Comments on: Xbox Live Arcade: The Democratization of Game Distribution, Peer Review, Community, all the Good Stuff

By: Dave the Longwinded

Dave the Longwinded — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 14:19:09 +0000

Sorry for the extra post. Forgot the URL... http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3545/sponsored_feature_democratizing_.php?page=4

By: Dave the Longwinded

Dave the Longwinded — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 14:16:28 +0000

An article on Gamasutra by XNA’s dev. manager puts this down as the peer review’s philosophy:

One of the most exciting aspects of community game distribution is that we do not manage the game portfolio. This means that we want consumers to decide which games to play, not Microsoft or the creator community. The game meets the bar for distribution if it has the appropriate content, runs without any “crashing” bugs, and is classified correctly.

The primary purpose of peer review is to ensure a safe experience for consumers who browse Xbox LIVE Marketplace, and then download and play a community game. Peer review determines whether the game has prohibited content. If the content is acceptable, peer review then confirms the game creator’s classification. Peer reviewers make no judgments whether the game is fun. A game’s entertainment quality is decided by the game players on the console through an explicit user-rating system and downloads.

Note the necessarily vague description of “appropriate content” and “classified correctly”.

By: Dave the Longwinded

Dave the Longwinded — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 13:51:39 +0000

Can anything really be called “indie” if it undergoes a “peer review” process of one of the largest corporations in the world? I think this could be a wonderful thing — demonstrate a market for more creative and engaging content than one rehash after another of sci-fi and WWII shooters.

But, I wonder too if this potentially creates a controlled, de facto caste system in gaming, relegating an “indie” aesthetic to this kind of “community”.

By: Jesper

Jesper — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 04:14:58 +0000

Brook, I am not skeptical as much as I want to see all the actual details. XNA is very promising, I completely agree.

By: Brook

Brook — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 18:55:01 +0000

Jesper you seem a bit skeptically, but in the very least XNA represents a free devkit that small garage teams can use to build prototypes with. I am sure 99% of all the XNA games that comeout are going to be rubbish, but that top 1% will make everything worth while.

By: Jesper

Jesper — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 16:29:51 +0000

They did present the gatekeeping as being simply the “peer review”, so no certs or anything. We’ll see if there are any other hoops.

By: Bruceongames

Bruceongames — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 09:13:34 +0000

In the console wars XNA community games gives Microsoft an immense advantage as they put more clear blue water between themselves and their competitors. This is the sort of advantage that won’t sell a thousand consoles tomorrow, but that over time will create a compelling case for Xbox 360 (or Xbox 3) ownership.

By: JP

JP — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 06:19:39 +0000

So does this mean no cert process? People can release buggy, terrible games with only their reputation at stake?

If so, very courageous move for MS. Bravo.