-
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.
Broforce skipping XBO due to Parity Clause, and "deal they couldn't refuse" w/ Sony
- Thread starter SerTapTap
- Start date
Bro, just Broforce? Bro, Broforce will be the Broest game on Steam. You can play as many Bro like Rambro, Brorocop, Brodley, The Brodock Saints.
I cant wait to buy it when it will come out.
I'm hoping for the Bride to come as a bro.
Oops!
Shpeshal Nick
aka Collingwood
That had already come out on 360. Not sure why it keeps getting mentioned in these arguments.
Lol. All good.
AmethystEnd
Member
Even if Xbone community are only interested in AAA games ( mostly shooters ), some of AAA exclusives bombed sales wise ( like Sunset ) because game is....not shooter even if game is awesome. I'm really concerned how Quantum Break or new Tomb Raider will sell.
Sad truth!
I asking myself how someone can say something like that and that person claim he is a gamer.krypt0nian
Banned
You forgot Piers Solar, Rogue Legacy, Oddworld, and Thomas Was Alone.
Golf Club was a sim ship, though. And Guacamelee was a special edition so that doesn't really count either.
Piers Solar wasn't a "big title form a big developer" either, since the reality is we treat every develop (big and small) exactly the same.
None of these exceptions make this any better.
True. Even Nintendo knows that. Heck, Nintendo has better policies than MS right now!
All I know is that it came out first on ps4 where I played it. It probably wasn't even subject to the clause I just remember seeing it on the Xbox one marketplace later.
Robot Carnival
Member
how much did MS support them in their early days? I'm not being sarcastic btw, I honestly dont know too much about it (yes, I'm the few ppl on Earth who wasn't interested in Minecraft). if they didn't support their grown and only "bought them in the end", then that's not helping, that's just a low risk investment as a business. and if they did support them from the start, then it's even more strange that they're acting the way they are now towards the indies.
FranXico
Member
Back in the early PS3 days, Sony executives were still drunk with the PS2 success and used to think they owned the show. The beating they got taught them a lot.
Night Angel
Member
That's exactly the feedback we wanted from you, a few more games. We didn't want clarification or any of the other things people are clamoring for, we wanted a few more examples of you sidestepping your own idiotic rule. Thanks, Chris.You forgot Piers Solar, Rogue Legacy, Oddworld, and Thomas Was Alone.
Golf Club was a sim ship, though. And Guacamelee was a special edition so that doesn't really count either.
Piers Solar wasn't a "big title form a big developer" either, since the reality is we treat every develop (big and small) exactly the same.
Microsoft Listens
Jimmyfenix
Member
Yeah, I stayed quiet on this before, but... he didn't try very hard, if at all. Pretty much was just making excuses to not have to deal with MS again.
We patched our game free about a year after it launched, and we had to do a complicated Title Update / mandatory Compatibility Pack DLC combo, which took approval from MS's Dark Council. The total update size was around 600 megs.
Because the Dark Council got involved, the patching process took forever. When we started the process, we were all set to pay the $10,000. But when the process finished, they were like "Oh hey, starting next week there is no patch fee. So we're just going to delay it a week so you don't have to pay - that cool?"
Fez's patch would've probably been a few megs at most, and just a Title Update since it was just a weird save bug that was missed, if I recall.
This isn't how this works at all.
MS makes more money by having more games on their platform, period. The point of a digital marketplace is to take 30% of every sale, not posture about how your choice is "better" by being more limited.
The more things you have to sell, the more customers you will reach, the more money you will make for just hosting files and running the store.
To be fair, he's working within his employer's framework. He can give feedback, but it's not something in this control. The fact that there's signs people within MS understand the concern means they have good people there. Hopefully that means a change to a better policy.
Duxxy3
Member
History repeating again. People, and companies, just never learn.
Nintendo got arrogant after the SNES and got pounded because of it. Sony got arrogant because of the PS2 and got pounded because of it. Microsoft got arrogant because of the 360 and got pounded for it.
Cycle repeating over and over.
The Artisan
Member
I thought "parity clause" meant forcing devs to make a better version of a game on par with a lesser version of the same game port. I didn't know it meant demanding all versions of the game releasing simultaneously.
didn't vf5 come out on 360 a few months after Ps3?
didn't vf5 come out on 360 a few months after Ps3?
Well, since I clearly can't tell the difference between a PM and post reply this afternoon, let me just write back publicly and say that we really do take all this kind of feedback to heart, and we take the feedback really seriously.
Night Angel
Member
That's a separate clause. This specific one is about release date parity.
Michanical
Member
Sounds like a "above his pay grade" kind of issue.
It could also be that Microsoft doesn't want to loosen the policy officially, otherwise it will be a lot harder to re-implement it later. It's better it just stays there with blanket exceptions, just in case they ever want to start enforcing it.
Miles Quaritch
Member
Dark Council = QA team?
slavesnyder
Member
Who is we? Does this include people who could decide to change certain policies?
Hope so, this would be nice for developers, gamers and, by the way, the xbox.
Que?
Pretty much this.
Like, if your Title Update exceeds a certain size, or certain other guidelines are technically impossible to adhere to, etc. you have to escalate your case to this shadowy cadre of people. The "Dark Council" is the name I gave them - I'm not sure what their actual titles are. But I'm guessing they're a group of high-level TRC folk, like the people that came up with the TRC in the first place.
You basically just endlessly fill out Word docs for them explaining the technical case, business case, and customer experience for what you want to do until they let you do the thing or don't. And it takes months!
So in our case, we couldn't have a 600 MB TU, so we had to appeal to the Dark Council for permission to split our updates into TUs/Compatibility Packs. This is why the first Skullgirls patch on 360 was 6-7 months after the PS3 one.
Shin-Ra
Junior Member
Sounds a lot like their pricing strategy.
Jimmyfenix
Member
Huh i did not know this.
Hopefully The feedback is is relayed to guys like Spencer and Harrison
SodiumBenzoate
Member
I understand the hate in this thread I don't think this is worth dogpiling over; what else can someone who works at MS (that isn't Phil himself) even say publicly? He's not making the policy. Posting here has wayyy more downside than up.
what the hell. I hope this does not exist anymore.
Goodacre0081
Member
as a PS4 owner I don't care what MS does with it's XB1 business, but when potential release dates for games I'm interested in are moved because of it then it irks me. in a way their policies are affecting my console. that shouldn't happen.
the lack of great indie titles available for XB1 users also sucks as a potential future owner.
I haven't done anything with the One yet, but I'm guessing it doesn't.
This was largely an artifact of the HDD-less 360, which is why there were strict limits on TU size, etc.
The Artisan
Member
once this news gets its publicity i think another 180 is on the horizon.
Probably not now that we live in a world of 20gb day one patches.
All our dreams have finally been realised
It was delighted to hear that.
I hope Microsoft can come up with a good solution. Especially, when it causes trouble to Microsoft more than other.
Jimmyfenix
Member
On twitter they replied to someone saying they could get the game out before E3
oh shit I totally forgot about the arcade edition 360
This isn't new news dude.
Neuromancer
Member
They could just tell developers there's a promotion!
Do you have any examples of games that have been moved forward to adhere to this specific policy?
slavesnyder
Member
That was funny!
Neuromancer
Member
The parity clause has been out there for a while. Phil even publicly defended it:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...er&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=socialoomph
travisbickle
Member
Lol, Sony aren't paying for exclusivity, they don't have to. Adam Boyes turns up with a free PS4 dev kit on loan, and access to resources to help port the game and bingo life-time exclusive guarantee because of MS parity clause.
Goodacre0081
Member
this issue has been brought up multiple times over the last year and every time it will get a bit of traction and quietly go away.
Neuromancer
Member
We never will due to NDAs.
I believe Sony places a timed exclusivity on any games they've loaned cash to via the pub fund, which delays the game for Xbox One users.
Similar threads
- Poll