forget the tools. is a corporate culture/language barrier issue thenisnt at beginning there is issue of 'lack of tools ready' for Xbox ? that might also play role. the game in development for few years already and obviously the devs cant wait no longer.
based on Sony's track record and how they is a japanese company at first place, obviously Sony got engineers ready to deploy at japan compared to Xbox, considering how much they fare there lately.
The FF7 Remake timed-exclusivity contract has expired. If you claim otherwise, you will have to share the new contract or an official claim / box art / executive quote that has the details on the new contract.Because it never expired
![]()
Microsoft: Sony Has "Xbox Exclusion" Agreements With Third-Parties, Includes FF7 Remake
A new document via the UK's CMA has Microsoft stating that Sony has entered what it calls "Xbox Exclusion" deals with certain game companies.mp1st.com
right, language and culture is also another important aspect. Sony has advantages of this as they still a japanese company at first place.forget the tools. is a corporate culture/language barrier issue then
.
The FF7 Remake timed-exclusivity contract has expired.
If you claim otherwise, you will have to share the new contract or an official claim / box art / executive quote that has the details on the new contract.
protect playstation gamers*Sony paid to cockblock the PC and Xbox version to keep selling the appearance that FF is part of the PS brand .
It's very hypocritical after Jim Ryan "fight to protect gamers" from Activision acquisition by MS.
that is what Jezz 'insider and analyst" says is the fact.Funny that some people believed the reason was that Square Enix was upset with MS.
Source stating that it's expired?
The link I have is the latest 'official' statement from any relevant party. If you have anything that says otherwise recently from Square that the game is not locked anymore and they're just not porting it for whatever reason, I'm all ears.
The game was timed exclusive until 4/10/2021.
'![]()
No, it's not official at all because it is neither by Sony nor by SquareEnix. Like I posted a box art by Sony and SquareEnix above. Post something official from the main parties (Sony and/or SquareEnix).
And then it got extended with the intergrade re-release, which was the timed exclusivity for it not coming to PC.
The game is being blocked from coming to Xbox.
We can see the same being discussed with FF16, the game has a 6 month 'exclusivity' clause with PS5 but beyond that it's only the PC version being talked about, not any other console.
Like I said, it's the latest relevant official statement from any of the 3 parties. Square have not made any comment that they're refusing to port the game for any reason at all, they're very likely contractually obligated not to.
And then it got extended with the intergrade re-release, which was the timed exclusivity for it not coming to PC.
The game is being blocked from coming to Xbox.
We can see the same being discussed with FF16, the game has a 6 month 'exclusivity' clause with PS5 but beyond that it's only the PC version being talked about, not any other console.
Like I said, it's the latest relevant official statement from any of the 3 parties. Square have not made any comment that they're refusing to port the game for any reason at all, they're very likely contractually obligated not to.
No it did not get "extended."
The Intergrade PS5 version is a separate SKU, which itself got a 6-month timed exclusivity, which also ran only until December 2021.'
No, that's your assumption.And that exclusivity clause was for the PC version, which came out 6 months. The game was, easy to guess still is, being blocked from other consoles.
Even in the picture above, it says any other format, unlike Forspoken where it specifically says console exclusivity is for 2 years (and the game launched on PC day and date).
It's being blocked Heis, we all know it. No reason to defend this alamo.
No, that's your assumption.
I like exclusives. It makes the platform more valuable. It does/offers something the other doesn't. It's partly why I like buying all consoles.These exclusives arent good for us consumers.
You are assuming, man.There is *extremely little* left to assumption.
.![]()
It's much more likely that SE simply studied how many copies they expected to sell on each platform and decided whether it was worth the cost to port and release on that platform. PC got the green light, Xbox didn't. It's that simple.There is *extremely little* left to assumption.
.![]()
No, that's your assumption.
Because those are much less popular games. An Octopath Traveller 2 or a collection of older games isn't going to be doing the same numbers as a big title like FF7 Remake would.Otherwise, why isn't Octopath Traveler 2 isn't on Xbox when it's releasing on all platforms? Why isn't Final Fantasy Pixel Remaster isn't on Xbox when it's literally on every other platform? Surely PlayStation didn't have exclusivity contracts for those 2 games, right?
It's an assumption, but he's probably correct.
Otherwise, there really is no logic behind releasing the Final Fantasy 7 Crisis Core remake/remaster on Xbox, but not releasing the actual remake of Final Fantasy 7, unless there's a contract that prohibits SE from doing so.
Or it is… and Square-Enid does not think it is a great return on investment despite the easy scaling myth while donating 30% of the proceeds to MS. Maybe MS insists on some GamePass clause… no, all suppositions are in MS favour and against others![]()
Just think about it, they would selectively not bring one of their most popular games to Xbox but will bring Triangle Strategy ...
And the FF16 example I gave above where the creators of the game are frankly talking about a PC version after the six month period but not any other console(s).
If Sony can selectively ask Nvidia to block their first party published games from Geforce Now specifically on the Edge browser on Xbox, the above is not a difficult conclusion to come to at all.
Which would also cost a lot more to port than those games and maybe it si not something S-E think it is worth the trouble in terms of opportunity cost (cost of not doing other things) and want money from MS to do so… and maybe there are other reasons also adding up (like the issues getting their MMO’s on Xbox and cross gameplay there).isn't going to be doing the same numbers as a big title like FF7 Remake would.
I mean "FFXI" is already on PC and even on 360.....Will "download" FFXI if it comes to PC if I can't buy it on XBox. Would love to get a PS5 but can't justify such a monolithic console for a FF game.
Or it is… and Square-Enid does not think it is a great return on investment despite the easy scaling myth while donating 30% of the proceeds to MS. Maybe MS insists on some GamePass clause… no, all suppositions are in MS favour and against others? Come on…
It's no Final Fantasy, but it's a good game and I'll die for itand that last god awful Star Ocean game
But by that logic, Crisis Core wasn't gonna do the same numbers as the FF7 Remake would either. So why did that get a multiplatform release?It's an assumption, but he's probably correct.
Otherwise, there really is no logic behind releasing the Final Fantasy 7 Crisis Core remake/remaster on Xbox, but not releasing the actual remake of Final Fantasy 7, unless there's a contract that prohibits SE from doing so.
Because those are much less popular games. An Octopath Traveller 2 or a collection of older games isn't going to be doing the same numbers as a big title like FF7 Remake would.
Did they mentioned that they have intentions of porting the game on xbox? Take a look at FFVII. It was timed exclusive and remained as console exclusive with a release on PC.Nothing new, a few year ago there was also ppl saying MS made an offer to Bethesda to get Deadloop and Ghostwire, but Sony made a better offer.
Also why is the article saying FF16 is skipping Xbox? FF16 just have a 6 month exclusivity deal with Sony. Did Square mentioned no intetions to port the game to xbox after that?
Well, if you're developing your game for Windows PCs in 2023, then you've done the lion's share of the work for your Xbox Series port as well. The cost for development of the Xbox version after the PC version is pretty minimal.It's much more likely that SE simply studied how many copies they expected to sell on each platform and decided whether it was worth the cost to port and release on that platform. PC got the green light, Xbox didn't. It's that simple.
I dont care about the article. My point of view isnt from that info.
I general hate these tactics, nothing more nothing less.
Stop acting dumb.![]()
Just think about it, they would selectively not bring one of their most popular games to Xbox but will bring Triangle Strategy ...
And the FF16 example I gave above where the creators of the game are frankly talking about a PC version after the six month period but not any other console(s).
If Sony can selectively ask Nvidia to block their first party published games from Geforce Now specifically on the Edge browser on Xbox, the above is not a difficult conclusion to come to at all.
Possibly, But I think that is unlikely. FF7 Remake has a PC version, so porting it to Xbox should be relatively easy and inexpensive. Both games run on UE 4 too. It's obviously not going to do Playstation numbers, but I seriously doubt that porting it wouldn't be profitable. I don't think there's anything comparable to the MMO situation going on: Allegedly, the issue is actually ingame guilds (known as Free companies in FFXIV) that is the issue here. Supposedly, Microsoft does not allow players to join separate communities outside of Xbox live in games that offer cross play. SE does not want to have Xbox specific servers.Which would also cost a lot more to port than those games and maybe it si not something S-E think it is worth the trouble in terms of opportunity cost (cost of not doing other things) and want money from MS to do so… and maybe there are other reasons also adding up (like the issues getting their MMO’s on Xbox and cross gameplay there).
Crisis Core was probably expected to outsell both Remaster collection and OP2.But by that logic, Crisis Core wasn't gonna do the same numbers as the FF7 Remake would either. So why did that get a multiplatform release?
They are a publicly listed company and could not accept a lower offer. As surprising as the price was/is for most of us, that really was the best offer they got.It's hard to take SE seriously after they sold Tomb Raider and Deux Ex IPs and the talented studios behind them for chump change to Embracer when I'm sure Sony or even MS would've offered them more. Imagine if Eidos Montreal and Crystal Dynamics became first party Sony devs, with access to 1st party tools they would've churned out some insane PS5 games I'd wager.
From the article:
"Square Enix also noted that the deal also offers them high-level platform support with PlayStation engineers, to the implication that Xbox does not. Square Enix also emphasized the benefits of focusing optimization on a single platform."
and
"Square Enix would have to invest in a heavily optimized version for the Xbox Series S too, which requires its own version as part of Microsoft's licensing agreement. PlayStation has no such weaker hardware SKU to account for."
Lack of support (perhaps a byproduct of contractors and failing to hire best people????) and the pain of dealing with Series S. Shocking. Who would have thought?
Besides, SquareEnix just does not see Xbox as a viable platform. Otherwise, why isn't Octopath Traveler 2 isn't on Xbox when it's releasing on all platforms? Why isn't Final Fantasy Pixel Remaster isn't on Xbox when it's literally on every other platform? Surely PlayStation didn't have exclusivity contracts for those 2 games, right?
It's much more likely that SE simply studied how many copies they expected to sell on each platform and decided whether it was worth the cost to port and release on that platform. PC got the green light, Xbox didn't. It's that simple.
Should be, but it might not be and it is still a cost.porting it to Xbox should be relatively easy and inexpensive.
It is not just profits it is opportunity cost, how much money would you generate if the people and effort you spent on it had been spent on something else?Both games run on UE 4 too. It's obviously not going to do Playstation numbers, but I seriously doubt that porting it wouldn't be profitable
That 50mln for ff16 exclusivity is peanuts, u got recent legit official info GoW Ragnarok Costed 200mln to make, and that game used many assets from GoW 2018.MS: "Here's 50mln for FF XVI's exclusivity"
Square: "Hmm, don't know"
Sony: "I'm japanese"
Square: "Say no more"8
Was there open bidding though? It's not like SE went bankrupt.They are a publicly listed company and could not accept a lower offer. As surprising as the price was/is for most of us, that really was the best offer they got.
It's no Final Fantasy, but it's a good game and I'll die for it
But by that logic, Crisis Core wasn't gonna do the same numbers as the FF7 Remake would either. So why did that get a multiplatform release?
I feel Series S is going to turn out to be a terrible bet from MS in like 3 years. Actually once we leave this cross-gen period tbh.From the article:
"Square Enix also noted that the deal also offers them high-level platform support with PlayStation engineers, to the implication that Xbox does not. Square Enix also emphasized the benefits of focusing optimization on a single platform."
and
"Square Enix would have to invest in a heavily optimized version for the Xbox Series S too, which requires its own version as part of Microsoft's licensing agreement. PlayStation has no such weaker hardware SKU to account for."
Lack of support (perhaps a byproduct of contractors and failing to hire best people????) and the pain of dealing with Series S. Shocking. Who would have thought?
Technically Sony's offer could be less than Xbox mainly because of their marketshare more sales, marketing deals etc...sony made a better offer.