Top
Siempre Amanazando

DaThreats

UnverifiedMember
CRank: 5Score: 0

Why FFXV and Kingdom Hearts 3 should have been exclusive

Now, we know that SE have been weird this gen, mostly due to MS's checks and Ex-CEO Mr. Wada. I do not want them to be like this again for the next-gen console cycle, but it seems they will be anyway as they are starting off in the wrong foot. I want them to be great again and have the fans loving them again as well. They will not be that way if they keep making the same mistakes.

I read this article and it seemed to have great points http://www.junkiemonkeys.co...

"Kingdom Hearts and Kingdom Hearts II were groundbreaking titles that rocked the PlayStation 2 over a decade ago. It still doesn't make sense; chosen to release their upcoming Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 Remix exclusively on the PlayStation 3. It's weird that Square Enix would choose to release an HD collection on one console and release Kingdom Hearts III on the Xbox One and PlayStation 4.I just do not understand the logic behind SE's decision other than money, money, money."

If they want to release KH3 for Xbox one, why in the world is Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 Remix not out on Xbox 360? If gamers want to get KH3 for xbox one and it's their only console, those who only owned the Xbox brand in their past will not know the backstory! Doesn't Square-Enix care about them to understand the whole story? If they never played the KH games and only owned the Xbox, why would they suddenly care about KH3 when it releases? Especially, since, Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 Remix is only on PS3?

Now, it seems the obvious reason for them to make both games multi-platform was to make the most money, but that logic is wrong right now and I'll explain why.

First, lets look at the sales for FF13
PS3 4.96m
360 1.96m

The sales were dominate 5:2.

Now at FF13-2
PS3 2.34m
360 650,00

You see the sales for PS3 were again dominate even more 4:1.

I expect FF13 Lightning Returns to be as dominating for PS3 with the 4:1 ratio. I don't see a reason why it won't change, and the biggest JRPG fans own a PS3.

With the extra budgeting plans that developers have to do with the process of making a game multi-platform, this domination of sales shown is not worth it. If they make it for one platform, they can release the game quicker, and this will be able to have them releasing more games overall, which would make them even more profit and we the consumers enjoy more great games. Remember we had games delayed about at least 5 months because they decided to make a game multi-platform; FF13 and Rayman Legends come to mind. Not only that, the games quality will increase because they will focus and use the full power of one system, which will create an even better game, resulting in higher reviews and creating even more sales.

Second, currently the Xbox one and PS4 sales is at zero. Now, based on polls, customer demand and response, we will know there be a much higher quantity of PS4s sold. I can guarantee you that if FFXV and KH3 were mentioned as exclusives, there would be a lot more PS4s sold, and I am talking way before and just as the games would of released. Those are games people would buy a system for, especially if both of them were exclusive. Many people have mentioned they have first bought the PS3 for one of the reasons to play FF13VS; way before the game was set in stone on when it will come out. The proof is there. If both these games released only on PS4 and were both great, a very high quantity of PS4s would have been sold. The PS4 is also the cheaper platform, more consumers will get it anyhow, so overall their profit would have been huge as the PS4 console would have dominated in sales, SE wouldn't have to worry about getting their investment back. These games as exclusives would have been a huge turning point for SONY, it was because of their platform SE became big. (I said big, not started) Like I said, their profits would be fine.

Also SE, you have blacklisted SONY this gen. Released multiple console exclusives for the Xbox brand, while taking away SONY's exclusives as well. Do them and the fans some service, release console exclusives for them. FF14 doesn't count as MS didn't want it on their systems and re-releasing old games does not count either. MS won't even have Xbox One available in your home country until after a year, that doesn't offend you or even care?

Just make the right choice and make at least one of these games exclusive.

The story is too old to be commented.
DEATHxTHExKIDx1202d ago

FF13 Lightning Returns to be as dominating for PS3 not PS4.

ANYWAY I understand where ur coming from but, as long as the games are good I think fans will be ok. I dont think they can go back and make either one exclusive now.

FamilyGuy1202d ago

2 Million copies sold of ff13 is nothing to scoff at and neither is the fact that M$ HAD a larger install base at that time, as well as them basically writing a check to fund it into its multiplatform state. Also, many PS2 owners jumped ship to the xbox 360 this gen so saying they probably didn't play it isn't all that true.

Other than that this blog is pretty logical but a good game is a good game. You don't need to know the back story if it's good enough. People will buy it regardless.

I think FF15 should have remained exclusive as that was what it was claimed to be when they showed it to us as ffvs13. It's been delayed to holy hell already, why make it take even longer going multiplatform? -_-

SE doesn't care about it's fan base, they're just like M$.

Skips1202d ago (Edited 1202d ago )

"I think FF15 should have remained exclusive as that was what it was claimed to be when they showed it to us as ffvs13."

^^^ This

I know a stupidly huge amount of people who bought a PS3 SPECIFICALLY for FFVS XIII. And ever since they heard the news about it shifting to PS4 and it ALSO being on Xbox One.

They were all like... WTF??? REAAALLLY?!?!

lol

What worries me more is Square trying to appeal more to the western market (limiting their creativity) and not just doing their own thing ala FF XIII being influenced by Call Of Duty.

Square cutting content for FF XIII (supposedly an entire games worth), saying they were influenced by Call Of Duty, and then finally releasing FF XIII for the 360. I knew something was up...

What worries me even FURTHER is KH 3 supposedly having MP. >: O

Let's just hope FF XV and Kingdom Hearts 3 don't suffer the same fate as FF XIII. : /

Man-E-Faces1202d ago

Some of this blame is on Sony as well, if you know you have a big third party exclusive that draws interest to your platform you need/try to pony up the cash and help development and advertisement cost, like Microsoft did with Gears for 360 life cycle if not why would a third party care about platform exclusivity. Imagine if MGS5 was exclusive to PS4 and was unveiled at this year's e3 instead of it being multiplat now, did Sony not see the impact MGS4 had with PS3 owners and the excitement it brought to the console when PS3 was getting blasted with the no games stigma.
Deep Down looks promising and Capcom may be open to keep it exclusive to PS4 but will Sony even care to help out there? As for FF15, Square is just a snake, if you state a game is exclusive you need to honor your word, Square led PS3 gamers on and flipped them the finger by going multiplat now. Why didn't they just put it on PS3 and PS4 and have a much bigger audience to sell to with PS3's install base which could be 100+ million by the time this game releases.

DragonKnight1201d ago

"Some of this blame is on Sony as well, if you know you have a big third party exclusive that draws interest to your platform you need/try to pony up the cash and help development and advertisement cost, like Microsoft did with Gears for 360 life cycle if not why would a third party care about platform exclusivity."

Absolutely wrong. It isn't Sony's responsibility to make up for SE's shortcomings by funding their projects. The exclusivity contract likely already provided them with funding as it is, Sony has no responsibility to provide more.

What's more, Sony can possibly have the legal right to sue Square-Enix for promising an exclusive title that they didn't deliver.

"Imagine if MGS5 was exclusive to PS4 and was unveiled at this year's e3 instead of it being multiplat now, did Sony not see the impact MGS4 had with PS3 owners and the excitement it brought to the console when PS3 was getting blasted with the no games stigma."

It's not Sony's fault that MGS5 is multiplat. That's the decision of Konami, and Konami alone. How do you know that Sony didn't approach them with a deal that Konami turned down? You don't.

"Deep Down looks promising and Capcom may be open to keep it exclusive to PS4 but will Sony even care to help out there?"

Again, not their responsibility.

The only responsibility the platform holders have is to A)Provide the platform, and B)Make an enticing offer. Beyond that, it's the publishers concern.

darthv721201d ago

but they all lead to the same conclusion. Money is exchanged in return for the exclusive rights to a title.

A) the developer/publisher approaches the platform holder with the proposition of if you back this project, we will give you exclusive rights to distribute it.

B) the platform holder approaches the dev/pub with the proposition of let us fund your project in exchange for the right to exclusively distribute.

Both case may seem the same but it is dependent on who moves first. If the platform holder moves first it is the example of buying exclusivity. If the dev/pub moves first it is the example of invested or funded exclusivity.

Buying and investing/funding are the same but seen from different points of view.

Now there are reasons why a game can be funded but still not exclusive. It could be the contract between the platform holder and the dev/pub could not be agreed upon. Like for example, too much control over the distribution leaning one way or the other.

smaller companies are more prone to allowing the bigger "investor" call the shots if it means their project sees the light of day. In the case of a bigger company dealing with the "investor" they base the amount of control on the initial investment.

Obviously if the project is 100% investor funded then that company has to abide by the contract. Even if it is 50% funded it would be in the best interest of the contract to abide by it. But if the initial investment is less than half, that company can approach (or be approached) by another investor to help fund it. thus we get multiplatform games where there should be exclusives.

The bigger the 3rd party dev/pub is, the less likely exclusives are warranted unless it is a specific type of game that only appeals to a certain demographic (ie, a touch based game in 3D would be more for the 3DS than the vita).

for the most part 3rd party games try to go for as much return on investment as they can. Which implies they are distributed to as many platforms as are fitting to support the product.

Man-E-Faces1201d ago

'' It isn't Sony's responsibility to make up for SE's shortcomings by funding their projects. The exclusivity contract likely already provided them with funding as it is, Sony has no responsibility to provide more.''

If Sony's not helping out then don't expect the game to remain exclusive, regardless of Square mismanagement. And you assume there was a contract or that Sony gave even a penny or offered any help for FF15 exclusivity, you tell me I am wrong yet make up your own opinions and state them as facts.

''How do you know that Sony didn't approach them with a deal that Konami turned down? You don't.''

And you don't know if Sony even tried either, so your argument there is meaningless.

''The only responsibility the platform holders have is to A)Provide the platform, and B)Make an enticing offer.''

So you admit in point B that it's Sony job to make an enticing offer yet my whole post pretty much stated just that. If you want a game exclusive pony up the cash or help in the development, that is in essence what would be considered an enticing offer to a third party.

DragonKnight1201d ago

"If Sony's not helping out then don't expect the game to remain exclusive, regardless of Square mismanagement. And you assume there was a contract or that Sony gave even a penny or offered any help for FF15 exclusivity, you tell me I am wrong yet make up your own opinions and state them as facts."

Why should Sony provide continued aid beyond what any agreement would require? It's foolish to assume that Sony is in the business of developer charity just to maintain an exclusive. Again, it's SE's responsibility, not Sony's.

"And you don't know if Sony even tried either, so your argument there is meaningless."

My argument is only as meaningless as the meaningless point you brought up that I was responding to.

"So you admit in point B that it's Sony job to make an enticing offer yet my whole post pretty much stated just that. If you want a game exclusive pony up the cash or help in the development, that is in essence what would be considered an enticing offer to a third party."

An enticing offer =/= 7 years of funding. Learn the difference.

bobtheimpaler1202d ago (Edited 1202d ago )

At this point I don't think it matters. The 360 and the PS3 was in a different environment at the time ffxiii came out...With the way things are going with the differences between the PS4 and XBOne, I don't see people who are into JRPGs picking up an xbone anyway. The xbox mainly appeals to a completely different demographic.

Same with MGS5. I also doubt sony would want to spend a lot of money trying to win exclusivity of a 3rd party develped game when it will probably be more rewarding for them to come up with a new exclusive IP. Development costs are expensive and I'm sure they would have conducted cost benefit analysis to see which option would be better worth their time.

This is just square trying to recoup their costs by releasing on more than one system.

project_pat361202d ago (Edited 1202d ago )

I could care less about multi plat release. I had both ps3 and 360 at the time of launch of ff13 and 13-2. Because I loved final fantasy, I opted for the ps3 versions. The same goes for Tekken. I feel that games who originated on one system, should stay on that one system. In the case that does not happen, I just get the game for the system it should've been exclusive to.

list of game franchises that used to be ps only, that I still only bought for ps :)

DMC4
DMC Reboot
Final Fantasy 13
Final Fantasy 13-2
Tekken 6
Tekken Tag Tournament 2
MGS

List of game franchises I bought on 360 that used to be exclusive

Dead or Alive 5...

Both lists obviously have more to them but FML, why waste time posting it all when this post will only get 3-4 agrees, and about 12 disagrees, respectively.

Just me though. How about you?

Show all comments (43)
The story is too old to be commented.