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

[KisaiTenshi]

I agree to an extent. However I'd rather not see them port the game over to a device that will become the next meme about not being able to get something done due to limitations. We just recently cut a system out for that very reason, why reintroduce what will become the next excuse?

The issues are basically two technical and one political/money.

Sony doesn't want cross-play because of the potential for users on other platforms to cheat, and it wants it's cut of subscriber revenue
Microsoft doesn't want cross-play because then they won't get their cut from the Live requirement.
Nintendo is more than willing to allow cross-play, but their systems are significantly weaker than the competition.

Steam (PC/Mac) wants their cut if subscribed via Steam, however "Steam" versions of games tend to only involve the initial purchase.

Windows and MacOS stand-alone versions are the only versions that actually aren't hobbled by some political/money issue. However the PC platform is also the one with the weakest toasters and potatos playing it.

So the tech issue is actually the weakest one. The Xbone, PS4, Switch and a $800 laptop are within the same realm of performance. Citing "cheating" as a reason to not support cross-platform is actually kinda insane because no platform is free of cheating, especially not the PC. MMORPG's however are client-server setups and the extent to "cheating" we see are not the same kinds of cheats that FPS and PvP RPG games are overwhelmed with. The lack of any open world PvP is what largely prevents being able to grief or harass players in the game.

So it's just about money. Making "PS4-only" or "Xbox Live only" servers defeats the purpose of having a MMORPG, because that gives the game a definitive end-of-life. If Microsoft wants to keep pretending that MMORPG's are not a thing, they are more than welcome to keep refusing money.

[Subucnimorning]

I would love to have FFXIV on the switch. Sadly, I don't see it happening. The switch has a lot of graphical limitations

[Wildsprite]

That's interesting, considering that Square abandoned Nintendo to produce FFVII for the PlayStation many, many moons ago due to the limitations of the Super Nintendo.

nope that was the problem with the N64 having cartridges over CDs which was why they chose the original Playstation over it.

I honestly don't see the upside for Sony to cooperate with SE and link up with their competitors networks like this. It'd be a good deal for SE but Sony would lose out on an exclusive for the PS4.

The issue is it was never intended to be an exclusive at all. Pretty sure they made sure Sony was well aware of this from the start

I highly doubt this, especially considering both Microsoft and Nintendo have not changed their patch/udpate policy. Nintendo being far worse on their policy. Also last I have heard Microsoft has not stopped requiring Xbox Live to play online MMOs, so that is the nail in the coffin that they need to removed.

Also PS+ has and will always not be required to play FFXIV

Don Mattrick The person in charge of XBox at the launch of the XB One is responsible for us not having XIV on it. I'm also pretty sure they can still allow some multiplayer games without Gold. There is a huge chance we might get it on there now that Phil Spencer is in charge. It wouldn't be that hard to port to the Xbox One considering both the PS4 and Xbox One use AMD Jaguar CPUs that are almost identical(the PS4 got a slightly better GPU on their chip but not by a lot)

MS is the reason you are not getting a XIV port. They want the service go over their servers and possibly even require a gold membership.

this was their stance before with Don Mattrick, They now have new management(Phil Spencer) for the XBox division of Microsoft so things changed

The issue with MS always has been.

not any more

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

technically this can be done, it isn't wise but it can be as long as you have a way to install/copy it to your XP machine the only technical reason it wouldn't run would be actual hardware limitations not the OS itself.

[Maeka]

To be honest, I'm wondering when the day will come that gamers will get tired of the playground crap between Microsoft and Sony and put their feet down and say "Screw this, we're not giving either one of you our money".

That's all this is, Microsoft and Sony acting like spoiled little kids at recess that can't get along with each other.

People should just dump them both and go to PC. *shrugs*

[Sigma-Astra]

To be honest, I'm wondering when the day will come that gamers will get tired of the playground crap between Microsoft and Sony and put their feet down and say "Screw this, we're not giving either one of you our money".

That's all this is, Microsoft and Sony acting like spoiled little kids at recess that can't get along with each other.

People should just dump them both and go to PC. *shrugs*

Well, to be fair, as much as I don't always agree with Microsoft and Sony's shenanigans regarding XIV and other games, dumping both companies like that because they won't do cross-play functions is, at least to me, acting about as childish as they are regarding the issue. That's also not to mention that not all of the games I like playing tied to Microsoft and Sony can always be found on PC either.

Companies make decisions that consumers don't always agree or understand fully on a daily basis. That's just how things are in this world, best to keep going forward with life and enjoy gaming as a hobby regardless.

On another note, even if a gamer was to dump Sony and Microsoft's consoles and go strictly to PC.....well, guess which two companies still continue to hold shares and make products for PC? It's kind of hard to get away from them both, especially Microsoft, who produces the very OS systems that you're using on your PC, to be fair.

[Maeka]

On another note, even if a gamer was to dump Sony and Microsoft's consoles and go strictly to PC.....well, guess which two companies still continue to hold shares and make products for PC? It's kind of hard to get away from them both, especially Microsoft, who produces the very OS systems that you're using on your PC, to be fair.

Microsoft is a large company with different divisions.

Their XBOX division is not the same division that handles their Windows OS. So, by refusing to give money to their XBOX division, that division will make less money and if enough people did this, they might rethink their practices. But of course this takes a lot of people and few people have the willpower to say No to all the shinies they offer. Pretty much the same way any large company can screw customers over and continue to do business. Not enough people willing to walk away.

And refusing both is not really childish; especially if that's not the only reason. There's also their anti-consumer practices of charging $50 a year just to play online (which you don't need to with a PC with Steam), how they handle their hardware (which borderlines scams; when I bought my XB360 (which was the last console I ever bought), I could pay one price for a 30GB HDD, and to get the 60GB model which is exactly same 'cept larger HDD, they wanted $100 more despite the fact that at the time you could buy a 150GB HDD for $80.

Consoles are a scam. They overprice their obsolete hardware and charge you ridiculous amounts of money for it, kinda like Apple does.

EDIT: Also, all three (Nintendo, Sony and XB) are running PC-compatible hardware (even if it is obsolete) in their consoles, so what you are REALLY getting when you buy a console is a gimped PC with a special OS that prevents you from doing stuff a PC owner could do, that is impossible to repair/service/upgrade at the end-user level unlike a real PC, lol. So you're getting all the Cons and none of the Pros except maybe price. But considering a good PC will last through two console generations, are you really saving any money?

EDIT2: I'll give the Switch some leeway because at least it's a handheld portable device that's much smaller than a laptop.

[Sigma-Astra]

Microsoft is a large company with different divisions.

Their XBOX division is not the same division that handles their Windows OS. So, by refusing to give money to their XBOX division, that division will make less money and if enough people did this, they might rethink their practices. But of course this takes a lot of people and few people have the willpower to say No to all the shinies they offer. Pretty much the same way any large company can screw customers over and continue to do business. Not enough people willing to walk away.

True, but you're not quite seeing my entire viewpoint here. Even if the division in charge of Xbox were losing finances due towards people walking away from one of their products. You're still, as a consumer, giving them your money one way or another through other means. If you're going to boycott a company, you'd have to do so entirely otherwise they won't really care if you're not giving them money in Product A, but still willing to support them in Product B. Either way, the company still wins and you still lose because they're making money off of you in the end, just a bit less than before.

That's why boycotts for large companies tend to fail because even if you fail to support their one practice completely, you're still fueling them in other means whether willingly or unwillingly. If you're going to boycott against Xbox, then you'd have to boycott against Microsoft entirely and well....that's easier said than done really.

[Maeka]

-snip-

Except for the fact that at the top-level, a CEO will look at the big picture, of their entire company.

Let's say theoretically the CEO of Microsoft is sitting at a board meeting, and they have their entire company's earnings on this fancy power point thing, and they see that XBOX is really tanking in sales, while the other divisions of their company are doing great.

Guess what's going to happen to the XBOX division? People get put on notice, or fired, or restructured, maybe the CEO will start giving orders for them to shape up or ship out. Companies oftentimes cut divisions that aren't making it.

EDIT: That, and I have not, and have no plans of, buying Windows10. I'm still running the same Win7 license that I got 5+ years ago and it will be good for at least two more years. Maybe by then, who knows, maybe there will be a better option. But still, giving them $1000+ during the next 3 years or $100 ... that's a pretty big difference. This means that in the last 5 years + next 2-3 years, Microsoft only made $100 off of me. Compare that to someone who bought an XB1 and then a XB1S and yearly subs. That'd be what, like $800 + $400.... $1200.

[Sigma-Astra]

And refusing both is not really childish; especially if that's not the only reason. There's also their anti-consumer practices of charging $50 a year just to play online (which you don't need to with a PC with Steam), how they handle their hardware (which borderlines scams; when I bought my XB360 (which was the last console I ever bought), I could pay one price for a 30GB HDD, and to get the 60GB model which is exactly same 'cept larger HDD, they wanted $100 more despite the fact that at the time you could buy a 150GB HDD for $80.

Consoles are a scam. They overprice their obsolete hardware and charge you ridiculous amounts of money for it, kinda like Apple does.

EDIT: Also, all three (Nintendo, Sony and XB) are running PC-compatible hardware (even if it is obsolete) in their consoles, so what you are REALLY getting when you buy a console is a gimped PC with a special OS that prevents you from doing stuff a PC owner could do, that is impossible to repair/service/upgrade at the end-user level unlike a real PC, lol. So you're getting all the Cons and none of the Pros except maybe price. But considering a good PC will last through two console generations, are you really saving any money?

EDIT2: I'll give the Switch some leeway because at least it's a handheld portable device that's much smaller than a laptop.

No offense, but you sound like a person who was burned by consoles and now you have this hyperbole paranoia about them. Consoles aren't really a scam, they're another form of entertainment for people who can't afford a custom PC build or multiple PC's in their home really. A standard PS4 to run XIV will costs you about $299 while a decent, custom PC with the specs to run XIV at it's best settings may run you twice over that initial amount. Sure, the PC will probably last you longer and has interchangeable parts that you can repair and replace at your own leisure, but again, it's still quite a hefty sum to produce.

And back then, consoles were the most sought after means of personal gaming entertainment for most people like the very first Sega and Nintendo console. You seem like a pro PC player over anything else, which is fine, while I'm just on the fence and can accept both means to an end as viable ways to find entertainment since one way is not any better or worse than the other if it means the person is happy.

[GunksFoy]

Snip

I think you're underestimating the convenience of consoles. No troubleshooting, no need for knowledge of tech outside plugging in an HDMI, and the price above all else. I think you're also blowing the price out of proportion. I paid $300 for my PS4 and an included game+controller 5 years ago and it still works the exact same as it did then, plus no OS to buy. There is no reason to upgrade until the PS5 releases unless it burns out, which is not common unless you get a dud.

Comparatively, I paid ~$1200 for my PC components, another $500 on monitors, an additional $40 for my mouse, and over $100 for my keyboard. And while I received my OS free courtesy of my company, that would have been another $120 minimum - $200 for Pro, unless you can configure WINE on Linux which is a nightmare in and of itself.

While my PC is obviously far superior, and you could do a much cheaper build that would still perform very well, you can't really get close to the price of consoles. While PC components may last you 10 years, by the end of that you're probably not playing at the cutting edge anymore anyways, and a console generation is typically about 7 years. You aren't getting 14 years out of your components if you're using them regularly. The average PC player upgrades every 5-7 years anyways, if not faster. And I could buy 5 consoles for the price of my single PC build. For that matter, a cutting edge processor or GPU alone can cost 3-4x as much as an entire console.

TL;DR: The only scams consoles are really committing is the lack of backwards compatibility in modern consoles and console exclusives. The hardware isn't cutting edge by any means, but it's certainly adequate and will play any game on the market. Just because it doesn't do shiny 4k at 144Hz doesn't make it a scam, that isn't what they're designed for. I do agree that their online pay-to-play structure is weird and unnecessary, but even 7 years worth of that doesn't come close to my PC cost once.

As for your other point, boycotting Xbox will never be effective. While theoretically possible, there are way too many poor/lower-middle class people who can't afford PCs for that to ever be realistic.

EDIT: Not to say I'm not pro-PC if you can afford it, but consoles have their place and don't deserve the scorn they get from PC players just because they aren't rolling in cash.

EDIT 2:

This means that in the last 5 years + next 2-3 years, Microsoft only made $100 off of me. Compare that to someone who bought an XB1 and then a XB1S and yearly subs. That'd be what, like $800 + $400.... $1200.

If you're buying every console iteration, sure, save the money and buy a PC, but most people don't do this. Especially poorer people. But even the price you listed is less than a high end PC and you got 2 systems for it, one of which you could sell to recoup money or give it to a friend/significant other to use. And, if you want to get the most out of your High End PC, you're going to need at least 1440p monitors, because the 1080p TV you already have isn't going to make your purchase worth it, unlike with console, so that's a cost you can't ignore.