Sony has a long history of trying to support indies. Net Yaroze was one example.
Why is Sony getting so much more credit than MS for embracing the Indie scene?
- Thread starter LQX
- Start date
Sony has a long history of trying to support indies. Net Yaroze was one example.
You'd think they forgot that Nintendo's original system was called the "Nintendo Entertainment System". =p
Not sure if you're serious or not but a fair warning, generalizing GAF to hate or favor any company can lead to a ban around here.
I recently got banned for complaining how annoying Sony-Gaf has been. Not going there again...
I think he's referring to how it seems like most of the threads related to Sony or the PS4 are generally filled with positive comments where most of the threads about MS or Durango recently have more doubt or negative speculation regardless of realities.
This thread is actually the perfect example of how a bunch of people have no problem making things up and refusing to listen to reason.
Kazuma Kiryu
Member
the only thing relevant i see in this thread is a few quotes from developers that say "they're good", and others that say "they're awful". and yeah, microsoft has been getting a lot more negative feedback this past year or two regarding indie development.
I've complained in the past about this (many times), it is not a matter of MS threads having "negative speculation" which is fine and makes can make a great discussion. It is how most MS threads with any new news are clearly being derailed with:
-Paying for LIVE (and the insults to those who do)
-Kinect sucks
Regardless of the topic.
lol you quoted me before my edit, I was trying to be nicer with my comment. =p
I'm not talking about the developer comments, which to be fair have had both positive and negative comments for both companies over the years. I'm talking all of the people in this thread who don't really understand some things but that hasn't stopped them from making assumptions that are completely untrue. What makes it worse is when these comments are addressed, nothing comes of it.
Edit:
I agree but I just try to look past the childish crap anymore. It's clear to me that 90% of GAF is clueless when it comes to this industry and just projects their own bias or preference.
Seriously?
Are you new here?
Have you never been in a Vita thread?
Did you miss the PS3 launch or the years of PS3 is doomed and PS3 has no games and PS3 is dead and Sony is dead threads or the 360 is the superior version of everything?
Sony is doing things right for now, and Microsoft have made some wrong decisions. It is not some kind of conspiracy and it is not some forum wide thing against Microsoft.
Wow how times have changed.
BumbleChump
Banned
Someone I know is in an indie company, and from what she's told me, MS is shit to work with. It took them months to receive 360 dev kits as opposed to quickly receiving ps3 dev kits. Her company has released a patch for the game but it's only on ps3 right now. Know why? Because Sony said "Hey, we like what you're doing so you can patch the game free of charge." Whereas Microsoft wants $10,000 for the patch. This patch does not have any kind of dlc, so it doesn't get the company any money.
Four_Chamber
Member
Seriously? Vita threads don't constantly bemoan anything other than its shitty sales (which is highly objective). The orgasms when the Vita price were announced show that there are people who really like that console. I know you want to make it seem even keeled. I'm not at all invested in this (videogames are priority #300 in my life), but to ignore the fact that any M$ (haha) thread gets spammed with that crap is naive.
The Elite
BOSS
This is pretty much it in a nut shell. I don't know what happened with Microsoft. They were doing pretty damn well by gamers this generation. When did they let it stop being about the games, man.
Exterminieren
Banned
Microsoft used to be by far the best for indies on consoles.
Now they're the worst.
There's no conspiracy here.
Now they're the worst.
There's no conspiracy here.
What's the game her company put out? It must be a really popular one if Sony waived the patching fees.
Nothing stopping them from improving their policies. It's not like they're just going to let their competitor take it all.
djplaeskool
Member
"What have you done for me lately?"
Sony: Quite a bit
MS: Not so much
Sony: Quite a bit
MS: Not so much
That's odd, the first patch should be free from MS as well.
Tripp Daily
Member
Exactly, just like everyone else it's a "what have you done for me lately" problem. There is no longer such a thing as built up good will in the marketplace anymore. The things that Microsoft has done for the indie scene have been overshadowed by recent Sony announcements and it is now up to MS to show why these indie developers should put their game on Xbox.
Kazuma Kiryu
Member
this is my assessment of this whole indie thing:
sony always had the image of having less restrictions but they had a problem of games not selling well enough on psn for pretty much the entire generation (probably still true right now).
microsoft, on the other hand, started out courting indies to their platform, where they sold a lot, but somewhere along the road (or that may have been there from the beggining, idk) some developers started showing signs of not being pleased of how they were being treated and having too much restrictions and stuff like that.
meanwhile, sony announces the ps4, seems to be taking a very easy approach regarding development (on all fronts, from what we hear), so i think it's normal that news nowadays are "sony is great for indies" (because they're improving a lot) and "microsoft isn't that great" (because the most recent news on indie development and microsoft has been pretty negative). that might or might not change when durango is unveiled, i guess people just need to relax and wait.
slightconfuse
Banned
MSoft sdrewing indie devs over and over again and sony making it more easy to work with them.
The bolded is why I think some people are being irrational.
It hasn't always been how you view it, but that's irrelevant right now. How things work out next gen is what matters but people are jumping to conclusions before we even have any info.
They likely see it as the cost to cover for the people who handle certification.
BTW both Sony and MS have fees for patching, this isn't a MS only thing.
They piggybacked off SEGA's groundwork?
This is the norm since the PS4 reveal...
Warm Machine
Member
Because MS has a team of people they pay to test your game so it adheres to the console requirements they set up and that their customers expect. As I understand it, the developer is essentially paying for the time of the testing group to stress test what you want to patch. Also, because there are loads of games going through this system there is a bit of que.
Baconsammy
Banned
They're still the best. If that changes next gen, then perhaps call them the worst. At the moment, they're still the best.
That stemmed from an interview Tim Schafer did on a website called Hookshot Inc. where he said this about consoles: -
Although that soon turned into "MS charge $40,000 for patches!" on forums, but I guess that's gone down to $10,000 today. MS do not charge for patching indie games at all AFAIK, although by "indie games" I mean games that are on the indie games service, not XBLA games made by independent developers.Tim Shafer said:
dragonelite
Member
Xna will be replaced with WinRt.
Hopefully allow native code on durango with a wp8 and w8 kind of patchjng system.
Atleast i hope
Hopefully allow native code on durango with a wp8 and w8 kind of patchjng system.
Atleast i hope
uncledonnie
Banned
Would be shocked if this is not the case; or at least the libraries/tools will almost certainly be geared toward making it easy to build for both.
To be fair, I wouldn't say they are the best and I think it also matters where you want to place your game as an indie dev.
If I were to submit something right now, I'd go with XBLIG instead of XBLA, but that probably won't be an option next gen.
Tripp Daily
Member
Agreed,
Do you think that the presence of ads for XBLA games helps the sells of these games where as this is not the case for PSN(correct me if I'm wrong on this)?
It's a point that people on these forums use to put down Microsoft, but imo you can't say you support indie games and then in the same breath put down the ads microsoft puts on the dash to promote these games.
Edit: Not trying to turn this into an ad discussion. I just think it is a way MS supports indie games and overall is a good thing.
Sony is also promoting a lot of these indie games, through gaming press, social media and their own PS.Blog. It's one thing to have indie games on your platform, but it's another to be promoting the indie games and the indie community. Just look at all the 'indie spotlight' Sony has been showing for the pat while, meantime what has Microsoft had to say about indie game development? "We have Minecraft".
Microsoft gets less credit because they failed in a lot of key ways when it came to indie developers. I'm sure everything I'm going to say has been said in here already, but another opinion never hurt.
They did at least try however. XNA is amazing, fantastic. Killing it is single handed the dumbest thing that Microsoft's gaming division has done in recent years. Publishing indie games on XBLA and getting (mostly) them publicity through their Summer of Arcade sales was also genius and a great way to embrace the community.
But then there's XBLIG, which has been a disaster since day one. A good idea mind you, but from poor publicity to lack of support from MS themselves it has just been a complete mess and while there is good stuff on there it's still near impossible to wade through the shit to get to it.
XBLA itself has never been great for indie devs either, thanks to high prices for patches and MS's lack of support for indie developers who want to self-publish their games.
So, yeah. They did some good things and some bad things. I think MS deserves praise for XBLA and XNA in particular, but Sony is getting more credit because they are taking the steps that MS should have been gradually taking with their system all at once. Both playing catch-up and completely overtaking MS in the process. MS will need to step up their game with their next console and I partially think they will.
Not to say Sony is doing perfectly though. The limitations on Playstation Mobile are completely pointless and idiotic. Why are the most popular Android devices not supported?!
They did at least try however. XNA is amazing, fantastic. Killing it is single handed the dumbest thing that Microsoft's gaming division has done in recent years. Publishing indie games on XBLA and getting (mostly) them publicity through their Summer of Arcade sales was also genius and a great way to embrace the community.
But then there's XBLIG, which has been a disaster since day one. A good idea mind you, but from poor publicity to lack of support from MS themselves it has just been a complete mess and while there is good stuff on there it's still near impossible to wade through the shit to get to it.
XBLA itself has never been great for indie devs either, thanks to high prices for patches and MS's lack of support for indie developers who want to self-publish their games.
So, yeah. They did some good things and some bad things. I think MS deserves praise for XBLA and XNA in particular, but Sony is getting more credit because they are taking the steps that MS should have been gradually taking with their system all at once. Both playing catch-up and completely overtaking MS in the process. MS will need to step up their game with their next console and I partially think they will.
Not to say Sony is doing perfectly though. The limitations on Playstation Mobile are completely pointless and idiotic. Why are the most popular Android devices not supported?!
That's much different from the PS3 Computer Entertainment System, as anyone from Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC would tell you.
In their own words:
Clearly they have no interest in entertaining people.
I would assume most customers would expect Microsoft to encourage parity between releases on their system and multiple other versions of a game like Skullgirls, but Microsoft's policy means that Xbox Skullgirls is behind both the PS3 version and the upcoming Steam version until they pony up $10,000 just to submit an update. This is really frustrating for both the community of players and the developer. It hurts everyone including Microsoft (how many Skullgirls players are either elsewhere on PS3 already or going to PC when that arrives?) but they refuse to address these serious problems.
If Microsoft want to compete in a market which in most cases doesn't charge for patch submission or place arbitrary limits on updating they should maybe leverage their Gold subscription fees to pay their testers instead of continuing to act like they're the only game in town with indies who now have multiple better options.
Their XBLIG policies are actually mostly fine, but XBLA is a no-man's land where there are arbitrary, almost retail-like restrictions placed on a digital marketplace that are either much more relaxed or non-existent on competing platforms.
Baconsammy said:
Being the best "on consoles" right now doesn't mean a thing anymore (even if it did, the fact that PSN has clawed its way into becoming a legitimate competitor for XBLA is fucking crazy considering how far behind Sony was). The bulk of sales for most of these titles has become Steam, iOS and Android. Microsoft have basically thrown away XBLA's position from 2+ years ago because they refuse to adjust their policies to the reality of the current market. The fact that something like the Vita, with it's install base, is being taken seriously as a platform while devs are unsupportive of XBLA despite its huge userbase speaks volumes.
It isn't enough that Microsoft did all these things to encourage digital sales at the start of this generation, being part of the digital marketplace means competing with the multiple players in that space right now. If they're arbitrarily holding back on policy changes for their digital platform so they can use it as a bulletpoint for their next console ("hey look we're now at parity with the 5+ platforms you already develop for!") then I hope the last 2 years of burnt bridges with indies was worth it.
Oh there is, but sony is willing to go in half way and actually help. It took how many months for skullgirls devs to finally get their patch situation resolved because Microsoft got all pissy about the patch size limit? Almost five months. God forbid it was halo. They would of patched that shit in a heartbeat. Also don't get me started how shitty GFWL is.
ThisWreckage
Banned
It's not Sony's fault that Microsoft tends to burn bridges with devs. You'll see more and more devs embrace what Sony is doing and publicly admit doing so.
True, although even having the best selling game of all time on PSN can still leave you facing bankruptcy and having to go multi-platform.....
Jenova Chen said:
What's all this "$10,000" bullshit? The Skullgirls patch was held up because it was 550MB and MS have a limit on patch sizes for XBLA. Sure, that can suck for developers sometimes and that's one example of that, but then sitting around staring at loading bars for half an hour while massive patches download on the PS3 kinda sucks for me too, especially given how frequent an occurrence that is.Maztorre said:
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
surly said:
They were bankrupt when Journey launched, as a result of taking 3 years instead of the 2 scheduled to get the thing done. Platform is immaterial as they were only ever going to be actually generating income after release.
Sony did the right thing by allowing them the extra time, that they ran out of cash was entirely on TGC and their own perfectionism.
Boss Man
Member
"Why is Sony getting so much more credit than MS for embracing the Indie scene?"
I don't know. Overall, GAF seems more happy with Sony's direction right now - but I don't know that it's anything more than the fact that Sony has been acting more favorably towards our crowd over the past few years. Even with the Vita, I mean that's a console that GAF would be more likely to create. The sales warz also hop in way out of context a lot of the time, and I don't think it's usually aimed at genuine discussion. It wasn't like this always, the entire Internet was against the PS3 at first (and rightfully so, that's a ridiculous price). It seems like some people are just really interested in defending Microsoft for whatever reason, not that they're trying to be voices of reason in a biased atmosphere. It's usually the same handful of people, but who knows whether or not they'd be defending Sony instead if the attitude right now was more favorable towards Microsoft.
I know I'm a lot happier with Sony than Microsoft right now - but I'm not invested in that in any way. If the names swapped places I couldn't care less. I don't think MS (the whole big company) is evil or anything, for instance Bill Gates is a huge philanthropist. Also, I own a freaking Zune (that I love). I think there are a lot of pots calling (white) kettles black going on in threads like this.
I've seen a lot of very interesting (and reasonable) posts arguing on either side of this, but it seems like some people just want to hear one side of it and pretend like people who believe Sony has been doing a better job are just "lol, hivemend Sony fanboys" or something.
Sony isn't just getting indie credit on GAF, they're getting it among indie developers. It's worth discussing the reasons why (or even questioning whether it's correctly placed or not), but I think it's a little silly to chalk it all up to "fanboys" or "hivemind" on GAF.
Punkster_NY
Member
Sony open to buy-in alpha games for PlayStation platforms
http://www.joystiq.com/2013/03/26/sony-open-to-buy-in-alpha-games-for-playstation-platforms/
http://www.joystiq.com/2013/03/26/sony-open-to-buy-in-alpha-games-for-playstation-platforms/
Microsoft charge for QA submission for any updates after the first title update (which is free). This includes patches and DLC updates. I won't even comment on how fucking dumb and arbitrary 4MB is as a filesize limit for patches these days.
Skullgirls have already disclosed their patch submission cost of $10,000 as part of their crowdfunding drive. Tim Schafer disclosed that he needed $40,000 for console patch submissions in a previous interview:
Tim Schafer said:
i don't think that it being a psn release had much to do with the bankruptcy that occurred leading up to the release....they can't earn money from sales before the game has released. isn't it possible that they would have faced bankruptcy even quicker if they were developing for several platforms?
Miles Quaritch
Member
There's an element of the story you're leaving out. Or, more accurately, your friend is leaving out. It's well known that the first patch is free with Microsoft with it then entering a scaled pricing system.
This is well established and has been commented on by various developers. So I guess it comes down to who's lying, yourself or your friend.
Evolution_1ne
Banned
so you haven't been to many Vita threads?
I'm sorry but you don't have any idea what you're talking about.
Yes there was an issue with the patch size, but this isn't a typical problem because patch sizes don't need to be big most of the time.
Maybe you missed the post where the dev said that while it's frustrating, MS has been working with the team on the issue. So I'm not sure it would have been passed in a heartbeat if it was Halo.
It's still premature for people to be jumping to conclusion when we don't know what MS is offering next gen.
I can certainly see how Sony has gone in the direction that fits most here at GAF, still that doesn't excuse the level of ignorance and immaturity that's directed towards MS in general.
Miles Quaritch
Member
Indeed. I'd actually quite like to know what the game is now. Anyway, something is definitely off with his story, I don't particularly like suggesting someone is lying, but there's obviously something amiss.
HoodWinked
Member
has more to do with whenever ms does something people take it for granted and a "no shit" stance. when sony does the obvious they are praised for not making another blundering mistake.
for example...
people cheered when they announced that ps4 would have a non fucked patching and download system when 360 already had it back in 2005.
the indie thing is practically the same thing, ms courted indie developers and had continued to sony recently just being more upfront about it and gets praised.
for example...
people cheered when they announced that ps4 would have a non fucked patching and download system when 360 already had it back in 2005.
the indie thing is practically the same thing, ms courted indie developers and had continued to sony recently just being more upfront about it and gets praised.
Similar threads
- Locked