Hey Guys & Gals,

I have a simple question (well maybe not that simple)... What does everyone think the next major/popular phase of American console gaming will be?

Popularity (and marketing) states that we are currently in the online/multiplayer FPS phase of console gaming (almost to the point of exhaustion for me...)

Will we revisit a somewhat lost genre of gaming? :confused:

I didn't include a poll on purpose, I want this to be a completely open-ended question with infinite results but please keep it relevant and mature. :D

MMORPG will be the next BIG console fad IMO.

I think it will be a combination of MMORPG and shooting. The best analogy would be something like chromehounds, where there is an ongoing 'war' with three factions and thousands of people on each side. Many people feel that chromehounds has been and still is the best on-line experience of all Xbox games because of this (everytime you play, you influence something in the entire war). From the fantasy side of things a game like WoW could eventually make its way to consoles, but to be susccessful and dominant, the game should be multiplatform (PC, and console). If someone could do that, they will strike it big.

i would tend to agree.

personally, the FPS online thing has been going for years on PC, and now that we have good online, it's there, but i've found just as much enjoyment playing sports games online, and other types of games.

MMOs definitely are coming... the issue with XBL is that you MUST have dedicated servers for MMOs, and XBL doesn't really rely on those.

also, i have to say, the most enjoyable thing i've found out about online this gen is online co-op. that is AMAZING. all the greatness of the SP story, without feeling like i'm just wasting time playing a SP game.

MMORPG will be the next BIG console fad IMO.


Makes sense it certainly has taken over the vast majority of PC games. Or it could go casual, there is a thriving (Pop Cap etc) market there and Live Arcade seems to be doing well in that area.

MMORPG will be the next BIG console fad IMO.
I agree. The industry is focusing on bringing gamers together more than ever now. I can't stop playing GOW for that exact reason. Playing alongside and against others on-line is seeming more fun these days than playing the single-player stuff. I still love a good story, though. I can't wait for the first great MMORPG on a console!

I agree. The industry is focusing on bringing gamers together more than ever now. I can't stop playing GOW for that exact reason. Playing alongside and against others on-line is seeming more fun these days than playing the single-player stuff. I still love a good story, though. I can't wait for the first great MMORPG on a console!

How would you rate Final Fantasy XI? It was also a cross-platform title...

The consoles have usually followed the PC in terms of gaming....so whats popular on the PC today that isn't represented on the Console? (PS: I think those days are over, as more and more development moves to a CONSOLE FIRST path, and less and less people are inclined to buy PC's where the videocard alone costs more than sometimes a PAIR of high-end consoles).

As others have mentioned the MMORPG...but more importantly we're going to see Consoles have to embrace the concept of gigabytes of memory for the purposes of holding vast map areas in memory, no matter what kind of game we are talking about.

Take Halo3....now imagine Halo3, only with maps the size of the ones of Battlefield 2 on the PC. Or perhaps a game like Call of Duty 4, only with battlefields as large as the Oblivion worlds? Or a 3rd person shooter in that same vein, or even a rowdy 3rd person fighter/beat em up with a fully destructible world?

GTA style games that go beyond a large cityscape, but perhaps a whole region or nation. The days of the "FPS fights in corridors" are coming to a close, HALO 3's post-launch reaction appears to be more one of blaze' disappointment than the rabid cheers of the satisfied masses. Why? Its still an old-school 1990's esque shooter. Small multiplayer maps.....even the "big ones". Ltes face it, having vehicles is pretty lame when there are no maps large enough to let you have running vehicular battles, due to the limitation of the machines RAM generally, or when you can just as easily get across a map on foot as in a vehicle.

In a way we have seen a return to an earlier style of gameplay, the XMEN/Marvel Universe games have essentially brought back the Beat-em-Up from the dead. Racing games are now coming out with great frequency.

The only real genere's that don't seem to exist any more are the adventure game (they have evolved into 3rd person action/shooters from the days of Kings Quest and Leisure suit Larry), and of course the Simulation has pretty much disappeared, which wasn't surprising as the games became more and more complex and less and less fun.

There are people who love Baseball, even though baseball hasn't changed in decades...FOotball, etc, etc. Poker...you name it. When you enjoy a game, you enjoy a game. I Enjoy FPS's and 3rd person shooters, racing games, etc.

I dont need to see these become anything more than they are right now, I need them to merely evolve with the technology.

EDIT:
Just one thing....I've been playing online games since the late 1980's via modem. I can honestly say the more developers cater to online-only experiences, the less fun we are all going to have with gaming in general. Why? Because gaming is about the experience, not about the goal. Warhawk is a good example. fun for awhile, then dull because the entire process starts to be simply about the quickest way to rack up points....and after awhile, you learn the patterns to success and failure in the multiplayer world...the best gun to choose, the best path to take in the map, etc.

A single player campaign will have things happen that will NEVER happen in a multiplayer game. Single player cinematics will move along a story, single player NPC's will do stupid things that give the actual player a sense of empowerment, either by rescuing them, or by presenting a room full of cannon-fodder guys for the player to mow down or hack apart......in a multiplayer environment, all you'd get is players bunny hopping or choosing the easiest to use weapon or doing whatever it took to score the most points. Multiplayer gaming is cheap and simplistic, fun with your friends but ultimately predictible.

There is no logic in multiplayer online gaming because there are no penalties for playing stupidly. You die, you respawn, you play stupidly again. A single player experience is always going to be much more immersive and satisfying, like watching a good movie unfold or a book as you turn the pages.

I think this is why CO-OP gaming is becoming more desirable than straight up multiplayer.....this lets people SHARE the experience of that book or movie or world opening up for you to explore (and exploit!), as opposed to just "ok you start at that side of the map, I'll start over here, and we'll see who has the more accurate set of thumbs!".

Since I'm a guy who finds football, basketball and most other sports to be about as interesting as watching paint dry (Basketball is the best...a game that, for all intents and purposes, defies logic on every level as to what makes this game interesting), I'm definately not the kind of guy who wants my FPS to turn into some multiplayer-only shooter wiht nothing but other bunny-hopping and spawn-camping humans to contend with.

How would you rate Final Fantasy XI? It was also a cross-platform title...
I don't play FF.

MMORPG will be the next BIG console fad IMO.

Makes the most sense. Considering the populairty of WOW and other games, it seems like a no-brainer to go down this path.

Also, I just read this interesting article about Portal (The Orange Box) http://www.wired.com/gaming/gamingreviews/commentary/games/2007/10/gamesfrontiers_1008

The author remarks how cool it would be to implement portals into a traditional FPS or even a sports game. Interesting...

Speaking of sports games, wasn't there talk before this gen came out of the ability to, for example in football, have 11 vs 11 matches, with 22 people participating?

Each person would control every player on the playing field. I realize that might be boring for lineman (but maybe not?) but perhaps 5 vs 5 with each person controlling the skill positions might make sense.

I think it will be a combination of MMORPG and shooting. The best analogy would be something like chromehounds, where there is an ongoing 'war' with three factions and thousands of people on each side.

Man, that's the kind of game I've been waiting for - some sort of huge, ongoing galactic struggle where people can pick sides and actually influence the capture of certain territories, etc. I didn't realize it had already been done (on a console)...

But yeah, in general I can see a blend of MMORPG/FPS/action becoming the next big thing, incorporating the elements above.

I don't play FF.

Well-said HeadRusch; a great thesis for a study on gaming and popularity amongst genres... Very, very nice...


Lake - I asked about FFXI, simply because you stated earlier that you were looking for the first console based MMORPG. Although I could be wrong, I believe FFXI was the first one to touch this genre on the console.

Speaking of sports games, wasn't there talk before this gen came out of the ability to, for example in football, have 11 vs 11 matches, with 22 people participating?

Each person would control every player on the playing field. I realize that might be boring for lineman (but maybe not?) but perhaps 5 vs 5 with each person controlling the skill positions might make sense.
That would be sick (in a very good way)! Ditto for B-ball. Bring it on!



Lake - I asked about FFXI, simply because you stated earlier that you were looking for the first console based MMORPG. Although I could be wrong, I believe FFXI was the first one to touch this genre on the console.
I didn't know that.

Single player will comeback after this MMO thing.

I think MMORPG is for sure the next thing for consoles. It will take a lot of work to get there though, a game like WoW is not going to be as much fun on the console. Sure the actually combat will be fine, but the combat is sadly only a small part of games like WoW. I also think online games like Sim City or any complete virtual world will be popular.

I also think the next gen console will not need physical disc drives as the games will all be downloadable. Microsoft is perfecting/testing this now with Arcade. The size of the game will only be limited by the HD size. HD are more reliable (less noisy too!) than physical disc drives.

But, as long as game companies like EA are able to participate then we will be stuck in stupid menu hell forever.

Isn't the Wii showing us that people are loving playing in their living rooms with other people physicaly present, regardless of what type of game?

more community user content.

Isn't the Wii showing us that people are loving playing in their living rooms with other people physicaly present, regardless of what type of game?

exactly. so no more kids yelling ridiculously as they'd be right next to you and you just knock em out LOL


there is no NEXT. everything has been done. you only need to make it PLAYABLE & FUN.

the best thing would be to get every system to play together.

That's like the guy who said in the beginning of the 20th century that they didn't need a patent office because everything had been invented already..... idiot :P

I also think the next gen console will not need physical disc drives as the games will all be downloadable. Microsoft is perfecting/testing this now with Arcade. The size of the game will only be limited by the HD size. HD are more reliable (less noisy too!) than physical disc drives.


This is bad news. Games that will only be playable when connected to Live after your console dies and you have to replace it or HD crashes and you replace that. I would like to see discs that can instal to a HD but not downloadable games.

Isn't Huxley trying to bring MMO/shooter to the console? I heard about this game at least a year ago but haven't heard any news since.

I've always been a big fan of the MMO Shooter idea. I'd love to see an online shooter like CoD4 where you can level up and unlock new things as you level, only in an MMO type big expansive and ever changing open world.

Leveling up could yield stat boosts like speed and defense as well as special abilities like CoD4s perks and the ability to equip better armor and and better weapons and weapon attachments. You could even get a "mount" so to speak, for example if you chose a small mech like thing (think Starcraft's Goliaths) you wouldn't move particularly faster when in your "mount" but you could take a lot more punishment and have some wicked firepower, but if you chose say a motorcycle you'd be just as vulnerable as if you were on foot but you could move faster allowing you to move about the world easier and do circles around your enemies in combat. Then of course when you reached your max level and got your "flying mount" it would open a whole new world of gameplay.

The best part is it would eliminate the problems with higher and lower level characters playing together as even a level 1 player could beat a level 75 character with high defense, good armor, and good weapons even they A) are good at the game and B) strategize (guerilla tactics perhaps?). Would it be easy? HELL NO, but it would be POSSIBLE.

If you really wanted to make it interesting the game wouldn't necessarily need to be pure PvP, it could have a more intricate storyline and have NPC enemies for PvE and even a quest system with thousands of quests to take on for NPCs like in an MMORPG such as WoW. And of course the higher your level the more quests will be open to you.

Add to that the prospect of HUGE PvP battles to take over territories for a faction. And different territories could yield different resources for your faction to harvest which would of course benefit players for that faction in some way shape or form.

That's the next evolution I want to see in video games, of course if that happens I can kiss my life goodbye.

I hate text messaging abreviations. What does MMO stand for?

I hate text messaging abreviations. What does MMO stand for?

Massive Multiplayer Online

I hate text messaging abreviations. What does MMO stand for?

It's not a text messaging abbreviation. It stands for Massively Multiplayer Online, it's a commonly used abbreviation on message boards and gaming news sites because let's face it no one wants to keep typing "massively multiplayer online role playing game".

Just to clear up some in my post CoD4= Call of Duty 4, WoW= World of Warcraft, PvP= Player vs. Player, PvE= Player vs. Enviroment, and NPC= Non-playable Character. Now you know and knowing is half the battle, unfortunately the other half of the battle may entail fighting a Rancor and a Balrog, just thought I'd give you a heads up.

Massive Multiplayer Online

And an MMO is quite different to Xbox Live where there are 8-12 people playing in one room/race. An MMO has thousands of people playing online at the same time TOGETHER.

Personally i'm looking forward to HUXLEY (MMOFPS). I'm just not looking forward to potentially paying a monthly fee to play it.

This game you guys are describing sounds just like the upcoming MMO spy game, the Agency by Sony Online

This game you guys are describing sounds just like the upcoming MMO spy game, the Agency by Sony Online

If The Agency is anything like what I just described then I am dropping out of college, bidding fairwell to my family, and enjoying the private company of my girlfriend one last time before I am forever lost in that game.

Yea, who am I kidding I'm single :p

I'm not thinking MMO, I am thinking interactive game with user created content. I think games like Little Big Planet are the future of console gaming. JMO. New innovative versions of games like the Sims can also fall into this category.

I like the MMO shooter idea, but god I hate leveling things up. I just sold off my WoW account to pay for my new Samsung 4065F. I'm looking forward to not having to wait on 24 other people to play a damn game. And I swear to god if I ever have to go kill elves for hours straight again I might just poke my eyes out...

On that note, I could see large scale shooters getting very popular. I definitely agree with the above poster's assessment of Halo3. Still the same old small game. Hopefully we'll see some dedicated server support in the future so we can get some real games going on massive maps. I want dozens of people on my team... not 3 :/ I just don't want to have to give them my cell phone number or make myself available every time illidan needs killing...

I don't think we are going to see a massive jump up in game size anytime soon. Look at the dev costs for AAA titles like Halo3, MSG4, and Killzone2. Millions of dollars are being sunk into those games already, quadrupeling the level size is going to mean a massive increase in programmer investment and artistic time. I don't think most dev CAN dream up interesting and varied levels beyond a certain point.

Valve seems to be working in the opposite direction with titles like Portal. Distill the gaming experience down, eliminate repetition.

I'm sure the console companies will finance a massive game with Oblivion sized levels, but I'm not sure many other companies will. Of course as devs use pre-built engines then I guess they can spend more time making levels and skinning bots and less time figuring out physics and collision detection.

I can not see MMOs ever taking off on current generation console systems. The catch in MMO's is being able to type messages back and forth between players Globally, Regionally, Locally, within your party, within your guild, and direct player-to-player. Customizing the chat interface to provide multiple chat windows, tabs within the windows, text size, and content specific colors are a critical usability concern. And finally, communication with infinitely variable external to the game voice chat, ex: Ventrillo.

The game creators will have to provide a way to type at high speed. This means the added expense of keyboards, both in purchase and in placement within the gaming space. My console gaming space has no easy way to add a keyboard. I do not have a desk in front of my couch. :(

The chat window customization is actually the largest problem, and in my opinion the one least likely to ever be solved. High-quality standard definition TVs only provide about 480 vertical pixels at best, and are translated through analog providing difficult to read text. 720p sets provide, well, 720 vertical pixels. These are also mostly LCD\DLP\DILA\etc digital end-to-end systems providing excellent focus. But, as it turns out, 720 vertical pixels means using more than half you screen for chat boxes. That is just not acceptable. 1080p is essentially required at a minimum for providing the resolution and real estate to handle the chat interfaces. And by the way, most people will need to sit a *loy* closer to thier screen than they are used to to read the tiny text. If they just make the text bigger, then they need something bigger than 1080p. :eek:

The voice communication problem is probably the easiest to solve. But that means Microsoft and Sony would need to open up thier online experiance to outside vendors. Do any of you see that happening?

And back on the whole resolution problem, Microsoft scales every picture through an analog device, which ruins the high fidelity signal needed for ultra-clear text on screen. Does Sony also use an analog device in the video chain? We need new generation consoles, and wide-spread support for 1080p (minimum) for MMO's to have any chance at being more than a small niche. I do not believe it will happen.

I don't think we are going to see a massive jump up in game size anytime soon. Look at the dev costs for AAA titles like Halo3, MSG4, and Killzone2. Millions of dollars are being sunk into those games already, quadrupeling the level size is going to mean a massive increase in programmer investment and artistic time. I don't think most dev CAN dream up interesting and varied levels beyond a certain point.

This was a common argument several months ago surrounding the advangtages blu-ray disk space would have for longer,deeper games than what you can get on a normal DVD-9.I've always thought that the extra resources spent on maximizing the space of blu-ray wouldn't be worth it to developers in the end,and especially since PS3 has the lowest install base now and into the near future.

I think what is and has been happening is people like MS will find a way that if you want to get past say figuratively a 6 hour game you must pay additional online "fees" to unlock additional levels or bonus content. There may not have been cases of any campaign like that but as I see it its a logical profit incentive, this way developers can slingshot a game out quicker and say once a month an additional chapter is then available. If sales fall off the story gets dropped, its also like how a casino would maximize profits, get someone hooked and keep feeding them. At the same time players can offer suggestions and feedback that can allow the developers to "build" the game instead of having it on the drawing boards for 4 years. Its cheaper to build a shorter game and add to it in bits than having it being built up over years while technology is passing it up almost like what happened to Halo.

Call me an old fart but I remember at the local movie house where you had to come back evey week to see another episode of an action show, why not do it with gaming? Some low quality games can be kicked out in a month or two but if the interest is good then it gets built up, or if it gets tanked its gone, and this could of course be done online but on a larger scale than now.

MMORPG will be the next BIG console fad IMO.

I sure hope so.. Because hopefully it would draw the kids to it so I can enjoy my other games online. MMORPG = well I won't go there on here..

Speaking of sports games, wasn't there talk before this gen came out of the ability to, for example in football, have 11 vs 11 matches, with 22 people participating?

Each person would control every player on the playing field. I realize that might be boring for lineman (but maybe not?) but perhaps 5 vs 5 with each person controlling the skill positions might make sense.

FIFA 08 has 5v5 online and it plays really well. By the 2010 World Cup EA will have 11v11 and will sponsor a virtual World Cup.

So long as the future doesn't include Halo 1, Version #472 or anything ever again to do with either the word or reference to Halo and we see a genuine movement to the banning of the words; owned, pwned, playa, playaz, pimp, mac-daddy, etc.

I'd be happy.

So long as the future doesn't include Halo 1, Version #472 or anything ever again to do with either the word or reference to Halo and we see a genuine movement to the banning of the words; owned, pwned, playa, playaz, pimp, mac-daddy, etc.

I'd be happy.

Never! OwneyMcOwn pwns jew.

The consoles have usually followed the PC in terms of gaming....so whats popular on the PC today that isn't represented on the Console? (PS: I think those days are over, as more and more development moves to a CONSOLE FIRST path, and less and less people are inclined to buy PC's where the videocard alone costs more than sometimes a PAIR of high-end consoles).

As others have mentioned the MMORPG...but more importantly we're going to see Consoles have to embrace the concept of gigabytes of memory for the purposes of holding vast map areas in memory, no matter what kind of game we are talking about.

Take Halo3....now imagine Halo3, only with maps the size of the ones of Battlefield 2 on the PC. Or perhaps a game like Call of Duty 4, only with battlefields as large as the Oblivion worlds? Or a 3rd person shooter in that same vein, or even a rowdy 3rd person fighter/beat em up with a fully destructible world?

GTA style games that go beyond a large cityscape, but perhaps a whole region or nation. The days of the "FPS fights in corridors" are coming to a close, HALO 3's post-launch reaction appears to be more one of blaze' disappointment than the rabid cheers of the satisfied masses. Why? Its still an old-school 1990's esque shooter. Small multiplayer maps.....even the "big ones". Ltes face it, having vehicles is pretty lame when there are no maps large enough to let you have running vehicular battles, due to the limitation of the machines RAM generally, or when you can just as easily get across a map on foot as in a vehicle.

In a way we have seen a return to an earlier style of gameplay, the XMEN/Marvel Universe games have essentially brought back the Beat-em-Up from the dead. Racing games are now coming out with great frequency.

The only real genere's that don't seem to exist any more are the adventure game (they have evolved into 3rd person action/shooters from the days of Kings Quest and Leisure suit Larry), and of course the Simulation has pretty much disappeared, which wasn't surprising as the games became more and more complex and less and less fun.

There are people who love Baseball, even though baseball hasn't changed in decades...FOotball, etc, etc. Poker...you name it. When you enjoy a game, you enjoy a game. I Enjoy FPS's and 3rd person shooters, racing games, etc.

I dont need to see these become anything more than they are right now, I need them to merely evolve with the technology.

EDIT:
Just one thing....I've been playing online games since the late 1980's via modem. I can honestly say the more developers cater to online-only experiences, the less fun we are all going to have with gaming in general. Why? Because gaming is about the experience, not about the goal. Warhawk is a good example. fun for awhile, then dull because the entire process starts to be simply about the quickest way to rack up points....and after awhile, you learn the patterns to success and failure in the multiplayer world...the best gun to choose, the best path to take in the map, etc.

A single player campaign will have things happen that will NEVER happen in a multiplayer game. Single player cinematics will move along a story, single player NPC's will do stupid things that give the actual player a sense of empowerment, either by rescuing them, or by presenting a room full of cannon-fodder guys for the player to mow down or hack apart......in a multiplayer environment, all you'd get is players bunny hopping or choosing the easiest to use weapon or doing whatever it took to score the most points. Multiplayer gaming is cheap and simplistic, fun with your friends but ultimately predictible.

There is no logic in multiplayer online gaming because there are no penalties for playing stupidly. You die, you respawn, you play stupidly again. A single player experience is always going to be much more immersive and satisfying, like watching a good movie unfold or a book as you turn the pages.

I think this is why CO-OP gaming is becoming more desirable than straight up multiplayer.....this lets people SHARE the experience of that book or movie or world opening up for you to explore (and exploit!), as opposed to just "ok you start at that side of the map, I'll start over here, and we'll see who has the more accurate set of thumbs!".

Since I'm a guy who finds football, basketball and most other sports to be about as interesting as watching paint dry (Basketball is the best...a game that, for all intents and purposes, defies logic on every level as to what makes this game interesting), I'm definately not the kind of guy who wants my FPS to turn into some multiplayer-only shooter wiht nothing but other bunny-hopping and spawn-camping humans to contend with.



hot damn about time someone on here says something like this...before i bought the 360 on launch day i for the most part played PC games...RTS, FPS and Sim City games were my favs...in the past 2 years of 360 gaming ive just become absolutely sick to death of going online and playing an FPS on xbox live...the maps are tiny and overall 360 games just seem so lacking in the inspiration department...the only truly amazing game ive played on the 360 so far is Bioshock...there were other very good games like GRAW, PGR3 and so on but other than about 5 games nothing really stands out as "fresh" so to speak.

you hit the nail on the head about the single player story/game...people have just seemed to deviate away from caring about the single player side of things anymore...devs hardly even bother putting games out with great single player storys anymore which really sucks.

as far as the next big thing in console gaming? same thing as everyone else is saying...MMORPG is definately going to be the next big thing on console gaming...lol...you know, the games weve been playing on PC for the last 10 years give or take...then by the time MMO's hit consoles the NEW NEXT big thing will start to happen on PC, whatever that may be.

i really cant see MMO's taking hold this gen...maybe one on the PS3 but i doubt it...the current systems just arent set up to do an MMO...escpecially the 360