Originally posted by madazz

Originally posted by Quirhid

Originally posted by madazz

Originally posted by Quirhid

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Again, using your logic, the games I listed are all MMO's. They are instanced, and some play like MMO's too.

I will repeat, I will argue to the death that 16 players does not constitute MASSIVE.

I never saw more than half a dozen people in the same place in Vanguard, Fallen Earth or Mortal Online. Therefore, are those not MMORPGs? There are relatively few occasions where MMORPGs have massive amounts of players in the same area anyway. Defining what is massive or not is arbitrary anyway. Who is the authority to say what is massive and what is not?

Some people so far as to say any game that has just one instance is not an MMORPG.

Saying GW1 is a "lobby game" is inaccurate since it does not have a lobby. All happens in the game with the game engine. Same with DDO and they didn't even bother calling it anything other than MMORPG. They are different, but not so different they don't deserve the term.

Genres are more defined by what people expect from those games rather than what is in them. Certainly not how well a game satisfies a particular acronym. I'd say its not just pedantic, it is anal. And figthing and arguing over such matters is futile - pointless.

Yeah, and you can also call my Pontiac G6 a Lambo, but it doesn't make it right.

If its not massive, its not massive. Get over it.

It also not about how many you see in one spot at any given time, its about ACCESS. They ARE there, they ARE accessible. In those little lobby games, only 16 people or less are actually accessible at any given time. THAT IS NOT MASSIVE. It will never be massive. 

Regarding instances, I honestly don't care for them, but at least those people are accessible. Unless of course each instance only allows 16 players, then it is no longer an MMO as that is not a massive amount of people.

By the way, I am an LoL, Dota, and FPS addict too, and after just hopping onto LoL for a quick dominion match, I asked either team if anyone would consider LoL an MMO and they laughed at the thought.

Hrmh... GW actually allowes 48 players in the same map. Hundreds in non-combat areas. Not that it matters much since anyone can call anything massive.

And I don't have to get over anything. Its not bothering me. And your metaphor doesn't fit.

When you have such a difficulty even understanding what the name of your particular hobby means you know there`s a serious problem. No wonder we have the kind of community we do.

``It`s a radio controlled car, man``. Cool, huh``.

``Actually that is called a dinky car, sherlock``.

``Well I`m calling it an RC car, I don`t care.``

Amazing logic to be witnessed on this site sometimes. Truly amazing.

Originally posted by Cecropia

When you have such a difficulty even understanding what the name of your particular hobby means you know there`s a serious problem. No wonder we have the kind of community we do.

``It`s a radio controlled car, man``. Cool, huh``.

``Actually that is called a dinky car, sherlock``.

``Well I`m calling it an RC car, I don`t care.``

Amazing logic to be witnessed on this site sometimes. Truly amazing.

There we go patronizing again...

Originally posted by Cecropia

When you have such a difficulty even understanding what the name of your particular hobby means you know there`s a serious problem. No wonder we have the kind of community we do.

``It`s a radio controlled car, man``. Cool, huh``.

``Actually that is called a dinky car, sherlock``.

``Well I`m calling it an RC car, I don`t care.``

Amazing logic to be witnessed on this site sometimes. Truly amazing.

 Unfortunately thats what happens when terms are vague and not defined.  It's why in all peer reviewed studies the terms they use are defined at the beginning so there is no argument

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Originally posted by Cecropia

When you have such a difficulty even understanding what the name of your particular hobby means you know there`s a serious problem. No wonder we have the kind of community we do.

``It`s a radio controlled car, man``. Cool, huh``.

``Actually that is called a dinky car, sherlock``.

``Well I`m calling it an RC car, I don`t care.``

Amazing logic to be witnessed on this site sometimes. Truly amazing.

 Unfortunately thats what happens when terms are vague and not defined.  It's why in all peer reviewed studies the terms they use are defined at the beginning so there is no argument

You can't really expect adacemic level writing or scientific accuracy on forums. Some posters just need to accept and tolerate the ambiguity better.

Originally posted by Quirhid

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Originally posted by Cecropia

When you have such a difficulty even understanding what the name of your particular hobby means you know there`s a serious problem. No wonder we have the kind of community we do.

``It`s a radio controlled car, man``. Cool, huh``.

``Actually that is called a dinky car, sherlock``.

``Well I`m calling it an RC car, I don`t care.``

Amazing logic to be witnessed on this site sometimes. Truly amazing.

 Unfortunately thats what happens when terms are vague and not defined.  It's why in all peer reviewed studies the terms they use are defined at the beginning so there is no argument

You can't really expect adacemic level writing or scientific accuracy on forums. Some posters just need to accept and tolerate the ambiguity better.

 I don't at all. However we do need to speak the same language.  What does massive mean?  is it massive multiplayer as in lots of people? How many people, or is it massive and multiplayer. 

What does role playing mean.  Is it just playing your character or something more.

I have my own definition but there's no saying that is the right one?  But until there is a generally agreed upon defintion it's not the wrong one.

Does the community at large feel that lobby games are massive becuase there is a lot of people in the lobby.

I mean technically there is nothing in MMORPG that states there even needs persistance.

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Originally posted by madazz

Originally posted by Quirhid

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Personally I think lobby games and co-op games are MMO"s.  I don't care what the developers called GW1, it meets the criteria of the acronym MMO.

IMO MMO is an an umbrella term and can encompass any online game that is more people than in a multiplayer.  Lobby, RPG, FPS... they are all MMO's just different sub-genre's.

Think if it like the book term fiction, a broad term that encompases high, low fantasky, steampunk, science fiction, horror, historical...

edit - to me the developers of GW1 saying there game is not an MMO is like Kellog's saying Vector is a meal replacement and not a cereal.  Essentially meaningless spin to differentiate their product. 

I agree. Essentially, it plays just like an MMORPG that one small detail of being mostly instanced does not suddenly make it completely different.

Again, using your logic, the games I listed are all MMO's. They are instanced, and some play like MMO's too.

I will repeat, I will argue to the death that 16 players does not constitute MASSIVE.

 I don't think 16 players is massive either, primarily becasue I think multiplayer beats that.  But if you have one area where hundreds can go in, that meets my definition of massive.  Eventually someone is going to have to define these terms :) otherwise the argument will continue ad nauseum :)

An area where hundreds can go in, at the same time, and actually play the game, is massive. If it is just some form of lobby, its just a massive chat then. I am combing massive, multiple and player. If it is just massive, multiple and lobby/chat, then the G part of MMOG is missing.

Originally posted by Quirhid

Originally posted by madazz

Originally posted by Quirhid

Originally posted by madazz

Originally posted by Quirhid

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Again, using your logic, the games I listed are all MMO's. They are instanced, and some play like MMO's too.

I will repeat, I will argue to the death that 16 players does not constitute MASSIVE.

I never saw more than half a dozen people in the same place in Vanguard, Fallen Earth or Mortal Online. Therefore, are those not MMORPGs? There are relatively few occasions where MMORPGs have massive amounts of players in the same area anyway. Defining what is massive or not is arbitrary anyway. Who is the authority to say what is massive and what is not?

Some people so far as to say any game that has just one instance is not an MMORPG.

Saying GW1 is a "lobby game" is inaccurate since it does not have a lobby. All happens in the game with the game engine. Same with DDO and they didn't even bother calling it anything other than MMORPG. They are different, but not so different they don't deserve the term.

Genres are more defined by what people expect from those games rather than what is in them. Certainly not how well a game satisfies a particular acronym. I'd say its not just pedantic, it is anal. And figthing and arguing over such matters is futile - pointless.

Yeah, and you can also call my Pontiac G6 a Lambo, but it doesn't make it right.

If its not massive, its not massive. Get over it.

It also not about how many you see in one spot at any given time, its about ACCESS. They ARE there, they ARE accessible. In those little lobby games, only 16 people or less are actually accessible at any given time. THAT IS NOT MASSIVE. It will never be massive. 

Regarding instances, I honestly don't care for them, but at least those people are accessible. Unless of course each instance only allows 16 players, then it is no longer an MMO as that is not a massive amount of people.

By the way, I am an LoL, Dota, and FPS addict too, and after just hopping onto LoL for a quick dominion match, I asked either team if anyone would consider LoL an MMO and they laughed at the thought.

Hrmh... GW actually allowes 48 players in the same map. Hundreds in non-combat areas. Not that it matters much since anyone can call anything massive.

And I don't have to get over anything. Its not bothering me. And your metaphor doesn't fit.

It actually fits quite well thank you :) Just because they have things in common doesn't put them in the same league. 

I am not arguing GW1's status specifically. By the way, even the developers of GW1 don't classify it as an MMO, I think that says a lot. They labeled it as cooperative role playing and competitive pvp game. And 48 is nowhere near massive, and hundreds in a portion of the game where you aren't playing IS massive, but its not a massive GAME. That is why GW and its developers never labeled it as an MMORPG, cause the M was not combined with the G. It was MORPG if anything.

Agreed :D

cant wait for that next year. it's going to be quite the skill-system type of sandbox MMO.

Most themepark supporters posting here (except for one who shall remain nameless haha) are going to wake up one day and start to hate themeparks just as we all have at some point. It's just the nature of us, we hate linear models where we're forced in a certain direction and forced to do certain menial tasks.

In short, we all desire freedom over control.

Originally posted by Zekiah

Most themepark supporters posting here (except for one who shall remain nameless haha) are going to wake up one day and start to hate themeparks just as we all have at some point. It's just the nature of us, we hate linear models where we're forced in a certain direction and forced to do certain menial tasks.

In short, we all desire freedom over control.

 The only game where I was forced to do certain things was SwTor.  Even WoW, what most people consider the biggest themepark of them all gives me lots of variations in how to play.  IMO more than EQ did.

The whole linearity things IMO is largely bs (except in swtor).

I never played WoW beyond the trial but for me it was LotRO. If you wanted to level in LotRO you were doing the theme parks. Open World leveling was 10 time slower and that was in optimal conditions, farming oranges a few levels above you. LotRO has a huge, huge world though.

Just in metrics,if you had to horse back from one side to the other it would take you hours.

I've said before, Entropia Online is massive and very sand box but they borked their payment system and made the money grab too obvious. It ate $30 in less than a week and I didn't even really do anything. Then for reasons I can't figure out, they locked my credit card for the rest of the month and by the time it was unlocked I was gone and playing something else.

To the point though, those games are world based and it is a big part of their draw. One based on Tolkien the other just a bunch of planets with space content in between. I think most developers are intimidated by big games. Even SWG in the last year. I could roam Dath and never see a soul. They worry they won't fill them up.

Originally posted by Zekiah

Most themepark supporters posting here (except for one who shall remain nameless haha) are going to wake up one day and start to hate themeparks just as we all have at some point. It's just the nature of us, we hate linear models where we're forced in a certain direction and forced to do certain menial tasks.

In short, we all desire freedom over control.

 

Don't think you know what others like. Some desire entertainment. There is zero freedom in watching movies, but they are a very popular entertainment form.

Lots of linear games .. Dishonor, Halo, COD ... sold millions upon millions.

Sure, if i wake up one day and change my taste, so be it. But so far i don't see any evidence of that.

---

Originally posted by nariusseldon

---

Originally posted by Zekiah Most themepark supporters posting here (except for one who shall remain nameless haha) are going to wake up one day and start to hate themeparks just as we all have at some point. It's just the nature of us, we hate linear models where we're forced in a certain direction and forced to do certain menial tasks. In short, we all desire freedom over control.  

---

Don't think you know what others like. Some desire entertainment. There is zero freedom in watching movies, but they are a very popular entertainment form.

Lots of linear games .. Dishonor, Halo, COD ... sold millions upon millions.

Sure, if i wake up one day and change my taste, so be it. But so far i don't see any evidence of that.

---

Originally posted by zafoulis
one thing i will say, Elders Scrolls Online. i can promise you that this will be the new world game, maybe an already known wolrd by the single-player series that we all know but it will be a WORLD. If you only think that their game engine was built from zero and it's not a already existed engine, it's enough.

LOL!! Oh you can promise that can you??

TESO is just going to be the same level/class based treadmill Themepark that all the others are

Linear, zoned, instanced, phased, shallow and derivative gameplay. Nothing more.

That Im sure of