NeoGAF

Originally Posted by Argyle

So wait, what they are saying is that in the future, if I wanted to launch first on PS4 (or Wii U for that matter) for any reason (Sony pubfund, simply limited resources, etc.) then I would not be able to release on Xbox at a later date?



Let's put it this way, it'll probably be several months to a year before we see any self published games on Xbone, whereas I'm pretty sure there were a few available at launch on PS4. That should tell you what you need to know.

That means if you're making a multiplatform game with a Xbone version, the Xbone version must come out or must be ready for release in the same timeframe as the others. Though there are weird cases like Ducktails where all the versions were ready to be released in the same week, but MS delayed it for about a month or so.

Originally Posted by Rhindle

I don't get the logic. You have the ability/resources to do a simultaneous launch on both platforms, or you don't.

If these guys did not, how did signing up for exclusive launch with Sony help their cause? They could have just as easily (or more easily) signed the MS agreement and left their options open (either release on both platforms or just one).

Basically, this is what Microsoft says: you don't launch on other platforms (PS4/WiiU) before the Xbox One.
What does that mean? Your game should launch on Xbox One at the same time as PS4/WiiU or earlier.

The developer heard about this before it was official. The developer doesn't have the resources to do two simultaneous launches. The developer already had a good relationship with Sony and they didn't want to push back the PS4 launch. So, before this Xbox rule went 'official', they quickly signed a deal with Sony to make it a one month exclusive.

This way, they could make sure that they could launch the game on both Xbox One and PlayStation 4.

Misleading title, a better title would be: "Microsoft requires indie games to launch on Xbox One before or at the same time as on other platforms". Or, if you'd like a more pro-Sony title: "Microsoft blocks indie developers from publishing their games if it launches first on other platforms."

Originally Posted by MThanded

I have read this sentence 10 times. I still don't understand it.

1. MS wants day and date release parity for any indie title also coming to PS4.
2. MS waived this requirement if indie title was already signed/announced as coming to PS4 previously.
3. Indie company has a hard enough time with the logistics of shipping a game on one platform, never mind two. Lack of resources, time, etc.
4. Indie company realizes that by giving a one-month exclusive to PS4, they can skip the day and date release parity on Xbone.

Originally Posted by V_Ben

Glad they were able to get out of that loophole, but it's supremely weird of Microsoft to have a clause like that. Surely the whole point of a program to allow self publishing is to let developers release content on your platform when they want to. Ugh.

MS got the same parity rule on the 360. It's nothing new (but it still sucks for developers)

Originally Posted by Barkley's Justice

I could see how the clause is fair if you want the 2 free dev kits and the Unity license. Otherwise, if you don't want to participate in the parity clause, MS should then simply not offer the free shit, but perhaps make it available at a discounted rate.

Yea thats what it looks like to me, if you dont want to launch on xbox first or at the same time as other platforms. Buy the devkits and the unity yourself when you're ready to release on xbox rather than get them for free.

"Microsoft was doing reach-out to certain developers back in the early days of ID@XBOX, and we discussed potentially bringing Nuclear Throne to Xbox One with them," Ismail says. "There had been mentions beforehand that there was a launch parity clause in the contract, with the exception of games that were already signed to another platform during the announcement of their self-publishing program. Thus, before we signed with Microsoft, we e-mailed Sony that we quickly wanted to sign Nuclear Throne with them with a month of exclusivity."

So this means in the future ID@Xbox is going to be limiting indies on both platforms correct?

Originally Posted by bishoptl

1. MS wants day and date release parity for any indie title also coming to PS4.
2. MS waived this requirement if indie title was already signed/announced as coming to PS4 previously.
3. Indie company has a hard enough time with the logistics of shipping a game on one platform, never mind two. Lack of resources, time, etc.
4. Indie company realizes that by giving a one-month exclusive to PS4, they can skip the day and date release parity on Xbone.

So Vlambeer exploited a loophole that will no longer exist going forward. Now that they are on ID@Xbox all games they release must be released either first on xbox 1 or on xbox 1 and ps4 at the same time?

This makes no sense.

Their program was late, and so the only way to get into it is to either launch simultaneously, potentially delaying the other platform, or to explore a loophole where you *can* launch later, *if* you have a previous exclusivity contract.


It makes no sense. Who designed this contract? We must be missing some crucial information.

What if development goes faster on the PS4 version in the future for some devs?

Trying to handcuff indie developers like this is pathetic.

Originally Posted by bishoptl

1. MS wants day and date release parity for any indie title also coming to PS4.
2. MS waived this requirement if indie title was already signed/announced as coming to PS4 previously.
3. Indie company has a hard enough time with the logistics of shipping a game on one platform, never mind two. Lack of resources, time, etc.
4. Indie company realizes that by giving a one-month exclusive to PS4, they can skip the day and date release parity on Xbone.

Though it's funny that MS gave Sony a favor with the developer being forced to sign an exclusive deal with Sony because of MS requirements.

Originally Posted by bishoptl

1. MS wants day and date release parity for any indie title also coming to PS4.
2. MS waived this requirement if indie title was already signed/announced as coming to PS4 previously.
3. Indie company has a hard enough time with the logistics of shipping a game on one platform, never mind two. Lack of resources, time, etc.
4. Indie company realizes that by giving a one-month exclusive to PS4, they can skip the day and date release parity on Xbone.

So this parity only applies to the date itself or the game also? The way it read it seem teh games require parity between version.

If it just launch date its not really a big deal.

Originally Posted by gofreak

Yeah, I honestly am not sure how that will work. If a game becomes HUGE -say on PC and PS4 - will MS really turn away a XB1 version later?

Maybe there are workarounds...like slightly tweaked versions or new content.

It'll assume that if the game gets big enough that'll easily find a publisher and dance around the clause with that.

Originally Posted by MThanded

So this means in the future ID@Xbox is going to be limiting indies on both platforms correct?

So Vlambeer exploited a loophole that will no longer exist going forward. Now that they are on ID@Xbox all games they release must be released either first on xbox 1 or on xbox 1 and ps4 at the same time?

Yes. It's gross.

Weren't we told that there were NO strings attached to the ID@XBOX program?

Originally Posted by bishoptl

1. MS wants day and date release parity for any indie title also coming to PS4.
2. MS waived this requirement if indie title was already signed/announced as coming to PS4 previously.
3. Indie company has a hard enough time with the logistics of shipping a game on one platform, never mind two. Lack of resources, time, etc.
4. Indie company realizes that by giving a one-month exclusive to PS4, they can skip the day and date release parity on Xbone.

The important distinction for #2 is that this was only valid because the developer had early access to the program and could add the exclusivity before ID@Xbox was announced, right?

Originally Posted by alr1ght

Yes. It's gross.

Well that is extremely dumb.

Originally Posted by Salvor.Hardin

In order to publish a game under the ID program, you must make sure that the game will come out on the XBO on the same day as it will on the PS4. However, if you happened to sign a time exclusive deal with Sony before entering into an agreement with MS, you're not bound to release the game on the XBO on the same day.

Indies are small and tend not to have enough resources to develop for two consoles at the same time. That's why a bunch of companiea quickly signed a time exclusive with Sony first so that they could work on the games onw at a time.

Ohhh now I get it, thanks.

Originally Posted by flamesofchaos

Though it's funny that MS gave Sony a favor with the developer being forced to sign an exclusive deal with Sony because of MS requirements.

Not really. Basically, they were already planning on launching on the PS4. Later on, they decided to publish their game on Xbox One as well.

If they didn't sign the exclusive contract with Sony, than they actually had to push back the release of the PS4 version - something they didn't want to do, as they are quite happy with Sony. Thus, they made a deal with Sony for a one month exclusive before Microsoft made their rule official.

Originally Posted by WolfForager

Anyone else confused as hell until about half way through the OP?

*rises hand*

I really wanted to see the binding of isaaac and dont starve on Xbox one. :l

Originally Posted by hawk2025

This makes no sense.

Their program was late, and so the only way to get into it is to either launch simultaneously, potentially delaying the other platform, or to explore a loophole where you *can* launch later, *if* you have a previous exclusivity contract.


It makes no sense. Who designed this contract? We must be missing some crucial information.

What if development goes faster on the PS4 version in the future for some devs?

Well by this statement in the article, the program wasn't late and they had been in talks. It just wasn't complete. They knew before the program was official to the public that they would need to sign with Sony to avoid the parity clause.

Which makes me wonder how many devs are following that same route.

Originally Posted by Salvor.Hardin

Wow. It's like you didn't read the OP at all.

Are you really having trouble reading between the lines?

Let me help you with that, then. Microsoft is way behind because IMHO their program is a knee jerk reaction to Sony's program.

The context of the OP is that the terms of Microsoft's program have perhaps only recently become public, but course they were going to talk about it with some of the bigger developers before details were released publicly. One of these developers took this opportunity to sign exclusivity with Sony in order to avoid being forced into launch date parity which is a crappy policy (since the parity doesn't apply on games with exclusivity contracts before they publicly announce the terms of their indie program).

Originally Posted by Raymo

The important distinction for #2 is that this was only valid because the developer had early access to the program and could add the exclusivity before ID@Xbox was announced, right?

Correct. If Vlambeer hadn't been privy to that knowledge and signed with ID@Xbox w/o the Sony exclusivity clause already in place, they would have been locked into day and date release for both platforms (and screwed over via resourcing, as per their previous explanation).

Originally Posted by hawk2025

This makes no sense.

Their program was late, and so the only way to get into it is to either launch simultaneously, potentially delaying the other platform, or to explore a loophole where you *can* launch later, *if* you have a previous exclusivity contract.


It makes no sense. Who designed this contract? We must be missing some crucial information.

What if development goes faster on the PS4 version in the future for some devs?

If they finish the ps4 version first then they have to wait until the XBO version is done. That is the whole point to this clause Microsoft doesn't want sloppy seconds and due to the nature of the XBO it takes more time to develop on so they want to make ps4 owners wait. The other sucky part about this is that devs cannot add additional stuff to the ps4 version while they are waiting because there is probably a content parity clause as well. This is to make sure that the devs either begin on the XBO first or hold onto the ps4 version.

The loophole is to sign a timed exclusivity with Sony.

So, moving forward -- indie devs will either be delaying their games on the Wii U and PS4 in order to get it on the X1 (in case they had decided to focus on one platform at a time, for example), or it won't get there at all?

Originally Posted by Wereroku

If they finish the ps4 version first then they have to wait until the XBO version is done. That is the whole point to this clause Microsoft doesn't want sloppy seconds and due to the nature of the XBO it takes more time to develop on so they want to make ps4 owners wait. The other sucky part about this is that devs cannot add additional stuff to the ps4 version while they are waiting because there is probably a content parity clause as well. This is to make sure that the devs either begin on the XBO first or hold onto the ps4 version.

Well, that really fucking sucks.

I thought they were done strong-arming indies.

Originally Posted by MThanded

So this has the potential to delay games on the ps4 that could have launched weeks in advance.

Yes.

Originally Posted by hawk2025

So, moving forward -- indie devs will either be delaying their games on the Wii U and PS4 in order to get it on the X1 (in case they had decided to focus on one platform at a time, for example), or it won't get there at all?

Yes.

OP should be updated to not be so confusing.

Originally Posted by USC-fan

If you launch a game on both consoles after this program was started. You have to have launch parity on both platform. So for PS4 owner you game would have to nerf to match the xbone version. So devs couldnt use the extra power of ps4 unless it was patched in after launch. For indie dev this would have to be tough.

Like how cod ghost and AV4 got post launch patches to 1080p. Its so silly and shitty...

Eh? I think you have completely misunderstood what they mean by launch parity. They want the games to release at the same time as other platforms. It's launch date parity, not visual parity at launch.

Having said that, it's still shitty.

interesting given that Zomboid just announced on their Kickstarter that Cosmic Star Heroine is now coming to Xbox One as well

I hope that doesn't mean those of us that wanted it on Steam/PS4 now have to wait...

Originally Posted by hawk2025

Weren't we told that there were NO strings attached to the ID@XBOX program?

I assume its for the ID@Xbox people that use Microsoft supplied hardware and software licenses for "free". The payment is parity.

if you pay for the devkit and acquire a unity license, then you are free to do whatever.

there likely won't be any such clauses when the public development system goes live (heavily hinted at as windows store with Xbox specific APIs)

Thanks Microsoft!



Its always cool to get to play games first on the console you own. One month exclusivity isn't some big game changer or anything, but I am glad that the system I own and support is the one that appears to be getting those small time period exclusives.

Originally Posted by MThanded

So this has the potential to delay games on the ps4 that could have launched weeks in advance.

Yes, and in turn could turn other games into pseudo timed exclusives for Xbox because it doesn't say anything about launching first on Xbox then going elsewhere. At least that's how I'm seeing it.

To be fair. The lingo I read said "In instances where games have signed a timed exclusive with another platform, we'll work with them on a case by case basis"

That seems to me to be the case for the FUTURE as well as prior to id@xbox being established.

So Microsoft do enforce a launch parity clause in the contract?

The more things change...

Originally Posted by DopeyFish

I assume its for the ID@Xbox people that use Microsoft supplied hardware and software licenses for free. The payment is parity.

if you pay for the devkit and acquire a unity license, then you are free to do whatever.

there likely won't be any such clauses when the public development system goes live (heavily hinted at as windows store with Xbox specific APIs)

You aren't, because as far as I know you are not allowed to publish in the platform as an independent outside of the program -- even if you buy all that stuff yourself.

Isn't that right? Am I mistaken?


If there won't be any clauses soon, why do they exist now? If that's the case, literally the only reason I see is to delay PS4 indies in the short to mid-run.

Originally Posted by 3rdamention

Thanks Microsoft!



Its always cool to get to play games first on the console you own. One month exclusivity isn't some big game changer or anything, but I am glad that the system I own and support is the one that appears to be getting those small time period exclusives.

Not any more. The OP is not very clear.

This won't work in the future. This only worked because vlambeer had insider knowledge of the contract and signed a deal before signing with MS. Now that they are signed with MS they must launch either on the xbox 1 first or on both systems together.

Originally Posted by bishoptl

Correct. If Vlambeer hadn't been privy to that knowledge and signed with ID@Xbox w/o the Sony exclusivity clause already in place, they would have been locked into day and date release for both platforms (and screwed over via resourcing, as per their previous explanation).

Wouldn't they be in the same exact situation - working on one console before the other?

Edit: Assuming they signed with MS first. Not sure how they would not know about the clause.

Microsoft is so healthy for this industry.

Originally Posted by nib95

So Microsoft do enforce a launch parity clause in the contract?

Yes. They already admitted that. Think there was another thread about it.

Originally Posted by nib95

So Microsoft do enforce a launch parity clause in the contract?

Launch date parity for ID@XBox developers, yes.

Wait, so if your game is not launching at the same time on Xbox One you don't get to be a part of ID@Xbox program?

How do devs get the devkits then? They have to pay for the kits + Unity like bigger developers?

That could be bad as they make really small devs delay their games to get the parity release or "force" them to make a deal with Sony.
Not really force, but it makes sense financially.
Xbone could be seeing a lot of late releases if that's the case.

I might be interpreting this worng though. Can anyone clarify more?

Originally Posted by hawk2025

You aren't, because as far as I know you are not allowed to publish in the platform as an independent outside of the program -- even if you buy all that stuff yourself.

Isn't that right? Am I mistaken?


If there won't be any clauses soon, why do they exist now? If that's the case, literally the only reason I see is to delay PS4 indies in the short to mid-run.

well I forgot to mention that I also didn't think there was a method for anyone to apply for ID@Xbox and not get said stuff. This may just be initial restrictions until they go public as they need dedicated kits. I wish I could get clarification on this one though.

Originally Posted by bishoptl

1. MS wants day and date release parity for any indie title also coming to PS4.
2. MS waived this requirement if indie title was already signed/announced as coming to PS4 previously.
3. Indie company has a hard enough time with the logistics of shipping a game on one platform, never mind two. Lack of resources, time, etc.
4. Indie company realizes that by giving a one-month exclusive to PS4, they can skip the day and date release parity on Xbone.

Still makes no sense to sign an exclusive with Sony.

By doing so, you've reduced your option set to 1 - launch exclusively on one and wait out Sony's exclusivity period.

How is that better than signing up for development on both platforms, and retaining the option to launch on one platform (XB1) or both concurrently? Unless you're getting some finanical support or other benefits from Sony for signing an exclusive, you're just shooting yourself in the foot.

So it applies to other console platforms only and not PC?

I am ok with that.

Originally Posted by justsomeguy

Launch date parity for ID@XBox developers, yes.

Maybe they have something similar for other games? Which is why we got all these post launch patches adding 1080p for PS4 games?

Originally Posted by Rhindle

Still makes no sense to sign an exclusive with Sony.

By doing so, you've reduced your option set to 1 - launch exclusively on one and wait out Sony's exclusivity period.

How is that better than signing up for development on both platforms, and retaining the option to launch on one platform (XB1) or both concurrently?

Because signing an exclusivity deal probably gets you some upfront money too or extra promotion.

Launching day and date on both consoles doesn't get you this.

Also this means if for some reason Sony has a much higher install base you can't just focus on that platform.