Xbox one FF14 not coming anytime soon

I can't wait to see how many copies of XBone FFXV and KHIII will be sold in Japan. maybe 55 units on the release date if they're lucky.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evangela

I can't wait to see how many copies of XBone FFXV and KHIII will be sold in Japan. maybe 55 units on the release date if they're lucky.

---

How many game copies are actually in a unit? I've never really got why it's "Units Sold" instead of copies sold.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JouriStarz

The 360 version of FFXI only required an Xbox live silver account so there wasn't an additional fee. There was also no segregation of players either so if they allowed it before why are they acting like this now? This guy says "its business" but its bad business in my opinion.

---

if u read my post i explained it.
X-box live was new back when ff11 was on the 360, it was also when europe got its official ff11 release (eur imported) so MS took it as to get ppl buying a 360 and getting online as online player games was still new. Like the only online multy player @ that point was halo, call of duty and Socom navy seals. Online gaming baxck then was still in early stages. remember this was roughly 2006 the iphone didn't exist yet. Silver was all u needed as it was just basic gaming net flix and all the net support wasn't even on the 360 yet.

I am kinda glad xbox one isn't getting it, once they get rid of the ps3 support we don't need another low ball console dragging it down even further with limitations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zcrash970

It will never happen. MS wants separate servers and Yoshi-P said no.

---

"But in the case of third parties, Spencer claims business deals change things and create platform-specific exclusives."

Honestly that quote kind nails it without him straight out saying it. It's a muddy sense of well is it Sony wanting exclusivity to XIV on console or is in MS being greedy and wanting their own servers almost like a Korea/China thing.

Truth is it's easier to say it's definitely a Microsoft issue, they are trying to get exclusivity for XIV and I bet I know why. They think if they can get XBONE to have exclusivity servers to XIV then they can introduce unique content to entice people to play that version rather than ps4/windows version. They can move more product if they get more perks and that's why he's so tight lipped about it cause it's their own greed that caused the issue.

The reasoning is at least two-fold, but it all comes down to one factor: money.

Microsloth wants there to be separate servers solely for Xbone players, a la ESO (which has 3 mega-servers: one for PC players, 1 for PS4 players & 1 for XBone players). There's also the additional issue involving XBL. And, basically, Yoshida doesn't want to nickel & dime the players, nor is he willing to separate the community.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeonx

I am kinda glad xbox on isn't getting it, once they get rid of the ps3 support we don't need another low ball console dragging it down even further with limitations.

---

by this reasoning they should get rid of the PS4 support as well since its specs are nearly identicle to the XB One

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wildsprite

by this reasoning they should get rid of the PS4 support as well since its specs are nearly identicle to the XB One

---

Apart from a GPU with 50% more GPU cores and GDDR5 memory....both of which are pretty significant differences in specification from the Xbox One. If you drop the whole console vs console and compare the two systems side by side as if they were PCs, the Xbox One doesn't look quite so nearly identical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaiser-Ace

How many game copies are actually in a unit? I've never really got why it's "Units Sold" instead of copies sold.

---

1

They use 'unit sales' because it literally means single units sold, not bundles, combined units, multi-packs or anything else. This isn't jargon that is unique to games, it's business/marketing jargon used when analyzing shipment or sales data.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kosmos992k

Apart from a GPU with 50% more GPU cores and GDDR5 memory....both of which are pretty significant differences in specification from the Xbox One. If you drop the whole console vs console and compare the two systems side by side as if they were PCs, the Xbox One doesn't look quite so nearly identical.

---

my point is, the xb one isn't a lowball system that would hold back the game anymore than the PS4 is also GDDR5 isn't that much of a difference since it still has to perfom with the bus of the system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kosmos992k

Apart from a GPU with 50% more GPU cores and GDDR5 memory....both of which are pretty significant differences in specification from the Xbox One. If you drop the whole console vs console and compare the two systems side by side as if they were PCs, the Xbox One doesn't look quite so nearly identical.

---

Regardless of that, they're not going to overhaul the game when PS3 support is dropped. Xbox One is more than capable of running the game as is, but if we're looking specifically at limitations, then yes, both the Xbox One and PS4 would be limiting factors, obviously not to the extent of the PS3 though. But if they did want to make something very impressive (such as proper hair physics, AMD TressFX/Nvidia HairWorks) that would never happen as it's incredibly costly to develop and if only 10% of the playerbase could use it (high end PCs, but even then my high-end PC struggles with HairWorks due to Nvidia making it CPU bound on AMD hardware).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colorful

Regardless of that, they're not going to overhaul the game when PS3 support is dropped.

---

Clearly they won't. My point was not that the XB1 would be incapable of running the game as is, but rather that it would represent more of a liability than PS4 would in the longer run. However, in the longer run, all platforms age and all older or lower spec platforms become a liability in the end.

But if by the time we get to 4.0 or 5.0 there is a new generation of console hardware and MS relents in it's policies we could easily see the new version of the game on newer hardware with a wider audience. That would be the ideal outcome in my mind, because more players = more life = more subs = better game. If MS changed their mind and SE shipped FFXIV on XB1 by Christmas, it would be a great thing IMHO, for the reason I outlined above, more players is a good thing. So long as you get those additional players without fragmenting the players by platform.

Probably because xbot cannot even run the game properly, lol
Joking aside truth is it was microsoft themselves the reason that the game is not on the console, not SE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Azazua_azura

Online gaming baxck then was still in early stages. remember this was roughly 2006 the iphone didn't exist yet.

---

Ha. Haha. Ahahahahaha. That was funny. :D

Kids these days, sheesh! I've been playing online games since 1995, and online games go waaay back if you count BBS MUDs. In 1995, a program came into wide usage in the gaming world called Kali95 that transformed IPX into TCP/IP, tricking LAN games like Warcraft II into thinking various people on the internet were really on a LAN. I played an absurd amount of Warcraft II with it, along with a bunch of Descent, Duke Nukem 3D, and eventually Quake 2. And then there was Gamespy aimed at FPSs (specifically Quake 1, but I mostly used it later on for Half Life and Counter Strike (Beta)), and then eventually Battle.net for Starcraft.

The first graphical, 3D MMORPG was probably Meridian 59, which also came out in 1995.


But yeah, gaming online on the XBOX360 was terrible because of the XBOX Gold lockout. My girlfriend at the time and I had to get Gold on both of our accounts just so we could play Borderlands 2 with my roommate whose TV was in the same room as mine and on the same network connection, just because he was on a different console =\ Before she had Gold, when it was just me with Gold, I could play with her on the same console, or with him over the network, but not with both at once, if I'm remembering correctly. If we tried, it would complain that her account wasn't authorized to play online games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Altera

Cause its the ONE Console to rule them all. Just kidding hehe
The name is annoying as its hard to know if a person is talking about the Original Xbox or the new one. I hope the next name isnt Xbox36One

---

That was their actual reason, initially, xD. This was back when they stuffed all the DRM nonsense in it.

I don't see any reason for them to make a Xbox version. By now, it would just be a waste of time and money.

Someone made a comment on one of those new articles that XIV not on xbox one cause PSN is inferior guess they should a little research and find out that SE runs their own servers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bourne_Endeavor

That was their actual reason, initially, xD. This was back when they stuffed all the DRM nonsense in it.

I don't see any reason for them to make a Xbox version. By now, it would just be a waste of time and money.

---

I still think they should have called it something else. Xbox 720 would have made more sense than Xbox One despite their reasoning. I still have friends who have the original Xbox that think it is the Xbox One....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nyalia

Ha. Haha. Ahahahahaha. That was funny. :D

Kids these days, sheesh!

---

Didn't realise 30 years old meant i was a kid >.>;; or that it was cool to chuckle at one line of my post. May want to read the thread infull to realise the topic is about ff14 on the xbox one, and reason microsoft had ff11 on the 360 with silver only as it was brough up. Both my posts was refering to microsofts words on the matter as it was infact asked. And that one line you lovely giggled at and felt the need to "correct" was refering to console online gaming only.

and protip, make sure you read the full thread to grasp the context of a thread ad each post ingeneral before "correcting" someone incorrectly which inturn makes you look bad. :)


tldr: im not a kid, i know the internet itself has been around since early aol, and my post was about console online gaming not pc gaming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wildsprite

by this reasoning they should get rid of the PS4 support as well since its specs are nearly identicle to the XB One

---

No they aren't, Xbox one has gimp specs, its why its doing poorly in sales to begin with they low balled the system.

Which was there mistake because of their red ring of death fiasco and wanted to gain trust, they should of made their system a power house and well they fell short and that wasn't the only thing, the price, the way they were handling their games with downloaded cd's and they become useless no sharing, which was a huge mistake.

And the name should of been called the X-1 get rid of the box.

Last but not least, the only reason they started to get sales, is they dropped the price and added backwards compatible though Sony says they cant do that with ps4, I am sure they can and if X-1 started to get the jump on we would probably see a slim model backwards compat with price drop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeonx

No they aren't, Xbox one has gimp specs, its why its doing poorly in sales to begin with they low balled the system.

---

the specs of the system are never a factor here.
the reason the sales are/were poor(though I suspect not as poorly as you think) is because of the DRM BS and the supposid requirement for Kinect to always be on. yes MS recinded on this but still, people feel Microsoft lied to them and lost trust in them.
second take a better look at those specs they aren't as gimp as you think they are. both the PS4 and XB-1 have midrange PC specs that are infact close enough that the few tiny advantages of the PS4 mean very little. it is the games that make the biggest difference. in the end if MS managed to get the best exclusives on their system they would have taken the lead despite what you think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeonx

Last but not least, the only reason they started to get sales, is they dropped the price and added backwards compatible though Sony says they cant do that with ps4, I am sure they can and if X-1 started to get the jump on we would probably see a slim model backwards compat with price drop.

---

the price drop came from them removing Kinect from the package. it was deemed by the guy who took over the xbox team the accessory itself was too expensive with too little support. though adding backward compatibility was a smart move I'm sure even you can agree with.

what you make yourself out with your post is a fanboi. fanboi's are pretty much gullible morons, in most cases they actually believe the company cares about them. I have news for you. the only reason sony does anything is for money. they couldn't care less about you.

anyway this isnt a PS4 vs XB-1 thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wildsprite

fanboi's are pretty much gullible morons, in most cases they actually believe the company cares about them. I have news for you. the only reason sony does anything is for money. they couldn't care less about you.

---

Apple has that area covered more then Microsoft or Sony do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lexia

Apple has that area covered more then Microsoft or Sony do.

---

can't argue with that one...lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Azazua_azura

X-box live was new back when ff11 was on the 360...

---

This is so false it's almost insulting. XBox Live has been around since the original XBox. I should know, it screwed over PSO players when, with V.2, the game adopted a subscription scheme (like had always existed in Japan). Unlike Square and Final Fantasy, though, Sega didn't have the clout to tell where Microsoft could stick Gold service and players were forced to not only subscribe to PSO but also Gold if they wanted to play online. They also had to use segregated servers because Microsoft hates cross platform that isn't MS Console to PC. The only reason Microsoft let XI get away with not meeting either of these conditions is, as has been said, they were desperate for Japanese sales and having a Final Fantasy game could go a long way towards that. Why were sales so bad? Because of the original XBox and Microsoft's policies of needing Gold for anything online and segregated servers.

If there was ever a thread for the "Not a single !@#$ given" meme gifs, this one would take the cake.

Good. Last thing we need is ANOTHER console holding the game back (no I'm not a PC elitist but PS2 killed FF11)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KeluBehemoth

Good. Last thing we need is ANOTHER console holding the game back (no I'm not a PC elitist but PS2 killed FF11)

---

You talk like the developers would actually put in the money and effort required to push high end PCs to the max if consoles weren't a thing, they wouldn't. They can't even be assed to give us high resolution textures.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wildsprite

my point is, the xb one isn't a lowball system that would hold back the game anymore than the PS4 is also GDDR5 isn't that much of a difference since it still has to perfom with the bus of the system.

---

You might want to review the system bus bandwidth of the PS4 to that in the XB1. Don't include the EDRAM, it's neither a fair, nor appropriate comparison, it would be rather like comparing apples and oranges to lemon seeds. I wasn't arguing XB1 is a lowball system, nor that it would be unable to cope.

However, if you want , we can argue the hardware into the ground here. GDDR5 is faster and has better bandwidth than the main memory in XB1, the system bus in PS4 is a single united bus, and is faster than XB1, the GPU in PS4 has 50% more compute units that the one in XB1. XB1 has EDRAM in the GPU that provides very high bandwidth for what is effectively an enhanced frame buffer. The GPU is clocked 5% higher in XB1 which helps offset the smaller number of compute units compared to PS4. MS requires exclusivity for online play, Sony does not. XBL subscriptions are required for online play on XB1, PS Plus is not mandatory (PSN is only needed to verify your login and license), it is up to the publisher. etc...

None of that matters because as the PS3 shows, even an 8 year old console with a 10+ year old design can run the game, so it would be foolish to complain that XB1 would hold back FFXIV (assuming it ever had the game on it), when clearly it currently would not. However the salient points here are not at all relating to the hardware or whether one console is better than the other, no, they relate to the business practice of Microsoft with regard to XBL, XB1 cross platform games and exclusivity. MS has always demanded far stricture exclusivity than Sony, they have always demanded that XBL Gold is required for online play and that all subs and in-game purchases are performed through their system. They (MS) have always demanded platform exclusivity or segregation because it would clearly be the end of the world if PlayStation and Xbox gamers were allowed to play together. Those are the sticking points, not the hardware, and not the console wars or any thing like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colorful

You talk like the developers would actually put in the money and effort required to push high end PCs to the max if consoles weren't a thing, they wouldn't. They can't even be assed to give us high resolution textures.

---

Devs are always foolish to put the money and effort into pushing the bleeding edge of the PC platform because it ignores the majority of their customers. What's the point of making a game that requires high end PCs to perform adequately? Oh, wait, we already have an example of a game that did this...and failed. It was called FFXIV v1.X...

Devs are always better served by aiming for the mid-point of the platform capability available, and ensuring that their game performs adequately on the lowest common denominator platform.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeonx

No they aren't, Xbox one has gimp specs, its why its doing poorly in sales to begin with they low balled the system.**snip**
And the name should of been called the X-1 get rid of the box.

---

It's specs aren't gimped, basically it has a weaker GPU and less system bandwidth, but neither are game breakers.

MS can't use "X-1", the ever craptastic ComCast has that trademarked already for their "X-1 Operating System" used on their cable boxes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kosmos992k

Devs are always foolish to put the money and effort into pushing the bleeding edge of the PC platform because it ignores the majority of their customers. What's the point of making a game that requires high end PCs to perform adequately? Oh, wait, we already have an example of a game that did this...and failed. It was called FFXIV v1.X...

Devs are always better served by aiming for the mid-point of the platform capability available, and ensuring that their game performs adequately on the lowest common denominator platform.

---

Experienced developers allow games to run on a multitude of systems, both low and high end while looking great on the high end scale and alright on the lower end. The best example I can think of MGSV, that game scales absolutely amazingly on almost anything you throw at it, including integrated graphics. I don't believe many games can make that claim. 1.0 is a prime example of how to do it horribly wrong, while yes, things did have decent textures and a high polygon count, that game (imho) looked like trash. It was bland and boring, watching YouTube videos of it and the world is just so empty and ugly, it even looks worse than World of Warcraft's newer areas! 2.0 beats it in stylistic choices and artistic vision 10 fold, but when you have both you can a game that's both impressive technically and artistically (the Witcher 3 for example). I don't expect them to overhaul the game, but why is HD textures too much to ask for? Everything is created in extremely high resolutions after all, and they still have them stored somewhere.

But that wasn't my point to begin with, the Xbox One and PS4 wouldn't be "holding the game back" as the developers would not push the game past that point to begin with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colorful

But that wasn't my point to begin with, the Xbox One and PS4 wouldn't be "holding the game back" as the developers would not push the game past that point to begin with.

---

Indeed, I mis-read your post - reading too fast. I agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wildsprite

snip

---

You are really going to take that path just to try to win convo?

Call me names cause let me explain something I don't fight over plastic so don't be assuming what I am.

I was still on topic about FFXIV and I even mentioned the ps3 holding back the game, so yeah idk what you are saying.

Something, something Glorious PC Gaming Master Race something. But seriously. The reason XIV isn't on XONE isn't because of hardware, it all comes down to business like Phil Spencer said. Clashing ideals and philosophies are making this not happen even though it should.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KeluBehemoth

Good. Last thing we need is ANOTHER console holding the game back (no I'm not a PC elitist but PS2 killed FF11)

---

Xbox One wouldn't hold the game back at all, you're mistaking it the ps3 in this case. Xbox One already has Neverwinter and give or take Warframe, these games run smoothly on the system. XIV isn't even a powerful game to run to start with, the only time this game has issues on the ps4 is when S Rank hunts pop, the Xone wouldn't be any different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emerald_Wyvern

Something, something Glorious PC Gaming Master Race something. But seriously. The reason XIV isn't on XONE isn't because of hardware, it all comes down to business like Phil Spencer said. Clashing ideals and philosophies are making this not happen even though it should.

---

I read that already two days ago and said good and most people will say it wouldn't limit this game further, yeah it would wonder how slow content would be made if they had to do it for 4 systems.

I don't know about how they port data but don't they have their hands full with the chinese version also with different monsters?

That is a lot of work and probably a lot longer wait if xbox one got it also.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeonx

snip

---

The Xbox One and PC architecture are almost virtually identical, it's pretty much a computer with a closed operating system, the and PS4 is the same thing. It would be practically effortless once they've learned how to work with the Xbox, and SE has staff that are familiar with that due to Kingdom Hearts 3 and FFXV coming to XO (makes you wonder why they don't port their games to PC, pretty much free money and people would buy it even if they were shitty ports). The PS3 on the other side uses an incredibly frustrating and still relatively "unknown" architecture so that's where the problem would be, but they've already got the game on the PS3 working and I'd imagine that porting updates is 'effortless' other than scaling the visuals to match up to the PS3's specifications.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jetstream_Fox

Xbox One wouldn't hold the game back at all, you're mistaking it the ps3 in this case. Xbox One already has Neverwinter and give or take Warframe, these games run smoothly on the system. XIV isn't even a powerful game to run to start with, the only time this game has issues on the ps4 is when S Rank hunts pop, the Xone wouldn't be any different.

---

Lower system requirements than WoW.

Let that sink in for a moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nadirah

Lower system requirements than WoW.

Let that sink in for a moment.

---

My God O_O how much power does it take to run that game's 1st gen cg graphics?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaiser-Ace

My God O_O how much power does it take to run that game's 1st gen cg graphics?

---

Rehauled with WoD.


Minimum System Requirements:

PC: Windows XP/Windows Vista/Windows7/Windows8 (latest Service Pack), Intel Core2 Duo E6600 or AMD Phenom X3 8750, NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT, ATI Radeon HD 4850 or Intel HD Graphics 3000

HW:
OS: Windows Vista® 32/64bit, Windows® 7 32/64 bit, Windows® 8 32/64 bit, Windows® 8.1 32/64 bit
CPU: Intel® Core™2 Duo
Memory: 2GB (4GB recommended for 64bit OS)
Available space on hard disk/SSD: 30GB
Graphics Card: NVIDIA® Geforce® 8800 or higher, ATI Radeon™ HD 4770 or higher

Basically, my Athlon IIx2 and GeForce 250 GTS would run HW but was below spec for WoD.

The CPU was cutting it super close. I was sitting at 100% usage in ARR. WoW ran like shit in raids on it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaiser-Ace

My God O_O how much power does it take to run that game's 1st gen cg graphics?

---

I'm not quite sure if Nadirah means FFXIV has lower sys. requirements than WoW, but while that is the case in their given requirements, FFXIV runs like ass on a crappy PC. Obviously that's a given due to WoW's age, but it's because WoW is heavily CPU reliant when you turn down the settings, while FFXIV is more GPU reliant (still quite heavy on the CPU side, but not quite as much). You can't really compare the two, but if we were to FFXIV runs much worse than WoW does on a crappy PC/Laptop. My guess is they did that because the current generation's consoles CPUs are low end PC grade, and a huge bottleneck when it comes to large scale games like WoW and or Planetside 2. Again, probably the reason we have small closed off instances rather than huge worlds. It's the reason cities in the Witcher 3 on consoles are practically deserted while on PC they're bustling. Their CPUs are incapable of handling so many characters without a huge dip in performance.

That's from my own personal experience anyway, it could vary from system to system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeonx

I read that already two days ago and said good and most people will say it wouldn't limit this game further, yeah it would wonder how slow content would be made if they had to do it for 4 systems.

I don't know about how they port data but don't they have their hands full with the chinese version also with different monsters?

That is a lot of work and probably a lot longer wait if xbox one got it also.

---

The game wouldn't be limited because of an additional system. The ps3/4/pc versions are the same exact game minus a bit of graphical differences and control layout, if they got HW to be played on the ps3, which is a 8 or 9 years old, then it's a clear view that SE has the experience with tweaking the game to work within different hardware specifications, adding the Xone would be no different in this regard. The enemy data between the NTSC and PAL version of the game also wouldn't be something that would limit a new system, they'd just not include things that aren't meant or can't be included, like how the NTSC version of the game has the Gold Saucer, the Chinese version can't have it due to gambling laws and such, yet that hasn't limited the game at it's core.

The game isn't on the Xone because Microsoft is idiotic in it's thinking it's players can't coexist with Sony and PC players. They want dedicated servers for all Xbox games, it's ridiculous to say the least, not even PSU had cross server play, sad because it could probably have helped the game last a bit longer then it did.

FF14 will NEVER come too xb1 o_O

M$ is WAY to greedy!
They want you to pay for XBL-Gold AND FF14 Sub! They also want there own servers only for xb user! Wich is very stupid