1. The UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) is considering ordering the divestiture of Activision's Call of Duty business as part of Microsoft's $69bn (£57bn) merger with Activision Blizzard.
2. The CMA is concerned that Microsoft could incentivise making Call of Duty exclusive to its Xbox consoles, reducing competition and potentially increasing prices for gamers.
3. The deal has attracted opposition from Playstation maker Sony, who have claimed Microsoft could use the deal to limit their access to future Call of Duty games.
The article is generally reliable in terms of providing factual information about the proposed merger between Microsoft and Activision Blizzard, as well as the potential implications for gamers if it goes ahead. It provides a balanced view by presenting both sides of the argument – those in favour of the merger, such as Bobby Kotick, chief executive at Activision Blizzard, who believes it will help Britain challenge Silicon Valley’s dominance; and those against it, such as Sony who are concerned about their access to future Call of Duty games being limited by Microsoft.
The article does not appear to be biased towards either side, although there are some points which could be explored further or presented more objectively. For example, while Bobby Kotick’s statement that “if a deal like this can’t get through they are not going to be Silicon Valley, they will be Death Valley” is included in the article, there is no exploration or discussion around this point or any counterarguments which may exist. Additionally, while the article mentions that video game sales are worth £5bn per year in the UK alone and that “the whole sector is worth more than the movie and music industry combined” these claims are not supported by any evidence or sources.
In conclusion, while overall this article appears to be reliable in terms of providing factual information about the proposed merger between Microsoft and Activision Blizzard, there are some points which could be explored further or presented more objectively in order to provide a more balanced view on the issue.