Please do not do what happen the ps2 and cut it at ps3. pc and p4 or better now.

[Avalon_Albrook]

Sorry if this sounds cold, but do you really expect a company which has a business model set to milk 10$ a month really focus on those with such limited resources. I would not expect any company to spend big dollars for design and test on any console after a year of its successor being on the market.

Also if $400, spread out over a year is to much, you really should look into getting a better job or some budgeting websites.

It is not appropriate to limit the entire player base to what a PS3 can support for a small number of people who cannot upgrade. I say pull the plug sooner then later.

This so much.

[KupoNuts]

Well, if nothing else, they could at least release high resolution texture packs for PC and PS4 users. They can't let 7 year old technology hold them down forever.

[Tiggy]

Let's see...

Players: "SE give us more inventory space!"
SE: "PS2 limitations, can't do that."
SE: "...Er here you go Mog Sack, Mog Satchel and Mog Case along with the final 3 Gobbie Bag updates oh and the Porter Mog system."

Just because they eventually added those systems doesn't change the fact they were not able to do it sooner and that was completely because of ps2 limitations. The fact they were savvy enough to find a way around it is a testiment to their ability to make it work regardless, but does not in anyway invalidate the fact the ps2 did directly limit the ability for them to do this easily.

You seem to think the end results invalidates anything said previously. It doesn't.

[Edellis]

The PS3 isn't a PS2. The PS3 isn't limited to the PS4/PC in the same ways the PS2 was limited to the PS3.


That said, Square is already destroying the PS3 playerbase by allowing a free switch to PS4 by removing your rights on PS3. And the PS4 has a much lower starting price than the PS3 did.

[Jinko]

It wasn't held back by anything, it's the system they chose to go with. They could have went with the system that destroys your item(s) - I bet people would still say that's a PS3 limitation even though it's PC only MMOs that sometimes have that system.

My goodness you are searching me out it seems.

They already said they couldn't make a separate vanity tab like other MMO's because of PS3 memory limitations, in fact they say this a lot for many things.

Just as they did with FF11 and PS2 limitations.

[Edellis]

My goodness you are searching me out it seems.

They already said they couldn't make a separate vanity tab like other MMO's because of PS3 memory limitations, in fact they say this a lot for many things.

Just as they did with FF11 and PS2 limitations.

I think what he's saying is, it's pointless to bring this type of stuff up because FFXIV ARR was literally designed FOR the Playstation 3 & PC.


which means, they could probably create sprawling lush worlds of vegetation with tessellated environments, volumetric lighting, physics-based interactables and have 900 players on the screen at once...but they never will, because the game is designed around the playstation 3. It's like saying "The Last of Us could have been EVEN BETTER if it were on PC". No, it wouldn't. Because thats what it was designed for.


Removing the PS3/PS4 isn't removing limitations, it's harming the game, because it's a targeted platform. Why do you think they chose to develop for it in the first place.

[Luxx]

yea also hope they remove ps3 version soon so they can make awesome graphics and mechanics.

why are you guys so high strung about graphics? graphics aren't everything.
the ps3 looks amazing. the pc looks pretty good too but do we REALLY need to see every single detail
of a tree or ground?

for me, the only time ima buy PS4, is when they lower price and give out games thats worth buying.
i just think some of u guys act so selfish and mean against ps3 players because u want better graphics. jesus who cares
if u want extreme graphics, try to have 20/20 vision and go outside.

I love how ps3 apologists parrot this every time. Low spec pcs are NOT a problem, the pc client has this thing called game settings, so that if your pc is on the slow side, you can just turn things down.

yes it is.
they had dummy down the gfx and made it low spec pc friendly because if you played 1.0, which i bet a whole lot of ppl couldn't, didn't,
because the specs were too damn high. you needed a pc from nasa to run it.

[Moheeheeko]

First of all, the 'limitations' you speak of are from both PS3 AND lower spec PC's.

I love how ps3 apologists parrot this every time. Low spec pcs are NOT a problem, the pc client has this thing called game settings, so that if your pc is on the slow side, you can just turn things down.

[Marael]

The reason I'm not getting the PS4 version is the same reason I'm not getting the PC version. There are more important things to spend $400 on than the ability to play a single video game. I have a mortgage, children, car payments, and I'd like my family to have some fun and memorable vacations to look back on when they're all grown up, a home that is in good living condition, cars that actually work, clothes, education, and other such things for my children. Those are more important to me, than shelling out $400 to play a single video game. I already owned a PS3 from before I was married, wasting my life away through college. It plays the game adequately for my needs. I see no reason to drop hundreds of dollars on a different system to play the same game on when I'd rather see my children smile. PS3 gets dropped, I'll find something else to spend my time and monthly fees on.

It's not that I can't afford a PS4, or a spiffy new gaming PC, it's that I don't play many video games these days. I have other responsibilities now, and better uses for my time. I can think of a whole lot of things I can use $400 on that would be more beneficial to myself and my family than a video game system that will mostly be used as a bluray player and not much more, Like building that fence around my back yard I've been planning for this summer, or re-shingling my roof, also planned for this summer, adding central air to my house rather than the swamp cooler it was built with. My truck, the truck that me and my grandfather used to travel cross country together in, and that he left to me when he died, needs a new transmission and radiator. I've been meaning to build a tool shed in my backyard, and a treehouse for the boys. I'd, frankly, rather spend my money on these things, than a $400 piece of hardware that won't see much use. You people who say "oh it's only $400, if you can't pay that for a game system, get a better job" or some other BS like that need to realize that not everyone's lives revolve around gaming. Maybe you should move out of your parents' house and see what real life is like before saying something so astoundingly offensive and thoughtless as that. Gaming is a very, VERY small part of my life. It's not important enough to me to drop hundreds of dollars on consoles or PC upgrades that will collect dust most of the time rather than being used. It's not a matter of not being able to afford it. It's a matter of I have more important things to do with my time and money than play video games all day. The use I will get out of a PS4 will not justify the expense, so I will spend my money on something that will, like that new back patio I promised my wife when we bought our house. If gaming is what makes you happy, power to you. Making my family happy is what makes me happy, and my family will not be happy if I blow money on hardware that will rarely see use rather than any one of the things I've listed. If I can't play the game on what I already have, I'm not going to play it. I barely play as it is, at night when the kids are asleep and the wife is having her alone time for the day. It's a matter of priorities, and owning the brand new spiffy gaming system, or an overpowered for what I actually use it for, PC isn't one. If I can't play it with what I already have, then I don't need to play it. Plain and simple. I don't even care about graphics or framerates. My all-time favorite video game is 16-bit. Honestly, when it comes right down to it, the graphics are the absolute least important aspect of a game to me when I am choosing one to spend my precious little free time on. I don't care how a game looks, I care how fun it is, how good the story is, what the music is like, are the characters entertaining. Not how good it looks on my new $2000 gaming PC with state of the art everything that will be obsolete in 12 minutes anyway.

[Avalon_Albrook]

The reason I'm not getting the PS4 version is the same reason I'm not getting the PC version. There are more important things to spend $400 on than the ability to play a single video game. I have a mortgage, children, car payments, and I'd like my family to have some fun and memorable vacations to look back on when they're all grown up, a home that is in good living condition, cars that actually work, clothes, education, and other such things for my children. Those are more important to me, than shelling out $400 to play a single video game. I already owned a PS3 from before I was married, wasting my life away through college. It plays the game adequately for my needs. I see no reason to drop hundreds of dollars on a different system to play the same game on when I'd rather see my children smile. PS3 gets dropped, I'll find something else to spend my time and monthly fees on.

This so much.

(See, we can play that game, too.)