Support NeoGAF

Brad Grenz · Jul 18, 2015

dragonelite said:
Loved it when phill said he would put BC on the list, and people claimed he will say everything to fans. Then this E3 ..

At this point it's only a handful of really old titles, and Mass Effect runs terribly. So BC is just another promise and it remains to be seen if they can actually deliver on the scale described.

hydrophilic attack · Jul 18, 2015

I don't quite get why this clause gets so much hate on a GAF. It's like he said before. Owners of The One should feel like they are First Class. If you are going on a flight, living the life with a first class ticket, like a boss, how would you feel if those second-class losers got to board the plane before you did? Then you wouldn't be first class, and that's not how you should feel like a The One owner.

Another way to say first class is Tier One. If you are Tier One, you should get your stuff first. If you are a Tier One country, like the USA, of course you should get the The One before second tier countries like Japan or Europe. Similarly, if you are a The One owner, you shouldn't wait to get your games until after those Tier Two PS4 gamers.

Another way to say First Class is Alpha, because Alpha was the first letter of the Egyptian alphabet. If you're Alpha, and you're out partying with some Beta friend, of course the girls would choose to go with you before your friend. Sure, if your friend manages to convince her to do a threesome with both you and him (multi-platform game), then sure that's ok. Let him get in on some action. He doesn't get a lot of chances, so of course you are going to be a good friend and let him join. (But cross-platform multiplayer is out of the question because dicks touching each other is not how you roll.)

Now if this chick would go with your friend first, of course you won't chase after her to be with you later. First, you are Alpha, you don't do sloppy seconds, and second calling her to be with you, just because she was with your friend makes you look pathetic. But still, you are a nice guy. You know that the world gets better the more people get to be with you. So you are willing to make some exceptions. You may be able to forgive this stupid broad for going with your friend if she does something nice to make up for it. So you say: "Come talk to me. If you really want to be with me, give me a call and we will find a way to make that happen. We can get together and you can work something out to make it special in some way." And then maybe she will cook you a meal, or do some freaky shit with you that she would never do with your Beta friend. In this situation you can be with her without losing face.

I hope you all understand their position now. I realize that the last example may be a bit difficult to understand for PS4 owners, as they don't get to have much sex, but I did my best to explain.

LewieP · Jul 18, 2015

Montresor said:
Hmm I dont see a problem with asking a dev to add something new to a game if the platform is getting a late port.

And if the game is extremely minimalist and adding anything would take away from the design? Do you think adding Battletoads to Journey would have enhanced the game?

And if the developer either doesn't have funds to pay for development of extra content, or the majority of the team have moved onto their next project?

There are plenty of cases where if the developers are confronted with being required (not simply asked but required) to develop additional content without receiving any money to do so, they will simply opt to not release a port for the platform that has a smaller install base of people who are less inclined to buy indie games.

This is pretty plain to see. Simply compare the library of the Xbox One and the PS4 and look at all the games that are skipping Xbox One.

For me the question isn't really "is what Microsoft is asking for fair?", it's "what is the impact of this policy?". The impact of the policy is that Xbox One owners miss out on a bunch of great games.Because of a power play from Microsoft that they don't have the install base to back up.

Doctor_Thomas · Jul 18, 2015

Even if there's games releasing later with no new content, why even make it so developers "have to come and speak to you". It making them some sort of gatekeeper to, and remember this because it's important, getting MORE games on their system.

The whole thing is full of shit for consumers and developers.

Cthulhu_Steev · Jul 18, 2015

It appears the MS philosophy is that arm-twisting indie devs trumps openness, no matter what, and is therefore the best option for making their own customers feel 'first class'.

I guess my left-wing sensibilities prevent me seeing that 'win, at all costs ' as a good thing.

Montresor · Jul 18, 2015

LewieP said:
And if the game is extremely minimalist and adding anything would take away from the design? Do you think adding Battletoads to Journey would have enhanced the game?

And if the developer either doesn't have funds to pay for development of extra content, or the majority of the team have moved onto their next project?

There are plenty of cases where if the developers are confronted with being required (not simply asked but required) to develop additional content without receiving any money to do so, they will simply opt to not release a port for the platform that has a smaller install base of people who are less inclined to buy indie games.

This is pretty plain to see. Simply compare the library of the Xbox One and the PS4 and look at all the games that are skipping Xbox One.

For me the question isn't really "is what Microsoft is asking for fair?", it's "what is the impact of this policy?". The impact of the policy is that Xbox One owners miss out on a bunch of great games.Because of a power play from Microsoft that they don't have the install base to back up.

Is there any evidence that xb1 is actually missing games because of this new clause?

The disparity in indie releases is apparent - but couldn't that be attributed to the older, more draconian (and much more awful) clause that forbid releases if there was no release date parity at all?

Cthulhu_Steev · Jul 18, 2015

hydrophilic attack said:
I hope you all understand their position now. I realize that the last example may be a bit difficult to understand for PS4 owners, as they don't get to have much sex, but I did my best to explain.

Makes sense, but even for those PS4'ers who get sex it's difficult to release if you've just done it previously elsewhere, and you often have to add something extra if you can't quite manage it. Or pay more cash.

LewieP · Jul 18, 2015

Montresor said:
Is there any evidence that xb1 is actually missing games because of this new clause?

The disparity in indie releases is apparent - but couldn't that be attributed to the older, more draconian (and much more awful) clause that forbid releases if there was no release date parity at all?

Developers are NDA'd before they have the conversation, which has the impact of stopping evidence of exactly this from being disclosed publicly.

It stands to reason that the policy only exists because on some occasions it will be enforced.

The Skullgirls devs (who have a long track record of transparency wherever possible, and treating their customers with a great deal of respect) have specifically said the policy is blocking an Xbox One version of their game. I very much doubt they are the only developer who have been declined an Xbox One release because of this policy.

MMaRsu · Jul 18, 2015

hydrophilic attack said:
I don't quite get why this clause gets so much hate on a GAF. It's like he said before. Owners of The One should feel like they are First Class. If you are going on a flight, living the life with a first class ticket, like a boss, how would you feel if those second-class losers got to board the plane before you did? Then you wouldn't be first class, and that's not how you should feel like a The One owner.

Another way to say first class is Tier One. If you are Tier One, you should get your stuff first. If you are a Tier One country, like the USA, of course you should get the The One before second tier countries like Japan or Europe. Similarly, if you are a The One owner, you shouldn't wait to get your games until after those Tier Two PS4 gamers.

Another way to say First Class is Alpha, because Alpha was the first letter of the Egyptian alphabet. If you're Alpha, and you're out partying with some Beta friend, of course the girls would choose to go with you before your friend. Sure, if your friend manages to convince her to do a threesome with both you and him (multi-platform game), then sure that's ok. Let him get in on some action. He doesn't get a lot of chances, so of course you are going to be a good friend and let him join. (But cross-platform multiplayer is out of the question because dicks touching each other is not how you roll.)

Now if this chick would go with your friend first, of course you won't chase after her to be with you later. First, you are Alpha, you don't do sloppy seconds, and second calling her to be with you, just because she was with your friend makes you look pathetic. But still, you are a nice guy. You know that the world gets better the more people get to be with you. So you are willing to make some exceptions. You may be able to forgive this stupid broad for going with your friend if she does something nice to make up for it. So you say: "Come talk to me. If you really want to be with me, give me a call and we will find a way to make that happen. We can get together and you can work something out to make it special in some way." And then maybe she will cook you a meal, or do some freaky shit with you that she would never do with your Beta friend. In this situation you can be with her without losing face.

I hope you all understand their position now. I realize that the last example may be a bit difficult to understand for PS4 owners, as they don't get to have much sex, but I did my best to explain.

lol haha

CaviarMeths · Jul 18, 2015

Montresor said:
Again - I don't see the problem with asking for more content for a late port. It would actually be quite nice to have something new on the xb1 version. And like I already said it seems like this isn't even enforced. There are loads of games releasing late without new content.

See caviermeths's post - what he wrote is exactly how I felt when the clause was "if there is no release date parity then your game is NEVER allowed to release on xbox". That was a clause that made no sense and did truly go against xbox consumers.

All I can say, "god dammit Spencer, stop I obfuscating and be clear!" Binding of Isaac coming SUPER late next week and it wont have any new content.

So while I like the idea of new content for late ports, I would welcome any late vanilla ports period, and that seems to be routinely happening on xb1.

I think it's actually super clear. If you accept money from another platform holder like Sony or Nintendo, you need to develop extra content for Xbox at no additional cost to the consumer. "Talk to us," as it were. Games that seemingly contradict this may not actually contradict it at all. Binding of Isaac was released first on Steam, so you can be pretty sure that Valve didn't pay for timed exclusivity or help fund it.

The problem is that accepting funding isn't always an avoidable situation, and developing extra content for free isn't always a reasonable expectation.

Mpl90 · Jul 18, 2015

I lost it at the cross-platform multiplayer part, oh God :lol

fantomena · Jul 18, 2015

I think so

For being the head of Xbox, Phil sure likes to think.

blakep267 · Jul 18, 2015

I agree with him tbh. If rocket league comes out today for ps4 and next year in July for the Xbox, I kinda want something a little more

I'm not looking at this through the lense of the developer like others are.

Another example is for Tlmb raider. When it comes out on PC and ps4, it better be a definitive sedition of the game with extra stuff out into it. They shouldn't get the same thing

Just to be clear I'm not talking about a game coming out a month later etc I'm talking about months to a year after the fact.

fantomena · Jul 18, 2015

blakep267 said:
I agree with him tbh. If rocket league comes out today for ps4 and next year in July for the Xbox, I kinda want something a little more

I'm not looking at this through the lense of the developer like others are.

Another example is for Tlmb raider. When it comes out on PC and ps4, it better be a definitive sedition of the game with extra stuff out into it. They shouldn't get the same thing

What on earth is this crap?

elfinke · Jul 18, 2015

hydrophilic attack said:
I don't quite get why this clause gets so much hate on a GAF. It's like he said before. Owners of The One should feel like they are First Class. If you are going on a flight, living the life with a first class ticket, like a boss, how would you feel if those second-class losers got to board the plane before you did? Then you wouldn't be first class, and that's not how you should feel like a The One owner.

Another way to say first class is Tier One. If you are Tier One, you should get your stuff first. If you are a Tier One country, like the USA, of course you should get the The One before second tier countries like Japan or Europe. Similarly, if you are a The One owner, you shouldn't wait to get your games until after those Tier Two PS4 gamers.

Another way to say First Class is Alpha, because Alpha was the first letter of the Egyptian alphabet. If you're Alpha, and you're out partying with some Beta friend, of course the girls would choose to go with you before your friend. Sure, if your friend manages to convince her to do a threesome with both you and him (multi-platform game), then sure that's ok. Let him get in on some action. He doesn't get a lot of chances, so of course you are going to be a good friend and let him join. (But cross-platform multiplayer is out of the question because dicks touching each other is not how you roll.)

Now if this chick would go with your friend first, of course you won't chase after her to be with you later. First, you are Alpha, you don't do sloppy seconds, and second calling her to be with you, just because she was with your friend makes you look pathetic. But still, you are a nice guy. You know that the world gets better the more people get to be with you. So you are willing to make some exceptions. You may be able to forgive this stupid broad for going with your friend if she does something nice to make up for it. So you say: "Come talk to me. If you really want to be with me, give me a call and we will find a way to make that happen. We can get together and you can work something out to make it special in some way." And then maybe she will cook you a meal, or do some freaky shit with you that she would never do with your Beta friend. In this situation you can be with her without losing face.

I hope you all understand their position now. I realize that the last example may be a bit difficult to understand for PS4 owners, as they don't get to have much sex, but I did my best to explain.

Nydius · Jul 18, 2015

CaviarMeths said:
If you accept money from another platform holder like Sony or Nintendo, you need to develop extra content for Xbox at no additional cost to the consumer.

I've yet to hear one rational argument as to why developers should be forced to spend their own money in order to put more content into a game just to release it on the Xbox platform.

This policy effectively penalizes anyone who decides that they want to expand their audience. Microsoft says: Ok, you can expand to the Xbox, but you have to do something that's a value-add solely for Microsoft, because you were naughty and took funding money from Sony.

It's sour grapes from Microsoft, nothing else. If someone makes a game funded by Sony and then turns around 6 months later and wants to put it on Xbox, Microsoft should be welcoming them with open arms, not making outrageous demands for value-added content. This kicks smaller devs square in the nuts.

Cthulhu_Steev · Jul 18, 2015

blakep267 said:
Another example is for Tlmb raider. When it comes out on PC and ps4, it better be a definitive sedition of the game with extra stuff out into it. They shouldn't get the same thing

I'll just be happy to be playing the new Tomb Raider without having to buy a new console, if there's extra stuff then cool, if it's the same game, that's not a problem.

Tell me, how do you manage with movies coming out at the cinema months before the Blu-ray, will you not watch it unless it has a new Battletoad scene squished in somewhere?

Y2Kev · Jul 18, 2015

What's the big deal? Just come and talk to us.

Just...talk...to us.

We can work together if you come and talk to us.

pastrami · Jul 18, 2015

There is no parity clause. All they ask is developers act like there is a parity clause, or else they won't let them release their game.

blakep267 · Jul 18, 2015

Cthulhu_Steev said:
I'll just be happy to be playing the new Tomb Raider without having to buy a new console, if there's extra stuff then cool, if it's the same game, that's not a problem.

Tell me, how do you manage with movies coming out at the cinema months before the Blu-ray, will you not watch it unless it has a new Battletoad scene squished in somewhere?

Blu Rays often have extended scenes and extras commentary etc in them.

But this isn't even about movies. I'm just saying if you take money for a timed exclusive deal for a prolonged period of time, then when you bring it to other platforms it should have extra stuff

I wouldn't be okay with getting tomb raider 4-6 months later at the same price for the same base game as when it launcged before

HighResTomato · Jul 18, 2015

Y2Kev said:
What's the big deal? Just come and talk to us.

Just...talk...to us.

We can work together if you come and talk to us.

What's your point?

LewieP · Jul 18, 2015

blakep267 said:
Blu Rays often have extended scenes and extras commentary etc in them.

Movie studios are not denied access to a Blu Ray release if they don't include extras.

Taurus · Jul 18, 2015

Cthulhu_Steev said:
I'll just be happy to be playing the new Tomb Raider without having to buy a new console, if there's extra stuff then cool, if it's the same game, that's not a problem.

Tell me, how do you manage with movies coming out at the cinema months before the Blu-ray, will you not watch it unless it has a new Battletoad scene squished in somewhere?

Pretty terrible comparison tbh.

mrklaw · Jul 18, 2015

dragonelite said:
Loved it when phill said he would put BC on the list, and people claimed he will say everything to fans. Then this E3 ..

But yeah directions/policies come from the top and trickle down to the bottom.

You put enough things on the list, eventually some of them are bound to happen. Doesn't make his lip service any less frustrating

TheJerit · Jul 18, 2015

hydrophilic attack said:
I don't quite get why this clause gets so much hate on a GAF. It's like he said before. Owners of The One should feel like they are First Class. If you are going on a flight, living the life with a first class ticket, like a boss, how would you feel if those second-class losers got to board the plane before you did? Then you wouldn't be first class, and that's not how you should feel like a The One owner.

Another way to say first class is Tier One. If you are Tier One, you should get your stuff first. If you are a Tier One country, like the USA, of course you should get the The One before second tier countries like Japan or Europe. Similarly, if you are a The One owner, you shouldn't wait to get your games until after those Tier Two PS4 gamers.

Another way to say First Class is Alpha, because Alpha was the first letter of the Egyptian alphabet. If you're Alpha, and you're out partying with some Beta friend, of course the girls would choose to go with you before your friend. Sure, if your friend manages to convince her to do a threesome with both you and him (multi-platform game), then sure that's ok. Let him get in on some action. He doesn't get a lot of chances, so of course you are going to be a good friend and let him join. (But cross-platform multiplayer is out of the question because dicks touching each other is not how you roll.)

Now if this chick would go with your friend first, of course you won't chase after her to be with you later. First, you are Alpha, you don't do sloppy seconds, and second calling her to be with you, just because she was with your friend makes you look pathetic. But still, you are a nice guy. You know that the world gets better the more people get to be with you. So you are willing to make some exceptions. You may be able to forgive this stupid broad for going with your friend if she does something nice to make up for it. So you say: "Come talk to me. If you really want to be with me, give me a call and we will find a way to make that happen. We can get together and you can work something out to make it special in some way." And then maybe she will cook you a meal, or do some freaky shit with you that she would never do with your Beta friend. In this situation you can be with her without losing face.

I hope you all understand their position now. I realize that the last example may be a bit difficult to understand for PS4 owners, as they don't get to have much sex, but I did my best to explain.

At first, I was like;

but as I continued;

28188-Thats-good-Thats-damn-good-gif-YXOa_zpsa03aabaa.gif

lol this is my favorite post in awhile

pastrami · Jul 18, 2015

By the way, do we know the deal behind Ashen and Cuphead? They are ID@XBox games so presumably self published, yet at E3 they seemed to be very clear that they were console exclusives, not timed or debut. Is Microsoft publishing those games? Or is Microsoft giving developers incentives to not develop on the PS4? And has something like this happened with a PS4 console exclusive indie game? Has Sony ever made a deal to not let a self published game out on the XBox One?

To be clear, I have no issues with games like Ori or Everybody's Gone to the Rapture being exclusive because the respective platform holders are publishing those games.

Cthulhu_Steev · Jul 18, 2015

Taurus said:
Pretty terrible comparison tbh.

Great response! Would read again A+++++

pants · Jul 18, 2015

HighResTomato said:
What's your point?

That they're putting normal release procedures behind an obvious attempt to strong arm devs. These games shouldnt need a conversation, they should follow the same process as every other game

tmtyf · Jul 18, 2015

LewieP said:
Developers are NDA'd before they have the conversation, which has the impact of stopping evidence of exactly this from being disclosed publicly.

It stands to reason that the policy only exists because on some occasions it will be enforced.

The Skullgirls devs (who have a long track record of transparency wherever possible, and treating their customers with a great deal of respect) have specifically said the policy is blocking an Xbox One version of their game. I very much doubt they are the only developer who have been declined an Xbox One release because of this policy.

Skull girls dev said in another thread that they never heard a response from MS so they just assumed it was a no instead of trying to follow up. MS reached out and apologized as they said the request was lost in the shuffle and are trying to work with them. I believe it was said that Xbox indie team is small so they get hammered with requests so stuff like that was happening, it's not that ms was blocking them from releasing.

mrklaw · Jul 18, 2015

blakep267 said:
I agree with him tbh. If rocket league comes out today for ps4 and next year in July for the Xbox, I kinda want something a little more

I'm not looking at this through the lense of the developer like others are.

Another example is for Tlmb raider. When it comes out on PC and ps4, it better be a definitive sedition of the game with extra stuff out into it. They shouldn't get the same thing

Just to be clear I'm not talking about a game coming out a month later etc I'm talking about months to a year after the fact.

What you want might make sense for you as a consumer. It might also make sense for the market as a whole. If MS has information like "games coming to market 6-12 months after other platforms sell 20% better if they have new content to freshen them up" then that is great to share with the developer.

But ultimately it should be the developer's choice what to do. Maybe they can't afford to do extra work. Maybe they have committed resources to their next game and can't justify delaying that to make changes.

Their choice.

hawk2025 · Jul 18, 2015

tmtyf said:
Skull girls dev said in another thread that they never heard a response from MS so they just assumed it was a no instead of trying to follow up. MS reached out and apologized as they said the request was lost in the shuffle and are trying to work with them. I believe it was said that Xbox indie team is small so they get hammered with requests so stuff like that was happening, it's not that ms was blocking them from releasing.

"come talk to us, hopefully our schedule isn't full!"

Abdiel · Jul 18, 2015

tmtyf said:
Skull girls dev said in another thread that they never heard a response from MS so they just assumed it was a no instead of trying to follow up. MS reached out and apologized as they said the request was lost in the shuffle and are trying to work with them. I believe it was said that Xbox indie team is small so they get hammered with requests so stuff like that was happening, it's not that ms was blocking them from releasing.

Ravidrath, the dev you're speaking about, has also stated how MS's policies require a lot more crap to go through than Sony. That MS requires an NDA just to have a conversation about things, and the options.

tmtyf · Jul 18, 2015

pastrami said:
By the way, do we know the deal behind Ashen and Cuphead? They are ID@XBox games so presumably self published, yet at E3 they seemed to be very clear that they were console exclusives, not timed or debut. Is Microsoft publishing those games? Or is Microsoft giving developers incentives to not develop on the PS4? And has something like this happened with a PS4 console exclusive indie game? Has Sony ever made a deal to not let a self published game out on the XBox One?

To be clear, I have no issues with games like Ori or Everybody's Gone to the Rapture being exclusive because the respective platform holders are publishing those games.

I can't remember exactly off the top of my head but I believe cup head devs went to MS first to release their game because they wanted to and preferred to.

as for Sony doing things like that I'm sure there will be people who will say a long time ago they did, however recently I don't think so. Only thing I can think of is that one game that they scrapped the pc version of for ps4 that got some ppl upset.

danwarb · Jul 18, 2015

Seems like a sensible idea. Help make a late port more interesting.

LiquidSolid · Jul 18, 2015

pastrami said:
By the way, do we know the deal behind Ashen and Cuphead? They are ID@XBox games so presumably self published, yet at E3 they seemed to be very clear that they were console exclusives, not timed or debut. Is Microsoft publishing those games? Or is Microsoft giving developers incentives to not develop on the PS4? And has something like this happened with a PS4 console exclusive indie game? Has Sony ever made a deal to not let a self published game out on the XBox One?

To be clear, I have no issues with games like Ori or Everybody's Gone to the Rapture being exclusive because the respective platform holders are publishing those games.

They would've paid them enough money that they'd sign a contract to never bring them to PS4. Pretty sure they've done it before too. Team Meat said that they weren't allowed to port Super Meat Boy to PS3 and I think something similar might've been in place for Mark of the Ninja.

Sony's never done it as far as I'm aware and even if they had, it's impossible to tell because Microsoft wouldn't even let games that came out on PS3 first on the 360. There's literally only a few exceptions to that.

LewieP · Jul 18, 2015

tmtyf said:
Skull girls dev said in another thread that they never heard a response from MS so they just assumed it was a no instead of trying to follow up. MS reached out and apologized as they said the request was lost in the shuffle and are trying to work with them. I believe it was said that Xbox indie team is small so they get hammered with requests so stuff like that was happening, it's not that ms was blocking them from releasing.

Interesting. News to me, but it also raises the question of how many devs fall into this category simply because of their perception of the policy, rather than the reality of Microsoft's actions.

pastrami · Jul 18, 2015

tmtyf said:
I can't remember exactly off the top of my head but I believe cup head devs went to MS first to release their game because they wanted to and preferred to.

as for Sony doing things like that I'm sure there will be people who will say a long time ago they did, however recently I don't think so. Only thing I can think of is that one game that they scrapped the pc version of for ps4 that got some ppl upset.

I am asking why they are exclusive, and never coming to the PS4, not why they are going to the XBox One first.

http://www.pushsquare.com/news/2015/06/e3_2015_dont_count_on_playing_cuphead_on_the_ps4

When in this thread they expressed a desire to get on the consoles (PS4/XBox One): http://studiomdhr.com/what-kind-of-game-is-cuphead/

So what changed? What changed from wanting to release on consoles, to releasing exclusively on XBox One, with no chance of a PS4 version?

HighResTomato · Jul 18, 2015

pants said:
That they're putting normal release procedures behind an obvious attempt to strong arm devs. These games shouldnt need a conversation, they should follow the same process as every other game

You are saying that if you are going to release a game on a platform, you are not going to take a meeting with the platform holder? I'd like to see how that works out without communication.

Pacotera · Jul 18, 2015

hydrophilic attack said:
I don't quite get why this clause gets so much hate on a GAF. It's like he said before. Owners of The One should feel like they are First Class. If you are going on a flight, living the life with a first class ticket, like a boss, how would you feel if those second-class losers got to board the plane before you did? Then you wouldn't be first class, and that's not how you should feel like a The One owner.

Another way to say first class is Tier One. If you are Tier One, you should get your stuff first. If you are a Tier One country, like the USA, of course you should get the The One before second tier countries like Japan or Europe. Similarly, if you are a The One owner, you shouldn't wait to get your games until after those Tier Two PS4 gamers.

Another way to say First Class is Alpha, because Alpha was the first letter of the Egyptian alphabet. If you're Alpha, and you're out partying with some Beta friend, of course the girls would choose to go with you before your friend. Sure, if your friend manages to convince her to do a threesome with both you and him (multi-platform game), then sure that's ok. Let him get in on some action. He doesn't get a lot of chances, so of course you are going to be a good friend and let him join. (But cross-platform multiplayer is out of the question because dicks touching each other is not how you roll.)

Now if this chick would go with your friend first, of course you won't chase after her to be with you later. First, you are Alpha, you don't do sloppy seconds, and second calling her to be with you, just because she was with your friend makes you look pathetic. But still, you are a nice guy. You know that the world gets better the more people get to be with you. So you are willing to make some exceptions. You may be able to forgive this stupid broad for going with your friend if she does something nice to make up for it. So you say: "Come talk to me. If you really want to be with me, give me a call and we will find a way to make that happen. We can get together and you can work something out to make it special in some way." And then maybe she will cook you a meal, or do some freaky shit with you that she would never do with your Beta friend. In this situation you can be with her without losing face.

I hope you all understand their position now. I realize that the last example may be a bit difficult to understand for PS4 owners, as they don't get to have much sex, but I did my best to explain.

GutZ31 · Jul 18, 2015

hydrophilic attack said:
I don't quite get why this clause gets so much hate on a GAF. It's like he said before. Owners of The One should feel like they are First Class. If you are going on a flight, living the life with a first class ticket, like a boss, how would you feel if those second-class losers got to board the plane before you did? Then you wouldn't be first class, and that's not how you should feel like a The One owner.

Another way to say first class is Tier One. If you are Tier One, you should get your stuff first. If you are a Tier One country, like the USA, of course you should get the The One before second tier countries like Japan or Europe. Similarly, if you are a The One owner, you shouldn't wait to get your games until after those Tier Two PS4 gamers.

Another way to say First Class is Alpha, because Alpha was the first letter of the Egyptian alphabet. If you're Alpha, and you're out partying with some Beta friend, of course the girls would choose to go with you before your friend. Sure, if your friend manages to convince her to do a threesome with both you and him (multi-platform game), then sure that's ok. Let him get in on some action. He doesn't get a lot of chances, so of course you are going to be a good friend and let him join. (But cross-platform multiplayer is out of the question because dicks touching each other is not how you roll.)

Now if this chick would go with your friend first, of course you won't chase after her to be with you later. First, you are Alpha, you don't do sloppy seconds, and second calling her to be with you, just because she was with your friend makes you look pathetic. But still, you are a nice guy. You know that the world gets better the more people get to be with you. So you are willing to make some exceptions. You may be able to forgive this stupid broad for going with your friend if she does something nice to make up for it. So you say: "Come talk to me. If you really want to be with me, give me a call and we will find a way to make that happen. We can get together and you can work something out to make it special in some way." And then maybe she will cook you a meal, or do some freaky shit with you that she would never do with your Beta friend. In this situation you can be with her without losing face.

I hope you all understand their position now. I realize that the last example may be a bit difficult to understand for PS4 owners, as they don't get to have much sex, but I did my best to explain.

Bravo sir, take a bow.

Biker19 · Jul 18, 2015

LewieP said:
It really does seem like the best way to get MS to waive their parity policy is to ignore them and achieve success on other platforms.

Which a large number of developers are doing. To the detriment of the Xbox One library.

And Sony's the one who's getting all of the glory & marketshare from them as a result.

They had barebone indie game support on PS3 while Microsoft got most of the indie game support with Xbox 360. Now this generation, the tables have turned.

Kayant · Jul 18, 2015

sam777 said:
A lot of people are missing a point that this clause only comes into affect if a developer takes money off Sony or Nintendo to be exclusive for a period of time. So it won't affect small teams who can only operate on a staggered release basis.

What about teams that need help in order to launch? Why are they the only one that should get exclusive content if a dev does a deal elsewhere and wants and is now able to launch on their platform?The other two don't have this requirement.

oldergamer said:
I'm not certain why people are combing over the obvious points here. The policy now, despite the spin is different from what it once was. If you can't afford to make both platforms at the same time, and PS4 is first, then you are NOT blocked from releasing on Xbox one ( which was the real parity close before ).

If you received an exclusive deal/payment on PS4 and want to release on Xbox one a year later, they are asking for some extra content ( which most games would need if they are re-releasing a year later anyway )

Phil says this has been in effect for a few months.

Not sure why some people are all up in arms about it.I think most people here didn't know what the parity clause was.

This isn't strictly true because they made exemptions when they wanted to like if you had signed a deal elsewhere before/during the announcement of the ID@Xbox program they would work with devs on a[URL="http://www.develop-online.net/news/microsoft-discussing-xbox-one-launch-parity-for-indies-on-case-by-case-basis/0190188"] case by case basis.[/URL] i.e Warframe, etc.

You're right in that it has improved in the sense they have expanded their exemption range allowing for the smaller indie devs that would not have had a chance to be an exemption like above but at the same time it's one step backwards because now unlike before they require devs to create "exclusive content" to be allowed on their platform something that was not required if were made an exemption before.

pastrami said:
By the way, do we know the deal behind Ashen and Cuphead? They are ID@XBox games so presumably self published, yet at E3 they seemed to be very clear that they were console exclusives, not timed or debut. Is Microsoft publishing those games? Or is Microsoft giving developers incentives to not develop on the PS4? And has something like this happened with a PS4 console exclusive indie game? Has Sony ever made a deal to not let a self published game out on the XBox One?

To be clear, I have no issues with games like Ori or Everybody's Gone to the Rapture being exclusive because the respective platform holders are publishing those games.

If MS is publishing them then like you said they can't be ID@Xbox games and self published. I don't think it's known why they are lifetime console exclusive but I would guess they are helping out with thoes titles and that's what they got in return for their help. As for Sony they have their Pub fund program which gives Sony timed launch exclusivity in exchange for their help after that they can do what they want and there is no known limitation to what platform they can go to as far I know.

Slashlen · Jul 18, 2015

Biker19 said:
And Sony's the one who's getting all of the glory & marketshare from it.

They had barebone indie game support on PS3 while Microsoft got most of the indie game support with Xbox 360. Now this generation, the tables have turned.

The policy works. MS's parity clause makes me feel like a first-class gamer. And I'm a PS4 owner, so it's not some bias. I don't even own the One and I'm getting the benefits.

Peterpan · Jul 18, 2015

pastrami said:
So what changed? What changed from wanting to release on consoles, to releasing exclusively on XBox One, with no chance of a PS4 version?

I'm not 100% sure, so someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they needed more money for development and Microsoft provided it.

Mr. Giggles · Jul 18, 2015

pastrami said:
I am asking why they are exclusive, and never coming to the PS4, not why they are going to the XBox One first.

http://www.pushsquare.com/news/2015/06/e3_2015_dont_count_on_playing_cuphead_on_the_ps4

Oh it's not coming to PS4? That's too bad.

Oh well, I was interested but not enough to buy another console for it.

tmtyf · Jul 18, 2015

pastrami said:
I am asking why they are exclusive, and never coming to the PS4, not why they are going to the XBox One first.

http://www.pushsquare.com/news/2015/06/e3_2015_dont_count_on_playing_cuphead_on_the_ps4

When in this thread they expressed a desire to get on the consoles (PS4/XBox One): http://studiomdhr.com/what-kind-of-game-is-cuphead/

So what changed? What changed from wanting to release on consoles, to releasing exclusively on XBox One, with no chance of a PS4 version?

like someone else said more than likely they partnered because they needed money like everyone gone to rapture did with sony. this is a quick quote i found from the cuphead devs but doesnt really explain why.

We are both hugely grateful for having Microsoft as a partner. From giving us amazing opportunities to allowing complete creative freedom and everything in between, its been a blessing. I said before that working with Microsoft was like we were working with great friends but I have to change that sentence: Working with Microsoft IS working with great friends all of the people there are amazing.

We need to give props to Alexis from the ID@Xbox team; he is the guy who originally found us and believed in everything that we were doing. Without him, I dont think wed be in the same position today (of course, we cant forget Chris, Nate, Dave, Blake, Katie, Glenn, James and the many other talented and genius people who are making our dreams come true!).

Sho_Nuff82 · Jul 18, 2015

blakep267 said:
I agree with him tbh. If rocket league comes out today for ps4 and next year in July for the Xbox, I kinda want something a little more

I'm not looking at this through the lense of the developer like others are.

Another example is for Tlmb raider. When it comes out on PC and ps4, it better be a definitive sedition of the game with extra stuff out into it. They shouldn't get the same thing

Just to be clear I'm not talking about a game coming out a month later etc I'm talking about months to a year after the fact.

If you've never played it and have had no opportunity to play it, why should it matter? Does the game get digital rust or something?

When you consider that most of the games this affects are $15 or less the demand for a discounted version or "definitive edition" seem absurdly silly.

MercuryLS · Jul 18, 2015

This is so stupid, but who gives a shit of a games old? Forcing a dev to add some exclusive bullshit is so stupid.

Mahonay · Jul 18, 2015

Y2Kev said:
What's the big deal? Just come and talk to us.

Just...talk...to us.

We can work together if you come and talk to us.

Lol.

I always found their line on that pretty funny.

"If we care enough about your game, we can totally help you sort through all of this bullshit that we continue to self impose. It's just to make sure all of those other chumps make their games special enough for our first class console. It's pretty much like the parity clause doesn't exist at all! So don't worry about it breh."

Love Pencer but I wish he could finally put this running joke to rest,

DeepEnigma · Jul 18, 2015

hydrophilic attack said:
I don't quite get why this clause gets so much hate on a GAF. It's like he said before. Owners of The One should feel like they are First Class. If you are going on a flight, living the life with a first class ticket, like a boss, how would you feel if those second-class losers got to board the plane before you did? Then you wouldn't be first class, and that's not how you should feel like a The One owner...

...

TheJerit said:
At first, I was like;

but as I continued;

lol this is my favorite post in awhile

Almost spit my morning tea all over the screen, lol. I read it the exact same way.

tmtyf said:
Skull girls dev said in another thread that they never heard a response from MS so they just assumed it was a no instead of trying to follow up. MS reached out and apologized as they said the request was lost in the shuffle and are trying to work with them. I believe it was said that Xbox indie team is small so they get hammered with requests so stuff like that was happening, it's not that ms was blocking them from releasing.

I bet they would never have found it "lost in the shuffle" if the Tweet never went out and opened a can of worms.

Support NeoGAF

Phil Spencer: Parity is a hell of a Clause

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Two copies sold? That's not a bomb guys, stop trolling!!!

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

MrArseFace

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

MrArseFace

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Gold Member

Similar threads