It really is. Idk what went on behind the scenes, but I can't help but think a company that would attempt to outright lie to the public without clearing it with their partner and agreeing on messaging maybe wouldn't be a good company to partner with; especially given how they have treated the title since its exclusivity was shown to be timed. From what I understand, it could have been a been a contender for goty if marketed properly and on multiple platforms.
When it comes to collaboration between different companies, sometimes norms and natural practices just don't come across properly between different people handling different things.
Between MS/Square, it's clear the one thing they agreed upon in the initial agreement was for it to not be acknowledged as a timed-exclusive. But it's clear neither side worked out a very clear structure of what-to-say/not-to-say, beyond the broad basics of "cannot acknowledge as timed exclusive."
Slimy as it was, MS actually covered themselves relatively well on that front with the "commas" and adheral to a strict PR line that very quickly outed the exclusivity as timed (even if Phil did a quick save with the interview to muddy the waters further), and all that, whereas Square flaunted the deal very awkwardly, celebrating MS's involvement, didn't utilise the same language, etc.
Sometimes you just don't expect a certain amount of backlash/reaction, and if you're not prepared for it, you fumble.