More possible sony bad news

[Shinjifei]

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6167864.html?action=convert&om_clk=latestnews&tag=latestnews;title;1

[Dancer O_o]

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6167864.html?action=convert&om_clk=latestnews&tag=latestnews;title;1

It's interesting that in France the pre-orders for PS3 have been good, 60,000 or so.

I thought that Final Fantasy XI (poor reviews) was on Xbox 360 and figured that was the beginning of the end of exclusivity for that series on Playstations. The series has become nitch unfortunately. I bought a movie that was for the PSP but my girlfriend is still watching it so I don't know its quality yet but she says nothing but good things about it even if she doesn't entirely understand it all. I know the movie that came out years ago (Spirts Within or something) was a turd in every possible way, one would think they were trying to ruin the good name of FF by releasing that weak storied piece of dung.

I think Final Fantasy is a dieing entity really, its numbers have dwindled over the years just like Metal Gears have too. People want new and fresh material to delve into and Final Fantasy may be on its final legs.

[Gamer From '78]

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6167864.html?action=convert&om_clk=latestnews&tag=latestnews;title;1

Thanks for the news Shinjifei. Unfortunately though, now we will get to hear ALL OVER AGAIN from LastLoad how Sony has 150 1st party games in development, yadda, yadda, yadda....:rolleyes:

Because when Devil May Cry 4 went multiplatform, it doesn't matter! Sony has 150 1st party games across all genres in development!

Because when Forza 2 comes out, it doesn't matter! Sony has 150 1st party games across all genres in development. And GTHD VIDEO looks better! Cuz he said so!

[ThaMaskedGamer]

How can anybody see this as bad news? Sony knew this was going to happen, the FF series is just getting stale and its about time everybody had it. Sony let it go so that they could make room for some of their 150 projects currently in development. This is really just bad news for 360 because it shows MS can't survive without Sony games. They are trying to be Sony, MS won't be happy until everybody is playing on 360s just like everybody was using PS2 last gen, so I don't care if MS is trying to be Sony, because now Sony is a different Sony and they have re-invented themselves, and MS can never be them. MS will never be the Blu-ray inventor.

Enough comic relief. I find this Sony's reps excuses as for the possible loss of exclusivity phony. First of all, just come out and say it, the "discussions" are how much money Sony will have to pay them to keep it exclusive, that's the only thing being discussed, oh and possibly if they do pay, how long they have to keep it exclusive. If I was them, i'd take whatever Sony is offering because FinalFantasy is NEVER going to sell well on the 360.

Next he states that the economics of game development make it so that games must be multiplatform. That's BS. There are tons of 360 games that have been exclusive and many more that will be that have made a boat load of money.

The only issue here installed base. Everybody knows a MS system with an installed base of 10-12 million users will sell as much software as a Sony system with 60 million users. Now which Sony system has 60 million users or 100 million, the PS2. How many does PS3 have? Squat! So if you are making a next gen game, you better put it on 360 or have Sony pay your for the $$ you will lose by not putting it on the 360. PS3 is not gonna move software in big numbers for a long long time.

Hell even when 360 had 2 million users games like GRAW, Oblivion, CallofDuty still moved over a million copies each. For some reason, and this goes back to last gen, Sony gamers just don't buy games as frequently. That's a big problem to have for a next gen system.

[MoNkEy MaN X]

So it's bad that Sony didn't cave and pay for exclusitivity of a game? I know MS has payed out left and right for exclusive titles last gen, and probably this gen too. So in that aspect they do deserve some success and the 360 is doing good. But when the horde of PS2 owners finally upgrade and go to a PS3 instead of a 360, it won't matter what is exclusive to 360.

[Shinjifei]

So it's bad that Sony didn't cave and pay for exclusitivity of a game? I know MS has payed out left and right for exclusive titles last gen, and probably this gen too. So in that aspect they do deserve some success and the 360 is doing good. But when the horde of PS2 owners finally upgrade and go to a PS3 instead of a 360, it won't matter what is exclusive to 360.

I truly don't believe hordes of PS2 owners are going to flock to the PS3. It cost too much for the average gamer and for the PARENTS(the ones who actually purchase the system) of Jonny 12 yr old. They are going to purchase a WII or 360(even if its just the stripped down version). Also I believe a great majority of the PS2's success in america can be attributed to one game... GTA. Now that that's not exclusive, heck not even coming to PS3 first, people have no reason to get a PS3. An early price drop might be sony only hope at the moment.

[Gamer From '78]

So it's bad that Sony didn't cave and pay for exclusitivity of a game? I know MS has payed out left and right for exclusive titles last gen, and probably this gen too. So in that aspect they do deserve some success and the 360 is doing good. But when the horde of PS2 owners finally upgrade and go to a PS3 instead of a 360, it won't matter what is exclusive to 360.

I see it like this Monk...We didn't see all these games being announced for the 360 right away. Games like Metal Gear Solid 4, Devil May Cry 4, Assasins Creed, Final Fantasy XIII, Ace Combat 6....these were all games destined and most likely as only on the PS3. The 3rd party developers have been watching and as the PS3 continues to sputter along, they are NOW making the announcement that their titles are coming to the PS3. It's poor sales on Sony's part that has these games going multiplatform.

I believe that the "hordes of PS2 owners" are already upgrading. And I don't think that brand loyalty is going to be a factor when A) All the games you WANTED a PS3 for are available on the Xbox 360 and B) Said games look just as good if not BETTER on the Xbox 360. Couple this with C) The Xbox 360 is $100-$200 cheaper than the PS3 and D) exclusives like Dead Rising, Lost Planet and two little games Called Gears of War and Halo are exclusive on the 360 and are so damn good. That is of course, among MANY great 360 exclusives.

You are truly delusional just like Last Load if you believe that gamers will flock to a system that doesn't have the games they want and rather because it has the "PS" logo stuck to it. Xbox 360 is kicking ass. How many times last gen did we see Xbox outsell the PS2? A couple of months out of FOUR YEARS?? So far, the Xbox 360 has consistently kept the PS3 at bay IN SPITE OF the PS3 being readily available at nearly every major retail outlet!

As it stands right now with all the exclusives I WANTED a PS3 for flying the coup for the Xbox 360, it won't be until God of War III is released that I buy a PS3. Unless of course-Metal Gear Solid 4 holds on and doesn't jump ship like nearly every OTHER game out there.

[Gadfly2317]

Wasn't losing Final Fantasy to Sony one of the Nintendo's death knells in the N64 vs Ps1 era?

I beleive Final Fantasy is on the wane too, just like Dancer 0 says, but that doesn't matter. What matters is that this is a system seller game to the remaining die-hard fans of the series. Each and every game, by itself, that Sony loses exclusivity to isn't the coffin itself, but is another nail in it. This seems bigger to me than even Devil May Cry if Final Fantasy franchise goes multi-plat onto 360.

Because, again, it is a system $200 less, with big exclusives of its own, and now the creme of what defined Ps2 like Grand Theft Auto, Devil May Cry, Final Fantasy, and many other big games. Hell, MS is even picking off the niche cult japanese stuff like Culdcept, which still hasn't been announced for Ps3 at all. Probably because to make it online for Live is more feasible for a niche low-budget game than having to host their own servers at their own cost.

[NEO-360]

How can anybody see this as bad news? Sony knew this was going to happen, the FF series is just getting stale and its about time everybody had it. Sony let it go so that they could make room for some of their 150 projects currently in development. This is really just bad news for 360 because it shows MS can't survive without Sony games. They are trying to be Sony, MS won't be happy until everybody is playing on 360s just like everybody was using PS2 last gen, so I don't care if MS is trying to be Sony, because now Sony is a different Sony and they have re-invented themselves, and MS can never be them. MS will never be the Blu-ray inventor.

Enough comic relief. I find this Sony's reps excuses as for the possible loss of exclusivity phony. First of all, just come out and say it, the "discussions" are how much money Sony will have to pay them to keep it exclusive, that's the only thing being discussed, oh and possibly if they do pay, how long they have to keep it exclusive. If I was them, i'd take whatever Sony is offering because FinalFantasy is NEVER going to sell well on the 360.

Next he states that the economics of game development make it so that games must be multiplatform. That's BS. There are tons of 360 games that have been exclusive and many more that will be that have made a boat load of money.

The only issue here installed base. Everybody knows a MS system with an installed base of 10-12 million users will sell as much software as a Sony system with 60 million users. Now which Sony system has 60 million users or 100 million, the PS2. How many does PS3 have? Squat! So if you are making a next gen game, you better put it on 360 or have Sony pay your for the $$ you will lose by not putting it on the 360. PS3 is not gonna move software in big numbers for a long long time.

Hell even when 360 had 2 million users games like GRAW, Oblivion, CallofDuty still moved over a million copies each. For some reason, and this goes back to last gen, Sony gamers just don't buy games as frequently. That's a big problem to have for a next gen system.

Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. Kudos for MS. The Sony Titanic continues to take in water.That iceburg keeps getting closer. Once MGS4 becomes 360 bound that boat is as good as sank.:p

[MoNkEy MaN X]

Honestly, by the time the mass of PS2 users actually have interest in upgrading, the PS3 may have seen 2 price drops by that time. Same with the other 2 systems. There are alot of PS2 owners that are probably not buying a new system for the next year or two. Not all people need to keep up with the Joneses, right? For alot of people the 360 is far out of their desired price point for a gaming system and the PS3 is leagues out of their pricing point. But come 2 years from know, things may be even at a price point after redesigns and such.

I would say right now, all 3 platforms are pretty bad. I'm not exactly sure what drives people to the Wii... I bought one, and have to say it's lacking. I'm playing through the buggy Zelda game which is a good game but definately doesn't showcase the use of their controller. Looking at the other games available on the system it is fairly disappointing.

The PS3 is mainly a movie player. Well, if you sold your PS2 and PS1 you can use it for that I guess. O, and a couple good PS3 titles. Definately not worth it.

The 360... Well, here goes... Lets have a bunch of bland FPS games and sports games. Lets make GOW, a game that actually does nothing to move forward for gaming but make it flashy, o and let the guys duck behind stuff... A novel concept... It's genious... Hey, here we go, lets charge people for a service like Xfire which is free on PC... It's brilliant... Let's have downloadable movies in HD over XBL that take 2 days to download. And let's make add on after add on. Hey, it's alright, we can release a new 360 in 2 years with an HDMI output and a wireless card built in... HAHAHAHAHA!!!

All the systems and games right now are lackluster. You'd be pretty hard pressed to find something truely revolutionary. Heck, you'd have a hard time finding a game to really sink your teeth into. I can play Zelda in 1 hour stints, sometimes 2, but it doesn't suck me into it. Maybe it has something to do with my priorities in life, or lack of time, or my band or the amount of hours I work, but I would think most people my age are in the same boat.

Do you know how I know games suck right now. All these 360 lovers spend more time in here bashing everything PS3 related than playing their freaking system. Come on guys. Sure PS3 sucks and it is overpriced but the 360 sucks too as well as the Wii... Gaming is just on a horrid downward slope. Soon we will have games based on reality TV because that is what EA belives will sell.

I've recently hooked up with some indie developers because I think there is something better to be made regardless of platform. I went to school to be a programmer but life struck me and I never persued a career in it. So I've hooked up to do the soundtrack and help out with some of the design concepts and story stuff...

And who the freak cares about the Aliasing on Gran Turismo vs Forza? Is this really how bad games suck now a days that we worry about this absolute crap?

[NEO-360]

Honestly, by the time the mass of PS2 users actually have interest in upgrading, the PS3 may have seen 2 price drops by that time. Same with the other 2 systems. There are alot of PS2 owners that are probably not buying a new system for the next year or two. Not all people need to keep up with the Joneses, right? For alot of people the 360 is far out of their desired price point for a gaming system and the PS3 is leagues out of their pricing point. But come 2 years from know, things may be even at a price point after redesigns and such.

I would say right now, all 3 platforms are pretty bad. I'm not exactly sure what drives people to the Wii... I bought one, and have to say it's lacking. I'm playing through the buggy Zelda game which is a good game but definately doesn't showcase the use of their controller. Looking at the other games available on the system it is fairly disappointing.

The PS3 is mainly a movie player. Well, if you sold your PS2 and PS1 you can use it for that I guess. O, and a couple good PS3 titles. Definately not worth it.

The 360... Well, here goes... Lets have a bunch of bland FPS games and sports games. Lets make GOW, a game that actually does nothing to move forward for gaming but make it flashy, o and let the guys duck behind stuff... A novel concept... It's genious... Hey, here we go, lets charge people for a service like Xfire which is free on PC... It's brilliant... Let's have downloadable movies in HD over XBL that take 2 days to download. And let's make add on after add on. Hey, it's alright, we can release a new 360 in 2 years with an HDMI output and a wireless card built in... HAHAHAHAHA!!!

All the systems and games right now are lackluster. You'd be pretty hard pressed to find something truely revolutionary. Heck, you'd have a hard time finding a game to really sink your teeth into. I can play Zelda in 1 hour stints, sometimes 2, but it doesn't suck me into it. Maybe it has something to do with my priorities in life, or lack of time, or my band or the amount of hours I work, but I would think most people my age are in the same boat.

Do you know how I know games suck right now. All these 360 lovers spend more time in here bashing everything PS3 related than playing their freaking system. Come on guys. Sure PS3 sucks and it is overpriced but the 360 sucks too as well as the Wii... Gaming is just on a horrid downward slope. Soon we will have games based on reality TV because that is what EA belives will sell.

I've recently hooked up with some indie developers because I think there is something better to be made regardless of platform. I went to school to be a programmer but life struck me and I never persued a career in it. So I've hooked up to do the soundtrack and help out with some of the design concepts and story stuff...

And who the freak cares about the Aliasing on Gran Turismo vs Forza? Is this really how bad games suck now a days that we worry about this absolute crap?

The 360 sucks? Why is that? Lack of good games? Last time I checked the PS3 is the king of that. The Wii? Hell, its outselling the PS3 and has less to offer. So whats your point to this saramonius babble thats coming from your mouth? :confused:

[MoNkEy MaN X]

The 360 sucks? Why is that? Lack of good games? Last time I checked the PS3 is the king of that. The Wii? Hell, its outselling the PS3 and has less to offer. So whats your point to this saramonius babble thats coming from your mouth? :confused:

Dude, there is no point in trying to connect with you. You missed the key points of the post. Obviously you only read the words "360 sucks" in my post and then responded. What I'm saying is all 3 new systems suck pretty bad for what they are right now. And the main thing to blame is not the sytems themselves but more so the games. How about actually reading a post and then responding instead of kneejerk posts.

[MoNkEy MaN X]

Actually, here I'll post something you may actually understand, let me just transform my language here so it is easier to read, I'll post it in all caps because I would like it displayed all big for everybody to read, oh yes, and we will just leave out puncuation:

THE 360 SUX SO BAD ITS LIKE THE THING BREAKS AND MICROSUCK IS LIKE DUDE YOU SUCK BECAUSE YOUR 360 BROKE 3 RED LIGHTS FANS STOPPED GRAPHICS CARD YOU SUCK BUY LIVE PAY US WE CAN FIX IT PAY US UP OUR WARRENT TO MATCH SONY AND NINTENDO BECAUSE WE MADE A FRAGILE PIECE OF GARBAGE AND RUSHED IT OUT AND NOBODY REALIZES NOW HOW BAD OUR LAUNCH GAMES WERE BECUASE SONY BLEW IT TOO BUT NOW WE HAVE GAMES AND EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE JUST THE SAME OLD RUBBISH EVERYBODY HAS BEEN PLAYING THEY WILL KEEP PLAYING HAHAHAHA

...end

[Gamer From '78]

Actually, here I'll post something you may actually understand, let me just transform my language here so it is easier to read, I'll post it in all caps because I would like it displayed all big for everybody to read, oh yes, and we will just leave out puncuation:

THE 360 SUX SO BAD ITS LIKE THE THING BREAKS AND MICROSUCK IS LIKE DUDE YOU SUCK BECAUSE YOUR 360 BROKE 3 RED LIGHTS FANS STOPPED GRAPHICS CARD YOU SUCK BUY LIVE PAY US WE CAN FIX IT PAY US UP OUR WARRENT TO MATCH SONY AND NINTENDO BECAUSE WE MADE A FRAGILE PIECE OF GARBAGE AND RUSHED IT OUT AND NOBODY REALIZES NOW HOW BAD OUR LAUNCH GAMES WERE BECUASE SONY BLEW IT TOO BUT NOW WE HAVE GAMES AND EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE JUST THE SAME OLD RUBBISH EVERYBODY HAS BEEN PLAYING THEY WILL KEEP PLAYING HAHAHAHA

...end

Are you allright man? Seriously? You seem to have just completely blown your top these last few posts of yours. :(

[MoNkEy MaN X]

I think I'm just tired of seeing nothing but anti PS3 pro 360 stuff over and over. Then when anybody pro PS3 comes up with something insightful or intelligent, somebody comes in with some PS3 sucks banter and bla bla bla, 360 is the greatest...

But I do stand firm that these 3 systems are pretty bad due to a lack of good games. Even now, the 360 has the same old crap. Sure the games are alright, but it is the same old crap over and over. I'm not saying PS3 is different, because it isn't. I shouldn't have purchased any of these 3 systems. It wasn't worth the price of admission here with the current line ups on any of them. The only "next gen" thing I own worth owning is the DS. There have been at least a couple original titles on it or games that don't follow today's normal setup.

[Bane]

I think I'm just tired of seeing nothing but anti PS3 pro 360 stuff over and over. Then when anybody pro PS3 comes up with something insightful or intelligent, somebody comes in with some PS3 sucks banter and bla bla bla, 360 is the greatest...

But I do stand firm that these 3 systems are pretty bad due to a lack of good games. Even now, the 360 has the same old crap. Sure the games are alright, but it is the same old crap over and over. I'm not saying PS3 is different, because it isn't. I shouldn't have purchased any of these 3 systems. It wasn't worth the price of admission here with the current line ups on any of them. The only "next gen" thing I own worth owning is the DS. There have been at least a couple original titles on it or games that don't follow today's normal setup.Post of the year here.You want real games get a PC!

[Mochan]

Are you allright man? Seriously? You seem to have just completely blown your top these last few posts of yours.

That tends to happen when you're dealing with Neo....


Wasn't losing Final Fantasy to Sony one of the Nintendo's death knells in the N64 vs Ps1 era?

That it was. FF7 was *the* killerapp for the PS1 once upon a time, and heck it was the game that put Square on the map (in the NES/SNES days Square wasn't that big of a household name, sure I enjoyed Chrono Trigger and there's a lot of die hard "FF3 is the best Final Fantasy!" people out there but what really caused the boom for Square was the PS1. Square only became king during the Playstation Era.

And definitely, losing FF as an exclusive is a MAJOR blow to Sony, far bigger than Devil May Cry. While it's true that DMC cries "PS2", Final Fantasy cries "Playstation" far more. This is like PrideFC losing Sakuraba to K1 Hero, or if it had happened, Michael Jordan traded off the Bulls to the Wizards. Final Fantasy is just one of those iconic sagas for the Playstation and losing it is like losing the "P" in Playstation it's now the Laystation. Lay and Pray!

I do agree with TMG though; Final Fantasy isn't going to sell too well on the 360. The only way it will, is if the PS2 fanbase adopts the 360 as the platform of choice. The XBox core demographic was just never keen on JRPGs; in the same way that Halo wouldn't sell too well on a Playstation, FF is just not going to do good on the Xbox.

[Mochan]

As for games moving the gaming world forward, especially in this era, it's better to look to the PC. Aside from adding glitz and glamour to the graphics, we are actually seeing some new gameplay mechanics come into play for the PC games.

Supreme Commander? Why be content with RTS on a small map when you can have a game that turns an entire planet into your battlefield, and have units the size of the Empire State Building!

STALKER is showing that to have a big ass game like Oblivion you don't have to have a crappy combat mechanic and crappy AI.

Company of Heroes showed us how to take a tried and true genre, RTS, and change the formula so much that it definies a brand new kind of game.

The PC did all sorts of things like this in the past, as well with games like Rainbow Six (which back in the day was truly innovative) -- it's a sad state to see that the current generation of Rainbow Six isn't even trying to innovate anymore, but instead changing itself to become more like the run of the mill FPS you see anywhere.

[Glockstar]

The only issue here installed base. Everybody knows a MS system with an installed base of 10-12 million users will sell as much software as a Sony system with 60 million users. Now which Sony system has 60 million users or 100 million, the PS2. How many does PS3 have? Squat! So if you are making a next gen game, you better put it on 360 or have Sony pay your for the $$ you will lose by not putting it on the 360. PS3 is not gonna move software in big numbers for a long long time.

Thank. You.


-


I do agree with TMG though; Final Fantasy isn't going to sell too well on the 360. The only way it will, is if the PS2 fanbase adopts the 360 as the platform of choice. The XBox core demographic was just never keen on JRPGs; in the same way that Halo wouldn't sell too well on a Playstation, FF is just not going to do good on the Xbox.

I made the mistake of thinking that the FF's were still big sellers all last-gen. I overestimated their clout everytime. So now that I know better, I say, no, FF-whatever isn't going to sell all that well on 360.

But it's still going to sell better than the PS3 version! Why? See above.

And in addition to that, by the time it comes out (assuming of course that it does come out) the 360 will be the console for J-RPG gamers. As it will have been host to several unique, and exclusive, J-RPGs. Like the upcoming Blue Dragon (which I predict will be #1 seller for the month that it comes out in :wink5:) and Lost Odyssey. And it will be host to a great many more J-RPGs than the PS3 in general. J-RPG gamers have no good reason to buy a PS3 right now. Nor will they have any in the future - as the 360 continues to beat the PS3 with future releases in the genre from this point forward.

And FF is still an important franchise and a big loss for Sony. For all the reasons that Gadfly gave/has given (with regards to niches and filling them).

[DrunkenThumbmaster]

The one thing that worries me TMG alluded to it. Is can they win being MS or to win do they have to morph into Sony. I prefered the Xbox to the PS2 even though the PS2 crushed the Xbox in sales. I hope MS can sell there vision and win as opposed ooh look we have the same thing and we are cheaper.

[MoNkEy MaN X]

I think I'll pick up Stalker while it's 30 bucks at circuit city. I'm actually considdering selling my Wii on eBay because they are still going for more than retail. Well, after I beat Zelda that is, which should be this week.

[Gadfly2317]

Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. Kudos for MS. The Sony Titanic continues to take in water.That iceburg keeps getting closer. Once MGS4 becomes 360 bound that boat is as good as sank.:p

Are you suggesting the Titantic was taking on water prior to hitting the iceberg?

[Mochan]

I made the mistake of thinking that the FF's were still big sellers all last-gen. I overestimated their clout everytime. So now that I know better, I say, no, FF-whatever isn't going to sell all that well on 360.

And in addition to that, by the time it comes out (assuming of course that it does come out) the 360 will be the console for J-RPG gamers.


I disagree with this one. I feel that the Wii will be the console of choice for J-RPGs, not the 360.

It's true that the 360 has Enchant Arm and will have Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey, but it seems to me that Enchant Arm totally fell off the radar and Blue Dragon probably will only sell well in Japan relative to the install base anyway; hell Enchant Arm on the PS3 has ALREADY sold better than Enchant Arm for the 360 in Japan, that's just plain sad.

I don't think the 360 is going to be a conducive platform for JRPGs. The Wii is very likely going to be the best platform for this genre.

[Mochan]

BTW what's this about Final Fantasy not selling well the PS2 Final Fantasies all sold over a million copies.

Er except for FF11.

[Mochan]

Are you suggesting the Titantic was taking on water prior to hitting the iceberg?

Only Neo could think up something like that....

[folken001]

BTW what's this about Final Fantasy not selling well the PS2 Final Fantasies all sold over a million copies.

Er except for FF11.

FF11 probably made just as much money though. Seriously, Square literally did nothing regarding to a lot of problems in the game for good 2-3 years and they charged for 13 a month.

[Gamer88]

FF11 probably made just as much money though. Seriously, Square literally did nothing regarding to a lot of problems in the game for good 2-3 years and they charged for 13 a month.


Regardless of that, loyal square fans played it anyways, because it was Final Fantasy, and you can judge a book by it's cover.

My friend's brother played this up till the point where he discovered that just because it was Final Fantasy didn't mean he was obligated to play it and give square money for it. It's conditioning, I swear. Like me, he bought ever FF game just because of blind loyalty. Mystic Quest? I don't care, it's FF isn't it?

heh, I'm just ranting because I hated the last few Final Fantasy, 10 and beyond suck, and I would like to see the company that once made quality games make the same quality games once more. Maybe if the fans would quite supporting them out of blind loyalty they would actually have a finiacial situation and make more compelling games...actually. thats my philosophy on sony, they messed up, punish them for it by not buying their lackluster launch system so they can learn from their mistakes and kick @$$ years down the road.

it doesn't matter, people are conditioned to be loyal to Square (just as they are to sony) so regardless of what the content is some postitive spin will be put on it and it will be hailed as greatness nevertheless. Thus, the quality can be put on the backburner, and the profits can start rolling in like never before.

(check out allrpg.com 's review of FFXII, now THAT is a real take on it!)

[ilnadmy]

Hey, I very much enjoyed FFX. It was a good game with a great story and a lot of depth and unlockables. Took me a good 60 hours to get most of the stuff out of it, and I still hadn't even touched the Monster Arena or gotten the last few legendary weapons.

[PapaSmurf]

Regardless of that, loyal square fans played it anyways, because it was Final Fantasy, and you can judge a book by it's cover.

My friend's brother played this up till the point where he discovered that just because it was Final Fantasy didn't mean he was obligated to play it and give square money for it. It's conditioning, I swear. Like me, he bought ever FF game just because of blind loyalty. Mystic Quest? I don't care, it's FF isn't it?

heh, I'm just ranting because I hated the last few Final Fantasy, 10 and beyond suck, and I would like to see the company that once made quality games make the same quality games once more. Maybe if the fans would quite supporting them out of blind loyalty they would actually have a finiacial situation and make more compelling games...actually. thats my philosophy on sony, they messed up, punish them for it by not buying their lackluster launch system so they can learn from their mistakes and kick @$$ years down the road.

it doesn't matter, people are conditioned to be loyal to Square (just as they are to sony) so regardless of what the content is some postitive spin will be put on it and it will be hailed as greatness nevertheless. Thus, the quality can be put on the backburner, and the profits can start rolling in like never before.

(check out allrpg.com 's review of FFXII, now THAT is a real take on it!)

You say allrpg.com's review is a real take on it only because the review when against the norm. However if you read his review and have actually played the game, that review compared to the score he gave is completely unfounded. I felt FFXII was a bit easier then any other FF I've played but I easily put over 40 more hours in FFXII than any other FF too.

What I got out of the allrpg review was the review wanted the same old **** from other FF's he'd played I.E. love story, ATB system, reliance on summons etc, etc. What he got was more like KOTOR war between nations, political intrigue, a battle system better than KOTOR (imo since you could pre-customize you fellow characters attacks without having readjust during battle) and the summons were more like things just to get mess around with.

While I don't think FFXII is the best rpg I've played (people tend to not usually agree with my likes cuz I found FF8 to be the best of the FF's) it was definitely in my top 4. They changed so much of the game that people hated and improved on it, like the random encounters. It definitely wasn't familiar to other FF's except the certain names of things.

I do however agree with your conditioning quote, but you make that sound like it's a bad thing. I'm taking Psychology. It's like I bought one FF game and it was good, so I bought the next one which was also good, and the same thing happened with next one. We wouldn't be able to be conditioned if we were having a bad experience. FFXI was a good game but it's not an FF game by any means. Sure the FF name might have caused me to garn interest in it, but I'm an MMO fan, I've played countless MMO's (Planetside, Earth and Beyond, EvE, Runescape, FFXI, SWG....)

The problem with the FF series as is becoming with any game that garners sequels is that it is just so hard to top a good game. You guys are all getting you panties in a wad for Halo 3, but I wouldn't be surprised if let the lot of you down. Hell people are excited over Halo Wars. It's a freakin RTS, how you know it's going to be good? That's conditioning to Halo name right there. FF8 was the first FF I played, so it was the first of that experience I ever got. It's probably why I don't think FF7 was as good, but I still got a good experience out of it, as I'm sure ya'll will get a good experience out of Halo 3, but I'm going to go out on a limb here and say it won't be as good as you're thinking it will be. There's only one game I've seen keep delivering on the goods with tons of new stuff and that was San Andreas.

[Mochan]

I didn't enjoy FF8 that much and found FFX a lot better than the FF8, and somewhat better than FF9, and actually I think I might like it better than even FF7. FFX was a good game, at first I didn't like the idea of it as I didn't like FF8 much (FF8 especially) but FFX was reasonably good. That's not to say FF8 was a bad game though; one thing about Final Fantasy is that the series *always* manages to impress somehow once you get playing. I keep coming into Final Fantasy games thinking, "Oh man not another one" yet sometime on the road while playing I suddenly find the magic in the series and end up playing happily. I've been playing Final Fantasy since FF4 and for the most part the Final Fantasy magic just seems to work. Granted I didn't like FF4 that much (never managed to finish it) but FF6 was okay, then FF7 came along and opened up some horizons because traditionally RPGs had bad graphics compared to other genres, all of a sudden comes along FF7 and shows that the best graphics can come to RPGs.

But man while FFX was a good game, goddamn no more Chocobo Racing, I swear I'm gonna murder someone if I'm forced to ride another Chocobo dodging birds.

FF12 I like, just been too busy playing STALKER and other stuff but I will revisit that though probably after I play Valkyrie Profile 2, which itself has been put on the backburner for a while. Now I preferred FFTactics to any other Final Fantasy and it wasn't just because of the brilliant gameplay, the story with all its political intrigue was very compelling so FF12 will be looking good to me, I just wish I didn't have to put up with Vahn in the early part of the game he is such a major turn off.


And Papa Smurf brings up a good point, so what if people are conditioned to buy Final Fantasy, XBots are conditioned to buy Halo and are excited over Halo Wars, an RTS that is nothing like the first two Halo games to boot.

[ilnadmy]

Oh man, that Chocobo bird-dodging, balloon-catching game was freaking frustating like a m***********, but I BEAT IT!!! I danced around the PS2 for a good 3 minutes. In fact, I kept dancing until the game stopped playing the victory music. That felt good. And now I can count myself among the elite in the videogaming world that have actually accomplished that feat.

Never got around to beating the butterfly catching game though.

[Gamer88]

Well, my arguement wasn't exactly intending to be pro-sony, I agree that xbots are conditioned to love halo.

But, im just kinda going on my own personal rant, because almost ever RPG-fan I have ever had a discussion with is final fantasy obsessed, and have this delusion that everything square comes out with, regardless of squares change in staff, will be superb, simply because it's square. Brand loyalty is sometimes alright, but I think it's a bit misplaced in square, but thats really just a personal opinion, nothing more.

After all, entertainment is subjective so even if Square conditions people to love Final Fantasy and buy their games as long as people are still entertained greatly by them then the mission is accomplished. and its not like monolith soft or bioware wasn't/wouldn't do the same thing.

I haven't played much of FFXII, but I played, and beat, almost other final fantasy ever made (excluding 12 and 11, which you can't really "Beat" anyways I guess). I actually have the game at my house, with a ps2, I just haven't played it yet. To busy with NOLF (still haven't beaten it), Farcry (the original), and Fire Emblem Path of Radiance. I also have a PSP which I just bought that my sisters are playing to death.


Anywho, I honestly loved the NES-PS1 generation of Final Fantasy. Excellent games with advancements in complexity and storywriting. The PS2 generation of final fantasy however...I saw as nothing but a dissapoint. Admittably, I played FFX, almost threw twice. I beat the game once, and would probably play threw it again eventually.

I enjoyed it, but I don't think it comes anywhere close to the other ones, in terms of freedom, plot, character development, or even musical scores! I mean come on, the epic soundtracks in the PS1 era and far more memorable than anything on FFX,( and especially FFX-2). The Characters in FFX were almost unbearable. Does anyone else think that FFX had the weakest cast of characters of any 3 dimensional Final Fantasy? (heck, even 6 and 5 and 4 had more compelling characters)

haha, I can rant on about this forever

FFX has a lot of innovations (The sphere grid, which I like, and the voice acting) but to me it seems like the world of FFX, just isn't as massive or complex as the World of FF7, 8 or 9. (lack of free travel on the world map is probably one reason for this)

oh yeah, and I know the FF12 review on allrpg was a little too critical, because it got a lower review than Anatosonsia story for christ sakes....but still..it's nice to see someone actually point out some of the faults of the franchise for once...instead of just getting on their knees.

[folken001]

I think current FFs are disappointing to some of us due to the fact that we are somewhat growing out of the videogame. From the people I've talked to, the younger audiences seemed to love FFX. I personally thought FFX was pretty bad. I couldn't stand FFX's lame story. While I agree with you that FFX characters are all pretty lame, but Auron is probably one of my favorite characters of all time.

I really enjoyed FFXI though. The story is actually ok but the battle system is top tier. I thought it was 100000000000000000000000000000000000000 times better than WOW. The only problem is that it's way too time consuming and a lot of bosses are just too hard. But jobs like Ninja and Monk are just plenty fun to play. Man, I loved to play monk. Monks are so powerful in FFXI. If you are a good mnk with good equipment, you would get hate all the time. Sometimes I would equip all counter+ equipment and use counterstance. I think my max counter ever was like 6 in a row. Monk itself can do up to 5 hits or so if warrior is equipped as sub job(double attack trait). So it's like hit hit hit, counter counter, hit hit, counter counter, 100% tp => raging fist, hit hit, counter hit = mob dead. But, counterstance also lowers the defense down 50% or something. Monsters can really rape you while you are in counterstance if today isn't ur lucky day. It was just exciting to live on the edge. It's either they die or you die. People usually don't like mnk/war though. It cost too much MP from mages to cure and exp per hour might be gimped. I had to /nin most of the time for shadows..... :(

Man....fun times.

[Mochan]

I'm not a big fan of the Final Fantasy series in general, it is quality entertainment but my favorite JRPGs lie elsewhere, Suikoden in particular is my favorite, even though frankly Suikoden 4 may have been the worst RPG on the PS2, and Suikoden 1 was meh.

[ilnadmy]

I really enjoyed FFXI though. The story is actually ok but the battle system is top tier. I thought it was 100000000000000000000000000000000000000 times better than WOW. The only problem is that it's way too time consuming and a lot of bosses are just too hard. But jobs like Ninja and Monk are just plenty fun to play. Man, I loved to play monk. Monks are so powerful in FFXI. If you are a good mnk with good equipment, you would get hate all the time. Sometimes I would equip all counter+ equipment and use counterstance. I think my max counter ever was like 6 in a row. Monk itself can do up to 5 hits or so if warrior is equipped as sub job(double attack trait). So it's like hit hit hit, counter counter, hit hit, counter counter, 100% tp => raging fist, hit hit, counter hit = mob dead. But, counterstance also lowers the defense down 50% or something. Monsters can really rape you while you are in counterstance if today isn't ur lucky day. It was just exciting to live on the edge. It's either they die or you die. People usually don't like mnk/war though. It cost too much MP from mages to cure and exp per hour might be gimped. I had to /nin most of the time for shadows.....

That makes absolutely no sense to me.

So yesterday I was playing on my Shaman, right? And I was all like using Astral Recall to get my quests in quick and then mounting up and getting the rest done too. And I have to say THANK GOD FOR GHOST WOLF I mean having an in-combat escape route that's pretty awesome innit? So anyway I'm specced enhance/resto and I've got that dual wield but then again resto for that +3% to hit, which is always useful and stuff. Yeah, good times.

[NEO-360]

Are you suggesting the Titantic was taking on water prior to hitting the iceberg?

In this case:Yes.:cool:

[NEO-360]

I think I'm just tired of seeing nothing but anti PS3 pro 360 stuff over and over. Then when anybody pro PS3 comes up with something insightful or intelligent, somebody comes in with some PS3 sucks banter and bla bla bla, 360 is the greatest...

But I do stand firm that these 3 systems are pretty bad due to a lack of good games. Even now, the 360 has the same old crap. Sure the games are alright, but it is the same old crap over and over. I'm not saying PS3 is different, because it isn't. I shouldn't have purchased any of these 3 systems. It wasn't worth the price of admission here with the current line ups on any of them. The only "next gen" thing I own worth owning is the DS. There have been at least a couple original titles on it or games that don't follow today's normal setup.

SO you're tired of seeing anti PS3 and pro 360 stuff huh? Get over it. Because theres more where that came from. I disagree with something you said earlier. You said that all 3 consoles basically sucks at this point? LOL! How do you figure that? Right now the Wii and the 360 is selling hardware and software very well. The PS3? Isnt doing so great in that department. At least the 360 currently has games worth talking about. Same can be said about the Wii. The PS3? Theres only about 3 games worth talking about.

You claim on all 3 consoles there is a lack of good games? When was the last time you picked up an EGM or a Game Informer or a Gamepro magazine? Apparently you've been in a dark cave since the PS3 came out last year.:rolleyes:

[NEO-360]

Only Neo could think up something like that....

I'm come up with some doozies over the years in VGR. Some cool some a bit disturbing. But thats showbiz for ya.:cool:

[Bane]

SO you're tired of seeing anti PS3 and pro 360 stuff huh? Get over it. Because theres more where that came from. I disagree with something you said earlier. You said that all 3 consoles basically sucks at this point? LOL! How do you figure that? Right now the Wii and the 360 is selling hardware and software very well. The PS3? Isnt doing so great in that department. At least the 360 currently has games worth talking about. Same can be said about the Wii. The PS3? Theres only about 3 games worth talking about.

You claim on all 3 consoles there is a lack of good games? When was the last time you picked up an EGM or a Game Informer or a Gamepro magazine? Apparently you've been in a dark cave since the PS3 came out last year.:rolleyes:

And yet you own none of these consoles to even have a valid opinion.Maybe if you quit wasting your money on every video game mag known to man you would have a console by now.

[NEO-360]

And yet you own none of these consoles to even have a valid opinion.Maybe if you quit wasting your money on every video game mag known to man you would have a console by now.

Know your role Bane.

No I dont own a PS3 or a 360 yet. Come April I will own a 360. So buying videogame magazines is a waste of time huh? Well to some it may be. To others it isnt. I like to read up on whats going on in the videogame world. On the internet as well as in magazines. Most of my opinions on things are valid. Its not my fault that people dont like to hear the truth about things.

But what exactly are you playing these days Bane? Enlighten us with your intelligent ramblings.If you can.:D

[MoNkEy MaN X]

Know your role Bane.

No I dont own a PS3 or a 360 yet. Come April I will own a 360. So buying videogame magazines is a waste of time huh? Well to some it may be. To others it isnt. I like to read up on whats going on in the videogame world. On the internet as well as in magazines. Most of my opinions on things are valid. Its not my fault that people dont like to hear the truth about things.

But what exactly are you playing these days Bane? Enlighten us with your intelligent ramblings.If you can.:D

Well, I have very limited time now. I have a lack of patience now too. So there is just a ton of crap games out there not even worth looking at. I could understand playing a bunch of mediocre games on the 360 though if you have the time to waste on it. When I play games, they have to be worth my while. I'm no longer focused in online gaming which seems to be the meat and potatoes of the 360. Now, that is great for some, but not for me. I'd rather have engaging gameplay and a good story. I'm not saying PS3 is doing anything great right now either. Actually the best 360 game now is Castlevania SOTN by my standards. It's fun and easy to get into, what many modern games lack.

You keep saying 360 has loads of awsome games yet you never mention any. It's not very convincing. I've owned and sold a 360 because it was the same old thing and I found when games come out for it, the multiplayer online aspect is focused on too much. I played through GOW and I'm not exactly sure what the story even was. Nothing memorable, just run and gun through a couple levels.

Why do you bash the PS3 when I stated even PS3 games pretty much suck right now? You don't need to tell me that PS3 only has a couple games, I already posted that but Wii has only a couple too. Heck 360 has been out for a year and a half and the only game I would go back and play is Burnout Revenge on it. Heck, at least I'm not getting shafted by MS. It sucks to buy a system and then have a company release add ons, upgrades, and better versions of the system... Especially with todays need to "keep up with the Joneses".

[DrunkenThumbmaster]

Well, I have very limited time now. I have a lack of patience now too. So there is just a ton of crap games out there not even worth looking at. I could understand playing a bunch of mediocre games on the 360 though if you have the time to waste on it. When I play games, they have to be worth my while. I'm no longer focused in online gaming which seems to be the meat and potatoes of the 360. Now, that is great for some, but not for me. I'd rather have engaging gameplay and a good story. I'm not saying PS3 is doing anything great right now either. Actually the best 360 game now is Castlevania SOTN by my standards. It's fun and easy to get into, what many modern games lack.

You keep saying 360 has loads of awsome games yet you never mention any. It's not very convincing. I've owned and sold a 360 because it was the same old thing and I found when games come out for it, the multiplayer online aspect is focused on too much. I played through GOW and I'm not exactly sure what the story even was. Nothing memorable, just run and gun through a couple levels.

Why do you bash the PS3 when I stated even PS3 games pretty much suck right now? You don't need to tell me that PS3 only has a couple games, I already posted that but Wii has only a couple too. Heck 360 has been out for a year and a half and the only game I would go back and play is Burnout Revenge on it. Heck, at least I'm not getting shafted by MS. It sucks to buy a system and then have a company release add ons, upgrades, and better versions of the system... Especially with todays need to "keep up with the Joneses".

Multiplayer is better than single player so 360 has better games. How does that work. I mean damn How can you dismiss a console and all it's games because it doesn't fit your "preference" then act like you opinion is superior to any one elses. So what Neo doesn't have the system yet he knows what type of games he likes and he knows where they are at.

You and a few others on ths board kill me. Acting like your opinon of a game is what makes it good Xbox has too many FPS blah blah blah. Well Sh!t FPS are the best games so it's a win win. Then you say it's to much of the same when the line up is consideralbly more varied and higher quality than last system at this point but apparently it's all the same. And the PS3 line up has so much variety right :rolleyes:

I understand people have there preferences but damn! There's a whole lotta of holier than thou going on.

By the way MMX it's not just you and not just MIlkdrinkers.

/rant

[PapaSmurf]

Multiplayer is better than single player so 360 has better games.

Your post ended right there for me. That comment right there is person opinion at it's finest and this is coming from a guy who played TFC and CS online for years back in the day. Multiplayer experience is great and I've had some great times, but at the end of the day I need substance to a game. I need a good story. Once you've played multiplayer games for a long time online as I have, it's still fun, but you find yourself wanting more single player experiences where you can just immerse yourself.

Sorry I didn't read the rest of your post, but that singe comment of yours speaks volumes that doesn't represent alot of people's tastes.

[ilnadmy]

Acting like your opinon of a game is what makes it good

So what else makes a game good? Other people's opinions? Shouldn't I play games that I like and buy consoles that have games I like?

[MoNkEy MaN X]

Hey, I never said I was superior or my opinions where even good ones, but they are mine. I also never said PS3 offers anything great, actually I believe I have stated numerous times that the PS3 games mainly suck as well but hey, it can play Blu-Ray discs.

Dude, if a console doesn't fit your preference you have every right to dismiss it. Freedom of choice. Why would you buy something that doesn't fit you? I did online games for years. Even back from the direct dial games like doom and decent. Played CS online for many years. At the end of the day though, online multiplayer is just lacking. It seems to be giving the developers an alternative other than actually making games with meaningful stories, and this isn't just one system or PC, it's everything. A game can be a great single player experience then get docked points because it doesn't offer multiplayer. It sucks that it has come to this.

It's funny that you, DrunkenThumbmaster, make me sound like I'm a holier than thou style poster when all the 360 guys are that way. They praise everything 360 and bash PS3, even dismissing some good ones like Motorstorm and Resistance.

In the end the PS3 probably will have a good variety because they have a pretty good in house devolpement crew. 360 could end up pretty good too, but right now neither system has anything that stands out from the crowd as far as being an original style of game.

In the end, there really is no point in arguing about opinions because it just goes back and forth forever. Besides, I've said PS3 has a weak line up in my posts along with the other sytems included... Then a 360 fanatic responds saying that PS3 sucks and that there are no good games on it either... Then I say, hey, I just said that, did you even read my post? It's almost as if the 360 people feel a grave need to justify their purchase, which usually means that somewhere in the back of your mind you are actually regretting your puchase. If you havn't noticed I don't really defend each system too much because of the current state of each system.

Bah, posting here is almost as much of a waste of time as playing some of these 2nd rate 360 game... :D Guys, calm the freak down... :thumbsup:

[slade]

Hey, I never said I was superior or my opinions where even good ones, but they are mine.

He takes criticisms about the 360 personally. It's like you seriously insulted his momma while all you really said was that she wears army boots.

[Mochan]

Played CS online for many years. At the end of the day though, online multiplayer is just lacking. It seems to be giving the developers an alternative other than actually making games with meaningful stories, and this isn't just one system or PC, it's everything.

Yes, I've whined about this myself for the past 10 years. Old peeps on the PC Boards will still remember me rattling on about how multiplayer was killing singleplayer and making game devs lazy because they were relying on tacking on a multiplayer experience to prolong a game's life. It wasn't a very popular opinion, let me tell you. It's good to see that someone else actually has the same view.

Make no mistake, like Papa Smurf I've been playing multiplayer for ages (not necessarily online) I went through Quake 2, Action Quake 2, Counterstrike, Rogue Spear, Star Craft, Battlerealms, Ghost Recon, Ravenshield, Age of Mythology, Diablo 2, Second Life, finally ending up with SWAT4 and Battlefield 2, never dirtied my feet with MMORPGs thankfully but I definitelysee the importance of singleplayer and I will *always* prefer singleplayer to multiplayer. At least until they develop multiplayer to levels beyond what we have now. Lightyears beyond.

Heck, even in BF2 a lot of the time I find myself playing singleplayer rather than multiplayer. Part of it has to do with my skill level (I'm just not as good as the sharks online anymore), part lag (being in the Philippines I get pings of at least 200, killer in FPS), part no time (I don't want to log out of the game after just 30 mins or so and make other players feel like I gipped them) so often times I just play on my own.

And not just that, multiplayer never has any kind of cohesive overall substance and feel to the game; the gameplay mechanic is often superb but I have always been a strong proponent of a strong narrative in my games and you just don't get that in multiplayer, not even in games like NWN.

So singleplayer will always be first in my book.

[Bane]

Some games though were made for multiplayer and are better played as a multiplayer game.Games like Ravenshield and GRAW are much better then the SP campaign when played with a good group of Human players.Ofcourse story based RPG'S are better played by ones self,but there are certain genres that just cry out to be taken online.RTS and Turn Based games IMO fit more towards online human play as for the most part you cant get the kind of strategy out of a sp campaign as you can playing a really good human player.But if your looking for nothing but storyline then ofcourse most online aspects suck but even then there are exceptions.I agree about FPS games when i was younger i was pretty good and in certain games i could win 90% of the death matches i entered but my skills have fallen off big time and now i get to frustrated to play alot of FPS games online atleast the DM games.

[Cuddly Knife]

How do you guys feel about co-op? That seems to be the latest multi-player trend, with games like Army of Two, BF: Bad Company, Crackdown, and stuff like GRAW co-op and such.

[Rogue Bounty Hunter]

How do you guys feel about co-op? That seems to be the latest multi-player trend, with games like Army of Two, BF: Bad Company, Crackdown, and stuff like GRAW co-op and such.

Don't forget about Mercenaries 2. (Quarter 2 begins, and so does my pimpage of Mercs 2)

I don't mind co-op if they are done right. I like where a 2nd gamer can jump in what was a single-player game and help with a few missions or play the entire campaign with player 1, and jump out and the game continues with one player w/o missing a beat. For a game like Army of Two, I want the AI to be able to be at least decent (which means he's 1000 times smarter than Dom on Gears of War) if I'm not playing the game with another human.

I don't care for the "special co-op missions" similar to the ones on Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory and Double Agent (I think) where it isn't really tied into the main part of the game.

[Glockstar]

I love the co-op missions in SCCT and SCDA!

I love co-op but period!

[MoNkEy MaN X]

I definately went through my online phase. I played Age Of Kings so much online it was crazy. I remember staying up late even though I had college classes to go to the next day. Same thing with CS, I logged so many hours play for fun and match stuff. While I did have alot of fun doing this, it got old especially once my time got squashed. After 2 kids and a fairly hefty day job where I sometimes log over 60 hours, the online games just became kind of shallow. I want to use my game time to experience a good story based game. It is fun every now and again to jump online but I usually get bored pretty fast.

As far as MMORPG goes, I tried a couple and played none greater than 2 weeks. A good amount of people that I have met that play these seem to get way to involved with the game. It's almost as if these people are living a double life. One of my buddies has recently put the MMORPG down and has decided doing the band thing is more important than wasting countless hours online. I guess it depends what you want to do with your life.

[joquito]

Co-op is pretty much the only time I play online. Special missions, such as in Splinter Cell aren't great, but I take what I can get. The goal should be that most games will offer online co-op through the single player campaign. I even bought Serious Sam for the Xbox due to its online Co-op. I've never played it with 4 people yet.

[Mochan]

Here's the thing: Coop goes hand in hand with my philosophy of anti-multiplayer. Sound weird? This is how my argument goes:



#1.) Deathmatch type games and MMORPGs make developers lazy to create singleplayer content
#2.) The best coop in my book is coop played through the singleplayer campaign. I love Coop
#3.) The reason why we see so many games today with deathmatch options tacked on but little to no Coop options is due to #1
#4.) Therefore give me more singleplayer, and give me more coop fun to go with it.


Of course #1 is all assumption but as far as I'm concerned, I think I'm on the mark here considering that all you really need to do to make deathmatch type thing work is a map and the core deathmatch contest mechanics. No need to write in content, and heck your modding community will be more than happy to supply more maps for free to the gaming community, extending your game's life even more. And since consumers eat up this kind of game and reviewers/journalists are more than happy to praise your game for strong deathmatch functions, it's such a no brainer and so tempting to provide for this and even rely on it, rather than develop Coop and singleplayer content.

And take note, the more a developer focuses resources on multiplayer deathmatch, the less time and resources they have to focus on the singleplayer (and/or Coop).

The main reason I am still slightly interested in Gears is because of its Coop function. The only reason I got Serious Sam 2 was because of Coop.

[DrunkenThumbmaster]

My point is this I hear this comment on this board all the time. They sacrificed single player for multiplayer. Ok so what if they did. It's just another type of game. That comment in and of itself makes it seem as though the game is inferior. I own games that I never touch the single player never!

If you don't like that type of game fine that's cool. But what if I said I hate JRPG's because they don't have multiplayer? Would that make any sense honestly. I don't like JRPG's so why am I going on about multiplayer in them.

Secondonly the critism I mentioned above 9 times out of 10 is B.S. what games are really sacrificing there single player?

3rd I always here about there are so many jerks online and etc. Of all the millions of online gamers you people honestly can't find decent people to play with? Seriously?

Plus online like so many in this thread has mentioned is more than just Deathmatch. Personally to me nothing can engross me more than a co-op game. If you playing with someone (a friend) and that person dies because of you it's more impactful I think than just watching your A.I. die.

I love football games and sure season and dynasty mode are fun. But playing in a real online season like Espn 2k5 blows singleplayer out the water the intensity and the way you get engrossed in an online season is beyond anything single player could hope to accomplosh.

I recently said God of War 2 is my favorite game of this generation. But I've finished it twice. And I haven't played it a quater of the amount of time I've played most online games I really get into.

Multiplayer does require good players to play with and if you really can't find them I can see why you wouldn't enjoy it. But for my money give me great multiplayer and I'll deal with a decent single player.

[DrunkenThumbmaster]

considering that all you really need to do to make deathmatch type thing work is a map and the core deathmatch contest mechanics. No need to write in content, and heck your modding community will be more than happy to supply more maps for free to the gaming community, extending your game's life even more. And since consumers eat up this kind of game and reviewers/journalists are more than happy to praise your game for strong deathmatch functions, it's such a no brainer and so tempting to provide for this and even rely on it, rather than develop Coop and singleplayer content.



The thousands of ****ty deathmatch games out there say otherwise. Then what about games like Pariah or Even the First Half-life and from the looks of it the upcoming The Darkness. All these games are heavily single player but the multiplayer is sh!t

As for the mod thing Half-life fits your description more than multiplayer based game out there.