Microsoft’s ID@Xbox policy for the Xbox One seemed like the answer to the publisher’s indie development woes, especially with the previous controversies surrounding the company regarding self-publishing games. That was, of course, until the Parity Clause in the program became known.

It stated that you couldn’t release indie titles for the Xbox One if they had appeared on other platforms. If an indie title was slated for other platforms, those same versions had to release on the same day as the Xbox One version. Several developers, including Vlambeer and Witch Beam, protested against this and discontent has only grown since.

Speaking to Edge, ID@Xbox head Chris Charla offered his own take on the situation.“Obviously we’ve heard the feedback from developers and we’re looking at all the ways we can to lower barriers for developers. But I really can’t comment on publishing policies. The reality is that developers should get in touch with us and talk.”

As of now, Microsoft is making special exceptions for developers who decided on other platform releases before ID@Xbox was first announced. As for other developers who can’t afford to delay planned platform releases for the sake of the Xbox One version of their games? Stay tuned for more details in the coming weeks to find out.

When Microsoft first introduced its ID@Xbox program, it was intended to correct several problems with the current indie development scene for the Xbox One. Firstly, it would allow developers to self-publish their games on Xbox Live without needing Microsoft or a third party as publisher. Secondly, it allowed any one – even one single individual – to develop for the console and bring their games out to the world.

After the heavily negative reaction for the initial policies of the Xbox One, which caused several indie devs to opt for Sony and the PlayStation 4 instead, this was a huge step-up. The announcement that more than 30 developers had signed up for the program made it even sweeter. However, ID@Xbox has a parity clause within. This states that if you want to bring your game to the Xbox One but also release it on other platforms, then all platform releases need to happen at the same time. That is, unless you already had an exclusivity agreement in place with another platform predating the announcement of ID@Xbox.

This was the case with Vlambeer, developer of Luftrausers and Nuclear Throne, though co-founder Rami Ismail was far from happy about it.

Speaking to Witch Beam’s Sanatana Mishra, who developed Assault Android Cactus, GamingBolt was told that there were three reasons the studio wasn’t on the list of announced ID@Xbox devs. Firstly, they are initially told there would be no self publishing on the Xbox One. Secondly, when they were initially approached by Microsoft and asked to contact them, there was no response. Thirdly, it was made clear that if Witch Beam wanted to be on Xbox One, they had to delay the PS4, PS Vita and Wii U versions of Assault Android Cactus due to this parity clause.

“We started work on our Wii U, PS4, and PS Vita versions a while back and they will most definitely be ready before any hypothetical Xbox One version could be, as a team of 3 we can’t really build in many platforms simultaneously. My understanding of the ID@Xbox launch parity clause is that you need to launch at the same time or first on Xbox One, which in our case would mean delaying the other platforms as they would definitely be ready earlier.

“As for [reasons] 1 and 2, they are more like reasons we would be hesitant to jump in to Xbox One development than something that would prevent us entirely. The ID@XBox program is very developer friendly aside from the launch parity clause.”

So say you have an Xbox One title that is also set to launch on the PS4 at the same time. Say your title is delayed on the Xbox One for any sudden reason. That means you have to delay it for the PS4 as well and according to Mishra, “I believe the rule applies to Wii U as well, but yeah the clause stipulates you need launch parity on the Xbox One version in order to be a part of the ID@Xbox program which means you cannot launch first on another platform.”

Microsoft is wiling to work with developers who already have exclusivity agreements in place on a case-by-case basis. Do Sony or Nintendo have such launch day parity clauses? Sony doesn’t, and though Nintendo hasn’t confirmed as such, Mishra is confident this isn’t the case with the latter either.

So say you want to bring your game to Xbox One at some point after hearing about ID@Xbox, but already have it in development for other platforms and aren’t willing to postpone their release for the same (as is the case with Assault Android Cactus). Mishra confirmed that, “Based on the clause we would be breaking the rules of the ID@Xbox program so we have no plans to bring Assault Android Cactus to the Xbox One.”

Other indie developers including Xiotex Studios’ Byron Atkinson-Jones and Two Tails Games founder Mitch have also expressed their disdain for the clause.

@LewieP @SanatanaMishra well, that kind of confirms that it’s not universally indie friendly then.

— Byron Atkinson-Jones (@xiotex) December 5, 2013

@LewieP @xiotex @SanatanaMishra it’s a pointless policy. It will only hurt Xbox long term.

— Mitch (@onimitch) December 5, 2013

In conclusion, it’s easy to see why Microsoft is asking for such parity. After the massive response to Sony’s “open arms” approach for indie development, the company wanted to prevent any more timed exclusive indie titles in the future. Remember, this is not currently the case for games announced before ID@Xbox was revealed – those games would be eligible for release later on Xbox One but will need to go through Microsoft and work it out (as Vlambeer has). Games that were already in development for PS4, Vita and Wii U when ID@Xbox was revealed and don’t have exclusivity agreements but also can’t devote resources for an Xbox One release? They’re flat out of luck.

Vlambeer’s Rami Ismail has called on developers to put an end to the parity clause. What are your thoughts on it? Do you believe it’s a smart tactic by Microsoft or just another flub by a company that has had nearly nothing but flubs this year as far as the Xbox One is concerned? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

Indie developer Vlambeer, which worked on Ridiculous Fishing and is currently working on Luftrausers, has highlighted a flaw with Microsoft’s ID@Xbox program for the Xbox One. It allows for indie developers – regardless of size – to develop for the console with all features accessible and self-publish it. So what’s the problem? According to Vlambeer co-founder Rami Ismail, there is a clause in the policy that states that any game arriving for Xbox One also releases for other formats at the same time.

Speaking to Joystiq, Ismail stated that, “Microsoft was doing reach-out to certain developers back in the early days of ID@Xbox, and we discussed potentially bringing Nuclear Throne to Xbox One with them. There had been mentions beforehand that there was a launch parity clause in the contract, with the exception of games that were already signed to another platform during the announcement of their self-publishing program. Thus, before we signed with Microsoft, we e-mailed Sony that we quickly wanted to sign Nuclear Throne with them with a month of exclusivity.”

Yes, you can break the clause if you sign an exclusivity deal beforehand. However, this presents a problem for indie devs due to constraints in resources. It’s hard enough creating a game for one platform – try developing for two.

Ismail has called for the parity clause to be removed. “Honestly, we’ve had enough trouble with our promise for a simultaneous release for Luftrausers, so by getting rid of parity we’d be able to focus on one platform for Nuclear Throne first. We’d rather Microsoft allow us not only the freedom to self-publish, but also to publish in whatever order we prefer…. We’ll keep pushing for Microsoft to drop the clause, and we’d recommend any other developer to do the same.”

What are your thoughts on the same? Let us know in the comments below.

@paniq I do not think any bribes are involved.

— Jonathan Blow (@Jonathan_Blow) November 15, 2013

@paniq I mean, they are curated, so what does _any_ mean? — Jonathan Blow (@Jonathan_Blow) November 15, 2013

@paniq Who says? — Jonathan Blow (@Jonathan_Blow) November 15, 2013

At this point, you’d wonder if Pitter has gone loony. However, he brings up the TRC/TCR (Technical Requirements Checklist for Sony, Technical Certification Requirements for Microsoft) certificates that each game is required to have. What are they? Think of them as documents given to developers and publishers detailing technical requirements for games on the platform in question. These documents are confidential, restricted to game testing organizations (though many requirements may fall outside the field) and as such not available to the public.

@paniq I think that is a bit of an overstatement. — Jonathan Blow (@Jonathan_Blow) November 15, 2013

@Jonathan_Blow I’m not saying this was done on purpose; I’m saying the elephants didn’t worry much about mouse culture. — Leonard Ritter (@paniq) November 15, 2013

@paniq So you didn’t pay anything, it would just recoup from revenue. (I am not a big fan of TCRs. But I am just saying.) — Jonathan Blow (@Jonathan_Blow) November 15, 2013

 

@Jonathan_Blow I was with a bigger dev in Hamburg; I was told a cert is in the 10k range which is why failing the cert repeatedly is costly.

— Leonard Ritter (@paniq) November 15, 2013

@Jonathan_Blow I wasn’t told that. That seems somewhat reasonable. — Leonard Ritter (@paniq) November 15, 2013

@paniq I am not sure how PS3 worked since I never did a deal there but I presume it is the same. — Jonathan Blow (@Jonathan_Blow) November 15, 2013

@Jonathan_Blow with all the NDA’s people have to subscribe to, it’s no wonder. — Leonard Ritter (@paniq) November 15, 2013

Blow reveals that he has not set up publishing for The Witness yet (which is a timed exclusive for the PlayStation 4) and as such hasn’t seen any contracts.

@paniq I don’t know, I have not set up to publish The Witness yet.

— Jonathan Blow (@Jonathan_Blow) November 15, 2013

@paniq So I have not seen the contracts or anything.

— Jonathan Blow (@Jonathan_Blow) November 15, 2013

Nonetheless, it’s fairly interesting considering Sony’s pro-indie stance. Granted, this could be something – like with Microsoft’s SDK for developing on the Xbox 360, which was non-refundable and in the range $10,000 – that is required. Even so, could Sony bump it up just to ensure that only select publishers and developers which can take the financial hit get in?

Take this all with a grain of salt, because like in Glengarry Glen Ross, it’s two guys “just talking about it”. What are your thoughts on the same? Let us know below.

Speaking to Gamasutra, Yoshida stated, “When we fund 100 percent, we publish. That doesn’t mean that we’re going to dictate the creative development of thechineseroom team.” Yoshida refers Everybody’s Gone to the Rapture, the developer’s next title, which will be out exclusively for the PS4.

“We don’t think that’s good for the project. We just support the team and probably help them. We have lots of resources, in terms of tech, or services, or testing – whatever it fits with the needs of the team, a small team like thechineseroom, we want to provide support so they can realize their ambitions or vision. They might become even more ambitious with our support.”

What’s the reason for posting such titles from comparatively smaller studios? Yoshida revealed that it’s “just for fun. Because we love working with these teams. We get lots of inspiration from these guys. It’s just healthy for us to work with some of those who are very aggressive creative, who try to do something not conventional.

“We have to provide big titles to support the platform, but if we are just doing that, maybe we lose some touch with the bleeding edge of thinking. It’s not like we have to fund these games. Without us, these teams would create some great indie games on their own. Luckily, these teams who have chosen to work with us have seen some value that we can bring to their project.”

So far, Sony’s indie showcase for the next year is looking pretty impressive with games such as The Witness, Volume and many more scheduled to be timed exclusives for the PS4. Stay tuned for more details.

In conversation with Polygon, Lanning stated that, “As storytellers in the 21st century, many designers, creators, and writers will be compelled to make deeper more meaningful and relevant content that reflects the challenging issues happening in the world around them today.

“Storytellers have been doing this from the beginning. Shakespeare reflected governmental corruption in his plays, without preaching about the obvious issues of his day. Pink Floyd was able to express cleverly their issues with the negative music industry practices and general dismay with capitalism, while in turn making some of the greatest selling entertainment music of all time.

“When content is deeper and more meaningful, then you can still create highly digestible and widely consumable entertainment products. Or, you can make Britney Spears albums. The games industry has more Britney Spears-class content than Pink Floyd. We just always aimed to deliver more of the later.”

Of course, it’s a problem with publishers since they focus more on the game’s marketing. “The least likely place we should expect to see more subtly influential, deeper content is from those products with the highest budgets and greatest focus on ‘must have massive audience consumption results.’ Anything that looks to possibly rock the boat toward that end, and reduce the size of the possible audience take will prove more likely to be cut from the end product before it ever makes it to the shelf.

“The more audiences realize that deeper content reflecting relevant truths can be more refreshing and engaging, [the more] we see documentary films having greater successes than ever in history. This is reflective of an evolving appetite that more people want more meaningful content and want to walk away from their experiences with more lasting impressions that add ‘more value to their lives.’

“This is why indie music is trending far more interesting in its content than the big pop stars with the highest short term sales. This is why indie films have more meaningful and lasting results on audiences than big blockbusters. Games are no different. It’s an investment versus returns reality.

“The best way to see deeper content manifesting in any of those mediums, is for creators to figure out how to deliver the products cheaper so that they may retain far more creative influence in the end product. Great content lasts the test of time, big pop for the moment evaporates from the history books more quickly.”

Currently, Oddworld Inhabitants and Just Add Water are working on Oddworld: New ‘N’ Tasty, a remake of Abe’s Oddysee set to release in Q4 2013 for PC, Linux, Mac and Nintendo eShop with a PS4 release due next year.

Microsoft will only let publishing be done through the company itself or a third-party, which is the same thing they have been doing since Xbox 360 and Xbox Live Arcade.

Matt Booty, general manager of Redmond Game Studios and Platforms told Shacknews: “As of right now, yes. We intend to continue to court developers in the ways that we have.”

He also said:  “I would also expect that for this new generation that we’re going to continue to explore new business models and new ways of surfacing content. But Microsoft Studios is a publisher that works with a wide range of partners, as do a lot of other people, to bring digital content to the box.”

This is not a healthy sign for developers or Microsoft themselves, I don’t understand what the company is thinking, and this is downright upsetting for everyone in the industry. I hope sooner or later the firm realizes their immense mistakes and finds a way to fight back. However, at the current moment this is not suitable.

Let us know what you think about this whole situation in the comments below.

Check back on GamingBolt for more updates on Xbox One.