ps1 days. How's that any better?

  • +3
ConservagameR dane007 (on 25 March 2023)

COD isn't new. GTA makes just shy of a billion.

MS has, or had $120 billion in cash to spend. Cash in their pockets. Buying ABK is an extra. MS didn't lose anything financially by acquiring it. They traded digital dollars for physical and digital assets.

You know what will make Game Pass grow even faster? Making Zenimax and ABK games exclusive there (eventually).

Sony didn't lose anything with PS3. They just ate into much of their past profits. Same as MS with ABK, just different type of situation. Sony didn't plan on that, but MS did here.

It's not. Why didn't MS just money hat whatever they wanted then? You talk about losses, how much did MS just waste on ABK when they could've spent far less and money hatted all the things the really wanted, including from ABK?

  • -4
dane007 ConservagameR (on 25 March 2023)

Gta comes once every generation. GTAV is an outlier because it lasted 2 and abit generation. Cod however had a new game every year and every year it makes billions of dollar. There's no annual franchise that's as big as cod.

They will lose alot if they kept cod exclusive to one platform and that's because most of cods money is made on playstation.

In the early years they lost alot before the slim came out which made some money back
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog/2008/jun/25/sonyhaslostmorethan3bill

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/technology/gamesblog/2006/nov/17/sonylosescash

If u are going to have discussion please do some research before replying.

Ms won't be losing any money with abk. Candy crush alone will make billions. And then cod will aloe up the rest and more because it will now target switch and many other platforms. Remember they are billions just being on pc and xbox and playstation. Once abk goes through it will probably double or triple that.

Because ms wanted to have a level playing field in terms of studios. It's faster to just buy them out fully they paying them out for generations. Remember it takes time to invest, create a new studio , hire enough people to make a game in the studio. It's hard enough to hire people that you will end up poaching people from the competition. Once u have done that, it would be couple of years wasted. Then that new studio u have established will then have to brainstorm for a gams
That takes at least 4 to 5 years. That would be totally 10 years. That's one generation gone and some of the new gen.. That's just 1 studio. How do u expect them to compete with that strategy. When you buy established developers, they can go straight to making the game. There's no wait and hire people. Money can be given to them to create a higher budget game. Its just a faster way. Plus with gamepass no one is losing out because again u don't need an xbox to access gamepass

  • +3
ConservagameR dane007 (on 26 March 2023)

So you meant to say nobody can make an exclusive or annual game that makes billions per year?
Maybe I should've done my research to find out what you really meant?

There's losing money, and then there's actually losing money.
One is business talk that means you planned to make more but didn't, which is nonsense because how can they know how much something will definitely make, or a product went negative but didn't break the bank.
The other is when someone says they lost a $5 bill they had on them, and now it's gone forever.

If Sony went all in on gaming, and borrowed everything they could to buy every (big) developer and publisher, to compete with Nintendo asap, with PS1, can you imagine what things would be like now?
MS wouldn't have stood a chance with XB to begin with. MS would've had to do this rapid mega buyout right off the bat, and even then, PS would've been so much bigger and wealthier they could've outbid MS here and there where they strategically wanted.
Would that have made gaming better from PS1 until now?
Why does it make it alright for MS to decide to compete with buyouts until they've eventually and quickly acquired so much that they're now automatically the industry leader in the not so distant future?

I can't win the game, so I'll change which rules I want changed, which greatly benefits me but not you, then I'll finally have proven to everyone that I beat you at the game.
No. No you didn't. You made a new game, because of your new rules that weren't agreed upon, while hurting the other game, then quickly took away everyone else's chance to play your game because you already have all the pieces.

  • -3
dane007 ConservagameR (on 25 March 2023)

Having cod on gamepass will help it grow because people will have a choice with paying 70usd vs playing on gamepass. It's a no brainer to choose gamepass method as its cheaper. With zenimax ms just had to honor those that signed contract with Sony. Rest would be exclusive. I would imagine with abk it will just be cod and candy crush that won't be exclusive
but the rest will.

Read an article few days back where they said that once abk deal goes through, gamepass subscribers will jump to 50 million. That would be a massive jump if that happens

  • +4
ConservagameR dane007 (on 26 March 2023)

What about the regulator commission who found that barely anybody will leave PS for XB because of what MS will do with COD?
Are they wrong? Were they wrong about anything else?

Last article said Game Pass subs were a lot higher than it actually was. Phil even had to come out and carefully say it was off by quite a bit, which meant way off. It'll help, but it's exclusivity that's going to do most of it.

  • -3
Qwark dane007 (on 25 March 2023)

FIFA usually sells more than 15 million per entry, which basically makes a billion a year. Sure it isn't profit, but COD and FIFA do make a billion dollar a year in revenue as a franchise.

  • +1
AJNShelton ConservagameR (on 25 March 2023)

Quick note: there is no company called PS

And exclusives aren't the reason why Sony sells better than Xbox

  • 0
ConservagameR AJNShelton (on 25 March 2023)

SIE is the proper company name in short, or something like that I believe.

Yes, Sony isn't a one trick pony, but listing all the tricks wasn't required.

  • -3
AJNShelton ConservagameR (on 25 March 2023)

Yes it’s Sony Interactive Entertainement indeed

  • 0
ConservagameR AJNShelton (on 26 March 2023)

SIE. Not SIEI.
Indeed is a different company.

  • -4
EpicRandy DonFerrari (on 24 March 2023)

Very few user expressed this idea, I don't think I could remember more than 2 or 3 but by the same token other were expressing the idea that regulators that had already approved of the deals were the ones corrupted. Then again it was a very slim minority.

  • +5
Imaginedvl DonFerrari (on 24 March 2023)

You keep coming up with this in every article about the CMA... Nobody said that (or if someone did, it is def. a minority).
Sony clearly gave numbers and work their ass hard to try to convince the CMA with their own ideas of what would be the result of this acquisition. And this was very obvious for everyone unless you have been living under a rock.

  • +7
AJNShelton DonFerrari (on 25 March 2023)

If tomorrow you see a "we're not 100% sure about Microsoft" you'll see people saying a check has been made overnight

  • -4
EpicRandy AJNShelton (on 25 March 2023)

yeah like 1-2 person that'll get downvoted by literally everyone else.

  • +1
ClassicGamingWizzz (on 24 March 2023)
  • -21
Comment was deleted...
Imaginedvl Zyphe (on 24 March 2023)

come on...

  • +3
shikamaru317 Zyphe (on 24 March 2023)

Now, now, no need to gloat, though I know it's tempting with the way certain Sony fans here on VGC behaved in the article comments on previous articles about the acquisition. Best to be gracious in victory.

  • +8

Who was it lol?
Another comment deleted by a mod to save a xbox from a ban lol

  • -8
zero129 ClassicGamingWizzz (on 25 March 2023)

since when did Xbox's start getting banned on vgc?

  • +2
G2ThaUNiT ClassicGamingWizzz (on 26 March 2023)

For what it’s worth, it was a Nintendo fan :P

  • +5