Turns out the 360 really did compromise the PS3 version

[Kawaii Ryûkishi]

So, you won't be able to play the Japanese voice track. That's to be expected; most games don't give you this option.

Other than that, there'll be disc-specific side-quests, and you might not have access to all locations at the end of the game. I didn't have a problem with the former limitation in the PS1 games (and even single-disc games manage to lock out certain side-quests before or after certain points, anyway); the latter was annoying in FFIX, but it didn't break the game or anything. And I doubt the situation will be as severe as FFVIII, where everything was locked out. So, it's probably forgivable.

I'm not sure I see the cause for outrage, here.

[Wolf Kanno]

I don't see much of a problem here either but some people feel the game is now less that it could have been. The real problem is that since people are not privy to the extent of this modification you know damn well it will be the excuse people will make if the game doesn't blow your mind. For all we know, all that was changed was getting access to two simple quests that net you an elixer which now has to wait until the end of the game but people will suspect large parts of the side quests were moved around when in reality they may have been originally designed to only be accessed until the end of the game.

I won't be surprised if every little problem that arrives in XIII will have the multi-platform choice be used as the excuse of why its there when in reality it may have been planned like that from the beginning.

[Shiny]

To be honest, I think the series itself has been a downgrade since X-2.

Uh, what???

Ew! *projectile vomits*

As for the topic - I don't care! I have a 360 and lack a PS3, so everything's still hunky dorey.

Yeah, that's basically sums up how I feel about this.

[Loony BoB]

Jumping on the Xbox 360 but no PS3 bandwagon.

As for bitching about these things, what do you expect? Square Enix is a company that is out there to make money, not to do fans a favour. Do you want them to have the money to continue to develop games after this or do you want them to go bankrupt? They could probably do a lot more if they didn't have to pay the wages demanded by the developers, composers etc. that you all love so much. Do you think those people should do it for less? For free? What are you wanting from Square Enix? Or will you instead blame Xbox 360 owners for not having the money for a PS3, or because the game selection might be poor for what they're after? I don't get it. Yes, it's arguably a lesser game. That's because they can't afford to buy everyone a PS3. You want it to be a better game, you stump up the millions that it'd cost to make it a profit while keeping it PS3 exclusive.

[Croyles]

Im not too bothered at this point, and am not really sure if this is true anyway.
However, id just like to say to all the people who thought I was being a stupid fanboy when I said that the multiplatform move will affect the game; here it shows that it is certainly a possibility.

But whatever, it might be annoying having this in the back of your mind while playing, but if they managed to make a good game then they managed to make a good game regardless of console

But it is funny that now im told "what do you expect", when before i wase told "it wont make a difference".

[Loony BoB]

To be fair, I don't think it was me who said that it won't make a difference.

[Quindiana Jones]

Jumping on the Xbox 360 but no PS3 bandwagon.

As for bitching about these things, what do you expect? Square Enix is a company that is out there to make money, not to do fans a favour. Do you want them to have the money to continue to develop games after this or do you want them to go bankrupt? They could probably do a lot more if they didn't have to pay the wages demanded by the developers, composers etc. that you all love so much. Do you think those people should do it for less? For free? What are you wanting from Square Enix? Or will you instead blame Xbox 360 owners for not having the money for a PS3, or because the game selection might be poor for what they're after? I don't get it. Yes, it's arguably a lesser game. That's because they can't afford to buy everyone a PS3. You want it to be a better game, you stump up the millions that it'd cost to make it a profit while keeping it PS3 exclusive.

I think they should pay you millions for making that post.

[Loony BoB]

I agree.

[G13]

I'm not as good with words as Kawaii or BoB but by a show of hands who here liked the ps1 FF's? I can't see your hands if they're raised but I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be on this site if you didn't like at least one of them. That's basically what we're going back to, the same thing we've known longer than the "one disc" deal. I personally don't see a problem (which may have something to do with me not expecting this game to be any good). Yeah it sucks cause it's the newest FF and all we have to look forward to is XIV after that, but this is how it is. Get over it. I'm sure no one will even notice or care when they start playing it.

[Croyles]

To be fair, I don't think it was me who said that it won't make a difference.

I know My post is to all!! So...... it doesnt make much sense lol

[Bolivar]

At the very least, you can't deny that arbitrary cuts and divisions are made in the content when you put your product to run on multiple units of a format. The id guys working on Rage absolutely loathed the prospect, and begged Microsoft to abandon their "no mandatory hard drive installs" for the 360 rule this one time. As a result, limits are placed around what they wish to create originally. Of course, games like the Metal Gear series have been forged out of hardware limitations - however that's entirely different from having an idea, then drastically changing it in the middle of development because one platform simply will not allow it.

Square has made a lot of comparisons of this game to FFVII, and that's sad. FFVII's platform choice (Playstation) was made due to creative decisions, wanting to produce a CG-based game that cartridges simply could not facilitate. Now, however, they're compromising game design in the name of platform choice (multiplatform release in US on 360).

Do you want them to have the money to continue to develop games after this or do you want them to go bankrupt?

This is a fallacious choice, one of the big ones I've been seeing lately around the web that has led gaming discussion into some pretty unnecessary areas. In the words of Tim Schafer himself, no one ever got their game idea canned because of market constraints. It's like the anti-environmentalists who say we need to choose between the earth or a (semi) functioning global economy.

^ This is completely regardless of the fact that Square's decision to make it multi-platform comes from a faulty forecast on the prospects of the PS3. In the months following 2007, when even mobile phone divisions were performing better than the ps3 for some companies, Square decided it would be best to not throw all their eggs in that one basket, at least not in North America. If they waited a couple months, they would have seen how Metal Gear Solid 4 proved you can have a PS3 exclusive and still sell millions of copies, even with a limited install base. In 2008, software sales skyrocketed nearly 800% for the platform, yielding more money for Ubisoft, EA, Namco, and (no surprise) Konami than the 360, and in some cases, the Wii as well (and in EA's case, the 360 and Wii combined). Consoles sales, even at $400, continued to out-pace the 360 on a month for month basis since launch time series. With the price drop to $299, the choice to go multiplatform seems more futile than ever.

[Elpizo]

What bothers me is not that the game was changed, but that SE flat-out lied in our faces again. No changes? SE, what can we believe of what you say these days? Me thinks lying is doing them more harm than going multi and invoking fanboy wrath, but whatever. That they have to make money, I can accept, that's theway it works. That they have to lie to do it, now that's less aceptable from my point of view, but who cares? I'll probably end up buying it anyway. Jeez...

I'm personally looking more forward to Golden Sun 3 than to FF XIII, because of all the lies, fanboyism, fanwars, moneywars, companywars and mudslinging that accompanied XIII's development. And in the end, it's probably just going to be a average FF game anyway that'll make millions like all the others did, and SE will gleefully rub their hands and drool over their money pile. And we're left with our dissapointment. Yay!

[Loony BoB]

^ This is completely regardless of the fact that Square's decision to make it multi-platform comes from a faulty forecast on the prospects of the PS3. In the months following 2007, when even mobile phone divisions were performing better than the ps3 for some companies, Square decided it would be best to not throw all their eggs in that one basket, at least not in North America. If they waited a couple months, they would have seen how Metal Gear Solid 4 proved you can have a PS3 exclusive and still sell millions of copies, even with a limited install base. In 2008, software sales skyrocketed nearly 800% for the platform, yielding more money for Ubisoft, EA, Namco, and (no surprise) Konami than the 360, and in some cases, the Wii as well (and in EA's case, the 360 and Wii combined). Consoles sales, even at $400, continued to out-pace the 360 on a month for month basis since launch time series. With the price drop to $299, the choice to go multiplatform seems more futile than ever.

You're right, Square-Enix should totally have predicted the future.

EDIT: And with all of that argument, you still can't deny that S-E will make much more money by selling on both platforms. If you want to compare the meerkat market, they'll be looking to sell in three major areas firstly and everywhere else as an afterthought. Japan (360 dominant), America (going by Amazon sales of the Beatles multiplatform release, it's Wii/360 dominant) and Europe (360 dominant last I checked). The only people I know personally over here that have a PS3 regret getting a PS3. That probably won't stop me buying one though... if I ever get the money. =/

[Croyles]

^ This is completely regardless of the fact that Square's decision to make it multi-platform comes from a faulty forecast on the prospects of the PS3. In the months following 2007, when even mobile phone divisions were performing better than the ps3 for some companies, Square decided it would be best to not throw all their eggs in that one basket, at least not in North America. If they waited a couple months, they would have seen how Metal Gear Solid 4 proved you can have a PS3 exclusive and still sell millions of copies, even with a limited install base. In 2008, software sales skyrocketed nearly 800% for the platform, yielding more money for Ubisoft, EA, Namco, and (no surprise) Konami than the 360, and in some cases, the Wii as well (and in EA's case, the 360 and Wii combined). Consoles sales, even at $400, continued to out-pace the 360 on a month for month basis since launch time series. With the price drop to $299, the choice to go multiplatform seems more futile than ever.

You're right, Square-Enix should totally have predicted the future.

EDIT: And with all of that argument, you still can't deny that S-E will make much more money by selling on both platforms. If you want to compare the meerkat market, they'll be looking to sell in three major areas firstly and everywhere else as an afterthought. Japan (360 dominant), America (going by Amazon sales of the Beatles multiplatform release, it's Wii/360 dominant) and Europe (360 dominant last I checked). The only people I know personally over here that have a PS3 regret getting a PS3. That probably won't stop me buying one though... if I ever get the money. =/

Lol at the meerkat bit

Wait sorry what? 360 is dominant in Japan? Where did you get that from? And its only on PS3 in japan anyway lol.
The 360 isnt that dominant, its actually pretty equal to the PS3 on a month to month basis, and especially not in europe.
Yeah its great that their making more money. But.... Lol since when does anyone defend a company about making money? All other times everyone is always moaning about companies milking people.

Again, im glad its on the 360 as long as this article isnt true (ive found a few places saying it isn't).

[Loony BoB]

I had PS3 there but a couple of my work colleagues (who happened to be at my desk discussing similar things) insisted it was 360 dominant since the 360 came out first or something. I caved after nobody found a source in the rest of my short lunch hour. xD So apologies on that end of things and HA to my work colleagues, I was right all along.

EDIT: Month to month means little if you're referring to console sales - it's total working units that matter (or, more specifically, total working units which games are actually being bought for ).

I defend companies for making money because it's what I'd do if I ran a company. What should they do if not make money? How could they develop future games without it? It's silly to say that we should accuse them of trying to make money. If anything, be proud that they're doing that. A successful company is, well, a successful company. Final Fantasy XIII wouldn't even be being worked on right now if Square Enix wasn't out to make dosh.