Braid dev wanted theme to be free Comments by Robert Purchese

M$

He should put free themes out for the PS3 instead. Anyone can make and distribute them!

I wonder if he didn't know the deal, beforhand...

If he doesn't dig the way they do shit, why did he do it, in the 1st place ? I wonder if he actualy likes money a lot, but likes to be "punk" rethorically...

note-to-self: I knew it was a bad idea to buy that theme...

I love my 360 but I hate this side of Microsoft. Most mission / map based DLC now clocks in at 800 points regardless of the amount of content, Arcade games coming out at 1200 points or more and now 'Premium' themes at 100 points more than the old style ones. MS may be trying to squeeze more out of me, but I'm actually buying less off of marketplace than a year ago because of the inflated prices.

It will be interesting to see the price of the GTA DLC...

I loved Braid and would probably use this theme if it resembles the game artistically (I'm sure it does), however I won't be buying any themes (premium or otherwise) out of principle.

I would never ever buy a theme. It's like buying a Nokia mobile phone covers. What is the point.

The only Themes I've bought were for Virtua Fighter 5 and N+. I felt sorry for them though.

This is exactly why I can't stand the whole concept behind consoles.

UncleLou : I dont know with wii but ps3 themes are free and you can make them yourself (on pc).

"What is the point."

None... . It's like an anti Social-Realism exercise (well, that's a point in itself, but... whatever...).

I don't mean themes specifically, but the idea of a platform holder having the final say over everything. This is just an example.

If the money goes uncut to the Braid developer, I would happily pay for the theme... but no.

If people stopped buying themes, Microsoft will be forced to let them go for free but when idiots spend money on them, MS will still rip them off. simple. Boycot the damn things and you will get them all for free.

Also, surely the Braid developers will get some royalties on sales of Braid themes but I guess it's easier for them to blame it on MS entirely and yet get the money anyway. If they sooo Wanted it to be free, they could have refused it to be offered in exchange for money entirely, YET, they didnt.

No, they DIDN'T.

"if thers only microsoft left in the gameing industry"

I don't understand this *fear*, I mean, if MS gets a monopoly or some crazy shit like that it will be because others didn't do a proper job. And I don't buy "out of fear", or "out of pity", sorry... .

I read there are some crazy online petitions, though...

Can he "thank fans" by patching his game so it doesn't wipe my saved games just because I bought it on a different 360?

I'd prefer that.

And before any tards make a comment, it was on my wife's 360, not because of an RRoD :P

"I don't understand this *fear*, I mean, if MS gets a monopoly or some crazy shit like that it will be because others didn't do a proper job."

True, but what do you think would happen to prices, quality and innovation AFTER a monopoly is secured?

We saw how Sony behaved with a near-monopoly. We know how MS behave in a near-monopoly in the OS & Office markets.

That's why I'm quite happy for MS & Sony to duke it out, it means we benefit from it!

@Retroid : Agreed :)

"True, but what do you think would happen to prices, quality and innovation AFTER a monopoly is secured?"

I don't want to sound rude, but baby sitting companies, and apologizing their mistakes don't fit my job description. I'll cross that bridge if it happens (like I use Linux for 10 years), but not before.

I mean, we can't really say 360 isn't raising the bar and trully inovating (not so sure about the pricing of content, I give you that...), like is almost the same proportions Vista really sucks bad. I'm not going to stop buying 360 stuff, or drop SuSE..., but I might, who knows ? - maybe things get stalled in 360 land, maybe Windows 7 is very good.

"In news today, Jonathon Blow, creater of the game Braid said as he left the Ferrari garage after purchasing a new Enzo, 'I really wanted the game to be less expensive and the theme to be free, but Microsoft must have missed the yellow sticky written in invisible ink that I left stuck to the wall of gents toilets saying so. What was that? Caviar? Yes, I'll some of that with my peacock tongue sandwich...'"

@KingsXKing

If you didnt buy the game you dont know how good it is do you?

I have completed the full game and the game is just as fantastic as the gamecritics say it is.

@miiiguel: MS isn't innovating anything in the gaming scene - not even online - but they to a great job at what they do and have attractive pricing (on the surface anyway) and a solid brand now. If they (or anybody else) get a monopoly, you will see heigher pricing and ness innovations. Not not be rude, but this should be common sense for anybody.
That's why I think it's extremely shortsighted and naive when people cheer for MS/Sony/Nintendo to fail and die - it will only hurt themselves as consumers.

@Beano: MS isn't innovating anything in the gaming scene - not even online

Really?

XBLA? Even though they did it with virtually no fanfare on the original Xbox, it's given me some of my favourite gaming experiences of this generation.

Community games? Even if quite a few of them are shite, and there are utter jokes like the fireplace, no-one else has ever opened things up on a console platform.

I know, I know, PCetc. :)

Retroid - surely those sort of things are the very least that would be expected once this (or any) console was properly online.

As you yourself said, the PC had already done stuff like it because it had been online for so much longer.

I think MS' biggest innovations have been achievements and gamerscores (and charging for online play), which were brilliant ideas to create loyalty for the platform.

@Retroid : Yes really :)

As I wrote they do a great job - XBLA is a good example. But not first with online game, not even on consoles (Dreamcast was first).
Ok true, uniform gamerscores and ahievements are a minor innovation... I'll give you that one :)

Community games?... Ever heard about Yaruze?
Sure it was not well known and didn't have a distributiuon method but homebrew on consoles is not really new either.

But they do innovate in how many competitors's games and features they can rip of within a few years while still being called innovative... Lips, SceneIT, Live Vision games, Avatars :D

I must again repeat that I think MS are doing a great job - just not very innovative, especially not the last few years.

there's really not much difference in MS charging for premium themes than Sony charging for a pair of virtual trousers in Home.

@crazyhorse174 -" but Microsoft must have missed the yellow sticky written in invisible ink that I left stuck to the wall of gents toilets saying so."
That would be the gents toilets in the locked basement with no lights or stairs and a sign on the toilet door saying 'beware of the leopard', right?

@paulf: So true :)

But at least a free theme is far more useable than a pair trousers for a avatar you don't ever look at ;)

I don't mind themes costing money, the free themes available is good enough. However I do mind the silly cost of gamer pictures since you can't make your own and they are just low-res pictures anyway. A gamer picture actually serves some function since it distinguishes you from other people in friends lists and putting a rather high price tag on them is just stupid. Still there are free ones to choose from too, but they mostly look shit.

About control over a platform:

Please bear in mind that Microsoft has control over the PC platform as well. PC gaming = Windows gaming.

The Games for Windows initiative is a first step, but I wouldn't be surprised if they started creeping in the direction of more control over what gets released on "PC" and for how much.

@ dominalien

No, they don't control PC gaming. They'd like to, they're trying to, but they'll continue to fail as they have done since the beginning.

PC = open platform, make no mistake about that.

Has anyone noticed how much faster the MS live service is for downloading updates/ patches/ content than "normal" http-based downloads?

That's due to the amount of bandwidth that MS has invested in across the UK, Europe and the US to keep the download speeds fast. And bandwidth is not cheap. I work for a game developer making a 360 game and we wanted to put something out free that *wasn't* a trailer/ theme etc- basically something a bit more involved than a screenshot/ wallpaper.

We were told that MS *have* to charge for a certain amount of content per title in order to support the bandwidth investment model. When you think about it, it makes sense.

You can't just host a crap-load of content for every game out there for free. It simply does not work from a business standpoint.

@Mogs

How is the PC an open platform?

PC = system = MS control. Proprietary software. If they tighten the leash little by little, there will be no outcry and people will not move away.

There really isn't anything to move away to, in any case.

@threewayswitch: No, it's because the XBL patches only contains changed data (patches existing files) and not just new version for files like many do.... meaning less data to download.

I'm afraid your ignorance is staggering.

Yes, MS own windows. Yes PC games run on windows. That doesn't mean MS controls it.

There's no certification process for the PC

Developers don't have to use GfW (most don't)

Developers don't even need to use other proprietary MS software like Direct X, they can use stuff like OPEN GL.

etc etc

Bottom line - you can put whatever you want on the PC and don't have to ask MS's permission to do it.

Open platform dude.

You can't just host a crap-load of content for every game out there for free. It simply does not work from a business standpoint.

Then how come PC games have done so since patches were invented? And MS already have a crapload more bandwidth to spare than your average PC developer, obviously. I'm sure the Live subs cover the cost of bandwidth many times over.

It does amaze me that people are still willing to pay actual money for a few JPEGs and some GIFs.

It's like the old mobile wallpaper thing all over again...

Anyone who buys MS's bogus excuses for why there's so many petty charges for live is a fool.

There is no justification for it. They charge because they can, it's as simple as that.

The theme thing = MS being greedy, as per other stuff that would be free, they need to change this

The 1,200 point thing though, seems a bit odder...surely Mr Blow could set the price of his content at 800 if he wanted to, or reduce it now if he really wanted this, this side of it makes less sense, i'm not convinced as he would have ye beleive that MS enforce the cost of arcade games, some put em out at 400 like Minter, some 800, surely Space Giraffe could have been 800 if Minter had so wished..i imagine this is more i want X return per sale and to do that it'd be X points which would be more than he makes...which is fairly normal

And you seem to have heavily rose-tinted glasses on.

Why are you talking about certification? Closed platform != console-like. Also, the fact that there is no certification now doesn't mean there won't be one in the future. There is driver certification, why not software, once people get used to it enough.

Truth of the matter is software lives or dies on the whims of Microsoft. Remember undocumented Windows features? The ones that made sure MS software runs better than other people's software, using undocumented features of the system? Don't know if these are still around, but I don't think it inconceivable they're still there. Pressure has been put on MS to remove them, but have they?

OOXML is another example. Fantastic standard, with functions like "footnote formatting like Word 97" (not actually a quote, can't be bothered to look it up) - with footnote formatting in Word 97 described where? Nowhere.

What about WinXP activation? Anyone remember the public outcries over this? Everyone lives with it now and no-one thinks about it twice.

I could go on. My point is, make a big change all at once and people will notice. Introduce small changes little by little and people will get used to them. If you want to believe Windows to be an open platform, I won't argue with you. But I don't consider it to be that, and I believe MS is trying to make it more closed as time goes by. I know I would if I were them.

EDIT: My actual point, which I failed to make in the paragraph above, is that Windows, hence "the PC" is only as open as Microsoft makes it. I'm not saying it's good or bad, just making a point that our computing lives depend on the decisions of this company - not God, or government of the US, or the whales in the sea or the phases of the moon. That's it.

"I won't pay for a theme out of principal, but I'll pay my cell phone provider for a ring tone!"

Keep your money in your pocket if you don't want to buy it, but enough with the "principal" excuse. We all pay for stupid things that we don't need. There are many free themes on the marketplace if it's that big a strain on your wallet. But stop comparing this with the PC because it's not a freaking PC! I'm not defending MS, because I certainly wouldn't pay for this garbage, but to act like they're so evil for charging is a bit foolish when you consider what people are paying for these days. They're all after you money, which is how they survive!

To address someone elses comment: You can make themes for the 360 on your PC as well.

People are trying to make lock down PC gaming and make it more like console gaming, that is true. However, it's a long, long way away at the moment.

If you don't think people will notice, look at Rock Paper Shotgun's Top 10 Angry Internet Man Angerers of 2008. Unfortunately they seem to dismiss a lot of it as a storm in a teacup (I think, it's hard to tell from that article), but many of us will not go down without a fight ;)

edit: "the PC" is only as open as Microsoft makes it

That bit's not really true though. If I wanted to write a game in my bedroom and release it on the internet for free (or for a small fee that I would keep 100% of) I could. That's what makes it open. Potentially Microsoft could turn around and say that with their next operating system, no programs can run unless approved by Microsoft, but this is such a ridiculous idea that it would never happen.

'Potentially Microsoft could turn around and say that with their next operating system, no programs can run unless approved by Microsoft, but this is such a ridiculous idea that it would never happen.'

I'm not so sure it would be that simple (there's probably anti-consumer/competition laws they'd be breaching), but even if they did that, people would gradually migrate to other OS's and there's not a damn thing MS could do about it.

If Google ever release an OS and make it free, Microsoft is in biiiig trouble. I think you'd actually find they'd drop the whole Xbox business altogether.

@skillian

Maybe it's a ridiculous idea, but it's Microsoft's decision to do it if they choose to. Which is what I mean when I say it's as open as they make it.

I guess my rant about small steps got lost along the way, somewhere.

@Mogs

I believe MS will not be "in big trouble" anytime soon. And when they do, it'll be the result of a long, slow process, not the release of a "free OS" by Google or anyone else.

In order for such an OS to be more-or-less successful, it would have to run all Windows apps right-out-of-the-box at 97% compatibility with all software developers falling over themselves to post huge notices on their websites that they are doing nothing else but removing incompatibilities with said system. Kind of what happened when Vista came out. Somehow, I don't see Google or anyone else (Novell? IBM? Sun? These were really powerful companies once. How much power do they have now?) being able to pull this off.

There are many hardware manufacturers out there. Many for motherboards, quite a few for HDDs, (at least) two for CPUs. There is only one Microsoft. One system :-) I'm off to buy some of their shares...

"@miiiguel: MS isn't innovating anything in the gaming scene - not even online "
I must disagree, XNA is a great innovation in the console buisness (and I bet they aren't getting rich because of that, it's as nich as a niche can be), same goes for "social networking" which is nowday's Live middle name (you don't pay to chat to death on online parties, and while in different games). A centralized ludic hub where you can pretty much organize all your games; movies; music at a press of a button (the "power on" one) at having all certified to be up to date, allways. I'd say it's a new thing...

edit: oh... and the "free OS'es", they exist for so long..., Google can have any OS any day, as a matter of fact I have my own OS (no shit...), just compile a kernel and call it "the MS killer OS". It takes so much more than that - it takes years, probably decades to change things as they are now.

I'm not saying it wouldn't be a big task, but if anyone were in a position to take it on it'd be Google. They could base it on some version of Linux (which a lot of software already supports), tart it up a bit & offer proper support for businesses etc...

Goodnight MS.

@Mogs

Major problem I see with this is that neither Google or anyone else will have much incentive to do this, unless they simply decide to go out of their way to spite MS. Looking at Red Hat, Novell and some others, I think it's safe to say selling support for Linuxes is... not very profitable.

er... and the "Google hype" is a tad silly. I remeber the "iPhone killer - we give you the Google phone!".

Turned out to be a crappy HTC with a Google logo on it...