inXile Entertainment joins Microsoft Studios

[svdp]

Industry consolidation seems to fan the flames of such nastiness. I viewed the independence of studios like InXile and Obsidian as a hedge against the worst corporate shenanigans.

Yeah. It's not accidental, that independent studios who pursued crowdfunding made some of the best DRM-free and Linux games available. They are a great counterbalance to DRM obsessed publishers who push for lock-in and walled gardens. That's why it's so saddening when someone like MS swallows such studios.

Agreed.

[demeisen]

It's not accidental, that independent studios who pursued crowdfunding made some of the best DRM-free and Linux games available. They are a great counterbalance to DRM obsessed publishers who push for lock-in and walled gardens. That's why it's so saddening when someone like MS swallows such studios.

Absolutely. One of my main motivations for supporting indie studios like the two involved here was to cast a vote against such lock-in and walled gardens from the likes of Sony and Microsoft. Handing such huge companies such power over you never ends well.

[Drool]

For instance, saying you got DLC's and similar stuff for free, does not mean it logically follows that everything they ever made was, or should be, free.

I asked when "free DLC" was a thing. You mentioned Morrowind. The only stuff for Morrowind that wasn't player-made mods wasn't free. I'm not sure how I'm being overly picky here.

The DC edition of WL2 or D:OS, or the additional mini-campaign in Shadowrun: Hong Kong ? PoE2 also had some free mni-DLC (but since I got the season pass I'm not exactly sure which were free and which weren't).

Where those free for everyone or just for backers? And if something's only free via a Season Pass then... it wasn't free.

[Jozape]

I found Morrowind complete if lacking in any sort of interesting anything back in 2002 without the expansions packs, but I suppose some people may argue that the expansion packs are not 'extra stuff'.

In my experience, espescially on this forum, many people argue just for the sake of arguing.

Is there something wrong with that?

Or they lack logic.

In my experience, most people don't know what a formal proof is or how to construct one. Whoops, not sure what that had to do with anything.

Or are nitpicking on the details, while they're well aware what is actually meant. Or both.

Well, speaking for myself, I assumed by 'free DLCs and extras' you meant that they were all free. Your original statement is ambiguous enough to mean some or all.

For instance, saying you got DLC's and similar stuff for free, does not mean it logically follows that everything they ever made was, or should be, free.

I asked when "free DLC" was a thing. You mentioned Morrowind. The only stuff for Morrowind that wasn't player-made mods wasn't free. I'm not sure how I'm being overly picky here.

Actually, I decided to look for these DLCs since svdp left the burden of proof of their claim on everyone else. Turns out there were DLCs for Morrowind, but they were trivial in comparison to Tribunal or Bloodmoon. Most are individual items, sounds, abilities, or sets; The most significant one seems to be an island siege where you kill a bunch of skeletons. According to their respective pages, they are or were available at no additional cost. Fallout 4's high resolution texture pack is comparable to these IMO, less trivial than all of them combined in a way.

[Woolfe]

With Broadbrush generic statements that aren't actually correct.

No, you're deliberatly interpreting it in a way that tries to focus and nitpick on the details - and in this case, the interpretation isn't even correct.

I spoke about DLC. You're either well aware that bloodmoon and tribunal are expansion packs, and no mere dlc, and thus you're deliberatly trying to misrepresent it to make a case, or you're unwaware of that, in which case you're not very knowledgeable about it.

If you were (the latter), you would have immediately known AND understood about what small DLC's I'm talking about. You can find it on the Morrowind wiki too. It's small stuff, but it was free, and they did it for the fans. Starting with oblivion, for the same kind of small stuff (horse armor, for instance), they asked premium money. That's where the change happened from indie to big. Which is, in fact, true: Oblivion is what made Bethesda really well-know. It was their breakthrough.

No, you're deliberatly exaggerating it in a way that tries to genericise and lacks details - and in this case, the exaggeration isn't even correct.

You spoke about DLC. You stated

Gone are the days, for instance, that you got DLC's and extra stuff for free

That is a generic broadbrush statement. When exactly where those days anyway? I mean Prior to Digital distribution expansions and whatnot had to be purchased on disc anyway.

Now there were games that had free DLC and games that didn't, today there are numerous companies that mix free with paid. Paradox for example regularly has free content for its games that comes out for everyone, side by side with paid content. And I mean CONTENT, not just patches and fixes for things that were missing.

So the days aren't gone. Those particular companies have changed, but so what. Oh and no, I don't know that much about Bethesda prior to FO3, I never really got into any of their old games.

The thing is, you aren't wrong, but you are making out like this is the be all and end all for everyone, when it really isn't. Yes there are some companies that have been dicks, and are continuing to be dicks. There are other companies that tested shit out and then went back to older methods. There are so many gaming companies out there. They aren't ALL activisions or Bethesda's or EA's or Microsofts.
I haven't Given EA or Activision any money for a long time. Bethesda got a little for Wolfenstein, but i waited for it to be on special.

People are arguing with you because you keep making broad generic statements that have an element of truth, but that ignore all the positives in favour of focusing on the negatives.

[svdp]

For instance, saying you got DLC's and similar stuff for free, does not mean it logically follows that everything they ever made was, or should be, free.

I asked when "free DLC" was a thing. You mentioned Morrowind. The only stuff for Morrowind that wasn't player-made mods wasn't free. I'm not sure how I'm being overly picky here.

The DC edition of WL2 or D:OS, or the additional mini-campaign in Shadowrun: Hong Kong ? PoE2 also had some free mni-DLC (but since I got the season pass I'm not exactly sure which were free and which weren't).

Where those free for everyone or just for backers? And if something's only free via a Season Pass then... it wasn't free.

Sigh. It wasn't player made. It was from Beth themselves. So you ARE overly picky, or you weren't aware.

Here, I looked it up for you, because you didn't seem to have done so:

Entertainers:
Speak with Dulnea Ralaal in Balmora, Eight Plates on the topic "entertain the patrons". She will give you options to tell jokes, dance the high-kick, play the drum, play the lute and sing, or juggle.

Bitter Coast Sounds:
Let the gentle chorus of swamp wildlife draw you further into the mire throughout the entire swampy region of the Bitter Coast. You'll find dragonfly creatures now inhabit the muck ponds along the coast.

Area Effect Arrows:
Visit Aradraen the Fletcher in Vivec's Foreign Quarter Lower Waistworks for the world famous area effect arrows exclusive to her shop.

Helm of Tohan:
The Adamantium Helm of Tohan is a rare and powerful artifact lost in the Sheogorad Region. Travel north to Dagon Fel to find out more about this legendary helm.

Master Index:
This is a quest to find the ten propylon indices. In return for completing this quest, you will receive the Master Index, allowing the you to travel to any propylon chamber, or return to the Caldera Mages Guild from any propylon chamber.

LeFemm Armor:
LeFemm Armor, specially tailored for the ladies, is on sale at the Fighters Guild in Vivec, from Sirollus Saccus in Ebonheart, the Redoran Vaults, and the lady smiths in Ald-ruhn, Sadrith Mora, and Ald Velothi.

Adamantium Armor:
A new shipment of hard to find Adamantium Armor has arrived in places across Vvardenfell.

Siege at Firemoth:
The island fortress of Firemoth was taken by the skeleton army of Grurn years ago. It's time to take it back.

These were all official DLC's for Morrowind, BY Bethesda.

[svdp]

I found Morrowind complete if lacking in any sort of interesting anything back in 2002 without the expansions packs, but I suppose some people may argue that the expansion packs are not 'extra stuff'.

In my experience, espescially on this forum, many people argue just for the sake of arguing.

Is there something wrong with that?

Or they lack logic.

In my experience, most people don't know what a formal proof is or how to construct one. Whoops, not sure what that had to do with anything.

Or are nitpicking on the details, while they're well aware what is actually meant. Or both.

Well, speaking for myself, I assumed by 'free DLCs and extras' you meant that they were all free. Your original statement is ambiguous enough to mean some or all.

For instance, saying you got DLC's and similar stuff for free, does not mean it logically follows that everything they ever made was, or should be, free.

I asked when "free DLC" was a thing. You mentioned Morrowind. The only stuff for Morrowind that wasn't player-made mods wasn't free. I'm not sure how I'm being overly picky here.

Actually, I decided to look for these DLCs since svdp left the burden of proof of their claim on everyone else. Turns out there were DLCs for Morrowind, but they were trivial in comparison to Tribunal or Bloodmoon. Most are individual items, sounds, abilities, or sets; The most significant one seems to be an island siege where you kill a bunch of skeletons. According to their respective pages, they are or were available at no additional cost. Fallout 4's high resolution texture pack is comparable to these IMO, less trivial than all of them combined in a way.

One could argue that maybe the sound for the swamp isn't a real DLC, correct. Just like a 'higher resolution pack' isn't a real DLC. Because neither adds something content-wise. But all the rest is clearly enough to fall under 'DLC'. Point in case, by the time they got to Oblivion they asked 5 dollar for two harnesses for horses. Was that, in any way, 'less' than what we see they did for Morrowind?

If you're honest, you'll have to agree: no. Thus: moneygrabbing took a hold, for stuff that USED to be free. That was my point.

[svdp]

With Broadbrush generic statements that aren't actually correct.

No, you're deliberatly interpreting it in a way that tries to focus and nitpick on the details - and in this case, the interpretation isn't even correct.

I spoke about DLC. You're either well aware that bloodmoon and tribunal are expansion packs, and no mere dlc, and thus you're deliberatly trying to misrepresent it to make a case, or you're unwaware of that, in which case you're not very knowledgeable about it.

If you were (the latter), you would have immediately known AND understood about what small DLC's I'm talking about. You can find it on the Morrowind wiki too. It's small stuff, but it was free, and they did it for the fans. Starting with oblivion, for the same kind of small stuff (horse armor, for instance), they asked premium money. That's where the change happened from indie to big. Which is, in fact, true: Oblivion is what made Bethesda really well-know. It was their breakthrough.

No, you're deliberatly exaggerating it in a way that tries to genericise and lacks details - and in this case, the exaggeration isn't even correct.

You spoke about DLC. You stated

Gone are the days, for instance, that you got DLC's and extra stuff for free

That is a generic broadbrush statement. When exactly where those days anyway? I mean Prior to Digital distribution expansions and whatnot had to be purchased on disc anyway.

Now there were games that had free DLC and games that didn't, today there are numerous companies that mix free with paid. Paradox for example regularly has free content for its games that comes out for everyone, side by side with paid content. And I mean CONTENT, not just patches and fixes for things that were missing.

So the days aren't gone. Those particular companies have changed, but so what. Oh and no, I don't know that much about Bethesda prior to FO3, I never really got into any of their old games.

The thing is, you aren't wrong, but you are making out like this is the be all and end all for everyone, when it really isn't. Yes there are some companies that have been dicks, and are continuing to be dicks. There are other companies that tested shit out and then went back to older methods. There are so many gaming companies out there. They aren't ALL activisions or Bethesda's or EA's or Microsofts.
I haven't Given EA or Activision any money for a long time. Bethesda got a little for Wolfenstein, but i waited for it to be on special.

People are arguing with you because you keep making broad generic statements that have an element of truth, but that ignore all the positives in favour of focusing on the negatives.

No. I appreciate the comment and the civil style in which it is made, but I have to disagree. It's some people deliberately either ignoring or twisting what I actually said, or they focus on details that are not relevant nor alter the conclusion, at all. Because they do not agree with what I say. It's that simple.

Look at your own use of my quote. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt you just copied-pasted it from someone who already cut of that quote, but why was it cut off? It's to cut out the context.

This is what I actually said, in full:

"I've played skyrim lots, and liked it. But compare the 'feel' of the company now with what it was when they released Morrowind, and you can already sense the difference. Gone are the days, for instance, that you got DLC's and extra stuff for free, and they actually listened to their fans. Now it's: we're asking half of what the game costs for a DLC that gives around 1/20th of the gameplay the main game has. Or: we'll ask 5 dollars for some cosmetic horse armor... "

Now... isn't it clear, from the context, that I'm talking about Bethesda? Isn't all what I said about them, true? Is it somewhere alluded that Morrowind did, or should, give ALL other stuff, including full expansions, for free? No: I said you got DLS's for free. So I am right in saying it's the (mostly willful) misinterpretation that is used as an excuse for arguing. It are like mini straw-man fallacies, which they then nitpick on.

Even if you would 'broad it up'; it would still be about the fact that big corps ask premium prices out of moneygrabbing for even minor stuff and DLC's, which, when they were indies themselves, they didn't do. That's the mentality shift I'm alluding at. Countering that with saying 'but you still can get some free stuff from some game-developer companies' makes no sense, because it has no bearings on what I said. There is a definite mentality shift going on, and this gets most apparent with indies whom became big.

[Jozape]

In my experience, espescially on this forum, many people argue just for the sake of arguing.

Is there something wrong with that?

Or they lack logic.

In my experience, most people don't know what a formal proof is or how to construct one. Whoops, not sure what that had to do with anything.

Or are nitpicking on the details, while they're well aware what is actually meant. Or both.

Well, speaking for myself, I assumed by 'free DLCs and extras' you meant that they were all free. Your original statement is ambiguous enough to mean some or all.

I asked when "free DLC" was a thing. You mentioned Morrowind. The only stuff for Morrowind that wasn't player-made mods wasn't free. I'm not sure how I'm being overly picky here.

Actually, I decided to look for these DLCs since svdp left the burden of proof of their claim on everyone else. Turns out there were DLCs for Morrowind, but they were trivial in comparison to Tribunal or Bloodmoon. Most are individual items, sounds, abilities, or sets; The most significant one seems to be an island siege where you kill a bunch of skeletons. According to their respective pages, they are or were available at no additional cost. Fallout 4's high resolution texture pack is comparable to these IMO, less trivial than all of them combined in a way.

One could argue that maybe the sound for the swamp isn't a real DLC, correct.

I wouldn't. It is a real DLC. You download the content and add it to your game. Now you have swamp sounds that weren't there before.

Just like a 'higher resolution pack' isn't a real DLC.

It is a real DLC. The difference is that significantly more resources were poured into its creation than all of the DLCs in Morrowind combined, and it is still free.

So in a way Bethesda is offering more for free now, even though they charge for most DLC now.

Because neither adds something content-wise.

Admittedly for the high-resolution texture pack, all it does is make the game look better or at least different. Many DLCs are like that so...

But all the rest is clearly enough to fall under 'DLC'. Point in case, by the time they got to Oblivion they asked 5 dollar for two harnesses for horses. Was that, in any way, 'less' than what we see they did for Morrowind?

Definitely no.

Thus: moneygrabbing took a hold, for stuff that USED to be free. That was my point.

For Bethesda's case, can't deny that.

[_noblesse_oblige_]

Look at the "saves" thread on the BT4 forum here where certain posters were literally foaming at the mouth insisting I and others like me should be burned at the stake for the heresy of asking for save anywhere anytime.

Really? Insofar as I saw people getting upset, it was the people insisting that the game should have unlimited save/restore. They had a really hard time understanding that there are other legitimate ways to make games and not every game has to cater to their desire to have unlimited save/restore.

I thought most of us where saying put in both. Save anywhere with an ironman mode. Or restrictive save with a I'm a wuss mode.

There were some people who were saying that the luck stone / save point thing was stupid and that unlimited save/restore is the only way to go. (Not you, specifically.) And, yes, there were people saying make save-on-exit an option as part of some ironman mode. But, there were also a couple of people who said that they didn't want it as an option (and they weren't advocating for the the luck stone / save point thing either). But, in all that, there wasn't a lot of "[literal] foaming at the mouth", except for maybe the good Captain, who started putting stuff in caps and then told us off for daring to argue with him when unlimited save/restore was "the one true way". So, maybe the earlier poster was referring to a different save game thread (as there have been... some... over the past few years), but in the most recent one that really blew up it was definitely at least one unlimited save/restore proponent who "foamed at the mouth". Don't recall any of their opponents accusing them of heresy or anything like that either.

But, what does this have to do with the Microsoft acquisition? Probably nothing.

[ET3D]

On the other hand, I just recently found out that Microsoft had opened Xbox development to everyone, which makes me more sympathetic towards that console.

In what sense opened, they don't charge for developer tools like Sony do? That's some improvement indeed (if that's the case), but I'd consider it open enough when they'll allow using open source tools and open cross platform APIs.

It's open in the sense that all you need is an Xbox One and registering as a developer (costs $19). You can then use the Xbox One as a development box (by downloading a dev mode app on it) and publish anything you want on a special Xbox store section called Creators Collection. A special toolkit provides access to most Xbox Live APIs (leaderboards, etc.), though not all, and integration with Unity.

Edit: By 'anything you want' I mean any game using the toolkit provided, and you still have to submit it, where it would be looked at, and there's a chance it will be rejected (for technical or content reasons). Far as content limitations are concerned, Microsoft doesn't allow anything over PEGI 12, which is certainly a limitation for some games. However, even given that, I still consider it open because there's no need to get accepted as a dev for the console, get a special dev kit or anything like that. I can just develop for it, and in most cases just publish (in theory, haven't gone through that yet), and if I want something more adult, I could still develop it, with almost full Xbox functionality, and then contact Microsoft for permission. And if I just want to dabble with it, I can do it without hassle.

If you're looking at the open source angle, I'm not sure there's that, but Unity is cross platform enough in my book, and some other game toolkits are also supported (Construct and another one I don't remember).

Edit: Reading some more, there's support for more game toolkits than I remembered, including for MonoGame and Xenko, both of which are open source.

By that measure, XBox is a closed platform, as are iOS, PS4, and others.

By that measure, it's semi-closed.

What I mean by that is that anyone can register as a developer, switch the console to dev mode, and run a downloaded app (see https://github.com/Aftnet/LibretroRT/wi ... n-Xbox-One).

Still, that's not very convenient and not something most users would do, and if you want to sell something outside the Microsoft ecosystem you can't. So I'd say that the Xbox is closest to iOS, where you can freely develop and publish (as long as you have a Mac and sign up as a dev), but publishing goes through more scrutiny than on Android, and you can't sideload directly as on Android. It's still a lot different than publishing on other consoles, where you have to be approved as a dev and get a dev kit. (By the way, sideloading from Xcode is also possible on iOS, so iOS and Xbox are also close in that respect.)

[IHaveHugeNick]

Then you misunderstood my point. My point was always build the game at the difficulty they want it to be. Then apply a save system after. Hence no expense, because the game is exactly the same in both save systems. If you use the save system to bypass the difficulty, then that is on the player. The game difficulty has not changed.

Fair enough.

With Broadbrush generic statements that aren't actually correct.

Indeed. One could actually make a solid argument that a lot of modern games have superior post-launch support and better free content updates, especially the games people on this forum would be interested in.

It may have taken InXile almost a year to get Wasteland 2 into polished state. But if WL2 came out in this mythical 90s era when grass was greener, girls prettier and game developers weren't filthy capitalists? Guess what, post-launch support would be abandoned after 3 months and you'd have to rely on fans to spend 10 years making community patches.

[Danathar]

Then you misunderstood my point. My point was always build the game at the difficulty they want it to be. Then apply a save system after. Hence no expense, because the game is exactly the same in both save systems. If you use the save system to bypass the difficulty, then that is on the player. The game difficulty has not changed.

Fair enough.

With Broadbrush generic statements that aren't actually correct.

Indeed. One could actually make a solid argument that a lot of modern games have superior post-launch support and better free content updates, especially the games people on this forum would be interested in.

It may have taken InXile almost a year to get Wasteland 2 into polished state. But if WL2 came out in this mythical 90s era when grass was greener, girls prettier and game developers weren't filthy capitalists? Guess what, post-launch support would be abandoned after 3 months and you'd have to rely on fans to spend 10 years making community patches.

In the Mythical 90's (and 80's too of course) you are lucky if you got ANY PATCHES AT ALL. In the 90's there MIGHT be a modem BBS you could dial into that the vendor had patches you could download. In many cases (as were in the 80's) there were none, and if the game was buggy on shipping that sunk it.

[Woolfe]

Indeed. One could actually make a solid argument that a lot of modern games have superior post-launch support and better free content updates, especially the games people on this forum would be interested in.

It may have taken InXile almost a year to get Wasteland 2 into polished state. But if WL2 came out in this mythical 90s era when grass was greener, girls prettier and game developers weren't filthy capitalists? Guess what, post-launch support would be abandoned after 3 months and you'd have to rely on fans to spend 10 years making community patches.

See my experience of late agrees with this.... (Edited to agree instead of appearing to disagree, I think I might have gotten caught up in my point around it being a good time in gaming from after market support... I dunno, brain fail)

The games I play have had continuous support for a long time. Usually funded by expansions.

As much as their forum is a bit sucky, Paradox have been absolutely champions for this. Stellaris is a game I regularly come back to. HBS before and after Paradox were the same, Shadowrun and now Battletech are awesome games.
InXile with WL2.

Firaxis and Civ to a lesser degree. They annoy me due to the race profiteering. But they do still release good content updates for the base game without the expansions.

It really is a good time in gaming. Most of the big guys have taken lumps and have or are re-evaluating themselves. Still being dicks about stuff, but not as big of dicks as say 5-10 years ago. Lots of Smaller indies, creating fantastic little games that last and play well. And with crowdfunding, mid range devs have got an alternative to pure investor and publisher money, which means they get to keep a little of the pressure off them.
Honestly as I see it, that is the biggest advantage of crowdfunding. It gives mid size devs a stronger position to keep control over their projects.

In the Mythical 90's (and 80's too of course) you are lucky if you got ANY PATCHES AT ALL. In the 90's there MIGHT be a modem BBS you could dial into that the vendor had patches you could download. In many cases (as were in the 80's) there were none, and if the game was buggy on shipping that sunk it.

So much this.

[Drool]

Er...

Indeed. One could actually make a solid argument that a lot of modern games have superior post-launch support and better free content updates, especially the games people on this forum would be interested in.

It may have taken InXile almost a year to get Wasteland 2 into polished state. But if WL2 came out in this mythical 90s era [...] post-launch support would be abandoned after 3 months and you'd have to rely on fans to spend 10 years making community patches.

See my experience of late has been otherwise....

The games I play have had continuous support for a long time.

[Woolfe]

Er...

Indeed. One could actually make a solid argument that a lot of modern games have superior post-launch support and better free content updates, especially the games people on this forum would be interested in.

It may have taken InXile almost a year to get Wasteland 2 into polished state. But if WL2 came out in this mythical 90s era [...] post-launch support would be abandoned after 3 months and you'd have to rely on fans to spend 10 years making community patches.

See my experience of late has been otherwise....

The games I play have had continuous support for a long time.

..... I blame drugs.... and society... It certainly would never have been a reading fail on my part

[Disguise_AU]

Personally I'm excited for inXile Entertainment, I wish you guys all the best!

[svdp]

I found Morrowind complete if lacking in any sort of interesting anything back in 2002 without the expansions packs, but I suppose some people may argue that the expansion packs are not 'extra stuff'.

In my experience, especially on this forum, many people argue just for the sake of arguing.

Is there something wrong with that?

I'll assume that is a rhetorical question.

[Kryten42]

Ahhhh! Well I guess this explains why all inXile (and other game dev's) games are being removed from EA Origin Access, even though we (technically) have paid for them.

[gamefan1978]

I don't blame Inxile for joining with Microsoft. Living off of Kickstarter or any other crowed funded service isn't a ideal way to make a game and pay your employees. I will still support them when they announce their next game.