Support NeoGAF

[Disaster Nebraska]

Why do people get so bent out of shape over asking for fresh content when you release a game a year later on a platform? It sounds like a totally reasonable request. If the exact same indie game on PS4/PC in 2014 released on Xbox in 2015, how would they possibly generate buzz for sales? It would just be like, "hey, you can now buy this old game people used to talk about on our platform, too". Announcing it with new content helps buoy an otherwise underwhelming re-release.

At the end of the day, I think people would prefer just getting the game. Extra content would be nice, but there is a massive (no, really, please take a moment to compare) disparity between the quantity and quality of indies on PS4 and Xbox One. We're talking early-360 days here where all the high-profile indies were coming out on 360 and it was just crickets on PS3. Xbox One is ridiculously behind while PS4 has a pretty large library of indies (still a bit slim in certain genres, to be fair).

 

[EBE]

If your game is already out on another platform, you're not allowed to release it on Xbox unless you add some Xbox-exclusive content.

zero exceptions? this is thoroughly and completely enforced?

 

[wachie]

But I thought Spencer was the man?

 

[Banjo-Kazooie]

If your game is already out on another platform, you're not allowed to release it on Xbox unless you add some Xbox-exclusive content.

That is simply not true.

im not fully understanding any of this. can someone be real kind and explain to me how indie releases work on xbox one if they've already appeared on other platforms

Well from the games that have come late so far, none that I know of have anything that I would call "special content"

1001 Spikes, Steamworld Dig, Rogue Legacy, Stealth Inc 2, OliOli, Blue Estate, Pinball Arcade, Thomas Was Alone, Stick it to the Man, Contrast, Outlast...ect (I'm sure I'm missing some)

And upcoming titles, to my knowledge don't have anything extra either
Octodad, Binding of Isaac, Don't Starve, Race the Sun, ect

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

zero exceptions? this is thoroughly and completely enforced?

Not-zero exceptions, which is actually worse. It appears that some indies can bypass this "rule" without adding content as long as they're high profile enough. Other lesser-known indies are forced to pony up the extra content.

Meanwhile, Sony is snapping up indie exclusives and funding and generally just being much awesomer towards indies, which is creating a wide disparity in the libraries available for Xbox One and PS4.

Comparing retail game lists between PS4 and XBox One looks bad enough for Xbox owners. When downloadable and indie games are brought into the mix, it's absolute genocide. XBox One is very far behind in this regard.

 

[Alucrid]

The Parity Clause is dead, long live the Parity Clause!

 

[BabyFaceKillah]

damn lol we havent had one of these in a while

 

[chromatic9]

Edge: Is the parity clause dead now?

Spencer: I think so. There's this idea that's been named 'parity clause', but there is no clause. We've come out and been very transparent in the last four or five months about exactly what we want.

If there's a developer who's building a game and they just can't get the game done for both platforms - cool. We'll take a staggered release. We've done it before, and we work with them on that. If another platform does a deal with you as a developer to build an exclusive version of your game for them, and you can't ship on my platform for a year, when the game comes out in a year let's just work together to make it special in some way. People complained about that, but you did a deal with somebody else and you got paid for it and I'm happy - we do those same deals, so I'm not knocking you. It's going to be better for you, actually, because people don't want last year's game, they want something special and new.

The word you're looking for is opaque

o·paque
(ō-pāk&#8242
adj.

3.
a. So obscure as to be unintelligible

 

[prwxv3]

The "come talk to us" strategy looks really stupid next the company that gives advertising to a four year old indie game. I assume the five year old super meat boy is going to get the same treatment.

 

[Kayant]

I'm curious, how many XB1 owners actually care about this. Some of these post reak of

Uh huh...

zero exceptions? this is thoroughly and completely enforced?

Well there is two options as detailed by Phil. If they game as a staggered release it's fine and nothing should need to be added however, if a deal has been made elsewhere there new content is required for it to be released on Xbox. Exceptions were a thing they did in the past not sure if that is still happening but things like Warframe had timed exclusivity and launched later without added content.

Not-zero exceptions, which is actually worse. It appears that some indies can bypass this "rule" without adding content as long as they're high profile enough. Other lesser-known indies are forced to pony up the extra content.
Meanwhile, Sony is snapping up indie exclusives and funding and generally just being much awesomer towards indies, which is creating a wide disparity in the libraries available for Xbox One and PS4.

Comparing retail game lists between PS4 and XBox One looks bad enough for Xbox owners. When downloadable and indie games are brought into the mix, it's absolute genocide. XBox One is very far behind in this regard.

Not true see Banjo-Kazooie and this post.

 

[DeepEnigma]

"There is no parity clause. It never existed. That don't make no damn sense..."

"Yes there's a parity clause"

This should have been the first post!

 

[Goodacre0081]

because people don't want last year's game, they want something special and new.

 

[EBE]

Well there is two options as detailed by Phil. If they game as a staggered release it's fine and nothing should need to be added however, if a deal has been made elsewhere there new content is required for it to be released on Xbox. Exceptions were a thing they did in the past not sure if that is still happening but things like Warframe had timed exclusivity and launched later without added content.

That is simply not true.



Well from the games that have come late so far, none that I know of have anything that I would call "special content"

1001 Spikes, Steamworld Dig, Rogue Legacy, Stealth Inc 2, OliOli, Blue Estate, Pinball Arcade, Thomas Was Alone, Stick it to the Man, Contrast, Outlast...ect (I'm sure I'm missing some)

And upcoming titles, to my knowledge don't have anything extra either
Octodad, Binding of Isaac, Don't Starve, Race the Sun, ect

is it just a case then of Microsoft suggesting new content (to entice new customers, as Spencer suggests) but not requiring it? i own quite a few indie games and i havent read anything about them having extra content if theyve appeared on say PS4

 

[Caayn]

Well there is two options as detailed by Phil. If they game as a staggered release it's fine and nothing should need to be added however, if a deal has been made elsewhere there new content is required for it to be released on Xbox. Exceptions were a thing they did in the past not sure if that is still happening but things like Warframe had timed exclusivity and launched later without added content.

I honestly don't see the problem with this approach.

 

[Biker19]

Excellent. We can finally put this behind us.

It's not completely gone as of yet.

 

[Dr. Zoidberg]

Doesn't sound like Xbox is ever gonna let up on this one, it seems.

I kinda understand where Phil's coming from. A year late port with nothing extra or new in it is basically worthless. Nobody cares. Especially if you are not the dominant console. BUT if it pisses devs off then by all means they should get rid of it. They can't afford to do that.

 

[Triggerhappytel]

So it still exists but they're just not calling it that. Lol.

 

[RowdyReverb]

How about just letting your consumers decide if they want the game? What if not every game needs new content? What if the developer is small and can't reasonably afford to add new content?

Because adding new content is not just a flip of a switch and costs developers money they may or may not have.

Also, so what that a game is coming to your platform a year later? It will be new to many.

They're asking sometimes very small teams to create additional content on top of the work it takes to port the game, for the "privilege" of having the game on Xbox. Microsoft should just be glad to get the game. It's good for their customers. But they're not interested unless they can "one-up" the competition.

I know there are plenty of year(s)-old exclusives I would gladly pay for on my system of choice.

It seems to me that in the long run it would help generate more profit from the port because of the boost in coverage. Take Shovel Knight for example. If that game was a straight port to XB1, it would have gotten a blurb on gaming news sites with a price and release date and a 3 page thread on GAF, but throw in a few small Battletoads levels and sprites and you can get news stories with a teaser video, screenshots, and new information and actually get people talking about your old game again.

Bear in mind that indie games live or die based on hype. There usually isn't a big advertising push for them, so word of mouth and press buzz is how those games get marketed. When a late, no-frills port gets produced, it's tantamount to releasing a product with little to no marketing. At that point, why bother porting at all? It needs something to get it back on people's radar.

Yes, MS is using this strategy to make more money from the game, but these sales also generate revenue for the developer, and the extra content is usually not very complex compared to the main games. By mandating this, MS is pushing the devs to shoot for a higher sales goal than they might have otherwise, which keeps their platform's store from looking like a desert of weakly-selling late ports and potentially grants the studio a greater return on their investment in the game.

I get that people dislike the notion of the platform holder telling people how to make or sell their games, but this is a business where image and marketing are vital to success. MS would rather have no release at all for a game that's going to make their platform look like the place to play games a year after everyone else has moved on, and that's their prerogative. I'm personally not a huge fan of the practice because it means that there are games I won't get a chance to play on Xbox One, but I can appreciate the logic of their stance and I wouldn't expect them to change it, at least not while they're behind in install base and desperately trying to make their platform look like an appealing place to play games.

 

[Triggerhappytel]

Excellent. We can finally put this behind us.

Reading is hard, guys!

 

[xxracerxx]

I kinda understand where Phil's coming from. A year late port with nothing extra or new in it is basically worthless. Nobody cares. Especially if you are not the dominant console.

So PS4 people who have never owned a PC or 360 do not care about Super Meat Boy coming out? Come on.

 

[prwxv3]

I kinda understand where Phil's coming from. A year late port with nothing extra or new in it is basically worthless. Nobody cares. Especially if you are not the dominant console. BUT if it pisses devs off then by all means they should get rid of it. They can't afford to do that.

Sony have literally gotten a four year old indie game on PS4 and advertised it (bastion). And will soon get a five year old indie game on PS4 (Super Meat Boy) and besides the stupid AAA games or bust people on the PS blog, PS forums, no one seemed angry that there was nothing extra.

 

[Banjo-Kazooie]

is it just a case then of Microsoft suggesting new content (to entice new customers, as Spencer suggests) but not requiring it? i own quite a few indie games and i havent read anything about them having extra content if theyve appeared on say PS4

Honestly have no idea. His statements are confusing and don't really add up with what we are seeing being done. Games released so far that have released on PS4 already have had no new content. Now, maybe none of these games signed deals with PlayStation?

Heck if I know haha

 

[Dyson Industries]

"There is no parity clause. It never existed. That don't make no damn sense..."

"Yes there's a parity clause"

Perfect.

Clear as mud. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
Someone on the PR side of things needs to pull these execs into a room and tell them to keep their mouths shut if they're not going to say anything of substance. Stop buggering around with developers' livelihoods and drop the clause. Until then, nobody needs to hear the word "parity clause" coming from a Microsoft exec's mouth.

I kinda understand where Phil's coming from. A year late port with nothing extra or new in it is basically worthless. Nobody cares.

Tripe and nonsense. Ask Supergiant Games about Bastion's sales on PS4.

 

[xxracerxx]

Honestly have no idea. His statements are confusing and don't really add up with what we are seeing being done. Games released so far that have released on PS4 already have had no new content. Now, maybe none of these games signed deals with PlayStation?

Heck if I know haha

And this is why I was shocked by his use of "transparent" in his answer.

 

[Triggerhappytel]

Why sigh for adding extra stuff? Isn't that the same thing Sony does when exclusive terms end with Xbox?

No. Recent examples include Bastion and Fez. A few games seem to get.exclusive stuff such as Shovel Knight, Broforce and Super Time Force Ultra, but they're the exception.

 

[libregkd]

Sony have literally gotten a four year old indie game on PS4 and advertised it (bastion). And will soon get a five year old indie game on PS4 (Super Meat Boy) and besides the stupid AAA games or bust people on the PS blog, PS forums, no one seemed angry that there was nothing extra.

Hell in regards to Bastion not only did they have it release on their platform, they even included it in their main advertising push in the Spring, having it up there with just as much importance as stuff like Axiom Verge, Titan Souls and Hotline Miami 2.

 

[walltowall]

So PS4 people who have never owned a PC or 360 do not care about Super Meat Boy coming out? Come on.

In fairness, Super Meatboy is getting that extra attention by launching on PS plus. They are not launching 4yrs late w/o marketing.

 

[Toki767]

In fairness, Super Meatboy is getting that extra attention by launching on PS plus. They are not launching 4yrs late w/o marketing.

See: Bastion.

 

[xxracerxx]

In fairness, Super Meatboy is getting that extra attention by launching on PS plus. They are not launching 4yrs late w/o marketing.

Switch phasers to BASTION, then.

 

[Eusis]

So they still won't let you release it on Xbox One if you released it on a different platform before unless you add something extra? Doesn't sound like much changed.

I think its acceptable if the drmand isnt bonkers. Usually these little extras seem to be enough.

 

[DSix]

"There's no parity close, except there is and you have to sign NDAs and agree to our conditions to drop it."

Drop it already, this is dumb.

 

[Triggerhappytel]

I recall the PR spin a while back about how the parity clause was about giving XBO users a "first class" experience, yet PSN has almost double the digital / downloadable / indie titles on it's store.

The irony that XBO users are second-rate citizens because of these shitty policies.

Believe it or not, some people actually think this shit is a good thing because it keeps the quality of digital games on the Xbox One higher

 

[Dyson Industries]

Hell in regards to Bastion not only did they have it release on their platform, they even included it in their main advertising push in the Spring, having it up there with just as much importance as stuff like Axiom Verge, Titan Souls and Hotline Miami 2.

Nobody gives a toss about old games, though.
Amazing thread title change. Spot on.

 

[Dr. Zoidberg]

Sony have literally gotten a four year old indie game on PS4 and advertised it (bastion)...no one seemed angry that there was nothing extra.

Yes, but how did it SELL compared to the 360 and PC releases? If it doesn't sell enough then what's the point for the platform holder or the dev? Especially in the case of X1 or WiiU where they are a secondary console to the market leader. Most people will not be interested, especially at new release price.

 

[prwxv3]

I have said this before but MS can't compete with a company that care more about 4+ old indie games then they do about new ones.

 

[vpance]

Why are they so stubborn? The 360 era high must be burnt into their synapses.

 

[BabyFaceKillah]

No. Recent examples include Bastion and Fez. A few games seem to get.exclusive stuff such as Shovel Knight, Broforce and Super Time Force Ultra, but they're the exception.

yeah man those PS exclusive characters in Super Time Force dont mean shit.

Edit: you edited your post... fersho.

 

[LiquidSolid]

is it just a case then of Microsoft suggesting new content (to entice new customers, as Spencer suggests) but not requiring it? i own quite a few indie games and i havent read anything about them having extra content if theyve appeared on say PS4

It's not a suggestion, they've said as much in the past. The reason why you haven't seen much extra content in ports is because Microsoft's enforcing their policies on a completely arbitrary basis. Some games get a free pass, others may not.

The common theory is that by not getting rid of the policy, they can play nice until they can get themselves into a position where they can start enforcing it again, bullying indies around just like last gen.

I kinda understand where Phil's coming from. A year late port with nothing extra or new in it is basically worthless. Nobody cares. Especially if you are not the dominant console. BUT if it pisses devs off then by all means they should get rid of it. They can't afford to do that.

Super Meat Boy is a 5 year old port and people are still excited to play it on PS4. If Microsoft thinks so little of good games then it says a lot about them as a company.

 

[walltowall]

See: Bastion.

Switch phasers to BASTION, then.

Noted.

Though as others have said, it did see heavy promotion by Sony. Does anyone know if the game had any legs after the promotion month?

Also, MS could easily do the sme thing with late ports to their system.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

yeah man those PS exclusive characters in Super Time Force dont mean shit.

Capy added those themselves and went to Sony to see if it would be okay to have Shu in the game. They weren't forced or encouraged to add them in just to release their game. I don't think anybody has any problem with having differentiating features in a game, the more content the better, but people would rather it be left up to the developers themselves, not the platform holder.

 

[Rymuth]

*looks up*

Thread title change?

 

[Firelord Chargrilled]

I'm curious, how many XB1 owners actually care about this. Some of these post reak of

This post + post History +Avatar = Comedy gold

LULZ dat thread title change

 

[hawk2025]

Yes, but how did it SELL compared to the 360 and PC releases? If it doesn't sell enough then what's the point for the platform holder or the dev? Especially in the case of X1 or WiiU where they are a secondary console to the market leader. Most people will not be interested, especially at new release price.

So?

Let them decide. Let the devs decide if they would like to add more content, or do something to make the game "fresh". Let them decide if most people will or will not be interested, and let them decide on the timing of release, the pricing, and everything else, too.

Your position stands on the assumption that the impact of the policy is a positive one. All evidence points that it's really not.

 

[libregkd]

Yes, but how did it SELL compared to the 360 and PC releases? If it doesn't sell enough then what's the point for the platform holder or the dev? Especially in the case of X1 or WiiU where they are a secondary console to the market leader. Most people will not be interested, especially at new release price.

Obviously I don't have numbers to compare it with it's original releases on the 360 or PC, but I think Bastion did pretty alright (considering what else was in the store that month). It just missed being in the top 10 for April.

1. Mortal Kombat X
2. Bloodborne
3. MLB 15 THE SHOW
4. Grand Theft Auto V
5. Shovel Knight
6. Minecraft: PlayStation 4 Edition
7. Borderlands: The Handsome Collection
8. Battlefield Hardline
9. Axiom Verge
10. DARK SOULS II: Scholar of the First Sin
11. Bastion

 

[xxracerxx]

Yes, but how did it SELL compared to the 360 and PC releases? If it doesn't sell enough then what's the point for the platform holder or the dev? Especially in the case of X1 or WiiU where they are a secondary console to the market leader. Most people will not be interested, especially at new release price.

Made it to #11 of the month in sales on the Playstation Store.

Link

 

[OrbitalBeard]

If Microsoft thinks so little of good games then it says a lot about them as a company.

I really, really hope you're just being hyperbolic and really don't actually believe this. This sounds dangerously close to fanboyism.

It's one thing to hate MS's policies but to claim the Xbox team isn't interested in quality games and bringing them to their platform is ridiculous. Games like Ori and Cuphead wouldn't be funded by MS if this were the case.

You know, you can be disappointed and critical of a company without resorting to nonsense like this. Not everything in this world has to be black or white.

Every time I hear Spencer speak or read a quote by him, I get the impression that he's an incredibly dishonest person. There is always something to be read between the lines, never any complete truths. Maybe after playing this game for so long, the mask has become his face.

I don't even know why I'm bothering but....what?

I actually agree that sometimes he can come off a bit too "corporate" and he sometimes seems to speak it platitudes but come on. Overall, he seems like a genuine guy who loves the industry and wants Xbox to be a "gaming first" brand now that he's in charge. Obviously he isn't perfect and there are things his team needs to work on.

I feel the same way about Yoshida and Boyes. Passionate guys who love the industry. Same with Damon Baker at Nintendo.

 

[Occam]

Every time I hear Spencer speak or read a quote by him, I get the impression that he's an incredibly dishonest person. There is always something to be read between the lines, never any complete truths. Maybe after playing this game for so long, the mask has become his face.

I find it astonishing that many Xbox fans don't notice this.

 

[tuna_love]

Every time I hear Spencer speak or read a quote by him, I get the impression that he's an incredibly dishonest person. There is always something to be read between the lines, never any complete truths. Maybe after playing this game for so long, the mask has become his face.

Maybe

 

[xxracerxx]

Every time I hear Spencer speak or read a quote by him, I get the impression that he's an incredibly dishonest person. There is always something to be read between the lines, never any complete truths. Maybe after playing this game for so long, the mask has become his face.

 

[hawk2025]

The problem is that even the logic of freshness itself doesn't pass muster. Microsoft is NOT consistent in requiring this.

Microsoft just let Activision shit out Prototype 1+2 on the Xbox One.

The PR line is about freshness, but it's abundantly clear that the policy, as it exists, is about strongarming and limiting competition to leverage their own platform. There is zero evidence to the contrary. Even the paternalistic view that they ask for extra content for the "good of the dev" doesn't work, because there is no evidence for it, and nothing impeding devs from doing it if they so wish.