Currently Online 
Jumpin said:
I agree. This whole thing is more or less a brand of “red herring” and “whataboutism” where they accuse company x of behaving unfairly too, rather than addressing the actual situation of whether company y should be allowed to swallow company z. Not only is the comparison irrelevant, but it’s not even comparable. Final Fantasy isn’t a major brand on Xbox. Dev resources aren’t infinite. Sony and Square have a long term business to business friendship—so, there is loyalty there. Yet the assumption is being pushed that Sony is somehow bribing Square to keep their games off of Xbox when no such bribe is necessary. It’s a really bad argument on the pro-“Microsoft eat Activision and Blizzard” side. In the end, the whole argument is straight up bad. The reality is Square Enix is a separate company, they’re not owned by Sony, and they’re not being secretly controlled by money hats to be exclusive to Sony, either. |
Except we know that alot of what you are saying here is false. There is tons of evidence that Sony is paying for exclusivity on various franchises. Publishers don't give out timed exclusivity deals that have set time periods on them for free, that makes zero sense. FF7R was shown at a Sony show with a trailer that stated it was a timed exclusive like a year before it released, and the case for the game also stated it was timed exclusive.
Then the timed exclusivity period lapsed, and the game still hadn't been ported to Xbox. Then Final Fantasy 7 Remake Intergrade was announced for PS5 a month later and people naturally assumed that Sony has paid to extend the deal by another year. Problem is, another year passed and the game still wasn't announced for Xbox. Now we have Microsoft stating in official documents to regulators that Sony paid to keep Final Fantasy off of Xbox. And the language of the Final Fantasy 16 exclusivity deal and the Forspoken exclusivity deals also suggest timed hats by Sony, 1 year for FF16 and 2 years for Forspoken. Same goes for Platinum's Babylon's Fall, also published by Square Enix (though it flopped so hard that it died, meaning it will never come to other platforms for sure). It has also been heavily speculated that Valkyrie Elysium was a timed hat console exclusive for Sony from Square.
Yes, development resources are limited and sometimes a console gets exclusives for free because the developer can only work on a single or a few platforms at a time, but you really think that Square Enix chose to invest development resources into Xbox versions of far more niche games like Star Ocean: The Divine Force, The Diofield Chronicle, Chrono Cross Remaster, and Balan Wonderworld, yet don't have the resources to put their biggest franchise onto Xbox? Heck, they put a side Final Fantasy game onto Xbox just earlier this year, Stranger of Paradise, but none of the 3 main series Final Fantasy games that released between 2020-2023 are coming to Xbox currently, you think Square decided to do that all on their own? Come now, that is nonsense and you know it, especially when we know FF15 sold somewhere between 1.5-2m copies on Xbox One (which would have generated at least $50m in revenue against a significantly smaller budget on the Xbox port), and Xbox One was a platform that will have a much smaller install base than Xbox Series will have by the time the 3rd part of FF7R releases, in Japan alone Xbox Series has already almost outsold Xbox One by 4x, by the end of the generation it could possibly be up 10x or more over Xbox One. Square would be foolish to skip Xbox on their biggest franchise unless Sony was paying them to keep it off of Xbox.
Then we have the various timed exclusive AAA deals they are signing with other publishers, Silent Hill 2 Remake from Konami, Ghostwire Tokyo and Deathloop from Bethesda, KOTOR Remake from LucasFilm Games. Has been rumored for 2 years now off and on that when Bioshock 4 is officially revealed it will have a Sony timed exclusivity deal in place too. Not to mention the timed exclusive content they have hatted in games like the upcoming Hogwarts Legacy. You can't just bury your head in the sand and pretend that Sony isn't using large amounts of money to keep 3rd party content off of Xbox.
If you want to make the argument that comparing Microsoft acquiring ABK to Sony moneyhatting AAA 3rd party exclusives left and right is false equivalence, then go right ahead, I disagree with you but that is you stating your opinion versus me stating mine. However, don't try to make up facts that say that Square is choosing to give Sony exclusives left and right simply because they have a good relationship or because development resources are too limited to develop Xbox ports for their biggest franchise.
Last edited by shikamaru317 - on 29 December 2022
