By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

SAN FRANCISCO, June 27 (Reuters) - Arguing for the government on Tuesday in its legal fight against Microsoft's (MSFT.O) $69 billion deal to buy game maker Activision Blizzard (ATVI.O), Harvard economist Robin Lee struggled at times to plainly demonstrate how the planned deal would hurt gamers.

Lee acknowledged that his analyses did not account for anything but full exclusivity of "Call of Duty" on Xbox and did not show what may occur if the game was available on Nintendo's (7974.T) Switch. If the deal goes through, Microsoft has pledged to provide the game to Switch for 10 years.

Microsoft attorney Beth Wilkinson pressed Lee in an effort to poke holes in his analysis of the deal, pointing out limitations of his economic modeling. At times the questioning grew testy, including when Wilkinson said forcefully, "Professor Lee, can you answer my question?" on a fine detail of his reports.

Appearing to grow frustrated with the difficulty in parsing Lee's answers, Wilkinson at one point mapped out his market share assumptions on a white board visible to the judge.

Microsoft attempts to pick apart US legal argument against deal to buy Activision | Reuters



Around the Network








Around the Network






Ryuu96 said:

But what percentage of games sold are shooters? CoD, Destiny, Fortnite, etc are pretty big games.

Although, it's a little narrow minded to exclusively talk about shooters. Strategy and WRPGs I think have tended to be more Xbox swayed than the console market share would suggest.

But there might be a difference in terms of genres that different platforms sell more of. No one else seems able to sell Nintendo style games the way Nintendo can.

Last edited by the-pi-guy - on 27 June 2023

Thank God someone else finally posted.