The Shrine

If Sony loses exclusive rights to either of those games, they're close to fucked, FFXIII will allow them to have some solid ground in Japan, but MGS4 on the XBox in America would sell like hotcakes.

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3158126

To anyone following Capcom (or the industry), last night's revelation that Devil May Cry 4 is no longer a PlayStation 3 exclusive came with little shock. And yet, the announcement's spawned message board threads spanning dozens and dozens of pages -- half filled with celebratory remarks, the other damning Sony for losing the game. Others went so far as to accuse Capcom of dumbing the game down in the endless pursuit of money.

Thus far at least, Capcom offers little allegiance to any platform this generation. Dead Rising and Lost Planet both seemed to arrive on Xbox 360 because Capcom was willing to take a risk with Microsoft on jumping into the next-generation pool early. Even then, their zombie thriller didn't show up until nine months after the machine launched in the US. The risks have paid off for companies like Capcom and Ubisoft (see: Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter). And, as of January, Dead Rising had sold over a million copies and talk's already underway for sequel.

Rumors puttered about in EGM that Sony was surprised at Dead Rising's success and working with Capcom to secure a PS3-exclusive sequel. To date, that's not come to fruition and DMC4 makes it all the more unlikely. Lost Planet found similar success when it launched in January, allegedly pushing more than a million copies across Europe and North America combined. The NPD Group numbers put sales for the adventure across the frozen tundra at 329,000 in January -- still mighty impressive.

Japanese publishers have flirted with Xbox 360 because of its head start in North America. Japan is still an important stomping ground, but there are more dollars here. Why would Namco Bandai have given Ridge Racer 6 to Microsoft, a historically Sony-exclusive franchise, and then drop the almost identical Ridge Racer 7 a year later on PlayStation 3? And, today, the publisher revealed they're bringing the Ace Combat series to Xbox 360 first, too, with no indication of a PS3 version. Sure, it's probably coming, just later.

Capcom made their intentions clear from the outset with Resident Evil 5. They may have taken a gamble with Nintendo on the last outing, but they won't risk the marbles this time -- the next sequel will arrive on both Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 simultaneously. Dead Rising and Lost Planet were experiments to see what kind of success they could muster by sinking some time and money into Xbox 360 (more with the latter, given its intense marketing push) and it's proven a successful formula.

Not that they've been explicitly public about the matter, either. Even in January, rumors started circulating that DMC4 had left the exclusivity camp, but Capcom stuck to their guns, telling Kotaku:

"Capcom does not comment on rumors. Devil May Cry 4 is exclusive to PS3. No other announcements have been made."

Yet, that's exactly what happened last night. Microsoft is clearly pleased, but how indicative is this of future third-party attitudes towards support aligned with Xbox 360 and PS3? Other rumors have suggested Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots is just waiting to be ported, and while Konami's remained silent, so did Namco Bandai and Capcom -- originally. Boris Schneider-Johne, Xbox product manager at Microsoft Germany, pasted the this check list on his blog in response to the news:

1. Devil May Cry
2. Final Fantasy
3. Metal Gear Solid

Schneider-Johne quickly claimed it was only a wish list and not representative of franchises Microsoft is actively pursuing. That would, of course, be a lie -- they would kill for them. The question's whether Konami and Square Enix are already taking that next step. In the next year, we'll find out -- but try to hide your surprise.

That would be very bad for Sony. I am hoping that it happens though. I want me some FFXIII, but I'm not buying a PS3 for several years. A 360 is probably in my near future however.

Plus, if FFXIII gets a multi-system release, maybe KH3 will also. One can hope.

My decision would be easy if FF13 hit the XBox360, even if their controller is crap compared to the gold standard Sony one. ^_^

Flip wrote:My decision would be easy if FF13 hit the XBox360, even if their controller is crap compared to the gold standard Sony one. ^_^

Same here. If I had a choice right now between a free PS3 and a free 360 (assuming I couldn't return one or resell it, etc), I'd pick the 360 without delay.

Yes, Sony is quite fucked right now.

Well, they already completely lost their biggest Japanese Franchise in Dragon Quest (DQ7 was #1 best selling PSX game in Japan and DQ8 was the #1 best selling PS2 game in Japan). Grand Theft Auto is also launching on Xbox 360 first.

I am not particularly interested in the upcoming FF13 though, it is my prediction that it is going to end up being the lowest reviewed FF game in the main series' history. My evidence is that they have a poor development team. Square has lost almost all of their key figures in recent years.

I agree that their exclusives are important, but while the main reason I want a PS3 is MGS4, the supplementary reason has become LittleBigPlanet, which is completely original. I think you guys are underestimating the ability of developers to produce good things on the platform...

Flip wrote:My decision would be easy if FF13 hit the XBox360, even if their controller is crap compared to the gold standard Sony one. ^_^

I dunno if you are joking, but the the 360 controller is probably the best I've ever held - overall.

The 360 controller gives me fucking finger cramps...but that might just be because Fight Night requires so many rotating motions, and that's the only game I'm playing right now.

kali o. wrote:

Flip wrote:My decision would be easy if FF13 hit the XBox360, even if their controller is crap compared to the gold standard Sony one. ^_^

I dunno if you are joking, but the the 360 controller is probably the best I've ever held - overall.

I don't know about best overall, but it's definitely better than the S which was a good controller and a slight improvement over the DC controller on which it was based on.

Eric, I think Lost Planet and Dead Rising were made on the 360 solely due to Inafune wanting to do it. I remember reading an article based on that and Capcom took the risk on him basically due to his past (he's the Mega Man boy, among others). They still sold like garbage in Japan but all of the companies are starting to realize that Japan's game market is shrinking whereas North America's and Europe's are growing. This only helps us.

And if they lose MGS4 I'd be VERY happy. Right now, that's the sole reason for me to get a PS3.

Sega Saturn 3d controller FTW

Zeus wrote:
I don't know about best overall, but it's definitely better than the S which was a good controller and a slight improvement over the DC controller on which it was based on.

As someone who owned a DC at launch and still plays it, the 360 is miles ahead of that - but we all have our opinions I guess.

Nev wrote:The 360 controller gives me fucking finger cramps...but that might just be because Fight Night requires so many rotating motions, and that's the only game I'm playing right now.

Rotation with the thumb sticks? Yeah...that's not a huge thing in other games. GoW, R6:Vegas, Viva Pinata, CoD3, Dead Rising, Lost Planet, Saints Row-- none of these games have hurt my hand from playing for extended periods of time (although pissing me off is a different story...f Lost Planet)

kali o. wrote:

Zeus wrote:
I don't know about best overall, but it's definitely better than the S which was a good controller and a slight improvement over the DC controller on which it was based on.

As someone who owned a DC at launch and still plays it, the 360 is miles ahead of that - but we all have our opinions I guess.

Maybe it's a bit of rose-coloured glasses, but I love the DC controller, it rules. My fav is still the N64 controller.

I alraedy know how you feel about it, we've been over it hundreds of times so don't exhume and re-beat a dead horse.

I find the Xbox 360 controller quite unremarkable. The Dreamcast Controller's VMU made it a superior option in my opinion.

The Seeker wrote:I find the Xbox 360 controller quite unremarkable. The Dreamcast Controller's VMU made it a superior option in my opinion.

That's cause you don't really use one, you just form opinions on virtually baseless...opinions.

The VMU, like 90% of what old Sega used to do, was an awesome idea, ahead of it's time (thus technologically under-developed) and under-utilised.

I'd be very surprised if someone didn't revisit the controller lcd/vmu idea again in the future.

I would love to see that. Although I have to say that while I did love the feel of the DC controller it was so strange to me that it was comfortable. It was the most uncomfortable looking controller yet somehow it worked quite well and was quite comfy.

and on that note...I do love the 360 cntroller it is quite comfortable without being

And that's what was so neat about the DC controller. It looked odd, really odd, yet it worked beautifully. It was the first controller to popularize the triggers over shoulder buttons and, to me, the first one to properly have both the analog and digital sticks in a way that was easily accessible. It was good enough for Microshaft to basically copy for the Xbox Controller S (with some of the Sidewinder mixed in) after their initial one, still influenced by the DC, was so poorly accepted by most, and hardly change at all for the 360 controller.

The vast majority of our innovations have come from Sega and Nintendo over the years. Although Sony does innovate, they haven't done very much at all with the games systems. Microsoft's done very well with the online and are the ones to catch. It's just too bad we won't have Sega innovating anymore, it only hurts the consumers and the industry IMO.

The console wars have gotten too expensive for exclusives. I simply will not buy both an 360 and PS3. Either they need to drop down by a few hundred dollars, or games need to be non-exclusive, or one of them has to go. Just think about console wars in the past:

1. NES was the dominator, so it was just one system to buy.
2. SNES was the dominator, so it was just one system to buy.
3. Sega and Nintendo had some small hits, but the PSX was the dominator, so you had a PSX, and maybe a N64 and/or Saturn.
4. Gamecube had some good titles, and so did the PS2. Many people started to have both consoles, but they were cheap. Nobody cared about the XBox and Dreamcast.
5. Errr...360, PS3, or Wii. Cheaper one doesn't support HD, the other two are way too expensive, all are starting to have good titles. Anybody else have $1500 to burn?

Yeah, so in a matter of 20 years, it's gone from $100-200 to $1500 in order to be able to get the consoles to play most of the good games. I don't like that.

You know what I think is going to happen? I'm surfing the web right now on my HDTV with my PC. I think consoles only have about 10 years left, and then we are going to move to purely PC games. PC games will be more controller driven with the option of keyboard/mouse. Everybody will have a HDTV with a PC tied to it, and there would be no point to consoles.

The only thing bad about the 360 controller is its shoddy D-Pad. If not for that, it would be perfect. Definitely better than the old DC controller, which was my previous favorite.

SineSwiper wrote:The console wars have gotten too expensive for exclusives. I simply will not buy both an 360 and PS3. Either they need to drop down by a few hundred dollars, or games need to be non-exclusive, or one of them has to go. Just think about console wars in the past:

1. NES was the dominator, so it was just one system to buy.
2. SNES was the dominator, so it was just one system to buy.
3. Sega and Nintendo had some small hits, but the PSX was the dominator, so you had a PSX, and maybe a N64 and/or Saturn.
4. Gamecube had some good titles, and so did the PS2. Many people started to have both consoles, but they were cheap. Nobody cared about the XBox and Dreamcast.
5. Errr...360, PS3, or Wii. Cheaper one doesn't support HD, the other two are way too expensive, all are starting to have good titles. Anybody else have $1500 to burn?

Yeah, so in a matter of 20 years, it's gone from $100-200 to $1500 in order to be able to get the consoles to play most of the good games. I don't like that.

You know what I think is going to happen? I'm surfing the web right now on my HDTV with my PC. I think consoles only have about 10 years left, and then we are going to move to purely PC games. PC games will be more controller driven with the option of keyboard/mouse. Everybody will have a HDTV with a PC tied to it, and there would be no point to consoles.

Actually, it wasn't until 1994 (3 years after release) did the SNES finally catch the Genesis which did wonders with its EA Sports games, Sonic, and "Sega doesn't what Nintendon't" advertising strategy.

Right now, the PS3 can only lay claim to one "good" title maybe two (Virtua Fighter 5 is out now) and the Wii with one "must-have" and maybe 3 "good" titles. It's really the price and the pack-in glorified demo that are boosting the Wii HUGE.

I think the opposite's gonna happen. PC gaming has been shrinking for a while now. It's really only things like the Sims and Warcrack that are selling really well. With the disconnect in power between the consoles and the PCs shrinking every generation (as reflected by the price of consoles) you're seeing more and more franchises moving to consoles. This is where Microshaft has helped a lot. Now that you can surf the web on your console and you can easily hook up a USB keyboard to two of them which have harddrives, it's only a matter of time before all functionalities aside from burning stuff and torrent downloads is available on consoles (ie. next generation).

Consoles also have some HUGE advantages to the masses over PCs such as EVERYTHING released for it is compatible with it, it's not obsolete in 2 years (life cycle's about 5 or 6 for a console), they're cheaper, and they can work on your normal TV which, with HDTVs, are just like big monitors anyways.

I personally will always have a PC but the consoles are becoming more and more appealing to the masses every generation as they catch up to the PC in terms of both power and functionality.

I don't think PC gaming has ever been close to console gaming in terms of popularity. Most major consoles manage to outsell the entire multi-decade long history of PC game sales, and do it in just a few years.

And yeah, you can't really skip out the Genesis, there was a period of time when it had about 65-70% of the market, essentially it was more than twice as popular as the SNES. I feel Sega could have kept int he race through to 96/97 if they hadn't of taken focus off of their successful product, the Genesis. If they had released the Saturn in 96/97, with more powerful hardware, a CD drive, and cheaper price-tag, they could have dominated the 32/64-bit generation. They made the mistake of moving WAY too early and it almost seemed without good knowledge of the market.

The Seeker wrote:I don't think PC gaming has ever been close to console gaming in terms of popularity. Most major consoles manage to outsell the entire multi-decade long history of PC game sales, and do it in just a few years.

And yeah, you can't really skip out the Genesis, there was a period of time when it had about 65-70% of the market, essentially it was more than twice as popular as the SNES. I feel Sega could have kept int he race through to 96/97 if they hadn't of taken focus off of their successful product, the Genesis. If they had released the Saturn in 96/97, with more powerful hardware, a CD drive, and cheaper price-tag, they could have dominated the 32/64-bit generation. They made the mistake of moving WAY too early and it almost seemed without good knowledge of the market.

I think maybe my post above was encrypted for you and you couldn't read it. So I'll try again.

From 1991 to 1994, the Genesis was ahead, way ahead early on (it came out in 1990), but that was only in North America and it was losing ground each year as the SNES gained momentum. So, after 1994, they were second and were losing ground with their weaker system...fast.

With the PSX on the horizon, they had no choice but to release the Saturn and it had to be done in 1995 to keep ahead of Nintendo who everyone saw as the main rival back then. They tried to boost the Genesis by releasing the Sega CD and 32X but that failed....miserably. In fact, that was the beginning of the end of Sega. Rather than spending the extra time and dough on the Saturn, they spent it on those failed add-ons (BTW, those represent the reason you don't release hardware add-ons). That and the 2D focus of the Saturn (it RULED as a 2D machine) was behind the times. Their tacked-on 3D sucked and made the PSX so much better for the masses.

To make my point, Sega couldn't have waited any longer than they did to release the Saturn. It just suffered from many mistakes they made before.

But what is a console? It's just a glorified computer. I don't think consoles are going to die because they are unpopular. I think they are going to die because of assimilation.

Pretty soon, the difference between a console and a computer will be so non-existant, that we'll call consoles computers, and force it down to a universal standard (ie: PCs). After all, if a console is exactly like a computer except that it only plays a certain subset of games/software and isn't upgradable, why bother? Why not just release everything on PC?

SineSwiper wrote:But what is a console? It's just a glorified computer. I don't think consoles are going to die because they are unpopular. I think they are going to die because of assimilation.

Pretty soon, the difference between a console and a computer will be so non-existant, that we'll call consoles computers, and force it down to a universal standard (ie: PCs). After all, if a console is exactly like a computer except that it only plays a certain subset of games/software and isn't upgradable, why bother? Why not just release everything on PC?

I think it's going to be the opposite. It's moving the features of a PC onto a console that'll make the PCs as we know it obsolete. TVs are like monitors now and you can download updates on your console the way you can a PC. Once it opens up a bit more and you get burning and other stuff on a console (ie. a piece of hardware tied to you TV rather than on its own with a monitor) I think you'll see the console eventually overtake the PCs.

Really, pirating, applications and full Internet surfing are the only advantages to a PC over a computer nowadays, unless you're part of the 1% of the population that has to have that extra pixel shading function. Most people don't care and would rather not have the possibility of compatibility issues.

Move over applications and open up the console a bit more and there's really be no reason for a PC other than to pirate or program

I disagree that personal computers will become obsolete. As for PC's place as a gaming machine, I do think that it will remain as it currently stands, as a secondary feature. Only a very very small number of people use their PCs as their primary system for gaming, this number is more likely to shrink than to grow 10 years from now.

I think the field's too turbulent to make any predictions, personally.

Microsoft has a new tech named XNA that I've been working with, and it's pretty superb. It's possible to make games for both the 360 and the PC with it (just stick a 360 controller into a USB slot), and you can play your own games for your own 360 if you join their Creators' Club thing. I'd definitely say watch that tech and space...

Nev wrote:I think the field's too turbulent to make any predictions, personally.

Microsoft has a new tech named XNA that I've been working with, and it's pretty superb. It's possible to make games for both the 360 and the PC with it (just stick a 360 controller into a USB slot), and you can play your own games for your own 360 if you join their Creators' Club thing. I'd definitely say watch that tech and space...

It's pretty neat but you also have to pay the $100 and they're quite strict on what gets passed through. I'd like to read an article on the first XNA game that actually makes it to the marketplace and see how they actually got it through

Well, I've more or less switched to working with it full-time and ditched the cell phones. Got a few really cool projects going. I'll definitely let you know if I get something through.

They're going to have a XNA Professional that comes out next year...I'm guessing this year is kind of an experiment to see if anyone does anything neat with it. I'm certainly trying.

Nev wrote:Well, I've more or less switched to working with it full-time and ditched the cell phones. Got a few really cool projects going. I'll definitely let you know if I get something through.

They're going to have a XNA Professional that comes out next year...I'm guessing this year is kind of an experiment to see if anyone does anything neat with it. I'm certainly trying.

What's the dif with the professional?