@bunchanumbers @Tridus Phones & Tablets all run on the same basic ARM design (except the Surface Pro, which is essentially a PC). Are you going to try and tell me that's a monotone world? Because that's a war so bloody with changes happening so rapidly that it makes the console wars look like afternoon tea.
What kind of processor the console has in it simply doesn't matter when it comes to this stuff. If you really want expensive games to be made, being able to easily port them means more sales at less expense, which is a good thing. If nobody can afford to make that kind of game due to the cost anymore, than more F2P casual time wasters are all you're going to get.
Go ask any developer if the PS3 having a screwy hardware design or the Wii U being underpowered helps them. It doesn't. It just causes them to waste money that could be better spent elsewhere.
You need to decide what it is you really want. Do you want core game companies to be healthy so they keep making non-casual games, or do you want funky "unique" hardware that's overly expensive to develop for?
The Wii U is unique. It's also doing very poorly, and almost nobody wants to make games for it. How is that a good thing?
@bunchanumbers The PS3 being obtsuely complicated to work with for no reason whatsoever added nothing to gaming. New systems being easier to work with by using stuff that's already proven to work is a good thing, since it lets developers focus on making the game part, and less on "how do I make this hardware do what I want?"
As for "core" games, don't worry. People will be making them so long as people are buying them. Hell, people said PC gaming is dead years ago and tons of great games are coming out all the time.
If you want more of a certain type of game to be made, go out and buy games like that (new, not used). They'll keep making them until people stop doing that.
@YukoAsho @Armyboy5 GFWL was never competition for Steam, or anything else. It was so poorly implemented and so reviled by PC gamers that companies were bashed for using it.
Hell, Bethesda dumped it in favor of Steamworks after one game.
@Warlord_Irochi @Tridus Certification QA doesn't test for this type of bug, that's why they didn't find it the first time it happened.
Actually what certification QA tests for is just that the cert rules are followed. The cert rules mostly cover UI conventions and not stepping on the toes of other games or crashing the OS. They'd never catch this bug in cert QA except by dumb luck.
@jtthegame316 No, MS only changed the patching policy. They still require you to have a publisher or use them as a publisher (with onerous terms) for no reason whatsoever.
Nobody else has that requirement.
If you want indie games, Xbox is not the place to be. Microsoft has been busy torching those bridges to make EA happy. Read about the experience the Skulls of the Shogun team had in dealing with Microsoft, it's a real warning.
@Warlord_Irochi Umm, so do Western games. The problem was Microsoft here, not the developers. A Steam version would have been patched instantly, because they weren't charging tens of thousands of dollars to post a patch.
@deadruler08 Castle Crashers had the same problem, and Microsoft gave that a big promotional pitch when it came out.
Bugs happen, that's reality. If you want a game that can be provably bug free, you're going to be paying $300 for it to pay for the extra costs required to make it that way.
@rem234 @Dixie987 Indie games on the Xbone? LOL. You must have missed the weeks of indies screaming about how terrible Microsoft's polices are and how they're not working with them again.
@rem234 @DiamondDM13 They also have privacy policies about lots of other data. They go out the window when the NSA shows up with a secret order saying "gimme".
Tridus' comments