RowdyReverb
Member
I hope SOMA makes its way to Xbox eventually. Game looks neat. Anybody hear anything about a port?
You mean Spartan Assault, which is also missing from your list https://store.xbox.com/Xbox-One/Games/Halo-Spartan-Assault/a3807603-9e22-48b2-8b75-c6bf36ddc511
Spartan Strike is its sequel and didn't come to Xbox One.
Yep, they said it's "vey much a possibility".I hope SOMA makes its way to Xbox eventually. Game looks neat. Anybody hear anything about a port?
Oh yeah, forgot it's a 2015 list. My bad.Assault came out in December, which misses this list.
PS3 and Xbox 360 were a generation ago. We're on PS4 and XB1 now. Try and keep up.
Yep, they said it's "vey much a possibility".
Well, I updated my post. You clearly left out three indy mentions that are on the first page.
So, you mentioned three AAA titles and then ignored three indie titles. What was the point?
A year later and I still do not get the fuss. As a XB1 owner I have no issues with MS requiring additional content if your game is going to be released months later at the same price. You want that extra money XB1 users can potentially provide? Then release your game the time as your PS4 release.
Alternatively you could just move on to the next game and skip the XB1 entirely, which appears to be what's happening.
There really is a lot of crap on both consoles that are just clogging the system. I'm not fanboy but I would honestly say that PS4 has a lot more "crap" on it than the Xbox One does. If that's a plus, then so be it.
And a generation later we had developers come out and express their regrets (with signed agreements) and dissatisfaction with the Xbox Live Arcade scene on Xbox 360 and how they mishandled it towards the last years of the system so it certainly wasn't perfect.I still remember how alot of Japanese Shumps simply died on Xbox LIVE Arcade and alot of that was blamed on how the games were being advertised/promoted on the store (and of course the developers platform of choice at the time).No I just mean Microsoft's attitude to indies has been there for since the 360. They just seem to be promoting it a lot more with ID@Xbox for Xbox One. But my point being, Microsoft has always been supportive of smaller developers.
Sweet.
What a way to end this Chubs. Kinda sad really.
Games that a reasonable person wouldn't miss sorry that's a shit post simple and plain.
Pretty sure Microsoft were on the indie train before Sony. Starting with allowing people to develop and publish on their system with games such as Super Meat Boy, Braid and Fez. Even to much smaller indie developers with the indie marketplace on the 360...which obviously led to complete crap being put on there. Combined with being able to giving people development tools such as XNA. PS3 didn't have any of this other than the big indies(oxymoron)?
A year later and I still do not get the fuss. As a XB1 owner I have no issues with MS requiring additional content if your game is going to be released months later at the same price. You want that extra money XB1 users can potentially provide? Then release your game the time as your PS4 release.
Which is kind of my point. They're being shoved off to a dedicated, apparently not heavily frequented site while Sony treats the newest Call of Duty trailer and some obscure indie equally on their blog.
I really don't pay much attention to Indie games on console (being a PC gamer too), but more is always better.
I see Gigantic and Pinball FX2, which both got showings at E3, not Elite but anyway, I was talking about really rather obscure and small games. Compare that to posts about Home Free and Bedlam on the PlayStation blog today, for instance. For an indie dev, that's really great exposure and it goes a long way to foster the community to accept these games as "equal".
Nice thread chubigans. Subbed.
It's interesting to see that PS4 has almost 33% more indies than X1 even after the Xbox team creating their indie program. And seeing big titles like Hotline Miami 2, SOMA, Rocket League only on PS4 show to me that there is still something behind the scene that stopping some of them to go multiplataform.
Frozen Free Fall was also released (to my dismay) on X1 in Sept.
Giantbomb guys kinda addressed this in last weeks podcast, but to sorta summarize my fellings on this matter......I dont care. I really dont care about the amount of digital titles coming to these consoles as I dont play 99% of them and they dont look interesting to me in the least. They dont sell consoles and outside of the guys sitting on forums like us, a large majourity of these games will go completely unnoticed by the mass public because shoving 10 games on your service a week means nothing gets the spotlight.
You care enough that you felt like posting in this thread. Also why would you care whether these games are system sellers or not? Are you a Sony/MS shareholder that just care about company profits or a gamer that wants the option to play as many games as possible? If you don't mind being treated like a 2nd class citizen fine, but don't you think there are others that would enjoy those games?Giantbomb guys kinda addressed this in last weeks podcast, but to sorta summarize my fellings on this matter......I dont care. I really dont care about the amount of digital titles coming to these consoles as I dont play 99% of them and they dont look interesting to me in the least. They dont sell consoles and outside of the guys sitting on forums like us, a large majourity of these games will go completely unnoticed by the mass public because shoving 10 games on your service a week means nothing gets the spotlight.
The problem is that what is a 'good' game is subjective, and having less games on a platform doesn't somehow mean that a higher proportion of them are good ones when those titles have to jump through the same hoops as the shovelware. Players with enough interest in games to explore a digital marketplace are quite capable of discerning what they want to play when on consoles you are talking only a few hundred rather than several thousand titles, and a much lower percentage of FTP titles. Steam statistics really don't apply to PSN etc.Not really. More games (and lack of trials) makes it just harder to filter the bad from the good and sales overall will be lower. Wasn't there a study on Steam that showed 90 % of revenue is generated by some 5 % of all games?
Are some people in this thread really arguing for less games?
Like, I understand not being interested in certain games, but you don't even want the option of buying them?
That's crazy to me.
Sometimes I browse the PSN store and buy a cheap game to amuse myself, and it would suck if I had less choice for no other reason than the platform holder's indie policy.
Not really. More games (and lack of trials) makes it just harder to filter the bad from the good and sales overall will be lower. Wasn't there a study on Steam that showed 90 % of revenue is generated by some 5 % of all games?
Sony was on the indie train going all the way back to the PSone
Remember a PSone puzzle game named Devil Dice? That was originally created in Net Yaroze.
Only in the sense that you have more choice, and that goes for having more lesser quality games to choose from, as well as more higher quality games too. Even then, it's not difficult for informed gamers with some common sense and the ability to use the internet to research the games a bit. No one argues that Apple's devices are worse off for having more apps. More is always better, because it increases your chances of getting a greater number of quality titles, not just lesser ones.
The amusing thing is, arguably the best exclusive released on the Xbox One this year, and the only major exclusive they had for the first two thirds of the year, was a digital title (Oni and the Blind Forest). Also with the PS4, games like Journey, Shovel Knight, Bastion, Galak-Z, Binding of Isaac, Velocity 2X, OlliOlli 2, Rocket League, Geometry Wars, Axiom Verge etc, ranking as some of the highest rated games on the platform.
Pretty sure Microsoft were on the indie train before Sony. Starting with allowing people to develop and publish on their system with games such as Super Meat Boy, Braid and Fez. Even to much smaller indie developers with the indie marketplace on the 360...which obviously led to complete crap being put on there. Combined with being able to giving people development tools such as XNA. PS3 didn't have any of this other than the big indies(oxymoron)?
This is one of the ps4 games listed - kitten squad. Not sure if quality is much of a concern when making lists like those in the op. It's just pure numbers which backwards compatibility will most likely provide.
I'd be interested to know how many of those games on the lists are vita/ps3 ports.
Is that a straight up Bomberman clone? Also, is that the game Peta made? I wrote Peta off immediately, but I do love me some Bomberman. You say it's not good though?
Or it could be that the barrier to entry is far lower than ever before for creative minds and we are now seeing an abundance of games made by great indies. Indies are a thing and they are important for a healthy gaming ecosphere. Gamers have realized there's plenty a gem to be had.This thread is like beating a dead horse. PS4 gets most of indie games first for three main reasons: MS abusive policies, install base and mindshare. The first one can be corrected, the other two not so much. The efforts that the ID@Xbox team have to put to bring a game first to their platform are huge, meanwhile a lot of indies are lining up to publish their games on a Playstation platform because Sony has provided a friendly environment for them since day one. At this point there is no way for MS to reverse this situation.
Anyways, last gen was the other way around and people weren't half as concerned. I think that a lot of people use this subject as a bullet point in console wars, which is a shame.
I just posted this in the 2014 thread, but I'm reposting it here since this is the place for new 2015 discussion.
I'll just briefly offer my perspective as someone who is actively trying to work their way into the world of indie development. This is just my own experience and opinion, so I'm sure it's not representative of other indie devs. I'm also going to omit most of the details (names, dates, numbers, etc.) because it wouldn't really be professional of me to speak to those.
The biggest advantage that Sony has over MS with regards to indie games is the way they're extremely active in courting interesting projects as they pop up. If you have an indie game that's getting some significant amount of attention via social media, there's a decent chance that someone at Sony will initiate contact with you. From there, it's an extremely low friction process to start working with them, and the people at Sony are very helpful and nice at every step along the way.
Maybe this is just me, but that extremely pleasant interaction kinda engenders a sense of loyalty. It feels like Sony has genuine confidence in your product and wants to help you make it successful. That sense of loyalty is a bit contagious, and I think it plays a huge part in making other developers and people in general feel encouraged by Sony's approach to indie games.
On the flip side, regardless of how much of it is actually truth vs perception, everything about approaching MS feels like trying to get inside of a walled city. Unless you have a massively popular up and coming project, it doesn't seem like MS is really initiating contact with any devs. You're most likely going to need to go pay the fee to become a registered MS developer and then submit to ID@Xbox without any prior interaction from someone at MS. It's not a hugely involved or costly process, but it ends up feeling like you're paying a fee for the opportunity to cold call and sell someone on your game. It's still relatively low risk to apply, but any amount of friction at all just makes it feel like much more of a long shot than the Sony experience.
I've only ever had one brief conversation with someone from ID@Xbox because I met them in person at GDC, and I didn't walk away from it feeling any better about the prospect of approaching an Xbox One release. To be totally honest, I felt like I was kinda being guilt tripped into applying. The conversation mostly boiled down to, "We've sent out X dev kits to developers. Don't you think you're one of the top X developers out there? If you don't fill out the application, you'll never find out what it's like to work with us." (just paraphrasing here, not an exact quote)
This isn't even touching on whatever MS's contractual obligations are with regard to release parity or additional content - I don't actually know about any of it and wouldn't be able to say anything specific if I did. I'm sure a lot of it is negotiable and won't be the same for every developer anyway.
Nintendo hasn't really entered into the discussion in this thread much, but for the record, all of my interaction with them has also been very pleasant and productive.
No I just mean Microsoft's attitude to indies has been there for since the 360. They just seem to be promoting it a lot more with ID@Xbox for Xbox One. But my point being, Microsoft has always been supportive of smaller developers.
Are some people in this thread really arguing for less games?
Giantbomb guys kinda addressed this in last weeks podcast, but to sorta summarize my fellings on this matter......I dont care. I really dont care about the amount of digital titles coming to these consoles as I dont play 99% of them and they dont look interesting to me in the least. They dont sell consoles and outside of the guys sitting on forums like us, a large majourity of these games will go completely unnoticed by the mass public because shoving 10 games on your service a week means nothing gets the spotlight.
This thread is like beating a dead horse. PS4 gets most of indie games first for three main reasons: MS abusive policies, install base and mindshare. The first one can be corrected, the other two not so much. The efforts that the ID@Xbox team have to put to bring a game first to their platform are huge, meanwhile a lot of indies are lining up to publish their games on a Playstation platform because Sony has provided a friendly environment for them since day one. At this point there is no way for MS to reverse this situation.
Anyways, last gen was the other way around and people weren't half as concerned. I think that a lot of people use this subject as a bullet point in console wars, which is a shame.
This thread is like beating a dead horse. PS4 gets most of indie games first for three main reasons: MS abusive policies, install base and mindshare. The first one can be corrected, the other two not so much. The efforts that the ID@Xbox team have to put to bring a game first to their platform are huge, meanwhile a lot of indies are lining up to publish their games on a Playstation platform because Sony has provided a friendly environment for them since day one. At this point there is no way for MS to reverse this situation.
Anyways, last gen was the other way around and people weren't half as concerned. I think that a lot of people use this subject as a bullet point in console wars, which is a shame.
Or it could be that the barrier to entry is far lower than ever before for creative minds and we are now seeing an abundance of games made by great indies. Indies are a thing and they are important for a healthy gaming ecosphere. Gamers have realized there's plenty a gem to be had.
Or, just go with your excuse if it makes you feel better.
Yeah... I'm sure chubs, a developer, is in it for the console wars...
The costs are all costs associated with shipping such as requiring you have insurance, and get the game rates in whatever region it is releasing in (different ratings boards cost different amounts).MS requires developers pay a fee to publish ID@ games?
Since when? That's a pretty stupid change, wasn't it free before?