2123
Unity deleted these terms, don't let them get out
(lemmy.today)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2023
2123 points (99.0% liked)
Technology
60112 readers
2419 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I've seen the "Microsoft should just buy Unity" argument a lot lately. And while I think it's probably a better management than current, I imagine Microsoft is hesitant having only just come out of a, what, 6 month long legal battle in US and EU courts regarding acquisition of ActiBliz? So a good idea, but one I can imagine might not happen...
I honestly don't think MS really wants to own Unity. Like, sure, there's a small amount of synergy because some of their games use it, but owning Unity also means committing resources to support and improve it and competing with Unreal to an extent.
If anyone would be interested in buying Unity I'd think it'd be a Chinese corp like Tencent or NetEase or else a publisher that works with a lot of indies like Devolver or maybe Embracer.
Yeah, it kind of sucks that Microsoft being an even bigger unstoppable monopoly would have actually helped in these instances... at least in the short term... hopefully something less future terrible comes along to solve the short term problems instead at least.
Microsoft gaming is not even an industry leader, much less a monopoly.
Gaming isn't the only thing they do though, cornering multiple markets as one company is the definition of a monopoly. The merger was thoroughly investigated as to whether it would be unfair competitively, that is a different way of saying they were worried it was gonna be a monopoly, and in that case they were even only concerned about the gaming market.
I'm not just throwing around random terms, it is indeed approaching a monopoly. And could indeed be bad long term, even if it gets rid of kotick and helps clean up blizzard in the short term. And that's a pretty big if.