There is one publisher which comes to mind: Ubisoft. Remember guys Tencent had like 20-30% share of ABK but Microsoft still bought them. I wouldn’t wonder if Ubisoft is their next target.
They won't be able to acquire Ubisoft (at least, nowhere near as easily as ABK which has been hell for MS to acquire as-is). In fact, they won't be able to acquire any other gaming publishers for a
long while. Microsoft argued for ABK on the grounds of being in 3rd place relative Nintendo (2nd) and Sony (1st). They argued on grounds of having way less market share than PlayStation. With ABK they now leapfrog Nintendo and are in spitting distance of PlayStation's annual revenue.
While they have also tried arguing market share in terms of consoles sold, opponents to future gaming acquisitions can easily point out Microsoft themselves saying console sales don't matter, not to mention, console sales are only a means to an end and actual market share is measured by revenue generated by the console brand, which is a LOT more than just consoles sold.
If regulators suddenly "change up" their own viewpoints just to accommodate MS buying more gaming publishers to "compete", when buying both Zenimax and ABK can statistically be pointed to as having boosted them more than enough to "compete", then you will see regulators dismantled and torn apart by lawsuits the likes of which has never been seen. Companies like Microsoft (and yes Zzero I know MS isn't the only company that's done this) can install people with close connections into regulatory groups, but the law doesn't end with them. It never did.
I think some of you are stressing out too much about MS going after more publishers because the way I see it, they won't be able to. At least not for a very long while. The main point of concern we should really be having about the acquisition is what do the concessions look like. So far MS have tried getting out front with their own remedies, but these are weaksauce remedies that still do their absolute best to have MS keep the advantage. What we need to see are what hardline concessions the CMA, EC, and FTC demand out of Microsoft for the deal.
That is going to set a precedent to other companies and maybe ward off other Big Tech from thinking they can just effortlessly replicate Microsoft's strategy for gaming acquisitions and consolidate everything to their absolute preferred advantage. It'll set guidelines for other companies like Sony who are likely looking into some larger gaming acquisitions of their own. It'll set guidelines for stipulating where the independent, open 3P software market needs to look like in terms of publisher stability and baseline revenue to help ensure enough choice in 3P relations for platform holders (where they can actually operate independently vs. going through another competitor for such opportunities i.e like Sony trying to get development or marketing deals with ABK after MS acquires them, which will be virtually impossible).
