Analysis: Could Halo Have Changed the FTC's Fortunes at the Microsoft Trial?

ign.com:

The Microsoft-Activision deal is almost upon us.

Though the FTC presented several games, like Starfield and Redfall, to prove its antitrust case, one key game that was curiously missing from notable testimony: Halo. Microsoft’s first-party exclusive may be made in-house — which could’ve potentially kept it from being named extensively in the evidence — but the title actually began its history at Bungie, before Microsoft purchased the company.

Very bizarrely, there’s a portion of the judge’s opinion where she says that Zenimax titles Starfield and Redfall being exclusive to the Xbox platform shouldn’t be compared to Call of Duty, as these games are fairly different. She writes about how Starfield andRedfall have different release dates than Call of Duty and are of different genres.

That’s a confusing distinction to draw, but let’s run with it for a time, shall we? What if the FTC were to rush out with a better video game example that’s more apples-to-apples with Call of Duty and is indeed exclusive to Xbox? What if we talked more about Halo?

Famously almost a Mac exclusive, Halo is a shooter video game that spans books, films, and merchandise. It’s Xbox’s crown jewel. It’s the perfect example to draw because Halo was invented by Bungie, and first announced in 1999. Microsoft acquired Bungie in 2000 and Halo became a launch title for the Xbox. Halo is Xbox’s God of War, or Last of Us, or Horizon Zero Dawn. Except there’s only one of Halo, which is exactly why we're here, because Microsoft didn’t make Call of Duty.

While the FTC briefly mentions Halo in some of its findings, it did not get a chance to elaborate on its points, as the deal has been rushed. The judge said that she would not respond to every point from the FTC