Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

[Preview] Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn: Ready to Lift the Veil

2

Comments

  • NyrrhoNyrrho Sacramento, CAPosts: 53Member

    Dear Square Enix;

     

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,463Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Vesavius
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by Vesavius
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by Vesavius

    "This seems a bit odd as most of the market is leaning towards the F2P micro-transaction model and it didn’t really do them much good last time around.."

     

    oh ffs.. give it a rest eh? First off, no it dosent seem 'strange'. Over half the market is still pure sub based in terms of players, and it is waaay more then that in terms of payers. Plus look at what all the converted 'F2P' MMOs offer... oh yeah, a sub... It's enduring appeal is clear.

     

    FFXIV will do just fine on a sub. It's far better to cater to the needs of a niche of paying customers than trying to appeal to the entitled squalling masses of 'F2P' and all the baggage they bring.

     

    The revenue model *was not the issue* the first time round. It neither hurt them or hindered them. It had nothing to do with why the game failed for so many. Being F2P would *not* have made the game any better. It was irrelevant, so it not having it this is not 'strange'.

     

    Does every article on every sub game here have to continously include the mention of goddam F2P? It's not like you feel the need to wistfully wonder why every crappy original F2P title dosen't have a sub or consider that fact 'strange', despite the facts above.

     

    Lets stop this lazy bubble thinking with regards to subs and cash shop gaming from the writters for this site and maybe we can stop writing these kind of repetitive posts (and also questioning the potential agenda at work around here).

     

    Sure it should. The MMO market is changing. 15 bucks a month was worth it back in the day.../snip

    I am not interested in a discussion about sub vs F2P here, I am simply saying that the sub is still still very strong and every game dosen't have to have 'F2P' to be successful. The continual pushing of the sub as something'strange' is the point, when it clearly has an enduring place in the market here.

    Also if its not F2P or B2P I may not even try it, why? From what they have given in the past, I dont see if this game is worth my money. Give me a ricks free way to try it and they would win more customers and that makes for a more stable community.

    I am not actually against free trials of games, but you don't need to have 'F2P' to do that. I will also say that if you don't know enough about a game by launch these days as to it's quality of a game and it's suitability to you then maybe you should read a bit on the interweb before purchase. It's not like we are drowned in info, official and not so official, before launch these days or anything...

    Trials dont do it for me. Here look at the first 20 levels and now buy my game lol. We MMOers know we dont know the game till we have lived in the elder game for at least a few months. Never seen a trial give a good picture of a MMO.

     

    oh boy... we got a freeloader here. You don't want to throw the company any money 'for months'? Months?

    Look, maybe this game just isn't for you, and it's time to start looking at one that is?  I can't see SE missing your (non existant) revenue really tbh. They obviously just prefer paying customers at this point and I can't say I blame 'em.

     

    No freeloader, been MMOing as long as anyone can. I have put more money into this market then most. GW2 being B2P got their box price and I messed in their cash shop as much as I felt they should for the product they gave me. When they give me content I feel is worth playing I will pay for that as well. IMO thats the way to keep customers. Why have I not gona back to WoW and other such games that I subbed to for years and years? Because IMO and for many, 15 bucks a month is not a current market value. If my wife and I could sub for 16 bucks a month I would, family plans, longer you sub the less you pay, B2P, F2P with cash shop are not freeloading. Its being fair for the market we live in now. If your not questioning it then you have been trained to and lied to.


    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • ValentinaValentina Los Angeles, CAPosts: 1,675Member Uncommon
    Should be buy to play with a cash shop.
  • shingoukiehshingoukieh Fayetteville, NCPosts: 125Member
    GW2, tera,swtor,tsw, other p2p or b2p games...been burned alot in the mmo world....this is my last attempt at finding a decent mmo besides eve. If this game is bad...im done with themepark games. only way i will play another themepark is if i can get into beta or if its free to play..i will not blindly buy another one if this one fails me
  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,463Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by shingoukieh
    GW2, tera,swtor,tsw, other p2p or b2p games...been burned alot in the mmo world....this is my last attempt at finding a decent mmo besides eve. If this game is bad...im done with themepark games. only way i will play another themepark is if i can get into beta or if its free to play..i will not blindly buy another one if this one fails me

    I think you maybe putting your eggs in the wrong basket if thats how you feel. May want to try Elder Scrolls Online or WIldstar before you give up on themeparks.


    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • CheboyganCheboygan charlotte, MIPosts: 36Member

    from three of the four pictures i could gather that they have exactly 2 kinds of trees  

    one of the big issues on the previous release was the constant reuse of the same "assets" - the claim that this has been vastly improved seems false to me - might be a bit much to draw from these few pictues but this casts a giant shadow to me - - - immersion is very hard to maintain (and i do get immersed easily be it book, movie or game) when you trot by the same rock, tree, bush, hill over and over and over

  • ICEBLUEICEBLUE Gilbert, AZPosts: 53Member

    What strikes me odd is the fact that no real consideration is being given to those of us who invested in the box the last time. I have a the colectors box of all things, hehe.

    When registering for Beta they dont seem to consider this, you would think they would ask former purchasers into beta before opening it up to new players interested in jus ttaking a look at it..

    I guess we wait and see how it goes.

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,463Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ICEBLUE

    What strikes me odd is the fact that no real consideration is being given to those of us who invested in the box the last time. I have a the colectors box of all things, hehe.

    When registering for Beta they dont seem to consider this, you would think they would ask former purchasers into beta before opening it up to new players interested in jus ttaking a look at it..

    I guess we wait and see how it goes.

     

    That would have been a smart move IMO as well. =-


    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • VorthanionVorthanion Laguna Vista, TXPosts: 2,119Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by Vesavius
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by Vesavius

    "This seems a bit odd as most of the market is leaning towards the F2P micro-transaction model and it didn’t really do them much good last time around.."

     

    oh ffs.. give it a rest eh? First off, no it dosent seem 'strange'. Over half the market is still pure sub based in terms of players, and it is waaay more then that in terms of payers. Plus look at what all the converted 'F2P' MMOs offer... oh yeah, a sub... It's enduring appeal is clear.

     

    FFXIV will do just fine on a sub. It's far better to cater to the needs of a niche of paying customers than trying to appeal to the entitled squalling masses of 'F2P' and all the baggage they bring.

     

    The revenue model *was not the issue* the first time round. It neither hurt them or hindered them. It had nothing to do with why the game failed for so many. Being F2P would *not* have made the game any better. It was irrelevant, so it not having it this is not 'strange'.

     

    Does every article on every sub game here have to continously include the mention of goddam F2P? It's not like you feel the need to wistfully wonder why every crappy original F2P title dosen't have a sub or consider that fact 'strange', despite the facts above.

     

    Lets stop this lazy bubble thinking with regards to subs and cash shop gaming from the writters for this site and maybe we can stop writing these kind of repetitive posts (and also questioning the potential agenda at work around here).

     

    Sure it should. The MMO market is changing. 15 bucks a month was worth it back in the day.../snip

    I am not interested in a discussion about sub vs F2P here, I am simply saying that the sub is still still very strong and every game dosen't have to have 'F2P' to be successful. The continual pushing of the sub as something'strange' is the point, when it clearly has an enduring place in the market here.

    Also if its not F2P or B2P I may not even try it, why? From what they have given in the past, I dont see if this game is worth my money. Give me a ricks free way to try it and they would win more customers and that makes for a more stable community.

    I am not actually against free trials of games, but you don't need to have 'F2P' to do that. I will also say that if you don't know enough about a game by launch these days as to it's quality of a game and it's suitability to you then maybe you should read a bit on the interweb before purchase. It's not like we are drowned in info, official and not so official, before launch these days or anything...

     

     

    DDO, Neverwinter and GW2 has proved that F2P dose not need to be a low quality game. Trials dont do it for me. Here look at the first 20 levels and now buy my game lol. We MMOers know we dont know the game till we have lived in the elder game for at least a few months. Never seen a trial give a good picture of a MMO.

    I didn't like DDO or GW2 and I certainly don't like the looks of NW either.  Cryptic is on my do not play list after trying CoH, CO and STO.  The only game I have tried so far that was built as F2P from the ground up and still had some half way decent quality was Planetside 2 and I lasted for all of a month and a half, during and after beta.  Subscription based games continue to be the quality powerhouses they have always been.  All of the games that I have played that started subscription and evolved to F2P have gone down in quality and quantity of content and patches.

    image
  • guin10guin10 CPosts: 21Member

    Thx Square-Enix for care about us (americans and europeans).

     

    - beta in the same day for all regions.

    - worldwide release.

    - patches/updates in the same day for all regions.

     

    I'm tired of all other publishers (ncsoft, en masse, etc...). They need months to bring content to US and Europe; they release their games a lot a of months after the asian release. The team behind the game doesn't listen to feefback from americans and europeans.

     

    A lot of people talk about ArcheAge. Really?

     

     

     

     
     
  • McGamerMcGamer Fairfield Bay, ARPosts: 1,012Member
    Why do so many Eastern MMOs use that annoying granular texture for terraign? I have never understood that and it usually is the dead giveaway when looking at a screenshot that its from an Eastern game.
  • KanethKaneth Posts: 1,930Member Uncommon

    I think going sub for a re-release of a previously failed mmo is a huge mistake on SE's part. B2P would have been a more sensible approach, considering how utterly craptastic the first version of this game was. SE has lost a ton of credibility over the past number years, with sub-par releases and questionable decisions. They are carrying on with questionable decision making by sticking to the sub based business model.

  • VesaviusVesavius BristolPosts: 7,645Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by Vesavius
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by Vesavius
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by Vesavius

    "This seems a bit odd as most of the market is leaning towards the F2P micro-transaction model and it didn’t really do them much good last time around.."

     

    oh ffs.. give it a rest eh? First off, no it dosent seem 'strange'. Over half the market is still pure sub based in terms of players, and it is waaay more then that in terms of payers. Plus look at what all the converted 'F2P' MMOs offer... oh yeah, a sub... It's enduring appeal is clear.

     

    FFXIV will do just fine on a sub. It's far better to cater to the needs of a niche of paying customers than trying to appeal to the entitled squalling masses of 'F2P' and all the baggage they bring.

     

    The revenue model *was not the issue* the first time round. It neither hurt them or hindered them. It had nothing to do with why the game failed for so many. Being F2P would *not* have made the game any better. It was irrelevant, so it not having it this is not 'strange'.

     

    Does every article on every sub game here have to continously include the mention of goddam F2P? It's not like you feel the need to wistfully wonder why every crappy original F2P title dosen't have a sub or consider that fact 'strange', despite the facts above.

     

    Lets stop this lazy bubble thinking with regards to subs and cash shop gaming from the writters for this site and maybe we can stop writing these kind of repetitive posts (and also questioning the potential agenda at work around here).

     

    Sure it should. The MMO market is changing. 15 bucks a month was worth it back in the day.../snip

    I am not interested in a discussion about sub vs F2P here, I am simply saying that the sub is still still very strong and every game dosen't have to have 'F2P' to be successful. The continual pushing of the sub as something'strange' is the point, when it clearly has an enduring place in the market here.

    Also if its not F2P or B2P I may not even try it, why? From what they have given in the past, I dont see if this game is worth my money. Give me a ricks free way to try it and they would win more customers and that makes for a more stable community.

    I am not actually against free trials of games, but you don't need to have 'F2P' to do that. I will also say that if you don't know enough about a game by launch these days as to it's quality of a game and it's suitability to you then maybe you should read a bit on the interweb before purchase. It's not like we are drowned in info, official and not so official, before launch these days or anything...

    Trials dont do it for me. Here look at the first 20 levels and now buy my game lol. We MMOers know we dont know the game till we have lived in the elder game for at least a few months. Never seen a trial give a good picture of a MMO.

     

    oh boy... we got a freeloader here. You don't want to throw the company any money 'for months'? Months?

    Look, maybe this game just isn't for you, and it's time to start looking at one that is?  I can't see SE missing your (non existant) revenue really tbh. They obviously just prefer paying customers at this point and I can't say I blame 'em.

     

    No freeloader, been MMOing as long as anyone can. Because IMO and for many, 15 bucks a month is not a current market value

     

    well, millions disagree, because  millions obviously think it is.

    Look, you like playing games for 'months' for free (your words), I get that, but what I am saying is three things...

    1. The sub model is desired in the modern market, it is valid, and it offers another section of players what they want. The evidence is overwhelming that it is an enduring robust revenue model that the Western market needs to survive.

    2. This website needs to start portraying the sub model as a valid and modern choice, because that's exactly what it is, and stop trying to promote the feckless thinking that cash shops are somehow more 'futuristic'. One has to wonder what the drive is in this in fact... What is there to gain by relentessly reinforcing a certain perception in a commercial environment?

    3. It's not all about you bro.

     

    That all aside, right now SE has to ask themselves one set of questions.... who do I want playing my game? Noisy demanding freeloaders that want to play for *months* for free, who will probably leave once paying becomes required, or do I want a smaller *paying* player base that will most liely be far less transient and more invested in what we are doing?

    I am proud of them for choosing the latter.

    There are plenty of so called 'F2P' games out there for you. Go play 'em.

  • MuruganMurugan D, COPosts: 1,494Member
    Originally posted by ICEBLUE

    What strikes me odd is the fact that no real consideration is being given to those of us who invested in the box the last time. I have a the colectors box of all things, hehe.

    When registering for Beta they dont seem to consider this, you would think they would ask former purchasers into beta before opening it up to new players interested in jus ttaking a look at it..

    I guess we wait and see how it goes.

    I have no idea how you missed this, unless this (pretty lackluster) article is the only thing you ahve read on FFXIV in the past year but....

     

    Anyone who invested in the box got:

     

    -Over a year of free playtime in 1.0 to see the new teams changes.

    -In Closed Beta as of phase 3 (first 2 are Gridania only)

    -Free copy of ARR

    -30 Days free after the official launch (on top of however long beta 3 and 4 last)

     

    So yes they did give real consideration to those of us who invested in the box last time.

     

    Also peopel who subscribed to FFXIV v1 for 90 days or more got into version one of the beta, their names in the credits (if they wanted), and a lifetime discount on the subscription.

  • coolgycoolgy Toronto, ONPosts: 61Member

    I am happy P2P games exist, have never felt 'ripped off' for paying for a month of game time. Will continue to sub to games i wish to play if i feel they are worth the sub.

    Come at me F2P market.

  • GamingGeekGamingGeek Woodstock, NYPosts: 10Member
    Originally posted by dimasok
    Japanese just cant wean themselves off the god damn subscription model. I will only try i when it goes f2p when it will inevitably burn again because of the same mistake.

    First, FFXIV 1.0's failures had nothing to do with having a subscription model. The reasons it did so poorly, crashed and burned and ultimately needed to be re-done has been well-documented, on a number of sites, many times.

     

    Second, SE re-opened subscriptions for FFXIV, as they said they would, after they took the time to assess the situation, decide what they wanted to do going forward, and produced a road-map. Many people - and I mean many - insisted reinstating subscriptions for FFXIV would be the final nail in the coffin. It would fail so hard and anyone left playing it would leave so fast, SE would have no choice but to shut it down and 2.0 would never get made. They stated that, at best, the re-launch would be just a "patched up" version of 1.0, and that the PS3 release would never see the light of day.

     

    It was stated, with emphasis, that the only thing that would save XIV was going F2P/Cash Shop. All these predictions, and more, played out on numerous website forums, including here and even the official forums.

     

     

    Funny thing happened, though. SE reinstated subs and guess what happened?

     

    Not only did the game not crash and burn.

     

    Not only did people actually stick around, with only a relative handful actually leaving.

     

    The population actually grew. More people came back to the game. The world was more alive, more active and populated after they reinstated the subs than it ever was during the year they had subscriptions frozen. All the cities - not just Ul'dah - were constantly populated with people, shouting for groups, looking for LS's, looking to sell stuff, looking to buy stuff,  chatting, talking, etc. The wilderness areas were all quite active with people running about doing missions/levequests, on their way to hunt down NMs, or off to some dungeon.

     

    So, what does this mean?

     

    Well, at the very least, it means that all the nay-sayers and arm-chair fortune-tellers were completely wrong about the fate of FFXIV with an active subscription model.

     

    The game has seen a complete overhaul, in almost every category. It's not "just patching up 1.0".  The PS3 version is being shown, and will be released.

     

    More importantly, it demonstrated, quite soundly, that a subscription model absolutely can and does still work, the persistence of people who claim "subs are out-dated in 2012/2013" or "archaic" notwithstanding.

     

    In short, all the nay-sayers and arm-chair "industry experts" were wrong. Reinstating subscriptions was not a final coffin nail for FFXIV. It was actually a boon for it.

     

    Finally, it's further worth noting that - at least in the Western market - having a MMO that is purely cash-shop driven is not a proven viable approach. In almost every case, a MMO that's gone F2P/Cash Shop has still offered a subscription-based membership. Why? Because it's still in demand, is still a viable approach, and still has more than enough people who prefer it over the more nickel-and-dime approach of microtransactions.

     

    So, your statement about Japanese not weaning themselves off the subscription model is way off-base. There's nothing to be "weaned off of". I understand some people want to live in a world where every game to come out is 100% F2P so they can just play when they want without ever investing a single dime to do so. Fortunately, we don't live in that world.

     

    Cash Shops/Microtransactions are finding their place along side Subscriptions, not as a replacement for them.

     


    Sub-based MMOs don't fail because they're sub-based. They fail because they're not good enough for people to want to pay for them. In much the same way, a poorly designed F2P/Cash Shop MMO is going to struggle because it can't keep enough people interested to generate adequate on-going cash shop sales.

     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     

    “Developers do not give players enough credit. And maybe even players don't give players enough credit.” - Ragnar Tørnquist

  • RalstlinRalstlin Las PalmasPosts: 234Member

    A company that put efforts (and lots of money) to fix a game that crashed... have my respects to at least try it before blame them again.

     

    Think about how many games u thought: "this need to be fixed" and how many of them did it? NOONE.

    So.. give them 30 minuts fo your time to try a game (if u bought old version u can try new one) and if u dont, just wait for reviews, comments, etc.

  • jbombardjbombard SapporoPosts: 531Member Uncommon
    If they are smart enough to release a free trial of some sort, then people who felt betrayed by the original pile of crap might give it a whirl and decide to resubscribe.  Or perhaps give all previous subscribers a voucher for 2 free months.  Still a trial is good for people who want to try before they buy, and with so many free games it is hard to justify paying for something without knowing what you are getting.
  • GamingGeekGamingGeek Woodstock, NYPosts: 10Member
    Originally posted by jbombard
    If they are smart enough to release a free trial of some sort, then people who felt betrayed by the original pile of crap might give it a whirl and decide to resubscribe.  Or perhaps give all previous subscribers a voucher for 2 free months.  Still a trial is good for people who want to try before they buy, and with so many free games it is hard to justify paying for something without knowing what you are getting.
     

    They're going one better. Two better, if you think about it.

     

    Everyone who bought FFXIV 1.0 will get ARR for free. No additional purchase necessary.

     

    Further, everyone who bought 1.0 will also get 30 days of free play time. No subscription payment required.

     

    Finally, they will be launching a free trial for it as well, for those who didn't buy it before and want to check it out.

    “Developers do not give players enough credit. And maybe even players don't give players enough credit.” - Ragnar Tørnquist

  • cruelzcruelz Nonsuch, COPosts: 9Member

    Regarding F2P vs Subscription, an article on pc.ign.com had this to say:


    ... A Realm Reborn’s director and producer Naoki Yoshida explained why.

    “For a free to play model, it’s very important to be able to give a lot of items to players in a very speedy manner. Unless you do that, you can’t get the money back as a business model. With [Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn’s] kind of quality, we won’t be able to bring so many items. If you want to support free to play as the game business model, the game design itself should be totally different.”

    Yoshida went into even more detail about why he thinks a subscription model will work for Final Fantasy XIV even though it’s failed for so many others. “There are so many great MMOs in the Western market. Most of them, they have investors behind. So those investors want their money back as soon as the game is released. If they don’t reach a certain number of subscribers and they can’t give the money back to the investors, then they switch to a free-to-play mode to get the huge money straightaway and divide the profit among the investors. Only Blizzard and Square Enix are the companies making MMOs with their own money. We don’t have to worry about giving money back to investors. As long as we never give up we can continue supporting the game.”


  • AlberelAlberel LondonPosts: 1,121Member
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    DDO, Neverwinter and GW2 has proved that F2P dose not need to be a low quality game. Trials dont do it for me. Here look at the first 20 levels and now buy my game lol. We MMOers know we dont know the game till we have lived in the elder game for at least a few months. Never seen a trial give a good picture of a MMO.

    Sorry to interject on this conversation but DDO went F2P post-launch so can't be used for that argument as it was developed with a diofferent business model in mind. Neverwinter isn't out yet but currently looks to be a shallow action MMO, which coincidentally is exactly what GW2 is. To date I haven't seen a single quality MMO launched as F2P or B2P; the shining example that everyone always gives, Guild Wars 2, is one of the shallowest MMOs I've ever played.

    To make another point, F2P and B2P games see very infrequent or very sparse updates. Everyone always raves about the frequency of updates released for GW2 since launch but they don't consider that the amount of content in each is pathetically small. The only actual content additions to GW2 since launch were the Fractals and the new island (which is empty and serves no purpose at all, no one goes there). Forgetting content they STILL haven't fixed most beta bugs, with most professions still limited by broken traits and poor balancing.

    A lot of players lately seem to have started using GW2 as an example for why every MMO should follow the same business model but to me and a lot of people it is a prime example of why devs should stick with the sub model. A subscription is the only reliable way to guarantee regular high-quality content updates. With B2P they have your money already and have no reason to keep you playing.

  • alyosha17alyosha17 ergftmjhkPosts: 156Member

    "and there’s a ton of new animations to go along with all your characters abilities"

     

    Um, actually they deleted many animations...

     

    "Enemies have gotten a their share of touch-ups as well and large creatures like the Treant look and run much smoother."

     

    WTF... how were they "touched up" and how do they "run smoother"?  The only difference is lower poly count and removal of shaders and textures.  Stop making stuff up... honestly.

  • KajidourdenKajidourden Panama City, FLPosts: 619Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by ICEBLUE

    What strikes me odd is the fact that no real consideration is being given to those of us who invested in the box the last time. I have a the colectors box of all things, hehe.

    When registering for Beta they dont seem to consider this, you would think they would ask former purchasers into beta before opening it up to new players interested in jus ttaking a look at it..

    I guess we wait and see how it goes.

     

    That would have been a smart move IMO as well. =-

    Agreed.  Though I think what they did was even smarter.  Rather than giving people who bought the original access to the beta (mind you you're still good to go for 2.0), they rewarded those who were loyal and stuck around by giving them beta access in the initial round.  To me, this is genius.  You give your fan base a reward for being your fan base while not alienating the people who initially purchased the game or those who are just trying out the beta (You can still get in, its just not certain).

    Not to mention, we're still not sure about what might happen for the other beta phases.  Perhaps they will give those who bought the game access priority, just not in the first phase.  This way you get your fan base in right away, as well as some newcomers.

    For example: Phase 1: All legacy members, and random selectees

    Phase 2: Purchasers but non legacy, and random selectees

    Being in purchaser category doesnt necessarily mean you wont get in until phase 2, as you still have the random selectees, but it still ensures that the most loyal of the fans wil be apart of it from day 1, as it should be.

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 5,769Member Uncommon
    I don't know of any other title that has seen so much work put into it after launch, with the exception of WoW and Lotro, but then the original launch was a glorified beta. I think FF XIV may well end up a sound game, but for me its a game I may play next year, after it has even more added.
  • Br3akingDawnBr3akingDawn a City, CAPosts: 1,357Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by BadSpock

    I've got a stack of Gamestop gift cards just waiting to be spent on this title.

    That way, if it still sucks, I won't feel like I wasted as much real money.

    I am a LOT more curious though what their plans are for PS4 integration/compatibility.

    With PS4 running on x86 AMD hardware, shouldn't be all too hard for them to put the PC version with the console interface on the PS4 right?

     

    Not hard at all. Ps4 is sppose to be very easier to make games for than PS3. But you will have to rebuy another FFXIVARR since PS4 is not compatible with any other PSgames.

    image

2
Sign In or Register to comment.