Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment

Massively Multiplayer Games On Consoles 99

Posted by timothy from the there's-been-some-speculation- dept.
Missionyrd writes: "In an interview on PlanetXbox.com Scott Herrington of Turbine Entertainment discusses the next wave of massively multiplayer games and their possible inclusion on consoles. Up until now MMPGs have been strictly created for the PC. What kind of things could we expect if they came to the consoles such as Xbox and Playstation 2 as well?" Isn't this what all the broadband-and-other network connections being built into or promised for modern console games are for? :)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Massively Multiplayer Games On Consoles More

Massively Multiplayer Games On Consoles

Comments Filter:
  • Two thing that are needed: 1) storage device 2) keyboard/mouse Because of human nature, any exploit will be used to its fullest. Exploits will absolutely kill a game. In order to fix exploits, game patches are required. I doubt that, even with broadband, that people will stand for basically the whole game to download each time they want to play. The other solution is to have local storage. Keyboards are required as well because people will want to talk to each other. Until consoles have both of these (almost effectively turning them into PCs), MMOG will be difficult at best on a console.

  • Phantasy Star (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Next Phatasy Star fer Dreamcast does this, even supposed to translate between 4 major languages real time...only time will tell needless to say :) Although the DC isnt' doing well on the sales side of things, this might give an indication of where things may go...
  • ...A lot less cheating (not that it would be impossible, but the equipment to do it is not widely available) and a lot more powergaming as the IQ bar for entering these games is lowered further.

    Making a NEW game based on a console might not be a bad idea but introducing console users to an existing PC only MMORPG would be utter chaos.

    Moderators: I have a +1 and I didn't use it. Consider this post already modded down.

    The real Threed's /. ID is lower than the real Bruce Perens'.

    --Threed
  • Userfriendly'ness is vital for a massmarket product. Beter than keyboards is to use microphones to exchange short voice messages.

    The Dreamcast microphone peripheral, which US and Japan readers will have seen bundled with Seaman, will be launched in Europe with the online game "Dream Dorobo", in which two players on two Dreamcasts connected over the net, cooperate with each other using voice-over-IP.

    That's great stuff, and it can't be long (although it might have to wait until Broadband is deployed) before console gamers can play (say) Team Fortress with voice communications. (although personally I'd prefer to see something more fun than a FPS).
    --

  • Well, I don't have any children yet, but I should think that a child is probably better off spending time in a virtual reality, where they are at least interacting with people, even if it's by way of avatars, than zombified in front of the TV, where they are doing nothing, learning nothing and developing no skills.(I've also been addicted to the EverCrack. I dropped out because of circumstances beyond my control, and I can't wait to get back in...)

    Some people go on vacation to exotic places, work at wonderful, fulfilling jobs that unleash their creativity, have smart and gorgeous Significant Others and lead lives straight out of Coca-Cola commercials; for the rest of us, there was first storytelling, then books, then comic-books, then radio and television. Now, Multiplayer Environments promise to fulfill the same socially equalizing function (because, at the end of the day, a wheat farmer can get just as much enjoyment out of a good movie as Bill Gates), but with the added advantage of being able to bring something of yourself into the experience.

    Of course, a game of EverQuest is no substitute for a good, fulfilling real life, but it can be a good substitute for a boring, stressful one.

  • Spot on! The Final Fantasy series on NES/SNES/PlayStation/PS2 is one of the greatest series of videogames created so far. The next release, Final Fantasy 9, will be the last on PlayStation, with 10 and 11 already announced for PS2. Final Fantasy 11 has been announced as being massively multiplayer, to the point where you cannot expect to complete the game without going on-line (the gameworld still lives on a DVD) to gain the co-operation of other players.

    This is a perfect example of using on-line play to bleed off extra revenue (assuming that you have to subscribe - nothing has been said, it could be a free extension once you have bought the game). There are millions of Final Fantasy fans across the world, all of whom will now be forced (if they want to play the next installment) to go on-line, pay whatever is required for the connection, and rely on being able to find some other people that want to play the same game at the same time, with the same level of commitment, compatible motives and all of whom have reached close to the same point in the game. Thats a lot of effort compared to the current scenario - get home from work, make cup of tea, switch on PlayStation and TV, continue with game.

    And Final Fantasy isn't the only example. According to a feature in the well respected Edge magazine, Sega's upcoming Phantasy Star Online, one of the most eagerly awaited RPGs for Dreamcast, can only be completed by co-operative groups of four players! Enough to put me off buying a Dreamcast...
  • It will be interesting to see if we hear the same complaints of lag, server downtimes, and the like. Imagine a new slew of lawsuits against game companies just like when UO was getting sued. Or poor little jimmy getting banned because he keeps saying those dirty words he hears on television.

  • I would have thought that as well, but then the original poster I responded to said they had non-standard USB ports (thus you couldn't use normal USB keyboards).

    The point is valid for the PS2 though, which does use standard USB ports.

  • In fact, I'm pretty sure they said in an interview I read some time ago that they were absolutley not coming out with a keyboard for the X-box at all!

    I wonder how hard it would be to replace the non-standard USB port with a real one (probably just a bit of rewiring...).
  • I thought a little about the respawn issue, at least from the player side - that could I think be solved on a per-game basis. For instance if you were a solider in a battle, you would simply take over the closest uncontrolled unit. You could indicate a prefernce for type of soldier or unit you wanted to be.

    A carmageddon player would simply respawn in increasingly distant circles, or possibly by a distance dicticated by damage done to players in other games or players in other games doing stuff to him. That would prevent things like a car screwing over one player in a battle through respawn and attack cycles, as well as keep a giant drop ship full of weapons from ruining a whole other game. I'm not sure you could really hope to keep a very persistant presence in these games, but it might be possible...

    I'm sort of aware of the MMRPG enemy respawn issues through people at work that play Everquest and the like. I think that could be solved through being "massive enough" in that you didn't have a million players waiting for one poor Orc to respawn, having giant areas full of creatures that were too tought for anyone to overcome that could slowly migrate into normal player areas, and players that could play the "Monster" side. You know there are a LOT of people out there that would love to take control of a dragon and fly into cities to destroy them, or lich players that would patrol dungeons and wander around killing people.

    As for the not having a life part, I totally agree - I've even stopped playing UT just because it was sucking up too much time. It doesn't mean I can't dream of a gaming wonderland though! I think an important part of such a huge gaming world would at least parts that you could just jump in for an hour or two and play casually without worrying about stats, as well as more stat oriented parts.
  • I hadn't thought of the SimAnt level of detail, but that would be great!

    The Lethal Chess game sounds exactly like what I was thinking of. I wonder how they managed to balance the play there, or keep the "chess" players from boredom? Also, chess seems a bit odd to apply it do as you could find your Queen dead from attacking a Pawn, if the Pawm team was good enough...
  • So you have one console with non-standard ports, that can use standard USB devices, and another console that uses standard ports but only works with non-standard devices?

    I don't really buy that. I think you could probably make an adaptor cable for the X-box, or re-wire the port like I was saying - but the point is that you won't be buying an X-box with a standard USB port, or even an adaptor cable from Microsoft.

    It's really a funny situation. On the X-box side, they are repeatedly saying "We're not a set-top box! Look, we only do games!" While on the Sony side they are saying they want the PS2 to be the successful general set-top box so many and strived (and failed) to build.

    In general, when Sony builds a non-standard thing, they go all out! Mini-Disc, Memory stick, they are not twists on a standard like you are thinking of. The PS2 is all about standards - standard USB ports, standard Firewire. In fact I believe UT for the PS2 is due to support any standard USB modem, which says a lot about them being a standard port.

    Not to say that Sony will not go to some trouble to build cool keyboards to match the PS2. The great thing is, we'll probably be able to use these sharp lookign things on our computers!
  • I've heard that FFXI will be a MMPOG just like Everquest. Playing final fantasy on your PX2 or perhaps the new Game Cube (or whatever it's called) sounds like a great idea. Unfortunately, I don't know much about the game at all, except that square is making it right now and will release it someday ...

    It wouldn't surprise me if it would be one of those games never released outside Japan. It's funny though, I also heard it should be using some kind of a multilingual format with icons and emotions instead of words. People all over the world would be able to play and talk.
    That would also eleminate the need for a keyboard - I'm just not sure I would like it that way... I think I would prefer regular chatting.

  • You know how much the charge is, you choose to pay it or not depending on whether *you* think it's good value. How on earth can they 'overcharge' unless someone inserted an inalienable right to multiplayer online gaming for less than $5/month into the universal declaration of human rights?
  • At least, that's the rumour so far that the Dreamcast is getting it... would be mighty cool, though.
  • Oh, I know that GTA itself isn't racing, but it does involve cars (as I remember) ... so if you could use cars stolen from the players of other games, if would be neat.

    And as far as the usefulness of having other players around, well, I just think the added complexity would be interesting. More targets to sort through, etc. It would be neat for one game to be able to cooperate with another in providing incentives / disincentives (like shooting a powerpuff girl would lose points, if you're 'sposed to be shooting bad guys).

    And that GTA isn't itself a "racing" game except vs the clock needn't interfere with the games being played in a common world; the racers would still be racing, and the non-racers wouldn't be! :)

    Again, I'm just thinking of games with different movitations and attitudes being played on the same field, a touch closer to real life. Heh -- GTA is probably not the greatest example. Just a gedankenexperiment.

    timothy

  • It'll cost $200 after about a year and a half, I'd bet. No way they can afford to give them away for that price.
  • I would expect more and more games companies to try and jump on this bandwagon, as they are trying hard to increase the revenue generated by games, through `services' and extending the audience to games -- and multi-player online games seems to be the way things are headed.

    Besides, games are moving to different platforms (set-top boxes as well as handheld devices) and so the business models are being set-up for that now...

    I guess that many companies are thinking : "It works for mobile phones, so it'll work for ".

    How well will this work though? Will people pay?
  • Apologies, I meant:

    "It works for mobile phones, so it'll work for (insert product/service here)"

    Yes yes, I know, preview. *grumble*

  • Last I checked console games mostly don't have keyboards and use game pads. These types of online games require a large array of inputs from the user that a simple gamepad won't offer. Of course, this isn't to mention the simple need for being able to communicate easily with other players.

    The games also typically need updating very frequently and thus need to be installed onto a hard drive and cannot be run from a CD.

    Perhaps newer systems will address all those issues (XBox?). Being a PC owner exclusively means I will never know.
  • The "broadband adapter" for the PS2 isn't just an ethernet connector... It also contains a "sizable" hard drive. You can't get the connectivity without the capacity, so say goodbye to that argument.

  • Sega is introducing Phantasy Star Online either late this year or early next year for their Dreamcast. What's the big whoop-de-doo, you say? Well, I guess it qualifies as a MMORPG, and it's got the added bonus that you'll be able to play with people from Asia and Europe, as well as here in America.

    They're going to use a more pictogram system, I guess so that things like, "Let's go kill the dragon over here." can be spoken in pictures rather than words to avoid the translation problems. All that, and a broadband connection soon in US. (It's already out in Japan.)

    I'd give you a URL, but there are alot already. Just go check out some console gaming sites or something.

  • Sounds cool....

    Imagine The Sims as an MMPG, where each person controls a character within the game, then each character within the game then goes and sits in front of their 'puter and plays a virtual MMPG version of The Sims where each virtual character is being controlled by a character that is in turn being controlled by a person.....wow, can't get my head round that one!
  • You never know if somebody else is controlling you to say that. We could be controlled by somebody, and we are all in a virtual place.

    You're all batteries!
    Sorry, had to bring that in. :)
    ---
    dd if=/dev/random of=~/.ssh/authorized_keys bs=1 count=1024
  • So now are we heading to a WAPlike situation?
    In the WAP scene, the mobile Biggies came together and formed a mutual technology to make stuff uniform.... like websites common to all mobiles,etc....
    Now is this thing going to happen for the Boxes too?
    Like the mobiles, even the boxes have different hardware, but the users want similar software... so are we going to have standard specs, formation of consortiums by Sega,Nintendo etc. to standardize how Quake will be deployed on a Box?
    Sounds wierd, but that's how i see the future is.
  • If in the future, wars were carried out on consoles? You have two virtual armies and which ever won got their way?? Of course, not having real guns and real bombs kinda makes it hard to intimidate people....

    psxndc

  • If anything, DIS is a fine example of what not to do on the real internet.

    DIS is a broadcast technology; all entities receive complete information for all other entities. Even if an entity can't interact with another entity (say, the distance between two aircraft is 1000 miles), those two aircraft will know about each other. This is wasteful, both of bandwidth and processing power. Some work has been done using multicast instead of broadcast, but bandwidth is still wasted.

    Further, there is no concept of a partial client update. If a client changes it appearance, it must send the client's position, velocity, acceleration, orientation, etc., along with its appearance. The size of an entity state PDU (the packet that announces a change of state) is 144 bytes (IIRC.)

    The reason the US Armed Forces can get away with this inefficient use of bandwith is that they throw expensive technology at the problem. The Defense Simulation Internet (DSI) is a private backbone used for hosting large scale simulations. When you have a dedicated DS3, you tend to not care about the network. Also, the Army doesn't have to deal with modems.

    On the real Internet, you have to build what Turbine and Origin have done with their MMPs: client/multi-server architectures. Each client receives information about relevant objects (clients, events) _only_. Each server handles a different part of the virual world.

    Signed,

    A former developer on the SIMNET project at BBN (the creators of DIS)

  • All good points.

    The problem I see with multicast (either alone or with some client/server mixed in) happens when the network connection to the client is almost full. If all your connection can handle is n players, what happens when the nth+1 player joins your multicast group? Or go back to the n players case (client/server)-- suppose you start an ftp connection to download the latest game patch. Or, what happens when a router at your isp decides to hiccup for a few seconds?

    In all these cases, there's no way for multicast to gracefully handle the bandwidth demand that exceeds your network connection. If a server was the sole "owner" of your network connection, then it could gracefully degrade the information overload (say, by removing the player furthest from you, reducing the update rate for some number of players, or reducing the ftp transfer rate.)

    I'd sure love to see a multicast that could handle bandwidth overloads, but I don't think it exists yet.

    Comments?

  • This comment isn't that much insightful.

    If we were in the 80's, it would be true... computers were costly and less useful to most people. But in 2000, people should consider investing in a computer... and they do. Why pay for a console, then? I mean, if you got the money for both, the question is pointless... and the parent message's first argument is also pointless. And don't forget that these consoles and these games aren't cheap.

    For the second argument, "the number of consoles out there", i'm sorry, but most of these consoles 'out there' are not those which will be targeted for massively multiplayer games...

    Finally, since hardcore gamers (people who care THAT MUCH about massively multiplayer games - not like my sister that likes Mario or my other friend who is happy with his Golden Eye the way it is) often play on a PC and are the majority of people who would pay a montly fee, i don't see why consoles would see a 'massive boom' in participation compared to mmg on the pc.

    (be nice with me, as english is not my first language)
    phobos% cat .sig
  • Last I checked console games mostly don't have keyboards and use game pads.

    Isn't there a keyboard planned for the PSX2? There's already a keyboard for Dreamcast [epinions.com], and I have vague memories about one for the original PSX, but I might be mistaken.

    I'd wonder more about acceptance - the Saturn had an online kit available, but got next to no use. Of course, that system isn't the best example to use for much of anything positive from a market aspect.:P

  • Is usaully better.

    I think the best system for any platform would be a truely persistent world with cities on servers where you can jump servers to new cities. Was thinking how something like Hitman could be worked in this way creating roaming groups and individuals with different factions, evolving.......

    Or something...

  • In an interactive world populated by a cast of thousands, who knows what interactions will occur? It'll be like watching a miniture version of this world, but one that can experiment with different scenarios.

    As one of many (many!) who got nabbed with EverQuest [everquest.com] addiction, I can honestly say that MMORPG's have a huge effect on human interaction. Moreso than PNP RPG's ever did. My world changed overnight, and remained that way for many months, as my interest level in my 'virtual' self grew stronger.

    I consider myself to be a 'seasoned' RPGer, and I know how to segment my RL responsibilities from my 'virtual' ones. Many children, however, do not - and I see this movement to consoles as a replacement for television for those who engage in it, insofar as it will eat up all free (and not-so-free) time they have.

    Don't get me wrong, I had some wonderful experiences in EverQuest. I made many friends, and enjoyed an enlightening view into the interactions of netizens in a virtual landscape. But for those of high-school age and younger, this will make an addictive passtime even more accessible. Parental control will me a must here.

  • In the case of MMORPGs, all account data will be stored in the servers. Turbine has said their engine is portable - I don't see why it can't be multi-platform. However, portability isn't as crucial as the playability. Remember Diablo I in the PS? It was pretty bad.
  • I wholeheartedly agree. I've beta-tested a number of MMO games before (Subspace, right now Jumpgate, etc) and the entire reason to play a multiplayer game in the first place is interaction with other people. Without a keyboard, or any truly effective way to enter text, interaction has been totally hindered. Now, I can understand getting online and playing Quake3 or UT - where the point is to shoot stuff instead of talk - but RPGs? Space/whatever sims? I can't see it working very well.
  • The games also typically need updating very frequently and thus need to be installed onto a hard drive and cannot be run from a CD.

    The speculation is about the new generation of consoles, not about the Playstation or the N64. The PSX2 has a hard drive and the Vapour-Box will have. As for the communication issues, how about VOIP. Real human voices, not antiseptic keyboard stuff and faster communication for those who can't touch-type.
  • yes, but they'll have to create a brand new genre of games. Racing, fighting and sport games are fun but I don't see how that would translate to a MMOG. And even if a game like EverQuest worked & was fun on a console, what kind of community would it have? I don't think most of them would take the game as seriously as "computer" people.. I suspect that a lots of them would only try to be as annoying as possible.

    -N

  • In fact, I'm pretty sure they said in an interview I read some time ago that they were absolutley not coming out with a keyboard for the X-box at all!

    But they'll probably let you use standard KeyTronic (or similar) USB keyboards.

    Let's face it, Microsoft makes money whether you buy a real live PC and run Winbloze on it, or buy an X-Box and run Microsoft Office 2000 X-Box edition (yes, this is pure speculation on my part.) Either way, you'll need a keyboard. And an awful lot of stuff on the web (like forms) requires a keyboard, and I'll bet you ice cream at the parlor of your choice that they'll be putting IE on it eventually.

  • How well will this work though? Will people pay?

    Duh. How many people are playing these games now?

    Mind you, I'm not. The only pay-by-month game I'm considering playing is Aces High. Why? Because it kicks ass, and the client is free.

    This is really just semantics, because Aces High is $30 a month. If I had to pay $40 for the client, after a year had gone by, that cost would have become negligible, but it's a matter of appearance. If you're going to charge me for a service, give me the client for free. If I have to pay for a client, I shouldn't have to pay for a service. And the nice folks running UO can't claim that the damned cloth map is worth thirty bucks. The free desktop background is far more useful.

    So I personally am unlikely to pay for these games, but lots of people have no problem with the recurring payment model. They tend to sell pretty well when it even seems like they won't suck. I do believe that it will be harder to get console gamers to pony up every month, though; One of the selling points of consoles is that they're cheaper than computers, and are getting closer to doing everything that computers do.

    When you're able to hook a USB printer up to your X-Box and run M$ Word on it, PCs are going to start taking a downturn...

  • A machine like that runs less than $150, with 15 inch monitor. Try getting a PS2 or X-Box for that price!

    The next-generation Nintendo system is supposed to run $200. It's basically a G3 or G4 at 400mhz.

    That's $50 more, and since just about everyone has a TV, you have a "monitor" as well. And Asheron's call would run better on that than on your squidly pentium, if it ran at all.

  • However, due to the nature of the game, it would be rather pointless to exist in a multiplayer form, let alone massively multiplayer. The game sends you on car-jack-and-bomb missions, and such, nothing that is enhanced by having other players around. Nothing that could really be competed over, either.

    Have you actually ever played GTA? Have you ever played it multiplayer? Were you using your brain at the time?

    Multiplayer GTA basically is a deathmatch, but it doesn't have to be. You could easily have a persistent world in which people competed to complete various quests, formed gangs (and waged war against rival gangs), held territory, et cetera. With some minor changes, money could be made useful in the game, letting you buy cars, weapons, upgrades, et cetera.

    Nearly anything that functions as a networked game can be made into a MMOG. It just takes a tiny smidgen of vision and at least half a clue.

  • Since the PS2 uses USB, keyboard availability shouldn't be a (hardware) problem. Any standard USB keyboard should work.

    It's nice to think that, but there's no guarantee of it. Sony may very well not support keyboards without the 'appropriate' manufacturer string, or similar.

    It's interesting to note that Microsoft, in their infinite wisdom, have chosen to use all parts except the connector of the USB standard for the Xbox. This means that while the machine could communicate with any keyboard, you can't connect it, since the plug won't fit.

    Of course, any asshole with a soldering iron and at least three neurons can make an adapter cable, then plug in a hub.

    Also, in a recent interview, they stressed the point that the Xbox is a console, not a slimmed-down PC. Weird. Perhaps they don't know about Turbine? ;^)

    Well, obviously they're lying. It's an x86 chip, has an IDE hard drive, presumably has VGA output, and will run (depending on the rumor; I haven't seen anything definitive on this) WinCE with some extras, or a castrated WinME. Either way, if it acts like a PC, and smells like a PC, it's a PC.

  • I would have thought that as well, but then the original poster I responded to said they had non-standard USB ports (thus you couldn't use normal USB keyboards).

    Maybe they do have nonstandard USB ports, but that doesn't change the signals on the lines, and you can make an adapter cable, and wire in a standard hub - otherwise, it's not USB.

    The point is valid for the PS2 though, which does use standard USB ports.

    Except the PS2 will probably not support standard PC USB keyboards, from what we all know of sony. They'll require a keyboard that speaks a slightly different language than "standard USB keyboard" so that they can make some money before the clones roll out.

  • Yes, this would lower the cost of entry for these games, if these games were the only reason that someone buys a PC.

    Personally, I actually do work on my PC

    Since I already own a PC, I'm paying only for the game, and not the hardware itself, therefore the cost of my entry into the game is actually lower, as a PC user.

  • I would hate to see MMORPG's ported over to console systems. We already deal with enough 14 year-old l33t kiddies, thank you very much. Porting these games over to a console would be horrible. As it is, it's very difficult for people actually roleplay (roleplaying in an mmoRPG, that's an idea!) in these games due to all of the mongoloids running around typing "r u fem?" I wish there was a shadowy secret police force that would drag people from their homes in the middle of the night, never to be seen again.
  • Actually the Sega Dreamcast doesn't come with a keyboard by default but comes with a built in modem and when you sign up for SegaNet Segas ISP they will send you a keyboard and mouse for your dreamcast free of charge (since your paying for their ISP) Heck they will even send you a check to cover the cost of your DC if you sign up for their ISP. Unreal and Q3 are supposed to be available soon as well. And lets be real, who hasnt wanted to play sonic head to head online
  • A MMRPG is already being planned for a console - the Sega Dreamcast. Phantasy Star Online has been in development for a while now, and if I recall correctly, they're aiming for release by Christmas or in Q1. The only problem I see is that you'd have to play it over a 56K modem via Seganet. I'd feel silly dialing up to play PSO when I've got a perfectly good DSL connection. (Why they didn't include an Ethernet option on the DC is beyond me...) - PCat
  • I saw several comments in here, so I'll just respond to all at once.

    1. There's already several of these games in the works for consoles, most of them RPG's. Most notable (for me, at least,...) is Final Fantasy XI, which will be fully multiplayer.

    2. As for the keyboard question, I've seen keyboards for all of the new console systems. They may not be real easy to find yet, but they are out there. Want to use a keyboard with one of the multiplayer games? Go buy one.

    3. Modem data connection is SUCK. I think Sega really messed up here with the Dreamcast, hopefully they'll be able to build out a high-speed connection in to the box through an expansion port or something. PSX2's little hard-drive thingy should be coming with an ethernet port (can't remember where I read that), so I should be able to make use of my DSL line for multiplayer games. XBOX will start out with only the broadband option, with a modem option as a possible expansion. I really don't think connection speed will be an issue.
  • Kendall, That reminds me of a game that I personally never played, but only knew of through stories from friends. The game was called Lethal Chess. It's a very old game, and was played on two different levels. You have two teams, each of which has a leader. Each leader makes moves on a 'game' level, moving pieces. The rest of the teams inhabited each square as if it was a mini-adventure game, complete with puzzles and combat.

    I think this is a fantastic idea, although difficult to implement. I love it. From world builder to city builder to general to captain to Joe Schmoe. Heck, SimAnt could live at the bottom of that food chain.
  • There are a number of technical hurdles, some of which I really can't see being overcome on the current hardware in order for a MMRPG to actually be feasable. The primary one is no place to store the game data.

    What will you do with all the updates? I doubt it is practical to download all the new patches to RAM, in the case of the PS2 or DC. Unfortunately, I don't think patches will ever go away. The nature of a MMRPG is to be constantly changing, and next generation MMRPG's will have much more dynamic features. XBox will probably be the first to be able to run MMRPG's, just due to it's close relationship (both in hardware and software) to a PC.

    All the current MMRPG's rely heavily on patches for new content, balance changes, and general bugfixes. I doubt this will change.

  • How about Dreamcast? You can develop for Dreamcast without using any leaked or proprietary information at all -- just reverse-engineered stuff. Start here.

    From a brief glance this looks interesting. I will dig in later, but for now it will have to go into book marks. Most of our current code is SDL [libsdl.org] based so we would need to port that first.

    We are still faced with the problem of media. Is it possible, or even legal to create media that will run on a stock DreamCast? I expect that anyone who has not signed any kind of agreement cannot technically be stopped, but I don't think that will prevent SEGA from getting litigious.

    Please don't use SVGAlib to write this sort of code. It is the wrong solution to almost any problem. Persuade someone to port SDL instead.

  • It's spelled "Phantasy Star" like the rest of the series, and you're about an hour and a quarter past redundant.
  • Thanks, but this has absolutely nothing to do with consoles.
  • There already are two very prominent console MMORPGs in the works. Sega has been working on Phantasy Star Online for Sega Dreamcast, and Squaresoft's Final Fantasy XI will be entirely MMORPG. Final Fantasy X will have a multiplayer/online option, but will be based in its single player experience.
  • At this point, a series as well established as Final Fantasy -not- getting published outside of the US would be ludicrous. I assure you the game will be published in the western world, the bigger questions is will Sony have their own little network to play it over in time?
  • Well, for what you're talking, think Everquest in console form.

    However, I think your whole concept of GTA is erroneous; it's not racing at all. You basically play the role of a mob driver, pulling off dirty jobs for your respective employer as fast as you can. The only thing you race is the clock.

    However, due to the nature of the game, it would be rather pointless to exist in a multiplayer form, let alone massively multiplayer. The game sends you on car-jack-and-bomb missions, and such, nothing that is enhanced by having other players around. Nothing that could really be competed over, either.

  • The system doesn't translate between languages Sonic Team have created a symbolic communication system so that you can easily say the most common things to members of your party i.e tactical discussion during battle, bartering for items etc. The system is limited but I played a beta about a month ago and it does the job superbly, much easier and quicker than typing on a standard PC online game and much less ambiguity about who is speaking and so forth.
  • come on you're suggesting that they can't ban you from using their software but you can ban them from using the internet, bit of a double standard. The internet should be accessible to the broadest number of devices possible. Also you do have the right to use emulators (although I'm sure Sony, Sega and Nintendo) would try to argue otherwise you just don't have the right to steal software.
  • I have to say that as a dedicated "thumb buster joypad user" I would love the interface on things like Asherons Call to be "dumbed down" the assumption that a game is somehow more complex because you can't play it without a keyboard is just plain wrong. When I'm playing a game I want to be a close to the character as possible and this requires as transparent a UI as possible, something which bloated PC RPG's haven't managed very often enough (I also hate screens and screens of stats can't we just have some nice graphical representation)
  • I would hate having to lug my big ass TV around. I think that broadband would be the way to go.
  • I am a PC advocate. I am also a gamer. This said, there are things which are being overlooked in these posts:

    Consoles are uniform. While PS2 is different from DC, the DC is always a DC; PS2 is always a PS2. Uniform hardware is what makes SOLID programming (lower bug count) possible, and has been done ALL ALONG on consoles - why would that change? The point? Why have a storage device, when it can be stored on a remote server? Who needs patches when you make the game right the first time? Of course there will be bugs, and there will likely be more of them with more complex games, but that brings another point: Why make a game that is not suited for a console and try to put it there? Granted, companies will want to just for the buck, but a great console game is designed around the input device(s).

    Storage devices actually encourage hacks, as without them, how are you going to change the game?

    Speaking to that last issue, keyboards (a must in my book anyway) also encourage hacking, as keyboard input means you can use it to hack the storage device.

    On account of the inevitable bandwidth increase, games can mostly be on the central server, and hence most patches can be server side or implemented "real-time" before the game actually begins, also relieving the need for a local storage device.

    A point on MMPGs: they need not ALL be complex RPG-format or 3D 1st person games. MMPG is Massivley Multi-Player Game, not Massively Multiplayer ROLE-playing game...

    To future console game designers (myself probably included): Design games around the console and it's inputs; do not under any circumstances try to cram a PC game into a console and it's limited input resources.

    Note to all: there are MANY types of console input devices currently available and many more planned - don't count the console dead on that account.

    Conclusion: It can be done; it can be done right. IMO ('H' conspicuously missing): Yes on console MMPG, Yes on keyboards, No on storage devices.
  • I've heard of being able to play online against people in an arcade, but there was actually a better idea that I have no idea if it ever made it, but they were talking about Memory card ports on Arcade cabinets.. That way you could build up your player at home in your spare time and then take your player with your stats etc to the arcade and actually play against "Someone".. SpaZ
  • """The games also typically need updating very frequently and thus need to be installed onto a hard drive and cannot be run from a CD."""

    The Need to update game software is a computer thing, as in Release too early, then patch the hell out of it.. The only reason I could ever see the need to patch a piece of console software is for adding extra levels etc.

    For the Dreamcast they (Sega) have already done this, For Sonic they released special Release Party, Halloween, and Christmas levels for the game that you could D/L onto your memory card, While not really being entirely 'NEW' levels they for example added snow and snowmen for the Christmas level etc etc...

    What Sony needs to do for the PS2 is to use it's new Memory Stix instead of memory cards, and we could D/L 128mgs worth of add on levels onto the memory card and it would be portable, Take 128mgs worth of levels to a friends house and not need to lug the hard drive along....

    SPaZ
  • There is help coming for us "Console Cheapskate"'s Sega has set up SegaNet which is supposed to be able to bring online gaming up to a decent speed for us modem players... Here's what their PR says...

    *Low-latency ISP gives you a high-speed, reliable Internet connection.

    *Play 3D multi-player games on a Dreamcast or PC.

    *Experience performance levels never before realized in online play.

    *Go head-to-head against opponents across the U.S.

    *Play some of the hottest online games around.

    I have yet to sign up, but it sounds well intentioned..

    As for save games, mail, bookmarks etc.. that can all be stored on a memory card.
    (Dreamcast already does this)

    SpaZ
  • Upcoming consoles are as good as current desktops (in terms of processor speed). The only thing that has ever stopped developers' is the lack of standard/competent networking hardware/software.
  • not intended as flamebait....
  • Exactly. The problem I have with MMORPGs is that I don't want to game with 100,000 people; I don't want to game with 2,000 people (the number typically on a server). Numbers that large inhibit the creation of virtual communities, and aid disruptive players (kill-stealers, PKs, con-artists and other types of assholes). In a strong community, assholes can be excluded, killed, ignored, whatever. On Everquest, there are too many to keep track of (and they operate under multiple aliases)

    What made the internet special when I started was the virtual community. Time was, in a newsgroup like rec.arts.comics, I "knew" every one of the regular posters. As greater numbers joined the discussions, the newsgroups splintered into smaller and smaller niches. Eventually, my friends and I moved off usenet and onto email lists.

    This is because a virtual community can only exist at a certain size (about 50 is ideal).

    I am way more interested in Diablo II, despite its limitations, because it is based on small-scale gaming (groups of 1-8 players), rather than 2000 crammed into one world instance.
  • Lo,

    On-topic:

    2 weeks ago I was a little bit surprised to see RTIME Inc. being bought out by Sony Computer Entertainment. Checkout http://www.rtimeinc.com; sneaky skunkworks.

    Bye.

  • Yes, there are ways and means [mc.pp.se] of burning a CDR which will boot code on most Dreamcasts (there are rumours of some new models coming out which are not amenable to this method). I suspect this method was reverse-engineered from the commercial Datel product "action replay CDX", which itself is not endorsed by Sega.

    Bleem! [bleem.com]'s Dreamcast port is also, by all accounts, not sanctioned by Sega. We live in interesting times...

    Ah so many choices: X, SDL, SVGAlib, GGI, ClanLib, ngine [ngine.de]...
    --
  • "Phantasy Star Online for the Dreamcast and FF11 for the PSX2 are both planned MMRPGs coming relatively soon.

    I haven't followed developments on FF11, but I'm fairly sure PSO supports games with up to four cooperating players. PSO will be massive, it will be multiplayer, it'll be magnificent I'm sure -- but I don't think it'll be massively multiplayer.
    --
  • "Twitch" games like Quake might require low latency and moderate bandwidth, but there are plenty of games you can design within the constraints dictated by a modem.

    Turn-based games like Chess, Backgammon and Whist are easiest of all. Something like Tetris (I yearn for Super Puzzle Fighter online multiplayer) would be doable. A MMRPG is certainly doable, as long as the action sequences were designed not to require too much large data.

    Q3A comes out for Dreamcast very soon indeed: I believe it will be limited to 4 players online. Let's see what they can achieve.
    --
  • I've heard of being able to play online against people in an arcade, but there was actually a better idea that I have no idea if it ever made it, but they were talking about Memory card ports on Arcade cabinets..

    Yes. There are characters in the Japanese Dreamcast release of SNK's King of Fighters 99 which cannot be unlocked without earning them by playing on the coin-op version with your Dreamcast memory card inserted.
    --
  • ...until the rest of the consoles drop the morally bankrupt licensing arrangements that developers have to conform to, we are not going to be able to release a Free Software MMORPG client that consumers will be able to use on their Playstation/Xbox/Gamecube.

    How about Dreamcast? You can develop for Dreamcast without using any leaked or proprietary information at all -- just reverse-engineered stuff. Start here [allusion.net].

    Note that there is currently a lot of homebrew Dreamcast development going on under Windows CE. As far as I can tell, this stuff is compiled using pirated devkits, and needs pirated WinCE runtime files in order to run -- as Free Software advocates, I'd expect you to reject these methods, even though it means some extra work reimplementing hardware-specific code.

    I understand that NetBSD/SH3 is progressing well on Dreamcast. Perhaps that and a SVGAlib port would be enough to persuade me to get coding?
    --
  • This just seems to be away for companies to start charging for time on the serves. Which there is nothing wrong with that as long as they do not over charge people.
  • Interesting that the classic DIS stuff is so primitive, but these are application issues rather than network ones, and it will be potentially hard to scale up the MMP servers if millions of people start playing these games.

    If you are using multicast (which I think modern DISs are aimed at, certainly the IETF LSMA work is) it's crucial to intelligently design the application and make good use of the multicast groups (don't put everyone in one big group, for example).

    Some mix of MMP and multicast may be useful - e.g. multicast between servers or to broadband clients, and special protocols to other clients. The big advantage of multicast is that it's just a routing/forwarding technology, so if your client has the bandwidth it's more efficient to use multicast groups where you can.
  • "I'd sure love to see a multicast that could handle bandwidth overloads, but I don't think it exists yet. "

    There is something called layered encoding that works well with multicast, but only really for audio/video rather than gaming/DIS: you send N streams of data for a single input multimedia stream, each on a differerent multicast group. Clients tune in to streams 1 to M, where M = N - stream 1 gives OK quality, adding stream 2 improves quality, stream 3 improves it further, and so on.

    The result is that clients on poor connections can reduce the amount of detail. This might work for DIS if you could come up with a 'high detail' type channel that provides extra info for high-end clients on broadband connections. However, the filtering you were talking about it too hard for this sort of mechanism, so server-based filtering is probably still the way to go.

    In the longer term, it's conceivable that routers may be able to run downloadable code, or even be programmed by the packets on the fly, which would enable this - however, this is very speculative. Search for tanenbaum and active networks for more info.
  • DIS is insanely wasteful. That is why the military is going to HLA. They have basically said that 'if you don't use HLA, you can't play'. (Wow, that rhymes). As a result, a bunch of sim makers (including me) are scrambling to introduce HLA into a sim developed with DIS in mind.

    That leads to no end of fun... at least its a different group doing it :)
  • Imagine the various levels you could have together:

    Players are controlling areas in a RTS type environment, operating at a really high level (creating cities and starting/stopping battles, like Civilization).

    The cities they create are given directives, which are acted upon either by computer or by human players playing a SimCity kind of game with that city. Money is fed to the city based on how well directives are being carried out (more soldiers! more research!).

    Within the cities and surrounding contryside, individual battles (initiated by the people playing the high level RTS) could be managed by a Battlezone type RTS combat.

    In the middle of all that, you could have a great game of Carmeggedon going with people racing through cities and battles.

    And at the lowest level, you could just be a single person wandering around the cities and countrysides (as a Sim?), perhaps able to steal cars like in GTA. It would even be sort of like lving in a Dark City kind of world, with the cities morphing around you as the Sim City type players made changes.

    And of course, above all that are people manageing multiple worlds and space battles in a similar fashion.

    Obviosuly there are time scale issues involved - would a high level city/war planning RTS player be willing to wait while battles were carried out by someone else, and cities were managed on a Sim City type timescale? Would city builders be too frustrated when a war blew into town and started blasting huge chucks out of a well-crafted city? I think all those issues are manageable, and would probably add a lot to any of the games.

    In a way, you can already see the start of that trend at it's most basic in many games now, where you control things on a high level but can step into a single unit at any time. This just adds a few more degrees of action in either direction.
  • I'm not a frequent gamer, console or otherwise, but I like the idea of the persistent world that many games create.

    What I'm curious about is whether there are any game worlds online which allow multiple games (or rather *types* of games) to coexist and interact on the same network, even if the players are primarily playing only one of them in particular.

    For instance (and I know I'm jumping genres, but indulge just for a second, ok?!), are there any gaming systems which would allow the players of a game like Grand Theft Auto to "interact with" the players of an auto racing game? (That is, steal their cars, perhaps complete the race, perhaps put them in hock ...)

    Since the Real World is full of people doing different things and with different motivations, I think this would improve the realism and interest of game worlds as well.

    I really like this idea, and if there is no such system it would be neat to work toward one. Is there an equivalent (again, leaping from category to category and ignoring an orders-of-magniture change in complexity) to RDF for games, so different games could recognize and accomodate entirely different types of characters?

    OK, now you can ridicule me;)

    timothy
  • Sounds like a cool idea, but not really worthwhile. Getting two completely different games to interact with each other would be monstrously complex, for the few benefits it would bring. Especially if they are from different companies.

    Just transfering simple info (for example, taking a character from one RPG and playing with it in another) would already be really hard. In fact I only know of one series of games that does that (Quest for Glory), and the same coders worked on every game from that series. Now try to get two competing teams of developers to agree on a file format for saved RPG characters: impossible.

    And that's orders of magnitude easier than your GTA/race car game example. Something like that would require at least hundreds of hours of work and tens of thousands of lines of code, if it was done during the development cycle. If you would like to patch it onto an existing game, forget it. There's nothing harder than twisting nonflexible code to do something it was never planned to do.

    Adding a lot of flexibility to code that should normally be lean and optimized (like game code) is _really hard_. In fact, the whole reason for object oriented programming is that it's supposed to make problems like that easier to solve. And what would you get for your efforts? An initial slight "cool factor", and then race car game players complaining that the GTA players are lagging them and vice versa :).

    Anyway, the idea is neat, but it's not really practical right now.

  • > Who needs patches when you make the game right the first time?

    Ever heard of EXPLOITS?

    QA does NOT find ALL bugs, as much as we developers wished it did :)

    > On account of the inevitable bandwidth increase, games can mostly be on the central server, and hence most patches can be server side or implemented "real-time" before the game actually begins, also relieving the need for a local storage device.

    In an ideal world, server changes wouldn't break clients. But we're not there yet.
  • Why should such long-reaching standardization be necessary? The way I see it, all that is needed is that the protocol used by any one game, say Quake 3 Arena, is standardized across platforms. To me, as a programmer, that sounds like a no-brainer anyway, so... The purpose of WAP was to create a protocol for wireless applications (doh!), but in the case of consoles and computers connected to the Internet, that protocol already exists--it's called IP. Sure, it could make sense for the industry to form some kind of committe to standardize some higher-level network API (like DirectPlay), but I don't see that happening any time soon. It's all about interoperability, and it's hard to beat good old UDP-over-IP for that. Already standardized and implemented, and rather well-known by programmers. Hardware vendors just need to make sure that an API to access it (not necessarily the traditional "sockets" API, although it might make sense due to experience and documentation etc.) is available, and voila!
  • Anyone who's played any serious online games over a modem knows how this is not going to pan out until consoles include an ethernet port for DSL or Cable modems.

    But then what console cheapskate (I see lots of talk about about this is great because Consoles are so much cheaper than PCs) is going to pay $40 or more a month for DSL or Cable Modem? (In a world where many people think $30 a month for basic cable is a major burden).

    And what else do you get with this highspeed connection? According to Microsoft, the Xbox won't do browsing or eMail, just games. Do any others? Is Joe cheapsake going to pay $40 a month for fast game play only?

    As for those who say a console requires storage, they are absolutely wrong. With decent bandwidth, the settings, save games and so on can be kept online. Same with eMail, or Web bookmarks. This is pretty much how WebTV works (and that's modem only!).

  • I can see it now. "UI specially dumbed down (er, designed) for thumb-buster joypad users."

    Take a game like Asheron's Call, made by Turbine, the company mentioned in the article. Their interface is big, and admittedly clunky, out of necessity. Without the keyboard and mouse combination it would be impossible to have the full and detailed control of the game that there is now. I know that they're already making keyboards for these machines, but let's face it, if you're going to start getting into expensive external peripherals and more UI than a joypad can handle, why not get a PC?

    Someone in a previous post stated that Consoles make for a larger market for games because they're cheaper. What they didn't take into account is that Asheron's Call will run on a regular old 586/Pentium machine without a 3D card (though a cheap 3d upgrade greatly enhances the experience, but I got one of those from CompUSA for less than $40 U.S. a week or so ago). A machine like that runs less than $150, with 15 inch monitor. Try getting a PS2 or X-Box for that price!
  • The down side to that being that they'll take anyone who gives them their $10 a month. You get less anti-social elements on smaller, private MUDs.
  • Interestingly Will Wright recently gave an interview where he talked about a new net enabled version of The Sims where every house would be controlled by someone. Aparently in testing it has resulted in some really interesting behaviou as people try to make their character popular. Would be interesting to watch as well, bit like a soap opera.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Any console that tries to pull something like this off is going to require a keyboard. Not that that's much of a problem-- the DC already has one (AFAIK), and I can guarantee that there will be one for the PSX2 sometime next year.

    I'm not particularly excited about the idea of "real time translation" between "x" languages, simply because it's a bitch to implement-- and assumes that the player is "speaking" in grammatically-correct, properly spelled sentences (and even then, it's a crap-shoot). Not to mention the difficulties of culture clash.

    I'm guessing that the first generation of console MMOGs are either going to be fairly simple, or extremely late. Using PC MMOGs (Ultima Online, Asheron's Call, EverQuest, any number of MUDs) as an example, the more complex these titles are, the buggier they're going to be; if every current and next-gen console was packing a hard drive, this wouldn't be much of a problem-- just download the current patch, and *presto*!

    Bear in mind, that despite the fact that they're less of a network hit than Q3 or UT, these games are still hellishly laggy on a dialup connection-- the average MMORPG server has between 500 and 2500 people on at any given point in time; even if everything is calculated on the client side (and it's doubtful that it will be), there's going to be a whole mess of jerking, popping, and stuttering on-screen-- which is something that a lot of console gamers just aren't going to put up with.

    Here's a question that the console manufacturers haven't even begun to answer adequately: how do you connect? SEGA has SEGANet, but will that be the only allowed DC provider? What will Sony do? Who will own the server hardware for these games?

    And, perhaps most importantly, how will console gamers react to a monthly subscription fee?

  • yes, but they'll have to create a brand new genre of games. Racing, fighting and sport games are fun but I don't see how that would translate to a MMOG. And even if a game like EverQuest worked & was fun on a console, what kind of community would it have? I don't think most of them would take the game as seriously as "computer" people.. I suspect that a lots of them would only try to be as annoying as possible.

    No, they don't have to create a brand new genre of games. You can play a RPG in the style of evercrack or baldur's gate on a console - especially when the next generation of them (Represented at the moment by the X-Box and the PS2) will all have mice available and supported. Sure, you could get a mouse for your SNES, but it worked with about two titles.

    Also, racing, fighting, and sport games will all translate into a MMOG without too much trouble. As for racing, all you need is a city or five that people can race in, with a customization scheme ala Gran Turismo 2 - Although I'd hope it would be far more powerful than GT. You should be able, at varying costs, to install motors from things like Camaros into cars like MG Midgets, and get a fairly realistic response out of it. Then you take your new car to the streets and race around ditching cops and beating down 'vettes. Don't think it'll sell? Consider the immense success of Interplay and GT Games' Driver. And that wasn't even multiplayer.

    Fighting is easy. You're a wandering fighter (or similar) and you fight against other people. Personally, I'd have a three-quarter view as you walked around a world (perhaps like FFVII in the overland, with the rotating view feature and all) and when you encountered someone, a dialogue begins, or they just attack you, or you just attack them, et cetera. Also present in the game would be various locations in which you could train, buy supplies, and so on.

    Sports is a little tougher, but you could tie football into a league system, with games played between any two teams that were active at the time. You get more points for beating teams higher on the roster, and you lose less points for losing to them. Trade players, develop new plays, yada yada. You can tell from my description that I'm just not into sports, but you could certainly develop, market, and produce the football thing. No word on whether it would sell, though.

    The problem isn't coming up with game ideas. I just thought those up on the instant, and they're certainly less ridiculous (And the first one especially has a great deal of appeal to me; I'd pay for a game like that, and lots of other people seem to share my taste in games) than lots of games which have hit the market *cough*Daikatana*cough*.

    The problem is implementing them in a worthwhile fashion. When you are the first to break some new ground, if you fuck it up, then those who come behind you are going to be less likely to succeed. For instance, among those of us who didn't like Descent, Forgiven was a no-go. More telling, if you brought out a monster truck game with real-world physics, a good soundtrack, and less annoying announcers, people would still shun it as a rehash of Monster Truck Madness 2. Well, those of us who actually remember the game.

    Here's my pathetic plea to all the game developers out there: If you're going to make a MMOG, don't choke. If you can't pull it off, go make some nice safe title and pull in some more cash until you can hire someone competent. Don't do a half-assed job on a new type of title, because you're going to screw it up for everyone: The developers, the financiers, and the people who are supposed to be most important in this cycle: The gamers.

    If you don't believe that the gamers are the most important part of all this, you need to get out of the industry. Now.

  • I tried NFL2K1 on the Dreamcast, with its support up to eight players over the Internet, and it rocks the casba.

    While I admit it has a bit of a strange menu system (basically, the player on the other end of the line can move the pointer around on your screen if he wishes. Eerie...) the game play itself is surprisingly smooth, even over a bad modem connection.

    Point is, something doesn't need to be "massively" multiplayer to be fun. Sports like football, hockey and baseball are fun with only a few players.

  • I have been following the Indrema news fairly closely, hoping that we will be able to put together a WorldForge [worldforge.org] client package for it, but until the rest of the consoles drop the morally bankrupt licensing arrangements that developers have to conform to, we are not going to be able to release a Free Software MMORPG client that consumers will be able to use on their Playstation/Xbox/Gamecube.

    In a sense I think this particular war has already been lost. All the companies that allowed free access to their platform have now left the scene due to the lack of control they had on the quality of the games available, and their inability to compete with consoles sold as loss leaders. Does anyone see a bright future for Open console gaming, or are we doomed to put up with expensive licensing agreements, closed hardware and closed markets?

  • Dreamcast has had a keyboard since release. Its an extra purchase, of course, but its easy enough to get. PS2 and Xbox will also have optional keyboards.

  • The idea that the new generation of consoles will allow players to enter any number of online worlds in which they can interact with potentially vast numbers of other players is both intriguing and scary at the same time.

    It's intriguing because it will bring the technology needed to do this into millions of homes worldwide, in an easy to use format which Joe Sixpack and his wife and kids can all enjoy - just look at the penetration delivered by the Playstation into family homes worldwide. Although games like Ultima Online and Everquest exist at the moment, the numbers using them pale to what these new consoles could bring.

    In an interactive world populated by a cast of thousands, who knows what interactions will occur? It'll be like watching a miniture version of this world, but one that can experiment with different scenarios.

    And this brings me on to the danger of these developments. With every new technology the potential for immersion grows, and more and more people, especially children, become vulnerable to losing track of the real world in their electronic fantasies. We must never lose track of the beauty that is the Lord's creation, even when false realities seem better to some of us, especially the technically-orientated but socially inept people that /. is primarily made up of. No virtual reality can ever match the real one, and people who lose sight of this are in danger of becoming less than human.

    So I'm going to be looking at these with interest, but I'm going to be doing so from a step back.

  • It is a great idea, but there are two problems related to persistent gaming. The first is that MMORPGs like Everquest, Asheron's, etc do not allow dynamic changes to the game world. The Evil One who lives in the bottom of the dungeon can be killed, but he will re-appear some amount of time later. Each "server" is an instance of the game world, identical to every other instance. Characters die, but they are reborn at their spawn point. Nothing can really change, which means it is impossible to implement territorial objectives, or measure success other than in some abstract way (e.g. points accrued, body-count, whatever). Secondly, if strategic objectives are implemented in a persistent game, you have the issue of timing. It isn't just a matter of a strategist being forced to wait for a tactical battle to complete. Who will fight the tactical battle, and when? Suppose players in Sweden attack my territory while I am asleep? The "solution" by Verant (designers of Everquest) for their online RTS is to allow players to be paged when their units are under attack (no lie...) This touches on another issue with MMORPGs, which is that I have a life, and do not wish to be chained to my PC 16 hours a day so that I can keep up with the teenage d00ds that don't have to work for a living.

  • Some networking challenges (Score:3)

    by Cato ( 8296 ) on Tuesday September 26, 2000 @03:33AM (#754334)
    For a view of what might be needed from the network to handle this sort of application, see http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/lsma-charter.htm l - this is an IETF working group that has been documenting and classifying the types of network demands (stringent QoS needs, very large multicast groups, etc) made by distributed interactive simulations (DISs).

    DISs can be networked military simulators located around the world (this is how the US Army rehearsed the Gulf War and continues to train its tank crew), or massively multiplayer games.

    Such simulations/games may in the future have up to 100,000 simulated objects, representing human or computer-managed players.

  • The trend (Score:3)

    by Chief Crazy Chicken ( 36416 ) on Tuesday September 26, 2000 @03:53AM (#754335)
    Until recently, I'd played MUDs for a long time (about a decade). They started out with small groups of people that were mostly tech-oriented (particularly when the internet wasn't a household word).

    As the internet spread, and particularly after AOL was unleashed upon us, more and more people started hitting MUDs. I noticed that more of the immature people became noticable -- though I suspect that the proportion wasn't drastically different. The people that didn't annoy me didn't get noticed, so I didn't note an increase there.

    This general trend hit a big bump once MUDs went graphical and mainstream. I played Everquest and Asheron's Call for 2-3 months each, long enough to see that it wasn't just a matter of proportion at work. Something else was making these games have a feel to them that was uncomfortably unlike the MUD communities that I had been used to. There are a lot of different elements behind it, and I haven't spent enough time on the problem to identify even a portion of them.

    Some sort of societal transformation happened that is tied up in both the change to the game, and the meta-game (meaning the large number of fansites that a big game will have.... some of the forum discussions on these sites have a tangible impact on the game society itself). There are clans now that weren't there before. These clans have an impact on the game society, yet are largely organized outside of the game proper. There are lots of other things that demonstrate the impact of just the change to graphical mainstream games on the genre.

    I suspect that the change to the console will cause large changes of its own -- though I won't be watching anymore.

  • From a purely economic standpoint.... (Score:3)

    by laetus ( 45131 ) on Tuesday September 26, 2000 @03:05AM (#754336)
    it lowers the cost of entry for these games. Consoles are cheaper than PCs, so the initial dollar outlay to participate will be less.

    I would imagine, given the huge number of consoles out there and their low cost, these online gaming companies are going to see a massive boom in participation when the console players are included.

    EMUSE.NET [emuse.net]

  • Why not combine? (Score:3)

    by don_carnage ( 145494 ) on Tuesday September 26, 2000 @03:03AM (#754337) Homepage
    Massive multiplayer games should not be restricted to one system or another. With graphics and storage advances on console systems, they can now better compete with PC systems.

    Sega (I think) is/was working on a game allows Dreamcast owners to play against people in arcades.
    --

  • The humanity (Score:3)

    by billybob2001 ( 234675 ) on Tuesday September 26, 2000 @03:01AM (#754338)
    Imagine: we could all interact with other human beings!

  • Re:Need Keyboards and storage space (Score:4)

    by Emil Brink ( 69213 ) on Tuesday September 26, 2000 @03:41AM (#754339) Homepage
    Since the PS2 uses USB [usb.org], keyboard availability shouldn't be a (hardware) problem. Any standard USB keyboard should work. It's interesting to note that Microsoft, in their infinite wisdom, have chosen to use all parts except the connector of the USB standard for the Xbox [xbox.com]. This means that while the machine could communicate with any keyboard, you can't connect it, since the plug won't fit. Also, in a recent interview [gamecenter.com], they stressed the point that the Xbox is a console, not a slimmed-down PC. Weird. Perhaps they don't know about Turbine? ;^)

Slashdot Top Deals

FORTRAN is not a flower but a weed -- it is hardy, occasionally blooms, and grows in every computer. -- A.J. Perlis

Close