The Last Story Has Co-op And Competitive Online Multiplayer Modes [Update]

By Spencer . November 10, 2010 . 2:05am

tls_screen

Here’s something that should interest you: The Last Story has an online mode. Two of them. Jump magazine reveals that players can face off against each other in an online brawl or battle monsters in a co-op mode.

 

This is done via a feature called the “Raid Lobby,” which allows six players to battle or cooperate together online. A large group of players taking on big monsters together? Hmm…

 

Jump magazine also mentions a new character, General Trista, who used to be a high-ranking commanding general in the Imperial Army, and that switching equipment changes your character’s appearance. Players can also alter the color of their equipment using paint.


Read more stories about & & & on Siliconera.

  • Hraesvelgr

    Ugh, online.

    • http://peacefulrespite.com/ Brett

      You know that it’s optional? Don’t bitch about something that you don’t even have to do.

      • Hraesvelgr

        Optional or not, online play in an RPG typically adds little to the game. So long as it doesn’t detract from the game (disc space, etc.), I suppose it’s not that big of a deal.

    • BOYLANmonk

      agreed.

      ugh, to online play and ugh to co-op online play (i hate them both!).
      optional? who cares! i don’t want it in my videogames at all!

      • http://tristsantithesis.tumblr.com/ Tsunayoshi Sawada

        The only issue is that its on the Wii…so the archaic online system, will hamper the experience, no voice chat :( I love voice chat.

        • Guest

          Dood voice chat is overrated. I dont wanna hear a bunch of 12 yr old mouth breathers. Plenty of that on Call of Dooty

      • http://twitter.com/The_9th_Sage Ian Chamberlin

        Are you serious? It’s not something you even have to use. O_o

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000301072427 Mark Shaver

    Nice, hopefully it’s implemented well. So essentially, there’s PVP and PVE.

  • http://tristsantithesis.tumblr.com/ Tsunayoshi Sawada

    Well its good to see games have some online functionality, it aids in promoting lasting value for a game.

    Unless there is a robust rewarding or ranking system in place, I doubt I would use it, as I need some incentive to play the mode.

  • Aoshi00

    I’m just desperate for a release day (there is one in Jan right?) No seller has listed it for pre-order yet. Maybe the online mode would be fun like Zangeki no Reginleiv or something.. argh can’t wait!

    • Guest

      aaaaaagh Reginleiv!! WTH Nintenof of America release that game and this one over here you fools!

      • http://tristsantithesis.tumblr.com/ Tsunayoshi Sawada

        That game was not that good, and I think it is an odd title to add to Nintendo of America’s portfolio of titles, without considerable improvements in the area of combat.

        • Guest

          WTF are you Reggie of NoA in disguise? That game was awesome and had three player online co-op

  • http://twitter.com/Kazyest Kaz

    Here is the scan
    It’s kinda messed up at the bottom
    http://www.dotup.org/uploda/www.dotup.org1242969.jpg

  • Tokyo Guy

    Also I must admit it’s hilarious that The Last Story has a multiplayer mode whereas Vanquish didn’t. (Seriously if someone told me Vanquish was released at 50% completion I wouldn’t even bat an eye).

    Still though, it’s a shame this game isn’t being released on the PS3, because I think the Wii sales will be quite low. IIRC Xenoblade didn’t even have high sales despite being heavily promoted here. Nintendo has basically ran out its actual gamer audience and instead created a horde of non-gamers who want nothing to do with any game-games.

    • puchinri

      I suspect you are in Japan, since Xenoblade hasn’t been released anywhere else? I know it selled well when it first came out, but it would be nice to see how the sales have been for it since.

      But then again, just because it’s released on the PS3 doesn’t mean it’d get more sales. Not everything sells spectacularly on the PS3.

      • Tokyo Guy

        Yes I live in Tokyo.

        And yes, PS3 doesn’t necessarily mean more sales, but it does mean a larger audience and, more specifically, a larger RPG-friendly one.

        • puchinri

          I see. Have you seen how the sales have been since it initially came out?

          It potentially can. I think both consoles are good for the RPs they have, and I can’t see one RPG being better on the other console than it was for.

    • Joanna

      Didn’t it sell 80k first week? Sure that’s not amazing by Nintendo standards, but it’s still pretty good considering that most of the Xeno fans are probably on Sony consoles given that all the previous Xeno games were released on Sony consoles.

      But regardless of whether it would have sold better on PS3 or not, it won’t ever happen as Nintendo owns Monolith Soft.

      Also, there is one thing I’m having trouble comprehending. Why does making some casual games (for lack of a better word) = running the actual gamer audience out? Some one would have to have a very elitist view of gaming to dread playing on a system that also caters to “causal” fans (again, for lack of a better word). I’m not saying that there isn’t a crap load of shovelware, there is, but that’s not the problem, the problem is 3rd party support and sales of new IPs, which I see more as a two lane street: game makers have to make games BUT gamers also have to buy games. Seems like there is a problem with both here. So really, if the gamers are too stuck up to pick up Wii games because their relatives also own the system, they are frowning over little insignificant things and letting good games pass them up. For such people I have no sympathy.

      • Tokyo Guy

        Well Joanna, I think there are a few reasons for that, at least as I see it:1. The Wii seems to have a very childish image in Japan among people who play games seriously, whereas it has a perfectly acceptable image among those who like “non-games” and things like Wii Sports or Wii Resort. Heck, one of my friends (who is over twice my age; I’m 28) has never owned a game console in his entire life, and yet he bought a Wii for his son, though he is the one playing it all the time. The only game he owns is Wii Resort. For gaming guys, I think there is this image that the Wii is full of kids games, whereas the PS3 is “manly” and has “real” games. Also it’s more expensive and thus they might come off as more affluent in their being able to afford a PS3 (especially before the price came down) whereas the Wii has always been much cheaper. Additionally I think that as the years have passed, Sony has long been established as the “real” gaming platform whereas Nintendo is full of niche and “childish” products. 2. I think that many people who wanted a new gaming platform but couldn’t afford the PS3 at the time, bought the Wii. But as the PS3 continued to get “real” games and the Wii replicated the N64 and Gamecube situation of endless shovelware, people started to jump ship as soon as the PS3 became more affordable. I myself bought a Wii on release day, but it’s often sat untouched for months on end simply because of a lack of games I wanted to play. Whereas I kept my Wii, many people might have sold theirs, assuming there wouldn’t be any future reasons to keep it.3. People obsessed with graphics won’t touch the Wii regardless of the games released for it. But you are correct. It’s rather foolish for people to not buy a Wii because of too many kiddy games. Xenoblade was fantastic and, IMHO, was far better than Final Fantasy 13. I await the day when The Last Story comes out because all indications point to that being a fantastic game as well. And this is why it saddens me, because you have some really good games releasing for the Wii only to be met with unacceptable sales and then of course the finances dry up and it’s either close shop or else make generic garbage that will cater to the masses…

        Though for what it’s worth, I have never understood why these shovelwear makers feel it’s acceptable to put out sub-par (if not downright crap) games. They either have extremely low talent and ability in terms of game design and programming, or else they are just so shameless they will only put forth the bare minimal effort knowing that they will still get decent sales from unsuspecting consumers. I mean do you remember that Nintendo DS USA launch game; the one that was basically a paid version of Picto-Chat?

        • Aoshi00

          Well put. Where is the Nintendo’s seal of approval when you need it, now they’re just rubber stamping everything.. Yea, Xenoblade was much more fun and well-rounded than FF13 (though I stopped at 16hrs and didn’t go back to it all these times for some reason..). Last Story seems to be good too, the Gooch has yet to disappoint me yet. Time to try out ASH and Chrono Trigger on the XL :)

          • Tokyo Guy

            You know, that is a very good point. Nintendo of America use to be synonymous with high standards and top quality. Granted there were always crap to be had on the NES or SNES, but by and large the main reason Nintendo was #1 and Sega was always trailing was the game quality; you just couldn’t compare the SNES and the Genesis.

            Now of course there were some issues with NoA’s stances, such as the fact that it had outrageous censoring practices (see the Castlevania series for example), however this seemed to go out the window when Nintendo had the questionable intelligence to allow the uncensored BMX XXX, or whatever it was called). Though that N64 game probably also marked the end of Nintendo’s integrity, as it also allowed Conker’s Bad Fur Day and the endless stream of shovelware.

            Nintendo of Japan has always been somewhat more open with approval policies, and hence there are hundreds of crap games that never made it overseas.

            I can only assume the change with NoA occurred because the company was trailing so badly behind Sony. The idea that more is better led to more games at the expense of lowering standards and integrity. And lo and behold, you have companies like Capcom openly complaining about Wii development because of the problems with sales, directly related to the amount of shovelware and the quality of said “genre”.

            And I might add that it affects the customer mentality as well. If you aren’t educated as to what’s good and what’s bad; if you just buy any game that looks interesting only to find out it stinks, then chances are you will be less likely to spend money in the future on a game that really IS good, simply because you were burned in the past.

        • Joanna

          Oh, I’m wasn’t asking non-owners to buy Wiis. I’m pretty sure there is a sizable amount of gamers with both Wiis and PS3s. What I was saying was, if someone owns a Wii or has access to one (i.e. bought it for their parents/ younger sibling under those impressions that it’s a kiddy/non-gamer platform) and simply refuses to buy a game for it because of that preconception, that’s rather silly and they are missing out.As for shovelware, I’m pretty sure it’s the latter. Business is business, after all. If you can cut corners and make the same profit, you end up with more money in your wallet because costs are lower. The problem with this kind of model though is that it is geared toward short term gain, and consumers burned once, won’t pick up the same kind of game again. That’s why the console makers like Sony and Nintendo put so much effort into their games.As for the seal of quality: I was under the impression that it was introduced because there was a lot of bootlegged and unofficial NES games. It was basically there as a seal that this game was manufactured under Nintendo’s license and specifications. In other words, it’s an authentic game cartridge. It never really had anything to do with the quality of the game.It would be better if there was more of a filter….but then people/companies would complain that Nintendo is sitting on a high horse dictating what they view as superior and inferior. Can’t please everyone.

          Also, there is one other problem I have with quality checks: what is the criterion? If it’s graphics, there are games with mediocre and even sub-par graphics (Class of Heroes) that are still liked and can be enjoyable. If it’s gameplay, well, that’s would require a rather large department of QA that would be rather hard to fund. Although, if they had a rather lose approach, I would be fine with that. As long as there are no biases against retro games and the like.

  • Happy Gamer

    If it is a fun little distraction I’m all for it. If you can get rare items or at least unique by killing online only monsters or whatever I think should be fun.

    I dunno I’m way too optimistic about gaming in general so I’m a bad person to ask. I just love games lol.

    I have alot of faith in this game. Def a day 1 for me no matter what the review. For example I remember Blue dragon got a pretty mediocre “score” from the US press but i freggin loved it. I got it after Lost Odyssey and was worth every 19 bucks! i woulda loved it for 60.

    • Joanna

      Happy Gamer indeed!

      I’m the same. I love games and I’m pretty easy to satisfy. The game has to have some awful glitches or really boring gameplay to get hate from me. Although, I am prone to getting too hyped and being disappointed….but I still won’t hate a game even if my expectations were not fully met.

  • Rollersnake

    I was going to say that this sounds absolutely terrible, but then I realized I’d misread The Last Story as The Last Guardian.

Video game stories from other sites on the web. These links leave Siliconera.

Siliconera Tests
Siliconera Videos

Popular