Meservey is hardly a reliable witness. As a senior Activision executive, she could have a significant personal financial interest in the ongoing deal. She’s also a post-Trump communicator, unafraid to appear badass and use tweets as a deadly weapon in the name of “honesty”. She is thus a useful attack dog for Microsoft, who is able to maintain the air of gentlemanly generosity she has managed to display throughout her feud with Sony and regulators, while also let her go places she herself would never dare. But – and here’s the not-so-shocking part – Meservey’s words to Ryan are nothing if not an accurate description of Sony’s position. A deal to secure Call of Duty’s place on the PlayStation is on the table for Microsoft, and it’s clearly good enough for Nintendo and Nvidia.
It was both shocking and not shocking at all. It was shocking that Meservey was willing to break the gentleman’s agreement to keep what was said in the meeting confidential. And it’s amazing how, if properly cited, Ryan is willing to state his company’s position so bluntly.
Sony showed no interest in negotiating further concessions; he just wants to use his influence with regulators to end a deal that would significantly strengthen his competitor, with or without exclusion. He will fight to his teeth to rip off his opponent’s legs and make him lose money, as any company in his position can do. It would be naive to think that Microsoft wouldn’t do the same.
That’s all, basically, fair enough, by the rules of the game: it’s capitalism! The problem is that the regulators – the European Commission, the UK Competition and Markets Authority and the US Federal Trade Commission – have let their own political interests drag them, Sony, Microsoft and Activision Blizzard, in an invisible performance that only damages the reputations of everyone involved, wastes a great deal of time and money, and actively harms the gaming industry in which it must protect.