Okay, so what does everyone think the big news will be at the show this year? Or do you think nothing really big at all will happen?

Make your predictions in this thread, no matter how ridiculous the prediction may be. I think the rumbling Sixaxis is basically confirmed by now, but what else? Capcom's "three huge announcements" thing was apparently erroneous information, so we might not hear much from them. Perhaps the confirmed 80GB PS3 price drop and the unveiling of that 40GB PS3. Maybe the FF VII remake actually happens. Maybe Microsoft will buy Nintendo and the two will rule the world with the Wii-60!

Well, whatever it is, let's hear it. Make your predictions and then gloat like a nut when it comes true. :)

P.S. What time is Sony's press conference tomorrow, anyway? Why can't I find this information?

"The PS3 does better in Europe and USA then in Japan,but in Europe and USA the 360 has a much bigger hardware basis and higher sales overall.If you produce a game you want to make money with and can´t be shure you sell it to every single gamer,so you use the biggest hardware basis,which are the Wii and the 360 without question.Look at Sony´s former exclusives list and how much of them are still exclusiveor even coming to PS3 (Katamari for example,Ace Combat will eventually come)"

Any particular reason you think the userbase will stay the same as it is now for the next 6-8 years? Most every analyst on the planet either has the PS3 coming out on top, or a very, very close race between all three platforms in the U.S. Do you even have a point to this?

"Since there whould be absolutely no reason to make a remake on the Wii...well self-explaining.I don´t say it will come to the 360 if it comes,but the pssibility isn´t that low.FFXIII isn´t coming to 360,but since the Engine is re-written the possibility is higher then any FF7-Remake,at least if you read between the lines of S-E´s statements like "FFXIII isn´t coming to 360,but that deasn´t mean none will come"."

Again...who cares? What does this have to do with a FF VII remake?

"I also want a FF7 Re-make,it was the best of the "newer"FFs since FF8-12 had some serious flaws FF7 didn´t but FF7s success and hype until today came frome being worldwide released (you could count RPGs on one hand in Europe back then) looking great for the time back then with many cutscenes and being almost uniqe.It wasn´t the best RPG ever or something (played much better games,like Grandia...Saturn Version prefered) and you can´t expect it will have the same effect today.Of course,it´s not like no one will buy it,but it´s not like the Fanboy-Basis that still talks about it is big egnough to have dream-sales like 9.8 Million (fom 1997 to December 2005) on a much better sold console."

I don't even know what you're saying here. I won't even try to interpret it. The only thing I can say is you're completely and utterly incorrect to think FF VII wouldn't sell millions. That's all.

"Well look at MGS:Twin Snakes...MGS was by far more realised and respected by the masses and how did the Remake sell?I think not bad...but not awesome."

That's a faulty statement, especially when looking at the long-term sales of MGS and FF VII. You should know that.

"By the way,some of the DQs is the best soldRPG series ever in Japan.DQ7 and 8 sold better then any game before.And why exactly do you think that the FF7-Remake will sell?Look at the PS3 sales.They are ok in Japan,but worldwide..."

Actually, the PS3 has been doing far better in the U.S. and Europe than in Japan, but it has long since crossed the million mark in each of the three territories. Why do I think the remake will sell? Because Final Fantasy VII is one of the most recognizable games in history; even new-age gamers know the name. Furthermore, the sheer number of fans that game has had, coupled with the release of supporting products like Crisis Core and Advent Children, means any remake would be an immediate blockbuster. Nobody sat around video game forums for several YEARS debating whether or not a MGS or DQ remake would be good. The Japanese culture heralds DQ, FF, and MGS, but it's Cloud who graces soda commercials over there. You're severely underestimating the pull FF VII has worldwide, plain and simple.

"Just to be sure,you think the Remake whould have the quality of the Demo,right?It didn´t run on a PS3 (the PS3s Cell-Chip wasn´t ready that time and it´s a much lowered version of the basic cell-chip),It took Months (I think it was 3) to make and eaten Millions through that.Plus the PS3 doesn´t have egnough power to put that think in real-time,that´s obvious and even Sony said that they can pull off the full potential of the PS3 in 5 or 6 years,and that whould be needed.Tech-demos always are better then the real output...remember the FF8-Dance-Video that should be possible in real-time on the PS2?"

I don't make any assumptions about how a FF VII remake will look, but one thing is for sure: it will certainly look like a next-gen version of one of history's most beloved titles. Furthermore, what the PS3 is capable of is a subject of constant debate, but most agree its potential is immense. We have no idea how long it will take to fully realize this potential, but this has nothing to do with whether or not a FF VII remake will look great on the PS3. Of course it would. To say otherwise is just...well, silly.

"Well if a remake comes,it will be much cheaper made then that demo.I whould be happy with it anyway,but since I won´t buy a PS3 in the next years and even the white-engine FFXIII is made with is Multi-Console-Based now (originally PS3-only planned)it whould be coming to both consoles anyway.But the idea they make a PSP-Remake instead (MUCH cheaper to make and it sells better then both consoles) isn´t too far away...or at least it gets a good port."

A PSP remake would defeat the whole purpose. That makes zero sense. You may as well just port the regular game over; the PSP can't handle much better graphics, anyway. And just for the record, FF XIII is not multiplatform and probably never will be. What you're gaining from the engine going multi (something just about every engine does) is beyond me.

The PS1 was the king of RPGs, so you're missing a lot. Here are a few that spring quickly to mind:

Any Final Fantasy (VII, VIII, IX, Tactics, Anthology, Chronicles, Origins)
Star Ocean: The 2nd Story
Vagrant Story
Chrono Cross
Lunar: Silver Star Story Complete
Lunar 2: Eternal Blue
Suikoden
Suikoden II
Wild ARMs
Legend of Legaia
Legend of Dragoon
Legend of Mana
Alundra (although it doesn't really qualify as a RPG, it's still one of the best games ever, IMO)
Parasite Eve (also not really a RPG, although Square called it one, and it's great fun)
Saga Frontier
Saga Frontier 2
Breath of Fire IV
Grandia
Thousand Arms
Persona
Persona 2
Threads of Fate
Valkyrie Profile

And there are several strat/RPGs like FFT that were good, too- Vandal Hearts II, Front Mission 3, and Tactics Ogre, for example.

Definitely Halo 3.NWA_31

By the way...Square-Enix,or more the Square-based titles have not been that good the whole last generation,or didn´t reach the older SNES and PS1 titles in any way.This isn´t only PS2 based.Final Fantasy Tactivs Advance for example wasn´t bad,but very far from quality of the original FFT.Maybe it´s based on the fact that many people left Square had beeninvolved with the older titles.Most of them areRumored to be at bandai-namcoor Mistwalker now thanks to the Firm-politics who involved Sony too much.Ever asked why S-E suddenly releases games for the 360...?Now you got a reason.That´s only rumred of course,but it gives a hint of what has happend,and the fact that former Square-based titles like Xenosaga comin out from other companys and some other games remeber of older Square-titles are more then just a clue.

And a little note to those who still think a PS3-Remake of Final Fantasy 7:They won´t make it,they never had planned it and they made it totally clear at the point the tech-demo was released.You want reasons?Remakes never outsell the originals.Not even in Japan.Look at the DQ-Remakes which Originals outsold every FF.It´s MUCH cheaper to make a new FF then remaking an old one because you make more money with it.Look at FFX-2.It got platinum even if the game was bad and totally cheap produced because Fanboys bought it hundredthousands of times.Even if most "old"FF-Fans whould like to buy a FF7-remake there aren´t egnough to cover the costs,or at least they make not enough plus with it.So give it up,S-E whould be very stupid to make it.

Ash2X

FFT is my favorite game of all time, and I'd never say that FFTA was even in the same universe as FFT. FF VII and VIII were two of my favorite RPGs of all time, and I consider FF VII the greatest RPG of all time. Therefore, I believe it's certainly true that Squaresoft productions were better than Square-Enix productions, and I would never say otherwise. However, to completely discount what S-E had to offer in the PS2 generation is ridiculous. If I list out the games I own from Squaresoft and from S-E, the list of games from each would be very similar. FF X, FF XII, DQ VIII, KH and KH II, VP 2, and Crisis Core match up favorably to FF VII - IX, FFT, Vagrant Story, and Chrono Cross. The merely average tend to match up, too, with Drakengard I and II, Star Ocean: 'Til the End of Time, and Unlimited Saga going hand in hand with Brave Fencer Musashi, Threads of Fate, Ergheiz, and Legend of Mana.

As for the FF VII PS3 remake, I hadn't intended to get into detail, but now I have to: you absolutely cannot compare FF VII to any other remake there has been. It's arguably the biggest RPG of all time, one of the biggest games of all time, and has maintained its reputation and popularity more than almost any other title in gaming history. To say a remake wouldn't turn enough profit to compensate the required work is downright absurd. FF VII is nothing like remaking a DQ, nor is it even remotely similar to any other remake project to date. Therefore, all of that logic is flawed.

Next, I would've agreed that this wasn't possible up to about 6 months ago. But I've kept a careful eye on all the Square-Enix responses to this rumor, and something has definitely changed in their tone. Ever since the tech demo at E3 in 2005, they've replied in the same way every time the rumor of a PS3 remake surfaced: "we're not doing it, we don't plan to do it, and that's that." They dismiss it completely out of hand, never once even entertaining the possibility. They've done that right along...until now. Recently, this attitude has changed. In an interview with Square-Enix, one of the original creators actually said the "decision could happen very quickly" (as it did with Crisis Core), and that "it's a matter of timing." This is almost a complete 180 from their song and dance over the past year and a half.

Furthermore, the online petition for a FF VII remake has garnered about 23,000 signatures, and the author sent it to S-E. The first part of the response was expected - "S-E Japan is not currently planning to remake this game," etc, etc, etc. But the last part said, "but this doesn't mean it won't ever happen." Again, something S-E would NEVER have said earlier this year. And lastly, and this is just a theory, but look at this year: it's FF's 20th anniversary. They have Crisis Core ready to come out...if they announced a FF VII remake, how much attention would be taken AWAY from CC? A lot. Too much, in fact. I think they're waiting to get CC out, and then perhaps we'll see some fireworks. Lastly, as unveiled from the ending and collectors edition material in Crisis Core, there appears to be a hint that FF VII - in some form - is on its way back: http://www.psxextreme.com/ps3-news/1852.html and http://www.psxextreme.com/psp-news/1034.html. So I don't really know what to expect. But I DO know Square-Enix's tone has changed significantly regarding this subject.

[QUOTE="fathoms_basic"]

"So when I praised FF VIII, FFT, and VP2, was that an example of my "vendetta" against SE? Missed that one, did we? Oops, why did you leave that out, because it would invalidate your entire rant?"

Your "praise" for VP2 was incredibly reluctant and FF VIII and FFT were NOT in the last generation. They were in the PS1 generation, and neither are a Square-Enix product; they're both Squaresoft products. You have yet to direct any praise - and nothing but venom - towards Square-Enix. That's not debatable, my friend. I can read.

"Who said anything about review scores? I sure didn't, so I have no idea why you feel the need to cite them, why even bring it up? Oh by the way, one's favorite games are usually based on their own opinion as the primary criteria. I just bring it up as you appear to be having great difficulty grasping such an elementary concept. Again, I have no idea why you choose to make an issue of this either. Time and time again, you have attempted to pass off your opinions and anecdotes as universal truths, so your inflammatory rhetoric is hardly a revelation."

It's clearly your belief that Square-Enix titles are nowhere near the level of Squaresoft with your "haven't created a must-have" game in a "long time" comment. I'm simply pointing out that the critics don't agree with a word of that. It's extremely relevant, and one you would undoubtedly bring up if it worked in your favor. And if you condescend one more time and use a word like "elementary," I'm not responding.

"Fathoms, where have I ever said that I hated SE? Oh wait, see above, your opinion equals fact. Like I said before (not that I believe you've even read my posts in this thread) I just don't believe their games are "must haves" like they used to be. To flesh this out further, there are simply more RPG developers out there who are offering games that are very much on par with SE, thereby providing gamers with more choices and comparisons than ever before. You however translate this as my "vendetta" against SE. As to why, I have no idea."

Oh, now they're not must-haves "like they used to be." Way to backpedal. Nobody said there weren't more RPG developers, and I never once said there weren't. Nor have I said they were lesser developers than Square-Enix. The only issue here is your obvious bias, which pops up in just about every Square-Enix-oriented thread on the planet. Exactly why did you feel inclined to "inform" everyone to be wary of S-E in this particular thread? The topic centers on an FF VII remake for the PS3 - something about ten zillion people want - and you barely even acknowledged the subject while immediately shifting into your typical mode of "questioning" S-E. This topic didn't call for that. It's OFF-topic, but you can't help yourself. How much more evidence do you want?

"Saying that a company doesn't put out "must have" titles is not the equivalent of saying that they do not produce a quality product. Again, there is more competition for our dollars in the RPG genre than ever. I would advise other gamers to be wary of ANY product that comes out,.Why else are we here on a gaming website eagerly awaiting the latest reviews of hotly anticipated titles? Frankly, its ridiculous that I have to spell it out for you, but you clearly weren't getting it or IMO, were purposely obfuscating this point just to flame me."

Never once have I flamed you or insulted you. Point me in the direction of that, please. Simply saying you have a vendetta is hardly an insult, while your entire attitude towards me is both elitist and insulting. Get that straight. And if you keep skirting the issue, don't bother replying. Here's some very simple proof- you have NEVER "questioned" any other RPG-centric companies. The only "questioning" you do is related to Square-Enix. Care to show me any evidence to the contrary? A real RPG fan is equally open to promising titles from everywhere, but you seem hellbent on forcing people to think twice about S-E titles, which is totally bogus.

You were actually silly enough to make assumptions about me based on my avatar (as if it's my fault GS's selection of avatars sucks), and yet, what about yours? Gee, there have been a lot of mediocre Atlus productions over the years, but we're not "questioning" them, now are we? No, you stick up for them any chance you get...and do the exact opposite with Square-Enix. Face it- you're a biased RPG player, and you and I BOTH know why. So just get over it.

"If you want to have an honest argument Fathoms, I'm all for that, but quit putting words into my mouth."

I'm using your own words, and you're apparently not capable of honesty and objectivity.

MarcusAntonius

How can I be backtracking when it was my premise all along?

Still making things up ,I see. The only issue being skirted here is your insistence upon serving up baseless nonsense. Others in this thread certainly got off topic (as early as the first page) but yet you continue to focus upon me.

SInce you continue to see things that aren't there, there's no purpose in continuing this discussion. At this point, you're just harassing me for the sake of it and your faulty reading comprehension is proof positive.

The only one here with a vendetta is yourself.

Brilliant. :roll:

I've proven my point. Go ahead and try to restrain yourself from your anti-S-E campaign. I'll be sure to call you on it each and every time it comes up...and I imagine it won't be long.

"So when I praised FF VIII, FFT, and VP2, was that an example of my "vendetta" against SE? Missed that one, did we? Oops, why did you leave that out, because it would invalidate your entire rant?"

Your "praise" for VP2 was incredibly reluctant and FF VIII and FFT were NOT in the last generation. They were in the PS1 generation, and neither are a Square-Enix product; they're both Squaresoft products. You have yet to direct any praise - and nothing but venom - towards Square-Enix. That's not debatable, my friend. I can read.

"Who said anything about review scores? I sure didn't, so I have no idea why you feel the need to cite them, why even bring it up? Oh by the way, one's favorite games are usually based on their own opinion as the primary criteria. I just bring it up as you appear to be having great difficulty grasping such an elementary concept. Again, I have no idea why you choose to make an issue of this either. Time and time again, you have attempted to pass off your opinions and anecdotes as universal truths, so your inflammatory rhetoric is hardly a revelation."

It's clearly your belief that Square-Enix titles are nowhere near the level of Squaresoft with your "haven't created a must-have" game in a "long time" comment. I'm simply pointing out that the critics don't agree with a word of that. It's extremely relevant, and one you would undoubtedly bring up if it worked in your favor. And if you condescend one more time and use a word like "elementary," I'm not responding.

"Fathoms, where have I ever said that I hated SE? Oh wait, see above, your opinion equals fact. Like I said before (not that I believe you've even read my posts in this thread) I just don't believe their games are "must haves" like they used to be. To flesh this out further, there are simply more RPG developers out there who are offering games that are very much on par with SE, thereby providing gamers with more choices and comparisons than ever before. You however translate this as my "vendetta" against SE. As to why, I have no idea."

Oh, now they're not must-haves "like they used to be." Way to backpedal. Nobody said there weren't more RPG developers, and I never once said there weren't. Nor have I said they were lesser developers than Square-Enix. The only issue here is your obvious bias, which pops up in just about every Square-Enix-oriented thread on the planet. Exactly why did you feel inclined to "inform" everyone to be wary of S-E in this particular thread? The topic centers on an FF VII remake for the PS3 - something about ten zillion people want - and you barely even acknowledged the subject while immediately shifting into your typical mode of "questioning" S-E. This topic didn't call for that. It's OFF-topic, but you can't help yourself. How much more evidence do you want?

"Saying that a company doesn't put out "must have" titles is not the equivalent of saying that they do not produce a quality product. Again, there is more competition for our dollars in the RPG genre than ever. I would advise other gamers to be wary of ANY product that comes out,.Why else are we here on a gaming website eagerly awaiting the latest reviews of hotly anticipated titles? Frankly, its ridiculous that I have to spell it out for you, but you clearly weren't getting it or IMO, were purposely obfuscating this point just to flame me."

Never once have I flamed you or insulted you. Point me in the direction of that, please. Simply saying you have a vendetta is hardly an insult, while your entire attitude towards me is both elitist and insulting. Get that straight. And if you keep skirting the issue, don't bother replying. Here's some very simple proof- you have NEVER "questioned" any other RPG-centric companies. The only "questioning" you do is related to Square-Enix. Care to show me any evidence to the contrary? A real RPG fan is equally open to promising titles from everywhere, but you seem hellbent on forcing people to think twice about S-E titles, which is totally bogus.

You were actually silly enough to make assumptions about me based on my avatar (as if it's my fault GS's selection of avatars sucks), and yet, what about yours? Gee, there have been a lot of mediocre Atlus productions over the years, but we're not "questioning" them, now are we? No, you stick up for them any chance you get...and do the exact opposite with Square-Enix. Face it- you're a biased RPG player, and you and I BOTH know why. So just get over it.

"If you want to have an honest argument Fathoms, I'm all for that, but quit putting words into my mouth."

I'm using your own words, and you're apparently not capable of honesty and objectivity.

"If you didn't intend for it to come off as an insult and more of just taking issue with a comment, fine, then I will believe you. But to call me an RPG elitest? Hardly. If I were, I certainly wouldn't be so enthusiastic to tell other gamers about some worthy alternitives to the more mainstream titles so that perhaps more niche titles like them can get more exposure and be released in the U.S. whenever the genre comes up for discussion. An "elitest" wouldn't want such games to get exposure so that they wouldn't be "cool" anymore."

Baloney. You make a very conscious effort on a continual basis to offer your "worthy alternatives," and it's painfully obvious you believe those niche titles are superior. Your responses in this thread are more than enough to prove that you've had a vendetta against Square-Enix for quite a while, and you go out of your way to make that plain. You don't offer "worthy alternatives." You shoot down people's appreciation and enjoyment of Square-Enix titles with your constant questioning. You also imply you know more about RPGs than everyone else when you do this. You can play whatever you want, but this behavior is just a little annoying, that's all.

"Where did I try to convince people that SE "sucks?" I simply believe that they're just not the only game in town anymore when it comes to RPGs, that's all. They don't dominate the scene as much as they once did and I've questioned their direction and decision making, as any consumer would."

I've taken the trouble to clarify this "questioning" from people like you, and the results are obvious: the average review score of Square titles from the PS1 generation is NOT significantly higher than Square-Enix's titles from the PS2 generation, contrary to popular belief. Despite thetimeless titles in the 32-bit generation, they also had several crap-to-average titles, just as they did last generation. Very little has changed in the frequency of quality titles from that publisher, no matter what you say. If you want me to prove it with hard numbers, I will, but I'm sure all you care about is your own opinion...which is all that matters, right?

"Is there really anything wrong with questioning SE? Are you going to honestly, wholeheartedly deny that their quality hasn't slipped from last gen? They are clearly not the same company as they were in the 32-bit gen, that much is unquestionable IMO. I'm far from the only regular in GGD who holds such sentiments."

See previous. You can do the research if you want, but I believe you're afraid to. I'm not going to deny more instant ****cs from Square were available in the PS1 generation, but I can run down a very similar list of quality from the PS2 generation. And you know I can.

"How could I say that FF XII "sucked?" I've never said that, ever. Nor have I implied it. Where have I ever said that, Fathoms?"

Right here, chief: "Square Enix needs to prove their product is worth my money before I ever play any of their games ever again. SE games ceased being "must haves" long ago." What's your definition of "long ago," Marcus? Last I checked FF XII wasn't "long ago," and neither was KH II.

"SE looks like they might be finally getting things back in order, but where is the fault in taking a wait and see approach?"

Don't try to hide behind that. You're not "waiting and seeing." You've been doing nothing but condemning S-E in every RPG-related post you make. It's been that way for quite a while...you think I don't read your posts? You think I forget? Want me to point out about seven million examples of you stomping all over S-E just for the sake of your "questioning"? The bottom line is that questioning and discussing is perfectly fine, but you never do that. You basically tell people to be wary of S-E because they "haven't created any must-have games" in a long time. That's complete and total BS, and if you want to be stuck in the rut of "niche RPGs are superior" and "hardcore RPG fans know everything," than you'll never be objective. You don't like S-E, fine. Don't infect everyone else with a flawed philosophy.

You didn't even have any reason whatsoever for being in this topic, besides doing what you always do. This is about a FF VII remake, which of course you don't like the idea of, and yet, you took three posts to try to convince everyone to "wait and see" with Square-Enix. No, that's not a vendetta. :roll:

Yeah it has to be consecutive hits, also hit all the health vases, mix them in during the combo. With sixaxis you are never going to do it, switch to analog mode.

I got all 129 medals, the only hard ones where the shooting levels. I just started over again in hell mode, so far not that hard at all and I am getting three medals in nearly each level.

Onesign of a good game is that you don't get bored playing the game over again, and I am definitely not bored of the game yet. Its still a lot of fun to lay waste to huge amounts of enemies and doing so with crazy combos. The only thing I don't look foward to playing again are the shooting levels. There is an excellent base to build something really special out of for the sequel. Great first step, if they can take it to the next level this franchise could be big.

dvader654

I want to go back and get all the medals, too; I just had to speed through much of the game to get that review up. I'm not very good with action games - beating stuff like NG and DMC 3 (NOT the SE) was extremely tough for me - so it's harder for me to get all those medals, but as you say, it's still fun. That's why I don't particularly like the "elite" action titles that only very few gamers would say they really enjoy. I loved NG and DMC 3, don't get me wrong, but because I'm no action expect, too much of each of those games felt like a chore. Nothing in HS (or either God of War title) EVER felt like a chore.

Maybe that sounds all crazy casual, but I don't care. I think it's a benefit. :)