If European Commission were lied to then they would 100% mention it and call Microsoft up on it and would very unlikely drop their Console SLC concerns.

Source for the commission dropping their SLC concerns?

And how do you explain the fact that CMA knows Microsoft cancelled the PS5 version of Redfall but have dropped their Console SLC concerns and won't even require Microsoft to provide a contract for Call of Duty because they trust them on their word that they would still supply it to PlayStation...

They don't trust them on their word. They think that it's not financially feasible for MS to pull CoD from Playstation.

https://mp1st.com/news/microsoft-activision-deal-unlikely-to-hurt-console-gaming-market-admits-cma

Per the CMA - "While the arguments of Microsoft’s competitors in the console gaming market claimed that the Redmond company does have an incentive to engage in foreclosure strategies with Call of Duty, the CMA believes – after revising its predictive model based on input from all concerned parties – would lead to a net loss for all these parties in every scenario the regulator “found plausible.”

Obviously not, it would have been on PS5. What's your point?


My point is the European Commission concluded that MS/Zenimax wouldn't have an incentive to engage in an input foreclosure strategy. And yet MS/Zenimax did exactly that by ending the development of Starfield and Redfall for PS5.

And no, it's not a he said/she said. Anybody can look at the fact that they made an incorrect prediction concerning an input foreclosure strategy.

Source for the commission dropping their SLC concerns?

Microsoft's EU Remedies Target Only Cloud Streaming Rivals, Sources Says | Reuters

Others have reported on it, that Microsoft has only offered the European Commission aimed at Cloud, the logical reason for that would be that the European Commission has dropped their Console concerns because Microsoft would have zero reason not to offer them otherwise, they already have the contract written up for Sony.

They don't trust them on their word. They think that it's not financially feasible for MS to pull CoD from Playstation.

https://mp1st.com/news/microsoft-activision-deal-unlikely-to-hurt-console-gaming-market-admits-cma

Per the CMA - "While the arguments of Microsoft’s competitors in the console gaming market claimed that the Redmond company does have an incentive to engage in foreclosure strategies with Call of Duty, the CMA believes – after revising its predictive model based on input from all concerned parties – would lead to a net loss for all these parties in every scenario the regulator “found plausible.”

Just like the European Commission then who found that Microsoft doesn't have the financial incentive to make Zenimax titles exclusive.

Not having the financial incentive doesn't mean it is impossible. Once again, if Microsoft lied to the European Commission then it would be very easy for CMA to force a legally binding contract on them because they can't trust that Microsoft won't just eat the costs and go back on their word that they won't make Call of Duty exclusive.

And no, it's not a he said/she said. Anybody can look at the fact that they made an incorrect prediction concerning an input foreclosure strategy.

It is.

• You're saying Microsoft lied to the European Commission.
• The European Commission are saying they didn't.

Who do I believe? The regulator who was apparently lied to who spent months and dozens of hours talking to Microsoft or you who is interpreting a document in the way you want it to be...Once again, Microsoft told EC right from the start that future titles will be decided on a case-by-case basis. Most of the rest of the conversations were related to current support.

The European Commission aren't an agency who would accept being lied to without calling a company up on it, Lol.

Web sites like these are very interesting to me. It's very telling when the vast majority of articles posted on a web site are overwhelmingly pro-microsoft. Even the mods will go so far as to call someone with a conclusion different than their own biased (even when that person proves it beyond a shadow of a doubt). Stay classy vgchartz. ;)

Furthermore, if Microsoft did lie to the European Commission about keeping future Zenimax titles multiplatform.

Then why are regulators all over the world approving the deal on the assumption that Microsoft won't remove Call of Duty from PlayStation? Why are they not forcing Microsoft into legally binding contracts? Are they all just stupid and naïve? Lol. Why have European Commission and CMA dropped their Console SLC?

Lets pretend that the EC is only trying to save face by saying that Microsoft didn't lie to them, they can still force Microsoft into a legally binding contract to release CoD on PlayStation without "admitting" that Microsoft lied to them, but instead they have reportedly dropped their console concerns entirely and will no longer require that from Microsoft.

Then there is the CMA who have dropped their Console SLC entirely despite the fact that up until recently they were suggesting that Microsoft should divest Activision due to CoD. They dropped it instead of formulating a legally binding contract with Microsoft to force them to release CoD on PlayStation even though Microsoft offered it.

Why would both of them do that if Microsoft lied to the European Commission about Zenimax? Why would they believe that Microsoft won't make CoD exclusive? Why would they trust Microsoft's word that there wouldn't be a financial incentive to do so? They wouldn't. Especially not the traditionally strict European Commission and newly tough CMA.

If you lie to one regulator, all major regulators will take note of that, these guys aren't entirely disconnected from one another, they pay attention to the decisions that each other make and sometimes even collaborate on decisions. If you lie to one then that will 100% be taken into account when you verbally promise another something. It tells them all that you aren't trustworthy.

There's one regulator left with a console concern, the FTC. They are accusing Microsoft of being liars but also gave us the gem that Nintendo isn't in the same market as Xbox/PlayStation and completely made up a market in order to weaken Microsoft's own arguments and justify their decision to sue to block whilst at the same time accidentally putting Nintendo in a market on its own therefore making it a de facto monopoly.

They also reportedly rushed to sue to block in order to put pressure onto the CMA and EC to also block the deal because on the same date they were in talks with the EC who stated that they are leaning towards approving. The FTC knows they will lose in court so they are trying to angle for someone else to block it and do the work for them.

They have repeatedly lost in court over the past few years and are on a losing streak because the cases they keep bringing are incredibly weak, they just got their asses handed to them in court after attempting to block Meta's acquisition of a VR fitness app, start-up company that literally nobody cares about, a start-up company...Lina even overruled her own staff who advised against it.

So I'm sorry but I believe the European Commission way more than anything the FTC tries to claim.

Microsoft's EU Remedies Target Only Cloud Streaming Rivals, Sources Says | Reuters

So anonymous sources. Neat.

Microsoft told EC right from the start that future titles will be decided on a case-by-case basis.

The case by case basis claim is just a sad effort by MS to muddy the waters. It has zero bearing here.

In an interview with Kotaku Phil Spencer claimed all the way back in October of 2020 that MS didn't buy Zenimax in order to pull games from rivals. Then they proceeded to pull Zenimax games Starfield and Redfall from rivals. And even within that interview he was using the case by case basis gobbledygook to muddy the waters.

Edit for Source: https://kotaku.com/xbox-boss-phil-spencer-on-series-x-launch-halo-infinit-1845392984

Edit: Don't make me hunt down my pre-2021 comments on various articles where I take Spencer at his word and believe him on Starfield coming to PS5. I've no doubt you remember my comments from back then.

Just think about it though.  You actually have the words from the EU regulators themselves saying that what was stated was incorrect but somehow its a conspiracy.  The same EU who has punished MS the most on Anti Trust laws they suddenly have a soft spot for MS and would lie for them.  No matter how many long post you make, you still have not shone anywhere to disprove those very obvious facts.

Its not that you have a conclusion that is different from everyone else, you have shone no evidence to support your opinion.  I guess you can believe whatever you want but most people like facts over a bunch of speculation.  You are basically doing a interpretation of a direct statement and making it into what you want.  At no time have you provided any evidence to your opinion beyond you believing this is what the EU meant.  Then we have direct statements from MS about their plays for Bethesda but you have provided not one statement to contradict those statement besides you stating "Well the EU believed that MS would not pull any games from Sony".  So basically you threw out every one of Ryuu links, direct statements from the EU that did not conform to your opinion and provided no counter besides your belief of what they mean.

This is exactly what I mean that people become so invested in their opinion they never do the work to prove it, they just give everyone their feelings and interpretation without any evidence or facts.

Everything you said could be true but in the absents of actual proof the only thing we can judge is that its your opinion/feeling instead of concrete evidence to support your stance.

Also you must live in a vacuum if you believe that this site is overyly pro MS.  Did you just sign up yesterday.

Proof again, you did not like the term case by case which is pretty explicit.  It means MS can make all Bethesda games exclusive some or none.  But since it doesn't conform to your opinion you throw it out.  This is what we call bias.

One of my biggest issue with post like yours is that you take a snippit of the whole interview to make your point but lets take the whole thing and put it into context.

“Is it possible to recoup a $7.5 billion investment if you don’t sell Elder Scrolls VI on the PlayStation?” I asked.

“Yes,” Spencer quickly replied.

Then he paused.

“I don’t want to be flip about that,” he added. “This deal was not done to take games away from another player base like that. Nowhere in the documentation that we put together was: ‘How do we keep other players from playing these games?’ We want more people to be able to play games, not fewer people to be able to go play games. But I’ll also say in the model—I’m just answering directly the question that you had—when I think about where people are going to be playing and the number of devices that we had, and we have xCloud and PC and Game Pass and our console base, I don’t have to go ship those games on any other platform other than the platforms that we support in order to kind of make the deal work for us. Whatever that means.”

So in that statement he is directly telling you that he believes only providing games on Xbox ecosystem is enough.  So basically as always people take one small statement and make it into whatever they want but context wise, its very clear he is saying that making Elder Scrolls exclusive to MS platform is all MS needs.

Provide those comments where Spencer stated Starfield was coming to PS5, then you have a case but please provide the whole statements not just some small snippit you believe proves your point but does not.

Did you not read the Kotaku article? Spencer claimed that they didn't acquire Zenimax to pull games from PS5. In that article he used the same gobbledygook "case by case basis" nonsense that he supposidly pitched to the commission. He then went on to pull Zenimax games from PS5 which proves him to be a liar.

And I did provide proof. I showed the commission's incorrect statement. You just want to stick your head in the sand like half the mod team when it comes to MS related stuff. This site is a joke. Anyone can come to this site, check the front page and tell it's just Fox News for MS fans.