> Microsoft also enjoyed exclusivity deals before Sony

Sony entered the video game console market prior to Microsoft. Sony has repeatedly engaged in exclusivity deals to stifle competition in order to maintain it's market dominance. And this started right around the release of the Tomb Raider saga and with Crash Bandicoot. There's plenty of evidence demonstrating their exclusivity foothold dealings over time.

Nintendo bought Pokémon and earns a bludgeoning profit from its ownership as the single best selling gaming franchise in history. Yet no one burst into upheaval when Nintendo purchased all rights to it after Pokémons explosive release on the Gameboy, a handheld market that was solely controlled by Nintendo at the time.

Sega had a console market before turning into a software-only company after the Dreamcast was overshadowed by PS2s release. Unfortunately for Sega, the didn't have the capital or the studios to contend with both Nintendo and Sonys dominance. But honestly, there was a plethora of multiple problems for Sega. Some of which self inflicted. I miss Sega as a console contender, but I digress.

> Seems like this is projection to me.

Projection how? How am I imposing my statements onto other people or attempting to control a narrative? Explain.

I'm not for or against the Microsoft deal.
I'm simply illustrating the hypocrisy in the arguments of those that automatically shout "anticompetitive" over this deal when other companies have made similar deals in the past.

Your argument, as you've clearly admitted, is biased for Sony for weak reasonings. I'd strongly suggest you actually read the articles I posted.

> Sony have dominated the gaming market, but that's because they developed better consoles and exclusive content

How does Sony make "better" consoles? I can tell you that the ecosystem of the Xbox is much more player centric. So much so that it's very intuitive and responsive. PlayStation's isn't bad but by comparison, Microsoft is demonstrating that they research what works for gamers and what doesn't. Sony is reveling off of PlayStation's recognition and hardly innovates like it used to.
And the "better content" argument is baseless. Sony has exclusivity deals for DLC with studios and have been engaging in that type of practice for years. Sony has strict deals with the express purpose of crippling Microsofts efforts in the gaming market.

> these are often just timed

Yes, both companies have had timed exclusivity content deals.

> the major publishers that own dozens of studios for the sole reason of removing their games from Sony's library.

Smart money dictates that would be a foolish move on any companies part let alone Microsofts. Why would a company that would earn profits as a result of their acquisition of another company entirely close off a revenue source? Even if that revenue source is from a rival companies platform, it's still leaving money on the table. This move is to explicitly increase market share. Microsoft will have control over the publisher but even top execs wouldn't outlaw releases of these games from other consoles "just because". I'm willing to bet they'll use timed exclusivity much like Sony has in the past.

> Sony supports content generation

I again refer you to the links I shared.

> it IS anticompetitive

Companies engage in this type of maneuvering regularly. Windows has the highest market share for home operating systems because Microsoft engages hardware manufacturers to have them preloaded the OS most laptops. Google corners the market with the with Android OS on phones that aren't iPhones. Apple corners the market with their walled garden ecosystem and disables iMessage functionality for non Apple devices. The list of this kind of business being conducted is non-exhaustive.

Sony has had dominance in market share primarily due to the past exclusivity deals that solidified their present foundation.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_Sony

https://www.pushsquare.com/guides/playstation-studios-all-sony-first-party-developers-and-what-theyre-working-on

Honestly, this deal isn't going to break anything other than Microsoft's wallet. And people against this deal, primarily the UK government, are hypocritically overreacting. All this energy over this deal but people weren't saying a thing when Sony was making waves in the past using similar tactics.

But the Sony console isn't better ? The Xbox has higher specs and is cheaper.

And Microsoft has already addressed concerns of removing content by offering long term contracts for the content. Its going down a different path to the single device, and its looking at a broader market.

Idk how you're jumping from acquisition to removal of content. If anything Microsoft will either milk IPs or let them rot just look at Rares IPs after they were acquired, most of them were left to collect dust. Sony until just recently has been almost as strict as nintendo with their IPs being exclusive to their consoles not to mention what they did with the content roll outs when they temporarily held the destiny ip locking it away from the rest of the community for like 6 months.