Kotaku 
Enter your username and password.
Denver, 12:13 PM
Fri Jan 1
17 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip us:
Editor-In-Chief:
Brian Crecente
| AIM | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Stephen Totilo
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Editor:
Michael McWhertor
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor, Japan:
Brian Ashcraft
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, East Coast:
Michael Fahey
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Oceania:
Luke Plunkett
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Weekends:
Owen Good
| AIM | Twitter
Correspondent, San Francisco:
AJ Glasser
| AIM | Twitter
Columnist:
Leigh Alexander
Columnist:
Tim Rogers
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
12/13/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/13/09
You hear that Microsoft!! There are 360 owners out there who want a cinematic experience like Uncharted!!
But then again we get Splinter Cell Conviction. So maybe then I shouldn't be writing this.
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
Drake over Fisher anyday...
12/14/09
Sony are heavily invested in those Dogs.
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
Heavily invested...:P Thats what I meant
12/14/09
12/13/09
12/13/09
12/13/09
I still think that the majority of DLC that comes out isn't worth it. The fallout DLC's have been the only ones that seemed close to their worth but the rest usually overvalue their content by too much to really be fair to the consumer.
12/13/09
Examples of Bad DLC:
Mirror's Edge: 7 levels for $10 that could be made by a mod team in less than a week.
Mega Man 9: extra character for $5. Main game is $10.
RE5: $5 for multiplayer code. Game is great, but having to pay for that dlc is just ridiculous.
Examples of Good DLC:
Fallout 3: all of the DLC are great except for the Alaska mission.
GTA IV: two large mission packs for $20 each.
I'm not asking for handouts, just fair prices.
12/13/09
I also thought that Valkyria Chronicles got it at least half right. The "Behind her Blue Flame" DLC was tops. Edy's mission, while passable, was kind of a stinker, comparable to Operation Anchorage.
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
Have to treat every game like a platform, nowadays.
12/14/09
Methinks they need fresh thinkers in their offices.
12/14/09
12/13/09
12/13/09
Soo... how does someone not in the industry get into this industry only event?
12/13/09
12/13/09
They're a bit on the expensive side though. Check everything here: [gdconf.com]
-Chris
12/13/09
Alright well those kinds of prices are definitely prohibitive for anyone who can't even at least write it off as a business expense...
#speakup
12/13/09
12/14/09
12/13/09
09/20/09
Successful MMO's are all about evolving according to the desires of their player base. Warcraft overtook Everquest because Blizzard was eager to please players and they consistently adapted the game to make each type of play (grouping, questing, soloing) more convenient. I realize that many old school MMO veterans feel like Blizzard is coddling its user base, and while they have a valid point, they aren't the primary demographic anymore. The mainstream is where the big money is, so MMO's have gone mainstream.
I'm not a programmer or game designer, so I can only speak from what I've observed, and it seems to me like consoles are growing more similar to computers with each new generation in terms of functionality and user-interface layouts. But for the time being, computers have a serious edge in terms of flexibility (both in terms of software development and customization within the user base) for several hardware generations to come.
09/20/09
The other issue of interest is how similar the Cell SPUs are to the original Emotion Engine in the sense that RAM is limited but bandwidth and processing power is available in huge quantities.
[arstechnica.com]
Granted, the PS2 is still around and is largely considered to be last generation's technology, but the fact doesn't change that the Cell SPUs are functionally similar to the Emotion Engine. The only real difference would be the fact that the Cell SPUs can be synchronized or used asynchronously. Other than that the development attitude really shouldn't be too different from developing for the PS2.
At least that's how I see it.
09/22/09
09/20/09
09/20/09
There are so many other problems. Let's put it this way, if MMOs did eventually migrate to the consoles, they'd be a lot different to what we consider a 'traditional' MMO these days.
09/20/09
But entertain me, what are the 'so many other problems' that stand in the why?
09/20/09
09/20/09
Lack of control customization-FF11 has customizable controls.
Fixed UI is something that is a issue and isn't.
Limited controls-Macros. FF11 has them.
Commuication issues - Keyboards are $10 dollars and again FF11 makes it possible to play using largely only macros. Both systems have chatpads which function like keyboards anyway.
Subscription fee-Sony charges the developers anyway and any MMO will have servers run by the MMO makers so the only fee you will pay is the monthly membership fee. Live's yearly fee and the monthly fee i'll give you are a issue.
And you don't need a mouse and keyboard to play a MMO. You can do it on a controller.
09/20/09
I've played FFXI exlusively with the controller... it's a tiny bit of a PITA, but that game is dumbed down enough to be playable with it. Other MMOs will have to be chopped down to 11 or so controller buttons, or cascading menus. Just means more time is spent telling what you want the game to do than actually playing. I still liked FFXI tho... driving across the world on a CHocobo laying down with my feet up was way better than sitting at the KB.
09/20/09
I still loved FFXI tho, despite it's controller interface.
09/20/09
You can play FFXI with an Xbox LIVE Silver account (i.e. no Gold account required). You still have to pay the same monthly Sony fee as you would on the PC or any other platform, but there are no additional charges imposed by Microsoft. Also, as far as I know, there are no in-game differences between Gold and Silver accounts.
Whether this will always be the case remains to be seen, I suppose. FFXI is one of the few (if not only) games on Xbox 360 that allows online play without a Gold membership. It is also (I think) the only game that is allowed to require a hard drive. It is an exception in the 360 game library.
If console MMOs become mainstream, I'm sure Microsoft, Sony, or anyone else would try to interleave their own platform benefits, possibly charging for them in the process.
09/20/09
And the man is right. PSO may not have been a 'true' MMO, but Everyquest Online Adventures is and FF11 sure was. People claiming he doesn't know what he's talking about need to go look at those games. Heck FF11 allows you to do something WoW still doesn't, that is have one toon and level out as many jobs as you want on that one character. Now of course if you level all 15 something jobs to 75, your bound to have storage issues but after so many years, SE has worked out a way around that too.
In fact, for MMO's to really even start to reach the numbers that could challenge WoW, you need a PC/console mixed MMO. The only downside is that after so many years the console may make it harder to add graphical improvements, meaning as new shiny stuff comes out, PC owners may get upset.
For all of it's mistakes (And they were largely done by SE simply not understanding the MMO market like they do now), FF11 was very, very groundbreaking and has one of the longest stories out of all of the FF games spanning a huge cast of characters. The only fault is that because the game was built more around the 'work together' model, this caused the game to be solo unfriendly, something WOW got very, very right when it came to leveling and story missions. It also led to a high level of competing in between rival guilds/Linkshells over limited loot and HNM's.
Still to discount that Turbine's Honcho is incorrect is highly shortsighted. A console only MMO would in fact have less to worry about when it comes to cheaters, depending how locked down it is.
09/20/09
09/20/09
09/20/09
09/20/09
Star's auto-promoting threads is gawkers problem. We've complained about it loads, if you wish you can email them (tips at kotaku dot com) and add your voice so stars only manually promote comments.
09/21/09
Ok, I'll put my serious pants on as well:
I don't enjoy MMOs, so I am not at all interested in seeing them on consoles. I think MMOs are more suited to PC as PC-gamers are more hardcore and more willing to invest hours upon hours of their lives into a virtual world. MMOs (unless tailored to appeal to the action-oriented mentality of the average console gamer) will not sell on home consoles.
^There. Now I can take my serious pants off. Miserable sods :P
09/21/09
Also you'll find many console gamers will plough hours into games as well so don't dismiss them.
But yes, if you don't want to be eaten alive then don't make comments that make you sound like an idiot :D
If you'd made that post your original point then you may of started a decent thread.
09/21/09
But you are right. From now on I will keep my serious pants on at all times when posting on Kotaku (although I will keep my idiot kilt close-by in case of emergencies).
09/19/09
I don't think that consoles are necessarily "superior" for the next generation of MMOs (traditional or otherwise). Some MMO types work well on just one one system, and some work well multi-platform, so we'll end up with both kinds. With the broader diversity of systems that MMOs are being developed for, the MMOs themselves will probably diversify. There's already a few examples of this happening, such as APB and The Agency. Of course, until they're released we have no way of knowing how much of an impact they'll have and if they'll survive or not - sometimes MMOs that break the mold don't last very long at all, such as Auto Assault. Then again, perhaps MMOs will diversify independent of console influence simply because the current formulas will grow stale.
There are pros and cons to console MMOs versus pc MMOs, but ultimately I think it's just a subjective thing. In theory, developers will make various styles of MMOs for various platforms and we can choose from a wider variety of MMOs to play. If there's something for everyone, then there will be no need for everyone to just agree on one platform and one MMO type.
09/19/09
The only real "downside" is the PS3 doesn't come with a USB mouse and keyboard...but that doesn't even count as a legitimate downside since you can buy them for cheap.
FFXI and the upcoming FFXIV are pretty much meant to be played with console controllers with keyboard in lap, BTW.
09/20/09
Sorry... but you have unrealistic expectations of microsoft and sony's generosity.
09/20/09
@Vonhert: I'm sorry. I've been able to use a wide range of $10 keyboards with my 360 and PS3 for years.
Oh and this.
09/20/09
09/19/09
No?
Well then, case closed.
09/19/09
09/19/09
09/20/09
09/20/09
09/19/09
09/20/09
09/20/09
09/19/09
A console makes things easy. Everything is controlled by the manufacturer. If there is an IM client, there's not thirteen different networks to spread your friends out on, there is one and your friend is there or s/he isn't. If you're paying for service, you're paying for ALL service with ONE payment. If there's voice, everyone can hear it and everyone has the option to turn it off.
(please note that I don't own a PS3, nor have I ever used one. I am completely in the dark on how it's online functionality works. Please don't be hating, I just have no interest in anything on the PS3. Just my opinion, I am not saying the PS3 sucks, I just don't like it. I know it runs/ran linux, I like linux.)
A PC, there's nothing centralized. Every game that is online has it's own fee, every game has it's own chat network. Everything you'd use to communicate with friends -- xfire, aim, msn, yahoo -- there is no guarantee it will work with your game. Voice may work, everyone's graphical settings will be different.
Now... with a PC, there are advantages. Technology skyrockets on computers -- each day someone comes up with a better RAM, CPU, GPU configuration, someone else finds a way to take that Crysis one tick higher than before, get that many more pixels on their monitor. With consoles, you get a refresh every half a decade or more. There are also games you can play without having to pay anyone jack. Any PC can also double as a server, though the commercialization of PC games frowns upon this and often the legality of it is questionable, especially concerning privately developed servers that are not backed by the original creators, but look up private WoW servers, private Ragnarok, etc. It's there, it's thriving.
So, yeah, I can see how console gaming could be seen as superior to PC gaming as far as MMOs are concerned. I don't think it's a fact, though. There is just no "Platform" on which PC MMOs are developed and there is probably never going to be one that anyone can agree with.
Sorry, didn't mean to write an article in the comments.
09/19/09
09/20/09
09/19/09
09/19/09
I don't expect any kind of console MMO explosion, at least until Sony and MS have launched their own and gotten playerbases on them.
09/19/09
(Kind of ironic that it sounds a lot like how the illegal drug market works...)
09/20/09
09/20/09
09/20/09
09/19/09
09/19/09
09/19/09
09/19/09
I'm not saying they need to be like Blizzard, but it makes me kinda scared to walk into FFXIV, hoping everything about FFXI is fixed.
09/19/09
[www.eorzeapedia.com]
09/20/09
09/20/09
But then again, I trust Square-Enix to deliver an amazing game because they're an amazing company.
09/20/09
This was the point I was trying to derive in my first response to this. I am aware of the existence of such a thing, but the ease of it through implementation causes my initial hesitation, as SE hasn't always had the best view of things outside their own initial scope in the past.