UK challenges $69B Microsoft/Activision deal, citing potential harm to gamers
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
Ofc, there is a anti-trust issue: that said how many significant US tech companies are not steered by directors "owned" by the blackrock and vanguard funds (when you look into the details)?
I am still drinking ristrettos from starbucks (vanguarded/blackrocked via m$ ceo and apple board member) because it is very hard to find drinkable alternatives anywhere else (irony...).
Hence why it is unsurprising in the UK regulator's view that since this is a horizontal integration of lots of games studios all reporting directly to Microsoft, it is getting more anti-competitive; which will also upset the FTC, depending on the outcome of the UK's investigation.
And no I also don't support this even if it came from Sony or Nintendo buying up control of larger game studios.
> sony will suffer A LOT to keep up, and I don't know if nintendo even with their zelda and mario will be able to keep their own platform for a long time.
No they won't.
Sony and Nintendo are doing just fine with their hundreds of billions between them and are still acquiring companies that are unrelated to their business. That is the difference.
Both have been around longer than Microsoft has. So they are fine.