33 posts in this topic

I don't like these style of childish jabs between corporations, but Sony at least knows how to do it well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And this is why MS will be forced to remove any such clause regardless of justification.

You simply cannot compete with that kind of PR. Sony easily wins and everyone gets behind them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except the parity clause can be avoided in many ways and with all the support MS gives the ID devs it makes sense.

Sony can come back when they have the same laundry list of dev support and tools MS gives.

Also these jabs only works on the undereducated consumers, not the actual India devs who know how it works so this will have no effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except the parity clause can be avoided in many ways and with all the support MS gives the ID devs it makes sense.

Sony can come back when they have the same laundry list of dev support and tools MS gives.

Also these jabs only works on the undereducated consumers, not the actual India devs who know how it works so this will have no effect.

Until MS tries to hit back with heir own smarta** remarks, Sony will win the battle with the online community crowd, which gets echoed all over the place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until MS tries to hit back with heir own smarta** remarks, Sony will win the battle with the online community crowd, which gets echoed all over the place.

And ignored by the average consumer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have PR for different groups of consumers, this is clearly targetted at one specific group so it doesn't really matter for those it's not aimed at. At least not to the point of trying to discredit it's value (that value being riling up the online communities, which it does. The online sharing video hit how many million views?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have PR for different groups of consumers, this is clearly targetted at one specific group so it doesn't really matter for those it's not aimed at. At least not to the point of trying to discredit it's value (that value being riling up the online communities, which it does. The online sharing video hit how many million views?).

Exactly. This is easy and cheap PR for Sony. The online community loves this type of stuff and Sony is feeding the beast. The online community has a huge impact on the 'discussion' of these things. Sony has been on fire hitting the right notes.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BikFsIHCEAAYR_9.jpg

 

 

The way it should be (Y)

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way it should be (Y)

Why ?

 

Why shouldn't a platform holder be able to demand that at least they get same day release when they offer, free dev tools, free dev systems, free dev support and assistance, resources, free distribution and free dev conferences among other benefits. 

 

And for those who absolutely can't live up to the requirement there is negotiation possible. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why ?

Why shouldn't a platform holder be able to demand that at least they get same day release when they offer, free dev tools, free dev systems, free dev support and assistance, resources, free distribution and free dev conferences among other benefits.

And for those who absolutely can't live up to the requirement there is negotiation possible.

Because platform holders should be privileged developers are choosing their networks to release on. Not throwing up red tape that potentially restricts income and the growth of the industry.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And this is why MS will be forced to remove any such clause regardless of justification.

You simply cannot compete with that kind of PR. Sony easily wins and everyone gets behind them.

As much as I don't like the parity clause, it just causes bad PR a lack of some games. This type of PR is childish, very childish. Especially when MS congratulated Sony on launch and Sony posted the "720" tweet, which is funny due to Killzone not outputting far off 720p in MP. At least MS is honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as I don't like the parity clause, it just causes bad PR a lack of some games. This type of PR is childish, very childish. Especially when MS congratulated Sony on launch and Sony posted the "720" tweet, which is funny due to Killzone not outputting far off 720p in MP. At least MS is honest.

This should make you happier then http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-11-22-sony-congratulates-microsoft-on-xbox-one-launch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because platform holders should be privileged developers are choosing their networks to release on. Not throwing up red tape that potentially restricts income and the growth of the industry.

Developers normally pay to have the privilege to release on a platform, ID devs get it free, as well as tons of resources and support. So that argument don't really work in this situation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Developers normally pay to have the privilege to release on a platform, ID devs get it free, as well as tons of resources and support. So that argument don't really work in this situation. 

 

Sony have scrapped publishing/patch fee's as well - Then you have promotions like PS Plus (many indie titles choose it), and SonyXDev who focus directly on publishing relations in Europe / Not sure who handles US, Santa Monica do a lot of publishing/development aid.

 

Then there's the ICE team for bigger titles, most notably aided by Naughty Dog.

 

No point in acting like MS do anything drastically different behind the scenes with development/publishing, it's all very similar on the support and aid front for developers.

 

Therefore, treat developers, especially indie ones, as a privilege if they want to choose your platform, not a minefield of red tape.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they have scrapped the extra fees, but when a copy of a PS4 game is sold, some of that money goes to Sony. Indies are different of course, but again, with the amount of support and resources MS hands all the ID devs, they're certainly entitled to not have the games released on a competing console 6 months before. And even then there's so many ways to avoid the launch parity or negiatiate it if you can't.

 

But as I said before, if you don't have the resource to launch on multiple platforms at the same time, launch parity is a non issue.

 

If you are releasing on the PS4 or something else first and you don't have the resources to develope multiple platforms at the same time. well then do the PS4 version, sign up with Sony, and then sign up with ID@xbox afterwards and you get full ID support and non launch parity. 

 

If you'r launching on the Xbox first anyway, well then there's no issue anyway.

 

if you have the resources to develop for all platforms at the same time.. well then again there's no issue.

 

so launch parity isn't an issue outside of fanboy whiner fuel. it's irrelevant and has ZERO real impact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This parity thing is a tricky thing to me...  I see Boyes having some fun as MS expense...

 

Though the One and PS4 are "somewhat similar", they are more different in offering than what people think. 

 

What if a developer want to get a game out (that's the same for the most part) on both consoles.  But only has resources to do one at a time.  But they really want to take advantage of each consoles unique abilities.

 

What if the devs have been eyeing using the track pack and camera together on the PS4 (as well as the horse power under the hood)...  

 

Or what if a dev has been eyeballing Kinect, and really wanting to do something different using that.

 

Now there's a problem because the developer doesn't have the resources to do so at the same time.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they have scrapped the extra fees, but when a copy of a PS4 game is sold, some of that money goes to Sony. Indies are different of course, but again, with the amount of support and resources MS hands all the ID devs, they're certainly entitled to not have the games released on a competing console 6 months before. And even then there's so many ways to avoid the launch parity or negiatiate it if you can't.

 

But as I said before, if you don't have the resource to launch on multiple platforms at the same time, launch parity is a non issue.

 

If you are releasing on the PS4 or something else first and you don't have the resources to develope multiple platforms at the same time. well then do the PS4 version, sign up with Sony, and then sign up with ID@xbox afterwards and you get full ID support and non launch parity. 

 

If you'r launching on the Xbox first anyway, well then there's no issue anyway.

 

if you have the resources to develop for all platforms at the same time.. well then again there's no issue.

 

so launch parity isn't an issue outside of fanboy whiner fuel. it's irrelevant and has ZERO real impact.

 

I'm glad all indie devs have you to tell them to shutup and call their concerns fanboy whiner fuel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the issue boils down to the fact that developers want zero restrictions put upon them, even if you might be able to justify it or explain how it has no drastic impact in the long run.

Add into that the fact that competitors do not ask for any such clause, and you have a one, two punch of ownage.

MS will never win that argument and as much as anyone may try to explain it, it will fall on deaf ears. I can certainly understand why MS would appreciate developers doing just a little something for them in return for all of this free access/support, but they are in a market that is not interested in doing something for the platform holder. The developer is king, especially indie developers.

MS' wish for games that are coming to mulitple platforms to launch in the same timeframe on both is not unreasonable if you just look at it on its own. MS has seen what happens when content is heavily delayed on your platform while others get it much sooner. They know its bad and they would love to see X1 developers avoid that.

Unfortunately as soon as you drop that idea into this scenario, it becomes unfair. I don't blame developers for thinking that way though. Sony has simply made it impossible for MS to ask for anything in return for what they are offering.

I suppose if MS wanted to actually offer to pay developers to insure launch day parity, then that might make the clause acceptable to developers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is one of the main reasons why I dislike sony these days.  

pretty much all of their game conferences have been filled with not-so-subtle jibes at microsoft when microsoft has never done such a thing to sony, even when sony was on the ground (such as their huge hack of the ps3/psn, etc.).  

 

very unprofessional, imo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like these style of childish jabs between corporations, but Sony at least knows how to do it well.

I know it may be bad but I like them.  I can't stand apple products but I actually enjoyed their PC vs. Mac commercials.  I love Microsoft's Scroogled campaign against Google and I enjoy Sony's little jabs as the Xbox One.  Strictly from an entertainment perspective I think they work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is one of the main reasons why I dislike sony these days.  

pretty much all of their game conferences have been filled with not-so-subtle jibes at microsoft when microsoft has never done such a thing to sony, even when sony was on the ground (such as their huge hack of the ps3/psn, etc.).  

 

very unprofessional, imo. 

 

Microsoft aren't saints

 

Both as bad as each other. It's just Sony's turn for a change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Microsoft aren't saints

 

Both as bad as each other. It's just Sony's turn for a change.

that just seemed like clever marketing, not taking jibes at every chance they get.  

and considering that sony was going to go in with the drm policies that microsoft set out to do before the backlash (sony just had the fortunate benefit of not showing their drm cards first to the public) forced them to quietly just sweep it all under the rug, their jibes at microsoft regarding the drm policies seem even more disappointing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that just seemed like clever marketing, not taking jibes at every chance they get.  

and considering that sony was going to go in with the drm policies that microsoft set out to do before the backlash (sony just had the fortunate benefit of not showing their drm cards first to the public) forced them to quietly just sweep it all under the rug, their jibes at microsoft regarding the drm policies seem even more disappointing.  

 

So learning from your competitors mistakes and listening to gamer's feedback isn't clever, but crashing a launch party is?

 

Microsoft have been their own worst enemy on PR and advertising. Sony simply put together an image or video and let the facts speak for themselves. Not exactly a jibe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.