I voted yes...

You added LoL, and Diablo is like full seamless MMO compared to that one heheheh.

If you didn't add LoL, i would say no ;)

If LoL is here, Diablo should be

No. I don't think Diablo III will be an MMORPG as we know it. Heck, even GW and GA are no MMORPG n my book...

Originally posted by lizardbones

 

---

Originally posted by Nibs

---

Originally posted by lizardbones
Massive - pretty sure it will be
Multiplayer - check
Online - check
RPG - check
It should be added.

---

That 1st 'M' is for 'massively', not 'massive'.
The 1st and 2nd 'M's should be taken taken together for 'Massively Multiplayer', meaning multiplayer on a massive scale, rather than only 32 people top a server.
On those grounds, I don't think D3 should be included.

---

It will still fit "Massively Multiplayer" as in 3 Million people playing the game online.

 

As Nibs said, Massively Multiplayer refers to  a 'massive' amount of players playing the game together in the same persistent world. Diablo 3 will limit players to playing together in small groups on instanced servers that are separate from one another, with no common gameplay area.

If all it takes is a lot of people playing a game online, then Modern Warfare 2 is an MMO... and I sincerely hope you understand that MW2 should not be considered an MMO.

Voted NO.  I will be playing it but I don't consider this type of game ANYTHING like a persistent world that keeps going when you are not online.  It's a top down, hack and slash RPG with very minor multiplayer elements.  Maybe there should be a new Guru site, like just plain RPG where you can add this type of game along with Torchlight and those, IMO, stupid MOBAs.  While we're at it, add GW1 to that site too.  ;D

I can see how the fuzziness exists:

Massively - Lots of people playing ... yep even if only in "instances" oh wait... we have MMO's that already do the instancing thing...

Multiplayer - Multiple people teaming up to achieve gains.  Yep.

Online - Here is the one fuzzy element.  Is it because the world is unique for each person?  Like Guild Wars?  I consider that an MMO (though it's taken time to get there).  Is the online persistent so that games like LoL or HoN shouldn't be considered?  I don't know that should be the case.  I have to wonder with games like Skyrim whether or not it will fulfill or qualify for this category.

RPG - This is the weakest link.  What defines RPG.  Someone playing IC would say that OOC is not RPG.  Some define it as playing another character doing a job is an RPG.  At what point do we declare we're not in an RPG?  A FPS like Modern Warfare could EASILY be put into this category.

Let's use the example:

Battlefield 2:

Massive - Yes

Multiplayer - Yes

Online - Yes

RPG - You're playing a character that you can level overtime.  Does this fulfull the requirements?  I could argue both ways on this honestly.

Yes.

I'd like to add that if you do add Diablo 3 and etc. Please keep the top voted and Most popular lists seperate, meaning MMO and Non MMO. Current forum activity seperation would be nice as well. Bah.... I just don't want to see the MMO coverage, discussion and etc. to be burried under non MMO stuff. I have other sites for non MMO's the only reason I frequent here is the fact that this site generally has the best coverage and discussions on MMO's. 

I voted yes. Personally I have zero interest in D3, but most of the very reasons I'm expecting to dislike it, move it closer to the realm of the MMORPG, rather than just the standard RPG. So I say, have at it.

No, it's not an MMO. People complain about Guild Wars not being an MMO but it at least has centralized hubs for others to gather and chat and play together in.

Why not just make a site for single/multiplayer games? I'd honestly rather read about them all separately so I have specific places to go when I want that specific information. You guys did this with the RTS site, so I think if you can swing the staff for it, a site for single-player games would be a great idea.

---

Originally posted by Ceridith

---

Originally posted by lizardbones
 

---

Originally posted by Nibs

---

Originally posted by lizardbones
Massive - pretty sure it will be
Multiplayer - check
Online - check
RPG - check
It should be added.

---

That 1st 'M' is for 'massively', not 'massive'.
The 1st and 2nd 'M's should be taken taken together for 'Massively Multiplayer', meaning multiplayer on a massive scale, rather than only 32 people top a server.
On those grounds, I don't think D3 should be included.

---

It will still fit "Massively Multiplayer" as in 3 Million people playing the game online.

 

---

As Nibs said, Massively Multiplayer refers to  a 'massive' amount of players playing the game together in the same persistent world. Diablo 3 will limit players to playing together in small groups on instanced servers that are separate from one another, with no common gameplay area.
If all it takes is a lot of people playing a game online, then Modern Warfare 2 is an MMO... and I sincerely hope you understand that MW2 should not be considered an MMO.

---

Only if you add Borderlands/Borderlands 2, Torchlight 2, Grim Dawn, Path of Exile, Drakensang Online, LinkRealms, etc.

Originally posted by lizardbones

Massive - pretty sure it will be

Multiplayer - check

Online - check

RPG - check

It should be added.

 

Why not? It is newsworthy, its of great interest to many of the readers here, and if you dont like it you have the option to not read the articles.

Originally posted by lizardbones

 

---

Originally posted by Ceridith

---

Originally posted by lizardbones
 

---

Originally posted by Nibs

---

Originally posted by lizardbones
Massive - pretty sure it will be
Multiplayer - check
Online - check
RPG - check
It should be added.

---

That 1st 'M' is for 'massively', not 'massive'.
The 1st and 2nd 'M's should be taken taken together for 'Massively Multiplayer', meaning multiplayer on a massive scale, rather than only 32 people top a server.
On those grounds, I don't think D3 should be included.

---

It will still fit "Massively Multiplayer" as in 3 Million people playing the game online.

 

---

As Nibs said, Massively Multiplayer refers to  a 'massive' amount of players playing the game together in the same persistent world. Diablo 3 will limit players to playing together in small groups on instanced servers that are separate from one another, with no common gameplay area.
If all it takes is a lot of people playing a game online, then Modern Warfare 2 is an MMO... and I sincerely hope you understand that MW2 should not be considered an MMO.

---

A game where every player enters the world one at a time would still be an MMORPG if there are a massive number of players. The world is persistent, but it doesn't have to be the same instance of the world. The definition is the players interacting with each other. There is an auction that is global to all players in a given region where the players interact with each other.

Call of Duty, World of Tanks, etc. all fit the definition. You can have your own personal interpretation, but D3 fits the definition. Farmville fits the definition as well.

** edit **
Farmville isn't referenced on these forums as a game people play, so it probably shouldn't have it's own section.

 

How is the game world in any way persistent in Diablo 3?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the game world will randomly generate each time you join a new instanced server, the same as it did in Diablo 2. So again I ask, how is that in any way a persistent world? And this still also doesn't even account for the fact that only small groups of players at a time will even be on an individual server that has it's own randomly generated instance of the 'world'... and when all the players leave the server, the instance goes poof and that 'world' is wiped out.

Diablo 3 simply is not an MMO. It may have a few features that are similar to what MMOs have, but at the end of the day Diablo 3 is just not make use of persistent world mechanics. If Diablo 3 is to be considered an MMO, then dozens, of not hundreds, of additional games will also fall into the MMO category, at which point the term MMO will mean mean pretty much everything, and the term itself will lose any useful meaning.

I haven't played in many years, but doesn't Diablo3 (like 1 and 2 LOD)  have like 16 or 32 player multiplay?  How is that massive?

I don't care though really.  Add it if you want to add it, I say.  BUT....don't be surprised when you choose NOT to add other games that might be closer to MMOs and some people get all pissy about it.

Originally posted by AlienShirt
Add it because there are plenty of other games on here that aren't MMORPGs so what's one more.

On a side note: I loved D1/D2 and logged way too many hours on Battle.net playing but I have no interest at all in D3.

ALL of that ^^^^^.

Originally posted by Enigma8833

Why not? It is newsworthy, its of great interest to many of the readers here, and if you dont like it you have the option to not read the articles.

Because it's simply not an MMO.

It would be like calling Modern Warfare 2 and RTS, or Starcraft 2 an FPS.

They may share some similar aspects, but they simply don't fall into the category. Forcing them into such a category devalues the entire meaning of said category.

Yep, add it.  I don't really care and I probably won't be playing it, but I would rather more online games be added to the site than games that fit just some old narrow definition of MMO.  Online gaming is evolving and so is MMO gaming.  Why limit yourselves.