Microsoft has proposed to Sony that it will continue to supply the super-popular IP "Call of Duty" series for PlayStation for 10 years when the acquisition of major game publisher Activision Blizzard is realized.
According to The New York Times (hereinafter "NYT"), Sony declined to comment on the matter.
This greatly exceeds the "three years after the current contract ends" previously proposed by MS to Sony.
The reason why MS offered an unusual contract is that it is necessary to persuade regulators around the world, mainly in the United States, the United Kingdom, and the EU (Europe), in order to complete the acquisition of Activision.
Sony has been lobbying governments around the world not to approve Microsoft's acquisition, which deprives gamers of choice and is detrimental to consumers.
UK regulators have expressed concern that CoD's potential monopoly (on consoles to Xbox) gives Microsoft an "unparalleled edge" in the cloud gaming industry. The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) was also reportedly on the verge of filing a legal challenge.
Also, from the standpoint of regulatory authorities in each country, rather than whether or not the CoD series can be played on PlayStation, how the government should control giant tech companies such as Microsoft is a matter of licensing and authorization that cannot be freed only by the principle of capital. There is also speculation that you want to be on the lookout for opportunities.
However, if you look around the game industry, only Sony is openly opposed to MS's acquisition of Activision. The CEO of major game publisher Take-Two also commented that there was no particular concern. In other words, Sony's opposition is a major obstacle to making the acquisition successful.
A major focus of the debate is whether CoD will significantly affect the balance of power between factions in the console market.
MS told New Zealand's Commerce Commission that the IP wasn't a killer title that would prevent it from competing with rivals, while Sony told the Brazilian government that it was a "must-have" for home game console companies.
In short, the only ones that are likely to be affected are platform companies that manufacture and sell game consoles and cloud gaming businesses, and a head-on confrontation between Sony and MS is inevitable (and other game software companies are not interested). Can be said.
PlayStation business chief Jim Ryan also said in a statement to the NYT that MS is "a high-tech company with a long history of dominating the industry" and that "if the deal goes ahead, it will end the options that gamers have today. It's very likely," he said. You can see how strongly Sony is against it.
On the other hand, Phil Spencer, the head of the Xbox business, also said, "As long as there is PlayStation, we will continue to supply CoD . " At the same time, he added that the contract cannot be made on the condition that it will continue to be supplied "forever".
Following that, a new movement launched by MS proposed to Sony a contract to 'continue to provide CoD to PlayStation for 10 years. As expected, it cannot be promised forever and it is not realistic, so it is speculated that Sony is hoping for a compromise by making a more realistic proposal.
The latest installment in the series, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, has been on sale for just one week and is the highest-selling PlayStation version of all time. Whether it's for MS or to boost the Xbox business, it may be playing the abacus that it doesn't pay to throw away such a dollar box.