©
Microsoft has told New Zealand regulators that there is “nothing unique” about Activision Blizzard games in its latest bid to win approval for its costly merger. In a document submitted to the Commercial Acquisitions and Business Permits Commission, Microsoft says the gaming giant does not produce any “must-have” titles and should therefore be eligible for acquisition.
The announcement is part of Microsoft’s efforts to allay concerns that its Activision Blizzard merger is threatening the gaming industry by creating competitive market challenges. At the same time, Microsoft said that its competitors will do just fine without Activision Blizzard games and will still be able to compete in the “bright” gaming market.
The vast majority of games are developed and published by parties other than [Activision Blizzard]such as Sony, Nintendo, EA and Take-Two. In particular with respect to Activision Blizzard video games, there is nothing unique about video games developed and published by Activision Blizzard. There is no must-have for competing distributors of PC and console video games to raise buyback concerns.
This may sound like surprisingly harsh language coming from a tech giant looking to buy the studio, but it’s unlikely that this applies to the quality of Activision Blizzard games. Rather, it seems like a statement meant for regulators who may not understand the gaming market and should therefore be aware that Activision Blizzard does not have a monopoly on a particular genre. But it’s still pretty fun to read regardless of the context.
This isn’t the only point the company is raising to ease concerns that the merger will give them an unfair advantage in the industry.
Microsoft also claims that the gaming industry has “low barriers to entry,” meaning that “content will remain available for distribution to competing PC, console, and mobile device distributors.”
It is increasingly likely that Microsoft will soon receive the regulatory approval it needs to proceed with the merger. As previously reported, the deal could be cleared by US regulators as early as August – potentially just a few weeks away. This depends on whether companies are requested to provide additional evidence to regulators. If not, the deal can go through.