Are MMO's on Console's important?

[Karak]

It seems that MS and Sony are at odds on their belief that MMO's are important on their consoles. So do you agree with Sony that MMO's are very important for console's and should be pushed onto the system despite some particular issues inheriant in consoles, or do you agree with MS that MMO's are just another kind of game for the systems?

[Gorvi]

As someone who's played FFXI on my PS2 for over 4 years, I'd love to see more. Developers can't be afraid to build MMOs on consoles w/a keyboard in mind, though. There's really no reason not to put MMOs on consoles.

[DoctorFinger]

Neither really needs the other. Consoles do fine without MMOs and MMOs do fine without consoles. Putting them on consoles is, I think, good for business, but not absolutely vital.

[Mashidar]

I would not mind more MMO's on consoles. I don't think they make or break the console market but I know that I would no doubt pick up each one and give them a shot.

I miss the possibility that was True Fantasy Online for the Xbox.

[Telefrog]

Important to publisher budget projections or important to the game players? So far, console gamers don't seem to care for the genre being on their platform of choice. You can argue that the right MMO just hasn't been published yet to turn this perception around, but I argue that it is already here. Xbox Live.

Your Gamertag/Avatar is your character. The score is your level. The Achievements are the loot. The games you play are the quests. You have all the community interaction of an MMO right now. Hell, you already pay a subscription to play it!

[Sandman]

As of right now we haven't seen a truly successful console only MMORPG. I think we will at some point but for now MMO's on consoles are just a way to extend the game's user base. I don't get why Blizzard doesn't see this as an option for WOW....obviously a console version even if it requires keyboard use would print money.

[Purple Santa]

Important to publisher budget projections or important to the game players? So far, console gamers don't seem to care for the genre being on their platform of choice. You can argue that the right MMO just hasn't been published yet to turn this perception around, but I argue that it is already here. Xbox Live.


My thoughts exactly. From a publisher's point of view or developer, of course it's important. You always wish to EXPAND your product line...and since there are so many consoles out there...why wouldn't they keep trying or find it important?

MMO's are like any genre on any platform...make it accessible...make it worthwhile to play...it will sell...it's not like the gaming mechanics of an MMO are so foreign to console playing...just need to find the right balance...and something that will appeal to console crowd...I think it will happen before the next generation of consoles...

[Blue]

I'd love to see more MMOs on consoles. I only have a Mac so I rarely have any options when it comes to the genre. I play WoW and love it but would kill to play WAR but, as it's not cross-platform, can't. I know DCU may be coming to the PS3 and if that's the case, I may pick it up just to give it a look. Played FFXI on the PS2 for a few years and really dug it so I can certainly see myself doing so again.

So yeah. It would open up a good deal more games for me and truthfully, one of the reasons aside from polish that I think makes WoW so popular is the fact that it's cross-platform. WAR would get my money but as it stands, they can't.

[Variable Gear]

I can't vote in the poll, because there isn't an option that says...

"MMOs have great potential in the console enviroment. MMOs that are built from the ground up with a console and a gamepad in mind have a chance at being really fun to play. The thing is, for whatever reason, no one seems to be investing resources in this space. This disappoints me because a MMO that would be easy for non-PC gamers to get into, and one that has a rapid and consistent update schedule, would be a license to print money. Console MMOs could be the next big thing, if publishers would just give them a chance."

That's what I think, at least.

[pomeroy]

I'd love to play an mmo on a console.

But I'd like it to be designed to work well on a console (FFXI, I'm looking at you).

[crazyD]

Playing a MMO on the 360? So you have to pay twice to play the game you spent full retail on?

[pomeroy]

Playing a MMO on the 360? So you have to pay twice to play the game you spent full retail on?

I guess you could look at it that way.

I don't pay my Live subscription by the month, so it wouldn't really bother me.

[Wraith]

I'd love to play an mmo on a console.

But I'd like it to be designed to work well on a console (FFXI, I'm looking at you).Well, FFXI was designed for the PS2. I only played the PC version, but I thought most players preferred the console controls over keyboard controls.

[crazyD]

I guess you could look at it that way.

I don't pay my Live subscription by the month, so it wouldn't really bother me.

Well, a lot of MMOs have yearly plans you can subscribe to as well. I guess it's like you aren't paying anything at all!

[Wraith]

Playing a MMO on the 360? So you have to pay twice to play the game you spent full retail on?I don't know of any other current MMOs on the 360, but FFXI doesn't require Live Gold (http://www.playonline.com/ff11us/envi/xbox/xbox01.html). A Silver account is fine too.

[pomeroy]

Well, a lot of MMOs have yearly plans you can subscribe to as well. I guess it's like you aren't paying anything at all!

Eh. You got me?

If it bugs you so much, you won't be playing it anyway. I guess I don't know why you're so mad about it.

Why so crazy, d?

[KingGorilla]

Like I said in the podcast thread, there are a lot of barriers before a serious attempt, and a solid MMO can make it to that space.

[crazyD]

Eh. You got me?

If it bugs you so much, you won't be playing it anyway. I guess I don't know why you're so mad about it.

Why so crazy, d?

I'm not really mad, I have just always disagreed with the concept of charging to play online. And I also wanted to point out the flaw in your yearly argument.

[pomeroy]

I'm not really mad, I have just always disagreed with the concept of charging to play online. And I also wanted to point out the flaw in your yearly argument.

For me, it's not a flaw, though. I don't pay for my Live sub period.

And when I did, paying never bothered me. It costs less than a full game and was definitely worth it to me. Besides, the $50 gets you access to much more than just one MMO.

But I did word that wrong. You are/were correct.

[KingGorilla]

For me, it's not a flaw, though. I don't pay for my Live sub period.

And when I did, paying never bothered me. It costs less than a full game and was definitely worth it to me. Besides, the $50 gets you access to much more than just one MMO.

But I did word that wrong. You are/were correct.
You missing that the "service" is just snake oil though. I am not just talking the old "it's free everywhere else." I mean more how after, this will be the 6th year of the service, Live has not evolved much. 8 players is still the norm for stable online games. There are limited standards across the board both in implementation and community control. I will not do the comparison to something like Steam, no one questions its overbearing superiority.

At least with an MMO there are palpable items that you can ascribe the costs to: Ongoing development, added content, paying for GMs, the cost of high bandwidth servers.

Live is still missing many of the basics that one would expect of any online infastructure, ability to create own servers(it is still pure P2P), do they have anything like GMs for speedy resolution of in game problems like cheating?