Likely used their free first patch for a day 1 title update and then were charged for their first post-release patch.
Why is Sony getting so much more credit than MS for embracing the Indie scene?
- Thread starter LQX
- Start date
Likely used their free first patch for a day 1 title update and then were charged for their first post-release patch.
Miles Quaritch
Member
That makes sense. If that is the case though, wouldn't Sony also charge for a second patch? Or at least for the bandwidth used for the patch?
Boss Man
Member
In general, no. All of the gnashing of teeth about Xbox being an entertainment platform, things like that, that's all jumping to conclusions and being super videogames.txt about something that could turn out to be very good.
But when we're talking about why "Sony is getting so much more credit than Xbox for embracing the indie scene," that's a very specific thing and I don't think it's some fanboy conjuration. We don't know what MS is offering next gen, but it's pretty clear indie developers have been upset with their direction for a while now and also that they are very optimistic about Sony's direction at the same time.
If the discussion was, "Sony is definitely going to have the better indie scene next generation." then I'd see where you're coming from with being premature. But the discussion is about what the sentiment is right now, and right now it is that Sony has been moving in the right direction while Microsoft has been moving in the wrong direction. I think that even precedes the PS4 announcement, honestly.
IIRC Sony will charge approx $0.16 per GB of bandwidth on both free and paid DLC (for the first 60 days of a free update and for the lifetime of paid updates). Don't know details of any charges up-front for patch submissions for them though.
Boss Man
Member
I'd love to hear more details about this from someone who's worked on both platforms.
It seems like Microsoft is definitely more of a pain to work with than someone like Valve (and apparently Apple), but I think we're really concerned about the differences between Sony and Microsoft.
They could be exactly the same, I have no idea. I do know that indie development, even on iOS, is not as 'nice' and open as people assume though. I was considering doing a little game for iOS for a senior project and profit until I realized that there's pretty much no way I would have made any money. I don't really understand why people think iOS is a friendly indie scene, it seems pretty shitty honestly. I guess it depends on your definition of indie though.
Sony is getting more credit, but is it valid? It seems like this has been going on even before the recent steps in the right direction. What were the difference this generation, without even considering PS4 plans or anything like that?
Raven77
Member
The question was about focus. Not sure how you're quote and info above says Sony is now focusing on entertainment and not games.
MS has openly admitted it is no longer about games but about entertainment. Sony very clearly made it a point with the PS4 presser that it is about games.
????
This is awesome. I just hope Sony knows what they're doing when it comes to organization. The picture or w/e we've seen of the interface doesn't look promising. It would suck if all this stuff is here but it gets XBLIG'd. The current PSN Store with some extra categories would be nice.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
This was a one-time thing for a few weeks more than a year ago and doesn't apply today
Boss Man
Member
Please, everyone innovates and everyone copies and refines.
Hopefully Microsoft will copy and refine some aspects of PS+ next-generation, just like Sony has copied and refined some aspects of Xbox LIVE. If they're worth anything as a company, they'll do exactly that and it will be a good thing for everyone. The only difference is that you look for one side and ignore the other one.
Just smile and nod....
Diversifying what the Xbox can do <> "MS has openly admitted it is no longer about games but about entertainment".
I have no doubt that Durango will have a bigger WOW factor than the PS4 to audiences outside of the core.
If they make it the "must have" item over the holidays for whatever reason or gimmick they have planned then Sony will be sweating.
The question is will that strategy pay off
I'm getting a PS4, but I am technically the core audience and Sony has a lot riding on this
Septimus Prime
Member
Sony does charge for patches, but its pricing policy is different.
I don't know what the policies are like now, but back when I was at a publisher, Sony's price per patch was significantly lower than MS's (although with Sony, the first patch was not free).
Boss Man
Member
I think the only way PS4 could gain the bigger mindshare (possibly) is if they're able to launch with games that look better. I think that after the Durango reveal it will look the other way around, and after E3 the ball will be back in Sony's court. But it has to be a notable difference, and I'm not sure that it'll be there early enough.
At that point it's all down to what everyone is used to (which is Xbox), and what could get outsiders interested (which is Xbox again probably). I think Microsoft looks better from a sales perspective, but then again it would seem that way coming off of this generation. It's hard to predict this stuff no matter how clear the current environment makes it seem, Pachter be damned. I also think that the industry is going to grow significantly and surprise everyone.
Although this is mostly from a U.S. perspective and also probably not for this thread.
All that says is that they hope to improve their entertainment services in the future.
Or am I reading it wrong?
Warm Machine
Member
Welcome to what everyone is trying to do. We are probably better off with a singular console doing this job than multiple devices.
ITYM Sony (at least SCEA) has a long history of promising ideas and then dropping them.
PS1 - The Net Yaroze was launched and then left to die with minimal to zero support. All the cool stuff Europe did with the NY? We didn't see any of that in the US.
PS2 - The Linux kit was Net Yaroze, round two. Announce, ship, leave it to die.
PS3 - "WE'VE GOT LINUX!" "Screw you, we're taking it away."
PSP - They launched Minis...and left them to die. How many notable Minis (aside from Velocity and Canabalt can you name?)
Sony was pretty control freak during the PS2 gen and first half of the PS3 gen.
For the longest time, SCEA didn't even have any interest in promoting PSN titles to the press. Microsoft was all about getting XBLA titles covered. Sony didn't care.
Then, Vita arrived. And Vita was tanking. AAA developers were ignoring it.
Hail Mary play...GO LONG FOR INDIES!
With the platform hurting, it wasn't a huge risk to open it up and encourage smaller developers. It's not like Sony was short on dev kits.
The result was a change in both how Sony treated developers as well as ease of access. Because it changed so much, so quickly, it's news.
Time will tell if Sony supports this new initiative over the long term or if it ends up dropping it like a hot potato. If it ends up pushing Vita sales, Sony will probably consider it a success.
Exterminieren
Banned
In terms of indie-friendly policies, Sony and Nintendo have handily bypassed them. Sony look to be striding even further with the PS4.
Sure, Microsoft might blast ahead with Durango, but if Microsoft haven't announced any such policies yet, it's hard to give them credit for them.
Does it matter? it was an interview in the "D: Dive Into Media" event. You know.. people went there to talk about.. Media.
Raven77
Member
I most definitely agree, I would rather MS take this road alone.
If info in this thread is true:
1.They do charge
2.They charge for the first patch unlike MS
3.We don't know how much they charge, it might be $9999
4.MS' charge scales according to the size of the dev
Any more comments?
Leaving out PSMinis and PSMobile, in which a lot of those charges don't exist.
Seems like they set up their own division for it so that it wouldn't take away from those who are focusing on games, but what do we know?
The same goes for Xbox games on Windows Phone and Windows 8/RT.
Same goes for XBLIG.
ChosenPredator
Banned
I was wondering this myself i see new indie games all the time coming out on XBLI but I guess people are referring to games on XBLA
Truespeed
Member
Yeah, sure.
1. No, we don't know how much
2. Sony charges to patch a game. But, I really
3. don't think it's a coincidence that these reports
4. are usually the result of XBLA costs.
outunderthestars
Banned
Except Sony actually promotes PSMobile titles...
Baconsammy
Banned
LOL. Sony has Sony Music studios. Sony Movie studios. And Sony TV. If they're not smart enough to leverage their assets to make the PS4 a success, they're not very bright. All this looks like is Microsoft is playing catch-up when it comes to the creation of non-gaming media. Nowhere in anything they spoke about did they say they were focusing less on gaming. To read that and then make that assertion is hilariously naive.
Now if only they'd promote the devices they play on. Vita is shaping up to be an indie-playing dynamo. Perhaps they might want to let the world know the device exists.
I think this is really significant. SCEA in particular has historically been miserable at handling local small and indie titles and did nothing to promote the provenance of the ones they localized, so limiting your focus to the US market MS's efforts with the 360 seemed like a great breath of fresh air.
Dreams-Visions
Member
Sums up my take on Sony.
People have short memories when it comes to Sony and Indie work.
Or maybe with Sony in general around here.
staticneuron
Member
That is some serious skewing of events there. I think this is all having to do with perspective and purpose. The Net Yarozee/linux functions were more about allowing hobbyist and learning attempts in the console environment. They weren't what you would really call supporting "indie" titles because iirc, no one could sell those titles in those forms. Sony did not offer alot of devkit features on NY and they never offered technical support, even in Europe. Hence if you were doing this on the PS3 you had to make a choice, keep the linux ability or continue access to PSN. If you weren't playing games on the device this wouldn't have been much of a problem.
But if you approached Sony as a developer they were known to be a little bit more easy going in terms of help and support. Developers basically say they same thing of Sony today as they did back then in terms of Sony's policies and attitude but now you hear more because some devs are happy with the sales they made, Sony reaching out more and easing fees/restrictions and the announcement of the PS4.
Seriously people MS hasn't officially announced the next console, of course devs are going to be tight lipped. While it is pretty much premature to be talking about what MS is doing, the reason this thread gets to this point is because it started off as a comparison between MS and Sony from the jump.
Truth of the matter is that both MS and Sony play nice with indies but given their history, their approach is different. The reason it is getting so much attention here is because GAF is a spot for enthusiast. When we hear news, good or bad, it tends to have a greater presence on the forum.
I'd say more like selective memory describes some of what goes on.
How exactly do you know this? And why wouldn't ms continue their strong indie support? Makes no sense.
PS1 and PS2, these were extremely cheap "dev kits" with a bit of docs. So people could play around. No other manufacturer has done that. But then what were they supposed to do, email every NY owner every 2 weeks to ask them if they got something to sell? Especially back then, there was no network, so distributing stuff easily wasn't exactly an option.
As for Linux on PS3, it turned out to be a major security issue and you know it, so I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here. I mean that's the reason why the PS3 was cracked open eventually.
Fact is, they always put options out there for indies or people willing to give coding some stuff a shot. I don't think Nintendo or even MS has been that open. Now if people didn't really do anything with it, that's not exactly their fault either. On top of that they've always been rather supportive of young/small devs. Look at Sidhe, TGC, MM and so on.
So yeah, out of the three, I'd say Sony has been the one to make things generally easier than the others, by far.
Ps3 was cracked open because the keys was found on the firmware well after linux was dropped.
And MS never allowed for indies to be open to XBLA? How are you forgetting that MS was the first to do this indie stuff? Judging by the minis and other disasters from sony, MS was the only console maker to support a solid platform for indies.
I beg of you to just compare the psn slate of indie games to xbla. Your opinoin will change.
Don't know if new thread worthy, but Penny Arcade just put up an article that seems timely with this thread.
Tales from the trenches: how Microsoft is losing the battle for indie developers
There's a small bit of some more positive talk about Nintendo in the article too. The 'slot' system in XBLA seems like a major sticking point.
Tales from the trenches: how Microsoft is losing the battle for indie developers
There's a small bit of some more positive talk about Nintendo in the article too. The 'slot' system in XBLA seems like a major sticking point.
Why, from Microsoft's point of view, should they care about and cater to the indies? Why is it considered a given that it's a good thing to do so? They make bank on AAA multi-platform games, Xbox Live Gold subscriptions and DLC. They watched XBLA go from a promising, growing, niche platform on Xbox 360 to its entire audience stampeding over to Steam and smartphones. Cultivating an indie community might be feel good and make some gamers happy, but does the effort required result in enough payoff to make MS give a shit?
staticneuron
Member
Callibretto
Member
Wait, I dont follow xbla, but is the bolded part, true?
Edit: er, I think I misunderstood the meaning, does "stampeding over to steam and phones" mean they're beating steam audience, or does it mean xbla audience move to steam and phones?
Sorry, english is not my first language
So does MS. Indie games have been promoted on the dashboard. I had a look on the online version of the PS Store and there's no section for indie games or minis like there is on the 360 and Xbox.com.
I'm wondering this too. I remember when XBLA was taking off and me and a bunch of buddies were going crazy over Castle Crashers. I have since stopped playing on my 360, so I don't know the scene myself. I do know that I have switched over to playing a lot of Steam myself so I might have been part of this migration without really know that it was happening en masse.
Uh what?
https://store.sonyentertainmentnetwork.com/#!/en-us/home/games
On the left side there's a Minis section on the front page of the store.
https://store.sonyentertainmentnetwork.com/#!/en-us/minis/cid=STORE-MSF77008-MINIS
Fair points and I agree. IMO there are two sides to this indie relationship that people are mixing or confusing. There is the professional relationship, where indie titles appear on PSN and/or XBLA, and there is the XBLIG option for indies, which MS has been pretty hand off on. I agree that Sony has opened up their policies for indie devs to make games for PSN before the PS4 was even announced and as of now they definitely seem easier to work with. However I don't think the existence of XBLIG should be dismissed like many here seem to do, even with the mistakes MS has made with the marketplace in the past.
I understand how the landscape looks now, but I still think people should wait to see what/if MS does next gen before forming final opinions. A console transition is going to be the likely time they update their policies and many comments in this very thread will be pointless if they open themselves up to the same extent that Nintendo and Sony have. To be honest, they have to if they wish to compete, at least IMO.
Also, regardless of how much I do agree with you, that doesn't change the fact that there have been plenty of wrong assumptions in this thread of people either making things up or just believing what they want to believe while ignoring better informed people who were trying to clarify some misconceptions. That in itself is rather disgusting IMO since it shows an agenda on the poster's end with no interest in actually learning something new for better future discussions.
Thanks for the quotes and link. I'm guessing these 'slots' refer to the schedule of XBLA releases and since they only release 2 titles a week, it can be hard for smaller teams to find a slot?
It would be foolish to ignore the indie scene, especially since they have been gaining in awareness and popularity over the last few years. You don't want to miss the chance to work with real, and undiscovered, talent just because you will also have to deal with shovelware.
I don't think many knew how large Minecraft was going to be, but now it's the most played game on XBL, even overtaking CoD. That's why you don't want to ignore the indie community.
Sony is also doing this. Nintendo is the gaming company out of the 3.
MS:
MS-Dos
Windows
Dat indie development support!
The UK store does not have "Minis" listed in that menu though: -
http://i.imgur.com/5sVAJG4.jpg
And if you select a platform, "PS3" for instance, there's no mention of them on that menu either. Sony has buried them outside the US.
Similar threads
- Locked