The United Kingdom’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has suggested removing the popular first-person shooter game, “Call of Duty,” from the portfolio of Activision Blizzard’s recent acquisition by Microsoft. The CMA is concerned that the acquisition could lead to a reduction in competition in the video game market, which could result in higher prices and less choice for consumers.
Call of Duty is one of the most popular and successful video games of all time, with a massive player base and a long history of delivering high-quality, immersive gameplay experiences. As a result, the CMA is concerned that if Microsoft were to own the rights to this game, it could use its market power to limit the availability of Call of Duty to other platforms, effectively monopolizing the market for this type of game.
In its assessment of the acquisition, the CMA concluded that Microsoft’s ownership of Call of Duty would give the company a significant advantage over its competitors, as it would control a major portion of the market for first-person shooter games. This could result in other companies being unable to compete effectively, as they would be unable to offer a similar level of quality and choice to consumers.
The CMA’s suggestion to remove Call of Duty from Microsoft’s portfolio is part of a broader trend of increased regulatory scrutiny of the video game industry. Over the past few years, there has been growing concern about the impact of large tech companies on the market, and the ways in which they use their market power to dominate and control the industry.
This has led to increased attention from regulators, who are keen to ensure that consumers are not being unfairly impacted by the actions of these companies. The CMA’s suggestion to remove Call of Duty from Microsoft’s portfolio is just one example of this increased regulatory scrutiny, and it is likely that we will see more similar actions in the future.
There are several reasons why the CMA is concerned about the impact of Microsoft’s ownership of Call of Duty on the market. Firstly, the game is one of the most popular and successful first-person shooters of all time, and it has a massive player base that is highly engaged and dedicated to the franchise.
Secondly, Microsoft has a history of using its market power to dominate other markets, such as the PC operating system market, where it has a near monopoly position. This has led to concerns that Microsoft could use its market power in a similar way in the video game market, using its ownership of Call of Duty to limit the availability of the game to other platforms, and to control the market for first-person shooters.
Finally, there are concerns that Microsoft’s ownership of Call of Duty could limit the innovation and competition in the video game market. This could result in less choice and higher prices for consumers, as companies would be unable to compete effectively against Microsoft’s market power.
In conclusion, the CMA’s suggestion to remove Call of Duty from Microsoft’s acquisition portfolio is an important step in ensuring that consumers are not unfairly impacted by the actions of large tech companies. The CMA’s assessment of the impact of Microsoft’s ownership of Call of Duty on the market is based on a thorough analysis of the potential consequences of the acquisition, and it highlights the growing concern among regulators about the impact of large tech companies on the market. As the video game industry continues to grow and evolve, it is important that regulators continue to closely monitor the actions of these companies, to ensure that consumers are protected and that the market remains competitive.
