-
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.
[2014] Xbox One Indie Parity Clause impacting number of announcements for system
- Thread starter chubigans
- Start date
HORRORSHØW
Member
can you not read? it's the underlying policy affecting indie games, and not necessarily the games or the lists that are composed of them that this thread is about. take your agenda elsewhere.
Yea a lot of people are nice guys. The majority of people on the planet are nice people. What is he doing for the platform. We have a huge montage from August with a bunch of shit that ain't out yet (and will likely be multiplatform). Meanwhile some of the best games on the PS4 platform are indie games.
Wickerbasket
Member
You're probably hitting a few nerves and that's because what you're bringing up has little to do with the actual thread topic.
It's not a list wars thread, it's a thread about a shitty Microsoft policy that's punishing indie devs for not being able to launch on multiple platforms at once. I'm sure Microsoft thought the policy would ensure indie devs would publish on their platform first, but it seems to have had the opposite effect going by the numbers in the OP.
Whether people buy enough indie games or not is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.
No, i was just talking about Indie games in general.
My initial question was just simply wondering if any research had been done on how many overall games actually buy Indie games, it seemed a fair thread for it as people in here seem to be big fans of Indie games.
I did read the op and i know what you're talking about. I don't see what was so wrong with asking that initial question, i thought some of you might know thats all.
TheUnsunghero26
Member
Parity Clause is definitely one of the most baffling things on the Xbox.
There was nothing wrong with asking your initial question, it was just irrelevant to the discussion at hand (and I even said it would be interesting to know). But you then went on that wild tangent of list wars and how many people buy a console for indies and other things that are really irrelevant and when you got called out on them you revert back to your original question.
Well what can he do?
He has good relations from those in the program from what I gather. He is working within the rules his bosses set for him.Basically "doing his best in a shitty situation". This clause is hurting him as well you know :/
Nothing, it had nothing to do with the thread so you came of as an ass.
Sorry for the harsh tone but man did you come of as one of those people that would kick a pregnant lady out of a life boat just because you had everything and didn't care about her.
Selfish that is.
If by "nerve" you mean you're making it very obvious with each passing post what your agenda is (attempt to devalue the importance of indies to try to distract from what this topic is about), then yes. You've hit a nerve.
The issue is it doesn't matter how important you think indies are, or what the data says on how many people buy their console for indies (Also: you don't have to buy a console for indies to love them and think this is profoundly fucked up. Also, you can hate them and still understand how fucked up it is, since it indisputably is).
This thread is simple:
Has the ID@Xbox parity clause hurt Microsoft in terms of the games it is receiving? Yes. Has the ID@Xbox parity clause hurt Xbox One gamers in terms of the breadth of options they have for game purchases? Yes. Has the ID@Xbox parity clause been damaging to indies themselves, the most vulnerable in this industry? Yes. Has the ID@Xbox parity clause caused less indie developers to commit to XBO? Yes. Has the ID@Xbox parity clause caused far less highly rated (metacritic 80+ games) to come to XBO? Yup, far less.
Every one of these can be summed up as: "The ID@Xbox parity clause is a bad policy and it needs to be fixed", with the rest of our posts going to provide evidence for how big the disparity for releases is because of it and how badly it hurts individual indies.
None of this topic is about how important you personally find indies, or how much the market cares about indies. That's irrelevant to the discussion about this policy being bad policy.
Wickerbasket
Member
Look at what you posted.
That's the reason people aren't taking you 'interest' seriously. Indie games aren't some lesser form of game. I've had more enjoyment out of some indie games than I have from AAA releases.
No one cares that you don't think indie games are real games, because it has nothing to do with this thread at all.
This thread is about a Microsoft policy that makes life worse for indie devs and gives Xbox One owners less choice in games.
Neuromancer
Member
I did read it, but I answered your question honestly.
They shouldn't have said anything rather than point out one small error.
Steverulez
Member
Hes securing games for the platform within the constraints that have been given to him. Games aren't made in a day, you know why games are announced when they are? To generate hype and interest, presumably putting a game on-stage somewhere is also a big part of what MS/Sony offer to get a game on their platform (or first on their platform) because of the promotion it offers.
Hes not developing the games, he's signing them to the platform then helping to facilitate the development needs of the team making the game should they need assistance etc.
Do you not think his job would be a lot easier if the parity clause didn't exist? Considering the parity clause, I think he's done a good job. And to me personally, he always answers my questions, is very nice etc, I think he's doing a good job.
Playstation just had a big event to announce more games, if Microsoft had an event round the corner you'd see a similar sort of thing of more games coming to the platform from indies too.
Fair enough.
I should of made it clear that my posts were made towards Indie games in general rather than this particular discussion.
As for Microsoft policies, surely Indies themselves will of let Microsoft know if they had major problems with these policies. If Microsoft aren't going to change their minds then Indie developers will have to do whats best for themselves.
Well what can he do?
Basically "doing his best in a shitty situation". This clause is hurting him as well you know :/
So does he get credit for giving exceptions to some late ass ports of free to play games, that turd strike suit zero and pure pool? Man he really got one done for the gamers with those gems. Maybe when all of the games that were in the montage come out I can say man, he really did a lot for me, but right now Cuphead, Below, Ori, and the limbo guys things are the only sure fire gems to me.
Poodlestrike
Banned
Whelp, tough to argue with that.
Indie devs have let them know. But that doesn't mean we at GAF can't make another topic bringing awareness to the issue again.
Look how many people in this topic said they didn't even know about this or how serious a problem it is. Companies that want to stick to bad policy thrive on such ignorance; they want people to stay in the dark so they can continue to keep these policies unabated. Only vocal and educated consumers can really make that a difficult proposition over the long term.
I never said any of that. None of my posts alluded to that.
Asking how many overall gamers buy Indie games does not allude to any of that.
Dude got banned like 3 times in a matter of 2-3 months....now that's a lot of leeway considering he got banned before that too.
Wickerbasket
Member
Why wouldn't you include them in lists then?
Each game an indie dev can't bring to Xbox is a game Xbox One owners miss out on.
Steverulez
Member
Signed a deal with Sony before ID@Xbox existed, it was a loophole for a limited time
That one was for the ID@Xbox parity clause loophole that no longer applies.
But!
Phil Spencer said he will make exceptions based on
1. If the game is "important" enough
2. If the indie dev can come up with a really really good reason for being unable to release day and date on XBO
How gracious of Phil, don't you think?
See then you are a prime example of someone that should let MS know that it's something that needs to change. I'm sure a lot of those developers wish they could give you the opportunity to earn your achievements.
Man I feel for you I do. If I was the big honcho of the world I would make it so that everyone could play every game no matter region/platform/income. Even if you only had enough income/internet to be streaming a shitty 240p image I would want to make it possible for everyone to play whatever game. But hey that ain't happening so all we can do is at least try to make the best of every situation. In this case. Scream at MS(not individuals) and really make them understand how shitty the situation is. A situation they themselves have created. People with better pens than me should scream at them though since I can't type for shit. I can probably BS you into selling me your kidney for two rocks if I met you though.
Yepp, to be really cynical I think *we* need to create a shitty PR situation for MS so their only way out to is to go 180 on this policy. Because I don't think milk and cookies will solve this situation.
yup. It's XBO gamers (and indies) that are hurt by this. Sony is clearly only benefiting at this point.
Yea, I realize a lot of the announcements are fresh in my mind. But this is not a new thing. XBOX did have a really good year in terms of big games but we're just looking at indie stuff here. MS is getting killed. I do appreciate that they released some really good new stuff like Max and Super Time Force but at the end of the day there are just more must have indie games, new or old, on PS4. These are people who worked with MS extensively in the past like Klei, and McMillen, and properties like Dust, Spelunky, etc. For some of those projects maybe MS burned bridges in the past, I don't know. For some devs it may be the parity clause. At the end of the day the situation is less than good.
I want MS to succeed but it's no big deal to just play on my playstation 4 if it continues. It's up to them.
I get it. He's a nice guy. I don't know how to judge his performance other than by looking at the portfolio of indie games on the platform. Right now it is poor compared to the competition.
Ehhh...it sure seemed like you were alluding to it with these posts.
Depending on how popular the game is, MS will make exceptions.
And I hope you also realise that why his performance is so bad is due to the parity clause?
FairXchange
Member
If anything will save the video game industry from another crash, it will be the creativity and innovation taking place in the indie game world. Makes me cringe when people attempt to discredit them for arbitrary, baseless reasons.
And I hope you also realise that why his performance is so bad is due to the parity clause?
It's certainly one reason it may be hard. Certainly it can't be hard to lobby for a late port of Spelunky or Fez. These are two of the most important games of last gen. Look at the games that somehow got around using a loophole. Literally some of the shittiest games in the library.
NoMoChokeSJ
Banned
While I understand the passion surrounding this issue, the things that always bugs me in these threads are there never seems to be any information about developers who have inquired with MS about being an exception to the clause. Is the rate of denial high? Low? Are they unreasonable to deal with when the clause is discussed?
And as was stated earlier, that is just dumb. Drop it now and not make it out to be like you are the hero.
I don't know how it'd be possible for us to get that data. They probably get an insane amount of requests, and does anyone think MS is going to publish data that makes them look like shits?
All we have to go on is the endless comments from indie devs, not a one who has been positive on the ID@Xbox parity clause and the massive, massive disparity in game releases. So I'm guessing not good as a starting point.
Thanks for posting that.
While I'm still disgusted by Microsoft's Xbox behaviour and dudebro attitude since... well, forever... it's vital to gaming that this attitude is changed. And while I can easily sit back and watch them continue to pull the dirt onto themselves because they dug it in the first place, this clause hurts gamers and gaming in general. So it hurts me.
I voted. Thanks again for the link.
Yes, of course he should be able to sidestep the clause. These are popular games. And has there been a defenitive no for these games? from the devs or MS? Could still be in the works and it's just not yet time to announce it?
Nothing. It's all conjecture. We really have no secrets because none of these devs are saying anything and Chris Charla obviously wants to keep his awesome job.
NoMoChokeSJ
Banned
I just don't recall ever seeing a dev on here talk about their experience with approaching MS to not be subject to the clause. It would be interesting to know.
Conjecture perhaps indeed...hey I waited in excitement for FF: Versus, I waited for Type-0, still waiting for FFXII HD, I waited for Suikoden 1/2 I'm very good at waiting
Of course I understand that it should be *fixed* asap, preferably yesterday but I'm not expecting anything before February. At the earliest in January and latest March. If nothing by then? Perhaps someone else than Charla should do that job.
Vigilant Walrus
Member
Nope, and I think it's bad ass that they are really listening to feedback, which is why I am scratching my head over these PHIL SPENCER DOESNT LISTEN ARGHHHH when in reality, there has been more changes happening faster than I can recall for any microsoft product?
I read a news article a while ago about MSN in the 90s.. it was something about that, that entire dot com project was an abysmal failure for the first five or six years, and they just rode it out until it gave a product. because they have this backbone infastructure where slow changes can be enough to win.
And XBox One is puzzling, because what you saw with Xbox to Xbox 360, was that the XBox was a project that literally could not have gone any other way than it did. By all accounts it was a massive success. And you really saw all the losses bearing fruit during the 360 era. Suddenly, all the hardships and lack of being taken serious for "american consoles dont work", "its called 360 because you go in a 360 direction to a sony store", "xbox 1.5" and all this shit got out the window, and it became a much better product.
But the people who where in charge of xbox one must have cut ties with that. There is just a fundamental shift somewhere in Xbox 360 era. Rememeber how amazing and revolutionary Xbox Live Arcade was. This was one of the most massive things I can even remember. And here we are, and Microsoft has lost its touch.
To quote good old ballin Balmer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMLcKtVwF-A
Or buy a really good dinner and a bottle of Remy Martin.
That was referring to the fact that not everyone buys Indie games.
Puppet Shadow
Member
This is a great post.
I'm embarrassed to say I was one of those 'lol, indy games don't matter' a few years back, until I discovered Steam sales and started broadening my horizons with regard to smaller games. Now I'm at the point where I probably pick up more indy games each month then AAA titles, simply for the fun, unique game play they offer.
Microsoft really needs to retire this policy.
Crayon
Member
Or get a tongue piercing and some kneepads.