Loved Sealab 2021!Classism? That's just great...Hasnt history proven that Marxs vision of an egalitarian utopia is unattainable, inevitably creating an oligarchy more oppressive to the proletariat than the bourgeoisie it vilifies?
This guise has worn increasingly thin over the last couple months
They just don't want devs to treat X1 as an afterthought or a given. If you can shoehorn in some use of platform unique features (i.e. Kinect), and talk to them upfront (i.e. before you release on PS4), then they'll probably be cool with you releasing later.
Also, is it better to launch first on X1 and get a free devkit or pay for a PS4 and/or Wii U devkit and be locked out of X1?
This is about release dates. It has nothing to do with crippling other versions or the weaker XB1 hardware. They just don't want games that release earlier on PS4
It's not blanket though; he says right in the quote that they make exceptions when necessary
They just don't want devs to treat X1 as an afterthought or a given. If you can shoehorn in some use of platform unique features (i.e. Kinect), and talk to them upfront (i.e. before you release on PS4), then they'll probably be cool with you releasing later.
Also, is it better to launch first on X1 and get a free devkit or pay for a PS4 and/or Wii U devkit and be locked out of X1?
Yep. Looks especially dumb with the amount of money changing hands when MS moneyhats something for exclusivity.
But MS will just ignore their policy when a game is a hit and they want to get on that.How are you making anyone feel first class when your policy is keeping you from getting certain indie games?
This is so fucking backwards. lol
This is almost exactly how I feel about Microsoft.
Microsoft is more like the old man with the leather jacket who thinks he's cool enough to be at the party but no one is rude enough to tell him to leave so everyone just uneasily tolerates his weird presence.
Then why have it at all? What deems a game/company worth it?
It's straight up bullying the small guys.
I still think they havent really understood that they increasingly are not in a position to strong arm indies anymore.
If the gap continues to increase Indie devs will say fuck Xbox we going for PC/PS4. Then there wont be a plane for Xbox users to be "first class" on.
Doesn't want to get them all mixed up.I like how he stipulated the term "indie" when talking about parity clauses.
It's not bullying small devs as they're the ones that would receive exceptions according to the quote in the OP since they would have difficulty with simultaneous releases. The point of having it at all is to protect xbox customers from business deals that would lead to games being released late on xbox for no other reason.
do you guys think he will change it if I put a spencer banner on my avatar
It's not bullying small devs as they're the ones that would receive exceptions according to the quote in the OP since they would have difficulty with simultaneous releases. The point of having it at all is to protect xbox customers from business deals that would lead to games being released late on xbox for no other reason
They just don't want devs to treat X1 as an afterthought or a given. If you can shoehorn in some use of platform unique features (i.e. Kinect), and talk to them upfront (i.e. before you release on PS4), then they'll probably be cool with you releasing later.
Also, is it better to launch first on X1 and get a free devkit or pay for a PS4 and/or Wii U devkit and be locked out of X1?
It's the Prisoner's Dilemma except that everyone knows what everyone else is doing.But then still allowing them to engage in business deals that would give Xbox exclusive rights or timed exclusivity. What if Sony came out with the same policy? Are indie devs totally fucked then?
It's straight up bullying the small guys.
Except he explicitly says in the interview that if the company's too small to cope with that demand, they'll come to an agreement. Suggest you listen to the podcast to hear how he puts it, not really any hint of bullying in it - more trying to balance his need to put xbox front and centre vs. not screwing over small companies.
But then still allowing them to engage in business deals that would give Xbox exclusive rights or timed exclusivity. What if Sony came out with the same policy? Are indie devs totally fucked then?
But MS will just ignore their policy when a game is a hit and they want to get on that.
It's a power play bullying tactic for games that aren't big yet to intimidate them to sign with Xbox first because PlayStation and Nintendo have more open policies by default.
They want any indie that is interested in consoles to think: I need to go with Xbox first, to maximize the platforms I can be on.
Indie devs have said about a thousand times that the parity clause is extremely problematic.
BUT HEY WORKS FOR MS I GUESS IF MS SAYS IT THEY SURELY KNOW BETTER
Was I the only one who found the quote difficult to follow and make sense of? :s
It's late here so my brain just may not be functioning efficiently.
Except he explicitly says in the interview that if the company's too small to cope with that demand, they'll come to an agreement. Suggest you listen to the podcast to hear how he puts it, not really any hint of bullying in it - more trying to balance his need to put xbox front and centre vs. not screwing over small companies.
If only there was someone in the position at Microsoft for the Xbox devision that could change that terrible clause.that's because at face value it is a terrible clause, hence why MS try to work things out with smaller studios. Obviously we don't know the extent of the negotiations, but all your posts are fanboy crap so I'm guessing you don't care.
So why would an indie dev choose to release late on xbox for no reason at all when they could really use the money from sales on the console? This is where your argument falls apart. Indie devs have legitimate reasons for only releasing on one platform at a time; they're not just pointing and laughing at MS for the hell of it.It's not bullying small devs as they're the ones that would receive exceptions according to the quote in the OP since they would have difficulty with simultaneous releases. The point of having it at all is to protect xbox customers from business deals that would lead to games being released late on xbox for no other reason.
yes, that is the risk. but indies don't act as a block -- they're all independent. Realistically, I can't imagine MS sticking to this policy for the few very popular indie games anyway
I sure am feeling like a first class citizen when you refer to my country as a Tier 2 country.
Is this our outrage of the day?
It's sad. I am so close to getting an Xbox One tomorrow, and now I am seriously considering once again stepping back on principle. I cannot believe I am this close to getting an XBO and he had to say this shit.
Except he explicitly says in the interview that if the company's too small to cope with that demand, they'll come to an agreement. Suggest you listen to the podcast to hear how he puts it, not really any hint of bullying in it - more trying to balance his need to put xbox front and centre vs. not screwing over small companies.
Microsoft is more like the old man with the leather jacket who thinks he's cool enough to be at the party but no one is rude enough to tell him to leave so everyone just uneasily tolerates his weird presence.