Is he right?

Attached: 5435534.png (551x137, 12K)

fpbp

Yep
well done user

Attached: FPBP.jpg (171x218, 14K)

why aren't twitter screencap posters banned on sight?
are mods really too busy watching their crushes get collectively BLACKED?

On a very simplistic level, yes.
However, the differences in culture, location and ownership issues would make this extremely difficult (even if they all wanted to).
Also fuck off twitterfag

Attached: 1538807662621.jpg (800x640, 161K)

>Onision

Attached: 1473965470752.jpg (900x702, 83K)

> stop competing
> make better product
I know people are stupid, but come on, you can bait better than that.

If they did that, why would the bother pushing pushing for technological advancements? There would be no competition to beat, so why bother.

onionson is an idiot

Because money makes good games, look at Star Citizien, with small injection of few millions dollars and 7 years of active development, we have barely playbale tech demo.

That's what commies did. Look how it ended.

No. Competition is what drives innovation, not to mention better consumer practices. Things are already shit now so imagine if they all pooled into one mega company and became the only face on the block. At that point, they would have license to get away with whatever the fuck they wanted to because there's no competition. for consumers to run to if they disagree with it. This tweet is likely from a broke, entitled, Nintendo fanboy that doesn't understand economics and business.

Thats illegal sweety

That's basically communism vs. capitalism

This bitch is retarded.

OH MY GOD A TWITTER THREAD

QUICK POST WOJAK AND PEPE FOR THE FULL Yea Forums EXPERIENCE I'M CUMMING

Money and also because competition is good and necessary.

>imagine if you created a monopoly

Attached: 1455607617384.jpg (300x186, 10K)

Attached: 102957.png (680x680, 430K)

No, he's not fucking right, because companies without competition get complacent and start charging insane prices.

Look at Intel and Nvidia. Both of them started charging stupid prices because they didn't have any competition for their high performance offerings. If you wanted the most powerful products, you had to go for Intel CPUs and Nvidia GPUs. This complacence has been the undoing for Intel especially, as AMD have now made massive gains. And while Nvidia aren't seeing a similar attack on the GPU front (not yet anyway), it is still detrimental to consumers that they have to pay stupid prices for an Nvidia card if they want the best gaming performance.

Competition is always good for consumers, which is why all developed countries have competition / anti-trust legislation to prevent monopolies from forming.

I meant it's only right on a very simple level. At first it would be amazing, you'd get games, power and multiplayer functions that would be each companies strong suit.
Over time they wouldn't find a need to improve and keep hiking up the price for minimal improvements until another startup company was created.

yeah like just everyone should work together!!!

>I want a monopoly
Brilliant

>At first it would be amazing
>799$ console with one 4 hour 90$ game with 120$ of "extra" content.
damn bro no competition is sweet

Attached: it.jpg (1085x1455, 153K)

it's always someone elses money with communists

Competition makes games better, first of all.
A multi-billion-dollar game would be a disaster. Imagine managing all the different teams trying to achieve a vision designed by corporate commitee.
Everything would be safe, bland and boring and in the end, the billions of dollars didn't even achieve anything you couldn't do much cheaper by a driven team. No one would be exited to work on it.

Wouldn't be profitable