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

Forums - Sony - Square Enix: "Maybe news on a Final Fantasy 7 remake soon"...

Khuutra on 26 August 2009
Carl2291 said:
Khuutra said:
Carl2291 said:

Sure, Sony didn't want it on PSN to add to the PSone Classics part of PSN... it was just to compete with Live.

Any links to say that MS aint asked for it?

@Khuutra, some downloads are way bigger than that.

How many XBLA titles are?

I've not checked. And i dont intend on going through the entire Marketplace to find out.

1 thing i do know, they can get 2.31GB of Halo: Combat Evolved onto the Marketplace, so there is no reason why FF7 wouldn't fit.

The Xbox Originals line was separate from XBLA, and has to be considered separate in that sense.

Watchmen came in at 1.2GB, almost as big as FF7, but it had the advantage of tying in to a very popular cinematic property at the time of release and not being a re-release of a twelve-year-old game.



Around the Network
kiefer23 on 26 August 2009
Carl2291 said:
kiefer23 said:
Carl2291 said:
Khuutra said:
Carl2291 said:
You should all know that PC means nothing

And you should know Banjo-Kazooie is on XBLA.

The illusion of brand loyalty means less than nothing.

I know... i have it myself.

But, if there is no Sony deal... why isn't FF7 on Live?

Like I mentioned before, Square-Enix most probably had no plans on bringing FF7 to the PSN. Sony more than likely approached them asking for a PSN version of FF7 to make their weak (Compared to XBL) downloadable game line up appear much better with Final Fantasy VII on the list.

Microsoft have not asked for it.

Also having a PSN FF7 gave Sony something to brag about at E3.

Sure, Sony didn't want it on PSN to add to the PSone Classics part of PSN... it was just to compete with Live.

Any links to say that MS aint asked for it?

@Khuutra, some downloads are way bigger than that.


What is the Psone classics section of the PSN? Downloadable games... They rival XBLA games alongside Sony's other downloadable titles like Pain and Super Stardust HD.

In the UK they have really shit PSone classics up except FF7. I haven't checked recently to see if Sony have put any other decent PSone classics. Calling Medi Evil and Destruction Debry classics is laughable.

Everything on the PSN is there to compete with XBL.

Believe me if Microsoft asked for it and Square-Enix refused it would be leaked onto the web and all the Playstation Fanboys would be running in circles rubbing it into every Xbox owners faces. And if Microsoft asked or offered money I'm positive they would get it even if it was the PC version.



Carl on 26 August 2009
Khuutra said:
Carl2291 said:
Khuutra said:
Carl2291 said:

Sure, Sony didn't want it on PSN to add to the PSone Classics part of PSN... it was just to compete with Live.

Any links to say that MS aint asked for it?

@Khuutra, some downloads are way bigger than that.

How many XBLA titles are?

I've not checked. And i dont intend on going through the entire Marketplace to find out.

1 thing i do know, they can get 2.31GB of Halo: Combat Evolved onto the Marketplace, so there is no reason why FF7 wouldn't fit.

The Xbox Originals line was separate from XBLA, and has to be considered separate in that sense.

Watchmen came in at 1.2GB, almost as big as FF7, but it had the advantage of tying in to a very popular cinematic property at the time of release and not being a re-release of a twelve-year-old game.

Its the same thing, Originals and Arcade are still both downloadable games.

Like i said, there is no reason why FF7 wouldn't fit onto the marketplace.



                            

Xoj on 26 August 2009

sony have to accept that though.
same for nintendo with golden eye.



ajaghvajagh on 26 August 2009

:D
Lets just hope it isnt a psp title, or I (and many others) will be PISSED
Also, lets hope its announced in the next 3 years at least lol



 

Around the Network
CDiablo on 26 August 2009

I hope that it comes out as an XBL exclusive so VGchartz will short out due to the tears of the fanboys.



Getting an XBOX One for me is like being in a bad relationship but staying together because we have kids. XBone we have 20000+ achievement points, 2+ years of XBL Gold and 20000+ MS points. I think its best we stay together if only for the MS points.

Nintendo Treehouse is what happens when a publisher is confident and proud of its games and doesn't need to show CGI lies for five minutes.

-Jim Sterling

kiefer23 on 26 August 2009
Xoj said:
kiefer23 said:
Munkeh111 said:
What's to stop it going on Live? Well they would have to port it, so it is not free money in the same way


What and 0 XBL users are going to purchase it? They have a buyer right here that would definetly pick it up "again" on XBLA.

It really couldn't cost much for them to port over a 5th generation game to the Xbox 360. Heck they could port the PC version with better audio. That would be even easier. It would cost even less then the DS remakes.

Final Fantasy VII is a goldmine. Where ever Square take it they will make profit.

actually the PC version was worse.. i had it.

it have some bugs that make the game unplayable, it could screw up your save also. controls were annoying , and the video were mere converstions.

text was easier to read though.

you know goldeneye was also by rare and it's on the XBLA mainly because nintendo was the publisher are they are not giving in golden eye so easy.

if a ff7 pc exist and sony  and squaresoft have to give a green light to go.

Ports

The President of Nintendo of America, Reggie Fils-Aime, announced that Nintendo is exploring the possibility of adding GoldenEye 007 to the Wii Virtual Console, despite a complicated situation in which the game's developer Rare is owned by Microsoft (producers of the rival Xbox 360 console) and the video game rights to the James Bond franchise are held by Activision. He stated, "We would love to see it [on the Virtual Console], so we're exploring all the rights issues."[46]

On January 7, 2008, Xbox Evolved confirmed the existence of GoldenEye 007 on Xbox Live Arcade.[47] On January 11, 2008, 1UP.com reported that a GoldenEye port (as opposed to a remake) had been in development at Rare for several months, but stated that the title would not be released on the Xbox Live Arcade since "Microsoft and Nintendo couldn't agree on the financial side of things."[48]

They are easy to fix bugs. And Golden Eye won't be coming to Live or the VC simply because Activision now own the license to the James Bond Franchise. They won't allow it unless they get something in return and Microsoft owning the developer of Golden Eye doesn't improve Nintendo's chances either.

Like many of us have mentioned Sony own's no License with the Final Fantasy franchise. Square-Enix decide where it goes. Sony gets
no green light to fiddle with.



Carl on 26 August 2009
kiefer23 said:
Carl2291 said:
kiefer23 said:
Carl2291 said:
Khuutra said:
Carl2291 said:
You should all know that PC means nothing

And you should know Banjo-Kazooie is on XBLA.

The illusion of brand loyalty means less than nothing.

I know... i have it myself.

But, if there is no Sony deal... why isn't FF7 on Live?

Like I mentioned before, Square-Enix most probably had no plans on bringing FF7 to the PSN. Sony more than likely approached them asking for a PSN version of FF7 to make their weak (Compared to XBL) downloadable game line up appear much better with Final Fantasy VII on the list.

Microsoft have not asked for it.

Also having a PSN FF7 gave Sony something to brag about at E3.

Sure, Sony didn't want it on PSN to add to the PSone Classics part of PSN... it was just to compete with Live.

Any links to say that MS aint asked for it?

@Khuutra, some downloads are way bigger than that.


What is the Psone classics section of the PSN? Downloadable games... They rival XBLA games alongside Sony's other downloadable titles like Pain and Super Stardust HD.

In the UK they have really shit PSone classics up except FF7. I haven't checked recently to see if Sony have put any other decent PSone classics. Calling Medi Evil and Destruction Debry classics is laughable.

Everything on the PSN is there to compete with XBL.

Believe me if Microsoft asked for it and Square-Enix refused it would be leaked onto the web and all the Playstation Fanboys would be running in circles rubbing it into every Xbox owners faces. And if Microsoft asked or offered money I'm positive they would get it even if it was the PC version.

Red- So they didn't do it to give the service a boost... or to earn some money?

Green- I agree that we get a shit service. Just because you dont count Medi-Evil or DD as classics, dont mean they aren't "classics".

Blue- I wont belive you. Why would SE leak the fail when they have had a good business with MS this gen?

 



                            

Khuutra on 26 August 2009
Carl2291 said:
Khuutra said:
Carl2291 said:
Khuutra said:

How many XBLA titles are?

I've not checked. And i dont intend on going through the entire Marketplace to find out.

1 thing i do know, they can get 2.31GB of Halo: Combat Evolved onto the Marketplace, so there is no reason why FF7 wouldn't fit.

The Xbox Originals line was separate from XBLA, and has to be considered separate in that sense.

Watchmen came in at 1.2GB, almost as big as FF7, but it had the advantage of tying in to a very popular cinematic property at the time of release and not being a re-release of a twelve-year-old game.

Its the same thing, Originals and Arcade are still both downloadable games.

Like i said, there is no reason why FF7 wouldn't fit onto the marketplace.

There is a difference, if only in presentation and allowance of size.

Final Fantasy 7, as an unenhanced port of a game that was not the belle of the ball over a decade ago, is not going to be given the same leeway as an enormous, completely original tie-in to a currently popular intellectual property.

That, of course, is assuming Square even assumes that there would be a large enough financial return on the deal, which they very well may not.



Xoj on 26 August 2009
kiefer23 said:
Xoj said:
kiefer23 said:
Munkeh111 said:
What's to stop it going on Live? Well they would have to port it, so it is not free money in the same way


What and 0 XBL users are going to purchase it? They have a buyer right here that would definetly pick it up "again" on XBLA.

It really couldn't cost much for them to port over a 5th generation game to the Xbox 360. Heck they could port the PC version with better audio. That would be even easier. It would cost even less then the DS remakes.

Final Fantasy VII is a goldmine. Where ever Square take it they will make profit.

actually the PC version was worse.. i had it.

it have some bugs that make the game unplayable, it could screw up your save also. controls were annoying , and the video were mere converstions.

text was easier to read though.

you know goldeneye was also by rare and it's on the XBLA mainly because nintendo was the publisher are they are not giving in golden eye so easy.

if a ff7 pc exist and sony  and squaresoft have to give a green light to go.

Ports

The President of Nintendo of America, Reggie Fils-Aime, announced that Nintendo is exploring the possibility of adding GoldenEye 007 to the Wii Virtual Console, despite a complicated situation in which the game's developer Rare is owned by Microsoft (producers of the rival Xbox 360 console) and the video game rights to the James Bond franchise are held by Activision. He stated, "We would love to see it [on the Virtual Console], so we're exploring all the rights issues."[46]

On January 7, 2008, Xbox Evolved confirmed the existence of GoldenEye 007 on Xbox Live Arcade.[47] On January 11, 2008, 1UP.com reported that a GoldenEye port (as opposed to a remake) had been in development at Rare for several months, but stated that the title would not be released on the Xbox Live Arcade since "Microsoft and Nintendo couldn't agree on the financial side of things."[48]

They are easy to fix bugs. And Golden Eye won't be coming to Live or the VC simply because Activision now own the license to the James Bond Franchise. They won't allow it unless they get something in return and Microsoft owning the developer of Golden Eye doesn't improve Nintendo's chances either.

Like many of us have mentioned Sony own's no License with the Final Fantasy franchise. Square-Enix decide where it goes. Sony gets
no green light to fiddle with.

of course they do, nintendo doesn't own they still get a talk in financial things.?

nintendo was the publisher only, same for sony and ff7.

square enix gets activision sit in this fight.