-
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.
ID@Xbox launch clause has dev signing exclusive deal with Sony in order to be on XB1
- Thread starter chubigans
- Start date
lol, a ringing endorsement if I have ever heard one.
Hey Rami, thanks so much for posting! And thanks for being willing to put yourself out there and talk about this stuff, it feels like it makes things better for everyone in the long run.
It sounds like Microsoft has someone really awesome at the helm of ID@Xbox with Chris Charla. Do you think a twitter campaign, like the #ps4NoDRM stuff from earlier in the year, could give his views some extra support within microsoft? In general since E3 they seem to be really responsive to fan feedback.
It sounds like you guys have some faith they might reverse this policy at some point. And from what you've said, if they did that, it would be hard to find anything wrong with the ID@Xbox program (at least from your experiences so far).
Anyway, don't expect you to respond, sounds like you've got plenty to do. But if you read this: thanks for posting!
Sony needs to be more aggressive. Simple as that.
Updated! Thanks tha_rami!
Dreams-Visions
Member
according to that last paragraph, he isn't.
Giant Panda
Member
It's policies like these that drove 3rd parties away from Nintendo back when Nintendo used them during their golden days.
Pardon me, but get off your fucking high horse. This is my career and my employees' careers. I'm not going to automatically say no to an extremely important section of my demographic because a company wants me to not give a timed exclusive to another company. It's the business. Not everything is going to be roses.
I'm not defending this action, but you implying I'm an asshole because I can't financially take a flag-waving personal stand is pissing me off.
Its just not in Microsofts corporate DNA to be friendly and cooperative with smaller players. They always have to put in clauses to try to keep the upper hand and create problems and hassles for smaller developers.
Every level of executive management in the company is absolutely rotten.
Every level of executive management in the company is absolutely rotten.
Thanks for weighing in, Rami! I sincerely hope MS gets rid of this stupid clause so that indies get similar experiences on all platforms and everyone benefits as a result. Keep fighting the good fight! All the best!
Pretty sure Rime is actually a pitch funded by Sony from the get-go, so no.
Rime? It's a Sony published/owned game so no.
3rdamention
Member
You shouldn't at all if you are selfish and closed minded....otherwise you should think it's a pretty shady clause, one that manages to affect the development or release of a product on a competitors platform....
BlackBuzzard
Banned
Funded and the IP is owned by Sony.
But it's also the company who recently killed off their always-online DRM plans (despite them being central to the console) and created the mostly great sounding ID@Xbox program, so maybe they can be reasoned with? If anything this clause seems like a weird, stubborn last vestige of the microsoft approach from back at the beginning of this year.
FranXico
Member
Here's the twist: you are not going to get your indie games sooner, but every paying PS4 owner is going to have to wait longer for them.
Really nice, isn't it?
Yeah, I just read his post and he isn't pleased with some aspects of it. But I can appreciate his position. It's a good thing for more indie devs the more platforms there are and fixing ID@Xbox is a good thing.
But man Microsoft always gets itself in bad situations with some really backwards policies. Hopefully another 180 is in order.
You could not care but if you like good games then realize that the harder it is for more developers to be successful then the less good games you will see on your shiny new toy. And if devs don't see success they will move on to other platforms and leave Xbox and Playstation and Wii U to die a slow death. If a developer has to sacrifice polish to get a game ready on two platforms instead of taking their time and releasing one at a time you will care.
IHaveCandy
Banned
Is Microsoft really gonna say "you can't come to Xbox One because you released on PS4 first."? This is really stupid.
Well to be fair to him if all of you collectively said no then they would have to change it. Just because you need to do it for your business does not make it the right path. Though i understand that you have to take care of yourself and with the way business is if you said no someone else would just take your slot but you don't need to be so defensive about your choice except you know that it is damaging to some people.
They said they are going through this initial phase with more established developers to work out the kinks, hopefully this is one of the things that gets addressed,
They really need to allow for a open mobile-style marketplace and stop screwing around. I don't get why they can't see the potential behind something like that. I mean... what good is every Xbox being a development kit if everyone can't publish games and with minimal red tape?
They really need to allow for a open mobile-style marketplace and stop screwing around. I don't get why they can't see the potential behind something like that. I mean... what good is every Xbox being a development kit if everyone can't publish games and with minimal red tape?
FranXico
Member
Yes, the idea is to make smaller indie developers halt the release of their games on the PS4, out of fear that they will miss out on potential Xbone sales.
Well said.
I don't know. It seems like the company can be reasoned with only based on revenue potential. That's exactly what happened with the DRM situation. Until the polls and the preorder numbers were out, they remained obstinate. Until they see indies walking away or, at least, expressing their disapproval en masse, I don't think MS would care.
Not really. As people in this thread have pointed out, most indie developers only have the resources to develop for one or the other. If this policy forces people to pick Sony, so be it. The indies pick Sony. Whatever.
Takamura-San
Member
I guess the issue that people, at least I, have with this is that Microsoft wants to have cake and eat it too.
I guess that most people have no issue with 3rd party exclusives. Its business and a platform is investing to add to their porfolio and competitive advantage. The thing about this is that there is no investment, unless you count the free sdk and unity license as that.
This is a no lose clause for Microsoft that rubs the wrong way with people because is one sided.
I guess that most people have no issue with 3rd party exclusives. Its business and a platform is investing to add to their porfolio and competitive advantage. The thing about this is that there is no investment, unless you count the free sdk and unity license as that.
This is a no lose clause for Microsoft that rubs the wrong way with people because is one sided.
IHaveCandy
Banned
So what are they going to do when an indie dev can't wait and needs to release already and does so on PS4? Refuse to let them release out of spite? I'm sure they don't do this to published games. What happened to "games are games are games?"
FranXico
Member
Or some indies who want to release on both consoles will instead release on the XBone first, because Sony will wait if they have to, whereas Microsoft won't.
I assume they can still publish their game under other pretenses, just not under the "ID@Xbox" initiative.
But don't you feel that anything that restricts the way you conduct your business is bad? They are the platform holder so I understand that they have a great amount of power over the business. But if they are forcing you into a course I would think that, at some point, that is going to cause damage to someone who wanted to launch on one platform at a time or avoid exclusivity deals.
As with the system itself, I think this is a product of suits stepping in and trying to make a "better" product in their eyes. I highly doubt Chris Charla is happy about the clause but has to find a way to make it work.
I wonder if enough people made enough noise about a few really promising indie games that are getting left off the Xbox One because of this if they would ever consider changing it. I was under the impression that the parity at launch, which we heard about a while ago, only applied to content regardless if it had come out earlier on another console first. It is so dumb that it would apply to release date as well. I understand Microsoft wanting the Xbox One version of games to match content of all other versions when it's released, but forcing launch day parity is really dumb.
True, though a relatively rare case. Still, does the order of Xbox -> Sony as opposed to Sony -> Xbox actually hurt the developer in terms of sales?
I think it DOES matter if you're only planning on releasing on one console (or perhaps doing a later port if sales are good). And in that case, I completely understand picking Sony.
Once again, I just took umbrage over the fact that I was essentially being called an asshole for theoretically wanting to release on both systems and "obeying" this policy.
They'll make exceptions for the big hits, but might stand firm on smaller titles in order to maintain that fear for developers. That seems like the logical corporate strategy.
I'm sorry, that's really not fair to put the burden on developers and expect some kind of microsoft boycott. This is not a business breaking clause, it's just shitty compared to what other platforms in the game industry are pretty much universally offering. Expecting one person/company to convince hundreds or thousands of other people to all go in on some kind of boycott during which some people who are barely making it (most devs) can't even pay themselves/their employees and some people lose their jobs is absurd.
Expecting every small developer to boycott as a group every time there's a policy they don't like is silly. For players and press who can see how this might negatively affect the industry, now is the time to speak out and let microsoft know that this kind of sucks. Devs have already spoken out despite the NDAs that usually keep stuff like this muffled. What else do you really want?
That's not what i said most indies will not choose only Sony what they will do is be forced to prioritize the xbo version or go longer without income while they work on additional platforms. All this does is make life harder for smaller developers.
Because it's a policy that does absolutely nothing to guarantee you get any games sooner or better than they would have been if devs were left to their own devices. In fact, it could result in the opposite.
How many multi-console platform indie games have come out in the last few years?
Legit question, I don't actually know. I can't think of any off the top of my head. It's pretty rare.
Well said. Couldn't agree more. Expecting every dev to participate in a boycott is totally unfair. This is a business after all, and people should be allowed to have their own priorities without facing ridicule
So because i think that Microsoft enabling their customers to experience games at the same time(not before) as customers on other platforms is a good thing, that somehow makes me selfish?
And since your against this parity, surely that makes you selfish?
funkystudent
Member
Does MS still set the price as well?
It will be interesting to see how thing will go depending on how well XB1 sells and how much of a lead the ps4 gets over it.
With Steam around and growing and growing and the PS4 probably going to dominate the console space for a while, MS cant really afford to be dicks to game makers.
They could get away with this crap back in 2007. Now? With so many other viable platforms? I dont think it will stick for long.
Especially after they already alienated so many of the 360's best indie developers.
It will be interesting to see how thing will go depending on how well XB1 sells and how much of a lead the ps4 gets over it.
With Steam around and growing and growing and the PS4 probably going to dominate the console space for a while, MS cant really afford to be dicks to game makers.
They could get away with this crap back in 2007. Now? With so many other viable platforms? I dont think it will stick for long.
Especially after they already alienated so many of the 360's best indie developers.
TheDarkKnight774
Member
That clause is total bs. Man MS stop mucking things up and making life harder for the indies and industry as a whole with this control crap. Just ruins the whole concept and benefits of the indie development scene. I'd love to see pushback from the developers ala the DRM to get another 180 but realize its their livelihood and cutting off a major revenue stream is much easier said then done. But if games were consistently released on everything but MS that crank the pressure on MS to change.
Deadstarone
Member
Hypothetically, if the install base of PS4 ends up being 100% larger than Xbox One, you're stuck in a situation where you still have to develop for Xbox One first.
Refusing to do business with a company will have more impact then just complaining about it but as you said small developers are plentiful and cutthroat so they will just lose their slot. I don't expect them to do anything like that because they have too much to lose however he should recognize that this is a shitty policy for some people and should not get upset when people suggest they don't care about other developers.
Well, start making noise then -- neither Jonathan Blow nor JAW were included at least in this initial round of devkits.
This at least means that the gap until The Witness comes to the X1 will be fairly significant.
Wait a minute, why does the Xbox get first dibs just because they have a dick policy? Do you see how that's exactly what they want, and is incredibly unfair? It should be up to you guys wherever the hell you want to put the game on first, simultaneously, you name it.
Sony's reaction to this may be to impose the exact same policy -- which, honestly, is probably a VERY hard thing to resist given that Microsoft's is in place -- which then brings us to the worst case scenario where you are all locked into releasing the game simultaneously or only in one.
That's the worst case scenario, and it's the scenario that Microsoft will get if Sony decides to play on the same dirty playground that they are.
DragonSworne
Banned
Screw MS for trying to bully developers.
They are no better than Nintendo was back during the NES and SNES days.
They are no better than Nintendo was back during the NES and SNES days.
Eh...I wouldnt go that far. They are basically trying to ensure that they get something out of the deal for giving away dev tools + Unity. You could argue that getting games out of it is that something but we know there arent any gurantees there at all.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll