Jakub Dvorsky's Machinarium To Grind Some Gears On PSN
MachinariumAh, good ol' point-and-click adventures. Don't you think they should make a comeback?
Even if they don't, at least we know a well-respected adventure title from the mind of Jakub Dvorsky is headed to the PlayStation Network. Developed by Amanita Design, Machinarium is scheduled to arrive on the PSN and tablets later this year. According to CasualGaming.biz, Amanita turned their attention to Sony after Microsoft passed on Machinarium; this sort of supports statements from other PSN developers who say Sony is more willing to take chances on different/innovative concepts. As for the tablet, they haven't quite decided yet but it seems they're shying away from the iPad; they'd rather focus on the Blackberry PlayBook, which arrives in North America next month. For our part, we're always happy to see PSN games that would act as pleasant, relatively unique diversions. And yeah, there was a time when the point-and-click adventure wasn't "unique;" it was actually quite popular.
But even if those days are long gone, we can still revel in past glories. You know, provided the game is good...
Related Game(s): Machinarium
Tags: machinarium, playstation network, psn, jakub dvorsky
3/28/2011 10:22:37 AM Ben Dutka
Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter
Comments (27 posts)
Highlander
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 10:41:18 AM
Reply
5 up, 0 down
Kiryu
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 10:50:59 AM
Reply
5 up, 0 down
Underdog15
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 10:52:24 AM
Reply
Original ideas belong on Playstation.
4 up, 0 down
Excelsior1
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 11:44:09 AM
1 up, 0 down
Excelsior1
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 11:44:09 AM
Last edited by Excelsior1 on 3/28/2011 11:45:34 AM
0 up, 0 down
DazeOfWar
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 11:24:27 AM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
kraygen
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 11:57:26 AM
Reply
As long as the pointing and clicking is good it could be awesome, story driven games are the best.
1 up, 0 down
jimmyhandsome
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 12:07:50 PM
Reply
4 up, 0 down
Highlander
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 12:31:00 PM
Microsoft demands exclusivity - or else. They'll pay you for it, but they demand it, and nothing less.
Sony appreciates exclusivity, but does not demand or require it, nor will they outright pay for it, unless of course you are contracted by Sony for a specific game that is their concept.
The proof is in the pudding. Microsoft's approach is restrictive, anti-competitive and developer un-friendly. Sony's approach is more open, more about competition through innovation and relatively friendly to developers. Now, I'd never say Sony does it their way just to be nice, it's because they believe as a corporate that is the best way to make money. I do think though, that in some ways, Sony is influenced by a Japanese quality of long term thinking and planning that concentrates on growing their presence in a healthy market.
Here's another story about the same thing. note how they talk of burning bridges....
http://www.develop-online.net/news/37368/Bridges-burnt-after-Microsoft-snubbed-indie-dev
Last edited by Highlander on 3/28/2011 12:31:39 PM
1 up, 0 down
jimmyhandsome
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 12:52:21 PM
It'd be naive to think that nearly all exclusivity decisions by both Sony and MS are not done soley based around financial analysis and how much money a certain project will cost vs. yeild in returns. MS has the money to throw around for these exclusive deals, and they obviously think that it'll pay off financially for them or they wouldn't do it. Its really more or less comes down to different corporate strategies, not mr. nice guy vs. mr. bad guy. They both want our money.
1 up, 0 down
Underdog15
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 2:08:38 PM
2 up, 0 down
jimmyhandsome
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 2:33:42 PM
I guess my point is, the story seems to be taken slightly out of context in this article. Rather than talking about the issue of business common sense here (if MS is funding a project, they would want to make sure they receive their return on it. Having the developer release it on other platforms would kind of under value their investment) we see MS in a negative light as a company not willing to take on or support creative games. That's really not the case here.
0 up, 0 down
Highlander
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 2:46:36 PM
It is the case because Microsoft are in fact allowing their business goals of short term gain and competing through purchased/enforced exclusivity to prevent them from having an innovative game on their platform. So by their actions Microsoft are showing themselves to be "a company not willing to take on or support creative games".
As for the point about "Why would they help fund and publish a title on XBLA that is already available on other platforms?" This isn't/wasn't about funding the project. Microsoft won't publish to XBLA without an exclusivity deal. In that case, how can Microsoft justify supporting any multi-platform game on XBLA? They didn't just want their share of the cake, they wanted everyone elses' share, and now they have no share.
Last edited by Highlander on 3/28/2011 2:49:43 PM
2 up, 0 down
jimmyhandsome
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 3:04:57 PM
In this case, yes they're not allowing the developer to release the game on their platform. However, this has nothing to do with the fact the game is creative or not. It has to do with the fact that the developer already had released the game on other platforms, and therefore did not fit into MS's business model.
The fact is MS DOES support creativitey and indie developers. They have an entire section of XBLA dedicated to "Indie games" (comparable to Mini's on PSN). They have put forth and published alot of quirky titles actually, from Limbo, ilomilo, World of Keflings, Monday Night Combat (not really quirky but not your average shooter either), Darwinia+(it might not be published by MS but I'm pretty sure its XBLA exclusive, and its highly addictive), etc.
1 up, 0 down
Highlander
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 4:24:17 PM
1 up, 0 down
jimmyhandsome
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 4:58:39 PM
Thats XBLA content released in 2010 alone. Doesn't look like their short on titles released. Again, I'm not saying I agree 100% with shunning of certain developers if they are unwilling to be exclusive, but MS is clearly the ones making the business decisions here, and they generally know what they're doing in that aspect. Developers, it seems, will often fight tooth and nail to be included in their promotional periods like "The Summer of Arcade" because those titles sell exceptionally well for downloadable titles, as they get most of the advertising costs from MS. There is obviously a benefit for these developers to "sell out" to an exclusivity contract with MS...and that is greater sales and more exposure. More money=more titles they are able to produce.
0 up, 0 down
Highlander
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 5:57:15 PM
You can defend XBLA all you like, it's not under attack. The business model chosen by Microsoft is inherently restrictive of the content available and therefore inherently discourages innovative and creative games from developers who choose not to be locked into a contract with Microsoft alone.
0 up, 0 down
jimmyhandsome
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 6:37:28 PM
You can also make an argument that Sony's less aggressive approach reduces the number of new and innovative titles distributed on PSN if MS is quick to snatch them up. It swings both ways, ya know?
0 up, 0 down
Excelsior1
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 7:42:07 PM
i often ask my xbox loving friends why they are so loyal to the platform. they will often cite ms backing them up by locking down early dlc. and content. that seems to be a strategy that's paid off for ms.
i wish sony were more aggressive in this area and would try to lock down exclusive content of their own.
Last edited by Excelsior1 on 3/28/2011 7:45:14 PM
1 up, 0 down
Highlander
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 9:19:01 PM
Jimmy, I'll give you a hint about my attitude towards Microsoft. I've been involved with Microsoft on a Business level for more than two decades, and I've gone from liking them, to disliking, and then loathing. Right now, I'm somewhere between loathing them and thinking that they are the most destructive element of the IT/gaming industry ever. Now, sadly, as things stand, Microsoft's power in the IT world is not under serious threat, and they know it, and they act like it. The trouble is that the same executives with that same attitude make the high level decisions and set policy for the other divisions, so that style of autocratic business is near universal with Microsoft - including their gaming division.
However, I understand that not everyone see's Microsoft either for what it is, or as I see it. So I moderate my opinions of them as much as I can. However in this case, you are defending a practice that suppresses innovation and creativity. It's got little to do with whether I like Microsoft or not, their entire business model suppresses creativity - it's the nature of the beast.
1 up, 0 down
jimmyhandsome
Tuesday, March 29, 2011 @ 8:49:33 AM
Fair enough. I don't have such a deep-rooted hatred for them. From a consumer level most of their products that I've purchased have been strictly videogames, and for the most part I haven't been disappointed with 360. I do understand why some people don't like their tactics, though.
0 up, 0 down
Mamills
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 12:31:44 PM
Reply
Demo is pretty cool, the art style is definitely fantastic
0 up, 0 down
JMO_INDY
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 3:06:51 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
Douchebaguette
Reply
Monday, March 28, 2011 @ 10:37:15 AM