^ You do realise that no-one has heard of around half of the games you just mentioned? ^
^ You do realise that no-one has heard of around half of the games you just mentioned? ^
insomniac_dog said: ^ You do realise that no-one has heard of around half of the games you just mentioned? ^ |
This is a video game forum sir. Those of us that have had more than 24 posts since January, do pay attention to what goes on. If you haven't heard of more than half of these games, how about taking a swing past IGN or 1up? Or maybe just put one ear out to 360 releases even though you don't own one. I don't own a PS3, but I'm sure I know more about the lineup than you do sir, including it's exclusives that "no-one has heard of".
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
You. Are. An idiot. East/West has nothing to do with it, the development does not prove they are arrogant twits. Your statement does prove that you are a twit. Have a nice day. |
@Loud_Hot_White_Box
Insulting a member is not tolerated, you now have a warning, next time you will be banned.
@Burgles & Loud_Hot_White_Box
Both of you need to find a way to make your point without being confrontational and disrespectful. We get that you have strong feelings but you can get that across without the flamebait comments. You are allowed to have and post just about any opinion (hate speech/etc being the exception) so long as you adhere to the rules when doing it.
Kasz216 said:
It costs 10% the price of a game to port it (according to estimates.)
|
i agree in principle, conversion should cost a fraction of development from scratch. But there are hidden costs due to being forced to put the game on multiple discs: production, warehousing and shipping, other than devising a convenient division in chapters and reliable and as little uncomfortable as possible way for disc swapping, so in conversions that force to use multiple discs I'd say it will be a little more than 10% (but at most 15%, so it should be profitable anyway if they manage to get even half decent sales for the converted version).
axumblade said:
because Final Fantasy XIII could save the PS3 in the US. Final Fantasy XIII could not save the 360 in Japan. |
That is not the answer to my question. Microsoft would still have insisted the 360 get the game in Japan, and you know it.
A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.
Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs
CrazzyMan said: I wonder, Sony knew about FFXIII or Not... Why there was no Kaz Hirai? =) Overall, there is still No dates, No info. Only that, FIRST will come PS3 version, so probably x360 is getting a PORT. =) So, there is a GOOD chance, that FFXIII will take ~50GB on PS3 then and won`t be donwgraded. =] GREAT! |
I won't even bother.
Damn....sucks to see Tretton telling the truth. I mean they knew Microsoft was going to do it, when didn't they try and avoid the situation.
I know for sure the PS3 version of FFXIII will sell better in Japan but it might have some mix signals in North America and Europe because of its PS3 and Xbox 360 release.
LordTheNightKnight said:
That is not the answer to my question. Microsoft would still have insisted the 360 get the game in Japan, and you know it. |
a simultanous release of ff xiii in japan on both ps3 and xbox would have meant pushing release back at least half a year.
SE's strategy for this game looks like they release the game in japan and invest the money they get from the sales there into the localisation and porting costs. So I guess if ms would have wanted SE to push back release date to do a simultanous release they would have had to pay a lot more money, which would have probably been far more than they could have gained from that. so the only other option would have been a timed exclusive for ps3 in japan, and a later xbox 360 release when the port is done, but that probably would not help ms console sales in japan.
For the US/EU release on Xbox they probably payed not too much since it also makes sense for SE to sell multiplat to a bigger potential userbase.
quaiky said:
a simultanous release of ff xiii in japan on both ps3 and xbox would have meant pushing release back at least half a year. SE's strategy for this game looks like they release the game in japan and invest the money they get from the sales there into the localisation and porting costs. So I guess if ms would have wanted SE to push back release date to do a simultanous release they would have had to pay a lot more money, which would have probably been far more than they could have gained from that. so the only other option would have been a timed exclusive for ps3 in japan, and a later xbox 360 release when the port is done, but that probably would not help ms console sales in japan. For the US/EU release on Xbox they probably payed not too much since it also makes sense for SE to sell multiplat to a bigger potential userbase. |
That just supports my argument that S-E did it for their own reasons, not a payoff.
A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.
Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs