The Swapper, Mousecraft & Titan Attacks will not appear on Xbone due to parity clause

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Curve Digital's current lineup of games won't be coming to Xbox One, it has been revealed.

 

Microsoft's parity clause, which requests developers release games on Xbox One at the same time as other systems, rules out The Swapper, MouseCraft and Titan Attacks, which are coming to PlayStation platforms first. "Unfortunately, all these titles here get ruled out by the parity clause," Curve's managing director Jason Perkins confirmed to Digital Spy.

 

"We feel like it's unnecessary handcuffs really," design director Jonathan Biddle added, "but that's the way they've decided to run that." It was explained that its current lineup of spring and summer games were signed before Microsoft indie programme ID@Xbox was in place.

 

Source: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a568620/the-swapper-mousecraft-titan-attacks-by-curve-ruled-out-for-xbox-one.html#~oDzvWfp1s7KZfh

 

Before anyone bashes Curve, they've actually done two lengthy posts on their site about the issues above in generous detail

 

Part 1 - http://curve-studios.com/why-isnt-curve-working-with-microsoft-part-i/

Part 2 - http://curve-studios.com/why-isnt-curve-working-with-microsoft-part-ii/

[Nick H. Supervisor]

I can't check the links because of the office proxy, but it sounds like Microsoft can't complain about this; they brought it on themselves.

[HawkMan]

What ? do they even understand the parity clause ? if they already have a deal to launch on PS4 they're not affected by parity. and even then a call to MS have solved it for anyone who did have issues. 

 

Seems like they're whining just to whine. Writing lengthy blog posts doesn't change that. 

[HawkMan]

Yep, their blog posts shows they don't understand the parity clause, they haven't even investigate it to see what it means, they assume a lot and only seem to pamper to the anti MS PS4 fans. 

 

Their posts goes on about how small indies can't develop for both platforms at the same time. 

 

Yeah of course they can't, that's why parity clause is irrelevant for them. Either you develop for Xbox first and parity doesn't go in effect OR you develop for PS4 first and release there and when the team is done there and ready to do another platform they do Xbox. and again, parity doesn't go in effect.

 

Parity ONLY affects bigger indies who DO have the teams to develop for two platforms at the same time and plan on releasing on both platforms reasonably close. it's here to prevent 1-3 month headstarts on PS4 after MS drops tons of free dev tools and dev support on them for a multiplat title. 

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Yep, their blog posts shows they don't understand the parity clause, they haven't even investigate it to see what it means, they assume a lot and only seem to pamper to the anti MS PS4 fans. 

 

Their posts goes on about how small indies can't develop for both platforms at the same time. 

 

Yeah of course they can't, that's why parity clause is irrelevant for them. Either you develop for Xbox first and parity doesn't go in effect OR you develop for PS4 first and release there and when the team is done there and ready to do another platform they do Xbox. and again, parity doesn't go in effect.

 

Parity ONLY affects bigger indies who DO have the teams to develop for two platforms at the same time and plan on releasing on both platforms reasonably close. it's here to prevent 1-3 month headstarts on PS4 after MS drops tons of free dev tools and dev support on them for a multiplat title. 

 

:/

 

Yeah I'm sure that's what they're doing here, they've got nothing better to do clearly. So they're just making it up their games can't come to the XB1, and the WiiU releases they're doing???

 

I think maybe you don't understand what the parity clause is, unless you want to go on record and say every indie studio out there complaining about it whilst dealing with it first hand is "lying".

 

OR you develop for PS4 first and release there and when the team is done there and ready to do another platform they do Xbox. and again, parity doesn't go in effect.

 

 

That's precisely when parity goes into effect, if you release on the PS4 first  :wacko:

[HawkMan]

No, if you have a release or a deal to have a release on another console before you make a deal with MS, there is NO parity clause. 

 

It would be awesome if all the parity clause trollers would understand how the parity clause works and how it doesn't work and that it only affects a small amount of studios who already plan on releasing on multiple platforms and have a studio capable of developing for two platforms at once.

 

if your studios is to small to develop for two platforms, there's nothing to worry about since there's so many ways to avoid it, starting with the two methods listed above, release on XO first, or have a deal with Sony first. In one instance the clause is irrelevant, in the other it's thrown out. 

[wakjak]

No, if you have a release or a deal to have a release on another console before you make a deal with MS, there is NO parity clause. 

 

It would be awesome if all the parity clause trollers would understand how the parity clause works and how it doesn't work and that it only affects a small amount of studios who already plan on releasing on multiple platforms and have a studio capable of developing for two platforms at once.

 

if your studios is to small to develop for two platforms, there's nothing to worry about since there's so many ways to avoid it, starting with the two methods listed above, release on XO first, or have a deal with Sony first. In one instance the clause is irrelevant, in the other it's thrown out. 

 

They do know how it works, they make the games, and deal with the companies. You don't. The only one trolling here is you.

[HawkMan]

They do know how it works, they make the games, and deal with the companies. You don't. The only one trolling here is you.

 

obviously they don't since they're ignoring the facts about how ID@xbox works and the specifics of the clauses and the fact that MS WILL WAVE these clauses or any dev that needs and requests it. 

[SierraSonic]

obviously they don't since they're ignoring the facts about how ID@xbox works and the specifics of the clauses and the fact that MS WILL WAVE these clauses or any dev that needs and requests it. 

How is "they don't know how the clause works" and "they will wave the clauses" the same thing?

 

Just because MS may bend the rules... doesn't change the rules. They are following them without trying to go around them. Which is what I expect most devs will do, as that is what they are expected to do, per the clauses.

[HawkMan]

How is "they don't know how the clause works" and "they will wave the clauses" the same thing?

 

Just because MS may bend the rules... doesn't change the rules. They are following them without trying to go around them. Which is what I expect most devs will do, as that is what they are expected to do, per the clauses.

 

because most devs can avoid the clause within the specifications of the clause, those that can't and still can't fulfil it can have it waved 

 

the developers they complain about that can't follow the clause(which isn't themselves, I don't see why they're bothered and complain about a clause they themselves don't affect them, when lots of other developers are going on about how it's NOT a problem) are the ones that will avoid the clause anyway, without needing to have it waived. 

[SierraSonic]

because most devs can avoid the clause within the specifications of the clause, those that can't and still can't fulfil it can have it waved 

 

the developers they complain about that can't follow the clause(which isn't themselves, I don't see why they're bothered and complain about a clause they themselves don't affect them, when lots of other developers are going on about how it's NOT a problem) are the ones that will avoid the clause anyway, without needing to have it waived. 

Most devs can't be assed to follow those clauses, so they rather just avoid the headache and work with sony.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

obviously they don't since they're ignoring the facts about how ID@xbox works and the specifics of the clauses and the fact that MS WILL WAVE these clauses or any dev that needs and requests it.

No, its said cases will be looked at on an individual basis.

If MS just waived everything why would they be stupid enough to still have a policy in place costing the business time and money with needless negotiations?

You've also said you've read the blog so you should have read this

Microsoft have added an additional layer of complexity by claiming that this clause can be debated on a ?case-by-case? basis...

If you think that?s all something that?s easily sorted behind closed doors I?ll leave with you this: We?re one of the most prolific publishers of console indie games in the UK, we meet Microsoft executives in person on a regular basis, and we still don?t understand how and when this policy is waived.

[HawkMan]

Most devs can't be assed to follow those clauses, so they rather just avoid the headache and work with sony.

 

Most would automatically follow them by doing what they already do. 

No, its said cases will be looked at on an individual basis.

If MS just waived everything why would they be stupid enough to still have a policy in place costing the business time and money with needless negotiations?

You've also said you've read the blog so you should have read this

 

 

I read it, but it only tells half the story since a lot of devs, especially the ones they talk about, the small weak ones, won't be affected since they can only dev for one platform at a time. 

 

again, if they already have a publish deal with Sony the clause doesn't affect them, if they do the Xbox version first, it's irrelevant. 

[SierraSonic]

Most would automatically follow them by doing what they already do. 

Most developers, THAT ARE AFFECTED, won't be bothered.

[Showan]

Most developers, THAT ARE AFFECTED, won't be bothered.

 

 

They won't bother, until they realize there is $$$ to be had.

 

Indies aren't multi-billion dollar corporations.  $$$ always talks....

 

 

I honestly don't think Microsoft cares about the very small select group of Indies, that they can't come to terms with.  These studios aren't the what potential console buyers make or break their decisions on.

 

Mount Your Friends isn't the reason 80million 360's were sold.  

 

More games is good I guess.  But this is going to be the trash can generation.  Where the next gen marketplace will look like Google Play/iOS store(s)  ....  1000lbs of crap for every 1 gem

 

On a personal note:  This Indie thing has more than worn out it's welcome for me...  

[trooper11]

More bad news for MS, it seems to be a regular fixture lately.

Hopefully MS reaches out to these guys and makes it right if there really are issues going on.

Indie developers have a lot of pull with the internet community and if they speak out against something, that thing is quickly dragged down because of it.

So whatever is going on, MS now has to respond in a way that defuses the situation.

[LaP]

Sad The Swapper is a good game worth playing.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

Already commented on this in the Stealth Inc 2 topic but MS need to get rid of this ASAP.

 

Besides the obvious reasons already covered, they're creating a divide among their partners when they waive the clause / favouring studios. If they're doing it so often already why bother having it in the first place :s

 

Reword the agreements to protect your tools and resources you provide, don't turn away business. Simple.

[GotBored]

Yikes, I thought this was going to work in Microsoft's advantage because if indie developers released on Xbox first they could then release on PS4 anytime they wanted to without worrying about a parity clause but it seems to not have worked out that way. I'm guessing indie developers would prefer to start on the next-gen console which has sold more; PS4 (7.4 million) rather than the one that has sold less; Xbox One (4.4 Million).

 

 

Sold-through sales data from http://www.vgchartz.com/

 

(Disclaimer VGChartz was considered an unreliable source from back in 2010 where its weekly sales data was a guesstimate rather than actual sales data but historical sales data has been accurate as they adjust sales data according to sales data trackers like NPD Group)

-side note: I'm not sure if graph indicates guesstimate value or confirmed sales data.

 

Sounds like the parity clause has back fired, one of those things that happen when your not the market leader anymore.

[Emn1ty]

-side note: I'm not sure if graph indicates guesstimate value or confirmed sales data.

 

Then why even post it?

[trooper11]

Yikes, I thought this was going to work in Microsoft's advantage because if indie developers released on Xbox first they could then release on PS4 anytime they wanted to without worrying about a parity clause but it seems to not have worked out that way.

Oh come on, you never thought this was a good idea, unless your saying you changed you mind, only to now be 'shocked' that it has not worked.

But hey, ultimately your point is correct, MS failed again.

[Slammers]

Yep, their blog posts shows they don't understand the parity clause, they haven't even investigate it to see what it means, they assume a lot and only seem to pamper to the anti MS PS4 fans. 

 

Their posts goes on about how small indies can't develop for both platforms at the same time. 

 

Yeah of course they can't, that's why parity clause is irrelevant for them. Either you develop for Xbox first and parity doesn't go in effect OR you develop for PS4 first and release there and when the team is done there and ready to do another platform they do Xbox. and again, parity doesn't go in effect.

 

Parity ONLY affects bigger indies who DO have the teams to develop for two platforms at the same time and plan on releasing on both platforms reasonably close. it's here to prevent 1-3 month headstarts on PS4 after MS drops tons of free dev tools and dev support on them for a multiplat title. 

 

So much fail in this post. You didn't read properly or don't fully understand what they are complaining about. An established company who meet with Microsoft exec's regularly don't know what they are talking about whereas "Hawkman" does? Sure. 

[GotBored]

Oh come on, you never thought this was a good idea, unless your saying you changed you mind, only to now be 'shocked' that it has not worked.

But hey, ultimately your point is correct, MS failed again.

 

Ofcourse I didn't think it was a good idea, but I thought it may have forced indie developers to release on Xbox One first and then to PS4 cause they could do that and not the other way around PS4 then Xbox One. But it didnt work out that way its seems.

[Hedon]

Yikes, I thought this was going to work in Microsoft's advantage because if indie developers released on Xbox first they could then release on PS4 anytime they wanted to without worrying about a parity clause but it seems to not have worked out that way. I'm guessing indie developers would prefer to start on the next-gen console which has sold more; PS4 (7.4 million) rather than the one that has sold less; Xbox One (4.4 Million).

Sold-through sales data from http://www.vgchartz.com/

(Disclaimer VGChartz was considered an unreliable source from back in 2010 where its weekly sales data was a guesstimate rather than actual sales data but historical sales data has been accurate as they adjust sales data according to sales data trackers like NPD Group)

-side note: I'm not sure if graph indicates guesstimate value or confirmed sales data.

Sounds like the parity clause has back fired, one of those things that happen when your not the market leader anymore.

Vgchartz is a horrible source and is inaccurate.

[Showan]

Yikes, I thought this was going to work in Microsoft's advantage because if indie developers released on Xbox first they could then release on PS4 anytime they wanted to without worrying about a parity clause but it seems to not have worked out that way. I'm guessing indie developers would prefer to start on the next-gen console which has sold more; PS4 (7.4 million) rather than the one that has sold less; Xbox One (4.4 Million).

 

 

Sold-through sales data from http://www.vgchartz.com/

 

(Disclaimer VGChartz was considered an unreliable source from back in 2010 where its weekly sales data was a guesstimate rather than actual sales data but historical sales data has been accurate as they adjust sales data according to sales data trackers like NPD Group)

-side note: I'm not sure if graph indicates guesstimate value or confirmed sales data.

 

Sounds like the parity clause has back fired, one of those things that happen when your not the market leader anymore.

So if I'm looking at this right... That's means the Xbox One is doing very very good...

The PS4 is just going nuts right now. All those other units are established, whereas the One has only been on shelves a few short months.