EA Sale Sparks Debate Over Saudi Arabia’s Growing Influence in Gaming

For many gamers, the phrase “EA Sports – it’s in the game” is deeply familiar, especially for those who grew up playing football, racing, or action games. Now, Electronic Arts (EA) is back in the headlines—not because of a new release, but because of a blockbuster sale.

EA is set to be sold for $55 billion (£41 billion), one of the largest deals ever in the gaming industry. While the price alone is impressive, it is not the main reason the sale has become such a major topic of discussion. Instead, much of the attention has focused on who is buying the company.

The new owners will be a consortium led by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF). PIF already owns major assets, including Premier League football club Newcastle United, the LIV Golf tour, and several high-profile boxing events. Each of these investments has previously faced strong public criticism and intense scrutiny.

When compared to earlier investments, the EA deal stands out even more. It is 11 times larger than PIF’s investment in golf and 180 times the cost of buying Newcastle United. Given these numbers, it is not surprising that PIF’s move to acquire one of the world’s biggest video game companies has raised eyebrows.

BBC Sport has examined what this takeover could mean, both for the gaming industry and for Saudi Arabia’s wider global strategy.

A Boost to Saudi Arabia’s “Soft Power”

George Osborn, editor of Video Games Industry Memo, described the deal as a major success for Saudi Arabia’s soft power strategy. Soft power refers to the ability to influence people and countries through culture, entertainment, and public image rather than force.

“EA is the perfect company for what Saudi Arabia wants to achieve,” Osborn told BBC Sport. “For Saudi Arabia, this is an enormous win. Whether it is a win for everyone else is another question.”

For years, the Saudi government has rejected accusations of “sportswashing”—the idea that it uses sport and entertainment to improve its image while diverting attention from human rights concerns. Critics often point to the country’s record on women’s rights, LGBT issues, and the use of the death penalty.

Osborn believes the move into gaming is part of the same long-term strategy. He explained that video games have huge cultural influence, especially among young people.

“If a parent buys a copy of EA Sports FC at a supermarket,” he said, “they’re not thinking about geopolitics. They’re thinking about fun. That’s the genius of the strategy—Saudi Arabia becomes associated with enjoyment rather than politics.”

Increasing Control of the Gaming Industry

Although the deal has been announced, it still needs official approval from regulators. The consortium also includes major investment firms such as Silver Lake and Affinity Partners, a company led by Jared Kushner, the son-in-law of former US President Donald Trump.

This is not PIF’s first move into gaming. The fund already owned 9–10% of EA before the deal and has also invested heavily in companies linked to Pokémon Go and Monopoly Go. These investments show a clear pattern of long-term interest in the industry.

EA itself owns an extremely valuable portfolio. It produces global hits such as Apex Legends, Battlefield, Need for Speed, and The Sims. Its football games—now branded as EA Sports FC—have sold 325 million copies since 1993. The Sims has sold 200 million copies, while Need for Speed has exceeded 150 million.

According to Osborn, this deal represents more than influence—it represents control.

“It’s no longer just a seat at the table,” he said. “With control, you can shape the direction of the company to suit your goals.”

Financial Concerns and Future Questions

The takeover would make EA a private company, meaning it would no longer be listed on the stock market. All public shares would be bought out.

Some analysts have raised concerns about the deal’s financial structure. Reports suggest it could involve $20 billion in debt, which would need to be paid off using future game revenues. In addition, the purchase price includes a 25% premium on EA’s market value, setting the share price at $210 per share.

As the deal moves forward, questions remain about transparency, creative freedom, and the growing role of state-backed investment in entertainment. What is clear is that gaming is no longer just about play—it has become part of a much larger global conversation.

Vocabulary List (B2 Level)

1. ingrained

Deeply fixed in someone’s mind or habits

The slogan is ingrained in gaming culture.

2. blockbuster

Extremely successful or large-scale

The deal was a blockbuster announcement.

3. astronomical

Extremely large

The company was sold for an astronomical sum.

4. consortium

A group of companies or investors working together

The consortium includes several major investment firms.

5. portfolio

A collection of investments or projects

PIF has a diverse portfolio across sports and gaming.

6. scrutiny

Close and critical examination

The takeover was met with intense scrutiny.

7. raise eyebrows (idiom)

To cause surprise or suspicion

The size of the deal raised eyebrows worldwide.

8. soft power

Influence gained through culture and image rather than force

Gaming is now part of Saudi Arabia’s soft power strategy.

9. sportswashing

Using sports to improve a country’s public image

Critics accuse the country of sportswashing.

10. geopolitics

The relationship between politics and geography

Most consumers are not thinking about geopolitics.

11. regulators

Authorities that approve or control business activity

The deal still needs approval from regulators.

12. acquire

To buy or obtain something

PIF plans to acquire full control of EA.

13. portfolio of games

A range of products produced by a company

EA has a strong portfolio of popular games.

14. take private

To remove a company from the stock market

The deal would take EA private.

15. premium

An amount paid above normal market value

The buyers offered a 25% premium.

Worksheet:

Part 1: Reading Comprehension

True or False

Decide if the statements are True (T) or False (F).

1. PIF has never invested in gaming before this deal.

2. EA Sports FC was previously called FIFA.

3. The EA deal is smaller than PIF’s investment in golf.

4. Critics worry the deal could create significant debt.

5. The article suggests video games have cultural influence.

Short Answer Questions

Answer in 1–2 sentences.

1. Why has the EA deal raised eyebrows among the public?

2. What human rights issues do critics often mention when discussing Saudi Arabia?

3. According to George Osborn, why are video games useful for Saudi Arabia’s strategy?

4. What financial concern do analysts have about the takeover?

5. Why might consumers not think about geopolitics when buying EA games?

Part 2: Vocabulary Practice

A. Match the Words to the Definitions

Word	Definition
1. ingrained	a) A group working together
2. consortium	b) Deeply fixed in the mind
3. scrutiny	c) To buy or take ownership
4. acquire	d) Close examination
5. premium	e) Extra amount paid above value

B. Fill in the Gaps

Use the correct form of the word.

(scrutiny – portfolio – raise eyebrows – soft power – astronomical)

1. The price of the deal was __________ by industry standards.

2. The takeover came under intense public __________.

3. The size of the investment is likely to __________ worldwide.

4. EA has a diverse __________ of successful games.

5. Entertainment can be a powerful form of __________.

C. Sentence Transformation

Rewrite the sentence using the word in brackets.

1. The deal surprised many people. (raised eyebrows)→ ______________________________________

2. EA will no longer be traded on the stock market. (private)→ ______________________________________

Part 3: Critical Thinking & Interpretation

Answer in full sentences.

1. Why do you think gaming companies are becoming more attractive to global investors?

2. Do you believe entertainment companies should remain politically neutral? Why or why not?

3. How is gaming different from sport when it comes to influencing culture?

Part 4: Discussion Questions (Speaking)

Use these for pair or group discussion.

1. Is it fair to criticize a company based on who owns it?

2. Should governments be allowed to own major entertainment companies?

3. Do you think concerns about “sportswashing” also apply to gaming?

4. Would knowledge of a company’s owners affect your decision to buy a game?

5. Is this controversy being blown out of proportion, or is it justified?