You wrote "freelance game development", but it's already different from what EDI is. PC portals don't support development. You should not forget the development of these games are funded and supported by SCE WWS around the world.
Good grief. The part you responded to was right in the quote. Observe: "I don't see how any console's electronic distribution is significantly different than any PC portal's electronic distribution." See?
So the payment comes first instead of getting a cut of the sales. Is that a significant difference? I don't see it that way.
I don't think that really matters, as they seem to be selling well enough. I'm not saying they should have done the same package deal they do now for the Premium if they sold it as one unit, but I do think they should have had the HD in one package starting at... say... $360.
They could have not bothered bundling the wireless controller or headset or component cables in and concentrated on the important stuff, and simply push the price down a bit ahead of schedule. (It's not like it will take any talent to "beat" the PS3 to those price points.) Not to mention the savings that would come from smoothing out the production and distribution process.
Unless the sales ratio of the Core is actually substantial compared to the Premium (and I have no hard numbers, but I think not--especially what with store employees pushing the Premium and badmouthing the Core the way I've seen), I think the monetary difference would be shruggable. Certainly not worth the downsides of forcing themselves and others to code to NOT having the HD, try to fit within the confines of a 64MB memory card, lacking backwards-compatibility, etc.
Just plain pointless, IMHO.
No, I don't see it. Let's get back again to your original comment.
Remember the bold part, and see the message in the link provided in my comment atInane_Dork said:
So what's different, again? The difference is quality. EDI is the attempt to pick up only good contents among all craps available in PC portal's electronic distribution and translate them into the PS3 format. This is essentially no different from usual publishing business.
Because the majority are! Go check out the PC Indie Dev forums to hear over and over again simple and stupid questions being asked about making games etc. Most people who turn their hand to Indie have an idea fora game and no understanding of computers or programming. I can also say that of the Indie games I've downloaded, 95+% have been rubbish as though produced by people who don't really know what they're doing. Of course there's going to be some talent out there, but on the whole, PC Indie isn't the place to find quality creations.
It comes from lots of developers saying they're interested and talking about how the lower costs are beneficial to creativity! Of course the best teams at the moment won't be working on EDIs as they'll be both coy and working on other major titles, but David Jaffe creating a small game is of note. You think that would ever happen without EDI? Would Jaffe create a little cops and robbers game without the cheap distribution method? Nope! It's early days yet, and XBLA hasn't really pushed the envelope by accepting mostly old game remakes. Downloads are currently synonymus with Retro (like lots of PC Indie!). The doesn't change the potential of the service, and with 40 titles coming from Sony...well, you think they're going to be PC Indie class games?
You quoted it. I don't know how you could possibly not see it. It's right there.
Look, the difference in game quality is totally and completely different from the many things you brought up that would be differences. Please, find an argument and stick with it. I dislike disproving arguments only to have them changed as soon as I do. All that tells me is that you have decided what conclusion is right and are grasping for proof of your belief.
EDI and XBLA are fundamentally identical to PC gaming portals (Zone, Real Arcade, etc.). The trappings are different, but they are similar enough that anything plaguing one will be a problem on the others (IMO).
They can market them aggresively because they're purposefully limiting them to not compete with the $50-$60 games. They will remain mostly that way until someone big makes a bet on e-distribution.
What does it matter if they're cloned? That doesn't stop the growth of new ideas. If EDI produces 4 new genres of game, and the rest of the world copies them over 10 years, that's no different to the history of gaming - only we'll have 4 more genres of game to play.
You're greatly confusing two things. You say that the overwhelming majority of indie developers don't know what they're doing, which is true given the way you define terms. But your mistake is that the pool of indie developers is HUGE by the same definition. Think game mods, Wik, Narbacular Drop (sp), etc. Sure, there's a lot of crap per gold nugget. But because the bandwidth is so enormous, you end up with quite a few gold nuggets.
1 game. My argument lies crippled.
Could have. Sony's first party developers do not need EDI support to make downloadable PS3 games.
Yes, he would have included it in a $60 PS3 game as a bonus (ala the original Geometry Wars) instead of selling it separately (ala GW: Retro Evolved).
Not the way you're defining the terms, no. But if you mean the equivalent if Wik, Mable Blast Ultra and flow, yes, I do think that.
The context said why it was important. It was a supporting point to a larger argument.What does it matter if they're cloned? That doesn't stop the growth of new ideas. If EDI produces 4 new genres of game, and the rest of the world copies them over 10 years, that's no different to the history of gaming - only we'll have 4 more genres of game to play.
Established developers, yes. It's rather unlikely that Sony will fund or support unproven projects/developers (which is arguably reasonable). It could do with an XNA-like counterpart, though. Something where the barrier of entry is even lower.
So you think the difference is one and only? What's wrong with describing various aspects of EDI in multiple posts? They are not mutually exclusive. Besides, if you read my posts carefully you'd notice they are consistent (PS3-format online publisher/distributor business). I'll paraphrase them until you get satisfied :smile:
Some of the differences are laid here
You mean the part where the Sony rep says, "Oh, trust us, we're waaaay different than Xbox Live Arcade. Waaay better, too."?
You are splittling hairs to prove a weak point. There is little to no difference between EDI and XBLA, and certainly XBLA was done first in the PC space. Whether the games currently available on XBLA target casuals or are more "artistic" seems more a byproduct of the current ecosystem rather than any tactical or technical attribute of XBLA (Wik, by the way, seemed fairly artistic and not casual friendly at all).
