OPINION – It’s no coincidence that the question keeps coming up: will EA slide back into its “darker” business habits now that its new owners openly plan to push the company deeper into microtransactions? The main investor groups have made no effort to hide that their ultimate goal is to strengthen their latest acquisition’s grip on the mobile gaming market.

The news of the Electronic Arts buyout — a staggering $55 billion deal — sent shockwaves through the gaming industry, and the tremors are still being felt today, not only in the corporate world but also in the media landscape. If Microsoft’s Activision-Blizzard acquisition reshaped the industry’s balance of power, this second mega-deal — both in timing and value — could trigger equally seismic shifts for EA, once the largest publicly traded Western game publisher.

But looming over all this change is a familiar and unwelcome specter: the return of microtransactions. And let’s be honest — there’s good reason for concern. If Saudi Arabia’s PIF sovereign wealth fund and U.S.-based private equity giants Affinity Partners and Silver Lake approach their new toy with the same strategy they’ve used in the past, we could see a company already deeply tied to this revenue model double down on it even more aggressively.

History speaks for itself. Unlike previous Saudi investments — such as Niantic and Scopely under Savvy Games, or SNK under MiSK and EGDC — this deal involves far more players, and they’re not even pretending otherwise. Their plan is clear: leverage EA’s powerful sports IPs as a launchpad to conquer the mobile gaming market.

Cloudy Forecasts Ahead

Within hours of the announcement, analysts were already speculating about how this acquisition could impact players. Forbes, citing analyst Michael Pachter via Kotaku, wrote that “this move could give EA a massive boost in the mobile space, where the company has struggled to establish a strong foothold.” And it’s not for lack of trying — but more on that later.

One major difference from previous acquisitions is that this time, two U.S.-based private equity funds are also involved. Particularly noteworthy is Affinity Partners, which has positioned itself as a “bridge” between East and West (with PIF on the other side). Leading the firm is none other than Jared Kushner, son-in-law to U.S. President Donald Trump, known for his ruthless, calculating negotiation style.

Columnists at the New York Times highlighted another key point: “Private investors see untapped potential in EA’s IP portfolio and plan to port some of its flagship titles to mobile, offering them for free while monetizing certain features.” That might broaden EA’s audience, but it could also alienate its long-standing fan base — a community notoriously critical of aggressive monetization practices.

EA’s Long and Complicated Relationship With Microtransactions

To understand how we got here, we have to go back to 2009. EA’s golden goose has always been FIFA (now EA Sports FC), and FIFA 09 introduced Ultimate Team — the single most profitable feature in the company’s history. Using loot boxes — now rebranded as “packs” — players could randomly unlock new athletes for their squads. Originally a paid DLC, Ultimate Team was later fully integrated into the base game, becoming the centerpiece of every new entry.

But FIFA wasn’t the only testing ground. Mass Effect 3, the finale to BioWare’s beloved sci-fi trilogy, also became a monetization experiment. Its multiplayer mode required players to invest significant time to unlock the “true” endings, and loot boxes were introduced here too — granting random characters and weapons necessary to progress.

Plants vs. Zombies marked one of EA’s first serious forays into mobile gaming. Initially owned by PopCap, the studio was acquired after the original game’s massive success, paving the way for Plants vs. Zombies 2: It’s About Time. Many referred to the sequel as EA’s “mobile monetization lab.” While it was generally well received, its far more aggressive and intrusive microtransactions created friction between the company and its fan base. In 2013, with no established rules governing the emerging mobile market, EA didn’t hesitate to squeeze every last drop out of its new cash cow.

The Star Wars Battlefront II Meltdown

In 2017, EA pushed things further than ever before. With Star Wars Battlefront II, the company locked iconic characters, weapons, and key gameplay features behind paywalls. Yes, everything was technically unlockable through gameplay — but the sheer amount of grinding required made what should have been a “pay-to-progress” model feel blatantly “pay-to-win.” Even industry giants like Blizzard and Gaijin Entertainment (War Thunder) condemned the move — though they later pivoted to similar strategies themselves.

The backlash forced EA to backpedal. Loot boxes were reworked to contain only cosmetic items, and countries like Belgium introduced legislation banning their sale outright. Yet EA and others never truly abandoned the model. It continues to thrive in franchises like The Sims, and Apex Legends — which embraced it from day one — was a massive success at launch, even if it has since lost some momentum.

Will the Storm Blow Over — or Is This Just the Beginning?

Now that EA is a privately held company, the acquisition has two immediate implications for gamers. First, the new owners will almost certainly try to expand EA’s presence and profitability in the mobile market. To loosely borrow from Gollum in The Lord of the Rings: “They did it once — they can do it again.” Potential candidates for this expansion include EA Sports FC, Apex Legends Mobile, The Sims, and possibly even a revival of Plants vs. Zombies, despite the franchise’s tarnished reputation.

The second — and more worrying — consequence is that, as a private company, EA is no longer subject to the same scrutiny from national and international regulators when implementing monetization strategies. Considering its history — and its new owners’ openly stated goals — it’s entirely possible that games previously free of microtransactions (such as the Battlefield series, with a new installment on the horizon) could soon be monetized again.

Of course, it’s not all doom and gloom. After the acquisitions of Niantic and SNK, there was no major uptick in microtransactions for games like Pokémon GO or The King of Fighters XIII Global Match. Still, the track record and the players involved in this latest deal leave little room for optimism. All signs point toward EA adopting even more aggressive monetization strategies — across mobile and console platforms alike. It may sound like a cliché, but in the end, only time will tell.

-theGeek-

Source: 3djuegos