I for one will drop everything on the pc (mmo) wise an will support every action Undead Labs take.
consoles are way more powerful when it comes to enjoyment within titles, they hold a style that PC will never gain an as you PC gamers think you out class every option a console has, it will 180 on you every time.
its the true form of Connection.
developers have not reached the point of seeing what is possible within the element of movement.
PC = you shelter yourselves with hardwear forming isolation within movement an voice.
consoles= forming a relation an innovation towards bonding with a community if its friends crashing over, grinding it up for hours at a time with a stack of cans on the floor an snack covered tables screaming "get get get YES ACHEIVMENT! IN YOUR FACE END GAME BOSS!" to posting comments on twitter/facebook when beating something you are proud for.
social interaction has evolved into a more stylized powerhouse, join it or be "outdated"
xbox live brings every element for online community to a bigger state a polished way to jump from game to game helping anyone on your friends list trying to achieve something.
its a form of MMO itself
Console is the Future of MMO's
If I had an award I could give out for spewing the biggest pile of crap, then you sir would earn this reward.
Everquest Online Adventures = little known PS2 MMO, why is it little known? Cause its a load of old rubbish, the console cannot do what the PC can do. Final Fantasy XI on the PS2 and 360? Restrictive. FFXI couldn't update in fear of upseting console gamers. Resident Evil Online? Ohh it got shut down...
You say you will drop anything to support some development team because there bringing MMOs to the consoles, but they have already been around for some time. Grab a copy of FFXI and start supporting my friend!
Console game's are not made for longevity. Companies don't invest long term into console titles, they tend to get there money off a new title during the first year then kick-it to the curb and start development on their next title.
Console games will never invest long term into an mmo style game.....
Thats obviously not true, Consoles are doing more and more DLCs, you see companies supporting games for much longer, such as borderlands who's last DLC was almost a year after release.
I see them expanding on SPG's all the time nowadays, I don't see why they wouldn't for an MMO.
I depends on your definition of longevity.
I'm guessing MMORPGs' lifecycles to be somewhere between 5 and 15 years. Or as long as it has enough subscriptions to sustain the title.
Non-MMO games don't really live beyond 2 years. Sometimes more for extreme classics (such as SimCity4, Civilization sequel, Counterstrike, ...) but most games don't really offer anymore expansions after 2 years. Since this most console are now plugged on our home networks we may see otherwise, but I think it's too early to tell.
All he is saying is that MMOs should be less about the mathmatics and more about action. Replace the numbers with literal actions. That sounds brilliant in my opinion.
He is almost correct with the consoles as well. WIth consoles you never have to update your hardware and all that jazz. Just buy the console and your guarenteed every game you buy for it to run at optimal speeds.
Longevity? Look at FFXI, it released on PS2 and when the next generation of consoles came out they updated it to be playable on them (at least the 360...not sure about ps3) but it is possible to keep an MMO running on the consoles for an extended period of time.
No idea why so many people dislike the idea of console MMOs. Of course the maturity level might be lower but that is the same on the PC. Just look at WoW, Champions and some other MMOs. Their communities range from complete immature children to very mature people. Why can't it be the same for this MMO? (No offense to the WoW and Champion communities..its just an observation with my stay with those two MMOs.)
Console game's are not made for longevity. Companies don't invest long term into console titles, they tend to get there money off a new title during the first year then kick-it to the curb and start development on their next title.
Console games will never invest long term into an mmo style game.....
Thats obviously not true, Consoles are doing more and more DLCs, you see companies supporting games for much longer, such as borderlands who's last DLC was almost a year after release.
I see them expanding on SPG's all the time nowadays, I don't see why they wouldn't for an MMO.
I depends on your definition of longevity.
I'm guessing MMORPGs' lifecycles to be somewhere between 5 and 15 years. Or as long as it has enough subscriptions to sustain the title.
Non-MMO games don't really live beyond 2 years. Sometimes more for extreme classics (such as SimCity4, Civilization sequel, Counterstrike, ...) but most games don't really offer anymore expansions after 2 years. Since this most console are now plugged on our home networks we may see otherwise, but I think it's too early to tell.
Can't really complain there, but the main difference between MMOs and SPGs is, usually MMOs have more content - because of the payment model, while SPGs usually have better playability.
Its true that (SP console titles) aren't built to last, but that lies more so in the genre then the platform. An MMO for console isn't going to cut and run after 6 months to a year unless they weren't making any money. Even mediocre MMOs on console have stuck around much longer then they should have because they appear to be profitable. A smash hit could really change perceptions of what we can expect a console to do.
I am not going to get into the console vs. PC thing, but I really hate the idea of more "action" in my MMORPGs. In fact, I hate the idea of more emphasis on it being a "game" and less on it being a "world". I mean, I like action games too, but that's not what I play MMORPGs for.
Also, there is an increasing variety in MMO games, and some of them are more action and less math. There's still plenty of room in the large player base online gaming format for many different kinds of games.
But that's not to say that there's anything WRONG with MMORPGs as they are and as they have been. If they aren't your thing, they aren't your thing.
I am not going to get into the console vs. PC thing, but I really hate the idea of more "action" in my MMORPGs. In fact, I hate the idea of more emphasis on it being a "game" and less on it being a "world". I mean, I like action games too, but that's not what I play MMORPGs for.
Also, there is an increasing variety in MMO games, and some of them are more action and less math. There's still plenty of room in the large player base online gaming format for many different kinds of games.
But that's not to say that there's anything WRONG with MMORPGs as they are and as they have been. If they aren't your thing, they aren't your thing.
Good post, and I completely agree. I think it outlines the position in which the original article stems from. MMORPGs are very much so as much a social gathering tool as they are an online game.
What the developer states is that, they are hardly games, and you see this starting to turn more in the current MMO scene to a lot of more action oriented games.
Theres nothing wrong with MMORPGs as they are currently, and theres nothing wrong with wanting more action if thats where your demographic is. Really, there shouldn't even be a question of platform as gameplay transcends what system you are playing on. A fun game created for consoles but playable on a PC won't suddenly make the game not fun.
Its just that we see more dedicated action roles on consoles then we do on PC, and thats where the developer may be blurring the lines where they needn't be blurred.
Can't really complain there, but the main difference between MMOs and SPGs is, usually MMOs have more content - because of the payment model, while SPGs usually have better playability.
Its true that (SP console titles) aren't built to last, but that lies more so in the genre then the platform. An MMO for console isn't going to cut and run after 6 months to a year unless they weren't making any money. Even mediocre MMOs on console have stuck around much longer then they should have because they appear to be profitable. A smash hit could really change perceptions of what we can expect a console to do.
I agree, and I would add non-MMO are also easier to have sequels... For example, Bioware is working on Dragon Age 2. It's not a DLC or an expansion pack. It's going to be released a year and a half after DA:O. And DA's fanbase is going to jump on this title as soon as it ships. You cannot really do the same for MMOs.
To quote my post in the other Undead Labs thread made a while ago:
[quote]
To many people using their time machines way to much. You cannot judge whether this game will be successful or not considering the company itself was only formed a year ago. The game is still in early stages of development, and it'll take a while for it to be released.
Secondly, why in the world are people saying 'oh it'll suck on a console, PCs are much better!!'. They aren't porting the game over from PC. They are designing the game FOR the console. I think it stands to reason that the game will be designed around console controls and capabilities. So to say 'oh you can't get that much customizability and control as you can on a PC' is ridiculous. The game will obviously be designed with console controls in mind, not computer controls.
Thirdly, to say it'll suck because it has rarely been done is ridiculous. A successful MMO on a console could open up a whole new market for the MMO industry. Give it time. You can't judge the success of a new MMO when it's still in early stages of development.
Fourthly, do you people not know that quite a few of the developers are from ArenaNet. You know, that company that designed Guild Wars 1, and currently making Guild Wars 2. The company was formed by a former ArenaNet employee. I'm willing to bet money that this MMO will have a similar payment model as Guild Wars, as in buy to play. I have no idea if it will turn out this way, but I'm willing to bet it will turn out that way.[/quote]
Now to add a few things in response to a few of the comments I've seen in this thread:
From what it sounds like, Undead Labs wants to make a game that you play purely to have fun. Your not playing the game like it's a full-time job. It sounds like they want it to be a game where you get on, blow a few things up, have a blast, then get off and move on with your life. I love the idea.
But then, I've always wondered why people think it's fun to treat a game like it's a job, rather than a fun stress relief. To be honest, even in WoW i don't do calculations to see what would be most optimal. My method: try it. If its good and you have a blast your in good shape. If not, scrap it and try something else.
I don't know about you, but IMO the most important question any developer should ask is "will our players have a lot of fun doing this or are our players going to treat this like its another job". I don't know. Maybe i'm just speaking blesphemy and I should be condemed for heresy.
I don't know about you, but IMO the most important question any developer should ask is "will our players have a lot of fun doing this or are our players going to treat this like its another job". I don't know. Maybe i'm just speaking blesphemy and I should be condemed for heresy.
I think 'fun' is really subject to one's point of interest
IMHO PC gaming is still where you break the mold at in areas of technology, new ideas, longevity, etc. I will stick with PC gaming for the forseeable future...
I don't know about you, but IMO the most important question any developer should ask is "will our players have a lot of fun doing this or are our players going to treat this like its another job". I don't know. Maybe i'm just speaking blesphemy and I should be condemed for heresy.
I think 'fun' is really subject to one's point of interest
That is true. I was refering to the joy most people get from seeing something go boom. I suppose there are some people that do find all the mathematics fun, and like games that are like second jobs.
On another note, why are we talking about the technical aspects of "oh it cant be done! Action oriented MMOs arent meant to exist because of ping!"...while this may not be an MMO but what about all those FPS's. Sure ping rules a lot there, but that hasnt stopped thousands of players from enjoying it. There will be a crowd for this game and of course there wont be a crowd for it. If a zombie MMO isnt for you, maybe just at least reserve your judgement for when we actually see the game in action? That's my only suggestion. Rather than saying "oh it cant be done! this game is going to fail! it's going to be no good!", why not just wait and see how the game turns out? Then decide whether the game is good for you or not. That's basically what I was getting at with my last post.
Edit: off-topic, how the heck do you make quotes, without clicking the little button on the corner of the post? Did I do the quote tags right? Are there quote tags? Thanks in advance.
Until they successfully release this "great console mmo" or ANY game for that matter, I see and hear nothing but blowhard bullshit, the same shit I've seen/heard before each and every epic failure in the industry. John Carmack ( Daikatana) got made a bitch, Bill Roper ( Hellgate: London, Champions Online), got rope-a-doped, Realtime Worlds ( APB ) got a realtime ass kicking etc., etc.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.- -And on the 8th day, man created God.-
I think he got a point. Personaly I hope mmo's make it to consoles. Would however need some good ideas to make the controls worthy.
Either way, except for fps/mmo and a handfull of rts gamers, pc gaming is dying.
You bumped your head, dude. We have 99% of the same games the consoles do, with better graphics and more content in most cases. Not to mention we have PC only games that are not mmos or rts games, Drakensang: the River of TIme being just the latest RPG on PC.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.- -And on the 8th day, man created God.-
I think he got a point. Personaly I hope mmo's make it to consoles. Would however need some good ideas to make the controls worthy.
Either way, except for fps/mmo and a handfull of rts gamers, pc gaming is dying.
You bumped your head, dude. We have 99% of the same games the consoles do, with better graphics and more content in most cases. Not to mention we have PC only games that are not mmos or rts games, Drakensang: the River of TIme being just the latest RPG on PC.
No, no you don't. PCs eventually get ports of the same games (sometimes), that never outsell the consoles. You have Console exclusive titles that you never see on PC and PC titles you don't see on console.
Neither is dying, but its apparent that there are plenty of games that we don't see a prevalence of going cross-system from console to PC and PC to console.
If you aren't playing games across all of the systems, you're really missing out.
I think he got a point. Personaly I hope mmo's make it to consoles. Would however need some good ideas to make the controls worthy.
Either way, except for fps/mmo and a handfull of rts gamers, pc gaming is dying.
You bumped your head, dude. We have 99% of the same games the consoles do, with better graphics and more content in most cases. Not to mention we have PC only games that are not mmos or rts games, Drakensang: the River of TIme being just the latest RPG on PC.
No, no you don't. PCs eventually get ports of the same games (sometimes), that never outsell the consoles. You have Console exclusive titles that you never see on PC and PC titles you don't see on console.
Neither is dying, but its apparent that there are plenty of games that we don't see a prevalence of going cross-system from console to PC and PC to console.
If you aren't playing games across all of the systems, you're really missing out.
It's funny that I have a 360, a PS3, and a PC and yet the consoles sit collecting dust 90% of the time because the same games are available for PC then. The last major games I bought for console that didn't have PC counterparts were FFXIII, Red Dead Redemption, Lost Odyssey, and Resonance of Fate.
I suppose if you want to count crappy "arcade" games, PSN rereleases of old games, or this years batch of recycled sports games then maybe you can say there's more console games than PC, but if that's the case, I'll just stick to my "dying" choice. LOL
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.- -And on the 8th day, man created God.-
he's actually completely right. we need more people like him. i've believed this for a long time. MMO's are ages behind any console game. they're just now breaking through the tab targeting rut and going into the manual aim system. consoles have been doing this for years now. i would love to see some real combat in a MMO soon.
Most mmo released last year , problem is they released it too soon , without enough contents .
Sorry lets take red dead redemption and GTA for example , those games are like old style MMO´s just without the levelup system . those worlds are sandbox to a degree , imagine connection all the areas together with a levelup system .
Would blow away most of the current so called new releases of mmo´s .
Now sadly i do not agree mmo´s to be played on consoles .
MMO´s are about social interactions , trough typing or teamspeak or what ever needed to get that social interaction .
For longer period of time say 4-6 hours ? or lets say 10-20 hours a week atleast .
Imagine that time holding a controller (now before saint you say we can purchase a keyboard etc )
There is another factor you forgot about console mmo´s .
Console market target short term players , the need to buy the next console game is what keeps them afloat.
MMO is a long term investment , time spend on playing a console mmo , wouldn´t suddece most console gamers.
(yes your target you talk about are those who switch from a pc to a console , that might be valid , but its not a big group)
Example how much i love wow , i cannot play it on my wii or ps3 , even if i bought a keyboard .
My consoles is just for that , gaming short time gaming , get the last release game play it or discard it . finish it within a week , then move on .
Or Maybe i am wrong and you are right , that console gamers have evolved .
obviously you haven't played a console game in quite some time, because almost everything you just stated was wrong. consoles target short term players? tell that to the guys that play MW2 30-40 hours a week.
I think what most people don't get is this, a fps mmo would work on a consol, a full on mmo won't. Before you freak out think really hard about all those hot bottons on your keyboard that link to all your skills on the computer screen. Now think your control is working like the wasd keys and the mouse. So that means one button for jump, one for interaction with on screen crap, and the rest to pull up menus of moves. Thats how it would work without a keyboard and a mouse, or if they get reall creative the bumpers change hot bars and turn the sticks to a mouse pointer and you click the skills you want.
But thats not an action game you say, that is because mmo's arn't action. They are closer to old school pen and pager rpg's, your character, quests, feats, skills, and loot all there. An action game is run and gun or hack and slash, limited to no skills. The world this guy is suggesting will be somewhere between fury and apb. And we all know how those worked out don't we.
I think he got a point. Personaly I hope mmo's make it to consoles. Would however need some good ideas to make the controls worthy.
Either way, except for fps/mmo and a handfull of rts gamers, pc gaming is dying.
You bumped your head, dude. We have 99% of the same games the consoles do, with better graphics and more content in most cases. Not to mention we have PC only games that are not mmos or rts games, Drakensang: the River of TIme being just the latest RPG on PC.
It sounds like these guys aren't really interested in making an RPG.
The idea is to disguise what we now consider to be multiplayer games as MMORPGs so that they can do less (for a MMORPG) but make more money (for a multiplayer game).
I think he got a point. Personaly I hope mmo's make it to consoles. Would however need some good ideas to make the controls worthy.
Either way, except for fps/mmo and a handfull of rts gamers, pc gaming is dying.
You bumped your head, dude. We have 99% of the same games the consoles do, with better graphics and more content in most cases. Not to mention we have PC only games that are not mmos or rts games, Drakensang: the River of TIme being just the latest RPG on PC.
No, no you don't. PCs eventually get ports of the same games (sometimes), that never outsell the consoles. You have Console exclusive titles that you never see on PC and PC titles you don't see on console.
Neither is dying, but its apparent that there are plenty of games that we don't see a prevalence of going cross-system from console to PC and PC to console.
If you aren't playing games across all of the systems, you're really missing out.
It's funny that I have a 360, a PS3, and a PC and yet the consoles sit collecting dust 90% of the time because the same games are available for PC then. The last major games I bought for console that didn't have PC counterparts were FFXIII, Red Dead Redemption, Lost Odyssey, and Resonance of Fate.
I suppose if you want to count crappy "arcade" games, PSN rereleases of old games, or this years batch of recycled sports games then maybe you can say there's more console games than PC, but if that's the case, I'll just stick to my "dying" choice. LOL
Whatever you say, but there are plenty of titles out there, and others that are coming out, that will be great: The entire Zelda/Metroid/Mario series, GoW, and Gears of War series, Little Big Planet, infamous, you'll have to wait for Fable, and you won't be playing the second one anytime soon, many of the Halo series, the forza series, the kingdom hearts series, Final Fantasy series (most of it) not really getting into sports games or anything like that, but there are more than enough console only exclusives.
Plus I've never said the PC was dying, but unless you were trying to be fecetious I'd consider you rather blind as a gamer or at least "limited" to have the ability to play a plethora of great games and not capitalize on that.
Then again, sometimes its easier to *lolz* and condescend then realize there might be more then you first thought, or at least plenty of merit to console choices that others deem enjoyable.
I think he got a point. Personaly I hope mmo's make it to consoles. Would however need some good ideas to make the controls worthy.
Either way, except for fps/mmo and a handfull of rts gamers, pc gaming is dying.
You bumped your head, dude. We have 99% of the same games the consoles do, with better graphics and more content in most cases. Not to mention we have PC only games that are not mmos or rts games, Drakensang: the River of TIme being just the latest RPG on PC.
No, no you don't. PCs eventually get ports of the same games (sometimes), that never outsell the consoles. You have Console exclusive titles that you never see on PC and PC titles you don't see on console.
Neither is dying, but its apparent that there are plenty of games that we don't see a prevalence of going cross-system from console to PC and PC to console.
If you aren't playing games across all of the systems, you're really missing out.
It's funny that I have a 360, a PS3, and a PC and yet the consoles sit collecting dust 90% of the time because the same games are available for PC then. The last major games I bought for console that didn't have PC counterparts were FFXIII, Red Dead Redemption, Lost Odyssey, and Resonance of Fate.
I suppose if you want to count crappy "arcade" games, PSN rereleases of old games, or this years batch of recycled sports games then maybe you can say there's more console games than PC, but if that's the case, I'll just stick to my "dying" choice. LOL
Whatever you say, but there are plenty of titles out there, and others that are coming out, that will be great: The entire Zelda/Metroid/Mario series, GoW, and Gears of War series, Little Big Planet, infamous, you'll have to wait for Fable, and you won't be playing the second one anytime soon, many of the Halo series, the forza series, the kingdom hearts series, Final Fantasy series (most of it) not really getting into sports games or anything like that, but there are more than enough console only exclusives.
Plus I've never said the PC was dying, but unless you were trying to be fecetious I'd consider you rather blind as a gamer or at least "limited" to have the ability to play a plethora of great games and not capitalize on that.
Then again, sometimes its easier to *lolz* and condescend then realize there might be more then you first thought, or at least plenty of merit to console choices that others deem enjoyable.
Look at the quote block, the "PC is dying" bit was Forumfall's contribution, which I disputed and then you joined in. I wasn't saying you said it. His original argument was also that PC only has FPS/mmos and rts games, which was my next point of dispute. As for the "lolz and condending", I was trying for neither.
I also never said there was no "merit to console choices that others deem enjoyable".
I'm wondering if you and I are even arguing about the same thing.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.- -And on the 8th day, man created God.-
Comments
If I had an award I could give out for spewing the biggest pile of crap, then you sir would earn this reward.
Everquest Online Adventures = little known PS2 MMO, why is it little known? Cause its a load of old rubbish, the console cannot do what the PC can do. Final Fantasy XI on the PS2 and 360? Restrictive. FFXI couldn't update in fear of upseting console gamers. Resident Evil Online? Ohh it got shut down...
You say you will drop anything to support some development team because there bringing MMOs to the consoles, but they have already been around for some time. Grab a copy of FFXI and start supporting my friend!
I depends on your definition of longevity.
I'm guessing MMORPGs' lifecycles to be somewhere between 5 and 15 years. Or as long as it has enough subscriptions to sustain the title.
Non-MMO games don't really live beyond 2 years. Sometimes more for extreme classics (such as SimCity4, Civilization sequel, Counterstrike, ...) but most games don't really offer anymore expansions after 2 years. Since this most console are now plugged on our home networks we may see otherwise, but I think it's too early to tell.
hehe. fixed
Swallow >> shallow
ty
All he is saying is that MMOs should be less about the mathmatics and more about action. Replace the numbers with literal actions. That sounds brilliant in my opinion.
He is almost correct with the consoles as well. WIth consoles you never have to update your hardware and all that jazz. Just buy the console and your guarenteed every game you buy for it to run at optimal speeds.
Longevity? Look at FFXI, it released on PS2 and when the next generation of consoles came out they updated it to be playable on them (at least the 360...not sure about ps3) but it is possible to keep an MMO running on the consoles for an extended period of time.
No idea why so many people dislike the idea of console MMOs. Of course the maturity level might be lower but that is the same on the PC. Just look at WoW, Champions and some other MMOs. Their communities range from complete immature children to very mature people. Why can't it be the same for this MMO? (No offense to the WoW and Champion communities..its just an observation with my stay with those two MMOs.)
Can't really complain there, but the main difference between MMOs and SPGs is, usually MMOs have more content - because of the payment model, while SPGs usually have better playability.
Its true that (SP console titles) aren't built to last, but that lies more so in the genre then the platform. An MMO for console isn't going to cut and run after 6 months to a year unless they weren't making any money. Even mediocre MMOs on console have stuck around much longer then they should have because they appear to be profitable. A smash hit could really change perceptions of what we can expect a console to do.
I am not going to get into the console vs. PC thing, but I really hate the idea of more "action" in my MMORPGs. In fact, I hate the idea of more emphasis on it being a "game" and less on it being a "world". I mean, I like action games too, but that's not what I play MMORPGs for.
Also, there is an increasing variety in MMO games, and some of them are more action and less math. There's still plenty of room in the large player base online gaming format for many different kinds of games.
But that's not to say that there's anything WRONG with MMORPGs as they are and as they have been. If they aren't your thing, they aren't your thing.
Good post, and I completely agree. I think it outlines the position in which the original article stems from. MMORPGs are very much so as much a social gathering tool as they are an online game.
What the developer states is that, they are hardly games, and you see this starting to turn more in the current MMO scene to a lot of more action oriented games.
Theres nothing wrong with MMORPGs as they are currently, and theres nothing wrong with wanting more action if thats where your demographic is. Really, there shouldn't even be a question of platform as gameplay transcends what system you are playing on. A fun game created for consoles but playable on a PC won't suddenly make the game not fun.
Its just that we see more dedicated action roles on consoles then we do on PC, and thats where the developer may be blurring the lines where they needn't be blurred.
I agree, and I would add non-MMO are also easier to have sequels... For example, Bioware is working on Dragon Age 2. It's not a DLC or an expansion pack. It's going to be released a year and a half after DA:O. And DA's fanbase is going to jump on this title as soon as it ships. You cannot really do the same for MMOs.
To quote my post in the other Undead Labs thread made a while ago:
[quote]
To many people using their time machines way to much. You cannot judge whether this game will be successful or not considering the company itself was only formed a year ago. The game is still in early stages of development, and it'll take a while for it to be released.
Secondly, why in the world are people saying 'oh it'll suck on a console, PCs are much better!!'. They aren't porting the game over from PC. They are designing the game FOR the console. I think it stands to reason that the game will be designed around console controls and capabilities. So to say 'oh you can't get that much customizability and control as you can on a PC' is ridiculous. The game will obviously be designed with console controls in mind, not computer controls.
Thirdly, to say it'll suck because it has rarely been done is ridiculous. A successful MMO on a console could open up a whole new market for the MMO industry. Give it time. You can't judge the success of a new MMO when it's still in early stages of development.
Fourthly, do you people not know that quite a few of the developers are from ArenaNet. You know, that company that designed Guild Wars 1, and currently making Guild Wars 2. The company was formed by a former ArenaNet employee. I'm willing to bet money that this MMO will have a similar payment model as Guild Wars, as in buy to play. I have no idea if it will turn out this way, but I'm willing to bet it will turn out that way.[/quote]
Now to add a few things in response to a few of the comments I've seen in this thread:
From what it sounds like, Undead Labs wants to make a game that you play purely to have fun. Your not playing the game like it's a full-time job. It sounds like they want it to be a game where you get on, blow a few things up, have a blast, then get off and move on with your life. I love the idea.
But then, I've always wondered why people think it's fun to treat a game like it's a job, rather than a fun stress relief. To be honest, even in WoW i don't do calculations to see what would be most optimal. My method: try it. If its good and you have a blast your in good shape. If not, scrap it and try something else.
I don't know about you, but IMO the most important question any developer should ask is "will our players have a lot of fun doing this or are our players going to treat this like its another job". I don't know. Maybe i'm just speaking blesphemy and I should be condemed for heresy.
I think 'fun' is really subject to one's point of interest
IMHO PC gaming is still where you break the mold at in areas of technology, new ideas, longevity, etc. I will stick with PC gaming for the forseeable future...
That is true. I was refering to the joy most people get from seeing something go boom. I suppose there are some people that do find all the mathematics fun, and like games that are like second jobs.
On another note, why are we talking about the technical aspects of "oh it cant be done! Action oriented MMOs arent meant to exist because of ping!"...while this may not be an MMO but what about all those FPS's. Sure ping rules a lot there, but that hasnt stopped thousands of players from enjoying it. There will be a crowd for this game and of course there wont be a crowd for it. If a zombie MMO isnt for you, maybe just at least reserve your judgement for when we actually see the game in action? That's my only suggestion. Rather than saying "oh it cant be done! this game is going to fail! it's going to be no good!", why not just wait and see how the game turns out? Then decide whether the game is good for you or not. That's basically what I was getting at with my last post.
Edit: off-topic, how the heck do you make quotes, without clicking the little button on the corner of the post? Did I do the quote tags right? Are there quote tags? Thanks in advance.
Until they successfully release this "great console mmo" or ANY game for that matter, I see and hear nothing but blowhard bullshit, the same shit I've seen/heard before each and every epic failure in the industry. John Carmack ( Daikatana) got made a bitch, Bill Roper ( Hellgate: London, Champions Online), got rope-a-doped, Realtime Worlds ( APB ) got a realtime ass kicking etc., etc.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.-
-And on the 8th day, man created God.-
I'm currently playing an MMO and it is for both the console and pc.
It is underwhelming in the amount of customization or in just the shear amount of things you can't do.
MMORPGS need to not be redefined and are much better on the PC.
The Stranger: It's what people know about themselves inside that makes 'em afraid.
I think he got a point. Personaly I hope mmo's make it to consoles. Would however need some good ideas to make the controls worthy.
Either way, except for fps/mmo and a handfull of rts gamers, pc gaming is dying.
You bumped your head, dude. We have 99% of the same games the consoles do, with better graphics and more content in most cases. Not to mention we have PC only games that are not mmos or rts games, Drakensang: the River of TIme being just the latest RPG on PC.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.-
-And on the 8th day, man created God.-
No, no you don't. PCs eventually get ports of the same games (sometimes), that never outsell the consoles. You have Console exclusive titles that you never see on PC and PC titles you don't see on console.
Neither is dying, but its apparent that there are plenty of games that we don't see a prevalence of going cross-system from console to PC and PC to console.
If you aren't playing games across all of the systems, you're really missing out.
There's nothing wrong with a console based MMO, as long as it's fun to play I'll play it.
errr... but I'll stick with the pc version myself..
Never trust a screenshot or a youtube video without a version stamp!
It's funny that I have a 360, a PS3, and a PC and yet the consoles sit collecting dust 90% of the time because the same games are available for PC then. The last major games I bought for console that didn't have PC counterparts were FFXIII, Red Dead Redemption, Lost Odyssey, and Resonance of Fate.
I suppose if you want to count crappy "arcade" games, PSN rereleases of old games, or this years batch of recycled sports games then maybe you can say there's more console games than PC, but if that's the case, I'll just stick to my "dying" choice. LOL
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.-
-And on the 8th day, man created God.-
he's actually completely right. we need more people like him. i've believed this for a long time. MMO's are ages behind any console game. they're just now breaking through the tab targeting rut and going into the manual aim system. consoles have been doing this for years now. i would love to see some real combat in a MMO soon.
obviously you haven't played a console game in quite some time, because almost everything you just stated was wrong. consoles target short term players? tell that to the guys that play MW2 30-40 hours a week.
I think what most people don't get is this, a fps mmo would work on a consol, a full on mmo won't. Before you freak out think really hard about all those hot bottons on your keyboard that link to all your skills on the computer screen. Now think your control is working like the wasd keys and the mouse. So that means one button for jump, one for interaction with on screen crap, and the rest to pull up menus of moves. Thats how it would work without a keyboard and a mouse, or if they get reall creative the bumpers change hot bars and turn the sticks to a mouse pointer and you click the skills you want.
But thats not an action game you say, that is because mmo's arn't action. They are closer to old school pen and pager rpg's, your character, quests, feats, skills, and loot all there. An action game is run and gun or hack and slash, limited to no skills. The world this guy is suggesting will be somewhere between fury and apb. And we all know how those worked out don't we.
It sounds like these guys aren't really interested in making an RPG.
The idea is to disguise what we now consider to be multiplayer games as MMORPGs so that they can do less (for a MMORPG) but make more money (for a multiplayer game).
Whatever you say, but there are plenty of titles out there, and others that are coming out, that will be great: The entire Zelda/Metroid/Mario series, GoW, and Gears of War series, Little Big Planet, infamous, you'll have to wait for Fable, and you won't be playing the second one anytime soon, many of the Halo series, the forza series, the kingdom hearts series, Final Fantasy series (most of it) not really getting into sports games or anything like that, but there are more than enough console only exclusives.
Plus I've never said the PC was dying, but unless you were trying to be fecetious I'd consider you rather blind as a gamer or at least "limited" to have the ability to play a plethora of great games and not capitalize on that.
Then again, sometimes its easier to *lolz* and condescend then realize there might be more then you first thought, or at least plenty of merit to console choices that others deem enjoyable.
Look at the quote block, the "PC is dying" bit was Forumfall's contribution, which I disputed and then you joined in. I wasn't saying you said it. His original argument was also that PC only has FPS/mmos and rts games, which was my next point of dispute. As for the "lolz and condending", I was trying for neither.
I also never said there was no "merit to console choices that others deem enjoyable".
I'm wondering if you and I are even arguing about the same thing.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.-
-And on the 8th day, man created God.-