snowdog said:
The problem with the parity clause is due to the publisher/developer not the clause itself. The clause says that Microsoft 'reserve the right' to refuse a licence to a game that's been released on other platforms previously. Publishers and developers have more power than they realise but don't have the balls to use it. Ubisoft for example could have released Rayman Legends in February for the Wii U and the other platforms (including the 360 SKU) in September without a problem. Microsoft certainly wouldn't refuse to give Rayman Legends a licence because it was such a high profile game. |
I see. In a sense it makes me feel worse about it because it means Ubisoft didn't have the guts to stick with at least timed exclusivity, but regardless I'm glad you cleared that up. Likely doesn't help the case for indies though, since they obviously don't have the kind of clout publishers like Ubisoft do.
NNID: TheCCluc







