• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

PlayStation Indie Showcase in a Half-Hour

And now they don't have the same rule. And you have no proof of that acusation. I'm tired of this stupid narrative people are trying to push that if this generation went a different way, Sony would do these things. You have no proof, and honestly, it doesn't matter unless we are strictly talking theoreticals.
I don't know anything about the narrative to which you refer, if you're suggesting I said that because of some Xbox preference, you are wrong.

MS implemented a simple rule because they don't want their audience treated like second class citizens, and despite not having an XBO, and right now can't see that changing, I think that's a positive thing, exactly as it was last generation when they both did it.

There are downsides for the developers, certainly, but if they're choosing to be on a console, they also choose to conform to the rules of that platform.
 
MS implemented a simple rule because they don't want their audience treated like second class citizens, and despite not having an XBO, and right now can't see that changing, I think that's a positive thing, exactly as it was last generation when they both did it.

There are downsides for the developers, certainly, but if they're choosing to be on a console, they also choose to conform to the rules of that platform.
And here you're merely asserting it again, despite acknowledging evidence to the contrary in a previous post.

Weak.
 
I don't know anything about the narrative to which you refer, if you're suggesting I said that because of some Xbox preference, you are wrong.

MS implemented a simple rule because they don't want their audience treated like second class citizens, and despite not having an XBO, and right now can't see that changing, I think that's a positive thing, exactly as it was last generation when they both did it.

There are downsides for the developers, certainly, but if they're choosing to be on a console, they also choose to conform to the rules of that platform.
perhaps if they had tools and information available for devs in a timely manner, their consumers would get the games sooner? Instead they seem to need a parity clause to slow up playstation delivery so MS can catch up.
 
perhaps if they had tools and information available for devs in a timely manner, their consumers would get the games sooner? Instead they seem to need a parity clause to slow up playstation delivery so MS can catch up.
It only 'slows' PS4 releases if they would rather do that than not release on XBO, I don't see what's wrong with that. It's a pretty simply stance, they own the platform, they set the rules.
 
I don't know anything about the narrative to which you refer, if you're suggesting I said that because of some Xbox preference, you are wrong.

MS implemented a simple rule because they don't want their audience treated like second class citizens, and despite not having an XBO, and right now can't see that changing, I think that's a positive thing, exactly as it was last generation when they both did it.

There are downsides for the developers, certainly, but if they're choosing to be on a console, they also choose to conform to the rules of that platform.

The problem with this argument is that now Xbox owners will be treated like second-class citizens since they will probably see none of these games on the Xbone thanks to the parity clause. Unless, of course, Microsoft allows for twelve exceptions, in which case why have the parity clause in the first place?
 
No Apotheon, Chasm, Jamestown and Escape Goat 2 for Vita? Ow come on. Sony, you should handle the ports and let Vita live.
 
The problem with this argument is that now Xbox owners will be treated like second-class citizens since they will probably see none of these games on the Xbone thanks to the parity clause. Unless, of course, Microsoft allows for twelve exceptions, in which case why have the parity clause in the first place?
It's an interesting thing because presumably MS doesn't actually require a developer to confirm when they signed their deals with Sony, and if you already have, the id rules don't quite apply, and they're debatable anyway.

However, you're quite right of course, it will only hurt their audience, I think it's a bad idea, I just don't think it's 'unethical' as many seem to.
 
However, you're quite right of course, it will only hurt their audience, I think it's a bad idea, I just don't think it's 'unethical' as many seem to.

They know for a fact some devs are too small to support 2-3 platforms at once. They're looking for free timed exclusives if anything.
 
They know for a fact some devs are too small to support 2-3 platforms at once. They're looking for free timed exclusives if anything.
I guess for a developer who wants to be on PS4/XBO and Steam, but can only possibly handle one submission at a given time, it means they'd have to be on XBO before PS4, but I think as we're seeing, people are either adopting to multiSKU submissions, or they don't care about being on XBO. I think if the idea is to create default exclusives, not just parity releases, it would only lose them games and create additional disdain for the platform.

Regardless of the requirements, an indie's relationship with PlayStation, and it's audience, is much more important than with MS right now, so it doesn't seem like MS would be in a position to strong arm indies, if that was the intent.
 
I don't know anything about the narrative to which you refer, if you're suggesting I said that because of some Xbox preference, you are wrong.
MS implemented a simple rule because they don't want their audience treated like second class citizens, and despite not having an XBO, and right now can't see that changing, I think that's a positive thing, exactly as it was last generation when they both did it.
There are downsides for the developers, certainly, but if they're choosing to be on a console, they also choose to conform to the rules of that platform.
I have said nothing about MS or the Xbox. I didn't even infer it. I'm tired of the following formula.
Imaginary McGee said:
Yeah, Sony is doing everything right, now. But they used to do things wrong and if they weren't doing everything right they'd be doing it just like they used to.
That or some other variation is a pointless hypothetical situation that has no place in threads about discussing reality as it currently is and could be. Not would be.
It's an interesting thing because presumably MS doesn't actually require a developer to confirm when they signed their deals with Sony, and if you already have, the id rules don't quite apply, and they're debatable anyway.
However, you're quite right of course, it will only hurt their audience, I think it's a bad idea, I just don't think it's 'unethical' as many seem to.
Alright. You're clear with me. MS needs to fail (maybe this 6 months they already have) so that can start overcorrecting some of their more harmful polices that affect the games industry as a whole. The Parity Clause at least, negatively impact not only developers, and their competition, but themselves too.
 
https://twitter.com/DanShoeHsu/status/461674737546977280/photo/1

BmgyucvCQAAw2rE.jpg

https://twitter.com/Jonathan_Blow/status/461674478284447744


https://twitter.com/tyronerodriguez/status/461662853527650304

 
Axiom Verge looks absolutely amazing, pretty damn cool music as well. Never tried Nidhoggg, looks pretty bomb though. Cool idea for a game.
 
IMAG3209.jpg

The hands-on line up at the event. Impressions tomorrow morning.
Holy shit that's a hell of a list !! There's gonna be a freaking blowout of tradeshow sizes if that's everything that embargoed !! Where's Volume and Cosmic Star Heroine though ? Good thing I already have some money set aside for most of these games.
 
I need Aztez impressions stat!

Seriously, it would be amazing for someone who understands combat systems on an advanced level to have some hands on time with it.
 
It only 'slows' PS4 releases if they would rather do that than not release on XBO, I don't see what's wrong with that. It's a pretty simply stance, they own the platform, they set the rules.

if you are a small developer and don't have the capacity to develop both at once, or the money to survive sitting on one version while you finish the other, then you don't have the luxury to choose which you'd 'rather' release on.

Choice is fine. The MS parity clause reduces choice. Free unity and access to dev kits should be enough incentive for MS to get first release.
 
Damn. All these games are crazy! Sony really is doing a good job. Cant wait to play them all. Although it would be great if they got the games on the vita.
 
This is the reason (along with remote play) why I got a PS4. I was already looking forward to Galak-Z, Velocity 2x and the witness! Give me those over AAA macho snooze fests any day. BIG MAN FIRE GUN BLAMMO
 
Whoa...a good 3-4 must haves from first impressions...I hope more people get exposed to what is happening in the industry..something for everyone in the industry right now...
 
Top Bottom