Why Gamers Should Question the Xbox Parity Clause

The Xbox parity clause limits the ability of independent developers to bring their games to Xbox platforms if they have already shown up on other platforms. Phil Spencer has claimed this clause helps maintain Xbox users' status as "first class citizens," with regard to when they get access to indie games. In reality, it really only limits Xbox users and what they can play in the long run.

[nicksetzer1]

I wouod question it if it weren't for the fact that MS has already made clear and concise exceptions to the rule. (ie. contrast and outlast) Clearly if there is a valid reason (or existing contract with sony) then MS allows games to bypass this. If they don't have a valid reason, well then I agree with the clause.

[turdburgler1080]

This should be titled ps4 gamers want xbox one gamers to question parity.

[gangsta_red]

The only gamers who would question it would be non Xbox gamers. There is a steady of good quality indie games on Xbox One and even more in the pipeline and works.

Like I said, for developers a good way to get around the parity clause if it's such a huge deal is to release their game on Xbox first ;)

[xHeavYx]

Quality has nothing to do with the Parity Clause though

[gangsta_red]

I never said it did.

Edit:
What I did say is there are some good quality indie games on the Xbox One.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

***"Like I said, for developers a good way to get around the parity clause if it's such a huge deal is to release their game on Xbox first ;)"***

Or Microsoft can just get rid of it.

What if releasing on Xbox first isn't the developers' best option? What if Sony is offering a particular indie dev exposure at E3 and exposure at the PS store while MS can't offer they same or better offering because MS in return already have their hands tied with similar deals with other indie devs. You can only promote so many games at the same time and give exposure at conferences for a limited amount of time.

Most if not all indie devs want to release their games on as many platforms as possible. It's the man power that prevents them from releasing their game at the same time on all platforms. Since that's the case they must decide which platform is best for them to release on first. If Sony offers them some sort of promotion and MS doesn't what should they choose? Xbox because of their policies and risk having no one know about their game, but get to release on PS and other platforms later? Or do they choose PS get the promotion and release on all platforms later beside Xbox because of the parity clause unless MS decides to make an exception?

Please, continue to blindly defend it.

[Pogmathoin]

Really do not see it being defended, I see this as just another article that comes up her rather than talk about the Forza Horizon 2 killa that is train wreck DriveClub..... Its way things work here... As for the parity, its pointless, should go, but also I do not buy that many indie games, so does not affect me....

[CaptainObvious878]

The only gamers who WOULDN'T question this parity clause are xbone gamers.

It's amazing people are defending MS for giving them less games.

[DigitalRaptor]

Oh believe me, that is EXACTLY what they're doing.

They're going for the "shovelware" angle, despite the fact that most console exclusive indie games on PS4 have been and continue to be of a great standard of quality and many of them are higher rated than many of the AAA exclusive games on any next-gen console.

Xbone will simply have less quality games because of it, and all they can come up with is a "what if" on the proven quality of indie games so far this gen, to defend a ludicrous clause that offers them less games.

[Spotie]

XB1 gamers SHOULD question it. For some reason though, they're fine with less games. I got marked for trolling for saying it earlier, but it's amazing how many ways Xbox fans come up with reasons for why games not coming to the XB1 don't matter to them.

[bleedsoe9mm]

duh wrong thread sorry . i have nothing to say about the parity clause other than its 100% up to ms .

[geddesmond]

If I was an independant developer I would treat MS like I do any woman that turns me down. It's there loss and stop wasting time on them. If MS want to push for parity then let them. They will eventually find that out that the person they turned down could have been the start of a great relationship or in their case a great partnership but they want to let looks and all that other crap get in the way of that.

Yeah today they are a small independant studio but in 3 years they could be one of the next hottest AAA studio in the industry.

[KiwiViper85]

Cheer up mate, you'll find her one day.

[geddesmond]

Lol I ain't looking mate. I have a great girl. I just used something a lot of us can relate to about the situation because I wasn't always in a relationship and this sounds like control tactics. No sex for you unless you do this type of tactics.

[johny5]

I guess you didn't get the memo, Phil. First Class Citizens aren't equal to everyone else! So there goes your parity defense!

[NegativeCreep427]

Microsoft's parity clause seems more like an imparity clause (meaning of course when it is in Microsoft's favor, f*ck parity. But when it isn't, hey lets all be fair here).

Everything must be fair, but only when Microsoft doesn't have the advantage. that's what makes it so funny and ironic. Phil Spencer's eyes are browner than most politicians.

[DigitalRaptor]

I know he's had a lot on his plate, but this is such BS. If he wants Xbox users to "feel first class", then they shouldn't have directly categorised their consumer base into different Tiers globally. Remember "Tier 2" countries? But yeah Phil… of course… "first class".

Xbox is bullying smaller developers without a doubt, and then Phil comes in with meaningless, political PR drivel to try and sweeten things for the situation they're in with indie devs. For someone who has gained a ton of respect as of late for the Xbox brand, this attitude is shocking.

The clause is universally saying "f**k you" to the smaller devs, except when MS feels that a certain dev's game will be beneficial to their marketing potential, and so they will make an exception because they can't afford to lose that game to Sony. What a disgrace.

[u4one]

I question it. I'd rather get games later than never.

[ScorpiusX]

Instead of everyone question MS about how they do things why not question the developers on the quality of thier game and why should a corporation should change how they do things for some out of nowhere indie developers who game may just be plain garbage .

[troylazlow]

Can MS do anything right?

[MCTJim]

They make exceptions to the clause to those that warrant it. That is a step in the right direction. I myself don't want the marketplace flooded with crapware.

[LordMaim]

That's what certification is for. That's got nothing to do with parity.

[DigitalRaptor]

Because if you don't question it, you're an apologist for bad decisions that continue to affect smaller developers, people who do this thing for a living to be able to put food on their own table as well as their family's.

For a multi-billion dollar corporation, there is no reason for the clause to exist. There is nothing but fluff and deflection surrounding the excuses Phil Spencer seems to come up with to "justify" the clause. The excuses are as meaningless as the clause itself.

[NeoGamer232]

People really don't understand the origins of the parity clause...

It originated with 360 is my understanding because lots of 3rd party developers were passing up the original xbox when making games in favor of the very popular PS2 first, then xbox later. Then, when 360 came out MS invented the parity clause to essentially say to 3rd party developers, "If you want to ship on 360, you have to do it day one along with PS". This made developers change their strategy and ship on all platforms at the same time.

People tend to forget that PS has been dominate for almost two decades. I don't see the parity clause as making sure that XB owners are treated like first class consumers as much as it ensures that XB owners are not treated like second class consumers with later ports.

Personally, I have PS4, Wii U, and XB1 so if a game does not ship only one platform I still will get it...