-
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.
Microsoft Cuts Indie Royalties in Half - confirmed in post #13.
- Thread starter Gowans
- Start date
Anyway, I thought I would shine a light at the current development process an indie dev faces via the excellent N+ Post-Mortem.
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=17490
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=17490
Barkley's Justice
Member
consider music artists receive about $1 for each CD they sell on a retail disc. let's say the average MSRP on a cd is $14.99...that's like 7%...
consider too MS may very well be giving indie developers advances to actually finish their games or even start them, or waving the cost of dev kits shit like that.
consider too MS may very well be giving indie developers advances to actually finish their games or even start them, or waving the cost of dev kits shit like that.
jetpacks was yes
Member
Shard said:
Well sure, if you're getting paid while making the game the budget can be huge.
Open Source
Banned
Barkley's Justice said:
The music business is completely different. They make their money from touring. MS waives the cost of the first couple certification passes (about a $25k value). Anything else was already factored into the royalty rate.
oldergamer
Member
I've had confirmation that this change in profit share is 100% true. Ms was getting too many game submissions for XBLA, and the quality wasn't as high on all the submissions. This could be considered a way to quality control the content, meaning that you won't see as many shitty titles, or in that case larger developers making games for it. Those larger developers will benefit more from making larger games.
Also MS didn't think XBLA would be as successful as it has been. so flipping the royalty rate will make them more money.
If you ask me, they just shot themselves in the foot by taking too big a cut. They could at least make it 50/50. They only thing that could change this is LOTS of BAD press. So imo, spread the word, that the gaming community is not happy about this change and we think those small developers deserve the bigger cut when making games for XBLA. I'm officially not buying any more XBLA arcade games until I see some sort of change to this royalty rate.
Also MS didn't think XBLA would be as successful as it has been. so flipping the royalty rate will make them more money.
If you ask me, they just shot themselves in the foot by taking too big a cut. They could at least make it 50/50. They only thing that could change this is LOTS of BAD press. So imo, spread the word, that the gaming community is not happy about this change and we think those small developers deserve the bigger cut when making games for XBLA. I'm officially not buying any more XBLA arcade games until I see some sort of change to this royalty rate.
dr3upmushroom
Banned
Well Phil said that the DS was a gimmick, that the PSP would raise handhelds out of the ghetto, and that the DS would only appeal to kids who love PokemonMejilan said:
oldergamer
Member
Tieno said:
I think MS will miss out on larger developers making quality download titles. Also they miss out on some gems that will possibly go to Wii ware because they may make more money from Nintendo publishing it.
What bothers me is there is no way MS should take a bigger share of the pie then the developer. That's just contrary to what they want to achieve. contrary to the changes MS has made as a company lately ( with being more open).
This all may have something to do with them also wanting to see more free games on XNA arcade.
bad time to pull this kinda crap with wii ware coming soon.
Despite this, it is probably still more profitable than PSN due to the much larger userbase offsetting the loss of royalties. Though I can see some indies switching sides out of principle alone (feeling screwed over).
I wonder if XNA community games have anything to do with this or if its just greed.
Despite this, it is probably still more profitable than PSN due to the much larger userbase offsetting the loss of royalties. Though I can see some indies switching sides out of principle alone (feeling screwed over).
I wonder if XNA community games have anything to do with this or if its just greed.
Sean said:
if you are thinking last month, maybe, but Sony is catching up fast. Change in fees will probably make big difference for larger teams, as supposed to smaller ones. It changes their business plans completly.
Again, publishing fees for online service and for retail are completly different. Publisher for retail title has 30% retail costs that they have to pay to retailers alone. Thats without marketing, that usually runs in millions.
PepsimanVsJoe
Member
After playing a few of those XNA demos I figured the cut had something to do with quality control.
Still a bad move on MS's part though.
Still a bad move on MS's part though.
Open Source
Banned
Although XBLA has a larger audience, the combination of the royalty rate cute, the difficulty in getting submissions approved, the sheer volume of competition on the platform, and consumer expectations holding down price ($10 max) make other platforms more attractive right now, unless of course you are a publisher whom MS is giving the old rate, or you are a developer who works with one of those publishers.
One of the great things about XBLA was that you could do it without working for publishers, who are essentially the pimps of the game industry, making money off other people's work without providing much of value in return. Developers who did not need the one worthwhile thing that publishers provide - financial security - could bypass those parasites and succeed on their own. Now a self-funding developer gets a royalty rate that's not only not great like it used to be, it's worse than the competition by a long shot.
One of the great things about XBLA was that you could do it without working for publishers, who are essentially the pimps of the game industry, making money off other people's work without providing much of value in return. Developers who did not need the one worthwhile thing that publishers provide - financial security - could bypass those parasites and succeed on their own. Now a self-funding developer gets a royalty rate that's not only not great like it used to be, it's worse than the competition by a long shot.
Open Source said:
The $10 price was always a mistake. I have no idea what MS was thinking releasing titles at that price, when the casual game industry current price point was $20.
I think Geometry Wars was one of the worst in this regard. Here's an awesome game, with amazing graphics, leaderboards, and quick pick-up-and-play gameplay for only $5. It set a standard that no other game could hope to match up to (I can't believe people were actually complaining about the Pac-Man remake being $10. $10 for crying out loud!).
Lumines was the first game to try a pricing structure to "fool" gamers into it's $43 price tag, and it failed miserably. So what options do devs have at this point? Make a $10 game with low royalty cuts, or try to supplement a game with DLC that gamers dont seem to have any interest in and has no guarantees.
I'm speaking as a dev here, not a consumer. I love cheap games as much as anyone, but it's crippling XBLA. (Sony will try it's hand at $20 titles soon, starting with Echochrome).
PhlivoSong
Member
So is this about XBLA or XNA? If it's about XNA then I can understand that. Not having to buy expensive dev kits, but still having your game on the platform... MS needs to make money on it somehow.
If it's about XBLA as well, not cool... not cool.
If it's about XBLA as well, not cool... not cool.
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
needlesmcgirk said:
Whatever it is, it is higher than 50% since the dev made a "I rather work on PS3"-ish statement.
devilscallmedad
Banned
Can anyone confirm what the PSN royalty percentage is, because i'd imagine 70% to be a bit high actually. Still you can't suddenly do such a huge cut i'd think 50-50 would be good business for both sides.
wackojackosnose
Member
Title is deceptively positive.
chubigans said:
Maybe it does though, like I said way back on Page 1, it could very well be that Microsoft are saying to the top-tier indie devs that they want them to slum it out in the XNA community with everyone else.
A strategy like that would work out for MS in a lot of ways because it means they get a lot of top-tier content in their new Community arcade baby AND they save a lot of money on certification AND they get a lot more developers using XNA & C# rather than cross-platform languages.
Which may in term give them a ready made development scene for a future Zune gaming device (now that the XNA framework also supports Zune).
Steverulez
Member
Wollan said:
You need to download the Club game launcher.
Go to all games, then go down to XNA. Its only like 7/8mb.
Then once you've done that go to the "Games Library" and there should be a new tab of "XNA Creators Club" go to it and press Y, the games will then appear.
Similar threads
- Locked