Microsoft FTC Closing Arguments: This Case Has Always Been About Call of Duty

Closing arguments between Microsoft and the Federal Trade Commission lasted nearly three hours yesterday, and nearly every second of the debate was dedicated to Call of Duty. The focus on Activision’s biggest asset is not surprising given what we’ve seen over the last week. As Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley eloquently put it herself: “This case has always been about Call of Duty”.

As we’ve seen throughout the trial, the FTC attempted to set Microsoft’s ZeniMax acquisition as precedent for how the company could handle Activision Blizzard games should the transaction go through. Throughout the entire hearing, the FTC repeatedly brought up Starfield’s exclusivity as an example of how Microsoft could withhold Call of Duty from PlayStation platforms. But in closing arguments, the FTC said The Elder Scrolls franchise is the most comparable ZeniMax title to Call of Duty.

When pressed for more details, the FTC backed up and argued that there’s actually not a comparable ZeniMax title, because of Call of Duty’s exceptional value, huge revenue, and annual release schedule. In other words, the FTC was arguing that Call of Duty is a unicorn.

As IGN Senior Reporter Rebekah Valentine further breaks down in her analysis of day five, one confusing section of closing arguments came when the FTC was arguing about a mysterious number of PlayStation users that could jump ship to Xbox if Call of Duty became an exclusive. It took several minutes and multiple lawyers (Including one of Microsoft’s lawyers chiming in to clear things up) to attempt to explain this point, and the FTC’s argument never ended up culminating in anything particularly effective. Judge Corley asked the FTC for concrete data and real-world examples, while the FTC continued to deal in hypotheticals.

The Nintendo Switch also came up during closing arguments, as Judge Corley once again tried to get clarity on if Nintendo’s console is a competitor to PlayStation and Xbox. The equal price point of the Nintendo Switch and Xbox Series S came up as evidence that the two consoles are in the same market, while the FTC continued to argue that the Series S and Switch do different things.

One lighter moment of the closing arguments came when Judge Corley sounded a bit like a Nintendo Switch commercial, saying, “Well, it’s not the same. In many ways, [the Switch is] better, because you can play it on a [TV] or take it on the airplane.”

How Important Is Call of Duty?

The conversation at one point shifted to cloud gaming, but it ended up being merely a 15-minute detour before the questions snapped right back to Call of Duty. Judge Corley eventually started to question the level of Call of Duty’s importance.

“This industry is very different in that it’s amorphous and it changes all the time and it’s completely dynamic,” Corley said, “I know Call of Duty has had enduring [impact], but other games come and go just like MySpace or TV shows or whatever. And I’m trying to figure out why, why the emphasis just so much on Call of Duty? Isn’t there an argument that would force someone to come up with another good annual game or some other thing?”

“… Why the emphasis just so much on Call of Duty?

The FTC once again argued about Call of Duty’s uniqueness, while Microsoft said Call of Duty is not an essential piece of content. While Microsoft appeared to have the stronger showing in closing arguments, the FTC wisely pointed out that the burden of proof is not on the government in this case. The FTC simply needs to raise enough serious questions about the merger to be granted more time to complete a full investigation.

After nearly three hours of closing arguments, the week-long Microsoft FTC hearing came to an end. Judge Corley asked both sides to submit their final documents, coyly reminding them “no Sharpie” for redactions. She praised the two sides on their civility and presentations on tight deadlines. Now, Judge Corley said she will make her decision, saying, “I’m going to do my best. It’s hard.” She said it won’t take as along as two-to-three months, but we don’t have an exact timeline of when to expect a ruling.

While we wait for the results, there’s a lot to catch up on from the last week of court. For more, check out our analysis of the final day of the hearing, and a full recap of everything that happened over the last week.

Additional reporting by Rebekah Valentine.

Logan Plant is a freelance writer for IGN covering video game and entertainment news. He has over seven years of experience in the gaming industry with bylines at IGN, Nintendo Wire, Switch Player Magazine, and Lifewire. Find him on Twitter @LoganJPlant.