Phantasy Star Online 2 confirmed

Details here: … aser-video

Coming to PCs in 2011.

Let’s hope it’s a serious project, not PSO with shinier graphics but a complete overhaul of systems to make it more up to date, and more vast. Like Tera Online, but good. The original formula is simple & clunky, I’d stick with Monster Hunter if that was it.

Honestly, I would be satisfied with PSO with shinier graphics. Phantasy Star Universe attempted to overhaul things (kind of) and, while I only actually played Ambition of the Illuminus and not even all the way through, I wasn’t too wild about it.

The best part will be how they charge the standard going rate for MMORPGs but provide nothing but the barebones minimum in service again.

Best SEGA news in years . Hope its looks stunning and console ports are planed This could be the game to get people to start to love SEGA again, I think it could be that big.

All I really want is a next gen version of PSO with lush stunning next gen visuals. C’Mon Sonic Team you can do it

I’m surprised that there’s no word of a console version. PS was always a console series.

Also, I agree with Parn regarding costs. if the gameplay is similar to the original PSO, why not just make it playable online for free or under the normal Xbox Live Gold subscription? Not everyone wants to commit themselves to a full MMORPG, PSO2 is an opportunity to provide a more accessible alternative. How about a middle ground between co-op Halo and World of Warcraft? Consoles are practically devoid of online RPGs, so it would be a welcome addition.

[quote]I’m surprised that there’s no word of a console version. PS was always a console series.

Also, I agree with Parn regarding costs. if the gameplay is similar to the original PSO, why not just make it playable online for free or under the normal Xbox Live Gold subscription?[/quote]

Does’t SEGA control and run the servers even on X-Box LIVE . I think SEGA have every right to charge if that’s the case, after loosing a potful on the DC version , but it should be a sensible rate of say a couple of quid (?2) each month, After all Capcom charges LIVE Gold Sub users in Japan for Monster Hunter on LIVE

Maybe the delay in the Console version is SEGA being in talks with MS and SONY over such issues

I’d rather they figured out a way to make it free. The original PSO only had four players per game - that’s much less than shooters like Halo or Call of Duty, yet you don’t pay an additional fee for those on top of Xbox Live Gold. I feel that there’s too many hurdles between getting gamers online, especially RPG players. Something like PSO with free to play four player co-op could really break down those barriers and make the genre more accessible.

Wasn’t the point of Xbox Live Gold to standardize the online gaming subscription fee?

Yup, if they go for a fee they better offer a hell of a lot more than 4 player coop (like FFXIV?). Every game under the sun can have online modes these days, even flash games or cheap indie games. The features should at least partially justify the cost by offering a true MMO environment or be made free like Monster Hunter on the Wii in the West, Guild Wars on PC for a recent example, or hell, Diablo II and its many clones this past decade.

I had forgotten about Guild Wars. You’re absolutely right, Al3x.

Even full MMORPGs such as The Lord of the Rings Online have found ways to become free-to-play. So, offering online play for Phantasy Star Online 2 under the standard Xbox Live Gold subscription (and free on Playstation 3) should be possible. If Phantasy Star Online 2 turns out to be a full MMORPG, a subscription fee might be acceptable.

I’d personally prefer a low fee over microtransactions, so everyone’s on equal footing and not able to spend more than others to do better or anything. It just cheapens the experience to know that’s possible, and you’ll end up with systems obviously designed to hinder the progress, or speed of progress for those who pay less or something… But no extra payments outside the game purchase should be possible if it’s not a true MMO… Publishers won’t fix their financials by nickel and diming consumers to the max but by fixing the industry model they themselves put in effect. Thinking to monetise COD-type multiplayer and such things is hardly the way forward when we had the same features a decade ago with no extra cost. Especially considering COD is one of the few multimillion franchises that do well enough to profit given the 10-15 millions of sales they achieve with just two years of development each time. It’s crazy how the general media consensus these days seems to be pro-publisher in monetising anything and everything at the expense of the consumer, and even crazier how some consumers defend them.


Wasn’t the point of Xbox Live Gold to standardize the online gaming subscription fee?[/quote]

It was just for online gaming it’ self and for most games that true, bar ones for games like FF12, Monster Hunter and PSU.
I don’t think SEGA is ready to take a hit again on servers, it closed down many over the past couple of years including Chrome Hounds for a reason

Maybe that why SEGA isn’t talking about console versions, its trying to sort stuff out with MS and SONY

Aren’t Activsion going to charge a sub for the new COD dictated servers on the PC.

Sort of, they made an exclusive deal with a particular server rental company so only they can offer dedicated servers for Call of Duty: Black Ops. Server rentals have been common years now for pretty much any PC FPS but the difference is that interested communities, clans, etc, had a choice of different companies since anyone could install the released server files, not to mention some of them had the required hardware and internet connection and didn’t need to pay any third party company at all. With the server files remaining unreleased all the options outside that one company are excluded. I have no problem with publishers wanting a cut from the money a server rental company makes thanks to their games (much like Valve Software has monetised their games played on internet cafes and such), but not having the other choices available to the consumer isn’t right… The majority of players who just fire up the game and join any random match remain unaffected in their eyes of course (though depending on their area it could lead to an increased difficulty in finding good servers to play on, if for example certain local communities decide against buying the game or lock down their now paid for servers for members only or something), that’s probably why there’s not much backlash. But even this is a minor step compared to their intetions which most likely include a fee from each and every PC & console player for future iterations of their games, once they figure it out.

I’d buy this. Along with Diablo 3

whats the PSO2 fee though?

I’m excited because i was never able to play PSO on dreamcast =(