Maybe, but Activision under Microsoft will still maintain its bottom line for itself, not for the conglomeration. Microsoft acquired Activision, but it did not absorb Activision; it is still its own publisher. And if the business that's good for Activision was and is COD, then they will still put everything they need to into COD, unless Microsoft moves money into Activision for them to do otherwise.
What might make better sense in a weird business-angle way (and what might be a reason why Vicarious Visions completed this merge-in, despite the MS acquisition outlining potentially different growth opportunities for Activision that might have reversed the course) would be for Microsoft to sublicense some of these brands and produce Xbox games with studios it has connections with, under a shared MS/Activision banner. They would feed GP, and Acti would still continue unabated in whipping away in the COD mines to keep that franchise lucrative. It'd be a strange work-around, but Activision itself is so narrowmindely focused on COD that I imagine it'd be hard for Phil Spencer to order them to make different Activision games without Kotick pointing out that the Acti financials depend on most if not all roads leading to COD.