| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (27)

Posted: Aug 28th 2009 8:19PM Scone said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Whats more baffling if you can get a baker's dozen of controls to fit on the lame controllers!
Reply

Posted: Aug 28th 2009 8:20PM wjowski said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The main hurdle is the fact that MMOs have longer shelf lives than consoles...
Reply

Posted: Aug 28th 2009 10:58PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Hehe not anymore.
Reply

Posted: Aug 29th 2009 5:24AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I have read other devs commenting that it has a lot to do with the matinance and constant update cycles mmos have and microsoft policy on xbl content
Reply

Posted: Aug 28th 2009 10:22PM mrgabrielserna said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
No, the main hurdle is that Microsoft does it's networking through Xbox Live and any and all patches must be approved through that service prior to being made available for download.

What that does is make it so that it is very difficult to keep a PC client and Xbox360 client on the same servers and the same version without delaying the PC client roll-out for every single patch.

Consoles last much, much longer than the average PC. Look at the Playstation2, it launched in October of 2000 in North America and the most successful console MMO (FinalFantasy XI) launched in 2003 and is still around for it and also on the Xbox360.

The fact of the matter is that Microsoft's system for online access is far from ideal means the publisher has to host the servers for access separate from Xbox Live like FinalFantasy XI does or be at Microsoft's mercy for connectivity and patch distribution.
Reply

Posted: Aug 28th 2009 10:32PM wjowski said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm sorry, but there's no comparison between a PCs lifespan and a console's lifespan. Computers can be upgraded, consoles cannot. An MMO made for, to use an example, the PS3 is going to be shackled to those system specs for the rest of it's lifespan, regardless of how the rest of the industry moves on.
Reply

Posted: Aug 28th 2009 10:49PM Cendres said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Wjowski

And consoles stop working after 5 years? PCs will always have an advantage in graphical beauty, or at least will still have the upper hand for some time that's true. But look at mmos how long do they stay very popular for? You can only upgrade a game so much as well, I really don't think console mmos are so far fetched considering after 4 years of the same mmo most people are ready to move on to something else, possibly on another console, or on a more powerful PC.

I think the industry in general is taking the approach of more modest looking mmos that play really well is a bit more important then killer graphics meant for a PC of 2 years from now. :)
Reply

Posted: Aug 28th 2009 11:20PM Dblade said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Most actually can't be upgraded cost effectively, they just get replaced. They have probably less than a console's lifespan even with upgrades-the playstation 2 is ten years old, but you'd be hard pressed to find a ten year old computer capable of running even classic EQ now without replacing everything in the box.

TBH I actually prefer the console model-I think about 6 years tops is the active lifespan of a game, anything else begins to turn it into a zombie game where content piles up so much that a new player has no hope of catching up. It's just too much to expect of a game to be able to keep us playing for a decade like that.
Reply

Posted: Aug 28th 2009 11:34PM Sam not Spam said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
SOE has noted a similar issue for them and the PC/PS3 games they're working on (DCUO, The Agency). Console players aren't likely to put up with the same issues that PC players are, or at least that's likely the major concern console holders have.

http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/09/30/sony-online-patching-concerns-ps3-pc-compatibilty-for-dcuo/

""But one of things with MMOs is that we update them; we add new stuff. When we add stuff to the PC side it's a different route; going through the PlayStation Network and getting it to our console person is a lot different than getting it to our PC person."

He explained that with PCs, it's easy to have players download enormous files, whereas on consoles, there are different requirements as to how much space the file can take. Cao also said it was partly a production process issue. To allow for cross-platform play, the company has to make sure to get updates out for both platforms simultaneously.

...

I heard the same thing from those working on SOE's spy-themed MMO shooter "The Agency," which will also appear on both PC and PS3. I recently spoke with the executive director of development of SOE-Seattle Matt Wilson, and he gave a few more specifics on the updating process. "The console requires a certification process for every one of its releases, and that can take a short period of time or that can take a long period of time depending on the schedule," he explained. "And if you've ever been part of an MMO release right after you launch the product, there's quite a few updates you do to solve issues.""

Its an issue with both consoles. Pity.
Reply

Posted: Aug 29th 2009 9:28AM LaughingTarget said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
PC games and console games from the same generation improve at the same pace. The difference is, to keep a console MMO past the new console generation, you need to keep two sets of hardware around. If you wanted to play a PS2 MMO on your PS3, you're SOL (barring the tiny population of early adopters).

PCs don't have this limitation. Imagine if Ultima Online was on the SNES, it would be dead today. Instead, since it's on PC, it's getting yet another expansion.

The funcional life of the hardware isn't the issue. My 2600 still works, but no one sells software for it. The PS3 will end up the same way eventually. Any MMO on it is limited to when the next one comes out as well as fickleness of an additional network layer. Consoles have separate networks on top of an Internet connection, PCs don't have to deal with this. MMO devs can keep their servers running indefinitely without worrying about Sony or Microsoft pulling network support.

Playing the new generation of games doesn't destroy the ability to play old ones on the PC. I can still run Sam and Max on my PC, but try getting your cart of Lost Vikings functioning on your Wii.
Reply

Posted: Aug 29th 2009 11:22AM wjowski said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You're missing my point. MMOs change *alot*. If you try to play the Everquest of today on the machine you originally played it on when it first released it's highly unlikely to perform well, if at all. A console MMO is going to be limited in content and graphical improvements by the console it was originally designed for. Look at Final Fantasy XI for an example.
Reply

Posted: Aug 28th 2009 11:09PM mrgabrielserna said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
yeah it is true that you can upgrade a PC with more ram, new graphics cards , hard drives, etc., how of ten does a MMO update it's game engine to take advantage of the added power?

at the most you become able to run the game at higher resolutions versus the game running on a console at a fixed resolution.

the "limited" shelf life of a console of about 5-6 years is longer than many MMOs last or at least retain high numbers of subscribers.

Besides that the Xbox360 can run most any modern MMO at good framerates ( you really do not need over 30 fps for a MMO) at the resolutions that TV's run at.

I do upgrade my PC and have spent good amounts of money doing so over the years but I'm not going to be running the same PC for 6 years even with upgrades and expect it to play current MMOs well that far along in the future.

So while it is true that a MMO developed for a console is going to be limited to those hardware capabilities for as long as a developer supports that console and years down the line it will be dated as compared to the potential of a PC if a developer wants to make MMOs for the Xbox360 it is microsoft's Xbox Live strategy that is stopping them in most cases not the worry that their is going to be hampered in some way buy potential limited console resources years in the future as compared to a upgraded pc.

Don't get me wrong , as a past Final Fantasy XI player, I was severely burdened buy the limitations of that game being developed for the Playstation2 but the game is still around and still has many subscribers and is still having content being made for it after 6 years.

I very much understand that PC are more future-proof but in the scope of a MMO that potential is not a big factor on a developer wanting to take on making a game for a console or not. If anything they would be happy for the fact that they would have a potential user-base of paying subscribers for many years to come.

Reply

Posted: Aug 29th 2009 11:19AM wjowski said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"the "limited" shelf life of a console of about 5-6 years is longer than many MMOs last or at least retain high numbers of subscribers."

Meridian 59, Everquest, Ultima Online. That's just three MMOs that've outlasted several generations of consoles.
Reply

Posted: Aug 29th 2009 2:45AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm more surprised that there haven't been more MMOs on PS3. Every system has a hard drive out of the box, the hardware is more potent than a 360 and probably most people's computers, Sony already has an MMO division, and they're probably more poised to localize Asian MMOs. How incredible would it be if Sony had a triple A MMO exclusively for PS3 without monthly fees and subsidized by microtransactions, which console gamers are already used to this generation? Shit, bring back Auto Assault or Tabula Rasa, revamp the controls for PS3 (both games would be easy to play on consoles), and it'd also make a great PR story, like how Journey discovered their current frontman from the Philippines through YouTube.
Reply

Posted: Aug 29th 2009 2:53AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
A few developers have tried and admitted what the road block was to getting an MMO to the console: Microsoft. They control Xbox Live and they want control of everything that goes through it. They are the Apple of the console world, control freaks.

You can do a little research using this fancy site called Google and you'll find a few articles and interviews about why MMO developers can't get on the Xbox. Every time, the problem is Microsoft. So not sure why this is even a question.

Sony on the other hand is all about Sony. That's why they are behind their games, but not bending over to help others.
Reply

Posted: Aug 29th 2009 3:32AM Sam not Spam said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Heh - Sony's behavior? That's pretty Apple-ish too, actually.

Regardless - MMO's need more freedom to patch/update than either console maker is willing to give them. Honestly - haven't we all seen at least ONE patch for a MMO we play that had to be issued the same day as another one? QA won't allow for that.
Reply

Posted: Aug 29th 2009 3:16AM einstini15 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I don't understand how people keep saying ps2, ps2. Yes the console is around but i think it is fair to say the larger majority have moved on to ps3
Reply

Posted: Aug 29th 2009 3:34AM Sam not Spam said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Nope - not even close. The PS3 is nowhere near the 138+ million sold the PS2 has. Even if you combined the PS3 and 360 they're still haven't sold half as many units as the PS2 has.
Reply

Posted: Aug 29th 2009 3:36AM SgtBaker said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
PS2 has sold 138 million units worldwide.
To my knowledge the PS3 has only sold around 25 million units.

I don't think it's fair to say that the larger majority has yet moved to PS3
Let's get back when the PS3 has sold over 100 units.
Reply

Posted: Aug 29th 2009 3:38AM SgtBaker said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
when the PS3 has sold over 100 *million* units.

duhh..
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

The Perfect Ten: MMO prisons

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 3:00PM

Engadget

Joystiq

WoW

TUAW