I rather enjoy how you don't understand how a mod for software works. When it comes down to it, a mod doesn't interact with a OS at all. it interacts with a program that is run by an OS. These are completely different things. If you haven't heard, Microsoft has a developers library (xna) that allows casual programmers (and profession) to build ground-up applications based off the xna framework (which is loosely based off .net and runs off the c# language). When you do build a program ground up, it interacts with the OS, and in that case you do need to have a language which the OS can interpret. Otherwise it's just a matter of making a mod which a program can read, copying it to the device's hard drive, and running it. This is how games like Oblivion (which I do enjoy that you seemingly forgot existed) can come out with mods. While it is more difficult to program mods for a console, it still is possible (just very difficult) because programmers never release a construction kit for the console. Mainly because they want you to buy the bloody expansion packs. Remember gaming is a business, people are out to make money. I do like how you pigeon-hole the entire console community as brainless idiots who want simple games. Again you forget about games like Oblivion (which is as MMO as you can get without being Daggerfall or Arena, which was much bigger). Oblivion was a huge seller. There are many console gamers who want a more open-ended experience. I also love how you cite FF as a great example of a console MMO, most people agree that they don't care for it on the PC. By the way, where did you get your information that 70% of MMO gamers were "hardcore"? I would like to read that study.
Uhh we're basically talking about the exact same thing when it comes to mods man, my wording was just rather lengthy and a bit confusing I'll admit.You basically proved my point even further how superior computers are. Can you get the packages to mod a console? Sure, but it's rather hard since you can't just go to any electronics store and pick it up. It's more about availability of the means to mod a game than it is about actually doing it anyway. And also, I never said FFXI was a 'great' console mmo, I in fact gave it a negative review. Also, it was just the most recent example that I personally have actually played.
As far as that 70% of MMO gamers -leaning- (key word there, LEANING) towards the hardcore spectrum of gaming it's personal experience. They may not start out as hardcore gamers, but as I have stated, mmos exploit competativeness far more than any other genre currently does (again, my opinion). Let me put it to you this way; What happens when you see some character running about with some uber, really shiny piece of gear? A lot of the time most people go, "Man, I so freaking want that!" and thus level ever harder in order to obtain said item. In that instance a casual gamer might, for a time at least, be turned into what many would call "hardcore" out of the urge to compete.
Personally there really is no comparison. The console just wimps out when it comes to the PC. Even two year old PC's are better generally than most consoles. The console market has it's niche, but when it comes to a MMO, 99 out of 100 players are going to play it on a PC, NOT a console. Better graphics, better controls, there is just no comparison.
As to AOC coming out on console, if you have been reading the discussions, the console version will be lucky to be out in 2008, more likely 2009 and they intend to have separate servers from the PC players. Pretty good indication that the two markets are quite different.
My PC is for MMO's, my console for the other games, I doubt you will see either of them merging anytime in the near future.
i do not know what the future will bring but NOW consoles are not able to handle next gen pc games just look at unreal 3 ... nearly the same on pc and ps3 the difference is on ps3 less players are possible, the maps must be smaller and the view distance is reduced this is not an opinion it is a fact
the generation after unreal 3 will for sure not be less hardware demanding ... and you cant upgrade a console
someone talked about oblivion yes it is the same on pc and console but just have a look at ancestor titel morrowind compared to this game oblivion is a step back ,not only controller and gui wise , it has greatly reduced character customisation ( i am not talking about skills ) so it is not the question if you plug in a mouse and a keyboard into a console and have the same game like on a pc
it is the question if a game is designed to fit on a console or not ( for a pc player it meanes dumbed down game or not )
I'm glad someone actually got my point. What everyone needs to realize is that it has nothing to do with whether or not a console can handle an mmo. In fact, I even admit that they can. The point is in order for an mmo to work for a gamepad -smoothly- AND work -smoothly- on a keyboard on the exact same standards is simply not possible.
Let's look at it this way: Why does anyone use a keyboard over a gamepad given they are playing an FPS on their PC? They certainly make gamepads for computers and they work perfectly fine and yet they still aren't really widely used for FPSs on PC's, as anyone stopped to actually consider why that is? I believe it's the simple fact that the majority of people prefer the much more advanced options you can exploit with your keyboard.
For example. I have a Razer Tarantula gaming keyboard. Other than just the usual keys my keyboard also has a five macro keys on either side I can use for anything. There is also a profile button to switch between one of twelve button configs I have set up for different games. Now I realize this type of set-up is quite a bit more than the usual gamer has, but can any of you honestly admit that you wouldn't enjoy having a macro key built into your keyboard that will (in the case of COD4) throw a flashbang -and- switch to your side arm all with the press of one button (it's one of my dick around macros, fun for flashing a room then killing the occupants with my pistol)?
At any rate, I digress. The bottom line is any control scheme designed to work with a gamepad is going to be fundamentally dumbed down so it will fit within the confines the number of buttons on a gamepad. For those of you that disagree, think about this: How many skills do you want your character to have? Well if you want to use a gamepad the answer better be, "not too many".
Break it down to each button and really think about it. Let's say this is for an xbox 360 controller. Ok so that gives you a right and left trigger, right and left bumper, four buttons, two sticks (push-in controls) and a d-pad with 8 directions (which isn't that great for quick-switching in some instances). So let's say you're playing an archer and the control scheme is set-up something like this: Left trigger uses skills, right trigger is regular attack, right bumper uses health pots, left bumper uses mana (or whatever your skill-pool) pots, A is jump, X interacts with objects and people, Y activates your character info and related info and B cancels (basically your standard RPG control setup). Let's add in the ability put your skills on a dias and switch them with the d-pad like in Oblivion. So that means you can switch between 8 abilities on the fly with a rather increased margin of error plus an extra lag-time for skill usage since you have to hit an extra key to use them, which isn't that big of a deal. But what else does that mean? Will the UI be cluttered with a large, circle so you can keep in mind what skills you have set up on it or will it be hidden most of the time? What about the rest of your skills? You've got to have more than eight freaking skills right? It's an mmo you CAN'T pause to switch weapons or skills. What happens if you get in a situation where your melee weapon would suit you better than your bow and you -don't- have time to stop, go into your inventory, find your melee weapon(s), equip them, re-set your skill dais with your melee weapon skills? You're hosed, that's what.
Now say those kinds of situations are taken completely out of the equation. What happens to the game? You've just taken out a large portion of skill and whacked a large portion of strategy in the face. Do you honestly think a game like that is going to be even a -good- mmo? I say no, but that's just me.
Sure a lot of the time in mmo's you grind and you really don't need a good interface in order to do that. However, what you're forgetting is about the situations that call for complex, changeable interfaces. Raids and pvp being at the forefront of those instances. You CAN'T have even a good MMO without both and the end game of both of these are what define great mmos and what keep mmos alive. If you dumb down an interface to the point that you people saying, "I'd love to be able to grind on my couch with a gamepad." well, again, you have to think about what happens end game? The whole point of all your grinding is to get to the end game content, isn't it? Anyway, I'm just repeating myself at this point.
Originally posted by Lord_Ixigan As far as that 70% of MMO gamers -leaning- (key word there, LEANING) towards the hardcore spectrum of gaming it's personal experience. They may not start out as hardcore gamers, but as I have stated, mmos exploit competativeness far more than any other genre currently does (again, my opinion). Let me put it to you this way; What happens when you see some character running about with some uber, really shiny piece of gear? A lot of the time most people go, "Man, I so freaking want that!" and thus level ever harder in order to obtain said item. In that instance a casual gamer might, for a time at least, be turned into what many would call "hardcore" out of the urge to compete.
I think WOW pretty much has shown that your statement is NOT true. In fact, the majority of WOW players have never seen the inside of a raid dungeon.
Furthermore, the need to "get stuff" does not necessarily equate the need to go hardcore. I can see casual players gravitate towards easier, grinding games like Maple stories. You can do something like Maple Story *easy* on a console.
The whole disscussion is being based off of bad numbers and personal preference. The fact remains that a current gen console can work with MMOs. The same input devices can be used, and the same games can be played. As for modding and what not, thats an area of preference. Not every MMO player will use mods, many of them are purists, or dont want the possible keylogger/virus etc that could be packed with one.
As for how games like CoD4 and unreal have different player sizes based on each platform, thats mainly due to the servers used, and can be easily corrected.
Graphics are another area of preference. MMOs do not need bleeding edge graphics to be insanly popular (example; WoW)
Input device is again preference. As is raiding. Hardcore 'gotta get it all' is preference as well.
Pretty much the whole disscussion is Preference vs. ability. The ability for MMOs to be successful on consoles is there. The ability for the same game to coexist is there. Preference is just a matter of taste.
There are 3 types of people in the world. 1.) Those who make things happen 2.) Those who watch things happen 3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
Originally posted by Lord_Ixigan As far as that 70% of MMO gamers -leaning- (key word there, LEANING) towards the hardcore spectrum of gaming it's personal experience. They may not start out as hardcore gamers, but as I have stated, mmos exploit competativeness far more than any other genre currently does (again, my opinion). Let me put it to you this way; What happens when you see some character running about with some uber, really shiny piece of gear? A lot of the time most people go, "Man, I so freaking want that!" and thus level ever harder in order to obtain said item. In that instance a casual gamer might, for a time at least, be turned into what many would call "hardcore" out of the urge to compete.
I think WOW pretty much has shown that your statement is NOT true. In fact, the majority of WOW players have never seen the inside of a raid dungeon.
Furthermore, the need to "get stuff" does not necessarily equate the need to go hardcore. I can see casual players gravitate towards easier, grinding games like Maple stories. You can do something like Maple Story *easy* on a console.
So you're fact, have anything to support that? Because of the two different servers I have played on as alliance and horde respectively practically every person I ran into had at least one end game epic from either pvp (technically still a raid) or from one of the raids themselves. So, again, based on personal experience I'd say more people play into end game content than not.
And...wow you really went there. Maple Story? You really think Maple Story would attract ps3 or 360 owners in enough of a way to warrant porting it? You do realize that when any game developer pushes an mmo they promote the grander (end game) aspects of the game, right? Most Western gamers don't really care for mindless grinding, they want to do the fun stuff, the actual content and what not.
The whole disscussion is being based off of bad numbers and personal preference. The fact remains that a current gen console can work with MMOs. The same input devices can be used, and the same games can be played. As for modding and what not, thats an area of preference. Not every MMO player will use mods, many of them are purists, or dont want the possible keylogger/virus etc that could be packed with one. As for how games like CoD4 and unreal have different player sizes based on each platform, thats mainly due to the servers used, and can be easily corrected. Graphics are another area of preference. MMOs do not need bleeding edge graphics to be insanly popular (example; WoW) Input device is again preference. As is raiding. Hardcore 'gotta get it all' is preference as well. Pretty much the whole disscussion is Preference vs. ability. The ability for MMOs to be successful on consoles is there. The ability for the same game to coexist is there. Preference is just a matter of taste.
If you notice I never say my numbers come from anything but personal experience. I just happen to have a lot of it, take it as nothing more than that.
As far as server numbers being correct well, it's not that simple. I'm not familiar with how the ps3 online works, but as far as servers go it can't be super different from the 360. The fact is the servers aren't in the hands of the gamers. While (in the case of COD4) someone can take a fairly a tower and turn it into a dedicated server, it's not something you can do with the same game on consoles.
Also, it's not about "having it all" it's a matter of, "this is where the majority of the fun, immersiive content is (raiding/mass pvp) and I want to enjoy that at least somewhat". The fact is consoles currently can -not- run an mmo in the same fashion as on PCs. This is pretty evident by even the upcoming release of Age of Conan having to push back their 360 release by most likely an extra year (my guess is they'll end up scrapping it anyway)
there is no debate....mmorpg should always be for pc.... only game that has pulled it off well on the consoles id FF11
And FF11 didn't even succeed in a huge way on the 360. I don't think stores even stock it anymore.
there is allot of stock....only reason it didn't succeed on the 360 is because people want kick ass graphics on the 360...not 5 year old graphics.... it done well on ps2 though
there is no debate....mmorpg should always be for pc.... only game that has pulled it off well on the consoles id FF11
And FF11 didn't even succeed in a huge way on the 360. I don't think stores even stock it anymore.
there is allot of stock....only reason it didn't succeed on the 360 is because people want kick ass graphics on the 360...not 5 year old graphics.... it done well on ps2 though
Even then what do you define as 'doing well' on consoles? To me, that means 350,000-500,000 copies of a game sold. I don't think even combined that many sold for consoles. It must just be my stores, I haven't seen FF11 stocked at any stores around me in months if not a year. Not that it really matters to me since, as I said before, I found the controls for FF11 to be too constrictive.
there is no debate....mmorpg should always be for pc.... only game that has pulled it off well on the consoles id FF11
And FF11 didn't even succeed in a huge way on the 360. I don't think stores even stock it anymore.
there is allot of stock....only reason it didn't succeed on the 360 is because people want kick ass graphics on the 360...not 5 year old graphics.... it done well on ps2 though
Even then what do you define as 'doing well' on consoles? To me, that means 350,000-500,000 copies of a game sold. I don't think even combined that many sold for consoles. It must just be my stores, I haven't seen FF11 stocked at any stores around me in months if not a year. Not that it really matters to me since, as I said before, I found the controls for FF11 to be too constrictive.
ff11 was always meant to be played with a game controller but yeah.....ff11 has an overall sub of about 500k...so probably about 200k active subs playing on console and add another 200k people who never continued playing it ...which is still great compared to games like everquest worlds on the ps2
the hardware issue is a huge + for consoles... upgrading pc costs alot no matter what others say. Not really you just dont buy your parts from a retail store like PC world. u simply cant just upgrade 1 part anymore. u have to change almost every part in ur pc when upgrading. i want a new GPU but then i have to buy a new mainboard also cuz my old one is AGP only but then i also need new CPU and Memory cuz new mainboards dont have the slots for em anymore. i love playing on pc never considered consoles but i now i do. hardware companies just making a bad joke imo and will loose alotta customers to consoles when they go on like this. we need more compatibility u should be able just to replace weak parts in ur pc without having to buy almost everything new. Point is that such big changes such as a new type of bourd only happens every few years to 10, so rather than stopping development they just create new bourds with the new parts, and this only happens every few years [can be as many as 10]. So next time dont buy your motherbourd when a new bourd design is due to come out. i have no problems buying a new cpu or gpu every now and then. but everything is too much, especially when ur old hardware is still great for everything else exept gaming. just hurts my soul to throw away my GPU whick i bought for more then 200euros and which is still working great.
Nehterless hardware is a big plus for consoles in that you only need to upgrade every few years. Course the price to pay is that you are mostly behind the times hardware wise. And you cant do much more than play games.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
"As for how games like CoD4 and unreal have different player sizes based on each platform, thats mainly due to the servers used, and can be easily corrected."
no that is not true
max player limit for ps3 unreal 3 is 16 .... end of storry
I am a PC purist, I hate consoles, and I hate console games, because are dumbed down games (but God of War, that is awesome).
But I will love to see a good MMO on the console, and I think is feasible. Maybe the control scheme will be totally different. Toolbars are mousefriendly, so will use something else.
The chat thing is a problem, but you can do as in DDO, voicechat with the guys on your team. There are problems, because there must be updates, and patchets, etc.. and updating will be slowed down by sony/microsoft/nintendo to avoid open a hole that able crack the system.
I want this to ocurre, and I want to see it, but I suspect can be another financial suicide, has this stuff may sux. Is really hard to make a AAA game, but a MMORPG is even harder, maybe 2 order of magnitures harder.
"As for how games like CoD4 and unreal have different player sizes based on each platform, thats mainly due to the servers used, and can be easily corrected."
no that is not true
max player limit for ps3 unreal 3 is 16 .... end of storry and no it is not a question of the server
I think what he meant is that those games could have 60 players online if the games had dedicated servers assigned, like Sony's first party games do. consoles simply aren't hosting material, but they can run 60 people thanks to dedicated servers:
Why is this even debated? There are way to many pros going for console based MMORPG's compared to the number of cons when it comes to PC based MMORPG's.
Cons of PC based MMORPG's:
1) The number of OS's it needs to be written for.
2) The overwhelming differences in PC builds - hundreds if not thousands of variations.
3) Production times due to those variations.
4) Production cost due to all the above.
Pros for Console Based MMORPG's
1) Everyone has the same console with the same tech in it. Much easier to code a game under those circumstances. Production time drops from an average of 4 years to produce an MMORPG to just under 2 years.
2) Consoles run games - period. Resources of the console are not used by some system hungry OS running in the background. So the game will no doubt run smoother and the code will be much tighter than what you'll find in a PC based MMORPG.
3) The console gaming market is 10x's the number of PC based games and that means you have way more console gamers than PC gamers. You'd stand a much better chance to have WoW type subscriber numbers via a console based MMORPG.
4) You'll see less hacks and cheats and even if they do crop up the game developer will have a much easier time squashing them.
5) It is way cheaper to upgrade a console than any PC based gaming rig. Lets face it. If a newer version of the Xbox came out it would cost about $350 to $500 dollars and have better graphics than the latest greatest PC based gaming rig. Console games have "overall" better graphics - period.
well they managed to export FPS games to console and were very sucessfull. i will never understand how ppl can play FPS with controler but they do and buy the games like crazy many times more then pc gamers.
there were alotta articles on the web lately about "pc gaming is dieing" and they mostly predicted no bright future for it
so MMORPGs will go the same way soon iam sure. console market is so much more profitable
but it can have benefits also. no bots/hacks and private servers, or at least less.
Sigh. So much misinformation and opinions being stated in this thread as fact and evidence.
I don't even need to provide any references or links. The simple fact that Funcom, Sony and many other huge name companies with plenty of experience are investing millions into console MMO's is reason enough.
Do you seriously think these companies invested millions without doing studies, polls, interviews, marketing research, etc.? The business execs want to see proof of return on investment. So obviously, there is convincing evidence that a console MMORPG could very well succeed.
BTW, many industry experts have stated over and over again that WoW's success is heavily due to its accessibility. It's easy to learn to play and easy on system requirements. It's totally wrong to say that console technology is the reason why it won't succeed.
well they managed to export FPS games to console and were very sucessfull. i will never understand how ppl can play FPS with controler but they do and buy the games like crazy many times more then pc gamers. there were alotta articles on the web lately about "pc gaming is dieing" and they mostly predicted no bright future for it so MMORPGs will go the same way soon iam sure. console market is so much more profitable but it can have benefits also. no bots/hacks and private servers, or at least less.
its because they use the same sort of "auto aiming" foudn in games like Doom, you didnt have to aim up or down and it would shoot things that where above or below you. Console use the same sort of thing they just narrow the cone of where it will auto aim for.
Originally posted by fervor
Sigh. So much misinformation and opinions being stated in this thread as fact and evidence. I don't even need to provide any references or links. The simple fact that Funcom, Sony and many other huge name companies with plenty of experience are investing millions into console MMO's is reason enough. Do you seriously think these companies invested millions without doing studies, polls, interviews, marketing research, etc.? The business execs want to see proof of return on investment. So obviously, there is convincing evidence that a console MMORPG could very well succeed. BTW, many industry experts have stated over and over again that WoW's success is heavily due to its accessibility. It's easy to learn to play and easy on system requirements. It's totally wrong to say that console technology is the reason why it won't succeed.
technicly there was already a mmo on a console, it was for the sega dreamcast, i bleave it was phantsy star online. It was ok, it was a scifi game, at least i think it was the name of it.
So it is doable, because it has already been done. there was a keyboard attachment for the conosle, but that was mainly used for typing.
Originally posted by fervor Sorry, but that is such an pointless statement. It doesn't matter to anyone but you whether or not you like PC or console games.
It matters to the companies that sell games. The bottom line dollar drives the development dollar, and sales makes the point.
Clearly, consoles are the current owner of development dollars as they drive an overwhelming amount of sales. This may change, and it's all a matter of speculation.
But one thing is clear, prior trends do not guarantee future performance. If game makers make the games I like (typically MMOGs, simulations, open-ended RPGs, and complex strategy games) on consoles then I'll probably be playing on consoles.
The point? I know I'm not alone in liking a segment of the market that console developers generally ignore. If they stop ignoring, they continue to profit.
...
All of that still condenses quite nicely into the declarative:
The games I like are released almost exclusively on the PC.
Comments
As far as that 70% of MMO gamers -leaning- (key word there, LEANING) towards the hardcore spectrum of gaming it's personal experience. They may not start out as hardcore gamers, but as I have stated, mmos exploit competativeness far more than any other genre currently does (again, my opinion). Let me put it to you this way; What happens when you see some character running about with some uber, really shiny piece of gear? A lot of the time most people go, "Man, I so freaking want that!" and thus level ever harder in order to obtain said item. In that instance a casual gamer might, for a time at least, be turned into what many would call "hardcore" out of the urge to compete.
Personally there really is no comparison. The console just wimps out when it comes to the PC. Even two year old PC's are better generally than most consoles. The console market has it's niche, but when it comes to a MMO, 99 out of 100 players are going to play it on a PC, NOT a console. Better graphics, better controls, there is just no comparison.
As to AOC coming out on console, if you have been reading the discussions, the console version will be lucky to be out in 2008, more likely 2009 and they intend to have separate servers from the PC players. Pretty good indication that the two markets are quite different.
My PC is for MMO's, my console for the other games, I doubt you will see either of them merging anytime in the near future.
Let's look at it this way: Why does anyone use a keyboard over a gamepad given they are playing an FPS on their PC? They certainly make gamepads for computers and they work perfectly fine and yet they still aren't really widely used for FPSs on PC's, as anyone stopped to actually consider why that is? I believe it's the simple fact that the majority of people prefer the much more advanced options you can exploit with your keyboard.
For example. I have a Razer Tarantula gaming keyboard. Other than just the usual keys my keyboard also has a five macro keys on either side I can use for anything. There is also a profile button to switch between one of twelve button configs I have set up for different games. Now I realize this type of set-up is quite a bit more than the usual gamer has, but can any of you honestly admit that you wouldn't enjoy having a macro key built into your keyboard that will (in the case of COD4) throw a flashbang -and- switch to your side arm all with the press of one button (it's one of my dick around macros, fun for flashing a room then killing the occupants with my pistol)?
At any rate, I digress. The bottom line is any control scheme designed to work with a gamepad is going to be fundamentally dumbed down so it will fit within the confines the number of buttons on a gamepad. For those of you that disagree, think about this: How many skills do you want your character to have? Well if you want to use a gamepad the answer better be, "not too many".
Break it down to each button and really think about it. Let's say this is for an xbox 360 controller. Ok so that gives you a right and left trigger, right and left bumper, four buttons, two sticks (push-in controls) and a d-pad with 8 directions (which isn't that great for quick-switching in some instances). So let's say you're playing an archer and the control scheme is set-up something like this: Left trigger uses skills, right trigger is regular attack, right bumper uses health pots, left bumper uses mana (or whatever your skill-pool) pots, A is jump, X interacts with objects and people, Y activates your character info and related info and B cancels (basically your standard RPG control setup). Let's add in the ability put your skills on a dias and switch them with the d-pad like in Oblivion. So that means you can switch between 8 abilities on the fly with a rather increased margin of error plus an extra lag-time for skill usage since you have to hit an extra key to use them, which isn't that big of a deal. But what else does that mean? Will the UI be cluttered with a large, circle so you can keep in mind what skills you have set up on it or will it be hidden most of the time? What about the rest of your skills? You've got to have more than eight freaking skills right? It's an mmo you CAN'T pause to switch weapons or skills. What happens if you get in a situation where your melee weapon would suit you better than your bow and you -don't- have time to stop, go into your inventory, find your melee weapon(s), equip them, re-set your skill dais with your melee weapon skills? You're hosed, that's what.
Now say those kinds of situations are taken completely out of the equation. What happens to the game? You've just taken out a large portion of skill and whacked a large portion of strategy in the face. Do you honestly think a game like that is going to be even a -good- mmo? I say no, but that's just me.
Sure a lot of the time in mmo's you grind and you really don't need a good interface in order to do that. However, what you're forgetting is about the situations that call for complex, changeable interfaces. Raids and pvp being at the forefront of those instances. You CAN'T have even a good MMO without both and the end game of both of these are what define great mmos and what keep mmos alive. If you dumb down an interface to the point that you people saying, "I'd love to be able to grind on my couch with a gamepad." well, again, you have to think about what happens end game? The whole point of all your grinding is to get to the end game content, isn't it? Anyway, I'm just repeating myself at this point.
I think WOW pretty much has shown that your statement is NOT true. In fact, the majority of WOW players have never seen the inside of a raid dungeon.
Furthermore, the need to "get stuff" does not necessarily equate the need to go hardcore. I can see casual players gravitate towards easier, grinding games like Maple stories. You can do something like Maple Story *easy* on a console.
The whole disscussion is being based off of bad numbers and personal preference. The fact remains that a current gen console can work with MMOs. The same input devices can be used, and the same games can be played. As for modding and what not, thats an area of preference. Not every MMO player will use mods, many of them are purists, or dont want the possible keylogger/virus etc that could be packed with one.
As for how games like CoD4 and unreal have different player sizes based on each platform, thats mainly due to the servers used, and can be easily corrected.
Graphics are another area of preference. MMOs do not need bleeding edge graphics to be insanly popular (example; WoW)
Input device is again preference. As is raiding. Hardcore 'gotta get it all' is preference as well.
Pretty much the whole disscussion is Preference vs. ability. The ability for MMOs to be successful on consoles is there. The ability for the same game to coexist is there. Preference is just a matter of taste.
There are 3 types of people in the world.
1.) Those who make things happen
2.) Those who watch things happen
3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
I think WOW pretty much has shown that your statement is NOT true. In fact, the majority of WOW players have never seen the inside of a raid dungeon.
Furthermore, the need to "get stuff" does not necessarily equate the need to go hardcore. I can see casual players gravitate towards easier, grinding games like Maple stories. You can do something like Maple Story *easy* on a console.
So you're fact, have anything to support that? Because of the two different servers I have played on as alliance and horde respectively practically every person I ran into had at least one end game epic from either pvp (technically still a raid) or from one of the raids themselves. So, again, based on personal experience I'd say more people play into end game content than not.And...wow you really went there. Maple Story? You really think Maple Story would attract ps3 or 360 owners in enough of a way to warrant porting it? You do realize that when any game developer pushes an mmo they promote the grander (end game) aspects of the game, right? Most Western gamers don't really care for mindless grinding, they want to do the fun stuff, the actual content and what not.
there is no debate....mmorpg should always be for pc....
only game that has pulled it off well on the consoles id FF11
As far as server numbers being correct well, it's not that simple. I'm not familiar with how the ps3 online works, but as far as servers go it can't be super different from the 360. The fact is the servers aren't in the hands of the gamers. While (in the case of COD4) someone can take a fairly a tower and turn it into a dedicated server, it's not something you can do with the same game on consoles.
Also, it's not about "having it all" it's a matter of, "this is where the majority of the fun, immersiive content is (raiding/mass pvp) and I want to enjoy that at least somewhat". The fact is consoles currently can -not- run an mmo in the same fashion as on PCs. This is pretty evident by even the upcoming release of Age of Conan having to push back their 360 release by most likely an extra year (my guess is they'll end up scrapping it anyway)
And FF11 didn't even succeed in a huge way on the 360. I don't think stores even stock it anymore.
And FF11 didn't even succeed in a huge way on the 360. I don't think stores even stock it anymore.
there is allot of stock....only reason it didn't succeed on the 360 is because people want kick ass graphics on the 360...not 5 year old graphics....
it done well on ps2 though 
And FF11 didn't even succeed in a huge way on the 360. I don't think stores even stock it anymore.
there is allot of stock....only reason it didn't succeed on the 360 is because people want kick ass graphics on the 360...not 5 year old graphics....
it done well on ps2 though 
Even then what do you define as 'doing well' on consoles? To me, that means 350,000-500,000 copies of a game sold. I don't think even combined that many sold for consoles. It must just be my stores, I haven't seen FF11 stocked at any stores around me in months if not a year. Not that it really matters to me since, as I said before, I found the controls for FF11 to be too constrictive.
And FF11 didn't even succeed in a huge way on the 360. I don't think stores even stock it anymore.
there is allot of stock....only reason it didn't succeed on the 360 is because people want kick ass graphics on the 360...not 5 year old graphics....
it done well on ps2 though 
Even then what do you define as 'doing well' on consoles? To me, that means 350,000-500,000 copies of a game sold. I don't think even combined that many sold for consoles. It must just be my stores, I haven't seen FF11 stocked at any stores around me in months if not a year. Not that it really matters to me since, as I said before, I found the controls for FF11 to be too constrictive.
ff11 was always meant to be played with a game controllerNehterless hardware is a big plus for consoles in that you only need to upgrade every few years. Course the price to pay is that you are mostly behind the times hardware wise. And you cant do much more than play games.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
"As for how games like CoD4 and unreal have different player sizes based on each platform, thats mainly due to the servers used, and can be easily corrected."
no that is not true
max player limit for ps3 unreal 3 is 16 .... end of storry
and no it is not a question of the server
I am a PC purist, I hate consoles, and I hate console games, because are dumbed down games (but God of War, that is awesome).
But I will love to see a good MMO on the console, and I think is feasible. Maybe the control scheme will be totally different. Toolbars are mousefriendly, so will use something else.
The chat thing is a problem, but you can do as in DDO, voicechat with the guys on your team. There are problems, because there must be updates, and patchets, etc.. and updating will be slowed down by sony/microsoft/nintendo to avoid open a hole that able crack the system.
I want this to ocurre, and I want to see it, but I suspect can be another financial suicide, has this stuff may sux. Is really hard to make a AAA game, but a MMORPG is even harder, maybe 2 order of magnitures harder.
ya "Resistance 2" may cause me to go out and buy a PS3. I already own a 360, purchased it specifically to play "Mass Effect".
60 person multiplayer on a console is very tempting
"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a robot foot stomping on a human face -- forever."
Why is this even debated? There are way to many pros going for console based MMORPG's compared to the number of cons when it comes to PC based MMORPG's.
Cons of PC based MMORPG's:
1) The number of OS's it needs to be written for.
2) The overwhelming differences in PC builds - hundreds if not thousands of variations.
3) Production times due to those variations.
4) Production cost due to all the above.
Pros for Console Based MMORPG's
1) Everyone has the same console with the same tech in it. Much easier to code a game under those circumstances. Production time drops from an average of 4 years to produce an MMORPG to just under 2 years.
2) Consoles run games - period. Resources of the console are not used by some system hungry OS running in the background. So the game will no doubt run smoother and the code will be much tighter than what you'll find in a PC based MMORPG.
3) The console gaming market is 10x's the number of PC based games and that means you have way more console gamers than PC gamers. You'd stand a much better chance to have WoW type subscriber numbers via a console based MMORPG.
4) You'll see less hacks and cheats and even if they do crop up the game developer will have a much easier time squashing them.
5) It is way cheaper to upgrade a console than any PC based gaming rig. Lets face it. If a newer version of the Xbox came out it would cost about $350 to $500 dollars and have better graphics than the latest greatest PC based gaming rig. Console games have "overall" better graphics - period.
I'll simply state this about PC vs Console: I'm a diehard Deus Ex fan, and console programming helped kill DX2.
I'll never forgive consoles for that, either.
End of story.
.:| Kevyne@Shandris - Armory |:. - When WoW was #1 - .:| I AM A HOLY PALADIN - Guild Theme |:.
well they managed to export FPS games to console and were very sucessfull. i will never understand how ppl can play FPS with controler but they do and buy the games like crazy many times more then pc gamers.
there were alotta articles on the web lately about "pc gaming is dieing" and they mostly predicted no bright future for it
so MMORPGs will go the same way soon iam sure. console market is so much more profitable
but it can have benefits also. no bots/hacks and private servers, or at least less.
Sigh. So much misinformation and opinions being stated in this thread as fact and evidence.
I don't even need to provide any references or links. The simple fact that Funcom, Sony and many other huge name companies with plenty of experience are investing millions into console MMO's is reason enough.
Do you seriously think these companies invested millions without doing studies, polls, interviews, marketing research, etc.? The business execs want to see proof of return on investment. So obviously, there is convincing evidence that a console MMORPG could very well succeed.
BTW, many industry experts have stated over and over again that WoW's success is heavily due to its accessibility. It's easy to learn to play and easy on system requirements. It's totally wrong to say that console technology is the reason why it won't succeed.
What debate?
The games I like are released almost exclusively on the PC.
End of debate.
its because they use the same sort of "auto aiming" foudn in games like Doom, you didnt have to aim up or down and it would shoot things that where above or below you. Console use the same sort of thing they just narrow the cone of where it will auto aim for.
technicly there was already a mmo on a console, it was for the sega dreamcast, i bleave it was phantsy star online. It was ok, it was a scifi game, at least i think it was the name of it.
So it is doable, because it has already been done. there was a keyboard attachment for the conosle, but that was mainly used for typing.
Sorry, but that is such an pointless statement. It doesn't matter to anyone but you whether or not you like PC or console games.
It matters to the companies that sell games. The bottom line dollar drives the development dollar, and sales makes the point.
Clearly, consoles are the current owner of development dollars as they drive an overwhelming amount of sales. This may change, and it's all a matter of speculation.
But one thing is clear, prior trends do not guarantee future performance. If game makers make the games I like (typically MMOGs, simulations, open-ended RPGs, and complex strategy games) on consoles then I'll probably be playing on consoles.
The point? I know I'm not alone in liking a segment of the market that console developers generally ignore. If they stop ignoring, they continue to profit.
...
All of that still condenses quite nicely into the declarative:
The games I like are released almost exclusively on the PC.