I guess you haven't tried playing Battlefield 4 on the Xbox One, or even Skyrim for the Ps3. Both of those games were horrible with bugs and they were not even mmo's. Buggy games can show up on consoles, really. The Elder Scrolls series sold a lot of units last generation, Zenimax knows that this game better be good by time it reaches consoles or they are losing a lot of money.
If only they had the patience to delay the pc version six months I think they would have been better off, now they are chasing their tail a bit. The whole way the game is structured makes it difficult since one bad quest can really block progression, and while the questing is more dynamic than in some other games, it also means they are easier to break. I'm not sure what their in house testing is like, but I hope they are making it more robust or they are going to struggle with each patch they release.
Originally posted by Dakeru And you really believe they will try a less greedy approach when they release on consoles?
They don't have a choice - Sony and Microsoft both said GTFO with that sub fee - your game is no better than any other game we have on our platforms and our consumers are complaining now because they already pay a sub fee for multiplayer.
FF14 ARR doesnt need PSN sub, just pay the actual games sub.
You need to have a registered Sony Entertainment Network account in order to play either the PS3 or PS4 version of FFXIV.
Originally posted by Dakeru And you really believe they will try a less greedy approach when they release on consoles?
They don't have a choice - Sony and Microsoft both said GTFO with that sub fee - your game is no better than any other game we have on our platforms and our consumers are complaining now because they already pay a sub fee for multiplayer.
FF14 ARR doesnt need PSN sub, just pay the actual games sub.
You need to have a registered Sony Entertainment Network account in order to play either the PS3 or PS4 version of FFXIV.
Yes you need a standard account, but it doesnt need to be PS+ account which is what monthly payment is for. Im a PS3 and PS4 owner.
I don't think FF is a real good example of console success - I think the pc version is carrying the console version and keep it live, that may end up being the case with ESO too - however ESO is not crossplay like FF is - that may open up a new can of worms in the long run for ESO on consoles.
Oh you dont "think"? than it must be true. Ill never understand why Final Fantasy 11 the other mmo is still being played on PS2 and Xbox 360 than?
Other than that, you do realize that majority of Final Fantasy fans are console gamers right? And the franchise is like in the top 10 of the most popular IPs on consoles.
Sales and operation of Final Fantasy 14: A Realm Reborn, which launches in August 2013 on PC and PlayStation 3, "have been making favourable progress", the publisher added.
I think the OP somehow managed to read something that wasn't there...
When it comes to games like MMOs on consoles, the publisher/developer enters into an agreement with the console makers as to how servers will be managed, update availability, content pushes, etc. The console makers basically become the host of the service, kinda like how MMO developers partner with other companies for some European/Asian distribution. It doesn't have anything to do with sub fees - the console makers happily take a cut of those fees and really don't want to lose a single penny. Its just like running Netflix through your console - MS required their Gold plan on top of the normal netflix fee to allow you to use the netflix app - they didn't just go "Well our users already pay for our Gold service, so you can't charge for access to your video service..."
ESO on console will have the same plan as ESO on PC/MAC - You will pay the sub fee until Zenni decides to no longer charge said fee. The only difference is you will probably have to pay MS for a gold sub while Sony fans might not have to have a PSN sub to play.
MS and Sony will just make sure system wise that Zenni meets certain criteria to allow the game to be played on their consoles (MS/Sony owned servers, etc) Thats basically all this article is talking about - the extra step and refinements needed to meet the console makers requirements to operate a game within their services.
There are 3 types of people in the world. 1.) Those who make things happen 2.) Those who watch things happen 3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
Originally posted by Dakeru And you really believe they will try a less greedy approach when they release on consoles?
They don't have a choice - Sony and Microsoft both said GTFO with that sub fee - your game is no better than any other game we have on our platforms and our consumers are complaining now because they already pay a sub fee for multiplayer.
FF14 ARR doesnt need PSN sub, just pay the actual games sub.
FF14 doesnt require PS+ sub because the game has a subscription. If ESO charges a sub on PS4 then PS+ would not be required either. If the subscription drops for any of those games im pretty sure the PS+ (or Live gold) requirement would take effect.
I dont think the OP realises that subscription based MMORPGs exist on current get consoles...and nowhere has MSFT or Sony stated "FU to game subscriptions"
Originally posted by Dakeru And you really believe they will try a less greedy approach when they release on consoles?
They don't have a choice - Sony and Microsoft both said GTFO with that sub fee - your game is no better than any other game we have on our platforms and our consumers are complaining now because they already pay a sub fee for multiplayer.
FF14 ARR doesnt need PSN sub, just pay the actual games sub.
FF14 doesnt require PS+ sub because the game has a subscription. If ESO charges a sub on PS4 then PS+ would not be required either. If the subscription drops for any of those games im pretty sure the PS+ (or Live gold) requirement would take effect.
Thanks for telling me exactly what I just said and been saying through out this thread. And I doubt ESO will lose its sub model just because it will go on console.
I dont think the OP realises that subscription based MMORPGs exist on current get consoles...and nowhere has MSFT or Sony stated "FU to game subscriptions"
This thread is utter perplexing.
The "logic" used by the OP appears to be perplexing because they were trying to justify a desired outcome, not debate with facts.
The article quoted simply refers to the inherent difficulties of developing and operating a game in the "closed system" that is the console market. Nowhere in the article or anywhere on the internet will you find any "proof" of the allegation that Microsoft and Sony disapprove of any particular payment models or monetization schemes. All they disapprove of in that regard is if they don't stand to gain something from the deal.
The OP is fervently hoping that all console games now and forever will remain B2P. That is a hopeless quest...
Originally posted by Dakeru And you really believe they will try a less greedy approach when they release on consoles?
They don't have a choice - Sony and Microsoft both said GTFO with that sub fee - your game is no better than any other game we have on our platforms and our consumers are complaining now because they already pay a sub fee for multiplayer.
FF14 ARR doesnt need PSN sub, just pay the actual games sub.
FF14 doesnt require PS+ sub because the game has a subscription. If ESO charges a sub on PS4 then PS+ would not be required either. If the subscription drops for any of those games im pretty sure the PS+ (or Live gold) requirement would take effect.
No, you don't need a PS+ if the service, or game whatever is not on Sony's servers, or is not a service that Sony provides. Its entirely different from the Xbox Gold account that you need to pay in order to do 'anything' online, regardless of whether MS hosts the service or not - something which MS recently indicated they were looking into changing btw, apparently they just realised their Xbox Gold service is not as competitive as the PS+ one. Whether the service or game 'external' to Sony has a fee or not, is irrelevant.
Originally posted by Dakeru And you really believe they will try a less greedy approach when they release on consoles?
They don't have a choice - Sony and Microsoft both said GTFO with that sub fee - your game is no better than any other game we have on our platforms and our consumers are complaining now because they already pay a sub fee for multiplayer.
FF14 ARR doesnt need PSN sub, just pay the actual games sub.
FF14 doesnt require PS+ sub because the game has a subscription. If ESO charges a sub on PS4 then PS+ would not be required either. If the subscription drops for any of those games im pretty sure the PS+ (or Live gold) requirement would take effect.
No, you don't need a PS+ if the service, or game whatever is not on Sony's servers, or is not a service that Sony provides. Its entirely different from the Xbox Gold account that you need to pay in order to do 'anything' online, regardless of whether MS hosts the service or not - something which MS recently indicated they were looking into changing btw, apparently they just realised their Xbox Gold service is not as competitive as the PS+ one. Whether the service or game 'external' to Sony has a fee or not, is irrelevant.
You didn't have to pay xbox live gold to play FFXI so it's nothing new to microsoft either. as long as the FFXI disc was in the tray you had the benefits of gold, i.e party chat and multiplayer
Originally posted by Dakeru And you really believe they will try a less greedy approach when they release on consoles?
They don't have a choice - Sony and Microsoft both said GTFO with that sub fee - your game is no better than any other game we have on our platforms and our consumers are complaining now because they already pay a sub fee for multiplayer.
FF14 ARR doesnt need PSN sub, just pay the actual games sub.
FF14 doesnt require PS+ sub because the game has a subscription. If ESO charges a sub on PS4 then PS+ would not be required either. If the subscription drops for any of those games im pretty sure the PS+ (or Live gold) requirement would take effect.
No, you don't need a PS+ if the service, or game whatever is not on Sony's servers, or is not a service that Sony provides. Its entirely different from the Xbox Gold account that you need to pay in order to do 'anything' online, regardless of whether MS hosts the service or not - something which MS recently indicated they were looking into changing btw, apparently they just realised their Xbox Gold service is not as competitive as the PS+ one. Whether the service or game 'external' to Sony has a fee or not, is irrelevant.
Man you have some awkward weird obsession with xb don't you. Dude there is nothing to be afraid of xb1, ps4, PC they are all good not sure why every post you make you try to bash the xb when you clearly are bias and desperate.
For your information MS is not looking into changing their xb gold they are next month. If you are going to make ignorant accusations try to at least do a little research on the topic.
Bethesda VP of PR Pete Hines spoke to CVG recently, and while the thrust of the interview focused on the company's interests outside of MMORPGs, there were some tidbits relating to The Elder Scrolls Online'sconsole delay.
It's a closed system. It's not just an ESO thing -- they have rules and regulations that govern all games, if you're going to do something it has to work a certain way. It doesn't matter the way that we want to do it -- it has to fit their requirements.
I'll give you an easy example; payments. When we do stuff on PC, we manage it ourselves, it goes through our store, we manage the whole thing. When it goes through somebody else, that someone is doing all of that; taking your money, charging your PayPal, and then transferring that information to us.
This is just inherently a different process than the one that we have, where it's our store and we just have to make sure our system works. It's the same thing on PSN -- you have to just make sure that all of that stuff communicates. When you start adding up the pile of things and everything that we learned from launch, it was clear that we needed to take the time to do this right, because it has massive ramifications if it doesn't work right for the consumer experience.
The statements in green are exactly why I like console gaming over pc gaming Now that all this drama got stirred up, the following is merely speculation but.... - if ESO complies - you can find me on Console playing the buy to play version of ESO - no cash shop or at least an irrelevant cash shop.
Yes my pc is more powerful, but my console is at least governed by a Sony or a Microsoft and both of them are saying yes you can develop for our system, but you can't dick our consumers and our other develop teams with your crazy payment models that are counterproductive to the betterment and sustainability of the gaming industry.
As much as you want to hate on Sony and Microsoft - they always have that governing card in their pocket protecting developers and consumers alike.
1. In my opinion nobody in their right mind would play ESO on any system so the console issue is less important.
2. Notice that the primary concern of Zenimax appears to be how to charge people, not how to make a good game.
3. Zenimax have no idea what they are doing and should just be a holding company and stay out of the day to day concerns of making games because they are clueless.
4. A method of charging you is the main reason you prefer a console over a PC which is technically better by a large magin in every metric known to man.....still seems weak for consoles
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Originally posted by Crusades DCUO and FF are established - Elder Scrolls is established on console as well - it's always been buy to play and people loved it.
ElderScrolls has never been "Buy to Play". there is a huge diffidence between b2p and a one off purchase of a game.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Originally posted by severius I will never, for the life of me, be able to comprehend the idiocy of the statement, and idea, that additional layers of bureaucracy are a good thing.
It makes one wonder if people are getting paid to post
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Originally posted by severius I will never, for the life of me, be able to comprehend the idiocy of the statement, and idea, that additional layers of bureaucracy are a good thing.
OP you completely missed the point of this article. This wasn't about Sony and Microsoft telling them they can't make a subscription game, this was about them having to fulfill specific requirements to make their game work on their platforms.
SE was able to strike a deal with Sony to not have PSN+ be a requirement to play FFXIV:ARR. I imagine Zenimax can do the same thing, there's just some very specific things (which are probably industy trade secrets we common folk aren't privy to) they have to do to accomplish that.
I have no idea what they will have to strike up with Microsoft as they were unwilling to budge with SE to allow their users on XBLive interface with those playing on PC and PS3/PS4. Likely, those players playing on the Xbox version will ONLY be playing with other Xbox players. They may be able to get the Playstation users and the PC users on the same megaserver, but the Xbox players are going to be on their own island.
OP you completely missed the point of this article. This wasn't about Sony and Microsoft telling them they can't make a subscription game, this was about them having to fulfill specific requirements to make their game work on their platforms.
SE was able to strike a deal with Sony to not have PSN+ be a requirement to play FFXIV:ARR. I imagine Zenimax can do the same thing, there's just some very specific things (which are probably industy trade secrets we common folk aren't privy to) they have to do to accomplish that.
I have no idea what they will have to strike up with Microsoft as they were unwilling to budge with SE to allow their users on XBLive interface with those playing on PC and PS3/PS4. Likely, those players playing on the Xbox version will ONLY be playing with other Xbox players. They may be able to get the Playstation users and the PC users on the same megaserver, but the Xbox players are going to be on their own island.
and if I was Sony or Microsoft I would think twice about getting into any legal agreement with that company.
Just sayin
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Comments
I guess you haven't tried playing Battlefield 4 on the Xbox One, or even Skyrim for the Ps3. Both of those games were horrible with bugs and they were not even mmo's. Buggy games can show up on consoles, really. The Elder Scrolls series sold a lot of units last generation, Zenimax knows that this game better be good by time it reaches consoles or they are losing a lot of money.
If only they had the patience to delay the pc version six months I think they would have been better off, now they are chasing their tail a bit. The whole way the game is structured makes it difficult since one bad quest can really block progression, and while the questing is more dynamic than in some other games, it also means they are easier to break. I'm not sure what their in house testing is like, but I hope they are making it more robust or they are going to struggle with each patch they release.
Not all who wander are lost...
About half of PS4 owners
Again, You just got served
You need to have a registered Sony Entertainment Network account in order to play either the PS3 or PS4 version of FFXIV.
Yes you need a standard account, but it doesnt need to be PS+ account which is what monthly payment is for. Im a PS3 and PS4 owner.
During The Letter from the Producer Live broadcast going on right now Producer and Director Naoki Yoshida announced something that will please many.
Square Enix managed to strike a deal with Sony so that the PS4 version of the game will not require a PlayStation Plus subscription. There will also be no difference in subscription cost with the current versions.
Oh you dont "think"? than it must be true. Ill never understand why Final Fantasy 11 the other mmo is still being played on PS2 and Xbox 360 than?
Other than that, you do realize that majority of Final Fantasy fans are console gamers right? And the franchise is like in the top 10 of the most popular IPs on consoles.
And these articles says different as well
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-02-05-final-fantasy-14-helps-square-enix-swing-back-to-profit
Sales and operation of Final Fantasy 14: A Realm Reborn, which launches in August 2013 on PC and PlayStation 3, "have been making favourable progress", the publisher added.
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/460596/final-fantasy-xiv-a-realm-reborn-ps4-review/
I think the OP somehow managed to read something that wasn't there...
When it comes to games like MMOs on consoles, the publisher/developer enters into an agreement with the console makers as to how servers will be managed, update availability, content pushes, etc. The console makers basically become the host of the service, kinda like how MMO developers partner with other companies for some European/Asian distribution. It doesn't have anything to do with sub fees - the console makers happily take a cut of those fees and really don't want to lose a single penny. Its just like running Netflix through your console - MS required their Gold plan on top of the normal netflix fee to allow you to use the netflix app - they didn't just go "Well our users already pay for our Gold service, so you can't charge for access to your video service..."
ESO on console will have the same plan as ESO on PC/MAC - You will pay the sub fee until Zenni decides to no longer charge said fee. The only difference is you will probably have to pay MS for a gold sub while Sony fans might not have to have a PSN sub to play.
MS and Sony will just make sure system wise that Zenni meets certain criteria to allow the game to be played on their consoles (MS/Sony owned servers, etc) Thats basically all this article is talking about - the extra step and refinements needed to meet the console makers requirements to operate a game within their services.
There are 3 types of people in the world.
1.) Those who make things happen
2.) Those who watch things happen
3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
FF14 doesnt require PS+ sub because the game has a subscription. If ESO charges a sub on PS4 then PS+ would not be required either. If the subscription drops for any of those games im pretty sure the PS+ (or Live gold) requirement would take effect.
I dont think the OP realises that subscription based MMORPGs exist on current get consoles...and nowhere has MSFT or Sony stated "FU to game subscriptions"
This thread is utter perplexing.
Thanks for telling me exactly what I just said and been saying through out this thread. And I doubt ESO will lose its sub model just because it will go on console.
The "logic" used by the OP appears to be perplexing because they were trying to justify a desired outcome, not debate with facts.
The article quoted simply refers to the inherent difficulties of developing and operating a game in the "closed system" that is the console market. Nowhere in the article or anywhere on the internet will you find any "proof" of the allegation that Microsoft and Sony disapprove of any particular payment models or monetization schemes. All they disapprove of in that regard is if they don't stand to gain something from the deal.
The OP is fervently hoping that all console games now and forever will remain B2P. That is a hopeless quest...
No, you don't need a PS+ if the service, or game whatever is not on Sony's servers, or is not a service that Sony provides. Its entirely different from the Xbox Gold account that you need to pay in order to do 'anything' online, regardless of whether MS hosts the service or not - something which MS recently indicated they were looking into changing btw, apparently they just realised their Xbox Gold service is not as competitive as the PS+ one. Whether the service or game 'external' to Sony has a fee or not, is irrelevant.
You didn't have to pay xbox live gold to play FFXI so it's nothing new to microsoft either. as long as the FFXI disc was in the tray you had the benefits of gold, i.e party chat and multiplayer
Man you have some awkward weird obsession with xb don't you. Dude there is nothing to be afraid of xb1, ps4, PC they are all good not sure why every post you make you try to bash the xb when you clearly are bias and desperate.
For your information MS is not looking into changing their xb gold they are next month. If you are going to make ignorant accusations try to at least do a little research on the topic.
1. In my opinion nobody in their right mind would play ESO on any system so the console issue is less important.
2. Notice that the primary concern of Zenimax appears to be how to charge people, not how to make a good game.
3. Zenimax have no idea what they are doing and should just be a holding company and stay out of the day to day concerns of making games because they are clueless.
4. A method of charging you is the main reason you prefer a console over a PC which is technically better by a large magin in every metric known to man.....still seems weak for consoles
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I'm confused by this, is the actual topic console vs pc development or F2P vs sub model?
ElderScrolls has never been "Buy to Play". there is a huge diffidence between b2p and a one off purchase of a game.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
http://www.speedtest.net/result/7300033012
It makes one wonder if people are getting paid to post
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Wow this thread just went off the deep end...
OP you completely missed the point of this article. This wasn't about Sony and Microsoft telling them they can't make a subscription game, this was about them having to fulfill specific requirements to make their game work on their platforms.
SE was able to strike a deal with Sony to not have PSN+ be a requirement to play FFXIV:ARR. I imagine Zenimax can do the same thing, there's just some very specific things (which are probably industy trade secrets we common folk aren't privy to) they have to do to accomplish that.
I have no idea what they will have to strike up with Microsoft as they were unwilling to budge with SE to allow their users on XBLive interface with those playing on PC and PS3/PS4. Likely, those players playing on the Xbox version will ONLY be playing with other Xbox players. They may be able to get the Playstation users and the PC users on the same megaserver, but the Xbox players are going to be on their own island.
and if I was Sony or Microsoft I would think twice about getting into any legal agreement with that company.
Just sayin
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me