hylian_pirate
Member
He was asked in an interview. What was he supposed to say?pivot said:
Valve: Xbox Live policy is 'such a train wreck'
- Thread starter Guy Legend
- Start date
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
I guess when Valve realized that they can use steamworks on PS3, they got all giddy-up with it.RSTEIN said:
Majine said:
Includes DLC and Portal. DONE SON!
Prime crotch
Banned
Besides the fact he can be a consumer as well, this is a thread about Gabe's opinion and... I dont know what you're getting at, don't make sensepivot said:
The Praiseworthy
Member
So.... Gabe is now SONY fan?
SturokBGD
Member
That would be great for Microsoft if the 360 was the one and only option consumers have. This is not the case, even less so now that Sony actually appear to be getting their shit together in regards to this kind of thing.aeolist said:
Put it this way, I've picked up everything Valve have ever produced on 360, assuming the same things that Valve themselves have assumed. I won't be doing so again, and that's no fault of Valve's at all.
I can get a better experience on a PC that isn't even as powerful as a 360 in some ways, at a reduced cost (dramatically so, when you compare the cost of brand new retail games on 360 and add the cost of DLC to get even close to a comparable experience), with the promise of support for months or even years to come.
I can understand the foundations of Xbox Live, but this is 2010, not 2005, so Microsoft are very quickly biting themselves in the bum.
IsntChrisL
Member
I wasn't aware MS was charging developers to update their own games. No wonder 360 games get late patches and add-ons sometimes..
I'm pretty sick of MS' stances on Live. They grab you by the ankles, shake you for cash and tell you they'll see you tomorrow.
Wait, what?
I'm pretty sick of MS' stances on Live. They grab you by the ankles, shake you for cash and tell you they'll see you tomorrow.
Wait, what?
Circle of Willis
Neo Member
Rad- said:
If they really wanted to make sure games weren't released unfinished, they'd make their certification process way more stringent. This one patch crap was just a lazy cop out..
Confidence Man
Member
Guevara said:
That service is reserved for Live Platinum users, for $80 a year. It's all about choice.
charlequin
Banned
stuminus3 said:
The actual full quote is quite unambiguously referring to Live's policy, not Valve's assumptions, and he's completely correct. Live the service is very polished and successful, but their paranoid unwillingness to allow any alternate content streams or anything that isn't monetized in their pre-specified way has been rapidly eroding their initially immense lead over the PSN service. Already Microsoft's lousy Live policy has cost them even a late-to-the-party FFXIV release and now it's turned what was previously a de facto Valve exclusivity into a scenario where the PS3 versions of all future Valve games will be dramatically superior.
This is just another example of tight-ass Microsoft shining through now that the investors have a tighter hand on the pursestrings. I don't think a single person with forward-thinking ideas about how to develop the Xbox platform is left at the company.
electroshockwave said:
The original policy was that DLC could be free if and only if it was free on PSN, but my guess is that they've tightened even that up in the interim.
Steve Youngblood
Member
Okay, he has an axe to grind. What's your point, again? Do you deny that his complaints are legitimate?pivot said:
pivot said:
So a video game company that has released games for a console is not allowed any opinion about that console developer or anything related, such as video games?
You'll excuse me if I give more weight to his opinion than yours, him heading a top tier video game company and you being, well, a forum poster.
Old Gimlet Eyes
Member
Obviously with how big of a fan Valve is for paid DLC and their Steam sales.spats said:
AndyMoogle
Member
If you don't play game X, why bother installing it in the first place? You don't have to install every game on your game list.speculawyer said:
Back on topic. I really can't see MS changing their policies. Games sell a lot; both on XBLA and retail. Not to mention how much DLC sell. I don't see why MS would want to back away from all that money.
OldJadedGamer
Banned
Darkshier said:
Both MS and Sony charge for patches. MS gives you the first one free but then all the rest of them are $10,000 last I heard. Sony charges each time and their patch cost is in line with MS's. It's put in place so that developers/publishers don't release an unfinished game and then patch it a thousand times... like they do on PC sometimes.
Valve could do all the updates they want, they just don't want to pay for it. Not sure how this is going to change on the PS3 as the updates still need to go through certification at Sony which costs money.
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
pivot said:
Think harder before you call people dense. This game will also release on Xbox and so on XBL. Therefore he wants it to sell as much as possible on both platforms.
His complaints are entirely legitimate also.
Sho_Nuff82
Member
EuropeOG said:
Fixed.
They've been woefully silent since the announcement of the Slim console on anything that could be considered "good news", aside from XBLA announcements. I'm not a chicken little who thinks this means everything is falling apart, but it's pretty obvious that the suits at MS don't know or don't care about good PR. Everything announced since has been a cash-grab or a feature removal.
Every company makes pig-headed decisions, but you have to eventually peak your head out and assure people that their dedication to your platform is not misplaced.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
OldJadedGamer said:
Sony is letting Valve port Steamworks and cert their own patches and deploy them by themselves. For free.
TouchMyBox
Member
RSTEIN said:
Valve never hated Sony, they hated the PS3. They're not saying how great it is to develop for the PS3's architecture, but it seems to have come to a point where policy reigns supreme, and any issues with coding will work itself out eventually.
charlequin
Banned
Stumpokapow said:
And of course they allow free DLC, which Microsoft have consistently objected to.
SturokBGD
Member
This is the crux of the matter. Sometimes, games get released on PC and they're junk until they get patched 50 times. Sometimes, games get released on PC and they're awesome and the developers put out patches that make them even more awesome.OldJadedGamer said:
The closed console solution to all of this seems to be "let's make this really expensive, and pass the cost on to the consumers". Which is kind of crappy on a closed platform, where the hardware is all the same and there's (apparently?) more quality control on what actually gets released on the platform in the first place.
Old Gimlet Eyes
Member
That's the joke of it though. Publishers aren't going to wait on QA to finish bug fixing, they are going to release the product when they want to. Games now, more than ever, need more post-release title updates. All the major online multiplayer games require AT least 2-3 bug/balance patches and most could use more than that. Hell, how many did Gears of War 2 have?OldJadedGamer said:
The fact that you would literally piss on the consumer by charging the publisher to fix their broken game, is just plain fucked. With game companies running on shoestring profit margins where it seems like every new game can make or break a studio, you would want that game to be as playable and supported as possible, IMO at least.
He is right... from a Industry POV not a consumer.
MS charge out the end for re submission and other content. They promote the "sell DLC within 3 months of launch" for reductions in submission.
The whole process is very tedious for an open developer such as Valve. PSN is totally open at a charge yes, but the overall control and options for movement is alot more developer friendly.
MS charge out the end for re submission and other content. They promote the "sell DLC within 3 months of launch" for reductions in submission.
The whole process is very tedious for an open developer such as Valve. PSN is totally open at a charge yes, but the overall control and options for movement is alot more developer friendly.
OldJadedGamer
Banned
Stumpokapow said:
And when the steamworks app needs patched? I'm not sure I feel good with Valve being unchecked and patching willy nilly without Sony double checking their shit.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
charlequin said:
Of course, by contrast Sony charges 16 cents a gig for bandwidth and Microsoft doesn't.
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
pivot said:
Steamworks isn't, no. I don't see how you think that this is such a lucrative vested interest that it would cause him to make extraordinary claims about XBL which everyone else knows to be damn-well true.
charlequin
Banned
OldJadedGamer said:
:lol Are you serious?
crimsonheadGCN
Banned
OldJadedGamer said:
Steamworks will be integrated into the game. It's not a separate application.
Prime crotch
Banned
If he had any wants on what I use or not it would be over Steam; but putting your paranoia aside, you posted on a thread about a topic you proclaimed no interest over it. And yet here you are.pivot said:
charlequin
Banned
Stumpokapow said:
Which is unfortunate, but it's a system that aligns the incentives correctly, at least. "You can release a free DLC -- but you have to understand that it'll cost money and so if it's really big and really popular it'll cost you a lot." As opposed to "we don't want you introducing any competition into our cartelized marketplace, jack up your prices or no sale."