to play on the xbox ver..

[Marthfox]

do i need xbox live gold?? or i can use silver to create and play online???

[landman]

You don't need Gold to play PSU online

[Maskim]

You don't need Gold to play PSU online

Exactly. Further, any game you have to pay to play individually, does not require a Gold subscription to LIVE. LIVE gold is the catch all server fee for games that are free to play. You're paying for server upkeep and maintenance, but microsoft is hosting all those games, so you pay your $5 a month to MS if you want to play them online. Phantasy Star's servers are run, and hosted by SEGA, FFXI's by Sony, so you pay those companies for the use of their servers, not MS.

The point of this longwinded and fairly pointless post, which basically just takes Landman's answer and elongates it, is just in case someone was curious as to the why gold is not required for PSU.

[Yusaku_Kudou]

Exactly. Further, any game you have to pay to play individually, does not require a Gold subscription to LIVE. LIVE gold is the catch all server fee for games that are free to play. You're paying for server upkeep and maintenance, but microsoft is hosting all those games, so you pay your $5 a month to MS if you want to play them online. Phantasy Star's servers are run, and hosted by SEGA, FFXI's by Sony Square Enix, so you pay those companies for the use of their servers, not MS.

The point of this longwinded and fairly pointless post, which basically just takes Landman's answer and elongates it, is just in case someone was curious as to the why gold is not required for PSU.

Okay, fixed.

[Maskim]

Okay, fixed.

Same difference. Sony owns not just stock in square, but a second place majority share of the company.

[A2K]

Same difference. Sony owns not just stock in square, but a second place majority share of the company.

Even then, I still wouldn't say that Square Enix = Sony, myself. They're still enough of an independent company to publish games on competing platforms. It's not so much a matter of where the money goes exactly as it is whose name it is on the check.

[Yusaku_Kudou]

Yeah, the billing statement says Square Enix PlayOnline on it and not Sony Online Entertainment, so that is worth noting, but I am aware of the majority stake. If Sony did have claim to SE then of course we wouldn't have FFXI on the 360.

[Maskim]

I bet we would, and do. It makes sense to release games multi platform, and the more niche games to the corresponding platforms (new Chrystal Chronicles on DS, and upcoming one for Wii). I note that the big ones, the official numbered games in the series, are staying with Sony. Whether FFXIII will be any good or not is yet to be seen, however it'd be hard to argue that it's not a system seller to the rpg'ers who may not have a ps3 yet.

I'd find it hard to believe that this is due to anything more than it is to 'We own a large portion of your company...and who bailed you out from that Spirits Within SNAFU'? ;)

[Maskim]

Even then, I still wouldn't say that Square Enix = Sony, myself. They're still enough of an independent company to publish games on competing platforms. It's not so much a matter of where the money goes exactly as it is whose name it is on the check.

It's always a matter of where the money ends up going. I make pretty good coin, but if my wife gets it all for staying home with the kids, I gotta think shes on the winning end of the bargain. ;)

[A2K]

Having a significant amount of influence is still a pretty far cry from being one and the same. If they were, we wouldn't see Square Enix titles on competing platforms in much the same way we don't see Uncharted or Gran Turismo on Xbox 360 or Ratchet & Clank on the Wii or PSP.