RiME developers had more creative "freedom" with Greybox as publisher than Sony

In a recent Gamastura interview, Raúl Rubio discussed their struggles in the early stages of RiME, an 3D platformer adventure game similar to Team Ico’s titles. With the news surrounding about Sony dropping as their publisher for the game, and the issues Tequila Works had with the publisher, Raúl explained further in this interview about their decision of going through with Greybox than Sony.

[AspiringProGenji]

Oh dear...
That is something you rarely hear from Sony as a publisher. At least they were cool enough to give the IP back and let Tequila keep doing their thing

[Fishy Fingers]

They bought the rights back.

[Gazondaily]

Well there it is! He just said it expressly. It was about developer freedom in the end (which was already abundantly clear imo). It just goes to show, not all Sony-indie relationships are that rosy. Some devs have said the same to me too (Inside My Radio dev is one).

[naruga]

they didnt bought them back...Sony agreed to give them back...its a bit different....if was them i would be insulted if Sony (or any big publisher ) didnt cared about the game i was preparing and so easily would give back the rights.......this means the game was not proved worthy by their quality teams .... and this proved true at the end ...it s far too simplisitc , copying outragiously alot of elements from other games

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

lol Septic didn't read the source. Got excited for no reason.

http://www.gamasutra.com/vi...

[Gazondaily]

@Outside_ofthe_Box

"lol Septic didn't read the source. Got excited for no reason."

Oh really? Lets walk through it shall we?

"In terms of freedom, for example, I can tell you that Greybox didn’t get involved in any creative decision with Rime.” Raúl told Gamasutra. “In general, they have been supporting us in everything and, again, I think that Greybox helped us get back our confidence."

So Greybox didn't get involved in any creative decision implying that Sony did. However, check that last sentence. Greybox helped them get their confidence back. Back from whom you reckon?

People cried about fake footage, development troubles- pegged squarely on Rime. And then it came out. And it did pretty well in reviews. Its okay to admit that Sony might not have awarded them the developer freedom the devs required. I don't see why people are so hesitant but instead will subscribe to the even crazier notion of deception on the part of the developers....developers who delivered what they said they would might I add.

You don't need to think outside the box on that one mate.

Oh and just to add some houmous to the falafel:

"I was not surprised because with Deadlight we did the same. It was an Xbox exclusive, but then Xbox allowed us to release it on Steam and PC."

Read the source you linked yourself. If you have any ability to analyse let alone do so critically, the truth is clear

[solideagle]

I think they wanted to go multiplatform thats it and Sony couldn't allow it. Nothing to do with creative freedom

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

@Septic

Answer me this, Why did they buy the rights back from Sony?

No where does it state that Sony's lack of freedom is why they left. Did Greybox provide MORE freedom from Sony? Yes they did, that's not what I'm arguing. I'm arguing about the reason why they LEFT and according to Tequila THEMSELVES it's because:

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ We bought back the indie rights for Rime and the explanation is very simple. With Sony, we were first party, a PlayStation exclusive. But as we grew up as an indie developer, we realized that we wanted Rime to reach as many players as possible. That meant going multi-platform. I was not surprised because with Deadlight we did the same. It was an Xbox exclusive, but then Xbox allowed us to release it on Steam and PC. So we wanted something similar. But that was not possible inside the framework of Sony. I mean, that's how it works. ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

That's their explanation for why they LEFT Sony. The freedom of Greybox is what they discovered AFTER having worked with them and they now want to continue working with them.

* * * "However, check that last sentence. Greybox helped them get their confidence back. Back from whom you reckon?" * * *

Again read. Read the entire piece. It is an interesting read. Their confidence was shot because of expectations of the game, Tequila "shat their pants" because of it:

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ The second part was that people would compare the title to Wind Waker and Shadow of the Colossus, and ICO, so, well, excuse my French, but we shit our pants. This is a very small indie title made by 18 people. So when you're compared to multi-million, blockbuster masterpieces, you start to reconsider what you did wrong in terms of expectations, right?"

So we kept working and we said, "Okay, don't worry. Next year, in 2014, people will see the game. People will play the game, and they will understand that this is not Wind Waker. It's something different. It's just Rime."

For other indie titles out there, in order to match expectations, in order to not get crazy and collapse under all of those love/hate feelings that you are going to find on the internet, don't try to hide behind trailers. People need to play the game. It's that simple. ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

* * * "Read the source you linked yourself. If you have any ability to analyse let alone do so critically, the truth is clear" * * *

Also I've never put the blame on the developers ever. Please don't givie me your condescending bullcrap. Admit that you got excited and jumped the gun. The truth is definitely clear on where your agenda aligns.

[its_JEFF]

This kind of thing happens. You don't like everyone you meet, do you? It would be great If every relationship was rosy, but that's not how the real world works. That's real life, shit gets canceled, delayed, reworked... for reasons. A pub is putting up the money, if they don't like what they see don't they kinda have a right to speak up? As a creative, you need someone to keep you in check... trust me!

If this is a surprise to you... then you need to get out in the real world more often.

[Gazondaily]

@Outside

And why are you scoffing at the point made by the dev for his reason for the split?? Sony clearly demanded that it be exclusive or they part ways:

***because with Deadlight we did the same. It was an Xbox exclusive, but then Xbox allowed us to release it on Steam and PC. So we wanted something similar. But that was not possible inside the framework of Sony.***

"Also I've never put the blame on the developers ever."

I never said you did? But others did. They sided with a big publisher, ridiculed the devs, accused them for showing fake footage...exonerated Sony for it all. So yes, it's a very interesting interview.

And that's my point. That's why I'm here.

"Please don't givie me your condescending bullcrap."

How are you gonna open your trap when your opening in this discussion was:

"lol Septic didn't read the source. Got excited for no reason. "

"The truth is definitely clear on where your agenda aligns."

Likewise.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

* * * "And why are you scoffing at the point made by the dev for his reason for the split?? Sony clearly demanded that it be exclusive or they part ways" * * *

How am I scoffing at that point? That's what I'm saying is exactly why they left Sony. You're the one saying it's because of creative freedom. If Sony owns the IP/rights, they want the game to be exclusive. This is nothing new right? Unless you're gonna say things aren't rosy with Insomniac because Sony doesn't want them to release their games on Steam/PC or From Software or Thatgamecompany?

* * * "I never said you did? But others did. They sided with a big publisher, ridiculed the devs, accused them for showing fake footage...exonerated Sony for it all. So yes, it's a very interesting interview.

And that's my point. That's why I'm here." * * *

What does what other said have to with me? Why reply to me with that? Maybe you should have put that in your initial post if that's why you're here? You're initial comment to me seemed like you jumped here cause you were happy that the relationship Tequila had with Sony wasn't good, as it appeared to be with the quote taken out of context.

"How are you gonna open your trap when your opening in this discussion was"

Did you read the source initially? If not then what I said was correct. You didn't read it and got excited based off what this article cherry picked. Did I question you're ability to read or analyze text?

* * * "Likewise" * * *

Certainly not. You're the one that is trying to push the 'Sony hindered their development so that's why they left' agenda narrative. I'm just telling you what Tequila said THEMSELVES not what I think they said. The whole interview is basically about how they tried to manage what they wanted to do vs what people on the internet were expecting the game to be and what they learned from it.

[_-EDMIX-_]

Will the rights had the first be available to be sold back in the first place.

[segamaniaco]

Sony wont fund your entire game for you to release it on xbox
Nintendo does the same since ever
Nintendo put their trojan characters in third party game, so they arent allowed to release on another platform
Like starfox adventure and metal gear twin snakes

[darthv72]

Can we all agree that on both Sony and MS side there are going to be those developers who don't see eye to eye with the big publisher and will say that they went with (insert other publisher here) as a means to express more creative freedom?

Is it really that hard to accept that neither company is a saint when it comes to such things???? some devs are fine with publishers as big as these and others... not so much. Bottom line is the game gets finished and comes out instead of being stuck in limbo for who knows how long.

Sony and MS do things that benefit themselves and that means letting deals go that they dont feel are worth continuing to invest in. It sucks when game take the hit but at very least this game was still released.

[freshslicepizza]

It's no secret Sony wants to own IP rights and lock games away from other platforms. Sadly this also creates a fanbase who seems to thrive on this philosophy that it's a good thing. A prime example is the new game Nex Machina, first response in that review topic is Sony should buy the studio. Why, so I have to play on a console and not have the freedom of a PC with no online fees and a game library I can carry over?

[Gazondaily]

"That's what I'm saying is exactly why they left Sony. You're the one saying it's because of creative freedom."

What do you mean creative freedom means? What do you think having more freedom with another developer implies?

"What does what other said have to with me? Why reply to me with that?"

Because you brought up the point about people doubting the devs.

"Did you read the source initially? "

Yes I did.

" You're the one that is trying to push the 'Sony hindered their development so that's why they left' agenda narrative."

And you're the one bending over backwards to defend Sony (yet again) and attacking others for making the point. You have no agenda?

"The whole interview is basically about how they tried to manage what they wanted to do vs what people on the internet were expecting the game to be and what they learned from it."

Yeah and they clearly managed to do what they wanted far better than they did in a relationship that eventually broke down because Sony restricted them. Its still a restriction that Sony imposed. You cant just say "oh its just exclusivity". And there's a point to be made about greater freedom these devs enjoyed with their new publishers. Its all about developer freedom. They quite obviously didn't get that from Sony. That is what I stated right at the start.

@moldy

"It's no secret Sony wants to own IP rights and lock games away from other platforms. Sadly this also creates a fanbase who seems to thrive on this philosophy that it's a good thing."

Absolutely. Take a look at what the dev said about the mixed reaction when they went third party.

[its_JEFF]

@moldy it's not secret that you believe that Sony is the root of all evil in the gaming industry... as if this isn't a common practice in every industry! As if money hats aren't a common practice in this industry! As if keeping a game away from one audience to lure them to another isn't a common practice! Go ahead, tell me this isn't true. Geez... dramatic much? You guys are ridiculous, both of you. It's just video games, get over yourselves, get over this "Us vs Them" mentality, get over this console war... it ain't that serious boys.

I have a PS4, I have a Switch... I trust each company as far as I can throw them. I have no delusions about what they are.. companies for profit. They'll say and do everything, they legally can, to make that money.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

@Septic

"What do you mean creative freedom means? What do you think having more freedom with another developer implies?"

You never answered my question... but I'll answer yours... creative freedom is the ability to create whatever you what with little to no interference from an outside party.

"Because you brought up the point about people doubting the devs"

Where did I bring that up? You brought it up first not me. All I said was you got excited about the news. Then you proceed to talk about people putting the blame on the developer.

"And you're the one bending over backwards to defend Sony (yet again) and attacking others for making the point. You have no agenda?"

How am I bending over backwards to defend Sony? I'm correcting you. All the devs said about Sony was that they wouldn't let them release the game on more platforms. Sony at the time owned the rights to game. We all know that when Sony owns the rights to a game they want it to remain exclusive. So Tequila bought the rights back and looked for a third party publisher instead. That's when they found Greybox. You cannot tell me that anything I said in this paragraph is false because that's exactly what the devs said THEMSELVES.

"Yes I did."

I personally think you're lying here, but obviously have no proof and have to take you at your word. If you truly did read the original source before commenting then I apologize.

"Yeah and they clearly managed to do what they wanted far better than they did in a relationship that eventually broke down because Sony restricted them. Its still a restriction that Sony imposed. You cant just say "oh its just exclusivity". And there's a point to be made about greater freedom these devs enjoyed with their new publishers. Its all about developer freedom. They quite obviously didn't get that from Sony. That is what I stated right at the start."

They never mention that the relationship broke down because of Sony's restrictions though. Give me a direct quote where they say that... You can't because they don't ever mention Sony aside from them not allowing Tequila to release on more platforms. They never mention going through developmental troubles or whatever. They claim the reason why they went quiet for a time was to reduce expectations:

♦ ♦ ♦We were very naive because we thought that would be 2015. As you know, that [turned out to be] January 2017. So we were a little bit late, and again, now I can tell you that that silence on the radio may have hurt fans, but it was what needed to be done to finish the game -- lowering expectations, and being super honest with people. When we released [the Rime demo] this year, it was like, "Look. The game is going to be released in May. It's playable this month. And yes, we're alive. This game has not been cancelled." ♦ ♦ ♦

I'm giving you what they said. You're giving me what you think happened. That's pushing an agenda. You're just upset because the truth doesn't put Sony in as much negative light as you would like it to be. Admit that you were quick to be happy that your assumptions were right and ended up being wrong. Deal with it and move on.

Greybox not questioning or making suggestions to Tequila during development is great. I'm not taking away from that all. That doesn't automatically mean that Sony was very restrictive though. Look at the God of War article. Sony suggested that they reduce the scope of the game, that would count as being involved in a creative decision, but that doesn't mean that Sony was restricting Santa Monica or hindering them.

[EatCrow]

Tequila had to buy back the rights.

[AspiringProGenji]

Yeah! Sony could have said no still.

[TruM0607]

#4theInvestors

[_-EDMIX-_]

But in order for something to even be bought back it has to even be available for sale in the first place they technically could have got another team to work on that game....

I understand tequila bought the rights to the game back but you have to take into consideration that Sony never needed to even sell them that property back.

It's very clear that they're a very small team and Sony very likely gave them a respectable price to get their property back because otherwise Sony could have easily got another one of their teams to continue this game.

[aconnellan]

@aspiringpro

Hahaha holy shit - are you praising Sony for 'letting' an indie dev team buy the rights for their own IP off them?

"Hey guys just remember, Sony could have been dicks and not let these indie devs take the rights back, but instead they valiantly chose to let them pay a large some of money in exchange. What a standup publisher"

I can't believe you're defending them by saying "yeah but they could have done an even worse thing and chose not to"

[badz149]

@aconnellan

"are you praising Sony for 'letting' an indie dev team buy the rights for their own IP off them?"

you do know what that means, right? it means that Sony had bought it from them in the first place and provided them with money to continue the project. you don't actually think that they came to Sony and just say "Sony, we have this cool game we want to make. so take it for free and we won't take your money". the fact that they changed their mind after that is totally not Sony's fault, it was theirs! it's a business and Sony already paid them for it. so Sony was actually the good guy here letting them buy the IP back eventhough they changed their mind. Sony could have kept it because they already own it like so many other IPs they already do and let other studios making it for them like how they have let 3rd parties making Resistance, Dexter and Sly before but no...they chose to let it go and let them do what they want with it BUT not before getting back the money they paid for it. like I said, it's business, not charity! so how is Sony the bad guy here?

it's the same with MS buying Gears IP from Epic. it's business. if Sony is THAT evil, how come they have the most diverse lineups? if they are THAT restrictive about creative freedom, how come they have let Naughty Dogs, Guerilla Games, Sucker Punch, Sony Bend and Sony Japan make different games they want not just the same IPs they are known for? why do they even let Polyphony take this much time to release a game?

but whatever...Sony is true evil, right? /s

[Deep-throat]

How about What Remains of Edith Finch?

[MegamanXXX]

Don't know the whole story about what happened but I will say it was a great game.

[AspiringProGenji]

Only one single fk remains, yours!

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

The main reason why they left was to get to as many players as possible, which obviously wasn't possible with Sony. The freedom Tequila is talking about is something they discovered after having worked with Greybox and now want to continue working with in future.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ We bought back the indie rights for Rime and the explanation is very simple. With Sony, we were first party, a PlayStation exclusive. But as we grew up as an indie developer, we realized that we wanted Rime to reach as many players as possible. That meant going multi-platform. I was not surprised because with Deadlight we did the same. It was an Xbox exclusive, but then Xbox allowed us to release it on Steam and PC. So we wanted something similar. But that was not possible inside the framework of Sony. I mean, that's how it works.

So we decided to go third party. When we bought back the indie rights, we were surprised by the mixed reaction. We thought that it was good news, but some people, again -- now we can see it. But remember, at the time we were in a cave. So some people saw it as a sign that we got dumped, or maybe the game wasn't very good, or there was no game.

But regarding Greybox, that means that this new publisher, they saw an opportunity and we arranged a meeting together. The meeting was pretty fast. Three minutes into the meeting, the boss of Greybox said, "Look. Let me play the game." And we let him play the game, it was on PlayStation 4. He played for 30 minutes or so and he said, "Okay, yeah. Cool. We'll sign." It was that simple.

In the process, every publisher is different. In terms of freedom, for example, I can tell you that Greybox didn't get involved in any creative decision with Rime. For example, the narrative for Rime is very deep. There are many layers. They were super supportive. In general, they have been supporting us in everything and, again, I think that Greybox helped us get back our confidence.

As an indie developer you should try to find your right match [in a publisher]. So again, when you are starting in games and you feel insecure, the biggest, most powerful partner is not really the solution. You need to find the right match for you. Maybe you expect the biggest publisher in the world is going to be your better half, but maybe your game is not the kind of title that is going to be very mainstream. For Rime, we were happy to find that Greybox was the right partner. And we expect that they will be the right partner in the future. ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

http://www.gamasutra.com/vi...

[TheUndertaker85]

Except for each time you quote this it also contains context about their experience with Microsoft as well who didn't stop them from releasing on more than a Microsoft platform.

"I was not surprised because with Deadlight we did the same. It was an Xbox exclusive, but then Xbox allowed us to release it on Steam and PC. So we wanted something similar. But that was not possible inside the framework of Sony. I mean, that's how it works."

So not only are they speaking about their treatment from Greybox but also Microsoft and Sony. Further it shows that two publishers have been willing to give them wiggle room while one didn't.

Even further they state Greybox is the right publisher for Rime insinuating that Sony was not.

They even state, as your quote says, that they expected Sony would be their "better half" which clearly wasn't the case.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

"Except for each time you quote this it also contains context about their experience with Microsoft as well who didn't stop them from releasing on more than a Microsoft platform."

What does this have to do with creative freedom though? Sony owned the IP/rights. We all know that Sony doesn't allow IPs that they own to go mulitplatform. Which is what I stated before the quote : 'The main reason why they left was to get to as many players as possible, which obviously wasn't possible with Sony.'

* * * "Even further they state Greybox is the right publisher for Rime insinuating that Sony was not.

They even state, as your quote says, that they expected Sony would be their "better half" which clearly wasn't the case." * * *

Greybox giving Tequila more freedom is something that I acknowledge as well so I don't see your point. My point is the reason why they left was because they wanted to reach as many players as possible. The 100% freedom they received from Greybox is what they discovered after working with them.

Also they was speaking in general when talking about 'the biggest publisher in the world.' " "Maybe you expect the biggest publisher in the world is going to be your better half, but maybe your game is not the kind of title that is going to be very mainstream"

You mean to tell me that Sony expected Rime to be a "mainstream" title? No, he saying that no publisher is a universal perfect fit for every developer and that all indie deves should look for the right match instead of assuming that the big publishers will be your best bet.

[bluefox755]

I think there might be some bad blood there, usually you hear the opposite. Sony is known for giving devs creative freedom.

[lelo2play]

Sony fanboys aren't going to like hearing this...

[FullmetalRoyale]

That's pretty obvious when part of being a fanboy of anything means you are basically a caricature.

[MorpheusX]

@FullmetalRoyale

Agree, be it not for Fanboy fandom, Microsoft's Xbox platform would have sunk like a rock long time ago, its these nut job Xbot addicts that are drinking Phil's koolaid, smh all the lies & spin MS does over & over again, its amazing they still have support from game consumers.

[thekhurg]

Why?

[1Victor]

Microsoft fanboys are going to make a big deal out of this

[81BX]

All fanboys are lame

[Dark_Knightmare2]

You're right and Xbox fanboys are going to love hearing this. Fanboys are ridiculous and annoying across all platforms and I wish they would just disappear

[TankCrossing]

fanboys won't see this, or at least not in the same terms as the rest of us perceive reality. What they actually see and hear is one of the greatest mysteries of our time.

[ziggurcat]

@lelo - well, it's a good thing the "freedom" referenced in this article was just related to owning the IP, then...

[-Foxtrot]

1 out of how many...

I just feel they are a little bitter being dropped by Sony to be honest

[EatCrow]

They weren't dropped. Rights were bought back.

[-Foxtrot]

Oh please...they were dropped by Sony and they just happened to buy the rights back. Most likely with it being something they weren't seeing anything from they decided to sell the rights to them.

[AspiringProGenji]

Rights were bought back after they dropped them. Obviously the better choice is still get money by selling the IP rather leave to root. If it's as simple as you think, why can't Platinum get their Scalebound IP back?

[Dark_Knightmare2]

Yeah because Sony was just like ok yeah have the game back lol please when it all went down it was said by insiders to be because tequila lied and showed a game that wasn't even close to being playable or what they said it was so Sony terminated the partnership and sold them the rights back

[EatCrow]

@AspiringProGenji

Well maybe because its not for sale.

[_-EDMIX-_]

In order for them to actually buy something doesn't it actually have to be even available for sale in the first place?

I mean you've actually said this over a series of months but you've never properly explained how this team is buying something by force? Sony first has to be willing to sell that property.

Buddy you need to get over that Sony dropped this company they were going around faking footage of their game and Sony has no reason to be funding a Project based on lies and fraud.

I mean Sony very well could have just kept the IP and put another team on the game, Sony selling the game to a small team likely means they gave them a reasonable price.

I mean I understand you're trying to purposely cleverly word it in a way as if they chose to leave on their own volition, but how could something be bought back if it's not available for sale?

If they are choosing to leave Sony high and dry why would Sony get rid of their own leverage by selling back the property?

If this team decided to get up and leave for whatever purpose and void their contract with Sony it would simply likely mean Sony would just get another team to work on the property since they own the IP. ..

Buddy regardless of how you're trying to look at this Sony first has to be willing to sell the property in order for it to be bought.

That's like saying I could buy your car without your consent by force 😂😂😂

The way I look at it is Sony sold back the rights because it's clear they're showing some sort of pity or Mercy on this company trust me not every developer would be so willing to sell back someone's IP after the fraudery that this team did.

"Well maybe because its not for sale."

🤔🤔🤔 So you understand how that would work regarding Scalebound, yet you're puzzled with this? Sony made it available for sale clearly to help this team they never needed to sell back that property , did Microsoft sell back scalebound?

[Krysis]

Why does it have to be that way? Why can't they be telling the truth? I mean if you have proof by all means share it.

[-Foxtrot]

I didn't say they were lying, I just said I FELT they were a little bitter.

I mean when you have news about a topic like freedom/creative control with Sony and look back through the years to compare it with similar stories you hardly find anything...it's not 100% a lie, nor can we prove it either way but considering what we have right now as general users reading this I'm just trying to compare it with Sony's history and honestly it doesn't sound like them considering how many studios they've gladly given creative control to. Look how long Last Guardian was in development, look at the risk GG took with Horizon when they could have been made to milk something familiar with Killzone, NaughtyDog being allowed to move on after Uncharted, the number of Indie games that's not really had this problem. Not many red flags to be honest

[gangsta_red]

@Foxtrot

To be fair all those studios you mentioned are first party, of course they would be given time or help to complete a game.

For a third outside developer not so much.

We're they bitter? They probably felt some but they have to realise they're in a business where these type of things happen all the time and so far they have maintained a professional demenor unlike other developers who take to Twitter and start bashing a company off top. (Johnathan Blow)

I don't see any bitterness in their statements personally just a long hard tale that ended on a good note.

[AspiringProGenji]

Sony is still not perfect publishers, but this is not a common issue for them. Disagreement or the unexpected may still happen

Still, most of the times Sony gives devs the freedom they ask. This is not just 1st party devs, but also second and third

Now let's take WilD for Example, which was showed in the same show as RiME. Has Michael Ancer said anything bad about Sony? Has the game been cancelled? No! He just confirmed we will know more about the game later this year

What about Kojina saying they couldn't find better patterns?

What about Insomniac being back at making exclusives for Sony after failed ventures with EA and Microsoft?

You have never heard FromSoftware say anything either. And yet they still got one more exclusive for Sony besides Bloodborne.

So Tequila saying this changes nothing about Sony's reputation with giving developers freedom. I would guess Sony didn't give them more time than given and that is why they parted ways. Considering the game looks the same as it eas first showed, CREATIVE freedom was not the issue. It is not like Sony forced them to imitate uncharted

[XabiDaChosenOne]

What evidence do you have that they are telling the truth? Why are you choosing to believe them?

[gangsta_red]

@XabiDaChosenOne

"What evidence do you have that they are telling the truth? Why are you choosing to believe them?"

Where's the evidence that they're lying? The game came out and it's exactly what was shown those years ago with more polish like they promised.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

They're not bitter. They actually didn't say anything bad about Sony at all. Just Greybox gave them the most freedom out of all the publishers they worked with.

The main reason why they left was because they wanted to reach as many players as possible:

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ We bought back the indie rights for Rime and the explanation is very simple. With Sony, we were first party, a PlayStation exclusive. But as we grew up as an indie developer, we realized that we wanted Rime to reach as many players as possible. That meant going multi-platform. I was not surprised because with Deadlight we did the same. It was an Xbox exclusive, but then Xbox allowed us to release it on Steam and PC. So we wanted something similar. But that was not possible inside the framework of Sony. I mean, that's how it works.

So we decided to go third party. When we bought back the indie rights, we were surprised by the mixed reaction. We thought that it was good news, but some people, again -- now we can see it. But remember, at the time we were in a cave. So some people saw it as a sign that we got dumped, or maybe the game wasn't very good, or there was no game. ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

http://www.gamasutra.com/vi...

Ya'll need to read before you comment else you look silly.

[Bigpappy]

Attacking the victim. The fanboy is strong with this one. How sweet.

[OhReginald]

Somehow I do not believe them. Now if it was Microsoft okay.....but Sony?...Yea I really don't think so. I sense a lot of saltiness from the RiME devs......

[goldwyncq]

Spoken like a true Sony fanboy

[Sunny_D]

Well, when you consider the Lead game developer of Guerilla Games says Sony allows them to make anything they want, it does make you question who is really at fault.

http://n4g.com/news/2032966...

Same reason why Marvel went to Sony to make a Spider-Man game.

Same reason why Team Ico was able to release their game after a lenghty development time with The Last Guardian.

Now obviously, there are still limits. The games still have to be profitable for you to stay a studio in the long run but that's for any company really.

[Fishy Fingers]

Clearly lying and salty. My development history of zero games means I know what I'm talking about and simply cannot believe Sony aren't 100% the best publisher/option 100% of the time.

.... read the source interview. It gives a rather more fleshed out explanation and you'll see he is neither salty nor had any problems with Sonys contact/requests. He only has good things to say about Sony, MS (theit last game was a similar situation, XB Exclusive that changed) and Greybox.

I question why you spend your time on a gaming news website only to choose to make up your own.

[aconnellan]

I legitimately can't believe you just said that

[DaGreatOne]

No their almost perfect streak is ruined. I would think most sane individuals don't see Sony as some sort of Saint that can do no wrong.

[gangsta_red]

Glad these guys were able to get the game back and released.

So far the people I know that have played it, love it so good for these guys.

[Gazondaily]

Yeah I've heard great things. Will try it out on Switch methinks

[isarai]

Sony is known for being very lenient when comes to devs and their creative process... As a AAA publisher compared to other AAA publishers. Smaller publishers like greybox can afford to take bigger risks I.E. give more freedom when it comes to devs and their creative process because they don't have investers, shareholders, and partnerships to worry about. It's been no secret Sony still pushes for quality and steers direction a bit, just not as much as other AAA publishers

[SinisterKieran]

i kinda doubt it tbh, my guess they just wanted more money and more platforms.

[joab777]

Of course they did! But I think Sojy is doing alright!

[medman]

I find this difficult to comprehend.......

[Number_9]

Surrounding yourself with echo chambers will do that.

[Grown Folks Talk]

I'm just glad it was made. I enjoyed it. Finished it this past weekend. Kind of wish it was longer tbh.

[jznrpg]

Well they were copying a Sony game and paying for it. It took years longer than it was suppose to as well, in the end Sony did the right thing and let them purchase it back, they didn't have to. MS should let Platinum buy Scalebound and take the MP out of it

[MellauxGMNG]

Sony can do no wrong on this site eh? Im seeing people commenting here "Sony allowed them to buy it back" "Sony could have said no". Jesus christ sony fanboys are crazy, nitpicking for anything to try and make them look like the good guy.

[Brohan]

Atleast they don't have to be stickly stuck on one device and have more freedom, good for them even though Sony can be a dick at times.

[Platformgamer]

You know what? After the frauds they do against sony (and their country, funding-wise), i hope to never see another game from them ever again