Xbox Games with Gold: July 2014

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

I was actually talking about how Sony kind of 'cheated' I think last month or this month and in effect was not even offering the normal two. I think you mentioned it in the PS+ thread.

 

Ah ok. Yeah Velocity Ultra fills a spot on the PS3 and Vita for PS+ July in Asia. Only 5 games instead of 6. Technically within the description of what they said they'd offer, but a cop out none the less IMO.

 

As for being inferior or superior that's definitely a subjective opinion when you're talking about the lines up. You can't please everyone with them, but there needs to be some consistency about what is included. Last month your XBL subs were apparently worth 5 games broken down into 2 retail games and 3 downloads. This month we get 1 arcade game, 1 download and 1 broken, abandoned mess. Doesn't add up, even if you ignore what PS+ is doing.

 

Seems like the parity clause isn't hurting all developers, since MS seems to be lifting that requirement more and more (the Oddworld announcement being the latest example of that). Maybe they are getting ready to just do away with it.

 

As I've said in the past, the moment you start waiving the parity clause is the moment it becomes useless. You cause a divide among your partners, possibly pushing them away and basically superimposing a restriction that doesn't benefit anyone. Coming from XBLA being the #1 destination you launched on for maximum sales etc to being the last port of call is not what you want your business to be. You can protect your assets in other ways that don't give away the next biggest game to another platform.

 

What I was getting at in that post you quoted is that PSN is getting the games first and they arrive later on XBL. Yes they're arriving, but behind the competition, which is also going to be the case for Oddworld N&T. Seeing as these indies games are making up the bulk of GwG/PS+ and probably will continue to for the forseeable future, you'll probably find Oddworld might be part of PS+ before it even launches on X1, as we saw with Contrast, Outlast etc.

 

The further back they push release, the longer you'll have to wait to be part of GwG, the skimpier the selection is for gamers.

 

There is currently 20 downloadable "arcade-esque" games on X1, not including any "free" games like KI, Powerstar Golf etc. Even at 2 games per month you're looking at 10 months worth of content for GwG. And if you're proud to tout 6 games in 10 days, there's not going to be an issue with keeping titles in the pipeline to choose from. Long before you even include retail games from launch ala Ryse, Forza etc. If it is an issue, and IMO it's not, you do like I said and boost your 360 offer to compensate it. There's only 600+ XBLA and 1K+ retail to choose from :laugh:

[trooper11]

As for being inferior or superior that's definitely a subjective opinion when you're talking about the lines up. You can't please everyone with them, but there needs to be some consistency about what is included. Last month your XBL subs were apparently worth 5 games broken down into 2 retail games and 3 downloads. This month we get 1 arcade game, 1 download and 1 broken, abandoned mess. Doesn't add up, even if you ignore what PS+ is doing.

I think what makes it worse is that one of the games is apparently really bad.

As far as consistency goes, I agree, its better when people can count on a certain amount of content each month. Offering Max for a second month isn't terrible though, its just a cop out like you mentioned Sony doing. The game itself is not bad and anyone that didn't get the game last month can still get it now.

 

As I've said in the past, the moment you start waiving the parity clause is the moment it becomes useless. You cause a divide among your partners, possibly pushing them away and basically superimposing a restriction that doesn't benefit anyone. Coming from XBLA being the #1 destination you launched on for maximum sales etc to being the last port of call is not what you want your business to be. You can protect your assets in other ways that don't give away the next biggest game to another platform.

Yeah, I hope they are just working towards phasing it out. MS is not stubborn enough to fight things like this for long. They now have a good history of making changes based on feedback.

 

What I was getting at in that post you quoted is that PSN is getting the games first and they arrive later on XBL. Yes they're arriving, but behind the competition, which is also going to be the case for Oddworld N&T. Seeing as these indies games are making up the bulk of GwG/PS+ and probably will continue to for the forseeable future, you'll probably find Oddworld might be part of PS+ before it even launches on X1, as we saw with Contrast, Outlast etc.

What I don't get though is why does the parity clause results in games coming later to the X1? The claim you seem to be making is that if no clause existed, then the games would come out at the same time. But if that were true, then why does the clause make that not happen?

 

There is currently 20 downloadable "arcade-esque" games on X1, not including any "free" games like KI, Powerstar Golf etc. Even at 2 games per month you're looking at 10 months worth of content for GwG. And if you're proud to tout 6 games in 10 days, there's not going to be an issue with keeping titles in the pipeline to choose from. Long before you even include retail games from launch ala Ryse, Forza etc. If it is an issue, and IMO it's not, you do like I said and boost your 360 offer to compensate it. There's only 600+ XBLA and 1K+ retail to choose from :laugh:

The problem with propping up GwG by offering more 360 titles is not not everyone wants to play 360 titles anymore. Some have even traded in their systems for an X1, so inflating the 360 numbers does nothing for them. That is like propping up a lack of ps4 titles with more free content on Vita.

If we compare this to Sony, I think they get a pass thanks to the fact that they have more platforms to offer content on. They may not be offering retail titles on the ps4, but since you get free games on the ps3 and Vita, its easier to cut them some slack. Both companies offer two titles free on each platform, Sony just has more platforms.

Thinking outside the box a bit, I wonder if MS could do something like offer free pc games at some point as well, to even the spread.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

What I don't get though is why does the parity clause results in games coming later to the X1? The claim you seem to be making is that if no clause existed, then the games would come out at the same time. But if that were true, then why does the clause make that not happen?

The problem with propping up GwG by offering more 360 titles is not not everyone wants to play 360 titles anymore. Some have even traded in their systems for an X1, so inflating the 360 numbers does nothing for them. That is like propping up a lack of ps4 titles with more free content on Vita.

If we compare this to Sony, I think they get a pass thanks to the fact that they have more platforms to offer content on. They may not be offering retail titles on the ps4, but since you get free games on the ps3 and Vita, its easier to cut them some slack. Both companies offer two titles free on each platform, Sony just has more platforms.

Thinking outside the box a bit, I wonder if MS could do something like offer free pc games at some point as well, to even the spread.

 

Not necessariliy that they would release at the same time, but perhaps they would come to the X1 first and PS4 later. Instead, developers are choosing to go the route without restrictions, however restraining you want to argue they actually are.

 

As for Sony propping it up with Vita, that is why I dispute the notion I am being entitled. I'm not asking for 6 games total to make up the numbers. At most I'd expect Microsoft to either offer less but better games than Sony (like they've done with Guacamelee), or to at least match the number split across the platforms i.e three 360, one X1 game etc (with the exception X1 retail games come later, obviously). Cutting the retail 360 games from the line up is a low blow that I can't quite understand why people find acceptable, but maybe the hype of receiving a game on release for "free" is what does it. In future if they did want to prop up their numbers they can use whatever software becomes cross-platform from Win8 store or include WinPho games. They've already played with that concept a little when Halo Spartan Assault was discounted for previous buyers.

[trooper11]

Not necessariliy that they would release at the same time, but perhaps they would come to the X1 first and PS4 later. Instead, developers are choosing to go the route without restrictions, however restraining you want to argue they actually are.

But wait, why would the parity clause keep them from releasing first on the X1 and ps4 later? It does not bar developers from releasing first on the X1.

I think the real issue is that it forces a developer to commit to a timetable at all. It would force a developer to commit to bringing an X1 version first or at the same time. I'm sure a developer would prefer to work by their own timetable, so that if say they run into trouble, they can change the schedule on a whim.

So yeah, I think they should just remove the clause if they are going to let developers ignore it anyway.

As for Sony propping it up with Vita, that is why I dispute the notion I am being entitled. I'm not asking for 6 games total to make up the numbers. At most I'd expect Microsoft to either offer less but better games than Sony (like they've done with Guacamelee), or to at least match the number split across the platforms i.e three 360, one X1 game etc (with the exception X1 retail games come later, obviously). Cutting the retail 360 games from the line up is a low blow that I can't quite understand why people find acceptable, but maybe the hype of receiving a game on release for "free" is what does it. In future if they did want to prop up their numbers they can use whatever software becomes cross-platform from Win8 store or include WinPho games. They've already played with that concept a little when Halo Spartan Assault was discounted for previous buyers.

How can MS offer better games than Sony? Sony already offers good games, that has been a given for a while. Its MS that doesn't always offer good games for most people. Your never going to be able to argue that MS offers 'better' games thanks to how subjective that point is. The only option is more or equal quantity.

As far as cutting retail games from the 360, I'm not sure who you think finds it acceptable, but it seems like most people were commenting on whether they like the arcade games or not. It could be as you said that more people are just appreciating the chance to get free games. Its all new to them remember? The MS platforms have been in the dark ages :laugh:. Us Sony platform owners are now much more discerning about those extra games.

Seriously though, I think every single person would agree that getting more retail games would be nice if you asked them. The difference is how angry it makes a person when you get two arcade games instead. For me personally, I don't get so worked up about it, but I prefer the retail/arcade mix each month, so I would like to see them get back to that. However, I could be very happy with the right two arcade games. There are really good arcade games across the 360,X1, Ps3, and PS4. I probably wouldn't get upset at all if there was a month with two very good arcade games. This is just one month though, so its a little early to assume this is a new trend. I've had poor months from PS+ too, so I take it in stride.

[neoadorable]

You guys are arguing about this now? Of course it's OK to criticize the quality and quantity of the games in both programs, why not? We pay for them and we are in a relationship with MS and Sony. We are stakeholders and we care. So we express opinions. I think the selections for both in July are pretty mediocre, but will try whatever they give us. I don't expect stuff like Forza 5 to go "free" just yet. And neither PS+ nor GwG are free, the only ones giving anything for free are ironically Origin.

[BajiRav]

Like I said, Sony can manage it, no reason MS can't. Some of the multiplatform games have been part of PS+ like Contrast, Outlast etc.

 

They should be investing in indies like Sony did to bolster their early offers until they can include retail X1 games, avoiding this very situation. Basically what we're seeing is a premature offer / programme instead.

 

And if they couldn't, there's no reason they can't offer more 360 retail / XBLA titles to make up for it. It's not about wanting more more more, but at least match them when you're playing catch up and have the advantage.

 

They need to have something for selling when they launch XBL in remaining markets in next few months. Sony doesn't have that factor because they have launched pretty much everywhere they usualy do (except China?).

Their retail offerings are as good as Sony if not better but if they give away everything now, what will they sell come Aug-Sept?

[BajiRav]

But wait, why would the parity clause keep them from releasing first on the X1 and ps4 later? It does not bar developers from releasing first on the X1.

I think the real issue is that it forces a developer to commit to a timetable at all. It would force a developer to commit to bringing an X1 version first or at the same time. I'm sure a developer would prefer to work by their own timetable, so that if say they run into trouble, they can change the schedule on a whim.

So yeah, I think they should just remove the clause if they are going to let developers ignore it anyway.

How can MS offer better games than Sony? Sony already offers good games, that has been a given for a while. Its MS that doesn't always offer good games for most people. Your never going to be able to argue that MS offers 'better' games thanks to how subjective that point is. The only option is more or equal quantity.

As far as cutting retail games from the 360, I'm not sure who you think finds it acceptable, but it seems like most people were commenting on whether they like the arcade games or not. It could be as you said that more people are just appreciating the chance to get free games. Its all new to them remember? The MS platforms have been in the dark ages :laugh:. Us Sony platform owners are now much more discerning about those extra games.

Seriously though, I think every single person would agree that getting more retail games would be nice if you asked them. The difference is how angry it makes a person when you get two arcade games instead. For me personally, I don't get so worked up about it, but I prefer the retail/arcade mix each month, so I would like to see them get back to that. However, I could be very happy with the right two arcade games. There are really good arcade games across the 360,X1, Ps3, and PS4. I probably wouldn't get upset at all if there was a month with two very good arcade games. This is just one month though, so its a little early to assume this is a new trend. I've had poor months from PS+ too, so I take it in stride.

 

I find the notion of Arcade games being "lesser" games a bit weird because some of the best games on Xbox 360 are Arcade. My personal favorites being Trials, Limbo, Shadow Complex, Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons etc. (not to mention the "free" Doritos games which were almost always fun) I am sure there are more that I am missing here.

[trooper11]

You know, we were talking earlier about the fact that MS is not offering two games for July because they are recycling a free game from last month, but I haven't actually seen it said by MS that those two games represent what is coming for July. I wonder if we will see them announce a true second X1 game once we reach the halfway point of the month.

Also, I believe it was last month that represented the best XBL Gold value where you saw 2 X1 games and 3 X360 games, but that was more than the norm.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

They need to have something for selling when they launch XBL in remaining markets in next few months. Sony doesn't have that factor because they have launched pretty much everywhere they usualy do (except China?).

Their retail offerings are as good as Sony if not better but if they give away everything now, what will they sell come Aug-Sept?

 

I would have thought the actual console that people have been waiting almost a year for would be good enough for something for selling :p

[trooper11]

I would have thought the actual console that people have been waiting almost a year for would be good enough for something for selling :p

Nah, zero interest. Where have you been?

[Anthony Tosie Veteran]

I'm not sure where you all get your information, but Gotham City Impostors has never been a free-to-play game on consoles. Ever. It's also not at all a bad game on consoles (the same isn't true on PC), but the community died down for a bit. Given that it's now free, I would imagine that's not going to be a problem.

 

No, it's not a "buggy" or "broken" mess.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

I'm not sure where you all get your information, but Gotham City Impostors has never been a free-to-play game on consoles. Ever. It's also not at all a bad game on consoles (the same isn't true on PC), but the community died down for a bit. Given that it's now free, I would imagine that's not going to be a problem.

 

No, it's not a "buggy" or "broken" mess.

 

I never said on consoles, it switched to F2P on PC because they couldn't fix it. F2P wasn't an option when it released on consoles IIRC. Instead they just abandoned it, as did the playerbase.

 

And I'm not surprised you like it when your favourite developer made it :p

 

I've played it since 360 beta and it never improved, only got worse. Each to their own though!

[Anthony Tosie Veteran]

I never said on consoles, it switched to F2P on PC because they couldn't fix it. F2P wasn't an option when it released on consoles IIRC. Instead they just abandoned it, as did the playerbase.

 

And I'm not surprised you like it when your favourite developer made it :p

 

I've played it since 360 beta and it never improved, only got worse. Each to their own though!

We're not discussing the PC version, however. We're specifically talking about the Xbox 360 version, since that's what this topic is about. The PC version is a bug-riddled mess that got drastically different review scores than the console versions.

 

Monolith is far from my favorite developer, so I'm not sure where you're going with that  :huh:

[trooper11]

I never played the Gotham game, so I have no idea if its good or not.

I suggest people just try out the game for themselves now that its free and go from there.

Although this does illustrate how the games that MS and Sony pick to be free can be of debatable quality. Some months you get something you like, some months you don't.

[123456789A]

This Guacamole game seems to be pretty fun.

[BajiRav]

I would have thought the actual console that people have been waiting almost a year for would be good enough for something for selling :p

Uh...i am talking about things they can sell along with the console. The stuff where they have better margins and make the most money.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

We're not discussing the PC version, however. We're specifically talking about the Xbox 360 version, since that's what this topic is about. The PC version is a bug-riddled mess that got drastically different review scores than the console versions.

 

Monolith is far from my favorite developer, so I'm not sure where you're going with that  :huh:

 

I'm not talking about review scores or even reviews, just my first hand experience on both platforms pre and post F2P. The game was a mess since beta for me and was built with the F2P model in mind, and in other areas worse, with P2W model (XP boosts DLC along with the micro-transactions). The latter of which is still evident in the console release the last I checked, as the game was released at a time when TUs still cost thousands to publish. The PC version was easier to update as it doesn't have the same silly restrictions obviously, but more importantly they had introduced F2P support to Steam just a few months before release. The game was only 6 months old before they switched :no:

 

But like I say, each to their own.

[Anthony Tosie Veteran]

I'm not talking about review scores or even reviews, just my first hand experience on both platforms pre and post F2P. The game was a mess since beta for me and was built with the F2P model in mind, and in other areas worse, with P2W model (XP boosts DLC along with the micro-transactions). The latter of which is still evident in the console release the last I checked, as the game was released at a time when TUs still cost thousands to publish. The PC version was easier to update as it doesn't have the same silly restrictions obviously, but more importantly they had introduced F2P support to Steam just a few months before release. The game was only 6 months old before they switched :no:

 

But like I say, each to their own.

Not sure how long you played, but the downloadable upgrades are a complete waste of money. You level up so quickly and unlock equipment so rapidly that it's almost insane to pay for the microtransactions. There's literally nothing you can buy that you can't also unlock in the game within an hour or less; plenty of developers and publishers were going this route at the time. Websites like Kotaku (I believe it was them) made a big stink about absolutely nothing when it came to the microtransactions.

 

Yet again, the PC version is a drastically different game. It went F2P because it sold about five copies, largely due to its horrible quality compared to the console versions. That was the only way they were going to make any money off it, because of the microtransactions.

 

I can understand not liking the game, as it's not for everyone, but the microtransactions are in no way what you're describing them to be. They are absolutely not a "pay to win" scheme. I believe Battlefield has similar downloads, for example, and those take far, far, far longer to unlock, yet there's been almost no outcry from Kotaku and the like.

[neoadorable]

This Guacamole game seems to be pretty fun.

 

"This Guacamole game" heh heh excellent deadpan! Post of the day! It's GUACAMELEE dammit, like guacamole and melee...GUACAMELEE! :ike:

Derivative humor and cheap cultural stereotyping aside, yeah it's pretty fun, not my kind of experience per se but certainly something to give a try.