Square Enix confirms new MMO for Xbox 360 & Vista, maybe PS3

Tough break for Sony, who used to get nearly all the FF exclusives. Now they're in the mabye pile while M$ is in the yes pile. Not the end of the gaming world, but now it's another incentive for some1 to get a 360 over a PS3

I'm not into the whole MMO thing. Never played one because they charge. If they were free I would give this a try. Or a pokemon MMO...

Interesting. I didn't really expect this. Up until now Square never really seemed committed to giving anything substantial to the 360. Sure, they tossed FFXI their way, but that game was already old news by then. Even if it's not truly exclusive to the 360, just having it ahead of the PS3 would be a nice score for the 360.

can't really blame them for going with an MMO on 360 first, the online aspect of 360 right now is significantly better

Another slap at the PS3 - honestly, how can PS3 fan boys not take note that Square developing more for the 360 is yanking the greatest titles out of Sony's pocket? I know there are a few folks out there that would buy the PS3 just to have final fantasy games - strange but true. Now they won't be forcing those sales. Ouch.

Don't really care where this ends up... Just wanna know if this is gonna be more FFXI-like tedium. If so, blech, i'll pass.

Let's all ignore the word "possibility" and pretend we see the word "exclusive" in this article. Ready? Go!

http://gamedrift.com/articles.php?a=245

i don't think very many huge FF fans really care about the MMOs. From what I've heard and read, FFXI sold decently well and was a decent game, but nothing spectacular. Certainly not on the same level as the traditional games which sell in the multi-millions. So I don't think too many Sony or FF fans will be very upset about this news. It's a blow to Sony, but not a very big one, and it adds value to the 360, but not that significantly, unless this new game is way better than the previous one.

This isnt a slap at Sony at all, it more a case of about fing time MS.
Square-enix said long ago that they would support all consoles evenly but so far Sony has gotten FF13 and most likely KH3, Nintendo has Crystal Chronicles and the next Dragon Quest as an exclusive while MS has got naff all.

Square-enix games are huge in Japan and it look like they were reluctant to give an exclusive to a none Japanese console so they gave em an MMO instead, FF game or not this seems a raw deal for 360.

Just as #4 pointed out, it's not so surprising to see Square developing a MMO on the most capable on-line networks - the 360 and Windows.
Although that would kinda hurt for the PS3 fanboys, i guess.

@4 yeah, Gears of Lag works way better than Resistance: fall of man.

It is about the userbase.

I am not really that excited about this, and some consider me a 360 fanboy.

It makes sense with their cross-platform strategy to focus on 360 first. I played FFXI on PS2 (still do on my PS3) and actually still love it. I would love to see this new MMO for PS3 and I'm sure it will reach PS3 not long after it's launched anywhere else, provided it's well-received.

~

gears of lag? I think I've experienced lag a max of 3 times since I bought the game on launch day. I guess its so easy to bash the competition, when your network has maybe 100,000 people logged on at once.

FFXI was made when? Like 4 years ago. That was their first MMO. I'm sure their experience from those years will make this game a lot better. Obviously they will be using UE3 so it should look good too.

12: Yeah, because I found LOADS of lag in the game, oh wait, shit... No I didn't. Glitches, maybe I'd give it to you, hell I'd throw it at you, but lag? Find a better argument and come back to us on it.

Anyway, step towards Final Fantasy XIII on the 360 anyone? Doesn't really matter, the game will suck whatever console it lands on.

Here is your argument: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42X0lPOD_PE

If you have a good connection then good for you, but the protocol used in the game is extremely unfair.

PS: I think the same video is available in a higher definition, but I would have to search it thoroughly and this one is good enough IMO.

Hahaha, that was a good one Ragnarok, gears of lag.

This shouldn't be too worrying for PS3 fans. "Maybe PS3" sounds to me like a most definitely. Besides, I doubt Sony fans love online gaming much. Besides, FFXI wasn't big... if it was "WoW" as an exclusive, then maybe that would be worrying, but come on. The reason FFXI got constantly ported was because it didn't do really well... and the reason behind it is probably the business model (and of course, the game not being as good as an MMO as WoW is).

whoa whoa whoa

You doubt Sony fans love Online gaming much? What are you smoking
Just because they bought the console with a slightly inferior online experience (and we wii fanboys bought the console with vastly inferior, and as yet nonexistant online experience), doesn't mean we don't love Online play (just love the games available on the other consoles more)

360 fans get so conceited some times

BTW: To explain it a little more, Resistance has free servers and its online, with matches up to 40 players, is free. For Gears of War you have to pay for XBL with its fancy interface, but to play one player has to host (host = server) the match, which is a cheaper (for them) solution and has the problems that you can see in the video.

I would be the first one to bash sony, but this time resistance seems to have something over gears of war.

Square Enix, being a big developer and making an MMO, which will probably be paid monthly and will have some servers for the persistent world, probably prefers the freedom to use the PS3 online capabilities given to developers, they have the money to pay for it and get a profit. A small developer can prefer to use XBL, so they don't have to worry about servers and they can save some money. I don't know which percentage would microsoft and sony charge for their services, but usually more freedom means less money, so I guess it is cheaper in the PS3 if it isn't equal. As I've said this paragraph is just speculation.

If they are shifting to windows and Xbox360 it is because the low PS3 sales and userbase, IMO.

"i don't think very many huge FF fans really care about the MMOs. From what I've heard and read, FFXI sold decently well and was a decent game, but nothing spectacular. Certainly not on the same level as the traditional games which sell in the multi-millions."

About 500,000 people pay $15/month to play FFXI.

Yeah, nothing spectacular about something like $90 million/year in steady revenue (ignoring the $30-60 year additional tax for expansions which adds another few million bucks). When you do the math... that's a lot of cash.

(Another hint: They probably wouldn't be doing another MMO if FFXI wasn't a huge success from their perspective.)

Ragnarok,

You're attempting to use one video and one game as a counter to #4's statement that the Live online service is significantly better. That's pretty weak. There really is no debating that Live is far and away better than Sony's online service. I own all the major consoles and speak from experience. I like my PS3, but the online side of things is just weak.

I have to agree. I play Gears of War all the time and I RARELY experience lag. If lag is experienced it is often because some putz is playing on something like a bottom-rung 512 or 768kbps down connection. Besides the fact that I rarely experience lag in Gears, I also own a PS3, however, my tv only supports 1080i. So I'll take my chances with playing Gears and MAYBE experiencing some lag over being FORCED to play Resistance in 480p any day.

About FFXI "not doing well," etc...

Before the release of WoW, it was the no. 1 MMORPG in the world, with the possible exception of Korea (where they're nuts for Lineage). At its peak it had over 600,000 subscribers. No, that isn't as much as a standard FF game, and no, it's not as much as WoW, but those are two extreme exceptions. 600,000 (the actual number of software sales is probably a lot higher, but I don't know the numbers) is an impressive figure for any game, and at $13 a month from each of them it's an absurd amount of money. And while the population has dropped off a little since its peak, it remains one of the most successful and popular MMO's of all time.

@16 - Get your facts straight.

FFXI was not "constantly ported", it was designed for and originally released on two platforms (the first MMO to share worlds this way). 360 support was added when that platform became available.

As for saying it "didn't do really well" you clearly have no clue what you're talking about. Prior to the release of WoW it was the second largest subscriber game in the world, only beaten by Lineage which was and still is an excession by any measure.

Whoa. I don't want either a PS3 or 360, but frig me. You have to be a deep shade of moron to not see how leagues ahead Xbox Live is to the PS3's online system.

RIGHT. The subject. No thanks. No new game from Square has been decent since FFVII. Could be that MMO's aren't my thing (only have a 512kbps connection, ps. My brother has never reported lag on GoW with our feeble connection.), ho hum.

Another reason why its probably going to be on 360 is the fact that they're also developing it for VISTA, which therefore, it would make sense to make it 360 compatible, but just like FFXI, chances are, it'll be made available on sony's system as well.

So like XI, it'll be on PC, 360, and Vista PCs.

I dont think Xbox lives service has more to do with it, i think its more ease of transition between Vista PC and 360 than anything.

Chances are also likely thats its an enitrely new IP as well. Also dont forget when a guys says "probably" in an interview about a new game, thats pretty much a definite that its being looked into at least. If it wasnt, he wouldnt of mentioned PS3 at all.

If Sony loses Final Fantasy exclusivity, they may very well say goodbye to their dominance of the home console gaming market.

my bad. i didn't realize 600,000 subscribers were that many (i don't play MMOs so my only point of comparison in terms of subscribers is WoW). I guess i figured most FF fans were like me and only really care about the core games. this could be a loss for Sony. I still don't see them losing exclusivity on the core FF games, tho. We have to realize that Square didn't say they wanted to support each console evenly, they just said they wanted more parity in the market. Like someone said before, Sony would be finished without exclusive FF and therefore Microsoft would have a massive share of the market like sony had last generation.

"We don't want the PlayStation 3 to be the overwhelming loser, so we want to support them. But we don't want them to be the overwhelming winner either, so we can't support them too much."

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6158660.html

This same strategy would apply to Microsoft.

well it is square enix so you already know it will be a great game

http://www.ares04.com

Or filled with 20 hours worth of pre-rendered cutscenes.

@20 and @24, I'm not comparing the online system of the PS3 to nothing because there is no such a thing, PS3 gives developers freedom to use the internet connection as they wish, as PCs do, XBL is something different.

XBL may be convenient for gamers so they can meet, chat, see the achievement points, and so on, ok XBL is great, have a cookie, but that's not the point, you have to look at it from the Square Enix perspective.

Developers don't care about those things, they don't care about what do you do while you are not p(l)aying their games, unless advertisements are embedded to put the ones that may interest you or something like that. So considering this and what I've said before, why should square enix give a sh*t about XBL?

Beside of that every PS3 owner is a potential user of their MMO, while only Xbox360 owners AND XBL subscribers are potential users. XBL seems just like a handicap for their game.

Once again, MY POINT, why would square enix take such a decision based on XBL? It seems more feasible to me to look at how many Xbox360 or PS3 owners are in the world (console owner = potential buyer) and make the decision based on that, actually there are about 8 Xbox360 owners for each PS3 owner. Other factor in this decision may be the PC, which has many users and, as Xbox360 and PCs are very similar when compared with PS3, the development costs to make a game for Xbox360 and PC are probably lower than making it for PS3 and PC.

There are of course many other factors that developers probably considered, as world of warcraft, their main competitor in the PC architecture and many more but I still can't find a reason why should they care about XBL, unless they have to pay microsoft so their game can use XBL as any other game to show achievement points and all that stuff, and that would be a con for XBL, not a pro.

I think at least now my point is clear, and I'm not going to reply any more, the only thing I see you may wonder now is why did I mention GeoW. It's because it is a perfect example of what does XBL for their games, roughly nothing, the game doesn't use the XBL servers while you are playing, instead of that one player is the host. XBL is great for gamers because you can have a profile and a community is created, it has demos, videos, etc. but square enix is a company, not a gamer so again what offers XBL to square enix?

With 35 nm xbox / 360 consoles, there are just 5-7mn Live users - whereas if PS3 sells, say, 10mn in 2007, thats already twice the number of online players (probably its the "choice" that 360 fans enjoy - pay 200USD over the console life or no multiplayer). And whats all the fuss, wasnt SEnix's earler MMO multiplatform as well.

"you may wonder now is why did I mention GeoW. It's because it is a perfect example of what does XBL for their games, roughly nothing"
Ragnarok, you're little FUD pusher.
You know that you're just spouting crap when you say that XBL does nothing for the games. GoW is not the norm and you know it. GoW is actually the exception on XBL.

I play Gears a lot and although there is no 'visable' lag (atleast not very often) its just because they did a good job hiding it. Anyway who has heard the phrase 'host shotgun' knows what i mean. it exists, believe me. I hadnt hosted a game until a few days ago and omg host shotgun owns the sh*t out of almost anyone. host shotgun is 'hidden' lag, and if you dont believe me just play the game or look at the posts on the gears site.

BOOOO!!!!

*^$% this MMO crap from Squeenix. Why would I want to keep paying on a game that's paid for (ie- monthly subscription)...it's the reason I never bought FFXI. Give me more FF or DragonQuest singleplayer RPGs. Leave the MMO crap on computers and to WoW.

You know theoretically, Square-Enix and Microsoft could allow XBL Silver members to access its MMO without upgrading to Gold, and thereby only force users to pay the fee for whatever game they release. Also, the servers for FFXI (and EA games) exist outside of XBL itself, so it is not something that is forced onto a developer.

But to be completely honest, I'm about to go play Rainbow and continue not giving a shit about Final Fantasy.

You MS Fanboys are full of it. Your getting nothing but an MMO... Maybe. You can have it. I'll take a REAL FF game over some MMO crap anyday. So will most TRUE FF gameplayers... You MS fanboys shouldn't hold your breath either. PS3 can still just as easily change their minds again, and there's no info that it even is a FF franchise game.

@Ragnarok

You DO realise that Xbox Live Silver (you know, the FREE SERVICE YOU GET WITH EVERY SINGLE 360) allows you to play MMOs, right?

That you don't need a Live Gold account for subscription-based games?

Because the game will be hosted on the developers/publishers own servers? And you pay them a separate fee?

No. Of course you didn't, because you're just a little troll sent here to annoy us, as evinced by you bringing up a single example of a game that had nothing to do with the thread.

Oh and Gears? I have never experienced lag in the month that I've had it and I'm on a 2 meg line about 4 miles from my local exchange in the arse end of Planet Thanet, using a wireless bridge of my own dubious contrivance that has to stretch through four floors! And don't even get me started on what the atmospherics do - but that's what happens with the North Sea fifty yards from your window!