bbsin said: Kasz216 said: bbsin said: Kasz216 said: bbsin said: Kasz216 said: bbsin said: LordTheNightKnight said: If FFVII gets remade, I say the PSP is the most likely, along with a plain port on the DS, mainly due to those systems having the lowest development costs, while still having potential for decent sales. I'm pretty sure Sony has first dibs on the FFVII series being on their systems exclusively since they published the original game. Eidos published FF7 on PC. So that alone proves Sony doesn't have exclusive publishing rights on it. I meant that they had first dibs on it. I wouldn't be surprised if they were offered the opportunity to publish the PC version but turned it down, they probably thought there was a better way to spend their resources. Do you have any proof that they have first dibs on future publishing or is this just wishful thinking? Cause publishing really doesn't work like that too often. Crissis Core could of went there because of poltic issues but if so i think it'd be more of the purchasing exclusivity kind, just like the did with the original FF7. After all Square published FF7 in Japan. I think it's more likely Sony just published in the US because Square wasn't willing to risk it's company publishing as many games as Sony wanted them too, or just couldn't. Sony likely just free rided it because they wanted it as a big game exclusive. Publishing games is a BIG risk considering how badly it can hurt you if you end up with too much extra inventory and Sony wanted Square to publish way more FF7 games then any other FF game. Who is going to risk their company just because another one asks them? I have the same amount of proof as you, no one really knows what goes on behind closed doors. I am just going by what i interpret when i see that Sony, for some reason, continuously land FF7 games or movies on their side. Like i said, it may be back door politics and if it is, no one really knows what kind of agreement they have made in the past. But the logical move would have been to move away from Sony consoles to get as much as $ as possible using their number 1 money maker. S-E obviously has been in bed with Sony, there's no other way to explain the reasoning behind all their high budget games being put on Sony platforms. Oh yeah, there's also the fact that Sony owns about 8% stakes in S-E and helped make them into the huge company that they are today. I wouldn't be surpirsed if Sony knows exactly what properties S-E is developing before everyone else, and is always the first to get a chance bid or strike a deal... hell, that's probably why they have 8% in the first place. Anways, the question boils down to this: Does Sony have a deal in place to keep FF7 games on their platform?? No one has solid proof to officially say yes or no, but by the way the evidence looks, i don't see Square bringing FF7 to anyother platform (except cellphone) to anything else but Sony and i think the reasoning behind that is because Sony wants it that way whether they are convincing S-E or it's their decision. EDIT: @Whitedevil: I'm not questioning the exclusivity of the future SE games. There's enough threads about FF13 going multiplatform on the web. My point is on the FF7 franchise and I think Sony is clearly influencing where that property ends up. Sony publishing FF7 for U.S and Europe was a HUGE deal, and it ultimately helped SquareSoft more than it did for Sony. Sony might not have a solid deal that allows them the rights to the FF7 franchise, but it's pretty obvious that they (sony) have a voice in the company or in terms of the FF7 franchise and apparently S-E listens. The difference is, I'm not assuming anything. You are. Usual publishing deals don't involve the kind of exclusivity you are mentioning, and there is no real reason to think they would give away future rights to a game that was going to be big with or without Sonys help. Square didn't want to publish a lot in the US and Europe so Sony did it for them because Sony wanted it to be big for their system. A lot of people think FF1 made the playstation successful and put it over the top. Which in turn helped make the PS2 successful. Both companies made out like bandits. It's a simple as that. You can assume there is some behind the door dealings but there isn't any evidence of that, so it's mere conjecture. If I'm wrong and there isn't any behind the door dealings then how do you explain S-E actions toward Sony? Loyalty? you can't be that blind. I am assuming that Sony somehow convinces S-E to continue to put priority towards their platform, you are arguing against me and based on your post, you believe S-E is making all their decisions without Sony whispering in their ear at all. You have no solid proof at all to put any substance behind that theory. You said it yourself, BOTH sides make out like bandits. But to think that SquareSoft only wanted to publish the game in Japan is VERY foolish. They knew the success of the game after the reception in Japan but did not have the resources to pull off a worldwide release without help. Sony happen to have the most resources at that time since Nintendo wasn't even in the picture. Also, when FF7 was in development, NO ONE knew it was going to outperform like it did. Heck, the only reason they moved to PlayStation was because of the whole stupid (yet important) CD vs Cartridge argument, If Nintendo knew FF7 was going to be that big they would have gave a flying shit when SS threatened to leave. Sony saw that as an opportunity and probably funded a good chunk of development to nail down publishing rights in the first place. How else would you explain the massive increase of staff and budget, SquareSoft wasn't nearly as rich as S-E is right now. Anyways, enough about the past. My point is simple, Sony has a vote/voice/say/etc. in SquareEnix. Based on the history, they probably have alot of stake in what goes with FF7. Sony are the ones that own a good chuck of S-E, not Microsoft, not Nintendo. With that being said, they are probably the ones that get to make a deal before anyone else notices, it's up to SquareEnix whether they accept it or not (business 101). Which leads back to what i said several post ago, Sony, in most likelihood has first dibs on FF7 property and that's why i'm certain we won't be seeing a FF7 game land anywhere but on a Sony platform (cept cellphone).

Final Fantasy games doing well in Japan don't nessesairly mean US success. All you are doing is making wild guesses with little reason behind them. I wouldn't be surprised if sony gets the right to try and purhase exclusivity if it was a PS3 remake. But that's about all I would exect them to get. To claim it's because of some sort of old publishing rights it silly though. Even in the cases where publishers get to maintain the rights it's usally a small timeframe, something like 5 years unless they own the IP, which they obviously don't, as they make FF games and the FF7 characters are owned by Square. It would be pretty unpresidented if that was the case. The reason Sony gets Preferential treatment when it comes to it's games is because the Final Fantasy branch of Square have become very huge on "Cinematic Gaming" and the Playstation brand always packs the most power. Also i'd guess they just assume that people who owned PSP's also owned PS2s... after all the Final Fantasy tactics remake also hit the PSP. Square has the luxuary of doing it this way because even on the PSP and PS3, Final Fantasy games will sell. So they can still have their Cinematic "flagship" and still make a profit on it, or atleast not that bad of a loss. To some developers bevlieve it or not, they feel they need one project that really stands out and shows the best of their "quality" even if it comes at a loss to keep their rep up. With Square they feel their strengths are really good graphics that make the game look like a movie. There are plenty of reason's Square would look to Sony first, but it's unlikely any of them have to do with some phantom publishing deal.

Sony owns about 8% of the Square Enix shares

white devil said:  Look at the situation between Microsoft and Bungie. Minus a rumored first-dibs deal, Bungie ultimately can make whatever decision they want.  SE has been talking up a global, multiplatform strategy for a while now. So, yes, I would say it is a bad decision for SE. PS3 sales suck, and Square-Enix knows this. They've bitched about, since one of their biggest games is exclusive to it. But beyond that, it's just a bad decision for SE to bank on any single console if they want to grow into a bigger publishing force. They recognized the need to diversify, and they have done that. No big publisher puts their eggs in one basket, and for good reason. They don't want to be tied to the fortunes and whims of Sony. Also, I would say yes, beyond their games succeeding on the PS3/PSP, the majority shareholders don't care about Sony's fortunes. They're looking to make SQUARE-ENIX a larger, more profitable venture, not Sony. And if Sony doesn't like that, they can sell their stock and I'm sure there are plenty of companies/people out there willing to buyout their shares. Besides, it's in Sony's interest as a shareholder for SE to be a bigger money maker. If they wanted an exclusive studio, they would attempt to buy a majority share in the company.  I repeat, a minority shareholder does not have the power to force the kind of decision you are talking about.

Boy do you have alot of things turned upside. But I can see that youre bitter about some of SE's choices on many levels. That really stands clear.

First of all, Bungie and Microsoft were in a completely different situation. Squarenix has not worked under direct first party ties to Sony. Bungie though, has worked in an internal relationship with Microsoft for a long time. So they naturally have a preference.

And they are using a global strategy already; the xbox 360 has had the pleasure of games like Project Sylpheed and in the upcoming future Infinite Undiscovery & Last Remnant. Plus you should joyous of the rumor (I've had faith in 1up since the bionic commando rumor came true) of Front Mission coming exclusively to X360.  That would be fucking neat for X360 owners.

PS3 sales are bad? I dont know what youre talking about lol. Of course, comparison as to how its currently standing in total, the rivals  do indeed dwarf the console sales figures. But on a weekly basis its selling well, its selling decent, plus its sold more than the X360's first year. Calling it a failure today, with 7 million consoles sold during 1 year would be oh, so wrong.

I dont see anything bad with SE wanting to make a profitable venture with Sony. Dont convince yourself that this kind of agreement is wrong, especially since it will probably have a profitable cause. Youre having a very superficial view on their business choice, especially since this kind of mutual agreement is a long term investment. SE does not need to prove to any one that they will make profit. Consider SE a designer brand in the world of gaming. If they've gotten that far they probably know what they're doing.

They do hold a certain amount of leverage, Sony bought shares from SE to ensure a continuate business relationship plan. Otherwise the shares would be useless. The benefit doesnt lie in the value pr. share, but how much of Sony owns of SE. And Sony is definitely not a minority at SE. So please dont play dumb my good man, you know Sony CORP has at least a few fingers in SE's work.

Dont worry, you shouldn't be concerned about SE, they know what they're doing ;). Obviously they make choices they believe it. So relax SE games will sell despite which console its on.

P.S: I dont see Bungie as a worthy developer to be acknowledged in the league of SE. Bungie has great commercial support from Microsoft. Plus I have never, gotten the deal about Halo. People may enjoy it, but for all that I know, its just a commercial succes. All this is off topic though.

white devil said: bbsin said: Kasz216 said: bbsin said: Kasz216 said: bbsin said: Kasz216 said: bbsin said: LordTheNightKnight said: If FFVII gets remade, I say the PSP is the most likely, along with a plain port on the DS, mainly due to those systems having the lowest development costs, while still having potential for decent sales. I'm pretty sure Sony has first dibs on the FFVII series being on their systems exclusively since they published the original game. Eidos published FF7 on PC. So that alone proves Sony doesn't have exclusive publishing rights on it. I meant that they had first dibs on it. I wouldn't be surprised if they were offered the opportunity to publish the PC version but turned it down, they probably thought there was a better way to spend their resources. Do you have any proof that they have first dibs on future publishing or is this just wishful thinking? Cause publishing really doesn't work like that too often. Crissis Core could of went there because of poltic issues but if so i think it'd be more of the purchasing exclusivity kind, just like the did with the original FF7. After all Square published FF7 in Japan. I think it's more likely Sony just published in the US because Square wasn't willing to risk it's company publishing as many games as Sony wanted them too, or just couldn't. Sony likely just free rided it because they wanted it as a big game exclusive. Publishing games is a BIG risk considering how badly it can hurt you if you end up with too much extra inventory and Sony wanted Square to publish way more FF7 games then any other FF game. Who is going to risk their company just because another one asks them? I have the same amount of proof as you, no one really knows what goes on behind closed doors. I am just going by what i interpret when i see that Sony, for some reason, continuously land FF7 games or movies on their side. Like i said, it may be back door politics and if it is, no one really knows what kind of agreement they have made in the past. But the logical move would have been to move away from Sony consoles to get as much as $ as possible using their number 1 money maker. S-E obviously has been in bed with Sony, there's no other way to explain the reasoning behind all their high budget games being put on Sony platforms. Oh yeah, there's also the fact that Sony owns about 8% stakes in S-E and helped make them into the huge company that they are today. I wouldn't be surpirsed if Sony knows exactly what properties S-E is developing before everyone else, and is always the first to get a chance bid or strike a deal... hell, that's probably why they have 8% in the first place. Anways, the question boils down to this: Does Sony have a deal in place to keep FF7 games on their platform?? No one has solid proof to officially say yes or no, but by the way the evidence looks, i don't see Square bringing FF7 to anyother platform (except cellphone) to anything else but Sony and i think the reasoning behind that is because Sony wants it that way whether they are convincing S-E or it's their decision.   EDIT: @Whitedevil: I'm not questioning the exclusivity of the future SE games. There's enough threads about FF13 going multiplatform on the web. My point is on the FF7 franchise and I think Sony is clearly influencing where that property ends up. Sony publishing FF7 for U.S and Europe was a HUGE deal, and it ultimately helped SquareSoft more than it did for Sony. Sony might not have a solid deal that allows them the rights to the FF7 franchise, but it's pretty obvious that they (sony) have a voice in the company or in terms of the FF7 franchise and apparently S-E listens. The difference is, I'm not assuming anything. You are. Usual publishing deals don't involve the kind of exclusivity you are mentioning, and there is no real reason to think they would give away future rights to a game that was going to be big with or without Sonys help. Square didn't want to publish a lot in the US and Europe so Sony did it for them because Sony wanted it to be big for their system. A lot of people think FF1 made the playstation successful and put it over the top. Which in turn helped make the PS2 successful. Both companies made out like bandits. It's a simple as that. You can assume there is some behind the door dealings but there isn't any evidence of that, so it's mere conjecture. If I'm wrong and there isn't any behind the door dealings then how do you explain S-E actions toward Sony? Loyalty? you can't be that blind. I am assuming that Sony somehow convinces S-E to continue to put priority towards their platform, you are arguing against me and based on your post, you believe S-E is making all their decisions without Sony whispering in their ear at all. You have no solid proof at all to put any substance behind that theory. You said it yourself, BOTH sides make out like bandits. But to think that SquareSoft only wanted to publish the game in Japan is VERY foolish. They knew the success of the game after the reception in Japan but did not have the resources to pull off a worldwide release without help. Sony happen to have the most resources at that time since Nintendo wasn't even in the picture. Also, when FF7 was in development, NO ONE knew it was going to outperform like it did. Heck, the only reason they moved to PlayStation was because of the whole stupid (yet important) CD vs Cartridge argument, If Nintendo knew FF7 was going to be that big they would have gave a flying shit when SS threatened to leave. Sony saw that as an opportunity and probably funded a good chunk of development to nail down publishing rights in the first place. How else would you explain the massive increase of staff and budget, SquareSoft wasn't nearly as rich as S-E is right now. Anyways, enough about the past. My point is simple, Sony has a vote/voice/say/etc. in SquareEnix. Based on the history, they probably have alot of stake in what goes with FF7. Sony are the ones that own a good chuck of S-E, not Microsoft, not Nintendo. With that being said, they are probably the ones that get to make a deal before anyone else notices, it's up to SquareEnix whether they accept it or not (business 101). Which leads back to what i said several post ago, Sony, in most likelihood has first dibs on FF7 property and that's why i'm certain we won't be seeing a FF7 game land anywhere but on a Sony platform (cept cellphone). Where are you getting this notion that SE is putting priority to Sony systems? Take Dragon Quest 9. Most everyone assumed it would be a PS3 title, but SE said "Screw that, we want a giant userbase" and went ahead and put on the DS. Keep in mind DQ in Japan is huge. It's one of the few games that can put up Halo level first week sales (though it admittedly has not displayed any form of legs). More than a few SE ppl have hinted and talked about the possibilities that multiplatform games may be the way to go for HD systems (hinting at a possible FFXIII port) as well as expanded business overseas. And FFXIII has been very much a mystery title, with rumored slow development. Rumor is SE is dragging their feet to wait for a viable PS3 userbase to sell to. SE does not prioritize Sony systems.

Lawls, you think DQ9 has a bigger budget than FF13,FF13versus, and FF7:CC??? honestly?. Nintendo is where S-E makes their money. They can spend a low amount resources and slap some bs together and come away with big profit, just like most 3rd parties when developing for DS and Wii. PS3 cost the most to develop for, has the lowest WW install base and is the most difficult to develop for, yet S-E keep coming out with title after title. Saying S-E does not prioritize on Sony has to be the biggest vice in your argument b/c that's were most their chips are. Think about it.

future games.

Sony: FF13, FF13 versus, FF dissidia, Kingdom Heart:BBS (the one that they spent extra hype on), Star Ocean: FD, Star Ocean: SE, and most likely Star Ocean 4.

Nintendo: FFCC:crystal bearers, FF4 DS, DQ6 DS, DQ9 wii, KH 358/2, Chocobo Dungeon.

MS: Infinite Undiscovery

Who's getting the big budget titles here? Nintendo? don't make me laugh. We're not in the mid 90's anymore, FF(FF7 being the most) is S-E's biggest most popular money maker. I am by no means confirming that S-E wants to be with Sony forever or that Sony is making the final decisions at S-E , but saying that Sony doesn't have any say or influence whatsoever on why S-E hasn't dumped Sony yet is just silly. Especially when you compare the facts I provide with the rumors that you think S-E is hinting at. Like i said before, you have as much as solid proof as I do.