PDA

View Full Version : PC only? Uh oh...



Dithrain
Feb 16, 2011, 08:15 PM
The biggest downfall of PSU for PC was the gross amount of hackers. Since PSO2 (as we know now) is PC only... "Uh oh..."

However, if it IS PC only they'll most likely have a hell of a hackshield.

What do you guys think?

Dongra
Feb 16, 2011, 08:24 PM
As long as the servers are global then we can probably expect Sega to step up their game regarding cheaters.

HUkyasuto Mk.2
Feb 16, 2011, 08:26 PM
To levels not thought possible? Maybe, After all they do have there soul back. I smell a V.2 if it's outta hand.

NoiseHERO
Feb 16, 2011, 08:32 PM
If the same underground group of hackers come back, and we do have global servers it'll be a funny fight watching japanese developers go ape shit on them...

Dithrain
Feb 16, 2011, 08:39 PM
Did they say that the servers were global?

NoiseHERO
Feb 16, 2011, 08:41 PM
Did they say that the servers were global?

Yeah, kind of...but sega's untrustworthy and it was vague from the start so a lot of people are skeptical.

Zyrusticae
Feb 16, 2011, 08:45 PM
I still find it bemusing that PSU was so vulnerable to hax to begin with. It just seems like terrible programming on their part - you never see anything to that effect in, say, every other MMO ever made.

So I can only wonder...

Arkios
Feb 16, 2011, 09:04 PM
I still find it bemusing that PSU was so vulnerable to hax to begin with. It just seems like terrible programming on their part - you never see anything to that effect in, say, every other MMO ever made.

So I can only wonder...

Actually every single other MMO has cheaters as well. The difference is that other MMOs have a zero tolerance policy and ban players.

I've played WoW for 4 years now and seen people cheating in game (super speed, teleporting, running through walls/ground). I assure you that every game has cheating to an extent.

If they want to "eliminate" cheating, they need to come down on cheaters and ban/suspend them.

Think about it this way, if PSO2 follows the usual MMO price scheme, you're looking at a cost for the game/account key and then a monthly fee on top of that. Let's say the game costs $49.99 and carries a $9.99 monthly fee. If some of these "prolific" cheaters want to cheat/hack, they will undoubtedly get banned if Sega actually monitors the game. To get back onto the servers, they would have to purchase another game and another monthly fee. That's $60 bucks every time they get banned and want to get back into the game.

Cheaters/hackers always choose the route of least resistance, that's why they cheat in the first place. So if Sega starts taking money from these guys, they're bound to jump ship and direct their efforts elsewhere.

NoiseHERO
Feb 16, 2011, 10:34 PM
Actually every single other MMO has cheaters as well. The difference is that other MMOs have a zero tolerance policy and ban players.

I've played WoW for 4 years now and seen people cheating in game (super speed, teleporting, running through walls/ground). I assure you that every game has cheating to an extent.

If they want to "eliminate" cheating, they need to come down on cheaters and ban/suspend them.

Think about it this way, if PSO2 follows the usual MMO price scheme, you're looking at a cost for the game/account key and then a monthly fee on top of that. Let's say the game costs $49.99 and carries a $9.99 monthly fee. If some of these "prolific" cheaters want to cheat/hack, they will undoubtedly get banned if Sega actually monitors the game. To get back onto the servers, they would have to purchase another game and another monthly fee. That's $60 bucks every time they get banned and want to get back into the game.

Cheaters/hackers always choose the route of least resistance, that's why they cheat in the first place. So if Sega starts taking money from these guys, they're bound to jump ship and direct their efforts elsewhere.

Most hackers I know would usually have like 8 accounts... They usually stop caring after their legit account is shot down, then they go on a mad chaotic rampage until all their accouts/ips are banned, then get their friends ip banned then get bored and leave semi satisfied...

If we're anything like PSU...It'd probably only take a week or so to slaughter the whole game's economy unless segas willing to do a huge rollback for the greater good... I dunno PSO's hacker story. @[email protected]

Ffuzzy-Logik
Feb 16, 2011, 11:37 PM
Chances are, if they cannot learn enough from their past mistakes to code the server securely this time around, then they won't learn enough to make the rest of the game worth playing either.


And again, hacking is a server problem, not a client/platform issue.

Niered
Feb 17, 2011, 12:07 AM
Heres the counter to OP's arguement, console games never get nearly as many updates as PC ones, so if it is PC exclusive, you can expect tons of "free" content that keeps getting added to the game. If it's console, well, you can expect a much more delayed effect. Team Fortress 2 probably being the most accurate example.

Abashi76
Feb 17, 2011, 12:28 AM
Thats okay. It means i get to take plenty of screenshots.

venn2010
Feb 17, 2011, 12:47 AM
If we're anything like PSU...It'd probably only take a week or so to slaughter the whole game's economy unless segas willing to do a huge rollback for the greater good... I dunno PSO's hacker story. @[email protected]


segas willing to do a huge rollback for the greater good...


a huge rollback


rollback

Uh-oh... That's a dangerous proposition you're making. Some people just HATE rollbacks... I suppose some MMO's did it and got away fine, but I've heard of others that didn't fare so well...

Checkmate
Feb 17, 2011, 02:43 AM
The biggest downfall of PSU for PC was the gross amount of hackers. Since PSO2 (as we know now) is PC only... "Uh oh..."

However, if it IS PC only they'll most likely have a hell of a hackshield.

What do you guys think?

Be it console or PC... you'll have hackers. Botters are a different story and a different flavor of cheaters. You cannot name any product placed on the internet that hasn't had a form of attack against its servers or end users. Most online PS game (don't know much about PSP or PS0 series) have been attacked; from destroying your saved file to flat out freezing your console and dropping your connection.



Uh-oh... That's a dangerous proposition you're making. Some people just HATE rollbacks... I suppose some MMO's did it and got away fine, but I've heard of others that didn't fare so well...


You know who LOVES rollbacks? WalMart shoppers.

darkepyonuk
Feb 17, 2011, 07:04 AM
OK basicly im behind on the times and my friend is arguing to the GROUND that nowere says that theres not a glimer of hope of a console release, can anyone provide me a link as to were the information on PSO2 being on PC only is please. thanks in advance :)

Akaimizu
Feb 17, 2011, 09:17 AM
The only thing scary about it being on the PC is the competition. The consoles were easier for them to thrive because there wasn't much of anything to compete with. On the PC, it's going to the wolves. Sonic Team will have to put on their absolute best game if they plan to compete on the PC front. That market is quite saturated.

Arkios
Feb 17, 2011, 04:05 PM
Most hackers I know would usually have like 8 accounts... They usually stop caring after their legit account is shot down, then they go on a mad chaotic rampage until all their accouts/ips are banned, then get their friends ip banned then get bored and leave semi satisfied...

If we're anything like PSU...It'd probably only take a week or so to slaughter the whole game's economy unless segas willing to do a huge rollback for the greater good... I dunno PSO's hacker story. @[email protected]

For them to have 8 accounts, they would have to purchase 8 copies of the game. That's $400 bucks right there.

Secondly, who cares if they get back on? If Sega is doing a proper job of monitoring the game with GMs, anything that is done can be reverted quickly and patched as necessary.

Cheaters/Hackers will always find a way around whatever security is in place. The trick is to make it not worth their while to do so. As for the rest of the players, ban/suspend anyone that is involved with duped/hacked items. If I get suspended for 3 days because I picked up a bunch of cheated items and meseta... if Sega removes those items from my inventory and suspends me... I'm sure as heck not going to get involved in any cheating after that if I know I'm going to get banned for the next offense.

In the past, Sega has always set up "security" measures, but as soon at they get bypassed... Sega basically just throws up their hands and walks away.

If Sega is incapable of fixing their game, hire one of these "hackers" and pay them to find holes/bugs and assist with fixing them.

The issue with PSU/PSO getting hacked has never been because "PCs" are easier to cheat/hack on. It's been because of Sega's failure to react to bugs/holes in the game.

Arkios
Feb 17, 2011, 04:11 PM
The only thing scary about it being on the PC is the competition. The consoles were easier for them to thrive because there wasn't much of anything to compete with. On the PC, it's going to the wolves. Sonic Team will have to put on their absolute best game if they plan to compete on the PC front. That market is quite saturated.

I think I would normally agree with this, however PSO2 doesn't fit in with the rest of the MMOs out now. PSO has always had it's own little niche by being an ORPG, especially since it's an Action RPG in most senses.

If you look at games like Everquest, Rift, Aion, World of Warcraft, Warhammer Online, FFXI, etc. they all are VERY similar games. In fact the newer games just rip off ideas from the older ones. Everything from the UI, combat system, character progression, etc. is all very similar in these games.

However, PSO(2) doesn't really fit this same mold. It plays more like a Console Action RPG, which is essentially what it is... except online. So I really don't believe that it will need to compete with these other games. It fits it's own niche and people will play it, not because it's better than World of Warcraft, but because it's an entirely different game.

NoiseHERO
Feb 17, 2011, 05:06 PM
For them to have 8 accounts, they would have to purchase 8 copies of the game. That's $400 bucks right there.

Secondly, who cares if they get back on? If Sega is doing a proper job of monitoring the game with GMs, anything that is done can be reverted quickly and patched as necessary.

Cheaters/Hackers will always find a way around whatever security is in place. The trick is to make it not worth their while to do so. As for the rest of the players, ban/suspend anyone that is involved with duped/hacked items. If I get suspended for 3 days because I picked up a bunch of cheated items and meseta... if Sega removes those items from my inventory and suspends me... I'm sure as heck not going to get involved in any cheating after that if I know I'm going to get banned for the next offense.

In the past, Sega has always set up "security" measures, but as soon at they get bypassed... Sega basically just throws up their hands and walks away.

If Sega is incapable of fixing their game, hire one of these "hackers" and pay them to find holes/bugs and assist with fixing them.

The issue with PSU/PSO getting hacked has never been because "PCs" are easier to cheat/hack on. It's been because of Sega's failure to react to bugs/holes in the game.

PSU didn't actually have a key, so a lot of people were able to just...*cough* 5 finger discount the game online to begin with...

In the end It all depends on how much sega cares, but hackers can still be really confident and persistent. and they spread like a miley cyrus virus. as long as one out of every 5 people don't end up with 99 mil in their pockets in the first 3 months of the game like last time there can't be much to worry about though.

Jinketsu
Feb 17, 2011, 05:25 PM
You guys are idiots, Game Guard was flawless.

/sarcasm

Arkios
Feb 17, 2011, 05:38 PM
You guys are idiots, Game Guard was flawless.

/sarcasm

I lol'd.

Nitro Vordex
Feb 17, 2011, 07:00 PM
For them to have 8 accounts, they would have to purchase 8 copies of the game. That's $400 bucks right there.

I wasn't aware people bought physical copies of the disc. I know most of the people that I knew just torrented it, because paying for a game that has numerous problems didn't sit well, and we're not getting into that.

Tyreek
Feb 17, 2011, 10:16 PM
Oh, I do believe its very common place now that people usually buy the discs. At least for release purposes. I know I have my two discs for PSU V1 and AotI still. Not that its any defense, seeing as they hardly give a crap about the game's security or piracy. Quite possibly why the game's disc based releases just diminished.

RemiusTA
Feb 17, 2011, 10:50 PM
i just hope that this doesn't mean the game is F2P w/ Cash Shop.

I will NOT play this game in such a case. All F2P games are trash anyway.

Arkios
Feb 18, 2011, 12:46 AM
i just hope that this doesn't mean the game is F2P w/ Cash Shop.

I will NOT play this game in such a case. All F2P games are trash anyway.

I agree, I'm more than happy to hand Sega my $10-$15 bucks a month if they deliver a quality game and maintain it properly.


I wasn't aware people bought physical copies of the disc. I know most of the people that I knew just torrented it, because paying for a game that has numerous problems didn't sit well, and we're not getting into that.

For some games, you can purchase just a digital copy. They've gotten wise to the idea of pirates, so your account gets bound to a serial number/product key. You don't need the 8 physical discs, but to open a new account you have to have a new serial number/product key.

Zyrusticae
Feb 18, 2011, 01:25 AM
I wasn't aware people bought physical copies of the disc. I know most of the people that I knew just torrented it, because paying for a game that has numerous problems didn't sit well, and we're not getting into that.
See, if this wasn't the case cheaters would not be anywhere near as much of a problem.

In every MMO save the free-to-play ones you DO have to pay the huge cost up-front for a box or digital copy of the game, making cheating an extremely expensive losing proposition. Of course, this is assuming that the game has an active anti-cheating program of some kind. Considering how harmful cheaters are to the player base, it would be really, awfully stupid of them to neglect it (again).

Jinketsu
Feb 18, 2011, 08:04 AM
PSU didn't have any security over the single player experience, but you couldn't go online unless you had a Guardian's License, which cost money. The monthly subscription is where Sega is going to make the real money with an online game. Sega's western problem was that most people didn't care for the online portion of the game with how slow support for the game came - especially giving that they could experience the online portion of the game by themselves for free. Does anyone remember how long it took us here in the states to get basic voices for NPCs? It was well after AotI came out.

I think PSO2 will do well if they limit everything to online-only. I'm talking storyline, quests, some sort of 'free mode' and the like. Also, keeping up with technical and bug support would be pretty important.

There are plenty of measures to counter things like RMT and botters. Sega just needs the right attitude.

funkyskunk
Feb 18, 2011, 08:36 AM
Online only? Please... not again! I like to play offline quite a lot on all PSO games and being restricted to online only really puts me off (blue burst). I played for the BB free period during beta testing then i gave up and did not play again until I got on a certain private server.

I understand that it is a good way of prevening hackers but I would rather play offline in a totally hack free environment. Blue burst was free to download so I can't moan about that but I would rather have paid a one-off fee and be able to play offline as much as I like. If there is a big event online then maybe I would subscribe for a couple of months to take advantage of that.

I also like going back and playing my original DC PSO games just for fun. If they were online only then I would just have the memories since the online servers are now dead.

If I buy a game I expect to keep it forever. If I play a game for more than 10 hours then I look after the save game and make sure I can go back to it if I ever want to.

I would only accept online only if the game was free to download and even then I doubt I would play it very much.

PC only? I'm not too fussed, I just bought a new PC and have no interest in the PS3 or X360. I'm still waiting for a PSZwii though :P

Jinketsu
Feb 18, 2011, 02:52 PM
I would enjoy an offline P2P multiplayer system so I can play with my friends via HDD-saved characters rather than online-only server-saved characters. That's the only qualm I've had with non-payed multiplayer on the PSMMO franchise. It would be nice, even if we have to be on the same network, to do things.

I think a buddy of mine and me would still be playing PSU if that were the case - regardless of the servers being down or not :P

But in terms of playing massively online with a character you want to play with offline as well - we will probably never see that in a game again.

Akaimizu
Feb 18, 2011, 03:06 PM
I think I would normally agree with this, however PSO2 doesn't fit in with the rest of the MMOs out now. PSO has always had it's own little niche by being an ORPG, especially since it's an Action RPG in most senses.

If you look at games like Everquest, Rift, Aion, World of Warcraft, Warhammer Online, FFXI, etc. they all are VERY similar games. In fact the newer games just rip off ideas from the older ones. Everything from the UI, combat system, character progression, etc. is all very similar in these games.

However, PSO(2) doesn't really fit this same mold. It plays more like a Console Action RPG, which is essentially what it is... except online. So I really don't believe that it will need to compete with these other games. It fits it's own niche and people will play it, not because it's better than World of Warcraft, but because it's an entirely different game.


Actually. You only talk about those games. Nowadays, there's a ton of these games that play a lot more like a Console Action RPG. The ones you mentioned, yes they are more like Active Time Turn based, but there's a slew of more action-related games out now. Sure, they aren't in the big 6 or so you mentioned (add in Guild Wars, too). However, times have really changed since those games were out. We have a good number of PC population split amongst various more console action-RPG games.

SEGA now has to compete with those companies, for which even they already have a much better reputation for updating their games in a timely manner. Quite of few of them with a F2P model, even the bigger ones. So SEGA has to beat them in terms of support, or at least match them with a better quality product, if they plan to survive against them. Otherwise people will start to demand more for their money, and maybe start to think that they don't even really need to pay a monthly premium for the same level of support they get for free.

Whether it's more from the sideview or from the 3rd person view. There's a good number of them, almost too many to list.

NoiseHERO
Feb 18, 2011, 06:19 PM
Actually. You only talk about those games. Nowadays, there's a ton of these games that play a lot more like a Console Action RPG. The ones you mentioned, yes they are more like Active Time Turn based, but there's a slew of more action-related games out now. Sure, they aren't in the big 6 or so you mentioned (add in Guild Wars, too). However, times have really changed since those games were out. We have a good number of PC population split amongst various more console action-RPG games.

SEGA now has to compete with those companies, for which even they already have a much better reputation for updating their games in a timely manner. Quite of few of them with a F2P model, even the bigger ones. So SEGA has to beat them in terms of support, or at least match them with a better quality product, if they plan to survive against them. Otherwise people will start to demand more for their money, and maybe start to think that they don't even really need to pay a monthly premium for the same level of support they get for free.

Whether it's more from the sideview or from the 3rd person view. There's a good number of them, almost too many to list.

I've never recognized Phantasy Star...and Competition in the same sentence no matter how I look at it...

RemiusTA
Feb 18, 2011, 06:54 PM
Down here, they dont compete. Sega has never attempted for them to; and quite frankly, even if we got PSUJP quality support, i dont think it could even compete with the kind of service WoW gets. Sega just doesn't put that much into the game -- it seems their business model is "design the game to need the least amount of maintance and updates possible"; hence the whole unlocking shit off the disc ordeal.

Akaimizu
Feb 18, 2011, 07:49 PM
I've never recognized Phantasy Star...and Competition in the same sentence no matter how I look at it...

Yep. That's the whole thing. On consoles, there isn't that competition. And that's what they didn't have to worry about. on the PC, the audience is different. the setup is different. They are all, "what have you done for me, lately" in their expectations of any online game with a monthly fee or F2P model. If you don't keep up with updates and/or fixes, your game gets dumped. Plain and simple. It's a harsh world and I've seen a lot of games fall due to lack of updates nowhere near what SEGA has done with Phantasy Star.

Anybody remember Tabula Rasa? Or pretty much any science fiction styled game outside of EVE online and the "too early to tell if it'll fall" Star Trek? Sure Phantasy Star has a style, but especially now, it can be threatened to lose a bit of its identity.

I still wish the best for them, but I know that world they're about to jump into far too well. Sega isn't going to survive just on people 'who remember a fun Phantasy Star game' and are both willing and in the position to jump into the new game, and give it a bigger chance than the others. Like a lot of neglected series SEGA has had in the past, those of us fans left are far too few in number, and the new higher number of folks don't have that attachment.

NoiseHERO
Feb 18, 2011, 09:23 PM
Yep. That's the whole thing. On consoles, there isn't that competition. And that's what they didn't have to worry about. on the PC, the audience is different. the setup is different. They are all, "what have you done for me, lately" in their expectations of any online game with a monthly fee or F2P model. If you don't keep up with updates and/or fixes, your game gets dumped. Plain and simple. It's a harsh world and I've seen a lot of games fall due to lack of updates nowhere near what SEGA has done with Phantasy Star.

Anybody remember Tabula Rasa? Or pretty much any science fiction styled game outside of EVE online and the "too early to tell if it'll fall" Star Trek? Sure Phantasy Star has a style, but especially now, it can be threatened to lose a bit of its identity.

I still wish the best for them, but I know that world they're about to jump into far too well. Sega isn't going to survive just on people 'who remember a fun Phantasy Star game' and are both willing and in the position to jump into the new game, and give it a bigger chance than the others. Like a lot of neglected series SEGA has had in the past, those of us fans left are far too few in number, and the new higher number of folks don't have that attachment.

Well I think this can all connect the whole global support thing, PSU english was weak to begin with but if we're just the same thing as the JP server, we're not really a problem and all the competetion and marketing can just work from the JP fanbase which is probably way bigger than just us. @[email protected]

That's assuming that's what they had planned and IF we're PC only. Even then I don't know how the PC scene is in japan either. I hear F2P games are popular in asia in general though. @[email protected]

Ieora
Feb 18, 2011, 11:27 PM
I can give a freakin promise that hackers will hit PSO2. It's the sad truth of the internet. Some people jsut don't give a f-ck for rules. (I had to recently deal with that myself on a forum I take care of) The only real way that SEGA can deal with it is, that They are constantly patching glitches (I guess on a.....Bi-weekly to monthly basis?) And cracking down on hackers like true bosses. I guess a good system is first offense, hacked content removed and warning (For those of us who get in trades and other such accidents, just in case.) Then suspension and again, removal of items, and then the banhammer. I see no reason to slam them from the start, as someone who has accidentally received such items and had to fight to get my account back. But we would have to deal with them if htey have no intention of stopping. As for single-player VS multiplayer, I'd want to use my chars in either, but that's just cause I don't want to level to 200 in single player, only to go online and have to reset it all. Since that's more or less a dream, the better Idea would be to keep them seperate, and just patch the client entirely (Yes, including single player. Deny those bastards even when they aren't ruining someone else's gaming experience)

Wall of text. Hope it made sense.

Zer078
Feb 19, 2011, 12:34 AM
well PSO BB or PSU PC both looked dated when they came on the pc market over crowded MMO space (even the hack and slash). Sega launches PSO2 near Diablo 3 forget about it

Zyrusticae
Feb 19, 2011, 01:26 AM
Sega launches PSO2 near Diablo 3 forget about it
Lolwut?

Two things:

1. Diablo 3 plays extremely differently from the Phantasy Star Online series. One is isometric top-down view, the other is over-the-shoulder action view. One is click-click-click, the other is controller-centric. One uses gear to determine character appearance, the other minimizes the effect of gear on appearance.

2. Diablo 3 is on the other end of the scale of cute vs. gritty graphics. It also boasts nonexistent physical character customization (ALL of your appearance is determined by your class, sex, and equipment).


In other words, the only overlap between the two is that they both boast a large emphasis on sweet loots. And that's about it. Kinda silly to compare them, dontcha think?

NoiseHERO
Feb 19, 2011, 03:28 AM
diablo doesn't sound like my cup of tea... maybe that game was good for it's time if what you just explained is accurate... e_e

Isometric makes me think of endless online...LOL...

Akaimizu
Feb 19, 2011, 07:16 AM
Diablo was pretty much the pinnacle of Loot fest games. Even as old as it was, it was instrumental at developing one of the best dynamic Loot systems of its time. Even the games today with the best and most diverse weapon/armor drops with random enchantments to diversify even the same weapon rank and class have not improved on that formula set upon by Diablo II.

It's a different animal, of course. To me, they don't compete on the same level. If they did, I would mainly play Diablo. But the sci-fi nature, perspective, and control set them worlds apart. There is a similar itch they scratch, but in very different ways.

One very different thing about Diablo's loot system (and the games that come close enough) is that if you pick up a specific type of Axe, for instance. Even though it has the same name, there could be literally hundreds of completely different ones you may pick up. Where in Phantasy Star, the same weapon might differ in that it has a different element and to what percentage it has of that element. (To a degree, even PSO would count for this); in Diablo, one of that same Axe might be straight damage but with a certain defense boost against fire attacks, another one with the identical name might have an additional frost damage tacked on (show it's dripping with a bit of frost on it, and the elemental effect on the enemy), give you electrical resistance armor bonus, and increase your character's mana/skill power regeneration by a certain number. All said bonuses with a random number or percentage of effect.

Other weapons/armors may have these effects plus empty slots for you to add enchantments when you find the proper gems/skulls/devices to do so. And this is just for the more common finds. There are cool rares, or rare attribute finds, for all sorts of levels of rarity. Part of what keeps Diablo so addicting. They appease your looting spirit with constant worthy awards, even if it takes a long time to get the big rare drop you are looking for; on the way there, you have plenty of chances to see neat improvements in your gear and make decisions on what is better for you and your playstyle. Diablo avoids the *get nothing until my prize* thing, but still gives you the accomplishment when you get that prize.

PSO, was a bit like that, but instead of fast weapon gains, it buffered that with Mag raising. It kept you right around the corner of boosting your stats just enough to try out the next cool thing while on the quest for the rare drop. A quest of constant, by appeasing, small gains enroute to big ones. That's also how Blizzard does it in their overall game formulas.

venn2010
Feb 19, 2011, 10:31 PM
Lolwut?

Two things:

1. Diablo 3 plays extremely differently from the Phantasy Star Online series. One is isometric top-down view, the other is over-the-shoulder action view. One is click-click-click, the other is controller-centric. One uses gear to determine character appearance, the other minimizes the effect of gear on appearance.

2. Diablo 3 is on the other end of the scale of cute vs. gritty graphics. It also boasts nonexistent physical character customization (ALL of your appearance is determined by your class, sex, and equipment).


In other words, the only overlap between the two is that they both boast a large emphasis on sweet loots. And that's about it. Kinda silly to compare them, dontcha think?

You're right, but there is also the fact that both are still... RPG's. Well, one can argue what type of RPG each is, and that's a discussion for another time. But in the end, despite all the differences, many people might view them together as loosely in same category and one can affect the sale of the other.

Besides, those differences you mentioned are largely the differences in the game mechanics. In the end both are level based, grinding loot-fest where you kill monsters, hunt bosses, and do quests. That's enough similarities for me. And many, many people.

Unless a person is wealthy enough to afford both of them, I bet most people will try to pick & choose. When it comes to that, and if Diablo 3 is released in relatively close time frame as PSO2, then PSO2 could surely suffer.

Mike
Feb 20, 2011, 01:35 AM
Yeah, kind of...but sega's untrustworthy and it was vague from the start so a lot of people are skeptical.
No, they haven't. There has been no information of that sort at all.

NoiseHERO
Feb 20, 2011, 02:39 AM
No, they haven't. There has been no information of that sort at all.

I was referring to that Espiokaos PSO2 video translation.

http://www.pso-world.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2539779&postcount=112

Like I said "kinda" but it was vague and even though that's what people would want or expect theres people are skeptical. In other words no one is really sure.

Until April or whenever we get more information I'm sticking to that list in terms of speculation.

:\

Mike
Feb 20, 2011, 03:35 AM
Global support does not mean global servers.

NoiseHERO
Feb 20, 2011, 12:22 PM
Global support does not mean global servers.

Yeah it may as well be something almost pointless/hopeless, right. =_=

You're crushing my dreams, man e_e you're crushing my dreams. =_=

RenzokukenZ
Feb 21, 2011, 02:07 AM
Would you rather have SEGA crush them? :-)

NoiseHERO
Feb 21, 2011, 02:12 PM
Would you rather have SEGA crush them? :-)

Yes. e_e

Kent
Feb 22, 2011, 12:25 AM
You're right, but there is also the fact that both are still... RPG's. Well, one can argue what type of RPG each is, and that's a discussion for another time. But in the end, despite all the differences, many people might view them together as loosely in same category and one can affect the sale of the other.

Besides, those differences you mentioned are largely the differences in the game mechanics. In the end both are level based, grinding loot-fest where you kill monsters, hunt bosses, and do quests. That's enough similarities for me. And many, many people.

Unless a person is wealthy enough to afford both of them, I bet most people will try to pick & choose. When it comes to that, and if Diablo 3 is released in relatively close time frame as PSO2, then PSO2 could surely suffer.
I'm surprised people can misunderstand this - PSO and Diablo are part of the very same sub-genre of RPGs: The dungeon-crawling loot-fest action-RPGs (Borderlands also borrows heavily from this, mixing it directly with first-person shooter action - yet, some people are still dense enough to just classify it as "another first-person shooter"). It's a fairly small sub-genre, but in order to not draw very direct comparisons between the two, one has to be either completely unfamiliar with one or more, or... Well, just plain daft.

As it stands, if PSO2 does end up being similar to PSO in this regard, then yes, Diablo III is going to easily be its biggest competitor. Though, Diablo III may very well be releasing in the US first, depending on whether or not Sega decides to do a global release for PSO2.

NoiseHERO
Feb 22, 2011, 12:35 AM
If we do have global servers it shouldn't be a problem at all, simply because we'd just piggy backing on to JP popularity, which if you look at pso jp, is MORE than enough to keep pso2 alive.

Corey Blue
Feb 22, 2011, 01:53 AM
Global support does not mean global servers.

I don't know what else it could mean then,Global support as in calling SEGA asking for help or something.(Well if they want to be stupid they can go ahead,just not with me.

relentless
Feb 22, 2011, 09:16 AM
I don't know what else it could mean then,Global support as in calling SEGA asking for help or something.(Well if they want to be stupid they can go ahead,just not with me.

Global support is a rather ambiguous term as it could simply refer to that people are able to play this all over the world, globally. Basically, the game will be translated for people but that doesn't mean we'll all be playing on the same servers, in this case, with the Japanese together. Just like PSU, it had global support in a sense, not global servers but seperated ones which was only to our (non-Japanese) disadvantage.

Zyrusticae
Feb 22, 2011, 11:16 AM
I'm surprised people can misunderstand this - PSO and Diablo are part of the very same sub-genre of RPGs: The dungeon-crawling loot-fest action-RPGs (Borderlands also borrows heavily from this, mixing it directly with first-person shooter action - yet, some people are still dense enough to just classify it as "another first-person shooter"). It's a fairly small sub-genre, but in order to not draw very direct comparisons between the two, one has to be either completely unfamiliar with one or more, or... Well, just plain daft.
Oh, okay, then, let's compare them directly:

Diablo 3:
-Graphics - Dark, isometric, low-resolution textures, low-tech, gothic/hellish aesthetic
-Gameplay - Point-and-click, ability spam, mobs die in a few hits (often in gory explosions)
-Loot system - Everything is randomized, with the only exception of unique and set items; armor determines appearance; Possible billions of different item stat combinations

PSO 2:
-Graphics - Bright, over-the-shoulder, high-resolution textures (note: this is me going off of Sonic Unleashed graphics), super-future-tech, cutesy anime aesthetic
-Gameplay - Controller-centric, combo spam, mobs can take quite a beating (and disappear once defeated rather than spewing blood)
-Loot system - This, we have absolutely no information on. Cannot compare. (Unlikely, however, that they have a random attribute system like Diablo's. I could be surprised!)


It seems, to me, like they're both shooting for completely different demographics, despite the fact that they are within the same genre of games. Hence why I believe that comparing them is silly.

Comparing Sacred, Torchlight, Darkspore, and Diablo, on the other hand? They're all isometric clicky-click-clickity-click experiences with western aesthetics, so comparing them seems a whole lot more fruitful, doesn't it?

Akaimizu
Feb 22, 2011, 11:40 AM
Actually, that's a good sum up, though Diablo III will likely have some very high-resolution textures. Likely to have more of them than PSO 2. Texture-wise, I'd expect them to get to fairly excruciating details, and layered standard effects, if SC2 is anything to go by. I've seen the Diablo 3 vids, but those are mainly Youtube vids with lower resolutions. So the visible details are obscured by the media.

Technology-wise the world would be early tech, though. Focuses more on magic meets medieval setting.

Randomness
Feb 22, 2011, 11:44 AM
Chances are, if they cannot learn enough from their past mistakes to code the server securely this time around, then they won't learn enough to make the rest of the game worth playing either.


And again, hacking is a server problem, not a client/platform issue.

Not quite. The client coding matters too, depending on what kind of cheating is involved. Ideally, the client is responsible only for rendering the game state and taking input, and the server determines all results (i.e, the client is functionally a dumb terminal). Chat is the only thing I'd trust to the client, and only barely, with the server still logging it all.

Hacking the actual servers isn't possible for the average cheater. They're more likely to tinker with packets to try and lie to it, which means proper authentication is a necessity.

The server itself is the last thing a cheater is going to try and break, especially when you consider doing so isn't simply ban-worthy, but a felony offense.

Kaziel
Feb 22, 2011, 11:52 AM
Not quite. The client coding matters too, depending on what kind of cheating is involved. Ideally, the client is responsible only for rendering the game state and taking input, and the server determines all results (i.e, the client is functionally a dumb terminal). Chat is the only thing I'd trust to the client, and only barely, with the server still logging it all.

Hacking the actual servers isn't possible for the average cheater. They're more likely to tinker with packets to try and lie to it, which means proper authentication is a necessity.

The server itself is the last thing a cheater is going to try and break, especially when you consider doing so isn't simply ban-worthy, but a felony offense.

True, but anyone who has tinkered with clients can tell you that it's not the most secure thing. Sure, things like FG can block script-kiddies (lol run this progrm 4 hax!1) but anything past that, and the client isn't very difficult to manipulate.

I would place my money on the server structure to be the best prevention of hacking.

Zyrusticae
Feb 22, 2011, 12:57 PM
Actually, that's a good sum up, though Diablo III will likely have some very high-resolution textures. Likely to have more of them than PSO 2. Texture-wise, I'd expect them to get to fairly excruciating details, and layered standard effects, if SC2 is anything to go by. I've seen the Diablo 3 vids, but those are mainly Youtube vids with lower resolutions. So the visible details are obscured by the media.
Actually, no. Believe it or not, Starcraft 2, despite having considerably more units on-screen than Diablo 3 ever will, is actually far superior graphically in both texture/poly-count and scene shader complexity.

Compare:
Diablo 3 (http://us.blizzard.com/diablo3/_images/screenshots/ss155-hires.jpg)
vs.
Starcraft 2 (http://us.media.blizzard.com/sc2/media/screenshots/protoss_carrier_002-full.jpg)

It really makes no sense, especially considering Diablo 3 is being released two years after Starcraft 2, but this is how it is.

Of course, the art team used to work on World of Warcraft, which explains the graphics tech from 2001. Doesn't make it any less disappointing visually.

Akaimizu
Feb 22, 2011, 01:07 PM
We'll just have to see when Diablo 3 gets close to the final days. It does look like it is using a different art style, and I don't know if a lot of it is being obscured by the sand storm. The ship, in the foreground, is probably the closest thing to showing off a lack of detail.

On the other hand, D3 may actually still be trying to maintain a low hardware requirement. Though low texture detail would be a surprise. Just about any half-decent general PC/Mac, these days (since like 2+ years ago), can address at least like 128MB of graphics memory. Unless the screenshot is just showing off a lower-quality graphics setting.

Also, the Starcraft 2 screen shot actually looks worse than the way it looks on my PC with medium settings. As a still, you can't see the layered sheen, and effects over the units like you can see when the game is running. On the screenshot, the textures look like flat ones.

Ffuzzy-Logik
Feb 22, 2011, 06:23 PM
Not quite. The client coding matters too, depending on what kind of cheating is involved. Ideally, the client is responsible only for rendering the game state and taking input, and the server determines all results (i.e, the client is functionally a dumb terminal). Chat is the only thing I'd trust to the client, and only barely, with the server still logging it all.

Hacking the actual servers isn't possible for the average cheater. They're more likely to tinker with packets to try and lie to it, which means proper authentication is a necessity.

The server itself is the last thing a cheater is going to try and break, especially when you consider doing so isn't simply ban-worthy, but a felony offense.This was exactly my point.

As long as the server is coded to verify everything, it does not matter how easy it is to mess with the client.

Kent
Feb 23, 2011, 03:13 AM
It seems, to me, like they're both shooting for completely different demographics, despite the fact that they are within the same genre of games. Hence why I believe that comparing them is silly.

Comparing Sacred, Torchlight, Darkspore, and Diablo, on the other hand? They're all isometric clicky-click-clickity-click experiences with western aesthetics, so comparing them seems a whole lot more fruitful, doesn't it?
Just because games are (supposedly) aimed at different "demographics," doesn't mean that the very obvious commonalities between them don't draw very direct comparison. Sure, there are more comparisons between Diablo and Torchlight, but it's kind of insane to use that as a justification for saying there's no reason to draw comparisons between Diablo and PSO.

Especially considering that the target demographic is still, very clearly, the "dungeon-crawling and loot-hunting action-RPG" fans. Just because two games may have stylistic and mechanical differences, doesn't necessarily mean they have to target different completely demographics because of it. That's a mildly-insane deduction to make, that core gameplay is the thing that matters least in determining a game's target.

Zyrusticae
Feb 23, 2011, 10:26 AM
Mildly insane? Heh.

Seriously, look at the minute-to-minute gameplay. The core gameplay is completely different between the two. You're looking it from the perspective that "dungeon crawling, loot hunting action RPGs" must always be comparable simply because they have vague commonalities, but really? When you actually PLAY THE GAME, there is very, very little in common between the two.

You ask me, it's "mildly insane" to say PSO/PSU's core gameplay is the same as Diablo's just because they both have loot. This is, of course, ignoring the two games' control schemes, the way loot actually works, the way enemies are dispatched, the way levels are created and seeded with enemies (Diablo is completely random), the way the player actually interacts with the world (which, you ask me, is more relevant to the "core gameplay" than any loot system), the way the character advances, and so on.

I could say Sins of a Solar Empire and Starcraft II share the same demographic because they're both sci-fi RTSes, but in reality they're strikingly different games that will not appeal to the same person, with one being slow-paced and macro-heavy while the other is far, far heavier on the micromanagement. Being in the same genre does not mean you're shooting for the same people.

Akaimizu
Feb 23, 2011, 11:08 AM
I technically think that the argument here isn't one. It's two different levels of demographics. There are the overall subgenre of folks in the loot aspect, but there are also tastes of atmosphere and control that break the fans into different divisions altogether. However, that's on a lower level than just the Dungeon hacking/lootfest fans.

It's the same division that has some loving it, but only if it is first person and with vehicles and such, so they make up the folks who LOVE Borderlands, but can't bring themselves to play Phantasy Star or Diablo. You have the exact opposite, which will avoid specifically Borderlands just because it's First Person. You have some into Borderlands not because it's first person, but because it's post-apocalytic.

You've got the folks who like Dungeon Hackers, but only get into it if it resembles more of a high fantasy nature. Some may allow some steampunk to get into the world of magic. So they'll stick with the likes of Torchlight and Diablo, but avoid pretty much anything that adds Science fiction into the mix.

The world of MMOs make a great example. So many like each other even in game mechanics, but there seems to be a great division and disparity of fans who like the magic and fantasy versus the science fiction-based ones.

There are folks like me, who like the entire genre, but sub-divide their wants among different environments and control systems. So the high fantasy and/or magic stuff would not replace the Technological Science Fiction ones, but compliment them. If someone brings in a new atmosphere and system within the genre, I'm pretty much there to give it a taste with the option to stay there. In the same way that someone would appreciate different wines. Or that one controls with a mouse, in an overhead fashion, while the other one controls directly with the joystick in a more console/arcade fashion.

However, the subdivision seems prevalent with a lot of different people. So for most, sci-fi only competes with sci-fi, while high fantasy competes only with high fantasy. Steampunk may attract a bit of a different crowd while high sea-faring piratey adventures grab another set of folks. They all technically like the same sub genre, but they all exist in different subdivisions of fans. High fantasy and magic tend to be the safest, since up until this time, that seems to have drawn the most fans. Another PC company has taken to making a bunch of games based on Japanese and Chinese folklore, with the mystical creatures borrowed from them. All to attract a specific sub-subgenre who'd love to spend time in that kind of folklore in their favorite sub-genre.

There's likely another subdivision (which may not be mutually exclusive) who sums up the entire genre, and only picks what they think is the best, regardless of atmosphere/environment, or the control/gameplay method.

unicorn
Feb 23, 2011, 01:49 PM
This game is going to flop.

Dongra
Feb 23, 2011, 02:26 PM
Or perhaps it will be the greatest Phantasy Star game to date.

Akaimizu
Feb 23, 2011, 02:30 PM
Vote of confidence, eh?

I do have my doubts, but I really wish it the best. Phantasy Star is a rather unique realm to play in, and it's always nice to see old licenses, that deserve it in their own right, still living strong. I'm going to err more in the optimistic side of the fence, but I definitely recognize first that Sonic Team will have a whole lot to step up to.

The biggest fight for creating an identity and a reputation to flock to, is on their hands. I think I called it the "Wolf's Den" before. The expectations on online gaming, in the PC world, are far higher than on the console. Outside of Voice chat aspects, the PC player's demands have been driven seriously high. Those games have become the new majority of PC-exclusive content. Made even more apparent as more of all the non-Multiplayer PC stuff gets released on consoles, as they have been lately.

It was precisely why I felt if they separated the PC servers from the 360 servers on PSU, that the 360 ones would be the most prolific, over time. It was nothing on console wars, per se; but given the pattern of supplemental in-game releases ST provided on PSO (which were really low), and compared to the expectations on PC online games; the servers that were console-specific were due to live longer, in the west. I simply gadged it by PC audience of which I also am a long-time member of, for quite a few variations on the online theme. Where there is no competition, the people will expect less.

Another example is DC Universe Online. PS3 owners can't be choosers, but they can be beggars. So it's no surprise the PS3 folks jumped on the game in larger numbers. And unless Sony can fix the typical MMO-killing bugs it has, quickly, they'll lose that PC audience just as quick as Tabula Rasa did. It certainly launched with very much the same initial bad issues (outside of typical initial server lag/overloaded stuff even PC folks will tolerate, etc) that killed games like Tabula Rasa before it got off the ground. Folks on the PS3 will tolerate them longer, to their credit.

Dongra
Feb 23, 2011, 02:34 PM
Vote of confidence, eh?
More like hopeless optimism. I still like to think the game will be decent.

Akaimizu
Feb 23, 2011, 02:42 PM
I was actually responding to super_luu's comment initially, but yours slipped in there. But I guess one could read it both ways. :)

Kaziel
Feb 23, 2011, 02:52 PM
More like hopeless optimism. I still like to think the game will be decent.

After playing the PSuP series, I've had more faith in SEGA than with the PSU franchise. I'm sure they'll come through in some way.

If not, I guess I would be speaking too soon.

Board
Feb 23, 2011, 07:29 PM
After playing the PSuP series, I've had more faith in SEGA than with the PSU franchise. I'm sure they'll come through in some way.

If not, I guess I would be speaking too soon.

Everyone is speaking too soon. We haven't seen anything from this game except for an announcement trailer with a vague feature list.

NoiseHERO
Feb 23, 2011, 07:49 PM
I'm sure most of the semi confident speculation comes from PSU from PSO...obviously the game SHOULD be similar, then we have those teaser hints and that "few tidbits of info." That's kind of all people would need for the guessing game.

It would be like comparing smash bros sequels................or something. >_>;;

Miyoko
Feb 24, 2011, 02:48 AM
After playing the PSuP series, I've had more faith in SEGA than with the PSU franchise. I'm sure they'll come through in some way.

If not, I guess I would be speaking too soon.

It's funny, for me, it's the complete opposite... PSP2 has been the worst entry in the series, IMO, so it has me terrified for the future of PSO2.

Regardless, it'll be interesting to see where they go with this. I hope they're able to capture the charm of PSO, and, unlike what feels like -every current generation game in the past 5 years-, use some actual friggin' colour again :l

KodiaX987
Feb 24, 2011, 07:10 AM
Lessee...

PSO = Super duper good.
PSO v2 = Ultimate mode + Lv.200 = Sega just outsourced their devs to Korea obviously.
PSO:BB = Waddya mean four times the same fucking canyon level?!
PSU = Completely, absolutely, utterly oriented for the Asian crowd, especially MMO grinders (try saying otherwise with a straight face after your latest epic weapon crafting fail.)

My expectation of PSO 2 will be like some sort of freeform variant of PSU with little to no plotline, a level cap that is attainable by naught but the most dedicated of players, and monsters that severely punish any attempt at fancy play or alternate strategy, causing grief and rage for all friends and family playing the game because OMGWTF THE HEALER WUZ SUPPOSED TO HEAL YEAH WELL HOW ABOUT U TANK BETTER NOOB LOL WTFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF.

And since it's Sega, which is a company that has the ability not to learn from their mistakes but instead capitalize on it, I can safely bet on a barely marginal game that'll fill a niche for two or three months before everyone goes back to WoW. :wacko:

Chaoman3
Feb 24, 2011, 09:34 AM
Um, my family and I are fans of the Phantasy Star franchise and we were wondering if the game would be made available for Macintosh and Linux (Ubuntu Specifically) users. Currently I use Windows Vista, one of my brothers uses Linux, the other Windows 7. And lastly, my sister uses Macbook 13" 2008 Ed.

Would it be possible to play PSO2 on a Mac or a Linux OS without having to resort to using a virtual box or a dual-boot?

Ffuzzy-Logik
Feb 24, 2011, 09:48 AM
No one knows yet for certain, but there is almost zero chance of them making it Mac and/or Linux compatible.

Kaziel
Feb 24, 2011, 10:25 AM
Um, my family and I are fans of the Phantasy Star franchise and we were wondering if the game would be made available for Macintosh and Linux (Ubuntu Specifically) users. Currently I use Windows Vista, one of my brothers uses Linux, the other Windows 7. And lastly, my sister uses Macbook 13" 2008 Ed.

Would it be possible to play PSO2 on a Mac or a Linux OS without having to resort to using a virtual box or a dual-boot?

You'll have to use emulation or use a Windows platform. They've even listed Windows XP as a compatible platform (which isn't even supported by Microsoft at this point) so you have quite a bit of leeway...

unicorn
Feb 24, 2011, 04:04 PM
Phantasy Star's most successful titles have been on consoles. The only reason I see them releasing it only on PC is pure lazyness.

PSO, PSO ep2, PSOI&II and the Portable titles did better than PSOBB and PSU. Just sayin.

Corey Blue
Feb 24, 2011, 04:14 PM
Phantasy Star's most successful titles have been on consoles. The only reason I see them releasing it only on PC is pure lazyness.

PSO, PSO ep2, PSOI&II and the Portable titles did better than PSOBB and PSU. Just sayin.

Better management,global servers,faster updates,you know alot of things you cant really do with console,without going through the bs.It might just come out for the PS3,but if if it splits us up,hell no.(There's no point in going through the same shit again.)

Checkmate
Feb 25, 2011, 02:25 AM
Phantasy Star's most successful titles have been on consoles. The only reason I see them releasing it only on PC is pure lazyness.

PSO, PSO ep2, PSOI&II and the Portable titles did better than PSOBB and PSU. Just sayin.

With the exception of Final Fantasy XI and maybe Everquest on the PS2, I cannot think of any other MMORPG that has done respectably well on a console system over the years.

Would DC Universe Online qualify into the genre of RPG? Would Monster Hunter Tri on the Wii classify as RPG?

And I wouldn't call it laziness, it's a huge process of funding; is there are market for it; which console would be best suited; setting up additional servers; hiring additional staff to manage, maintain and implement changes. It's easy to say "SEGA iz dumb if they dont do 1 2 3 4 and 5". It might not be finacially beneficial at the current stage to have PSO2 on a console until they see how it performs on PC and if it is well received.

Ishia
Feb 25, 2011, 07:02 AM
Phantasy Star's most successful titles have been on consoles. The only reason I see them releasing it only on PC is pure lazyness.

PSO, PSO ep2, PSOI&II and the Portable titles did better than PSOBB and PSU. Just sayin.

Better than those two, but not better than every other MMO.

Kaziel
Feb 25, 2011, 10:21 AM
Better than those two, but not better than every other MMO.

Iunno. BB might've not been as popular at the time, but the servers are still kicking (albeit somewhere else) & the PC population FAR overpowers the console population. I'd say at least 1:10 PC's favor.

Don't get me wrong though, mixed servers are great, I'm all for it, but PC is probably the best (primary) target given the case.


It might not be financially beneficial at the current stage to have PSO2 on a console until they see how it performs on PC and if it is well received.

This is very true. We still do not know how well the game will be received at this point, all we have is blind speculation.

Nir
Feb 25, 2011, 11:23 AM
PSOBB Blue Burst is PC Only
And i have give Up PSU to play 2006 PS2 players have to much lag on Servers

So i am Happy that only is for PC

Akaimizu
Feb 25, 2011, 02:02 PM
PSOBB PC was still going strong only because it is Japan. However, everywhere else in the world, they would have to work just as hard if not harder. Lack of updates (which has been true for every single Phantasy Star Online game in the non-Japanese locales), is the biggest issue waiting for them. They have to step up (everywhere else) to at least Japanese standards or better. Preferably better since the competition on the PC is fierce. Steady updates have become a very very important thing.

However, maybe PC only might just be the kind of lower workload that might have them actually keep at a decent pace with the rest of the world. And yes, I know it didn't help back when PSO was Dreamcast only, but we can dream can't we?

Corey Blue
Feb 26, 2011, 05:22 AM
PSOBB PC was still going strong only because it is Japan. However, everywhere else in the world, they would have to work just as hard if not harder. Lack of updates (which has been true for every single Phantasy Star Online game in the non-Japanese locales), is the biggest issue waiting for them. They have to step up (everywhere else) to at least Japanese standards or better. Preferably better since the competition on the PC is fierce. Steady updates have become a very very important thing.

However, maybe PC only might just be the kind of lower workload that might have them actually keep at a decent pace with the rest of the world. And yes, I know it didn't help back when PSO was Dreamcast only, but we can dream can't we?
If they were smart they would keep us together.Fast updates,big community,good times,what else could we ask for? (Praying that they keep us together,I refuse to be treated badly.)

Chaoman3
Feb 26, 2011, 07:44 PM
No one knows yet for certain, but there is almost zero chance of them making it Mac and/or Linux compatible.


You'll have to use emulation or use a Windows platform. They've even listed Windows XP as a compatible platform (which isn't even supported by Microsoft at this point) so you have quite a bit of leeway...

Thanks.

I suppose with XP it could be possible. It's sort of irritating but in the end I'm not the one who makes the decisions.

MOHFL
Mar 2, 2011, 05:46 PM
"uh oh" is right
it definitely needs to be on PS3
PS3 is the least vulnerable console to hacks (even now after Geohotz)

Ffuzzy-Logik
Mar 2, 2011, 05:50 PM
Errrr, no?


Anyway, we've been over this a thousand times. Hacking needs to be prevented server-side; the client has nothing to do with hacking vulnerability.

Kaziel
Mar 2, 2011, 05:58 PM
"uh oh" is right
it definitely needs to be on PS3
PS3 is the least vulnerable console to hacks (even now after Geohotz)

It's not the least vulnerable, it's just the least popular.

Kent
Mar 2, 2011, 06:49 PM
"uh oh" is right
it definitely needs to be on PS3
PS3 is the least vulnerable console to hacks (even now after Geohotz)
You're confusing "least" and "most," actually.

Besides, proper security server-side would prevent a lot of the potential for any hacking to take place, but it obviously can't prevent everything. Having secured hardware on which the client runs certainly would help, but the PlayStation 3 is the exact opposite of secured.

Jinketsu
Mar 2, 2011, 10:45 PM
No system is safe from being hacked or anything of the sort. Where there's a will, there is always a way.

Ffuzzy-Logik
Mar 2, 2011, 10:52 PM
Besides, proper security server-side would prevent a lot of the potential for any hacking to take place, but it obviously can't prevent everything.If it is coded with sufficient forethought, then it can prevent everything but the most ingenious efforts. Really, just do not let the server trust anything from the client apart from controller input, and you will prevent 99.9% of what has passed as hacking in previous PS games.

Randomness
Mar 3, 2011, 12:31 AM
No system is safe from being hacked or anything of the sort. Where there's a will, there is always a way.

Any system that you have physical access to may as well be completely unsecured. Thus, the only machine that can be trusted is the server.

As long as SEGA follows that logic, it should make hacking very, very hard. But of course, I find it likely that they'll put something client-side they shouldn't.

As I recall though, the whole meseta dupe issue on PSU wasn't a hack, it was an exploit, so the problem was more them not immediately bringing down the servers, doing a rollback, and then turning on double xp double droprates to make up for it.


If it is coded with sufficient forethought, then it can prevent everything but the most ingenious efforts. Really, just do not let the server trust anything from the client apart from controller input, and you will prevent 99.9% of what has passed as hacking in previous PS games.

Well, you prevent everything that's not a felony offense, anyways. (Because actually breaking into SEGA's servers is the only form of hacking left then, and that would lead to some jail time) Again, this is assuming bug-free code, so I hope they make sure their inventory handling code sections are airtight so we don't get some glitch in shop code that lets people dupe meseta and/or items. I also hope that meseta drops don't grow quite as exponentially as they did in PSU, to where it was eventually trivialized as a currency because the sinks eventually became insufficient (not that the haxeta problem didn't seriously accelerate the issue, but Bruce's would have started inflation anyways with its disproportionate rewards). I mean, back at PSU's launch, 10k was a lot of meseta, and 20k could get you just about anything.

Ffuzzy-Logik
Mar 3, 2011, 12:37 AM
It was a bit of both, really.

People would sell a single Scape Doll to the NPC, intercept the packet, and change it to selling 99 Scape Dolls. The server saw nothing wrong with this, despite the fact that it is impossible to even carry that many Scape Dolls, and paid out 99 times the correct amount of Meseta.

Pretty much every single instance of hacking on PSU relied on similar packet tampering methods.

The room thefts, for example, were done by changing a packet so that the server thought you were the owner of the room, even though you obviously were not. This was possible because the server let the client tell it which user was in the room, instead of the server naturally already knowing this based on what character was being used.

Arika
Mar 18, 2011, 11:14 PM
If they make most of the stuff on server side, this shouldn't be a big deal, as very very very little people can do server hack things. last time in PSU, they only hack client by using tool, and in the end, SE did very good job to prevent it into the level of not detectable threat at least.
Especially in JP server, they prevent it so quick.

Yata The Prophet
Mar 20, 2011, 02:49 PM
No system is safe from being hacked or anything of the sort. Where there's a will, there is always a way.
^THIS.

SEGA should be focusing on making an incredible game. Future systems to be decided...later.

Amaury
Mar 20, 2011, 03:02 PM
Hooray! I'll be able to get it when it gets released in the U.S.!