|
I do think that Microsoft did get
some indie stuff early on, like Cloning Clyde. But you have a
different approach, wherein a project will be found and it will be developed
with Sony.
JH: Yeah. It's one thing to go out
and sign up things, but you want to ensure success. We look at our developers
as long-term relationships, so we put in whatever resources we need.
In the case of the guys who work with me, typically we have a producer
and a designer. These are all seasoned people who have had 10 or 15
years of experience, and they know their job is to mentor these developers.
And they take it seriously.
The success of their teams is their personal
success, and they don't try to co-opt the ideas of their team. By the
same token, they don't just toss in an SDK and say, "Hey, I'll
get back to you later." They really spend a lot of time with them.
Is that a model that you plan to
continue?
JH: Absolutely. Yeah, it's been successful.
We're not going to do a ton of games, but we're trying to make every
game its own unique, cool experience. We're going to continue to focus
on teams that we see as having a lot of potential, and we hope to grow
with them.
What do you see as the benefits
of releasing games as they are done, versus specific, spaced-out gated times?
JH: It isn't completely just as they
come out, but for us, it's about making sure each game has the time
to be refined. These are not downloadable games on your PC. They're
on your console, and the expectation from a consumer standpoint is,
"These things can't crash. These things can't drop a virus on my
machine." They have to have the same solid, rigid QA that we put
in all of our console games and our Blu-ray titles.
Plus, when we release, we release worldwide,
so that means 21 languages in Europe, 4 or 5 languages in Asia... and
we'd like to -- we've gotten a lot of feedback from our customers --
they don't like it when you delay and release it in the United States,
and then when localization's done, in Europe, then we release... we're
trying to coordinate it all so that it's a simultaneous worldwide release.
But games have their momentum. You don't want to sit too long on them.
I try not to double-up and release two things at once, because one gets
to have its air time.
I meant more
on that last point, I guess: releasing the game when it's done, versus queuing in any way.
JH: We try to do simultaneous release,
but we're also cognizant that these are small developers, and while
we do support them, at least in the first party, we support them through
financial advances to fund the game.
In our third party side, a lot of these
developers are self-funded, so you can't just have them hanging out
on a line for months with no royalty income coming in. You want to make
sure that you release it in time, so they can start earning earnings
back on their work.
|
Declare victory regardless of the actual reality.
XBox 360's online network is far and away the best of the three right now.
In fact Sony's whole approach is so different, I doubt that it will ever catch up.
This isn't a problem if you listen to Sony however, they kind of admit that and say 'Well our approach is better'.
XBox 360's indie game approach with the XNA toolkit and being able to develop a game on the PC and then just move it over to XBox is amazing power.
Sony's approach of 'well we have more power, so you have to do more work to develop on our platform' is just backwards thinking.
I find it amusing that Microsoft with it's Live Arcade and XNA toolkit is embracing the openness that has allowed Open Source and Linux to trounce Windows products.
It's like Microsoft has learned a lesson and is reaping the rewards on their XBox 360.
Sony meanwhile holds on to old concepts of control, control, control. Complexity is king.
Sigh. If I were a Sony investor, I would be VERY worried.
Ahhh well, at least Sony has Blu-Ray to keep it alive :)
Sony talks about how they work with independent developers instead of just throwing them an SDK and leaving them to fend for themselves. They are interested in growing products and careers; XNA Studio is interested in becoming the YouTube of games. So far, the XNA Studio games are incredibly underwhelming; they play like unfinished Flash-games. I can't see paying $5-$10 to actually buy one. Jelly Car is not the next Everyday Shooter.
Microsoft is not embracing openness on Arcade, which is why Epic has been unable to get permission to allow user-created content on UTIII. XNA Studio games still have to be peer-reviewed before they are allowed to be posted. You may see more bite-sized games as a result of XNA Studio, but I'm not sure you'll see more quality games.
The statement on page 1 kind of says it all: "We're very careful about how too much quantity could kill us, because it's more about having really well-selected, cool experiences." That's a different stance from their competitors. It is not necessarily wrong. There's so much I dislike about XBL that I welcome a different approach.
JET
I suppose your right. A lot of good indie games come out on the PC platform all the time. Being able to easily download XNA and develop games that can work on the XBox, with it being so easy for 'anyone' to do, I see a HUGE potential for some amazing games to surface on the X360.
YouTube may have hundreds of thousands of total junk videos, but there are a large number of very good videos that drive insane amounts of traffic and profit (through ads) to the site. I can easily see this sort of scenario surfacing on the X360 with indie games. Some awesome games are sure to arrise, games that will only exist on the X360. As the months and years roll by the number of great games on the X360 will continue to rise and the PS3 may look far less attractive to the gamer consumer.
I guess that's OK with Sony. They are going after the more 'grown up' market I suppose. They also have Blu-Ray and other 'features' to help sell units too.
The PC indie game movement is growing and growing. Very high quality games are being created by very small teams usually numbering in the single digits.
I suppose the huge, complex, massive budget, multi-year, mega games that Sony is going after will still exist, I just question whether or not it's wise for Sony to be betting so much on it.
Maybe I'm just looking at things wrong...
And tell John Hight to quit using my name... :)
It's still funny to me how much shouldve been obvious by now, like having a comprehensive online service around launch, but its also kinda ironic to call Sony the republicans when all ms does is buy studios they like outright.