Sorry, I am not a mind-reader - and seeing as SE has been primarily a publishing company for quite some time now, I took "from" to mean "from SE" not "developed in-house in SE" - and seeing as how there is no real distinction a lot of the time, since many teams are made up of contractors to begin with, it doesn't really make sense to draw a line in the sand like that.
There are already rumors going on that this game is primarily being developed by third-party contractors (which would make sense when SE already has so many titles on its plate).
I didn't expect you to read my mind sir (but the post I made about AAA companies may been a bit vague and open for interpretation). We may simply have a different natural reaction on the word "from" in the given context... Or maybe I'm too lazy in my wording.
In my defence though -and as a correction- I did use the word "create" which imo relates better to the creative process (development) than publishing rights, or whatever you imagine when you conjecture the word "from". I was not trying to make fun of you or anything by the "lol" and whatnot in the latter post, sorry about that.
And, yes, any big company will always have contractors/third party and/or new blood on any project (most projects at least). I used to work for Cisco as a contractor; I know a bit about this. Even though there always were some contractors on every project, the end products -at the time- were always considered in-house developed Cisco products. Do you mean "in-house development" and "third party developed" are such blurred terms that it is debatable whether they should even be distinguished? Just curious, not trying to put you on the spot or anything. The way I see it is that there usually is a clear distinction on who have the creative input vs publishing rights, even if the parties are mixed. With exceptions of course. There probably have been "internal" disputes on who the publishers are and who the developers are.</offtopicish>
I'm still not getting the hate...
I don't if you refer to people like me... :O Pretty much everything said in ultima espio's quote presupposes a mass-appeal minded, realism themed, matrix-esqued FF7R. Which fits the evidence so far. If that also turnes out to be true, then I, most likely, will not like it. Which is based on the recent stuff SE has made, the direction/trend they seem to follow and the evidence of the remake we currently have. I try to strip my expectations (to anything fictional), but in the case of FFs and SE it's kinda hard to do that without giving them the benefit of the doubt. Everything of the above may still be true at release, and I may still like it. I have not decided that I will not like it even though to some I seem to be on the hate-train with no going off. What I'm guessing as of now however, is that I will not like it. Based on the evidence. The reason I voice it is not to spread hate but in an poor attempt to make similar minded people to not automatically buy into this. Hate =/= not liking in my book. What I find a bit troubling however, is this presupposition I mentioned above that have snuck in, seemingly unintentionally everywhere.
Now, as I said before, I understand why SE would do a remake in this manner. As a company they have to survey the marked to conclude what kind of product would be most profitable for them. It's a company mentality not a personal mentality. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are plenty of people in SE who loves what they do, and work with passion.
If FF7 was ever to be remade, and still get a huge coin from the original fans, they are running out of time. In that regard making it now makes sense.
On the topic of "staying true to the FF7 spirit" vs "FF7 rebooted", I would actually love to see a more R-rated-ish rebooted FF7 (no, I don't mean porn). With mature themes, hard decisions and whatnot. Hell, GoT is wildly profitable right now, can't SE get inspired by that? I would love SE to at least make a FF spin off title aimed for us that are tired of PG 13 FFs.