Both execs are just protecting their business. While disguised with a smile, every Phil says it to protect the business. While controversial, all of the decisions Jim makes is to protect the business. No nice guys here.
I find it interesting that the entire discussion from the CEOs, PR and regulators all revolve around Call of Duty. What about the other franchises under Acti-Blizz?
I'm curious to see how this all ends. Someone is going to take the L.
The benchmark is 3 years. Its what MS offered and what Sony rejected.
Also, if this deal gets rejected, where does that leave Activision and Sony's relationship?