Weren't we talking about rpgs?
Edit: oh you are banned. Well, bye I guess.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Theory: Reason Square Enix kept Final Fantasy on Sony Systems in the past
- Thread starter IbizaPocholo
- Start date
Edit: oh you are banned. Well, bye I guess.
Though Crystal Chronicles is also tied to this "events". From what was mentioned back then, Square also talked to Nintendo. But because Square already had a deal with Sony, the only way they could give money to them was through the Q-Fund, which was for Gamecube development. So they created (the shell) Game Developer Studios to make games for a GCN which resulted in only one game: Crystal Chronicles.
They didn't have time to make anything BUT CC.
GDS was a front for Squaresoft Production Team 2, aka Kawazu's team.
GDS was useless as soon as Square and Enix merged because the deal with Sony no longer applied.
The reason GDS was creditted for CC was for the use of Q fund AND as proof positive to Sony that Squaresoft wasn't harming the development of a ps2 title with making games for Nintendo's GC.
Bridges were probably already mended with FFTA being GBA bound before they were even done with making FFCC after all.
The thing is FFTA was a GBA game and Sony having no handheld, it couldn't be a game made for ps2 anyway (and chances are it started as Wonderswan project but don't ever quote me on that...or maybe not because we got an Ogre Battle before that and then Quest was bought by Square and they made FFTA afterwards).
With knowledge on working with Nintendo systems they kept at it until it proved unprofitable.
Rings of Fate is pretty much an extension of everything FFCC tried to do and has more ironed out mechanics where FFCC was clearly very experimental.
But the thing is GDS was 51% owned by Kawazu (a Squaresoft board member) and 49% by Squaresoft.
They only "created" 1 game because they didn't have time to make another one.
Square and Enix merged before FFCC was released and I think that FFCC in Japan doesn't even have the Square Enix logo while the PAL/NTSC versions do.
No we were never talking about RPGs! I stated and restated single player games. So funny, I was told I was arguing in bad faith, when this post just underscores that the outrage against me was bad faith console wars nonsense!
checks watch
It hasn't even been 2 days yet...
But to answer your question, yes, I am indeed the Nostradamus.
Not sure I believe this as from what I can see is Sony only got exclusive FF games when their systems were very dominant over the competition and the cost of making games wasnt so ridiculous. Once that dominance started to wane, the costs of games rose with the demands of graphics and framerates, the games were no longer exclusive.
Can we please look at the context of this thread? Final Fantasy games. Final Fantasy is a console franchise, except for in ports of older games and spin offs. Final Fantasy XVI is not going to be on the 3DS. If it were, it would be a radical shift in the trajectory of the franchise.
Once again, the bad faith actors in this thread are all of the people listing random 3DS games, and games very minor budgets. And no, development time does not necessarily = bigger budgets. Refuting those games as counter examples to my argument is not moving the goal posts. It is logical in context of this thread.
Sakaguchi was fired for making a 137 million dollar movie, not for making a 5 million dollar indie project.
Last edited:
This is very true. Yet on the other hand, even a developer like Ubisoft is turning to cheaper and multiplayer titles. Why would Ubisoft support Sakaguchi in an expensive venture, when they can easily make profits by developing a Rabbids game for Nintendo? Because Rabbids is CHEAPER TO DEVELOP THAN FINAL FANTASY.
I said Sony should take on Sakaguchi like they did with Kojima, so he can make a big budget RPG again, because they are the only ones investing in single player games anymore.
That was construed, in bad faith, as an affront on our beloved Nintendo. And like, have I ever heard of a little franchise called Fire Emblem on the 3DS? Because everyone knows Fire Emblem and Final Fantasy are equal in production levels! Then Xenosaga was mentioned, as a sort of good example of a bigger budget Nintendo game, which I acknowledged.
Yet it is still only one of a very small number of Nintendo games that resemble modern, console level single player titles over the past decade+, vs the dozen or so Sony has put out at a 1080p fidelity (an order of magnitude more expensive) on the PS4. Then I was told I was arguing in bad faith by the moderators, when I was not the one who made this about Nintendo's entire library of games. Very amusing.
User Banned (2 Weeks): Continuing behaviour after returning from a ban, backseat moderation, and abuse of the report system.
This is a bad faith post. User should be banned. Thread derailment. I never said Nintendo only puts out "JRPGs" every 10 years. I was referring to major single player titles, which is factual. Not up for debate.
Also just so we're clear, the term "JRPG" is still racist.
The banned dude made a claim that Sony invests more into jrpgs than Nintendo, people post evidence against it, he doubles down, moves goalposts, and backtracks to save face
Don't think there's really much discussion left to be had. All we have are theories, but all of them have their holes (except the most simplest one, SE just not caring to port the games until now). Unless someone comes out and says why, we'll just keep going in circles
What a thread derailment lol. That has 0 relation to this thread.
Though it's funny someone can argue Sony should be funding new JRPG by Sakaguchi.
Sony has given JRPG exactly 0 fuck for at least the last 12 years.
They didn't even utilise their JRPG IPs for PS3 and PS4.
All along the rumour of PS1 FF exclusivity is nothing more than fan theory.
There has been no substantial proof, only circumstantial "evidence" that has never been conclusive.
I'd say it has more to do with Sony fanboys making up some dumb theory.
I still remember after FF XIII was announced multiplatform, a lot of Sony fanboy online claimed XIII versus is the real FF sequel and that Nomura will never "betray" Sony.
Come 2018, the supposed XIII versus is on XB1 and KH3 is coming to XB1 as well.
Lmao, what a fucking jokester that person was. The sheer amount of lies was somewhat impressive in a way.
Hopefully they won't be back.
Oh no please not again. I hope they don't.
There's so much lying, pure misinformation and obvious backpedalling a person can take.