Support NeoGAF

[Sean]

Microsoft needs to take a few lessons from the likes of PC Download Services like Steam and Gametap, start organizing games by publisher or genre and so on and have the corresponding tabs.

Also, I am not entirely convinced that Microsoft will go through with this, oh sure, they talk bold now and are in PR Mode, but I still think that the backlash will be too much for them.

The sad thing is, MS is already doing this sort of stuff over on the Video Marketplace side of things. It's got additional sorting options (most popular, most recent, etc) and can view TV shows by network (publisher), AND it offers suggestions too.

I don't see why they can't make that functionality standard across the whole marketplace (including XBLA section).

 

[Everdred]

Goodbye Novadrome! You will remain only on my hard drive.

 

[Slavik81]

Exactly, I still don't think this is the right solution to the problem, but after reading that my displeasure has turned into indifference.

Why? By saying that you want the ability to redownload it, you suggest that you care about being able to play the delisted game.

Why would your desire to play the game depend on whether you own it or not? Sure, if you don't own it, the cost might outweigh the benefit, but that's not necessarily always the case.

What if you'd not yet bought the hypothetical game that you're currently referring to?
Your indifference on this issue, but not on the prior issue makes no sense.

 

[inpHilltr8r]

If they de-list Robotron, they're dead to me.

 

[Shard]

If they de-list Robotron, they're dead to me.

I doubt Robotron will get delisted, I believe that it more then made the minimum conversion rate, especally since it was one of the early releases.

 

[grandjedi6]

What an awful idea. There is no advantage for Microsoft to remove the games completely that could not be solved by making a Discount (coughgraveyardcough) section for XBLA

 

[jordan0386]

MS has their motives. Its not like this wont work for them.

 

[Maztorre]

MS has their motives. Its not like this wont work for them.

We'll see how well it works for developers who have titles delisted and consumers who get to witness a game catalogue that shrinks over time.

 

[Sean]

What an awful idea. There is no advantage for Microsoft to remove the games completely that could not be solved by making a Discount (coughgraveyardcough) section for XBLA

This would only encourage people to wait six months before buying anything on XBLA. Not a great idea.

 

[Slavik81]

This would only encourage people to wait six months before buying anything on XBLA. Not a great idea.

Then why would they have a series of 'Greatest Hits' re-releases at retail and on XBLA?

 

[Sean]

Then why would they have a series of 'Greatest Hits' re-releases at retail and on XBLA?

It might seem similar, but they're very different.

There is no set date for a title appearing in the Arcade Hits section. It's up to the publisher to decide whether they want it up there or not (Assault Heroes was discounted just before the sequel came out for example).

Besides, half of the games on there currently are launch titles and the other half are from 2006. Much longer than waiting six months.

 

[NeXuSDK]

I have to voice my opinion on this issue as well. This move completely contradicts the advantage of digital downloads. Basically, it's just the lazy and not very user-friendly way of giving quicker and better access to more popular game.

I generally like the dashboard, but they could easily change some of the design, layout and structure to give quicker access to the most popular games (ala YouTube) and make it even easier and quicker to recommend a game to a friend (again ala YouTube)...

And what they really should implement is a "this is similar to..." category, where you can look at a game and then be quickly redirected to similar games, something that works really well for YouTube.

 

[grandjedi6]

This would only encourage people to wait six months before buying anything on XBLA. Not a great idea.

Well only the poor selling or bad rated games would be punished to the bargin bin, thus there would be no guarentee of a game ever going there.

But still I can see two benefits for Microsoft by removing games:
1.) They can appease developers who dislike all the games flooding the system (and hence making it easier to get attention for their games).
2.) and to set up a threat developers that if there game isn't good/profitable enough, then they will be removed

 

[Slavik81]

It might seem similar, but they're very different.

There is no set date for a title appearing in the Arcade Hits section. It's up to the publisher to decide whether they want it up there or not (Assault Heroes was discounted just before the sequel came out for example).

Besides, half of the games on there currently are launch titles and the other half are from 2006. Much longer than waiting six months.

Actually, titles need to be up for 9 months. Six months before judging if they'll be dropped or not, then a further 3 months notice. Thus, titles will be up for at least 9 months, and you'll never know if they are eligible to be dropped or not, because you'll never be given the attach rate. It also does not say whether Microsoft will drop every game or not. Only that they are eligible to be dropped at that point.

Very similar requirements as Platinum Hits. Wikipedia states:
"Platinum Hits is a term used to refer to a line of select Xbox games that have sold over 400,000 units on the platform in the nine months after release" [source]

 

[ZeoVGM]

Here's a question: who can we contact/e-mail about this if we disagree?

I'd hope maybe this is one of those things we can change if we're vocal enough.

 

[Kafel]

http://gamerscoreblog.com/team/default.aspx

 

[pswii60]

This would only encourage people to wait six months before buying anything on XBLA. Not a great idea.

What, the same way everyone waits six months to buy retail games?

 

[DSN2K]

find the potential removal of content awful, seriously its meant to be one plus's of using a online market place, games will always be there right!??

 

[sinnergy]

Onoes GAF, MS is not that evil.

Q: If I bought a game, and deleted it, can I redownload it even if it's been delisted?
A: Yes, you can. Go to Download History under the Account Management section of marketplace (far left blade).

 

[Sean]

What, the same way everyone waits six months to buy retail games?

Retail games and downloadable games are nothing alike. MS has said that XBLA games do 2/3 of their sales much later on, so clearly it's different from retail games which are typically very front-loaded. XBLA titles have no hype, get little to no press coverage, have no commercials or advertising budgets, no stories that would get spoiled, etc. Retail games are like the summer blockbuster movies that you see in theaters while downloadable games are like the quirky indy flick that you'll rent on DVD.

There is much less incentive to buy an XBLA game right away. I'm sure most people would have no problems waiting a couple months when it comes to downloadable games. I have seen a lot of people post things like "if this game were $5 cheaper I'd buy it". Just look at the Penny Arcade Game thread for example.

 

[MCD]

http://majornelson.com/

what happened? no updates at all even though the marketplace got new contents like the lost odyssey dlc (1st fucking party)

and 715 comments full of rage, awesome.

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

Onoes GAF, MS is not that evil.

Did you actually read what most peoples objections to this move actually are?

 

[dfyb]

Microsoft needs to take a few lessons from the likes of PC Download Services like Steam and Gametap, start organizing games by publisher or genre and so on and have the corresponding tabs.

Also, I am not entirely convinced that Microsoft will go through with this, oh sure, they talk bold now and are in PR Mode, but I still think that the backlash will be too much for them.

you think backlash from this will be too much for microsoft...? what microsoft are you thinking of?

 

[CrunchinJelly]

So rather than improve their Game Store UI, they're just going to remove a ton of games.

Sounds fair to me... :lol :lol :lol :lol

There are not enough smilies in the world.

 

[Ptaaty]

I love so many things about the x360, but sometimes I wonder what the hell is wrong with MS.

I mean this is really about their inability to migrate what used to be an awesome interface (the blade system) to handle the additional content and deliveries.

Things have gotten more confusing and worse over time, and now this takes the cake...just delete games based on the metascore? WTF?

They could so easily created better binning of games, created an area for "free to Live Gold members" XBLA.

Weak...so so weak. Worst part is those who already bought the games being left holding the bag if they ever need to redownload.

I am becoming more disappointed in MS every day regarding the 360. Yeah I still love the games, even own two 360s, but it is like someone took away their vision...like no one takes a look at the bigger picture and can steer them correctly.

 

[Shins]

you think backlash from this will be too much for microsoft...? what microsoft are you thinking of?

certainly doesn't seem to stay Sony's or Nintendo's hands either

 

[Wildstar75]

The idiot at Mircosoft who thought this up should be fired!

 

[Ash Sparrow]

As much as i'm enjoying XBLA i agree with the posts saying they better rethink this. some MS intern watching the board better take this back to the big guys andcome up with a better solution.

i like the bargin bin idea and yes XBlA is great overall but i sometimes find the blades confusing, is it really that hard to organise the stuff a bit better.

 

[Synth_floyd]

There's obviously a real reason that MS is delisting poorly performing XBLA games that they're not telling us. I wonder what it is.

 

[MechDX]

There's obviously a real reason that MS is delisting poorly performing XBLA games that they're not telling us. I wonder what it is.

The execs read GAF daily and did it for shits n giggles.

 

[Shard]

you think backlash from this will be too much for microsoft...? what microsoft are you thinking of?

Microsoft has responded to backlash in the past, XBLA backlash at that, in fact, some suspect that this move is because of some of the Metanet backlash against the system. Moreover, there is something that is being ignored here, Microsoft seems to be playing this move out on an equal opportunity basis, I have seen a fair bit of whining over the loss of the games themselves and the anti-developer slant, but what has been understated is that the publishers of these games are also going to be affected, I didn't see any part where Microsoft was going to let the likes of Konami, Sierra Online, THQ, EA, Midway, Namco Bandai, et al being exempted from this new tactic. Microsoft not only runs the risk of further alienating the indie devs that GAF loves so much but also the big publishers as I don't see any of them being happy with Microsoft yanking one or more of their games off of the service due to such arbitrary rationales.

 

[acm2000]

The execs read GAF daily and did it for shits n giggles.

haha this is so funny its probably true :lol

 

[watership]

After reading that gamerscore blog post (here http://gamerscoreblog.com/team/archive/2008/05/24/559300.aspx) I know know why MS chose there wording carefully. Delisting isn't deleting. The game will always be archived for those who have bought it. So only 8 more pages or gaf-reaction instead of 16?

 

[DuckRacer]

http://majornelson.com/

what happened? no updates at all even though the marketplace got new contents like the lost odyssey dlc (1st fucking party)

and 715 comments full of rage, awesome.

It is a little suspect.

 

[bishoptl]

The game will always be archived for those who have bought it.

What if you haven't had the opportunity to purchase it yet?
What if you buy a 360 later, want to buy the game, and can't?
Where's the wisdom in allowing metacritic as a determining factor as to what stays on XBLA, when the nature of digital delivery as a medium is perfectly suited to allow all types of games an extended lease on life - even the ones that aren't rated as highly?
Oh yeah - if these titles are always going to be available for re-download if you've already purchased them, why remove their visibility at all?
Why do competing services like Steam have little issue keeping upwards of 600+ titles up and running on its DD network?

Do continue to thoroughly vet your posts and click that submit button, it's working well for you.

 

[Zaraki_Kenpachi]

Did they say when they'll announce which ones are up for delisting?

"What if you haven't had the opportunity to purchase it yet?
What if you buy a 360 later, want to buy the game, and can't?
Where's the wisdom in allowing metacritic as a determining factor as to what stays on XBLA, when the nature of digital delivery as a medium is perfectly suited to allow all types of games an extended lease on life - even the ones that aren't rated as highly?
Oh yeah - if these titles are always going to be available for re-download if you've already purchased them, why remove their visibility at all?
Why do competing services like Steam have little issue keeping upwards of 600+ titles up and running on its DD network?

Do continue to thoroughly vet your posts and click that submit button, it's working well for you."


You've got a lot of good points and the first two bother me the most. Some people I know are still waiting to buy a 360 and if they come to my house and really enjoy playing an arcade game and then want to play coop or multi with me and can't due to this policy or vice versa than that's really annoying. I don't try every demo that ever comes out and sometimes it's not until you're friend kind of pushes you into it do you give it a chance and possibly enjoy it. It also seems weird to effectively kill a community for a game, I mean whether you can redownload it or not you aren't letting in any new players so if the current players get tired of it its dead forever and you can't revive as it sometimes happens with older games.

 

[Twig]

They said they'll be announcing a game's delisting three months before the date of delisting.

Anyway. There are TWO things they could do to easily fix this problem. Obviously, the Bargain Bin idea is a big one. But more than that, why don't they just have a "Remake/Port" section? I mean, that separates like 75% of the "crap" they want to get rid of into its own specific section.

I wholly support deleting Yaris from the service, however. O:<

 

[charlequin]

There's obviously a real reason that MS is delisting poorly performing XBLA games that they're not telling us. I wonder what it is.

It seems pretty obvious to me that it's a hamfisted attempt to repair XBLA's (certainly at least partially accurate) reputation as being full of a bunch of crap.

 

[harSon]

What if you haven't had the opportunity to purchase it yet?

Trends show that the number falling under this category is shamefully low. Again, it's an old shitty game selling HORRIBLY.

What if you buy a 360 later, want to buy the game, and can't?

Same answer. The game has a history of not selling, chances are new system adopters will go for the newer and better reviewed video game. A 5.99% conversion rate and lower is beyond horrible.

Where's the wisdom in allowing metacritic as a determining factor as to what stays on XBLA, when the nature of digital delivery as a medium is perfectly suited to allow all types of games an extended lease on life - even the ones that aren't rated as highly?

It's not, it is one of three criteria to be eligible (Not necessarily guaranteed). If the game is old, was reviewed horrible, and is selling like shit then it will be considered for determination.

Oh yeah - if these titles are always going to be available for re-download if you've already purchased them, why remove their visibility at all?

Because allowing a customer to redownload his purchased games is required (If they don't want a lawsuit).

Why do competing services like Steam have little issue keeping upwards of 600+ titles up and running on its DD network?

Possibly because Publishers and Developers are not complaining to Valve? Quality control and list compression are things Publishers/Developers and Users have asked for, Microsoft is simply making a business decision based on these needs.

 

[X26]

Just dl'd a video off marketplace for pirates vs. ninjas dodgeball

...yeaaaaaa, still plenty of crap coming in

 

[ThirdEye]

Why does everyone suddenly start to care about shit arcade games nobody gave a damn?

 

[jordan0386]

Why does everyone suddenly start to care about shit arcade games nobody gave a damn?

Well. Captain PicAllard and the gang did force the concept of choice down our throats a few years ago.

 

[Stop It]

What if you haven't had the opportunity to purchase it yet?
What if you buy a 360 later, want to buy the game, and can't?
Where's the wisdom in allowing metacritic as a determining factor as to what stays on XBLA, when the nature of digital delivery as a medium is perfectly suited to allow all types of games an extended lease on life - even the ones that aren't rated as highly?
Oh yeah - if these titles are always going to be available for re-download if you've already purchased them, why remove their visibility at all?
Why do competing services like Steam have little issue keeping upwards of 600+ titles up and running on its DD network?

Do continue to thoroughly vet your posts and click that submit button, it's working well for you.

Your first point is the killer blow to this idea in my opinion, I bought my 360 not two months ago, imagine if MS had implemented this policy from the very start, I could have been deprived of the opportunity to play possibly up to 100 XBLA titles because they were deemed "not worthy" of staying listed on the XBLA.

That is an unacceptable situation, the whole point of Digital Distribution is infinite shelf space, no limits, no games ever out of stock, no hassle, Steam manages to have over double of titles on the system compared to the amount of XBLA titles, yet still manages to present the games in a way which makes finding the ones you want a breeze.

The only real arguments I have seen used have been ones of quality or clutter, both are moot, Metacritic isn't exactly the bastion of quality control, especially with casual titles, and a good system can handle an infinite amount of games, the current XBLA marketplace interface needs fixing, delisting games masks the issue, it does not solve it.

If MS pushes through with this, we will see only established publishers use XBLA, we will only see the most focus group tested, generic rubbish we see at retail, only "lite" versions of them, all the risky, indie, creatively sound games will go to WiiWare and PSN, where the threat of deletion will not hang over their heads. The idea is good for consumers in the short term, in the long term it will bite them in the ass.

 

[pswii60]

http://majornelson.com/

what happened? no updates at all even though the marketplace got new contents like the lost odyssey dlc (1st fucking party)

and 715 comments full of rage, awesome.

I take it you haven't noticed the Twitter box on the left hand side where Nelson has been posting self-updates constantly. Show coming later today.

 

[GhaleonEB]

If MS pushes through with this, we will see only established publishers use XBLA, we will only see the most focus group tested, generic rubbish we see at retail, only "lite" versions of them, all the risky, indie, creatively sound games will go to WiiWare and PSN, where the threat of deletion will not hang over their heads. The idea is good for consumers in the short term, in the long term it will bite them in the ass.

This is my biggest concern. It's enough of a risk for independent developers to create a game these days, and to meet the many requirements and cert process for XBLA. But there's comfort in knowing your game will always be on the service and sell, however incrementally, over time. Now with the very steep requirements Microsoft has for XBLA games on top of the risk that your game could get de-listed (for no damn good reason) and I think it's going to cause a chilling effect on development from all but the largest dev houses.

More than any other recent development, I think this shows that Microsoft just doesn't "get" digital distribution.

 

[Iced_Eagle]

All I can say is I can't wait for Nelson's show today to hear about this.

I'm very firmly in the camp that says they should NEVER take games off the marketplace.

I mean honestly, if you were a developer and you got told your game is coming off, wouldn't you be pissed? You don't even have the opportunity for any more sales then.

I also fear this is going to lead to even more conservative publisher choices in what games to even suggest for XBLA, in this already conservative publisher world.

Goodbye adventurous indie games. Off to the PSN you go I suppose.

 

[M3wThr33]

I would have bought Boom Boom Rocket long ago if the Xmas song pack was still up there.
I hate the idea of not having DLC anymore while other people do.

 

[Rhindle]

This is my biggest concern. It's enough of a risk for independent developers to create a game these days, and to meet the many requirements and cert process for XBLA. But there's comfort in knowing your game will always be on the service and sell, however incrementally, over time. Now with the very steep requirements Microsoft has for XBLA games on top of the risk that your game could get de-listed (for no damn good reason) and I think it's going to cause a chilling effect on development from all but the largest dev houses.

More than any other recent development, I think this shows that Microsoft just doesn't "get" digital distribution.

Look, what they are trying to do is maintain a casual-friendly environment - that an average user can easily navigate, find good games and come away with a good experience. There is a perfectly legitimate concern that if you throw everything into a pot and expect people to be able to pick out quality titles within a mass of older crap, your average user is going to end up with bad experiences and be turned off by the entire system.

Steam is addressing a different, narrower, more sophisticated audience. I thing the idea of creating a bargain bin category for older crap might work, but the concern might be that this would further undermine sales of non-bargain bin titles.

I think the solution they need to work towards is to not have a single store that is all things to all people. If they want the main Marketplace to be a casual-friendly place, then that's fine. But create a separate store for the more hardcore crowd that read reviews and now what they want, and have a much broader variety of stuff available there.

Ultimately, if online distribution really takes off, the platform holders need to open up their systems to allow third parties to launch stores. Having a single storefront for all online distribution will become a real choke point if they don't open things up eventually.

 

[radjago]

Why does everyone suddenly start to care about shit arcade games nobody gave a damn?

I disapprove of what they make, but I'll defend to the death their right to make it and get it published.

Just because I don't like it doesn't mean that someone else won't. Likewise there are games that I love that no one else does.

 

[Twig]

Look, what they are trying to do is maintain a casual-friendly environment - that an average user can easily navigate, find good games and come away with a good experience.

By ridding themselves of a large portion of games which might be appealing to the "casual" gamer?

Does not compute.

If they want to make it easy to navigate, they need to start from scratch and redesign the entire interface. Because as it is now, it's kind of crap. It worked when there were only twenty or so titles, but not anymore.