New Final Fantasy MMORPG

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: New Final Fantasy MMORPG

Well, yeah. But I fail to see how either is relevant given that neither are really next-gen consoles. Don't get me wrong, they have their own games that are exciting, fun, and novel... but I wouldn't count on next-gen MMOs making their way to a Nintendo platform.

Next-gen or no, its outselling PS3 and so long as PS3 remains expensive as it is, not to mention providing new gaming experiences. See DS vs. PSP, lather, rinse, repeat.

MMOs are beside the point, as you made the claim PS3 will dominate Japan. That's really in question right now. SE's focus for the next year or so is heavier on DS than any platform and why is that?

Cheaper to develop for, lots of revenue opportunities.

And that's a smart move considering the costs they'll be facing to make games for PS3. Putting the next FF MMO on Xbox360 and PC first is a smart move for the same reasons. If people go with the 20 gig HDD on PS3, putting it there could be impractical considering Sony is hoping you'll also download other non-gaming content to the system... as well as their laughable stab at VC, which Nintendo and MS are doing quite sucessfully

lolQBert.

[jwalton]

Re: New Final Fantasy MMORPG

You know what? Fine, you're right. PS3 isn't going to dominate.
Moving on.

What is the definition of next-gen?

I dunno. What is the definition of a MMORPG?

[Raydeus]

Re: New Final Fantasy MMORPG

And what games are these? If you tell me Gears of War didn't look impressive and champion God of War II as being of the same visual calibur, you're insane. Gears of War has way more going for its visuals than just some meager resolution upgrade. I don't even like shooting games. I don't like the art style used in most American-made games. But the amount of detail put into everything in Gears of War is very impressive, and to liken it to PlayStation 2 games is the epitome of fanboy nonsense.

I haven't seen Gears of War in action, so I can't comment about it, but that wasn't my point.

I said it rivaled the 360 and the PS3, simply because even though the hardware is nowhere near the specs of current gen games at least to me it still holds it's ground pretty well against the new games.

Nope. Current Xbox 360s can do 1080p. All it takes is an update through Xbox Live, no different than the firmware updates for PS3 that have corrected backwards compatibility issues with PS2 games. And once again, this goes back to the whole production of most games being 720p anyways. Final Fantasy XIII? 720p. White Knight Story? 720p. Metal Gear Solid 4? 720p.

1080p is just a fancy number that's being thrown around, but generally amounts to nothing. Several stations across the US transmit free HDTV at 1080i, yet it looks no better than 720p or 480p because the source material is 480p or 720p. Wasted bandwidth

Recent movies look pretty sweet in 1080p, sure... but don't count on most games to take advantage of it.

The 360 can thorically display at 1080p, however at least from what I've read the console isn't too happy about it. And I have more confidence on a product that was designed with 1080p in mind than on a product that was designed for 720p and now is trying to push forward to 1080p. Of course, that's a matter of personal choice.

One of the things I'm curious about (360) is if using a component cable instead of HDMI would have an impact on image quality on the consoles that are already out there.

And even if current games are being developed as 720p that doesn't mean games 2 years from now wont take advantage of the PS3's capabilities, as time passes and more players have access to 1080p displays you'll start seeing more and more developers taking advantage of it.

And the PS3 "only plays Blu-Ray movies". So? And if we want to talk about add-on expenses, the PS3 doesn't come stock with component cables or HDMI, so you have to buy one or the other to get 720p or 1080p on your HDTV.

The PS3 doesn't require an add-on to play BD movies and games will be able to take advantage of that, the 360 is using dual layer DVDs so I wouldn't be surprised if that affected the lenght and quality of future games.

And really, my point was that I prefer BD movies over HD-DVD, as simple as that.

The HDMI cable thing does suck, but I don't mind buying one considering the machine I got. I mean if I'm willing to spend the money on both a new display and a PS3 a cable doesn't make much of a difference to me.

This pretty much clears up your real stance on the issue.

If you think I don't like the 360 just because it was made by M$ you are wrong, however being made by M$ gives me a good indication of the kind of product to expect.

Take that any way you want.

So, what PS3 games are you playing right now?

Right now none, as I'm waiting for them to arrive, however the ones I've played and the ones I expect to come out are more than enough for me to be very happy with the PS3 right now.

But I dunno why my opinions bother you so much.

[Dark Raz]

Re: New Final Fantasy MMORPG

Yeah, it could be true or not, but either way, SE did state:

"We will not remake any Final Fantasy titles and have no plans to do so"

yet here we are...lol.

Anyway, I hope it is true, and I hope it is part of Vanadiel or Ivalice, if it isn't part of those worlds, maybe a brand new universe, would be cool, long as the MMO is for the PC also I would definitely get it ^^. I remember SE dispelled this rumor by saying it isn't a "FFXI-2", but they didn't say anything (that I remember) about not having a new MMO in production and they confirmed more expansions for FFXI.

Either way, I hope it's a new one, FFXI was SE's first MMO, and it was great, even though the community did throw it outta whack by turning everything into a "chore" (which it wouldn't be if people agreed to help and not "only if it benefits me" type of help xD).

Hopefully in the new one people would be more open to help, and I hope it sticks with the current way FFXI in terms of difficulty and great story, not something easy like WoW or (insert low budget free MMO here).

[jwalton]

Re: New Final Fantasy MMORPG

I haven't seen Gears of War in action, so I can't comment about it, but that wasn't my point.
I said it rivaled the 360 and the PS3, simply because even though the hardware is nowhere near the specs of current gen games at least to me it still holds it's ground pretty well against the new games.

So not only have you not seen the most visually impressive next-gen game that's out on a console right now, you also managed to avoid answering the question I had posed. Which games on the 360 have you played/seen in action?

The 360 can thorically display at 1080p, however at least from what I've read the console isn't too happy about it. And I have more confidence on a product that was designed with 1080p in mind than on a product that was designed for 720p and now is trying to push forward to 1080p. Of course, that's a matter of personal choice.

The console is perfectly fine in displaying 1080p. I'd like to read what you've read, so kindly link me to an article if you would.

And once again, this goes back to 720p gaming. You argue this "built for 1080p" nonsense, but you really don't seem to understand the nature of the beast. My old Nvidia Geforce 6600GT card can max out at 2048x1536 resolution. That's more resolution than the PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360 officially supports, 1080p being 1920x1080 resolution. To put this in terms of pixels, my Nvidia card has support all the way to displaying 3145728 pixels on screen at a time, while Xbox 360 and PS3 can display 2073600 pixels on screen at a time. This goes for the majority of video cards made in the last three years or so.

However, just because my PC can output such a high resolution does not mean it can run said high resolutions optimally. The higher the resolution, the more strain you put on the hardware, and the higher the chance of having framerate issues in games, especially when you start adding in lots of visual effects. If you try to program a game with the level of detail that would take full advantage of 1080p resolution, you will strain the hardware considerably more than you would if you designed it around 720p. I don't care if it's Xbox 360 or PS3... you only have so much RAM and the CPUs can handle only so much. All the awesome games on PS3 are going 720p for a reason. You are riding the hype machine right now with the 1080p crap.

Xbox 360 almost shipped with 256 megs of RAM. Epic Games showed Microsoft what Gears of War would look like with 256 megs of RAM versus 512 megs of RAM. When Microsoft saw the difference, they shipped 360 with 512 megs of RAM. It cost Microsoft over a billion dollars. Good thing too, because if they had shipped the 360 with 256 megs of RAM, the console would have flopped.

PlayStation 3 also has 512 megs of RAM. The differences between the two consoles in visual capabilities will be minimal. It's like the whole ATI versus Nvidia deal that PC gamers have been doing for the majority of the last decade, fanboys on each side barking about how much better their cards are when both sides produce good products with differences between the performance so marginal that it's ridiculous that there's so much fighting over it. As far as visuals go for 360 and PS3, it will ultimately come down to the programmers and the artists. Good art direction makes all the difference.

For the record, the Wii is also capable of resolutions higher than 480p according to the latest gaming news. It's a matter of "turning on the switch" so to speak. But there isn't enough juice to make decent looking 720p or 1080p gaming happen on said console, and so Nintendo is not offering either as an option.

The hype machine has left the area.

One of the things I'm curious about (360) is if using a component cable instead of HDMI would have an impact on image quality on the consoles that are already out there.

HDMI is better than component since it transmits the audio and video digitally rather than analog. The image quality difference is minimal since component is really good, but it is most certainly there and if you have an exceptionally good HDTV that wasn't purchased from Walmart, you can see the difference. PS3 wins in this department for having HDMI support. Rumor has it that Microsoft will be shipping 360s with HDMI support in May, but shame on them for not supporting it to begin with. The only way to get a "lossless" image on current 360s is through a VGA cable, which results in a washed out looking picture... kind of like how the PC version of FFXI looks washed out compared to PS2.

And even if current games are being developed as 720p that doesn't mean games 2 years from now wont take advantage of the PS3's capabilities, as time passes and more players have access to 1080p displays you'll start seeing more and more developers taking advantage of it.

See: above. It's not going to happen for any games that want to have the most visually impressive looking visuals without having significant framerate issues.

The PS3 doesn't require an add-on to play BD movies and games will be able to take advantage of that, the 360 is using dual layer DVDs so I wouldn't be surprised if that affected the lenght and quality of future games.

I don't see how it would. I'd prefer not to have to swap discs in RPGs, but I did it during the 32-bit era, I did it for a few games on the PS2, so I fail to see how it'll be an issue in the current gen.

Blue Dragon is supposedly 3 discs. The graphical style is supposed to mimick Pixar's animation, so I'd like to see it in action when it releases in the US someday.

And really, my point was that I prefer BD movies over HD-DVD, as simple as that.
The HDMI cable thing does suck, but I don't mind buying one considering the machine I got. I mean if I'm willing to spend the money on both a new display and a PS3 a cable doesn't make much of a difference to me.

But you said the 360 costs more with the "add-ons" when it doesn't. You buy a $400 360 with the HD-DVD player and you're at $600. You buy a PS3 and you can play Blu-Ray out of the box, but you still have to buy a component or HDMI cable. You could just use the composite cables supplied with the PS3 and you'd be at the same level of expense, but then, you may as well be watching standard DVDs.

I won't argue your preference for Blu-Ray though. Personally, I hate both formats because Toshiba and Sony wouldn't just set aside their differences and come together for one format, so I hope both fail in the movie department like LaserDisc, UMD, Betamax, etc.

If you think I don't like the 360 just because it was made by M$ you are wrong, however being made by M$ gives me a good indication of the kind of product to expect.
Take that any way you want.

I already did.

Right now none, as I'm waiting for them to arrive, however the ones I've played and the ones I expect to come out are more than enough for me to be very happy with the PS3 right now.

Personally, I'd have waited until the actual games came out before I purchased one, but hey. More power to you, I guess.

But I dunno why my opinions bother you so much.

It's mostly an issue of misinformation that bugs me. If you prefer the PS3's lineup of incoming games, cool. Just... stow the extra baggage, heh.

[Raydeus]

Re: New Final Fantasy MMORPG

So not only have you not seen the most visually impressive next-gen game that's out on a console right now, you also managed to avoid answering the question I had posed. Which games on the 360 have you played/seen in action?

Lost Planet, N3, Kameo and a FPS called Prey or something.

You are riding the hype machine right now with the 1080p crap.

Maybe, but that doesn't change the fact that I have much more confidence on the PS3 capabilities than the 360's.

See: above. It's not going to happen for any games that want to have the most visually impressive looking visuals without having significant framerate issues.

I'm sure the same was said about the PS2 games (and PS) for that matter when the system came out, yet programmers were capable of doing really good things with the hardware once they got enough experience.

And I'm sorry but I seriously doubt you are in a position to judge what is or isn't possible to do with the PS3 at this time, the same way I can't judge if the 360 will be really able to pull 1080p without problems, but I don't care about the 360 anyway.

I don't see how it would. I'd prefer not to have to swap discs in RPGs, but I did it during the 32-bit era, I did it for a few games on the PS2, so I fail to see how it'll be an issue in the current gen.

Blue Dragon is supposedly 3 discs. The graphical style is supposed to mimick Pixar's animation, so I'd like to see it in action when it releases in the US someday.

I wouldn't be surprised to see developers like SE taking advantage of the higher storage capabilities of BD discs to include really good HD cutscenes and things like that in games, using DVDs only it would be difficult to get the kind of quality video without having to use several discs, which is really a 32-bit era thing indeed. But again, it's a matter of personal choice, if you wanna keep swapping discs I wont critizice you for that.

But you said the 360 costs more with the "add-ons" when it doesn't. You buy a $400 360 with the HD-DVD player and you're at $600. You buy a PS3 and you can play Blu-Ray out of the box, but you still have to buy a component or HDMI cable. You could just use the composite cables supplied with the PS3 and you'd be at the same level of expense, but then, you may as well be watching standard DVDs.

You are only considering the 60GB version of the console, the 20 GB version would be cheaper and isn't as gimped as the 360's Core version. And even if the 360 costs the same that's yet another reason for me not to pay the same price for a product I consider inferior.

Personally, I'd have waited until the actual games came out before I purchased one, but hey. More power to you, I guess.

Of course I tried the system out and it's games before buying one.

It's mostly an issue of misinformation that bugs me. If you prefer the PS3's lineup of incoming games, cool. Just... stow the extra baggage, heh.

I think I have my info very clear even if you don't think so, but if it bugs you so much you could just /blist me and go back to your happy life.

[jwalton]

Re: New Final Fantasy MMORPG

I like how you selectively respond to certain parts of my post instead of all of it, and retort technical explanations with the equivalent of "nuh-uuuuuh!" Two can play at that game, I suppose. You seem to buy into any kind of hype Sony throws at you. Reminds me of all the people who bought into it when PS2 came out, and how PS2 was going to be an access device for distribution of digital content over the internet, how it could potentially replace a PC, all among a bunch of other nonsense and empty promises that helped kill off Sega's Dreamcast, a perfectly good system that shouldn't have bit the dust like it did.

I dunno, it just amazes me how Sony can continue flinging empty promises, and that there are still people that continue to fall for it. When the good games come out on PS3, I'll own one. Until then, Sony can spare me the BS, because I sure as hell don't buy game consoles based on promises.

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: New Final Fantasy MMORPG

You know what? Fine, you're right. PS3 isn't going to dominate.
Moving on.

I didn't say that. I said they're not dominating Japan right now. It's impossible for them to so until they start breaking even on PS3 and are able to do price drops. Sony is riding on the hope that Blu-Ray and PS3 succeed as DVD and PS2 did.

The problem? Too expensive and many people can't or don't care to make the distinction between HD and what we had before. Sony also dropped the ball on with the much-vaunted HD by releasing PS3 games that skew down to 720i or 480p instead of 1080i.

[Raydeus]

Re: New Final Fantasy MMORPG

I like how you selectively respond to certain parts of my post instead of all of it, and retort technical explanations with the equivalent of "nuh-uuuuuh!" Two can play at that game, I suppose. You seem to buy into any kind of hype Sony throws at you. Reminds me of all the people who bought into it when PS2 came out, and how PS2 was going to be an access device for distribution of digital content over the internet, how it could potentially replace a PC, all among a bunch of other nonsense and empty promises that helped kill off Sega's Dreamcast, a perfectly good system that shouldn't have bit the dust like it did.

I dunno, it just amazes me how Sony can continue flinging empty promises, and that there are still people that continue to fall for it. When the good games come out on PS3, I'll own one. Until then, Sony can spare me the BS, because I sure as hell don't buy game consoles based on promises.

I still don't know what does that have to do with me, or how do you know what I believe or not about what Sony said about their system.

My reasons for liking the PS3 have nothing to do with digital media or even other cool features like the visualizations when you play a music CD (really cool indeed), nor other things like the image and video playback which are nice too (and will be even better once I get my new 1080p display).

And it certainly has little to do with stuff Sony has said about the console, my "faith" in Sony comes from the all the years playing PS and PS2 games, and from all the products I've bought from them that have never dissapointed me.

About the PS3 itself what I like are the backwards compatibility since it's been almost 2 years since I had a PS2 (so I still need to catch up on plenty of PS2 games I didn't play), the 1080p possibilities, the BD movie player, the upcoming titles and some of the few that are already out there right now (which I ordered).

If you are bitter about the empty promises Sony made to you and didn't fulfill then you should write them a letter or something, because trying to tell me what to think or what to say about something that's completely my call isn't gonna make your situation any better.

That being said, I did start a fanboy thread a while ago, simply because I liked the publicity. But to asume just because I like the publicity I'm gonna follow the ads like a zombie is kinda too much.

[Manatra]

Re: New Final Fantasy MMORPG

HDMI is better than component since it transmits the audio and video digitally rather than analog. The image quality difference is minimal since component is really good, but it is most certainly there and if you have an exceptionally good HDTV that wasn't purchased from Walmart, you can see the difference. PS3 wins in this department for having HDMI support. Rumor has it that Microsoft will be shipping 360s with HDMI support in May, but shame on them for not supporting it to begin with. The only way to get a "lossless" image on current 360s is through a VGA cable, which results in a washed out looking picture... kind of like how the PC version of FFXI looks washed out compared to PS2.

HDMI also happens to be a manifestation of DRM technology, which makes it much worse than component

Honestly, at this point you guys are starting to sound like audiophiles. Perhaps if you listen just a little bit harder you can hear the difference between a normal digital audio cable and a gold plated digital audio cable.

[Vyren]

Re: New Final Fantasy MMORPG

I'd LOVE to see it in Ivalice. It seems like the best choice considering the range of races and jobs from FFT/FFTA/FFXII. Hume, moogle, Banghra(sp) Nou mou, Viera and Seeq should all be playable. I don't think the job system should change widely from XI though, unless they do something brilliant and amazing. I hate MMORPG's that make you create a new char to play a new job.

As far as making a sequal to XI goes, I don't think it'd be a good idea for lots of reasons. All it would basically be doing is upping the graphics and adding more storyline things. If you create a new, better XI, people from the old version will either get bored and leave, or feel how old XI is. Having to start over just for better graphics really isn't worth it for many people.

[Canuklehead]

Re: New Final Fantasy MMORPG

As far as making a sequal to XI goes, I don't think it'd be a good idea for lots of reasons. All it would basically be doing is upping the graphics and adding more storyline things. If you create a new, better XI, people from the old version will either get bored and leave, or feel how old XI is. Having to start over just for better graphics really isn't worth it for many people.

Not to mention, you'd be cheated out of everything that makes a new game good.

I mean, (if it were a "true" sequal set in the same world) you'd be running around the same zones and the same cities with the same layouts and same everything. Albeit, you'd look fancier and the graphics would be shinier, but the sense of discovery would be lost.

Besides, that's what expansions are for... they'll be your sequels


But yeah, a new world with FFXI style mechanics would be amazing. Everything that made FFXI great with everything that makes a new game great.

[Rostum]

Re: New Final Fantasy MMORPG

I got FFXII recently (just released in Australia on the 22nd), and I've been playing through the world of Ivalice. I think it'd defenately make a pretty good MMORPG -- but the world might be a little bit small?

The most exciting thing about SE making a new MMORPG, is that it'll be a lot different in atmosphere and feel than most western MMORPG (WoW, LotR, EQ2). At least I am hoping.

They're alright, but too much of the same thing. I just hope they put a really good user interface (better than what they have in FFXI, and completely different than WoW as everyone seems to use it!).

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: New Final Fantasy MMORPG

Invalice is actually getting a lot of love, much like The Compilation of FFVII, there's the "Invalice Alliance" series. FFXII is the first, FFXII: Revenant Wings to follow on DS. Then there is FFT: The Lion War on PSP and FFT Advance II on DS.

Even with all that attention considered, Invalice is a very compelling MMO setting.

But that aside, I've recently been playing FFVI Advance and the War of the Magi referred to in FFVI would make for a compelling setting. When you think about it, there could be a good and evil side to it - and empire versus the espers and humans that may ally with them, outside factions and also espers that refuse to associate with humans.

Races could be human, moogle and all kinds of espers. Jobs could range through all the FF classes, but could stand to eschew the subjob system in favor of using Relics or Magicite to get various job traits and abilities. Espers could learn skills by levelling, Human by magicite and Imperial by Magitek infusion.

And since we don't really know when this war ends, but know how it ultimately ends, you could make lots of expansions to fill the time out. And it leaves a door open to PvP potential. Imperial vs. Esper/Returners vs. Espers vs. Freelancers (who, like Shadow, have no loyalty, just work for the highest bidder).

There'd be Magitek Armors for the imperials, chocobos for humans and moogle, flight for espers and pets for Freelancers, like a dog or wolf or maybe some tiger.

[raidenn]

Re: New Final Fantasy MMORPG

Bet there will be several people with the title 'dark' -something on their names...