FFXIII Exclusivity Under Discussion 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."
is Final Fantasy still relevant? (Score:2, Insightful)
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? (Score:3, Insightful)
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? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (Score:2, Insightful)
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:Last time I checked... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:is Final Fantasy still relevant? (Score:5, Insightful)
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:Dream On Xbots (Score:3, Insightful)
Think I just felt the earth shake... (Score:5, Insightful)
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:I don't think I need to tell you... (Score:5, Insightful)
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... (Score:4, Insightful)
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... (Score:3, Insightful)
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
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.