I wish they'd just let it through already. The way it looks, nothing changes for PlayStation gamers, Nintendo gamers get access to CoD for the first time since in years, Activision's back catalogue goes to a company that's way more likely to use it for something other than cool easter eggs in Black Ops games, CoD gets more accessible overall by being a part of the subscription, and Sony's complete market dominance gets another blow that once again forces them to compete and improve their platform.
If anything, I wish the FTC had been this aggressive when it came to the Zenimax purchase. All that really did was give Microsoft the ability to make those games Xbox-exclusive (establishing a pretty scary amount of western RPG dominance) and plop them on Gamepass.
We should be pushing for competition in capitalism whenever we can. Microsoft is openly pushing for a monopoly, they've even admitted in leaked documents that they want to squeeze Sony out of the market.
Your view of what is happening is very short sighted, only Microsoft wins when they control the majority of the market.
Buying Activision Blizzard means they are still third in the console space. Just not so far behind the others.
You are also misqjoting out of context. One executive suggested it was a path to spend now in order to gain footbold later. They would still need to spend a lot more to get there.
After having watched Sony rest on their laurels for the last entire generation while doing effectively nothing for their platform except releasing new games, I am pushing for competition. The only company who's seriously improved their platform in the last decade has been Microsoft, working on backwards compatibility, accessibility features like copilot and the adaptive controller, a full Chromium-based browser so you can do anything from your taxes to playing Mario 64 in-browser on an Xbox, and easy $20 dev access so that users can install Retroarch and have better backwards compatibility than people who actually own PlayStation and Nintendo consoles.
I want that for other platforms. I own a Switch and PS5 because I feel obligated to in order to play games. I own a Series S because I want one and I consider it a good value.
What do you mean by Sony's complete dominance? AFAIK they only dominated with the PS4 because Microsoft bungled the release of the XBOne by tacking a bunch of junk on it that turned people off. Furthermore, online play used to be free with Sony until Microsoft started raking in the dough by charging for Xbox Live so we can thank them for Sony and Nintendo following suit with their own subscription fees. Current gen has PS5 leading in sales despite their production issues contrasting with Microsoft having consoles on the shelf that apparently nobody wanted to buy, but how is that Sony's fault? They don't drive demand.
I don't see how Sony is the dominant one in this scenario.
I wish these appeal announcements would include whatever argument they have for how the lower court erred. It just makes "appeal" synonymous with "do over" the way it's done now.
It would be nice. From your specific wish I take it you probably already know, but for general discussion it looks like they've just filed the Notice of Appeal with the trial Court, which is entirely procedural and required before an appeal can be brought to the Circuit Court. We'll likely have to wait for the briefing before we get the substantive arguments. Reporting on appeals really does give the impression that it's like a second trial though.