MMORPG.com Writer Carolyn Koh is attending this year's, modified, E3. In this article, Carolyn unleashes the Fury as she brings us up to speed on the PvP game's development and talks to Michael Hampden, a former MMORPG.com podcast co-host and current Content Designer for Fury.

In 2006, Unleash the Fury was the sleeper hit of E3. Several of the staff voted for it for Best Graphics and it won the "Most Surprising" award. It then went on to garner more interest at PAX and GDC, and then fans waited... and waited for more news. Well, the news is here. Unleash the Fury will be published by GameCock in the USA. Currently in closed beta, it will be released in October of 2007 and the business model will be unveiled in a couple of weeks.

More excitingly, there will be a free preview weekend beginning Friday, July 27th and running through July 29th. Client downloads will be available prior to that weekend and all interested will be able to preview the gameplay of this PvP game. Just as we sat down to demo the game; the power went out on us, so we talked about the game while waiting for an engineer or electrician to get more juice to the hotel suite.

Read the whole article here.

nice...... but i still think age of conan or darkfall workcs :P

personaly i dont see Fury as MMO. but hey some could say that about Guild Wars also.

I'm a  little confused.  How is this an mmo?

There are games already out that allow for 32 vs 32 and they are not being called 'mmo's.  I think BF2 is one such game.

Games like BF2 also have single player campaigns. Fury is entirely online, and probably has a central hub in which you can run around in / interact in before joining a match.

Originally posted by Hellebore

Games like BF2 also have single player campaigns. Fury is entirely online, and probably has a central hub in which you can run around in / interact in before joining a match.

Originally posted by Hellebore

Games like BF2 also have single player campaigns. Fury is entirely online, and probably has a central hub in which you can run around in / interact in before joining a match.

Battlefield 2 does not have a single player campaign, you can play offline, but its just the normal maps with bots.  I don't see any stretch of the definition that makes this qualify as an MMO.  A graphical lobby does not an MMO make.  This just sounds like a regular 32 player, multiplayer game..  Either there is some info we are missing, or the MMO label on this game may be strictly a marketing tool.

This game would sound interesting if my view of these types of games weren't tainted by Guild Wars. Because Fury sounds similar to the PvP portion of GW. While I know that it is not the exact same, because Fury will offer larger battles, different graphics, and ways to level up; the general idea is the same. A monthly fee would make a world of difference between Fury and Guild Wars and I would suggest it. Any how, this game doesn't offer the whole MMORPG package, so I probably won't be playing it. I've had my experience with MMORPGs that serve only one or two courses of the MMORPG meal (GW & DDO) and I never felt satisfied at the end of the day. However, there is a niche for it and I will never deny those people their own game. To them, the best of luck to you in Fury. If it is a smashing success, maybe I will come over and give it a whirl.

As far as the snobbish sounding people on the forum that were talking about how Fury isn't a true MMORPG and shouldn't be on this sight, I really think you all should relax, because you don't pay a subscription for the services mmorpg.com provides. While I agree that Fury shouldn't be on a site that claims their site is dedicated to MMORPGs; I believe that we shouldn't complain about which games they put on their site and also be understanding when it is blatantly obvious that this website is steering more towards online games in general, instead of specializing in MMORPGs anymore. At least it should be blatantly obvious to members that have been following this website for the past 2 years at least.

For those who got burned on the GW PVP experience, I've gone on record as saying that Fury isn't like that at all.  Fury will have several types of PVP tournaments, and a good assortment of rankings.  You can max out a character in 1-2 main classes with about 24-30 hours of gameplay, and by modern standards that is basically nothing. The good thing though is that you can compete all along the way so you don't have to max out a character before getting into the competitive part of the PVP.

So for those that had high hopes for GW PVP, I encourage you to give Fury a shot.

I can see how it may look like it wouldn't qualify as an MMO, but there are probably many more aspects that are unmentioned at this point. Like said a couple of posts above me, probably a general hub where players can interact.

Anyways, I'm looking forward to it, sounds and looks like it will be fun.

Definitely doesn't sound like an MMO. Why would MMORPG review it?

Do they get paid by advertisements?

To be fair... if the developers call it an MMO, of course they should report on it.  They have also said, regarding guild wars, that while it may not strictly fit some people's definition of an MMORPG, it certainly shares the same target audience.  I think they should really be watching for games that are only using the term MMORPG for marketing reasons.  That may or may not be the case here, but it kinda sounds that way so far. 

What is a MMO , what is not ?

Why GW is a MMO and Diablo or BF isnt ?

I think, MMO is a game in which exist an environment where a large number of players can gather at a same time. Well, kinda not clear for BF . Think like this , you have to join a "game" to meet ppl in Diablo and BF. However , in GW you can almost meet  anyone anywhere anytime without log in into a "game" or a "game server"

If FURY has a space where a large number of ppl can gather without being in "a game" or " a match" , it is a MMO

I love GW pvp but it keep getting out of date because of the expanding of pve. GW dev prolly after the profit and forgot the main pvp core of GW. FURY is my new hope. Hurry up and release the game to save my soul.

Ok, so you want definitions, here it is:

A massively multiplayer online game (MMOG) is a type of computer game that enables hundreds or thousands of players to simultaneously interact in a game world they are connected to via the Internet. This kind of game is played in an online, multiplayer-only persistent world.

As you can see the most important two things are:

1. simultaneously interact - Which Fury and GW fails at

2. persistent - of course both of them support this.

Therefore, by definition both GW and Fury are not MMOs.

I dont know about FURY but you prolly have not played GW.

It's instance like pve does not make it non-MMO . Every zone in GW, even towns , is an instance. simultaneously interact? Common man, a few hundred ppl in a town, chilling out, trading , chatting, even playing games ( in festivals ) is not simulatneously interact ? So few hundred ppl in a same zone at the same time ,is not massively multiplayer online ?

Beside that , the wolrd in GW is not really persistent . Its divided into zones and every zone is customized for the ppl who are playing in it.

yYour definitions sound good but I doubt you really understand them.

Whether it's a MMO or not you could debate for ages. Plain and simple this game is a game any competitive pvper should at least give a chance. I've found no matter how hard I try and simply can't explain the game, you just need to get in there and play, it blends some things from FPS and RPG's and certainly pulls on things that GW's did well but when it comes down to it I've been having a great time playing the game and the fact that my skill as a player means so much in this game is a huge step in the right direction from other MMOs that base things on gear and time instead.

Originally posted by cdeepal

Ok, so you want definitions, here it is:

A massively multiplayer online game (MMOG) is a type of computer game that enables hundreds or thousands of players to simultaneously interact in a game world they are connected to via the Internet. This kind of game is played in an online, multiplayer-only persistent world.

As you can see the most important two things are:

1. simultaneously interact - Which Fury and GW fails at

2. persistent - of course both of them support this.

Therefore, by definition both GW and Fury are not MMOs.

Interesting comment and worth exploring.

WoW has 9 million subscribers. What is the maximum you can "simultaneously interact" with? You can get 2,000 or so people into Ironforge. Is that fun? (I've seen some dead dwarves in those numbers, but not live players.

You can fly from Darnassus (ok you need to hop on a boat as well) to Ironforge, or if you're a mage, you can teleport there. In Fury you can teleport from one "instance" of Sanctarum to another within your Home Realm. What is the difference? The designers of Wow have created a world with distinct areas, each one different, but you cannot go from one continent to the other without zoning. What is more simulataneous - a flight path and boat ride, or a teleport?

The key point here is that both technology and sociology play a part in what makes a game world. In Fury, we have dfesigned a game world that promotes Realm versus Realm conflict. Once you choose your Realm (your home team using a sports analogy), you are there until you choose to transfer to a new Realm. If within your Realm, there are too many people in one zone (e.g. 500 people between the bank and the auction house in Ironforge), Fury creates multiple instances of that area.

Now, you want to chat with your friends on your home Realm, that's just like chatting from Ironforge to Darnassus or standing together in Ironforge. You want to physically trade, teleport and meet at the mailbox. The systems are very much the same.

I am interested to hear why this is less simulataneous, or indeed why promoting more players in a single space than graphics cards can handle is in fact a desirable game feature.

And my last point; in Fury, p to1 million people can interact in warzones and compete over the same rewards. Not simultaneously, that is true. We could have to wait for improvements on the 21" monitor before those numbers become reality in a game.

Flame away

P.S. Come check it out this weekend for yourself....

Heck, I'm going to answer my own post before anyone else...

We've struggled with the genre of Fury since the outset. Multi--player? No - we have a client-server architecture. MMO - well, not a traditional one that's for sure. Are there more than 32 people interacting - yes. Do we have a central secure server cluster - yes.

But then, are we full price monthly subscription - no.

You tell us what we should be called. We're just happy that we're now ready (almost) to show the world how much fun our game is. 

Requirements for listing on mmorpg.com:

http://mmorpg.com/faq.cfm/showFaq/4

First, please make sure that the game is not already on our list.  If you know the name of the game, make sure you sort our list by "Title" (click on the Title column name) and look for it alphabetically. 

Second, make sure that it completes our definition of a MMORPG:

• 500 or more simultaneous players in one world.
  • The game must include some form of graphical common area. This distinction means Diablo II is not considered an MMORPG, while Guild Wars is.
• It must be graphical...so no text based MUDs.
• Persistent characters.
• Some form of character advancement.
• It must use a true client/server connection.  In other words, no HTML or "web" based games.  Games that run in a browser using Java are OK.
• Five or more screenshots from inside of the game engine itself.
• A professional web site free of annoying pop-up ads or Spyware programs and access to some kind of support system.
• Must fully support English.  This means the client interface, in-game chat, help system and support website must all be in English.

NOTE: At this time we are no longer adding 2D/Isometric games to our list - we will add these again at a later date once we adapt our list to allow feature filtering.

If the game fails to meet any of these criteria, we do not include it on MMORPG.com. Occasionally, we will cover high profile games that have not yet met the screenshot criteria, but they will still not be included in the “Game List”.

Ultimately, MMORPG.com reserves the right of final judgment on whether or not a game should or should not be added to our game list.

If you know a game that meets all of the criteria listed above, please email it to editor@mmorpg.com.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Decide for yourselves whether it fits the description or not. I would start with whether you can fit 500 people in the "lobby" or in a "room".

Just a side note, Dan Gray, Fury developer, does not consider it an mmorpg, as seen in a post here: http://mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/1540082#1540082

Quote: "That would be why we don't describe it as an MMORPG. Fury is a 'PvPMMO'."

GW is kinda of on the border between multiplayer and mmo .  How Fury got on the list is beyond me however.  Basically the keyword for any mmo is PERSISTANT WORLD.  Sadly Fury doesnt fit this by any strech of the imagination.  Would love to hear a staff member explain it to everyone if possible.  Perhaps its about politics and mmorpg.com wants to suck up to K2 networks.

P,.S. to the post above me. Game world is a term used very loosely thanks to GW.  The thing is I wuldnt call a zone for players to hang out a game world, definetly not by mmorpg terms.