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

Forums - Nintendo - Should Square port FFXIII to Wii?

jarrod on 01 December 2009
KylieDog said:
They don't get release outside japan because the games that did release outside it didn't perform well enough.


Clear enough?

No, because you can't actually seem to prove that.  You're just piling faulty assumptions on top of faulty assumptions/

Name these games that "did release outside it didn't perform well enough" for me.  Hell name the games that aren't getting release now because of that too?



Around the Network
ClaudeLv250 on 01 December 2009
Chrizum said:
ClaudeLv250 said:
Chrizum said:
ClaudeLv250 said:
Yes, yes they should. They already said it was possible with Crystal Tools, no point in gimping their sales by ignoring the best selling console.

If they don't, they should at least make FFXV Wii exclusive. And Haeresis XIII too.

Yeah, they shouldn't ignore half the market by not releasing it on Wii. However, they really should ignore half the market with FFXV.

It makes perfect sense.

Roffle, like Wii isn't going to be more than 50% of the market by the time FFXV comes out.

You really aren't making much sense to me.

By the time FFXV comes out, it will release on a next-gen console. It wasn't a realistic statement from you to begin with.

It's just that you hate to see the being Wii ignored, but love to see the HD consoles being ignored. There's a word for that around here, I'm sure you've heard of it before...

Let's see...

Me: "FFXV should be Wii exclusive."

You: "That's ignoring half of the market!"

Me: "Wii will be more than half of the market by the time FFXV comes out."

You: "You're not making any sense!"

You sure you want to go down this road? Those are some pretty flimsy strawmen you put together. You mad?



Tag - "No trolling on my watch!"

Chrizum on 01 December 2009
ClaudeLv250 said:
Chrizum said:
ClaudeLv250 said:
Chrizum said:
ClaudeLv250 said:
Yes, yes they should. They already said it was possible with Crystal Tools, no point in gimping their sales by ignoring the best selling console.

If they don't, they should at least make FFXV Wii exclusive. And Haeresis XIII too.

Yeah, they shouldn't ignore half the market by not releasing it on Wii. However, they really should ignore half the market with FFXV.

It makes perfect sense.

Roffle, like Wii isn't going to be more than 50% of the market by the time FFXV comes out.

You really aren't making much sense to me.

By the time FFXV comes out, it will release on a next-gen console. It wasn't a realistic statement from you to begin with.

It's just that you hate to see the being Wii ignored, but love to see the HD consoles being ignored. There's a word for that around here, I'm sure you've heard of it before...

Let's see...

Me: "FFXV should be Wii exclusive."

You: "That's ignoring half of the market!"

Me: "Wii will be more than half of the market by the time FFXV comes out."

You: "You're not making any sense!"

You sure you want to go down this road? Those are some pretty flimsy strawmen you put together. You mad?

I'm at a loss for words here...

You said FFXIII should also be on Wii, because it's half the market. Newsflash: Wii is NOT half the market when FFXIII releases.

Will the Wii be past 50% market share when FFXV comes out? Maybe, maybe not. We just don't know. Still, you demand it should be Wii exclusive, thus ignoring an extremely big part of the market (probably around half the market).

And even then, neither the HD consoles or the Wii will probably be a viable market at the time FFXV comes out.

Conclusions:
1) It is not okay to ignore a large part of the market when the Wii doesn't get the game.
2) Ignoring a large part of the market is okay when the Wii gets an exclusive.



jarrod on 01 December 2009
KylieDog said:
Disaster, if that isn't a game that should have sold great in the west compared to Japan nothing is. As it stands in Europe it didn't even sell enough to get tracked and it wasn't even seemed worth releasing in the US even despite the lack of quality games getting released.

lol.  It didn't even break 30k in Japan, and half that probably went to importers anyway.   If I can't bring up games like Muramasa (150k+), No More Heroes (450k+) or HotD2&3 (1m+) on the basis of sales being wholly incomparable to a mainline Final Fantasy, why can you bring up something like Disaster?  This is your shining example!?  LOL!



wichdog69 on 01 December 2009

no, no more ports. ports have left a bad taste in my mouth.



Wichdog69

Around the Network
ClaudeLv250 on 01 December 2009
Chrizum said:
ClaudeLv250 said:
Chrizum said:
ClaudeLv250 said:
Chrizum said:
ClaudeLv250 said:
Yes, yes they should. They already said it was possible with Crystal Tools, no point in gimping their sales by ignoring the best selling console.

If they don't, they should at least make FFXV Wii exclusive. And Haeresis XIII too.

Yeah, they shouldn't ignore half the market by not releasing it on Wii. However, they really should ignore half the market with FFXV.

It makes perfect sense.

Roffle, like Wii isn't going to be more than 50% of the market by the time FFXV comes out.

You really aren't making much sense to me.

By the time FFXV comes out, it will release on a next-gen console. It wasn't a realistic statement from you to begin with.

It's just that you hate to see the being Wii ignored, but love to see the HD consoles being ignored. There's a word for that around here, I'm sure you've heard of it before...

Let's see...

Me: "FFXV should be Wii exclusive."

You: "That's ignoring half of the market!"

Me: "Wii will be more than half of the market by the time FFXV comes out."

You: "You're not making any sense!"

You sure you want to go down this road? Those are some pretty flimsy strawmen you put together. You mad?

I'm at a loss for words here...

You said FFXIII should also be on Wii, because it's half the market. Newsflash: Wii is NOT half the market when FFXIII releases.

Will the Wii be past 50% market share when FFXV comes out? Maybe, maybe not. We just don't know. Still, you demand it should be Wii exclusive, thus ignoring an extremely big part of the market (probably around half the market).

And even then, neither the HD consoles or the Wii will probably be a viable market at the time FFXV comes out.

Conclusions:
1) It is not okay to ignore a large part of the market when the Wii doesn't get the game.
2) Ignoring a large part of the market is okay when the Wii gets an exclusive.

I never said anything about half of the market - you did. I said they shouldn't ignore the best selling console. FF has traditionally released on the leading console since the first game. I didn't think suggesting that FF continue its tradition was going to bring rage-induced controversey. The only reason FFXIII is even multiplat is because SE bet on the wrong horse. They might as well skip all of the drama and backpedaling with XV and make it Wii exclusive like they should have with XIII.



Tag - "No trolling on my watch!"

Chrizum on 01 December 2009
ClaudeLv250 said:

I never said anything about half of the market - you did. I said they shouldn't ignore the best selling console. FF has traditionally released on the leading console since the first game. I didn't think suggesting that FF continue its tradition was going to bring rage-induced controversey. The only reason FFXIII is even multiplat is because SE bet on the wrong horse. They might as well skip all of the drama and backpedaling with XV and make it Wii exclusive like they should have with XIII.

Why should FFXIII have been Wii-exclusive in the first place? Just because it's the leading console? I'd say the decision on which system(s) to release the game should be based on the prospect of profit, nothing else.

If anything, it should be on all viable systems: Wii, 360, PS3 and PC.

By frantically stating all Final Fantasy games should be exclusively on Wii, you're basically showing your true -and not so pretty- colors.



LordTheNightKnight on 01 December 2009

S-E should port X, X-2, and XII, because the Wii could handle those. And even though ports are as cheap as many think, these sure as hell wouldn't cost as much as the original development.



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

ClaudeLv250 on 01 December 2009
Chrizum said:
ClaudeLv250 said:

I never said anything about half of the market - you did. I said they shouldn't ignore the best selling console. FF has traditionally released on the leading console since the first game. I didn't think suggesting that FF continue its tradition was going to bring rage-induced controversey. The only reason FFXIII is even multiplat is because SE bet on the wrong horse. They might as well skip all of the drama and backpedaling with XV and make it Wii exclusive like they should have with XIII.

Why should FFXIII have been Wii-exclusive in the first place? Just because it's the leading console? I'd say the decision on which system(s) to release the game should be based on the prospect of profit, nothing else.

If anything, it should be on all viable systems: Wii, 360, PS3 and PC.

By frantically stating all Final Fantasy games should be exclusively on Wii, you're basically showing your true -and not so pretty- colors.

By frantically screaming at everything I post with strawmen shows your true colors. "All" Final Fantasy games? Does that include Dissidia, Versus XIII and Agito XIII? I actually thought it was absurd when they announced not one but two exclusive FFXIII games for the PS3 before it even came out but suggesting that one of these games should have been for the more successful console is ridiculous? Even when one goes multiplat because they started to backpedal? Does the notion really bother you that much?

I'm curious. Why does it make you so angry that you have to resort to strawmen?



Tag - "No trolling on my watch!"

jarrod on 01 December 2009
KylieDog said:
jarrod said:
KylieDog said:
Disaster, if that isn't a game that should have sold great in the west compared to Japan nothing is. As it stands in Europe it didn't even sell enough to get tracked and it wasn't even seemed worth releasing in the US even despite the lack of quality games getting released.

lol.  It didn't even break 30k in Japan, and half that probably went to importers anyway.   If I can't bring up games like Muramasa (150k+), No More Heroes (450k+) or HotD2&3 (1m+) on the basis of sales being wholly incomparable to a mainline Final Fantasy, why can you bring up something like Disaster?  This is your shining example!?  LOL!

 

It was an example of a game that should have done great in the west.  You keep creeping away from a fixed stance so I'm not gonna bother tackling this anymore especially since I pointed out those games sales combined would be poor for a Final Fantasy, especially considering one of them released at budget price and another dropped to budget price after a month.

It didn;t even get released in half of the west, it got awful reviews, it came from a developer who produced nothing but bombs after XenoSaga... why should it have "done great in the west exactly"?   And what's "creeping away from a fixed stance" mean?  Does it have something to do with me pointing out the basic hypocrisy in your arguments?

"Hardcore" Wii games sell better in the west than in Japan.  Even Japanese developed ones.  Pretty much all the sales data we have backs that up.  Period.