[collapse=原文(全文)]Rift Between Gaming Giants Shows Toll of China’s Economic Crackdown
Activision Blizzard and NetEase could not agree on a new deal to distribute video games in China, cutting millions of players from the games in January.
By Kellen Browning and Chang Che
Last October, executives at the Chinese gaming company NetEase and the American video game developer Activision Blizzard joined a Zoom videoconference to discuss the future of their 14-year partnership to offer Activision’s games like World of Warcraft in China.
NetEase executives were worried about new laws imposed by the Chinese government and wanted to make changes to their longstanding contract with Activision to ensure they were in compliance.
But the companies left the call with drastically different interpretations of what had been said, according to four people familiar with the talks and a document viewed by The New York Times. What NetEase executives contended was a conciliatory gesture was seen as a threat by Activision executives. A month later, the companies broke off talks.
In January, more than three million Chinese players lost access to Activision’s iconic games when the partnership ended, and angry NetEase employees livestreamed the dismantling of a 32-foot sculpture of an ax from World of Warcraft that stood outside NetEase’s headquarters in Hangzhou, China.
The testy breakup, after months of talks, ended a relationship that had seemed to prove that global commerce could thrive despite deepening geopolitical rifts. A partnership that had been worth about $750 million in annual revenue, according to company filings and the video game research firm Niko Partners, had become another case study in the increasing difficulty of doing business in China.
Details of the breakdown in negotiations between Activision and NetEase provide an unusual, behind-the-scenes look at how Chinese and American companies are struggling to balance the interests of the Chinese government with what they believe is best for their businesses.
China’s government()has clamped down on China’s largest internet companies and urged businesses(). It has barred children from playing video games on school days and tightened its already strict approval processes for companies to distribute new games. Last year, China’s $39 billion gaming market contracted for the first time in years.
“The private sector in China is in a very weak position now,” said Duncan Clark, the chairman of the Beijing-brd investment advisory firm BDA China. “The cost of accessing the China market has gone up for Western companies, and for domestic companies, there is a greater fear of arbitrary regulations.”
In a statement, Michael Lee, an Activision vice president, said the company’s experience in China had been “very positive” for nearly 20 years, including its decade-long partnership with Tencent to offer Call of Duty. “While it’s true that the partnership you’re describing took a surprising and troubling turn, it’s important to recognize that this was an anomaly,” Mr. Lee said.
Alexandru Voica, a NetEase spokesman, said NetEase had moved on, and “we suggest Activision Blizzard do the same.”
Last year, NetEase executives asked Activision to file relevant disclosures, such as annual revenues and details about parts of its business, to Chinese regulators, but Activision disputed that it was out of compliance with the law or that it was required to turn over more information, according to four people with knowledge of the situation and documents viewed by The Times.
In the contract renegotiations with Activision, conducted every few years since the partnership started, NetEase said it wanted to end the companies’ joint venture agreement — a business entity that helped NetEase distribute games from Blizzard Entertainment, an Activision subsidiary, in China. NetEase said it wanted Activision to license its games directly to NetEase, which would give NetEase more control over operations and allow it to better comply with the new regulations without Activision’s help.
Andrew Tang, a veteran gaming executive in China with close ties to Activision, said he thought NetEase was simply using the antitrust regulations as an excuse to get a better deal.
NetEase is “under a lot of pressure the last couple of years because of all these crackdowns and limiting kids’ play,” Mr. Tang said. “Ultimately, I think it all has to do with the bottom line.”
But tensions had been building before last year’s contract renewal discussions, according to the people familiar with the talks.
NetEase executives believed Bobby Kotick, Activision’s chief executive, had made unreasonable demands over the years, two of the people said. In 2018, NetEase announced a $100 million investment in Bungie, a game developer that worked with Activision to produce Destiny, a popular game. Mr. Kotick was unhappy with the investment because Bungie was behind schedule on developing Destiny content, and he worried the investment would further distract the company from its Destiny obligations, two other people said.
That year, NetEase invested in a game development company founded by a person who had until recently been a senior Activision employee, which also angered Activision, the people said. Mr. Kotick considered ending the partnership. A 2019 deal between Activision and NetEase included restrictions that prevented NetEase from hiring former Activision employees or investing in gaming studios directed by them.
Those tensions came to a head in the call last October. Mr. Kotick and William Ding, the chief executive of NetEase, discussed the many antitrust regulators around the world scrutinizing Microsoft’s $70 billion deal to purchase Activision, two people with knowledge of the call said. Mr. Kotick told Mr. Ding that he would consider the licensing proposal, even though he worried that a switch could rattle Chinese regulators before an important political meeting that month and cede more control over Activision’s intellectual property to NetEase.
At some point in the conversation, which was conducted at times through translators, Activision executives felt that Mr. Ding threatened Mr. Kotick. The Chinese government was reviewing the Microsoft acquisition, and the executives recalled that Mr. Ding said NetEase could sway the government either to block or support that deal depending on the outcome of the licensing discussion, according to two people familiar with the call and a document reviewed by The Times.
But NetEase executives did not intend to make a threat and were trying to be conciliatory toward Activision, said two other people familiar with the conversation. The point they intended to make was that if Activision did not switch to a licensing deal, Microsoft would face the same regulatory hurdles when it acquired the company.
Mr. Voica, the NetEase spokesman, denied that Mr. Ding had threatened Activision. He said Activision was continuing to “harass and taunt companies and regulators worldwide.”
Microsoft declined to comment.
After the Zoom call, Activision made a counteroffer: It would switch to a licensing agreement if NetEase paid it roughly $500 million upfront, rather than in payments throughout the course of the deal, according to three people familiar with the negotiations. That was meant to insulate Activision from the risk that its games could be tied up in government approval processes or be replicated without its consent.
NetEase later said in a statement that Activision’s terms were “commercially illogical,” and the stage was set for the contract to expire in January.
When the breakup became public in November, it sent shock waves through the Chinese gaming community. Shares of NetEase stock plunged in Hong Kong.
As time was running out, Activision made a last-ditch proposal to extend the partnership for six months so gamers could keep playing while it searched for a new long-term partner, as the business news site Yicai Global reported. NetEase declined the new offer, and in a statement likened it to “staying together while being divorced.”
In mid-January, NetEase contractors destroyed the World of Warcraft ax sculpture. As the contractors swung hammers at it, employees livestreamed the demolition to 30,000 people. NetEase said local law required it to clear out another company’s intellectual property after the partnership was terminated.
In late January, most of Activision’s games — including World of Warcraft, Diablo III and Overwatch — went dark in China. Chinese companies, including NetEase, released games that some analysts said bore close similarities to the shuttered Activision titles.
NetEase also made a recruiting pitch to former World of Warcraft players, hoping to get them to join Justice Online, a NetEase game in the same genre as World of Warcraft. Online, people posted photos of items from the Justice and Warcraft games that resembled each other.
NetEase said its games did not share similarities with Activision’s.
Activision has said that it plans to return to China and that it is in talks with other Chinese companies to distribute its games. In the past, both Tencent and ByteDance, which owns TikTok, have expressed interest in working with Activision. Activision has also considered teaming up with telecommunications companies like China Mobile, two people said.
For China’s gamers, the breakup was devastating. Zhang Yu, a 35-year-old World of Warcraft player in Beijing, said he was still mourning the loss of a game that had been a constant companion and connected him with thousands of people since 2005.
“What I’m most worried about now,” Mr. Yu said, “is that these friendships will disappear.”
[/collapse]
部分内容翻译：
- 据4名知情人和纽约时报看到的文档，去年十月动视暴雪高层与网易的Zoom视频会议中，双方对同一问题出现了极大程度的误解，使得会议不欢而散，动视暴雪高层认为网易怀有敌意
- 在一份声明中，动视暴雪的一位副总裁Michael Lee称，他们公司在中国做业务近20年的体验都是非常正面的，包括他们和腾讯的十年使命召唤合作。他说“即便你所述的合作关系有令人惊讶和不安的转变，但是明确这是一种异常转变很重要”
- 网易发言人Alexandru Voica在被要求置评时称网易“已经放下(向前看)了”，并且“建议动视暴雪也做一样的事”
- 据4名知情人和纽约时报看到的文档，2022年网易高管曾希望动视暴雪向中国监管部门提交年收益，公司各部分细节等信息，但动视暴雪不认为公司“不符合法律规定”或“是被(监管部门)要求交出更多信息”
- 在续约谈判中，网易希望动视暴雪能结束合资公司协议(注意：不是网之易，网之易是独资公司；战上风信息技术(上海)/(香港)等是合资公司。他们的英文名称是StormNet)。网易希望动视暴雪直接将游戏授权给网易，因为网易将在运营层面获得更多控制，他们也能在没有动视暴雪帮助的情况下遵守最新的监管要求。
- 与动视暴雪有较近关系的资深游戏业内人士Andrew Tang认为网易是在利用反垄断监管去获得对他们更有利的协议
- 根据知情人的说法，续约谈判之前双方的气氛已经紧张了
- 根据其中2名知情人的说法，网易高层认为动视暴雪CEO鲍比·考迪克近几年提出了许多不合理的要求。另2名知情人说，2018年网易向Bungie(与动视暴雪合作，制作命运2)投资1亿美元，鲍比对此次投资不快，因为Bungie制作命运2新内容的日程已经落后于预定时间了，他担心在投资之后Bungie将被其他业务进一步干扰。同年，网易投资了由另一名动视暴雪资深员工创立的企业(他在最近之前都还是动视暴雪雇员)，也使得鲍比不愉快。此时鲍比就考虑过结束与网易的合作关系。2019年，双方签订新协议，禁止网易招募任何动视暴雪前员工，也禁止网易投资由动视暴雪指导？(directed)的工作室
- 紧张局势在2022年10月达到高潮，根据两名对这次通话知情的人的说法，在丁磊与鲍比·考迪克交流反垄断管制时，考迪克告知丁磊他会考虑续约，即便他担心当时正值重要的会议之前，这会让监管者紧张、导致对动视暴雪知识产权的更多控制权被让给网易
- 据知情人和纽约时报看到的文档，在那次藉由翻译人员实施的对话进行到某个时间点的时候，动视高层认为丁磊在威胁鲍比·考迪克。当时中国政府正在审查微软/动视暴雪收购案，而动视暴雪高层回忆到，(他们认为)丁磊提出“网易可以根据续约合同签署与否，向中国政府施加影响，从而影响微软收购案的审查结果”
- 另两名知情人则称网易高层当时并非打算威胁动视暴雪，而是对动视暴雪持和解态度。网易高层当时希望表达的是，如果不更换授权协议的话，在微软收购案成功之后，微软也将面临相同的监管问题
- 网易发言人Alexandru Voica否认丁磊曾威胁过动视暴雪，并称“动视暴雪总是在骚扰和奚落世界各地的公司和监管机构”
- 微软拒绝置评
- 根据3名熟悉那次谈判的人的说法，Zoom视频会议结束后，动视暴雪提出还价，要求网易事先缴纳5亿美元授权费用(而不是在合约期内支付)，否则将无法更换授权协议。在他们的计划中，这(5亿美元)将把动视暴雪从游戏被卡在审查流程中的风险、以及游戏被未经许可地复制的风险中隔离开。
- 动视暴雪公司已经表示，它计划重返中国，并且正在与其他中国公司谈判以发行其游戏。之前腾讯和拥有抖音的字节跳动公司都表示有兴趣与动视暴雪合作。两位人士说，动视暴雪也考虑过与中国移动等电信公司合作。
- 对中国玩家，这个合作的破裂是毁灭性的。Zhang Yu，一名北京的35岁魔兽世界玩家，现在仍在对这款从2005年就陪伴他、并且让他与数千人得以连接起来的游戏致以哀思。Zhang Yu先生说：“我现在最担心的是，这些友谊会消失。”
可能有疏漏，欢迎指正翻译！ |
1、在论坛里发表的文章仅代表作者本人的观点,与本网站立场无关。
2、论坛的所有内容都不保证其准确性,有效性,时间性。阅读本站内容因误导等因素而造成的损失本站不承担连带责任。
3、当政府机关依照法定程序要求披露信息时,论坛均得免责。
4、若因线路及非本站所能控制范围的故障导致暂停服务期间造成的一切不便与损失,论坛不负任何责任。
5、注册会员通过任何手段和方法针对论坛进行破坏,我们有权对其行为作出处理。并保留进步追究其责任的权利。
|
提升卡
千斤顶