By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
kain_kusanagi on 18 March 2013
Edit Thread
brendude13 said:
kain_kusanagi said:

4. Your wishing for Sony to buyout FF Vs 13 is NOT the same as my respecting the exclusivity of the MS/Epic Gears of War deal.  IF Epic was NOT under contract, but made Gears of War exclusive I would call for it to be multiplatform just like I am calling for FF Vs 13 to be multiplatform. But Epic entered into contract with MS and Square Enix has not entered into contract with Sony. Therefore FF Vs 13 can and should be multiplatform. Not only that but unless Sony pays them a ton of money Square Enix would be stupid to make it exclusive.

Isn't Gears of War out of contract now? How would you feel about having Judgement on the PS3?

Non-Nintendo consoles are built on 3rd party exclusives, if you get rid of 3rd party exclusives, you're getting rid of practically the only thing which is differentiating the PS3 and the Xbox 360 from eachother at the moment. I'm all for 3rd party exclusives, as long as there is no "franchise stealing" involved and the game is most at home on the console it's exclusive to.

Nobody knows what the MS/Epic contract is. If the contract was up after Gears of War 3 than yes I would want Epic to have made Judgement multiplatform. It's a multiplatform engine after all. But it doesn't really matter when talking about FF Vs 13. Epic was or is under 2nd party contract, but Sony has not paid for FF Vs 13 to be exclusive. If Nobody has paid for exclusivity than it should be multiplatform. It's as simple as that.

I disagree with your statment. In my opinion what differentiates the PS3 and Xbox 360 isn't not 3rd party games, it's 1st/2nd party games. That's the mayn reason why I want all 3rd party games multiplatform. 3rd party devs have no reason to make exclusive games. Modern game dev tools and engines make multiplatform development easy and cheap.

BTW, I don't know what "franchise stealing" is.