Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

FFXIV on 360 blip with EurogamerFollow

#1 Jun 24 2010 at 5:31 PM Rating: Good
11 posts
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/closed-xbox-live-blocked-ffxiv

Final Fantasy XIV Online creator and director Hiromichi Tanaka has told Eurogamer that a "closed" Xbox Live blocked the game from appearing on Xbox 360.

"The main reason why we couldn't go with Xbox 360 was the Xbox Live system," he explained at E3. "[Live is] different to the normal internet environment, so when we wanted to introduce this game in the same environment as Windows PC it had to be PS3, so that was our choice.

"Microsoft has a different point of view: they want to have a closed environment for Xbox Live. We're still talking to... We couldn't come to an agreement on Xbox Live."

Square Enix number-one Yoichi Wada told GamesIndustry.biz a similar story; he said what he'd like to see "first and foremost" was a network structure that allowed third parties to "freely design different business schemes".

Final Fantasy XIV won't be the first MMO snagged by the closed nature of a console's online service . Cryptic chucked in the towel on an Xbox 360 version of Champions Online earlier this year. Producer Craig Zinkievich told Eurogamer he was frustrated with the business side of getting an MMO on Xbox Live; the game itself, he said, ran just fine.

Ironically, Final Fantasy XI remains one of the only MMOs to be offered on Xbox 360.

Final Fantasy XIV Online is in development for PC and PS3.
#2 Jun 24 2010 at 5:35 PM Rating: Good
***
1,159 posts
Is "closed environment" code for monthly payment?
#3 Jun 24 2010 at 5:47 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
630 posts
Yogtheterrible wrote:
Is "closed environment" code for monthly payment?


No...originally they were talking about allowing people with silver subscription (meaning they didn't pay for xbox live gold service) would have access to MMOs. After talking MS didn't want to give up their xbox live membership fees as well as allowing the game to be played on SE server (they wanted the servers to be run through xbox live services). Basically each company wanted their own way and both lost a little bit by not compromising.
#4 Jun 24 2010 at 8:21 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
burtonsnow wrote:
Yogtheterrible wrote:
Is "closed environment" code for monthly payment?


No...originally they were talking about allowing people with silver subscription (meaning they didn't pay for xbox live gold service) would have access to MMOs. After talking MS didn't want to give up their xbox live membership fees as well as allowing the game to be played on SE server (they wanted the servers to be run through xbox live services). Basically each company wanted their own way and both lost a little bit by not compromising.


I always assumed the only reason was the reason they kept telling us; MS wants FFXIV 360 players to pay for XBL gold and SE doesn't want them to have to. If "Closed environment" doesn't refer to that, what else does it refer to? Are the 360 players supposed to be on separate servers from PC/PS3 or MS wants to have domain over SE's servers or what?

I know with Bungie/Halo, there's the issue of MS wanting people to pay for DLC and Bungie doesn't and they fought over that since Halo is Microsoft's IP... is it something along those likes, where MS wants control over the way the servers and DLC/expansions are handled if the game is on 360?

I'm still confused as to what exactly "closed environment" means here, if not what I initially thought.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#5 Jun 24 2010 at 8:37 PM Rating: Decent
*
223 posts
Mikhalia wrote:
burtonsnow wrote:
Yogtheterrible wrote:
Is "closed environment" code for monthly payment?


No...originally they were talking about allowing people with silver subscription (meaning they didn't pay for xbox live gold service) would have access to MMOs. After talking MS didn't want to give up their xbox live membership fees as well as allowing the game to be played on SE server (they wanted the servers to be run through xbox live services). Basically each company wanted their own way and both lost a little bit by not compromising.


I always assumed the only reason was the reason they kept telling us; MS wants FFXIV 360 players to pay for XBL gold and SE doesn't want them to have to. If "Closed environment" doesn't refer to that, what else does it refer to? Are the 360 players supposed to be on separate servers from PC/PS3 or MS wants to have domain over SE's servers or what?

I know with Bungie/Halo, there's the issue of MS wanting people to pay for DLC and Bungie doesn't and they fought over that since Halo is Microsoft's IP... is it something along those likes, where MS wants control over the way the servers and DLC/expansions are handled if the game is on 360?

I'm still confused as to what exactly "closed environment" means here, if not what I initially thought.

I'd say all of the above if I'm understanding right. The main issue that SE faces is that even if M$ agreed to let people play on a silver membership, they'd have to agree to everything else SE wants as well. If they release the game on the 360 and a couple years down the road M$ refuses to let SE do things their way for the XBL players on top of having them on separate servers, SE would REALLY be screwed because it's not like they can just stop producing the game for XBOX after it's already been released on it without some serious penalties from the public. They're playing a much safer route by waiting until M$ decides to stop being bags of douche.
#6 Jun 24 2010 at 8:54 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
Bluefirefly wrote:
Mikhalia wrote:
burtonsnow wrote:
Yogtheterrible wrote:
Is "closed environment" code for monthly payment?


No...originally they were talking about allowing people with silver subscription (meaning they didn't pay for xbox live gold service) would have access to MMOs. After talking MS didn't want to give up their xbox live membership fees as well as allowing the game to be played on SE server (they wanted the servers to be run through xbox live services). Basically each company wanted their own way and both lost a little bit by not compromising.


I always assumed the only reason was the reason they kept telling us; MS wants FFXIV 360 players to pay for XBL gold and SE doesn't want them to have to. If "Closed environment" doesn't refer to that, what else does it refer to? Are the 360 players supposed to be on separate servers from PC/PS3 or MS wants to have domain over SE's servers or what?

I know with Bungie/Halo, there's the issue of MS wanting people to pay for DLC and Bungie doesn't and they fought over that since Halo is Microsoft's IP... is it something along those likes, where MS wants control over the way the servers and DLC/expansions are handled if the game is on 360?

I'm still confused as to what exactly "closed environment" means here, if not what I initially thought.

I'd say all of the above if I'm understanding right. The main issue that SE faces is that even if M$ agreed to let people play on a silver membership, they'd have to agree to everything else SE wants as well. If they release the game on the 360 and a couple years down the road M$ refuses to let SE do things their way for the XBL players on top of having them on separate servers, SE would REALLY be screwed because it's not like they can just stop producing the game for XBOX after it's already been released on it without some serious penalties from the public. They're playing a much safer route by waiting until M$ decides to stop being bags of douche.


WoW China comes to mind here.

It's just one giant *********** headache to deal with distributing your product to a channel when that channel has an asston of restrictions. As I recall, WoW players in China don't have WotLK (because their government dislikes the emphasis on the Lich King and the undead); even the Forsaken race just look like "Really really pale humans". Blizzard still deals with this crap because the Chinese playerbase makes up more than half of their total playerbase; they just licence it out to NetEase to deal with the crap.

Comparatively, I can see from SE's standpoint that they probably feel that the amount of players they are losing by not dealing with Microsoft is probably not worth the headache that they would have to deal with to do so.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#7 Jun 24 2010 at 9:11 PM Rating: Good
*****
12,622 posts
I still think paying for Live Gold is like paying for ***. It's free everywhere else and generally better. Good for SE actually sticking to their guns. There is no reason on earth anyone who has rightfully bought a copy of FFXIV and pays their monthly dues should not have access to the game.

Microsoft just asked "What the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?" to the wrong guys. They've earned this ownage and it's funny to watch because SE clearly wants to get this game on their system.

And before anyone gives me the tired speech about how awesome mcawesomesauce Live is, I have two words for you:

Gabe Newell.
____________________________
Blah
#8 Jun 24 2010 at 10:53 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Lefein wrote:
I still think paying for Live Gold is like paying for ***. It's free everywhere else and generally better. Good for SE actually sticking to their guns. There is no reason on earth anyone who has rightfully bought a copy of FFXIV and pays their monthly dues should not have access to the game.

Microsoft just asked "What the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?" to the wrong guys. They've earned this ownage and it's funny to watch because SE clearly wants to get this game on their system.

And before anyone gives me the tired speech about how awesome mcawesomesauce Live is, I have two words for you:

Gabe Newell.


Sadly, the problem with your point is that the people who need to hear it will either not understand it, or will refuse to accept it.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#9 Jun 25 2010 at 8:51 AM Rating: Decent
23 posts
Sadly, the people who are losing out the most on this deal are the people, like me, who own an XBOX 360 and not a PS3.
I'm all for "stickin it to the man", but I'd rather pay for XBL Gold + FFXIV fees, than buy a new $300-$500 system to play the game of my choice on a console. Most XBOX 360 users have XBL Gold anyways, so it really is only hurting the consumers. Sure, MS is money hungry and whatever else you want to call them, but that doesn't change the fact that 360 users are now going to have to drop $300+ on a PS3, or $1000+ on a PC capable of playing FFXIV. Whereas if SE would have just went with MS on requiring XBL Gold, we'd be paying no more than we have been since we purchased our Xbox 360, $50/yr.
#10 Jun 25 2010 at 9:06 AM Rating: Excellent
Sage
****
5,587 posts
If my kids didn't still play it, I'd trade in my 360 and games for a PS3 right now. The XBox Live Gold crap ****** me off. I never got into playing any titles online other than FFXI (which I rarely played on my 360 to begin with) and maybe a little Left for Dead. I was basically throwing money away on a gold membership so I finally canceled it at the last annual renewal. Then I found out you can't stream Netflix unless you have Gold which I think it utter BS. I can stream Netflix through my PC or Wii for nothing and I assume you can do it free on the PS3 as well. ***** you Microsoft for trying to charge people for something they can get for free elsewhere.
____________________________
Harri
80BLU/80BST/76RNG/75THF/75WHM/60SCH
100+3 Bonecraft
#11 Jun 25 2010 at 9:09 AM Rating: Good
*
63 posts
Quote:
Most XBOX 360 users have XBL Gold anyways, so it really is only hurting the consumers.


From what I have seen that is definitely true. Sure there are still plenty of people that don't have XBL Gold subscriptions, but from my experience the vast majority do. I go to the local video game arcades and net cafes and unofficial tournaments and have talked with plenty of people. I know approximately 300 people with Xbox 360s and out of all of them I know that only 1 of those do not have a Gold subscription.

Now I don't think that people should have to pay two subscriptions to play a single game and I also don't think that the potential player base of FFXIV on Xbox 360 would be worth it financially for SE to conform to MS demands. But it is an annoying thing for those few people that only have Xbox 360 and want to play FFXIV have to deal with.
____________________________
When life gives you lemons......BAM!!!! Ninjas everywhere!! Thousands of them!!!
#12 Jun 25 2010 at 9:54 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:
or $1000+ on a PC capable of playing FFXIV.


I paid $400 for my new computer and only had to put another $100 for a new graphics card and power supply. Granted I got great deals on everything, but the point is that if you look for them-- and you have several months to do so-- cheap computers are out there, and you can get good deals on upgrading your rig as well.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#13 Jun 25 2010 at 10:41 AM Rating: Good
My new compy when the time comes is going to be around $500, including the video card and such. Only thing that will be left over from old compy is the case and one hard drive which will probably serve as archive area. Its all basically off Newegg.
____________________________
Die! Die die die. die die die die, die die. - Scarlet Briar
#14 Jun 25 2010 at 10:55 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Mimedestroyer wrote:
Quote:
Most XBOX 360 users have XBL Gold anyways, so it really is only hurting the consumers.


From what I have seen that is definitely true. Sure there are still plenty of people that don't have XBL Gold subscriptions, but from my experience the vast majority do. I go to the local video game arcades and net cafes and unofficial tournaments and have talked with plenty of people. I know approximately 300 people with Xbox 360s and out of all of them I know that only 1 of those do not have a Gold subscription.

Now I don't think that people should have to pay two subscriptions to play a single game and I also don't think that the potential player base of FFXIV on Xbox 360 would be worth it financially for SE to conform to MS demands. But it is an annoying thing for those few people that only have Xbox 360 and want to play FFXIV have to deal with.


I have a 360 and have never had, and never will have gold (excluding the free gold trial they give you before putting you at silver).

Yes, yes, "Exception that proves the rule" or whatever, but there you go.

The only reason my 360 ever goes online is if I have an urge to buy GH/RB DLC or if I pop in a new game and it says my system needs an update. If either of those ever require gold, then I guess that means no more new games/DLC for me.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#15 Jun 25 2010 at 10:56 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,178 posts
I did think this was decided long ago.

MS wants a peice of the MMO-online-fee pie, while Sony is happy to just sell more systems.
sound right?

I know at least one person who bought a PS3 just for FFXIII and FFXIV - me.

turned out that blu-ray and streaming netflix is the real awesomesauce
#16 Jun 25 2010 at 11:18 AM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
RufuSwho wrote:
I did think this was decided long ago.

MS wants a peice of the MMO-online-fee pie, while Sony is happy to just sell more systems.
sound right?

I know at least one person who bought a PS3 just for FFXIII and FFXIV - me.

turned out that blu-ray and streaming netflix is the real awesomesauce


Microsoft, not content with making money off their own products, has raised the bar by wanting to make money off of everyone else's products too.

Good idea in theory, bad business practice. Especially if you have a competitor right next to you pointing out that all the sh*t you're offering is free elsewhere.

EDIT: Although with the PS3 including a blu ray player for 300, it does make me wonder how this has affected the sales of -actual- blu ray players.

Edited, Jun 25th 2010 1:19pm by Mikhalia
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#17 Jun 25 2010 at 11:25 AM Rating: Good
Sage
**
770 posts
Mikhalia wrote:
RufuSwho wrote:
I did think this was decided long ago.

MS wants a peice of the MMO-online-fee pie, while Sony is happy to just sell more systems.
sound right?

I know at least one person who bought a PS3 just for FFXIII and FFXIV - me.

turned out that blu-ray and streaming netflix is the real awesomesauce


Microsoft, not content with making money off their own products, has raised the bar by wanting to make money off of everyone else's products too.

Good idea in theory, bad business practice. Especially if you have a competitor right next to you pointing out that all the sh*t you're offering is free elsewhere.

EDIT: Although with the PS3 including a blu ray player for 300, it does make me wonder how this has affected the sales of -actual- blu ray players.

Edited, Jun 25th 2010 1:19pm by Mikhalia


Blue ray players are acually slightly more expensive than a PS3 from what ive seen.
____________________________
I do not suffer from insanity.. I rather enjoy it.

{retired} Devalynn Mithra WHM extrodinare -Garuda (gives everyone a high paw! yeah!)

Church OF Mikhalia
#18 Jun 25 2010 at 11:39 AM Rating: Decent
*
63 posts
Quote:
Blue ray players are actually slightly more expensive than a PS3 from what ive seen.


I've seen a blu-ray player as low as 90$ and a whole bunch between 100$ and 200$. There are a good amount available cheaper than the PS3.

EDIT: New blu-ray players at those prices

Edited, Jun 25th 2010 1:39pm by Mimedestroyer
____________________________
When life gives you lemons......BAM!!!! Ninjas everywhere!! Thousands of them!!!
#19 Jun 25 2010 at 11:46 AM Rating: Good
Sage
**
770 posts
Mimedestroyer wrote:
Quote:
Blue ray players are actually slightly more expensive than a PS3 from what ive seen.


I've seen a blu-ray player as low as 90$ and a whole bunch between 100$ and 200$. There are a good amount available cheaper than the PS3.

EDIT: New blu-ray players at those prices

Edited, Jun 25th 2010 1:39pm by Mimedestroyer


I stand corrected :) well sitting acually lol
____________________________
I do not suffer from insanity.. I rather enjoy it.

{retired} Devalynn Mithra WHM extrodinare -Garuda (gives everyone a high paw! yeah!)

Church OF Mikhalia
#20 Jun 25 2010 at 1:20 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
Puppy1 wrote:
Mimedestroyer wrote:
Quote:
Blue ray players are actually slightly more expensive than a PS3 from what ive seen.


I've seen a blu-ray player as low as 90$ and a whole bunch between 100$ and 200$. There are a good amount available cheaper than the PS3.

EDIT: New blu-ray players at those prices

Edited, Jun 25th 2010 1:39pm by Mimedestroyer


I stand corrected :) well sitting acually lol


I suppose the argument could be made that "You're not paying $300 for a PS3; you're paying $200 for a PS3 that doesn't play Blu ray and $100 for a Blu ray player; we'll combine them into one unit for free."

In which case, maybe I might consider buying a PS3 after all, if it ends up with more exclusive titles that I like and can't get on PC or 360.

I'd like to replace my 10 year old 55" non HD projection screen with a 50-55" Plasma/LCD HDTV first though. The colors are slightly off and I can't figure out how to ***** with the lamps to get it just right. So skin looks slightly orange tinted and everything is kinda dim.

Edited, Jun 25th 2010 3:21pm by Mikhalia
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#21 Jun 25 2010 at 1:41 PM Rating: Good
***
2,010 posts
I'd like to know where people are getting their numbers regarding Xbox live and the *majority* having Gold. I couldn't find numbers anywhere on the web. I'm guessing that Microsoft just doesn't want the information out there for whatever reason.

It actually seems to me like it would be the opposite. There isn't anything spectacular about Gold unless you play certain games, so I wouldn't think that Gold would be the *rule* and Silver the *Exceoption*. I could certainly be wrong, but it seems to me there must be a reason that Redmond won't release the number of subscriptions that are Gold versus Silver, and why they planting their feet on the XIV question this time around.
#23 Jun 25 2010 at 3:17 PM Rating: Decent
*
63 posts
Quote:
It actually seems to me like it would be the opposite. There isn't anything spectacular about Gold unless you play certain games, so I wouldn't think that Gold would be the *rule* and Silver the *Exception*. I could certainly be wrong, but it seems to me there must be a reason that Redmond won't release the number of subscriptions that are Gold versus Silver, and why they planting their feet on the XIV question this time around.


Well I did say in my post that my views are from what I have seen personally. I live right beside an army base and the large amount of numbers I know are those troops around my age and just about all of them are COD addicts. So my numbers are probably tainted by my location. But also as I said, out of about 300 I only know of 1 that doesn't have a Gold subscription. So at least around my location it holds true.
____________________________
When life gives you lemons......BAM!!!! Ninjas everywhere!! Thousands of them!!!
#24 Jun 25 2010 at 5:12 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
**
602 posts

The only reason why 360 is popular is because of Party Live Chat and Cross Chat which it seems Sony is working covertly to add to the Playstation Subscription service that they are rolling out. So honestly, 360 is going to be losing a lot of customers very soon. Microsoft better step up their game and roll out that 720 cause they are going to definitely lose this generation in the end.

The 360 cannot handle Final Fantasy XIV unless you really want to play a dumbed down game. The 360 has 3 cores while most of the highest benchmarking on BG forums is happening with quad cores and up. Single core absolutely cannot run the game very well, dual core? Forget about that too. Thankfully, PS3 has 8 cores and is futureproof. AMD/Intel have 6 core CPUs out in the market now and 8 cores are due end of the year/spring of 2011. FFXIV is going to be the next gen MMO and 360 would only hold it back.

And as for the 'closed environment'. It's quite possible that Microsoft won't share some of their code perhaps or Microsoft is asking Square to divulge some of their networking code. Square or Microsoft don't appear to be budging, so unless Microsoft becomes Square's ***** paying out of their ***. It's a no go. Besides, who wants past tech anyways.
#25 Jun 25 2010 at 5:26 PM Rating: Default
36 posts
This is all i can say. XboX fans can just get over not haveing FFXIV. If thay really want to play it then play it on PC. IF not on PC then buy a PS3. And think of it as getting a Blu-ray player in the process sence there 300~1grand depending on make and model. So stop FLAMING OUT that the poor XboX dosent get FFXIV. And deal with it or Cry in the corner like a 4 yearold.
#26 Jun 25 2010 at 6:14 PM Rating: Decent
**
456 posts
I agree the majority of the people that own the xbox 360 does have a gold membership anyway, because that's the only way you can play any game online. All you have to do is play games like gears of war 3 or call of duty or halo online, and you will see the massive amount of people that own gold memberships. That being said I do think Microsoft is extremely greedy and is basically hurting their customers by not endorsing MMOs. Not only FFXIV but it has been a number of MMOs that have made xbox 360 versions of the game later to be trashed because they couldn't come to a agreement with microsoft. Age of Conan, and Champions Online just to name a few.

I believe the 50 dollar a year gold membership is justified because xbox live is easily the best online experience for a console (I do own a ps3 and wii). The party chat system (being able to talk to a party of friends even without playing the same game) is awesome and the ps3 online experience is far behind the xbox in terms of social networking and convenience. Even small things like being able to play music with a game in, and being able to download stuff while playing games (offline), enhance the experience.

Anyways to get back on topic, I think Microsoft has to realize that MMOS are very different from regular games and they should have their own rules. MMOS that require a subscription fee to play the game should not also require a gold membership. It would just be disheartening to the consumers if they paid their subscription fee but still can't play because their gold membership has just expired. Microsoft should just use MMOs to sell more systems instead of trying to make a profit off of their cake, because an established company like SE has all the leverage. They can simply just trash the xbox version and their game will do just fine and microsoft and more importantly microsoft's consumers is more hurt by it than SE.

#27 Jun 25 2010 at 6:14 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Torrence wrote:
I'd like to know where people are getting their numbers regarding Xbox live and the *majority* having Gold. I couldn't find numbers anywhere on the web. I'm guessing that Microsoft just doesn't want the information out there for whatever reason.

It actually seems to me like it would be the opposite. There isn't anything spectacular about Gold unless you play certain games, so I wouldn't think that Gold would be the *rule* and Silver the *Exceoption*. I could certainly be wrong, but it seems to me there must be a reason that Redmond won't release the number of subscriptions that are Gold versus Silver, and why they planting their feet on the XIV question this time around.


Dated 2008

Quote:
It seems that just about 50% of the people who have registered for an Xbox Live account are willing to pay to enjoy the perks of a Gold membership. The others are just as happy to use a Silver account, which is free.


Source: http://news.softpedia.com/news/Only-About-50-Of-Xbox-Live-Subscribers-Go-for-Gold-105251.shtml

Logically speaking, I always assumed more people got gold than silver, but according to this article, it's about half and half. 60% in just the US, 56% worldwide.

Dated 2009

Quote:
Xbox Live: 10 Million Gold Subscribers [...] with 17.7 million consoles sold worldwide


Source - http://kotaku.com/341399/xbox-live-10-million-gold-subscribers

That's about 56%. worldwide, the same number as a year (2009) later in the softpedia article.

Dated May 2010

Quote:
Microsoft's Xbox LIVE has some 23 million subscribers


Source - http://www.beet.tv/2010/05/game-times-is-prime-time-microsoft-xbox-live-as-audience-reaches-23-million-.html

Quote:
Units sold Worldwide: 40 million (as of April 23, 2010)


Source - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360

23/40 = about 57.5%

Still more than half but not what I'd call an overwhelming majority.

Edited, Jun 25th 2010 8:23pm by Mikhalia
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#28 Jun 25 2010 at 8:46 PM Rating: Decent
23 posts
Your numbers *might* be accurate, if no xbox 360 has ever been lost, broken, or is otherwise just not in use. 40 million units sold does not mean 40 million units are in use. 23 million subscribers, however, means 23 million people are using XBL, or at least paying for gold sub.
#29 Jun 25 2010 at 11:29 PM Rating: Good
**
296 posts
I actually think this article gives us a new clue as to the nature of MS's demands. We knew MS was looking to monetize off of the MMO genre. Most assumed they just wanted Gold service as a requirement to go to the XIV servers. While that may be true, I'm reminded of a Blizzard interview on GameSpot last year where they mentioned (and the executive interviewed may have been postulating) MS wanting a portion of the subscription fee. I always thought that would be difficult/impossible to do fairly, because when you're dealing with a cross platform MMO (especially one with modest PC requirements such as WoW) it would be impossible to identify a player as solely a Playstation, Xbox, PC, or Mac player. Take XI. I started on PS2, but also played on PC, PS3, and 360 over the years. It would be impossible to decide what, if anything MS was to be owed out of my subscription.

But with all the talking about "closed system" I'm wondering if MS recognized how difficult such a situation would be and decided any future MMO on their console must be run through their servers. This way they can easily justify requiring Gold membership, plus they have a segregated population. Then they could easily identify the 360 players (since they are the only ones playing that version of the game) and demand a cut of all subscriptions.

FFXI was given extraordinary freedom on the 360, and I believe MS did so in the hope that it would boost early sales of the XBox in Japan, after enduring very disappointing sales in the region with their first console. That gamble didn't work at all (as regional sales will attest) and even though we all have to speculate on the details, it's now clear from multiple developers that going forward MS will not allow another MMO the same deal that XI enjoyed.
#30 Jun 25 2010 at 11:46 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Valtrex wrote:
Your numbers *might* be accurate, if no xbox 360 has ever been lost, broken, or is otherwise just not in use. 40 million units sold does not mean 40 million units are in use. 23 million subscribers, however, means 23 million people are using XBL, or at least paying for gold sub.


Well, I did quote several different articles over several years. If we assume that 5% of xboxes (That's 2,000,000 units) are moot (due to part failure, physically broken, person ownign multiple) then that's still 23/38 mil or about 60.5%.

I was expecting a number closer to 75-80% originally, but the 56-57% number seems to be pretty consistent, and doesn't go too much higher if we neg some.

If you have a source with accurate numbers on exactly how many systems are in use (including offline ones) or conversely some data on how many units have been decommissioned over the years (due to anything from RROD to "Cat knocked over my 360") that would show a different number, feel free to list it.

It's one thing to expect a certain result before looking for data, but you can only manipulate the data to account for margin of error to a certain point; 3% MOE seems reasonable and still is only 60.5%.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#31 Jun 25 2010 at 11:51 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
ascorbic wrote:
I'm reminded of a Blizzard interview on GameSpot last year where they mentioned (and the executive interviewed may have been postulating) MS wanting a portion of the subscription fee.


Wait, am I misreading this or are you telling me that Microsoft was trying to claim that they were entitled to a portion of the WoW subscription fees?

It's not even on 360; it's Windows/Mac. Unless Microsoft is taking the stance that "Any game that requires online access on a Windows computer requires you to pay a fee to Microsoft for using the internet on your Windows computer".

So if I'm not misunderstanding you (and I hope that I am), Microsoft is retarded.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#32 Jun 25 2010 at 11:55 PM Rating: Default
Thief's Knife
*****
15,053 posts
Excenmille wrote:



The 360 cannot handle Final Fantasy XIV unless you really want to play a dumbed down game. The 360 has 3 cores while most of the highest benchmarking on BG forums is happening with quad cores and up. Single core absolutely cannot run the game very well, dual core? Forget about that too. Thankfully, PS3 has 8 cores and is futureproof. AMD/Intel have 6 core CPUs out in the market now and 8 cores are due end of the year/spring of 2011. FFXIV is going to be the next gen MMO and 360 would only hold it back.


Apples and oranges. the 360 uses a different CPU from either a PC or a PS3

If the 360 can run FFXIII it can run FFXIV, they both use the same graphics engine. It would run at 576p however (as does the 360 version of FXIII)
____________________________
Final Fantasy XI 12-14-11 Update wrote:
Adjust the resolution of menus.
The main screen resolution for "FINAL FANTASY XI" is dependent on the "Overlay Graphics Resolution" setting.
If the Overlay Graphics Resolution is set higher than the Menu Resolution, menus will be automatically resized.


I thought of it first:

http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/forum.html?forum=10&mid=130073657654872218#20
#33 Jun 26 2010 at 12:12 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Lobivopis wrote:
Excenmille wrote:



The 360 cannot handle Final Fantasy XIV unless you really want to play a dumbed down game. The 360 has 3 cores while most of the highest benchmarking on BG forums is happening with quad cores and up. Single core absolutely cannot run the game very well, dual core? Forget about that too. Thankfully, PS3 has 8 cores and is futureproof. AMD/Intel have 6 core CPUs out in the market now and 8 cores are due end of the year/spring of 2011. FFXIV is going to be the next gen MMO and 360 would only hold it back.


Apples and oranges. the 360 uses a different CPU from either a PC or a PS3

If the 360 can run FFXIII it can run FFXIV, they both use the same graphics engine. It would run at 576p however (as does the 360 version of FXIII)


The highest I've seen on a dual core processor (with a good video card) was about 2700 on low (720p). Since 360 is 576p, and a 360 has a triple core processor, I could see it running the game at (assuming there was a 360 benchmark program) 4000ish. As Lobi pointed out, 13 and 14 are pretty close, and if the 360 can run 13, it should be able to handle 14.

Plus, just to point out again: SE -wanted- to put 14 on the 360 and only decided they weren't based on MS being cash whores. If it was technologically impossible to put 14 on the 360, SE wouldn't have wasted their time talking to MS about it.

But unless MS changes their mind, it will be a moot point.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#34 Jun 26 2010 at 12:32 AM Rating: Default
Thief's Knife
*****
15,053 posts
Mikhalia wrote:


The highest I've seen on a dual core processor (with a good video card) was about 2700 on low (720p). Since 360 is 576p, and a 360 has a triple core processor, I could see it running the game at (assuming there was a 360 benchmark program) 4000ish. As Lobi pointed out, 13 and 14 are pretty close, and if the 360 can run 13, it should be able to handle 14.


Again, apples and oranges. The 360 uses a 3 core IBM PowerPc CPU not an x86 processor and if FFXIV were ported to the 360 the port would reflect that fact. The instruction set and architecture of a PowerPc CPU is not the same as an x86 chip. It's is not like running the PC benchmark on two different PCs and comparing the results.

Also you can squeeze more out of a game console than a PC of the same general level of technology. There is no unnecessary crap using up system resources and you are able to optimize for that specific hardware configuration with no worries about compatibility.

As an example, the 360's version of DirectX is stripped down compared to PC windows. There is no error checking (not needed except in development because your game will only ever run on the 360) and it is optimized for the 360's graphics hardware only. (The 360 renders the screen in tiles internally in the GPU using 12 Mb of on-die VRAM)


But yeah, if FFXIII runs at 576p then FFXIV probably would also. I don't think the zones and models would suffer though, just the resolution.

Edited, Jun 26th 2010 3:42am by Lobivopis
____________________________
Final Fantasy XI 12-14-11 Update wrote:
Adjust the resolution of menus.
The main screen resolution for "FINAL FANTASY XI" is dependent on the "Overlay Graphics Resolution" setting.
If the Overlay Graphics Resolution is set higher than the Menu Resolution, menus will be automatically resized.


I thought of it first:

http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/forum.html?forum=10&mid=130073657654872218#20
#35 Jun 26 2010 at 12:47 AM Rating: Good
**
296 posts
Mikhalia wrote:
ascorbic wrote:
I'm reminded of a Blizzard interview on GameSpot last year where they mentioned (and the executive interviewed may have been postulating) MS wanting a portion of the subscription fee.


Wait, am I misreading this or are you telling me that Microsoft was trying to claim that they were entitled to a portion of the WoW subscription fees?

It's not even on 360; it's Windows/Mac. Unless Microsoft is taking the stance that "Any game that requires online access on a Windows computer requires you to pay a fee to Microsoft for using the internet on your Windows computer".

So if I'm not misunderstanding you (and I hope that I am), Microsoft is retarded.


I'm terribly sorry, as I reread my post it's clear I didn't set that up properly. The discussion that the relevant information I was paraphrasing came from dealt with the possibility of WoW or Blizzard's in-development MMO making its way to the 360 or other consoles, and the challenges a port like that would face. I remember it because of the "spirited" debates the console fanboys had about it on the GameSpot forums, specifically because the gentleman interviewed made the claim that MS would want a portion of the subscriptions if an MMO were to be ported to the 360.

I did a very brief Google search and didn't find the relevant article, so as always take that with a grain of salt. Doubly so since even with his relevant quotes, I don't believe you could accurately discern whether he was speaking from previous negotiations, or simply postulating what Microsoft's stance might be.
#36 Jun 26 2010 at 12:51 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,416 posts
You would think MS would at least consider lowering the cost of the gold subscription.

IMO, MS shot themselves in the foot when it comes to accessing online content from the 360, especially since they wanted to tie it into the PC and their Media Servers. They would have been better off with just a flat fee for a network connection like the PS2 had.

Til this day, the 360 still creates problems for players on XI. I'm glad it won't be on the 360. There will be less development and troubleshooting that needs to take place for it.
____________________________
Abort, Retry, Fail?
TeamAFK!

/equip Head Knowledge
You gain the latent effect of Power.
#37 Jun 26 2010 at 2:03 AM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
ascorbic wrote:
Mikhalia wrote:
ascorbic wrote:
I'm reminded of a Blizzard interview on GameSpot last year where they mentioned (and the executive interviewed may have been postulating) MS wanting a portion of the subscription fee.


Wait, am I misreading this or are you telling me that Microsoft was trying to claim that they were entitled to a portion of the WoW subscription fees?

It's not even on 360; it's Windows/Mac. Unless Microsoft is taking the stance that "Any game that requires online access on a Windows computer requires you to pay a fee to Microsoft for using the internet on your Windows computer".

So if I'm not misunderstanding you (and I hope that I am), Microsoft is retarded.


I'm terribly sorry, as I reread my post it's clear I didn't set that up properly. The discussion that the relevant information I was paraphrasing came from dealt with the possibility of WoW or Blizzard's in-development MMO making its way to the 360 or other consoles, and the challenges a port like that would face. I remember it because of the "spirited" debates the console fanboys had about it on the GameSpot forums, specifically because the gentleman interviewed made the claim that MS would want a portion of the subscriptions if an MMO were to be ported to the 360.

I did a very brief Google search and didn't find the relevant article, so as always take that with a grain of salt. Doubly so since even with his relevant quotes, I don't believe you could accurately discern whether he was speaking from previous negotiations, or simply postulating what Microsoft's stance might be.


Well, given that SE was planning to put FFXIV on the 360 and MS wanted to make money off of XBL, it's safe to say that if Blizzard were to bring WoW to 360, MS would likely require XBL gold for that, too.

The thing that gets me is the whole "If your game is on our system, we have jurisdiction over your servers and what you can do with them".

Especially when you consider that SE did not segregate FFXI by region or platform, the conspiracy theorist in me shudders to think about "What could go wrong" If an MS/SE agreement to have 360 as one of three platforms (remember that the servers are all multiplatform, therefore 360 players can play on any server, therefore MS would try to claim jurisdiction/control over all servers), would that mean that MS has the right to tell SE "No, you can't do that" or "We want you to do this" and hold their balls to the fire over breach of contract if they refuse?

Chances are that whole paragraph is taking things a bit out of proportion but still... Virtually no good can come of having someone who has no stake in development telling the developers what they can and can't do with their own game. e.g.: Halo and the MS/Bungie issues over the years. Since Halo is Microsoft's IP, MS can pretty much boss Bungie around when it comes to the final word on Halo-related business decisions. Granted, FFXIV isn't even remotely MS IP, but I'd hate to think that PC users and PS3 users would have their gameplay or content availability affected as a result of Microsoft.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#38 Jun 26 2010 at 3:24 AM Rating: Decent
Sage
***
1,246 posts
It seems to me, the only people that complain about Gold don't even own an xbox 360. So why don't you stop being a blatent fanboy yeah?

Xbox's policy is that nothing is alowed to run on external servers, Playonline is the sole exception. Everything else on your xbox goes to Microsoft, and then elsewhere if need be.

FFXI on 360 was hardly a huge success so why would microsoft want to take the plunge a second time?
____________________________
Meowth!
#39 Jun 26 2010 at 3:27 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
602 posts
I guess Microsoft could have an undermining objective as to why they won't allow it on their Xbox 360. How many here have willingly given up a lot of new games and such to just stick with Final Fantasy XI? Instead of buying games you perhaps just go out and rent them? I know since playing Final Fantasy XI myself the last 6 years that I have mostly stopped buying games and just rented them. So in no way am I contributing to Microsoft, Sony, all these other game publishers/developers. Is it wrong? Perhaps. Is Microsoft and other companies losing a lot of cash because I play a MMO? Most definitely.

From a Consoles makers point of view, MMOs cost them money right from the beginning. When they announced FFXI for Xbox 360 I was quite shocked back in the day because I had already saved thousands of dollars up because I stopped buying 360/PS3/PC games due to the fact of playing FFXI. ****, I got a lot of money saved up now. And that is mostly thanks to Final Fantasy XI.

In the end that could be the determining factor for Microsoft's stance. Game publishers also need to check their prices. They don't even bother to balance it with the economy. 60.00 for a new game which probably has only 20 hours game play? Get the @#%^ out of here with that. Next gen will be 70.00 to 80.00 a game? Haha. Who the **** can afford that.

I thank Square Enix and will name my first child after them. They helped me save money for college that I otherwise would have spent on video games, anime, dvds that other wise could have been borrowed/rented. Square Enix actually is putting me through college. Imagine that one.

I love Steam's Business Model although they don't allow you to RENT games as far as I know. I think Digital Distribution is the future. And game developers need to be open to the option of allowing their games to be rented and enjoyed by many people. Sure they could make $60.00 a pop from a game but if you just allowed it to be rented, I think you would be reaching more consumers that way. Maybe 10.00 a week or something. Make a great game and that would be maybe 10 people that rented the game for two weeks making them 400.00 over the one person who paid the full 60.00$ and the 9 people who didn't want to spend $60.00 on a game. That's why the rental market is so huge right now.

I think I need to switch my degree to Business >.<

Edited, Jun 26th 2010 5:34am by Excenmille
#40 Jun 26 2010 at 8:20 AM Rating: Default
36 posts
Playstation 3 spec sheet
http://playstation.about.com/od/ps3/a/PS3SpecsDetails_3.htm

XboX spec sheet
http://support.xbox.com/support/en/us/xbox360/hardware/specifications/consolespecifications.aspx

Also Final Fantasy XII Playstation version is 1080i and if you want me to prove it i can here it is.
http://playstation.about.com/b/2010/03/18/comparing-fantasies-final-fantasy-on-the-xbox-360-vs-final-fantasy-on-the-playstation-3.htm

if thats not enough then here watch this

XboX version of the game
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O31ICnblWWs

Playstation 3 version
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mc8W8qjd-E8&feature=fvw

Still not happy ok lets compair then Head 2 head
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArO4x1xEicM

Still not happy geeze ok how about this from IGN would that make you happy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfbRuvei33c&feature=related

Also to add the Xbox version was on 3 disks PS3 version 1 disk. That tells you a little bit about processing power also.

NUFF SAID SO QUIT FLAMING AND CRYING. It is what it is And i know the Truth hurts thats why some dont want to execpt it. Also blame M$ if thay werent so **** greedy thay would also have the best MMO comeing to there platform.



Edited, Jun 26th 2010 10:25am by vermillionreign

Edited, Jun 26th 2010 10:35am by vermillionreign
#41 Jun 26 2010 at 10:47 AM Rating: Decent
23 posts
Quote:

NUFF SAID SO QUIT FLAMING AND CRYING. It is what it is And i know the Truth hurts thats why some dont want to execpt it. Also blame M$ if thay werent so **** greedy thay would also have the best MMO comeing to there platform.


Great! You solved this thread. Oh wait, this thread has nothing to do with PS3 vs Xbox 360.
#42 Jun 26 2010 at 1:03 PM Rating: Decent
36 posts
Quote:
Great! You solved this thread. Oh wait, this thread has nothing to do with PS3 vs Xbox 360.


Well if you took the time to read all the posts you would have read that people are TRYING to show a difference between Xbox and PS3 and PC with FFXIV. Trying to find silly reasons other then the truth.Wether it is made up reasons like well umm the xbox dosent want a MMO. Or FFXIV looks better then the PS3 version why isent it on xbox. Even when the truth that SE isent intrested in Xbox for FFXIV hits them in there face like a left hand from your Ma'MA.

The Truth Microsoft is only intrested in Profit. Thay could "Dumb" down XIV for Microsoft . Yes DUMB DOWN! (this is where i said the truth hurts.look and the links on my post) But there to intrested in takeing away a piece of SEs cake.Unlike the PS3 and a PC. Example for the people who are to stupid to understand this. Lets say its Your birthday. And its cake time!! and a kid your parents invited runs over and takes a huge handfull of your cake. Befor you even blew out your candles or got the 1st piece.

Yeah its like that with Microsoft thay want a piece of everyones cake. So again Xbox players blame Microsoft.
#43 Jun 26 2010 at 1:58 PM Rating: Good
23 posts
Quote:
The Truth Microsoft is only intrested in Profit


Unlike Sony, who are only interested in pretty pink rainbows and fairy tales.
#44 Jun 26 2010 at 4:17 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
vermillionreign wrote:
Quote:
Great! You solved this thread. Oh wait, this thread has nothing to do with PS3 vs Xbox 360.


Well if you took the time to read all the posts you would have read that people are TRYING to show a difference between Xbox and PS3 and PC with FFXIV. Trying to find silly reasons other then the truth.Wether it is made up reasons like well umm the xbox dosent want a MMO. Or FFXIV looks better then the PS3 version why isent it on xbox. Even when the truth that SE isent intrested in Xbox for FFXIV hits them in there face like a left hand from your Ma'MA.

The Truth Microsoft is only intrested in Profit. Thay could "Dumb" down XIV for Microsoft . Yes DUMB DOWN! (this is where i said the truth hurts.look and the links on my post) But there to intrested in takeing away a piece of SEs cake.Unlike the PS3 and a PC. Example for the people who are to stupid to understand this. Lets say its Your birthday. And its cake time!! and a kid your parents invited runs over and takes a huge handfull of your cake. Befor you even blew out your candles or got the 1st piece.

Yeah its like that with Microsoft thay want a piece of everyones cake. So again Xbox players blame Microsoft.


I have absolutely no clue what you're trying to say, especially that second paragraph.

I will say this though:

vermillionreign wrote:
Also Final Fantasy XII Playstation version is 1080i and if you want me to prove it i can here it is.
http://playstation.about.com/b/2010/03/18/comparing-fantasies-final-fantasy-on-the-xbox-360-vs-final-fantasy-on-the-playstation-3.htm


That's nice, but:

http://www.qj.net/qjnet/news/ffxiv-to-run-at-1080p-for-pc-not-for-ps3.html

Quote:
Hiromichi Tanaka, producer of Final Fantasy XIV, has confirmed that the game will indeed be caught running at 1080p. That is, however, for the PC only.

So what of the PS3 version of the game? He says that it is locked to run at 720p on Sony's power console. "The PS3 version will be running in 720p in order to ensure performance remains high quality," he explained, "but the PC version can go up to 1080p if your machine is powerful enough as you pointed out. We also support multiple displays, so players can use two or three displays to show that game."


So yeah, FF14 for PS3 will be 720p.

vermillionreign wrote:
Also to add the Xbox version was on 3 disks PS3 version 1 disk. That tells you a little bit about processing power also.


360 supports only DVDs. PS3 supports Blu-ray. The difference between 1 disk vs three disks is that the PS3 can support larger optical media. It has nothing to do with processing power.

I'm not taking sides in this whole "360 vs PS3" thing because I honestly don't care, but try not to spout off miworded or flat out wrong "facts".

Edited, Jun 26th 2010 6:18pm by Mikhalia
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#45 Jun 26 2010 at 4:18 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
12,622 posts
But seriously, people are buying new gaming laptops and upgrading their PCs left and right to play this game. It doesn't seem like a huge deal to ask 360 owners to grab a $300 PS3 to play the game. Just sayin'

I mean, what's the worst that could happen? "Oh noes, I have a BluRay player that can play FFXIV, teh horror!"

Edited, Jun 26th 2010 6:19pm by Lefein
____________________________
Blah
#46 Jun 26 2010 at 4:19 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
11,539 posts
Lefein wrote:
But seriously, people are buying new gaming laptops and upgrading their PCs left and right to play this game. It doesn't seem like a huge deal to ask 360 owners to grab a $300 PS3 to play the game. Just sayin'


If nothing else, the irony is that Microsoft is helping Sony make money.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#47 Jun 26 2010 at 11:14 PM Rating: Decent
Thief's Knife
*****
15,053 posts
Mikhalia wrote:

Chances are that whole paragraph is taking things a bit out of proportion but still... Virtually no good can come of having someone who has no stake in development telling the developers what they can and can't do with their own game. e.g.: Halo and the MS/Bungie issues over the years. Since Halo is Microsoft's IP, MS can pretty much boss Bungie around when it comes to the final word on Halo-related business decisions. Granted, FFXIV isn't even remotely MS IP, but I'd hate to think that PC users and PS3 users would have their gameplay or content availability affected as a result of Microsoft.


Keep in mind that Level 5 canceled True Fantasy Online on the original Xbox and swore to never work with Microsoft again over similar issues.

Edited, Jun 27th 2010 2:14am by Lobivopis
____________________________
Final Fantasy XI 12-14-11 Update wrote:
Adjust the resolution of menus.
The main screen resolution for "FINAL FANTASY XI" is dependent on the "Overlay Graphics Resolution" setting.
If the Overlay Graphics Resolution is set higher than the Menu Resolution, menus will be automatically resized.


I thought of it first:

http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/forum.html?forum=10&mid=130073657654872218#20
#48 Jun 27 2010 at 12:01 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
It seems appropriate to interject on how Atari was arguably the biggest game in town in the 80s when a certain relatively unknown Japanese developer approached them about US distribution of their Famicom game console. Atari agreed to oversee distribution of this "Nintendo" system in America, until they saw a Donkey Kong port on Colecovision. Atari flipped out, and the deal fell apart.

25 years later, let's compare Nintendo's console sales to Atari's current console sales. Oh wait.

****, that didn't even take 25 years; it took less than 5.

Greed is bad, m'kay.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 19 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (19)