Xbox One: "Our long term vision hasn't changed at all"

Microsoft's Phil Harrison discusses why there will be no indie games at the Xbox One launch, digital price parity and the cost of next-gen development
It's been a turbulent three months for the Xbox business. The unveiling of a new games console was fumbled badly with unpopular announcements and assumptions about consumer behaviour - a situation that benefited rival Sony as much as it harmed Microsoft. Since then, the company has u-turned on its original digital vision, shelving always-on requirements, cutting back Kinect functionality and opening up to used games. And it was slow to talk about its support for independent publishing on Xbox One, only revealing detailed plans last month at Gamescom while rival Sony had spent months publicly shaking hands and kissing the babies of indie game development.
But those reveals already seem a long way off when the launch of two new home systems is only two months away. Microsoft now appears to have a more coherent message about the Xbox One and has gradually answered the awkward questions, and as the campaign to put the system at the forefront of consumer and developer minds hots up, the business is developing a stronger public presence.
GamesIndustry International sat down at Microsoft's London office last week with Phil Harrison, corporate vice president of the interactive entertainment business in Europe, for a wide-reaching interview to discuss the build up to the impending launch of Xbox One, the current state and cost of games development, Microsoft's vision of digital pricing and delivery, and the changes in publisher, developer and consumer relationships.
Q: We should catch up on the independent publishing plans. It's been four weeks since you first publicly revealed the indie publishing initiatives for Xbox One - what's been happening since then?
Phil Harrison: We've had an avalanche of interest from all corners of the globe. It's what we expected but it's great to see. Now we're working through applications and creating that dialogue with developers. As we said at the time, we have phase one where we give away development kits and loan them to the teams that inevitably will have to pass some kind of a qualification to justify a limited number of dev kits being given to them. That process is ongoing. Eventually our goal is that every retail Xbox One console becomes a dev kit. And then we open up to the widest possible audience.
"We haven't diluted our long term vision, which is all of the benefits of a connected ecosystem and what that means for all of the stakeholders - us, developer, publisher and player"

Q: How many applications have you had for the programme?
Phil Harrison: Within hours it was hundreds. I actually don't know the number now but I'm assuming it's in the thousands.
Q: How do you streamline that process. That's a lot of applications to go through and developers needs to know if they're in the queue, if they're rejected, whether they should come back in 6-12 months time...
Phil Harrison: The team with Chris Charla are the guys who have that enviable task of managing that process. That's the exact process Chris is going through now.
Q: You've announced your indie programme but to show it really works we're going to need to see the games, the way they are integrated into the Xbox One retail environment, how they are promoted and supported through digital channels. When are we going to see the first releases?
Phil Harrison: There's been a lot of debate about what is an independent developer? Is it Capy with two people, or is it Crytek with 200 people? I think it's both and it's everybody in between. There's been too much focus on the financial structure as to whether they qualify for being an indie. For me, it means they are independent of their own design decisions, they're independent in thought, they're independent in motivation and creative direction. The current structure of retailer and publisher and financial investor in a studio inevitably means there are a load of executive producers. Executive producers are a good thing, they add value, but they can also mean that certain kinds of games get built over and over again because they are more predictable in nature. They're more easy to forecast, easier to sell to a retailer and easier to pigeon hole.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/article...changed-at-all