Originally posted by madazz

The weird version of MMO that a few users are trying to define:

Massive = Network

Multiplayer = Multiple people playing a game (doesn't have to be together, as long as they are networked)

Online = Online

 

The actual version of MMO that already exists and has for many years:

Massive = Large Quantity or Size

Multiplayer = Multiple people playing a game together

Online = Online

It's Massively, not Massive. The word describes the degree of multiplayer, not the world, proximity, connection type or anything else. It seems your main issue is what constitutes 'together' and I get the impression your assumption is that it needs to be in a 2D or 3D world, correct?

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by madazz

The weird version of MMO that a few users are trying to define:

Massive = Network

Multiplayer = Multiple people playing a game (doesn't have to be together, as long as they are networked)

Online = Online

 

The actual version of MMO that already exists and has for many years:

Massive = Large Quantity or Size

Multiplayer = Multiple people playing a game together

Online = Online

It's Massively, not Massive. The word describes the degree of multiplayer, not the world, proximity, connection type or anything else. It seems your main issue is what constitutes 'together' and I get the impression your assumption is that it needs to be in a 2D or 3D world, correct?

Your assumption as to what my assumption is, is incorrect. Are you resurrecting this just to pick a fight?

Originally posted by madazz

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by madazz

The weird version of MMO that a few users are trying to define:

Massive = Network

Multiplayer = Multiple people playing a game (doesn't have to be together, as long as they are networked)

Online = Online

 

The actual version of MMO that already exists and has for many years:

Massive = Large Quantity or Size

Multiplayer = Multiple people playing a game together

Online = Online

It's Massively, not Massive. The word describes the degree of multiplayer, not the world, proximity, connection type or anything else. It seems your main issue is what constitutes 'together' and I get the impression your assumption is that it needs to be in a 2D or 3D world, correct?

Your assumption as to what my assumption is, is incorrect. Are you resurrecting this just to pick a fight?

I was asking if that was your assumption, not telling you it was. Also, the thread had two replies sitting on the top of Recent Posts when I clicked it, so I didn't know it was a necro'd thread. My bad.

Originally posted by Quirhid
Its not a necro thread when its not even two weeks old.

I don't know... rigor mortis has definitely started to set in.

Originally posted by Cuathon

Quizz, the real indicator of mmo status is massively multiplayer. How many people does your activity affect? LoL is not an MMO because the actions in one game do not change the experience of players within the whole game. EvE is an MMO because the actions of any given player permanently alter the experience of many other players.

MMO is the new ironically, or the new literally. Does the rampant misuse of ironic in popular culture change the meaning? I would say no. Therefore the same applies to MMO.

Unfortunately the people who make sense are vastly outnumbered by the plebs so we can't assume that anything means what it meant 10 minutes ago much less 10 years ago.

    Well the answer to that highlighted sentence is - in LoL if I play a 5v5 match, the main part of the game, my actions directly affect 9 people. 4 on my team and 5 on the other.  If I play the main part of , for instance GW2, most of the the time my activity affects practically no one else as the game uses a personal story that only you run and quests that are soloable.  By your indicator LoL has more MMO to it than GW2. In reality Massively Multiplayer Online is just that. Both games have multiplayer online followings and thousands upon thousands playing at any given time. LoL's matches can be viewed as instanced runs in the same way GW2 and others do dungeons and the way GW1 was entirely designed.

Originally posted by Axxar
Interesting how lots of classic multiplayer games I played in the day have now retroactively become MMOs.

lol i keep thinking the same. i keep wondering how Yahoo! Chess is now an mmo.

all because some no-name marketing company that pops out of no where starts calling themselves "the industry."

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by madazz

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by madazz

The weird version of MMO that a few users are trying to define:

Massive = Network

Multiplayer = Multiple people playing a game (doesn't have to be together, as long as they are networked)

Online = Online

 

The actual version of MMO that already exists and has for many years:

Massive = Large Quantity or Size

Multiplayer = Multiple people playing a game together

Online = Online

It's Massively, not Massive. The word describes the degree of multiplayer, not the world, proximity, connection type or anything else. It seems your main issue is what constitutes 'together' and I get the impression your assumption is that it needs to be in a 2D or 3D world, correct?

Your assumption as to what my assumption is, is incorrect. Are you resurrecting this just to pick a fight?

 

I was asking if that was your assumption, not telling you it was. Also, the thread had two replies sitting on the top of Recent Posts when I clicked it, so I didn't know it was a necro'd thread. My bad.

No, my bad. Thread isnt old enough to be necrod. I am just tired and unwilling to talk about this topic anymore lol! You guys can continue though.

Since nobody can agree what constitutes an MMORPG.  Is there any consensus on what games are not considered MMORPG's?

Pac-Man?  You can play Pac-Man online now.  A lot of other people are playing it too so I guess it's massive.  I get to play the role of Pac-Man so you can call it a role playing game.

What about Asteriods?  Pong?  Solitaire?

Originally posted by dave6660

Since nobody can agree what constitutes an MMORPG.  Is there any consensus on what games are not considered MMORPG's?

Pac-Man?  You can play Pac-Man online now.  A lot of other people are playing it too so I guess it's massive.  I get to play the role of Pac-Man so you can call it a role playing game.

What about Asteriods?  Pong?  Solitaire?

 

Any game that limits the number of people you can interact with to about 64 people at a time.

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Originally posted by dave6660

Since nobody can agree what constitutes an MMORPG.  Is there any consensus on what games are not considered MMORPG's?

Pac-Man?  You can play Pac-Man online now.  A lot of other people are playing it too so I guess it's massive.  I get to play the role of Pac-Man so you can call it a role playing game.

What about Asteriods?  Pong?  Solitaire?

 

Any game that limits the number of people you can interact with to about 64 people at a time.

I like the number 64.  I've always been partial to the perfect squares.  Oh and irrational constants (who doesn't love e).

Originally posted by dave6660

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Originally posted by dave6660

Since nobody can agree what constitutes an MMORPG.  Is there any consensus on what games are not considered MMORPG's?

Pac-Man?  You can play Pac-Man online now.  A lot of other people are playing it too so I guess it's massive.  I get to play the role of Pac-Man so you can call it a role playing game.

What about Asteriods?  Pong?  Solitaire?

 

Any game that limits the number of people you can interact with to about 64 people at a time.

I like the number 64.  I've always been partial to the perfect squares.  Oh and irrational constants (who doesn't love e).

Admittedly I'm not postive about 64, thats just the number I keep hearing that multiplayer formats are supported to.

The MMO part of MMORPG was coined to distinguish the multiplayer of these games from that of ordinary multiplayer games of the time. With that in mind it should be fairly easy to eliminate certain game types from the MMO umbrella by simply seeing if something similar existed back when the MMO term was first established (when they were NOT considered MMOs).

So take a look at what other games existed when UO and EQ1 were around, if they were not MMOs then their modern evolutions certainly aren't MMOs now.

Originally posted by nilden
It's not so much expanding the definition as it is watering it down.

Same thing.

The set of MMOs included in the definition is bigger.