next »

[bento_smile]

But but but where are my free games??

IT'S OK! You can still pirate them. No hurt feelings!!!

[googoogjoob]

Googoogjoob, do you think that every creator should be allowed to violate their contract? Agreements are made for a reason, to benefit both parties. It's more peculiar that Nifflas spoke out and effectively encouraged his fans to be angry towards Nifflas.

It's the equivalent of Jon Blow saying "boo hoo, Microsoft won't let me release the PC version of Braid for a whole year!"  

I don't think you should be allowed to violate your contract, but that doesn't make it okay for Nicalis to make a decision against Nifflas's desires, and then never give the public a reason for it. (Nicalis hasn't ever actually released a statement saying "PC Night Game is cancelled", and in at least one interview, Tyrone blatantly dodges the question of why there won't be a PC version.)

Nicalis hasn't done anything illegal, but that doesn't make everything they do okay.

Tyrone is a really nice guy imo. Without prompting he has been very generous to me with advice and support on numerous occasions to do with surviving as an indie, and none of his help included suggestions that were unethical, greedy, mean or disrespectful to players/customers or other devs.

Top bloke in my book.

This isn't about Tyrone the person here this is about Nicalis the company, which Tyrone happens to be a part of.

[Corpus]

Guys, stop being massive pricks. You're better than this. Dock's response was pleasant and measured. Observe and emulate.

(written before appearance of googoogjoob's post, which I haven't read)


EDIT: Rudolf's post was also pleasant + measured.

[Hayden Scott-Baron]

I don't think you should be allowed to violate your contract, but that doesn't make it okay for Nicalis to make a decision against Nifflas's desires, and then never give the public a reason for it. (Nicalis hasn't ever actually released a statement saying "PC Night Game is cancelled", and in at least one interview, Tyrone blatantly dodges the question of why there won't be a PC version.)

Yes, I agree with you that Nicalis should have a corporate line saying 'We don't currently have any plans to release Night Game on other platforms', or 'we don't have anything to announce at this time'. 

It does make it okay to make a decision against Nifflas' desires though, that's the point of the contract.

[googoogjoob]

It does make it okay to make a decision against Nifflas' desires though, that's the point of the contract.

Depending on your definition of "okay". From a business standpoint it's fine, but personally/artistically it looks like a slight. I know Nifflas willingly signed onto the deal, but I also know he'd never signed any such contract before, and I'm pretty sure he did not seek legal advice regarding it, so the contract is likely tilted against him. Again, this is okay in the sense that it's totally legal and probably even commonplace, but it's not okay in the sense that Nifflas looks like he got the short end of the stick.

[Eclipse]

this is my theory:

- Night Game is pc exclusive
- Nifflas sign with Nicalis for the wiiware version, maybe even without thinking the pc version can be cancelled
- Nicalis has now all the rights over the game
- Nicalis decide that's better for them to work only on wii (less development time?)
- Pc version is cancelled, Nifflas can't do anything but apologize

sounds bad when others decides where YOUR game will run and where not

[jstckr]

So you're basically saying you don't trust Nifflas to be able to understand a contract and its consequences before signing it? I don't think that's a healthy view.

Likewise, when you try to make money off things with the help of other people (such as a publisher), there will soon be choices up ahead that can only be solved through compromises. From your moraline-poisoned first post and a tiny bit of research, it doesn't look like anything but that has taken place here. I sure get your point, don't misinterpret me, but it's one you make in a very sterile, idealised environment.

I'll regard this thread as kind of moot until anyone actually involved in the matter has a say (hint: for future journalistic integrity, contact the people involved before posting texts like this).

[Alex May]

Depending on your definition of "okay". From a business standpoint it's fine, but personally/artistically it looks like a slight. I know Nifflas willingly signed onto the deal, but I also know he'd never signed any such contract before, and I'm pretty sure he did not seek legal advice regarding it, so the contract is likely tilted against him. Again, this is okay in the sense that it's totally legal and probably even commonplace, but it's not okay in the sense that Nifflas looks like he got the short end of the stick.

The way you write just makes it sound like you're implying Nicalis are kind of deliberately being evil to Nicklas. All this "no it's not illegal BUT" evokes "it SHOULD be illegal" or "they're DELIBERATELY being immoral". It's nonsense; Nicalis is being no more immoral than Nicklas is by selling his IP to another developer.

If Nicklas, Pixel or Nigoro were upset with their situation, do you think they would continue to be associated with Nicalis? If it were me and I were upset, I would certainly just say "Look, you guys do as you like - I'm off to do my own thing". I don't see how you can be upset for people who seem satisfied with their position (in their own words, for instance as I have posted about above). So therefore what is it that you ARE upset about?

[Sos]

I suppose a good lawyer would be able to resolve that, at least to the extent where Nifflas can actually become decisive about his creation

[Alex May]

We don't know the details of Nicklas's relationship with Nicalis or the terms of the IP clauses in that contract. It's all just speculation fuelled by entitlement-driven anger.

[googoogjoob]

- Nicalis decide that's better for them to work only on wii (less development time?)

Nifflas still worked on the game using a PC and MMF2. The levels are stored in an external format after he makes them, and the Wii program is a version of the game capable of interpreting the levels.

So you're basically saying you don't trust Nifflas to be able to understand a contract and its consequences before signing it? I don't think that's a healthy view.

I don't trust Nifflas to be able to realize exactly what is going to happen in the future when he signs his first commercial game publishing contract.

I'll regard this thread as kind of moot until anyone actually involved in the matter has a say (hint: for future journalistic integrity, contact the people involved before posting texts like this).

Nifflas is under an NDA, and Tyrone is excessively uncommunicative.

The way you write just makes it sound like you're implying Nicalis are kind of deliberately being evil to Nicklas. All this "no it's not illegal BUT" evokes "it SHOULD be illegal" or "they're DELIBERATELY being immoral". It's nonsense; Nicalis is being no more immoral than Nicklas is by selling his IP to another developer.

I think capitalism itself is immoral but that's not the issue here- the issue is that Nicalis has acted in a way that I believe most people would consider unfair. (I don't think any of the specifics should be illegal.)

If Nicklas, Pixel or Nigoro were upset with their situation, do you think they would continue to be associated with Nicalis? If it were me and I were upset, I would certainly just say "Look, you guys do as you like - I'm off to do my own thing". I don't see how you can be upset for people who seem satisfied with their position (in their own words, for instance as I have posted about above). So therefore what is it that you ARE upset about?

They are forced to continue to be associated with Nicalis regardless because Nicalis owns Night Game and Cave Story, and they're under contracts that do not allow them to walk away.

We don't know the details of Nicklas's relationship with Nicalis or the terms of the IP clauses in that contract. It's all just speculation fuelled by entitlement-driven anger.

Nifflas has said that Nicalis owns all the rights to Night Game. I don't know where entitlement comes in; sure I'm upset I won't get to play Night Game, but even if I could I'd be upset that Nifflas doesn't have control over his own art.

[Glaiel-Gamer]

Tyrone is excessively uncommunicative.

I talk to tyrone all the time on AIM, he's a nice guy (and gave me a free copy of cave story)

[Lurk]

googoogjoob-Many developers are now moving onto console exclusive titles, simply because the pc piracy scene has gone overboard. Night Game as a wii/pc title of equal quality might, in a publisher's mind, see its sales cut by massive 'free' distribution on warez sites.
At some point, a business model where you work for free all the time will tend to make you and your family go hungry. If you want to play Night Game, buy it on the wii. If you don't have a wii, tough luck  (I don't have a wii either so...) You might call it 'selling out and compromising artistic integrity', I call it 'getting responsible and boring'.

[Alex May]

The way you write just makes it sound like you're implying Nicalis are kind of deliberately being evil to Nicklas. All this "no it's not illegal BUT" evokes "it SHOULD be illegal" or "they're DELIBERATELY being immoral". It's nonsense; Nicalis is being no more immoral than Nicklas is by selling his IP to another developer.

I think capitalism itself is immoral but that's not the issue here- the issue is that Nicalis has acted in a way that I believe most people would consider unfair. (I don't think any of the specifics should be illegal.)

Can you be more specific?

If Nicklas, Pixel or Nigoro were upset with their situation, do you think they would continue to be associated with Nicalis? If it were me and I were upset, I would certainly just say "Look, you guys do as you like - I'm off to do my own thing". I don't see how you can be upset for people who seem satisfied with their position (in their own words, for instance as I have posted about above). So therefore what is it that you ARE upset about?

They are forced to continue to be associated with Nicalis regardless because Nicalis owns Night Game and Cave Story, and they're under contracts that do not allow them to walk away.

They are free to go and create more games if they like. Perhaps they signed away their game IP to Nicalis - in that case if they are upset with the job being done it is relatively easy for them to walk out the door and create their next great game on their own. If you are aware of Nicklas having signed a contract that says he cannot quit his job at Nicalis, I would say that you should report this to the authorities as that is definitely illegal.

We don't know the details of Nicklas's relationship with Nicalis or the terms of the IP clauses in that contract. It's all just speculation fuelled by entitlement-driven anger.

Nifflas has said that Nicalis owns all the rights to Night Game. I don't know where entitlement comes in; sure I'm upset I won't get to play Night Game, but even if I could I'd be upset that Nifflas doesn't have control over his own art.

Art is in the execution, not where it can be viewed. Night Game will likely be a better game than Nicklas could ever have created alone.

[Valter]

What vexes me about this is that the decision being lambasted isn't about the game's design- it's a business measure made by the business people with the legal rights of the game.

If it were something like "Nicalis decided to change the graphics from silhouettes to a more gritty style" or "Nicalis has rejected some of the puzzles because it thinks they are too hard", that might be a basis for some righteous indignation. No indication has been given of Nifflas' game being tampered with in any way, though.

Nifflas is the developer, and it seems to be that he is in full control of developing the game. Nicalis is the publisher, and it looks like they're in full control of publishing the game. What is the problem with this?

[Movius]

The thing with this thread is that there isn't a single legitimate criticism made, only the obsessive rambling of those still pissed off about being cockblocked with Indie Brawl.

In fact, any links to anything resembling reality are tenuous at best. I'm not exagerrating when I say that these are the sorts of leaps of logic made by Moon-Hoaxers or 9/11 'truthers' (met 2 of these last week, good times.)

This entire conspiracy theory relies on the assumption that Pixel and Nifflas are simultaneously creative geniuses, who have made some of the great works of our time, and at the same time drooling simpletons incapable of signing and understanding a contract or making even the simplest of business decisions that any rational adult makes every day.

[googoogjoob]

Tyrone is excessively uncommunicative.

I talk to tyrone all the time on AIM, he's a nice guy (and gave me a free copy of cave story)

I don't know him personally and my attempts to ask questions regarding Night Game have dead-ended.

googoogjoob-Many developers are now moving onto console exclusive titles, simply because the pc piracy scene has gone overboard. Night Game as a wii/pc title of equal quality might, in a publisher's mind, see its sales cut by massive 'free' distribution on warez sites.
At some point, a business model where you work for free all the time will tend to make you and your family go hungry. If you want to play Night Game, buy it on the wii. If you don't have a wii, tough luck  (I don't have a wii either so...) You might call it 'selling out and compromising artistic integrity', I call it 'getting responsible and boring'.

I don't mind that Nifflas is working on a Wii-exclusive game. (Actually, I think that's pretty cool that Nifflas will get more exposure.) I mind that the game had been in development for over a year before anyone said anything about it being Wii-exclusive, and that during that year, everyone had (reasonably) assumed the game was going to be on PC as well; and that following the announcement Nifflas felt obliged to apologize for the decision.

Can you be more specific?

I don't think specific aspects of contracts should necessarily be illegal because that would restrict everyone's freedom to make deals unnecessarily.

They are free to go and create more games if they like. Perhaps they signed away their game IP to Nicalis - in that case if they are upset with the job being done it is relatively easy for them to walk out the door and create their next great game on their own. If you are aware of Nicklas having signed a contract that says he cannot quit his job at Nicalis, I would say that you should report this to the authorities as that is definitely illegal.

As far as I know, Nifflas doesn't have a job at Nicalis beyond making Night Game for them. (I have no idea if/how he is paid- if it's treated like a Nicalis project which Nifflas is paid for working on, or if it's treated like a Nifflas project that Nicalis has bought from him to publish.) He certainly isn't required to make more games for them- he made Saira independent of Nicalis and it's self-published rather than published by Nicalis.

Art is in the execution, not where it can be viewed. Night Game will likely be a better game than Nicklas could ever have created alone.

The trick is that Nifflas was working on Night Game (with Chris Schlarb) for several months before Nicalis became involved with the project.

Nifflas is the developer, and it seems to be that he is in full control of developing the game. Nicalis is the publisher, and it looks like they're in full control of publishing the game. What is the problem with this?

The problem is that Nicalis owns the game itself, rather than having licensed it for publishing, and that this might become problematic in the future. (Like how Paul McCartney only owns two Beatles songs.)

This entire conspiracy theory relies on the assumption that Pixel and Nifflas are simultaneously creative geniuses, who have made some of the great works of our time, and at the same time drooling simpletons incapable of signing and understanding a contract or making even the simplest of business decisions that any rational adult makes every day.

Rational adults don't sell intellectual property every day, and Nifflas at least hadn't sold any of his games to a development/publishing company before.

[raigan]

I think the real problem here is that the original creators seem willing to sign away IP ownership, and other people seem willing to let them do it, whether or not this is somewhat exploitative.

DON'T DO IT!

There's no reason why Nicalis would need to own e.g Cave Story, Night Game, etc. in order to port the games to Wii. The original developer could have instead simply granted them a license to use the IP for that one specific project, but retained ownership and control of the IP.

Obviously such an arrangement isn't going to be as attractive from Nicalis' perspective, but royalty amounts/etc. could be adjusted in order to compensate for this.

I'm sure there must be a number of licensed Wii devs who would be willing to work on such licensed ports in exchange for a revenue-share.



 

[Hayden Scott-Baron]

Googoogjoob, it sounds as though you ought to be upset at Nifflas. He is the one who chose to sign it away to a publisher including the PC game rights. It sounds as though you just have a very strong sense of entitlement. If you believe in Nifflas, why can't you respect his decision to work with Nicalis? Working with them hasn't stopped him from making further PC games, as has been shown, and his game hasn't been compromised either.

When I show my works in progress, I would hate it if people got furious at me or anyone else if that game was signed to a publisher, a specific platform, or indeed I decided to murder the project.

[PlayMeTape]

I don't mind that Nifflas is working on a Wii-exclusive game. (Actually, I think that's pretty cool that Nifflas will get more exposure.) I mind that the game had been in development for over a year before anyone said anything about it being Wii-exclusive, and that during that year, everyone had (reasonably) assumed the game was going to be on PC as well; and that following the announcement Nifflas felt obliged to apologize for the decision.

Actually I think he was apologizing for not revealing that it would be wii exclusive earlier which he couldn't because of still being in negotiations.