Microsoft Pledges Openness in New App Store

Activision Blizzard, Microsoft

Executives at Microsoft are pledging the company’s new video game app store will be governed by open-market principals, the Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday (Feb. 9).

These remarks were made to reporters ahead of meetings between Microsoft and lawmakers about the company’s landmark purchase of gaming giant Activision Blizzard.

Among the principles the company pledges to adopt for its store: developers won’t need to use a proprietary, something Apple has been criticized for by lawmakers and developers alike.

“We are more focused on adapting to regulation than fighting against it,” said Microsoft President Brad Smith.

Last month, Microsoft announced plans to acquire Activision for $75 billion, its largest purchase ever and a deal that would help bolster the company’s subscription gaming service Game Pass. The service gives users access to a catalog of games for a monthly fee. These users would get to play wildly popular franchises like Call of Duty and World of Warcraft if the deal goes forward.

As many observers have pointed out, the deal is also Microsoft’s bet on the burgeoning metaverse, a 3D world of immersive activities that mix with virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR).

Read more: Microsoft Latest M&A May Put It in Regulatory Spotlight

The deal is subject to regulatory approval, with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission trying to determine if the acquisition will hamper competition in the gaming world.

As PYMNTS noted last month, this will mark Microsoft’s first time in the regulatory spotlight in several years.

In the early 2000s, EU antitrust regulators found that the company abused its dominant market position by tying its Netscape explorer to its operating system and fined the company a record – for its time – $1 billion. (It was later eclipsed by a $5 billion penalty levied on Google.)

However, Microsoft has avoided the regulatory scrutiny that other Big Tech firms have faced for the last decade, in part because the company hadn’t been competing in markets that attracted regulators’ attention, such as mobile ecosystems or online advertising.