-
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.
steam | April 2015 - Orange, you glad its morningbus? No.
- Thread starter morningbus
- Start date
- Status
Se7enSword
Banned
Bayonetta in a hat would sell well, I imagine.
NingenJanai
Member
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
That certainly aligns with what I've seen in threads.
Servizio
I don't really need a tag, but I figured I'd get one to make people jealous. Is it working?
I enjoyed it when it came out. It's like a cross between Max Payne and Halo, but not as good as either.
lashman
Steam-GAF's Official Ambassador to Gaming-GAF
yeah, I've noticed that as well
Would have still sold better than on the WiiU.
My opinion was and still is that third party exclusives should be timed exclusives (min 6 months). That is long enough that those exclusives push console and in that 6 months it will be released another exclusive that will continue to push that console. Third party developers will earn more money so they can make more games and pay their devs, gamers will get game to play on platform they own/prefer.
First party exclusives should stay permanent exclusives.
First party exclusives should stay permanent exclusives.
Better than R* Support's "Buy the game on Steam or the R* site if you want to pre-load" that was shown a day or two ago, at least.
Well, The Order, Bayonetta 2, Sunser Overdrive, Ratchet & Clank and a shitload of other games are third party exclusives.
PetriP-TNT
Member
I'll just download my GTAV via Steam with my super duper fast finnish internet connection that's practically free
They will release it 2 days before and call it a day
And does Sunset Overdrive for example still sells X1 and is it relevant today? Will it be relevant for X1/MS this fall? I don;t see nothing wrong in publishing those games on other platforms after certain period. It is good for all parties in my opinion.
That sounds good in theory, except modern AAAs require such a large budget that it would not make economic sense for studios to make games without publisher/console backing. This applies especially to new IPs.
Even if there might be a case in terms of revenue, its a fact that there is usually way too much risk for most studios to stomache.
That's excluding the other benefits third parties obtain by sticking to one console, such as marketing, development help, and all sorts of other things that are talked about in closed doors that we'll never hear about.
So it doesn't matter what you think or feel. Money always talks the loudest. Reducing risk always pays off, whereas sales might not happen.
When it comes to Sunset it has been rumored to release on PC for qutie a while, I assume it will come to PC, but only for Windows 10 store.
Should be circa today's store update assuming the subs are ready to go and R* has told Valve to flip the switch.
Yes but after a year that title is not relevant to publisher who paid development. Why stop developer to publish that game on other platforms then? If game is good publisher will earn money and push/sell consoles in 6 months and they got what they payed and devs god risk free development. If game is bad they won't get anything and dev could be in danger, but they could still publish game on other platforms and earn bit more money *JeseC will buy it on Steam no matter how bad it is!)
Another example Nintendo payed Bayonetta 2 development and Platinum made amazing game but that didn't help Nintendo to much. They could allow Platinum to publish that game on other platforms for certain % of profit. Nintendo will get more money back that they invested in game development.
We will see MS told us that they will bring more X1 exclusives to PC.
I suspect MS will use the Win10 Xbox app as a middle-man, like Ubi with Uplay, so it can sell its games on Steam without forsaking its own service.
TBH I suspected Karnaaj Rally and wondered if now even GBA ports start appearing on Steam.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karnaaj_Rally
someguyinahat
Member
Baron_Calamity
Member
Yes.
There are good parts about it. The graphics are just ok. The game play is good and it feels like the story is going places however keep in mind that it was the first part of a trilogy and the story is all setup. You will not be satisfied when the game ends.
MMBosstones86
Member
after the next delay.
GFWLite.
Yes but after a year that title is not relevant to publisher who paid development. Why stop developer to publish that game on other platforms then? If game is good publisher will earn money and push/sell consoles in 6 months and they got what they payed and devs god risk free development. If game is bad they won't get anything and dev could be in danger, but they could still publish game on other platforms and earn bit more money *JeseC will buy it on Steam no matter how bad it is!)
You misunderstand the problem fundamentally. Consoles will ONLY pay if the game IS exclusive or subsidise if its a temporary exclusive. Its called a contract. You don't break contracts unless you want to get sued. And they will win. And nobody will ever make another contract with your studio again.
You sacrifice long term sales in return for greatly diminished risk. That's usually a good trade, especially at the start of a generation.
Yeah, it'd basically be a repeat of GFWL, only without the third-party support, so at least long-term you'd only have to worry about your recently-released Microsoft games not being fully functional.
Speaking of the Xbox app, though, did anybody else here get into the Fable Legends beta some weeks ago? I don't have Win10, so I haven't played it.
Tizoc
Member
Fantasy Life 2 though....
I'm ok with iOS long as the IAP isn't in my face.
heck let me buy the game for $20 so I play without IAP and I'll give to you day 1.
if you redeem Drive to hell (from Build a Greenlight 5) on desura, you can generate another working steam key there
(same with Battlepaths and Last Knight.. not sure if there were any others)
(same with Battlepaths and Last Knight.. not sure if there were any others)
Characters are way better than in W2 and i don't have any complains on that field. Foliage on the other hand is in my opinion not that good.
I never said that developer should break contracts. I said that publisher (Sony, MS, Nintendo) should allow devs to publish game on other platforms after certain period of time.
It is sad that many gamers won't be able to play Bayonetta 2 and probably there won't be Bayonetta 3.
Jawmuncher
Member
I for one am glad. Means it will be easier to run on my 660.
You still fundamentally misunderstand the issue. Why should the publisher allow that? Why pay so much money for something that slips away?
So the payout is less, studios bear more risk. Big studios can get away with this, but smaller studios or newer studios cannot manage this risk.
What you're talking about makes no economic sense, which is why its destined to forever be message board fodder.
Want to play Bayonetta 2? Buy a WiiU.
Tizoc
Member
Ha...
Then let me pay an amount to get rid of IAP and whatever lame stamina bar that is imposed.
There's a Vita game that let me 'buy' it for $10 and I never had to worry about IAP ever again.
They still could take % of profit from sales on other platforms. Everything can be negotiated. I am sure that Nintendo lost money on Bayonetta 2 deal. People won't buy Wii U for that one game is they are not interested in rest of the Nintendo games.
From what I can see, the Fable Legends beta for Windows 10 hasn't started yet.
Tizoc
Member
To be fair the Wii U has a good selection of games aside from Bayo 2, however those amount to maybe what under 20 games? Then again there is also the Wii VC which is also worth investing into.
On the other hand, not everyone has room for 2 consoles and can only commit to one.
Imagine if Ninty's NX service would bring their Wii U library to PC/Steam though
Freedom = $1.05
Banned
Bayo2 was a risk Nintendo took to have more hardcore gamers buy their platform. they gain nothing by allowing the game to appear on other platforms because it justifies people not buying their hardware for an exclusive game.
look, while no one really likes the idea of games being hardware exclusive in the case of Bayo2 we're talking about a game that wouldn't exist if it weren't for nintendo funding it. People are just going to have to get over it already, some games aren't going to come to their platform of choice and that's ok.
texhnolyze
Banned
More games (Nuked).
Looks like I shouldn't have put the rules.
Looks like I shouldn't have put the rules.
freshVeggie
Member
Happy birthday zkylon! Didn't know we are so close to each other.
I get you. But to be fair that video from IGN is badly compressed, so the "plasticy" look could very well stem from the smearing.
I advise you to watch some much higher bitrate footage of Witcher 3 at Gamersyde. It looks much better detailed and thus less plasticey.
I kinda agree. But there are folks like that in every camp.
Also I don't think Bloodborne is a good example as for all we know the game was directly given as an order from Sony to make and not bought exclusivity during development.
The rapture game is I hope only timed exclusive on PS? Would suck if full. Their explanations with "without Sony's funding, we couldn't make it this big or whatever" boils down to your trust into the devs words in the end. I am not that convinced tbh.
Bayonetta 2 for WiiU was a total nutcase though in terms of fan rage. I mean the game would literally not exist without Nintendo's funding, so I see absolutely no logical reason to call it "betrayal". It doesn't make sense and is petty.
Same goes with Xbox. Tizoc, people are not raging why Sunset is exclusive you know. Tomb Raider was for all we know always planned as a multiplat release. Xbox plainly bought timed exclusivity. I can understand the reaction of people in that case. Sony has been doing that as well - a lot more tbh afaik. Just not such big games.
That looks interesting. I actually enjoy watching "movie cuts" of fighting game SP's on Youtube, so this is to my liking.well this is new O_O
Sorry mate. That's not how it works. The new publisher takes a cut from the studio, then you take an additional cut from the studio. The studio ends up not making that much money from an additional sale, and no publisher would be willing to pay you up front for the same amount if your game is going to end up exclusive anyway.
In the end, you would be better off just getting a small subsidy for temporary exclusivity, and we've already established that certain studios just cannot bear that much risk.
That's even ignoring the logistical nightmare that will probably occur if you want to move money everywhere. How would the publisher even track how well the game sells on a separate platform? You have to take into account your cut, the rival publisher's cut, the price of the actual software, and any other additional pieces of information, all of which can vary with sales or promotions.
And that's ignoring fans who want to buy the game on their respective platform. It might not be yours.
Yeah, I took a closer look at the e-mail I received on January 31st and the code is for the X1 even though I selected PC when signing up.
- Status