Slashdot Mirror
Squaresoft To Go Multiplatform
Gemini writes "Gamespot has an article on how Squaresoft is to go multiplatform, starting with Final Fantasy XI. This is good news for Nintendo." Well, good news for the Microsoft's X-Box as well, since they will release for it as well. But I'm sure Sony has happy to hear that it will be out for the PlayStation 2 first, since that will be key to their strategy for defeating the X-Box.
-It isn't impossible, they just made the basic avenue of programming the bare metal. Developers have been asking for this since the PSX was released
"Numerous companies have jumped ship because of that single fact."
-One company jumped ship. They had never done a 3d title before. Their reason is also dubious as this Penny Arcade comic so nicely points out.
Companies have been all over debunking the 'hard to develop for' FUD such as in this article.
Some more quotes:
Hideo Kojima - "It will take three years for games to make complete use of the total potential of the PS2. What's key is where to use those capabilities and what to make stand out. After some trial and error, titles with new ways of expressing things will appear. However, this is not going to happen right away."
John Riccitiello (President of EA) - "It's drop dead sexy."
George Lucas - "It's mind-boggling. What they've accomplished is just beyond comprehension, if you know anything about computers."
Trip Hawkins (President of 3D0) - "It's historic, a mass market appliance that fundamentally changes society in the same way the printing press did."
Jeronimo Barrera (Rockster Video Games) - "What usually happens with new hardware is, the people who are having a lot of trouble are the ones who are talking a lot of sh-t."
Most developer house already have created their own toolsets, some are even licensing them out to other developers, the 'hard' to program issue is a dead-issue and has been for several months now.
Vermifax
Vermifax
Logout
Well if you already own a PS2, than it's the hands-down winner. Sony has had a year now to sell, and it's out there. So all things being so conveniently equalas you describe, the PS2 wins because it plays the same games, it's just as good, and since people already own one, it's cheaper.
I think the X-box is going to make an impact for different reasons. I look foward to offers of getting an X-box for only 50 dollars when you buy an MS Office suite at full price, or some silly thing like that. MS is all about bundling...
J
Who moderates the meta-moderators?
I disagree.
Personally, I think that FF6 is one of the best games ever made. Some people disagree with me, and say that their favourite is FF4, but none of us are picking any of the first few games they made.
With FF7 and FF8, Square showed people what could be done on the Playstation, and took the game in a different direction. In fact, no Final Fantasy game has been related to the plot of another (except for a few summon monsters/Espers/GFs/Eidelons that Square didn't make up anyway (Odin, Ifrit, Shiva, etc.), and a few side references thrown in for amusement purposes). And with FF9, they've responded to fan's pining for the lightheartedness of FF6.
FF4 had the standard Black + White mages, Fighters, etc. FF5 introduced the Jobs system, where anyone could take on a different role and learn those skills, then combine them in unique ways. FF6 had characters that were slightly more unified, though some were better spellcasters/fighters than others, they each had their own type of armour/weapons (Sabin's claws), and there were a few specialty characters (Gogo, Gau, Shadow, Umaro, etc.). They also brought in the Espers for the purpose of learning magic and summoning (available to all). With FF7, it was still "everyone can use magic and has their own type of weapon", but they did away with armour, and introduced Materia, which was _somewhat_ similar to Espers, but still very different. FF8 introduced the Junction system, which I really like, and GFs, which are not quite Espers nor Materia. It also had a very complex card game. FF9 has Eidelons, which are similar to Espers, except that we're back to only certain people using certain skills now. And also Abilities, which are excellent, and the way Espers _should_ have worked in FF6. I haven't played Tactics, but it's apparently a Shining Force-ish sort of battle system, and you have generic comrades who can actually die. All very different, while keeping enough elements in common to make them easily playable by fans.
Don't get me wrong; I play nearly every Working Designs title, and sometimes buy them just because they were done by WD. But with Final Fantasy, Square has produced a stream of games which, since FF4, have never failed to entertain me. "Final Fantasy" is more like a brand than a string of movie sequels (speaking of which, the movie has nothing in common, plot-wise, with any of the games...just like the games themselves).
Sotto la panca, la capra crepa
WMBC freeform/independent online radio.
if it's called 'final fantasy', why are there so many versions?
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
See my user info for links.
Final Fantasy XI won't be out any time soon. By the time that it is, even the xbox will have been out for months, if not a year. Its FF X that will be the difference, as it will be released in the US in early 2001, just a few months after the xbox, assuming that it is released on time. FFX is going to be out in Japan in a few days, which will pretty much seal the deal for the PS2 in Japan.
You're over-simplifying it. First off, if Resident Evil 2 could fit on a cart, so can Final Fantasy. It would be even easier if they didn't insist on pre-rendering everything.
However, in general, Squaresoft left Nintendo over a difference of opinions over how games should be made. Nintenedo's pilosophy has always been "game first, flashy stuff later," which they've been operating under for a long time. For example, it was more important for the original Game Boy to have better games than to be technologically superior to the Lynx and Game Gear.
On the other hand, Squaresoft would rather make a/v masterpieces and put a game in there afterwards; less of a game, more of an interactive movie, even going so far as to make a non-interactive movie.
There were other less-important arguments between the two (the cart size of Enix's Dragon Quest V comes to mind), but this was the biggie. In the end Nintendo said "not on my hardware," so Squaresoft went off to find different hardware.
I also feel it's wrong to place all the blame on Yamauchi. The bad blood flows both ways. For example, if Squaresoft was interested in turning a profit, would they have re-released their first three Final Fantasy games for WonderSwan Color instead of Game Boy Advance? That act can only be seen as an attempt at a direct (but poorly thought out) attack at Nintendo's cash cow. They only started talking about GBA development after they finally realized (duh!) that the GBA is the superior platform, both from a technology and sales POV. But Nintendo said "no" to that...
Their differences at the start of it all was philosophical, but it's been getting more and more personal. I think the current state of affairs are more Squaresoft's fault than Nintendo, but others see it differently. All in all, though, it's not entirely one side's fault.