| Neil Sorens |
|
|
Do execs in every industry vent about their business partners in public like this?
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| Cameron Hart |
|
He has a point though.
|
|
|
| Sebastian Cardoso |
|
|
What I wouldn't change in the cert process is TCR compliance. As a gamer, I want to make sure the games I buy on XBLA are properly tested, stable, yadda, yadda. Driving a dev nuts with legal paperwork, well that's just quite unfortunate, of course.
|
|
|
| Olivier Lejade |
|
|
@Neil Sorens I would only call it a partnership if you count serfdom as a partnership. Furthermore, I wish more people in more industry refused to put up with the crap platform holders come up with. Unfortunately this is business as usual for them, like Dan Cook eloquently explained here: http://www.lostgarden.com/2011/03/gdc-2011-game-of-platform-power.html
So thank you Jon Blow for telling it as it is and more transparency please! |
|
|
| Harry Fields |
|
|
The great thing is, if you don't want to hassle with Microsoft and their cert process, as an Indie, no one is putting a gun to your head and making you do it. Put your game out there as you see fit under the terms you see fit. Microsoft has their own marketing agenda. You can't really ask them to offer substantial flexibility to every Indie that comes along It taints "the platform". On a personal note, If not for XBLA, I never would've bothered with Braid.
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
| Jim Perry |
|
|
Why is it that why people play in someone else's sandbox they're surprise when they have to play by the rules of that sandbox? It's not like someone is forcing them to play to begin with. I just don't understand the whinyness of people these days. Personally the opportunity to get a game on a major platform is a huge thing, at least for me as an indie. I guess when you get to be a gaming "celebrity" you just expect special treatment like other celebrities. :
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| Noel Llopis |
|
|
@Jim, that has nothing to do with being a "celebrity" or wanting special treatment. He's calling it as he sees it, and explains how the process is broken. Coming out publicly like this, can only benefit all developers in the end if Microsoft changes some of their procedures.
I wish more people in the industry were free to speak up their mind like this. I bet there would be a lot less bullying and bullshit going around. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| David Paris |
|
|
@Jim: Why are you distressed that he openly criticizes Microsoft policies? At the end of the day, he's saying that the hassle he has to deal with in order to make use of them is significant, and that they should consider streamlining that process for smaller developers.
I view it as a warning for other people considering what platforms they wish to release on. He's absolutely not the first developer to say that for the amount of time & nuisance required to be released on XBLA their payouts are unimpressive. I forget which guy was just interviewed who mentioned that his year and a half on XBLA profits were bypassed by his Steam release in like 2 weeks. Since a platform is absolutely worthless without software to provide value, Microsoft should be thinking long and hard about these messages. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| Ryan Miller |
|
|
Taken with a grain of salt I don't think it's too hard to understand what Jonathan's saying here, nor to believe there could be room for improvement, and regardless of whether such statements can be a true proponent for change or not (I think so), I say the more people willing to start an open dialogue, the better (and that goes for both sides).
|
|
|
| Mike Smith |
|
|
Working with MS on Xbox Live Arcade games is tough. Thanks for being brave enough to voice some of our feelings Mr. Blow!
|
|
|
| Robert Boyd |
|
|
I think the core issue here isn't that XBLA is a bad platform for indie developers, but rather that there are probably better alternatives. If XBLA was the biggest platform out there, then it would make sense to do whatever it takes to get on there, but by all indications, the PC (particularly Steam), smartphone, and social game markets are even bigger than XBLA and involve less hassle.
When we released Cthulhu Saves the World + Breath of Death VII on Steam, we got a good amount of marketing support from Steam including a front page ad for the games that lasted about a week. I doubt Steam's level of support was any less than the kind of support we would have gotten had we gotten an official release on XBLA or PSN. With that said, there are reasons that would justify a console release for an indie developer such as: 1 - You're making a game that uses a specific piece of hardware or accessory that's associated with a console like Kinect or the Wii remote. 2 - You're planning on releasing the game on as many platforms as possible. 3 - Your game is in a genre that generally sells much better on a console than otherwise. Not sure how many genres are like this these days - I would have thought console-style RPG and platformers would do better on consoles, but our RPGs and Team Meat's Super Meat Boy seem to say otherwise. 4 - You get a favorable deal with a console owner to release your game on their system. On the plus side, it looks like Microsoft is becoming more friendly to indie game development. Some of the Summer of XBLA games like From Dust & Bastion are being released on PC soon after their XBLA release which in the past would have been unheard of so it looks like Microsoft is easing up on their exclusivity requirements. And on the XBLIG front, they did a dashboard ad for various XBLIG titles last week and just a few minutes ago, Major Nelson posted a message on Twitter talking about the Indie Games Summer Uprising. |
|
|
| Steven Ulakovich |
|
Blow got into it with a member of Microsoft's Xbox Love team during Giant Bomb's first E3 2011 live Bombcast. He has always had these feeling towards Microsoft's policies.
|
|
|
| Jane Castle |
|
What happens if The Witness is not accepted into Steam? Will he then go off to XBox Live?
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| Lennard Feddersen |
|
|
I'd like to say thanks to Jonathon. It is helpful to the entire dev. community to know before getting involved with a platform what the gotcha's are going to be.
|
|
|
| Justin Kwok |
|
|
As someone who's gone through TCRs, TRCs and Lotcheck multiple times, I can definitely say that Microsoft TCRs are the strictest. The first couple of times I went through them it was a pain in the a$$. However, I came out of those experiences designing certain aspects of the game with passing the requirements in mind.
Now I actually find that it's a nice foundation for some aspects of the game (say, front ends) and can add an element of polish to it as well. I totally understand where Jonathan is coming from though. However, I think that beginning with knowing that you'll have to pass platform requirements is a lot easier than making your game and then trying to adjust everything afterward to accommodate them. I've gone through that process and have known a number of others who have. There seems to some resistance as well to listen to people who have gone through that and try to warn others not to make the same mistake. I don't know why, but people tend to develop the game and assume that TCRs will just handle themselves. And then they're surprised that it's such a huge pain. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| Jake Birkett |
|
|
Even though Jon says his most recent publisher experience was in 2009 I know for sure that many devs are still finding it tough to work with Microsoft (and I'm sure that Jon knows even more). Jon just happens to have spoken openly about it, and that can only be a good thing in my opinion because a) it acts as a warning to others who may want to consider their options more carefully, and b) it's possible that Microsoft might take some notice and alter their policies a bit. In fact I heard reports from a friend recently that things are improving after he and some other indies made complaints and suggestions.
The great thing about being indie is you don't have to give a f*ck and pussyfoot around issues that you would have to if you worked in a corporation or if you depended on some publisher. Openly sharing information is one of the best things about being indie in my opinion - the blunter the better. We all support each other, and it's awesome. (Sorry if that sounds a bit "indies rulez" or something, but I feel strongly about it, and it's true!) *MANY* publishers and distributors have crappy contracts, deals and requirements, and they hold devs over a barrel. For example, in the casual download industry, the BEST royalty rate you can get is 40%, most only give you 25%-35%. The Popcap CEO just called them out on this at the recent Casual Connect conference. If the casual download portals paid devs 70% like Apple or Steam then my family of four (+cat) would have a very different lifestyle to now because I'd have made DOUBLE my income! |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
| Bram Stolk |
|
|
Jonathan, thanks for sharing your views.
To the commenters who disapprove of outspoken critique: maybe suffering from Stockholm syndrome, and you are afraid of what MS will do to *you*? Indies need other indies to take a stand every now and then. As long as there are mine crafts and braids, devs will hold some power not yet usurped by publishers. |
|
|
| Bob Johnson |
|
Seems well articulated to me. Very reasonable complaints.
|
|
|
More: Console/PC, Indie, Exclusive, Business/Marketing