PSO2 vs PSO

[Shinnomura]

What got me addicted to PSO was a combination of the difficulty, gameplay, and the equipment and how everything you acquired was useful, you had to think long and hard about changing equipment because even if you had a big stat boost in one area you normally lost something in return.

So far PSO2 feels like it progresses really fast, my character went straight from 1 star equipment to 4 star, and then straight to 7 from there. I always have equipment before I can use it and "rare" items don't seem rare at all, it just means high level.

In PSO items that were considered rare were actually rare and very few people had them. When you first got to go up a difficulty it was harder with the best available equipment than it was when you originally played through as a level 1 with basic equipment.

This isn't really a rant, just an observation of how it seems to compare in my opinion.
Does it feel this way for everyone or is it just me?

[otakun]

The MMO audience from back then has vastly changed since now. If you are looking for an old school MMO experience you aint going to find it in anything outside the "hardcore sandbox" style MMO which always keeps to a niche audience cause despite what people say they want its not what they actually play.

Back in PSO days the MMO audience was fine grinding one spot for days on end to get 1 piece of equipment and a level or two but the majority of the audience doesn't have the time to invest that in just one game anyone since there are so many in the market. People have jobs, family, and other hobbies they need to invest their time into and thus you get this more modern casual experience which I feel was popularized by WoW.

The Emergency Quest system that PSO2 has is the epitome of the casual MMO experience. Be here at this time, spend a half an hour or an hour a day and progress rapidly in that time. Get to late levels to get to the equipment progression states. So, a person can hop on for a half an hour then leave to go do other things they need to. Pretty simple and effective for the modern MMO audience.

Of course, there are exceptions and of course people have individual tastes but when your aim is to have millions of players in your game then you have to be open for a greater audience approval, not the minority of people who are looking for the more dedicated old school style of play which while can be more rewarding isn't really worth much when it comes to a company trying to make money and promote a game.

[Shinnomura]

I see, that makes sense.
I would absolutely love the emergency quest system of it wasn't so easy.

Even games that have boasted about being super hard do their best to make it easy for everyone. There was a game I was excited about because it said it had permadeath. Turns out you can pay for your revival with your inventory and even if you do die and lose the character you don't lose your levels for what your new character can equip.

[TheLadyRena]

PSO1 worked very hard for all 'rare' weapons to feel unique - or at least like, not trashy and thrown together - whereas PSO2 plays more along the lines of PSU - several "rare" weapons are just upgrades to nonrare weapons. Like ALL rare weapons are just upgrades, but in PSU and PSO2 it is sometimes literally the same weapon with more sparkles or some shit.

However, to say that in PSO, rare meant rare and few people had them...that's just not true.

Certain very rare weapons might've been something "few people had" when you looked at the size of the playerbase - TJS comes to mind - but overall, that same size of playerbase led to plenty of people obtaining those. While it wasn't necessarily likely you'd party with one of them, it's not like you never saw them around.

In PSO2, we have the option of viewing the equipment of total strangers in the lob, which makes rare weapons seem...less rare. Because regardless of whether or not you party up with someone, you can check out their gear.

PSO1 vs PSO2 difficulty scaling is just a matter of different standards. In PSO1, it was designed so that it was a bad idea to solo because it would be very difficult to overcome the HP and attack stats of the monsters you'd face. Playing the game Forest-to-Falz style was something you did after grinding, and preferably with a party. Simply starting in Forest and expecting to even reach Caves on your first go from lv1 was difficult, simply due to Dragon's stats.

PSO2 doesn't have that. You're free to solo your way through all the Free Explore unlocks.

However, I defy you to find a way to make it so that every class we currently have had PSO1-style difficulty in advancing from Forest to Vol Caves to Desert and so on.

PSO1 had a bunch of classes that early on fell in to the same style of gameplay: Hit things with a Saber and shoot them with a Handgun. Hunters did this by default, and would equip a Sword asap; Rangers too, but with Rifles; and Forces who tried to rely on magic to kill swiftly found themselves running out of TP.

In PSO2, you regen PP just by waiting around, and you can do it faster by smacking something. The combat mechanics in play do not allow for PSO1-style difficulty advancement.

PSO2 is an overall easier game than PSO1, I think, but to paint that as purely a bad thing is to just flat ignore why it's easier, which are just the demands of the present day.

PSO2 in general shares a lot more with PSU than it does with PSO1. If you're wondering why X thing is the way it is, try looking at PSU first.

[Shinnomura]

I'm not meaning to state t as a purely negative thing, but as you said since psu it has been that way and I personally disliked that change. I'm saying that I alone didn't find it as fun, not that it's a worse game, since other people like it that way.

[[Ayumi]]

My reasoning in getting hooked to PSO was because it was my very 1st online game and the atmosphere was awesome.
If it wasn't for that, it would've been a game that would've collected dust and never played and I would've just stick to the SA2 Trial game until SA2 came out.

[BWS-1]

For one thing, I can - and still - boot up my Dreamcast and play the same character I've had since the beginning of PSO. On the other hand, I feel like killing myself if I play this for more than an hour (if I can even add an hour to the over 1000 hours spent there). I mean, it's only 4 areas and offline and with no bots or partners and a bit dated and shitdroptables and primitive gameplay mechanics.

While I don't think PSO2 will be able to compare, longevity-wise, despite having more diversity (simply because I doubt I'll be able to play it for 15 years), I still think that no matter how long it lasts, it'll be a good experience, so in the end, I have a hard time saying which is better... oh though on paper, PSO is better because it DID get released and localized in several languages pretty fast, and officially, I am not ready yet to even play PSO2 as SEGA isn't technically giving it to anywhere outside Japan, so that means Existent vs Non-Existent... I think what wins is what IS.

[Keilyn]

The MMO audience from back then has vastly changed since now. If you are looking for an old school MMO experience you aint going to find it in anything outside the "hardcore sandbox" style MMO which always keeps to a niche audience cause despite what people say they want its not what they actually play.

Back in PSO days the MMO audience was fine grinding one spot for days on end to get 1 piece of equipment and a level or two but the majority of the audience doesn't have the time to invest that in just one game anyone since there are so many in the market. People have jobs, family, and other hobbies they need to invest their time into and thus you get this more modern casual experience which I feel was popularized by WoW.

The Emergency Quest system that PSO2 has is the epitome of the casual MMO experience. Be here at this time, spend a half an hour or an hour a day and progress rapidly in that time. Get to late levels to get to the equipment progression states. So, a person can hop on for a half an hour then leave to go do other things they need to. Pretty simple and effective for the modern MMO audience.

Of course, there are exceptions and of course people have individual tastes but when your aim is to have millions of players in your game then you have to be open for a greater audience approval, not the minority of people who are looking for the more dedicated old school style of play which while can be more rewarding isn't really worth much when it comes to a company trying to make money and promote a game.

Great Argument,
that is until you realize that SoJ has never advertised PSO or PSO-2 as an MMORPG, but as an Online RPG...because with Korea nearby...SEGA would not dare to incur the wrath of true MMORPG nuts by making such idiotic declarations.

So the question is...
Why is it that PSO and PSO2 are not MMORPGs, but people think they are MMORPGs? An example comes from this site:

http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/811/Phantasy-Star-Online-2.html

Where MMORPG.COM declares PSO-2 to be an MMORPG, even though SEGA does not say MMORPG in their advertisements. In short, laziness of people to not have to read, do research, or learn the way things work.

Now with that out of the way...
What is true hardcore MMORPG fan like?

Well for starters, you forgot to mention that the more things change, the more they stay the same...

True Hardcore players were PvP-Oriented Players, which is why the heavy PvP Oriented MMORPGs and their playerbases are the ones that truly survived. Only people who are clueless about MMORPGs dare to mention anything Hardcore without speaking about PvP.

Its true that not everyone plays PvP in games, and I also respect when Carebears talk about their issues as well....but at the very end of the day a lot of the grinders out there in MMOs do it because they want to have their killer gear in order to do as best as possible in their guilds in PvP or in the one meaningful thing to PvE... Guild Based Raid Content!!!

Which brings us to the EQs...
Really? Like.... Really Really Really!?

EQs are Scheduled Events, NOTHING MORE....
Guild Wars 2 and many Modern Day MMORPGs handle Events a lot better than PSO-2.

In old MMORPGs, we would spend hours waiting for getting a good 20 - 30 man Raid Group together to traverse a PvP Zone and be able to still stand and fight the RAID while also destroying enemy players. Those days were Glorious and Priceless. In PSO-2s So-called EVENT SYSTEM....

People wait for HOURS to get the Event that they WANT so they can run it for 30 minutes on Luck of the DRAW (if they pug) to be able to actually run and get something out of it, and then deal with RNG giving the player nothing. Half of the frustration of this game is that in order for the player to TRULY SUCCEED in PSO2, he or she has to REVOLVE HIS LIFE around the EQ schedules of the game...

Sorry, but that is FAR MORE INTRUSIVE than any REAL MMORPG out there...which I might add to make more CASUAL usually SPLIT PvE and PvP into their own servers and zones...

Finally,
What do MMORPG fans truly despise?

They hate it when Carebears try to define Hardcore like some crazy PvE experience in a non-MMORPG populated by Carebears who fail at Carebearing, which more than half the posts in PSO-W revolve around carebears failing to carebear. :)

A Definite Hatred would be Carebears attempting to prove that puny instanced 12-man boss fights are more thrilling than open-world 50 - 100 man World Boss Fights. ^_^

[BWS-1]

I would define PSO as an MMO if MMO stands for "Micro Multiplayer Online".

[Shinnomura]

lol "micro"
With a max party of 4 there was no way for it to be an mmo.

[BWS-1]

lol "micro"
With a max party of 4 there was no way for it to be an mmo.

And there's nothing wrong there too! But to call this massive would... require games like WoW to be called GMO (Galactic Multiplayer Online) and we all know how problematic it would be if we did that for many other reasons; "THE LATEST GMO IS TOTALLY AWESOME", "BEST GMO ON THE MARKET", "GMO OF THE YEAR".

...

[otakun]

snip

Well, 90% of your whole argument here is semantics and pointless term defining that has nothing to do with the comparison of PSO to PSO2. Hope you had fun wasting your time on it though cause it was barely worth the skim over to see if you even had a proper point, which you didn't.

[[Ayumi]]

I think Keylyn just made me realize I loathe MMORPGs...

[Tunga]

The only part that could be considered "Massive" would be lobbies when they get full.

[Selphea]

PSO1 being difficult is probably a first time experience thing. After learning the game, levelling is just lv200 Mag head start and one-combo everything with a handgun until a slicer or shotgun drops. Then slicer or shotgun everything before they can touch you.

Ultimately, farming GGG for Saiki doesn't feel too different from farming Forest of Sorrow for God/Battle though. Same with Austere grind vs Excalibur.

[Dammy]

square maps in pso2 triggering me
at least pso1 feels like adventure/exploring etc

[Sirius-91]

square maps in pso2 triggering me
at least pso1 feels like adventure/exploring etc

If you zoomed out all the way, it's a gigantic square map. It only feels larger due to how slow we jog vs how on PSO2, we literally blitz through shit, and fighting monsters is optional and no longer required to progress.

[Zysets]

Great Argument,
that is until you realize that SoJ has never advertised PSO or PSO-2 as an MMORPG, but as an Online RPG...because with Korea nearby...SEGA would not dare to incur the wrath of true MMORPG nuts by making such idiotic declarations.

Yeah, they don't call it an MMORPG because it's NOT an MMO, and never was, I don't get how Korea's MMO market would have any influence on what terms they would use to talk about their game.

[HeyItsTHK]

I think one thing I missed were goofy weapon effects on rares and things like unsealing a J sword, also some terrifying enemies like dorphons and del sabers. On the otherhand, with the freer movement of combat in PSO2, those enemies wouldn't have been as scary.

and Towards The Future killed the game. :wacko:

[otakun]

Yeah, they don't call it an MMORPG because it's NOT an MMO, and never was, I don't get how Korea's MMO market would have any influence on what terms they would use to talk about their game.

Actually, it doesn't matter what they call it. Just because they say it's only an Online RPG doesn't make it not an MMO. People of the online community have flip flopped around for years about what makes a game an MMO or not but by the most popular modern definition of an MMORPG PSO2 would be considered an MMORPG. The now popular term for the kind of MMORPG you are thinking of fits that term is more commonly referred to as just being an Open World MMORPG. This change accord around the time of the popularization of Guild Wars 1. Where originally GW1 was releases as an Online RPG but then later was rebranded as an MMORPG.

https://media1.giphy.com/media/Y2nbrJyAR6RiM/200_s.gif

[[Ayumi]]

I think one thing I missed were goofy weapon effects on rares and things like unsealing a J sword, also some terrifying enemies like dorphons and del sabers. On the otherhand, with the freer movement of combat in PSO2, those enemies wouldn't have been as scary.

and Towards The Future killed the game. :wacko:

They could always be modified.

Delsabers were modified in PSU to be a little slower and such while still being quite powerful.

Belras who used to be slow moving statue-like creatures... when I saw one run at me in PSP2/PSP2i for the 1st time I was like "THE HELL KIND OF SORCERY IS THIS?! TOO FAST! TOO FAAAAAAAAAAAST!"
In same PSP2/PSP2i, Debilters were still scary as fuck when we have more movement than we did in PSO.

We have "centaur" creatures in PSO2 which while aren't Chaos Bringers can be very threatening with their range, speed, and movements.
Can almost even say that Loser/Magatsu is almost like newer versions of Falz/Flow as well... except phase 2 Magatsu we don't fight on feet.

[Keilyn]

Actually, it doesn't matter what they call it. Just because they say it's only an Online RPG doesn't make it not an MMO. People of the online community have flip flopped around for years about what makes a game an MMO or not but by the most popular modern definition of an MMORPG PSO2 would be considered an MMORPG. The now popular term for the kind of MMORPG you are thinking of fits that term is more commonly referred to as just being an Open World MMORPG. This change accord around the time of the popularization of Guild Wars 1. Where originally GW1 was releases as an Online RPG but then later was rebranded as an MMORPG.

https://media1.giphy.com/media/Y2nbrJyAR6RiM/200_s.gif


Actually, that is exactly what it means...
Its the very same thing as saying that FF XIV and PSO-2 fall under the same category of games, which clearly they do not....

You are also wrong about Guild Wars 1.

When Guild Wars 1 came out, a lot of people did not know what to call it and so many defaulted to calling any Online RPG an MMORPG. However, Guild Wars launched and people were pissed about the instanced, non-persistent world. ArenaNet then claimed that they drew inspirations from many games in designing the game... One of them was a game called Phantasy Star Online. Maybe you've heard of it?

They proceeded to create their own genre, CORPG meaning Cooperative Online Role Playing Game, which was marked by blending Action Game elements with RPG elements into a game. The focus of the game would be for smaller groups of players to work together in instanced environments....sound familiar?

Guild Wars 1 also had the same Variable Gear System that PSO had where the same weapon can drop, with different stats and players would look for the weapons with the right prefix and suffix in its name.

In fact I used to Joke saying

"I am wielding a Giant Middle Finger of Fortitude" when entering PvP areas when everyone would flash their equipment....


Related to the Genre Declaration:
From Wikipedia (which has a reference to Arenanet on the bottom)


Guild Wars is the first in a series of Guild Wars, a game that merges the Action RPG and the role-playing video game genres into one, with competition in both the player versus player (in random matches, teams, tournaments, or guild battles), and player versus environment (in missions, quests, or area exploration) forms. The developers call this blend a CORPG, short for competitive online role-playing game. Important goals of the game are both to minimize the amount of repetitive actions a player has to perform to become a respectable force in the gaming world (called grind), and also to minimize a player's dependency on game items to stay competitive. These are two goals that set the game apart from most MMORPG's, where one hardcore player will gain major advantages when competing against another more casual gamer simply from having played the game more and found better items. In Guild Wars, the advantages in battle will instead come from how well a player picks and uses the character's 8 skills (from a library of hundreds), an art that is hard to master. The game is different from most MMORPG's in that it did not have any additional recurring fees, but bases revenue on standalone game expansions, or "campaigns" (in addition to microtransactions). This structure was discontinued with Eye of the North, which was a traditional expansion pack that required one of the three standalone campaigns. ArenaNet stated that this was because they felt that this format was restricting their ability to add new game mechanics and balance the overwhelming number of skills introduced with each title, and decided to begin work on Guild Wars 2 to address these issues (with Eye of the North bridging the gap between Guild Wars and Guild Wars 2).

[Shinnomura]

I absolutely love the equipment system in PSO, likely my favorite part of the game was the struggle of picking between what to use

[The Walrus]

PSO is a simple but well designed game that offers shitloads of fun while you massacre things over and over

PSO2 has dress up and a lot of retarded design choices

[otakun]

Actually, that is exactly what it means...
Its the very same thing as saying that FF XIV and PSO-2 fall under the same category of games, which clearly they do not....


Actually, they do. It's called MMORPGs. =P

One is open world and the other is instance based. Not hard to wrap your mind around it.

[Shinnomura]

As I recall MMO refers to a game with massive interactions with other players, like being able to trade with anyone on a server, party up on the field, leave that party and join another without returning to a lobby. Instant based games where you only ever play with 4 people at a time wouldn't be considered massive, the same way shooter online matchmaking doesn't make a game massive. That was my understanding of the term anyway.

[otakun]

As I recall MMO refers to a game with massive interactions with other players, like being able to trade with anyone on a server, party up on the field, leave that party and join another without returning to a lobby. Instant based games where you only ever play with 4 people at a time wouldn't be considered massive, the same way shooter online matchmaking doesn't make a game massive. That was my understanding of the term anyway.

massive multiplayer only refers to a lot of people playing at one time. nothing in mmorpg says interacting with everyone in the server at anytime. if you need the differences between shooter match making and an mmorpg hub lobby explained then you need to play more online games.

[Shinnomura]

Going off of that wouldn't your typical shooter qualify since "a lot of people" are playing in matches at the same time? If it has to do with them being in the same match or room of origin doesn't that start to move closer to my previous statement? I thought massive multiplayer was referencing multiplayer on a massive scale, where one match or field has way more than your typical multiplayer game.

[[Ayumi]]

Going off of that wouldn't your typical shooter qualify since "a lot of people" are playing in matches at the same time? If it has to do with them being in the same match or room of origin doesn't that start to move closer to my previous statement? I thought massive multiplayer was referencing multiplayer on a massive scale, where one match or field has way more than your typical multiplayer game.

And while I haven't played a shooter in years, I recall many of them have that "XP" which is pretty much exp you get that you unlock I guess certain classes and weapons and such from doing matches and such.
CoD confirmed an MMORPG.

(Wait... CoD has that XP stuff in it right? I know most shooters do these days... don't know if CoD is one of them as my last CoD game was CoD 3)

[Shinnomura]

Yes it does lol, and I don't really play them either as of late.
The point I was trying to make is that before the game even comes out it is categorized as an mmo so it's a genre, not a classification of how many players are on at once. And given that it would have to mean the multiplayer side is significantly more massive meaning you get to play "levels" together with a lot more people than a typical online multiplayer game. So a game like PSO/PSO2 wouldn't be an mmo since it does the same sort of group level playing as a shooter or other common coop game.
Sorry for being long winded lol

[Keilyn]

massive multiplayer only refers to a lot of people playing at one time. nothing in mmorpg says interacting with everyone in the server at anytime. if you need the differences between shooter match making and an mmorpg hub lobby explained then you need to play more online games.

Are you a leading Authority on MMORPGs? The answer is No... as you are not even a developer. Where do you truly define what an MMORPG is? I've played them and competed in them. I am an MMORPG Gamer...and I don't act like a leading authority on them because I am not a developer.

Anet declared GW1 as a CORPG, and then players in their stupidity compared it to MMORPG. SEGA calls PSO-2 an "Online RPG" and players compare it MMORPG. Simply put...players are the ones who expect demands to reach to the preferred genre of their choice without acknowledging the declared developer's Genre.


Do not dare to compare 12 people in EQs that don't give you beyond a single major objective per map...

to

Having to guide and lead over 100 players in zone-wide events, each player either alone or in parties... while simultaneously fighting world bosses and coordinating efforts through my 100-slot TeamSpeak Server. There are times where there are more monsters on-screen than players.

..and seriously,

Unlike PSO-2 where one sneezes on a monster and it dies, while in the games I play.. the monsters are at the same level of the characters and if not careful, a single veteran to legendary mob can finish an entire party....

yeah, sometimes in PSO-2 we see maybe 3 - 5 people dead on the floor.....while its common to see 40 - 50+ people dead on the floor when we fail in MMORPGs.

[Shinnomura]

lol I have wanted to play some of those true mmos for that experience but haven't found any that really stood out to me, I played Eve for awhile and it was really fun for the reason that anyone at any time could ambush you.

[.razor.]

Massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs) are a combination of role-playing video games and massively multiplayer online games in which a very large number of players interact with one another within a perpetual game world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massively_multiplayer_online_role-playing_game

ayy lmao

[Shinnomura]

Thanks razor for chiming in :)

[Keilyn]

lol I have wanted to play some of those true mmos for that experience but haven't found any that really stood out to me, I played Eve for awhile and it was really fun for the reason that anyone at any time could ambush you.

Lately what has been going on in MMOs is that some of these games have become more casual, but because its easier to get equipment for highest-level content; more and more players in MMORPGs are finding out that there is a lesser grind for equipment, but a heavier grind for mastering some of the encounters, events, and coordination...

The last thing I did in an MMORPG was defend an area with 50+ players....and we almost lost until we realized the enemy that were left were melee enemies and we made a choke point in two passages while positioning our tanks in front and ranged players behind them.. healers and siege equipment in the middle to win...

This was of course PvP. :)

The commander of the enemy force whispered me to say that he felt bored to death and now is having fun again that his force lost...I told him that fate would have one of us lose our heads tonight....but when I lose mine, I will ask to go to the same hell in order to spend some time together...

I guess the reason I love PvP is because entertainment in PvP is defined by what humans provide for each other... not computer-controlled enemies...

Example: if you have 100 players and I have 100 players...and we are both in an empty map that is a PvP map. The existence of each opposing group of players is the reason we have a game tonight. It means you are depending on my 100 putting up a good fight to make things interesting as much as I am depending on your 100 to give me the fight of my life... ...

This means when you attack my fortress, your event panel is going to read "Assault the fortress" while my panel is going to read "Defend the Fortress." Almost everything that happens for the next 2, 4, 6 and maybe 8 hours will be determined by the actions both of our groups take.

There is a heavy subculture behind PvP that I've always loved. ^_^
A lot of people love this subculture which is why they look for MMORPGs that have PvP in it. :)

[Shinnomura]

Are there many mmos that allow for more indepth combat like blocking dodging and being able to slowly take down the "better equipped" enemy through skill and strategy? That's how I like to play but most games I've seen are just "overpowered force hits underpowered force for unsurvivable damage"

[[Ayumi]]

Thinking on it, I think there was only 2 MMORPGS I liked (okay, one I liked and the other I tolerated).
Dragon Ball Online and FFXI.
I did like Dragon Ball Online (despite not knowing the language at all that it was in. I heard it's Mandarin that they speak in Taiwan?). Was somewhat fun to play.

FFXI I tolerated. While I liked the atmosphere, the music, and the areas... I loathed the gameplay and as Keylyn mentioned about being careful and maybe dying/leveling down or even waiting forever to get a party just to fight a few monsters and call it a night because even though they might be a few levels above you or even below you... they're ...ugh.
I tolerated FFXI because I couldn't play PSOBB (was on dial up) and was waiting for PSU as it wasn't out but it was at least revealed a year or so before it was out.
So... I stuck with FFXI with everyone on there when I said I will be leaving then PSU come out.
"You'll be back. They're always coming back."
I never went back.

[Shinnomura]

I enjoyed maple story when it first came out because it was challenging and you could fight things well above your level of you could dodge around and take your time, it's how I leveled so fast in it.
Also liked la tale which is similar but in my opinion a lot better than even original maple story. The other two were shin megami tensei imagine and mabinogi, which are the same sort of game focused more on your character's skills than level, your skills level up through usage instead of a normal point system and both games are really challenging solo so I had a lot of fun. Other than that all other mmos felt disappointing

[Keilyn]

There are games like that,
but it would mean enemies actually being in-depth too.

If all enemies have is one attack and no special moves, it means nothing....
One attack = once you find a way to beat that, there is no real strategy to winning.

and yes... there are ways of beating better equipped players with strategy. It happens a lot in Objective-Based PvP games where a player can have the best equipment in the game and simply die to the fact that the map environment is the worse for the character...

Example: Ranged Characters should not be fighting in open fields, they should be behind walls where their range gives them the most advantage...and higher ground helps. However, a map that is completely open field and has almost no cover for the players means a ranged class is initiatially at a disadvantage regardless the equipment.

Open Fields are also a disadvantage to a spellcaster. While they have AoE nuking abilities, they also have limited AoEs and its easy to actually get out of the AoE circle. AoE only hits GOOD players if they are caught off guard, or the players are taking the AoE damage as risk to another objective.

The exception to RANGED Classes or Spellcasters in Open Fields is if they are Protected by someone who is in the front line..

For Strategy to exist, there has to be good Class Design, Good Map Design, Good Creature/Enemy Design as well....the META has to focus about the internal operations of the class itself....

[Shinnomura]

Well I'm glad games like that exist :) I'll probably get on a few later and see if I can find one that has gameplay similar to what I want.

[[Ayumi]]

I enjoyed maple story when it first came out because it was challenging and you could fight things well above your level of you could dodge around and take your time, it's how I leveled so fast in it.
Also liked la tale which is similar but in my opinion a lot better than even original maple story. The other two were shin megami tensei imagine and mabinogi, which are the same sort of game focused more on your character's skills than level, your skills level up through usage instead of a normal point system and both games are really challenging solo so I had a lot of fun. Other than that all other mmos felt disappointing

Completely forgot Maple Story. I played that for a short time too. Really enjoyed it until I was passing through an area with someone who was hacking/botting/magnetting/pulling(whatever it's called... don't know) enemies towards him and just farming drops and exp and from what it seems was me and a few others were trying to run past the area quick to not get caught up in the mess and supposedly someone tried to screenshot the guy to report him...
...and I guess had fucked up timing as it probably looked like I was the one botting.
Got I think a 2 week or so ban for nothing.
During those 2 weeks I went and played something else so I lost interest in ever going back to it.

[Shinnomura]

They redid it completely now where there is no challenge, if you can manage to hit an enemy it takes no time to kill them, that's how they keep people in their appropriate areas now, they make it where you can't hit or damage high level bosses that would be an actual challenge.

[Shinnomura]

Oh, I played one other for a bit, wizardry online. It was supposed to be the hardest mmo at the time with permadeath and accurate blocking/dodging, but the permadeath was downplayed where you were very unlikely to lose a character and it wasn't a complete restart to make a new one. It also limited what you could fight to a degree, if I remember right you had to complete missions that didn't become available until you were the appropriate level, and the quests you got weren't much of a challenge.

[otakun]

Are you a leading Authority on MMORPGs? The answer is No... as you are not even a developer. Where do you truly define what an MMORPG is? I've played them and competed in them. I am an MMORPG Gamer...and I don't act like a leading authority on them because I am not a developer.

Anet declared GW1 as a CORPG, and then players in their stupidity compared it to MMORPG. SEGA calls PSO-2 an "Online RPG" and players compare it MMORPG. Simply put...players are the ones who expect demands to reach to the preferred genre of their choice without acknowledging the declared developer's Genre.


Do not dare to compare 12 people in EQs that don't give you beyond a single major objective per map...

to

Having to guide and lead over 100 players in zone-wide events, each player either alone or in parties... while simultaneously fighting world bosses and coordinating efforts through my 100-slot TeamSpeak Server. There are times where there are more monsters on-screen than players.

..and seriously,

Unlike PSO-2 where one sneezes on a monster and it dies, while in the games I play.. the monsters are at the same level of the characters and if not careful, a single veteran to legendary mob can finish an entire party....

yeah, sometimes in PSO-2 we see maybe 3 - 5 people dead on the floor.....while its common to see 40 - 50+ people dead on the floor when we fail in MMORPGs.

I don't need to be an authority to know facts. I don't need to be a developer to know what a game type is. An MMORPG is clearly defined in its name. It involves a lot of people playing on at one time. Saying nothing for how many exactly, nor where they all have to be, nor what they are doing, nor what they can do other then the RPG part. Which doesn't involve even half of that you consider an MMORPG.

I also consider myself an MMORPGer. Difference is I can see that there are different styles to games that evolve in time and not live in the idea that games never change.
It doesn't matter what the developer calls it. If a baker makes bread and calls it a baguette it is still bread. Bad analogy but this conversation is like talking to an old man listing to a "back in my day" story.

It's clear you're hung up on the past about how a game should be. Yeah, I remember being on Ventrillo with my guild of 200+ members in mass PvP sieges in Warhammer and Aion leaving hundreds dead in our path but that has NOTHING to do with PSO2 and it's style of MMORPG. PSO2 is clearly aimed at a casual PvE audience with a completely different mindset then that you want to compare it to.

Just because PSO2 is an MMORPG doesn't take away the good point of an open world game and it features but to deny it based on the idea of "MMORPGs were better back in my day" isn't fair for what good things PSO2 does bring to the table but it's clear you're obviously bias so I ain't expecting you to see.

[SteveCZ]

Is PSO2 claimed as an MMO by the dev? MMO is a term coined for marketing effort, though. So, it really depends on what they claim.

[Shinnomura]

I haven't looked myself but everyone talking about what the company calls it said no, and I would assume the same thing.

[Sirius-91]

Is PSO2 claimed as an MMO by the dev? MMO is a term coined for marketing effort, though. So, it really depends on what they claim.

They call it "Online Action RPG" and "Online RPG".

[NightfallG]

PSO and PSO2 are apples and oranges. Original PSO was more of a Diablo-esque experience. PSO2 and by extension PSU (since they're based on the same engine and all) are closer to an MMO, but in the Vindictus/Mabinogi Heroes way rather than the WoW way.

[HeyItsTHK]

;3356831']They could always be modified.

Delsabers were modified in PSU to be a little slower and such while still being quite powerful.

Belras who used to be slow moving statue-like creatures... when I saw one run at me in PSP2/PSP2i for the 1st time I was like "THE HELL KIND OF SORCERY IS THIS?! TOO FAST! TOO FAAAAAAAAAAAST!"
In same PSP2/PSP2i, Debilters were still scary as fuck when we have more movement than we did in PSO.

We have "centaur" creatures in PSO2 which while aren't Chaos Bringers can be very threatening with their range, speed, and movements.
Can almost even say that Loser/Magatsu is almost like newer versions of Falz/Flow as well... except phase 2 Magatsu we don't fight on feet.

That is true. Kuron does carry quite a bit of danger (when soloing anyway).

[Keilyn]

I don't need to be an authority to know facts. I don't need to be a developer to know what a game type is. An MMORPG is clearly defined in its name. It involves a lot of people playing on at one time. Saying nothing for how many exactly, nor where they all have to be, nor what they are doing, nor what they can do other then the RPG part. Which doesn't involve even half of that you consider an MMORPG.

I also consider myself an MMORPGer. Difference is I can see that there are different styles to games that evolve in time and not live in the idea that games never change.
It doesn't matter what the developer calls it. If a baker makes bread and calls it a baguette it is still bread. Bad analogy but this conversation is like talking to an old man listing to a "back in my day" story.

It's clear you're hung up on the past about how a game should be. Yeah, I remember being on Ventrillo with my guild of 200+ members in mass PvP sieges in Warhammer and Aion leaving hundreds dead in our path but that has NOTHING to do with PSO2 and it's style of MMORPG. PSO2 is clearly aimed at a casual PvE audience with a completely different mindset then that you want to compare it to.

Just because PSO2 is an MMORPG doesn't take away the good point of an open world game and it features but to deny it based on the idea of "MMORPGs were better back in my day" isn't fair for what good things PSO2 does bring to the table but it's clear you're obviously bias so I ain't expecting you to see.

You like Facts?
SEGA does not call PSO-2 an MMORPG.
Completely voiding your argument....

PSO-2 is a unique game, with a unique population...because we are importers to the game. We deal with morality, ethics, and even legal issues in a gray area to even play this game...Setting us apart from many other populations..

Comparing a Unique Population (PSO2) that plays a Unique Game (PSO2) to a General Population (MMORPG)....

Makes no sense, as even in 2001... PSO-1 was not an MMORPG either. Neither was PSU... Now you think by some magical sense that PSO-2 is an MMORPG when SEGA declared it was not, or could it be that you are biased in believing that in order for an RPG to be good it must be classified as an MMORPG in order to make you feel good and secure?

You accuse me of being biased..
Guess what!
All human beings have biases in them.. so yes.. I am biased. Are you trying to act like you are not? In that being said, I guess if you are going to act shocked that I have a bias, it seems you do not understand the rules to argument or persuasive writing. It makes me wonder if you have ever published any article under your name that has survived peer review...

--------------------------------------------------------

@NightfallG

I've often heard people saying "Apples to Oranges" and it makes me wonder....representing how different two things are even when:

Apples and Oranges are both:
----------------------------------------
~Fruit
~Have seeds inside
~Grown in trees
~Grown under the same climate conditions
~Require the similar levels of humidity
~Watery beyond the skin
~Require similar time to grow
~Have similar sizes and shapes
~Can be mashed and used in recipes
~Can be made into Juice
~Are healthy for you, providing vitamin C

The one major difference to apples and oranges (which I understand why it came to be at the genetic level), is that all apples have edible skin, while Oranges have a good amount of Vitamin C, and Apples have an Abysmal amount of vitamin C.


Pardon me for nitpicking. :)
Not trying to make you look bad..

I just cook a lot and I love fruits and vegetables. Though I love Apples and Oranges, I know there are fruits and vegetables that beat them both.... but it doesn't make me like either one any less.

I grew up on Strawberries, Peaches... and a certain berry called "Acerola" where having 2 of those berries = a full day supply of vitamin C.

[Altiea]

So... Favorite fruit?

[otakun]

You like Facts?
SEGA does not call PSO-2 an MMORPG.
Completely voiding your argument....

PSO-2 is a unique game, with a unique population...because we are importers to the game. We deal with morality, ethics, and even legal issues in a gray area to even play this game...Setting us apart from many other populations..

Comparing a Unique Population (PSO2) that plays a Unique Game (PSO2) to a General Population (MMORPG)....

Makes no sense, as even in 2001... PSO-1 was not an MMORPG either. Neither was PSU... Now you think by some magical sense that PSO-2 is an MMORPG when SEGA declared it was not, or could it be that you are biased in believing that in order for an RPG to be good it must be classified as an MMORPG in order to make you feel good and secure?

You accuse me of being biased..
Guess what!
All human beings have biases in them.. so yes.. I am biased. Are you trying to act like you are not? In that being said, I guess if you are going to act shocked that I have a bias, it seems you do not understand the rules to argument or persuasive writing. It makes me wonder if you have ever published any article under your name that has survived peer review...


Nice rehashing and more pointless topics you bring up which if you want to get into critiquing debate styles shows you can't even keep it a point without adding in topics which don't concern the topic.

As I stated before, it doesn't matter what a developer calls it as since genre for the main point is aimed towards marketing to the customer. A perfect example of this is Super Smash Bros. The lead designer outwardly states that Super Smash Bros. is not a fighting game. It's hardly a traditional fighting game yet is obviously based on fighting gameplay and thus why SSB is in EVO.

We aren't talking about PSO1 as far as this conversation is concerned, donno why you brought it up. The fact that we are foreigners also doesn't concern the topic at hand unless you are trying to argue how it might be categorized differently in Japan then in th US but you didn't bring that up.

This might come to a big shock for you ... PSO2's gameplay style isn't unique! PSO2 is hardly the first lobby hub based instance MMO and isn't even close. As an MMORPGer that you claim to be, you should have known that.

"could it be that you are biased in believing that in order for an RPG to be good it must be classified as an MMORPG in order to make you feel good and secure?" - How is that any different then what you're doing? The fact that I call you biased is based on the fact that you're wrapped in the old idea of what an MMORPG is. You can consider it biased, for some reason, that believing other styles of gameplay can fit the same category by why? What benefit would I having a bias about it what it is? You clearly already expressed why you would biased for it not being an MMORPG cause you have memories of what you consider to be an MMORPG and you don't want those memories tarnished by a more casual style of gameplay. You try to turn this argument of bias against me where I have nothing to gain and nothing to defend on the issue while you do. So, yeah, feel free to question my peer review once you've had yours done on similar topics.

and just for a heads up, I have written college papers on MMORPGs since you feel the need to question me personally about it based on a simple forum discussion.

[Shinnomura]

So... Favorite fruit?

ぼくはいちごがすきだ

I like strawberries. Don't think I really have a favorite though.

[Altiea]

ぼくはいちごがすきだ

I like strawberries. Don't think I really have a favorite though.

I like bananas. But it was more of a wry comment about the topic derailing again.

[Shinnomura]

So genre doesn't matter but the argument here is about genre? Saying the actual genre of a game is irrelevant and it's true genre is based on what people decide it is would mean every game with multiplayer could be an mmo if the players called it such correct? If that's true then genre truly is irrelevant as it means nothing, it's not even a way to determine game elements or play style at that point. If we go with that then PSO2 could be called anything, it could be a puzzle game or a RTS just because the players choose to call it such.

[Shinnomura]

I like bananas. But it was more of a wry comment about the topic derailing again.

I know, but through my sly remark i was able to learn you like bananas. Victory is mine. lol

[otakun]

So genre doesn't matter but the argument here is about genre? Saying the actual genre of a game is irrelevant and it's true genre is based on what people decide it is would mean every game with multiplayer could be an mmo if the players called it such correct? If that's true then genre truly is irrelevant as it means nothing, it's not even a way to determine game elements or play style at that point. If we go with that then PSO2 could be called anything, it could be a puzzle game or a RTS just because the players choose to call it such.

You jumped to a lot of different points here.

No one said genre didn't matter but just because a developer says what it is doesn't mean they are correct, as stated before. Just because someone made something and named it a certain way doesn't mean its the correct name for it. When there are other games in the market that are played almost exactly like PSO2, which there are, that are called MMORPGs, then how does PSO2 not be categorized the same?

If you want another real world example of this then look up MOBA. Guy makes a mod to an RTS game and called it something doesn't change the fact that a MOBA is still an RTS game. PSO2 is the same in that it is an MMO but Lobby instance based MMO instead of Open World MMO which is what people like to stick it only to.

Not really in the mood to explain in greater detail how an instance based MMO makes sense but most of the people who argue against it are more hung up on the idea that "this game isnt like such and such and thus is not it". Well, that's what happens when it comes to gaming, things change and evolve. Believe me, I played online games before they even had graphics. =P

[Achelousaurus]

PSO and PSO2 are apples and oranges. Original PSO was more of a Diablo-esque experience. PSO2 and by extension PSU (since they're based on the same engine and all) are closer to an MMO, but in the Vindictus/Mabinogi Heroes way rather than the WoW way.
Apples and oranges, true. Both are delicious, incredibly popular fruits that are sweet and eaten all over the world. I take it that was the point you were not making and not the nonsensical idea that you cannot compare these or cannot compare PSO2 with its predecessor?



Ultimately, farming GGG for Saiki doesn't feel too different from farming Forest of Sorrow for God/Battle though. Same with Austere grind vs Excalibur.
Well, I found 4 saiki units from regular Gunne's without hunting. I needed over 6 months of intense Hildetorr piping to get my God/Battle. The drop rates are very different.

PSO1 was only hard early on if you had no higher lvl character or gifts from others.
Early on it was really tough cause a lot of classes were very weak at low lvls even if they got strong in endgame.
Hence You wanna be Hucast or Hucaseal but virtually nothing else in cmode. (except the occasional Fonewearl).

A lvl 20 starting hard with good equipment for normal ruins would do alright in H forest.
The only true jump in difficulty is lvl 80 ult Forest. Even if you ruled VH you would get your ass kicked hard unless you had hand me downs or traded for for strong ult gear already. And even then all armors had lvl requirements so no matter what your def would be low. Just, with MB and all ontop of incredibly fast lvling thanks to Koffie, you barely spend any time at low lvls now and your MB units make you near unkillable until VH.

PSO1 was harder, but really only early on. And that was mainly poor game design cause of lacking ATA to hit anything, forces being oneshotted easily and having too low TP to be able to use techs enough for decent dmg.
Once you got past being a lvl 80 with your VH ruins / Seabed gear in ult forest it got easier, too. And endgame was almost the same kind spawnkilling speedrun stuff as we got now (I never did TAing but I tagged along with Z-0 a couple of times, though he doesn't remember).

One thing PSO truly is however, is being a lot clunkier, more cumbersome and slow as fuck.
BS like arbitrarily endless animations like wasting time after your mechgun combo or most of the time the 3rd hit of a combo being too slow to be useful, etc.
That's the main reason I can never go back.

What PSO really had, though, that was far better is long 4 player quests. That was a lot of fun and especially Forest to Falz took a long time and was fun, this way you'd often meet a lot of people and make new friends.
While of course it has downsides like that you must literally kill everything ever to get to the boss and boss rush was impossible outside TTF, it meant that there was ample time to socialize and kill stuff at all times.
And just doing part of ruins for half an hour and then leaving was also an option if you didn't hunt anything and weren't desperate for exp, so you didn't really need to spend a lot of time for most of the stuff.
The real problem with drops wasn't the way they worked in general, it was only the abysmal drop rates. If you didn't have a 1/12500 chance for a Pwand from a miniboss appearing once a run or maybe 3-5 times in a long and hard quest, drops would have been great.
TBH I think PSO2 drops are BS. Using boosters you literally get 100+ rares every single EQ nowadays. Makes them all seem shit. Clutters your inventory and storage, Sega should have excubes drop instead cause that's all they ever amount to for the most part.
One of the HUGE problems with PSO2 is that it's a purely rewards oriented game, which means you don't want to play the part that gives no rewards and once new content's rewards become stale, you don't even want to play that anymore.
There is no main incentive to play just for fun anymore like in PSO.
I spent easily 10000 hours in that game (mostly PSOBB) just cause it was so fun to play long quests with friends.

While it makes sense that EQs let you get a lot of progress in a little time, they are completely anti casual and total BS. Not just that a fuckton of the good ones are scheduled during early morning or work/school hours in Japan so casuals cannot do them, to get the random ones you need to be ready to start up the game at almost a moment's notice, too.
And Sega's plan to make people buy premium set to get into a good block semi-backfires when everyone idles 90% of the time, wasting Sega's money while usually not liking the game enough to buy any AC.

PS: Not a single enemy in PSO2 is even near as threatening as a Chaos Bringer. Maybe some bosses but no regular or rare enemies.

PPS: PSO never was an mmo but that's precisely the charm and why I nearly dropped PSO2 when I saw the first 12 player quest back in 2013 and even again in 2014.
MMORPG's ALL have the exact same crippling flaw. Until you find a lot of friends to play with or are in a well sized guild, you will be running with strangers that don't even talk to you.
Out of the countless times I tried to talk to people in the numerous mmorpgs I tried, barely a handful ever replied to me.

Whereas in PSO you only had 3 other people and it was really intimate and direct and you were definitely playing with each other and not simply alongside each other, it was the difference between going on a trip with a bunch of friends and doing the trip alone, being surrounded by tons of other tourists from all over the world.
That's why any quest would be fun cause you would chat and kill the whole time.
Now it's pure killing, lest EQ time ends. Cause almost nothing outside EQ is worth doing for any noteworthy amount of time, all quests are super short and if you do a set like dailies or tacos you do it purely for the rewards, never for the fun.

[Shinnomura]

I agree on what you're saying about the pros/cons of both games. The intemacy of PSO and being able to have fun doing anything was what made the game last, if a game is just a rush to max level it's nothing more than a progress bar.

[Lumpen Thingy]

Goes from what game is better to if PSO and PSO2 are MMOs or not. Nice one POS forum. Anyways for the topic they're both good and shit in design one way or another and are both really really dam easy soooooo win win?

[Zipzo]

otakun is correct.

It really doesn't matter how the developer wants to market it.

Blizzard tried to repeal the "MOBA" tag when Heroes of the Storm released. They said that it was not a MOBA, but a "Hero Brawler". How many people do you think today call it that? Do you think that stuck? It didn't. It's a damn MOBA, and people refer to it as one.

MMORPG does not necessarily mean you have to be actively engaging in activities with a huge amount of people all at once in an large open world. It simply refers to the idea that there is a large number of people within your virtual space. They could be running their own dungeon, sitting in the hub/town, being afk. It doesn't really matter.

Just because PSO2 is instanced doesn't mean it is exempt from being classified as a virtual space being inhabited by a large number of players.

Nobody actively interacts with more than a handful of people at one time out of sheer lack of capability anyway, it's stupid to insinuate that in order for a game to classify as an MMORPG, you must be indulging in some sort of activity that requires 100000 people out of necessity for the genre title.

As for which Phantasy Star is better...I personally think that PSU was better than PSO2. It's a pretty tight race between PSO Ep1&2 and PSU because they did things so differently, it's tough to compare them, but I'd say PSO edges out PSU out of sheer nostalgia and how much more "mysterious" and fun it was.

[SteveCZ]

What the dev said about the genre of the game determines on what they will do on the game. As simple as that.

If the dev says online-action RPG, then that's the game will go, no matter how hard players want to bend them to whatever genre they want to believe about the game.

I also agree on PSO vs PSO2 as apples vs oranges, but everyone can enjoy their nostalgic differences to talk about, both pros and cons.
Sadly, each game will always have something different cause the dev always (of course) want and have to make something new for marketing purposes.

[Selphea]

Isn't MMORPG that one genre where you run around a world full of people standing around with question marks on their heads telling you to go kill 40 monsters or deliver some package to some guy in another town? Then you proceed to park in one spot, press tab-1-2-3 for 40 times and repeat until level cap.

And when you cap, every evening you have to subject yourself to some manchild drill sergeant telling you to throw more dots while 39 other people do stupid stuff like stand in front of a boss breathing fire?


Well, I found 4 saiki units from regular Gunne's without hunting. I needed over 6 months of intense Hildetorr piping to get my God/Battle. The drop rates are very different.

Funny thing, I got my two God/Battles on PSOBB within a day of hunting, each, but GGG has never given me a unit outside of a trigger run.

[Meteor Weapon]

Isn't MMORPG that one genre where you run around a world full of people standing around with question marks on their heads telling you to go kill 40 monsters or deliver some package to some guy in another town? Then you proceed to park in one spot, press tab-1-2-3 for 40 times and repeat until level cap.

And when you cap, every evening you have to subject yourself to some manchild drill sergeant telling you to throw more dots while 39 other people do stupid stuff like stand in front of a boss breathing fire?

One reason why I don't like MMORPG's in the first place, NPC's telling you to do stupid chores and stuff before proceeding to the next area. Well PSO2 had that too but never had that said target respawning endlessly at the same spor over and over, which feels more natural.

[Renvalt]

park in one spot, press tab-1-2-3 for 40 times and repeat until level cap.
And when you cap, every evening you have to subject yourself to some manchild drill sergeant telling you to throw more dots while 39 other people do stupid stuff like stand in front of a boss breathing fire?

This is the biggest reason of why I consider WoW and its clones to be a cancer upon the gaming industry - it was the first spark of many that led to the degrading of gaming difficulty (not to mention making people soft to learning how to actually use common sense tactics - I mean, they can somehow figure out a raid boss but still won't touch other games like Mario/Sonic/etc.?)

Not to mention, fighting like that is... how do I put it? Oh yeah - "dull" and "pacebreaking". Not to mention I just feel like my character is more of a puppet on strings than ever before. At least with PSO2 and other games like it (by which I mean alike in combat gameplay - though again, we're probably not going to see 100% eye to eye on that), I feel like I have to do more, which makes it feel engaging.

I won't argue that WoW has brought some good ideas into the MMO industry - cosmetics over useable gear being one big thing I do thank them for (and by that I mean being able to use in-game gear in a cosmetic manner - without taking away from my combat practicality), but it has also made mindnumbed "sheep" out of the gamer community as well. At least IMO, anyways.

[Shinnomura]

That is why I tend to prefer the old games, what people call bad controls often times just meant less ways to avoid danger. Like how 2d shooters could only dodge by running and jumping but 3D now allows for you to just walk sideways to avoid danger instead of having to time your jumps and such. Keeping things difficult in a 3D game is a challenge nowadays since it means you would have to make things dangerous enough that the person has to utilize all 3 dimensions well to survive. Most games you can just run back and forth in a fight and be fine, the side to side option is just a bonus.

[Achelousaurus]

Bad controls = bad controls, no amount of sugarcoating or nostalgia can change that.
back in the day games were still sorta new, less mainstream and more aimed at kids, that's why they could get away with more shitty game design.

And if a game designer has trouble making something hard just cause it's 2D and not 3D he just sucks so bad he really has to stop making games.

There just is no excuse for bad controls. The horrible misconception that better controls or more convenience = easy games and poor controls or inconvenient gameplay = difficulty is BS that has prevailed far too long and is responsible for ruining far too many games.
Anyone thinking along these lines needs to stop to make and play games ASAP lest he either makes more crap games or supports crap games by buying them.

It's the same nonsensical logic as saying old school horror movies were scary as hell cause they have no cgi but poorly made make up and prosthetics, entirely missing the point of what makes a movie scary and what doesn't.

[[Ayumi]]

So... Favorite fruit?

Freddie Mercury.
(What? I don't eat fruits.)

[Shinnomura]

I don't think there's any problem with a player liking what they like in a game. It's true I haven't played every game but I've never felt like the controls of any game were actually bad. What it has felt like is a different play style, which in turn makes a game more unique instead of playing exactly like every other game.
As far as people needing to not support games with bad controls by buying them, if enough people are buying the game and enjoying it that should be all the proof necessary that the controls are irrelevant or they add to the gameplay. If the customers aren't enjoying it because of the controls it's obviously a problem, but if that's not the case then there's no reason to say it shouldn't be supported.

[Nitro Vordex]

Oh look, another X vs Y thread where we compare completely different games, put on and take off our rose tinted glasses, and argue semantics of MMORPG. (As long as I've been here, it really just doesn't matter. The definition changes as the games change, stop trying to label it. Also, it's an action RPG, no arguing that. :wacko: )

And by the end, we're all like "Nice opinions".

[Shinnomura]

lol was not expecting things to turn out like this when I asked

[Achelousaurus]

Oh look, another X vs Y thread where we compare completely different games, put on and take off our rose tinted glasses, and argue semantics of MMORPG. (As long as I've been here, it really just doesn't matter. The definition changes as the games change, stop trying to label it. Also, it's an action RPG, no arguing that. :wacko: )

And by the end, we're all like "Nice opinions".
Are you new to the internet? Cause this is 99.99% of all entertainment related discussions.

[SteveCZ]

lol was not expecting things to turn out like this when I asked

I thought you've learned from previous thread you made. :-?

[Shinnomura]

Eh, didn't think this would become such a touchy subject

[SteveCZ]

Eh, didn't think this would become such a touchy subject

http://globalgamejam.org/sites/default/files/styles/game_sidebar__normal/public/game/featured_image/card_back_final_edges.png

[Raygaen]

I sadly only got to play Universe and Blue Burst......

[Raygaen]

I sadly only got to play universe and Blue Burst before PSO2

[Altiea]

Eh, didn't think this would become such a touchy subject

Opinion threads always do this, since people fight each other when they voice their thoughts.

And... I played Zero (hence signature). So I don't have anything to contribute to the topic. I'll say that I really liked Zero in terms of what it offered, but I felt that playing it was significantly clunkier than PSO2. (I played Zero after I got into PSO2.)

[Shinnomura]

Ya, that clunky feeling is in PSO as well, never played zero. I never thought it took away from the game though (not trying to upset anyone by saying that), it and the slower character movement that's similar to light jogging just added to the challenge for me.

[CocoCrispy]

Zero was alright but I can't play that game too long. The music just isn't very exciting to me so it gets kinda meh. Eternal Tower would be amazing if they added that to multiplayer.

I have a strong nostalgic bias toward pso so anything I say about that game will be drenched in rose tinted memories. The story, the creepy atmosphere, the jerkface move for throwing a boring caves level immediately after the awesome forest. Classic Sega at its finest. I don't see the comparison between it and pso2 though. Pso2 is much more quick, reflexive kinda action game. Besides the mmo lobbies, they're pretty different games. If anything, psu had more of pso in it than pso2.

[Great Pan]

I will say it anytime, nostalgia always win.

[[Ayumi]]

I will say it anytime, nostalgia always win.

Not for me anymore when it comes to PSO/PSO2 I like both qually if I negate some of the stuff Sega did to PSO2 I hate.