Microsoft No Longer Charges Devs To Patch Their Games

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
According to Eurogamer, Microsoft is no longer charging developers for patching their Xbox 360 games.

Microsoft has always charged a fee when developers first submit their games to Microsoft's certification process so they can be approved for release, and the company normally grants developers one title update free of charge. This remains the case, but sources have told Eurogamer that subsequent re-certification as a result of a title update is now free. This applies to Xbox Live Arcade games and full retail games.
Click to expand...
 
Took MS long enough. Indie devs got hit the hardest with this BS fee.
 
It was always curious to me how Microsoft cared enough about software quality to give their static analysis tools freely to Xbox developers, yet they charged to deliver patches. Patches to enhance software quality.

The two things were completely at odds with each other. It now appears that Microsoft actually cares about software quality.
 
The only downside of this is that it does help the consoles vs PC competition ... I actually like it when the PC has features and capabilities not available in the console market ... helps keep the PC competitive ;)
 
wonderfield said:
It was always curious to me how Microsoft cared enough about software quality to give their static analysis tools freely to Xbox developers, yet they charged to deliver patches. Patches to enhance software quality.

The two things were completely at odds with each other. It now appears that Microsoft actually cares about software quality.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure all these recent changes are because of Sony. At E3 all the indie devs were like microsoft sucks, sony is better self publishing and no bs fees!
 
///AMG said:
Pretty sure all these recent changes are because of Sony. At E3 all the indie devs were like microsoft sucks, sony is better self publishing and no bs fees!
Click to expand...

Cool to see msft with a competitor they can't ignore
 
LeninGHOLA said:
Now let's see if people start patching these buggy console games.
Click to expand...

Or rather, people start launching games that are buggy and unfinished because they can patch them for free later. The size of the fee was silly, but having a fee in general was smart because it gives devs incentive to make sure the game is 100% good to go, rather than launching tons of little patches that cause more problems than they fix.
 
sushiwarrior said:
Or rather, people start launching games that are buggy and unfinished because they can patch them for free later. The size of the fee was silly, but having a fee in general was smart because it gives devs incentive to make sure the game is 100% good to go, rather than launching tons of little patches that cause more problems than they fix.
Click to expand...

Hypothetically, I can see where you are coming from. In practice, this really wasn't the case. Cross platform games were often as buggy, or more buggy on console vs. their PC counterparts.
 
Having QA at Microsoft look at the patch costs money. They have ensure the patch doesn't do anything crazy.

That's why it cost money before :p
 
jynxycat said:
Having QA at Microsoft look at the patch costs money. They have ensure the patch doesn't do anything crazy.

That's why it cost money before :p
Click to expand...

But $10k a pop??? I think it was around $25k when the 360 first came out.
 
///AMG said:
Pretty sure all these recent changes are because of Sony. At E3 all the indie devs were like microsoft sucks, sony is better self publishing and no bs fees!
Click to expand...

Competition is great. If one company does a BS move, the other can take advantage of it and basically force the other one to backstep. Microsoft has been doing a lot of flip flopping lately due to Sony and other competitors.

This is good, healthy competition between Sony and Microsoft where the consumer is the winner.
 
sushiwarrior said:
Or rather, people start launching games that are buggy and unfinished because they can patch them for free later. The size of the fee was silly, but having a fee in general was smart because it gives devs incentive to make sure the game is 100% good to go, rather than launching tons of little patches that cause more problems than they fix.
Click to expand...

LOL.

Did you ever play and EA game?
Their was no incentive the only incentive was to release another game or a DLC.

If by your logic MS Windows should have next to no patches nor should the dashboard be ever updated.
 
Maybe the Fez developer can finally patch there game. Too bad I already bought it on Steam and for cheaper :D
 
pcjunkie said:
I can actually hear the chains with all the back peddling MS is doing...
Click to expand...

I hate star wars..
but

The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.

MS is trying desperately to lock people in but MS forgets that people have free will and they don't like being told what to do especially something they have worked hard for.
 
EvilWays said:
But $10k a pop??? I think it was around $25k when the 360 first came out.
Click to expand...

I think, but don't quote me on this, it was because of the way the xbox 360s game environment worked. Without virtualization, a game gets full system access, including the ability to brick or root consoles. I believe the reasoning behind the cost was that the initial game had to be tested before being approved (taking dev & test resources). At approximately 100k/year for each dev/test resource used, this was a significant cost. I'm not sure what changed in the 360 (or if we just decided to eat the cost), but that's what I thought was the reason behind the cost - the risk & cost of verifying that a game/patch doesn't brick users' systems or produce security holes in the console.
 
Tawnos said:
I think, but don't quote me on this, it was because of the way the xbox 360s game environment worked. Without virtualization, a game gets full system access, including the ability to brick or root consoles. I believe the reasoning behind the cost was that the initial game had to be tested before being approved (taking dev & test resources). At approximately 100k/year for each dev/test resource used, this was a significant cost. I'm not sure what changed in the 360 (or if we just decided to eat the cost), but that's what I thought was the reason behind the cost - the risk & cost of verifying that a game/patch doesn't brick users' systems or produce security holes in the console.
Click to expand...

Maybe MS should of designed a system that suck a bag of dicks. So essential their incompetence was push down to developers?
 
but that's what I thought was the reason behind the cost - the risk & cost of verifying that a game/patch doesn't brick users' systems or produce security holes in the console.
Click to expand...

And yet Sony and MS still have released system updates that have effectively bricked systems by accident those 100K a year jobs cant even test there own shit correctly let alone indie game patches lol
 
Trolls. Trolls everywhere. Where's freddiew's ban hammer when you need it?
 
Awesome! I hope game developers use the cash saved to actually improve their games. Pipe dream for a lot... :(
 
potency said:
With a system like that I'd never leave the house!
Click to expand...

Um.... You would when the system crashed... "WE HAVE A BLEEDER!". Red Screen of Death/Red Ring of Death. :/ You buy the launch day version and give a Jon style review (Avatar Fleshlight).
 
LeninGHOLA said:
Hush, you. We know you work for Microsoft. Plus, trollin ain't easy.
Click to expand...

I don't hide that fact. My opinion is my own.

Fact is, writing updates can be _hard_, even for practically homogeneous hardware.

Good trolling isn't easy. Making flamebait statements about sucking dicks or mistakes or oversight in our products isn't good trolling, and is quite easy.
 
Tawnos said:
I don't hide that fact. My opinion is my own.

Fact is, writing updates can be _hard_, even for practically homogeneous hardware.

Good trolling isn't easy. Making flamebait statements about sucking dicks or mistakes or oversight in our products isn't good trolling, and is quite easy.
Click to expand...

No, I agree. I just tend to blank out those types of troll posts. But, you do have to expect this kind of thing even when good news is what the thread is about.
 
Tawnos said:
Good trolling isn't easy. Making flamebait statements about sucking dicks or mistakes or oversight in our products isn't good trolling, and is quite easy.
Click to expand...

Yea. Whatever. You're dumb.


What has Microsoft ever done for us!?
DOS.
Well, yea. They did give us DOS.
Windows!
Yea, that too. But, aside from DOS and Windows, what else has Microsoft given us?
Xbox!
Well, yea. Of course, the Xbox.

Fuck Microsoft!

Solidarity, Reg.
 
The fee was there in the first place because there were developers who released patches with zero QA. Why spend money when Microsoft can be the one to have Xbox QA look for your bugs?
 
Wow if I was a dev I would never release my game on a 360. There was 2 better alternatives at the time to. PC / PS3..
 
wonderfield said:
It was always curious to me how Microsoft cared enough about software quality to give their static analysis tools freely to Xbox developers, yet they charged to deliver patches. Patches to enhance software quality.

The two things were completely at odds with each other. It now appears that Microsoft actually cares about software quality.
Click to expand...

No they don't. Nothing's changed. Arrogance is what led to the policy to charge devs $40k for additional updates beyond the first freebie. Smaller developers fled the platform in droves. PS4 has all the Indie momentum and buzz right now if you look at statements from them.

This is just an MS backpedal as usual.
 
DPI said:
No they don't. Nothing's changed. Arrogance is what led to the policy to charge devs $40k for additional updates beyond the first freebie. Smaller developers fled the platform in droves. PS4 has all the Indie momentum and buzz right now if you look at statements from them.

This is just an MS backpedal as usual.
Click to expand...

Its usually good for a company to change because they "listened" to the consumers and their partners. But with Microsoft its never because the are doing something actively lately with regards to Xbox everything is reactive to the fear of being irrelevant. The other thing is lately I tend to believe their PR dept. needs restructuring and new management. As of late their PR has been terrible thats what has led to all of this. If they made sure everything was crystal clear and their employees were all on the same page then I think Xbox One had a chance, but you had everyone at E3 contradicting each other, lying, and then you had Sony come in to nut check Microsoft with their pants down and hands up in the air. This led to all the ill will towards Microsoft and then they go around and change pretty much all of the policies that they got ragged probably only after PS4 raped Xbox One in preorders. So now we have Microsoft who is supposed to be a pioneer and innovator that stands by their product and vision but caving into their competitor. The best way they could have done this IMHO is to keep some of the non DRM features like library sharing etc. while getting rid of the DRM features everyone hated. That is actually listening to your customers, but instead all they are doing is reacting and trying to save the sinking boat.

Just my .02 on what I have been observing lately. Seriously its not like W8 isnt a decent product or potentially Xbox One, but introducing all these new features will taking away so much only to pull a 180 and add them in is really bad for PR. Either stand by your product, make needed changes to the things people want and keep the good, but dont make a 180 and take away all the good and bad.
 
As of late? MS has never had a good PR or advertising dept in their entire existence.
 
Its funny you guys think there is such a thing as good PR/ad depts.! Pack of lying bastards the lot of them! It's not an honest man's (or woman's) job! At least... not these days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top