PSX5Central
Playstation/Gaming Discussions => PS3 Discussion => Topic started by: Stupid Mop on May 23, 2001, 04:57:51 PM
-
Monthly acssess fees for play online. Bummer. I\'ll still pay if it isnt too much.
http://ps2.ign.com/news/35105.html
-
I\'m sorry but this is gay, having to pay a fee to play a certain game online. No thanks.
-
I thought this game was for online only. If they charge you to play online then that means you have to pay to play this game.
if a=b
and b=c
then a=c
-
Not only that, but you also gotta buy the game for around 50 bucks translated yen. Gimme a break Square! They should just go the PSO way...frizee!
Eric Jacob
-
Re-read
I hate to be a sticler. Your not paying to play the game. It says that the first game reqiures PlayOnline. You are paying for PlayOnline. An internet service that can be used in place of your present one. As long as I get to use my BroadBand adapter Im happy. Which I can if you read the new information.
http://ps2.ign.com/news/35144.html
-
Caspian, if that\'s the case, then it will be just like paying for Sega\'s online service. It\'s a great deal if you put it that way.
But if it is just an extra monthly fee to play the game, it will be just like paying for Everquest. I think a lot of people will still be interested in it even if it is just an extra fee.
-
and thats the problem. Will people want to give up their ISP to play a game? PlayOnline MUST be used. That is such a gip and a really crappy way (for consumers) to have to play a really anticipated title.
Square pisses me off. You can really tell what companies still make games for the consumer and what companies make games for the money.
Eric Jacob
PS- it is obivous all companies are in it for money, it seems like Sega doesn\'t mind taking a hit on the paycheck as long as the gamers are happy, though.
-
Online play is not near reliable enough BY ANYONE to pay for. Too many connectivity issues. too many cheaters. I\'ll just play a game that\'s free online like Counterstrike. Hell, I\'ll probably still be playing Counterstrike long after I beat FF X.
-
yea and look where sega choices got them
i could care less really i am sure it will be like 5-19 bucks a month and if you don\'t wanna pay that then don\'t buy the game - no one will make you
-
No thanks. If they\'re going to be A-Holes and make you sign up for their service, then they can kiss my penny pinchin american ass. Why not just go the route of SegaNet and allow anyone to play. Hell most of their American audience won\'t be in calling range.. unless they have 1800 numbers to call into. (Which are absolute crap from my experience.) I mean, even if they charged people 20 to 30 bucks a year to play FFXI that\'d still be better than making you use them for an ISP.
Looks like my MMORPG fix will only be PSO for alot longer than I had hoped. (It\'s not like I\'m going to get bored of it too quickly... I hope)
-
Never Fear! PSO v2 will be out soon and once again, should add another 200 odd hours or so to your experience. My friend has racked in over 500 hours! Unbelievable!!
Eric Jacob
-
Never Fear! PSO v2 will be out soon and once again, should add another 200 odd hours or so to your experience. My friend has racked in over 500 hours! Unbelievable!!
I have ranked in over 1500 hours with UT{pc ver}( i no Sad, even lost a girlfriend becuase of it). My first experience with Online play. Once you go online there is no turning back baby!!!
Oh by the way, i haven\'t played UT for 5 months now
-
You didn\'t expect this? I don\'t see how anyone couldn\'t expect this. And you know what, it IS NOT out of line.
Sure, you can play Phantasy Star Online online for free, but there is a big difference between PSO and FFXI.
PSO is basically Diablo, just a set of levels that you can sign on and play through with some buddies. Final Fantasy XI is a persistant world RPG that stays online even when you log-off. It doesn\'t have "levels" like PSO\'s forests, mines, caves and ruins. It has a continuously online world that you enter whenever you play and the thing continues to change even when you\'re offline. This isn\'t true with PSO, they are completely different kinds of online games.
EVERY SINGLE MAJOR PERISTENT WORLD rpg starting with Meridian 69 has had a monthly charge (except for the free beta period on most of them of course). Every last one of them has so why should you expect anything else now? Usually the charge is like $10 or less a month (that was the price for Asheron\'s Call when I was actively playing it). It\'s less than what I pay in gas a month so you know what they can have it so long as the game is fun.
You don\'t see people complaining that Anarchy Online on the PC will have a monthly charge based on the fact that Diable doesn\'t have a monthly charge do you? That same illogical argument is what is used when people cite PSO as a reason FFXI shouldn\'t have a monthly charge.
Also, from what I\'ve read PlayOnline isn\'t an ISP service. It\'s kinda like a separate network that will host all of Square\'s content but it is not an ISP service -- at least that\'s the impression I got.
-
The end very infrequently justifies the means. Although Square will provide gamers with memorable online experiences, those same gamers will be forced to sacrifice their hard earned dollars on a monthly basis in order to play a game they\'ve already purchased. Tell me there isn\'t something wrong with that.
-
There isn\'t anything wrong with that. I have to pay for upkeep on my car. I don\'t just buy it and then expect to get oil changes, tire rotations, inspections, and replacement parts for free. Sure, I can do the maintance myself if I want but I still end up paying for parts outside of the price of the car.
When you buy a persistent RPG you first pay for the initial development. After that your monthly fees are used for upkeep and to pay the programmers that stay on maintaining and updating the game month after month after month. Unlike a stand-alone game where much of the programming staff leaves or goes on to other projects there has to be a staff that stays and maintains the servers and makes sure updates to the world are done.
IMO, $10 a month is a small price to pay for a gaming experience that has much more scope and freedom than a limited "level based" game like Phantasy Star Online.
-
wise words spoken by Rasputin!!!! Very nicely said
-
I hope this isn\'t a trend. I\'ll stop playing games if too many games start charging ****ty fees. And paying monthly for PlayOnline \'instead of\' paying for FFXI alone is just as stupid... **** Square and their ****ty ass games. PSO might have more in common with Diablo, but that doesnt mean it\'s not better (IMO it is). And Sonic Team/Sega isn\'t ripping off it\'s customers.
If I paid $50 for a game, transaction over. I owe the company nothing more to play my game.
-
Very fine words EThugg. I share your sentiments on this Square Online balderdash. Fifty dollars should be enough even for the greediest of game developers.
-
Sega ripped off its customers by dropping the Dreamcast. Square didn\'t do anything that bad.
-
Originally posted by Weltall
Sega ripped off its customers by dropping the Dreamcast. Square didn\'t do anything that bad.
DC\'s paid for itself with more quality games than still currently available on PS2. While sad to see it go, I, and no gamer, was ripped off by buying DC.
-
You see there is a BIG problem with the logic of "it is a REAL MMORPG, it needs a monthly fee". That is hogwash. This is a CONSOLE we are talking about, not a PC. If PS2 wants to further connect itself with PCs, that is there perrogative, but there is no way in hell that they are gonna get 300k people in America to pay after a month even for FF11.
For FF11 you have to buy:
game (50$)
monthly fee (10$)
harddrive - ethernet (est. 100$)
after 5 months of playing you would have spent 200 bucks estimated.
It is bad enough that the ethernet is not included, paying monthly access is just retarded.
Weltall - choosing your words more wisely in the future would accredit a higher opinion of you by me and other sensible games who still think DC is a blast.
Eric Jacob
-
No. I feel ripped off. It\'s great that there are quite a number of nice DC games out there, but when I spend $140 on a system, only to hear 10 days later that it\'s being discontinued, I feel screwed. I buy a system for the long term.
-
I disagree, you may have already got a back catalogue of games which in your opinion makes your purchase worth it, I agree, it was worth it, I just got a dreamcast soley for the back catalogue. However when Sega drop the dreamcast there dropping the future of the console and in turn no more games will be released. Your purchase is now obsolute, leaving you with just the back catalogue which although good, its no excuse for a year or so worth of games which could of been had if Sega continued with the Dreamcast. Although im not saying that Sega made a wrong move, if I was in there postion I would have done the same, but yes they can take the blame since its there fault that the console failed, the third time Sega fans have been burnt (counting 32x, Saturn and then Dreamcast but I could have also mentioned the Mega CD).
As for Final Fantasy XI, its going to be EVEN MORE expensive to play this game in the UK, since we have dearer telephone bills. No doubt you lot will pay a monthly call and that will be all. We will end up paying a MORE EXPENSIVE monthly call and then have to pay for the phone calls PER MINUTE.
I personally won\'t be buying this game unless they can offer free per month and free phone calls to play, but I can\'t see this happening.
The least they could do is give the game to people for say £5 and then charge per month for online time.
-
You all are blowing this way out of preportion. teiresias, PlayOline is like SegaNet in very many ways. You can dial-up to it. You can access it on broadband and it host all of Squares games.
Please remmemebr people that PlayOnline is not only a ISP or Network. It lets you read magazins, hints and tips, and with conjuction of the PS2 camera have video phone conversations.
So please remmember that Play Online is not only just a ISP it is so much more.
-
Am i the only one that thinks this will be a good idea ?
look, it\'s simple fact of life that every service we use requires funding to maintain and develop it.
I play TFC online and have seen many a Free SERVER close due to lack of Funds ETC etc Etc
Barrysworld is a classic example, Free access but things when T!Ts up pritty quick as soon as demand out striped their ability to serve.
ONline Play will alow people to obatin fast internet gaming access to Squaresoft games plus a whole host of other features , sounds good to me.
Also with the investment by the Users we can expect to see an evolution in the way the games are played.
This is a very important feature for that all important replay factor.
Remember you DOn\'t Have to Play FF11 !
and the ironic thing is that..
i can see that most of the People who have been
B!tching about not "wasting" money on a HDD and internet Adaptor, B!tching about this news too.
Why are you people complaining your not even going to get internet access for your PS2.......
-
So 00Seven, You think your the only one who thinks this is a good idea?
-
Originally posted by Caspian
So 00Seven, You think your the only one who thinks this is a good idea?
sorry mate, but it was just reading some of the replys (not yours)
they forget that someone has to fund this online system , if they want more newer charaters, levels and weapons Funding is they way.
-
Originally posted by Weltall
No. I feel ripped off. It\'s great that there are quite a number of nice DC games out there, but when I spend $140 on a system, only to hear 10 days later that it\'s being discontinued, I feel screwed
That is almost funny. I feel sorry for you, I was almost going to buy the DC but I didnt.
-
I agree totally.The creaters of PSO say that they didn\'t want to make PSO a frequently updated game because they wanted to spend more time developing other things. Which is why after (Version 2) they are going to move on.
-
I know, it amazes me how many people want something for nothing and how they refuse to understand the economy of gaming.
I mean look at PSO and PSOversion2. PSO version 2 is adding functionality to PSO (very limited extra functionality IMO, no new levels or anything), yet no one is complaining that they\'ll have to go out and buy PSO version 2 to get that extra functionality. I\'m surprised they aren\'t all saying, "I should be able to walk in and get it for free if I bought the first release of PSO!!"
-
Obviously you are stupid tserias! I don\'t have to correct people amny times, because MOST people look up things before blatantly lying out of there mouths.
PSO v.2 adds -
2 new levels.
Soccer in the lobby with teams and such!
new mags
ability to level 200
ability for mags to go to 999
new weapons
more character variations
quick weapon and item selection.
and so on.
Next time look up things before you just assume you are correct and I wont make fun of you.
Back to the topic -
The thing that is VERY bad about this, is it REQUIRES you to have PlayOnline. requires. I dont care if PlayOnline is exactly the quality SegaNet, if it MAKES you use it, which SegaNet never did, then it is a scam.
Eric Jacob
-
I know ooseven touched on it a little bit but I dont think he stated it fully. Why is everyone complaining about the PlayOnline? I figure most would complain that it is also reqiried (everyones favorite word) to buy the HD Adapter to play the game. Less then 10 Dollars a mounth is nothing. If you beg people for a dolar every day. I garentee you will have ten by the end of the mounth.
-
Not only that, but you also gotta buy the game for around 50 bucks translated yen. Gimme a break Square! They should just go the PSO way...frizee!
Didn\'t mean to single you out Beasty, but I just chose to quote you.
As teiresias already stated, there\'s a huge difference between PSO and a true online RPG such as EverQuest. Maintaining a true and persistent online world takes money. You don\'t like it? Tough. Don\'t pay, and don\'t play. If you think PSO is where it\'s at, go play EverQuest and you will see what being addicted really means. This coming from a fully recovered EQ addict. You guys have no idea. Trust me. People have lost jobs, gotten divorced, and ruined their life because of EQ. No f\'cking joke.
Oh, for the record, I don\'t care for FFXI either, after going through EQ and its hold on me, I\'ve decided I\'ll never go down that route again. I\'m not paying to play either. But regardless of what anyone thinks, the means are justified.
- dm
- the trick is to keep breathing.
-
Originally posted by Caspian
You all are blowing this way out of preportion. teiresias, PlayOline is like SegaNet in very many ways. You can dial-up to it. You can access it on broadband and it host all of Squares games.
Please remmemebr people that PlayOnline is not only a ISP or Network. It lets you read magazins, hints and tips, and with conjuction of the PS2 camera have video phone conversations.
So please remmember that Play Online is not only just a ISP it is so much more.
Ohhhh, a magazine and all Square games online??? Wow, what a bargain! Moron. You can trow your money away... I wont be.
And PSO is a true online game to somme of you that think mainstream EQ is the model to follow. Try getting all the casual solitare gamers to pay for PS2, a HD, and monthly fees while they still have EQ to play....
This thing has failure written all over it. Anyone who thinks this is a good idea?.... come to me, I\'ll shoot you now, so you can stop ruining gaming.
-
And PSO is a true online game to somme of you that think mainstream EQ is the model to follow. Try getting all the casual solitare gamers to pay for PS2, a HD, and monthly fees while they still have EQ to play....
This thing has failure written all over it. Anyone who thinks this is a good idea?.... come to me, I\'ll shoot you now, so you can stop ruining gaming.
Tell that to Verant who is successful as hell thanks to EverQuest. It doesn\'t take 2 million casual gamers for FFXI to be a success. EQ was considered a great success with only 300k subscribers.
Want to argue about it next year when you see that it won\'t be a failure? Or we can continue to spew hot air right now. PSO is a nice game for those who don\'t know any better. (online rpg wise - not to be taken another way.)
- dm
- the trick is to keep breathing.
-
First of all "AlteredBeast" this is what I said, "very limited extra functionality IMO, no new levels or anything."
Notice I said in my opinion. I knew about everything you listed. However, I don\'t believe they add anything significant to the game. Your character and mag can go to a higher level cap -- ooh what genius thought of that!! New weapons, more character variations, new "stuff" overall -- new stuff like this is added monthly in other online games on the PC so I really don\'t see what\'s so huge about that. None of this really changes the way the game plays though, they just give you new options.
I thought soccer in the lobby was cool until I saw a video of it in action. Rather boring looking with no real goal or organization.
I believe the 2 new "levels" are only available for player versus player games. They don\'t contain any new bosses or anything. All the old levels have also been retextured and have a new look, but they\'re the same levels, they just look different. That\'s why I consider there not to be any new levels.
And thank you for assuming that I give a damn whether you make fun of me or not. After all my life revolves around what people say about me on an internet message board <-sarcasm Next time, you may wish to be a bit more civilized and realize that you can correct people (though you had nothing to correct anyway) without trying to be an ass.
This thing has failure written all over it. Anyone who thinks this is a good idea?.... come to me, I\'ll shoot you now, so you can stop ruining gaming.
Failure written all over it just like Everquest had right? Uh huh, whatever. Anyway, after you started talking about shooting people I blanked out because if someone can\'t discuss something without becoming moronic than they\'re not worth reading anymore.
-
Originally posted by teiresias
Failure written all over it just like Everquest had right? Uh huh, whatever. Anyway, after you started talking about shooting people I blanked out because if someone can\'t discuss something without becoming moronic than they\'re not worth reading anymore.
1- PC\'s have more casual gamers.
2- Even casual gamers will only pay for so many online games.
3- FFXI isn\'t a PC game.
EQ is successful with 300k? PSO has surpassed that. Why? You can use your own ISP, and it\'s FREE to play online.
-
Ethug, Moron was uncalled for. Would this be classified as Counsol Debating?
-
1- PC\'s have more casual gamers.
Odd, all the arguments I ever hear say that gaming on the PC is so expensive that there are no casual gamers on the PC. Add in the fact that most of the online RPGs are 3D games and you need a decent PC to run them anyway further eliminating many of these "casual" people.
I\'m still not convinced PlayOnline is an ISP though.
-
Originally posted by Caspian
Ethug, Moron was uncalled for. Would this be classified as Counsol Debating?
Maybe you feel it was, but that\'s how I feel. Trust me, as much as I diss FF, I\'m getting FFX. I really feel strongly this will ruin gaming if widespread. You\'lll pay for PlayOnline maybe, but what happens when every game requires a subscription to each companies own service??? It will happen if PlayOnline is successful.
teiresias- Casual PC gamers include millions of solitaire players in offices. And I didnt call PO a ISP. It\'s just a bad idea.
-
. You\'lll pay for PlayOnline maybe, but what happens when every game requires a subscription to each companies own service???
Then you will just have to selective about what games you play, boohoo. The vast majority of online games will be like PSO and Quake and the like. They won\'t require subscriptions, but certain types of games that require high maintanence and upkeep costs will have to be subscription based. You may not like that, but its your choice not to play them. Just don\'t go saying something is going to "ruin" gaming when it won\'t since the majority of gaming, at least this generation, is going to remain offline anyway.
I wasn\'t referring to you talking about PlayOnline, I was referring to others, though you did site as one of the reasons PSO did well was because you could use your own ISP, implying FFXI would not allow that which makes no sense.
-
Originally posted by teiresias
Then you will just have to selective about what games you play, boohoo. The vast majority of online games will be like PSO and Quake and the like. They won\'t require subscriptions, but certain types of games that require high maintanence and upkeep costs will have to be subscription based. You may not like that, but its your choice not to play them. Just don\'t go saying something is going to "ruin" gaming when it won\'t since the majority of gaming, at least this generation, is going to remain offline anyway.
I wasn\'t referring to you talking about PlayOnline, I was referring to others, though you did site as one of the reasons PSO did well was because you could use your own ISP, implying FFXI would not allow that which makes no sense.
If PlayOnline is successful, it will be widespread. And you may be able to use your own isp to go online w/PS2, but you need more than a ISP to play on PO, you need to pay extra. You can give me lots of bull**** about server costs, but Square is doing this out of pure greed.
-
Yes, I guess the fact that they want to pay the salaries of the programmers that will be keeping the game fresh and up to date is pure greed. That\'s bull****.
Then you had best not play any game from MS because they charge monthly for Asheron\'s Call out of pure greed.
You had also better not play any game from EA because they charge monthly for Ultima Online out of pure greed.
And whoever owns Everquest had better be on your "not to play" list since they charge monthly out of pure greed.
The fact that they could need to the money to actually could keep the game running couldn\'t be a valid reason could it. Guess not for those that would rather try to make up something to vindicate what they want to believe.
-
Originally posted by teiresias
.
And whoever owns Everquest had better be on your "not to play" list since they charge monthly out of pure greed.
:laughing: Verant Interactive developed Everquest, and Sony owns Verant Interactive
I think that creates a dillema for some of us :laughing:
-
1- PC\'s have more casual gamers.
2- Even casual gamers will only pay for so many online games.
3- FFXI isn\'t a PC game.
1 - Nope. The majority of PC users (I think) are more \'hardcore\' than console users. After all, consoles are much easier to deal with right? Lots of PC users like to tinker and dive in their PC, but of course this doesn\'t apply to all.
2 - That\'s fine. If FFXI delivers though, then people will gladly pay. There\'s far more FF fans than EverQuest and Ultima Online combined.
3 - Square is doing it for the PS2 and PC.
-
EQ is successful with 300k? PSO has surpassed that. Why? You can use your own ISP, and it\'s FREE to play online.
Yup. Considering the issues with online games, 300k is considered succesful. You want to compare the earnings made by EQ vs PSO?
PSO hasn\'t surpassed 500k in sales worldwide. But let\'s take 500k anyway and multiply it by $50.
= $25, 000, 000.
EQ = ~300k
= $15, 000, 000. +
300, 000 users paying $10 for 24months (~2 years)
= $72, 000, 000 (+ the continuing payments)
I can see the clear winner, can you?
(* This isn\'t 100% since PSO hasn\'t reached 500k in sales and EQ didn\'t have 300k subscribers from the start - but you see my point.)
I\'m not trying to fight you on this issue thugg, just think for a second man. I agree with you on the paying part. I hate the idea of playing to pay. Though the concept is not a failure as you can see from the EQ example. I believe FF would easily surpass 300k subcribers.
- dm
- the trick is to keep breathing.
-
dp
-
Originally posted by datamage
1 - Nope. The majority of PC users are more \'hardcore\' than console users. After all, consoles are much easier to deal with right?
2 - That\'s fine. If FFXI delivers, then people will gladly pay. There\'s far more FF fans than EverQuest and Ultima Online combined.
3 - Wrong. Square is doing it for the PS2 and PC.
1-No they aren\'t.
2-Morons will gladly pay.
3-Ok.
I don\'t feel like arguing about profits, but PSO is better than EQ. And PSO is about to have the highest game to system ratio.
-
1-No they aren\'t.
I\'d say that most PC USERS aren\'t more hardcore, but most PC gamers that use their PC for something other than solitare are more hardcore.
Anyone willing to spend $300 to upgrade their videocard every six months is more hardcore than any console gamer that complains about having a $10 monthly bill.
but PSO is better than EQ
opinion, nothing more
-
1-No they aren\'t.
2-Morons will gladly pay.
3-Ok.
I don\'t feel like arguing about profits, but PSO is better than EQ. And PSO is about to have the highest game to system ratio.
1 - Useless debate as we\'ll never know.
2 - Idiots or cheap f\'cks won\'t. (since you think only morons will pay and not ppl that enjoy those type of online games + ff)
3 - .
You keep passing opinions as facts. Howabout if I tell you this... PSO is a piece of dog sh!t compared to EQ. Have you even played EQ? Hmm? I doubt that you have. And if I remember correctly we\'ve had a similar argument before and you mentioned that you haven\'t played EQ. So until you have this argument is a waste of space.
- dm
- the trick is to keep breathing.
I f\'cking hate EQ, and you have me defending it.
-
Originally posted by datamage
1 - Useless debate as we\'ll never know.
2 - Idiots or cheap f\'cks won\'t. (since you think only morons will pay and not ppl that enjoy those type of online games + ff)
3 - .
You keep passing opinions as facts. Howabout if I tell you this... PSO is a piece of dog sh!t compared to EQ. Have you even played EQ? Hmm? I doubt that you have. And if I remember correctly we\'ve had a similar argument before and you mentioned that you haven\'t played EQ. So until you have this argument is a waste of space.
- dm
- the trick is to keep breathing.
I f\'cking hate EQ, and you have me defending it.
1-Ok.
2-Yes. I\'m sooo cheap \'cause once I pay for a game, it\'s done, and I shouldn\'t have to pay any more.
3-I don\'t recall saying I havent played EQ before, but I havent. And won\'t. It\'s queer. And so is a company bleeding you after you buy a game. I can judge a game, even if I haven\'t played it. I decided TM:Black is a good game, I haven\'t played it yet, but I think few people here would complain about me praising it.
I\'m not making you defend EQ. Stop anytime you like.
And to everyone else: yes, I\'m a opinionated SOB. If you don\'t like it, tough ****.
-
You can be opinionated all you like, you just make it easy for people to dismiss your opinions when they are based on nothing substantial -- like your view of games that you haven\'t played.
Your problem is you think all games are the same. Obviously, persistent world online RPGs are not like other games because they have maintanence costs that many other games do not have in terms of hardware and software teams. Sorry if you don\'t understand that, but it doesn\'t change the reality of the situation.
-
Show of hands, how many FF fans were polled by Square to find out if they wanted a persistant online world? Oh yea, no one! I understand they\'re making the game force players to pay extra, despite a online world not being remotely what the FF experience has ever been about. Way to tell the plethora of FF fans who won\'t buy the HD and play online to **** off Square. This is exactly why I hate Square. While I don\'t like FF. my friends and family do. They represent the mainstream. They think it\'s the stupidest idea they ever heard of, and they said they won\'t bother playing it then. Smart move $quare!
While you may buy into this crap, just like the addons themselves, this will fail to catch on with the mainstream. Squares severly limiting their audience by doing this. I\'ll be hanging out at EB when it comes out and laugh at the people as they return the game after finding out they cant play it without spending $200 on services and addons.
-
This would be the perfect time to end the conversation.
-
We can settle this a easy way. I\'ll start a new thread with a poll.
-
You guys do realize the BIG difference between console gamers and PC gamers correct? Until the two merge together console gamers will always be the more casual of the two.
1. Casual gamers are not likely to sign up for an extra monthly fee in addition to buying a game. They barely buy add-ons, and you guys think they will pay for a game 2 and 3 times over?
Maybe I am not 1337 enough but can someone explain why it would cost more to run FFXI over PSO?
-
Originally posted by EThugg
We can settle this a easy way. I\'ll start a new thread with a poll.
...I don\'t know why...but I think that if FFXI were an X-Box game :D...the X-Box fan should have a different opinion.......
-
Originally posted by Gohan
Maybe I am not 1337 enough but can someone explain why it would cost more to run FFXI over PSO?
It isn\'t. Sega paid for game servers w/o charging us extra. These guys just want to excuse Squares BS. These are the same people who think Sony\'s addons will succeed. ;)
BizioEE- I don\'t know if you count me in that or not, but I would have felt the same way if my FAVORITE company, Sega, did it. It\'s a bad idea.
-
It isn\'t. Sega paid for game servers w/o charging us extra. These guys just want to excuse Squares BS. These are the same people who think Sony\'s addons will succeed.
You know thugg, I used to think you had half a brain. With your recent lame comments, I can now confirm that you don\'t.
If you can\'t understand how maintaining a real-online-world costs more money than having static servers, then tough. Stop whining about it. Don\'t play the damn game and stfu already.
- dm
- the trick is to keep breathing.
-
Originally posted by datamage
You know thugg, I used to think you had half a brain. With your recent lame comments, I can now confirm that you don\'t.
If you can\'t understand how maintaining a real-online-world costs more money than having static servers, then tough. Stop whining about it. Don\'t play the damn game and stfu already.
- dm
- the trick is to keep breathing.
It doesn\'t cost more money. I\'m not whining, I\'m telling the truth. You stfu.
My poll so far has proved me right in how popular this idea is.
-
It does cost more money. Here are differences:
In PSO practically EVERYTHING is on the client side, this includes characters, graphics, sound, etc. In fact, the only thing that the servers host is probably the downloadable quests. Otherwise the thing simply acts like a hub that sends signals giving locations of characters so that your DC can draw the game correctly.
Unlike, PC games like that though you can\'t add patches or other upgrades to PSO so that\'s why you have to buy the upgrade PSO version 2 to get stuff most other games would get in free updates.
Games like FFXI, Asheron\'s Call, etc. keep the world and graphics on client side -- since downloading all the graphics everytime you connect would be cumbersome. Of course, if they add a new area there will have to be an update to get the new graphics onto the client.
Unlike PSO, these RPGs keep the character information on the server side for security reasons. This makes altering your character outside the game difficult to do since your character information isn\'t stored on your client computer like in PSO. You can\'t cheat and alter your inventory as readily because you don\'t have access to it. This also requires more hacking security but its better than keeping the characters floating about for anyone to mess with.
Basically, static information is kept on the client, just like in PSO. The major difference is that in persistent worlds there is continuous variation that the servers have to maintain and get to the players, a requirement PSO doesn\'t have since it\'s just the same four levels over and over and over again. This also involves keeping programming teams on the game 24/7 implementing gameplay tweaks and fixing any unbalances in the game.
-
It doesn\'t cost more money. I\'m not whining, I\'m telling the truth. You stfu.
My poll so far has proved me right in how popular this idea is.
It does cost more money, But I won\'t bother to show why. Teiresias has already shown good examples. Don\'t assume something that you don\'t know anything about. And who gives a damn about your poll. It represents this forum and not the entire world.
- dm
- the trick is to keep breathing.
-
Originally posted by datamage
It does cost more money, But I won\'t bother to show why. Teiresias has already shown good examples. Don\'t assume something that you don\'t know anything about. And who gives a damn about your poll. It represents this forum and not the entire world.
- dm
- the trick is to keep breathing.
Uhhh, gamers on this board represent people who are into gaming more than the general public. If the idea isn\'t popular here, it won\'t be popular anywhere.
200 servers hosting a \'persistant online world\' for 300,000 gamers costs exactly the same as 200 servers hosting temporary online worlds for 300,000 gamers. You know nothing about it, as common sense is above your head.
-
Uhhh, gamers on this board represent people who are into gaming more than the general public. If the idea isn\'t popular here, it won\'t be popular anywhere.
200 servers hosting a \'persistant online world\' for 300,000 gamers costs exactly the same as 200 servers hosting temporary online worlds for 300,000 gamers. You know nothing about it, as common sense is above your head.
Yup. What an easy way to determine that FFXI will be a failure. Wow, you are truly brilliant. I\'ll stop replying to your useless and meaningless logic. If you want to keep assuming junk, knock yourself out.
\'Oh EverQuest sucks even though I\'ve never played it - is the same as the X-box sucks even though I\'ve never used it.\' Talk about double-standards.
- dm
- the trick is to keep breathing.
-
Originally posted by datamage
Yup. What an easy way to determine that FFXI will be a failure. Wow, you are truly brilliant. I\'ll stop replying to your useless and meaningless logic. If you want to keep assuming junk, knock yourself out.
\'Oh EverQuest sucks even though I\'ve never played it - is the same as the X-box sucks even though I\'ve never used it.\' Talk about double-standards.
- dm
- the trick is to keep breathing.
:rolleyes: I\'m glad I can\'t see you. I\'d feel ill watching the bullsh1t spewing out of your mouth.
-
refrane from swear words even if the are "cleverly" hidden.
-
There really is no reason to have a bummer here. You can play the game off-line! Even if the game had free online play the game itself would be more expensive.
-
Originally posted by ViVi
There really is no reason to have a bummer here. You can play the game off-line! Even if the game had free online play the game itself would be more expensive.
Is this true???? Before people were saying it was online ONLY. If there\'s a offline game, this changes a lot of my opinion on the situation. (although I still think PO is a bad idea)
-
People who update a game from time to time charge money for their services and it also costs money to update a server with new information and it also costs money to keep those servers running. If keeping servers constantly updated with brand new content and add-ons were a free thing, then why would Squaresoft say this:
Square requires 300,000 paying users in order to break even on the PlayOnline service.
Break even rates are generally only used for console manufacturers who produce HARDWARE at expensive rates, only to offer them at a cheap price with the hopes of breaking even on the costs down the road through some other means. I guess these things must cost an awful lot to need to announce this information to anyone.
On the note of Sega with PSO and PSO version 2, I\'d like to point out that PSO has been out for about four months now, free of charge, to DC users. PSO version 2 will be out in about a month and a half, giving the first PSO a total of 5.5 months of release time before an upgrade is released which addresses many issues. In case you people haven\'t been keeping count, that\'s about 100 bucks on basically one game in 5.5 months. Now, let\'s just drop a quick comparison on that one shall we...
Squaresoft releases FFXI in the US at the tail end of 2002, going into 2003. The game retails for 39.99 (yes, it will be this price because of the price drop in all territories SS promised, especially since most JP games retail for about 74 US dollars, 8800 yen). Now, lets look at the monthly cost of roughly 5-15 dollars, which is obviously a rough estimate. By the time the costs even themselves out between PSO with PSO v 2 and FFXI, I could have had 3 different upgrades to FFXI along with constant protection against any cheats if any are shown. It may cost a bit more in the long run, but over the year, the cost is negligable.
As with all games, choosing to play online or off is a players choice. I myself opted to not play PSO since I heard about the n00b cheaters. Anyone can play FFXI as they sefit, but understand, the online fee for the servers is very necessary in maintaining the network and keeping it constantly upgraded. These things do no pay for themselves, regardless of what people may think.
-
Ryu, they did not need an update to PSO to fix the cheating problem. It was readily crushed by Sonic Team. ANd if you got duped weapons, they would tell you to drop them. If you were caught using game enhancers, you would be banned and so on. The upgrade just adds new levels, graphics, characters, mags, weapons, etc. If DC had a hard-drive and standard ethernet, I am betting you that instead of PSO V.2 it would be dowloadable, such is the bad things about being first out the door with online play.
Eric Jacob
-
If DC had a hard-drive and standard ethernet, I am betting you that instead of PSO V.2 it would be dowloadable, such is the bad things about being first out the door with online play.
Cheating is still going on today though, or so says everyone who continues to play it on the ign staff (now that\'s staff, not message boards). Like I said, I don\'t play it online because of cheaters and knowing if they still exist or not is very important to me so I am constantly asking those who still play it in their offices.
Moving back to topic, I\'m sure if all that existed, the world would be a better place, but since it doesn\'t and Sonic Team needs to charge you for every version, then it still costs us money to have it regardless. Either way, it\'s going to cost people money to continue to play wether they like it or not. It\'s just a sad fact, but that\'s life in a capatilistic world.
-
No Ethugg I think you opinions should stay the same. Final Fantasy XI is completly Online. You can not play it offline.
-
Originally posted by Caspian
No Ethugg I think you opinions should stay the same. Final Fantasy XI is completly Online. You can not play it offline.
Then I stand by what I said.
-
I guess FFX is the last Final Fantasy I purcase then..........I will not pay to play a game I have to shell out 50 bucks for....big loss for Square doing this! Unless I can use my broadband..and not have to pay.....then it will all be good!
end of line-----MCP
-
Final Fantasy XI is being released between FFX and FFXII. They have a different group of programers working on that game. FFXI is the only game thats going to be online. FFXII and so on will all be off-line like the pre-FFXI games.
-
Anyone who thinks that playing games online is crappy is wrong. PSO was a very, very cool game. I didn\'t buy it (I was thinking of getting a DC just for that). Why? Cheaters. Closed online realms cost a lot more than open ones. They try and control cheating in PSO, but they have failed. There are plenty of sites that explain subtle ways to cheat. Games like EQ and AC require a lot more maintenance, and that\'s hat why they have a monthly cost, because of the extra money you spend, though, any problems are fixed quickly, and cheaters can be harshly punished.
Don\'t compare server numbers either. Just cause the "both have 200 servers", doesn\'t mean that Squares won\'t be far more expensive to purchase and maintain. I personally love online games, and rarely have paid a monthly fee for one (just cause that sucks, especially if you play more than one), but in the last year and a half, I\'ve always had one subscription to an online world or another. First EQ, then AC, right now, nothing (I\'m playing Diablo II, it\'s free - but ask about the cheating on "closed" realms, and the horrible latency. Good luck in Hardcore, I\'ve lost 20 characters to date over lvl 30).
Online games I think will work, especially when they lower the cost of the game, so that you can play it for 5-6 months at the same overall cost of games now. People who are not hardcore gamers will buy it, play it for a few months, and stop (just like most people do with games anyways), people like me will buy it, and play constantly untill the next thing comes out.
I\'m happy to pay for an online world where:
1) I can interact with thousands of other people.
2) The world can be larger to start with than most game worlds, and can grow, change, and get new quests.
3) The world is policed by a dedicated crew of people to stop cheating and hacking.
4) I can choose to stop playing online and not pay for the game anymore.
-
They should do a deal with sony where you get hardrive modem the game and a Playonline membership for a cheaper price. Like for each year of Playonline you buy you get a certain amount off on the package, kinda like bestbuy and MSN.
Sony better take advantage of this cause it will be what gets alot of people to buy the modem and especially the hard drive. (Untill EA and SEGA sports go online)
-
Originally posted by Caspian
Final Fantasy XI is being released between FFX and FFXII. They have a different group of programers working on that game. FFXI is the only game thats going to be online. FFXII and so on will all be off-line like the pre-FFXI games.
Then why do it with 11? Why not make a seperate FFOnline series? Why make offline fans miss out on one of the games \'in\' the series? Sounds silly to me...
-
Then why do it with 11? Why not make a seperate FFOnline series? Why make offline fans miss out on one of the games \'in\' the series? Sounds silly to me...
For once we can agree on something.
- dm
- the trick is to keep breathing.
-
Originally posted by datamage
For once we can agree on something.
I\'m sure once upon a time we agreed on something else... :)
-
K i think we should just listen to Capian he seem to know the most about this, and if he were right about all of it then that would pretty much be the best way to go online with Ps2
-
I think it\'s time we all took a step back from this theoretical B.S. and talk reality:
It\'s too expensive. I buy a game maybe 1/month. That\'s $50/month. I have rent, utilities, car payments, insurance payments, groceries, and student loans to pay back. I make all my money count and paying $15+/month to play a game does not fit into that equation.
Some days I don\'t even get to play at all. And to me, that\'s wasted money.
WORD
-
I just dont think that paying that much for it is even true, i believe what caspian said.
-
K i think we should just listen to Capian he seem to know the most about this, and if he were right about all of it then that would pretty much be the best way to go online with Ps2
No comment. :rolleyes: (and no offense to you Caspian)
I\'m sure once upon a time we agreed on something else...
I\'m sure we did. And probably still agree on some things. :)
- dm
- the trick is to keep breathing.
-
LOL, None taken. You siad much more then I and what I believe. Even if your not getting the game.
Are we finally at peace then? I see everyone has siad thier final statements without any harsh words.
And to comment at what Ethugg siad about missing out for Offline fans. FFX is going to be released the same year as XI. One in spring/summer the other in fall/winter. If it were not for the fact they are called XI and XII I would consider XI a side story to the final fantasy series. Then agian they can sell millions if they use name recognition. Which I believe they have.