WHY?!?
i could have this wrong and i hope i do, but from wat ive seen its gonna be on xbox 360.
it was a game unique to playstation and now theyre gonna put it on 360. Even though it may increase their profits... i still argue this point.
i dont see any games exclusive to xbox comin out on ps3!
I stick with sony, cause its got the Gran Turismo series(should the dang game actually ever come out )
Otherwise, i actually dislike the shape of the 360 controler.
Exclusives are nice for specific consoles, but its realistically annoying.
I'm also biased against microsoft because they eventually will become the bane of the gaming world. By capitalizing and trying to control every market (PC and console), they eventually will own everything, and console gaming and computer gaming will eventually merge into a single market, specially if the market of both are basically controlled and owned by a single company.
I like the fact we have options atm, and i fear that eventually we will have none. So trash talk all you want on the PS3, its still a physically more capable system (and which is why Microshaft is in the works of a brand new system, omg LOLOLOL YOU"LL HAVE TO SHELL OUT MORE MONEY THAN A PS3 WHEN IT COMES!)
It'll get to a point when that system comes out, that people are going to compare and make fun of the new xbox, simply because they can. what will you do then?
A series whose first and third were on Nintendo consoles, and second and fourth on Sony isn't exactly what I'd call "born on" Sony or anything near exclusive.
There's no control reason why it couldn't--nobody says you have to use the motion controls (Smash Bros. does not, for example), and there's always the classic controller as well. A more likely reason is simply that it would not be helpful to the ever-increasing graphic detail of the mainline FF series which Square has made a point of. Less powerful systems (Wii and handhelds) are getting Crystal Chronicles and remasters of the older titles though.
Ummmm actually it does have an affect on us consumers. Exclusives make a company take advantage of whatever a specific console has to offer, once you port it over than you lose what both consoles give and you end up with a lower quality game on two consoles rather than a high quality game on one. I hope FF stays PS3 exclusive a long with Ace Combat, afterall Ace Combat only went to the 360 since they were rushing it out.
Um, when did I say that Microsoft has not paid for an exclusive? They certainly have.
However, they are neither the first nor the last to do so. You don't think Nintendo dropped some cash on Capcom to have the REMake and RE4 exclusive to GC? And even the latter one went rogue.
What Microsoft is not doing is buying up every exclusive, or even a majority of them. They're picking some here and there, just like Sony and Nintendo do.
Again, don't read things into my posts that I didn't say. They coughed up a bunch of crap for X-Box and 360. But their recent games have started to show signs of the old Rare (Banjo-Kazooie 3).
So, it's Microsoft's fault for making a system that competes with PS3. And this is bad.
Are you serious here?
FF games don't need more than a D-Pad and 2 buttons: accept and cancel. And a button to bring up the menu. You could run most FF games with just the Wii remote itself.
Again, why is it wrong for a 3rd developer to show up? There's nothing special about Sony or Nintendo that says that they are the only console makers who deserve to be in the market.
so, it's Microsoft's fault for making a system that competes with PS3. And this is bad.
[/quote]
im not saying from a business stand point that MS doesnt have the right to, but from a moral stand point, what reason could they have had for making a gaming console?
they already monopolize the computer Os realm, and make crazy money because of windows, and the other programs they write and over charge for, they dont need any more money.
i cant understand why they made the move into the gaming community otgher then to shake things up, and thats whats p%@&ing me off about the xbox series, it's kind of like the Obama administration.
Coming in they both had good intentions and conveyed those intenstions very clearly but along the way those intentions got warped by outside influences. Even if Microsoft didnt mean anything by bringing in a new console to makes things a bit moe lively its totally screwing up the game flow for the systems now.
bah, w/e..lol. hopefully these developers will come to their senses and stop acting like their heads are cut off because if not, the ps3 may never get to where it needs to be.
[quote who="kryo" reply="2" id="2066508"]A series whose first and third were on Nintendo consoles, and second and fourth on Sony isn't exactly what I'd call "born on" Sony or anything near exclusive.
first and third???
I always thought the first was a nintendo release then 2 and till the end of time (3) were ps/2 releases (least till the end of time is).
and what I ment by born wasnt that they were only even on the ps systems, but they got their rise to fame from the ps system releases.
They have more "moral" reason than Sony or Nintendo. Sony made random consumer electronics, not videogames. Nintendo was a toy company.
At least Microsoft had a game studio before they made a console. And they were already software governors of a gaming platform (PCs), who spent time and effort seeing to the needs of PC game developers, providing them appropriate tools and so forth (DirectX was born out of a desire to make PC development more similar to console development).
In what way?
And where does it "need" to be? It's losing fair and square; what right does PS3 have to win if it can't earn it in fair competition?
There was a GBC sequel to Second Story before TTEOT.
Point is, Squenix (and by extension Tri-Ace) doesn't have any particularly special relationship with Sony. They make their games for whichever systems they feel suit them and will be most profitable; just because a particular series was on one brand of console at one point in its history is no guarantee that it will (or should) continue to be that way.
anywayz ... what happened to FFX13 lol.
... went way off topic, especially when talking about SPECS of diff consoles so i stopped reading majority of them.
the debate on console topic will never end coz everyone is BIASED no matter wat.
lol qft.
but as i said before, as long as it sticks on the ps3 im fine with it going cross console, its when stuff starts going exclusively to consoles where they do not belong that it starts getting me mad.
it's like how would 360 owners like it if Halo 4 (if there ever is one) was exclusively for the ps3, i'd bet they would be as po'ed as the jrpg fans.
before the xbox came along developers only had 2 major consoles to develop for; ps2 and game cube.
rpgs games almost always ended up on the ps2, fps' as well were a majority of the catalog while the Gamecube was mainly a mix of fps and action adventure games.
but then we added in the xbox in 2001 or 2002 ment that now developers had a new system to work on. Now, most of the games released last gen were cross console, but some were not.
a general pecking order was established as far as what consumers playing on an xbox would play, which is mainly fps' and a few fighting games.
so, fast forward to now. developers think that since the xbox has had no rpgs and that the ps seires has had next to no fps games that they should flood the two with those kind of games.
and all I am saying is that its going to back fire, ps2 owners want rpgs for the ps3, xbox fans want fps' and maybe rpgs on the 360, its all screwed up, even more so with MS dishing out the dough to make games xbox exclusive that should have been released on the ps3/2 in the first place.
partially answered above.
the ps series have been rpg juggernaughts since their inseption. Final Fantasy, some of the Tales games, legend of legaia, legend of dragoon, chrono cross, digital devil saga, magna carta, shadow hearts, and about 400 other rpgs that I wont go into.
that is where the ps3's butter zone is, its not because it cant compete, it's that there are outside influences other then supply and demand that are holding it back.
As was said earlier in the topic, as each game comes out, developers will get better and accessing the graphics power of the ps3 or the wii or the 360, but if certain companies are snatching games that could push the envolope on the ps3 away from the ps3, thats never going to happen.
Games do not "belong" to any particular console. Devs don't owe Sony or Microsoft anything; they can and will put the games wherever they think they'll be most profitable (which exclusivity deals can impact) or get the best userbase for the budget they have.
Asserting that two machines which offer more or less the same basic functionality (same sort of controls, HD support, internet, etc.) should be locked into particular genres just out of tradition is plain silly.
So true...
Fujuki
wat does qft mean ... ive been trying to figure it out but cant lol.
i dont understand y MS had to make a console in the end, this is just what i think. werent computers earning them enough!?!? or was it something else? did they just want to make it just for competing against PS and nintendo? MS making a console was not necessary it was just another way to milk money out of us consumers. computers can do so much more than what their console can do.
anyway i am just really glad theyre not doing what they did to star ocean, to FFXIII.
Sorry, but that's Sony PR, technically the 360 GPU blows the PS3 GPU, read their specs and you'll see (the 360 GPU is really good).
Quoted For Truth.
Why did Sony make the PlayStation? Weren't CD players and VCRs enough?
You can ask that question about any company expanding into a new market. And the answer is always the same: money. Either now or later.
the problem is with Microsoft, they dont just expand, they expand and dominate by any means nessissary.
this is what i was trying to get at with some of my posts. MS might get more and more aggressive about buying out games for the xbox series, which could eventually (talking MANY years down the line, more then seven to thirteen) throw Nintendo and Sony out of the gaming industry.
That's how they got to where they are now, they used strong arm tactics to push compitition out of business to assimalate or destroy (google Microsoft Vs Netscape for a good example of this).
dollar for dollar Ms has more money then Sony and Nintendo can deal with combined.
thats just my worries about all this anyway, or my paranoia if you will.
How about you be concerned when this actually happens, rather than when it "might" happen.
Um, Netscape lost because Netscape 4.0 was a pile of festering crap and IE4.0 was the best browser of its day. That is an objective fact: Navigator 4.0 was a terrible browser, and IE 4.0 was its better in every way.
Did Microsoft use their OS monopoly to increase IE's marketshare even more? Yes; they put the browser in the OS. But that doesn't mean Netscape had a good product.
First, while that's true, Microsoft isn't going to fling all of its money at the VG industry. They have many other things going on; they can only afford to spend so much on gaming. And they're not in nearly as strong a position as they used to be.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
