N+ developers rail against glut of bad XBLA games [Joystiq]

[Gabriel]

You're certainly welcome to play the game or not; but to deny yourself a solid, unique gaming experience baffles me. Even if you ultimately don't like it, you've at least tried something new. And the fact you can enjoy (or not) what it has to offer for free in about 10 minutes is even more encouragement to do so. In fact it takes as much time to watch a video of it on YouTube as it does to go play the flash game itself (which you can do here).

The visuals look like a simple flash game because it is a simple flash game.

Though I am curious; how does this game remind you of load runner? It plays nothing like it, it looks nothing like it, and the game concept sounds nothing like it. Perhaps you don't recall what Load Runner plays or looks like; it's like saying that BurgerTime reminds you of Q*Bert.

As I was typing this, I did check out the flash version you linked to. I would definitely say my comparison to Lode Runner is accurate. It's an "Xtrem" version of Lode Runner, but the general gameplay is similar enough.

The goal appears to be to collect gold items and the visuals certainly are reminiscent of Lode Runner. Then there's the level editor, which is another close similarity to Lode Runner. The appearrance of a stick figure exploring a platforming world has definite ties to the classic Lode Runner. The play itself is based around puzzles and herding enemies to help solve those puzzles, just like Lode Runner. So, despite what you say, it shares a few key distinctive similarities with that older game. I really don't think anyone who has played Lode Runner on the Apple II would miss the resemblance.

Definitely not anything I'd care to play again, and definitely not anything I'd pay to download. If you like it, more power to ya.

Incidentally, the Wikipedia article on the game says it was inspired by Lode Runner.

Edit: And the official homepage of N says "N is an award winning 2d action/puzzle platformer reminiscent of Lode Runner." So, I guess the creators of the game thought it played a bit like it too.

[ProgrammingAce]

I find it strange when game developers forget that this is still an entertainment medium. If you don't spend money on advertising, then nobody is going to hear anything about your game after the first month.

If you don't have money for advertising, too bad. Come up with venture capital like everybody else. Making games is dificult, expensive, and it's easy to loose your shirt. If you don't like it, go back to making freeware PC games like everybody else.

Remember, just getting a game rated by the ESRB is $80,000. Getting through microsoft's certification is more then that. If you're going to spend that kind of dough on your game, you had better put some cash aside for advertising...

N+ doesn't stand out because the developers made no attempt to make the game stand out. It has simple visuals, a difficult name to search for, and is made by a company with no history in console development. Again, this is an entertainment medium. You have to make people want your product, they won't come searching for you.

[blissfulnoise]

Incidentally, the Wikipedia article on the game says it was inspired by Lode Runner.

Then maybe I'm the daft one because I don't really see it.

After all, a core element in N/N+ is the ability to jump, something completely missing from Load Runner. And likewise, a core ability in Load Runner is to dig holes to trap monsters, this is also missing from N/N+ in all forms; you can simply avoid the MOBs, not herd or contain them (though, to be fair, this is possible with the level editor). The environment you navigate is also entirely different substituting ladders and rope hangs with jump boxes, geometric objects, and trampolines.

I guess in a very loose way the level framework is similar to Load Runner as are collecting "gold objects", but beyond that, similarities seem superficial to me.

But who am I to argue with the official web site.

I am glad you checked out the game for yourself though; sorry to hear you didn't enjoy it. Personally, I think it’s a strong evolution to physics based platforming pioneered by games like Prince of Persia.

[Jon R.]

If that's not whiny, then at the very least its arrogance. Just as Minter was bitching about how Frogger was outselling Space Giraffe, these guys can't figure out how games like Uno are popular. Frankly, if they can't figure that out, maybe they shouldn't be developing games. As I said in my post in the "Space Giraffe" thread, it is the developers job to make sure we get it. If we don't, it is their fault, not ours. (See also Lair and the Sixxaxis controls).

The interviewer briefly touches on it, and the developers simply blow over this, and that is that XBLA is only releasing 2-3 games per week. That provides plenty of spotlight for new games to be seen before they are mixed with the hundred shitty games according ot the developers. On top of that, this game got plenty of coverage in the gaming mags. I remember reading about it in OXM, EGM and Game Informer.

Well, i think that's actually part of the context of their gripes. I have zero interest in spinning anything any developer says, but they also did mention how a racer in the vein of Off Road was turned down because MS felt there were too many racing games. They seemed to find this absurd, since in their opinion all the available racing games that were supposedly saturating the XBLA market were shit.

"Nick has this racing...do you know Iron Man Off-Road Racing, like the old arcade game? It's four-player, and a little isometric. Nick made a racing game like that, and Microsoft was like, 'Well, racing is too saturated on Live Arcade.' But that's because they've greenlit like ten really shitty racing games. There's no good racing games."

The lead-in to that was:
"RB: I think the thing with Live Arcade, though, is that I remember the last year and the year before. Two years ago was when we were first talking with Microsoft about doing it, it was really exciting, because Live Arcade had just came out, and they were like, 'Oh, it's new. It's not going to be like retail. There's not going to be all this crap. There's going to be all these small, great, fun things.'

But now it's exactly the same. There's all these big-budget ones with big publishers making them, and the real problem, I think, is that the same people who are deciding what retail games get greenlit are deciding what Live Arcade games get greenlit."

So it would seem that even with the 1-2 releases per week, the way things are greenlit is screwy. From that, it sounds like MS doesn't care about the quality of the games, but the quantity. To me it seems absurd that you can't even make a game that rises above the rest if some nimrod already greenlit too many inferior games in the same genre.

Maybe so, but it is implied. If the numbers were there would they even be making this argument? My guess is they wouldn't care.

I don't know, but that's sort of the catch with the interview. It was given before N+ was release over XBLA. http://www.xbox360fanboy.com/2008/03...nti-xbla-rant/

Ahh, but that's not what the developers are saying. They are saying demos should be enough for you, and that you don't need to download the game, at least if its not their game...

I didn't see that at all. Maybe it's my own experiences bleeding through, but what i ultimately saw was them saying that demos are actually the best way for people to decide, but that you get a problem with "demo fatigue" if you greenlight too much garbage.

This leads me to wonder if these guys even play any XBLA games, especially the demos. A demo does not give you the full experience of the game. Most demos last like 1 maybe 2 minutes. Even the Retro title demos are brief, and have you wanting more. Playing the demo of Double Dragon will not satisfy your desire to play a retro beat 'em up.

I know exactly what you mean there, as i just recently spent some time looking over that exact issue for PC demos. But what i took from it is that most people already know what the deal is with Double Dragon. They also said something about how things aren't broken up between retro re-releases and original XBLA games.

Moreover, how hard is it to scroll through X amount of games listed and download a demo in the first place? I don't think the number of releases are the problem. Part of their problem is marketing. If you give your game some obnoxious name that has been used over and over, like "Xtreme Whatever", or a bland or generic name like "N+", what do you expect?

Well, that gets into the issue of just what XBLA is supposed to be. Is it supposed to be an avenue for cheaper indie games, or is it supposed to be the same sort of "marketing blitz or die" rigamarole as with mainstream releases, but with crappier games? And the thing about scrolling through the listed games for demos gets a bit harrier depending on the size of that list.

[CartCollector]

The problem with XBLA is that if it proves to be profitable, then it will eventually be like brick and mortar stores. A whole bunch of clone games will flood the market. However, the situation could be improved if Microsoft has a gamerankings-type system where one can get an average review score (both average professional and average consumer) for each game, along with reviews. Also, there could be a search engine where one can search based on average score, minimum amount of reviews, etc. This would make it hard for indies to get started, but profit has never come easy to the average indie. I also doubt whether Microsoft would have the audacity to list what reviewers think of each game right next to it when it would benefit them to sell it, but it would help build consumer trust. No matter what, the indie paradise that XBLA started out as can't continue indefinitely.

[Leo_A]

There's only been 4 or 5 racing games on XBLA, though they all sucked. I wish they had approved that project, it sounds like it was heading in a good direction that might've been a lot of fun.

[skaar]

I still say it's way closer to Jumpman. Screw Lode Runner.

[Melf]

I read somewhere (don't remember where) that N+ had exceeded sales expectations. If that's true, then I'd like to see the developer's reactions. I'd also like to see sales numbers, so that we can compare them to how well N+ does when it's released for the PSP and DS. That way, we can truly see if the developers are right or just whining excessively.

And for all the complaints about the shovelware on XBLA, why are the confined to there? PSN will have more as it picks up steam, and WiiWare already has cell phone ports lined up, and it's not even released yet. If the N+ guys have a problem with releasing their games on platforms with lots of crap, they might as well get out of the industry now.