Xbox one FF14 not coming anytime soon

[Wildsprite]

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

can't argue with that one...lol

[Gilraen]

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.

[Mycow8me]

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

[KeluBehemoth]

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

[Colorful]

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.

[Kosmos992k]

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.

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.

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.

[Colorful]

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.

[Kosmos992k]

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.

[Zeonx]

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.

[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.