Square, FFXI, and the MMORPG

LukeG writes "Squaresoft's latest instalment in the ubiquitous Final Fantasy series will mark huge departure from previous titles, as they gamble on the popularity of massively multiplayer gaming on consoles. The genre, already succesful on the PC, has yet to be tested on a console audience, but that is exactly what Square are planning with the groundbreaking release of Final Fantasy XI later this year on PS2." I'm interested to see the FF world taken to an MMORPG. If anyone can make the genre not suck, it's Square.

Comments

It's Been Done

[cancrman]

It's called Phantasy Star Online. It did (and still does) quite well IIRC.

The Only Way

[druiid]

The only way you'll see this doing well, is if Square makes it accessible to everyone, which would mean porting it to competing consoles. So far we know almost for certain that it should be coming out for the X-Box as well, but for the Gamecube it's only a rumor. Due to what Nintendo did just a few months ago when Square tried to apologize... Who knows if Square even got a dev kit yet. Overall, I don't know how Square's first foray into online gaming is going to be. Should be interesting, but the key is to get it to a wide enough audience.

Re:The Only Way

[Anonymous Coward]

It is highly unlikely it will appear on Xbox, not because it doesn't make sense (as the only console with built-in networking, it makes perfect sense) but because of Sony and that little 30% purchase of Square after the Final Fantasy movie fiasco. They're even on their board of directors now, and it's highly unlikely they would support Square developing anything for a major console competitor.

In other words, it will be multiplatform, but expect those platforms to be PS2 and PC. The Xbox and Gamecube will be left out in the cold, though it's possible the latter will get it if Sony doesn't feel the markets overlap as much as they do with Xbox.

They also face an uphill battle, because console owners will have to purchase additional storage and broadband adapters (another reason Sony wouldn't want it on Xobx but may support it for Gamecube). Currently in Japan, Sony's hard drive costs around $200, so in addition to shelling out $X for the game, you need to spend a few hundred bucks for a hard drive and the modem adapter. Few games that required additional hardware have ever done well, though this is one that is big enough to buck that trend.

Early word on it out of Japan is the fans of the series feel it's too "Western," and are very unhappy with it in beta.

Re:Eh...

[dkemist]

Doesn't your post contradict itself? "I suppose it can be expected ten or however many sequels later." -- Then you go on to talk about Sega NFL 2k2 which really doesn't qualify as a sequel -- it's the same game updated with graphics and players each year.

Personally, I think one of the best things about the final fantasy series is that they keep the same basic playing feel and keep adding interesting twists. The materia system in FF7 was great and added a whole new dimension of strategy. I'm just started on FF10, but I already think the sphere grid level system is a great enhancement. Far from being sequels (the plots are unrelated) I think the final fantasy series takes a good game engine and keeps updating it with new concepts and new options. I'm already looking forward to a multiplayer version.

An MMORPG without a Keyboard !!!

[Average_Joe_Sixpack]

I ain't gonna sit there and select letters with the PS2 gamepad to type "Owned"

Multi-player console games.

[ImaLamer]

The genre, already succesful on the PC, has yet to be tested on a console audience, but that is exactly what Square are planning with the groundbreaking release of Final Fantasy XI later this year on PS2."

What about the DC online games? There is Quake3, Unreal Tournament, hell even Chu Chu rocket. What about Phantasy Star Online?

The DC online games are great. Worms, WSB2K2, there is plenty. It was fun too!

Basically, Squaresoft isn't going to be the first to test this.
--

Square... predictable?

[Chris Canfield]

There are a lot of things wrong with this article.

First, FFXI isn't the first MMPORPG for a console... that honor (as far as I know) goes to Phantasy Star Online. As for the first "En Masse" game? I didn't have a NES modem, so I don't know.

Second, FF VIII is generally reviled as the worst of the series, being essentially a rushed out the door half of the two-sides-of-war tale they wanted to tell.

Third, neither this nor Phantasy Star should be considered a true MMPORPG, as this sounds like only groups can venture forth into the wild together. In Everquest you are likely to stumble across people who washed ashore on the small island in the middle of the ocean, but chance encounters like that are not possible if only groups can quest together.

Online games like this lend themselves to character and community-building gaming, whereas all of the recent Final Fantasies have been story driven. While in theory most MMPORPG have a larger story arch, in practice they are basically a world with which gamers can explore, communicate, and form communities and heirarchies. Squaresoft is famous for jaw-dropping moments of twisting plot, and that amazing feeling of convincing the player that he is the second coming of the Messiah (see "Xenogears"). Neither of these is possible in an online game where basically everyone has an equal role. However, with an online game comes a sense of community, the sort of thing that Final Fantasy games have been known to cause people to abandon.

I'm sure Square will pull this off with flare, albeit bumpy flare. FF7 was quite frankly amazing compared to FF6 (FF3 in the states), and the jump to online gaming gives Square the chance to make another massive jump in gameplay. If they don't just copy what is available, and they don't succumb to profiteering to cover for their atrocious losses on The Spirits Within, then this could very well be the greatest MMPORPG released this year. On the other hand, with one look at Square's release calendar (Snatched, apparently, from Eidos's dead hand), we can expect that next years new Final Fantasy release will be every bit as engrossing too. That is, if we bother to pick that one up.

Synopsis -- just the facts

[ProfKyne]

For those who aren't interested in reading 9px Arial font with few line breaks, or the fanboy details/speculation (like what kind of magic Red Mages can use, or how desolate the Saltbelt Plains are), here's the meat of the story:

• You can "communicate" with other players by selecting a symbol from a menu, which becomes like a "name tag" -- it hovers above your head, broadcasting your intentions to other players.
• You can join a team of other players by broadcasting the right symbol.
• At least in the beta, no multi-language chat facility (a la PhantasyStarOnline)
• Teams can form alliances, up to three in an alliance
• A leader must be selected when an alliance is formed, and this leader is highlighted in the game for all to see (i.e., a target)
• Wandering monsters can be seen ahead of time and avoided
• Not known if limit breaks are going to be included in battle
• You can choose the race of your character, this obviously has implications for what its abilities will be
• A class system may also be included. It has been designed, but it is still unknown at this point.

All of that information is taken from the article, not my own a priori knowledge or opinion.

Ethernet

[Technician]

Hopefully all the major console manufactures will provide ethernet connections and make the software multi platform. Then you could join a lan party with whatever box you had.

It won't happen right away. Can you say product lock-in with propritory protocols? This ides of speaking a common language will take a while to catch on. It will only happen after sticking to a closed protocol proves to be much more detrimental to your sales more than it does the competition.

MS is of going to require .net and passport trying for the lock-in, while everyone else goes high speed lan protocols not needing a remote server on the internet. Expect something propritory first. (like they already do with memory cards. Why couldn't they use a smart media or compact flash card?) They will have to join forces and use an open standard (TCP/IP or IPX maybe?) to pull an end run past the 800 Lb gorilla. Not everyone is going to buy a console and set of games from each manufacture just to have the correct software/hardware for the lan parties. Hopefully games on consoles will start to be compatible with PC platforms and they can sell the consoles because they are optimised for game play and start to clean up at lan parties with a mix of PC's and consoles. Then we should start to see the adoption common connections and protocols

Too many sequals?

[68030]

I've heard it commented many times that the series as a whole is slowly declining and even more whining over Uematsu's musical ability, yet none the less the game continue to be popular enough to warrent a decent fan following. Each release will the first introduction to the series to many gamers. I would venture that many of those gamers do not own a SNES or NES that they could play the older games on, so the only frame of referance they have are the more recent sequals.

Square wouldn't be making another sequal if they didn't think there wasn't a demand for it.

Probably the same reason that almost half of the remixes at Overclocked Remix are from a Final Fantasy game. :P

Re:Eh?

[ProfKyne]

I don't get it. How final is a fantasy when there are dozen of them?

Taken from www.videogames.com, here is the origin of the name "Final Fantasy".

Sometime in 1987, a small Japanese publishing company named Square Co. LTD. was in desperate need of a hit. Until this point, Square had mostly published smaller games for the Famicom Disk system. The titles sold respectably, but the modest installed base of Famicom Disk systems made blockbuster status an elusive goal. Hironobu Sakaguchi had an idea: why not create a game similar to competitor Enix's Dragon Quest? The console RPG was a big hit with gamers, and Sakaguchi thought that Square could significantly improve upon the basic formula. Thus work began on a massive one-megabit cartridge role-playing game that would attempt to revolutionize the genre. All of Square's resources, dreams, and hopes were placed on this single game. If it failed, Square would be no more. The project, as Square's final gasp, was given the name "Final Fantasy."

it's the hardware, stupid

[Hnice]

let's not get involved in 'ff is stale' or 'your console suX0rs' discussions. the issue here, as much as i love square, is the hardware.

7 syllables to remember for the console industry, and if you don't believe me, ask sega's hardware division: no one buys peripherals.

they'll buy an extra controller. they'll buy a hundred games. they'll pay an isp. but no one drops $100 on anything, once they've spent $300 on a console that plays mgs2, ffx, gta3, gran turismo, and ico just fine already. it's been tried, dozens of times, and it doesn't just fail, it puts companies out of business.

now, sony's not going out of business on its hard drive/ethernet combo. i'm going to buy one. but i'm giant sucker with lots of disposable income who must play ff. but (slashdot aside) there aren't that many like me -- not enough to make this work. there were only 300k phantasy star online players, and that didn't even require hardware. sony will be lucky to get 250k people to buy their $100 hardware, and square may get half of those to PlayOnline. compare that to the millions of units of, say, ffix they've sold.

i know, i know, a usb ethernet adapter -- you can also make your linux machine into a gateway for halo, but how many people are doing *that*? again, not counting me ;)

i want square to do well here. and maybe other consoles will help, although last i read, they're thinking about nintendo and not ms, and the cube also has no connection. but the hardware is the issue here, and for all ff's sweet, chocolatey goodness, it's not going to sell much hardware.

The end of the Final Fantasy series?

[Rayonic]

Whether or not this MMORPG is successful, it marks the end of Final Fantasy as we know it. The main series (1-10) has always been single-player with predefined characters and a linear story with an end. An MMORPG is none of that.

Problem is, a lot of people probably want yet another traditional Final Fantasy game - I know my fiance does. It boggles the mind why they named this spinoff game Final Fantasy XI. They should have named it "Final Fantasy Online" or something, so they could pick up the main series again, if they wanted to.

Capcom is a good act to follow in this case, especially with the Mega Man franchise. The original series is still intact, with the spinoffs relegated to their own series' (i.e. Mega Man X, Legends, etc). What if Mega Man 9 was a platformer, while 10 was an RPG, and eleven was real-time strategy? Nonsense.

FF Games in a Nutshell

[Maul]

Note that this is my opinion only.
If you think I'm on crack for liking FF4,
that is up to you.

FF1: Wander around aimlessly for hours on end
getting poisoned, paralyzed, and ultimately killed
by monsters. Surprisingly enough I beat it eventually after getting lots of help from my
Nintendo Power player's guide. Of course, I
was in 5th. grade at the time, so you can't blame
me.

FF2 & 3: Never released here at all, and I'm
too lazy to play them on an emulator right now.

FF4: The story and script are both cheezy, but
for some reason I still have more fun playing
this game over and over again than playing
any other game, period. Difficult if
you play the "original" version (not the
hacked up version known as FF2 here in the US)
or the Playstation version. IMO this is the
greatest game ever made, and probably always will
be.

FF5: Also really fun. Not as good as 4, sorta
better than 6... or at least a tad more difficult.
Job System is kinda fun.

FF6: Lotsa characters, lots of cool powers.
Probably the first game in the series where
it is too easy to create over powered chracters
that can kill the last boss in a turn.

FF7: Huge change of scenery for the first time.
The first disc is lots of fun, 2 and 3 aren't
quite as much fun. The first game that Square
put graphics above story, unfortunately.

FF Tactics: This game is challenging until
about halfway through. Then it becomes easy
when your guys are more powerful and you get
all these special unique characters with
overpowered abilities. Oh well, it is a LOT
of fun, and is better than 7 or 8 for sure.

FF8: Take one Leonardo di Caprio clone, throw
in a bunch of other pretty looking guys and
a crappy story. Then add some chocobos and
pretend it is Final Fantasy. I still have
nightmares about this game. Heck, the FF movie
is better than this.

FF9: Square caught a clue at how horrible FF8
was and made this game much more like the SNES
ones. The result is a kickass game that is
almost as enjoyable as FF4 for me.

FF10: I haven't started playing this game yet
thanks to Super Smash Bros. Melee.

FF11: I'm in agreement with those that think
this should have been just called FF Online.
IMO it shouldn't be part of the main series,
but rather be a side game like FFT was.
Mind you that I'm not against an FF online
game at all. I hope I get to make my own custom
black mage (complete with pointy hat). That'd
be cool. However, I think the games in the main
series should focus on the single player
story based RPG.

Re:This might be lame but..

[1stLexicon]

Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game

There is one way to be sucessful

[Lumpy]

Make your multiplayer game NOT REQUIRE your companies servers to work.. The entire doom and Quake series is a testament to this.. and The best examples of how not to do it is anything that works with WON online. (SOF is a great game, and I finished it in single player mode. but then the game becomes a throw away.)

If I cant pop up the game, and select "play online" and then be presented with a list of games running from a list server (Open source so it's not that company hogging it) and play then it wont work.. WON games require you to sell your soul to them in personal information and then you have to go through their horribly slow servers. No I'm not going to create a login, no I'm not gonna watch your pepsi ad whil the game starts.

If Squarsoft screws up their Multiplayer with stupid "lock IN" devices then they will fail. and they will fail horribly.

Good luck, It's gonna be tough.

[rgold]

Over the past three months, I've been doing some business-model consulting to a company with a struggling MMORPG game. Given that experience, here are a few reasons why I think Square will have a difficult time with this (although I honestly hope they succeed)...

1. Revenue Model I'd love to know how Square intends to charge for the game. Generally, MMORPG games for the PC use a two-part revenue model: $9-$50 for the game software, then an additional $5-$13 per month for a game subscription.

Given the massively multi-player nature of the games, they require enormous support including servers, game masters, billing and account support and on and on. For a decent analysis of these costs, check this out. The bottom line is that it's expensive, way more expensive than your normal game. Square has two sets of considerations here: They probably don't want to become the company to try charging a monthy fee to Console folks who tend to skew younger and have less experience with this genre. This would lead them to either jack up the software price and minimze the monthly fee, or design a game that runs more like Diablo and less like a true MMORPG. On the other hand, these games have network effects, the more people playing them, the more fun they are. That would encourage square to come to market with a low price and use the subscription model to make it up on the backend. It will be interesting to see which way they go.

2. Audience and appeal Despite the buzz, the existing market for MMORPG games is very small, maybe 3.5-4 Million worldwide, and arguably only 1-2 million in the US. They are a unique bunch of people. Given the hardware issues its relatively clear that a console isn't the best platform for these types of games. To overcome that, a console game will need to broaden it's appeal and lower the complexity and learning curve considerably in order to succeed. It will be interesting to see what things square removes from the genre to do this. Based on the coverage in the article, it seems as though trade skills will go completely. So will (I guess) much of the politics and diplomacy with respect to clans and factions. What they have left will be something very different than todays MMORPGs. It sounds like MMORPG lite. Not a bad thing, just very very differnt.

In the mean time, people like LucasArts are working on Star Wars Galaxies to try to popularize the genre a bit by using a huge and popular license. It will be interesting to see which way is more effective.

3. Cost These things are big budget to develop. Given Square's failed film and new management, it will be interesting to see how much cash they are willing to risk on something this new. Square has never been known to go cheap, and I bet they risk a bundle on it. It had the potential to be another very high profile flop for them.

But then again, nothing risked, nothing gained.

It should be fun to see what happens. -rg

I don't WANT an MMORPG FF

[mckwant]

I, evidently, am the only human on the planet who does NOT want his gameplaying experience to be sandwiched between 133t h7x0rz talking fractured, misspelled english at each other while wondering "any girlz out there?".

I happen to enjoy sitting by myself, undeterred by lag times or server outages, enjoying the content as provided. I may be the only one, but I hope not.

FF allows you to get into a movie, and play a role. I don't want to have to rely on anyone else to provide content, nor do I want to have to find people to go adventuring with.

If it's MMORPG only, I, for one, will not purchase it. Period.

end of rant.

Re:It's hardly groundbreaking.

[IronChef]

There's a very good reason for doing combat EQ-style -- it's a lower barrier to participation.

For a game to really hit the mass market, as EQ has, it needs to appeal to geeky guys, less geeky guys and even un-geeky women. EQ does that and the fact that there are no rigorous action components to the game makes this possible.

If EQ had Quake-style combat I bet it would have far fewer participants. There's a place for that kind of product (Planetside), but it will always lag far behind a game that 30 year old geeks and 15 year old schoolgirls can enjoy equally.