×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

FFXIII Exclusivity Under Discussion

Zonk posted about 7 years ago | from the we-have-a-problem dept.

PlayStation (Games) 120

In an interview between a French-language newspaper and Sony Computer Entertainment France president Georges Fornay, he revealed that FFXIII's exclusivity is still under discussion. Gamespot reports, and attempted to check with Square-Enix about the reality of this situation. If the high-profile RPG's exclusivity is not a lock for the PS3, it could be a crushing blow for Sony's future plans. "The development costs of games have exploded, and it has become more difficult to have exclusives, outside of our own games. But we have for launch day [in France] 30 games, including MotorStorm, Resistance: Fall of Man, and Virtua Fighter 5. Moreover, we are expecting 200 games [for the PS3] by the end of 2007...As far as Final Fantasy XIII goes, I can tell you that the exclusivity is in discussion."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

120 comments

is Final Fantasy still relevant? (2, Insightful)

stratjakt (596332) | about 7 years ago | (#18449847)

I guess X was a big hit, but I don't think "final fantasy" resonates the way it did. I don't know if the franchise still guarantees a hit.

I haven't played the latest (XII), but there's been a lot of crap games (X-2), media/merch crap (advent children, spirits within).

I'd think another player would have toppled FF off the tip of the RPG mountain by now.

I just don't see how a exclusive lock on final fantasy is as lucrative as it once was (like it was with VII).

Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (3, Insightful)

malevolentjelly (1057140) | about 7 years ago | (#18449905)

I think Final Fantasy is still very relevant. It's the watermark for which system will be the "J-Rpg System". That's a big deal to a large variety of gamers.

This news, of course, comes as no surprise. Sony doesn't have the financial or install base to finance AAA+ super-titles like Final Fantasy. They're going to want a piece of 360's fat North American/European/Aus market share. Final Fantasy has a massive following in all these regions.

Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (2, Insightful)

stratjakt (596332) | about 7 years ago | (#18449985)

Final Fantasy is like a genre unto itself, and like the FPS genre, has gotten so pigeonholed that it's marginalized a lot of its original fan base right out of playing it.

It gets to the point that they can't innovate - the hardcore fanbase that's left expects certain things (common keyboard layout in FPS's, common spells based on "elements" in an RPG).

I mean, the plot of any final fantasy game is, and has to be, exactly the same. The settings and characters change. But its still the same start in small town, meet party members, ride chocobo, get airship, collect 8 things, fight end boss.

The spells, as I mentioned, are the same. The "summons" (might have a different name), are the same.

It just gets a little less interesting each time around.

I point to the fact that I haven't played, let alone bought, FFXII yet, and I was once a big fan of the series.

Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (1)

malevolentjelly (1057140) | about 7 years ago | (#18450089)

I hope this isn't off-topic- but FFXII was a very redeeming game as far as the series goes, I recommend giving it a shot. :)

I was not too impressed with FFVIII-XI, although I hold FFIX a little dear.

Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (1)

LordVader717 (888547) | about 7 years ago | (#18458727)

But its still the same start in small town, meet party members, ride chocobo, get airship, collect 8 things, fight end boss.
So, what was the last Final Fantasy game you played? (I can't even remember collecting 8 things, that's more of a Zelda thing)

Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (1)

LordRobin (983231) | about 7 years ago | (#18461087)

I point to the fact that I haven't played, let alone bought, FFXII yet, and I was once a big fan of the series.

Yeah, that's kinda obvious -- because if you had played it, you'd realize that FFXII breaks many if not most of the "conventions" you cite.

  • The plot's different. No sappy love story -- it's a strange combination of political intrigue and sorcery.
  • The spells are indeed different. Oh, there are "summons", but they're in there to satisfy the hard-core "old-schoolers" and are pretty much useless. My wife beat the game without using them.
  • Combat is not strictly turn-based. You attack enemies as you see them. You program your characters using what is essentially a rule-based expert system, freeing you from the constant use of menus.
  • You don't have to wait for the airship to jump all over the world. You have access to "teleport crystals" right off the bat which allow you to jump back to any previously visited area.
  • You can do side quests at any time, and some send you all over the world.

In short, unlike FFVII-X, FFXII is not "run on rails". You have a lot of freedom of activity. It's almost the "Grand Theft Auto" of Final Fantasy games.

------RM

Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18450347)

"I think Final Fantasy is still very relevant. It's the watermark for which system will be the "J-Rpg System". That's a big deal to a large variety of gamers."

Not even remotely true. Dragon Quest blows the pants off of Final Fantasy in Japan. The Japanese gamers will flock to DQ9, not the next Final Fantasy.

Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (1)

Rycross (836649) | about 7 years ago | (#18450479)

Dragon Quest does blow the pants off Final Fantasy, but Final Fantasy is still extremely relevant in Japan. And Final Fantasy trumps Dragon Quest in the US.

Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (2, Informative)

7Prime (871679) | about 7 years ago | (#18450657)

I don't think "blow the pants off" is quite accurate. It does better, but Final Fantasy is still VERY popular, selling at least 80% of the DQ series. These are the #1 and #2 best selling series in Japan... being a strong #2 is not something to cry about.

Also, in worldwide sales, Final Fantasy does, here, "blow the pants off" of Dragon Quest. The 360 is also the dominant system outside Japan. Porting a series that's very popular in the US to a platform that is selling very well in the US (and Europe), just seems like a good business strategy.

Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (1)

Rycross (836649) | about 7 years ago | (#18450717)

Yeah I agree. A port would make a lot of business sense. And Square is on the record stating that they want to broaden support to keep a single player dominating, like the last two console generations. A FF port would definately meet that strategy.

Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (1)

DarkJC (810888) | about 7 years ago | (#18457143)

I know that they said they wanted to broaden support for all consoles, but if I'm remembering the statement you are, it was to prevent a single player dominating like last time.

Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (1)

miro f (944325) | about 7 years ago | (#18452577)

These are the #1 and #2 best selling series in Japan


are you sure about this? according to vgcharts [vgcharts.org] the number one series in Japan is Pokemon, and number 2 is Mario.

Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (2, Informative)

twistedsymphony (956982) | about 7 years ago | (#18457379)

maybe not the most popular of all time but look at that VG chart again and filter out portable systems and anything made before the N64/PS/Saturn generation and you'll find that DQ and FF filter right to the top. making the top 10 look like this:
  • Dragon Quest VII
  • Final Fantasy VII
  • Final Fantasy VIII
  • Dragon Quest VIII
  • Final Fantasy X
  • Final Fantasy IX
  • Gran Turismo
  • Final Fantasy XII
  • Final Fantasy X-2
  • Resident Evil 2
While portables are still video games it's pretty much a different market... in terms of games that have sold well in the past and STILL sell well enough to reach the top of the charts today DQ an FF are it. Mario on the NES might be near the top but where is the GC's Mario on that list? The tubby plumber doesn't move consoles like he used to, certainly not as well as effeminate males with large swords. Not to mention FFXII was released just a few short months ago and it's already sold half as many copies as Mario on the NES has in over 20 years... I'd say that's some drawing power.

Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18450949)

In terms of worldwide sales Final Fantasy is the bigger series. Dragon Quest VIII has sold 4.68 million copies and it's the best selling Dragon Quest game yet but every Final Fantasy game since VII (except XI) has outsold Dragon Quest VIII.

The Japanese developers seem to be losing the "Japan first, everywhere else second" mentality. How well a series does in Japan is now less important than its overall sales. To see this you need only consider Metroid Prime which is more or less irrelevent in Japan but is a flagship series for Nintendo in the US.

Anyway, Dragon Quest IX is being developed for the DS so it's not like it even affects the non-portable console war.

Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18449943)

I haven't played the latest (XII), but there's been a lot of crap games (X-2)
Nothing like a uninformed rant on slashdot, eh? FF XII ranks by game review magazines roughly as high as FF VII. You would have known that if you weren't living under a rock. The Final Fantasy games are selling more than ever and an exclusivity lock has probably never been more valuable. Using X-2 and Advent Children to say the FF series is failing is sort of silly when FF VII, IX, X, and XII were all incredible successes.

Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (1)

Kazzahdrane (882423) | about 7 years ago | (#18450013)

Thanks for being the voice of reason and fact. I certainly hope you didn't post anonymously because you feared a karma backlash from idiots though. I'll assume you just don't have a /. account :)

Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18449993)

Yes, it is still relevant. Maybe not to you, but you are far from the general public.

An official announcement of FFXIII coming to the 360 would literally triple overnight the sales of the 360 in Japan, the one region where the console is doing poorly.

Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (4, Insightful)

7Prime (871679) | about 7 years ago | (#18450249)

You'd think that... but nope. FF12 was a huge success, wild acclaim, won many "game of the year" awards, and brought a lot of innovations to the genre. If you're not into JRPGs, it's kinda hard to understand, I know, but it's just the way things are.

I like to view video game sequels as more along the lines of albums by a band or composer [rather than like movie sequels]: some groups just keep getting better, some drop off, some come back again. I even know quite a few that, in their old age, release the most original stuff of their career (King Crimson, for example, whome are nearing their 40th anniversary). The Final Fantasy team(s) really have shown that they have what it takes. I expect them to continue making benchmark-worthy games for at least another decade. For one thing, they're not really sequels, in the traditional sense, as much as a mini-genre, since they have no connecting universe, story or characters, besides a few camios. So the developers can, and do, make huge changes from game to game... sometimes more than a whole genre will do in the same period of time.

Besides Dragon Quest, no single-player RPG has ever come close to the acclaim that the Final Fantasy series has. The "Tales" series is probably the next closest of the genre, which is getting more and more publicity in the US, but even that has a long way to go.

Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (1)

mgblst (80109) | about 7 years ago | (#18456851)

release the most original stuff of their career (King Crimson, for example, whome are nearing their 40th anniversary)
 
Hard to belive that the most original stuff of their career is not the first album, because as there career gos, that must have been pretty original (by definition).

Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (1)

Sciros (986030) | about 7 years ago | (#18450267)

FFXII got stellar reviews for the most part and sold something like a million copies in one month.

It's the franchise that I think helped the Playstation dominate the N64, and has sold very well regardless of game quality (though you can find enough fans of any FF game). In terms of "the RPG mountain," there are no JRPGs out there that are strictly better (Tales of ___ia are okay, Xenosagas are basically dirt, and everything else falls in-between). Sure, Bethesda and Bioware are the kings of "Western" RPGs, but for some odd reason folks just choose to prefer JRPGs over those, individual game quality notwithstanding. That make a big difference for SONY.

Heck, I even bought a PS2 just to play FFXII because I liked what they finally did with it (disliked the previous ones :-/), but that's just me.

I'm ranty today... I also first wrote "I'm randy today..." and thankfully re-read my post before hitting submit.

FFXII (4, Informative)

phorm (591458) | about 7 years ago | (#18450639)

I would summarize it as: - Nicer battle system (more interactive, more realistic) - Lots of eyecandy - Poor transitions (from in-game to pre-rendered video, for example many boss attachs) However, it has these certain MMORPG overtones - Lots of repetitive tasks - Sidequests don't add much to the overall story value - Grind... And the plot is a bit lacking - Underdeveloped characters - Less believable characters - Pretty, but fluffy... However, the environment itself was rather nice. In the english version, the use of somewhat archaic language added somewhat to the game IMHO

Re:FFXII (1)

atomicstrawberry (955148) | about 7 years ago | (#18452819)

I tend to agree. FF12 did some things extremely well, and other things very badly. It certainly shows that they took a lot of ideas from FF11. Personally I think they changed the gameplay too radically. My main beef was the change to the initiative system - instead of a character having an initiative gauge that built up, and upon filling the character was marked as 'ready' to perform an action immediately, with different actions having a different recovery time, they switched it to idle characters having to 'charge up' an action before using it. That caused a massive disconnect for me, it took me hours of play to get my head around such a subtle yet fundamental change.

When added to the rest of the changes they'd made, you can see why FF12 seems to have polarised a lot of people. Had it not been released as Final Fantasy XII, no one would have even noticed the difference, but the Final Fantasy name for a lot of people implies certain gameplay conventions, and most of those are simply not there any more. It's a great game, but it doesn't feel like a Final Fantasy game.

On the other hand, it should be held up as an absolutely shining example of how good English localisations of games can be when your company actually puts some effort into it. The quality of the voice acting and everything really sets it apart from a lot of Japanese RPGs.

Voice acting (1)

phorm (591458) | about 7 years ago | (#18460599)

The voice acting wasn't bad... I'd definitely have to say that the "olde english" flair added something to the environment, however then I got my GF into playing FFX.

Some of the rendering is a little plasticy, but I'd have to say that while the character models are perhaps not as good as FFXII, the environment is in many cases a little better, the soundtrack is better, and the actual voice acting is definitely a step above.

I remember playing KOTOR a few years back and thinking that a final-fantasy-style game would do well in such an environment, so FFXII wasn't a big deviation for me in terms of gameplay. When you think about it, it's really just a step up from the mechanics of say, "Chrono Trigger" and "Secret of Mana"

Re:FFXII (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18459337)

....wtf? The FFXII was the exact OPPOSITE of interactive. Except for boss battles, you set up your gambits and let the computer fight against itself.

I don't think I need to tell you... (2, Interesting)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 7 years ago | (#18449891)

...that the end of Final Fantasy console exclusivity (FF titles are on Nintendo's handhelds, and there's been PC versions of some games, but in general it's all Sony) would pretty much be the end of the Playstation 3. It's already suffering in the corner. People follow both companies and games, but the latter is more important at the end of the day. If you can play the same game for $100 less and have the same experience, which console are you going to buy?

It seems to me that the two franchises that have been keeping Sony going are Gran Turismo and Final Fantasy. Turismo is their property, so they'll be able to hold that one. But if that's their only selling point, it's over. And since Sony is bringing out a $600 Blu-Ray standalone player, which is pretty much guaranteed to be a better player than than the PS3 no matter how good the PS3 is, that final non-game reason to buy a PS3 is going down the toilet if you don't also desire the gaming functionality.

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (1)

pl1ght (836951) | about 7 years ago | (#18449955)

Dont forget God of War. But yeah losing FF would be huge. Altho gleaning from what was said that FFXIII is up in the air i think is a bit premature.

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 7 years ago | (#18450057)

Altho gleaning from what was said that FFXIII is up in the air i think is a bit premature.

Well, I would assume that squeenix threatens to go multiplatform every generation in order to get a good deal. And I would assume that such an utterance was to further that end... if it weren't from a sony exec.

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (4, Insightful)

7Prime (871679) | about 7 years ago | (#18450805)

Not in the slightest. Square would have no way or reason to go multi-platform until now. FFX came out before the GameCube and Xbox even launched... what would they have gone to... back to the N64? No way, that's the one they ditched in the first place. The PS1/N64/Saturn generation was no contest, either. The N64 didn't have the media they needed, and the Saturn didn't have the robust 3D graphics processing they needed, Square had no choice. FF4, in its infancy, was designed with a patched NES engine. The SNES gave Square everything they needed in hardware. I guess they could have gone Sega... but their relationship with Nintendo was at their absolute peak.

So no, there has never even been a choice, due to technical or marketing reasons, up until now. There would, therefor, be no reason for Square to "threaten" anyone to go multi, since noone would believe them.

I can just hear the interchanges:

Square: "Sony, give us a good deal on PS2 exclusivity"
Sony: "or what? You're gonna go back to the N64?"
Square: "...."

Square-Enix: "Sony, give us a good deal on PS3 exclusivity"
Sony: "or what? You're going to move over to the 360"
Square-Enix: "That's about right"
Sony: "....."

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 7 years ago | (#18451289)

The N64 didn't have the media they needed, and the Saturn didn't have the robust 3D graphics processing they needed

The only area in which the Saturn was deficient (besides installed base, which was a very important lack) was that the system had no 3d hardware support for transparency. It has almost twice the CPU power (2xSH-2 vs 1xR3k at similar clock rates) and a couple of publishers did transparency in software, as you can overlay 2d graphics on top of the 3d as usual. Since neither FFVII nor FFVIII use much in the way of transparency, this solution would have been feasible for Square's use.

Before Sony helped murder Dreamcast, they could have threatened to go there in that generation, as well. And when the Xbox came out, they could have threatened to jump in that direction.

The release of some games (like FFVII) for the PC was possibly also an exit strategy, hedging bets.

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (1)

7Prime (871679) | about 7 years ago | (#18452519)

Since neither FFVII nor FFVIII use much in the way of transparency, this solution would have been feasible for Square's use.
This is incorrect. In fact, FFVII was one of the first times I noted the use of 3D, polygonal transparancy on a console. Think about all the magic effects, like the starburst-light sources that emmenate out from characters before they cast spells. Those are all fairly advanced forms of 3D transparancy, using animated textures that had featered alpha channels. That's just one example; in fact, pretty much all the spell animations had heavy use of 3D transparancy. Some were 2D sprites, but many were fully polygonal. The Saturn would have not been able to handle these... and seeing that they were the 3D representation of the same kinds of sprite effects that had been used throughout the series, Square would have had no options on the Saturn.

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 7 years ago | (#18457949)

pretty much all the spell animations had heavy use of 3D transparancy. Some were 2D sprites, but many were fully polygonal. The Saturn would have not been able to handle these...

Care to back up that assertion?

"The hardware also lacked light sourcing and hardware video decompression support. Nevertheless, when properly utilized, the dual processors in the Saturn could produce impressive results such as the 1997 ports of Quake and Duke Nukem 3D by Lobotomy Software, and later games like Burning Rangers were able to achieve true transparency effects on hardware that used simple polygon stipples as a replacement for transparency effects in the past." ("Sega Saturn." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 23 Mar 2007, 08:39 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 23 Mar 2007 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sega_Sa turn&oldid=117243370 [wikipedia.org]>.)

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (1)

acgrissom (1002693) | about 7 years ago | (#18459203)

And since we're on the subject of RPG's, let's not forget the incredible graphics in Sega's Panzer Dragoon Saga on the Saturn.

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (2, Interesting)

_xeno_ (155264) | about 7 years ago | (#18452315)

That, and Sony kinda sorta killed support for FFXI on current PS2 models. I'm not sure Square Enix ever really forgave them for that.

Plus FFXI is already cross-platform for the PS2 (with hard drive), Xbox 360 (with hard drive), and PC (with Windows). So they've had some experience going cross platform before. (Although given how crappy the FFXI port on the PC remains, I hope they've learned some lessons...)

In any case, I think there's a very real chance that FFXIII could be released for the Xbox 360. It wouldn't be the first time a Final Fantasy was released on the Xbox 360.

(Although, again, the FFXI port kinda sucked.)

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (2, Informative)

7Prime (871679) | about 7 years ago | (#18452861)

Also, remember that FFVII and FFVIII were released on PC. I played both of them for the first time in that format, and aside from a few minor complaints, both worked great (the translation was, in fact, slightly improved in the PC version of FFVII).

Xbox 360 has ZERO install base in Japan (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18457541)

Japan is a pretty damn important market for Final Fantasy! You should check out a Japanese game shop, I've seen some that are arranged like PS2|GC|handhelds|FF - it gets it's own section as though it was a console.

So, Sony has a counter weapon. They can threaten not to release FF on PS3, and Squeenix either loses Japanese sales or goes to Wii or even DS (like Dragon Quest).

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (1)

electrosoccertux (874415) | about 7 years ago | (#18450759)

Sadly you're right.

So I'm going to go out on a limb and say I hope Sony wins this generation, or at least beats Microsoft. Don't care about position relative to the Wii. Why? I want BluRay. Lets just hurry up and get this format battle over with so we can get on with hacking it and be able to back up our harddrives on less than a brand new full stack of DVDs we just bought at Costco or CompUSA or wherever you get your $1x.xx after rebate pack of 100 dvds. Holding all my data on 10 discs as opposed to 100 sounds like heaven.

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18450811)

"So I'm going to go out on a limb and say I hope Sony wins this generation, or at least beats Microsoft. Don't care about position relative to the Wii. Why? I want BluRay."

People keep on bringing this up as if Microsoft is HD-DVD only. What in the world would prevent Microsoft from selling a Blu-Ray add-on just like their HD-DVD add-on, if Blu-Ray ultimately wins the format war?

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18453645)

What kind of an argument is that? He wants Sony to win the war because he wants BluRay to prevail. He doesn't need to be interested in any of the current consoles (although buying a PS3 might help his cause, nay, better buy two or three, just to be sure).

No-one cares about what Microsoft adds or won't add to their noisy brick. Besides, they won't, because they would have to shell out royalties to Sony for each and every BluRay drive sold.

Go, Sony, go, but mind the chairs!

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 7 years ago | (#18450897)

Multilayer HD-DVD prototypes that store more data than Blu-Ray have been demonstrated by, IIRC, at least two companies. Of course, if Blu-Ray can go multilayer (not sure, to be perfectly honest) then the Blu-Ray may be ahead again, no idea. But Blu-Ray is not inherently superior once you get a disc format up to the same level - their contents are pretty much identical now.

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (2, Insightful)

donaldm (919619) | about 7 years ago | (#18454565)

Disk requirements to backup of a 320GB hard drive using a double sided disk (forget about a single sided disk). 1) CD - don't be silly, 2) DVD - 32 minimum, 3) Bluray - 6 minimum, 4) HD-DVD - 10 minimum. I will leave it to you to work out the cost but needless to say it is not going to be cheap. Now lets make it more interesting try backing up 1TB and your costs just went up three fold.

It does not take much to work out that a CD is great for music, DVD is great for Standard Definition TV while Bluray or HD-DVD are aimed at the rapidly growing High Definition TV market. Using them as a backup media is going to get expensive, especially now that home users' storage requirements are approaching or well past 1TB.

The only viable backup solution for the average home user is to backup to hard disk but this does not take into account fire, flood, theft .. etc and stupidity. Sure there is tape (the commercial industry standard) but that is not exactly cheap and neither is HVD (Holographic Versatile Disk) which hopes to replace tape in the fairly foreseeable future.

So what do we do for home backups? The cheapest solution is a hard disk (or disks) backup system and hope.

I personally have never had any issues with Sony since I have never been forced to purchase their products but I don't think Bluray is going to be much use as a backup medium given the ever increasing storage requirements of the home PC market.

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (1)

mgblst (80109) | about 7 years ago | (#18456895)

Holding all my data on 10 discs as opposed to 100 sounds like heaven.
 
Is that really your idea of heaven. You seem to have some really misplaced values if you think having 10 discs instead of 100 is a really huge improvement. Why not just buy another harddrive, a HDD is fine for personal backup solutions, and then you only have 1 drive to get excited about.

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (1)

ZorbaTHut (126196) | about 7 years ago | (#18450845)

I plan to eventually buy a PS3 for the new Ratchet and Clank game, assuming it's good, as well as for Flow.

But you're right, I'd also buy one for Final Fantasy.

And Gran Turismo is going into micropayment hell, so that's not a guaranteed win there, actually. I guess we'll see.

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (3, Insightful)

StikyPad (445176) | about 7 years ago | (#18451015)

I don't think I need to tell you...

that the end of Motorola processors would pretty much be the end of the Macintosh.

Different argument, same logical fallacy [logicalfallacies.info]. There is more to the PS3 than the exclusivity of a single title (or set of titles), and if FF___ is multiplatform then buyers will simply use other metrics to make their decision. I don't particularly care about Halo - Combat Rehashed, so that wouldn't affect my decision. I wouldn't want to have to buy a console AND an HD drive, so that's a strike against the 360. I want a console with enough power that it still looks relevant in 2-3 years. I like that I can run Linux on the PS3. Of course, I'm not everyone, but those are some examples off the top of my head. The point is not that the PS3 is better/worse than the 360, merely that title exclusivity is not a console's only merit. Personally, I buy on hardware features/overall capability rather than a given title's availablility, but that's why I'm a PC gamer (when I game).

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (1)

steelfood (895457) | about 7 years ago | (#18454251)

Everybody keeps mentioning another console. What about the PC? PC's have the graphics and numerical processing power. And, if current configurations aren't enough, people can always upgrade. Whatever happened to the games and gamers driving the hardware market?

So the question is, would you buy a PS3 if games started migrating to the PC?

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18456155)

Maybe if PC games ever actually worked they might have a point.

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (1)

CaseM (746707) | about 7 years ago | (#18460009)

You, yourself, commit the fallacy of the weak analogy [logicalfallacies.info] and also failed to note that the GP's biggest problem was that of the false dilemna [wikipedia.org] because you were trying to be a high-horse nitwit instead of reading between the lines of the guy you cutting down.

How about this analogy? "The end of OSX (or whatever flavor is the current OS for a Macintosh) would be the end of the Macintosh computer". It's not a perfect, but I think it's a fairer one than the chip/computer one you proferred. People buy consoles largely for games and price point (See the PS2's continued success as an example). If you give a competitor the edge in both of those categories and offer very little incentive to purchase your own product, they'll bail. It's really that simple. Losing exclusives hurts your console, especialy when you're $100-$200 more than the competition's "premium" model.

You also failed to make the mistake

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (1)

WedgeTalon (823522) | about 7 years ago | (#18451593)

I absolutely agree. I have been hoping and preying that FF13 would hit the 360, as that was the only game left on the PS3 making me crave one. If it truly does come to 360 my investment will be decided. Otherwise, I may only have a Wii until late in this generation when console prices are finally bottoming out.

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (1)

wezzul (813900) | about 7 years ago | (#18452435)

The "exclusivity" deal that Sony had with the GTA games is probably the one that sold the most systems. Regardless of what you think of the Final Fantasy series of games, GTA games are famous, and played by all types, gamers and non-gamers alike. Even though they were eventually released on Xbox, I think the year long buffer is more than enough for many people to pick up a PS2 to play it *now*.

Re:I don't think I need to tell you... (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 7 years ago | (#18457881)

Even though they were eventually released on Xbox, I think the year long buffer is more than enough for many people to pick up a PS2 to play it *now*.

Well, I just beat San Andreas on my Xbox [finally!] and while the control scheme sucked (switching weapons is much better with four shoulder buttons) I don't understand why you'd think that the PS2 is the logical console to buy to play them. I'd rather buy an Xbox if I had neither (I have both) because it's hackable and versatile.

Good to discuss this... (1)

Speare (84249) | about 7 years ago | (#18449911)

I bought a PSone just for FF9 (my first FF game). I bought a PS2 just for FFX but have now played FFX,FFX-2,FFXII. (I did subsequently buy some other games for each, and loved Katamari Damashii.) I saw the upcoming issues with PS3 and said I would not buy it, even if the next FF standalone was exclusive on it.

Sony knows that FF has enormous draw but even that has limits. I hope Square does more with other platforms.

Exclusivity (1)

Otis2222222 (581406) | about 7 years ago | (#18456903)

I can relate to that. I bought a PS1 largely just for FF7, having played the older chapters on NES/SNES back in the day. If I ever do buy a PS3, the exclusivity of Gran Turismo is likely to be the breaking point for me, assuming it lives up to the standard the previous games have set.

The real question I have is why would an independent company sign an exclusivity agreement with a console manufacturer these days? If you are Square-Enix and have a more or less guaranteed blockbuster (FF13) waiting to come out why would you? How much money can Sony possibly pay them to make it financially worth their while to exclude other platforms like the 360/Wii?

Obviously it makes sense for first party titles to be exclusive. But why third parties go for this is beyond me. I wonder how much Sony paid Rockstar for the exclusive rights to the GTA3 franchise (yes, I know they came out on XBOX but not for quite a while after the PS2). After the first title was a smash hit, when Vice City (and later San Andreas) came out if I was Rockstar I would have said "sorry Sony, we're releasing this on the XBOX as well as the PS2 at launch. Cha-Ching!". That must have cost Sony a lot of money.

Last time I checked... (1)

Chouonsoku (1009817) | about 7 years ago | (#18449913)

The President of Sony France probably doesn't have very much to do with the decision making process regarding whether or not a game made by a 3rd party publisher stays exclusive.

Besides, it's France. Why would we listen to them now?

Re:Last time I checked... (2, Insightful)

Rycross (836649) | about 7 years ago | (#18450019)

They may not have much say in the decision, but being in such a high level executive position probably puts him in the communication chain to hear about such a decision. I'm sure that if there were problems with FFXIII exclusivity, that the issue would make the email rounds among high level executives. Its naive at best to suggest that because he's in charge of the French division that he would have no way of knowing.

Re:Last time I checked... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18450379)

Somewhat off topic but IIRC Vivendi is based in France. Vivendi and all that they are in the gaming world, including Blizzard (and EA?). Now I'm not twisting this around to be a yay WoW post, and am ignoring the fact that they own companies that are not based in France, but it is not so simple to dismiss a country due to popular feelings(and sometimes comical reasoning). You never know where the conglomerate you support through multiple sub-companies has their head office. I would argue that at the moment 'France' (as in location, not nationality) has a very large say in terms of the gaming industry.

Then again, it's Sony France and not Vivendi France.

Re:Last time I checked... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18451591)

Vivendi and Ubisoft are headquartered in France.

That's a huge chunk of todays gaming market.

This could mean a lot of things. (2, Interesting)

Rycross (836649) | about 7 years ago | (#18449973)

This could mean several things.

1) FFXIII isn't exclusive, and Sony is now in talks to lock it in.
2) FFXIII was exclusive, but they're considering taking it cross-platform, and Sony is trying to get them to stay the course.
3) FFXIII is exclusive, but Microsoft/Nintendo are trying to convince them to port it.
4) Insert more here.

That being said, if they do defect, it would be a serious blow to Sony. Ace Combat has already switched over entirely (now 360 exclusive), and Devil May Cry is cross platform. The list of AAA exclusives is dwindling. I think they're sitting at, first party titles (God of War), Ratchet and Clank, MGS4, and FFXIII.

If FFXIII defects, then that combined with Lost Odyssey and Blue Dragon might be enough to start swaying the Japanese market. It would be a very strategic title for Microsoft to acquire. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Microsoft has been leaving suitcases full of cash at Square's doorstep if this turns out to be accurate.

Re:This could mean a lot of things. (1)

webrunner (108849) | about 7 years ago | (#18450117)

Regarding 1), this generation I imagine it costs a lot more to lock in an exclusive. How much is it worth to give up 1/3rd of your profits?

Re:This could mean a lot of things. (1)

Rycross (836649) | about 7 years ago | (#18450229)

True, but given the strategic nature of the Final Fantasy franchise, I'm betting that (if talks are going on), large sums of money are being thrown around. I remember back in the N64 days, how huge a deal it was for Final Fantasy to defect to Playstation. Its not as influential as Dragon Quest in Japan, but it still has a lot of pull.

If Square moves one of its main franchises to XBox, how long until a lot of other Japanese RPG developers add support to their games? If anything can get the XBox selling in Japan, its this. And Sony sure as hell doesn't want that to happen.

Re:This could mean a lot of things. (1)

C0rinthian (770164) | about 7 years ago | (#18450355)

Does the 360 really offer much more than the PS3?

What if S-E is looking at the Nintendo camp?

Re:This could mean a lot of things. (1)

Rycross (836649) | about 7 years ago | (#18450405)

Currently, XBox 360 installed user base is greater than PS3 and Wii combined, although this is likely to change in the next couple months with Wii's continued impressive sales and PS3 launching in Europe. XBox 360 is close to 10 million consoles worldwide at the moment, compared to Wii's roughly 6 million and PS3's 2.5 million.

Re:This could mean a lot of things. (1)

antek9 (305362) | about 7 years ago | (#18453873)

... and that's 10 Million shipped, not installed user base. Same for the PS3 number, probably.

Re:This could mean a lot of things. (2, Interesting)

7Prime (871679) | about 7 years ago | (#18451033)

I highly doubt it... although as an owner of a Wii and not of a 360, I would be very happy if that were the case.

No, FF13 requires really really high resolution graphics, and even I am not about to argue that the Wii could handle anywhere close to that. With the lavish graphics we've been seeing (even if the bulk of which are pre-rendered), downgrading to the Wii's graphical capabilities would piss a lot of people off, and Square's long-time success has come from making fans happy. Now, it's not completely unthinkable that S-E might make a lower-res version for the Wii, as well. In fact, that makes some sense, since this may mean the end of the PS3, which means that the Wii automatically dominates Japan. Even if FF13 were to go to the 360, it isn't a given that Japan would start buying up 360s overnight... but they sure as hell wouldn't buy PS3s.

We're witnessing 1996 all over again, here: consoles hanging in the balance with a Final Fantasy. The fact is, even if Final Fantasy games are NOT sone of the all-time best selling games (outside Japan), the fanbase is so dedicated that it WILL sell many many consoles. It, and Dragon Quest, are really the only 3rd party series that really has the ability to pull the strings like this.

I know one thing, if I were a JRPG developer right now like Namco-Banai, I'd shitting myself waiting for the shoe to drop (Namco would most likely go Nintendo, as they've done in the past, especially isn't most of their series aren't based around eye-candy).

Re:This could mean a lot of things. (1)

C0rinthian (770164) | about 7 years ago | (#18452019)

I'll be honest, I havn't been following FF13 much, so I don't know how deep into production they are.

Re:This could mean a lot of things. (1)

7Prime (871679) | about 7 years ago | (#18452703)

Seeings as though these games take quite a few years to do (FF12 took four, but that was because of some legistical nightmares), and the fact that we're already seeing game engine screen shots, I think they're probably coming down the home stretch. That does not mean that it would be difficult to port. In fact, the basic coding is probably one of the easiest steps in making a modern RPG, and since both the PS3 and the 360 support the white engine, it would take virtually no time at all (in comparison to the rest of the process). If you go to any RPG oriented site (RPGFan.com, even IGN and other major online gaming magazines), you'll see a number of screenshots, some pre-rendered, some game engine.

Bottom line is, fans already know what to expect, it's going to be difficult to convince them to back off of that.

Re:This could mean a lot of things. (1)

miro f (944325) | about 7 years ago | (#18452717)

Does the 360 really offer much more than the PS3?


an installed base of ~10 million?

remember that Final Fantasy is still hugely popular in USA, Australia, Europe where the 360 is doing well.

Re:This could mean a lot of things. (1)

C0rinthian (770164) | about 7 years ago | (#18457301)

10 Million units shipped != 10 Million units installed

Console sales trends need to be taken into account as well as existing userbase. Do you want to start developing for the most popular console today? Or the console that will be most popular when your game ships?

Re:This could mean a lot of things. (1)

Kazzahdrane (882423) | about 7 years ago | (#18450121)

No complaints with what you've said. To get even a cross-platform "proper" Final Fantasy game for the 360 would be a massive boon for MS. Especially since (if I even had a PS3 or was thinking about getting one) I'd rather have the game for the 360. Achievements may not be much, but I can't see a PS3 version having anything over a 360 one. Perhaps more FMVs/music from using the Blu-Ray disc, but we all know the access speeds on them are horrendous so they'd just put all the data on the disc twice like they've done with Oblivion (and others?) - so in the end I expect both systems would get the same game.

Re:This could mean a lot of things. (1)

powerlord (28156) | about 7 years ago | (#18451747)

Perhaps more FMVs/music from using the Blu-Ray disc, but we all know the access speeds on them are horrendous so they'd just put all the data on the disc twice like they've done with Oblivion (and others?) - so in the end I expect both systems would get the same game.


Just a nitpick, if dual-layer DVDs have a capacity of ~8GB and a single-layer Blu-Ray disc has a capacity of ~25GB (with dual-layer holding ~50GB), then even if they cut the size of the capacity in half to speed up loading by burning all the assets twice, that still leaves twice the capacity.

Also, I've only read an article about Oblivion doing this, I'm not aware of any other game. Do you have any other sources?

Re:This could mean a lot of things. (1)

Kazzahdrane (882423) | about 7 years ago | (#18453365)

Sources? Sadly not. My excuse is I read many games news websites every day and can't be expected to remember them all - really I just have a bad memory for where I read things.

Other games, not sure as I implied - however I know that l33t hax0rs checked out the Resistance: Fall of Man Blu-Ray and it was full of empty "padding" data to fill the disc, as well as everything being on the disc twice (I believe). Apparently the only reason it needed to be on a Blu-Ray over an DVD was that the textures are all uncompressed, but apparently this would still have fitted on an HD-DVD. Of course, since MS have said they won't be using HD-DVDs for games this generation that's a kind of moot point.

I just find the double-data Oblivion thing really funny, to be honest. As an aside, I just got home from working the PS3 midnight launch at my store, go Europe and getting things a little bit late!

Re:This could mean a lot of things. (1)

Rycross (836649) | about 7 years ago | (#18453731)

Well, I have a friend whos working on Uncharted, and basically, yeah they will replicate data sometimes to allow them to stream it all in one chunk. The less seeking the BDROM has to do, the more bandwidth they can get out of it. Which is not to say that they're primarily using the extra space for that. A lot of it is filled up by extra texture maps and higher resolution source material.

Re:This could mean a lot of things. (1)

antek9 (305362) | about 7 years ago | (#18453835)

No. It only would start swaying the Japanese market if it became Xbox360 exclusive (if at all). The higher price tag on the PS3 is giving Japanese gamers headaches just as it is to gamers in the West (even if it's considerably cheaper in JPN than everywhere else), but no-one I know in Japan would even consider buying that Microsoft thing.

A (slightly) more earnest approach to backwards compatibility (combined with an indefinitely more significant back catalogue) comes to mind. Add faith in a brand. I figure many Japanese feel that they'd be trading in their assets for mere glass pearls if they went the X way.

Dream On Xbots (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18450227)

FFXIII has been in development on the PS3 for quite some time now. It has a custom PS3 engine and is designed to run off a next gen amount of storage space.

Dream on Xbots. Getting a DMC4 port was obvious to anyone who had seen the gimped graphics as Capcom had to downgrade the PS3 version to the same level as the 360 could handle.

Anyone who has seen the realtime FFXIII footage can see there is no gimped to 360 level bullshit going on.

Dream on...

Re:Dream On Xbots (2, Insightful)

Rycross (836649) | about 7 years ago | (#18450261)

I remember the Sony fanboys saying the exact same thing about a Devil May Cry 4 port, despite your insistence that it was obvious. XBox and PS3 are, currently, neck to neck graphically.

Re:Dream On Xbots (1)

_bug_ (112702) | about 7 years ago | (#18457049)

...despite your insistence that it was obvious. XBox and PS3 are, currently, neck to neck graphically.

Which should tell you a great deal. Look at FFXII. This is a PS2 game. Look at its graphics compared to early PS2 games. It's like night and day.

Developers have had more time to work with XBox 360 than the PS3. More time to figure out where power can be squeezed out of the hardware to pull off better looking graphics. Give it another year. The comparison will be night and day.

Re:Dream On Xbots (1)

Rayonic (462789) | about 7 years ago | (#18460141)

Give it another year. The comparison will be night and day.

When the original Xbox launched, its games looked better than their PS2 counterparts, right off the bat. And those were launch titles.

If the PS3 really is much more powerful than anything else, why couldn't it pull off the same thing? Should I really take your word over everyone who's done an in-depth technical comparison?

Re:Dream On Xbots (4, Interesting)

EGSonikku (519478) | about 7 years ago | (#18450611)

That's strange, can you point me to a post anywhere claiming that DMC4 was 'gimped' looking prior to the announcement it would be on the Xbox 360 as well? In fact, I recall everyone claiming the game looked too good to be done on the 360!

I guess being a Sony fan these days is like being a Republican. Every 5 minutes you need to revise past statements and claim that you new belief has always been your belief.

Oh, and just try and call me a fanboy:
http://img372.imageshack.us/img372/8692/00001re2.j pg [imageshack.us]

Re:Dream On Xbots (1)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | about 7 years ago | (#18451697)

Sir, I am torn between respecting the large amount of money you have available for consoles, and seething with jealousy because I can't get my hands on a damn Wii.

Re:Dream On Xbots (1)

ad0gg (594412) | about 7 years ago | (#18455043)

If you spare time read the wii forums. Thats how i found mine, someone posted delivery dates to bestbuy, just show up when the stores opens on the listed date. Not sure how it is now, finding a second controller back in january was impossible though.

Re:Dream On Xbots (1)

Valdrax (32670) | about 7 years ago | (#18457675)

Oh, and just try and call me a fanboy:

How 'bout "arrogant braggart with too much time and disposeable income on his hands?"
I mean, that's what...? Well over $1000-1200 in hardware plus whatever that fourth thing in the middle is? I mean, do you even have more than three games for each system (that you've actually played) to justify owning each one?

Yeesh. I'm having a hard enough time cost- and time-justifying owning two of those systems, much less all three.

Think I just felt the earth shake... (4, Insightful)

7Prime (871679) | about 7 years ago | (#18450615)

...nope, that was Sony stock falling.

But seriously, I'm not in the least bit surprised. In fact, I've been expecting FF13 to go cross-platform for quite some time now. Square has more reason to go cross-platform, now more than ever before. When they were with Nintendo, they were pretty tight, and were more intimately familliar with their hardware design. They switched to Sony only because Nintendo screwed them with the N64. FFX came out long before the XBox or GameCube, and even FF12 was in progress while those consoles were in their infancy. And up until now, there hasn't been any direct competition with Sony that revolved around the exact same user-base. That's changed... and we have two very similar consoles, with similar (or at least potentially similar) install bases. The fact that Square has already jumped ship on many other titles, makes me think they're not adverse to doing so with any... and it just seems the safest, and most ecconomical, to do so.

There's only one line of reasoning as to why they would be better off remaining exclusive. That is that if the PS3 were to fail, the resistance to the 360 in Japan may not simply go away over-night... meaning NO ONE would have a system capable of buying and playing FF13 on. If they were to port FF13 to the 360, the Japanese may simply ditch the series as well as the PS3, and go completely over to the Wii. Still, in the US, where Final Fantasy is the strongest, porting FF13 to the 360 would generate enormous sales, enough to counter any strange occurences that Japan might provide.

I gave FF13 a 75% chance of going over to the 360, back in November... this news raises that to about 90%.

It's going to go, let's just sit back and watch the fireworks.

Re:Think I just felt the earth shake... (1)

bluej100 (1039080) | about 7 years ago | (#18451867)

If they were to port FF13 to the 360, the Japanese may simply ditch the series as well as the PS3, and go completely over to the Wii.
It doesn't make sense that anyone would give up on FF because it's available on more systems. I don't think anyone in Japan thinks so lowly of the 360 as to assume any game associated with it is trash. Indeed, I'd argue the opposite--I think it would hurt the Wii to stand out as the only system of its generation that can't support FF. Interesting thoughts, though.

Re:Think I just felt the earth shake... (1)

7Prime (871679) | about 7 years ago | (#18452825)

Well, here's my thoughts. There are quite a few people (even people here in the US that I know) that are buying the PS3 specifically for FF13. If FF13 comes out on more than one system, they no longer have an incentive to buy a PS3. However, the 360 does not market itself well to the Japanese, and it tends to leave a sour taste in their mouth. In "putting off" buying a PS3 for FF13, they may very well just eventually decide to skip over it. But you might be right, in that the Wii probably wouldn't benefit from this. However, I don't think it would hurt the Wii either, seeing as though no ever thought that FF13 was going to be on it.

The more I think about it, however, the more I think, "why not port it to the Wii?" Sure you'll get a resolution loss, but not much more than just the transition from HD to ED. I've actually been surprised at the number of PS3/360 games that were ported to the Wii and seem to do fairly well. When I think about it, even if the game was made for the measly GameCube, it would look far more advanced than on the PS2, where lack of anti-aliasing really really hurt the graphics.

For example, I'm playing Tales of the Abyss right now, for the PS2. The last installment, "Tales of Symphonia" was on the GameCube, and, unfortunately, this latest installment looks far inferior, and feels very graphically glitchy. And the Wii isn't just a GameCube either.

Re:Think I just felt the earth shake... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18457315)

I'm not really refuting your post or commenting on it, I just wanted to rant about a pet peeve of mine...

I gave FF13 a 75% chance of going over to the 360, back in November... this news raises that to about 90%. I hate armchair analyst statements like those. What, if it doesn't port, you're gonna say "Damn I guess it fell within the 10% wrongness of my opinion"? I don't even think that makes sense. Whenever someone says this, I don't get it.

wide title range... (1)

invader_allan (583758) | about 7 years ago | (#18450655)

Final fantasy games are starting to become mini franchises, with at least 3 variations of XIII planned: the standard, epic XIII, VS XIII for MMORPG, and a portable called Agito (for phones at the moment). The whole thing is called Fabula Nova Crystallis Final Fantasy XIII. The VS title would most likely be for any thing that can handle it, including PC and possibly more consoles. The exclusivity may be just for VS, or perhaps if they are considering a port of VS they are starting to think about doing the same with the main title.

Re:wide title range... (1)

shoptroll (544006) | about 7 years ago | (#18452425)

VS is an MMO? Everything I've read has suggested it's an action-RPG much like Kingdom Hearts.

Prolly still going on PS3. (1)

Jartan (219704) | about 7 years ago | (#18450803)

I suspect the nature of the talks isn't really likely to land FF13 on the 360. It's more likely square is waiting till sony realizes square has their nuts in a vice and can squeze for all the money they want on this exclusivity deal.

Why is this not a full-blown post? (1)

7Prime (871679) | about 7 years ago | (#18451117)

I'm just curious... this is a blow that could potentially mean the end of a console line. Sure, it isn't official, but even the fact that it's in question is pretty big gaming news. Why is it not a full post?

Re:Why is this not a full-blown post? (1)

shoptroll (544006) | about 7 years ago | (#18454225)

Because right now it's still in the rumor incubator. This is a post regarding a translation from a French Sony executive speaking about Final Fantasy XIII. If it was coming from someone in Square-Enix or Sony Japan it'd be a bigger news item. This rumor has been floating around since before yesterday.

Excellent news (1, Troll)

Cloud K (125581) | about 7 years ago | (#18451195)

I *despise* Sony nowadays and keep saying I'll never buy a PS3. FF13 would come close to swaying me to the dark side (providing FF12 gets exciting... I'm probably half-way through and it's failed to do so thus far), but I've been hoping, praying and begging for S.E. to bring it to another platform - fingers are suitably crossed.

Re:Excellent news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18454963)

Sorry, FF12 stays dull, if you don't care now, then you won't care at the end of the game either.

Re:Excellent news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18458593)

Yeah, don't go over to the dark side - you have to spend you money on companies with integrity like MICROSOFT.

. . .

If you think Sony is evil then you're a fucking moron. The greatest trick the devil performed was convincing the world he didn't exist. Microsoft's PR and viral marketing have convinced you that Sony has bad intentions so you fund the evil empire itself. Did you forget that the PS3 uses HDDs you can buy directly from Seagate? That it runs Linux? It uses standard memory card ports (SD, compact flash, memory stick)? That it's fully backward compatable (at least, in the States, but worldwide their BC is better than 360 anyway). That the PS3 uses OpenGL?

You need a fucking reality check. You remind me of Anakin in Revenge of the Sith, trying so hard to fight evil that you've lost sight of what evil really is and become what you sought to destroy. This is no different than 1995, when Windows exploded because it did everything Mac OS did but Mircosoft really cared about their customers/products *rollseyes*

Yeah, keep hating on Sony, and when no 3D video game can be made without at least paying Microsoft for DirectX and various other licensing fees, tell me who's evil. Sony is the biker who looks scary but has a good heart, Microsoft is a con man who convinced you to leave the bar because of the scary biker, but is really just trying to get you alone to stab you in the back. /rant

Re:Excellent news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18459023)

Sony's rootkit scandal is all I needed to know about them. They are not the biker that has a good heart, but thanks for trying.

FF on PS3: end of a fan (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18452415)

I own and play all of the Final Fantasy titles. I even pulled out FF1 for my NES last summer.

Any FF title that is exclusive to the PS3, that will be the first title I will not buy.

I don't care if others praise it. It'll hurt to drop the line, but not as much as paying the sony tax.

perfect title (1)

dosboot (973832) | about 7 years ago | (#18453477)

I like how when I was reading the text and trying to distinguish if that was three III's or two II's or four IIII's and I realized that the title for Final Fantasy is now becoming like the games in the franchise.

FF VII Remake? (1)

Cyno01 (573917) | about 7 years ago | (#18455625)

So where does the rumored FF VII remake fit in with all this? Back before launch it was rumored that this was a pet project at square, FFVII with PS3 graphics. If they do wind up making this and if it goes cross platform, as well as FF XIII, that may be the last straw for me. I'm happy with my Wii, but there are so many kickass games on the 360 now... Well, ill wait till the built in HD-DVD version comes out.

Re:FF VII Remake? (1)

DarkJC (810888) | about 7 years ago | (#18457449)

As far as I know any rumors were squashed with the fact that it was "just a tech demo". I wouldn't hold your breath for the HD-DVD 360 either, although a new and improved one is probably coming soon, it won't have HD-DVD built in.

Important Correlation w/ Winning Consoles... (1)

MasterGwaha (1033282) | about 7 years ago | (#18458235)

It just so happens that the console which had the FF main series exclusively, has always won the console war. Square must be really good at picking the winning team eh?

Playstation vs N64 (1)

strider2k (945409) | about 7 years ago | (#18460917)

I remember the SNES days. After hearing that Nintendo is developing the "Dolphin", I quickly anticipated the next Final Fantasy on it. It even had a tech demo of 3d FFVI characters. Then, when I heard that the PS1 was getting FFVII, I was shocked. It was so shocking that I had to save up money for two systems instead of one. By the way, I bought more PS1 games than N64 mainly due to the RPG selection. The only N64 games I had are the 1st party games and Golden Eye (btw, kicked ass back in the day).
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...