Judge grills FTC about data in hearing on Microsoft deal to buy Activision

The judge hearing the U.S. Federal Trade Commission's fight against Microsoft's planned purchase of "Call of Duty" maker Activision Blizzard on Thursday pressed government lawyers about the data behind their arguments and asked why there was so much fuss over "a shooter video game."

The Federal Trade Commission has asked the judge to stop the proposed $69 billion acquisition because, it argues, it would give Microsoft exclusive access to Activision games including "Call of Duty," one of the best-selling games of all time. That would leave Nintendo and Sony Group out in the cold, the FTC has said.

Xbox console-maker Microsoft has pressed for a decision before the July 18 termination date for the deal, and a ruling could come as early as next week.

[lelo2play]

The problem with the FTC is that they are more worried about what's harmful to Sony then what's harmful to consumers. They clearly showed their bias during the trial. Even the judge noticed it.

This is taken from another news report related to the trial...
"...Corley has shown skepticism of the FTC’s arguments against the Activision deal, particularly on Thursday when she stopped the agency’s lead attorney during his closing arguments to ask him to pin down “exactly what is the harm” to consumers.
“Why don’t you sort of be a little bit more precise?” Corley said. She added later: “It’s not the harm to Sony we care about. It’s the harm to the consumer.”"

https://www.washingtonpost....

[StormSnooper]

and you have this insider information from...?

[--Onilink--]

The link to the article is literally right there in his comment…..

[Othegamer5]

Can’t make this up

[StormSnooper]

there is a link that "FTC lawyers are more worried about what's harmful to Sony" ?

Really

[AngainorG7X]

Are you blind or what?

[StormSnooper]

Oh you mean you assumed what suits your narrative, and call me blind for not seeing what is not there? Then yes, I am blind.

[crazyCoconuts]

the people that game on Sony consoles... are called consumers

[Kayser81]

same as xbox , switch , pc , tablet , apple product etc .
its about the consumer and they need to bring a case where the consumer are hurt from its deal not sony .
which is why FTC are facing hard time , everytime they keep mentioning sony in their case .

[FinalFantasyFanatic]

Why does your post sound eerily similar to a Forbes article I partially read earlier today?

It's best for consumers if Microsoft doesn't pull a Disney and own everything.

[Rude-ro]

The harm to the consumer is Microsoft gaining so much leverage over the market.

Possibilities are as follows:
If Microsoft pulls the licenses on a competitors product, of which they can fully do, said consumers lose their money invested into said games.
If a consumer with a long history of supporting an ip that Microsoft pulls from their preferred hardware due to the acquisition.. said consumer would either have to fork over more money to purchase a product that Microsoft allows said software to play on… or never play it again.

What can hurt Sony will hurt their install base.

Funny how businesses only exist because of consumers needs… yet it is as if people do not exist with this line of question.

The consumers are directly affected by these acquisitions… especially one the size of activision/blizzard.

[MrDead]

Can this scum sucking tax dodging tech giant just **** off, MS is the biggest cancer in this industry and for some reason wants to punish gamers for MS's failure to make an attractive console or hardly making games for the last 10 years. Their entire plan is to remove multiplatform publishers and shrink the libraries of competition, how does this POS move benefit anyone but MS CEO's and shareholders?
Allowing MS to buy up and ban competition from a huge percentage of the multiplatform market is the biggest anti-gamer move in the industries history.

[itsmebryan]

@Mrdead
Would it be better if only Sony continues to block games games from other platforms? Because if 2 companies do it that would be anti gamer. Only company that dominating the market should be able to control where people can play games. Thru know what's best for gamers

[MrDead]

"Would it be better if only Sony continues to block games games from other platforms" Is this the only option?... it seems like really dumb reasoning.

Single games and spending a combined $80 billion to ban entire multiplatform publishers from competition are not the same thing.

[StormSnooper]

pleeeeeaasseeee stop comparing apples to oranges. You are making a false equivalency between the two conducts and you are either too stupid to know better or are blatantly acting the fool. Besides, doesn't MS also engage in the same sort of blocking of games? The answer is YES they DO.

[darthv72]

^^apples and oranges are more alike than they are different.
Similarities include: both grown on trees, both have seeds, both can be pealed, both can be juiced, both are fruit, both can be used for cooking.
Differences include: one is an apple, other is an orange

[4Sh0w]

lol, darthv72

You made me just spit out some of my burrito.

Anyways no we won't stop comparing just because it makes ps guys argument for Sony look like "do as I say not as I do".

If Microsoft was the dominant market leader then perhaps you'd have a point but their not so why shouldn't they buy whatever they can to compete with ps, fortunately they can & you ps loyalists don't get to decide whats right, so just hug your ps, its gonna be OK bro.

[MrDead]

4show, don't get too high from huffing MS gas, take those lips off of Phils behind.

"do as I say not as I do". Name one multiplatform publisher any other platform has banned from releasing games on competing systems like MS has?

"you ps loyalists don't get to decide whats right, so just hug your ps, its gonna be OK bro." And what are us PC loyalists meant to hug when MS starts removing games from platforms such as Steam, GOG, Epic, etc because it's going to happen.

[shinoff2183]

Do you mean block games from the competition, like Microsoft and Nintendo also do. Wtf is wrong with you people

[StormSnooper]

@Darth72
But of course, making light of a legitimate comment is easier when there is nothing else that can be said.

[Gamerscore2077]

You’re spreading misinformation, the deals that you’re referring to, are deals made between Sony & the “publisher”. And most of the time, it’s the publisher shopping around their Ip to the highest bidder. If you’re going to go with the narrative that Sony is blocking games off other platforms, then you have to include said publisher, because unlike MS, Sony doesn’t own any major third party publisher and locked down well known established IPs to their system.

[Flenter]

Nail on the head!!! Fuck MS!

[Majin-vegeta]

Theyre literally the definition of life
Sucking leech.

"Oh we can't compete so well just buy our way through.

[King_Noctis]

And Sony literally didn’t just buy 10+ studios amidst this debacle?

[VariantAEC]

@King-Noctis
They didn't, PS bought Bungie.
Since PS5 was announced PS acquired Insomniac Games, BluePoint, Housemarque, Haven, FireSprite and of course most notably Bungie. Since PS5's announcement there were 2 studio closures within PS Studio Japan and Pixel Opus.

That's five individual studios in 3 years being rolled into PS with two closures and one new studio being built in-house (Team Asobi), but for some reason everyone wants to treat PS' recent acquisitions like they're every bit as toxic as MS' buying of Zenimax which includes Alpha Dog Games, Arkane Studios, Bethesda Softworks, id Software, MachineGames,
Tango Gameworks and ZeniMax Online Studios...

That's seven studios in a single $7.5 billion MS publisher acquisition and that's somehow totally ok and not at all consolidation according to the MS fanboys while PS acquiring five studios after two studio closures with one new studio being built all in the span of a few years by PlayStation makes them the real bad guy here, not MS?

Their arguments show how deluded they are. PS also doesn't have a habit of destroying studios (Lionhead Studios, Rare) and IP (Halo, Banjo and Kazooie) that they acquire within a couple years either like MS does.

MS is buying these games and devs by taking their parent companies in and by extension all these devs IP also becomes MS'. It's very disgusting to see MS buy so much so fast and with it's anti-competitive and anti-consumer history just so that it MIGHT become a bit more popular next to PS. Sony built PS from the ground up and while the higher ups initially saw PS as a joke almost 30 years later it's now one of the companies most significant revenue streams and is highly profitable.

Microsoft wants to kill PS just so it can be seen as better and if Sony falls apart in the process, it's no skin off MS' nose. <- This is exactly what the FTC was created to stop, if they don't block this acquisition what's the point of even having this check and balance system?

[Lightning77]

"Name one multiplatform publisher any other platform has banned from releasing games on competing systems like MS has?"

https://m.youtube.com/watch...

Originally suppose to be multiplat then Don't came in and funded it and cancelled the Xbox version.

That was easy. Btw I love how emotional and mad you're getting out of all this lol.

[QuantumMechanic]

Ummm---that's a game, not a publisher...

[MrDead]

Hey my little stalker is back, still have no clue what a publisher is I see!

Try again kid.

[Gunstar75]

Ooooh... Someone mad lol

[AngainorG7X]

You seem upset 🫠

[Lightning77]

You whines and cries are funny. You're right Sony took a game a way they don't even own that was announced for Xbox. Vs MS owning said games and can do what they want with them. Keeping FF16 to themselves, they don't own that IP, they tired to that with SF. silent Hill 2 remake So MS rather own those games then spend money to pretend it's their IP and games. Kena was suppose to be Multiplat still nothing on other platforms. Sony doesn't own these at MS owns the game's.

"Kid" I embarrassed you in the last article so who's really the kid around here? Your cries about everything Xbox is amusing though you're so emotionally invested lol.

[MrDead]

Yet again little one, you seem to not understand the difference between spending a combined $80 billion on buying and banning multiplatform publishers to single games and what industry consolidation on this scale does.

"I embarrassed you in the last article so who's really the kid around here"...oh dear. You know what, this obsession with me isn't healthy. I occupy too much of your head time, have a nap and take a timeout and stop trying to defend your plastic toys to me.

[Lightning77]

"I occupy too much of your head time, have a nap and take a timeout and stop trying to defend your plastic toys to me."

Hardly kiddo, hardly. Like no said I find it amusing you get so red faced and teary eyed over trillion dollar company. Has absolutely nothing to do with a plastic box though that's what you're wishing that's what it was unlike you. I just destroy narratives.

Nothing you and I can do about how MS wants to spend their money. The ABK stuff imo is dumb and something I don't agree with but what are we gonna do about cry about it, cry about it every 2 seconds? Besides this deal still has every chance of getting blocked nothing is certain. So you can wipe your tears away.

[MrDead]

The nap didn't work then, sigh. Seeing someone so enraged buy comments like yourself it's no surprise you're all over N4G trying to cope.

"I find it amusing you get so red faced and teary eyed over trillion dollar company." When you're a lot older and start working you'll see these trillion dollar companies that keep wages low, profits high, stifle innovation and lower the choice and quality of the product to the consumer aren't your friend no matter how you long you keep huffing what they excrete, but your unfaltering support is what they rely on to keep the status quo.

"Nothing you and I can do about how MS wants to spend their money." No that's the job of the different commissions that are meant to protect the consumer but MS spends vast sums of cash lobbying to make sure protections don't get passed or can be sidestepped, like they did with the EU. Companies like MS now spend more money lobbing the EU than oil industry and they did this to make sure The Digital Markets Act and the The Digital Services Act was neutered, the very thing that was meant to protect the consumer and industry from companies like MS, Google and Apple buying up everything.

"I just destroy narratives."... looking at your comment history it looks like the only narratives you destroy are your own, I guess you can take credit for that in your own little way.

Seriously, take a break from N4G as you seem to have a real problem.

[Lightning77]

Sure why not I just play games not sweat and lose sleep over what conglomerates are doing. I don't pledge the allegiance to XYZ. You have a emotional investment towards it so good for you I guess.

I destroy my own narratives? That's makes no sense at all. I'll be here waiting for you to cry and lose sleep over a faceless corporation in another comment section though.

[Hofstaderman]

Shouldn’t the judge be recusing herself?

[1Victor]

@hofsta:”Shouldn’t the judge be recusing herself?”
A good judge with high ethical morals will do it but those look like are coming too far in between all the yay from the Supreme Court to trial judges

[green]

The judge at the beginning asked the FTC if they had an issue with her son working for Microsoft and they said "NO" because they know that her son gets no benefit from the trial.

The judge is not the issue. The issue is the FTC embarrassingly (painful to watch actually) failing in providing any evidence that shows how this case is harmful to consumers rather than Sony.

[4Sh0w]

green

Right, she said that upfront before it started FTC had no objections this is only coming up because the FTC's case fell apart. We all know if Sony was winning this wouldn't be coming up now.
https://www.google.com/amp/...

[__SteakDeck__]

@green The judge’s son works for MS my man. Lol I know you’re a fanboy, looking at your comment history.

[giovonni]

Shouldn’t the FTC be able to prove their points? Why would she be “recusing” herself? her son doesn’t hold any weight in this case, and even if he did The FTC still didn’t prove the deal was bad for consumers… unless you have unbiased, proof?

[Othegamer5]

They need a new goalpost now 'the judge is a xbox fanboy" is the new one

[StormSnooper]

Simply, because the judge decides whether they proved it or not, and if the Judge can be biased because her son worked for the Corporation, it creates a conflict of interest.

Also, the litigation is on going so I'm not sure what you mean "the FTC didn't prove".

[giovonni]

@stormsnooper, so show me in this case where she didn’t allow them to provide evidence to prove their points without a shadow of a doubt. Also show me where the FTC proved this was bad for the consumer. The Judge was not biased and challenged Sony to provide solid info. Again her son has no power, presents over this case. He isn’t a ceo, on the board, and she asked if there was a problem the staff said no. Can we now please put it to rest because this reaching and goal post moving is enough. Just blamed the FTC for the poor job they did proving their case. Hell, MS could still lose the case.

[StormSnooper]

I don't think you understand how this works, so let me give you the simple breakdown. The judge doesn't have to be proven to have been biased. As soon as a judge can be legitimately perceived to be compromised as a result of an "actual conflict of interest" then she can be removed through either a motion by one of the parties or thought the court's own motion to recuse herself.

Also, "without a shadow of a doubt" is a criminal law standard of proof, you've been watching too much tv.

[giovonni]

@stormsnooper no I haven’t been watching tv. I have a degree in business management which also study’s law. This judge, and majority of Sony Ponys are against this case with extreme bias. Because if you have been following it for real, there is no way you can say the FTC did a stellar job proving they’re interested in protecting the consumer. Their job was to show, without a shadow of a doubt that the info they provided went against the customer, and it didn’t. A lot of their info was incomplete or lacked understanding… this is why I said without a shadow of a doubt. The FTC did a great job protecting Sony though. So help me understand, how her son could sway her decision, when the FTC did it for her? Like I said before all this is reaching, goal post moving, and ignoring the truth.

[__SteakDeck__]

@giovonni Using the word “ponies” immediately makes you a fanboy 🤡

[Extermin8or3_]

@giovanni the standard of proof in a case like this is NOT beyond a shadow of doubt (which isn't actually a legal term, that's just the term they use in Hollywood films the real term is "Beyond all reasonable doubt". In a civil proceeding like this it's "on the balance of the evidence it is more likely than not". Also this judge isn't actually meant to be ruling that the acquisition should be stopped for good. She is simply meant to be ruling if it appears the ftc MAY have a case and allow their proceedings to progress and occur. Sony was a big component of the case but it isn't the only one. I've been following it and they clearly refer to the industry at large and in particular streaming and subscription applies on a much wider basis. This whole thing is a joke though the emails from Microsoft the other day alone should have been enough to demonstrate that the deal needs to be blocked. The fact the judge has said "all this fuss over a shooter videogame" however doesn't bode well. Not only does she have a real conflict of interest and the ftc should have objected and had her replaced at the start.

Her comments betray an attitude to videogsmes that is snobbish- and dismissive of video games.

The ftc could have done alot better but I get the sense the judge had decided right at the

[giovonni]

Cool

[got_dam]

Did I read that right? This will be done by 7/18/23? God, I can't wait until this deal goes through or falls through. It's has gotten real old. Wait, was I supposed to say MS sucks? Sorry, BOOOO MS. They are the devil and they will come eat your babies! Or was Sony the baby eating devil? I can't tell anymore.

[Old_Prodigy]

Imagine clicking on an article you don't want to see, reading (i'd assume) said article, and finally commenting on said article. Your actions are pretty contradictory to what a person who wants nothing to do with the subject would do.

[CrimsonWing69]

It’s crazy to me how uninformed and incompetent the FTC has been throughout this whole ordeal.

[Petebloodyonion]

here's the juicy tidbit I have mentioned about why the FTC was blocking the deal when they declared the deal was bad.

"The FTC, which enforces antitrust law, has taken a harder line on mergers during the Biden administration to protect consumers from being disadvantaged by powerful corporations."

See this again to show that it has nothing to do with the gaming deal or consumers' interest! the purpose is just to stop GAFA companies from growing fearing situations like Meta with the Canadian government.
or commercial threats if the government votes for new laws that touch them.

[shinoff2183]

Keep companies from growing. We'll fking great imo. It's not like ms is some small start , their one of the biggest richest companies in the world

[Petebloodyonion]

Are GAFA companies small?
Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple?
Meta is basically now ruling information just ask Canada how Meta fears them by giving the middle about a law project asking Meta to pay royalties to media when sharing their content on Facebook.
Meta basically blocked Canadian media and stop all current deals forcing PM Trudeau to talk about compensation to local media to alleviate the financial repercussions of Meta not playing.

Pretty sure that MS with Windows, Teams, Office, and Cloud service falls in this category.
and pretty sure that MS would be against paying royalties for Bing stories.

[azzkikr8502]

in australia, we passed a legislation that social media outlets that use local news for their platform must pay loyalties to said outlets. was alot of pushback at the start but in the end they all agreed. this was a massive win and a first

[FinalFantasyFanatic]

That was more to benefit the Murdoch media empire rather than Australia as a whole though, I think we lost out (plus I want to give that monster as little money as possible).

[tbagmonster]

at this point you cant gaurentee cod or warzone will even be a hit 10 years from now. so many things can cause it to flop

[gunfan]

So many keyboard lawyers and analyst. Stop defending Sony stop defending MS. Stop defending giant corporations. In the end your just a number to them. Leave the fanboyism to middle schoolers.

[VariantAEC]

If you enjoy playing videogames, you would be an idiot not to choose a side here. PS has a proven trackrecord of delivering while Xbox is like the child that is bumped up from grade to grade eventually being graduated because the teachers simply didn't want to deal with that student anymore.

Xbox (2001) was second place mostly because of Halo: Combat Evolved, but also because of a massive marketing push and the fact that the GameCube was just such a weird system and at this point people were a bit upset with Nintendo's lack of 3rd parties and such.
Xbox 360 was in last place because it was too expensive for what it was and had few noteworthy exclusives... this to many consumers was Xbox's best generation.
Xbox One went from fail to fail while the tail end of the 360 generation technically brought with it Kinect, MS had no reason to encourage always online console-wide DRM and then there was the lack of noteworthy games the high price the fact that all third party games looked and or ran worse the fragmentation of Xbox as a console with 3 unique skews all with their own compute limitations that erked software developers.

Now we have Xbox Series which tried to reintroduce always online DRM and started the gen totally fragmented with two radically different systems available day-1 (and a $100 discount to buy the weaker of those two systems) which devs don't want to be saddled with so they're choosing PS over Xbox. Predictably Xbox fanboys are treating this as if PS is moving some serious money into publisher's hands to block Xbox releases. The simple truth is there's some stuff Xbox Series S cannot do well so devs are choosing to leave Xbox behind because Microsoft enforces parity between games made for Xbox Series consoles (including both S and X). Imagine Xbox didn't force devs to make FFXVI for the Series S? FFXVI would likely be on Xbox Series X right now! Why would Square Enix leave MS in the cold when they've been releasing so many games on Xbox 360 and Xbox One? It's MS' policy that forces devs to make games for Series S which devs are simply choosing to pass up now.

FFXVI already can drop (according to DF) as low as 720p on PS5 to maintain 60FPS. Xbox Series X would likely drop resolution a bit less often and maybe could even stay above the PS5's lower 720p limit. If PS5 and theoretically the Series X can barely handle this game dropping under Full HD resolutions regularly how the heck would the Series S handle this game? If the game has to regularly drop to 540 or maybe even 360p just to maintain 60FPS on S would it be worth it to play the game?

Larian Studios can't get co-op working in Baldur's Gate 3 on Series S (presumably) but it's working on PS5 so PS5 users will be able to experience co-op while Xbox Series users won't. There's conspiracies floating around that PS paid Larian for co-op BG3... nope, sorry, that's not what's happening. I mean ask MS why they s•••canned co-op in Halo: Infinite. Clearly Sony paid 343i to stop development in Halo: Infinite, DEFINITELY SONY'S FAULT THERE AND NOT THE XBOX SERIES S'!!!

[neomahi]

Because it's Microsoft in any business as a whole. Xbox hasn't had to work for anything. They treat everyone, including their consumers however they want and sabotage relationships and then just go to the mother company to ask for bottomless pockets to bail them out. That's what this is about, Microsoft just buys themself out of everything while everyone else has to work hard to build relationships, be innovative, and feed creativity. Xbox just wants to be Disney and mimic PlayStation. That's why "just a shooter game matters". It sets the precedence for business in the world as a whole. Remember when Nintendo monopolized the market and SEGA came in to finally create a balance? Well, Sony's is taking the stand to keep that balance.

Xbox 360 challenged Sony, they went toe to toe. But Xbox shot themselves in the foot with Xbox One and pissed off consumers and hasn't been able to recover since. Sony found a way to recover with the PS3's start, it made them better. But Xbox doesn't know how to do that so they're stealing the competitions exclusives (MLB The Show developed by Sony San Diego) and gives it away on their service that's claimed to help developers. It's not about "just a shooter" it's what you're going to let big corporations get away with to look out for the consumer that doesn't have the resources to defend themselves against a corporate giant. Sony is defending the consumer

[azzkikr8502]

if the sale goes through, i think the right play for playstation would be to limit COD sales and focus on their own franchises. it did wonders during the ps3 era. why feed xbox and make them stronger by taking cuts into your business at the same time helping them grow. sometimes short term pain is worth the long term gain. removing almost 50% of the COD player base will be a tough for sony but it will hurt xbox more and it will show that gaming isnt about buying up whole publishers and removing entire groups of gamers. its about innovating and driving the medium forward. hopefully everyone can shut up and take their medicine if sony or nintendo go on a buying spree. if it works for one then its works for all

[FinalFantasyFanatic]

I imagine Sony/Nintendo may go on a buying spree if this goes through, although they can't out money Microsoft, the gap in financials is too great, which is partially why I don't agree with allowing this deal.