They need 100% of the stock to make COD first party...The 40% other stockholders will never allow MS to make COD first party (Xbox 360 exclusive) and I think they can start a lawsuit..

I don't think so. While Nintendo only owned  49% of Rareware, they were a first party developer for them. And as a minority, those 40% you're talking about really have nothing to say.

Do keep in mind though that while Microsoft owned 100% of Rare they still released two DS titles. All they needed was Microsoft's permission.

Edit: Fixed the numbers.

Holy shit, I don't care what happens to COD, but this would mean that Bungie would fall back under Microsoft's umbrella. That's huge news for Bungie/Halo fans.

Steep price, but if MS wants complete control of the living room ... this would come pretty close to sealing the deal.

There would be no need to put CoD on Playstation, everyone who wants that franchise would just buy an XBox.

60% would be a controlling share the other shareholders (assuming they even give a crap) wouldn't raise much of a stink. If video game companies operated on the whim of all their minority shareholders, then Nintendo would be making games for iOS right now. Obviously it does not work that way. 

Even if MS was "forced" to give Sony/Nintendo token ports, who's to say those ports would be of the same quality or be released anywhere near the XBox versions? 

MS could easily farm ports out to crappy dev houses so the Sony/Nintendo versions are crap and released them 6-12 months later. 

Nintendo never owned 51% of Rare, but 49%, which they sold since it would make them powerless against MS's then-recently bought 51%.

With 51% Microsoft can do whatever it wants with Activision, I think.

This is a great way to get Bungie back.

Microsoft makes software for the Mac.   The likes of Call of Duty and other titles could stay multiplatform.

If MS bought Activision, yes COD would be available on other platforms than Xbox, but not other consoles. MS would be happy to sell Activision's games to PC and Mac users, but not on Nintendo and Sony consoles. MS wants to own the living room so they would never alows anything they own to boslter the competition's library.

I would beg to differ here.  Microsoft used developing for the Mac as a way to get specs and info on the Mac.  I see them still releasing a few top multiplatform titles across them, so they have access to the dev kids, and be on the inside loop as to what the competitors are doing.  If a competitor is coming out with a console, owning a top third part on the system would be a competitive advantage.  Now, they could still get all the advantages of early releases for map packs and expansions.  What they would want to avoid is having yet another title take the place of what Activision has in Call of Duty.  Go exclusive and another third party title will rise.

I hope not true. Would really hurt the Playstation.