Two Different Types of Indie Developers...

[artphotodude]

Indie today is all the Rage. And while it is easy to see why (a need for something other than the attractive [but stinky] waste-products dripping out of giant money machines in the sky), it is worth noting that not all Indies are equal, in talent; and as important -> in ethics.

We are all familiar with all the GREAT FREE STUFF on Steam and Android, so these guys are automatically going to heaven and we can safely forget about them for the moment.

So what happens when money gets involved? Sometimes BAD THINGS. Sometimes GOOD.

Take for instance Coffee Stain Studios makers of the most excellent Sanctum series. They offered Sanctum 2 on XBLA (roughly equivalent to to your Girlfriend wearing that skimpy-little outfit) and then thoughtfully released 2 of the 4 expansion packs, taking the party up to 3rd base, but then at the last moment decided that XBLA just wasn't profitable enough to justify allowing 360 users to see how the story turns out.

Further, on writing to them asking for some sort of cross-play option for Steam or the like was told that it was XBox's fault things had not worked out, and that NO - there will be no migration over to another platform without buying the game from scratch AGAIN.

So Coffee Stain, if XBLA is such a money pit, why have their since been not one, but TWO Goat Simulator games released on XBLA?

But... Thankfully - Not all Indies become Soulless Bourgeois Jerks .


Introducing Mattrified Games: makers of the really-very-good retro brawler Battle High 2 http://www.battlehigh2.com/. On a recent journey to see what Ouya stuff might still work in a year, after Razor's Corporate Takeover, I emailed Mattrified about this game on Ouya as there had not been many updates on XBox Indie for it, and it was being updated about every month on Ouya. The dev told me that XBox Indie was pretty much dead and that the Ouya did require online purchase verification. I replied that I'd pass on buying a second copy of a game that will be dead in a year or so (later somewhat regretting my snark as this game is quite fun and only $2 ).

Low and Behold in a week I get a reply from Mattrified saying they had patched up the Ouya version to only require online verification once! So I paid the additional $2 to have a lasting copy of a very good example of Indie beginnings.


Also, Crunching Koalas, makers of the indie puzzle-masterpiece MouseCraft http://mouse-craft.com/.
This being the only "Really, gunna' miss that game...", that will be fading away from playability on Ouya after the Razor falls on them. They replied by email that they would look into a patch for Ouya users and if one couldn't be done in time, extend a free Steam coupon for the game.

"Was that so hard??"

It's not even like it costs studios like Coffee Stain anything to do the right thing. They are CHOOSING to loose a customers by saying: "We have your money now, so suck it!"

So when you find excellent developers, with excellent professionalism like Mattrified and Crunching Koalas, do yourself a favor and take care of them and support their efforts.

Because the alternative is just another Money Machine in the sky Crapping in Your Mouth

[Erik_Twice]

The souless indie burgeoisie does not exist nor is releasing expansions on Xbox Live free.

[MrPopo]

It's not even like it costs studios like Coffee Stain anything to do the right thing. They are CHOOSING to loose a customers by saying: "We have your money now, so suck it!"

Except for the fact that it does cost them. But aside from that teeny tiny detail you still have absolutely no point and are just whining.

[artphotodude]

The souless indie burgeoisie does not exist nor is releasing expansions on Xbox Live free.

Except for the fact that it does cost them. But aside from that teeny tiny detail you still have absolutely no point and are just whining.

You both have profoundly missed the point. Nobody is asking anybody to release expansions for free. But if you BUY a game for one system, and the developer chooses not to release expansions for that system, it does not cost them anything to give you an equivalent entry-point for another platform (like Steam), to FINISH BUYING other existing expansions for the same title ALREADY PURCHASED (especially in a world of downloadable digital content).

In fact, it makes the sale of those other items more likely, since very few people will be willing to pay to go through the first toll-booth a second time.

This feeling in American business that there is some virtue in duping people, is much of the reason why so few great games are being made in the AAA sector.

But you both likely won't care about any of that, since "Call of Duty: Eternal Warfare III" and Madden 92 will be waiting for you, at 10X the price they should be.

Those who understand value will, however, Get the Point.

"There is only one boss. The customer. And he can fire everybody in the company from the chairman on down, simply by spending his money somewhere else."
-- Sam Walton, Founder of Walmart

[MrPopo]

You both have profoundly missed the point. Nobody is asking anybody to release expansions for free. But if you BUY a game for one system, and the developer chooses not to release expansions for that system, it does not cost them anything to give you an equivalent entry-point for another platform (like Steam), to FINISH BUYING other existing expansions for the same title ALREADY PURCHASED.

You are the one profoundly missing the point. If you buy a game for one system that doesn't give you the game on another system. Why should their decision to not continue releasing for that system (due to not making enough sales to be worth the cost of the port) mean you get the game for free on another system? You purchased the game knowing it would only run on that particular console.

[marurun]

it does not cost them anything to give you an equivalent entry-point for another platform (like Steam), to FINISH BUYING other existing expansions for the same title ALREADY PURCHASED (especially in a world of downloadable digital content).

Except it might. I know some digital delivery platforms do not give developers unlimited copies to hand out for free. Developers may have to pay a fee for each copy given away to provide their subsidy for the digital platform that are using to distribute.

[emwearz]

I can see his point, it would be a pain in the ass if you were to buy The Walking Dead on the Xbox 360 only to have Telltale decide not to release the final chapter on the console.

However I don't see how you get so up in arms about them giving you are free copy to another platform. Sure it would be nice, but I don't think it should be expected, I highly doubt Valve has given them unlimited activation keys to their own game. It has nothing to do with Steam.

[artphotodude]

You both have profoundly missed the point. Nobody is asking anybody to release expansions for free. But if you BUY a game for one system, and the developer chooses not to release expansions for that system, it does not cost them anything to give you an equivalent entry-point for another platform (like Steam), to FINISH BUYING other existing expansions for the same title ALREADY PURCHASED.

You are the one profoundly missing the point. If you buy a game for one system that doesn't give you the game on another system. Why should their decision to not continue releasing for that system (due to not making enough sales to be worth the cost of the port) mean you get the game for free on another system? You purchased the game knowing it would only run on that particular console.

Platforms are irrelevant. This is the age of cross-platform. There is a reasonable expectation of support, ESPECIALLY in a game that must verify purchase online - to function. If you bought Destiny, for PS4, and after a year, they stopped all servers for it, despite the fact you paid as much as users on XBox One, you would probably have a good cause for concern.

Likewise, in expansion, both developers and gamers get screwed by poor support. Just ask anybody who bought Dead or Alive Dimensions for 3DS or Ultimate Marvel vs Capcom 3 just a month or so too late, and while they can still play, they'll never have access to much of the content for the title because of these options no longer exist, even-though the games can still be purchased brand new from many retailers.

Developers have no excuse for arbitrarily undeserving their customers. And gamers get what they deserve, if they make excuses for poor value.

[MrPopo]

I can see his point, it would be a pain in the ass if you were to buy The Walking Dead on the Xbox 360 only to have Telltale decide not to release the final chapter on the console.

That's certainly a pain; especially if there is some sort of progress file that persists across entries. But platforms get cut due to economic realities; if they decided not to put the final chapter on the 360 it'd be because the cost to make the 360 version would be greater than the projected revenue from the sales. I certainly hope no one is insinuating that a dev should take a loss so a customer can have all the entries on one platform.

Platforms are irrelevant. This is the age of cross-platform. There is a reasonable expectation of support, ESPECIALLY in a game that must verify purchase online - to function. If you bought Destiny, for PS4, and after a year, they stopped all servers for it, despite the fact you paid as much as users on XBox One, you would probably have a good cause for concern.

I'm going to spell this out for you because you don't seem to understand this.

Cross
platform
costs
MONEY

[artphotodude]

I can see his point, it would be a pain in the ass if you were to buy The Walking Dead on the Xbox 360 only to have Telltale decide not to release the final chapter on the console.

That's certainly a pain; especially if there is some sort of progress file that persists across entries. But platforms get cut due to economic realities; if they decided not to put the final chapter on the 360 it'd be because the cost to make the 360 version would be greater than the projected revenue from the sales. I certainly hope no one is insinuating that a dev should take a loss so a customer can have all the entries on one platform.

Platforms are irrelevant. This is the age of cross-platform. There is a reasonable expectation of support, ESPECIALLY in a game that must verify purchase online - to function. If you bought Destiny, for PS4, and after a year, they stopped all servers for it, despite the fact you paid as much as users on XBox One, you would probably have a good cause for concern.

I'm going to spell this out for you because you don't seem to understand this.

Cross
platform
costs
MONEY

It is not quite like they are being asked to make a special version just to suit previous customers. Let's say they do have to eat a few bucks to hand out a Steam voucher, lets do the math:

Works to Satisfy Customer Scenario:

Original purchase price: $14.95

Cost of Steam voucher (let's assume half):
-$ 7.48

Expansion pack 1 $ 5.00

Expansion pack 2 $ 5.00

Expansion pack 3 $ 5.00

Expansion pack 4 $ 5.00

Next game release $29.95

Future Expansion sales ..........


Abandons Customer Scenario:

Original purchase price: $14.95


Why is a long-game so tough for people to get these days. It is very lucky that console manufacturers have more enlightened self-interest than many gamers, or we wouldn't have any platforms to play on accept expensive PCs (Most consoles loose money for a few years before showing any profit). When all was said and done, the original XBox lost 2 Billion dollars. Should Microsoft have thrown in the towel?