Well in a way you could say a feud started the Sony and Nintendo war...but now they aren't feuding. MS and Sony were never feudig in the begining and they were cool with one another...MS just picked the fight because Sony ignored them if we go by what Joachim Kempin says. The Xbox was originally created with good intentions but the head of Microsoft wouldnt sign off on it without a reason. Microsoft is a naturally monopolistic company (which is why they are so powerful). They really have no OS competition on PC. 

Sony had every right to be pissed at Nintendo. They were trying to to get use the services of Ken Kutaragi while he was under contract to Sony to build a CD Rom for the SNES. Sony found out about it and was convinced not to fire him by one of the heads of the corporation. They did business the proper way with Nintendo by making a contract and helping out with the rest and manufacturing the product;.However, when they showed Nintendo the contract Nintendo walked out on them at CES and embarrassed Sony. Sony saw it as a betrayl and so Sony's board was convinced by Kutaragi and his friend who was one of the higher ups in Sony and that gave birth to the Playstation. Yes they wanted revenge, but they got it by naturally dominating the industry.

MS had no beef like Sony and Nintendo did...they just attack whatever seems like a threat. They saw that Sony was dominating so they decided to be partners with them...but according to Kempin Sony has always kept Microsoft at an arms length even though they were cool with them.

Microsoft is in it to take over and make gamers happy.

Nintendo was using Kutaragi to develop the CD-Rom for the SNES while he was working for Sony and they were busted by Sony. It goes deeper than that. Microsoft had no beef with Sony. Sony had every reason to feel bitter with Nintendo. They are over that now though since they dominated the industry.

Of course their primary goal is to earn money, same as Sony and Nintendo. But they are a much larger company, and it can be expected that they have less passion about 1% of their business than Nintendo whose business is 100% gaming, or Sony to whom gaming is one of the few bright spots and a direction away from bankruptcy.
I truly don't care how much passion they have for gaming, as long as that passion doesn't translate into taking more games away from their fans, Tomb Raider style.

To be fair Sony has given away so much free shit because of their fuck ups, not to mention reviving old games that gamers vote that they want to be brought to PS4, stuff like that doesn't really make them much money, most companies are similar I'm just getting Microsofts reasons.

There was always a suggestion of both, I wasn't giving just two options. Read the OP.

Well if MS didnt buy up IP's like the plague how else would they have decent first party?

Some would say that's passion for Tomb Raider, so much so they made it exclusive to xbox one.

They have a passion to find an answer for Uncharted, which is why paid for Tomb Raider exclusivity. After failing to make their own answer quite a few times they had to do it. But its ok...Spencer is a fan of Uncharted and fans know their competitions potential. ;)

I am not a big fan of Microsoft but I think we dont need them. Nintendo and Sony is enough for console business. Microsoft should have invested in PC gaming.

What did they fail with?