All they have to do is add that work before Call of Duty. Say all the games and make them have parity between platforms.What was said before wasn’t as definitive as what was said today. Before it was about ‘desires’, today it was about ‘commitment’.
The paragraphs before and after give the statement of remaining on Playstation more context.
In addition, this post today wasn’t about consoles and Call of Duty. It was about app store regulations and getting this deal approved. So they weren’t going to go over every little detail about how they intend to do multiplatform releases moving forward. Also, this wasn’t a Phil Spencer blog, it was a Brad Smith blog so the tone and focus will be different.
I think they made it pretty clear today. Due to fear of upsetting regulators(and nothing else), MS will not shake the boat. They will continue to work with Playstation and Nintendo in regards to Call of Duty [the franchise] and ‘other popular Activision-Blizzard IP’ after the deal closes.
This MS blog post was a public declaration of intent to which they can now be held accountable. The blog post itself kinda hand waved consoles off as a small market in the grand scheme of things, so they probably don’t even care that much about keeping Acti-Blizz stuff exclusive.
shyt is like Square Enix saying Final Fantasy will be available on Nintendo platforms and they get Crystal Chronicles while others get the main line games. Or if Rockstar saying GTA will be on Nintendo platforms and it's the old trilogy while GTA VI isn't there. If you don't nail these corporations down they'll dance around their own carefully worded statements and technically not make a false statement while misleading you.
Since Microsoft went halfway I expect that to be a condition of the merger with very specific language and at least a time frame they have to abide by. Watch that not happen though.