You are hypocrites

And you changed your avatar and now I can't recognize you quickly.

Shame on you.

But then the only one to be annoyed at is the assumer. Assume NOTHING is what Kaicho Nakamura always told his students.

Well as a hypocrite , i think a sequel to a not so old game that you can find on every platform , now only on one machine is bullshit.

But a remake to a game that is older then some users here that never graced one of the machines , does not seem such a big deal.

That being said:

I think a remake of a 20 year old game that A LOT of ppl have already played and was exclusive to Sony at first.....vs a series in reboot status that many ppl adore that started out as a multiplat.....are 2 different things.

But as far as seeing your point....I get it.

You are still right, but theres still a somewhat of a difference.

You're asking me? I am not employed by MS in any way. I have no more say than any of us do in the Xbox games division and that is the feedback forums. So they aren't spending money on Sea of Thieves, Recore or Ashen? Funny how much people piss and moan about "HaloGearsForza" so they actually read the feedback forums which asked for some new games and to see Rare not do Kinect anymore and come through with it and you aren't happy because they didn't shove tons of money at Bethesda for Fallout 4 to never go to PS4.

@charizard1605:

Ok? so cows are huge hypocrites? Is this news to you?

There are at least another 7, maybe 9, examples of hypocrisy unique to cows that we could have made a thread about.

It's what happens when you're the middle platform, when you have better graphics than the other two consoles, but less exclusives and you have "higher metascore games" than PC does, but worse graphics. They pull flip flops in all their arguments. When it's cows vs hermits graphics don't matter and when it's cows vs lems/sheep graphics are the only thing that does matter.

Nonetheless, They're extremely amusing to watch. About 85% of the cow population on SW are either trolls or fakeboys.

@Ant_17 said:

Well as a hypocrite , i think a sequel to a not so old game that you can find on every platform , now only on one machine is bullshit.

But a remake to a game that is older then some users here that never graced one of the machines , does not seem such a big deal.

That being said:

All I got from that was pure personal rationalization. But again your choice with humor is great.

@cainetao11: You deserve a stalk....i mean a follow

I hate when MS do it because they are forcing you to play a game in 900p that otherwise would be 1080p.

@charizard1605: I dig the concept of this thread. I just think in this case the deals and the announcements surrounding them provide plenty of reasons for different community reactions. First let's look at the announcements.

Rise of the Tomb Raider (from here on referred to as TR2) was originally announced months before "exclusivity" was announced. Now it could have been that MS moronically decided to play coy with a long established deal, but it also may have been that MS - finding themselves looking for a counter to the also announced Uncharted 4 - decided to pay to delay PS gamers ability to play the game. By presenting an assumed multiplat, allowing that assumption to persist for months, and THEN announcing otherwise, they made it easy for the media and community to view the deal as something being taken away from gamers. With FFVII, no prior announcements had been made (though we had some epic trolls) so this snafu was avoided entirely.

They also did their best to create a misleading announcement, and continue stubbornly to hide the facts of the deal to this day. When CD made their... Artfully worded announcement that TR2 was "Coming holiday 2015, Exclusively to XBox" (along with identically phrased press releases from CD and MS, to demonstrate that the wording was deliberately chosen) it was an attempt to convey a reality that didn't exist. Only after pinning Spencer down was the press able to discern the general framework, and then only by reading between the lines of some very defensive Spencer replies to questions. Even now, with all of the blowback MS is sticking to their guns of insisting all parties make no mention of other versions of the game. Compare this to the FFVII announcement, where "Play it first on Playstation 4" was an immediate and clear indication that other versions were forthcoming, and A Sony rep recently also told lol taku that "gamers will know how long the PS4’s timed-exclusivity lasts relatively soon. “We’ll be disclosing that to everyone before the game comes out, so everyone will know.”" If I were to guess, I'd say the biggest single source of criticism of MS comes here. They helped design an intentionally misleading announcement and have continued to be obstinate about allowing other details to be discussed. Why? the only people fooled at this point are a few of their own fanboys. Any possible PR coup from this evaporated once Spencer was forced to admit he had a timed deal with no control of the game once it expired. Now they just look petty.

Finally, the likely terms of each deal are quite distinct. TR2 is a multiplat MS had no prior relation to before paying to hold back other editions for the holiday shopping season. FFVII was translated into English (poor effort) and published in NA for PSOne by Sony. Despite several popular rereleases in subsequent console generations and on PC, the title has never appeared on a Nintendo or MS console, leading many to deduce that Sony's publishing rights limit the console availability of the game. It seems plausible to me that Sony surrendered any claim on the remake for an exclusive console window (sounds like SE can release at anytime on PC, again from loltaku interview). Which hey, you can call BS there too, but I don't think anyone would expect a shareholder owned company to give away something as valuable as even limited FFVII rights for free, and without the ability of the remake to go full multiplat, SE wouldn't likely bother anyhow.

In short, I think Sony's previous connections to FFVII, combined with their willingness to speak more clearly about the game's future outside of their platform makes it easy to see why the community at large views that situation more favorably to one where MS paid for a multiplat to delay its release on other platforms, crafted an announcement designed to convince gamers and the media that they had an actual (well... Brand?) exclusive, and has obstinately refused to allow information about other platforms to come out to this day.

@charizard1605: Why do you think we have slavery throughout mankind's history and still do? Some people are born docile and submissive to their masters.

The difference with tombraider was the first game in the series was on all major "next gen platforms" and pc shortly after the time of it's release, MS is giving timed exclusivity just to the xbone version and even went as far as to label it as an exclusive title. We know it's coming to PC shortly after so the fact lems parade this around is just lul. I don't think FF7 is even on XBL. by all accounts console wise it's a Sony property (Again let me repeat that, on consoles)

This seems like a silly thing to get upset over Charizard, I really would of thought this thread through a bit better. The two situations are not at all the same.

Both sides are capable of hypocrisy, but I personally got a good chuckle out of lemmings praising the footage shown of TR when they've been so vocal against cinematic action games,

I dont like timed exclusivity but i already own PC/Ps4 so i dont complain. We celebrate the remake of the game, not that it is timed exclusive, kinda difference there.

Just because we not making threads and complaining doesnt mean we like timed exclusives.

Both Cows and Sheep do that. Hell they still do it. Apparently both fanboy groups have high end PCs.

Ok.

That TL;DR did a terrible job of summing up the post

@charizard1605: First on Playstation, woo!

Yeah, fine. It's dumb.

@charizard1605:

It's mater of taste if the controller is better for Xbox1? Or the PS one is crap?

I'm not an hypocrite to say that I'd buy the Xbox1 just for the controller that is much better imo.

With Xbone selling 100 units in Japan, is it a mystery as to why Square may not even want it on the bone?

You're just now figuring out cows are hypocrites? Hell you can see it in this thread. But i guess when you have the worst console of the gen, you gotta flip flop and be angry all the time.

Yeah, lems are definitely the most delusional.

@ReadingRainbow4: Explain to me how the PS4 is a good console. I have one and almost never play it,

I don't think your personal taste effects how good a console is in the grand scheme of things. That's just what you like.

PS4 has a much much much brighter future tho, so it's kind of odd to say Sony has the worst console of the generation.

Probably because FF7 was originally on the playstation.

@ReadingRainbow4: It's the worst right now, but it's about to be better than the Wii U. And i can't really see the bright future. The uncharted trilogy, Uncharted 4, Horizon, and the FF VII are the games I'm looking forward to, and one doesn't even have a release date.

well shit, wasn't gonna make a serious post because well most people here aren't capable of having a discussion, but **** it why not.

This gen has been the worst of the fanboys and hypocrites by far. Why? can't really say, could be the role reversals (PS4 running multiplats better then xbox finally) could just be the explosion of the internet and forums where people can voice their opinions, could be that gaming is getting to be a bigger and bigger industry. Nobody can really say for sure. It isn't just limited to cows either, lems, and sheep do it to. probably everyone except hermits. They stay pretty consistent.

I mean the second that cows started talking about running PMs better on PS4, you knew they were hypocrites. how many of them cared last gen when the PS3 ran most games like crap? They didn't. How many said MS was screwing people for charging for online and laughed at paywalls, but then changed their tune now that PS4 requires a sub fee for online? All the crap talk about CoD and exclusive DLC, maps 1st buying marketing instead of making their own exclusives? Now the tables have turned. Sony is doing everything that cows complained about last gen on the 360 and they don't care. It's really sad. With that said, I'm sure there are plenty of lems that talked about how MPs ran better on the 360, now they don't care.

The issue isn't really being a hypocrite, it's being a fanboy. I'm willing to bet that 99% of people don't really care about 99% of the crap they talk about on here. They have a weird loyalty to a piece of plastic and metal, and then will talk about how great any difference is on it and how the other one sucks for. It doesn't matter what it is, exclusives, batteries, controller issues, Timed DLC, Online sub fees, etc anything that the 2 don't' share 100% in common will be picked apart and either praised or trashed based on how they feel about a company and not how they feel about the actual feature or game. I just can't understand that mind set. It's immaturity and stupidity at it's max level.

In the end, everyone here is a gamer, regardless of the platform or games they like, it's normal for people to have a preference but when you take it to the level you see here, it becomes abnormal and borderline insane. But people who do that, don't have the brain capacity to realize how stupid they sound, so it'll never change. and of course then you have the trolls who's only point of coming here is they have nothing better to do then try and piss off strangers on the internet for a laugh. Those people need to turn off the computer and go outside or read a book. basically do anything more productive with their time.

I've always hated third party timed and full exclusivity. All it does is alienate the fan bases. I won't be buying any Square games new because of the Tomb Raider deal as it was a long time favorite series of mine. This includes the FF7 Remake. If a Square game comes out that I want, I'll wait and get a used copy.

I can agree with the argument that people aren't being consistent in their outrages, but I also think the reason this isn't being as looked down on like the Tomb Raider situation is simple. Sony is the market console leader, and FF7 is the game that arguably made the Playstation brand relevant. Why shouldn't they get the first crack at it?

Could you imagine the outcry we'd get if Microsoft announced that FF7 remake? Or if Nintendo announced a FF7 remake for the 3DS, that wasn't coming to Vita?

Timed exclusivity is a big deal now because the console manufacturers know they're going to lose profit and brand power if they don't get exclusives on their platforms. Multiplatform games are the standard now to maximize profit. Not to mention PC gaming is on the rise and more Japanese games are showing up on Steam like FF. This does not bode well for Sony so they have to pay more money to SE. The Japanese market isn't that important like it used to be anymore (it's going mobile).

Final Fantasy doesnt appeal to me. I think people that are into those types of games would flock to PS4 on day one. When I think playstation I think Final Fantasy, GOW, DMC, and Metal Gear.

Yeah Sony can do no wrong.

Pretty much everything Sony did at this years E3 is stuff MS have done in the past and got shat on as a result. Everything becomes okay when its Sony doing it

LOL

Sony fans praising COD at E3 is the most surprising game related thing Ive ever seen happen.

system wars not fanboy wars

when mods do it it's ok?

FF isn't a franchise exclusive to Sony, so is Tomb Raider. Sure FF7 specifically helped the PS1 brand but it was only because Nintendo was stupid enough to not go for CDs. FF7 was supposed to be on N64. FF was like exclusive to Nintendo consoles before FF7 for PS1. FF started on a Nintendo console, why shouldn't Nintendo Wii U owners not get an FF game? Bayonetta started on a Sony console, why shouldn't PS4 owners not get to play Bayonetta 2? This whining is stupid like kids whining "But mama I want that." Boohoo. Video game development is a business and all of this is because of business reasons not because this belongs to that or this game is special to that brand.

@lordlors: Never said that specific brands were anyones property. Just saying the reason people aren't up in arms about this is because, the game coming out first on a platform where the game originally was released, That's all.

...and how is PC best platfrom, i have one and almost never play it, yeah

@draign: When you think PlayStation you think Final Fantasy? You do know that the first six games were on a Nintendo console, right?

Anything goes here, until someone with power has a knee-jerk reaction to something and then it's all police like for a short period, then things go right back to anything goes.

Wise words, I try not to make assumptions I prefer to have all the information at hand but that can be difficult when devs or publishers refuse to give us all the details.

Youngin's don't know their vidja game history. :D

Remember when Sony published FF7 for PS1? A lot of people don't remember that, most likely many people were too young or weren't born when the game released. Squaresoft was a smaller company and relied on other publishers which may be hard for people to realize in modern times as SquareEnix is massive and even bought out Eidos. Years ago it was speculated that if a FF7 remake was made, Sony would have some sort of rights to the FF7 product, in some limited fashion. At one point Sony owned 20% of Squaresoft. How did those people years ago predict that a FF7 would in some ways be exclusive? Maybe it was luck or wishful thinking. Maybe it was more.

I, of course, wondered about that sort of deal, but without seeing the contract it's all just speculation. I did notice that FF7 was never ported to any Nintendo or Xbox console in the decades after and I certainly think the DS for example would have been a great spot for a FF7 port at the very least. PS3 enjoyed PS1 classics like FF7 but we never saw those ports elsewhere and the Xbox 360 and Wii certainly could have handled FF7. Could it be the original FF7 contract made with a younger SquareSoft and young Sony Playstation? We did see PC ports, but Sony doesn't consider the PC a threat. Furthermore a FF7 HD port is coming to PS4 in a few months this October (not to be confused with FF7 Remake) and not Wii U or Xbone. What's up with that? Again, there is some sort of ties to FF7 and Playstation.

Without seeing the original PS1 contract with a young SquareSoft and Sony, it's tough to say one way or the other. I'm not for Timed Exclusives at all, I would prefer that money spent on creating 1st party, but I don't know what the deal is.

Why wasn't FF7 ported more frequently? Other than Sony and SquareEnix, we just simply aren't privy to the intel.

Personally, I'm just happy to see something I never thought would happen, finally happen. That's pretty sweet at least. If Sony did pony up for a timed exclusive, that's a bummer. In many ways I see Sony going the way of timed exclusives for the PS4 gen, but I warned of them adopting that stratagem years ago as it was so successful for Xbox. Spent money with 3rd parties instead of investing in 1st party. It bummed me out then to see the masses get caught up with timed exclusives and it bums me out now.

I know what timed exclusives ultimately mean...less games for me to play.

I should point out there is one difference with Rise of the TR. TR was multiplatform for years and when Rise was originally announced it wasn't timed. It was assumed like the last game it was going to be just like the last TR which was on PS3/360/PS4/Xbone/PC. Then a deal was struck and then Rise was 360/Xbone only. There was a definite transition from multiplat to Xbox multiplat. FF7 doesn't have that history of bouncing about between console companies both the original FF7 game and the FF7 remake. The announcements for FF7, unlike Rise TR, were clean and to the point.

That does not magically invalidate the strong connection with the PS brand. Halo 1 & 2 are on PC, yet the series was from day one associated as an Xbox brand. Simple as that.

Remember when Sony published FF7 for PS1? A lot of people don't remember that, most likely many people were too young or weren't born when the game released. Squaresoft was a smaller company and relied on other publishers which may be hard for people to realize in modern times as SquareEnix is massive and even bought out Eidos. Years ago it was speculated that if a FF7 remake was made, Sony would have some sort of rights to the FF7 product, in some limited fashion. At one point Sony owned 20% of Squaresoft. How did those people years ago predict that a FF7 would in some ways be exclusive? Maybe it was luck or wishful thinking. Maybe it was more.

I, of course, wondered about that sort of deal, but without seeing the contract it's all just speculation. I did notice that FF7 was never ported to any Nintendo or Xbox console in the decades after and I certainly think the DS for example would have been a great spot for a FF7 port at the very least. PS3 enjoyed PS1 classics like FF7 but we never saw those ports elsewhere and the Xbox 360 and Wii certainly could have handled FF7. Could it be the original FF7 contract made with a younger SquareSoft and young Sony Playstation? We did see PC ports, but Sony doesn't consider the PC a threat. Furthermore a FF7 HD port is coming to PS4 in a few months this October (not to be confused with FF7 Remake) and not Wii U or Xbone. What's up with that? Again, there is some sort of ties to FF7 and Playstation.

Without seeing the original PS1 contract with a young SquareSoft and Sony, it's tough to say one way or the other. I'm not for Timed Exclusives at all, I would prefer that money spent on creating 1st party, but I don't know what the deal is.

Why wasn't FF7 ported more frequently? Other than Sony and SquareEnix, we just simply aren't privy to the intel.

Personally, I'm just happy to see something I never thought would happen, finally happen. That's pretty sweet at least. If Sony did pony up for a timed exclusive, that's a bummer. In many ways I see Sony going the way of timed exclusives for the PS4 gen, but I warned of them adopting that stratagem years ago as it was so successful for Xbox. Spent money with 3rd parties instead of investing in 1st party. It bummed me out then to see the masses get caught up with timed exclusives and it bums me out now.

I know what timed exclusives ultimately mean...less games for me to play.

I should point out there is one difference with Rise of the TR. TR was multiplatform for years and when Rise was originally announced it wasn't timed. It was assumed like the last game it was going to be just like the last TR which was on PS3/360/PS4/Xbone/PC. Then a deal was struck and then Rise was 360/Xbone only. There was a definite transition from multiplat to Xbox multiplat. FF7 doesn't have that history of bouncing about between console companies both the original FF7 game and the FF7 remake. The announcements for FF7, unlike Rise TR, were clean and to the point.

Well said.

@Desmonic: But half of the Final Fantasy titles appeared exclusively on a Nintendo console BEFORE the Playstation was a thing. If a person didnt start playing Final Fantasy until 7 may have an excuse for this perception. And Halo 1&2 appeared first on Xbox. I'm not sure I understand the comparison.

Which is why Sony has to pay SE to keep it timed exclusive because FF7 remake may eventually make its way to PC. People tend to forget there was a port of VII to PC back in 1998 a year after it was released on PS1. The view that FF7 is an exclusive is a lie. This is Sony desperately wanting to keep the FF exclusive to the PS brand image as much as possible even though it's a lie. If FF becomes "visibly" multiplatform, the PS brand diminishes. I think many are already expecting FFXV to appear on Steam.

LOL no problem dude.

most unnecessary thread of the week

I hear ya. They never confirmed it was every platform before the announcement of timed exclusive. I realize many will automatically assume it will be but this is the business of gaming now. The idea that we will not see changes in business is lying to ourselves. As this industry grew the big business "screw you" tactics were going to come in. It was inevitable as it has been for any industry.