Sony lost Limbo exclusivity deal because it wanted IP rights

[Guild McCommunist]

Except I believe rewriting still is consider copyright infringement and there no site that we copy from said it was or enforcing copyright infringement on others.
"Add original content" still doesn't change the fact that you copied from another site. If someone with a cite was pushing copyright infringement, that would still fall under it.
I pretty sure do see sites quoting word for word, even if they saying something on top of it. Which most of the time the added words confused the point or understanding of the article.

Rewriting is not copyright infringement. It's what pretty much all the professional sites do. IGN gets an exclusive interview with, I dunno, Kojima, and Eurogamer takes an excerpt and plants it on their site as "Kojima discusses Metal Gear Solid" with a link back to the IGN interview and a few choice quotes from that.

I'd like to see what sites quote word for word. I have 10 RSS feeds right now and I've seen the same subject appear on many of them multiple times but the articles are different.

I'm just gonna nip this in the butt here and say we want original content and it should be that. No ifs, ands, or buts. It's pretty much policy at this point.

Let's get back on topic, shall we?

Personally I never played Limbo but I never thought it looked too interesting. I saw a friend playing it once and it felt so dull. Just boring puzzles and bland art.

 

[shakirmoledina]

note that limbo introduced something like portal. portal introduced the concept of short games still being worth selling and playing.

limbo said, u dont need a storyline, graphics, sound and animation. just focus on gameplay. KISS, the best way.

EDIT: okay so its a rule and standard. i can accept that just like i have done for css being used for layouts and not tables.

 

[Hyro-Sama]

Shit. You guys are still bitching over the articles?

 

[Depravo]

limbo said, u dont need a storyline, graphics, sound and animation

But...but...but... I've only played the demo but the graphics, sound and animation are excellent. Games don't have to be 3D (as in polygonal, not stereoscopic) to look amazing.

 

[Maikel Steneker]

To get a bit ontopic: it's interesting how differently Sony and Microsoft approach indie developers. Microsoft really seems to focus on timed exclusives, while Sony wants IP rights (essentially securing multiple exclusive games).

Obviously, in this case it didn't turn out well for Sony. I feel like Limbo is one of the defining XBLA titles of the past few years.

What did it define? Can't use a buzzword like "defining" unless it "defines" something. It looked nice, yeah, but that was it. The gameplay was subpar, the story nonexistant, and the controls sloppy. It was a pretty meh game, honestly.

Bit of a late reaction maybe, but I can't resist giving my opinion about this.

I think Limbo is an excellent game. It succesfully uses graphics and sound to make players feel engaged. Limbo is one of the games in which I cared about the main character after only a few minutes of playing. On top of that, I think the gameplay is phenominal. I like how it changes what is essentially trial-and-error gameplay into something that feels like it's worth playing. You really want to keep playing even after dying multiple times. I think the way sounds are integrated in puzzles is also really clever.

But the reason why I say it's defining is not because it's good. I say that because Limbo is a very popular title that has reached a lot of gamers that in the past wouldn't bother with XBLA games. It shows that it's possible to create a game of only a few hours long that's worth playing. I think that shows a lot of promise. Titles like these get people to play more XBLA/PSN games. If Sony would have had Limbo as an exclusive, players would go to PSN for their bite-sized games. With Microsoft picking it up, a portion of those players will instead go to XBLA.