Support NeoGAF

[Maztorre]

I see Phil Spencer as a business man running a business. Indie devs don't have a right to release games on whatever platforms they want to, whenever they want to, however they want to. This is how the business world works. I can't open up my own hotdog shop in the local mall tomorrow because I want to. The mall has rules in place for entry, and I can only get in if I follow the rules they've put in place.

Unless the local mall is run by Microsoft, in which case they will cut you a backroom deal to let you bypass the building code if you're popular, right?

The rules are being pointed out as harmful. Not to mention that other, similar, more popular platforms are not imposing these rules. Which highlights how arbitrarily they're being applied.

Microsoft has rules in place for releasing a game on their platform. Is it harming the platform? I kinda doubt it, as the guy in charge clearly has decided to keep the policy in place despite some complaints. He's also made it clear that they'll bend the policy in certain situations where they think it's best for them to do so. So it's not 100% rigid.

It clearly isn't working, as shown by the reaction from potential business partners and the market.

 

[Impeccable]

So the intention was to try and make something which is already bad look worse by way of padding?



Everybody's Gone to Rapture
WiLD
Helldiver
Resogun
Aliennation

No, if I had to guess they slapped it together without much thought especially without the intention of padding or manipulating. Looks to me like making a quick visual point to stress what this policy is causing people to miss out on.

It is easy to deflect and take five games off missing the point, though. I will give you that.

 

[IAmRandom31]

Helldivers
Resogun
WiLD
E: Alienation

House Marquee is not first party

WiLD isn't WWS either, forget the name of the studio though

 

[PhatSaqs]

What I see here from some people, is attempts that seem thinly disguised as "support for small developers" basically saying don't force them to support more then one platform ( within a release window?). When in reality, it's totally up to the developer if they want to release on more then one platform. Only developers serious about platforms will approach with that idea.

This seems misguided to me. You could even view some of the arguments here as people arguing for games to "not be multi-platform". Which totally goes against supporting small developers.

I think there' a mixture of:

a) What benefits the consumer
b) What benefits the developer
c) What benefits the platform holder

There's no solution that benefits all three items above.

I buy games, for me the consumer it would benefit me to have games released on multiple platforms at the same time. Its gives me choice of which platform I want to play the game on.

As a developer it would be best to launch on multiple platforms at once, if I can't do that, then I make staggered release dates fully knowing that sales may be diminished ( due to reviews, problems with the game, or simply the game hitting the right subsidence) on the second platform due to launching first on another. I have to weigh cost versus benefit of supporting the second platform. If I can't reach that point of supporting two or more platforms, or if I don't want to strive for that point, then I become platform exclusive.

As a platform holder, I wouldn't want a game released on the competitors platform before my platform. It gives them an advantage, gives my consumers a disadvantage. I would prefer exclusivity for my consumers, and if i can't get that, then I ask for multi-platform release.

People saying this hurts indies, doesn't have the full picture. Indie doesn't only mean 2 guys coding a game in a basement anymore, Indie means independent developer ( take HB studios for instance), there's lots of studios out there that are fully capable of multi-platform release. Studios too small to tackle two platforms, simply won't. They won't risk closure to support a second platform if the title hasn't done well enough.

Pretty much nailed my stance.

 

[prwxv3]

House Marquee is not first party

WiLD isn't WWS either, forget the name of the studio though

They are published by sony

 

[orthodoxy1095]

So the intention was to try and make something which is already bad look worse by way of padding?



Everybody's Gone to Rapture
WiLD
Helldiver
Resogun
Aliennation

The only one on your list that's not really an indie is Eveybody's Gone to Rapture, SCE Santa Monica is helping the indie devs. The rest are all developed by independent studios.

They are published by sony

But they're not developed by Sony which is where the key to being an indie really lies: having the creative freedom to develop what you want.

 

[Marcel]

So the intention was to try and make something which is already bad look worse by way of padding?



Everybody's Gone to Rapture
WiLD
Helldiver
Resogun
Aliennation

Even if you subtract those five games, it's still a pretty big list of notable titles that Xbox will miss because of a backwards policy.

 

[Exploratory]

Unless the local mall is run by Microsoft, in which case they will cut you a backroom deal to let you bypass the building code if you're popular, right?

The rules are being pointed out as harmful. Not to mention that other, similar, more popular platforms are not imposing these rules. Which highlights how arbitrarily they're being applied.



It clearly isn't working, as shown by the reaction from potential business partners and the market.

Or more like a popular new restaurant that wants to open would be prioritized? I mean come on.

 

[Amir0x]

People saying this hurts indies, doesn't have the full picture.

you mean the picture painted by the all the indies themselves saying

'hey guys, you know this is a huge problem'

they don't get the full picture, I agree. they're only indies. we should only listen to the people who say it is not really a huge issue, because that means the one for which it is a big problem for don't actually exist.

 

[Jacksinthe]

We are a couple of guys making things. This was the only thing holding us back from X1 development. It was considered straight out of the gate for us. We have been approved for one of the big 3 and are in the process of courting another. MS isn't on our list. We don't have that kind of manpower or funding to push several builds at once. As it is, we are spreading them as lightly as possible but it is rough.

Not that we are amazing or any of you should care about us but I hope MS changes their tune in the future. It would help us little guys out big time to get that extra bit of help and exposure. Right now its just a pipe dream.

 

[FonkyByNature]

If Sony had more of a war chest don't kid yourself into believing they would be any different, its business after all.

I personally have zero hate toward Microsoft or any corporation, love the games they've nurtured and as a multiplayer only guy they have me covered 100%. Gears of War, Halo, COD 2 all started the success on Xbox.

That's not to say I'd say I hate Sony, I don't hate any corporation and will buy a platform based on where the games I want to play are. Companies like Microsoft and Sony exist to be successful for there share holders.

You know that naughty dog were AQUIRED by sony right? Do you hate them too for taking a pool of talent too?

At least Sony invest in creativity, doesn't have draconian rules for indies and do invest in first party games. As for MS ? Forza-Fable-Gears repeat.

You just can't compare MS output VS Sony output, it's leagues better on Sony's side. They do invest in games more than MS and that's not even a question. I don't like Sony either and i'm not saying they're saints but MS is so much worst.

 

[IAmRandom31]

They are published by sony

publishing doesnt = first party studio that is a part of WWS

 

[Amir0x]

We are a couple of guys making things. This was the only thing holding us back from X1 development. It was considered straight out of the gate for us. We have been approved for one of the big 3 and are in the process of courting another. MS isn't on our list. We don't have that kind of manpower or funding to push several builds at once. As it is, we are spreading them as lightly as possible but it is rough.

Not that we are amazing or any of you should care about us but I hope MS changes their tune in the future. It would help us little guys out big time to get that extra bit of help and exposure. Right now its just a pipe dream.

Absinthe you don't get the full picture man, you're just an indie. you'll never understand.

 

[Marcel]

We are a couple of guys making things. This was the only thing holding us back from X1 development. It was considered straight out of the gate for us. We have been approved for one of the big 3 and are in the process of courting another. MS isn't on our list. We don't have that kind of manpower or funding to push several builds at once. As it is, we are spreading them as lightly as possible but it is rough.

Not that we are amazing or any of you should care about us but I hope MS changes their tune in the future. It would help us little guys out big time to get that extra bit of help and exposure. Right now its just a pipe dream.

Anyone who thinks an indie parity clause isn't a problem should read this.

 

[GeordieMark]

Guess we can being up every instance of any Microsoft division to be anti consumer just to make a point about the Xbox simply because they all are under the corporations CEO.

Go nuts. It doesn't bother me in the slightest.

 

[Dragon]

We are a couple of guys making things. This was the only thing holding us back from X1 development. It was considered straight out of the gate for us. We have been approved for one of the big 3 and are in the process of courting another. MS isn't on our list. We don't have that kind of manpower or funding to push several builds at once. As it is, we are spreading them as lightly as possible but it is rough.

Not that we are amazing or any of you should care about us but I hope MS changes their tune in the future. It would help us little guys out big time to get that extra bit of help and exposure. Right now its just a pipe dream.

Sorry to hear that. I think there was another dev earlier in the thread echoing your thoughts. It strikes me as bizarre that you have devs actually commenting and saying it's harmful to their bottom line and people will still defend this. It is worse for the devs, worse for Microsoft, and worse for owners of non-Microsoft consoles. I really don't understand the defense here.

 

[NoMoChokeSJ]

The outrage about this seems a little forced to me at times. If a developer can't meet the terms of publishing on the XB1, then focus your attention on the PS4 and PC. I get if you own an XB1 and are upset that you may miss out on an indie the other platforms have, but I don't get the outrage if you have no plans on purchasing an XB1 and your platform of choice now has exclusivity of a title.

Phil Spencer's job is to ensure the success of HIS platform. He doesn't work for Sony and they are competing for the same customer base, sp why should he care if his business decisions inconvenience supporters of a competing platform?

Maybe it's just not a big deal to me since I have both and a good PC.. It seems like we typically hear praise from developers when working with MS instead of the outrage that is talked about on here.

 

[Goodacre0081]

the clause seems to be waived for the games that garner hype and a following. that's even more of a slap in the face to the less known studios.

the more the Xbone division changes the more it stays the same. I can't believe people were so sure that Spencer was going to bring some real changes to the way the division was run

 

[Peterpan]

Why would you bother making a first-class hardware when PR can accomplish a better job at convincing the sheeps that they are buying a real first-class hardware ?

I like how you insult people. I dislike people and there 'better than you' mentality or elitist mentality. Don't assume people are idiots.

 

[Xando]

We are a couple of guys making things. This was the only thing holding us back from X1 development. It was considered straight out of the gate for us. We have been approved for one of the big 3 and are in the process of courting another. MS isn't on our list. We don't have that kind of manpower or funding to push several builds at once. As it is, we are spreading them as lightly as possible but it is rough.

Not that we are amazing or any of you should care about us but I hope MS changes their tune in the future. It would help us little guys out big time to get that extra bit of help and exposure. Right now its just a pipe dream.

Cant be qouted enough for those defending this clause.

I hope you can make the game you wish without some bullshit clause.

 

[Marcel]

The outrage about this seems a little forced to me at times. If a developer can't meet the terms of publishing on the XB1, then focus your attention on the PS4 and PC. I get if you own an XB1 and are upset that you may miss out on an indie the other platforms have, but I don't get the outrage if you have no plans on purchasing an XB1 and your platform of choice now has exclusivity of a title.

Phil Spencer's job is to ensure the success of HIS platform. He doesn't work for Sony and they are competing for the same customer base, sp why should he care if his business decisions inconvenience supporters of a competing platform?

Maybe it's just not a big deal to me since I have both and a good PC.. It seems like we typically hear praise from developers when working with MS instead of the outrage that is talked about on here.

It's better for everyone to have an open environment for creativity and exposure. Microsoft thinks being the dinosaur is good for them and their customers. So far it hasn't done much at all other than make them look foolish.

 

[LukasTaves]

The migration of indie games away from Xbox and developer reactions on the indie parity clause tell the tale. You don't need a high-profile case of "blocking" to see what's going on.

Like I said when I quoted Amirox, none of the complains had actually talked to Ms, they were just concerned that they were going to be blocked because it was on the contract. I didn't mean a high-profile case, we just don't have any evidence of anyone being blocked at all.

The migration of indies don't tell the whole tale, because many of them started developing on Ps4 even before either console was announced. Ms opened their gates to indies way after sony and that cost them these games. And the fact that some of these games are starting to appear on Xbone, also suggest that they are indeed open about it.

Like I said before, I don't disagree that forcing parity or blocking is a bad policy, but I've seen no evidence that this is what Ms is doing. Having a policy that makes the developer talk to Ms and figure out why the game isn't launching day and date to xbone and if it would be possible for it to launch is not a bad thing, imo, as long nothing is enforced.

 

[rjcc]

At least Sony invest in creativity, doesn't have draconian rules for indies and do invest in first party games. As for MS ? Forza-Fable-Gears repeat.

You just can't compare MS output VS Sony output, it's leagues better on Sony's side. They do invest in games more than MS and that's not even a question. I don't like Sony either and i'm not saying they're saints but MS is so much worst.

don't forget those other Microsoft first-party games that they just keep repeating: Killzone, Gran Turismo, Uncharted.



.....wait.

 

[Dragon]

The outrage about this seems a little forced to me at times. If a developer can't meet the terms of publishing on the XB1, then focus your attention on the PS4 and PC. I get if you own an XB1 and are upset that you may miss out on an indie the other platforms have, but I don't get the outrage if you have no plans on purchasing an XB1 and your platform of choice now has exclusivity of a title.

Phil Spencer's job is to ensure the success of HIS platform. He doesn't work for Sony and they are competing for the same customer base, sp why should he care if his business decisions inconvenience supporters of a competing platform?

Maybe it's just not a big deal to me since I have both and a good PC.. It seems like we typically hear praise from developers when working with MS instead of the outrage that is talked about on here.

This policy is actively hurting Microsoft, because it's preventing games from coming to their platform at all.

Your last comment shows you have not been reading the thread whatsoever. Do yourself a favor and read the thread. Even on this very page you have a dev saying it hurts their bottom line.

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

I can't believe people were so sure that Spencer was going to bring some real changes to the way the division was run

People seem to forget that Spencer was quite high up at XBox. I gave him a chance. His mentality is no different but he wasn't tainted the way ol' Donny Matt was.

 

[USC-fan]

Sorry to hear that. I think there was another dev earlier in the thread echoing your thoughts. It strikes me as bizarre that you have devs actually commenting and saying it's harmful to their bottom line and people will still defend this. It is worse for the devs, worse for Microsoft, and worse for owners of non-Microsoft consoles. I really don't understand the defense here.

It not bizarra they defend MS in every thread.

 

[benny_a]

The only one on your list that's not really an indie is Eveybody's Gone to Rapture, SCE Santa Monica is helping the indie devs. The rest are all developed by independent studios.

But they're not developed by Sony which is where the key to being an indie really lies: having the creative freedom to develop what you want.

That doesn't matter to this discussion.

This discussion is about indies that are self-published, not indies that sign work-for-hire contracts with a platform holder.

 

[Patroclos]

Maybe somebody can explain the quote from the linked page to me;

"Describing the controversial parity clause for independent studios signing up to ID@Xbox, Phil Spencer emphasised to TiC Podcast that this wasn't to screw developers over (shock horror), but it is in-fact to prevent a mentality amongst developers that Xbox One is a second class audience due to market share."

Help me out here, the Xbox One was on obviously equal footing with the PS4 sales wise leading up to and upon release, correct? The parity clause was in effect then, correct?

How in the flying fuck is this about "market share" now? Sounds a lot like Phil changing the narrative to fit current trends to me. Phil is rapidly exposing himself to me as nothing more than a hipper more charismatic Mattrick (RIP, our Fair Prince).

 

[mcrommert]

I don't want anyone's leftovers. If it isn't a technical reason..and a good one...they can keep their game. I'll get it for a dollar on a steam sale 2 years from now.

 

[Amir0x]

A few of my friends and I have come together to try our hand at developing games. We're all really excited and every time we move closer to finishing the game, it's like we're kids at Christmas. It's such an amazing feeling, but when you're so wrapped up in it, it's easy to forget the kind of bullshit that goes on in the "big leagues."

That's why we've all agreed that we want no part of it, regardless of whatever financial hit we take. If there are inane politics like this parity clause (unless you're big enough or important enough) involved in getting on a platform, fuck it. We don't exist to serve them.

We're all definitely a lot happier since we stopped worrying about this stupid parity thing and decided not to release on Xbox.

We are a couple of guys making things. This was the only thing holding us back from X1 development. It was considered straight out of the gate for us. We have been approved for one of the big 3 and are in the process of courting another. MS isn't on our list. We don't have that kind of manpower or funding to push several builds at once. As it is, we are spreading them as lightly as possible but it is rough.

Not that we are amazing or any of you should care about us but I hope MS changes their tune in the future. It would help us little guys out big time to get that extra bit of help and exposure. Right now its just a pipe dream.

I am actually half of a two man indie team. We work out of our apartments, not basements so you got us there. I will say that Microsoft's policy absolutely affects us negatively. We are in the prototyping stages for our next game and it sucks that we have to waste any of our bandwidth on platform decisions at this point.

Three indie devs up and coming, three examples of the parity clause being harmful.

And there's endless more links in this topic.
And others have heard countless similar stories from their indie dev friends.


Anyone else want to tell us the clause isn't bad? So we can point and laugh?

 

[SEGAvangelist]

We are a couple of guys making things. This was the only thing holding us back from X1 development. It was considered straight out of the gate for us. We have been approved for one of the big 3 and are in the process of courting another. MS isn't on our list. We don't have that kind of manpower or funding to push several builds at once. As it is, we are spreading them as lightly as possible but it is rough.

Not that we are amazing or any of you should care about us but I hope MS changes their tune in the future. It would help us little guys out big time to get that extra bit of help and exposure. Right now its just a pipe dream.

What is MS's response when you ask for an exception?

 

[prwxv3]

I don't want anyone's leftovers. If it isn't a technical reason..and a good one...they can keep their game. I'll get it for a dollar on a steam sale 2 years from now.

what a petty reason to deny games.

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

I don't want anyone's leftovers. If it isn't a technical reason..and a good one...they can keep their game. I'll get it for a dollar on a steam sale 2 years from now.

What about they're too small to develop for multiple systems? Is that not a good reason?

 

[thatmariolover]

I see Phil Spencer as a business man running a business. Indie devs don't have a right to release games on whatever platforms they want to, whenever they want to, however they want to. This is how the business world works. I can't open up my own hotdog shop in the local mall tomorrow because I want to. The mall has rules in place for entry, and I can only get in if I follow the rules they've put in place.

That's really a terrible analogy.

It's more like this: You want to open up a hotdog shop - possibly a couple. But you only have money to open one right now, so you prioritize one location over the other. However, the second pick location won't let you ever open there if you don't open shop at the same time as the first pick location.

What do you do? Wait to open for business even though you have a product ready to sell? Or forego your second choice altogether because they're controlling your profits?

 

[Xando]

I don't want anyone's leftovers. If it isn't a technical reason..and a good one...they can keep their game. I'll get it for a dollar on a steam sale 2 years from now.

So you do want the leftovers.

 

[Amir0x]

I get if you own an XB1 and are upset that you may miss out on an indie the other platforms have, but I don't get the outrage if you have no plans on purchasing an XB1 and your platform of choice now has exclusivity of a title.

This is the problem in a nutshell. People literally don't understand why some people are not selfish with their thought process.

I want Xbox One fans to get every single indie game I've ever played if possible. Shit, I want them to get every indie game I haven't played too. I don't have an XBO yet, but I want the gamers on the platform to have the experience I do. Further, I want the indie developers themselves to have as many options as possible, because it's hard enough trying to make a profit in this industry.

 

[Marcel]

I don't want anyone's leftovers. If it isn't a technical reason..and a good one...they can keep their game. I'll get it for a dollar on a steam sale 2 years from now.

So you're admitting to being a self-deluded miser. Brave.

 

[Goldmund]

So Xbox owners are sitting in a mock-up first-class compartment with Phil Spencer running title cards of all the fantastic games they're going to miss by the windows to suggest rapid movement on their ride to nowhere. Got it.

 

[mcrommert]

What about they're too small to develop for multiple systems? Is that not a good reason?

Did you see the "technical reason"? That is a fair reason to delay a game. Otherwise forget it.

 

[ICPEE]

It sounds like they're being flexible when the situation calls for it. I don't see why people on gaf care about this so much, but anything can be turned into system warz ammo these days.

This post, lol.

 

[GribbleGrunger]

Maybe somebody can explain the quote from the linked page to me;

"Describing the controversial parity clause for independent studios signing up to ID@Xbox, Phil Spencer emphasised to TiC Podcast that this wasn't to screw developers over (shock horror), but it is in-fact to prevent a mentality amongst developers that Xbox One is a second class audience due to market share."

Help me out here, the Xbox One was on obviously equal footing with the PS4 sales wise leading up to and upon release, correct? The parity clause was in effect then, correct?

How in the flying fuck is this about "market share" now? Sounds a lot like Phil changing the narrative to fit current trends to me. Phil is rapidly exposing himself to me as nothing more than a hipper more charismatic Mattrick (RIP, our Fair Prince).

Bingo. This argument can only have validity 'now' but the parity clause has been there all along. This proves once and for all that Spencer is manipulating the facts and conning his user base.

 

[LukasTaves]

We are a couple of guys making things. This was the only thing holding us back from X1 development. It was considered straight out of the gate for us. We have been approved for one of the big 3 and are in the process of courting another. MS isn't on our list. We don't have that kind of manpower or funding to push several builds at once. As it is, we are spreading them as lightly as possible but it is rough.

Not that we are amazing or any of you should care about us but I hope MS changes their tune in the future. It would help us little guys out big time to get that extra bit of help and exposure. Right now its just a pipe dream.

But if you haven't even approached Ms yet (unless I misunderstood you), why are you so sure they wouldn't been forthcoming towards you releasing a xbox version when you guys are able to? Why not talk to them and try figuring out? Perhaps they could point you to framework and tools that would make going from Pc to xbone as easy as possible (Assuming PC is one of your target platforms).

Or did you tried contacting them and didn't get a positive answer?

 

[statham]

What about they're too small to develop for multiple systems? Is that not a good reason?

Phil says to contact them. Guessing if the game is good, they will help out so they can release on multiple systems.

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

Did you see the "technical reason"? That is a fair reason to delay a game. Otherwise forget it.

But... that's the reason for most of the "delays" with indie games. They don't just choose a platform to piss off users of other platforms.

 

[Peterpan]

Some people might take that as insult.

Until they see their salary, then I doubt they will think that.

 

[GribbleGrunger]

Phil says to contact them. Guessing if the game is good, they will help out so they can release on multiple systems.

Who decides if the game is good? Wouldn't it be better to release the game and let the gamers decide whether the game is good?

 

[Arcblast]

I get it now. It's about protecting (some) Xbox owners' vanity. So they don't feel insulted from used goods. Oh, and "the feeling" of added values when something disappears from other platforms, too. Such good intention. Such first class feeling.

 

[Impeccable]

Did you see the "technical reason"? That is a fair reason to delay a game. Otherwise forget it.

So no income at all for several more months or longer just because they can't do all platforms at once? Seems fair, who needs money to operate?

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

Phil says to contact them. Guessing if the game is good, they will help out so they can release on multiple systems.

Phil says a lot of things. Cherry picking to help on hyped products ignores so many developers.

 

[Patroclos]

I don't want anyone's leftovers. If it isn't a technical reason..and a good one...they can keep their game. I'll get it for a dollar on a steam sale 2 years from now.

Lol. I bet you have a hard time finding romance.