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

Reader Comments (128)

Posted: Jun 12th 2011 10:57PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
It must be maddening for the author to continually write about an exciting and revolutionary new concept for two games tied to the same live universe, only to be met with the same, complaining ad-nauseum repetitive posts that have nothing to do with content.

I know as a reader, it certainly is tough to tolerate. I have commented more frequently than usual simply because every article on this subject is now a mix of interesting content and comments on the same answered issue.

For the 1000'th time:

(1) It is on PS3 because specific network restrictions/rules on the XBox Live network do not allow the functionality *REQUIRED* for this game to function as intended. This isn't a stand-alone shooter like CoD -- it has to interact with the central Tranquility server generating the entire New Eden ("EVE" to the uninitiated) universe in real time. As the author mentions, the level of interaction is unprecedented. That makes the ability to do this non-negotiable. Even most co-op FPS'ses don't connect to a central supercomputer outside the console's network and thus this isn't an issue. If you need to blame someone, blame MS'ses restrictive network policy. Although if Dust becomes big enough, maybe Microsoft can make an exception for CCP. They have bent their restrictions in the past for EA etc., but even in their case, its still gated EA servers *within* the Live network. But this hasn't been tried before. Ever.

(2) It's not PS3/PC due to this same *real-time one-universe* interaction. FPS titles are cited that have PC/Console versions and thus are a point of "why can't Dust do this!" Again, you fail to understand the central concept of the game. These fps'ses do this because these platforms don't interact in real-time, in the same battlefields on the same live server universe. In the case of Dust, different platforms and different players from these platforms would have to meet in real-time and go head-to-head and never be locked out of a map due to their system. And the consequences of matches are far-ranging in the EVE universe.

PCs and Consoles have different controls. And it has been shown that mouse and keyboard can outcompete controller given two players of equivalent skill. Microsoft themselves tried this. Thus, in any universe where players from these two clash, complaints will be raised about balance and fairness unless this is solved -- which hasn't been yet.

Ironically, it is probably the people whining the loudest about no console/pc port that would also cry the most about the "unfairness" of being forced to directly compete with each other due to these different system capabilities.

I love gaming, but I sometimes wonder if the critics are right that it has reduced our ability to process complex data when I see complaints that could be addressed with the smallest amount of reading comprehension, logical consideration and cursory internet research.

Posted: Jun 12th 2011 11:31PM HokieKC said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@(Unverified) - Maybe CCP should provide details of their so called 'negotiations' with MS instead of saying "MS is too hard to work with....Herp da derp derpa derp!".

What actually happened is Sony showed CCP the $$$.
Reply

Posted: Jun 12th 2011 11:47PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@HokieKC My god. You do know using hackneyed net memes lie "herp derp" in place of actual substance is actually making you look like the sub-moron right?

Anyway, no one claimed my analysisnwas based on knowledge of some negotiation. The restrictions with the Live network are well known and documented, and it is apparent to anyone who actually considers the architecture of the system what the issue would be. Although CCP did mention that the PS3's network allowed certain things. So perhaps you should read the de blogs and get some knowledge before you pipe up. Why is it so many think they don't need to provide reasoning or knowledge before making claims?

Likewise, there is no evidence of "$$$" by Sony. In fact, the concept of Sony bribing a little known developer with no track record in FPSes to exclusive, and that CCP would for a small payout sacrifice millions in revenue from a market leading console is on the face more implausible than network restrictions not allowing obvious game mechanic requirements.

Reply

Posted: Jun 12th 2011 11:57PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@HokieKC In fact, the thoughtnthatncompanies' main priority are conspiracies to screw-over their customers -- even going so far as to kneecap their own products to do so for unknown perverse reasons -- is a feature of popular thought recently but is patently absurd.

Companies will of course do things not in their customers interests of it is on their financial interest to do so does exist, of course. But no logical financial incentive makes sense as a Sony bribe can't make up a whole platform.'s revenue.

And CCP has consistently proven that they value innovation and are willing to pursue a vision even over short-term profit or mass-market appeal. so what in their track record justifies your contention (vs. Sacrificing some markets to fulfill their vision, which has been more in line with their past.behavior)?
Reply

Posted: Jun 13th 2011 12:00AM HokieKC said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
@(Unverified) - The whole notion that LIVE is MMO unfriendly and everything isn't true. MS has already made two exceptions (FFXI, PSU) and two more MMOs are on the way (Undead Labs Zombie MMO, Dungeon Fighter Online). The current MMOs require zero approval from MS for patching or anything. I highly doubt the two upcoming ones will either. Sony's content approval system for DCU is far more stringent than MS's for MMOs.

The tired "MS is too hard to work with line"line is thrown around by MMO developers with no evidence their game even ran on the Xbox 360 in the first place nor evidence of any negotiations with MS.

And Sony's big strategy this generation has been exclusives. When CCP approached Sony with Dust 514 some executive at Sony about wet himself in excitement at the idea of another 'exclusive'.

And CCP spent a lot of money on Dust 514. To assume they wouldn't take Sony's money isn't based in reality. CCP is a for profit company and their attitude over the years has changed. The CCP of the mid-2000's is gone and would not have settle for the quick check. They would have made far more effort to make this game cross-console as they promoted for two years.
Reply

Posted: Jun 13th 2011 12:16AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@HokieKC Those MMOs are sharded into realms. For example, a PS3 MMO such as DCUO has different realms for PC and Console, and those players never directly interact.

As mentioned (a lot) a major element of EVE -- and now Dust -- is a real time realm-less system in which every single player exists in the same shard. I would be willing to bet good money that both those MMOs are not.

Dust would also be unique in its need for a direct connection to CCPs heavy iron (and across two games)

Perhaps if ypunhaven't experienced this single shard, there's a lack of quite getting the unique demands it requires on tne architecture and it's possibility. A comment can't express really it vs. A sharded world.
Reply

Posted: Jun 13th 2011 12:18AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified) P.S. Typing these on a phone, so sorry about the occasional artifact from the over-small keys and auto-correction errors.
Reply

Posted: Jun 13th 2011 1:01AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)

1- No need for name calling

2-I don't read every article on massively, so it isn't the 100th time for me

3-People are going to disagree all about all topics of discussion and the people that are for something WILL ALWAYS use the facile argument that the other side are whiners.
Reply

Posted: Jun 13th 2011 2:05AM halfcaptain said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)

thank you!

this is the essay many of us wish we could've mustered (again).
Reply

Posted: Jun 13th 2011 1:37PM octoberasian said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@HokieKC

Actually there are difficulties in getting an MMO on the 360. You would have to look around the net to find it. The biggest example is FFXI and FFXIV.

Square-Enix had to make negotiations with Microsoft in only requiring Silver Membership for FFXI players to play that game. Microsoft reluctantly allowed it given that the Xbox Live service and the 360 console were still new at the time of the 360 release-- 2006.

Fast forward to FFXIV and Xbox Live has become a cash cow for Microsoft especially with DLCs and other content on Live. Square-Enix would like to put it on the 360 but Microsoft has changed their tune. Microsoft will not allow FFXIV unless its members sign up for the Xbox Live Gold membership. And, they would want it to go through their Xbox Live servers thereby giving Microsoft a reason to require Gold Membership.

Tell me how many players are willing to pay for both Xbox Live and a monthly subscription fee? Some would but in this kind of economy, I'm sure not a lot would want to pay double.

Square-Enix is still trying to get FFXIV on the 360 but given Microsoft's stance and stubbornness I don't think it will ever come to that console.

Microsoft is restrictive. You can google this.

- Updates must be approved by Microsoft.
- Updates and any matchmaking is done through the Xbox Live servers.
- Monetary transactions are handled by the Xbox Live servers.
- Additions and expansions to any game must be hosted as a DLC. Team Fortress 2 is a good example. Valve had tried to work out a negotiation with Microsoft to allow additions to the game for free but Microsoft would not allow it. This did not happen with the PS3 at all.
- Cross-platform play requires Gold Membership regardless of the game. For cross-platform games between PC and the 360, Gold Membership is required for the console port and Silver Membership for the PC port. This is mentioned on the MSDN XNA website network information for developing games on the 360.
- Games hosting multiplayer games whether peer-to-peer, dedicated hosting, or server-client, all matchmaking and connections must be done through the Xbox Live servers. Again, that also requires Xbox Live Gold membership.
- Developers make zero commissions out of any Xbox Live Gold membership.
- Developers only make money from DLCs while a portion of that revenue goes back to Microsoft.

There are very few exceptions like FFXI. And, as you mentioned, EA and Dungeon Fighter Online are other exceptions. However, I will not be surprised both developers had to make concessions to Microsoft in order for them to bypass the Xbox Live servers.

Microsoft also has the strictest and most expensive licensing and certification processes in the industry. For example, getting a program certified to install on Windows costs about $700 per license per software.

I would not be surprised that crossplatform play isn't possible between PS3, 360, and PC without requiring additional certificates and permissions from Microsoft.

To Microsoft, it's either their way or no multiplayer at all.
Reply

Posted: Jun 13th 2011 2:16PM HokieKC said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@octoberasian - Again, there are two MMOs on Xbox Live and two on the PS3. MS requires zero approval for patches and content. Sony does.

There are two more Xbox 360 MMOs on the way (Undead Labs' Zombie MMO, Dungeon Fighter Online) and I highly doubt they will have to go through any approval process to update their MMOs either.

In a year and a half from now we know there will be four total Xbox 360 MMOs (FFXI, PSU, Undead Labs' Zombie MMO, Dungeon Fighter Online) and MAYBE five for the PS3 (DCUO, Free Realms, DUST 514, Planetside Next, Everquest Next). Who knows what will happen with Defiance or if something like Age of Empires Online makes it to the Xbox 360.

So after SEVEN years of this console generation the PS3 might be ahead in MMOs by a grand total of ONE and MS's policy towards approval on MMO content and patches is far more lenient (there isn't any) than Sony's and yet the Xbox 360 has this reputation that it's 'MMO unfriendly'.

It's just not based in reality. And at the bottom of your post you mention how MS requires game developers to pay license fees to use Windows. Do you think CCP is using EPIC's Unreal Engine for free?
Reply

Posted: Jun 13th 2011 7:52PM Persistantthug said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@HokieKC

Age of Conan: Rise of the Godslayer Xbox 360 MMO

All Points Bulletin Xbox 360 MMO

Champions Online

CrimeCraft Xbox 360 MMO

Dust 514 Xbox 360 MMO

Huxley Xbox 360 MMO
Kingdom Under Fire II Xbox 360 MMO

Marvel MMOG Xbox 360 MMO

Marvel Universe Online Xbox 360 MMO

Stargate Worlds Xbox 360 MMO

The Secret World Xbox 360 MMO


Those are all of the MMOs that were canceled because Microsoft was unwilling to accommodate them.
It is more than clear that Microsoft doesn't really want MMO's on their console.
Reply

Posted: Jun 13th 2011 10:31PM HokieKC said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Persistantthug - And there is zero evidence ANY of those MMOs even ran on the Xbox 360. Do you have any because I would love to see it. They all gave the same tired 'MS is too hard to work with' line. The same tired excuse CCP gave with zero evidence Dust 514 EVER ran on the Xbox 360.

Thanks for reinforcing my point.
Reply

Posted: Jun 14th 2011 7:08PM Persistantthug said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@HokieKC
Yes that's right....All 10 of them say so.

YOu know who also said so...VALVE.

No offense, but the only reinforced point you're making, is a point of denial.
Reply

Posted: Jun 12th 2011 11:19PM Jade Effect said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
The fps console market is saturated. In the over-crowded fps market, does Dust 514 have a special kind of staying power? I doubt it. I predict Dust 514 would be played for awhile, then players will move on to the next shooter.

Some PS3 owners who are also interested in the Eve Online tie-up would likely become the last few die-hards a few months after the game is released.

Posted: Jun 13th 2011 2:17AM halfcaptain said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Jade Effect

you've got a point there. i'm hoping that CCP will keep rolling out updates for DUST as fast as they can to capture and hold the attention of its fanbase. I think though that the nature of DUST will have a depth that players will keep coming back for. The kind of depth i'm talking about here is being a part of the eve universe, and having skill/weapon trees that are richer and more dynamic than what we see in most shooters out there right now; e.g. play a bunch, buy a gun attachment with xp, repeat.

wishful thinking, i know.
Reply

Posted: Jun 13th 2011 1:03AM Rayko said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)

1- No need for name calling

2-I don't read every article on massively, so it isn't the 100th time for me

3-People are going to disagree all about all topics of discussion and the people that are for something WILL ALWAYS use the facile argument that the other side are whiners.

Posted: Jun 13th 2011 1:03AM Rayko said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Rayko

sorry double post
Reply

Posted: Jun 13th 2011 1:12AM Rayko said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm done with this topic, I was excited about the game originally, oh well. I would like to apologize for not knowing that it had been said before this was going to be console game. I feel that I have let my family and friends down, and I will now wander the earth performing good deeds to make amends.

Posted: Jun 13th 2011 1:53AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Rayko

you lie.. you will drink a brew and pass out nao.... ADMIT IT
Reply

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW