Farsight comes clean on issues with 360 platform

[Bonzo]

Seems like a good idea, PiN WiZ. But I fear MS would make FS jump through twice as many hoops from that point on instead of making things easier.

 

[aangel]

I'm not impressed that they lied to us all this time.

What else can you do when you don't fully know what you are doing. It's very obvious.

 

[Sean DonCarlos]

I'm not impressed that they lied to us all this time.

Being prevented from speaking by the terms of an NDA is not the same as lying. In the Facebook post quoted in the first post of this thread, FarSight mentions that Microsoft requires a publisher and will not allow direct relationships. Now why would FS mention this, since they already have a publisher. Well, because there may be problems with that publisher that FS is unable to disclose because of the NDA. Now that Crave has filed for bankruptcy, which is a public announcement that there's trouble, it no longer breaks the terms of the NDA for FS to comment publicly on the matter.

I know to an outsider it appears duplicitous, perhaps even like a lie. But having been in the software development business myself, this situation is unfortunately rather common, where a company needs to comment publicly on something but can't because of an NDA, and so it suffers damage to its reputation while it can't speak.

 

[aangel]

So why has this latest information surfaced? Why did it takes months for them to say "because of the NDA we can't tell you anything." Why wasn't it posted and stickied on FB, where many 360 users inquired over and over again about the delays. Why were there various reasons for the delays and WHY was the blame initially directed at MS only to say NOW it's not Microsoft's fault? Why would you conduct business like this? Would this make sense to you? Come on now, really?

 

[Bonzo]

Could you please provide a quote from FS that reads even remotely like "MS is to blame for the delays"?

 

[aangel]

Could you please provide a quote from FS that reads even remotely like "MS is to blame for the delays"?

Farsight first said MS takes several weeks to approve submissions, then it was MS's policy concerning the "little known" issue regarding the title update, then it was MS's doesn't make direct contact with us we have to go through a publisher. etc etc. INSTEAD of FS doing their in the first place and NOT being ignorant of MS's policies, it could have saved a lot of time, pain, and frustration. MIND YOU this information was spread out piece by piece in a course of months and now this latest piece of information nips it in the bud. No more confusion. FINALLY the truth!

 

[Bonzo]

Nevertheless they never said MS is to blame. All they said is that they have some issues with MS. Reading between the lines this could mean a lot of things. On the one hand they admitted that they didn't think everything through (which is quite unprofessional, i give you that) but on the other hand they also said that the way MS handles small developers is a big pile of bullcrap (in which they are quite on point, I'd say). And it hasn't been "months" since Xbxox saw the last DLC, has it?

 

[Rudy]

I'm just glad nobody mentioned Crave in financial trouble as a possibility before, I wouldn't have wanted to see a Farsight employees neck on the line for trying to hint at something.

 

[Sean DonCarlos]

So why has this latest information surfaced? Why did it takes months for them to say "because of the NDA we can't tell you anything." Why wasn't it posted and stickied on FB, where many 360 users inquired over and over again about the delays. Why were there various reasons for the delays and WHY was the blame initially directed at MS only to say NOW it's not Microsoft's fault? Why would you conduct business like this? Would this make sense to you? Come on now, really?

Perhaps because FarSight was seeking legal counsel on what they could say before opening their mouths? Perhaps because earlier delays were due to issues with the XBLA title update process, but this latest delay is instead because Crave filed for bankruptcy?

To those of us with experience in software development, this does in fact make sense. At any rate, it makes more sense than immediately jumping from "FarSight announced a delay" to "FarSight must be incompetent."

 

[aangel]

Nevertheless they never said MS is to blame. All they said is that they have some issues with MS. Reading between the lines this could mean a lot of things. On the one hand they admitted that they didn't think everything through (which is quite unprofessional, i give you that) but on the other hand they also said that the way MS handles small developers is a big pile of bullcrap (in which they are quite on point, I'd say). And it hasn't been "months" since Xbxox saw the last DLC, has it?

Nevertheless I NEVER said that FS SAID they "said" MS was the blame. I said the blame was directed at MS because of their policies. It hasn't been months since the last DLC, But the Xbox is way behind other platforms because of FS's mistakes. Lastly as of OCT 29th we have the whole reason for this debacle when it never really got off the ground properly starting with the initial launch that was January, or was it March, or was it April?

 

[Matt McIrvin]

Oh, God, I feel for these guys.

Getting screwed over by problems with some third-party middleman is one of the commonest things in the world in this industry.

 

[Nik Barbour]

I wish FarSight would allow Microsoft to be their publisher from here on out, then they could communicate with them directly and hopefully get around the submission fees. Since Microsoft is the big dog here, I don't think Zen Studios would have any say in the matter.

+1 I think MS would have to be the best, and most sensible option here.
It could only improve things having MS as publisher.

 

[Carl Spiby]

I have a feeling they would want a large cut of profits.

 

[Nik Barbour]

I have a feeling your right.
But it could only help communication between FS and MS. And could grease the dlc / title update issues.
It would be my preferred choice anyway.
It's Farsight's choice anyway - no doubt it's hopefully already decided.

Edit - couldn't hurt the MS red tape with changing publisher too.

 

[xNiCeGuYx]

Sure MS probably want a large cut of profits, BUT loosing a lot ot profit is better than having no profit at all!

 

[Sean DonCarlos]

Doesn't MS already take a large cut of the profits for titles sold on XBLA?

 

[Rudy]

Microsoft won't be able to publish TPA because they're currently publishing Pinball FX and it will be a conflict of interest.

It'd be like EA Sports publishing FIFA '13 and Pro Evolution Soccer '13. They'd be indirectly harming both of their products by competing against each other.

 

[Sinistar]

Im glad you mentioned that , EA already got sued for Madden (*again) for monopoloising a business with that sports franchise and jacking up the game's price , Im sure the litigants got a check for $.03 after the lawyers were paid.

 

[Nik Barbour]

Whichever route FS does go down, I'd suggest they choose the route of least resistance time wise, and not focus on the most profit.
If it's more than a few months away, forget it, the market will have walked away or gone to pc (if it ever gets published).
If they can't make money out of the fastest resolution, then it's probably best they walk away from the fiasco that is the xbox release of TPA.
It's not unrealistic to think the next gen consoles could be out, before this gets a longer taking resolution!

 

[superballs]

That's a great route for us if they take it and surely desirable, however, the less they make, the more they will have to charge. Sure we might say now we'll pay more, but the second there's a price hike.....well...need i even go there?