Yoshi-P says discussions about FFXIV on Switch and Xbox One are "Positive"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebazy

Where's the problem with that?

---

-_-

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebazy

It'll handle that the same way the PS3 did

---

This ^.

Seems like 1 step forward and 2 steps back if we're tying the game to a relatively new consoles life cycle that's pretty on par(?) with the ps3 that was just recently dropped.

I get that with the smaller screen you don't need the higher resolution to get a good looking game to the user but you're also talking just 30fps out of the deal too and not 60+fps. At 30fps you're fine but should that drop because of a sudden increase in intensity of graphic rendering needs your more likely to drop into visual lag territory of 15fps or lower and that can get you or a team member killed in a fight.

I've talked to a friend that has a switch but has also played FFXIV pre SB and he said while it could handle the graphics and the mobs on screen, it would be horrible in handling the sheer amount of players in certain locations aka S ranks, boss fates, probably even raiding.

In short unless MS caves in and allows non gold, standard server sharing it's going to stay on Sony/Pc at this rate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeaconMoore

Seems like 1 step forward and 2 steps back if we're tying the game to a relatively new consoles life cycle that's pretty on par(?) with the ps3 that was just recently dropped.

---

Seems to me that you're too busy tunnel visioning down your 60 FPS or bust mentality to listen to a single point I've said. Correct?

The PS3 was a burden because at the risk of massively oversimplifying things, it required the game to fit into a 256mb footprint. I'd repeat that detail in 72pt bold if it'd help you absorb it. The GPU wasn't a problem, the CPU wasn't a problem, the critical failing here was the memory, do you think the comical UI limitations and decisions we saw were because of the GPU? Do you think the absurd housing item limitations were because of the CPU? Even if we're massively generous with the frame buffer, the switch has at least 8 times that to play with here. Maybe if Yoshida suddenly gets a AAA budget to start throwing around significantly more complex assets and animations then the switch will become an issue again, but uh, you're kidding yourself if you think that's going to happen at this stage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeaconMoore

but you're also talking just 30fps out of the deal too and not 60+fps.

---

Nonsense. For better or for worse, 30 FPS is an accepted baseline for the majority of games out there. This isn't Overwatch or Doom, 60fps+ is very nice for sure, but it's absolutely not required. Ask anyone unfortunate enough to still be running that horrible Wine wrapper pretending to be Mac client, or the multitude of more casual players who simply putz about on older laptops and PCs who wouldn't know 60fps if it hit them in a youtube stream and simply don't care. This is who a Switch release would appeal to, I dunno if you've seen the sales figures, but it's a startlingly big crowd btw.

From the PS3 it's 8 steps forward and it most certainly isn't 2 steps back. Get off your 60FPS or bust high horse because you most certainly aren't the majority, nor are you even the norm. For all the money I've sunk into my setup, at least I'm not so blind as to appreciate that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebazy

Seems to me that you're too busy tunnel visioning down your 60 FPS or bust mentality to listen to a single point I've said. Correct?

---

I have been listening to your points. I get it you want a mobile platform to play FFXIV on. And I even said 30fps is fine, but that 30 fps needs to be under stress and not just sitting idle crafting or surfing the marketboard.

If people are going to be playing FFXIV on the Switch they need a platform capable of doing everything people can do in the game without it suddenly getting all choppy on them. It's not fair to Switch players or others playing with switch players if it can't handle it all seamlessly. The switch isn't like a PC, it's a console, the end user isn't going to be able to spend some cash to upgrade it so it doesn't chop out on them anymore.

Every argument you been bringing for how to make the game play on the switch has been to "seriously" downgrade the graphics to get it to fit and run. That'll also be extra development time for the team to handle. Will we all wait for the switch team to finish or will the switch players be the ones to wait?

Now as far as Yoshida getting a bigger budget to start throwing around significantly more complex assets and animations. It certainly isn't unheard of in the gaming world, even at this stage. We have what we have largely because of the PS3 and what it could handle. As things stand now they have the footprint of the PS4 to work with as far as how far they can push the animations and asset complexity. If they bring in another console the footprint they have to work with will be the footprint of the lesser console supported. Which, from what you say, would be the Switch. So yeah, they'd be taking steps backwards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeaconMoore

Every argument you been bringing for how to make the game play on the switch has been to "seriously" downgrade the graphics to get it to fit and run. That'll also be extra development time for the team to handle. Will we all wait for the switch team to finish or will the switch players be the ones to wait?

---

Scaling the visuals to fit and run smoothly would actually be pretty easy. Half sized textures, disable the fill rate intensive effects and post processing and you're pretty much there. Remember that the Switch practically meets this games requirements as is right out of the gate with no work done. The real work would porting the game engine to the switch's ARM based CPU.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeaconMoore

Now as far as Yoshida getting a bigger budget to start throwing around significantly more complex assets and animations. It certainly isn't unheard of in the gaming world, even at this stage.

---

It is in the MMO world tho. Whilst FFXIV bucked the trend by getting quite significant infrastructure upgrades over the years, it's always felt like the content team has rarely seen a penny of that outside of perhaps a bit more voice acting. Don't get me wrong, I'd absolutely love to be siding with you on this one even going as far as to comment in the tank/healer role thread that I'd love nothing more than to be fighting complex multipart dragons that are flailing and hacking away at the raid with multiple levels of animation. As it is, the only noticeable thing I've seen since SB is Shinryu's fancy tail, even then he still fell short of what he could have been in the animation department IMHO.

Realistically, do I think a Switch version will happen? Despite all my protesting and preaching here, I can't see it. I don't think it'll fail because of the hardware, rather I suspect red tape and bureaucracy will end it before it ever goes beyond a bored programming lead's dev kit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silverlunarfox

Recently its been all Sony, like with Rocket League and Minecraft both which they refuse to allow cross plat play.

---

Which has nothing to do with FFXIV, just like it had nothing to do with XI back in the day. Sony and MS do not need to share their networks at all for FFXIV. You know why?
- The game is managed by SE Servers and requires SE Accounts for its users.
- It needs only authentication of the user's console network, nothing more.
- No information needs to be shared between the 2 console networks at all.

Rocket League & Minecraft need:
- PSN IDs and XBL IDs shared between their networks, period.

The issue with MS always has been.
- XBL Gold requirement (XI was the only exception back in the day, period)
- Dedicated XBL servers (SE does not want to fracture its communities)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dyvid

I think you are confusing Sony with Microsoft. Sony already allows it, Microsoft wants it closed off from PC and PS4.

---

I know this is like 4 months old, but I have no idea how this has 7 likes. Microsoft's playbook has been crossplay...they are even giving players both copies for Xbox One and PC if you purchase the cross platform game (Sea of Thieves, etc). This has been a major selling point for all current multiplayer games and a large focus for MS in general. MS's Phil Spencer has reached out to Sony on several occasions to partner on cross-platform play and has been turned down by Sony several times:

http://bgr.com/2018/03/13/xbox-one-v...-play-support/

Posts like yours only serve to confuse and muddy the waters for any advancement. The ball is in Sony's court and they have declined on several major occasions to work with MS, Nintendo or any other company. We're talking about a company that still refuses online gamertag changes...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Juxtapose

snip .

---

FFXIV works seperately from Sony and Microsoft though as SE can put the game on whatever platform they want (obviously considering tech requirements), and on this occasion it's Microsoft that have issues with it. Sony would have no problem if FFXIV went on Xbox, as they don't have any exclusivity to the title and it doesn't require the PS Network

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Juxtapose

I know this is like 4 months old, but I have no idea how this has 7 likes. Microsoft's playbook has been crossplay...they are even giving players both copies for Xbox One and PC if you purchase the cross platform game (Sea of Thieves, etc). This has been a major selling point for all current multiplayer games and a large focus for MS in general. MS's Phil Spencer has reached out to Sony on several occasions to partner on cross-platform play and has been turned down by Sony several times:

http://bgr.com/2018/03/13/xbox-one-v...-play-support/

Posts like yours only serve to confuse and muddy the waters for any advancement. The ball is in Sony's court and they have declined on several major occasions to work with MS, Nintendo or any other company. We're talking about a company that still refuses online gamertag changes...

---

In the case of this game, and this game only, it is Microsoft causing the issues, as the dev's, and Yoshi-P have mentioned several times. Part of Microsoft's requirement for cross-play is that Xbox Live users have the option to play with Xbox Live users only, which goes against the all inclusiveness that XIV currently has. I believe MS also still has the requirement that Gold Live is needed even for MMO's that do not use their servers, which SE does not want. PS+ is not required for XIV.

Please link to me any article where Yoshi-P states its MS fault and unwillingness to cross-platform. I know Gold is a requirement for every online game (minus free ones). That has nothing to do with cross-play and everything to do with maintaining a strict structure on the games requiring Xbox Live Gold. FFXI worked with Xbox, and they made an exception to the Xbox Live Gold rule specifically for that title, but they adamantly refused to do it for Xbox One and any game going forward.

Things are getting mixed up. Xbox was the one that initially didn't want cross play, back then when PS4 and Xbox were more or less in equal footing in the market, it wasn't until PS4 went way ahead in the market that Xbox decided to seek crossplay, but now Sony doesn't want it because they get no benefit from it, they are already ahead and there's no way Xbox can catch up until the next gen console.

Right now the two biggest roadblock here are: Sony, because they started to deny crossplay to every single game now (go read what Fortnite and Rocket League had to do to work around this), and Microsoft because there's no way they would waive XBL payment just for FFXIV, and SE won't make players pay for two subs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Juxtapose

Please link to me any article where Yoshi-P states its MS fault and unwillingness to cross-platform. I know Gold is a requirement for every online game (minus free ones). That has nothing to do with cross-play and everything to do with maintaining a strict structure on the games requiring Xbox Live Gold. FFXI worked with Xbox, and they made an exception to the Xbox Live Gold rule specifically for that title, but they adamantly refused to do it for Xbox One and any game going forward.

---

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/07/...60-or-xbox-one

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valkyrie_Lenneth

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/07/...60-or-xbox-one

---

Again, that article seems to be specifically referencing the Xbox Live Gold requirement on having a paid subscription to access ANY online functions. I do not believe it's referencing MS's unwillingness to have games cross-platform.

I agree, the GOLD requirement sucks, but it makes sense. If they make an exception for FFXIV, what's to stop every other developer to question this exception or ask for the exception for their game.

Xiv has no need for a gold sub, because the servers are not hosted by the console companies. Why would SE want to force their players to pay 2 subscriptions? They made that allowance for Xi, why not xiv.

Again, Sony does not require it, and if they are the worst offenders, the surely Ms can do better. In fact no paid or free mmo on psn requires ps+


And I don't know how you missed the first half saying they wouldn't split the player base among separate servers.

Tera has some pretty interesting console stuff going on right now. Some videos of the game is running pretty poorly and some times it looks really solid. But they have split servers at this point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Juxtapose

Again, that article seems to be specifically referencing the Xbox Live Gold requirement on having a paid subscription to access ANY online functions. I do not believe it's referencing MS's unwillingness to have games cross-platform.

I agree, the GOLD requirement sucks, but it makes sense. If they make an exception for FFXIV, what's to stop every other developer to question this exception or ask for the exception for their game.

---

Before ESO was released it was announced that you wouldn't need Gold to play online. Can't find that article anymore :(
But even if that was still a roadblock, gold is a lot different from how it was on 360... if one profile is gold, anyone who plays on the Xbox is gold. So for example. my whole family is gold, but we only pay for my one profile.

I still feel it shouldn't require gold what so ever, but I don't think that's the issue anymore. Would love this game to come to xbox.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Juxtapose

Again, that article seems to be specifically referencing the Xbox Live Gold requirement on having a paid subscription to access ANY online functions. I do not believe it's referencing MS's unwillingness to have games cross-platform.

I agree, the GOLD requirement sucks, but it makes sense. If they make an exception for FFXIV, what's to stop every other developer to question this exception or ask for the exception for their game.

---

Microsoft used to require a GOLD requirement to watch Netflix. Let's just say that Microsoft has not learned it's lesson here about how the Xbox Live Gold requirements actually push casual people away from the platform, and all MMO's. Final Fantasy XI/XIV are not the first games to look into it, and to give one example, Mabinogi was "already done" for the 360 way back in 2007 or 2008, and then it was not shipped because of these requirements. Once the hard drive died on my Xbox 360S and I couldn't find another one, I've shunned the Xbox platform. It's just not worth buying Microsoft hardware, they consistently do things that saddle the user with extra costs for no benefit other than milking the user for extra money on accessories (hello echos of SEGA.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perezca

Hey guys!

I read in this interview that Yoshi-P says that discussions with nintendo and microsoft about ffxiv on xbox and switch are pretty positive. Check it out here:

http://www.gamerevolution.com/news/3...-producer-says

---

This is the same guy that thought Eureka was a good idea, just thought I'd point that out

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pyroxene

This is the same guy that thought Eureka was a good idea, just thought I'd point that out

---

We really don't need to spread the topic of Eureka in every unrelated thread, there are more than enough relevant threads up already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Juxtapose

Again, that article seems to be specifically referencing the Xbox Live Gold requirement on having a paid subscription to access ANY online functions. I do not believe it's referencing MS's unwillingness to have games cross-platform.

I agree, the GOLD requirement sucks, but it makes sense. If they make an exception for FFXIV, what's to stop every other developer to question this exception or ask for the exception for their game.

---

No it makes no sense, MS needs to stop being greedy and stop charging a monthly subscription just to be allowed to use 3rd party servers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Juxtapose

I agree, the GOLD requirement sucks, but it makes sense. If they make an exception for FFXIV, what's to stop every other developer to question this exception or ask for the exception for their game.

---

Sony doesn't require PSN+ for FFXIV and have set clear boundaries about it. "Are your game servers hosted on PSN? No? Ok, we'll waive PSN+ for you." - that's clear boundaries so devs don't question it. What's to stop Microsoft doing the same thing? Because in essence that's all that's needed. Square Enix won't host the FFXIV servers on Xbox Live servers. So why does it need Xbox Live? And Microsoft can pull a PR stunt here to stop the questioning and say "Due to Sony's success, we have decided to adopt their system for Xbox Live Gold. If you only use Xbox Live for the oauth flow, we will waive the Xbox Live Gold requirement". There we go, it doesn't look like a dev is responsible, and other devs won't question it as much.

I don't think Microsoft will allow it. They did with FFXI after a long time, yet it didn't go that well.

They even charge you Gold sub to watch Netflix, a feature that is free on Smart TV, PS3/4 and everywhere...

And about Switch, I don't know if it could be possible :S, and I wouldn't like to have another limitation to the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pyroxene

This is the same guy that thought Eureka was a good idea, just thought I'd point that out

---

So? I like Eureka too, are you going to witchunt me as well?

Jeez, the entitlement these days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChocoFeru

They even charge you Gold sub to watch Netflix, a feature that is free on Smart TV, PS3/4 and everywhere...

---

https://www.lifewire.com/what-is-xbo...silver-3563184
According to this, not anymore. Now it seems to be online multiplayer only that is locked behind Gold.

I have the xbox, only online multiplayer is locked behind gold.

That being said recently Microsoft has been completely open to cross play. Sony has been adamant that they do not want to allow it. Not just to FFXIV but it extends to other games as well.

We will not see crossplay of most games for a long time still....

I really hope this Switch news however doesn't happen with XIV. I have a Switch, I love the thing, but XIV doesn't need more "limitations"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silverlunarfox

Not just to FFXIV but it extends to other games as well.

---

I don't know how they "wouldn't allow it" considering the game is already on PC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

I don't know how they "wouldn't allow it" considering the game is already on PC.

---

For that reason alone I don't understand Sony's aversion aside from the whole "console war" they have in sales.

They are the only console that has it. From a business standpoint I can understand that. From a gamers standpoint, cross play should be standard in most games.

Bad idea. Limitations due to the Switch and Xbox One would be bad. We got rid of the PS3 support because of said limitations so I say nay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChocoFeru

So? I like Eureka too, are you going to witchunt me as well?

Jeez, the entitlement these days.

---

Possibly, humor isnt a form entitlement. (Im sure even google can help you find the meaning, perhaps ask your parents for help if you have trouble) so ease up on your judgmental and paranoid attitude.

Back on topic though, I'd prefer they focus more on pushing the limits of the existing platforms with their chosen game, rather then getting it to as many platforms as possible. Limitations are enough of an issue as is

It will never be on Switch. It would be like trying to play XIV on a PC that still uses XP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noshpan

It will never be on Switch. It would be like trying to play XIV on a PC that still uses XP.

---

Consider that the Switch is basically the same power as the previous console generation, and FFXIV was already on the PS3.

What would actually prevent a FFXIV for the Switch is actually the lack of storage space. FFXIV is a little over 32GB. (I tried to move it via USB drive once and it just barely fit, a few patches ago.) Dragon Quest Heroes (hey look another Square-Enix title) is 32GB.

So I wouldn't put it past them trying, but one certainly is not going to get the PS4 experience. It might go back to PS3 levels of performance, or just reduce the draw distance much more significantly. It would unlikely run at anything over 720p either. (Which is what happens in Skyrim)

At any rate the real question is if anyone would actually play it on the Switch, and to that end I think the answer is no. The Switch is more attractive, than say all Android devices, but all the gawd awful SE mobile/PC ports (FF5, FF6, Chrono Trigger) kinda show much little care SE puts into porting things (let's not forget that huge bomb of FFXIV for MacOS X.) So I think until Square-Enix starts caring about all their ports, we shouldn't ask for quick-and-dirty ports of games. Either they need to produce a native game/game-client, or they should adopt a common middleware to use with all their games that can compile native game clients for different operating systems and console hardware. And yes that's what Crystal Tools originally was that ran V1.0 of FFXIV, FFXIII, and FFXV. Note that Dragon Quest X is for the Switch and uses this engine.

I'm a PC player and getting tired of consoles limiting a games development, esp for UI.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChocoFeru

I don't think Microsoft will allow it. They did with FFXI after a long time, yet it didn't go that well.

---

MS is actually very open nowadays to Crossplat, it's sony that doesn't like it.

I don't care if it goes to the current gen on Xbox; however, it needs to stay away from the switch. Switch is comparable to the previous gen ps3 and 360 in terms of power. And support for the ps3 version of XIV has ended for good reasons.. limitations. Why the hell should they reintroduce those self same limitations they just got rid of?

Again, Xbox sure. Switch no.

Honestly I hope they phase consoles out completely....Yes I am selfish but I wonder what FFXIV could truly be if they didn't have to deal with the console limitations to begin with.

While that is nice there won't be any cross platform if it happens. As stated before, Sony and MS tried to get along at one point but both sides decided to snub the other. First MS then Sony. While playing on Consoles is nice for some folk, I don't see MMOs lasting long on it. PS3 already went out and those FF XIV users had to carry over to PS4 or PC. Consoles seem to be having shorter and shorter lifespans. The days of the PS2 era where games and consoles lasted us a long time has faded. Technology keeps updating rapidly. Heck my computer which was top of the line in 2016 is suddenly becoming mid tier. That frightens me at how fast things upgrade.

unpopular opinion incoming: Don't support switch, sick of nintendo and their gimmick consoles. seriously nintendo wtf happened to you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stardrifter

unpopular opinion incoming: Don't support switch, sick of nintendo and their gimmick consoles. seriously nintendo wtf happened to you

---

I don't mind the Switch but I do agree that it's very gimmicky. Nintendo just wants to be different and innovated but it seems they are doing it without actually thinking it through. I mean look what happened to the Wii U. That one didn't last long compared to the Wii and Gamecube. Nintendo is for a niche audience. They know people are going to buy their consoles for the newest Zelda and Mario game. When I heard that the Dark Souls remaster was coming for the Switch with an exclusive Solaire Amiibo, I just sort of rolled my eyes. FF XIV doesn't have to be on the Switch but a FF game would be nice on it.

Please dear god no.... it's already a shame that so many limitations were set in place thanks to them launching on the PS3. I really don't want to have any further limitations thanks to the Switch. :/

If they really are thinking of doing this then I want my Dragon Quest X game released overseas already gosh darn it! 8T I've been waiting for YEARS for that game; GIMME ALREADY!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarevok_Thordin

MS is actually very open nowadays to Crossplat, it's sony that doesn't like it.

---

Of course they're open to it these days, they're behind Sony they stand to gain from cross-play whilst Sony stands only to lose. Same reason why Microsoft refused back in day when Sony wanted cross-play between PS3/360 when Sony was behind X360 they Microsoft didn't want do it cause only Sony would gained from it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarevok_Thordin

MS is actually very open nowadays to Crossplat, it's sony that doesn't like it.

---

Last I heard, MS was OK with windows/xbox cross platform, but was still totally not OK with the idea of xbox players interacting with playstation players. A difference from their originally stance of no crossplay at all, but still not quite on FFXIV's level.

Has this changed?