I've always liked terrifyingly abysmal.

Uhm maybe you should go read my post a couple posts above yours. Not every userbase has the same make up of gamers. Just because the 360 has more users does not mean it is a better console to be on for the type of games that SE makes. If SE was not a specialized publisher like EA isn't, then it would make sense as their games go over all different types of genres and a bigger userbase translates into more buyers for the different genres. But SE makes JRPG's. That's pretty much it. Just one type of genre. A genre that has been greatly supported by the playstation fanbase before and never really supported by the xbox fanbase before. 

The transition can be made for the xbox brand to support JRPG's but I don't think it is SE's role to sacrifice in orer for it to happen. Unless MS was financially supporting SE with a substantial amount, SE should follow the JRPG target market, not force them to follow SE. But I guess we'll see how it works out for them. In the long ru it may be a good idea, but as of right now I think it was a bad one. 

Paying for what?  Versus?  If so, do you really think that Sony paid for Versus and not the actual FFXIII?

Versus is staying exclusive for now for very odd reasons (as far as I know), and it's very likely to go multiplat. If it does go multiplat, expect some interesting things to happen internally at Square Enix.

And I don't see SE holding out for MS to sell some more consoles in Japan, so why would they do the same for Sony in the West? JRPGs have a much higher attach rate in Japan than in the West, and I don't think SE would be too worried about the ps3's sales specifically in NA of all regions (in Europe things are roughly equal).  The majority of JRPGs (up until those on the 360) sell more in Japan than in either of the other two territories. This holds true for the juggernauts like FF, DQ, and Pokemon, and it usually holds true for more niche titles like Valkyria Chronicles and the Tales franchise. Hell, even the 360 version of Tales sold more in Japan than in NA (it has yet to hit Europe).

Ultimately, Japan is the most important region for JRPGs.  The only reason SE is ignoring that must be the result of monetary compensation.  Yes, you could say that the ps3's install base doesn't warrant exclusives, and this is true, but the same holds true for the 360's install base, if not even moreso.

Just look at White Knight Chronicles.  It is apparently a fairly mediocre RPG according to various reviewers (much to my disappointment), yet it has managed to sell almost half that of Lost Odyssey in only two months, despite being released in only one territory vs Lost Odyssey's three.

Bull crap. You really shouldn't use your opinion as fact. It looks very dumb.

We've had these good games, imo.

Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles
Final Fantasy X-2
Star Ocean 3
Dragon Quest 8
Radiata Stories
FF 12
Valkyrie Profile 2
Dissidia

And this isn't counting the numerous fantastic remakes and ports we've had.

I know that they are working on the next installment of Deus Ex, and probably Thief. And I know that IO Interactive is working on Mini Ninja, but are these enough to warrant $125 million?

I wouldn't be suprised to see another Hitman either. I could see where they would think the movie may have boosted it's popularity.

You are right, they have to invest in the strongest console in their territory if they want to survive but......it is not the PS3, is the Wii.

I don't actually think Sony paid for Versus, but I was trying to make a counter argument that the moneyhatting argument isn't the best. I'm sure there are some arrangements in place between Sony and SE to keep it on the PS3 (just as MS is sure to have an arrangement with SE for SO4).

However, I strongly disagree with the userbase argument specifically for IU. Its been mentioned already by myself and others that game is a different case, since its development was funded by MS, and SE merely published it. That being the case, even the half million copies sold would be good for SE, since they didn't spend the millions of dollars it cost to develop. Almost like a Wii-game, since all SE had to do was pay for the packaging, distribution and advertisement (in that Wii games cost significantly less to make, so less copies need to be sold to turn a profit). Aside from that, there would be no reason for that game to be on the PS3 since MS funded it. As for Last Remnant, nobody can be sure. UE3 games have a history of problems with PS3, but the fact that the PC version was delayed as well points to some kind of deal with MS. Ultimately, I think that it was a title meant to test the western waters with a new IP, but I could just as well be full of shit.

As far as WKC, it has sold well in Japan for a PS3 title. However, you yourself mentioned that JRPGs tend to do best in Japan, so I don't think the game will end up selling as well WW as Lost Odyssey, particularly since Sony doesn't seem to want to advertise their games that much (I have yet to see a Killzone 2 ad here in the US, while LO for example was well advertised). Keep in mind that of the 3 home consoles, Lost Odyssey is the best selling JRPG of this gen worldwide.

I'm not really arguing against moneyhatting being done, but that the same reasoning given to say MS is moneyhatting can be applied to Sony, since both are in fairly similar circumstances. And I believe that both SO4 and Versus are gonna end up on both systems anyway.

It's really funny how so many PS3 fans hope and pray for Kitase and Nomura to leave the company. It's like something has mas you sure that in that case they will start working exclusively with Sony - yeah, right, just like Sakaguchi and Matsuno did.

 ... Oh wait

I'm pretty sure I'm the only one in this thread that mentioned Kitase and Nomura's possible departure, and I *don't* think I implied any place that they might go...