http://blog.wired.com/games/2008/02/finalfantasy.html?cid=103890992#comment-103890992

Of course this has started the FF13 to be ported rumours anewed.

Of course this has started the FF13 to be ported rumours anewed.
… despite the fact that the trailer they showed at the announcement clearly showed the title to be PS3 onry. :p

If FF13 gets ported to 360, then I guess that will hold off my PS3 purchase for a bit longer. If FF13 makes it to PS3 first, that is the day I drop $400 on one. :)

… despite the fact that the trailer they showed at the announcement clearly showed the title to be PS3 onry. :p


I didn't say they were logical rumours, only that they have started anew. And just for the record, what the trailers says historically mean little, considering that the trailers for Lost Planet, Eternal Sonata, DMC4, etc all said only for at one time also. I put zero credence in what trailers say, considering how this generation has gone.

I didn't say they were logical rumours, only that they have started anew. And just for the record, what the trailers says historically mean little, considering that the trailers for Lost Planet, Eternal Sonata, DMC4, etc all said only for at one time also. I put zero credence in what trailers say, considering how this generation has gone.

capcom is notorious for lying about exclusives and dmc4 was never exclusive to any system. eternal sonata on the other hand bombed so namco ported it to the ps3 to earn revenue. heck, if you saw namco's financial sheet for 07, all of their games on the 360 sold poorly.

there's no way ff13 will be released on the 360. even the developer said it out of their mouths this is a ps3 game only. of course, you're going to try to stir up some rumors to make you feel better since the 360 lost most of their exclusives to the ps3.

capcom is notorious for lying about exclusives and dmc4 was never exclusive to any system. eternal sonata on the other hand bombed so namco ported it to the ps3 to earn revenue. heck, if you saw namco's financial sheet for 07, all of their games on the 360 sold poorly.

there's no way ff13 will be released on the 360. even the developer said it out of their mouths this is a ps3 game only. of course, you're going to try to stir up some rumors to make you feel better since the 360 lost most of their exclusives to the ps3.


Actually in the new Play, the guys working on Tales of Vesperia on the XB360 are asked if they worry if TOV will bomb like ES did, and they stated that Namco was actually very pleased with its sells and that it was one of their five best selling games of 2007.

people will do anything to think they are getting FF. its not going to happen. still, the fact that its not designed with ps3 sole focus probably means we will get another trash multiplatform engine.

I really don't understand you guys that hope and pray that a game stays single platform. It really makes no sense to me to actively want less people play a game that you like.

"course, you're going to try to stir up some rumors to make you feel better since the 360 lost most of their exclusives to the ps3"

This is exceptionally funny! It the same post you essentially say "360 games going multiplatform over to the PS3 is good! PS3 going mulitplatform to 360 is bad!".

Why the double standard?

"there's no way ff13 will be released on the 360"

How about a little honesty? You have no clue whatsoever what platforms FF13 will be released on, and neither do I. What is fact is that there is no technical reason that FF13 could not come out on the 360, or even the Wii. Now politics may prevent that, or hats made of money, or even a simple decision that the porting cost may not be worth it for the additional sales.

Well in theory the PS3 can handle a much larger game, which is what you want in a FF game. I do think that the PS3 can do games the 360 can't, if anything because of blu-ray, and thats why people don't want ports, because in theory it'd be better if its just released for PS3.

Well exclusives are what dictates rather a console is worth it or not, personally I think FF13 should go multi from a gamers point of view, simply because it gives the game a wider reach and more potential to sale better. But if I was in charge of Sony, I would be very much against it going multi, because then it becomes one less reason to buy a PS3 and there lies the issues that Square most face. Do they release it on both so that they might get higher sells, or do they keep it exclusive so that the PS3 gets more sells and therefore keeping balance in the industry and the chances for more sells later on.

"Well in theory the PS3 can handle a much larger game"

Slower access to a larger chunk of storage does not equal bigger game. Worst case, if storage really is that big of an issue, then lower resolution video and textures plus less complex models fixes that storage problem right quick. That fix also further widens the 2:1 load speed advantage that the 360 already has. Notice that game world size was not touched. Hell, if anything, the worlds being built on these "nextgen" systems are smaller than the last generation of consoles, but rendered at higher fidelity.

Back in the real world, it is very rapidly being shown that the 360 and PS3 are essentially on par with eachother. 20 minute installs are overcoming the read speed advantage of the 360, multiple discs are overcoming the PS3's storage advantage. For every FF13 on PS3 there is a Lost Odyssey on 360, for every Bioshock there is a Drake's Fortune. For every really well done mulitplatform Burnout there is a steaming pile of crap port.

Only Capcom is doing the 20 minute install thing, I don't think that is necessary at all to overcome whatever advantage the 360 has in read speed. As for multiple discs... it works fine in linear games like Lost Odyssey, but it wouldn't work in, say, a racing game or a sandbox open-world game.

For example, Ubisoft said they had trouble packing everything onto the DVD (I think Rockstar said this about GTA as well) and sure enough we got the game and it really could have used a lot more voice samples and what not (the PC version needs 12 gigs of space, so maybe we will see what they did end up cutting). And for PGR4, Bizarre couldn't have cities in both day and night because of disc space. You can't do multiple discs for a lot of game styles that are popular today.

The smaller DVD size, imo, will definitely compromise games as time goes on. It already has. Of course, we won't know because multiplatform titles will be gimped from day one to fit on DVD. I really, truly believe Sony's stance on Blu-Ray being right for games this generation was correct.

"Well in theory the PS3 can handle a much larger game"

Slower access to a larger chunk of storage does not equal bigger game. Worst case, if storage really is that big of an issue, then lower resolution video and textures plus less complex models fixes that storage problem right quick. That fix also further widens the 2:1 load speed advantage that the 360 already has. Notice that game world size was not touched. Hell, if anything, the worlds being built on these "nextgen" systems are smaller than the last generation of consoles, but rendered at higher fidelity.

Back in the real world, it is very rapidly being shown that the 360 and PS3 are essentially on par with eachother. 20 minute installs are overcoming the read speed advantage of the 360, multiple discs are overcoming the PS3's storage advantage. For every FF13 on PS3 there is a Lost Odyssey on 360, for every Bioshock there is a Drake's Fortune. For every really well done mulitplatform Burnout there is a steaming pile of crap port.


This is exactly what we don't want. Why should we want them to do that? They have the storage space, use it. What's this 2:1 load speed that 360 has?

I dont see how this changes anything regarding FFXIII and FFvXIII, as square has previously stated that these are two parts of a large collection of FFXIII games that will be exclusive to the ps3. I imagine that the move to add multi platform support is for their mmorpg which more than likely will hit the 360, a la FFXI

"Why should we want them to do that?"

Good thing you highlighted the "Worst case" part of that statement. :) I was speaking in reference to a ported 360 version as well. The statement "Back in the real world" would also imply that the entire first paragraph was theoretical...

As for the read speed? The 360 can stream data off it's DVD at about twice the speed of the PS3's Bluray.

Regardless, thanks for completely missing the points guys! :) The real world end result is that the PS3 and 360 are very close to each other in capabilities. Additionally, storage space does not equal game quality or size. The developer's effort and skill has a far higher impact on that than any percieved storage restriction or advantage could.

Yes, one can fit more stuff onto a Blu disc, but one has to put up with slower access to it at the same time. Pretending for a second that RAM wasn't such a huge limiter... You can put models and textures that are let's say twice as complicated onto a Bluray than on DVD, meaning more detail. Great! But now you have an item that is twice as big connected to a pipe that is half as small. Hmm... So we can have better detail, but it takes 4 times as long to access? Crap!

Absolute real world? We will see alot of games with the same level of quality for the game worlds between the PS3 and 360. The 360 version will have 720p pre-rendered videos that are pretty harshly compressed, and the PS3 will have 1080p videos that are not as badly compressed. Seeing as how any film or pre-rendered video has rapidly diminishing returns at anything over 480p, that sounds like just about the same game to me.

do a search, PS3 BD transfer speed is not slower than the 360 DVD9....it averages out to be about equal...

I really don't understand you guys that hope and pray that a game stays single platform. It really makes no sense to me to actively want less people play a game that you like.

This is exceptionally funny! It the same post you essentially say "360 games going multiplatform over to the PS3 is good! PS3 going mulitplatform to 360 is bad!".

How about a little honesty? You have no clue whatsoever what platforms FF13 will be released on, and neither do I. What is fact is that there is no technical reason that FF13 could not come out on the 360, or even the Wii. Now politics may prevent that, or hats made of money, or even a simple decision that the porting cost may not be worth it for the additional sales.

1. I don't really understand why you come here to troll the PS forum, if you weren't so insecure about your box you wouldn't come here and reply to every post.

2. I didn't say that, you did. Nice spin job, of course I expect nothing less from the other camp.

3. How about a little common sense? Square's director said it out of his mouth many times FF13 is PS3 exclusive. Square isn't Capcom or Namco who have lied about exclusives. Could you name one exclusive they have lied about? Exactly, a big fat zero.

4. F13/FF13 VS coming out for the Wii is even more asinine than the 360. A spin off is possible, but the actual game is impossible. You can continue to drink the fanboy kool aid and pray these exclusives will come to the 360.

5. If you want a RPG this bad, go play the mediocre Blue Dragon or the recently released Lost Odyssey. THey were made from former Square employee's, so maybe that'll make you happy.

3. How about a little common sense? Square's director said it out of his mouth many times FF13 is PS3 exclusive. Square isn't Capcom or Namco who have lied about exclusives. Could you name one exclusive they have lied about? Exactly, a big fat zero.
.

5. If you want a RPG this bad, go play the mediocre Blue Dragon or the recently released Lost Odyssey. THey were made from former Square employee's, so maybe that'll make you happy.

1.) Well there was FF7 which they stated for nearly 2 years was a N64 exclusive and even had demos of it running on the N64 shown before they suddenly went with the PSone, at the time many were angered by this and yes they argued that they were lied too and mislead by Square. Not saying Square is doing this again, but yes they do have a history of lying about a exclusive and bringing to other than its once planned console.

As to LO and BD, neither are mediocre and I think most know that. BD wasn't quite good as hyped, but its biggest fault isn't that its mediocre, but that it steadfastly stayed true to old school RPGs in gameplay and had a very bright Chibi look too it, both things now despised in the US. Those who actually gave it chance, like me, really seemed to enjoy it.

As too LO, yeah it and mediocre have nothing in common. LO is by far the best JRPG released in the last 10 years outside SMT:Nocturne and Dragon Quest 8, and I would go as far as too say its better than any FF released since FF9. FF12 comes close, but LO IMO is better and FFX and X2, well those were complete and utter crap. Its kinda of refreshing to see male characters in a JRPG both look and act the part, and woman that don't act more manly than the dudes do.

Slower access to a larger chunk of storage does not equal bigger game. .


Stop spreading misinformation, do some homework before you post negative comments.

And Lost Odyssey is not comparable to FF13, that game sucks. The guy lost his touch. Play Blue Dragon instead.

1.) Well there was FF7 which they stated for nearly 2 years was a N64 exclusive and even had demos of it running on the N64 shown before they suddenly went with the PSone, at the time many were angered by this and yes they argued that they were lied too and mislead by Square. Not saying Square is doing this again, but yes they do have a history of lying about a exclusive and bringing to other than its once planned console.



That's not what I've read. I dug up a link and some quotes for you:

"Ten years ago, in October of 1995, an article by Nick Rox run in Volume 3, Issue 10 of Diehard GameFan Magazine showed images of what were believed to be "actual screen shots of a game currently in development for Nintendo's Ultra 64." The images were from a demo of a technical demonstration that "in many a gamer's opinion, is THE U64 game: Final Fantasy VII."

Not only did the GameFan article name the game as Final Fantasy VII and claim that it was to be released on the Ultra 64, but it also proclaimed a release date of December 1996 and that the details about the game came from "a member of the cart's staff," which would imply that the game was to be released in a cartridge format. These solid proclamations about the demo led many fans to believe that a new Final Fantasy title was already in the works for the Nintendo 64."

"When we discussed designing the field scenes as illustrations or CG based, we came up with the idea to eliminate the connection between movies and the fields. Without using blackout at all, and maintaining quality at the same time, we would make the movie stop at one cut and make the characters move around on it. We tried to make it controllable even during the movies. As a result of using a lot of motion data + CG effects and in still images, it turned out to be a mega capacity game, and therefore we had to choose CD-ROM as our media. It other words, we became too aggressive, and got ourselves into trouble." -Sakaguchi

"The interactive Final Fantasy technical demo displayed at the ACM SIGGRAPH 95 conference was not a prototype of an upcoming game, nor was it a demo that was being developed specifically for the Nintendo 64 or for the Sony PlayStation. It was simply a technical demo that was designed to show what Square envisioned the next generation of RPGs to be, and to familiarize Square's software developers with the basics of 3D engines."

"The demo was never intended to be developed into a game, so the work-in-progress title of "Final Fantasy x" is not plausible. Since it was not intended to be a game and was not intended to be released on any console, both Final Fantasy VII and Final Fantasy 64 can be ruled out as possible titles. And while the title "Final Fantasy SGI Demo" describes a technical aspect of the demo, it was not the actual title."

Source:
http://lostlevels.org/200510/

Not once does it say anything about Square's Final Fantasy VII or Square themselves saying it was going to be exclusive for the N64. I don't know where you got that "2 years exclusive to the N64" from. That was just assumed and rumored.

Can someone ban these guys from the Playstation forums? they only come on here to stir trouble.

Posting news and stating facts causes issues? Only if your an insecure fanboy. No one has stated anything remotely trollish or fanboyish here, just facts actually issued by many a dev who work on both machines.

"If you want a RPG this bad"

Maybe you should read post #3 again. :) As FF13 isn't out yet, neither of us can have it, no matter how "bad" we want it. If it hits PS3 first without a 360 port in sight then that will be the day I drop $400 on a PS3. I dropped $300 on a PS2 the day FFX hit, and another $300 on another PS2 the day FFX-2 hit as I was seperated from my first PS2 in between titles. I have no problem playing on whatever console the game I want to play is on. I don't have any fanatical devotion to any console (aside from the Dreamcast :) ) either, and as such have no problem with realizing what the flaws are in said consoles.

Sony with one thing very, very right. They built some exceptional brand loyalty. :)

I don't have any fanatical devotion to any console (aside from the Dreamcast :) ) either, and as such have no problem with realizing what the flaws are in said consoles.


Actually you do. I've read your posts in the other gaming forums before and your biased just like Methos. You guys come in here to start rumors and try to pass them off as facts. That's what people call trolling. If you have something worth discussing, no one would be arguing with you.

I like how you guys ignore the posts that prove you wrong. What's wrong, cats got your tongue? :rolleyes:

Square has plenty of games coming to the X360. They by far have nothing against the console. The engine going multi-platform means one thing and you know what that is. It's certainly not because the PS3 is the only machine that can handle it kids.. It very well might not be FF, but it will be something using an engine of the same power.

Why do you guys have to be so shocked and offended that someone suggest a game isn't exclusive? You guys are GAMERS. You don't own Sony. You know for a FACT the game is coming to the system you own. Is it going to hurt you in some way if others enjoy it as well?

If you truly love a game or series, you'd want everyone to enjoy it no matter the platform. I know personally it sucks more for me when an awesome exclusive comes that a friend can't play. (I own everything, most do not)

Seems very childish to me.

"I've read your posts in the other gaming forums before and your biased just like Methos."

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=13193878&postcount=38

Here's some choice words I had to say about the 360 just yesterday...

"Take Resident Evil 5 360 versus Resident Evil 4 Wii. Having played RE4 on the GCN and PS2 with dual analog, I can tell you that the controls for that game were not correct until it came to it's proper home on the Wii. In that manner, RE5 will be a severe step backward on the 360. Sure, it will be prettier, but it will play far more poorly than it's predecessor. That doesn't sound like a "next-gen" experience to me!

"I have both systems, and really do enjoy them both. Hell, I even play the 360 more. Really though, Metroid Prime 3, Mario Galaxy, and RE4 Wii are the only original experiences I had last year in gaming. The 360 games were fun too, but they were really just prettier versions of what I played on my PS2 and Xbox 5 years ago."

So am I too pro-Wii to be talking in the Playstation forum? 360 games just being a prettier version of 5 year old gameplay sounds pretty damning of that platform to me! :)

I didn't come here to complain about the PS3 or to poo-poo it's capabilities, and frankly I haven't. The arguement that I have is that statements like "Bluray makes games bettar!!1" or "PS3 allows games that can't be done anywhere else" are just silly. The other idea that is silly is that SquareEnix won't port FF13 to the 360 at the drop of a hat if it means more money. Square likes hats made out of money. If they decide porting FF13 to the 360 or Wii will mean more money, then damn straight they will do it, regardless of what they may or may not have said concerning exclusivity.

"I like how you guys ignore the posts that prove you wrong."

Nothing has been "proven" anything. :) A couple of guys have said stuff, but there has been no proof. Chosing not to respond to specific comments can be based off simple things like "I don't feel like it".

Really, leehom, I'm not attacking your platform, so you don't need to defend it. What I am attacking is the idea that hardware makes games better, and that developers aren't into making cash money. Competent developers make good games on any hardware, and that exploit those games for as much monetary gain as possible. Square Enix wouldn't have the piles of cash that they have today if they didn't have a very long history of porting their games to every platform imaginable. Hell, I've been able to buy FF1+2 on NES, PSX, GBA, Cell, and PSP just off the top of my head. :) Yeah, yeah, they've never ported a core FF game before (except for the first 6, and 11, and 7 and 8...) but now would be a great time to start given the likely install bases of the current consoles at FF13's launch.

1.) LO is by far the best JRPG released in the last 10 years outside SMT:Nocturne and Dragon Quest 8, and I would go as far as too say its better than any FF released since FF9.

I can understand your prospective. If you never owned a ps2, I would agree with you LO is one of the best rpg's because you have never experienced a decent rpg until now.

Frankly, most gamers own a ps2 and LO isn't as great as you make it out to be. If you think it's the best rpg you have played or read about, thats great for you. When it comes to the masses, I think they'll agree with me it's not.

There's at least fifteen rpg's in the last ten years that is better than LO. LO is riding the hype train like all the other mediocre exclusives. BD was almost as hyped up as LO and the general consensus is that BD sucks. Lost Planet was really hyped as well. Heck, I'll just make a list of the recent games that's fresh on my mind that were fairly hyped but ended up being average or sucking. Lair, Heavenly Sword, BD, Lost Planet, LO, Warioware, etc.

Heck, I'll just make a list of the recent games that's fresh on my mind that were fairly hyped but ended up being average or sucking. Lair, Heavenly Sword, BD, Lost Planet, LO, Warioware, etc.

Heavenly Sword?!? Woah there partner, that's one of the best games on the PS3. Only complaint is the length, average or sucking? That's a joke.

What Sony really needs to do is immediate sue Microsoft when they announce the blu-ray add on. Even if you can't stop it, tie it up in the courts for as long as humanly possible. Don't let Microsoft steal your one edge. I hope Sony is willing to be aggressive with those bastards.

Wow... Some people really have no clue. I guess Microsoft should sue Sony for using Windows in their Vaio computers? Sony is just one company in the Blu Ray Association.

Apple Computer, Inc.
Dell Inc.
Hewlett Packard Company
Hitachi, Ltd.
LG Electronics Inc.
Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.
Mitsubishi Electric Corporation
Pioneer Corporation
Royal Philips Electronics
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
Sharp Corporation
Sony Corporation
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
TDK Corporation
Thomson Multimedia
Twentieth Century Fox
Walt Disney Pictures
Warner Bros. Entertainment

Give em a call and tell them to "be aggressive with those bastards" and see how many tell you that Microsoft is an important partner company to them.

Well that and the fact that Sony wants Microsoft to join Blu as well.

Sony Pictures has openly invited Toshiba and Microsoft to join the Blu-ray Disc Association.

The comment above comes from Don Eklund, executive vice president of advanced technologies and Rich Marty, vice president, new business development, after Pocket-lint asked which companies they would most like to have in the Association, following the announcement from Acer that it would start to sell PCs with Blu-ray drives.

"We would love to have Toshiba and Microsoft on board", said Don Eklund in an interview with Pocket-lint at IFA in Berlin, Germany.
http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/news/news.phtml/9946/10970/sony-invites-toshiba-blu-ray-group.phtml

Microsoft exec Jeff Bell says Microsoft has been talking to Blu-ray about the possibility of some kind of partnership.

"We've been talking to Blu-ray all along because we have the best piece of software in the business, called HDi. It is the backbone that powers interactivity in HD-DVD and we have that available to potentially partner with others," Jeff Bell told 1UP.

Bell also points to another sort of partnership between Microsoft and Sony. He uses the term "coopetition" to describe how Sony uses Windows software on their computers.

As far as the future possibility of an Xbox 360 Blu-ray player goes, Bell does not rule anything out.
http://www.destructoid.com/a-microsoft-blu-ray-partnership-you-never-say-never--67212.phtml

So I doubt Sony is going to do anything to stop MS from joining with Blu. They want it to happen pretty bad.

darklordjames, you are either misinformered on the PS3 BD transfer speeds, compared to the xbox360 DVD9, or you are trolling... which is it???

"We've been talking to Blu-ray all along because we have the best piece of software in the business, called HDi. It is the backbone that powers interactivity in HD-DVD and we have that available to potentially partner with others," Jeff Bell told 1UP.HDi...., isn't it to late for BD to adopt that, didn't the BDA already say no to MS regarding HDi...

There's at least fifteen rpg's in the last ten years that is better than LO.

What are they, and why are they better?

I wouldn't go as far as to say LO is the best RPG in the last 10 years, but it's far better than mediocre. It's right up there with the best. The storyline is superb and just wonderfully told. Everything about the game is old-fashioned, yes, but it's all very simple yet very deep.

do a search, PS3 BD transfer speed is not slower than the 360 DVD9....it averages out to be about equal...

Exactly. The amount of FUD and misinformation on this issue knows no bounds.

I can understand your prospective. If you never owned a ps2, I would agree with you LO is one of the best rpg's because you have never experienced a decent rpg until now.

Frankly, most gamers own a ps2 and LO isn't as great as you make it out to be. If you think it's the best rpg you have played or read about, thats great for you. When it comes to the masses, I think they'll agree with me it's not.

There's at least fifteen rpg's in the last ten years that is better than LO. LO is riding the hype train like all the other mediocre exclusives. BD was almost as hyped up as LO and the general consensus is that BD sucks. Lost Planet was really hyped as well. Heck, I'll just make a list of the recent games that's fresh on my mind that were fairly hyped but ended up being average or sucking. Lair, Heavenly Sword, BD, Lost Planet, LO, Warioware, etc.


Oh yeah, here is my game collection. http://club.ign.com/b/list/custom?lid=100018

As you will see I own more JRPGs than 90% of the guys here probably own games overall, and I own ever JRPG released for the PS2 except for Xenosaga 2 and 3 and Atelier Iris 2 and 3 because I did not like the first ones. I have been playing JRPGs forever since the NES, they are by far my favorite genre and I have completed well over 150 different ones, including every single Square title released, even the mediocre ones like FF:Mystic Knight. Like I said, LO is the best JRPG I have played in the last 10 years and I have played and beaten EVERY JRPG released in the last 10 years. As to the masses, well considering that on every forum devoted to LO the game is getting nothing but sheer praise and many are argreeing with me that it is the best in a long time, well I think the masses have spoken and that they are saying LO is just that damn good.


And I love how you call me biased, not even hardly. I own all three consoles and I am critical of all three. I say it like it is, I do not kiss anyones ass like you do leehom. Your nothing more than a big Sony ass kissing fanboy and nothing more, the very fact that you have SDF in your sig, well that makes everything you say pointless because all it is insecure fanboy ramblings. When I go home at night, I go home to both a XB360 and a PS3, I have no reason to bash the other unrealistically or make up false crap about it, because I am not to cheap to own both.

I agree, that LO is an amazing game... It's the best JRPG since FFVII. I'm about 6 hours into it.

To you guys that are saying that LO is mediocre. Do you even own a 360? Have you even REALLY played it besides picking it up for 15 minutes at a friend's house. Mediocre to me just sounds absurd.

I'm not sure why you guys think that FF coming to the xbox 360 is such a bad thing... I mean all of us PS3 owners will still be able to play it. If it does come to xbox, I'll probably get it for that though. This is just speculation guys. Nobody knows if it will be multi-platform or not. We will not know till the game is close to being released. Things could change at anytime.

I agree, that LO is an amazing game... It's the best JRPG since FFVII. I'm about 6 hours into it.

To you guys that are saying that LO is mediocre. Do you even own a 360? Have you even REALLY played it besides picking it up for 15 minutes at a friend's house. Mediocre to me just sounds absurd.

I'm not sure why you guys think that FF coming to the xbox 360 is such a bad thing... I mean all of us PS3 owners will still be able to play it. If it does come to xbox, I'll probably get it for that though. This is just speculation guys. Nobody knows if it will be multi-platform or not. We well not know till the game is close to being released. Things could change at anytime.


It is funny, let us be honest, if Sakuguchi would have stayed at Square then LO would of been FF12 probably. You cannot be a FF fan IMO and not like LO, the two are so similar its eerie. As to the mass acceptance of LO, its funny that I see all of these guys who are Xbox only playing LO and loving it, and stating how its their first JRPG and that they want more to play now after it. Sounds like another game I know, one that also had its issues and hiccups, but was many's first JRPG and the pathway to that genre. One that is now iconic within the JRPG fanbase, what was that game again? Hmmm, O yeah it was FF7.

"darklordjames, you are either misinformered on the PS3 BD transfer speeds, compared to the xbox360 DVD9, or you are trolling... which is it???"

http://www.emedialive.com/articles/readarticle.aspx?articleid=11404#iiia

The PS3's 2x Blu drive reads at a constant 8.5MB/s using a CLV read scheme. No matter where the data is on the disc, it comes off at 8.5MB.

http://www.osta.org/technology/dvdqa/dvdqa4.htm

The 360's 12x DVD drive uses a CAV read scheme to stream data from about 10MB/s to a max of 16MB/s (read as avg = ~13.5MB/s). In the mastering process, the most speed sensitive data is pushed to the outside ring of the disc for maximimum performance, while video and linear initial loading chunks tend to sit on the inside.

Ahem, who's misinformed now? :)

If FF13 gets ported to 360, then I guess that will hold off my PS3 purchase for a bit longer. If FF13 makes it to PS3 first, that is the day I drop $400 on one. :)

Wow.

$400 + $60 = just to play one specific videogame.

:eek:

zzzzzzzz

HDi...., isn't it to late for BD to adopt that, didn't the BDA already say no to MS regarding HDi...

Is it EVER too late for the BDA to make changes? :) Heck they released 1K players that will never see the final spec!

Heck they released 1K players that will never see the final spec!
*ahem*

;)

Originally posted by darklordjames
Ahem, who's misinformed now?

The xbox 360 reads DVD9 at a peak 8x speed, not 12x. With a minimum speed of approx. 5x. So on average, the transfer rates are basically the same.

Originally posted by FrankJ.Cone
Is it EVER too late for the BDA to make changes?
They already said NO THANKS once, why would they change now?

They already said NO THANKS once, why would they change now?

I am not suggesting they would, just pointing out that the BDA makes changes even after it looks like they have finalized things, even if it means product owners are left behind.

Originally posted by FrankJ.Cone
I am not suggesting they would, just pointing out that the BDA makes changes even after it looks like they have finalized things, even if it means product owners are left behind.
Well thats the reality of being an early adopter...but feel free to take a stab at the BDA if it makes you feel better.

I was questioning the below quote, because that quote seemed kinda odd to me, since I had thought that the BDA association already said no thanks to Microsofts HDi.
"We've been talking to Blu-ray all along because we have the best piece of software in the business, called HDi. It is the backbone that powers interactivity in HD-DVD and we have that available to potentially partner with others," Jeff Bell told 1UP.

I was questioning the below quote, because that quote seemed kinda odd to me, since I had thought that the BDA association already said no thanks to Microsofts HDi.
We've been talking to Blu-ray all along because we have the best piece of software in the business, called HDi. It is the backbone that powers interactivity in HD-DVD and we have that available to potentially partner with others.
Well, he also had this to say about Blu-ray on the 360.
You never say never. I think we'd like to see how things evolve. Our commitment, however, to HD-DVD is profound and consistent, and we have done very, very well in term of our accessory sales.
This was less than a month ago, and Microsoft's official response to the death of HD DVD didn't mention Blu-ray adoption at all. In fact, they later came out and said, "Well, it's really about the games anyway, and right now we have more." Also, I fail to see how a 3% adoption of HD DVD amongst 360 owners counts as doing "very, very well." :rolleyes:

Clearly, he's a PR guy who's trying to downplay the rapidly decreasing relevance of his company's products. The only people saying that HDi on Blu-ray is a possibility is MS and their legion of fanboys (and viral marketers). Ditto for BD-on-360.

Well, he also had this to say about Blu-ray on the 360.

This was less than a month ago, and Microsoft's official response to the death of HD DVD didn't mention Blu-ray adoption at all. In fact, they later came out and said, "Well, it's really about the games anyway, and right now we have more." Also, I fail to see how a 3% adoption of HD DVD amongst 360 owners counts as doing "very, very well." :rolleyes:

Clearly, he's a PR guy who's trying to downplay the rapidly decreasing relevance of his company's products. The only people saying that HDi on Blu-ray is a possibility is MS and their legion of fanboys (and viral marketers). Ditto for BD-on-360.


I agree his downplaying it, but rapidly decreasing relevance, yeah thats pushing it. MS is more in power now than they were 10 years ago, thats for sure.

I agree his downplaying it, but rapidly decreasing relevance, yeah thats pushing it. MS is more in power now than they were 10 years ago, thats for sure.
Considering the fact that 10 years ago they didn't have a console, that would be a very difficult point to argue, yes.

If you're referring to the computing world in general, well, MS has been steadily losing share there. (Both market- and mind-.) In the digital entertainment industry (non-gaming), they're getting their ass handed to them by Apple.

Considering the fact that 10 years ago they didn't have a console, that would be a very difficult point to argue, yes.

If you're referring to the computing world in general, well, MS has been steadily losing share there. (Both market- and mind-.) In the digital entertainment industry (non-gaming), they're getting their ass handed to them by Apple.


Its a matter of perspective though, yes compared to 10 years ago they have lost market share, but the market is also vastly larger now and therefore MS is profiting much more so than they did 10 years ago and they still have the controlling share of that industry and have more power in it than they did in say 1998. In the Digital realm its true Apple beat them to the punch, but the Zune has made significant inroads into that realm more so than anyone else has, and is a very serious rival to the Ipod. As to movies, MS is in a much better position than apple is to captilize on digital movies and shows downloads than Apple is by sheer virtue of what they have on XBL. Even within the BDA, they might not be a member but they were powerful enough to force their VC-1 on the specs, that speaks volumes.

Its a matter of perspective though, yes compared to 10 years ago they have lost market share, but the market is also vastly larger now and therefore MS is profiting much more so than they did 10 years ago and they still have the controlling share of that industry and have more power in it than they did in say 1998.
MS has more money than they did 10 years ago, but they have less influence ("power").

More and more, people (both consumers and the industry itself) are thumbing their nose at MS. Something that was unheard of 10 years ago.

In the Digital realm its true Apple beat them to the punch, but the Zune has made significant inroads into that realm more so than anyone else has, and is a very serious rival to the Ipod.
How are you defining "serious threat"? :confused:

As to movies, MS is in a much better position than apple is to captilize on digital movies and shows downloads than Apple is by sheer virtue of what they have on XBL.
No, despite the generally poor performance of the iTunes video marketplace, it's still far and away the most popular place to buy video content online. In fact, given the lock that Apple has on the online marketplace with iTunes, the poor performance of the video store is simply an indication that online distribution of video is still an idea that's currently ahead of it's time.

Even within the BDA, they might not be a member but they were powerful enough to force their VC-1 on the specs, that speaks volumes.
We've already talked about this before. They didn't "force" anything on the BDA. The BDA adopted it voluntarily, probably in the interest of promoting purple encodes until the war was over.

If VC-1 was the only codec supported, you might have a point. As it is, it's an optional codec, and a rarely used one at that. The adoption of VC-1 doesn't get MS a cut of every movie sold (though they do get a cut of every player sold). It only gets them a cut of the movies that actually use VC-1, which is currently a small fraction, and that fraction is likely to get smaller, as studios will no longer have to do purple encodes that will fit on to a red disc.

Again, if MS had any influence here at all, they would already be a member. Look at the membership list. There are a bunch of tiny companies on there will little or no "influence" in the home video industry. Microsoft's absence is not a coincidence or an "oversight." They didn't need Microsoft's hands in their pie before, and they need it even less now.

Now, if you have some evidence that MS somehow strong-armed the BDA in to using VC-1, or that they are in any way beholden to MS for its use, I'd love to see it. If you don't, I don't understand why you insist on repeating this drivel.

Guys, you keep derailing threads... I'll keep closing them.
Suspensions will follow.

Kyser