True Fantasy Live Online - Still Xbox's Killer MMO App?

Thanks to XBN for its in-depth preview of Level 5's Japanese-developed Xbox MMORPG, True Fantasy Live Online, the long-in-development Microsoft funded title which is finally "hitting Xbox Live in early summer 2004." The piece points out that Level 5's RPG portfolio "...is stunningly impressive; in addition to Microsoft's Fantasy, the studio is developing the Dark Cloud series for Sony and Dragon Quest VIII for Square Enix", before speaking to chief game designer Akihiro Hino, who "believes it's possible to play and enjoy a noncombat character without fighting for the entirety of a lifeline in Fantasy", and the article ends by boldly claiming: "Fantasy already has more environments, enemies, vehicles, items, skills, classes, monsters, pets, and foods than any console RPG to date." Are you remotely, significantly, or excessively excited about this Xbox Live exclusive title?

Comments

more != better

[Anonymous Coward]

I wish companies would stop using the philosophy that 100 different swords is always better than 1 sword. I wish they'd concentrate on making the game intrinsicly fun to play regardless of what items are in it or not. Here's a concept: make a combat system for an rpg that's enjoyable IN AND OF ITSELF! What's wrong with having a game where people go and fight monsters or whatever for the fun of it rather than entirely for the rewards they get? Give me simple and fun over complex to compensate for lack of fun any day.

The game looks nice

[oprahwinfree]

Checking out the article, it looks nice. But I wonder how many people may buy it mistaking it for a Final Fantasy title?

Better Combat?

[madygoosey]

I don't know about the combat system in MMORPGs, I mean I know they are supposed to be more relaxed and easily accesible, but can't someone come up with a zelda(ocarina of time?) like combat system, where more than a dice roll affects your attack. Maybe like planetside without the human vs human comabt, and swords and bow and arrows instead of machine guns and rocket launchers. Battle would be so much more fun. The game could actually be more about fighting harder monsters even which a weak character, than spending hours and hours in some stupid cave fighting frog men to level your character to 65 and then go 'fight' the bigger and 'harder?' creatures.

Re:Better Combat?

[Highrollr]

The reason MMOs are limited to typical MUD turn-based combat is more of a technical limitation than a creative one. Think for a second about the sheer amount of data that have to be moved to keep a 16-player game of UT2004 in sync. That kind of bandwidth usage simply does not scale to thousands of players. Even Planetside does not have true FPS combat. The bandwidth costs to keep the server going would be too high. It has an approximation based on trusted clients and large cones of fire. I think having true reflex-based MMO combat would make them much more fun to play, but it looks like we'll have to wait a while until we get it. On the bright side, designers have come up with enough tricks with time-based special attacks and such that combat is still fairly involving. For those who have played it, I think a system like Legend of Dragoon would work well to enhance MMO gameplay. This sort of system is basically turn-based, but by clicking at precise moments one's damage output can be increased dramatically. I believe EQ2 may have something like this planned.

Re:Yes

[DrSkwid]

pure nonsense

people clock up hours on both games because they prefer one to the other

you need depth *and* gameplay not one or the other

why do you think counterstrike doesn't have just 1 weapon and 1 map?

DAOC, for instance, had less item depth, each class at each level has an optimum set of kit. Part of the fun of Everquest was the array of items. Even though I was a specialist in 2H Axe I used to carry a set of thulian claws and a rapier. I could then choose whether to deal damage or interrupt casting. No such need in DAOC, the scope of your activity was much less.

I have played quite a few MMOs and EQ has by far the best items. We'd often just go on an adventure to get specific items even though we didn't really need them because that was the fun.

The real variety needs to be in the way the MOBs fight the party. DOACs approach was poor in this area. It wasn't until I hit level 36 that there was any difference in the way one pulls and kills the mobs (chain pulling the pygmies). However, the game was really aimed at PVP so it's slightly excusable.

As for this game, I couldn't care less.

EQ2 is the one the hardcore people are waiting for.

Anti-MS Troll?

[superultra]

pay them to do it.

Is there a free way to make first and second party games?

This is not unusual at all. Nintendo is probably the only one who doesn't, but Sony does this all the time. It's a good way to test the waters with a developer, as Sony has often contracted out games and then bought the studio. In fact, Sony did very much the same thing with Guerilla Studios to make their "Halo-Killer", and then just recently bought them out. I think EA did the same thing; hired out Blackbox for a game or two and then bought them out. Happens all the time. Suddenly it's weird because Microsoft is doing it?

Re:XBOX aka: PC games for dummies

[FubarPA]

Why would anyone buy an X-box when virtually every title for it is out for the PC?
Well, I can think of a few reasons:
- The Xbox is now only 149.00. If you have an out of data machine, you may spend at least that much to upgrade it.
- Ease of use. Some people may not like to use a computer, but they love video games. Open the DVD tray, drop the game in, and off you go.

half of the "new" titles coming out for the X-Box are three year old PC titles?
If you can show me that Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow, Steel Batallion, or Doom III (coming in June) have been out for three years, then I'll give you credit. Otherwise, nice troll attempt.

more = better

[DavidBrown]

In defense of "100 different swords", I have to say that the wide variety of swords, armor, etc. is much of what made Diablo II a success. I'm not saying that gameplay, fun, etc. isn't important - that's the heart of any good game. It's just that having a variety of weapons and other stuff to discover makes a game more interesting.

It actually has to do with the psychology of operant conditioning. Kill a monster or open a chest and get a weapon. If you get the same sword every time, you won't bother seeking out and killing the monster unless you happen to need the sword (which you won't need because you already have). But if there's a chance you may wind up getting a much better sword, then you're going to go out, time after time, killing and looting until you find the sword and start looking for the next one, or you give up, bored.

Operant conditioning is why gambling is so addictive. It's why people who can't afford it buy lottery tickets. And it's why having a variety of "neat" weapons in a fantasy RPG is part of what makes it fun. Even NetHack has more than one sword.

And it doesn't have to be complex. Diablo II is a very simple game to play, with a very large number of items that can be acquired by a player. None of the rare ones are needed to do well in the game - they're just neat, and a way to make your character different in its own way from the rest of the crowd.

Cheaper!

[2nd Post!]

An XBox costs less than a reasonable CPU upgrade
Less than most decent 3d video cards
Less than a new motherboard and ram
Less than a case, hard drive, and power supply

So the better question is, (and as a Mac user, I get this *all* the time), why should I spend more on a PC when an XBox is 90% as good?

Re:XBOX aka: PC games for dummies

[merdark]

Half the time the PC versions of the XBOX games are crippled. Notably, many many XBOX games have co-op multiplayer abilities. None of the PC versions have this ability. :(

Halo PC has no co-op.
Lord of the Ring PC has no co-op.
Doom3 PC will not have co-op, but XBOX version will (makes me sad).

Re:Yes

[Xzzy]

> Part of the fun of Everquest was the array of
> items.

Sort of. There was still always an "absolute best" that every gamer insisted on owning. The only time weapons varied were when new expansions released and people were finding new gear.

I'm not sure that there's a real solution for it. You mentioned DAoC, and they had a novel idea of giving different weapons varying effectiveness against different types of armor. I think something like that is a good start for a system that rewards all weapon choices.

Finding some way to require skill to inflict damage instead of just hitting auto-attack and damaging as dictated by an arbitrary damage rating would help too. Again, DAoC had a fair idea for this with their style system as indicated by how many games are now copying the idea.

But I agree, it still isn't quite nirvana yet. I'd like to see an MMOG utilize some form of rag doll physics. ;)

> Even though I was a specialist in 2H Axe I used
> to carry a set of thulian claws and a rapier.

Wow, when was that.. 1999? :) I stopped playing EQ 9 months ago and hadn't seen BTC's for years at that point.

Pay to play = no play

[cabra771]

I would be quite interested in this if there was no additional charge except for the XBox Live subscription. In fact, I would be very interested in this game. I've always wanted to play a MMORPG like Star Wars Galaxies or Final Fantasy XI, but I can justify 15+ dollars a month plus the cost of my internet connection. What does XBox Live cost now? 50-60 bucks a year? I'm in. This article doesn't talk about subscription costs, though.

Re:XBOX aka: PC games for dummies

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn, I KNEW we couldn't go one frickin /. article on a cool Xbox game without an obligitory troll.

And to answer your question, the Xbox provides the best of both the PC ports (games for XBox are ported to PX and vice versa, a la Knights of the Old Republic and Splinter Cell : Pandora Tomorrow), and console ports (There are very few multi-console games that don't look or play the best on the XBox, excepting SSX Tricky and Sonic Heroes), plus a bunch of stellar titles that are only on XBox (Ninja Gaiden, Project Gotham Racing 2, for example.) Xbox live is just the icing on the cake.

It's currently the best console out there in my eyes, with a Gamecube a close second (The genius of the first party games and some of the other third party games is unparalleled, but it needs more 'in the middle' kinds of games), and the Playstation 2 a distant third (I'm not that big of a fan of RPG's, a lot of the multiplatform stuff is better on Xbox, online play is a joke compared to XBL).

And I am quite looking forward to this game. I loved Dark Cloud, and I've played the hell out of Phantasy Star Online already.

And take your trolling elsewhere. We XBox fans have heard your rheteric to death, and quite frankly, we're sick of it. You're doing the equivilent of walking into a gay bar and calling someone a fag. Good thing you can't get a black eye on the internet, eh?

Bound to be a success

[rpillala]

Foods. That's what's been missing from the online and offline games that I've been playing. More foods.

Ravi