Err.. you said a lot of things

• FFXVI is half of their games for the near future (you do not know what is coming out)
• The only reason Playstation is getting FFXVI and FFVIIRE as exclusives is because MS never made a better offer to SE (A. that's Microsoft's problem, and B. if it were that simple, they certainly would have tried)

Could also be that Square knows where the majority of those sales will come from and FFXVI being exclusive to Xbox is a massive risk when they don't have the units sold that Sony does (particularly in EU/JP where it is currently a slaughter). 

So, you want the deal to get blocked so they can take $70B and go on an exclusive buying spree (my error for seeing that as more pub purchases). Why wouldn't you prefer they take that money and invest in their own studios? This is what I was getting at. That should be the first line of defense and they already have plenty of studios. Why do you think Nintendo and Sony have the brand power and recognition worldwide that they do? No doubt the latter makes more exclusive deals than the former (who made many against SEGA during its 80s/90s reign), but they are no longer mainly recognized for 3rd party properties (Devil May Cry, FF, Metal Gear, Tekken, etc). That's how you nurture a brand. 3rd party deals will always happen — that's the nature of the business. But, you need to come correct with your own hand or risk being left behind and that is the situation they are in.

Game Pass can only do so much, and since a 30+% decline this early in a gen is not good, I'd prefer they stepped their game up with many of their own properties. 

Really? Are we seriously suggesting that now? What's next? Are you gonna tell me that the reason MS can't even mention Ghostwire Tokyo in a sentence is because Bethesda just thought that it would sell better on Playstation?

I have no idea what you are barking about here. A Japanese publisher going with Sony (on Nintendo) over Microsoft is an easy concept to grasp, regardless of how much green is on the table. It was a logical suggestion.

But hey, I'm not blaming Sony, I know that (like you keep repeating) it is all business. I mean, if it hadn't been for that Square Enyx partnership, PS gamers whould have had to wait a bit between GOW and.. Spiderman 2? So yeah, I can totally see how paying for exclusivity can fill the gaps.

Them waiting between those two games would hardly be a reason to worry. It's not like they go long periods with dry spells very often. This continues to ignore that they haven't revealed their entire hand for 2023 yet. 

And it is not about what I would prefer, it is about what would be the more realistic scenario; and if this deal is blocked I think they will have only 5 options left:

1) Make small adquisitions
2) Invest on their own studios
3) Hire more studios as 2nd parties
4) Invest more heavily into putting 3rd party releases into GP day one
5) Invest more heavily into 3rd party exclusives

Now, I don't think you need to be a genius to realize that $70b would be enough to do all five of those things; and I also think that you don't need to be a genius to realize that investing in their own studios would be the slowest option of them all. I mean, Sony just bought Bungie and Housemarquee for a reason (and Insomniac not too long ago).

Bungie is the only oddball and they were acquired to aid with Live games. Destiny is remaining multiplat, so they have absolutely no correlation to Housemarque and Insomniac whatsoever. This is particularly because the latter two mainly created games for PlayStation. Neither purchase was out of left field (unlike Activision, Bungie, or Zenimax).

So yeah, I would like for this to get blocked just so MS gets forced to focus on these other options instead.

Bold.

In regards to it getting blocked ( speaking of folks repeating themselves ), you're not going to get that wish. It isn't going to be. Concessions will be made, but things will go through. Nothing is stopping Microsoft from doing the very things you asked for regardless. 

Would not say they have no say but yes I should have said MS not investors, Investors may have no direct say over MS way to spend but MS does over Xbox and I do not believe that if this deal fails the money return directly in Xbox pocket but in MS's one, which Xbox will then need to fight to secure back.
What I described in my previous post is only under the hypothesis that Xbox does secure it.

Every action MS take will end up impacting Sony but yeah if you look only short term they won't be significant.

Latest news we saw on the matter GP already is profitable.

Yeah I wouldn't fully trust what PR says on this matter.

Cause we saw that several times with similar stuff

"Xbox is doing fantastic" "you're under oath" "okay we never made a dime on console sales for over 20 years"

"GP actually helps sales" "you're under oath" "okay games on the GP tends to have lesser sales after [X] month"

"Game pass have now X million users" then "Game Pass is growing" then "I mean at some point you reach a seiling point you can't go beyond'"

None of the statement above are mutually exclusive and actually PR statement can actually be used in legal context. Statement like "Xbox is doing fantastic" is just an opinion and Xbox profits status does not make it wrong either. However statement like "GamePass is profitable" is factual in nature and can have direct consequence on stock value if the statement is false then MS may get into trouble for this with both the SEC and investor. Just ask Elon Musk in learned (not really cause of extreme narcissism) the hard way.

None of the statement above are mutually exclusive and actually PR statement can actually be used in legal context. Statement like "Xbox is doing fantastic" is just an opinion and Xbox profits status does not make it wrong either. However statement like "GamePass is profitable" is factual in nature and can have direct consequence on stock value if the statement is false then MS may get into trouble for this with both the SEC and investor. Just ask Elon Musk in learned (not really cause of extreme narcissism) the hard way.