So what's Agni's Philosophy going to be? The new Versus as in the Sony exclusive Final Fantasy?
So what's Agni's Philosophy going to be? The new Versus as in the Sony exclusive Final Fantasy?
kain_kusanagi said:
|
That is why you believe it will make more sense for Epic Games to release Gears of War on different platforms.
Nintendo is selling their IPs to Microsoft and this is true because:
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=221391&page=1
AbbathTheGrim said:
|
MS paid for Gears of War just like Sony paid for Journey, Flower and Flow. I have nothing against what we refer to as 2nd party games. What I don't like are straight up 3rd party exclusives. It used to be that PS2 was all a game developer needed to support because it was THE gaming system in everyone's houses. Those days are over and multiplatform engines have made developing a game for everything very easy. There is no reason to make FF vs XIII, or FF XV or whatever they call it, an exclusive. The engine is multiplatform and porting is cheap and easy. There is absolutely no reason to make an exclusive when the game can make money on other platforms. When a console manufacturer buys exclusivity it's no different than flat out buying a developer. When that happens the game becomes very much like a 1st party game even if the developer is independent. But when a 100% independent developer and a 100% independent publisher release an exclusive game I just don't understand it at all. It's a pet peeve of mine. The Xbox 360 and the PS3 have the same capabilities and each hold close to the same market share. Everything Square Enix makes should release on everything that can run the game. The same goes for EA, Activision and all the rest.
kain_kusanagi said:
MS paid for Gears of War just like Sony paid for Journey, Flower and Flow. I have nothing against what we refer to as 2nd party games. What I don't like are straight up 3rd party exclusives. It used to be that PS2 was all a game developer needed to support because it was THE gaming system in everyone's houses. Those days are over and multiplatform engines have made developing a game for everything very easy. There is no reason to make FF vs XIII, or FF XV or whatever they call it, an exclusive. The engine is multiplatform and porting is cheap and easy. There is absolutely no reason to make an exclusive when the game can make money on other platforms. When a console manufacturer buys exclusivity it's no different than flat out buying a developer. When that happens the game becomes very much like a 1st party game even if the developer is independent. But when a 100% independent developer and a 100% independent publisher release an exclusive game I just don't understand it at all. It's a pet peeve of mine. The Xbox 360 and the PS3 have the same capabilities and each hold close to the same market share. Everything Square Enix makes should release on everything that can run the game. The same goes for EA, Activision and all the rest.
|
Maybe they just want to show Sony some gratitude for the ps2.
Talal said:
|
I'd rather they show gratitude to their fans regardless of the console they own.
kain_kusanagi said:
I'd rather they show gratitude to their fans regardless of the console they own. |
I'm also pretty sure that Sony owns about 10% of their shares so that may be it.
kain_kusanagi said:
MS paid for Gears of War just like Sony paid for Journey, Flower and Flow. I have nothing against what we refer to as 2nd party games. What I don't like are straight up 3rd party exclusives. It used to be that PS2 was all a game developer needed to support because it was THE gaming system in everyone's houses. Those days are over and multiplatform engines have made developing a game for everything very easy. There is no reason to make FF vs XIII, or FF XV or whatever they call it, an exclusive. The engine is multiplatform and porting is cheap and easy. There is absolutely no reason to make an exclusive when the game can make money on other platforms. When a console manufacturer buys exclusivity it's no different than flat out buying a developer. When that happens the game becomes very much like a 1st party game even if the developer is independent. But when a 100% independent developer and a 100% independent publisher release an exclusive game I just don't understand it at all. It's a pet peeve of mine. The Xbox 360 and the PS3 have the same capabilities and each hold close to the same market share. Everything Square Enix makes should release on everything that can run the game. The same goes for EA, Activision and all the rest.
|
That's cool and all, talking about what you have nothing against and all, talking about contractual games that make them second party. But once Epic Games ends their contract with Microsoft and given the fact that Epic Games owns the Gears IP, with your reasoning, you are saying it will make more sense for Epic Games to release Gears in multiple platforms. Or do you believe there are reasons for keeping games from third party developers as exclusives?
Nintendo is selling their IPs to Microsoft and this is true because:
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=221391&page=1
Soriku said:
Well one they can focus on the strength and capabilities of one console to make a better game tailored to the hardware it's on. Two, they might find that one platform is enough for sales because they believe their fanbase isn't split up everywhere. Then they can just continue to focus on making the best game on one console, and also not worry about the costs of another version of the game for another platform. |
Everything you said is very reasonable. But I'll tell you why I'd rather have 3rd party games tay multiplatform unless they are paid for 2nd party type partnerships.
"Well one they can focus on the strength and capabilities of one console to make a better game tailored to the hardware it's on."
Sure, but the PS3 and Xbox 360 have the same capabilities. Unless Sony gives a 3rd party dev Naughty Dog secrets or MS gives a 3rd party dev 343i secrets it's not going to matter. Even if a primary console was picked a port could still be made even if the primary release is superior. I'd rather have a dirty port than no port at all.
"Two, they might find that one platform is enough for sales because they believe their fanbase isn't split up everywhere. Then they can just continue to focus on making the best game on one console, and also not worry about the costs of another version of the game for another platform."
If one platform is enough than the sales of another is gravy. Multiplatform engines and tools are so good now that there it's cheap and easy to both develop in parallel and port after the fact. Devs should always focus on making the best game, but they should also get that game into as many hands as possible.
thats actually good news, I don't want any more FF13 mytho , three games are enough.
make something new and fresh, and I hope that people could stop with the exclusivity thing, they need to release it on next gen consoles and PC (please?) if they hope the series to still be as strong as it did once, being exclusive has no benefit at all, being exclusive to PS3 is just not just shooting themselves in the feet, as final fantasy always aimed for "high graphics"
Well if they not downgrade the game due multiplat then the name can be anything.