The Future For Online Gaming

[BogusKun]

O.K. It's the year 2004 for some of you who have somewhat been, confined in a cave.

But this is something that has been on my mind since the first Pay-To-Play online games (interesting ones in this case)hit us in the face.

What is your take on Online Gaming in the future? Online marketers can fore-see that video games, whether console or PC, would make big money in the United States. They understand the audience (somewhat), and they understand the "popularity" of the game that is being created for online use.

My take on Online Gaming? It's pretty acceptable at this time we have to pay for just about each game (5 dollars or more) a month to take advatage of its online capabilities... But, think about this 5 years from now? There will be more and more games with online/ORPG features with its own fee, just to play a game with a replay value of either nothing or something.

For example, I play FF-XI, PSOep1&2/3 (will get to this later), XBOX Live games (this, too), and just about to quit Anarchy Online... And the total cost to play these games are just about 90 dollars (or 27 a month minus 40 for XBox Live). Well, mathmatically speaking... anyone who considers themselves an online gamer will have to prepare to spend $324 a year PLUS the XBOX Live Kit and to get that online.

So you're at $350/yr (just for online gaming)... and most gamers are in their High-School phase of life (basically still borrowing from their parents), wouldn't this affect online gaming marketing? I believe so, because not every family can afford to have dial-up/BB services which adds to another $300/yr on dial-up and $948 for Cable (there are discounts, however).

And if your income is outstanding (like mine), you will be spending at least $1298 a year on playing online games alone. That's basically 1300. And for dial-up users, spend just about $624/yr (Yes, I subtracted XBOX Live, hence BB only).

Well, there are big time cable companies out there, and unless you're in a monopolistic town, you have a choice of providers:

EarthLink/ DSL DialUp - Great U.S. ISProv., $10 for first 6 months compared to AOL's 2-month Free w/ Sprint.

Time Warner/ BB - (Austin/Houston TX) Have decent discounts.

And these things most careful people, like myself, some others reading this, and parents pay attention to.

And we all know, the normal person isn't going for the high price no matter how bad someone wants to "play online". Nintendo (who isn't aware of the online gaming successes) needs to wake up, and smell the coffee. Their only game PSO/+/CARD are successful, and yes the HL Triple compatibilty is genius but, there may be more games out there later... updates and content cost money...

My suggestion for the future? Nintendo and Sony should do... is create a "XBOX-Live-Like" Net-Gaming program. PS2 is doing good, but there are still games being released with it's own net fee. And my belief is the only way anyone will maintain cap., is by doing what was said above.

I don't know if anyone agrees with me but, that's how it should be. Whether or not the actual game title is recieving money, it should go toward the companies (who should give back shares).

How you like that Alan?

[Dangerous55]

Follow the Nintendo route, and pretend this "online" thing is a fad.

[BogusKun]

I love Nintendo... but what sucks is I have to get a game that's better on another system... online updates+downloads... that what makes a game different... sure there are other games that are still fun and retro. But change is necessarily that bad.

Then you got yourself to worry about when you're bored.

[HUnewearl_Meira]

You raise a good point.

With a million online services independent of eachother for each game, the price of accumulative online content will become more and more expensive. If we have to pay another price for every itiration of every NFL, NBA, MLB, FIFA, NHL, [Insert Name Here] Pro-[Pop Culture Pseudo-Sport], Mario Kart/Mario Kart Rip-off, DDR, FPS and virtual paint ball game, then the casual gamer would be asked to pay some ungodly credit card bill every month. In otherwords, the market would quickly become diluted, and people in general wouldn't be able to float from game to game.

This is the purpose of XBox Live. It puts all the games under one subscription price. It's a very intelligent idea presented forth from some very intelligent business and economic majors working at Microsoft.

More time consuming games, on the other hand, such as PSO, Final Fantasy XI or Evercrack, I would expect to remain on a special subscription basis. Why? Because they take so much time to play, that a single person can't reasonably expect to play and enjoy more than one or two, anyway. Another reason why they shouldn't really be included in the overall-subscription packages, would be the fact that these games do require more staff and effort. These are games that require not only maintainence, but they also require staff to create and add new content. As a result, it's a more expensive setup, and again, they're time consuming enough that one person can't really play more than one or two and enjoy them. Plus, in the end, because of all this, only three or four of the games will really remain at the top of the "dogpile" in this genre, anyway, so it all works out.

So, yeah, that's what I think.

[trypticon]

In the end, if the consoles really want to take online gaming seriously, they are going to have to go the route of the Xbox with the Xbox Live subscription, just as Meira already stated. It is obvious that these different games cost different fees to utilize, but the public as a whole would be more interested in paying a price if there were more options and content available to them, such as with Xbox live where you are able to play different games under a single subscription price.

What I think would be interesting is if one of the console companies would take this idea, and have the different games revolve around an ever-evolving character that the customer is able to create (much like the character creation options in PSO).
While it might sound like this could be a limiting idea, let's look at it like this: you make a character that you like, and play something like an RPG with it, on the RPG you make many online friends who also happen to own a few other online games that you have purchased. When you go to those other online games, you can all recognize each other because the character you are playing will have the same appearance minus whatever equipment or abilities the new game you are all playing adds or requires. In this way, you are all able to keep the same name, and same outward appearance to everybody. It would end up becoming much like not only a gaming community, but also a console community. If that happened, I could have my RAcast jump into a racer along with Luigi or Mario, and play Mario Kart Double Dash online via the Pipeline project.

I could see a drawback in the console community idea simply because of the different companies making online games. It would pretty much only work on the software that the console creater puts out themselves. With Nintendo or Sega, this could be a great idea since both companies make excellent games. I'm not certain about the games that Microsoft or Sony puts out. The third party companies could do a like thing with their own software that they put out though, playing as the console companies would, but limiting created characters from their own titles. Of course, this would all probably require some massive server side saving.

The price involved with online gaming, if the different companies would do as the Xbox did, would reach a comfortable constant. I thought, and have thought since PSO was released for the gamecube, that the game upset the possibility of an online front for the system. That price for the hunters license was only covering that single game, and Nintendo didn't do as Microsoft did and start up an online subscription fee. Even with the hunters licenses in place on both systems for PSO, I think that Nintendo should have gone that route. I get the impression that the bigwigs at Nintendo are almost afraid of releasing any first party online games simply because they would have to charge a fee for it. Of course, they are only happy to have PSO episode 3 released on the system not only because it is another online game, but also because the customer is able to keep the same hunters license from Episode 1 & 2 and play online with the new game.

This is only for console games. Computer games are a different situation, as they are constantly improving while at the same time becoming outdated. With computers, I see the internet chat interfaces utilizing 3D video chat rooms via a group of webcams. The demand for it in the online sex industry is definately there. The monitors would grow larger and larger until these sizzling 3D images could become life sized.

The only drawback to this is that people would begin to be turned on by something so stupid as someone sitting across from them typing and staring at a screen. That would make officework more difficult and uncomfortable. Law suits would arise from both women and men who would claim to have been sexually harrassed in the work place. These lawsuits would either succeed or fail, but the ones that fail would certainly force a lot of embarrassment over whatever the person that started it was thinking upon complaining in the first place.

The comedy industry could use this new technology too. It would be a type of comedy on demand process where some poor guy would sit in front of a computer or camera all day, and the viewer would input commands for the comedian to do. The viewer would be able to assign hot keys to the 3d video chat session, enabling them to surprise the comedian with pies being tossed in the face by some robotic arm, or even a wooden mallet or boxing glove smaking them in the face. It would be the optimum way to humilate someone seemingly from the comfort of your own home, but without the mess!

Over time, scientific case studies would be done, and papers would be written. The world will be presented with an entire new set of adult oriented statistics, each of them pointing to what goes on behind closed doors.

Online gaming, it's here to stay.

[Reenee]

It'll be free. It's in an early phase right now, but it'll eventually be free.

[KodiaX987]

Okay, where's the beef? Waddya got to back up your statement?

[Outrider]

Honestly, I could see online gaming becoming free in the future. But what's probably more realistic is that it will just start being a given. You know how you assume you're going to spend so much money on a console, so much money on a memory card and so much money on a game? I figure in a matter of years, we're all going to start including the price of online games into that equation. And not just us gamers, but everybody.

Then again, that doesn't sound quite right. Heh, I guess you can ignore everything in my post if you want.

But yeah, what the companies really need to do is enact an X-Box Live type system.

[BogusKun]

That's what I was thinking. I can't see how these online gamers go on and spend multi-hundred dollars on a simple feature. The purposes of online gaiming is giving a plus on replay value and the sense of communication and supposely the brink of inventions of a new "era of gaming". But as this world grows, so does the need for money. And when online gaming becomes a ultra-fad and/or way-of-life, it would be cut off by the loving parents of the babies in the coming future. Not everyone can make money like me, or some other well off kid. I can't surpass a wealthy kid or rich kid... (yet) but, sometimes, my concern of money (and I'm sure my father is most concerned) get in the way of having to buy or spend on games.

And it's surely not fun to be one of the few americans who can take full advantage of a certain program. I have cousins who can't afford to have cable internet and pay-to-play because of their budget. I could help them out myself, but of course you have family value as well (that value in which their mother may want me to keep my own money to myself just in case I need it).

Microsoft, (I'm afraid to say it but) the current leader in online gaming, has shown these older console gaming companies the light of online gaming. And what I want is Nintendo, and such to take full advantage of what is ahead of them.

[DeathCheese87]

On 2004-02-12 14:33, Reenee wrote:
It'll be free. It's in an early phase right now, but it'll eventually be free.

Um, someone has to maintain the servers and provide new downloads. They probably won't do it for free.