http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/770/770176p1.html
No suprises here, as it's been speculated for awhile now.
No suprises here, as it's been speculated for awhile now.
XBLA Size Limit Tripled
- Thread starter Greetard
- Start date
A
Apossum
Guest
They should just do away with the limit completely.
CoffeeEdge
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 15 (100%)
It was never much of a secret. Everyone knew that Castlevania SOTN would need at least an exception, and probably cause a universal limit increase.
The thing is, I thought that Konami said that they need 250 megs for SOTN...perhaps it's still getting an exception?
The thing is, I thought that Konami said that they need 250 megs for SOTN...perhaps it's still getting an exception?
[quote name='Zoglog']Why the hell do they give a shit about size when they're already serving up demos that are up to almost 2 GB[/QUOTE]
Because if XBLA games were 2GBs you could only have 6 arcade games on your HDD. Lets say you bought the games for $5 each, they only sold $30 worth of games. At 50MBs, you could have 200+ arcade games on your HDD (200 X $5 = $1000).
Demos are free and most people get rid of them, once they decide if they are buying the game or not.
Because if XBLA games were 2GBs you could only have 6 arcade games on your HDD. Lets say you bought the games for $5 each, they only sold $30 worth of games. At 50MBs, you could have 200+ arcade games on your HDD (200 X $5 = $1000).
Demos are free and most people get rid of them, once they decide if they are buying the game or not.
[quote name='Zoglog']Why the hell do they give a shit about size when they're already serving up demos that are up to almost 2 GB[/QUOTE]
The demos are marketing for games on DVD. An actual game that size would better suited to retail sales than online. At least until the majority of subscribers have broadband rates measured in tens of megabits throughput.
Broadband performance is a variable beyond Microsoft's direct control that inevitably defines what they can do in practical online sales. People will wait a very long time for a free item to download. When there is real money involved immediate gratification becomes very important. For instance, there is a certain portion of the market that will never subscribe to a service like Netflix nor does much online buying of goods to be delivered via the mail. They only want what they can have immediately. That is only a subset of the market but the desire exist in nearly everyone to a lesser or greater level.
There is also the desire to maintain a level of separation between the class of product found on XBLA and that on DVDs sold at retail. A company producing a good but small game would once have had no choice but to go to the expense of retail disc production. XBLA is a big advantage for those kinds of games and will become more so as larger sizes become practical. A decade from now it will be DVD-sized packages purchased via download while retail is reserved for media holding 100GB+ capacities.
The demos are marketing for games on DVD. An actual game that size would better suited to retail sales than online. At least until the majority of subscribers have broadband rates measured in tens of megabits throughput.
Broadband performance is a variable beyond Microsoft's direct control that inevitably defines what they can do in practical online sales. People will wait a very long time for a free item to download. When there is real money involved immediate gratification becomes very important. For instance, there is a certain portion of the market that will never subscribe to a service like Netflix nor does much online buying of goods to be delivered via the mail. They only want what they can have immediately. That is only a subset of the market but the desire exist in nearly everyone to a lesser or greater level.
There is also the desire to maintain a level of separation between the class of product found on XBLA and that on DVDs sold at retail. A company producing a good but small game would once have had no choice but to go to the expense of retail disc production. XBLA is a big advantage for those kinds of games and will become more so as larger sizes become practical. A decade from now it will be DVD-sized packages purchased via download while retail is reserved for media holding 100GB+ capacities.
thrustbucket
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 7 (100%)
[quote name='epobirs']A company producing a good but small game would once have had no choice but to go to the expense of retail disc production. XBLA is a big advantage for those kinds of games and will become more so as larger sizes become practical. [/QUOTE]
This is an important, often forgotten, point. A large reason for the 50 meg limit was/is so very small teams (3-10 people) have a chance at developing a game and selling it with little money or overhead, and still turn a profit. This hasn't been possible for nearly 15 years.
By forcing such a small limit, you limit bells and whistles, graphics and music production from the get go. You are forced to focus most of your development on gameplay; back to the roots of video games.
If the limit is raised much more than 150 megs, then it threatens true indie development. Graphics and sound will start to get much better, closer to retail games, forcing a lot of indie developers out. The only dev houses that will compete then, are the same ones competing for retail. Then you end up with a scenario where you negate the whole reason for XBLA.
This is an important, often forgotten, point. A large reason for the 50 meg limit was/is so very small teams (3-10 people) have a chance at developing a game and selling it with little money or overhead, and still turn a profit. This hasn't been possible for nearly 15 years.
By forcing such a small limit, you limit bells and whistles, graphics and music production from the get go. You are forced to focus most of your development on gameplay; back to the roots of video games.
If the limit is raised much more than 150 megs, then it threatens true indie development. Graphics and sound will start to get much better, closer to retail games, forcing a lot of indie developers out. The only dev houses that will compete then, are the same ones competing for retail. Then you end up with a scenario where you negate the whole reason for XBLA.
[quote name='CoffeeEdge']It was never much of a secret. Everyone knew that Castlevania SOTN would need at least an exception, and probably cause a universal limit increase.
The thing is, I thought that Konami said that they need 250 megs for SOTN...perhaps it's still getting an exception?[/QUOTE]
The original was almost 90% uncompressed music streaming off the CD. Changing that to WMA or MP4 gets the game easily within the 150MB range.
The thing is, I thought that Konami said that they need 250 megs for SOTN...perhaps it's still getting an exception?[/QUOTE]
The original was almost 90% uncompressed music streaming off the CD. Changing that to WMA or MP4 gets the game easily within the 150MB range.
[quote name='thrustbucket']This is an important, often forgotten, point. A large reason for the 50 meg limit was/is so very small teams (3-10 people) have a chance at developing a game and selling it with little money or overhead, and still turn a profit. This hasn't been possible for nearly 15 years.
By forcing such a small limit, you limit bells and whistles, graphics and music production from the get go. You are forced to focus most of your development on gameplay. Back to the roots of video games.
If the limit is raised much more than 150 megs, then it threatens true indie development. The only dev houses that will compete then, are the same ones competing for retail.[/QUOTE]
The problem isn't as bad as you may think. The reason big developers can produce multi-gigabyte epics isn't just huge teams but also because the tools allow them to do so much more in a reasonable time frame. For instance, between FF7 and FF8 there was a great improvement in the modeling software but just as important was the amount of complexity that could be rendered by $1,000 worth of silicon in a single day's work.
Another good example was the difference between the movies Shrek and Shrek 2. The software hadn't changed much but the level of detail in minor characters was greatly upgraded for the second movie. This is because the updated render farm could perform at that level in the same amount of time it took for its predecessor to deliver the first movie's level of detail.
CalArts is located just a few miles south of my home, so I encounter a lot of kids taking classes there. With a modern PC equipped with a high-end graphics card (this being a relative term since we're talking well under $2,000 for the system) these kids are producing animation work over a weekend that would have taken weeks a decade earlier on a more expensive PC.
So a team of ten guys working full time on a XBLA game will have no problem consuming 150MB. If the intended design comes out well under the limit it would take a days work to produce some additional bells and whistles to enhance the game if they saw fit. The real challenge will be to manage their resources well. Where games loading from DVD might have unique art resources for every level, XBLA project will still need to be designed for reuse of art elements. Just having everything at a native 720p resolution consumes space in a simple but graphically detailed 2D game surprisingly fast.
By forcing such a small limit, you limit bells and whistles, graphics and music production from the get go. You are forced to focus most of your development on gameplay. Back to the roots of video games.
If the limit is raised much more than 150 megs, then it threatens true indie development. The only dev houses that will compete then, are the same ones competing for retail.[/QUOTE]
The problem isn't as bad as you may think. The reason big developers can produce multi-gigabyte epics isn't just huge teams but also because the tools allow them to do so much more in a reasonable time frame. For instance, between FF7 and FF8 there was a great improvement in the modeling software but just as important was the amount of complexity that could be rendered by $1,000 worth of silicon in a single day's work.
Another good example was the difference between the movies Shrek and Shrek 2. The software hadn't changed much but the level of detail in minor characters was greatly upgraded for the second movie. This is because the updated render farm could perform at that level in the same amount of time it took for its predecessor to deliver the first movie's level of detail.
CalArts is located just a few miles south of my home, so I encounter a lot of kids taking classes there. With a modern PC equipped with a high-end graphics card (this being a relative term since we're talking well under $2,000 for the system) these kids are producing animation work over a weekend that would have taken weeks a decade earlier on a more expensive PC.
So a team of ten guys working full time on a XBLA game will have no problem consuming 150MB. If the intended design comes out well under the limit it would take a days work to produce some additional bells and whistles to enhance the game if they saw fit. The real challenge will be to manage their resources well. Where games loading from DVD might have unique art resources for every level, XBLA project will still need to be designed for reuse of art elements. Just having everything at a native 720p resolution consumes space in a simple but graphically detailed 2D game surprisingly fast.
A
Apossum
Guest
[quote name='thrustbucket']
By forcing such a small limit, you limit bells and whistles, graphics and music production from the get go. You are forced to focus most of your development on gameplay; back to the roots of video games.
[/QUOTE]
Ideally, but that's not really happening. for one thing, cutting back on bells, whistles, graphics, and music production doesn't make the gameplay any better. This is evident in a lot of original XBLA games. It still comes down to design. Sure, there's a good handful of excellent original games but it's...from a quick glance at the XBLA wiki-- probably over 75% retro ports as of now. So it's literally going back to the roots of gaming. Plus, some of the launch period XBLA games are still the best on there, so I'm not getting the feeling that a lot of companies are inspired by this. Which is a shame--I'd love to see more games from Ninja Bee, the team who made Wik, and others.
Lastly, the PS3 network completely proves this point wrong-- Tekken DR is a game with amazing gameplay with more longevity than pretty much all the xbla games and it has all the current gen features taboot. you don't need to go back to the roots of gaming to have great gameplay.
With the ability to delete and redownload games, I don't see any reason why they couldn't push the limit up to 1gb or more.
By forcing such a small limit, you limit bells and whistles, graphics and music production from the get go. You are forced to focus most of your development on gameplay; back to the roots of video games.
[/QUOTE]
Ideally, but that's not really happening. for one thing, cutting back on bells, whistles, graphics, and music production doesn't make the gameplay any better. This is evident in a lot of original XBLA games. It still comes down to design. Sure, there's a good handful of excellent original games but it's...from a quick glance at the XBLA wiki-- probably over 75% retro ports as of now. So it's literally going back to the roots of gaming. Plus, some of the launch period XBLA games are still the best on there, so I'm not getting the feeling that a lot of companies are inspired by this. Which is a shame--I'd love to see more games from Ninja Bee, the team who made Wik, and others.
Lastly, the PS3 network completely proves this point wrong-- Tekken DR is a game with amazing gameplay with more longevity than pretty much all the xbla games and it has all the current gen features taboot. you don't need to go back to the roots of gaming to have great gameplay.
With the ability to delete and redownload games, I don't see any reason why they couldn't push the limit up to 1gb or more.
thrustbucket
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 7 (100%)
[quote name='Apossum']Ideally, but that's not really happening. for one thing, cutting back on bells, whistles, graphics, and music production doesn't make the gameplay any better. This is evident in a lot of original XBLA games. It still comes down to design. Sure, there's a good handful of excellent original games but it's...from a quick glance at the XBLA wiki-- probably over 75% retro ports as of now. So it's literally going back to the roots of gaming. Plus, some of the launch period XBLA games are still the best on there, so I'm not getting the feeling that a lot of companies are inspired by this. Which is a shame--I'd love to see more games from Ninja Bee, the team who made Wik, and others.
Lastly, the PS3 network completely proves this point wrong-- Tekken DR is a game with amazing gameplay with more longevity than pretty much all the xbla games and it has all the current gen features taboot. you don't need to go back to the roots of gaming to have great gameplay.
With the ability to delete and redownload games, I don't see any reason why they couldn't push the limit up to 1gb or more.[/QUOTE]
Again, I think you are missing one of my points. One of the original goals of XBLA was to have INDIE developers making games. NOT the big boys that make games like Tekken. I know for a fact, actually, that when XBLA was launched, certain large company's like Vivendi came to MS saying 'we love this model, we want to create a whole XBLA division' and MS told them no, that they were focusing more on the Indie developers for now.
I know as a consumer, there is little difference. You just want cool games to download, the end. But enticing the low budget, small crew indie developers to make games, you get a different flavor of game that you can't get on a shelf usually. That is the goal. That is what they are/were aiming for. And if they up the size limit too much, the only people that can afford to compete will be company's like Vivendi.
You make valid points about too many retro titles. But those are really just meant to be filler between indie releases, if it hasn't been that way, then that's probably why a few guys lost their jobs recently.
You use Tekken as an example. No indie company on earth could have made a game like Tekken. It is a RETAIL game experience you just happen to be able to download. That's the difference with Sony's download service and XBLA.
That being said, it's fully possible that in the future Microsoft will up the limit even more, and spread the pricing structure way out so that the big budget downloadable titles cost $20 or soo while the small indie games are still cheap. But you could argue that the big ones would overshadow the little guys, so I think Microsoft is delaying doing that as long as possible.
Imagine you make a living selling hand made pocket knives with hand carved unique designs from a little stand in an empty lot. The city tells you it's fine for you to do so. Then you find out later that they have allowed Wal Mart to build a store on that lot, but the city tells you that you can still sell your knives too. Now anyone can skip you and go into walmart and get a bigger flashier knife for cheaper, and they quickly forget about your unique designs. How would you feel?
Oh and you will have a new Ninja Bee title out within the next month or so. Bugs of War.
Lastly, the PS3 network completely proves this point wrong-- Tekken DR is a game with amazing gameplay with more longevity than pretty much all the xbla games and it has all the current gen features taboot. you don't need to go back to the roots of gaming to have great gameplay.
With the ability to delete and redownload games, I don't see any reason why they couldn't push the limit up to 1gb or more.[/QUOTE]
Again, I think you are missing one of my points. One of the original goals of XBLA was to have INDIE developers making games. NOT the big boys that make games like Tekken. I know for a fact, actually, that when XBLA was launched, certain large company's like Vivendi came to MS saying 'we love this model, we want to create a whole XBLA division' and MS told them no, that they were focusing more on the Indie developers for now.
I know as a consumer, there is little difference. You just want cool games to download, the end. But enticing the low budget, small crew indie developers to make games, you get a different flavor of game that you can't get on a shelf usually. That is the goal. That is what they are/were aiming for. And if they up the size limit too much, the only people that can afford to compete will be company's like Vivendi.
You make valid points about too many retro titles. But those are really just meant to be filler between indie releases, if it hasn't been that way, then that's probably why a few guys lost their jobs recently.
You use Tekken as an example. No indie company on earth could have made a game like Tekken. It is a RETAIL game experience you just happen to be able to download. That's the difference with Sony's download service and XBLA.
That being said, it's fully possible that in the future Microsoft will up the limit even more, and spread the pricing structure way out so that the big budget downloadable titles cost $20 or soo while the small indie games are still cheap. But you could argue that the big ones would overshadow the little guys, so I think Microsoft is delaying doing that as long as possible.
Imagine you make a living selling hand made pocket knives with hand carved unique designs from a little stand in an empty lot. The city tells you it's fine for you to do so. Then you find out later that they have allowed Wal Mart to build a store on that lot, but the city tells you that you can still sell your knives too. Now anyone can skip you and go into walmart and get a bigger flashier knife for cheaper, and they quickly forget about your unique designs. How would you feel?
Oh and you will have a new Ninja Bee title out within the next month or so. Bugs of War.
[quote name='thrustbucket']
You make valid points about too many retro titles. But those are really just meant to be filler between indie releases, if it hasn't been that way, then that's probably why a few guys lost their jobs recently.
You use Tekken as an example. No indie company on earth could have made a game like Tekken. It is a RETAIL game experience you just happen to be able to download. That's the difference with Sony's download service and XBLA.[/QUOTE]
So you mean to tell me that Symphony of the Night, Worms, Alien Hominid, Ikaruga, Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3 etc etc are just more indie releases? All of those are (or were) retail game experiences we just happened to be able to download.
Face it, XBLA is like 10% indie releases and 90% of the big boys, and that will never change. It may have started for indie developers but it's evolved far beyond them. People are wanting Worms and SOTN and TMNT, nobody is going "oh man, I can't wait until Catan hits!!!".
Hell, I'd wager the indie companies can't even compete as it is now on XBLA... given the choice, most people will always choose Alien Hominid / SOTN / Ikaruga / whatever.
You make valid points about too many retro titles. But those are really just meant to be filler between indie releases, if it hasn't been that way, then that's probably why a few guys lost their jobs recently.
You use Tekken as an example. No indie company on earth could have made a game like Tekken. It is a RETAIL game experience you just happen to be able to download. That's the difference with Sony's download service and XBLA.[/QUOTE]
So you mean to tell me that Symphony of the Night, Worms, Alien Hominid, Ikaruga, Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3 etc etc are just more indie releases? All of those are (or were) retail game experiences we just happened to be able to download.
Face it, XBLA is like 10% indie releases and 90% of the big boys, and that will never change. It may have started for indie developers but it's evolved far beyond them. People are wanting Worms and SOTN and TMNT, nobody is going "oh man, I can't wait until Catan hits!!!".
Hell, I'd wager the indie companies can't even compete as it is now on XBLA... given the choice, most people will always choose Alien Hominid / SOTN / Ikaruga / whatever.
A
Apossum
Guest
[quote name='thrustbucket']Again, I think you are missing one of my points. One of the original goals of XBLA was to have INDIE developers making games. NOT the big boys that make games like Tekken. I know for a fact, actually, that when XBLA was launched, certain large company's like Vivendi came to MS saying 'we love this model, we want to create a whole XBLA division' and MS told them no, that they were focusing more on the Indie developers for now.
[/quote]
That's great, but the majority of what's on there and the majority of what's planned for release is from major developers. Granted they are all retro ports, aside from what Roufuss mentioned. but it's a majority.
also, I wasn't implying that Tekken was from an indie company
That's not true at all...I like a lot of games outside the popular genres and support indie crews that put out GOOD games. (on a side note, "indie" is starting to signify games that takes formulas from retro games and put a small spin on it. I'm pretty non-plussed by the indie offerings on Live thus far--though the launch titles had some real gems- Hexic, Wik, Outpost Kaloki X, Mutant Storm.)
Anyway, I don't get why indie games and full featured releases have to be mutually exclusive on XBLA. They could easily throttle major releases so that indie companies outnumber the big boys. There are 6 million people on live who have varied tastes. If something full featured comes out quarterly or less, it's not going to completely oust the indie devs.
Either way, once there's a deluge of indie games on there, it won't matter who made what-- people will buy the good ones and not buy the bad ones.
back on topic again, what does filesize have to do with any of this? All it does is open up possibilities, MS can still regulate XBLA releases. I'd love to see an indie company take free reign and develop a full featured title.
You seem very sure of MS' goal with the XBLA... almost everything released last year was retro and almost everything coming up is retro. Maybe they'll change that or maybe they've found retro titles to be ultra profitable...or maybe indie devs aren't enticed enough by XBLA? I dunno, but there's a big disparity between what is happening and what you're saying. and those guys supposedly left on their own will.
umm...there are a bunch of indie games on Sony's service and...Tekken. that's all. The only difference I see is MS preventing full featured releases from ever happening. I don't think Tekken is going to kill all the sales of future games. I bought Flow with Tekken, as did many people.
also, if you're talking about the gameplay experience, yes, any indie company could make something like Tekken. Maybe it wouldn't boast the production values, but good game design is good game design. That's what I like about fighting games--they are pure gameplay, imo. Look at Small Arms--they have a pretty nice looking game that's a complete bore because they didn't design it well.
They'll delay it until the other guys start catching up. I think the big titles would overshadow the small ones if MS let them, but like I said earlier-- it doesn't have to be all one or all the other-- they can coexist if MS regulates it.
First of all, the indie games industry is very healthy online. The ones who make good games do well and get recognized, those who don't sink. they did this on their own and mainstream sales didn't encroach upon this. Look at Alien Hominid. XBLA is a smaller, secondary market, so the appeal to emotion doesn't really work. They aren't starving artists.
anyway, how would I feel? I wouldn't sit there and feel sorry for myself, that's for damn sure. I would curse wal-mart a bit, but more importantly, I'd rethink my strategy. For one thing, it wouldn't matter whether my business was usurped by Wal-Mart or if it was just a guy who made better knives. My course of action would be the same.
People who succeed don't just set up a stand and start selling their knives and expect to be successful based on the fact that they are simply selling knives (no company should succeed just because they are making indie games--the games have to be good.) You would have to consider your competition, location, and most importantly, you would need to work on features that would set you apart from others--features that your customers can't get anywhere else. So if you got pushed out by Wal-Mart, you'd need to create something better--perhaps a knife that would appeal to knife enthusiasts or something. Then you could open up your knife stand elsewhere and if your work is good enough you'll get recognition and the cash to open up a store across from that wal-mart.
basically, i wouldn't just make robotron or arkanoid clones for XBLA, I'd actually try something new.
edit: jesus christ, that's the longest post I've written! anyway, yeah- Full featured games + Indie games + MS regulation of both = Harmony.
[/quote]
That's great, but the majority of what's on there and the majority of what's planned for release is from major developers. Granted they are all retro ports, aside from what Roufuss mentioned. but it's a majority.
also, I wasn't implying that Tekken was from an indie company
That's not true at all...I like a lot of games outside the popular genres and support indie crews that put out GOOD games. (on a side note, "indie" is starting to signify games that takes formulas from retro games and put a small spin on it. I'm pretty non-plussed by the indie offerings on Live thus far--though the launch titles had some real gems- Hexic, Wik, Outpost Kaloki X, Mutant Storm.)
Anyway, I don't get why indie games and full featured releases have to be mutually exclusive on XBLA. They could easily throttle major releases so that indie companies outnumber the big boys. There are 6 million people on live who have varied tastes. If something full featured comes out quarterly or less, it's not going to completely oust the indie devs.
Either way, once there's a deluge of indie games on there, it won't matter who made what-- people will buy the good ones and not buy the bad ones.
back on topic again, what does filesize have to do with any of this? All it does is open up possibilities, MS can still regulate XBLA releases. I'd love to see an indie company take free reign and develop a full featured title.
You seem very sure of MS' goal with the XBLA... almost everything released last year was retro and almost everything coming up is retro. Maybe they'll change that or maybe they've found retro titles to be ultra profitable...or maybe indie devs aren't enticed enough by XBLA? I dunno, but there's a big disparity between what is happening and what you're saying. and those guys supposedly left on their own will.
umm...there are a bunch of indie games on Sony's service and...Tekken. that's all. The only difference I see is MS preventing full featured releases from ever happening. I don't think Tekken is going to kill all the sales of future games. I bought Flow with Tekken, as did many people.
also, if you're talking about the gameplay experience, yes, any indie company could make something like Tekken. Maybe it wouldn't boast the production values, but good game design is good game design. That's what I like about fighting games--they are pure gameplay, imo. Look at Small Arms--they have a pretty nice looking game that's a complete bore because they didn't design it well.
They'll delay it until the other guys start catching up. I think the big titles would overshadow the small ones if MS let them, but like I said earlier-- it doesn't have to be all one or all the other-- they can coexist if MS regulates it.
First of all, the indie games industry is very healthy online. The ones who make good games do well and get recognized, those who don't sink. they did this on their own and mainstream sales didn't encroach upon this. Look at Alien Hominid. XBLA is a smaller, secondary market, so the appeal to emotion doesn't really work. They aren't starving artists.
anyway, how would I feel? I wouldn't sit there and feel sorry for myself, that's for damn sure. I would curse wal-mart a bit, but more importantly, I'd rethink my strategy. For one thing, it wouldn't matter whether my business was usurped by Wal-Mart or if it was just a guy who made better knives. My course of action would be the same.
People who succeed don't just set up a stand and start selling their knives and expect to be successful based on the fact that they are simply selling knives (no company should succeed just because they are making indie games--the games have to be good.) You would have to consider your competition, location, and most importantly, you would need to work on features that would set you apart from others--features that your customers can't get anywhere else. So if you got pushed out by Wal-Mart, you'd need to create something better--perhaps a knife that would appeal to knife enthusiasts or something. Then you could open up your knife stand elsewhere and if your work is good enough you'll get recognition and the cash to open up a store across from that wal-mart.
basically, i wouldn't just make robotron or arkanoid clones for XBLA, I'd actually try something new.
edit: jesus christ, that's the longest post I've written! anyway, yeah- Full featured games + Indie games + MS regulation of both = Harmony.
I believed they tripled the limit because they're allowing anybody (who has a XNA Game Studios Purchase) to make games for live arcade and the grand prize is 10 grand. Heres the info at http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/673846/Microsoft_Offers_10k_For_Best_Game.html
bread's done