@1st Bold - FF and Metal Gear were originally Nintendo exclusives, so it's not like they can't jump again.

@2nd & 3rd Bold - Don't attack members it's against the rules, we can all debate logically, and make real points.

"Yes, some franchises jumped from NIN to Sony when the PS1 came around,yet the only one we still talk about today that jumped is FF. THe other ones are not that important. Sony had there own mess of exclusive games that they had ushered into the gaming world. Crash, Tomb Raider, etc started on PS1. THese games were awsome. Has no one but me noticed that once these games became multiplatform or left Sony that there quality deminished. This is very much true for all developers that have started with sony and dishonored themselves with multiplatness or abandonment. Sony ushers in great games everytime a new system comes around, this is an undebatable fact. The best franchises of today started or at least debued MAJOR success on there systems. To be anywhere else is to not aknowledge a game's full potential , in return simply not as good a game.

I will never agree with the gaming generation that MS has ushered in. To the loud potty mouthed toddlers on Xbox Live, to the money hatting of games, to the bringing of standard multiplatform, none of these things bode well for gaming in general. I look for the bettering of my games, not for the cheapest route."

@1st Bold - Metal Gear says hi!

@2nd Bold - Most intellectual properties were sold for a profit, the buyers killed the brand

@3rd Bold - it's very debateable I could tell you a good list of things that changed when Sony came in that wasn't good.

@4th Bold - PS1 says hi as well, just like Sony did with N64...

So honestly most of your arguments are based in ignorance but that doesn't excuse you of attacking members like Soriku.  So please stop your arguments until you can read up on the actual argument you're trying to make.

Everyone needs to bring it down a notch and stop taking this so seriously. Debate is one thing, but when you start typing entire sentences in CAPS you're probably in need of a break to rethink how serious this gaming discussion really is to you....hopefully not enough that you would still seriously want to yell at someone over it =P

1.Wow, 2 games that matter that were taken from the NIN systems. Now name another that sells on par with FF. Like I said, the others are just filler. I never expect games that dont do that well in general to stay loyal to one system or another. And when it came to the jump from NIN to Sony there were many improvements to gaming such as the CD(And yes I kno other systems had it too).

2. I never attacked anyone. When I talk about the Soriku fund he knows I am not serious, well....I am serious but I am not saying it in a demeaning........It is not out of anger.

3. Please name these invisible faults of the PS1, do tell. That system had greatness written all over it.

4. Sony does not money hat. People just want to believe they do because of their success. We KNOW MS does it, they have admitted it on occassion. Sony has strict policies against it. My issue with it is the mentallity that throwing money around will win you everything with no work put into it.

forevercloud3000, you're acting so biased and closed-minded that I don't even know what to say. But I'll do my best.

Now, a series doesn't have to be a big seller to be influental and big part of the video gaming industry. Here are two big franchises that went from Nintendo to Sony (Although one of them only partly) during the PSX/N64 era: Megaman and Castlevania. Besides those, everyone has already mentioned Metal Gear and Final Fantasy. We also have Dragon Quest, which Soriku mentioned, which no matted what anyone says is a big seller - Despite if it's only in one region.

These were titles that were taken from Nintendo to become exclusive to Sony (except for Castlevania). What has 360 taken that's now exclusive to them instead of Sony? Star Ocean, but people here said that it's not a big franchise, and it didn't count when Sony stole it from Nintendo, so it doesn't count now either. Is there anything else? I really can't think of anything. I mean, there might be, but I can't think of a single one. So why all the whining?

Also, regarding "Sony does not moneyhat", did you miss that recent article where Sony stated "We may start paying for exclusives again"? Keyword being again. There's a reason they added that.

On a different note, I'd totally give $50 to a Soriku PS3-fund if KH3 comes to PS3.

and never returned, i don't see Final fantasy xiii for the wii.

I think the interview in question that you are referencing to is the one where they said they would "ReEvaluate" paying for exclusivity, not what you said. Unless you know of a different one, you are surely mistaken. I still would not like it if they started doing it either.

Secondly, you have heard no wining from me about SO4. They will see on there own that simply because a system has a wider fanbase does not mean it is going to sell better. No JRPG has sold well on 360, you know why? Because the JRPG fanbases lie with the DS,PSP, and PS3 thats why. Now FF is a title you will hear me rip and rave about going multiplat. Yet that is a different topic all together (I dont like multiplatform period).

And I will donat 10bucks to Soriku so he can get a PS3 and understand WHY the game is better suited there...

I do see it for the 360 however.

See, that's not the point though. People are saying Microsoft steal games from Sony, when in fact they do not. The games are still on PS3. What Sony did to Nintendo? That's stealing, if anything, but even then there was a lot less whining than there is now.

Also, regarding the interview, here, I'll post it in it's entirety and bold the parts that are interesting:

"A long time ago, Jack Tretton mentioned that Sony will not pay for PS3 exclusivity in this generation of games. 'We have a very different approach to exclusives than some of our competitors. We don't buy exclusivity. We don't fund development. We don't, for the lack of a better term, bribe somebody to only do a game on our platform,' he noted. Instead, Sony tries to seduce developers to make better games on the system, and use the appeal of the PS3 hardware to secure exclusives.

This strategy has meant a bevy of formerly PS2-exclusive series to become multiplatform successes on Xbox 360 and PC. However, Kaz Hirai told ThreeSpeech 'that's something that we can re-evaluate.' High-profile exclusives act as differentiating reasons for system purchases. PS3 has a strong first-party line-up, but it will need to pursue third-party exclusives with an even stronger bite. However, with games being so expensive in this generation, such a proposal may be difficult. 'It's also something that the publishers need to make a business decision on. Ultimately, it becomes a dialogue – if it makes sense for them to go exclusive, that's a business decision that they need to make. But generally speaking, because of the investments that publishers need to make in this round of hardware, it's going to be more difficult for publishers to make that decision.'"

Notice how they're only referring to this generation, and heavily implying that it differs from last generation in that sense. This subtly suggests, but suggests nonetheless, that Sony just recently adopted this strategy.

Calling people "cheap asses" is insulting and therefore attacking other members.

PS1 had many faults, being a console with a decent amount of failure rates when consoles before it had relatively none, graphics were horrid when console power actually meant something to how the game could play (now power just means you can just add some more bells and whistles), most of their ideas for the console were taken from Nintendo which is partially because the PS1 was orignally being developed by both Nintendo and Sony but vibration and analog sticks were slapped on after the N64 got them, and then the fact that there was a ton of shovelware cause devs knew they could make a quick buck on the ignorant consumers that had never gamed before and picked up a PS1. (I can go on if you want but you probably don't want me to)

Sony promised a lot of developers funding or help for their products if they jumped ship from N64, they also bought dev teams, that's still money hatting just they didn't do it out in the open as much as MS has.