Why is Microsoft belittling Activision Blizzard?

Microsoft is taking an interesting approach to gaining regulatory approval for the acquisition of Activision Blizzard. In a recent filing spotted by Rock Paper Shotgun, the company told the New Zealand Trade Commission that the developer does not produce “must have” games. At this point, one wonders why the tech giant wants to invest 68.7 billion dollars in acquiring a studio that does not produce indispensable titles for players. Let’s try to understand it then.

Activision Blizzard: Microsoft says the company does not produce “must have” games

“There is nothing unique about the video games developed and published by Activision Blizzard that is a ‘must’ for rival PC and console video game distributors that give rise to a foreclosure issue,” Microsoft said in a leaked document from Rock Paper Shotgun. Simply put, the tech giant believes that owning the rights to best-selling franchises like Call of Duty it won’t stop rivals like Sony from competing with him. A statement that may be meaningless, considering how much Microsoft is willing to spend on its acquisition. But it is clear that this is a statement in response to its competitors.

In a filing with the Brazilian regulatory authorities, Sony called Call of Duty “an essential game” and a AAA title “that is unrivaled”. In fact, the company claims the franchise is as popular as influence the choice of console purchase by users. On the other hand, in the document filed with the New Zealand Commission, the company confirmed that it will not withdraw support for Activision Blizzard games from platforms other than its Xbox and Microsoft Store. Downplaying the importance of Call of Duty, therefore, is just one of the ways Microsoft is trying to placate regulators. Will it work?