[Suggestion] PS4 version.

[Zenoxio]

The PS4 has been announced and has PC architecture (http://www.polygon.com/2013/2/20/4009940/playstation-4-tech-specs-hardware-details) as well as Gaikai integration to play previous generation games (http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/02/20/playstation-cloud-revealed) (although it may not be available at PS4 launch). I personally expect to continue playing on PC, but based on these two facts it seems like it would be potentially viable to release FFXI on the PS4 (or have FFXI playable via the Gaikai service); this would help draw new players into the game on a modern console.

I'm not suggesting an HD version or any changes; and if perhaps Gaikai is used it might help stay away from "console limitations" some may be concerned about. I understand it is still early to inquiry about this (tentative release date of PS4 is this holiday season) but it doesn't hurt.

[Horadrim]

The PS4 has been announced and has PC architecture (http://www.polygon.com/2013/2/20/4009940/playstation-4-tech-specs-hardware-details) as well as Gaikai integration to play previous generation games (http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/02/20/playstation-cloud-revealed). I personally expect to continue playing on PC, but based on these two facts it seems like it would be potentially viable to release FFXI on the PS4 (or have FFXI playable via the Gaikai service); this would help draw new players into the game on a modern console.

I'm not suggesting an HD version or any changes; and if perhaps Gaikai is used it might help stay away from "console limitations" some may be concerned about.

*shrug* Sure, I'd buy that.

[Ziyyigo-Tipyigo]

Not as easy as it seems at first blush.


The PS4 has been announced and has PC architecture (http://www.polygon.com/2013/2/20/4009940/playstation-4-tech-specs-hardware-details)

But not a PC operating system. The Xbox 360 was easy for them because it pretty much runs DirectX natively. A native PS4 port would need to be retooled and recompiled for the custom PS4 firmware.


as well as Gaikai integration to play previous generation games (http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/02/20/playstation-cloud-revealed)

You missed the important word "eventually." Out of the gate, the PS4 won't even play your PSOne Classics.

Since XIV will all but assuredly be ported to the PS4, we probably have a better chance of XI being ported to the ARR engine (which was built from the ground up with multi-platform capabilities in mind) than a custom port of PS2-centric XI to the PS4 as-is.

[Zenoxio]

Oh I understand, I'm just thinking it would be more viable than say making a PS3 version. But I'll throw in an edit that Gaikai likely won't be at launch.

[Elphy]

It would be fantastic for them to open the game up to new players by making it available on more platforms, we could use the influx of fresh players, however I believe the reason they are sticking to their guns about supporting ps2 is because a lot of jp players still play ffxi on a ps2 since the 360 is highly unpopular there. And they would have to work out a new deal with sony + the legal work that would go into a different consule. Its more work then porting it over and little effort seems to be being put into ffxi these days.

I wouldn't be surprised if these ps2 gamers had ps3 or will upgrade to ps4 and only retain a ps2 for ffxi and such games but SE doesnt want to seem to take that chance. Maybe they should add that to their next census (I dont remember if it was on the last) just to see if it would be worth their time. Which I am certain it would be.

[Elphy]

Since XIV will all but assuredly be ported to the PS4, we probably have a better chance of XI being ported to the ARR engine (which was built from the ground up with multi-platform capabilities in mind) than a custom port of PS2-centric XI to the PS4 as-is.

Even with my nay saying, I am still hoping the best for ffxi. And am obviously really excited about ARR, that being said I also hope ARR is a gigantic success, so maybe just maybe they will then consider retooling ffxi a bit too. Even above and beyond a new platform.

[Ziyyigo-Tipyigo]

I was almost able to play XI and XIV on the same console, but then XIV had to be rebooted and won't be out before Adoulin renders my NA PS2 version useless...

[Miiyo]

You are bold to assume the PS4 will be out in the lifetime of FFXI. I shall hope you are right. I would like PS4 to come out by the end of next year. That's about as much guaranteed time FFXI has left @.@

[Ziyyigo-Tipyigo]

You are bold to assume the PS4 will be out in the lifetime of FFXI.


NEW YORK (AP) - Sony wants you to know that the PlayStation 4 is coming this holiday season(.)

Their CES unveiling is all over the internet. Meanwhile, I haven't heard anything even that definitive from S-E about XIV's release.

As for your pessimism about the PS4 being the death knell for XI, I have a hard time believing S-E would put the effort into making a whole new expansion pack if they don't see the game lasting into 2014. Look how many years they milked out of the last expansion...

[Alhanelem]

They're not even doing a ps4 version of FFXIV (at least, not any time soon), so the odds of a PS4 release are basically zero. They would be smart to keep the game off of any future consoles and keep it only on the PC. Plug your game pad in, use your PC, and be free of all console limitations forever. the PS4 will fail harder than the PS3 unless they open the system up a bit (the other consoles need to do this as well) and make it easier for devleopers to release and update their games on it, especially downloadable titles, which are currently subject to archaic restrictions and absurd costs on the PS3 and xbox 360- this pushed a lot of developers toward the PC and mobile, and with good reason.

I've said it before and i'll say it again, MMORPGs (any MMORPG, not just FFXI), games that are generally enhanced and upgraded over time, should only be released on platforms that can extend and upgrade over time.


You are bold to assume the PS4 will be out in the lifetime of FFXI. I shall hope you are right. I would like PS4 to come out by the end of next year. That's about as much guaranteed time FFXI has left @.@ whats with all the death predictions? You know there are many older and more archaic MMOs than FFXI that are still running and have been running even longer? The original Everquest is still running and still gets content updates and expansions. Yes, the population is not what it was in its heyday, but it still makes money, and therefore, it still keeps running.

[Miiyo]

I watched the stream. Sony said what PS4 can/will do. No timelines were given. An image of the console wasn't even presented. I really wouldn't be surprised if it didn't come out until next winter. They just released the slim ps3, wouldn't make too much sense to release the PS4 in the same year. When they're already on the talk of making financial comebacks.

[Ziyyigo-Tipyigo]

The Associated Press isn't just some fanboi gaming rag. I'm inclined to go with what they print.

[wildsprite]

The Associated Press isn't just some fanboi gaming rag. I'm inclined to go with what they print.

might you be willing to post a link to your source?

I looked for the AP article and could not find one from them that mentioned a date for the PS4, and while the video speculated it mentioned no dates either

[Camiie]

They wouldn't make a full-fledged PS3 version in part because Sony would have required them to make it HD. I'm sure they'd have similar if not greater requirements for PS4 development.

[Alhanelem]

The Associated Press isn't just some fanboi gaming rag. I'm inclined to go with what they print.As much as the AP is a decent press source, I don't really consider them much of an authority in the area of gaming.

[Eric]

People "predicting" FFXI's death have been around since ToAU was released. Just ignore them, they're like the crazy people who keep on "predicting" the end of the world every few months.

[Camiie]

People "predicting" FFXI's death have been around since ToAU was released. Just ignore them, they're like the crazy people who keep on "predicting" the end of the world every few months.

Says you! It's coming! You better make peace with the Goddess!

http://www.mattftw.com/wp-content/uploads/EndIsNear1.jpg

[Sarick]

People who signed up for this game in 2000ish KNEW it was multi-ported to console at the start. If they didn't want to join an MMO that was designed around consoles they shouldn't be complaining about the related limitations. JUst realise the console versions of this are crippled and the PC version isn't far behind it. These dreams of a 3d game world in 1080p 120fps aren't going to happen even if they drop PS2 or add PS4 support.

The players who Nag about how the consoles restrict the game need to suck it up and realize this game is OLD, back when it was launched on PS2 that was an uber game console just look at the sales. The PS2 and XBOX created a surge of interest in FFXI that probably would have never happened if they where designed PC only. Can we please stop acting like PS2 and 360 clients where a bad thing when they where VERY popular back then. I doubt FFXI online would be where it's at today if it wasn't promoted on consoles.

Anyway, a PS3/PS4 port would be nice but is it worth it probably not. As it is now the PC version is starting to be outdated enough that it's becoming complicated to load on newer operating systems. That was a good thing about PS2 you didn't need to worry about the OS or hardware setup as much.

[Jaall]

Consoles are consoles, PC's are PC's, both have their uses and can/can't do's so really there is no comparison. The PS4 was announced to be released in "holiday 2013"... what that means nobody knows but it is 2013 and although they can delay that they would lose a lot of interest and that's not in their best interest. If you want clarification on that release date, search Sony 2013 meeting on youtube and check the last few seconds of the vid.

FFXI should stay where it belongs on PS2, PC and xbox 360. If PS2 support is lost then jp complain due to their "jp onry" attitude towards everything including consoles. If it moves onto another console the waiting time for that to happen and the amount of effort needed will be massive and therefore we will have even less dev support and game updates. Just look at how much we're missing out on update-wise due to the new expansion. If they were trying to then improve the game and launch on a new console we would all be complaining about that, as we are now. They cannot win and therefore nobody can. As good as SE are they aren't gods. They can't just fix everything there and then and with a game like this there isn't much point as there is a really big chance ARR is gonna replace FFXI as SE's main income, and lets face it, a company will pour the majority of it's resources in whatever makes more money. Obviously FFXI will never die, as long as they are making a profit above server costs etc then it will keep running and that can't be too expensive in this day and age. My guess is it would have to be down to only 1 server being active and only when that becomes desolate will SE have to shut down FFXI which imo wont happen in a very very long time, long enough even to just ignore that's a possibility.

[Alhanelem]

Consoles are consoles, PC's are PC's, both have their uses and can/can't do's so really there is no comparison.Actually, PCs can do everything a console can and more, while consoles have lots of "can't dos."

Consoles have fixed hardware and thus have limitations that can never be overcome. PCs do not have such limitations.

PCs can use controllers and game pads just like the console. PCs can be connected to TVs in your living room just like consoles. There is no real advantage to consoles other than they're cheaper.

[Jaall]

Except the fact consoles are faster to load up, aren't as loud and have games that are only available for console. Also a lot smaller generally and much more living room friendly with less cables etc. Point is there are a lot of disadvantages to using a PC in a living room environment where you'd generally find a games console.

[Alhanelem]

Except the fact consoles are faster to load up, aren't as loud and have games that are only available for console. Also a lot smaller generally and much more living room friendly with less cables etc. Point is there are a lot of disadvantages to using a PC in a living room environment where you'd generally find a games console.
Actually, those things aren't all true all the time either.

Consoles are only faster to load up if you have crappy hardware. Get an SSD and Windows will boot up in a few seconds and games load even faster than the console versions They're more expensive than hard drives to be sure but they're getting cheaper every day. As for size, I've never met a living room you couldn't fit a PC somewhere. Many consoles are just as big as smaller form factor PCs- because they essentially ARE unupgradable PCs.

[Jaall]

Look at the figures. Consoles still sell enough to keep them producing more and more since the early 90's. Every few years they bring out another updated model from the profits they make. Fact is even though you're a PC fanboy, consoles have their advantages and are a lot more cost efficient. And tbh if you want a PC to boot up at the same speed as a PS3 you need to spend at least 2x as much on the PC and that's just for starters. Then you need graphics etc to match up and by the end of it you're gonna have a very loud, large PC sitting in your living room and I know for a fact that my fiancé won't appreciate that, nor any other families I know. Yes PC's are good for gaming but fact is there are downsides and benefits to both whether you like it or not.

[Jackstin]

Consoles have better games than PCs. There, I said it. Console gamers are also less weird than PC gamers.

[Alhanelem]

Consoles have better games than PCs. There, I said it. Console gamers are also less weird than PC gamers.
Yeah, except you're wrong. Especially within the last couple of years, consoles have been getting fewer and fewer exclusives as more and more developers move to the PC and Steam, due to Microsoft and Sony's shiatty business practices.

There isn't anything about a console that makes games on it better. It's simply cheaper so many people who can't own a PC can own a console.

Beyond that, whether or not one game is better than another is entirely your subjective opinion and if you made a list of games that you compared to games on the PC I'm sure I could personally dispute all or nearly all of them, because we may not even like the same kinds of games.

[Jaall]

Like I said, there's really no comparison due to the fact that the only difference in the 2 would be price and gaming opinion. It has to be fact by now that opinion doesn't count for anything worthwhile. For example, while Alhanalem, you're obviously a massive PC fanboy who would happily have a PC sitting in your living room, I and other casual gamers wouldn't want that and also wouldn't want the sheer hassle of starting up a pc, loading up via keyboard and mouse etc just to play the same game on a PC where it may be .2% better and only due to the graphics customisation. It is all opinion and even the price point being cheap or expensive is an opinion so there is no argument unless it goes back to the same old "he thinks this" and "he thinks that" endless war between people. I think we can all agree nobody is gonna win that.

[Sarick]

Yeah, except you're wrong.

You agree to disagree or are you contradicting yourself?

Consoles ae standardized hardware meaning that each unit is nearly identical hardware wise. There are no hardware incompatibilities and you don't need to upgrade hardware constantly.

Unless everyone is running on the same PC or nearly identical system PCs do have a limitation that consoles don't. Each system is totally unique. A PC can have mullions of hardware/software configurations. Consoles can have several setups but they are matched much better universally then the average PC.

I bet my PC and yours doesn't have a single matching part equipped to it! On the other hand I have 4 PS3's. The PS3's all run PS3 software flawlessly and there is no special drivers or hardware requirements aside from HDD space. It's simple to understand. Consoles are much more user friendly especially now that windows 8 is out. Also I haven't seen a low end PC run native PS3 software yet.

These things that make consoles static give make them have a longer user life then a high end PC that "NEEDS" updated every 1-3 years or new software starts becoming incompatible with them. Consoles remain compatible with new software most of the time until end of life.

If This was on the PS3 or PS4 it'd probably run just as good as the PCs run it today with the exceptions of those 3rd party tools people talk about.

[Jackstin]

Yeah, except you're wrong. Especially within the last couple of years, consoles have been getting fewer and fewer exclusives as more and more developers move to the PC and Steam, due to Microsoft and Sony's shiatty business practices.

There isn't anything about a console that makes games on it better. It's simply cheaper so many people who can't own a PC can own a console.

Beyond that, whether or not one game is better than another is entirely your subjective opinion and if you made a list of games that you compared to games on the PC I'm sure I could personally dispute all or nearly all of them, because we may not even like the same kinds of games.

Yeah but PC gamers only like PC games because they're basement dwelling oddities.

[Zhronne]

One thing that hasn't been noted yet is that PS4 gamepad has 2 buttons less than PS1-2-3 gamepad. Unless you can re-map them on the touchpad I wonder how it would do with a game like FFXI.
The missing keys are not vital luckily, but still it makes you wonder.

Gonna be fun for other games retrocompatibility (through Gaikai) as well

[Ziyyigo-Tipyigo]

One thing that hasn't been noted yet is that PS4 gamepad has 2 buttons less than PS1-2-3 gamepad.

Unless you're referring to L3 and R3 (and how would you be able to tell?), Select and Start already each have dedicated areas of the touchpad along the bottom edge.

http://images.lazygamer.net/2013/02/Dualshock4.png

[RAIST]

actually...from a cold boot, I can get into FFXI faster on my dinosaur of a PC than I can get into Borderlands2 on my new PS3 from a cold boot.

It all depends on how you are set up I guess. But in general, PC's offer way more flexibility than a console. Games are developed on a PC/MAC, then loaded on the console for testing. Why? Because they have considerably more resources under the hood. Also, if a game requires more resources to run as intended, you simply upgrade the PC if needed---can't necessarily do that with a console.

No matter how you slice it, the PC is generally a better platform in the long run if you are dealing with games that are meant to evolve and grow over time (and thus potentially demanding more resources one day).

[Ramaza]

actually...from a cold boot, I can get into FFXI faster on my dinosaur of a PC than I can get into Borderlands2 on my new PS3 from a cold boot.

It all depends on how you are set up I guess. But in general, PC's offer way more flexibility than a console. Games are developed on a PC/MAC, then loaded on the console for testing. Why? Because they have considerably more resources under the hood. Also, if a game requires more resources to run as intended, you simply upgrade the PC if needed---can't necessarily do that with a console.

No matter how you slice it, the PC is generally a better platform in the long run if you are dealing with games that are meant to evolve and grow over time (and thus potentially demanding more resources one day).

While I can see your point I think we're all forgetting a critical part here. This game is nearly 10 years old. It can practically be run on a toaster these days as far as PC is concerned. The PS4 is orders of magnitude stronger than even the bare minimum requirements to run the game. It'll be a cold day in a certain place before this game ever gets close to using 8 gigs to run in main memory.

The only things that would really stop this game from being on the PS4 is recompiling the game for the PS4's custom firmware. So really it boils down to the price recompiling and recoding to make it work on the PS4 versus potential increase in customer base, and how many people would actually buy into a 10 year old MMO such as this. Other than that there is really no drawback to having this game on the PS4 from a logical standpoint.

[Zhronne]

Unless you're referring to L3 and R3 (and how would you be able to tell?), Select and Start already each have dedicated areas of the touchpad along the bottom edge.
I think that's a prototype, this is the new version:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8239/8493772456_34a85b7767.jpg


From the official data sheet released they said that Select and Start will be accessible through a menu from the "Option" button.
This is the only, if possible, disappointing thing I read about the PS4. If anything I would have loved 2 buttons MORE, not less.
There's hope they will allow you to map the right side and left side of the touchpad to "Select" and "Start" (sorta like in the prototype pic you posted) but it's a bit too early to tell I guess.

[Alhanelem]

Yeah but PC gamers only like PC games because they're basement dwelling oddities.
Logical fallacy alert. Stereotypes don't help your argument, and just as many console gamers are basement dwellers.


Consoles ae standardized hardware meaning that each unit is nearly identical hardware wise. There are no hardware incompatibilities and you don't need to upgrade hardware constantly.If you build your PC properly the first time, it will last years before really needing an upgrade. Not "constantly."


I bet my PC and yours doesn't have a single matching part equipped to it!Yet, in all probability, we can probably play most if not all of the same games on them. Your point lacks merit.

PS2 Limitations severely hindered FFXI's ability to grow and expand. With FFXIV using PC as the primary platform, the issue won't be as big of a deal, but it's still better to just keep the game on the one platform it's most suited to. With FFXI, if it was a PC game first, we'd likely have had a better UI from the beginning, graphical upgrades over time, more fixes and content more quickly, and more often.

[Jaall]

I never get the logic that ps2 hindered FFXI simply for the fact that it was designed years ago when the PS2 was in it's prime. It's almost like saying "oh, Xbox 360 is bad for call of duty now, let's cut all 360's access to the game and bring it out on Xbox 720 because then we can increase potential". Just stupid that most people assume FFXI would work that way. Yes it gives limitations but if any game developer comes to those limitations and starts losing a player base due to them they create a new game. Oh and guess what... FFXIV. Issue here is that people have wasted a lot of years on this game and never realised it until the threat of it collapsing appears, or want too much. If you really like FFXI you would be happy with it the way it is and if not then you wont mind switching to FFXIV surely? Way I see it FFXIV is gonna be a lot like FFXI but with a new UI and slightly different combat system.

[Alhanelem]

I never get the logic that ps2 hindered FFXI simply for the fact that it was designed years ago when the PS2 was in it's prime. It's almost like saying "oh, Xbox 360 is bad for call of duty now, let's cut all 360's access to the game and bring it out on Xbox 720 because then we can increase potential". Just stupid that most people assume FFXI would work that way. Yes it gives limitations but if any game developer comes to those limitations and starts losing a player base due to them they create a new game. Oh and guess what... FFXIV. Issue here is that people have wasted a lot of years on this game and never realised it until the threat of it collapsing appears, or want too much. If you really like FFXI you would be happy with it the way it is and if not then you wont mind switching to FFXIV surely? Way I see it FFXIV is gonna be a lot like FFXI but with a new UI and slightly different combat system.
FFXI is not anything like call of duty. CoD was released as a finished game- MMORPGs are never "finished" and continue to grow and expand and add new features over time. What FFXI had when the game was new was well within the PS2's capability- but that is no longer the case. If you could upgrade the PS2- put in a bigger hard drive, add some memory- you could eliminate these problems. But you can't. Only the PC can do this.

[RAIST]

have to remember, we nearly maxed out certain registers when TAU came out in what.... 2006? or was it 2005? forget the timeline. Since then, they've resorted to trickery to get around them (a la: Locker, Satchel, Sack, etc.).

As Alhanalem pointed out, this could be more readily addressed in a PC environment---if not for their desire to maintain compliance with the PS2. If not for the need to maintain certain aspects of code tied to (and restricted by) PS2 limitations, this game could have evolved so much more over the last 10 years or so.

Also bear in mind, that if it DID get ported to the PS4, it would likely be simply that--another port.....with the same restrictions embedded due to continued PS2 compliance issues. Until that gets removed from the equation AND the dev's are given the freedom to rewrite some core code---just gonna be the same issues on newer hardware.

[Jaall]

My point with FFXI and CoD is that like CoD, it would never get changed anyway. Maybe it would get a few new updates but seriously? We have enough issues with Dev's regarding updates already what with them being too busy with FFXIV and a new expansion. We're already getting more but the updates for this game are slowing, are you really putting all that blame onto the fact this game has to follow PS2 limitations? Truth is, they're moving on like most other game developers, sure they're keeping this game alive but barely and only cause it still brings in money. If I had an old car that people paid me to use, even if it was old and rusty I'd keep it going for as long as they were paying me. This is the same deal.

[Sarick]

If you build your PC properly the first time, it will last years before really needing an upgrade. Not "constantly."

Oh so you think comparing $2400+ for an advanced computer to a under $500 console accounts not needing to updated constantly? Your logic hides the fact that building a computer right means spending much more then whats needed for current gen games. A console out of the box is 1/5 the cost of a long term invested PC. It's usable life is 5-10 years and in that time the console gets cheaper but still plays all the new games until it's end of life.


Yet, in all probability, we can probably play most if not all of the same games on them. Your point lacks merit.

I don't know where you've been getting your info but there are a lot of FFXI incompatible computers out there. Just look at the supported video cards. That list has more merit in what I'm saying then the entire context of this topic. A lot of the new laptops can't run it because the video cards aren't supported.


PS2 Limitations severely hindered FFXI's ability to grow and expand.

Let me ask you this, Why did you join an MMO that was SEVERELY limited by PS2 limitations when you could've played everquest or something like EVE? If you didn't chose FFXI the first time you wouldn't be here complaining about the limitations. The truth is the PS2 is what created the biggest expansion of players when it launched on PS2 they population skyrocketed.


With FFXIV using PC as the primary platform, the issue won't be as big of a deal, but it's still better to just keep the game on the one platform it's most suited to. With FFXI, if it was a PC game first, we'd likely have had a better UI from the beginning, graphical upgrades over time, more fixes and content more quickly, and more often.

They can't even keep support XP OS compatible even though the end of is life in 2014.

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/products/lifecycle

So, what's that say? It says they could be losing massive amounts of money because there is to much competition in the market. If they continue with the same support practices they provide in FFXI it won't go well with new customers. FF14 flopped first time out most people hated it. People are fickle when they just start out if it's not user friendly they don't stick around. It didn't generate interest and had a lot of negative hate.

When FF11 was launched there wasn't as much competition and console based online games where just starting out. Sqaresoft and the FF series had a much stronger devoted following. The console version and setup was easy to understands and less complex then it is today to setup an account.

All in all there won't be a PS3 or PS4 version, the PC version might end up having a short life too. With all the cuts to support etc. The FFXI online market is digging its own grave and people who want the best of everything aren't going to save it.

[Demon6324236]

All in all there won't be a PS3 or PS4 version, the PC version might end up having a short life too. With all the cuts to support etc. The FFXI online market is digging its own grave and people who want the best of everything aren't going to save it.They dropped PS2 everywhere but Japan for the new expansion, PS2 has been discontinued by Sony, I doubt the PC is going anywhere right now, but if SE is dropping XP support because Microsoft is no longer supporting it, you have to admit it looks like the PS2 may be coming up on the chopping block in the next year or two. I doubt there will be a PS3 or PS4 version of this game unless somehow SE flops on FFXIV and this game gets a ton more players from SoA, enough so that they can somehow afford to keep everyone on staff from FFXIV, but instead have them work on this game. If that somehow happened, then this game could possibly be upgraded to a level of graphics and such to fit those consoles, not to mention look more modern on the PC as well, instead of the way it looks now.

This is all to say that they did not just cut their losses and back off of the MMO market entirely and leave FFXI as is, or that they did not attempt to save FFXIV yet again, or something similar with their extra hypothetical income from FFXI:SoA.

[Sarick]

This is all to say that they did not just cut their losses and back off of the MMO market entirely and leave FFXI as is, or that they did not attempt to save FFXIV yet again, or something similar with their extra hypothetical income from FFXI:SoA.

This is the only thing I'm seeing is cutting, servers, cutting, staff, cutting play online features and cutting support. Despite having new expansion they seem to at the last movement decided not to support XP. This way if their updates screw stuff up or break the client they can say Opps, sorry we don't support that anymore. Go buy a new OS/computer. It's a lovely bad example of how much cost cutting is going on.

I highly highly very highly doubt a PS4 version is created. It's an investment that doesn't fit well with bean counters. The PC users can't even get a BOXED set for gods sake this essentially means they're trying to reduce overhead cost as much as possible. That and they slapped that last minute notice that on seekers expansion launch date "We no longer support XP" shows they're looking to limit the stress of supporting the older OS.

There is enough evidence that bean counters are in action. Like it or not FFXI might really be on the chopping block despite the new expansion. A PS4 version doesn't fit with bean counter bottom lines unless there is a sudden surge of high demand. LOL

http://exploredia.com/top-10-mmorpg/

http://mmoattack.com/mmo-articles/top-10-mmorpg-games-2013

Why should they care? When looking at popularity of online games FFXI and FFXIV doesn't even rank these days in comparison to other online games. As a result funding may be lower priority then we're lead to believe. There's just to much good competition out there for a company to get a foothold if they have bad service, design, promotion and/or support. Making a PS4 version wouldn't do squat unless they do things to make the MMO better then everyone else. :rolleyes:

Other then this top 100 list (http://www.the-top-tens.com/lists/top-ten-mmorpg-games.asp) I couldn't find FFXI in other top ten rankings. Not surprisingly FFXIV was no where in any of the list yet they planned on making it for PS3.

[Demon6324236]

In that case it would be the game as a whole, not simply PC. I agree, however I was just trying to point out with how things are going right now, it seems as though PS2 will be on its way out way before PC is.

[Zenoxio]

http://astralsidegames.com/blog-entry-3059.html

Google Translation:

Satoshi Matsui Sukueni I think whether I came out the possibility of porting "FF11". I want to try to make Gaiden "FF11". Server to the client, the Vita the PS4, or bring their play PT Vita

[Laraul]

Sony said prior to the PS3's release that it could run on two HDTVs at once. That it would be able to play all PS2 games with "enhanced graphics." That it would increase your sex appeal when taken once daily. One of those I might be confusing with something else, but I've learned that what Sony says and what Sony delivers are two different things.


PCs can use controllers and game pads just like the console. PCs can be connected to TVs in your living room just like consoles. There is no real advantage to consoles other than they're cheaper.

There's the advantage that with a console when you buy a game for it, you know it's going to run and you will be able to play it. PCs can't do that. No one will argue that a PC is capable of producing graphics far better than any console. Or that the hardware can be 50 times as powerful. But people will say that PCs are not worth all the hassle of getting a game to run when you can just buy a console, turn it on, and go. And that's what people want. To just sit back and play.

[RAIST]

There's the advantage that with a console when you buy a game for it, you know it's going to run and you will be able to play it. PCs can't do that. No one will argue that a PC is capable of producing graphics far better than any console. Or that the hardware can be 50 times as powerful. But people will say that PCs are not worth all the hassle of getting a game to run when you can just buy a console, turn it on, and go. And that's what people want. To just sit back and play.

That's why every PC game has labeling detailing the minimum/recommended system requirements. If one takes the time to research/build/buy a system with respectable hardware (ie, avoiding cheezy non-dedicated GPU's and such) and is actually paying attention when they buy the game, they know in advance if their system can run it. Also, in this day and age, many of the game companies will have a demo or benchmark utitlity to help you test your system for playability in advance. IF it comes up short in one department (Graphics, memory, processing power, API support, etc)--one can usually simply upgrade the component (in most cases, barring moving to new architecture that requires a new motherboard). Even if they need a new motherboard/CPU technology, it is still an "in-place" upgrade--it maintains backwards compatibility in better than probably 90% of the cases. I say 90% because some games are just flat out broken on today's PC's without running something to control clock speed and such because they were built to run on a 386 or 486 architecture or an older DirectX version---but there usually is a way to run it.

In contrast....if the game you want to play is not released for your console, you have to buy another console to play it. A perfect example is FFXI. If you want to continue playing it on a console....you are now restricted to older content outside of JP UNLESS you have/purchase it for XB360. Yet, the PC players can continue on. If you want to play Diablo on a console, you have to still have that older console lying around---where as you can pop you PC/MAC disk in and go.

Edit: Afterthought, Diablo is a bad example, as it was a PS release, and is thus playable on PS2 and PS3...but take something like Panzer Dragoon for the Saturn. If you no longer have a functioning Saturn to play it on, you can run it through emulation on the PC, or you may have the PC release of the game.

Also, games on consoles aren't always so consistent with the playability factor. That's one of the big things they get scored on in reviews. For instance, you may have an acceptible single player experience but crappy multiplay, whereas the PC version is more consistent. You also can run into situations where a game was intended for the PC but also got released for the console, and the console version had to be "dumbed down" so it could run acceptibly on the console's more restricted resources (ie, part of what has happened to FFXIV).

Consoles are fine for games that were INTENDED to run on a console....but when the concept/assets can be advanced further by running it in a PC/MAC environment, in most cases, it tends to offer a better experience overall.

[Jackstin]

All you have to do on PC is research what parts are good, ensure they meet your games requirements (assuming they've been released), build the pc, download the benchmark and install the game. I don't see how that's more difficult than buying a console and the..oh wait.

[RAIST]

All you have to do on PC is research what parts are good, ensure they meet your games requirements (assuming they've been released)build the pc, download the benchmark and install the game. I don't see how that's more difficult than buying a console and the..oh wait.

Really? I guess perhaps if you have a real dinosaur of a system you might need to build a new system for a brand new release. Games usually take a while to develop/test and are often behind the curve on the latest and greatest hardware available. The core of my system dates back to 2010 and has enough power to play games that are being launched in 2013, and possibly beyond. It was MORE than enough for fFXIV beta, and is more than enough for Diablo 3:
http://www.diablowiki.net/Diablo_III_System_Requirements

Diablo III Minimum System Requirements
From the official page:[[1]]

[edit] Windows
Windows® XP/Vista/7 (latest service packs) with DX 9.0c
Intel Pentium® D 2.8 GHz or AMD Athlon™ 64 X2 4400+
NVIDIA® GeForce® 7800 GT or ATI Radeon™ X1950 Pro or better
1 GB RAM (XP), 1.5 GB (Vista/7)
12 GB available HD space
DVD-ROM (required for retail disc versions only)
Broadband* Internet connection
1024x748 minimum resolution
[edit] Mac
Mac® OS X 10.6.8, 10.7.x or newer
Intel® Core 2 Duo
NVIDIA® GeForce® 8600M GT or ATI Radeon™ HD 2600 or better
2 GB RAM
12 GB available HD space
DVD-ROM (required for retail disc versions only)
Broadband* Internet connection1024x768 minimum resolution
* Be advised that some wireless connections do not meet the minimums required to be a true Broadband Internet connection. Wireless results may vary.

Note that some of the important hardware on that list dates back as far as 2005/2006, and the software even further back. Note also the proposed level of support for the new Tomb Raider isn't much higher than this either...they were recommending slightly newer graphics cards (ATI 4870 and nVidia 480 series) and quad core CPU's, but the minimum specs are basically in line with D3.

Basically one just needs to invest in a new gaming grade system and it will be viable for at the very least several years to come, even at the production level we are currently seeing. Now, if a person opts instead to buying already outdated used hardware off ebay or something, that is a whole different ball game. So long as one is keeping up with fairly recent technology, they should be fine. For instance, one of the biggest things to avoid is the cheezy integrated GPU and shared system memory--a strong graphics processor is easily choked by the slow fill rate of a crappy memory subsystem. So long as the buyer is aware of such simple things, it's easy to find a system that will hold up for years to come, possibly even a decade with some minor upgrades when needed.