Another reason I'll never support Xbox. Not even a true to its core, new Banjo Kazooie would convince me at this point.
Parallel universe thread whining? What the hell? I'm just pointing out that, by Greenwood's own admission, the game is not coming to Xbox One primarily because they have a deal with Sony. The parity clause was practically only mentioned in passing.
What's with that though?
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-01-08-indie-platformer-rogue-legacy-confirmed-for-xbox-one
Game came out last year on PS4/PS3/Vita and is now coming to Xbox One.
Meh. Just another worthless indie game. Thanks to Microsoft for helping curate XBL - it just means a higher caliber of game and saves us from a ton of indie garbage.
What is typical pub fund timed exclusivity anyways, 6 months? If they really want to do an Xbox One version I'm sure they can work around the parity clause and get it ported by then. There are already quite a few examples of the parity clause being ignored.
Shall we start pretending we don't all know what Pub Funding by Sony does to a game's exclusivity?
this rule goes against everything that xbox used to stand for at some point, ease of doing business, ease of development, etc.
35%? I don't know.
Anyway, parallel universe thread whining can probably get you in trouble over on anti-Gaf.
Well they accepted your indie garbage so they cant be curating that hard.
http://absinthegames.com/idxbox/
Yeah, fuck fun games! Give me more nothing!
Not at all. Sarcasm is hard to read through serious looking postsYou realize that is an indie game developer who was making a joke right?
Well they accepted your indie garbage so they cant be curating that hard.
http://absinthegames.com/idxbox/
The game is coming out FIRST on PlayStation 4 due to a deal. It is never coming out on XboxOne due to the parity clause.
So this is a confirmed pub funded game?
Oh, well why not just say that in the interview?
Seems like something that should be added to the OP.
Well they accepted your indie garbage so they cant be curating that hard.
http://absinthegames.com/idxbox/
I don't even know what point you're trying to make.
I think that is fair. Rayman Legends would have had a Wii U release in March and the Director's Cut in September for PS3/360.Err... where did you get that second part of the sentence?
They not even tried to bring it to a Microsoft machine.
Look, the Parity Clause is stupid, I agree with people who criticizes it. It could be easily changed in something more appealing for developers, like "Ok, publish it on XB1 whenever you want, just add something exclusive, even 1 level or 1 weapon or 1 shitty feature".
Yet, this whole thread is based on a clearly flawed premise.
Not at all. Sarcasm is hard to read through serious looking posts
Microsoft's shitty policy drove the developers to be more amenable to Sony and take their deal, with whatever terms that entails. I think that's the safest thing you can say.
They revealed that they have a deal from Sony that they were not able to refuse.
Err... where did you get that second part of the sentence?
They not even tried to bring it to a Microsoft machine.
Look, the Parity Clause is stupid, I agree with people who criticizes it. It could be easily changed in something more appealing for developers, like "Ok, publish it on XB1 whenever you want, just add something exclusive, even 1 level or 1 weapon or 1 shitty feature".
Yet, this whole thread is based on a clearly flawed premise.
Everything is NDA'd. You have to be an ID@Xbox dev to get some answers.
It puzzles me that the guys at Xbox could clear up a LOT of things simply by outlining a lot of stuff but can't due to the heads up preventing just that.
Long story short, it's a great indie dev initiative at MS being strangled by tons of red tape, and Phil Spencer doesn't give a shit. Frustrating as hell.
The game is not out, it's on early accessNot sure why people think it's a pub-fund game when it isn't self-published and in fact is already out on PC. The Sony deal could mean anything from a PS+ place to an E3 stage presence to reduced platform fees. Anything really.
If you not signed up with ID@Xbox you don't get answers
Also it is all NDA'd
That doesn't sound like what happened at all.
Seems like the opposite of what you're suggesting. Sony 'reached out' and the deal they couldn't refuse was made, doesn't sound at all like they were driven to accept this deal.
Err... where did you get that second part of the sentence?
They not even tried to bring it to a Microsoft machine.
Look, the Parity Clause is stupid, I agree with people who criticizes it. It could be easily changed in something more appealing for developers, like "Ok, publish it on XB1 whenever you want, just add something exclusive, even 1 level or 1 weapon or 1 shitty feature".
Yet, this whole thread is based on a clearly flawed premise.
People are still stuck in 2008/2009. "They could've come to MS and talk to them, hash out a deal, trying to get them to drop the parity clause, make an exception for them!"
Yeah, maybe. They could have. But that's still assuming the old distribution of power, the one that's been shattered during the last couple years by the proliferation of Steam and Desura and indies finding massive success outside of consoles. If you're a promising, fully-featured, well-covered and well-known indie game published by Devolver Digital, the console manufacturers come to you and court you to release a port of the game on their platform. The times when bigger indie names had to come begging to get put on XBLA and abide by their shitty, one-sided contracts are over.
Someone just forgot to tell MS.
This comment,
Implies that they haven't even discussed bringing the game to Xbox becuase they have a deal with Sony that would prevent it anyways. We have heard from the MS indie program that the clause is not a blanket one, and that you just need to talk to them about it.
That being said, the clause should probably go anyways.
Well they accepted your indie garbage so they cant be curating that hard.
http://absinthegames.com/idxbox/
Yeah, the parity clause does not matter if you release on mobile or PC. Only on consoles.
Sony "moneyhatted" Drinkbox studios by giving them the funds to finish their game, then it, quite shockingly might I add, released on Xbox. It's really not that hard to understand but I'm aware you have your own ways.
Lol, it's not very "specific" at all, just the way he decided to word it because he probably wasn't thinking about how thousands of console warriors on the Internet were going to insta-parse it from the safety of their pre-existing biases.What's vague about it? Seems pretty clear cut. He says in no uncertain terms that Sony reached out and the natural conclusion to reach is that Sony moneyhatted the game based on what we know that means from past deals.
It's a very specific choice of wording.
you need to fix your sarcasm detector before you keep shitting on him for no reason.
Anyone else find it ironic that a guy who got mad at a post seemingly bashing indies is now himself bashing indies?
Seems the original 'moneyhat' resulted in a 15 month console exclusivity period. So what's your point?
Microsoft's shitty policy drove the developers to be more amenable to Sony and take their deal, with whatever terms that entails. I think that's the safest thing you can say.
Fuuuuuuuuu.... i REALY love this game on my windows pc but as the one is my primary console i will miss it on my big screen...
...hopefully it comes to the ps vita...
"we can't make any conclusions on his vague statements, except that it was all because of the parity clause and the other thing was probably circumstantial at best"
The guy edited in the /s afterwards, it's not his fault his poor "joke" didn't go to plan.