To summarize this story, Polytron refuses to make a new patch because that would be too hardz, will instead release the same patch because that's easier, and asks the 1% of customers they project to be angry over their decision to direct all complaints to Microsoft.
Developer Polytron says re-certifying the game would be too costly; it will re-release the same patch that was originally recalled by Microsoft due to bugs.
Fez developer Polytron has announced that it will be re-releasing the same patch for its downloadable puzzle platformer that was initially recalled by Microsoft due to a bug that saw some players losing their saved games.
According to Polytron, the developer is bringing back the same patch because Microsoft would charge "tens of thousands of dollars" to re-certify the game.
"We're bringing the first Fez patch online," the developer said on its blog. "It’s the same patch. We're not going to patch the patch. Why not? Because Microsoft would charge us tens of thousands of dollars to re-certify the game. And because, as it turns out, the save-file delete bug only happens to less than a percent of players. As a small independent, paying so much money for patches makes NO SENSE AT ALL, especially when you consider the alternative. Had Fez been released on Steam instead of XBLA, the game would have been fixed two weeks after release, at no cost to us."
The developer said that the patch is safe for the majority of players. According to Polytron, the patch fixes framerate issues, loading, skips, and death loops.
"For 99 percent of people, it makes Fez a better game. To the less than 1 percent who are getting screwed, we sincerely apologise. We know this hurts you the most, because you’re the ones who put the most times into the game. And this breaks our hearts. We hope you don't think back on your time spent in Fez as a total waste."
Polytron went on to say that the developer pays Microsoft money for the privilege of being on the Xbox Live platform, not the other way around.
The Fez patch will now be back online, available for download.
Awesome game but this dev can't help being more and more douchey the longer they're in business. Seriously low move on their part.
I didn't know it costs so much to release a patch. I sort of like that concept because it makes developers release less buggy games--at least in theory.
It's disappointing that Fez has released with such glitches. It sounds like they're a little bitter towards M$ but the fault ultimately lies with them. These glitches are not very excusable.
Don't put out severely glitched games.... it's as simple as that. Microsoft probably gives them a free patch after release, because I see very small games that cost $1 putting out patches. And there's no way these individual garage devs are paying thousands for that. Recertifying the entire game was probably required and is much more involved than certifying a patch.
@Vodoo Yeah... Maybe someone knows for sure, but editing books after they go to print is costly. Maybe MS is using similar logic for "extra patches." Still "tens of thousands" to patch is overpricing either way...
Hmm. Trying so hard to see both sides of this story. Ultimately, polytron has learnt an important lesson. Test before you release! But on the other side of things, there really should be some sort of agreement in place to allow developers to release fixes (not updates that improve the game) for free.....it's not like Polytron see any extra cash from fixing their broken games! Now we know why EA (caughs..ahem....FIFA) never properly fix their games.....cause it costs so friggin much!
That is not professional. I get where they are coming from, it would cost too much, but still. How do you expect to make money if potential buyers are hearing about how your game is faulty on the internet?
P.S. I don't know if this game is on PC, but if not why not port it?
Fez is overrated, bad game. Also, the creator Phil Fish is the Grandmaster @sshole. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8Ifue2xGFY
@skw4712 Unfortunately even if it had been the best indie game ever released with a developer that was the nicest guy on Earth, they still would have experienced the same experience from XBLA.
@skw4712 I wouldn't go as far to say that its a bad game...I'm pretty sure out of all the indie titles out there..its not a bad game but it probably is overrated.
Well I hope the game eventually releases on PC via Steam so we can get patches to our hearts content!
poor microsoft..I feel so bad for them..how they are so portrayed by the media...phhhh give me a break
Oh Polytron, never work with Microsoft if you're expecting logical solutions to indie-developed problems!
I LOVED this game it was super fun and creative but after i read articles about how much of an a hole the guy who made it is the game left a dirty taste in my mouth
"Polytron went on to say that the developer pays Microsoft money for the privilege of being on the Xbox Live platform, not the other way around". I never knew that developers paid console makers money to release games on their consoles! I always thought it was the other way around. I'm sure Sony and Nintendo would love a piece of Fez :D
Anyone else miss the good ol' days when you could buy a game cartridge without worrying about game-breaking glitches and follow-up patches?
@billwood661 ah the good old spectrum tape days.....and even if was broken, you didn't care cause it only cost a couple of bucks.
@billwood661 I smell sarcasm
@billwood661 I don't know which good ol' day you're referring to because there are plenty of old games that have glitches and need patches.
@billwood661 Now that i thought about, a number of 64 could of used a patch.
Polytron, biting the hand that feeds you!
I like how they twist it around to make Microsoft the reason for the bad patch. If you are an Indie dev and want to have Indie prices on Xbox Live, then you need to contract with the Xbox Live Indie market and NOT the XBLA market. There's a huge difference in price between the two.
Everyone should read the full comment made by Polytron, they really lay all the blame for their bad patch on Microsoft needing money to re-certify a new patch. They even claim that:"Microsoft gave us a choice: either pay a ton of money to re-certify the game and issue a new patch (which for all we know could introduce new issues, for which we?d need yet another costly patch)"
So, Plytron believes a patch they make might introduce more problems. I'm pretty sure the fault of a bad patch lays completely on the dev teams. They also make it sound like MS is somehow holding a blade over their necks. MS didn't "give them a choice", Polytron CHOSE to work with Microsoft's XBLA market and was fully aware of the costs involved.
Polytron, you have lost this gamers faith in your ability to properly run a game developer business.
@Landsharkk poor microsoft..lol give me a break..they are both in the wrong...fanboy
How are they both in the wrong?
Also, what is this fanboy word you use?
I lost so many weekends to that game! I remember being pretty good at it though, so I'd take that bet. :)
@Landsharkk and whats wrong with being anti-american...?
@Landsharkk you mean bush's actions..or the whole persona of america?..
@Landsharkk you know what i got two free games out of the hack..I never complained..when someone got a rrod..they got another xbox...that will eventually rrod again..thats pathetic..they also got a free year of xboxlive..wow..something taht shoudl be free so don't give me bull about service..
Oh ok, now I get it. You are just anti-american. Luckily I don't make judgements about an entire group of people/nation based on 1 person's actions.
My conversation with you is over and I wish you luck in learning more respect and maturity.
@obsequies Actually there was a known Apache hole in PSN network, which was brought to Sony's attention months prior to the 'hack'. It was Sony's lack of network security and other poor choices that lead to the Anonymous hacking.
That would not have happened on the Xbox Live service because....they don't use Apache (not that Apache is bad, but in the case of Sony they weren't using the most recent secure version of it).
@Landsharkk ebay has been hacked..amazon..everythings been hacked..and its been on windows frickin computers..anything can be hacked..it wasn't a manufacturing defect like the rrod incident..I'm not bringing this into the argument though...
@Landsharkk and the psn outage could ahve happened to xblox live too..it was "anonymous" and had nothing to do with how secure they were..they attacked them because sony disabled the other os feature for linux because they were loosing money companys buying ps3 for linux server farms
@Landsharkk pc does better..psn is better in terms of the fact that it is free..its almost as compareable to xbl and its free..therefore you get more for you\re money and it sure as hell feels like they respect me more as a consumer..rather than a frickin piece of livestock..pathetic american trash
@Landsharkk when they charge money for ps plus you get a service..not something that should be free..you get discounts and games..actually many free games..cloud saves and crap that you don't really need...#1 gaming service phhh in america maybe you sound like a drone..,...thats a joke.. lol..#1 lol...and what exactly does number 1 mean to you?.. what is the benifit of being number one? number one what..jhust reminds me of ms at e3..manipulation
Well, if you can do it better, by all means give it a shot!
"running everything through ms is only a reason to charge their fees...its pathetic..they are trying to milk the frickin consumers"
I don't understand that comment.
@Landsharkk gee if I have to pay money then it must be better...because it has to go through them and they have all these bills to pay..thats why they charge me money,...cause its the only way
@obsequies Again, you are wrong.
PSN does charge money. They offer a free service as well. Let's also remember which service has the most up-time, least amount of security breaches, and continues to be the #1 gaming service even this late in the current console generation.
Nintendo doesn't charge, but then again they don't offer nearly an as robust gaming service as Xbox Live.
@Landsharkk running everything through ms is only a reason to charge their fees...its pathetic..they are trying to milk the frickin consumers
@Landsharkk so how having that giant list of reasons to charge money...makes it a reason that that type of system is supperior..becauase gee...every other platform doesn't charge money
Again, you lack knowledge of how the Xbox Live service works. EVERY game on Xbox live uses Xbox live servers at some point during gameplay, regardless of who hosts the actual -game- servers.
1) When you log into Xbox Live, there are Xbox servers you are logging into
2) When you start any Xbox live game, there are Xbox servers that are tracking your 'presence' within the xbox live service
3) When you choose to join an xbox live friend to play with, that matchmaking is using Xbox matchmaking servers
4) When you send a message to anybody on Xbox Live, you are going through Xbox servers
5) While playing an Xbox game, your stats/leaderboard info, achievements, etc are all tracked on Xbox servers.
And that's just a start.
No, my giant list was to show reasons why MS charges for Xbox Live membership.
The reason they charge for certification of games and patches on the Xbox Live Arcade is encourage developers to release solid, bug-free (or at least no game-breaking bugs) code. If you were to make it free or too cheap you'd have developers releasing much buggier code, allowing the players to become the testers. It could end up being cheaper to release buggy code and let playing customers test it than to have an in-house test team that is directly paid by the developers.
@Landsharkk I know pso was on sega..they also charged for their service...you had to pay for pso and for ms to play online..but it was sent THROUGH the ms live servers and REQUIRED them to be able to play..you cannot play the original xbox live games like that online without live servers..its a closed platform
@Landsharkk so you're giant list is a reason why they wanted 40 grand to do something that steam would have done for free?
@obsequies Um, I don't believe MS hosted the 'game servers' for Phantasy Star Online. In fact, I believe it was SEGA (publisher) that hosted them. If you want to blame someone for turning off those servers, blame SEGA. It's similar to how EA turns off their game servers for games they feel like don't have enough players to offset the cost to host the servers. Mercenaries 2 is a good example of this. It's an Xbox 360 game, but can no longer be played online because EA turned off the servers.
@Landsharkk so what if I think you're just trying to defend micrsoft because you're a fanboy?
Here's a rough overview of components of a top-tier world-wide gaming service:
1) Thousands of Servers (not your cheap at-home servers either)
2) Operations Personnel (this includes SQL/DB Developers, your Tier 1 through Tier 3 roles, Account Managers, Change and Release Management for updates to the service, your Service Engineers, etc, etc)
3) Support Personnel
7) Research and Design Personnel
8) Power/utility costs (at the DC "Data Center") hosting the servers (this cost is about the same as it is to power a small city)
9) Infrastructure and up-keep (replacing faulty equipment, etc)
10) Networking Personnel
11) Networking devices (thousands)
12) Security Personnel (network security)
Plus you have your agreements with networking/media providers that you have to PAY in order to have them available on your gaming service. Xbox alone has roughly over a couple dozen different media/entertainment services in addition to the game service (Xbox Live).
I'm leaving out a ton of stuff, but this is a good start.
@Landsharkk the original xbox live service is no more..you can't play phantasy star online..on your xbox..and even if you wanted to use xlink kai..its impossible unless its a system link game..microsoft won't even release the source code for their old servers because they reused some of the architecture for the new xbox live service..and they are didn'[t dont you tell me otherwise...you have got to be kidding me if you say that they are the same service.they required everything to be changed over..they are completely differnent consoles. My point of argument is that Microsoft never card about consumer relations and this reflects over to small developers..I also make the point as you've probably stated that phil chose to put himself in this position
@Landsharkk you're changing the subject of my argument
@obsequies It seems you are attempting to change the subject of argument.
First off, I don't need to try to get on the original Xbox Live, because it's the same service now as it was then. Also, most of my original Xbox 1 titles work just fine on my current Xbox 360.
Second, you can't compare the Xbox 1 to the PS2. At the point in time that the Xbox 1 was released, Sony and the Playstation console already had a 7 year head-start in the game console industry over MS. Even the PS2 had a 1 year head-start compared to the Xbox 1. This means that many game IP's available on the Playstation had many sequels and huge followings when the PS2 was released, thus making the timeline for the PS2 console based entirely on different factors than the Xbox 1, which was brand new to the industry.
@Landsharkk why don't you go and try to get on the original xbox live..just try it...you know their are like at least 20 ps2 games that are still playable on official servers..and live was a payed service..ms dumps on consumers
@Landsharkk and I'm judging the entire xbox live system...having everything run through microsoft is a bad idea
@Landsharkk tell me how you know?
You assume too much.
"Microsoft have always milked anything..they don't need to charge for xbl..they don't need to charge 40 grand to get this past them again"
Tell me what you know about running a world-wide, top tier gaming service hosting millions of users a day and then I'll tell you what I know (having worked in the industry directly).
Hint: It's not cheap!
@Landsharkk I feel like you're defending ms...just because they have a platform that fits and a business model that is set...and people give into it but later regret it..doesn't make ms correct...Microsoft have always milked anything..they don't need to charge for xbl..they don't need to charge 40 grand to get this past them again..its bureaucraticall lunacy with a nice little price tag on top. People have every right to judge ms for their services system...and I think its bull compared to many alternatives..they are just being assholes..phil is also just trying to milk something..anything but the are both in the corner
@Landsharkk ms and polytron are both assholes
@Landsharkk You don't seem to get it. Patching a game shouldn't cost the developer money. The developer is already putting more time and effort into fixing the game for the sake of it's customers, why should they have to PAY to do this? It's like asking a TV repairman to pay to come fix your TV.
Also, it's not at all like asking a TV repairman to pay to fix your TV.
Does the TV repair man mass-market your business? Does the TV repair man offer you the service that allows your business to sell its products?
Does the TV repairman have to worry about whether or not your products and feature add-ons will break other products that he's responsible for marketing and hosting?
That's just it, they don't HAVE to pay, they CHOSE to pay. Polytron had a choice in how they contracted with MS/Xbox. They CHOSE to use the XBLA and are fully aware of the costs involved. So, why does that give them an excuse to complain about it? Nobody forced them to make that choice.
@Landsharkk The guy who made this game is an idiot.
I don't fucking care how good it may be, the guy is one of the biggest idiots the industry has ever seen. Just read anything he says. He's the end result of the press giving too much clout to loners who are incapable of working well with other people, and use the 'indie' shtick to hide their inability.
Please gaming press, stop that. It's great that we now have outlets for creative people to do things independently that would have a much harder time to be accepted in the bigger companies, but that doesn't mean being 'indie' is something mystical, magical, hip or commendable. It's a choice. As with all choices in life, it can go horribly, superbly, and anything in the middle of this wide spectrum.
Content you might like…
Users who looked at this article also looked at these content items.
Avalanche Studios co-founder says developer's ambition is for action, not moments that make players cry; steampunk-style game on hold. Full Story
- Posted May 15, 2013 6:33 am PT
4A Games creative director Andrew Prokhorov thanks Jason Rubin for telling the studio's story, but says, "We deserve the ratings we get." Full Story
- Posted May 16, 2013 12:44 pm PT