The UK's CMA details its concerns with Microsoft's Activision acquisition, including withholding games from rivals; Microsoft argues Sony is the dominant player
The CMA’s initial scrutiny put PlayStation access and game streaming at the center of the Microsoft-Activision case, despite Microsoft’s argument that Sony held the stronger console position. The issue later hardened into a remedies process: the CMA asked Microsoft for remedies after finding harm to UK competition.
The regulator ultimately blocked the original transaction over competition and innovation concerns, then said a revised structure involving Ubisoft gaming rights appeared to address its concerns. That sequence makes the original focus on withholding and streaming the foundation for the deal’s eventual restructuring.
First-order effects
Microsoft must answer the CMA’s concerns that control of Activision games could weaken PlayStation and game-streaming rivals, rather than rely solely on Sony’s console-market scale as its defense.
Sony gains a formal regulatory channel to challenge any post-acquisition restriction on access to Activision titles and related distribution rights.
Second-order effects
Microsoft’s acquisition strategy is pushed toward behavioral or rights-based remedies that preserve rivals’ access, a path the later Ubisoft rights proposal directly reflects.
Other large game-content transactions face closer scrutiny of how exclusive rights affect cloud gaming, not only console competition.
Third-order effects
If this enforcement approach persists, premium game catalogs become regulated platform inputs: ownership can be permitted only alongside commitments that limit exclusivity across consoles and streaming services.
The case signals a broader shift toward assessing digital-market mergers through emerging distribution channels, with cloud gaming receiving weight before its market structure is settled.
The trend: Gaming merger review is expanding from console share to the control of content rights across nascent cloud-gaming platforms.
Microsoft also claims “keeping Call of Duty on PlayStation is... a commercial imperative for the Xbox business” and that it is “counting on revenues from the distribution of Activision Blizzard games on Sony PlayStation.” 🧵 3/3 https://twitter.com/...
Microsoft isn't happy with the UK's CMA regulator over its Activision Blizzard acquisition comments. It describes the regulator's concerns as “misplaced” and that it “adopts Sony's complaints without considering the potential harm to consumers” 👀 🧵 1/3 https://twitter.com/...
Xbox has shared a statement with GamesIndustry saying that even if all COD players would switch, PlayStation would still have a “significantly larger” player base “While Sony may not welcome increased competition, it has the ability to adapt and compete” https://www.gamesindustry…
If this deal is bad for competition, which it very well might be, the CMA still needs a better argument other than “PlayStation is worried about Call of Duty.” https://www.gamesindustry.biz/ ...
This has grown so petty and exhausting. Don't envy the employees who have to draft these statements, file documents, and work with regulators. Microsoft will do whatever it takes to get the deal done and Sony will keep crying about it. I don't see how this ends any other way. htt…
Sony will happily sell you the same PlayStation game 5 times but god forbid a company with deeper pockets wants to put stuff on a subscription service and let you stream it on your phone.
Sony can quote its biggest rival for its next ad campaign -> Microsoft “says there were over 280 first and third-party exclusive titles on PlayStation in 2021, which was nearly five times as many as Xbox.” https://www.gamesindustry.biz/ ...
here's Microsoft trying to make it look like it sucks at Xbox and gaming 🙃 : • “last place in console” • “seventh place in PC” • “nowhere in mobile game distribution” CMA thinks Microsoft has an advantage in cloud gaming with Windows + Azure. Microsoft says: nope 🧵 2/3 https://tw…