Square Enix Scolded For Misleading Final Fantasy XIII Advertising

MattAn24

Pulse l'Cie
Jul 16, 2009
656
0
0
Straying Bullet said:
Nothing you say will cancel this out. Sure, there is common sense but you people are ruining FF franchise every installement. You have been deceptive and lying in our face, no matter what reasoning you put behind this.

If this was the case to be excused, I could get away with alot of shit in my life with the same logic. Are they being fined for this?

MattAn24 said:
They're not going to switch back and forth between versions on ADVERTISING, just because it's slightly different quality. It has been mentioned many times that the PS3 version looks shinier due to anti-aliasing and blu-ray, whereas the 360 version has a quicker framerate, etc. They've been directly compared before and there's been NO PROBLEM.
False. Thanks to the 'sister' chip in the 360, Anti-aliasing looks much better on the XBOX360. No fanboy rage, but actual fact regarding multi-platform games. I don't think you paid attention that most multi-platform games to this date, the 360 has most of the times -small/large- advantage regarding graphics and whatnot. Take for example racing genre. It has been mentioned that PS3 blurs out the egdes whilst it's all tidy and tight with the 360 version.

Though PS3 exclusives blow this out of the water regardless.
...Wait, what? The article clearly states that the PS3 was BETTER than the 360 version.
I OWN a 360. I DON'T own a PS3. Yet I am still allowing the 360's minor faults. So the fuck what, Jeeves..?
 

Meggiepants

Not a pigeon roost
Jan 19, 2010
2,536
0
0
So... I hope they aren't going to let the Dragon Age 2 trailer run either, because I am pretty suspicious that the game won't look like that when I play it. In fact, I don't think even the "cutscenes" will look like that.
 

V8 Ninja

New member
May 15, 2010
1,903
0
0
...So what? The adverts are still advertising the same game. The only reason I could see this happening is if Square used the quality of PS3 screenshots as a sort of selling point for the game on the 360.
 

Grey_Focks

New member
Jan 12, 2010
1,969
0
0
squid5580 said:
They should have gotten in trouble for saying it was good
this made me chuckle.

Meh. Never played it on either system, don't really ever plan on it...so I really have nothing to contribute. Though to be fair, false advertising is pretty commonplace nowadays.
 

SaintWaldo

Interzone Vagabond
Jun 10, 2008
923
0
0
They made a distinction between "misleading" and "false". One has a possibility of zero malice, the other does not. S/E got labeled as "non malicious", received a slap on the hand, and no more. Trying to make this a full-on flame war over cut-scene quality in an advert is kinda silly, as is trying to declare a regulatory body as silly for doing its job with the due restraint it's chartered to employ. I also love how S/E is on record saying that it's a nitpick from both the misleading advert angle and the platform war angle.

"Reviewing the material forensically," indeed.
 

ActionDan

New member
Jun 29, 2009
1,002
0
0
Tom Goldman said:
Also said it "did not believe any average viewer, or indeed avid gamer, would perceive any difference in the output unless reviewing the materially forensically."
Well they are wrong. I could tell the difference in picture quality in a second, having seen Final Fantasy 13 played on both 360 and PS3.
 

WilliamRLBaker

New member
Jan 8, 2010
537
0
0
icyneesan said:
Well you might as well use the footage that looks better for all of your advertisements right? Also I couldn't help but laugh at how they said there was a discernible difference in picture quality for the PS3 and 360 versions
there is a difference but as it says in the article.
""albeit marginally""

there is a difference but its very small.
 

Snotnarok

New member
Nov 17, 2008
6,310
0
0
This is pretty silly considering Epic has been advertising EVERY Gears of War game they've made with like 4x anti aliasing and all sorts of effects you don't see in game.
 

Redlin5_v1legacy

Better Red than Dead
Aug 5, 2009
48,836
0
0
Jaredin said:
Oh wow...of, all the things. I mean, I suppose it is true, but..come on, it seems like such a minor thing...
Nothing is minor on the internet!

OT: Haha, well here is another example to show Xbox fanboys that no, the PS3 does have better graphics.

As for Square Enix, this sucks for them. I mean it is a little lazy of them to recycle the footage from the PS3 ads but it isn't worth this bad press.

Snotnarok said:
This is pretty silly considering Epic has been advertising EVERY Gears of War game they've made with like 4x anti aliasing and all sorts of effects you don't see in game.
But Gears of War is a mainstream action game and we can't have anything wrong about anything involving mainstream games!!

/sarcasm

I guess it just shows that the media likes Epic better than Square Enix.
 

Stone Wera

New member
Feb 13, 2010
1,816
0
0
Motakikurushi said:
In many ways, Square falsely advertised this game. Like, when they advertised it being worth playing.
Oooooh burned, SE.


OT: I don't see why they're making such a huge deal out of something so small.
 

Twilight.falls

New member
Jun 7, 2010
676
0
0
Personally seems like such a small thing to get in a tizzy about, it was a pre-rendered cinematic, not gameplay (If I read this right).

I think it's a bit much, but I may be biased for being one of few people who thought FFXIII was a good game.
 

Uber Waddles

New member
May 13, 2010
544
0
0
Excuse the language; but really, someones got some extra fucking time on their hands.

They used the PS3 version to cut costs for advertising. Thats it. The whole false advertising thing is moot; the PS3 Version sports the SAME features as the 360 version, with the difference in buttons and graphics.

AND COMPANIES DOCTOR GRAPHICS ALL THE TIMES IN ADVERTS. SO WHO REALLY CARES?

Things like this just make me want to rip my hair out and throw small objects at peoples faces.
 

WilliamRLBaker

New member
Jan 8, 2010
537
0
0
Snotnarok said:
This is pretty silly considering Epic has been advertising EVERY Gears of War game they've made with like 4x anti aliasing and all sorts of effects you don't see in game.
~_* i've never been able to tell a difference, On my 32 inch 1080p samsung gears of war 1 and 2 in action look like the teasuers, trailers, and media photos.
 

-Samurai-

New member
Oct 8, 2009
2,294
0
0
Uber Waddles said:
AND COMPANIES DOCTOR GRAPHICS ALL THE TIMES IN ADVERTS. SO WHO REALLY CARES?
Apparently the one kid that cares more about how the game looks than anything else about it.

Stupid people complaining about things like this is why cereal boxes have to say "image enlarged to show detail"....
 

SmugFrog

Ribbit
Sep 4, 2008
1,239
4
43
What a trivial thing. It's like going to a restaurant, and then saying "My apple pie didn't look like the one in the picture, so that's false advertising!"

Seriously?
 

Ziadaine_v1legacy

Flamboyant Homosexual
Apr 11, 2009
1,604
0
0
Who cares. Seriously, Xbox should get over it and be lucky that a mostly PlayStation based game of such quality even came to their console. They probably just used the PS3 version because the obvious factor was that the largest audience and its ground-console IS PlayStation.
 

pretentiousname01

New member
Sep 30, 2009
476
0
0
Motakikurushi said:
In many ways, Square falsely advertised this game. Like, when they advertised it being worth playing.
quoted for truth.

Also am I allowed to sue for false advertising? When I watch a commercial over a friends house? On that nice big screen tv they own. Then when the game or whatever looks like poo on my "have to use rf adapter old piece of shit" tv?
 

Jimmybobjr

New member
Aug 3, 2010
365
0
0
Okay, fair enough. Its falce advertising, even if it is a small difference.

But really; if i was putting a advert together, I wouldnt even notice the difference between PS3 and XBOX360 details.

I think its more of a mistake than anything.
 

ultrachicken

New member
Dec 22, 2009
4,303
0
0
Any advertisement for food uses plastic(?) models instead of food, and yet they don't get into trouble.