Why is it that I always sleep late on a days like this? C’est la vie je suppose. Alright, a lot to unpack.
First and foremost, I am a glass half-full kind of guy and it’s weird to see some of the doom and gloom about the deal already, as Embracer is quite literally the best possible outcome if Microsoft wasn’t going to acquire them. Embracer, for all their enigmatic practices thus far, have shunned console exclusives and have shown they are willing to invest in lesser-known IP and elevate those that are already popular (unlike Square-Enix, most certainly).
Secondly, and this is perhaps the most important, I think it’s presumptuous to jump to blaming Microsoft and the ABK deal for Xbox “missing” the pickup when none of you have any details, especially the big one being the possibility that Square-Enix maybe simply didn’t want to sell to Microsoft. We are talking about the same publisher that spent much of the 360 and early Xbox One generation supporting Xbox, and making decent revenue on titles that otherwise would have been “even more disappointing” from SE’s skewed sales perspective, only to shun them overwhelmingly for the last three years. There’s a lot of politics involved that many of us aren’t aware and there have been numerous times through M&A history where a lower bidder was accepted and/or where a party’s offer was given blanket-refusal.
Thirdly, I’m not going to say it’s directly analog to the Take 2/Codemasters situation, but people need to remember that this is the point for which SE could accept other bidders. Not saying that anyone is going to, but it is possible at this point, and if the aforementioned is true, I’d rather Sony not pick them up; unless they were already in the bidding and turned down a wholesale SE buyout until they trimmed the fat… for which I actually mean, their best studios. It could also be the case that Square Enix wants to fish for higher offers (see the eventual EA/Codemasters buy).
At the end of the day, am I disappointed that Microsoft didn’t pick up CD and Eidos? Sure, but as I said Embracer is the best outcome if it wasn’t going to be Microsoft, and given all the moving parts that you all, and I in this case, aren’t privy to, I think it’s weird how some of you can somehow twist this into some doom and gloom. Sony’s not picked them up, those franchises aren’t going exclusive, and plenty of other weird takes I’ve seen have not happened, so I fail to see what’s there to be upset about. I will say, as someone who’s watched the industry like a hawk since acquisitions really started taking off, I don’t know why some of you thought SE wouldn’t sell their Western division, especially after letting IOI simply go independent; @Hindle and I called this one 
In closing, I don’t see what there is to be so upset about. Microsoft may have missed the mark on this one (if they made an offer and it was even considered), but Embracer has shown no indication historically that they’ll lock up their titles behind a single platform, so it’s still a win for us considering the alternatives. I think this kind of moment does make first-refusal clauses for the independent studios Xbox is working with extremely important though; Xbox is indicating that they’re looking for the biggest splash, bang-for-buck acquisitions, but they can’t forget how pivotal some of these smaller studios can be, and are.
P.S. - I may have missed the original post referring to CD as a support studio, but whoever started that or repeated it may want to take a look at how that term is defined because CD is very much not a support studio.