I am talking about all FPS games on consoles.

And yes, Microsoft bad.

A company wants billions in profits?!? Who knew!?! And here I thought Sony was raising the prices of their games and hardware out of the goodness of their heart despite no longer selling the PS5 at a loss.......

And yes, MS is bringing CoD to more platforms. That's how a contract works. 

This is taking into account that XB is the western company, FPS land, and PS is the Japanese company newly based in the west?

Along with the fact that PS, since PS4, has outsold XB 2.5 to 1, meaning third party sales would almost always be higher on PS?

How many FPS titles has PS produced since PS4, vs XB and XB One? How many more does XB now have with Zenimax and ABK?

$120 Billion Sony is picking on $2 Trillion MS? MS buying $70 billion ABK is being bullied?

Your trolling is quite directionless. Not sure how I should respond when you've confused yourself already.

Not sure why you thought that.

Sony said out front it was due to higher cost of production for software and inflation for hardware. MS said they didn't see why software or hardware needed to cost more, then followed suit anyway. If MS didn't see the need for higher prices, why did they raise them? For the good of the consumer?

So MS will be making the FPS big bucks now, but won't have too much of the FPS genre cash vs Sony?

You're mistaken. How could it be trolling if it's directionless? That could be why you don't know how to respond, maybe.

This is taking into account that XB is the western company, FPS land, and PS is the Japanese company newly based in the west?

PlayStation had a US division almost if not as soon as it existed in Japan and this was 8 years before Xbox.

Along with the fact that PS, since PS4, has outsold XB 2.5 to 1, meaning third party sales would almost always be higher on PS?

That is a reason that explain why Xbox does not have a stranglehold on FPS 

How many FPS titles has PS produced since PS4, vs XB and XB One? How many more does XB now have with Zenimax and ABK?

Sony made the business decision to rely on 3rd party for FPS, MS did not make this decision for them.

$120 Billion Sony is picking on $2 Trillion MS?

Isn't what other users have been suggesting

MS buying $70 billion ABK is being bullied?

ABK statement are more akin that they consider Sony as trying to bully them out of the deal.

PS was not headquartered in the US until 2016.

Yet MS now owns Zenimax and ABK. Everyone knows Sony complained about COD because of how much money they will lose and how that money lost, plus development and publishing profits will also be going to MS now.

So MS has way more FPS games than Sony already and also makes plenty of money from them.

Which other users? Are we talking about how Sony had argued their COD case or the merit behind it?

This statement goes along with the company values. You mean to say you think regulators won't be allowing the deal to pass due to Sony?

Headquartered yes, but Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC was in the US since 1993 and exactly to cater to the US market and help Sony in this task.

Yet MS now owns Zenimax and ABK.

Yes that's is a risk of relying on third party to fulfil some of your need, Sony took that risk willingly and benefited from this until the risk materialized into a tangible negative aspect.

Everyone knows Sony complained about COD because of how much money they will lose and how that money lost, plus development and publishing profits will also be going to MS now.

I would argue it is not the reason as Sony is not going loose those revenue with contractual agreement from MS for at the very least 10 years were Sony to agree. Sony is much concern that MS will make Xbox GamePass such a success that it will shift the status quo in the console video game market and this may have a side effect of limiting Sony margin profits if they were forced to follow suit on things like day one game on PlayStation plus and/or day one pc release. If MS successfully shifted the status quo to a point where selling a console is not a necessity but only a part of their business Sony would find themselves in a situation where they are not the top player anymore and where they'll need to react quickly to great expense. To sum it up Sony doesn't want MS to be the Netflix of gaming where they would be the one playing catch up all of a sudden. 

So MS has way more FPS games than Sony already and also makes plenty of money from them.

Both statement are correct but only a result of business decisions from MS to focus on first party FPS and Sony to focus their efforts elsewhere. 

Which other users? Are we talking about how Sony had argued their COD case or the merit behind it?

No for the later for the first your question in response to RolStoppable was $120 Billion Sony is picking on $2 Trillion MS?

Wasn't this a rhetorical question to summarizing RolStoppable argument as being akin to victimizing Xbox from Sony? Cause the way I saw it he was using irony to show that your first point ("Should Sony and the Japanese government go after XB for having too much of a strangle hold on first person shooters for console?") doesn't apply.

This statement goes along with the company values.

How so? Are you implying that the statement of ABK regarding Sony's behavior's is somehow fueled by their bad work culture?

You mean to say you think regulators won't be allowing the deal to pass due to Sony?

No I meant ABK viewed Sony's action in regards to this deals as unfounded and hostile to them while enjoying a top position in the relevant market.

The Japanese government would probably tell Biden to go kick some rocks if he would pressure Japan about this. The Japanese aren't really that into told what to do and on who to apply pressure. Also didn't Xbox also make many deals with third parties during the X360 era. Tales of Vesperia wasn't a X360 exclusive, because it was the platform it sells best on.