Do the European Box Arts Actually Indicate Console Exclusivity?

[Scsigs 119]

Hey, Everyone.

So, I’ve been in a pretty heated debate with a guy who is adamant about KH remaining a “Playstation Exclusive” (which is a total crock of shit if you actually know the series). He’s been arguing all the typical arguments, like the collections not being on Xbox One, thus robbing people on Xbox the experience of playing through the games & finding out what’s going on in the stories of the games & the overall story of the series (which I can say is not a great argument for reasons I can elaborate on), KH not selling well on the Xbox One (which there’s no prior history of the series on Xbox, so let’s wait for the games to come out & wait a few months or so to see the sales numbers, attacking Xbox players as being nothing but a bunch of American teenage boys who only play games like COD & GTA (which, I’m pretty sure that’s only a minority & I’m sure Playstation also has players like those who only like those kind of games), etc. I’m gonna stop there before I get carried away with the arguments that don’t make sense.

 

Now, this guy has been trying to argue that the European box arts for the series are indicative of exclusivity on the console family, despite Nomura & Square’s seeming stance on the issue being, “I don’t know. We COULD do ports if we feel it’s warranted, but we don’t know…”

First, he linked me the European box art for KH1 from 2002. Seemingly saying that this decision was something Square &/or Sony intended from the start.

 

https://prnt.sc/jp5zoy

 

However, if you look at the NA box art, nowhere does this moniker appear.

 

http://www.theisozone.com/images/cover/ps2_910.jpg

 

This speaks to me that Sony & Square’s European branches have different standards with which to slap the “Only on Playstation” moniker on their games, as can be seen here with the NA release of Dissidia Final Fantasy NT.

 

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/517CbejjVPL.jpg

 

I then challenged this dude’s claim with 1.5+2.5, plus 2.8 &, what a shock, he linked the EU box art for 1.5+2.5.

 

https://prnt.sc/jpb7gw

 

I had, in my previous response to him, linked the NA box art, which, again, lacks the moniker.

 

https://www.koi-nya.net/img/subidos_posts/2017/01/kingdom-hearts-1-5-2-5-730x911.jpg

 

The guy didn’t link box art to 2.8, but I looked up the EU box art & it DOES have the moniker…

 

https://c.76.my/Malaysia/ps4-kingdom-hearts-hd-2-8-final-chapter-prologue-r2-saveallstore-1702-18-F280345_1.jpg

 

…while the NA release doesn’t…

 

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/6115IsFIYmL.jpg

 

I also have the reveal box art, which I think is the Japanese box art because of the Kanji/Katakana on it absent from the NA & EU versions. I don’t have the Japanese releases myself, so this is just my assumption, but I don’t think that the Japanese versions of the games have this moniker either.

 

https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.mJHhJspZcFGABlTf45UHRQHaJS&pid=Api

 

I mean, I DO see 1.5 & 2.5 have that “Only on Playstation” moniker…

 

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81v%2BykC1SYL._AC_SL1500_.jpg

 

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/911khmDJL3L._AC_SL1500_.jpg

 

…so, obviously, that was probably the intent at some point. The thing about this is that KH3 had been announced as multiplat before 1.5 even came out, right? So, I can only think the moniker was on there because by the time 1.5 & 2.5 came out, the PS4 & X1, which is just weird to me that they would have that moniker there, but maybe Sony was sure that they were the only ones getting the collections, since the Xbox 360 & PS3 were slowly being phased out & Microsoft was more focusing on the One than the 360, whereas Sony, while definitely focusing on the PS4, wasn’t done with the PS3. I also imagine that they developed the collections for the PS3 instead of the 4 because they new the architecture better. I mean, that happens in new console generations usually, especially when the past consoles were still being supported for the time being, since it takes time for most developers to get used to newer console architectures.

 

However, it seems things have changed since Nomura said here that, in addition to KH3 being on the X1, they ARE considering a Switch port after the 2 initial ports come out. Plus, it IS possible for them to port the collections to the X1 if they feel it’s warranted.

 

http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/07/16/kingdom-hearts-3-director-switch-version-maybe-possible-after-xbox-one-ps4-versions-are-released

 

And I also just realized that the “Only on Playstation” moniker doesn’t mean a game is explicitly exclusive, it’s just that the game isn’t on other platforms, which is most likely why the moniker existed on the EU box arts of the PS2 versions of the games & the PS3 versions of the collections. 2.8 didn’t have the moniker at launch & neither did 1.5+2.5, otherwise they’d have it if they were meant to just be on that console. Need to get second opinions on this. I had a thread before a few months or so ago on this forum about the “exclusivity deal” being a crock that was just being spread around by Sony fanboys because nobody had another explanation as to the games only being on PS2 & 3, but not GameCube or Xbox.

I mean, if they were exclusive, Square wouldn’t even try to put the games on to other consoles. Square is a company that loves money. I DO think that just focusing on the Japanese market for releasing games (which is what Nomura said is apparently a big factor in deciding to release ports of the collections on the Xbox after 3 comes out) is incredibly shortsighted, especially when it’s the worldwide audience combined with the Japanese one that have yielded the most sales, but it’s Square. I mean, a region-specific limited physical release with a digital release as well like with Bandai Namco & their release of the ports of the Naruto: Ultimate Ninja Storm trilogy on to PS4 & Xbox One last year, but whatever. I still believe that the games aren’t bound by consoles & it’s up to Square to release these games on whatever platforms they can & want to. 

Is the moniker being on these games in certain regions, & only one release each in NA, indicative of their “exclusivity” status, or no? I’m genuinely curious about this if anyone has anything to add here.

Edited June 1, 2018 by Scsigs

[Merilly 438]

I'm not going to partake in the whole Xbox argument because in my opinion there's nothing much to argue about. Microsoft likely approached SE to get the game on their console, they said yes since it likely won't increase their workload a whole lot, but they don't really care, there's a contract or whatever. Of course it makes no sense to deny them access because it's confusing and few people will decide to buy an Xbox One just for that game.

 

However, while I cannot say it holds true 100%, the "Only on Playstation" banner has been around for a long time and mainly exists for the sole purpose of marketing. Exclusive titles are an incentive to buy said console to play the game in question. There are quite a few franchises which are exclusive to one console and it may tip the favor toward one console if someone can only buy one and doesn't know which or deciding to buy a second one.

 

This banner does not indicate that a game will forever remain exclusive as far as I'm aware. But if there are no indications for a release on other consoles in the near future, they can put it there without any issues. For KH, it makes sense since Square has more or less said that there won't be any other title than KH3 coming to Xbox One from the franchise in the near future. No plans could translate to that. They may wait for newcomers and people with no console to demand it on Xbox before doing that since the old fans who will play the game will likely own a Playstation 4 anyway if they have the money. The series has been on that console from the beginning along with Nintendo, so fans expected it from the get go.

 

To be honest, I never found it too appealing but I guess some consumers are too lazy to look up exclusivity and simply see it on the boxart and decide on it then. It may even be directed to those people standing in the store, trying to decide what to buy without having informed themselves prior.

 

We don't know if there are any contracts which forbid previous games from being released on another console, but I think that it's not evidence it will never be coming. Contracts are legally binding, yes, but it's not like there's absolutely no way out of them and that they last forever.

 

I think exclusivity is a terrible choice. I won't buy two consoles for just one game and it feels more like a tug of war between Sony and Microsoft than a real necessity. Nintendo is somewhat understandable since they use different controls, but the other two... Those must be really good deals if developers only stick with one company. But I cannot judge what happens behind closed doors and won't do it because it simply is as it is.

I just know that some console exclusive titles got ported to PC at a later point without being announced beforehand so the same can still happen to KH at one point, especially after 3 is out.

 

I wouldn't argue with your friend so much about some text on a boxart. Especially when it's only on the European one. We have some strange laws sometimes and even stranger marketing, but it's not like this continent sets most of the standards in the gaming industry.

[Scsigs 119]

I'm not going to partake in the whole Xbox argument because in my opinion there's nothing much to argue about. Microsoft likely approached SE to get the game on their console, they said yes since it likely won't increase their workload a whole lot, but they don't really care, there's a contract or whatever. Of course it makes no sense to deny them access because it's confusing and few people will decide to buy an Xbox One just for that game.

 

However, while I cannot say it holds true 100%, the "Only on Playstation" banner has been around for a long time and mainly exists for the sole purpose of marketing. Exclusive titles are an incentive to buy said console to play the game in question. There are quite a few franchises which are exclusive to one console and it may tip the favor toward one console if someone can only buy one and doesn't know which or deciding to buy a second one.

 

This banner does not indicate that a game will forever remain exclusive as far as I'm aware. But if there are no indications for a release on other consoles in the near future, they can put it there without any issues. For KH, it makes sense since Square has more or less said that there won't be any other title than KH3 coming to Xbox One from the franchise in the near future. No plans could translate to that. They may wait for newcomers and people with no console to demand it on Xbox before doing that since the old fans who will play the game will likely own a Playstation 4 anyway if they have the money. The series has been on that console from the beginning along with Nintendo, so fans expected it from the get go.

 

To be honest, I never found it too appealing but I guess some consumers are too lazy to look up exclusivity and simply see it on the boxart and decide on it then. It may even be directed to those people standing in the store, trying to decide what to buy without having informed themselves prior.

 

We don't know if there are any contracts which forbid previous games from being released on another console, but I think that it's not evidence it will never be coming. Contracts are legally binding, yes, but it's not like there's absolutely no way out of them and that they last forever.

 

I think exclusivity is a terrible choice. I won't buy two consoles for just one game and it feels more like a tug of war between Sony and Microsoft than a real necessity. Nintendo is somewhat understandable since they use different controls, but the other two... Those must be really good deals if developers only stick with one company. But I cannot judge what happens behind closed doors and won't do it because it simply is as it is.

I just know that some console exclusive titles got ported to PC at a later point without being announced beforehand so the same can still happen to KH at one point, especially after 3 is out.

 

I wouldn't argue with your friend so much about some text on a boxart. Especially when it's only on the European one. We have some strange laws sometimes and even stranger marketing, but it's not like this continent sets most of the standards in the gaming industry.

 

Trust me, the dude who I argued with is FAR from a friend. He HATES Xbox so much that he, literally, posted a video explaining his reasons for not wanting KH on Xbox One at all, then in the last 30 seconds or so has a segment that incites violence towards Xbox players just because they don't have his preferred console & some of them want KH on Xbox as well. I mean, my god, what a dick. I promptly told him off about that after I found out he did that.

 

And he's the one who brought up the box art being proof in the first place. It was only after I really looked at the screenshot that it was the EU cover, since all that was different between it & the NA cover was the rating & that "Playstation Exclusive" moniker.. Like I said, above, he brought it up as "proof" & I relayed my thoughts on it proving nothing of the sort. I completely forgot about marketing being a big factor in these things, but it doesn't shock me that you'd bring that up, since it makes sense. I mean, why put the words on one release of the games, but not the other. And, yeah, that's my thought exactly on timed exclusivity. Look at Crash Bandicoot's N. Sane Trilogy. It was exclusive for almost a year before finally being announced to be coming to other platforms at the end of this month. And that is a thing with Microsoft paying to have Square publish the game to Xbox One, but it's like you said, we don't know what went on behind closed doors years ago when all of this stuff was being planned out & contracted. I had a discussion with an older friend of mine at work yesterday & he pretty much agreed with me on all of this stuff when I told him about the exclusivity stuff & the argument I was having with the other guy. Exclusivity is, I'm pretty sure, being only set by Square Enix. Sony released the collections on PS3 & PS4, so it's most likely their doing that the moniker appeared on the EU & PS3 releases of the games. Their EU branch probably though that there was no way that Xbox was getting the games, so they put it on as a safe bet. Their NA & Japanese branches most likely just played it safe, since they know 3's coming to the Xbox as well. Even then, the EU branding is a blatant lie, since most of the games in the collections are just 3D remakes/ports of handheld games, most of which were Nintendo-released beforehand. Marketing is, clearly, the biggest reason for this confusion. I mean, if it's gonna sell more consoles, then I guess it's understandable why they'd do that.

 

Really? Square have said that they have no plans to release anything more in the future? Where is that quote? I'd like to read that interview. Not that I'm doubting, but I've seen no direct evidence or quotes to back up what your saying. Probably a lesser note to end a response on, but there's nothing else to respond to right now.

Edited June 1, 2018 by Scsigs

[Merilly 438]

I apologize for calling him your friend then. Your acquaintance apparently is fairly biased toward one console. Not that I'm not favoring the PS4 over the Xbox One because the controller suits my small hands better and it has a lot of exclusives I enjoy, but there's no real reason to deny them access to Kingdom Hearts. If Sony decided that it would be understandable because big franchises, which KH has slowly come to be, are a selling factor against competitors and having the sole distributing rights can make a huge difference.

But why fans are so against it... I have no idea. It's not like we're losing anything with it being on Xbox. In fact, I couldn't care less. It could be good for sales at least in the North American territory, so why deny that over some stupid war? People sometimes.... Having nothing better to do than to complain about issues which aren't even a disadvantage to them.

 

However, exclusivity deals might also be instigated by Sony, Microsoft & Co. themselves. As I said, marketing plays a huge role and exclusive titles are a factor that gamers take into account since most people essentially use it to play games. The console differences could be as large as day and night and people would still buy the objectively weaker console if it offers subjectively better games. Otherwise, there would be no real reason for large companies to do this whole exclusivity deal or even propose it. The controls of the Xbox One controller aren't that different to really be considered in my opinion. Hardware-wise, the Xbox One S can compare to the PS4,so that's no issue either for the development.

I can't imagine SE proposing this exclusivity nonsense unless they make a good akount of money from it. Because there are a lot of people who won't buy another console for one game and they'd be missing out on that audience by remaining on one console. I actually think that it's the larger companies like Sony and Microsoft proposing these things. With how little SE cares about the Xbox One version, I have my doubts that it was them who came up with the idea.

 

Hard to tell though. I find this wjole argument of your acquaintance a bit wobbly without knowing the contracts. Of course they may prohibit ports to other consoles just like how there were difficulties with the ports at first, but just because of some text on a box... I mean, I'm European but those boxes are made with the current foundation of information as far as I'm aware and don't really prove anything for all eternity. Everything can be subject to change and even if there should be NDAs, I feel like SE could have straifht out denied that they will never be coming if that was the case. The fact that they did not and used a roundabout way of saying there are no plans still gives the whole thing a chance in my opinion. I believe they said something similar before about 1.5 and 2.5 coming to PS4 and here we are...

 

As a matter of fact though, the industry is constantly changing and so are contracts, rights and obligations. While complex, they can also be fairly fickle and I wouldn't rule out the possibility of KH coming to Xbox in full just because of some text that isn't even universal and calling that proof.

 

Marketing is arguably one of the most important factors in the industry. Great games can get lost without the right advertisements. It doesn't even have to be large on stage at E3 or something. Sometimes it's sufficient to have one famous Let's Player playing it for example and sales skyrocket. And the same applies to subjectively dull games. The nth entry of Call of Duty, Fifa, Assassin's Creed, etc. profit from large scale marketing as well as an established name. Hence the reason why developers seem reluctant to let go of franchises even if they aren't that critically acclaimed anymore because they do not have to sell the name. People know what to expect. And they buy it. Names, be they from developers, series, celebrities, and so on make all the difference in the world. Especially in a world were graphics aren't enough to impress on their own anymore.

 

Long story short, I think it's mainly a marketing thing with no foresight into the future included which determines a game's fate for all eternity. It's basically like an advertisement screaming "look here, we are the only ones who have this amazing products so if you want to buy it, you need to be a member (in this case by buying a console)". That person you are talking to seems to have lost some objectiveness to take other possibilities into account and I personally can't support that very well because that's how misinformation is spread. Misinformation which can have terrible consequences in some cases.

 

The only thing people can donis continue asking for it. If there's demand, SE will feel more inclined to deliver and perhaps alter contracts. As far as I'm aware, a lot of exclusivity rights are only there for a limited period of time if they are not renewed.

 

I'll try to find said interview where they said there are currently no plans for an Xbox version of preceeding titles, though this may take a while.

 

Trust me, the dude who I argued with is FAR from a friend. He HATES Xbox so much that he, literally, posted a video explaining his reasons for not wanting KH on Xbox One at all, then in the last 30 seconds or so has a segment that incites violence towards Xbox players just because they don't have his preferred console & some of them want KH on Xbox as well. I mean, my god, what a dick. I promptly told him off about that after I found out he did that.

 

And he's the one who brought up the box art being proof in the first place. It was only after I really looked at the screenshot that it was the EU cover, since all that was different between it & the NA cover was the rating & that "Playstation Exclusive" moniker.. Like I said, above, he brought it up as "proof" & I relayed my thoughts on it proving nothing of the sort. I completely forgot about marketing being a big factor in these things, but it doesn't shock me that you'd bring that up, since it makes sense. I mean, why put the words on one release of the games, but not the other. And, yeah, that's my thought exactly on timed exclusivity. Look at Crash Bandicoot's N. Sane Trilogy. It was exclusive for almost a year before finally being announced to be coming to other platforms at the end of this month. And that is a thing with Microsoft paying to have Square publish the game to Xbox One, but it's like you said, we don't know what went on behind closed doors years ago when all of this stuff was being planned out & contracted. I had a discussion with an older friend of mine at work yesterday & he pretty much agreed with me on all of this stuff when I told him about the exclusivity stuff & the argument I was having with the other guy. Exclusivity is, I'm pretty sure, being only set by Square Enix. Sony released the collections on PS3 & PS4, so it's most likely their doing that the moniker appeared on the EU & PS3 releases of the games. Their EU branch probably though that there was no way that Xbox was getting the games, so they put it on as a safe bet. Their NA & Japanese branches most likely just played it safe, since they know 3's coming to the Xbox as well. Even then, the EU branding is a blatant lie, since most of the games in the collections are just 3D remakes/ports of handheld games, most of which were Nintendo-released beforehand. Marketing is, clearly, the biggest reason for this confusion. I mean, if it's gonna sell more consoles, then I guess it's understandable why they'd do that.

 

Really? Square have said that they have no plans to release anything more in the future? Where is that quote? I'd like to read that interview. Not that I'm doubting, but I've seen no direct evidence or quotes to back up what your saying. Probably a lesser note to end a response on, but there's nothing else to respond to right now.

https://www.hardcoregamer.com/2016/01/02/why-arent-there-kingdom-hearts-hd-remakes-for-xbox/184773/

 

Here's an article by the way which picks up on that interview. It basically doesn't rule out the possibility but KH3 is their main concern right now, which basically sums up the whole there are no plans int he near future thing.

I'll try to find the whole interview tomorrow. Must be somewhere around here.

 

And btw, I don't see it as a bad thing to be doubtful and ask for sources. It's good to retain some skepticism egen toward trustworthy sources becauee mistakes happen, be it translation or trusting some dubious source. You have every right to doubt what I'm writing. After all, I already admitted with my phrasing that I'm going by memory here.

Edited June 2, 2018 by Merilly