Mr Puggsly said:
Ali_16x said:
You mean those frauds? Do you know why Sony dropped them? All the shit they had shown to Sony was just CGI, they were lying to them.
Oh and Sony allows the most creative freedom from all companies, that's a fact.
Oh and "creative freedom" is a generic excuse the industry uses, even in movies.
Lol, what I said still holds, they treated them horribly. Indies were big back then because they were fun and cheap, and you had plenty of AAA games to go a long with them. Now they have a bad stigma because AAA are seen less often while indies are in surplus.
Can you show me where Sony had these shitty policies? Because I've never seen them. I know of Microsoft's shitty policies.
And I still don't see where you address how having a parity clause for them is a good thing.
Or how requiring a publisher was a good thing for them, while most went with Microsoft because it was the easiest. Explain how them getting a publisher and the developers getting less money because of it is good for them.
Or did you forget all the shit Microsoft went through last gen when they weren't giving money to the developers, ie being late on payment. And all the shit with Jonathan Blow. Let's see what he had to say, “put you through as much pain as you will endure in order to extract whatever [they] feel like this week.” Wow, that sounded absolutely amazing for indies and it also sounded like they had no restrictions at all.
https://www.wired.com/2013/04/sony-indies/
Read more on nothing but positive things about Microsoft. Like cancelling their game release for speaking against them.
Lol "do more research", and then you bring up Braid. LMAO. thanks for proving you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. You seem to be mistaking Microsoft creating/leading the indie space with them automatically being in a healthy environment.
|
If you wanna argue neither company was great to indies, there is totally a discussion. But Sony was worse and thats why MS got great support early on. Over time, Sony relaxed and got better support.
However, your original point was Sony started the indie boom when MS actually deserves the credit.
Frankly, it doesent really matter and I do agree the indie scene has become oversaturated. But there are still gems.
|
Please give me examples as I don't know any. I've actually given you tons of examples. And even if Sony did treat indies worse, which I haven't heard of anything, Microsoft got indies because they looked for them. It was just a plan, like how Microsoft is doing BC right now, it's just a plan.
And again, you seem to be confusing Microsoft getting indies first to indies being in a health environment. So if you can't give me any facts, and even if you did, it doesn't change what I've said, they've changed all their shit, BECAUSE OF SONY. It's a fact, you can see that RIGHT NOW, with how indies are given so much freedom now. You can see now that MS doesn't have a partiy rule or atleast not as severve as it use to be, you can see that indies don't need a publisher, they can actually publish their game themselves. You can not say that indies were better off in the 360/PS3 era than right now. You just can't. And I have a feeling you're going to reply and basically say nothing, like you just did, don't bother.
