By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Sony: 'Disappointed in Square Enix'

Scruff7 on 17 July 2008

i don't know about Sony, but i feel like i've had a bit of a kick in the teeth. and i'm not even a FF fan...!

it does sound underhand to me and it will be a serious blow to Sony's campaign in the US and one which will affect all PS3 owners, as the more consoles, the more likely to get tailored exclusive games.

i can see why MS wouldn't bother to buy rights to Japan, even if it was multiplat there, Japanese people would still buy the PS3 version - it's already more prolific there, and it suits their tastes more according to the games sales there.



Atari 2600, Sega Mega Drive, Game Boy, Game Boy Advanced, N64, Playstation, Xbox, PSP Phat, PSP 3000, and PS3 60gb (upgraded to 320gb), NDS

Linux Ubuntu user

Favourite game: Killzone 3

Around the Network
Andir on 17 July 2008
DirtyP2002 said:

 

 MS has enough money to spent on exclusive deals. Sony just can't mess with MS moneywise. MS could buy Square Enix, just because they feel like to. I mean 45 billion USD for yahoo. Square Enix would be a smaller fish :D

I know they won't buy SE, but they could if they wanted to.

*edit* there is just no company that could convince a 3rd party developer just with the money. MS pays just too good.

The funny thing about th Yahoo deal is that 45 billion would wipe Microsoft's cash on hand out... Totally.  They don't have the cas h on hand to cover it so they offer a 50/50 stock buyout and don't have ot pay as much because the stock they buy becomes their own in a sense.  It would put Microsoft in a large world of hurt if that actually went through, which I why I think they were after Yahoo not for search or web, but patents they can turn against Google.  Otherwise, there is no reason for MS to put themselves in that situation.



It seems the mods need help with this forum.  I have zero tolerance for trolling, platform criticism (Rule 4), and poster bad-mouthing (Rule 3.4) and you will be reported.

Review before posting: http://vgchartz.com/forum/rules.php

quaiky on 17 July 2008
LordTheNightKnight said:
quaiky said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
axumblade said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
And where's the proof this was paid for?

And even if it was, why didn't the supposed deal include FF XIII in the region the 360 needed it most?

 

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 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.

 

its hard to say if there really was a payment or not, i was just arguing that paying SE for a simultanous release in japan too would have been very irrational at such a late status of the game project. Pushing back release a few months is a lot extra costs, so i think SE would only have accepted it if MS would have payed full cost of these extra months or more.

Also if there really is no direct payment involved, then there might still be some indirect payments that helped convince SE like MS sending a few developers to help with the porting,  or ms helping out on a smaller project in return, or some hardware deals (there are lots of possibilities for indirect payments)



LordTheNightKnight on 17 July 2008
quaiky said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
quaiky said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
axumblade said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
And where's the proof this was paid for?

And even if it was, why didn't the supposed deal include FF XIII in the region the 360 needed it most?

 

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 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.

 

its hard to say if there really was a payment or not, i was just arguing that paying SE for a simultanous release in japan too would have been very irrational at such a late status of the game project. Pushing back release a few months is a lot extra costs, so i think SE would only have accepted it if MS would have payed full cost of these extra months or more.

Also if there really is no direct payment involved, then there might still be some indirect payments that helped convince SE like MS sending a few developers to help with the porting,  or ms helping out on a smaller project in return, or some hardware deals (there are lots of possibilities for indirect payments)

 

Which, by the way, Sony could actually do, since Trenton specifically stated they just don't write checks for exclusives. There are plenty of other ways to get exclsuvies, that Sony could take advantage of. They just didn't.



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

drkohler on 17 July 2008
axumblade said:

because Final Fantasy XIII could save the PS3 in the US..

Wow.. axumblade better tell Sony needs to be saved in NA... after all, they only sell a tiny fraction of units compared to X360... oh, wait... axumblade trolling..

Looking at this whole FF thing, it really isn't that much of a deal for Sony, although they were apparently caught by surprise. Expect to see some heavy action when the board of S-E is supposed to get reelected (but Sony does not hold enough shares to really "revenge-punish" some exec..). Sony is doing well now in two of three markets with the PS3 but needs to improve in the asian market as they haven't sold enough units there for general software profitability. And guess what, FF stays exclusive exactly in that market as told by S-E.. what a coincidence, some exec does seem to want to keep her/his job at S-E..