By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Machinarium submitted to Sony after Microsoft refusal

Rainbird on 13 April 2010

Good point, I guess Xbox 360 owners will just have to pass on Machinarium, unless these guys ever decide to find a publisher. No way in hell this game is coming out in the XBL Indie Games space.



Around the Network
tingyu on 13 April 2010

More power to Sony, such a gorgeous game with 85% Metacritic may become the next Flower. Hope Sony will get another Pixel Junk or Thatgamcompany out of this.



akuseru on 13 April 2010
Seece said:
Why can't they appeal to a third party publisher? Why does it have to be a big one like Microsoft or Sony?

They want to piggy back off the reputation of a big name without a price?

"It means if we want to release the game on XBLA we must throw, probably, most of the profit out of the window -- to the publisher. Just because we created Mac and Linux versions."

That's why. Aren't we always saying here on these forums that everything in this business is about making profit and getting them dollars?



rocketpig on 13 April 2010
Rainbird said:
Good point, I guess Xbox 360 owners will just have to pass on Machinarium, unless these guys ever decide to find a publisher. No way in hell this game is coming out in the XBL Indie Games space.

And from the sounds of it, they shouldn't have a hard time finding a pub.




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

rocketpig on 13 April 2010
akuseru said:
Seece said:
Why can't they appeal to a third party publisher? Why does it have to be a big one like Microsoft or Sony?

They want to piggy back off the reputation of a big name without a price?

"It means if we want to release the game on XBLA we must throw, probably, most of the profit out of the window -- to the publisher. Just because we created Mac and Linux versions."

That's why. Aren't we always saying here on these forums that everything in this business is about making profit and getting them dollars?

Again, massive misquote. Let's see how much they "throw out the window" by getting a publisher.

Namely, to be on XBL, PSN, or Wii, they NEED A PUBLISHER. THEY WILL LOSE THE "SAME" AMOUNT OF MONEY.

Really? Is this hard?




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

Around the Network
Rainbird on 13 April 2010
rocketpig said:
akuseru said:
Seece said:
Why can't they appeal to a third party publisher? Why does it have to be a big one like Microsoft or Sony?

They want to piggy back off the reputation of a big name without a price?

"It means if we want to release the game on XBLA we must throw, probably, most of the profit out of the window -- to the publisher. Just because we created Mac and Linux versions."

That's why. Aren't we always saying here on these forums that everything in this business is about making profit and getting them dollars?

Again, massive misquote. Let's see how much they "throw out the window" by getting a publisher.

Namely, to be on XBL, PSN, or Wii, they NEED A PUBLISHER. THEY WILL LOSE THE "SAME" AMOUNT OF MONEY.

Really? Is this hard?

Wait wait wait, didn't you just bash people for not reading the article and discuss with me how they can't publish the game themselves on XBLA, but can on PSN and WiiWare?

The whole issue here is that they want to publish the game themselves and not pay a publisher, but Microsoft won't allow that, whereas Sony and Nintendo will.



rocketpig on 13 April 2010

Maybe I'm misinterpreting what I know of the three manufacturers but there is not only going to be a posting fee but also a publishing fee, whether it comes from a third party or not.

In the end, someone gets their cash. That's my point.




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

rocketpig on 13 April 2010
Rainbird said:
rocketpig said:
akuseru said:
Seece said:
Why can't they appeal to a third party publisher? Why does it have to be a big one like Microsoft or Sony?

They want to piggy back off the reputation of a big name without a price?

"It means if we want to release the game on XBLA we must throw, probably, most of the profit out of the window -- to the publisher. Just because we created Mac and Linux versions."

That's why. Aren't we always saying here on these forums that everything in this business is about making profit and getting them dollars?

Again, massive misquote. Let's see how much they "throw out the window" by getting a publisher.

Namely, to be on XBL, PSN, or Wii, they NEED A PUBLISHER. THEY WILL LOSE THE "SAME" AMOUNT OF MONEY.

Really? Is this hard?

Wait wait wait, didn't you just bash people for not reading the article and discuss with me how they can't publish the game themselves on XBLA, but can on PSN and WiiWare?

The whole issue here is that they want to publish the game themselves and not pay a publisher, but Microsoft won't allow that, whereas Sony and Nintendo will.

Who "publishes" these games? It seems to me like a strawman argument. If the game was that good, someone would pick it up. MS doesn't publish XBL games. If the dev has to shop around, it's either a a crap game or something that needs a bit of love, one of which I'm a huge fan of coddling and possibly helping into mainstream.




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

Rainbird on 13 April 2010

The way I'm interpreting it, Microsoft requires developers to have an independant publisher before they will allow their game on XBLA, and since the game is out on Linux and Mac, Microsoft won't do the publishing (which I assume is a better deal for the developers than getting someone like EA, THQ or whatever. Otherwise I don't understand why we have this situation to begin with).
On PSN and WiiWare, an independant publisher is not required, so these guys can publish it themselves and only pay the licensing to the platformholder, and not any publishing fees.

This is entirely what I have made of it so far, I don't know how factual that it is.



badgenome on 13 April 2010
Darth Tigris said:
badgenome said:
MrBubbles said:
microsoft has published other games that were on the computer (braid, which even went to other consoles later) so i have trouble believing this is the entire story.

Braid was on the 360 first, though. And it stayed exclusive for a good 6-9 months.

But he hit the nail on the head, there is obviously much more to this story.  MS just isn't airing the dirty laundry like this guy is.  How could he expect them to publish something that wasn't exclusive to the platform?  They could go to any 3rd party publisher if they want it released on multiple systems right off.

Sorry, I don't see what MS did wrong here and I'd be very surprised if SCE says "sure, we'll publish it even if you release it on the 360 at the same time" ...

No, I totally agree. The game looks sweet and all, but no one is entitled to have Microsoft publish their game.