I'm confused,

How can you say comparing MC to MMORPGs - is like apples to oranges?

MC is a simplified meta MMORPG, simplied in the meta sense as the overall objective of the game isn't the same as other MMORPGS, while the same metas do exist they are more of a side-skirt objective rather then the primary goal.

The only difference of MC:MMORPG is that MC priorties are making crafting/gathering/building/exploring it's main facet, while making adventuring, raiding, PvP, PvE, Buy/Sell a secondary facet.

It's just reverse of a typical MMORPG - Obvious the graphical style is different then most current industry standard, but thats not the point, there are indie MMORPG's being pushed out to F2P models using graphical presentation of the same ilk as MC. So the mechanics, and meta of the game is what we are talking about here.

Speaking of graphical quality, i just downloaded a super HD with the max resolution texture pack, had to install with the MCpatcher, and now the game has resolute graphics comparable with some high end indie MMORPGs, my rig runs it fine, but this similar set up will tax lower end pcs that can run mainstream MMORPGS fine - Showing that the graphical choice is because the procedural gen. code MC uses is very intesive on hardware, which is why vanilla MC looks the way it does.

Fact of the matter, the game is 'deceptivily' simple - There are small, easily overlooked complexties to the game that actually shows the game to be a far deeper concern, such as :

Deep mining : You might tap into a lava/water well, if you drown that fine, you can get your stuff back, but you lava destorys your items, so if you have an inventory of precious rare metals/gems, you might want to go back home and store them in a secret/hidden chest to minimalize risk.

Raiding : I mentioned secret chest? Yes - Because raiders are always looking for easy loot, hide your chests, booby trap your houses, or even just hide them in a manner that makes finding it out side of accidental impossible.

Mindgames : The game is simple, so we are less questionable about simple things, this makes the game psychology must more interesting, that tree there? Looks simple, turns out it's a fake tree, hiding the entrance to a diamond mine! That cave there? Looks boring, turns out someone has been using it to trap creepers, you go in there, and BOOM. Quick to action, slow to think can lead to some very fun/interesting issues.

Originally posted by Divion

I'm confused,

 How can you say comparing MC to MMORPGs - is like apples to oranges?

 MC is a simplified meta MMORPG, simplied in the meta sense as the overall objective of the game isn't the same as other MMORPGS, while the same metas do exist they are more of a side-skirt objective rather then the primary goal.

 The only difference of MC:MMORPG is that MC priorties are making crafting/gathering/building/exploring it's main facet, while making adventuring, raiding, PvP, PvE, Buy/Sell a secondary facet.

It's just reverse of a typical MMORPG - Obvious the graphical style is different then most current industry standard, but thats not the point, there are indie MMORPG's being pushed out to F2P models using graphical presentation of the same ilk as MC. So the mechanics, and meta of the game is what we are talking about here.

 

Speaking of graphical quality, i just downloaded a super HD with the max resolution texture pack, had to install with the MCpatcher, and now the game has resolute graphics comparable with some high end indie MMORPGs, my rig runs it fine, but this similar set up will tax lower end pcs that can run mainstream MMORPGS fine - Showing that the graphical choice is because the procedural gen. code MC uses is very intesive on hardware, which is why vanilla MC looks the way it does.

 

Fact of the matter, the game is 'deceptivily' simple - There are small, easily overlooked complexties to the game that actually shows the game to be a far deeper concern, such as :

 

Deep mining : You might tap into a lava/water well, if you drown that fine, you can get your stuff back, but you lava destorys your items, so if you have an inventory of precious rare metals/gems, you might want to go back home and store them in a secret/hidden chest to minimalize risk.

Raiding : I mentioned secret chest? Yes - Because raiders are always looking for easy loot, hide your chests, booby trap your houses, or even just hide them in a manner that makes finding it out side of accidental impossible.

Mindgames : The game is simple, so we are less questionable about simple things, this makes the game psychology must more interesting, that tree there? Looks simple, turns out it's a fake tree, hiding the entrance to a diamond mine! That cave there? Looks boring, turns out someone has been using it to trap creepers, you go in there, and BOOM. Quick to action, slow to think can lead to some very fun/interesting issues.

It's pretty simple:

• Minecraft isn't massively multiplayer (MMO).
• Minecraft is barely an RPG.

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by Divion

I'm confused,

 How can you say comparing MC to MMORPGs - is like apples to oranges?

 MC is a simplified meta MMORPG, simplied in the meta sense as the overall objective of the game isn't the same as other MMORPGS, while the same metas do exist they are more of a side-skirt objective rather then the primary goal.

 The only difference of MC:MMORPG is that MC priorties are making crafting/gathering/building/exploring it's main facet, while making adventuring, raiding, PvP, PvE, Buy/Sell a secondary facet.

It's just reverse of a typical MMORPG - Obvious the graphical style is different then most current industry standard, but thats not the point, there are indie MMORPG's being pushed out to F2P models using graphical presentation of the same ilk as MC. So the mechanics, and meta of the game is what we are talking about here.

 

Speaking of graphical quality, i just downloaded a super HD with the max resolution texture pack, had to install with the MCpatcher, and now the game has resolute graphics comparable with some high end indie MMORPGs, my rig runs it fine, but this similar set up will tax lower end pcs that can run mainstream MMORPGS fine - Showing that the graphical choice is because the procedural gen. code MC uses is very intesive on hardware, which is why vanilla MC looks the way it does.

 

Fact of the matter, the game is 'deceptivily' simple - There are small, easily overlooked complexties to the game that actually shows the game to be a far deeper concern, such as :

 

Deep mining : You might tap into a lava/water well, if you drown that fine, you can get your stuff back, but you lava destorys your items, so if you have an inventory of precious rare metals/gems, you might want to go back home and store them in a secret/hidden chest to minimalize risk.

Raiding : I mentioned secret chest? Yes - Because raiders are always looking for easy loot, hide your chests, booby trap your houses, or even just hide them in a manner that makes finding it out side of accidental impossible.

Mindgames : The game is simple, so we are less questionable about simple things, this makes the game psychology must more interesting, that tree there? Looks simple, turns out it's a fake tree, hiding the entrance to a diamond mine! That cave there? Looks boring, turns out someone has been using it to trap creepers, you go in there, and BOOM. Quick to action, slow to think can lead to some very fun/interesting issues.

It's pretty simple:

• Minecraft isn't massively multiplayer (MMO). --- You must be delusional, it's as massive as the hosting server allows - i've seen servers with 1000 slots, and they are all hanging out building together, thats more massive then allot of MMORPGS where i find myself solo questing, or just with a group of 3-4 people.
• Minecraft is barely an RPG. - Taking on the role of a miner, and building an empire, not an RPG. The fuck?

You're right that graphics or the gameplay focus (combat vs. crafting) don't really matter.  But the lack of RPG and the lack of MMO are why it's pretty clearly an apples/oranges comparison.

 

Not that I'm one of those gamers who thinks that apples to oranges comparisons should never be made.  They will be made, and game developers definitely need to be concerned by those inevitable comparisons.  But it's just that in this case we're talking about a game which isn't a very solid model for an MMORPG -- at least not compared to the several better models of crafting-focused games with more of an RPG element.

 

I'd love to see a game with Haven & Hearth's style of crafting which also included Minecraft's terrain manipulation.  I'm not sure I'd want it to be MMO necessarily though.

 

Why not MMO?

 

Well, sandbox games are a canvas.  Artists love canvases!

 

But MMO sandboxes are one giant, shared canvas.  And while some artists are trying to work together to draw something amazing, other artists are pissing all over parts of the giant canvas.  Often they're able to piss on your section of the canvas.  So instead of art, you get a pissed-on piece of fabric.

See the above red.

I only skimmed the rest of your post as i find you either : Trolling, Delusional, or lacking intellectual prequitists to be apart of any sorta intelligent debate.

I won't read/respond to anymore of your messages, saying MC isn't MMORPG is the most innane thing i've ever see.

MMO - Massive Multiplayer Online - Minecraft is Online, it's multiplayer, as far as massive, quantify massive? You can't, and Minecraft like i said above is only limited to how many players are online by hardware restriants of hosts, if an instanced MMORPG only allowed 30 people at a time in a clone "Channel" of a full zone, then the fact there are 200-300 people present in the same world at all times makes MC more massive - Again quantifiy massive.

Minecraft IS an RPG - What else would you call it? If i can take a pen, paper, and cards, and call my Zu'Tan The Arcane Eastern Watch Wizard, and roll dice, and write down my adventures, then MC is a RPG.

Originally posted by Divion

Minecraft IS an RPG - What else would you call it? If i can take a pen, paper, and cards, and call my Zu'Tan The Arcane Eastern Watch Wizard, and roll dice, and write down my adventures, then MC is a RPG.

Oh, you're using the loose "every game where you play a role is an RPG" definition.

I suppose that explains your confusion, but no just because you play a role in Zelda, God of War, Team Fortress 2, or League of Legends that doesn't mean any of those games are RPGs.

Since videogame RPGs began, they've always been about story and character progression. These elements are the central focus of videogame RPGs.  They're not in Minecraft.  They're barely even present in Minecraft.

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by Divion

Minecraft IS an RPG - What else would you call it? If i can take a pen, paper, and cards, and call my Zu'Tan The Arcane Eastern Watch Wizard, and roll dice, and write down my adventures, then MC is a RPG.

Oh, you're using the loose "every game where you play a role is an RPG" definition.

I suppose that explains your confusion, but no just because you play a role in Zelda, God of War, Team Fortress 2, or League of Legends that doesn't mean any of those games are RPGs.

Since videogame RPGs began, they've always been about story and character progression. These elements are the central focus of videogame RPGs.  They're not in Minecraft.  They're barely even present in Minecraft.

I lied, because i read, and im replying to your post.

So you are obviousily a troll, and a good one, because here i am arguing with you over things you are obviousily wrong about.

Zelda is a ARPG (Action Role Playing Game), one of the first.

RPGs are games with roles, and emmersion. Some have more/less Emmersion then others, some are unique avatars, some are premade hero stories, all are roles, and yes even those games you mentioned could be role playing games, but the fact they lack emmersion, and have more profound features in action, competitive play, and shoot mechanism, make their genre different by de facto ambigiouty. 

Minecraft has a Story, and Character progression, the story is available if you look it up, it's just not made appearant in the game.

Character progression happens in the typical sense (levels), and none typical, you start with nothing, get wood, then sticks, make a wood pick, mine rocks, make stone pick, mine iron, make a iron pick, ect progression through crafting.

Are you even arguing with me? Seems like you are just agree that minecraft is an MMORPG by disagree, and stating all the reasons why it is one :)

Originally posted by Divion

I lied, because i read, and im replying to your post.

 

So you are obviousily a troll, and a good one, because here i am arguing with you over things you are obviousily wrong about.

 Zelda is a ARPG (Action Role Playing Game), one of the first.

RPGs are games with roles, and emmersion. Some have more/less Emmersion then others, some are unique avatars, some are premade hero stories, all are roles, and yes even those games you mentioned could be role playing games, but the fact they lack emmersion, and have more profound features in action, competitive play, and shoot mechanism, make their genre different by de facto ambigiouty. 

Minecraft has a Story, and Character progression, the story is available if you look it up, it's just not made appearant in the game.

Character progression happens in the typical sense (levels), and none typical, you start with nothing, get wood, then sticks, make a wood pick, mine rocks, make stone pick, mine iron, make a iron pick, ect progression through crafting. 

Are you even arguing with me? Seems like you are just agree that minecraft is an MMORPG by disagree, and stating all the reasons why it is one :)

So when someone says "RPG" you immediately think of a game like Zelda, and not one like Final Fantasy, Ultima, WOW, Dragon Age, or Baldur's Gate?

It's very unusual for someone to bother using that definition of the word, given that it basically includes 90% of games and just about every other genre.

Again, all the games I mentioned have just as much story and character progression as Minecraft (usually a lot more) and we're not calling them RPGs, because it would be silly to.

Arguing?  No I'm pointing out the fact that Minecraft is less of an RPG than something like League of Legends, which isn't an RPG at all.  So no, Minecraft isn't an MMORPG.

The reason why minecraft is so popular is because of the amount of moding that is allowed with it and conversion. If you play plain old vanilla minecraft you will be bored to tears in a week or two. If you go to their forums they are always screaming for the next patch months in advance . Minecraft is just a sandbox and while its fun it becomes stale just like any other mmorpg. You can look at similar mmorpgs like Star wars galaxies which allow tons of creative altering with their crafting and structure. Even SOE and SWG was losing tons of subs which caused the entire CU and NGE feisco that people hate now. In fact if you really follow minecraft , most of the mods that are so popular are stuff like better then wolves and minecraft comes alive etc which alter gameplay into progression and epoches etc. So even in the true sandbox game of this time you see a lot of players seeking progression in the form of quests IE finishing goals to unlock new techs etc.

I grew up in the UO DAOC crowd and while those games like eq1 and DAOC uo etc were great games that started the genre I think people are missing the entire point on this site. You just are not going to be able to relive your glory days in your first mmorpg. Yes some games obviously take a crappy direction as clones like Rift and SWTOR but not all games are generally heading in that direction . Look at games like TSW which has a classless system and open ended quests that you progress where you want to . While not a fan of that game its still obviously not your typical themepark linear ride. GW2 is another example and I think both of those games are going to take the genre in a new direction completely for awhile. You will still have you quick buck clones releasing Im sure ,Bioware tried it and failed as did Trion but I think by those larger companies mistakes I think some of the companies out here are starting to finally move back to the open world feeling and exploration.

I don't care if something is done simplistic as long as it has depth,iactually prefer any type of in depth content to remain rather simple.

What i usually find however is that devs keep simple to cut cost and just dish out lazy design.

To mention that some features or content is never being used,then i would have to ask why a player would join that game?

The whole purpose as a consumer is to seek out the developer that best exemplifies the effort to bring a game world to life and give us mechanics that bring our players to life.After all this is a ROLE playing genre,not a fps or puzzle game or any of the other myriad of genres.

There is another factor that is important and that is HOW ideas are mplemented.The developer needs to put their mind to work and envision the end result to their game and over time as well.A perfect example would be the ability to manipulate land.This of course could not be a simple free to use as you please,the world would be unrealistic,a mess by abusers.

There is a fine line as i mentioned earlier about "simple"that was the CHEAP factor.In case of Minecraft,they designed the game around a very low budget,so it was not a concept to design the best possible game,but merely like a pet project.

What games like this DO achieve is to open the door,give ideas to bigger developers so they can make the AAA games better.The bummer is i have not seen the large devs go "effort" instead are trying to cover most areas but with little depth.Staying with the minecraft theme,most games just use auto generated land/maps the days of heart felt design and effort have been turned over for speed and cost/profit.

Remember when you were little and Legos and cardboard boxes were the most awesome things ever? Even though they were simplistic, the enjoyment you could have with them was only limited by your imagation. This is exactly why games like Minecraft are fun, and a part of the reason why AAA titles are lacking - there's something wonderful about curiousity paired with the imagination to create. Most titles today are going after the media consumption experience: "Sit here and I will entertain you." Whereas many people prefer the aforementioned approach: "Here's a bunch of random stuff. I wonder what we can do with it?"

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by Divion

I lied, because i read, and im replying to your post.

 

So you are obviousily a troll, and a good one, because here i am arguing with you over things you are obviousily wrong about.

 Zelda is a ARPG (Action Role Playing Game), one of the first.

RPGs are games with roles, and emmersion. Some have more/less Emmersion then others, some are unique avatars, some are premade hero stories, all are roles, and yes even those games you mentioned could be role playing games, but the fact they lack emmersion, and have more profound features in action, competitive play, and shoot mechanism, make their genre different by de facto ambigiouty. 

Minecraft has a Story, and Character progression, the story is available if you look it up, it's just not made appearant in the game.

Character progression happens in the typical sense (levels), and none typical, you start with nothing, get wood, then sticks, make a wood pick, mine rocks, make stone pick, mine iron, make a iron pick, ect progression through crafting. 

Are you even arguing with me? Seems like you are just agree that minecraft is an MMORPG by disagree, and stating all the reasons why it is one :)

So when someone says "RPG" you immediately think of a game like Zelda, and not one like Final Fantasy, Ultima, WOW, Dragon Age, or Baldur's Gate?

It's very unusual for someone to bother using that definition of the word, given that it basically includes 90% of games and just about every other genre.

Again, all the games I mentioned have just as much story and character progression as Minecraft (usually a lot more) and we're not calling them RPGs, because it would be silly to.

Arguing?  No I'm pointing out the fact that Minecraft is less of an RPG than something like League of Legends, which isn't an RPG at all.  So no, Minecraft isn't an MMORPG.

I've been playing RPGS since i was 5 year's old on the NES.

So it depends on which era/generation of gaming you are talking about.

In 1995 if you said RPG, i would have thought of Zelda for NES, Faxandu, Bard's Tale

In 1997, i would have said Zelda : Link to the past, Secret of Mana (pretty much an asian version of Zelda, it spun off almost 4-5 sequels also know as the "sieken densetsu" series),  Final Fantasy, Chrono-Trigger, Eye of the Beholder - Just to name a few i enjoyed

In 2000, i would have said : Any of the N64 Zeldas (Ocarian, Majora's mask), FFVII, FFVIII, ChronoCross, Ogre 64,  Legend of Dragoon, Everquest* - First MMORPG i played was EQ.

 2005, it changed greatily - Dungeon Siege 1/2 - Diablo 1/2 - World of Warcraft, Lineage 2, Everquest 2, City of Heroes..ect..

and so ..

The industry walked away from SP RPGs

Yes, having a "Role", and a story does on the SURFACE encompass 90% of all games.

However it's about the full macroscopic aspect of the game.

Games where the focus was more into shooting skill, rather than story were "Shooters" intime that became the FPS - Games where you controled large armies, and fought out wars, required strategy, those became RTS, those games that were turned based usually are called CCC (Colonize, Command, Conquer ex. Civ Series, Total War, ect) - Ect, the point i'm making is they had VERY PROFOUND mechanisms that set them apart from other games.

When it comes to RPGS it's about the story, and that is IT, it's like an inactive storybook

HOWEVER

RPGS ARE NOT MMORPGS

When richard garriot released ultima online due to the introduction of gaming to the internet, everything changed -- There was no longer a "Beat the game objective" present, the game was about just doing what you want, with an emphasis on several archetypes of play, all up to the player.  It gave the player the choice to, or not to enguage in progessive play in many different forms, ontop of that there were otherplayers they could make these choices with, onto, or with an influeance on. 

You know where this went, everything exploded from there - into the MMORPG Industry it is today, with 2 different possible archetypes of MMORPG - "Sandbox/"Themepark". 

The first MMORPGS were hybrids both Themepark, and Sandbox.  - Most ones launched these days are either/or, with a greater degree of profoundment addressed to each.

So i'll give you this.

Minecraft is not an RPG

Mine IS a Sandbox MMORPG.

Originally posted by dreamscaper

Remember when you were little and Legos and cardboard boxes were the most awesome things ever? Even though they were simplistic, the enjoyment you could have with them was only limited by your imagation. This is exactly why games like Minecraft are fun, and a part of the reason why AAA titles are lacking - there's something wonderful about curiousity paired with the imagination to create. Most titles today are going after the media consumption experience: "Sit here and I will entertain you." Whereas many people prefer the aforementioned approach: "Here's a bunch of random stuff. I wonder what we can do with it?"

+1

This is how i feel.

I think be given the tools to let your imagination, even as an adult run wild is amazing.

Those that think Minecraft is boring.

There is a reason.... Your skull..it's empty :)

You have no imagination, which is derived from your ability to call upon a frame of reference of reason, and deduce different variables for a finalized goal/picture. 

You look at a large rock, and see a rock.

I see carbon, graphite, a building block, a statue, ect...

(:

Originally posted by Divion

 

 

 

Minecraft is not an RPG

Mine IS a Sandbox MMORPG.

 

Minecraft is not an MMORPG, it is not even an RPG, I dunno how you can say with a straight face that Minecraft is not an RPG but it is an MMORPG, surely you must be trolling. Minecraft is a sandbox game that is the only thing you got right. 

As far as MMORPG is concerned your definition is so loose that it could be applied to anything that has a server, also the fact that you went for rabidly defending Minecraft as an RPG to say its not an RPG but its an MMORPG, shows that you are truly grasping at straws.

It might be an MMORPG by your own definition, but it is not by the accepted definition as coined by Richard Garriot in 1997.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massively_multiplayer_online_role-playing_game

Originally posted by Divion

and so ..

The industry walked away from SP RPGs

Yes, having a "Role", and a story does on the SURFACE encompass 90% of all games.

However it's about the full macroscopic aspect of the game.

Games where the focus was more into shooting skill, rather than story were "Shooters" intime that became the FPS - Games where you controled large armies, and fought out wars, required strategy, those became RTS, those games that were turned based usually are called CCC (Colonize, Command, Conquer ex. Civ Series, Total War, ect) - Ect, the point i'm making is they had VERY PROFOUND mechanisms that set them apart from other games.

When it comes to RPGS it's about the story, and that is IT, it's like an inactive storybook

HOWEVER

RPGS ARE NOT MMORPGS

When richard garriot released ultima online due to the introduction of gaming to the internet, everything changed -- There was no longer a "Beat the game objective" present, the game was about just doing what you want, with an emphasis on several archetypes of play, all up to the player.  It gave the player the choice to, or not to enguage in progessive play in many different forms, ontop of that there were otherplayers they could make these choices with, onto, or with an influeance on. 

You know where this went, everything exploded from there - into the MMORPG Industry it is today, with 2 different possible archetypes of MMORPG - "Sandbox/"Themepark". 

The first MMORPGS were hybrids both Themepark, and Sandbox.  - Most ones launched these days are either/or, with a greater degree of profoundment addressed to each.

 So i'll give you this.

 Minecraft is not an RPG

Mine IS a Sandbox MMORPG.

The industry "walked away" from singleplayer RPGs?

Diablo, Torchlight, Skyrim, Fallout, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, and Witcher (amongst many others.)  The industry didn't walk away.  You did.

Yes, you understand that the macro view determines whether something is an RPG or not.  Not just a game mecahnic or two.

And since the macro view of Minecraft lacks a story focus or sufficient character progression, it's therefore not an RPG.  Not even the game's own website or wikipedia entry try to pretend it's something it isn't.  If a mod of Minecraft was an RPG, then that mod would be an RPG (but base Minecraft still wouldn't be.)

Not all RPGs are MMORPGs, but all MMORPGs are RPGs.  RPG is half the acronym!

The correct course of action is to say "Okay okay, Minecraft isn't a MMORPG, but it's a MMO Sandbox and I like it."

Not sure why you'd try so hard to insist it's something it isn't.  One acronym means one thing (MMORPG = MMO RPG), so if a new game comes along and doesn't fit that definition don't try to stretch the definition to encompass that new game.

I personally think the next evolution of mmo's will inherently have to break away from the standard mmo model in order to keep people truly interested. In any genre there is a threshold where it either evolves or fades away.

The success of Minecraft is a clear indicator that there is a big market for freeform styled games (I resist using sandbox on these boards ). I think the merging of minecraft with the character progression etc of mmo's would be VERY interesting and enticing to a lot of people.

     I really dont see what people like about Minecraft so much....I was bored to tears within a few minutes.....On the other hand though, I never liked Legos much and was more of a play outside, adventurous kind of kid........