By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Machiavellian on 09 December 2014
Edit Thread
Smeags said:

At the end of the day, the Parity Clause is bad for everyone.

Obviously the big one is on the Xbox One owners, who have less games to choose from and play.

But it's also bad for Microsoft, who because of the lower amount of games present, receive less revenue from the absent sales of said games.
And of course it's bad for the developer, who now have to choose to either spend more money now for added console development for Xbox One, or no Xbox One development at all (or hope for a pardon from the clause later on).

Despite Sony fans not getting Shovel Knight at the start, I'm sure they're not complaining about getting the game now rather than never. A great game is a great game, no matter when it's released on your console of choice (*hugs Guacamelee which was released later on Wii U*)

Let's ignore the petty bragging and goading and see this as a gamer issue. More awesome games is never a bad thing.

I see that Xbox has seen it (the original OP in question). Prety cool.

Has there been a developer who has not been denied to self publish on the X1 due to the parity clause.  I know we keep talking about it but already are games that have come out on other systems first that MS has approved for the X1.  One developer was asked how they got by the parity clause from MS and they simple said they just registered their game.  If anything, as long as a project looks legit, MS is more than happy to forego the Parity Clause.

I must say as a gamer, I do not care about having a lot of games to choose from, I only care about quality games to choose from.  If people really cared about having the system with the most games then you would hook up your PC to your TV and not bother with a console.