Justin: Hi, it's Justin, your friendly moderator, once again. Our roundtable this year features some interesting questions and some interesting people, so let's get on with the introductions!

Andrew: Hi, I'm Andrew Long, head of RPGamer news. I make my living running in front of cars and suing people.

Tony: *Rises from the Depths* I..am...Batman! All right, maybe not. Tony Green, Internal Contributor reporting.

Matt: Hello, I'm Matthew Stuckwisch, music editor and site artist here at RPGamer. I like cookies.

Pierce: Hey, I'm Pierce, just your normal everyday RPGamer reader, and I think Andrew ran in front of my car on my way here.

Mike: Hey, RPGamers. I'm Mike, staff alumni. I left because Andrew kept making e-passes at me.

Justin: Ok, now, without further ado, our first question: With games like Final Fantasy XI, EverQuest Online Adventures, and Star Wars Galaxies coming to PlayStation 2 in 2003, it seems inevitable that Sony will release their hard drive add-on for the system in North America, in addition to their already released network adaptor. However, peripherals that are required to play games have a notoriously bad history in this business. Do you think Sony can pull it off, especially when they must compete with Xbox, which has both a network adaptor and hard drive and is the same price as the base PS2 system?

Matt: Sony has by far the largest installed base of all the consoles. Even though Microsoft includes an online adapter and hard drive, there are less people using it. So even if only 20% of the people get the Sony additions, there are already more people on Sony's side than Microsoft's, and that's assuming everyone who has an Xbox will utilize their modem. Therefore, while Sony may have a little trouble initially, it shouldn't take too long for it to gain mass support if the games are there to back it up.

Mike: While Sony's efforts may not prove financially rewarding for them as a company, I can't help but encourage the attempt. I mean, eventually - and we're talking far down the road - there has to be a major convergence between consoles and the PC, and console companies adding PC-like elements is just a necessary step.

Tony: In all honesty, I think we're going to see a major shift in the way developers make games. There are going to be groups that concentrate ONLY on the Multiplayer, and groups that concentrate ONLY on the single player. It's just not sound to focus on both at once, and we've already witnessed this sort of thing on the PC market.

Pierce: I think it's valid to say that Morrowind is a game that definitely lost out due to it's lack of multiplayer and it's focus on single player.

Tony: Morrowind was never MEANT to be multiplayer in the first place, though. It was made as, and designed as, a single player game.

Pierce: That is true. However, I met a great many people who were quite disappointed in the lack of a multiplayer feature. From my experience, I think it would have benefited greatly from such.

Matt: Let's not forget that some people prefer the focus on single player in Morrowind, which, of course, was an outstanding game.

Tony: Then again, how could Morrowind be a Multiplayer game? You'd run around hacking people apart with buddies? Come to think of it, isn't that what practically EVERY on-line game has offered so far? Monster hacking with people? Is that the future of games?

Pierce: I see your point - that was what turned me off to EverQuest and has me dreading what Final Fantasy XI might end up being. However, I'm only saying that perhaps the better route is indeed to focus on a single and a multiplayer option, rather than excluding one for the other. A broader range of people are satisfied, in that respect. I know that the lack of a single-player option in FFXI is a disappointment to me and several of my friends.

Matt: Another thing to consider is that Microsoft's online strategy involves broadband only. While this doesn't affect me personally, I know a lot of people who are still on dial-up connections and thus can not utilize the Xbox's online capabilities. Here, Sony has a clear advantage over Microsoft.

Justin: Matt's right. Too often people are saying "broadband, broadband, broadband" while a ton of people can't get anything but $180 SDSL.

Pierce: Agreed. It's a small enough percentage that has internet access as it is, let alone the even smaller percentage of those with broadband access. It wouldn't surprise me if broadband isn't even available everywhere yet, as well.

Justin: It's not available back home, that's for sure.

Tony: All right, here's an attempt to tie all this in AND address the original question - What about the costs involved? Is it right to make a person pay for a game and THEN for Internet service and a modem? I wonder if some of you remember an old experiment Nintendo did a few years back. Although the name escapes me, they actually MADE a foray into the whole online thing with a modem network and everything. If memory recalls, it failed miserably.

Justin: Same thing with the Sega Channel/Xband. Anyway, going back to hardware for a second, do you guys really think a game like FFXI, which relies so much on the hard drive, will be able to survive if someone needs to buy a peripheral just to play the game? The N64 had a few problems with that, especially with the RAM chip.

Tony: NO! One of the major complaints of recent times it seems is cost. I doubt anyone but the hardcore fanatic is going to plunk down ALL that cash just so they can play EverQuest with Final Fantasy Characters.

Andrew: I'm getting the impression that people aren't too thrilled with the idea of FFXI to begin with, so I'm not so sure they will.

Pierce: This begs the question of how much people are willing to pay for a game. I worked at a GameStop for a good while and I remember people complaining about paying $50 for a game, let alone the $50 for the game, then more for the hardware, then the additional monthly fees that a game like FFXI is going to carry. Just how much are people willing to pay for a game? The very idea of paying so much may be enough to kill interest.

Justin: Right. And then if they have to add a network adapter too, it'll really add up. You could get a whole new system for that.

Tony: Bottom Line - online gaming, at least online gaming with peripherals needed, is going to bomb. So Sayeth the Slacker.

Andrew: I wouldn't necessarily go that far. There are enough people with the money, and the susceptibility to advertising that they'll be able to create a niche market. I doubt it'll ever reach the scale of even the PC MMO market, though.

Mike: I second that.

Pierce: Online gaming is something that is more easily attributed to the PC. Costs are reduced, as everything is included with the PC itself. But on consoles, additional costs will rack up quickly and a large majority will lose interest in favor of keeping their money for something else.

Matt: I don't see the costs as being more on the console side in comparison to the PC side, rather that on the console side the costs are more obvious. When you get a computer for several thousand (if you want top of the line) then you tend not to notice the fifty dollars the gigabit Ethernet card and CAT5 wiring and such cost you.

Justin: So how could Sony fix this? How could they turn this apparent drawback into a victory for online console gaming?

Pierce: Perhaps it's not up to Sony to curb this, but up to the game developer. If MMORPGs were to come without a monthly charge, I'm sure that would cause a significant increase in interest.

Andrew: They could charge less, and I'm serious there. I'd be much more willing to entertain the notion of online console gaming if it didn't have such prohibitive costs associated, and if it didn't require turning my console into a PC, which basically defeats the purpose of having a console anyway, in my eyes. On the other hand, the online capabilities of PCs also have other uses, which make these associated hardware costs easier to swallow as well. Granted, systems like PlayOnline are adding many of these features, like instant messengers and email, but this isn't, I don't think, a universal thing with online console gaming. So for now, at least, it's just not worthwhile.

Tony: Maybe it isn't even the cost. Look at all the MMORPG's available. THEY'RE ALL THE SAME THING! If they want to go and make it a more viable market, then they need to fix the entire genre first!

Mike: The genre needs a major overhaul, but I think that's obvious. If it was a near-perfected style of gaming we wouldn't be having a discussion about how to fix it in the first place.

Pierce: It might be beneficial to ask who buys consoles versus who buys PCs. I see more people buy a console for younger gamers whereas PCs seem to occupy an older crowd. This could be a big problem for online console gaming, as younger gamers won't have the means to pay monthly for a game or even pay for the additional peripherals and I doubt most parents would understand or agree with the concept of paying monthly for a game.

Justin: So basically, what it boils down to is that the whole genre has inherent problems, and it needs either a killer app or a huge decrease in cost before it becomes viable.