Roughly 44% of Activision's console game sales this generation has been on Xbox 360. (Please note that these totals include worldwide numbers for games which Activision had only partial rights to ... such as Lego games).

It right now specializes in Call of Duty, Skylanders, and licensed properties. CoD sells best on Xbox. Skylanders sells best on Wii.

Of those, only CoD is an exclusive IP with total control. (Toys for Bob markets the Skylanders toys). Licensed IPs often can and do require sales on all systems or on all systems if certain conditions are met.

Substitutes exist or can be made for these games. for the games -- Battlefield, Pokemon, etc.

And Activision has a history of running properties into the ground (e.g., Guitar Hero).

This would not be a good buy. And Microsoft would have to bid against companies which could sell twice as much product or more.

Mike from Morgantown

EA/SEGA/Square Enix/Ubisoft/THQ/Capcom to name a few others don't have that problem?  

I didn't say anything about any of the other companies. 

But Activision killed Guitar Hero by releasing 6 games in one year. (It also over-exposed Tony Hawk.) No one else has ever been that bad. That is why they have that reputation.

Mike from Morgantown

Internal Ubisoft studios working on Assassin's Creed: Ubisoft Montreal, Ubisoft Sofia. Also some minor assistance work by some of Ubisoft's obscure studios (Ubisoft Singapore, for example). Activision's biggest studios are all working on CoD.

If MS were to buy Activision, it is likely that most licensed games would be lost - licensed games usually have to be multiplatform as part of the deal (there are, of course, exceptions). Third party publishing by Activision would simply move to another publisher more likely than not (except where deals lock them in), and those companies would not continue having Activision publish if MS were to in any way negatively impact sales of their games on other systems (let's be blunt - if Activision were bought by MS, and Bungie wanted to make multiplatform games, they'd probably find a way out of the deal, rather than have the non-MS versions of their games treated as inferior).

I already pointed out the way that Tony Hawk has been driven into the ground. Note that the original developer of Tony Hawk games was later moved to Guitar Hero, and then to CoD. Activision now has an external developer, Robomodo, making Tony Hawk games. And Tony Hawk HD isn't likely to do any better than other recent Tony Hawk titles on PS3/360. The best-selling Tony Hawk on PS3 is Project 8 at 560,000, and on 360 is RIDE at a similar number. The original game sold over 5 million on Playstation alone.

And Skylanders, as I pointed out, isn't really "up and coming" - there's no indication, at this point, that the second entry will do significantly better than the first one.

So, what would I have them do? I'd have them put either Infinity Ward or Treyarch on the task of creating a new IP that isn't Call of Duty (I'd probably try to set up a rolling schedule, where every third year, CoD is skipped in favour of a new IP, alternating whether it's IW or Treyarch that makes it). I'd have had them put Neversoft on the task of coming up with a new Hero game with some innovation (before it died), and would now task them with coming up with a new, innovative music-based game franchise. I'd have had them put Sledgehammer Games on the job of creating a darker game in the survival horror type of realm, perhaps with instructions to put some new twist on the genre. I'd have had them put Raven Software on the task of making a new Heretic or Hexen game and reviving that series (or I'd give that franchise ot Sledgehammer Games, and have Raven Software work on making a new IP).

I note that, at the very least, Activision Leeds will be making a new Pitfall game... but that's just one title, before they focus on handheld CoD games. I probably would have had Activision Leeds work on reviving some older IPs as their main task - start with Pitfall, but then continue on to Crash Bandicoot, MechWarrior, River Raid, and Zork, and any others they could think of. Work on coming up with new games in each franchise, to try to kickstart them back into action.

List of Ubisoft studios attached to AC, Monteal, Ubisoft Annecy, Ubisoft Singapore, Ubisoft Bucharest, Ubisoft Quebec, and Ubisoft Massive. So 6 rather than 8 but still that is a lot of studios. 

So your plan to make Activision more successful is to make less of the best selling franchise so they can work on franchises that have proven to sell less and new IPs that may or may not be successful. Both of which would cost more to develop than another CoD. Seems like a terrible plan to me. 

Ubisoft has 26 internal studios.

Ubisoft "Bucharest" (It looks like it's actually Ubisoft Romania) did work on a few Assassin's Creeds, but their most recent game is a Tom Clancy game (Ghost Recon: Future Soldier).
Ubisoft Singapore is currently mainly working on Ghost Recon Online.
Ubisoft Quebec has been working on Battle of Giants games, and are behind PowerUp Heroes for the 360, The Black Eyed Peas Experience for the Wii, and Marvel Avengers: Battle for Earth for 360 and Wii U.
Ubisoft Massive's most recent title is Far Cry 3.

Even Ubisoft Montreal, the main AC studio, has been working on games like Far Cry 3, Watch Dogs, various Tom Clancy games, recent Prince of Persia games, and the Shaun White games.

This leaves Ubisoft Annecy as the only studio dedicated to Assassin's Creed at the moment (and their official page on the ubisoft site says that they also work on multiplayer in Splinter Cell games). Now compare with Activision and CoD, with their four biggest studios currently all working on CoD.

And yes, I'd have them put a lot more into the effort to make new IPs that might not be successful. Why? Because that's how you establish a variety of franchises that can bring in profit on a long-term basis. CoD is their cash cow, and they're driving it into the ground, just as they drove Guitar Hero into the ground before it, and Tony Hawk before that.

Why would microsoft by activision anyways so ps3 COD fans will get an Xbox. HAHAHAHAH I don't think that will happen and if it does only Xbox fan boys will buy it and play it and activision will loos money. First of all Halo is not a great franchises like COD as well. If microsoft do this it will kill there loved and only one exclusive game Halo. Microsoft is just obsess with FPS and only FPS example = Halo, Gears of war and Left 4 dead. 8( 

Ubisoft uses a global stratergy now everyone works on everything, even Ghost Recon had 4 studios working on it.

As for the bolded it's exctaly how EA runs things and they lose moeny every year, It may be better for gamers but as a business it's supply and demand and everyone demands CoD and as a business Activision is providing them with as much as they will buy and so far demand keeps growing so they are supplying more. Activision is profitable (which is more than most publisher can say) with what they do which is focus on a few profitable core franchises and in doing so they are one of the few. They are doing things outside of CoD and leveraging profitable ventures but for some reason you just don't like them, despite Skylanders selling out and beating all internal projections. 

Anyway we are just going round in circles now 

If true, it would be a smart move for Microsoft as they are severely in need of more studios, and more IPs; I'm sure Microsoft has learned enough from their purchase of Rareware.