ID@Xbox Has Strings... Go Figure.

Subject: General Tech | December 10, 2013 - 08:59 PM |
Tagged: microsoft, consolitis

This is why certification is bad, folks.

View Full Size

How bad? In this specific case it is not too annoying but it does limit both freedom of expression as well as business opportunities. On the Xbox 360, indie developers were required to be published by Microsoft and give their console exclusivity or launch date parity. Things are a bit more relaxed on the Xbox One with ID@Xbox permitting self-publish releases. Microsoft will work "on a case-by-case" for games that have already been released on other platforms.

But Australian developer, Witch Beam, is unable to launch on the Xbox One. They had enough resources for a PC release in January followed by PlayStation 4, Vita, and WiiU. They did not have enough manpower to include Xbox One in that second window. As such, unless Microsoft gives them a waiver based on press attention, "Assault Android Cactus" will not appear on the Xbox One.

Microsoft has been improving their policies since the Xbox 360. Still, because of the precedent they set, they can always change their agreements at any time. Retail certification? Yeah, that can be useful for end users. Platform certification? Big problems.

Source: Eurogamer

Video News

December 11, 2013 | 03:38 AM - Posted by praack

ok so lead me down the rabbit trail, if Witch Beam went Windows and Microsoft first: then all ok

but Witch Beam released PS4 and Wii as well so sealed their doom. so even if the game sold like Angry Birds- unless it got the press that Angry Birds got- it will sit languishing on the sidelines because PS4 and Wii came first.....

December 11, 2013 | 09:35 AM - Posted by ET3D (not verified)

It's a speculative problem -- the dev didn't yet get rejected, as I understand it. As the head of ID@Xbox said (in the Eurogamer article), the dev should send through an application. Microsoft isn't evil, nor mortally stupid. If there's a problem, there's a chance it can be worked out.

December 11, 2013 | 11:54 AM - Posted by Lord Binky (not verified)

Why does there need to be a waiver at all? Well, Witch Beam will definitely get the waiver with an article about it, but it's still frustrating that Microsoft prefers the stick to the carrot even if it's a smaller stick than for the 360. Instead of rewarding release parity, they want to punish for not having release parity/exclusivity by making it harder to release on their system with the option to still deny them.

Curious if a dev could get the waiver if their excuse for not doing release parity is 'Something about you just pisses me off'. I suppose that section of the waiver isn't the place for complete honesty.

December 11, 2013 | 03:19 PM - Posted by MarkT (not verified)

MS dosent want to support indie they want to SAY they support indie.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.