Capped: XBLA Size Limit Will Continue
The title says it all. Microsoft has not plans to raise the limit any time soon. This reiteration comes in counterpoint to Sony's latest strategy of simultaneous retail and PSN release of Warhawk.
And not only is Microsoft unfazed by Sony's latest idea, but they think the limit is a good thing. Katie Stone (Senior Games Program Manager) was quoted at Gamefest 2007 as saying, "It [the 150MB cap] really lets you focus on the innovation."
Now, before the mob forms, torches are lit, pitchforks are hoisted, and people get out of control let me say this: I agree. As evidenced by the many games that already exist on the service and the many bizarre and innovative titles coming out of the Dream-Build-Play contest, the XBLA size limit does not hinder innovation. In fact, because the limit is there and expectations of XBLA are set appropriately, a small team (or even a single person) can develop for XBLA and make something great. That allows developers to take risks and go crazy. And that is why XBLA is a huge leap forward in the world of console gaming.
Okay. I am off the soapbox now. So, the mob may continue as it so pleases.
[via IGN, thanks Measure]
Comments
Kornicos
15146
I guess this post means I'm part of the mob.
Having no cap (like on PSN) does not stop people from inovating. These smaller games can still sell based on inovative gameplay and price.
I think most people understand the cap exists because of the decision to sell the HDDless Core system. There is also the belief that MS is trying to keep in the retailers good books by not selling full games via download (like Warhawk). MS wanted it all (cheap and premium boxes to cater for all) and now they have to play this balancing act between the two skews. Which is crappy for the people who put their money on a premium.
LunarDuality
36370
I know what you're saying about how MS has to mitigate a possible PR nightmare regarding the "value" of the Core SKU in regards to XBLA.
I also agree that having no cap does not stop innovation. But neither does having a cap. That's my point.
I know many times in artistic ventures of my own I've felt much more free to create and innovate when I had a structure on which to build. It sounds counter-intuitive, I know, but it's true. When you have limits, it forces you to push out against them, which can drive innovation. If your canvas is empty, it can be hard to imagine what to fill it with.
And then there's the whole bandwidth issue for Microsoft in terms of price of XBLA games (currently capped at $15 for the base game) vs. the cost of having people download the game. Obviously, Warhawk is going to be a HUGE download but they're also charging you $40 to defer the cost of development AND delivery.
Also, I've heard it from dev after dev that having more space is not necessarily a good thing because it allows you to be lazy. And lazy code is never a good thing. Sure, if you push against the upper limit and need a tiny bit more space it's good to have the cushion. But some XBLA dev (I wish I had the link) just talked about shooting for 135MB so they have the leeway built in. And that they had plenty of space.
But I do wonder
ifwhen MS will create a new space for full retail style downloads. It's only a matter of time...but will it exist on the 360 or the next xbox?Kornicos
15146
I agree (that you can spell innovate better than me).
I like the smaller cap, as I believe that it should encourage small, innovative games, which are a refreshing change from the big-budget epics that you see at retail. It's like a throwback to the days of old.
Not that I don't see the value of offerering full games over download like PSN does, but I don't think it should be in XBLA. Keep XBLA small and simple, and maybe they can add on a downloaded games section as a separate area when the Elite becomes more prevalent (let's face it, 20GB is not going to go far if you allow full games for download).