All this because of Call of Duty? The judge thought

Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley was struck by the FTC’s closing argument that it was all just a game. She meant Call of Duty and pointed out that 62% of all PlayStation owners don’t play Call of Duty at all.

The judge focused on Activision’s popular shooter, and even the three FTC lawyers didn’t really know what to say. Among other things, they couldn’t answer the question of how many PlayStation people would buy an Xbox because of Call of Duty.

The judge also questioned why the FTC does not consider PC an alternative to Xbox. An FTC attorney argued that a gaming PC is a special type of computer. But the judge did not lose and said that she might be biased towards the world in which she lives, but during the pandemic, no one had a cheap PC. Everyone had computers for $1,000 or $1,500.

The judge noted that the FTC and other regulators have benefited from concerns about Microsoft’s dominance in the cloud gaming world. They forced Microsoft to sign contracts with Nvidia and other companies. However, the FTC does not believe that it has won because it has no evidence of what these agreements lead to. The office is also unhappy that Microsoft does not have any agreements with Google or Amazon. This should be proof that he chooses who to deal with. It’s important to mention here that Google Stadia is dead. But I wonder why Microsoft didn’t sign an agreement with Amazon on Luna.

Microsoft lawyer says FTC skepticism about cloud contracts is absurd. The FTC says it’s not protecting Sony, it’s consumers. He fears that we will end up in a world where content will only be available on Game Pass and possibly PlayStation Plus.

The FTC’s concerns also extend to the development of PlayStation games. Sony has warned that after the acquisition, it will not release developer kits for the new PlayStation console to developers Activision Blizzard until Microsoft receives confidential information.. Sony did the same with the Mojang dev kits that developed Minecraft Legends and Minecraft. According to the FTC, this will affect consumers as the games will be released later on the PlayStation.

In the case of Minecraft, due to the fact that the PlayStation did not provide a development kit, it was not possible to prepare a version for PS5. On the latest consoles, we only find the PS4 version, but it works without too many problems. In addition, the PS5 version of Minecraft Legends has also been delayed.

FTC lawyers de facto admitted that if Sony had signed an agreement with Microsoft, CoD would not have been considered. Instead, the FTC will be concerned about other markets, i.e. outside of consoles. This probably means that a lot of attention is being paid to the cloud.

In previous days, a lot of courtroom has been given to an FTC expert assessing the impact of a possible Call of Duty exclusivity and other steps Microsoft has taken in an attempt to favor its platform. The expert talked about a twenty percent difference in the market. That is, up to 20% of people would buy an Xbox instead of a PlayStation. But no one knows where the expert came up with it. The Microsoft lawyer was also confused. These days, the judge will have to analyze the data of the economic expert.

Journalists who were present in the courtroom throughout the trial noted that the FTC expert did not do her job well and everyone got lost in his statistics and presentations. Instead, the Microsoft lawyer should have clearly described the situation and explained everything.

The FTC doesn’t seem to understand how the world of video games works. Arguments are more like guesses and conclusions.

The judge wanted to know which Bethesda game is comparable to Call of Duty. The FTC stated that The Elder Scrolls, but added that Call of Duty has exceptional value and is a unique brand.. A Microsoft lawyer later tried to fix the FTC but made a mistake.

A Microsoft lawyer first explained that The Elder Scrolls is two games: one is online (Elder Scrolls Online) and available on the PlayStation, and the other is Elder Scrolls 16, which is expected to be released in 2026 and is intended for single player. According to him, there are no similarities with Call of Duty anywhere.

Microsoft’s lawyer was probably wrong because they’ve talked about Final Fantasy 6 before. However, 2026 is interesting. A week ago, Phil Spencer said in federal court that The Elder Scorlls 6 will not be released in the next 5 years.

For most of the day, FTC lawyers tried to convince the judge that Microsoft’s goal was exclusivity. As proof, they provided several emails related to the Bethesda purchase.

In November 2021, the leaders of the gaming division of Microsoft and Bethesda discussed exclusive games at a meeting.

“Not just new brands, but all games in the future? Lord,” Tim Stewart, chief financial officer of Xbox, reacted unexpectedly to Phil Spencer’s decision.

The FTC also submitted an email between Stewart and Spencer to the court. Xbox CFO writes in it: “I wish we could come out with the truth and say that at this moment she [obsah Bethesdy] completely exclusive.” To which Spencer replied: “We can not”.

In another piece of evidence presented, the FTC wants to make it clear that Microsoft is ready to take a financial hit to increase Game Pass subscribers, sell more consoles, and bring more customers to its platform.. This is an email between Stewart and Matty Botti, head of Xbox Game Studios. It says that Bethesda games will be exclusive and about financial compromises. The letter mentions the growth in the number of subscribers, etc.

Stewart said in court that Microsoft had five scenarios to choose from in February 2021, shortly before the deal to acquire Bethesda closed. From multi-platform publishing to full exclusivity.

When the FTC cited Phil Spencer’s decision that all Bethesda games must be exclusive to the Xbox, the judge asked how the possible exclusivity of some games could negatively impact consumers. FTC lawyers have clarified that Activision will not be an independent company. As an independent company, Activision would have more reason to release its games on as many platforms as possible than a Microsoft-owned company..

The judge argued that Activision was already taking money from some platforms to delay the release of games on others, which could also be attributed to Sony’s strategy. Here, the judge was probably referring to the agreement regarding Call of Duty, where Sony has marketing exclusivity and, for example, PlayStation players have earlier access to the beta.

Of course, Microsoft also discussed the exclusivity of Activision Blizzard games, lower earnings and compensation. The general consensus is that the Xbox Game Pass subscription should increase by two million subscribers per year. as compensation for any loss of Call of Duty exclusivity.