The Agency Forum » General Discussion » Ok, this isn't even an MMO.

Originally posted by Mike_L

MMO = massively multiplayer online

 

If it is that then it is a MMO... the success of this is seriously up for debate though.

But is a heavily instanced world where players can only play with a small group at a time an MMO?

Really, what is the difference between a forum and a graphical 'lobby'?

Simply having lots of players and being online does not make a game an MMO.

If it does then Yahoo Games is an MMO?

Originally posted by Gyrus

Originally posted by Mike_L

MMO = massively multiplayer online

 

If it is that then it is a MMO... the success of this is seriously up for debate though.

 

But is a heavily instanced world where players can only play with a small group at a time an MMO?

Really, what is the difference between a forum and a graphical 'lobby'?

Simply having lots of players and being online does not make a game an MMO.

 

If it does then Yahoo Games is an MMO?

I think you guys nitpick too much.

Your so stuck with the definition of what an mmo is that you can't see the forest from the trees.

Online games are always going to be evolving. It is very possible that what will pass as an mmo might not readily be recognized as one 20 or 30 years from now.

What is the common denominator is that you can assume a role and you can meet and play with a great amount of people.

And as games such as guild wars fall a bit outside of the definition of what a tradtional mmo is, it stands to reason that it's not going to have it's own site for corpg's but might be of interest for pepole who play online games.

From my time with Guild Wars I have to say that it felt very much like an mmo. Oh sure, you didn't meet people whe you were outside but quite frankly, in some cases that was a blessing in disguise. When we were involved in a mission it felt very much like an mmo. And I was able to play with a large variety of people when I wanted to group.

Originally posted by Sovrath
...

 

I think you guys nitpick too much.

Your so stuck with the definition of what an mmo is that you can't see the forest from the trees.

Online games are always going to be evolving. It is very possible that what will pass as an mmo might not readily be recognized as one 20 or 30 years from now.

What is the common denominator is that you can assume a role and you can meet and play with a great amount of people.

...

Actually - that's my point.

Lately there has been a definate trend toward MMOs that are more like Single Player games with multiplayer content.
So, when does a game stop being an MMO and just become a game with multiplayer content?

And most importantly to this site - when does a game stop being an MMORPG?

Originally posted by Gyrus

Originally posted by Sovrath
...

 

I think you guys nitpick too much.

Your so stuck with the definition of what an mmo is that you can't see the forest from the trees.

Online games are always going to be evolving. It is very possible that what will pass as an mmo might not readily be recognized as one 20 or 30 years from now.

What is the common denominator is that you can assume a role and you can meet and play with a great amount of people.

...

Actually - that's my point.

Lately there has been a definate trend toward MMOs that are more like Single Player games with multiplayer content.
So, when does a game stop being an MMO and just become a game with multiplayer content?

And most importantly to this site - when does a game stop being an MMORPG?

Well that's really opinion now isn't it?

you ask when does it stop being an mmo and just become a game with multiplayer content. I would think that's subjective.

I have no problems with games allowing people to either solo or group. I do actually think a game can have both. they could even have different rewards for both types of play, though in the end the players who group more can also do the solo content and the players who don't have the time or inclination to group will miss out. but that's ok I think.

I think MMORPG's cease to become role play games when the player refuses to take on a role.

Let's look at what MMORPG means.

Well, we have massive. I know that many players think that means one large world but I would posit that "large world" can actually mean many things. Doesn't have to just be a large oblivionesque world in my opinion. It can just be many different dungeons that players can access.

Then we have multiplayer. Again, I don't feel that being able to run into anyone at anytime encompasses the massive or multiplayer part. As long as you can meet people at some point then you will have the ability to meet many types of people. There have been too many times to count that when I was in an open world I onliy ran into 4 or 5 people.

What I think is that the first mmo's were made in the only way that the dev's could make them. Players then got used to that, the term mmo was born and forevermore they thought of those games as "mmo's"

But if the first games were heavily instanced with large hubs for meeting people then it is more than believable that those games would have been called mmo's.

 Online.. well, they are online.

And RPG means that the player takes on some sort of role. This is a hard one because does that mean all the first players role played? Or were their characters such that they fulfilled a real and believable role within the game world?

I have personall found that what many people desire in a mmorpg is actually the antithesis of any type of immersive world. Having large regional chats where players can shoot the shit is not conducive to immersive playing in my opinion. I've had to shut all that off in any game I've played just so i didn't have to see "every day" conversations.

To me an immersive world is one where the outside world is mitigated and the players can concentrate on the ingame activities. Doesn't mean that once you know people you aren't going to start speaking about day to day things. But to be in the countryside in a world (or wherever) and hear the most inane talk, especially the comparison talks about "it's like WoW", "no, WoW is better because of x", etc, well it's just beyond the pale.

Originally posted by Waterlily

I saw the E3 trailer of this game. This is just a CO-OP action fps.

 

This isn't an MMO.

By my standards it doesn't count either.  This is pointless to have on here.

It is going to be Massively Multiplayer.

It's going to be Online.

It has persistent world locations.

It is full of instances.

It allows you to build your own avatar how you want and "level" them up.

What does it need to be an MMO, elves and dwarves? Sorry, we have enough games like that.

Surprised it took Waterlilly until the 7th post to bring up SOE.

Would it be possible to get an SOE Hate forum going where all the SOE bash posts could go to die?

Maybe put it right along side the SWG "Vets" forum?

"Right, in essence you can give any definition you want to MMO. It's not like the semantics are so important in games, it's not science.

HOWEVER, what bothers me here is that SoE is trying to sell and promote this game as an MMO. And this game really has far too little to do with an MMO to use that trick as a selling point, that's dishonest."

And in your previous post you talked about games that kept track of your stats and such, as this game will do.                                                                                                                                                                                                             And then in the second sentence the truth comes out.

Originally posted by Waterlily

There is nothing Massive Multiplayer in this game, nothing. And as far as I could tell, it's not a role playing game either. You're just a spy in an instance.

Great. So finally there is something different on the market. MP stealth/action/disguise gameplay sounds interesting.

Originally posted by Waterlily

I saw the E3 trailer of this game. This is just a CO-OP action fps.

 

This isn't an MMO.

If game can hold over 1000 players in same server and there is possibility that these player are in same place inside the game. Then game is MMOG (Massive multiplayer online game). If players can't how ever meet anywhere, except having groups or grouping in group search features, then it's just multiplayer game. Example Guildwar is MMOG, because players can meet in town, even if "hunting" is group based activity.

As for RPG, it only means player is taking role of character. How ever, RPG is often related ability have character development, what player control.

Perhaps it is following the Guild Wars model rather than the stabndard MMORPG

 This is nothing new, Phantasy Star Online called itself an MMO. We just need a new term, uh SRMOG, Server Room Multiplayer Online Game, but that's TF2 too. LMOG, Limited Multiplayer Online Game, but again, too broad. Ok I got it, WRWMMMOBMT, We Really Wanted to Make an MMO But Made This. That work for everyone?

Originally posted by Sovrath

Originally posted by Waterlily

Originally posted by Edroe

well actually it is an MMO. It looks like its just not an MMORPG. They did say it was set in a persistant world so its not exaclty CounterStrike

 

Ok, a game keeping track does not make it an MMO.

BG / Diablo / NN all keep track of your ranking and stats and gear, they are not MMO however.

 

It's all instanced as far as I can tell, you just co-op with another person, and the game keeps track of your gear.

There is nothing Massive Multiplayer in this game, nothing. And as far as I could tell, it's not a role playing game either. You're just a spy in an instance.

 

I think people need to realize that as time goes by the definition of what an MMO is will change.

It's only natural that it will evolve into something that is different from the very first games.

Of course one could come up with a different name for every change that an online game incorporates into its design but it probably is easier to think of any online game that allows access by multitudes of people as an MMO or at least a flavor of MMO.

In the end it will all come under the moniker of MMO.

Screw the semantics.  A FPS that has a lobby system (CrimeCraft) and perhaps this?, , ,are not mmo's, but FPS's. 

Another stupid thread about definitions...

Terms like FPS, RPG, MMO and RTS do not have a singular meaning. They are terms that host multitude of different type of games underneath the same umbrella. Suck it up and get used to it.