PlayStation 3 rootkey shitstorm grows

Apparently the link doesn't work for most people. It works for me, and I will confirm that (this person at least is claiming) it covers 100% of the cost at minimum.

Well Kotaku is also claiming that. Meanwhile, again, I have no clue where you people are getting the 25 to 35% number.

X4 Most good guitars will range into the thousands, if you want to compose and record by yourself your set up is going to range into the thousands as well. Special lens? Same. Good Cameras like the ones professional use also range into the thousands. And to put on a play not of your own making you have to pay for the screenplays and music unless you've somehow managed to memorize the whole thing or find another way to write it all down.

And no one gets developer first time into the game industry, you start at the bottom and work your way up starting in something specialized like music or character design and then moving into developer after a good amount of time.

If you're a hobbyist who has no intention of going into the industry then why do you need the full professional set? What's the difference between XNA and Unity 3D besides the fact one publishes on the Xbox?

edited 28th Feb '11 3:13:37 PM by WORLDTree

One search, 5 seconds, and I found this. Dated 1 year after yours. Somehow I don't think they stuck with the 100% return...

edited 28th Feb '11 3:19:15 PM by Swish

Unity is an engine. A much more powerful one than LBP 2, to be sure, but one where many of the most powerful features are not free by a long shot — try $1500 for the license. XNA is a full development kit.

The difference between the two has been explained already.

^^Did you miss the word "first"? As in, the first payment, which implies more than one?

edited 28th Feb '11 3:27:13 PM by IndigoDingo

Did you miss the word "royalty?"

And almost none of those features are needed to make a full game, things excluded are stuff like more advanced audio options and not having to make water yourself, I'm pretty sure a "hobbyist" isn't going to need that stuff, hell the free version even comes with multiplayer, a physics engine, tree creator, animation editor, terrain creator, and the ability to create your own scripts for additional functions using many languages like Java and C#.

XNA comes with jack, you got to make it all yourself.

For what it's worth, I'm currently working on an XNA game in a group with a couple other students, and I haven't had to pay a cent.

And I'm using Unity with other students what's your point?

^^Did you miss the word "first"? As in, the first payment, which implies more than one?

So you had an idea of what people were talking about... and were just being stupid? Because it was stated multiple times that the 25-30% number was total costs, and you keep going on about 100%...

Moving the Goalposts indeed.

edited 28th Feb '11 3:33:51 PM by Swish

Well some people were trying to make XNA out to be this super advanced thing that is too complex for hobbyists.

^^ What the hell are you talking about? I knew that Sony matched the full 100% of the budget for the game in royalty payments - I was unaware of if it was a lump sum or over a period. You guys were claiming they only gave 25% of the budget. This is now shown to be completely wrong.

edited 28th Feb '11 3:35:41 PM by IndigoDingo

Or, you can pull in a free engine like Flat Red Ball, Ox, Quick Start, etc... or port over an existing engine from Windows in many cases... or any number of other options. XNA is the gateway, you can use whatever engine will work with it, of which there are many.

Or, you know, the Unreal Development Kit, which allows you to make a free game or sell it with the caveat of having to pay Epic after a certain profit margin.

^^^ And you were claiming that hobbyist development on the PS 3 is feasible. This is now shown to be completely wrong.

I'm sorry Indigo... where do you keep getting 100%?

Every deal is different, says Cooney, but Sony will guarantee a rebate between 25% and 35% of the budget when the first quarterly royalty check is sent to the developer.

That says only 35% (tops) is guaranteed to a developer. Thus one cannot get 100% unless they sell more. Why do you keep coming up with 100% when it seems more and more like a blatant lie?

edited 28th Feb '11 3:42:39 PM by Swish

One word that appears in every single other discussion of the deal, including those dated afterwards - "match". Which, like I said, means giving an equal amount.

And you just admitted that won't be the only payment - it says right there "FIRST QUARTERLY ROYALTY CHECK". That means more than one!

edited 28th Feb '11 3:45:47 PM by IndigoDingo

But the others are not guaranteed. And that still doesn't address any of the other issues that have already been mentioned so much.

edited 28th Feb '11 3:46:52 PM by storyyeller

Do you know what a "royalty check" is, Indigo?

The developer gets a rebate in their first royalty check... but in every subsequent one, they just get the royalties. How you figure that equals 100% is beyond me...

edited 28th Feb '11 3:49:54 PM by Swish

I was claiming indie development was possible, but then "hobbyist" was added as a category and apparently hobbyists can't take out small loans, at which point I then suggested they just use Unity then if they want functionality without payment.

edited 28th Feb '11 3:49:30 PM by WORLDTree

Yes, the payment of their net allocation of the gross profits generated from the games online sales, as well as any special agreements of excess royalty payments.

Yes, it is garunteedd, as its under contract, which we've already established.

^^ Uh, where does it explicitly say in black and white with no other words "after the first Rebate payment any and all future payments are terminated"? Because thats the only thing that would give the proof you claim you have, as distinct from a lack of clarification?

edited 28th Feb '11 3:52:25 PM by IndigoDingo

^x2 You're aware that the vast majority of homebrew is not intended to be commercial, right? There's a world of difference between what most people know as the "indie" scene, and what is known as the "homebrew" scene. One scene is composed of people making software for money, one is composed of people making software either as a technical exercise, or to create things that would be commercially non-viable to develop.

edited 28th Feb '11 3:52:19 PM by TheGinkei

Unity cannot be used for low-cost development for the PS 3. It requires that you have the official devkit to produce PS 3 games. Even with that engine, no dice for low-budget hobbyists and startups.

If people want to make games for the PS 3, they should be offered the same options as for other competing platforms. Thus far, they are not.

If it's a technical exercise then why are you releasing it? And looking through the things you can buy off of the iphone I find it hard to believe somethings are "non-viable" as you can buy things from a sketchbook app all the to a fart app, if your product is good it will be viable.