• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

EDGE: Indies praise XB1 self-publishing – but MS must drop its launch parity policy

N

nbnt

is responsible for the well-being of this island.
..Many indies have voiced their concerns over the clause, and even Sony has taken a swipe at its rival’s stance on indie self-pubishing – before GDC PlayStation’s VP of publisher and developer relations Adam Boyes tweeted a ‘list’ of platforms developers are not allowed to release their games on before they hit PSN. So, at the ID@Xbox event we asked corporate vice president of Microsoft’s Xbox division Phil Harrison if he’d seen the tweet, and what he thought of it.

“I laughed,” he said. “Taking aside competitive positioning and all of that, the winners in all of this are game players. There are more games coming out for these platforms, there are more developers creating for these platforms, there are more fresh minds coming into our industry than any time in recent memory. And that’s so, so important to the future of our industry.”
Click to expand...
Harrison continued to stress the progress Microsoft had made with indies through the ID@Xbox program, but could not give any further update on when or if Microsoft might drop the launch parity clause. “It’s difficult to debate these kind of commercial relationships in a media interview so you’ll forgive me for not going into the details,” he said. “What I would say is that everybody in our program, whether it’s a developer or people on the platform side working with Chris [Charla, ID@Xbox boss] is committed to making sure the best games are on Xbox One. That’s our job, basically, if you boil it all down to the essence of what a game platform is, it’s to make sure that the biggest, best, most exciting, most creative games are on your platform and we are working super hard to make that happen.”
Click to expand...
Hyper Light Drifter creator Alex Preston is head of four-person studio Heart Machine. He told us that despite his presence at the ID@Xbox launch event, the game will be released on Sony’s platforms first. “Sony was great to us initially so I don’t think we’re going to push the Xbox version before we do the Sony platform versions,” he told us. “The parity thing is a problem. It’s not a good policy for Microsoft and I definitely don’t think it helps small developers. There’s not really any reason to do it and it’s one of those old relic things…I think we’ll see it disappear eventually.”
Click to expand...
Drinkbox Studios’ Guacamelee has already debuted on PlayStation platforms, and a special edition is slated for release on Xbox One and Wii U. Studio co-founder Ryan MacLean summed up the thoughts of several other indie studios at the event. “From the perspective of a developer the ideal thing would be complete freedom to release on any platform you want,” he said. “I can kind of understand the platform holder’s preference – I guess they don’t want to be second in line.”
Click to expand...
CEO of Divekick developer Iron Galaxy Dave Lang is in a similar situation. “We wanted launch parity – we’re a 70 person studio so we want to maximise our marketing money,” he said. “Getting the games ready all together isn’t the hard part for us, but I know that with someone like [Riptide GP2 developer] Vector Unit, there’s four of them – trying to get games to launch on multiple platforms at once is really hard.”
Click to expand...
Microsoft has proven that it is able to listen and revise its policies throughout the lead-up to Xbox One’s launch, and our brief chat with Phil Harrison suggested that there’s still room for manoeuvre on launch parity. “The support we’ve got has been really gratifying and we continue to engage with the community,” he told us. “Chris Charla and his team are doing a great job listening as well as sharing, and continuing to refine and adapt our developer program so I’m really happy with the progress.”
Click to expand...
Much more at http://www.edge-online.com/news/ind...microsoft-must-drop-its-launch-parity-policy/
 
M

Miles Quaritch

Member
Getting rid the parity clause should be the first big thing Spencer does to show he really means business and isn't blowing hot air when he talks about the Xbox being a gaming platform/brand.
 
H

hawk2025

Member
Time to use that goodwill with the new position and drop this altogether.

I assume that Spencer has that power now?


KoopaTheCasual said:
Best Phil. And yea, if he pulls that as his first order of business, it would go a long way to marking a definitive change in the guard.
Click to expand...



Exactly.

It's a very nice olive branch for the community, for devs, and for everyone involved. Would be a great move, IMO.
 
J

James Coote

Neo Member
The problem is getting on the ID@Xbox program in the first place. There are literally hundreds of devs, myself included, who have applied, got the standard "Welcome" email, and then nothing more since (or perhaps a monthly newsletter telling them all about the wonderful stuff being done by those who have been lucky enough to be given devkits).
 
M

Miles Quaritch

Member
James Coote said:
The problem is getting on the ID@Xbox program in the first place. There are literally hundreds of devs, myself included, who have applied, got the standard "Welcome" email, and then nothing more since (or perhaps a monthly newsletter telling them all about the wonderful stuff being done by those who have been lucky enough to be given devkits).
Click to expand...

That's troubling. One hopes they are simply swamped but emails and will eventually get around to everyone, but they risk alienating and angering some indies in the process.
 
J

Jimmyfenix

Member
For a man toying with my heart about not getting another windjammers game i will not accept Dave Lang is a CEO of anything!

I agree Alex this policy will disappear in the future but it should happen sooner rather than later.
 
dugdug

dugdug

Banned
Seems weird to sign a contract with the parity clause in it, and, then complain about it.

What's to stop MS from changing the clause if it obviously doesn't stop devs from signing up with it?
 
S

SwiftDeath

Member
Yep I'm with the group that says dropping the parity clause would go a long way in showing Xbox is still a gaming dedicated brand and all that

Make it happen Phil :)
 
S

Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew

Banned
No matter which side he's in, he'll always laugh about it. Face it Phil: Microsoft would do the same and more if they were in the position Sony is in right now. They still boost the shit about it and were the first ones to come up with the "Only on Xbox" bullshit, and started this time exclusive trend. Enjoy the laugh, for they can enjoy their Call of Duty DLC first on Xbox.
 
S

Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew

Banned
Xer0 said:
Seems weird to sign a contract with the parity clause in it, and, then complain about it.

What's to stop MS from changing the clause if it obviously doesn't stop devs from signing up with it?
Click to expand...

In the industry there are two major platforms. Releasing in both means you make more money. Won't you sign it to make more money? Its all about the money. That does not mean that the contract they are signing is shit. We've all done it and have all signed shit contracts whether it be phone service or other permits, but we do it because that's the most feasible option no matter how shit it is.
 
dugdug

dugdug

Banned
shagg_187 said:
In the industry there are two major platforms. Releasing in both means you make more money. Won't you sign it to make more money? Its all about the money. That does not mean that the contract they are signing is shit. We've all done it and have all signed shit contracts whether it be phone service or other permits, but we do it because that's the most feasible option no matter how shit it is.
Click to expand...

Well, yeah, but, we also don't get phones from more than one service provider at a time. I left Verizon because they were charging too much for too little. Sprint is the worst, but, Verizon won't have me back until they either change their price or data caps. If Verizon loses enough customers for similar reasons, there's no doubt something would change.

I just don't think anything will change unless action's taken. What incentive does MS really have to alter anything about the clause, right now?
 
F

Frayne Daddy

Banned
Xer0 said:
Well, yeah, but, we also don't get phones from more than one service provider at a time. I left Verizon because they were charging too much for too little. Sprint is the worst, but, Verizon won't have me back until they either change their price or data caps. If Verizon loses enough customers for similar reasons, there's no doubt something would change.

I just don't think anything will change unless action's taken. What incentive does MS really have to alter anything about the clause, right now?
Click to expand...

Agreed. Not sure how it benefits MS. Outside of the dedicated video game scene who really cares about a parity clause? I bet some of my friends would not care about this clause at all as long as they get the games they want. I don't even really care all that much. Still plenty of developers signing up.
 
A

Armaros

Member
Xer0 said:
Well, yeah, but, we also don't get phones from more than one service provider at a time. I left Verizon because they were charging too much for too little. Sprint is the worst, but, Verizon won't have me back until they either change their price or data caps. If Verizon loses enough customers for similar reasons, there's no doubt something would change.

I just don't think anything will change unless action's taken. What incentive does MS really have to alter anything about the clause, right now?
Click to expand...

The indies that can't afford to release their game on multiple platforms all at the same time, will choose other plateforms and ignore the Xbox One.

If it continues, expect more indies go PC first and the PS4 later, and completely ignore the Xbox one or do it muh later if/when MS lets them. You already see the discrepancy in the number of indie devs on the PS4 vs the Xbox one, with the PC highest for obvious reason.
 
J

jordan0386

Member
Pretty sure Target and Kmart would want products to be on their shelves day and date with competition.

Deadlines are deadlines.
 
O

OldRoutes

Member
jordan0386 said:
Pretty sure Target and Kmart would want products to be on their shelves day and date with competition.

Deadlines are deadlines.
Click to expand...

Precisely. I don't think Microsoft sees it as a selling point, but it could be a selling point that a developer release the same version earlier on Ps4 because it has more users, for example.
 
FranXico

FranXico

Member
What a nice PR stunt MS is about to pull. As far as PR stunts go, this one will be high up there with the no DRM thing for Sony (even if Sony didn't originally plan it, the way they used the campaign to their advantage was brilliant).

First, they design an indie support program with a clause intended to slow down or hopefully halt exclusive indie game releases on the first year of the PS4.

Then, after public outcry, they remove the clause. At a moment that it won't matter any more. And will be praised as heroes for that.
 
T

TomShoe

Banned
Xer0 said:
Well, yeah, but, we also don't get phones from more than one service provider at a time. I left Verizon because they were charging too much for too little. Sprint is the worst, but, Verizon won't have me back until they either change their price or data caps. If Verizon loses enough customers for similar reasons, there's no doubt something would change.

I just don't think anything will change unless action's taken. What incentive does MS really have to alter anything about the clause, right now?
Click to expand...

Negative press, bad word of mouth, missing a few high quality titles, etc. You never know, today's indie could be tomorrow's AAA franchise. Just look at Minecraft.

FranXico said:
What a nice PR stunt MS is about to pull. As far as PR stunts go, this one will be high up there with the no DRM thing for Sony (even if Sony didn't originally plan it, the way they used the campaign to their advantage was brilliant).

First, they design an indie support program with a clause intended to slow down or hopefully halt exclusive indie game releases on the first year of the PS4.

Then, after public outcry, they remove the clause. At a moment that it won't matter any more. And will be praised as heroes for that.
Click to expand...

And then Sony counters by adding DLNA support. The world explodes.
 
T

TheSlySoul

Member
Phil's best decision would be to drop the clause that forces games to come out on Xbox simultaneously with other consoles. It is really unfair to a developer like Ubisoft who wanted to make Rayman Legends multiplatform.
 
FranXico

FranXico

Member
TomShoe said:
And then Sony counters by adding DLNA support. The world explodes.
Click to expand...

:)

Jokes aside, media support on the PS4 is still lacking. I do use the PS3 media features and expected at least feature parity with the PS3 in that respect.

I hope that by the time I can finally get a PS4, it will have better media support.
 
F

Frayne Daddy

Banned
TheRagnCajun said:
Its easy to understand why MS wants what they want. The question is whether that policy will ultimately do good or harm for MS.
Click to expand...
Probably not as much harm as some like to think.


Who really cares or notices about this stuff outside of gaming forums? I have friends who wouldn't care nor know what even a parity clause is. They want to play games on their xbox and that's it. Don't care about resolutions, parity clauses, new or old IP's, etc.

I feel this really isn't hurting MS as much as some like to believe.
 
N

Nafai1123

Banned
Frayne Daddy said:
Probably not as much harm as some like to think.


Who really cares or notices about this stuff outside of gaming forums? I have friends who wouldn't care nor know what even a parity clause is. They want to play games on their xbox and that's it. Don't care about resolutions, parity clauses, new or old IP's, etc.

I feel this really isn't hurting MS as much as some like to believe.
Click to expand...

Except they won't be able to play those games from developers that decide to release on everything except Xbox. Would that not hurt your friends who just want to play games?
 
F

Frayne Daddy

Banned
Nafai1123 said:
Except they won't be able to play those games from developers that decide to release on everything except Xbox. Would that not hurt your friends who just want to play games?
Click to expand...

Not if they don't even know it exists. I'll tell u that indie games on not on my friends radar.

And only a few are on my radar. You must be kidding yourself if u think a few indie games will break a console.
 
N

Nafai1123

Banned
Frayne Daddy said:
Not if they don't even know it exists. I'll tell u that indie games on not on my friends radar.

And only a few are on my radar. You must be kidding yourself if u think a few indie games will break a console.
Click to expand...

A few games now, maybe a dozen in a year, maybe a hundred by the end of the generation.

All it takes is missing out on that one big game and becoming known as the console with less games to play. They are already losing in public perception.

So yes, I think it could harm them if they don't get rid of it.
 
dugdug

dugdug

Banned
Nafai1123 said:
Except they won't be able to play those games from developers that decide to release on everything except Xbox. Would that not hurt your friends who just want to play games?
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right, but, the issue is, that list of developers that would exclude Xbox is dwindling, seemingly, week by week. Might hurt their public image with people like us, *right now* but, if this keeps up, it eventually won't be a problem for MS, once they're all caught up to Sony.
 
J

James Coote

Neo Member
Miles Quaritch said:
That's troubling. One hopes they are simply swamped but emails and will eventually get around to everyone, but they risk alienating and angering some indies in the process.
Click to expand...

It's not that. Well, not as such

I applied in October, went to the ID@London event in December, demoed my game informally to various Xbox folks whilst there. Have had a number of conversations with people in the Xbox team about how my game would use SmartGlass (one of the technologies they keep mentioning along with Kinect, that they keep telling us devs we should be making to help them shift Xboxes). I ended up part of a little community on facebook of other developers who are on or trying to get on ID@Xbox, and have made efforts to actively participate in that, contribute etc.

But what MS really want are teams with a history of shipping titles, that they can rely on to actually come up with the goods. "Independent" studios of 3 or 4 AAA veterans who've now formed their own new venture with that awesome-yet-slightly-too-crazy-for-publishers idea that they've had brewing for the last few years. Not one-man indie devs straight out of college who take a devkit only to 6 months later mumble something about cancelling their project and going back to making Ludum Dare games "for the art". (I'm slightly exaggerating here :p )

Thing is, the game I was working on in December, and showed to the Xbox guys; the other indie dev I was working with on that had to get a day job to support his family. And since it was a job in games industry, his employment contract said he couldn't work on his own games during his spare time. So that game fell through and never came to anything. So MS were right not to give us a devkit!

And from a "gamer" perspective, that means a store of higher quality (polish/production values wise) indie games, and consistency in that quality. And if some indie has the latest crazy-shit-hot game blow up on social media, or get a mazillion greenlight votes, they'll probably get approached by MS anyway, so not like you'll be missing out.

But yeah, just whining because "when can I haz my free xbox devkitz?!11" I mean the whole thing makes sense. MS don't owe me anything, and I'm probably being stupid and slightly naive letting myself get towed along by the hope of getting on the program, when really I ought to be out there making a really cool PC game that then gets picked up on by MS, or that I can go to them with and say "look, I haz gaem! Shiny!"
 
R

Raist

Banned
It's so weird to see MS talk about "making progress/getting there/working on it" etc on the topic of indies. They sound like Nintendo, while they were ahead of everyone else on that front years ago.
 
T

TheRagnCajun

Member
Frayne Daddy said:
Probably not as much harm as some like to think.


Who really cares or notices about this stuff outside of gaming forums? I have friends who wouldn't care nor know what even a parity clause is. They want to play games on their xbox and that's it. Don't care about resolutions, parity clauses, new or old IP's, etc.

I feel this really isn't hurting MS as much as some like to believe.
Click to expand...

I think it has less to do with what NeoGAF thinks and more to do with what the indie devs think.
 
R

Respawn

Banned
FranXico said:
What a nice PR stunt MS is about to pull. As far as PR stunts go, this one will be high up there with the no DRM thing for Sony (even if Sony didn't originally plan it, the way they used the campaign to their advantage was brilliant).

First, they design an indie support program with a clause intended to slow down or hopefully halt exclusive indie game releases on the first year of the PS4.

Then, after public outcry, they remove the clause. At a moment that it won't matter any more. And will be praised as heroes for that.
Click to expand...
It seems there is still a lot of sensible posters on GAF. Microsoft hasn't changed and will not. Now they want to hug the gamers since they're getting beaten soundly.
 
D

Dueck

Banned
Launch parity can only be implemented when you have such a large percentage of the market share, as people are forced to abide by it. The 360 only got away with it because it was so dominant over the PS3 for about 4 years (and was easier to develop for). Now things are so neck-in-neck (with MS on the lower side) that it's impossible to make anyone agree to it without some sort of payment.
 
N

Nafai1123

Banned
Xer0 said:
You're absolutely right, but, the issue is, that list of developers that would exclude Xbox is dwindling, seemingly, week by week. Might hurt their public image with people like us, *right now* but, if this keeps up, it eventually won't be a problem for MS, once they're all caught up to Sony.
Click to expand...

That doesn't make any sense. It has nothing to do with the number of indie games on each platform, it has to do with the size of the indie studio making the games. Small indie studios of a few people are not going to disappear over the years, and they will always have difficulty releasing on multiple platforms at once. Thus, there will always be indie developers that choose to overlook the Xbox as long as this policy is in place. That number could grow or diminish depending on the install base of each platform (which isn't looking good for MS either).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Phil Spencer: “We don’t pay for exclusivity on our own platform."
2
73
5K
Victor Omega replied
Xbox has paid over $4 billion for 3,000 id@xbox games since over the last 10 years.
2
70
5K
ungalo replied
[VGC] Baldur’s Gate 3 won’t come to Xbox before 2024, Larian suggests
News Game Dev 2 3 4 5 6
264
15K
Last Hearth replied
Quantum Error is in an “Unacceptable” State on Xbox Series S Due to its Weaker Hardware, Developer Says
Game Dev 2 3 4 5
216
15K
StreetsofBeige replied
[Windows Central] Xbox's biggest crisis right now isn't games. It's hardware.
Opinion Business Analysis 5 6 7 8 9
418
25K
Ainem Enamas replied
Top Bottom