id@xbox.com exclusivity... who is to blame?
As a developer, this is a topic which does have some real meaning to me. In addition to the sales numbers, the hardware reviews and comparisons and whatnot, another item which has been getting a lot of attention, and mostly of the negative sort, is Microsoft's approach to indie game development for the Xbox One.
Much of the reason it has come under fire has been for the exclusivity related clauses.
Who is to blame? Everyone and no one.
To explain, I want to go back to a similar experience not long past. The unveiling of Windows 8 and its app store. The market erupted with fury. Companies like Blizzard and Valve/Steam, and indie devs like Notch (of Minecraft fame) just absolutely tearing into Microsoft's store policy.
Now, it is definitely Microsoft's choices that caused the public bouts of insanity. But, the people erupting with fury are not clear of the blame here. I could find no evidence whatsoever, that any of the parties involved in these public outcries had ever reached out to Microsoft to try and resolve the situation. Blizzard produced probably one of the most popular games of all time that runs on Windows (World Of Warcraft) which likely motivated a goodly number of PC (and thus Windows license) sales. Steam is the single largest digital games store/platform. And many form factors of computers which are disc-less rely heavily on Steam to supply games.
Minecraft is also (somehow) extremely popular. And it makes a good argument for indie games scene and their place in Windows 8.
While there is no reason why Minecraft couldn't simply be released as a standard WinRT game, I would say Microsoft's approach come borderline to denying that new revenues will ever exist. Which is most likely blatantly short sighted.
There are also companies like Blizzard that already run their own stores and who run the risk of becoming less profitable under a model where Microsoft takes a cut of the profit.
And then there are companies like Valve which by design are completely invalidated in the new Windows UI.
Not every revenue model is perfect. Not every system is perfect. But, not everyone who implements these things is going to be completely unmovable. These examples are all large enough ones that I think Microsoft would gladly work together with these groups and individuals as partners to carve out an experience that benefits everyone.
Microsoft doesn't want Steam to disappear, potential competition between the two stores could serve to boost both platforms. They certainly don't want Blizzard to go out of business, or worse, start developing games for a competing platform. And they don't want popular titles like Minecraft and indie developers like them to ignore their new platform.
But nothing is going to happen if no one starts a dialog.
The same story appears to be going on with the id@xbox.com program. Microsoft is again to blame for adding constraints to their programs that infuriate and provoke developers. But, as many articles show, Microsoft is willing to work with game studios on a case by case basis and are, from the sounds of it, waiving most of those requirements when asked. Over time, I expect this will result in reform to their policies.
I tend to think that if the same level of communications was happening over the Windows 8 Store, we might be hearing similar stories with similar glimmers of hope.
So, while the requirements probably shouldn't exist in the first place. The people complaining about them should be getting in touch with Microsoft if it is a problem for them and they would have wanted to develop for that console were that not the case.
Frankly, this seems like a shame. With the lofty plans to turn every retail Xbox One into a potential dev kit and open up indie game development on this platform for virtually everyone, snags like this could kill what could be a wonderful platform for creativity before it ever has a chance to get off the ground. Project Spark and id@xbox.com are 2 more reasons why I, personally, felt like Xbox One was superior to the PS4. Supposing a giant PR nightmare doesn't blow it all up.
Much of the reason it has come under fire has been for the exclusivity related clauses.
Who is to blame? Everyone and no one.
To explain, I want to go back to a similar experience not long past. The unveiling of Windows 8 and its app store. The market erupted with fury. Companies like Blizzard and Valve/Steam, and indie devs like Notch (of Minecraft fame) just absolutely tearing into Microsoft's store policy.
Now, it is definitely Microsoft's choices that caused the public bouts of insanity. But, the people erupting with fury are not clear of the blame here. I could find no evidence whatsoever, that any of the parties involved in these public outcries had ever reached out to Microsoft to try and resolve the situation. Blizzard produced probably one of the most popular games of all time that runs on Windows (World Of Warcraft) which likely motivated a goodly number of PC (and thus Windows license) sales. Steam is the single largest digital games store/platform. And many form factors of computers which are disc-less rely heavily on Steam to supply games.
Minecraft is also (somehow) extremely popular. And it makes a good argument for indie games scene and their place in Windows 8.
While there is no reason why Minecraft couldn't simply be released as a standard WinRT game, I would say Microsoft's approach come borderline to denying that new revenues will ever exist. Which is most likely blatantly short sighted.
There are also companies like Blizzard that already run their own stores and who run the risk of becoming less profitable under a model where Microsoft takes a cut of the profit.
And then there are companies like Valve which by design are completely invalidated in the new Windows UI.
Not every revenue model is perfect. Not every system is perfect. But, not everyone who implements these things is going to be completely unmovable. These examples are all large enough ones that I think Microsoft would gladly work together with these groups and individuals as partners to carve out an experience that benefits everyone.
Microsoft doesn't want Steam to disappear, potential competition between the two stores could serve to boost both platforms. They certainly don't want Blizzard to go out of business, or worse, start developing games for a competing platform. And they don't want popular titles like Minecraft and indie developers like them to ignore their new platform.
But nothing is going to happen if no one starts a dialog.
The same story appears to be going on with the id@xbox.com program. Microsoft is again to blame for adding constraints to their programs that infuriate and provoke developers. But, as many articles show, Microsoft is willing to work with game studios on a case by case basis and are, from the sounds of it, waiving most of those requirements when asked. Over time, I expect this will result in reform to their policies.
I tend to think that if the same level of communications was happening over the Windows 8 Store, we might be hearing similar stories with similar glimmers of hope.
So, while the requirements probably shouldn't exist in the first place. The people complaining about them should be getting in touch with Microsoft if it is a problem for them and they would have wanted to develop for that console were that not the case.
Frankly, this seems like a shame. With the lofty plans to turn every retail Xbox One into a potential dev kit and open up indie game development on this platform for virtually everyone, snags like this could kill what could be a wonderful platform for creativity before it ever has a chance to get off the ground. Project Spark and id@xbox.com are 2 more reasons why I, personally, felt like Xbox One was superior to the PS4. Supposing a giant PR nightmare doesn't blow it all up.
Comments
Post a Comment