CmA doesn't see that way.
Because of Switch hardware, they can't get COD. So they won't get impacted by Activision purchase.
I know that and ultimately it is their decision.
Just respectfully disagree with their definition of a market.
I just think you can make similar arguments for MacOS/Apple Devices but they decided not to.
I think that's needlessly going down a rabbit hole to answer a question that was never really controversial until it was forced into the Activision Blizzard discussion. The fact that Nintendo doesn't sell the same type of games as the other consoles isn't new. Suddenly, Nintendo is a key factor when it comes to Call of Duty? Really trying to pound that square peg into around hole at that point.
I don't think it is needless if the analysis shows if the games that represents 90% of total engagement across all consoles are also on the Switch. Making that percentage up but using that sort of analysis, think you can definitely argue that the Switch is in the same market as COD. I wouldnt classify the question as controversial before or now.
Phase 2 is where they are going to have to quantify stuff so will be interesting if what comes out of that.
What does an analysis involving MacOS have to do with Nintendo?
If the CMA are arguing that Nintendo isnt in the relevant in their analysis of the console gaming market cause it doesn't get COD games.
How does their concerns about Windows dominance over cloud streaming or native gaming make sense? No native COD games on Linux or MacOS for a while, right?
Just want to add that I believe that there probably should be some concessions around Sony, Steam, GFN.