not really. the whole story was:

1. SE made FF7 alpha/beta for n64 that was shown on many conventions.

2. sony comes on stage and offer SE moeny for FF7.

3. SE goes to nintendo and offer FF7 for certain(probably bigger) amount of cash.

4. Big N said no.

5. SE took sonys offer and ported existing FF7 game to psx and finished it as psx exclusive.

sony did that several times during psx/ps2 era.

Link or it didn't happen. Several different sources has it that SE (And other 3rd Parties) made a tech demo build for Nintendo showcasing FFVI on the N64. During development of said demo they ran into several problems with the N64 hardware. Mainly the expensive cartridge based format. Sony announces their Playstation with the CD format.

CD's are also WAY cheaper to produce, develop and keep royalty costs to a minimum. SE Approaches Nintendo asking for an alternative way to make FFVII or a cheaper royalty fee. Didn't happen SE approaches Sony and FFVII is created with Sony handling Publishing in EU and NA same as Nintendo did it for Square with FF1-FF6.

Sony has gone record again and again saying that they don't pay for 3rd party support. And truly during the PS1 and PS2 era they didnt see a need to.

well i never heard of that, i been for the ps3 15 years being updated with square enix.

i know FF7 was shown n64 but squaresoft did complain on the 32mb-64mb being too small especially when FMV tech wasi n full blow.

i am happy they made the jump. the end result was much better game.

This is the reason why I don't take any of the complaints seriously. This was the grand mother of steals and GTA III was the grand mothers daughter of a timed exclusive.

Ghostbuster game in europe was another one - they just announced like 1-2 months before release that they will fuck every other platform and their owners, it was fucked up.

That is the way things work in the business world. Microsoft does everything it can to get people to buy its exclusives and its versions of 3rd party games, whether it means it being a timed exclusive or having exclusive DLC. Why? Because it likes beating its competators, like just about every other business does.

Personly i think microsoft has the best console but sony is fantastic at suppirting new takent and looking after new studios resultin in great and exciting things!

I think microsoft needs to take a leaf out of there book and start putting miney into buying studios rather than exclisivity!

well it shouldn't, i like how things work in the market microsoft nose isn't, cellphone , LCD, name it, the one who offers the cheapest highest quality, better design, and features will sell more.

thats why the toyota camry and civic are destroying the american automakers, samsung sony panasonic LG are spilling blood to get the cheapest and highest quality LCD.

can't be competition if there is a monopoly especially when the lowest quality console it's paying third party to competition doens't get the software too.

both sony and nintendo built a awesome first second party studio, and they all produce good games, if they could why microsoft can't.

I hope this doens't turn into a another IE 6 thats it's preventing the internet to progress.

if microsft actually ever built a console that it's high quality, free online, but also have strong first party? u think i wouldn't buy it?

i be the first in line.

Especially in the U.K where they loved the movie... TBH I was more peeved that it might hurt Twesterms company, Terminal Reality.