Xbox’s Activision deal reportedly set for in-depth probes in the UK and Europe

Microsoft is reportedly facing prolonged investigations into its proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard in both the UK and Europe.

Last week, the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said its inquiry into the $68.7 billion merger may be expanded to a second phase due to a number of antitrust concerns.

Notably, it said it was worried about the impact the deal could have on PlayStation’s ability to compete, given that the deal would see Microsoft gain ownership of the Call of Duty series.

According to the Financial Times, the CMA is expected to officially expand its antitrust probe this week after Microsoft chose not to offer any remedies to its concerns at this stage.

Phase two of the CMA’s investigation would see it appoint an independent panel to scrutinise the deal in further detail and evaluate if it’s more likely than not to result in a substantial lessening of competition.

According to the FT, regulators and others involved in the deal are also expecting a lengthy EU probe once Microsoft officially files its case in Brussels soon.

“It is a big deal, a difficult deal,” a Brussels source said to be familiar with the transaction told the publication. “It needs an extensive investigation.”

[Orchard]

Everyone expected this acquisition to be scrutinized, even Microsoft - that's why they tempered expectations that it won't close until 2023. The internet will explode on the day that this deal closes.

Looking forward to this closing though, this year will be the last year I sink money into Call of Duty.

[SullysCigar]

Are you not approving this one?

Tbf, it's only right it should be looked at independently. Make sure all the 'I's are dotted and 'T's are crossed. It's a big deal, after all.

[Orchard]

There was a valid report on it from Christopher at the time I commented. I have now approved it.

And yes, a deal of this size (within and outside of gaming) should always be reviewed.

EDIT: Scrap that, noticed an issue with the article.

[Gamingsince1981]

Look forward to it but it has a chance it won't be legally allowed, I guess we will see, but so far it's not looking that good considering MS aren't giving any concessions or leeway.

[Orchard]

If you read the source article (which unfortunately is behind one of those randomized paywalls), it says companies rarely offer any concessions in phase 1 because they are very rarely accepted in phase 1 - so you end up double dipping and offering extra concessions in phase 2.

[Elda]

If you're paying or paid for a GP subscription you will still put money into COD just not at retail price.

[Father__Merrin]

If you play cod it's likely your gonna grab a lot of playtime few months at least. £11.99 a month for a few months. I can't believe they still believe it's free

[Orchard]

No one is saying GP is free. But I already subscribe to gamepass, so assuming they don't increase the price or add extra tiers when COD arrives in it, it's just a value add for me, and yes, lets me stop sinking money into COD.

[generic-user-name]

The Internet already exploded when it was announced. It'll only explode over this again if the deal 'doesn't' go through.

[Elda]

Anytime your spending money every month on GP you're still paying to play is all I'm saying.

[Jin_Sakai]

“Microsoft lawyers respond to CMA by offering no remedies/commitments“

It’s pretty clear they’re confident the deal will close then.

[Destiny1080]

they offered ''no'' remedies to the concerns of the regulators and you interpret that as a done deal

[Gamingsince1981]

Him and orchard are a bit too confident, these looks into the deal could stop it dead in its tracks if they think it will be bad for competition. The laws in Europe are much more harsh compared to the US where monopolies are seen as a good thing.

[Jin_Sakai]

I’ll come back to these comments when then deal is complete next year.

[crazyCoconuts]

MS is no stranger to these proceedings. I'd bet there's a well rehearsed dance that goes on in these negotiations, and playing hard ball might be part of it. How many times have we heard about the EU doing a "probe" on US businesses only for it to go away after a substantial "fine" has been paid...

[Profchaos]

They offered no remedies as stated in other articles because there is almost nothing they can offer to satisfy concerns at this stage. They will not hold agreements and offers to serve a game up for x years as a remedy.

Just reiterating what I read ms will have a chance to rebutted at an appropriate time now is not it

[blacktiger]

No it means that they won't hold anything exclusive or disrupt the service such as say since Playstation is call of duty's biggest customer, they will shut it down or change things around because they own it.

That's what it means. If they won't offer to hold it for few years then regulators will look into it Whether it's fair or not against monopoly fps game.

[AmUnRa]

Wrong, after fase one they asked MS if hey will make concession concerning the deal.
MS refused, so the investigation in now going in fase 2. Its not pretty clear for MS that the deal will be closed, infact its realy insure for now and the near feature...

[shadowT]

This acquisition is not healthy for the gaming industry.

[MrVux000]

Consolidation of any industry is never good.

(Yes, the same would apply if Sony makes similar purchases of certain publishers.)

[ChiefofLoliPolice]

True but since MS got the ball moving Sony has to make moves like that now. This is why I said I have no respect for what MS is doing.

They have deep pockets but they can't even build their own studios or buy some to bring in some fresh talent to create new 1st party experiences (which is where MS has been SORELY lacking in these past two generations of consoles) they are trying to outright buyout ENTIRE publishers with well known established IP's that will surely not be on other platforms.

Buying devs is one thing, paying for exclusive content to a game is one thing but outright buying up whole established publishers? And considering these publishers has some of the the most popular game franchises on earth?...cmon.

[porkChop]

I think for the most part it's fine. Blizzard makes most of their money on PC, and King is all mobile. The main issue is COD going exclusive. Personally I'd prefer COD stay multiplatform like Minecraft, and hopefully that's what ends up happening. But I do hope this is the kick in the ass that Sony needs to start making shooters again.

They're complaining about competing with COD but they don't even try. They had Socom, Resistance, and Killzone. All great franchises, all very successful. They stopped making all of them because they realized they could just pay for exclusive content in COD every year and call it a day.

Then they complain that Xbox shouldn't be allowed to have exclusive content in COD after the deal closes. You can't reap the benefits of exclusive content for 2 generations and then cry if your competitor does the same. Honestly, Sony are making themselves look like spoiled children.

[Workshyskiver]

I wouldn't say they are acting like spoil children, completely hypocritical yes but at the end of the day this is business and Sony wouldn't be doing their jobs if they weren't trying to wring every little bit of concession they can from this deal going through.

[Gamingsince1981]

It's not Sony, these are independent governments doing what they are supposed to do, what crack are you on ?

[porkChop]

@Gamingsince1981

Did you read the article? Have you not read all the other articles every day about Sony's comments to regulators all over the world? Obviously the regulators are doing their job, that's not what I'm talking about.

[Jin_Sakai]

Paying to keep Hogwarts Legacy content off Xbox for one year isn’t healthy either. Same for Ghostwire Tokyo and Deathloop.

[tay8701]

thats funny you mention deathloop and tokyo ghostwire. yes they had a.1 yr exclusive, but what is worse sony paying for 1yr exclusivity or MS just buying the publisher outright and making all games going forward xbox exclusive. dont care for bethesda games personally,but im sure there are quite a few playstation only owners who are pissed. MS can keep bethesda and activision. if capcom, square and fromsoftware were all somehow available, id rather sony scoop them up than spend money on the likes of activision and bethesda. very curious what sonys next move is. they clearly are interested in square tokyo and fromsoftware.

[CR7JUVE1897]

And that is the same as buying an entire publisher that has always been multiplatform?

Oh wait. Correction.

TWO publishers that have always been multiplatform.

Please name 1 single multi platform title that Sony has taken away permanently. Go ahead. Name one.

You can't.

[SoulWarrior]

You guys keep parroting the same thing as if one is equal to another, MS do timed exclusives content and deals all the time and have been doing for years, how is this in any way equal to spending 70 billion to take games away from the competition?

[Christopher]

Ah, the whataboutism where you compare timed exclusivity, let alone of a minor content item, to owning and controlling a slew of IP, including the best-selling IP every year.

I think we can agree that timed stuff sucks. But, in comparison to controlling what has been third-party titles of great note and utilization by the gaming community as a whole to suddenly fall under one hardware, not software, umbrella entirely? Yeah, not an argument. It's like you're arguing the value of punishment between a person who stole an apple to survive versus Bernie Madoff.

[shinoff2183]

not the whole game though from multiple publishers. Ms went for the killshot to try and ruin sony. MS is looking to monopolize. Your comparing a few hours worth of DLC to buying whole publishers wtf dude.

Ill add ms does the same thing with timed exclusive dlc. Remember ms paying out the wazoooo for gta4 dlc

[ApocalypseShadow]

The biggest issue is the lie Microsoft told the industry that there was this outside threat. That if they didn't save.....buy these companies, others would have swooped in to buy them. They do need scrutiny. If those other companies did buy them, there's a clear chance they would have continued making multiplatform games. Because there's money there. Being that most 3rd parties made more money on PlayStation. And there's still Nintendo, Xbox, mobile and PC to make money from. Microsoft is making them exclusive to their platform and services.

Did Facebook, Apple, Amazon or Google buy any big console publishers BEFORE Microsoft did with Zenimax/Bethesda?

No. They had plenty of time.

Did any of the four show interest and buy any big console publishers AFTER Microsoft moved in to buy Zenimax/Bethesda?

No again. They had plenty of time.

Did the big four show interest in buying any big console publishers AFTER Microsoft moved in to buy Activision/Blizzard?

No. Still not seeing it yet?

We have not heard or seen any movement from these companies. A developer here. A developer there. No big console publishers. Yet, Microsoft felt it necessary to move in and buy two big ones. Supposedly to create their own metaverse. To gain a foothold on mobile. Besides saving Kotick's ass. Microsoft knows exactly what it does to PlayStation and other platforms.

Tencent was considered a threat from Kotick's words. But Tencent owns developers that make multiplatform games. Embracer Group owns multiple developers that make multiplatform games. No threat there. Those companies bought developers and continue to spread games around.

But what Microsoft is doing is creating an imbalance. Supposedly, to bring "joy and unity of gaming to everyone on the planet." That was Satya Nadella's words. That's what he told investors. Joy is fine. Unity sounds like control and a monopoly with them on top. I'm guessing Windows Internet explorer brought joy and unity as well Satya. And that's why Microsoft was sued with anti trust. Microsoft is now trying to leverage game pass in a similar fashion to Internet Explorer. Where some devices aren't compatible or willing to have it. Creating inoperability. Are wonder who devices aren't compatible with game pass? Hmmm...

The purchase will most likely go through. There's so many shady things that get allowed. So, I wouldn't be surprised. But it's obvious what Microsoft is doing. Embrace Extend Extinguish. It's still the same. Just done in a different industry. AT&T learned this years ago as well. Do I see "Baby Bells" in Microsoft future? We'll just have to see.

[porkChop]

The metaverse hasn't even taken off. That's why we haven't seen Amazon, FB, etc, start buying anyone up. The actual platform has to be there and it has to work. Logically most people knew we wouldn't be seeing any of those companies start swooping in yet. FBs metaverse project has been such a failure that their stock historically tanked. And yet you're surprised they didn't jump in dropping billions buying developers for a nonexistent platform? Come on man, I know you're smarter than that. Hopefully the metaverse never takes off at all though. That would be better for all of us.

"Microsoft is now trying to leverage game pass in a similar fashion to Internet Explorer. Where some devices aren't compatible or willing to have it. Creating inoperability. Are wonder who devices aren't compatible with game pass? Hmmm..."

Huh? What are you talking about? They want it on as many devices as possible because that widens their potential customer base. MS can't put GP on a device if the manufacturer doesn't let them though. Phil publicly stated he wanted to put GP on PS. It's not there because Sony refused. He wanted it on Switch but Nintendo refused. MS wanted GP on Apple's App Store. It's not there because Apple blocked it. So you have to stream the games through the browser. MS can't work miracles and they can't force any company to support their service.

[Gamingsince1981]

Yes because the competing companies should all be lining up to put xbox onto their consoles......what ever world you live in must be pretty weird compared to reality.

[porkChop]

What are you talking about? I'm not saying they *should* be. Dude, the quote I was responding to was literally in my comment.

[Mr_cheese]

People keep saying that Sony had exclusive content with COD but they seem to be forgetting the 360 days were COD was marketed and pushed through Xbox.

Competition is healthy when we everyone can compete. What this highlights is that these systems and the audiences rely heavily on 3rd lart developers for some of the "biggest" experiences. It's something we've all known and until this attempted purchase by Microsoft, neither company has tried to really push or invest their own FPS to tackle the giant that is COD.

[porkChop]

"People keep saying that Sony had exclusive content with COD but they seem to be forgetting the 360 days were COD was marketed and pushed through Xbox."

No one forgot. It was stupid back then and it's still stupid now. Multiplatform games should not have exclusive content on any platform. However, let's not act like they're the same. Xbox got map packs 30 days early. PS has been locking entire game modes to PS for a *year* with every COD game. By the time those modes launch on other platforms the fanbase is moving to the next game, meaning most players never get to play those modes. That's not the same as a map being exclusive for a month.

[Thundercat77]

Very sad it has always come to this. In the Xbox 360 days, Microsoft started that trend of locking or having time exclusive content in order to compete (they couldn't compete on their own content) and then when Sony did it, they were the bad ones.

Now on this generation, Microsoft strategy to compete is to buy all mayor studios, as always, they cannot compete on their own and they need to disrupt the market with their trends.

[CR7JUVE1897]

They are not even buying studios. They are buying entire publishers that have always been multiplatform across all consoles and other types of hardware.

[Neonridr]

and we still don't know what will happen. If all the big multiplatform games still continue to release on Sony machines, would you care so much then?

[CR7JUVE1897]

@Neonridr Personally it doesn't affect me because I have all of the consoles and a PC.

However, in the grand scheme of things it does bother me if certain long standing, traditional multi platform franchises are suddenly taken away from a platform. Something that Sony has never done. Hell, they just bought bungie and committed to making Destiny multi platform. They have made a certain chapter in a franchise exclusive (Street Fighter V for example when Capcom were in dire straits), but I can't recall them ever making a multi platform title exclusive.

And IIRC didn't Microsoft come out and say immediately after the Bethesda acquisition that Fallout and The Elder Scrolls were now exclusive? Starfield, I get that. Brand new IP, Microsoft is well within their rights to do what they wish with that.

[shinoff2183]

@thundrcat77

Your dead spot on. The thing I see is that some of these people on here probably were in diapers when MS started the trend of exclusive timed dlc and used to do the same thing that sony has a deal with cod about.

[Crows90]

Well I think considering the majority of the world plays on PlayStation instead of Xbox I can see how this deal would be a problem. If call of duty which sells more on PlayStation suddenly becomes exclusive at any point it removes an option for all PlayStation gamers across the globe that they've had for years. It also removes a pretty significant revenue stream that PlayStation has had for years as well.

[JayRyu]

@CR7 JUVE

Just answering your question about a multi platform title that Sony permanently kept off off of another platform...Street fighter 5

You said name one

[shinoff2183]

Comparing a game sony helped pay to make to MS buying 2 whole publishers isnt on the same level. Ms has done it to dude

[JayRyu]

Sony helped "paid to make" a 3rd part game that every other iteration of it has been multplatform for years, and not an IP that they own to only release on one platform?

I understand that this business and both MS and Sony have been doing this since ps1 and og xbox. But now MS has more money to compete with Sony's money hating games. Project Eve now a PS exclusive? Or now that Sony can't exclusive mode/map COD anymore, they are doing it with Hogwarts Legacy?

[SimpleSlave]

Translation: "We're going to need more greasing of the palms."

[WiiU-Dude]

I would love for someone that knows to answer this. Microsoft and Activision are both American companies. Quite frankly, what does it matter what the UK or anyone in Europe thinks about this acquisition outside the US? Yes I know Microsoft and Activision most certainly do business in the UK and elsewhere in Europe, but certainly this acquisition can go down regardless what outside countries and legal systems think, right? Are they going to bar the Xbox from the UK? If this acquisition happened and they found it to be detrimental to Sony, will they not allow COD to be sold in the UK of owned by Microsoft of they indeed acquired Activision? I don't see how they should have any say quite frankly. I know they don't care what I think, but it just seems silly. Almost as if they have some vested interest in Sony. Japanese regulators I may understand being more appropriate in examining this deal in support of Sony, but the UK? Seems weird to me.

[JayRyu]

Wiiu Dude

Hoeg Law just did an video on your exact question. Check youtube.

https://youtu.be/yTd0xquejY...

[WiiU-Dude]

Thanks. I'll have to check this out.

[Gamingsince1981]

If those boards say it's not allowed due to monopoly laws the deal would be stopped, companies that trade internationally have to follow international laws, not just the US laws.

[WiiU-Dude]

Ok. Thanks for the info. Much appreciated.

[JBplusVB]

Well according to most users on this site, the deal won't affect Sony being able to compete. All I ever see is how well Sony does with it's own studios. Now that the deal is getting close more and more crying about the ability of Sony to compete. Let's not even pretend that these politicians understand that Sony offers some amazing exclusives, they have no idea about competition in the gaming world.