hotshot 10101:

Is this documented somewhere? It seems to me that a single fail should be able to fail a game. For example if only one person happens to find some prohibited content and they fail the game, but are not nice enough to put in the review forum why they failed it so no one else is looking for it and no one else sees the content, that game will still make it into release?

It will still make it to release. Peer reviewers should never not be looking for prohibited content and crashes. If they are not looking for those things, they are not doing their job and should (and potentially will) see repercussions if it is determined they are intentionally not looking (for example, someone passing games in hopes of getting "kickback" reviews).

Nick Gravelyn:

ChefTeslaCoil:

I noticed there's a new statement about not being able to use the XBLIG as some kind of video distribution medium.  A guy had commissioned us to make a game about his stand-up comedy and it is going to be a racing/platformer hybrid as he tries to make it to gigs in time.  The original idea was that when you make it to each gig a video of some of his stand-up would play or be viewable in some kind of extras menu.  Would this go against the rules?

Thanks,
(Pat)

Not in my opinion. You have actual gameplay so that is what you need. The new rule is to avoid more things like the GoVids stunt show where it's literally just a menu with three little videos. If you have an actual game and just use videos as rewards, that should be just fine. It's like Tony Hawk games and unlocking videos for each skater. :)

Or cut scenes in a game like Final Fantasy or Metal Gear Solid, which are essentially "rewards" for beating sections of games.  I'd say it's perfectly fine.

RainbowDespair:

I think it would be a good idea to specifically mention in the Evil Checklist that certain music instruments when plugged in can read as having certain buttons being pressed (like the triggers or the analog sticks) even when the controller itself is not in use. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has had to pull a game from review and wait an extra 7 days for this problem which is highly annoying since it's such an easy thing to fix if you know to look for it (just don't allow the triggers or analog sticks to activate a controller).

Tis done see 1)d) and e) The best practise does tell you clearly to look for 'start' to begin a game. Thats what 99% of the games do and even if you add (A) that will give you 99.9% of the games. There really is no need to add any other kind of activation.

Nick Gravelyn:

hotshot 10101:

Is this documented somewhere? It seems to me that a single fail should be able to fail a game. For example if only one person happens to find some prohibited content and they fail the game, but are not nice enough to put in the review forum why they failed it so no one else is looking for it and no one else sees the content, that game will still make it into release?

It will still make it to release. Peer reviewers should never not be looking for prohibited content and crashes. If they are not looking for those things, they are not doing their job and should (and potentially will) see repercussions if it is determined they are intentionally not looking (for example, someone passing games in hopes of getting "kickback" reviews).

I am certainly not talking about what you suggest. I am talking about a situation where the prohibited content is obscure or hidden in such a way that everyone who plays the game will not see it. So one reviewer happens to see it, but doesn't mention it. They simply fail the game. Then another reviewer does as good of a job as possible, but doesn't hit the right circumstances to see the bad content and pass the game. I am not talking about intentional passing of bad content.

hotshot 10101:

I am certainly not talking about what you suggest. I am talking about a situation where the prohibited content is obscure or hidden in such a way that everyone who plays the game will not see it. So one reviewer happens to see it, but doesn't mention it. They simply fail the game. Then another reviewer does as good of a job as possible, but doesn't hit the right circumstances to see the bad content and pass the game. I am not talking about intentional passing of bad content.

Well, we know that the peer-review system is not perfect. The consumers do take risks when they download games, and that is why Indie Games are still
unrated even after peer-review and only adults can play them if the necessary family settings are done in the console.

Nick Gravelyn:

hotshot 10101:

I am pretty sure that when you fail a game is does not come down from review right then. It continues until either the review time period is over or the dev removes is from review.

If the time period expires and there are ANY fails, then the game just drops out of review and doesn't release.

Not quite. If you have one fail, you can still pass. Once there are two fails in the same category, the game is kicked out of review. One fail is never enough to fail a game completely.

Please let me confirm one thing. This "category" corresponds to each of checkboxes such as "The game freezes..." and "Grossly misrepresents content... ."
Or am I mistaken. Does it mean each of large categories such as "Game Defects," "Prohibited Contents" and "Avatar Prohibited Contents" ?

Also, I have a completely different question.

I'm going to peer-review a block-dropping puzzle game called "Movipas." Which is apparently using assets from Movipa.
I think this is O.K. because Movipa is distributed under Microsoft's permissive license.

However, I can't decide if the title "Movipas" is confusing (in  comparison with "Movipa") enough to urge the creator
to change the name.

EDIT: Started a new thread.

TrippinAlien:

If you are using an MU, you can pull it at the exact moment the data is being saved, and it will cause a Code 4.

It seems like you could cover yourself by surrounding all your reads/writes to storage with try/catches that handle exceptions. If you get an exception, you can do anything you want with it - like restarting the game, or resetting information. But you'll run the risk of somebody doing that exact thing in peer review (pulling the MU right during a save) and they are supposed to fail you for that.

Runway 360:

Please let me confirm one thing. This "category" corresponds to each of checkboxes such as "The game freezes..." and "Grossly misrepresents content... ."
Or am I mistaken. Does it mean each of large categories such as "Game Defects," "Prohibited Contents" and "Avatar Prohibited Contents" ?

I don't know for sure, but I believe it means the larger categories such as "Game Defects" and "Prohibited Content", not the individual checkboxes. But I don't know for sure.

Nick Gravelyn:

Runway 360:

Please let me confirm one thing. This "category" corresponds to each of checkboxes such as "The game freezes..." and "Grossly misrepresents content... ."
Or am I mistaken. Does it mean each of large categories such as "Game Defects," "Prohibited Contents" and "Avatar Prohibited Contents" ?

I don't know for sure, but I believe it means the larger categories such as "Game Defects" and "Prohibited Content", not the individual checkboxes. But I don't know for sure.

Thanks.
I have another question (confirmation, or begging for your support) concerning the same fail category.

The game "Ninja Brothers" is in review. Already two reviewers mentioned the usage of the term "achievement"
for a similar function. However, the game remains without getting rejected.

Unless it has anything to do with reviewer score, some one marked a different checkbox from one marked by the other one.

The review process stays at 93% now. I'm going to terminating it by voting against the game.
I'm marking the checkbox which says "Code Defects - Crashes Make Content Unplayable."
Please correct me if wrong.

Also, I assume some reviewers speaking the same language as mine passed the game as well.
I am going to once again remind them about this issue although the translated checklist says against using those terms.

I'm going to write that not only achievement and leaderboard, but also gamerscore and XBLA are prohibited terms unless the
first two of them are used as generic words and are not used in misleading ways.
[EDIT 2] I changed my mind. I am not letting them know this time. It's not due to my issues with you folks here in this particular
forum, but due to my community concern about something elsewhere.

I guess what Albert said is still in effect today...
http://forums.xna.com/forums/t/21124.aspx?PageIndex=3

[EDIT] I have done my review and the game is no longer in queue.

Runway 360:

I have done my review and the game is no longer in queue.

It is on the marketplace now with the word Achievement. I don't understand how that game can be passed as it stands but yet many people passed it.

BogTurtleCarl:

Runway 360:

I have done my review and the game is no longer in queue.

It is on the marketplace now with the word Achievement. I don't understand how that game can be passed as it stands but yet many people passed it.

Something is wrong with the system or there are people passing the games not even posting in the thread. Maybe Microsoft should have a closer look to this.

BogTurtleCarl:

It is on the marketplace now with the word Achievement.

Not only that, it have a bunch of other obvious problems (the creator even had the balls to make a fake guide showing your achievement :) . I have emailed MS about it, so the mods will know about it.

Fabian Viking:

Not only that, it have a bunch of other obvious problems (the creator even had the balls to make a fake guide showing your achievement :) .

I don't think showing a guide of your "Awardments" or "Badges" or whatever is against the rules, just the term "Achievement(s)."

hotshot 10101:

Personally I think we have gone too far. I think we are limiting the creativity of Indie games with all the requirements. We need to keep in mind what this is about....trying things and playing around with ideas. The rules are very clear. We just need to follow them as reasonablly as we can.

Sorry for a later answer (you wanted different opinions).
From my point of view, I cheered when we got the new rules, and I wouldn't mind them being even harder. I and some persons with me are dreaming about breaking in to the game market. It have been almost impossible without being millionaire until now. If I now take a shot on this, quit my job, pay for images/music, working on my code for one year - would I like to see my game drown in a ton of massage game? Sure crap games make a buck now, but they have no future. Microsoft is a professional company and they are looking for professional game makers, not people that can suck the blood out of the work they put on promoting Xbox and never give anything back.

BogTurtleCarl:

Fabian Viking:

Not only that, it have a bunch of other obvious problems (the creator even had the balls to make a fake guide showing your achievement :) .

I don't think showing a guide of your "Awardments" or "Badges" or whatever is against the rules, just the term "Achievement(s)."

That's correct.

BogTurtleCarl:

I don't think showing a guide of your "Awardments" or "Badges" or whatever is against the rules, just the term "Achievement(s)."

First of all there is a copyright problem, you cant just make a print screen on some one else image and use it yourself. Second, Microsoft is very sensitive about how you use their xbox logo and such, I have a hard time to believe they would like it when you are trying to fool someone to think that you got a real achievement.

PinoEire:

BogTurtleCarl:

Runway 360:

I have done my review and the game is no longer in queue.

It is on the marketplace now with the word Achievement. I don't understand how that game can be passed as it stands but yet many people passed it.

Something is wrong with the system or there are people passing the games not even posting in the thread. Maybe Microsoft should have a closer look to this.

I think this is what the abuse reporting system is for and recommend you take advantage of it.

Fabian Viking:

hotshot 10101:

Personally I think we have gone too far. I think we are limiting the creativity of Indie games with all the requirements. We need to keep in mind what this is about....trying things and playing around with ideas. The rules are very clear. We just need to follow them as reasonablly as we can.

Sorry for a later answer (you wanted different opinions).
From my point of view, I cheered when we got the new rules, and I wouldn't mind them being even harder. I and some persons with me are dreaming about breaking in to the game market. It have been almost impossible without being millionaire until now. If I now take a shot on this, quit my job, pay for images/music, working on my code for one year - would I like to see my game drown in a ton of massage game? Sure crap games make a buck now, but they have no future. Microsoft is a professional company and they are looking for professional game makers, not people that can suck the blood out of the work they put on promoting Xbox and never give anything back.

Thank you for your reply. Since I am so big on the idea that this is our club I welcome your input. I will abide by and truly champion whatever we decide as a group because that is what I believe in. I had to make my own opinion known and am glad others are willing to do the same.

Swampopus:

I would tend to agree, but I have a developer who is arguing with me over it, and accusing me of singling him out for failure.  According to him... "The game is controllable from controller #2. This is not a fail for that reason."  This was his response after I pointed him to Test case 1, section (c) of the EC.

I am sorry to hear that!
If you have a game in review, you are far from impartial - so your opinion doesn't matter. It is really bad when reviewers become personal or treating, ironically they whine about getting reviews but they are never happy with them.
>Swampopus - if they dont want you help, they can just go to a warmer place.

I was double reading the new rules about trial, video and so on. Something came to my mind: If a game must have a fair amount of actual gameplay in trial mode to pass... what about the non-games which have no gameplay at all? Screensavers, soundscapes and so on? Am I right if I desume that the time of those non-game apps it's actually come to an end? Aren't we supposed to fail an app lacking of any actual gameplay?

Your thoughts?

Cheers,
Pino

PinoEire:

Aren't we supposed to fail an app lacking of any actual gameplay?

Unfortunately, no. If you have a screensaver app that doesn't let you view the screensaver without actually buying it, then it would be a fail.

Fabian Viking:

BogTurtleCarl:

I don't think showing a guide of your "Awardments" or "Badges" or whatever is against the rules, just the term "Achievement(s)."

First of all there is a copyright problem, you cant just make a print screen on some one else image and use it yourself. Second, Microsoft is very sensitive about how you use their xbox logo and such, I have a hard time to believe they would like it when you are trying to fool someone to think that you got a real achievement.

if they are using Microsofts logos then that is an instant fail. If they are making a screen that looks like a Microsoft dashboard screen and therefore is trying to confuse mislead on purpose then my guess is that Microsoft would not like that. Though its not so much a legal issue but one which I've added to the escalation over this game.

This is all one more reason to put your game in playtest first.

Just to double check: using the term "Leaderboard" is a valid fail reason, correct? (see here)

Also, what happens if the game in question is at 93%, so if I were to fail it it will go out to the marketplace in its current state? (unless they fixed that bug and I missed it)

Thanks.

See http://blogs.msdn.com/xna/archive/2008/12/12/creators-club-communiqu-11.aspx

Technically its 'leaderboards' that they asked us not to use but this does seem awefully close to me...

No that 'feature' has not changed. Its as annpyong to the mods as it is to you guys.... I suggest you enter a connect issue or 10 on it..