Originally posted by kadepsyson

Originally posted by tawess
Because you seem to very fixated on the physical "world" as in walking around in a physical area. While i consider that community warfare will provide the persistant world.

I can lift a world map of Earth and hold it in my hands.  I can't lift the world Earth with my hands.

That's the difference between looking at a map, that colors change on, and having a game world.

As much is i would like to have Luthien / Siam / Rasalhauge / New Avalon / Tharkad / Atreus / Outreach in game as social hubs they would fill no other purpoes. But that is in your mind al  that is missing to make this a MMO?

 

MMO still just means "Massive Multiplayer Online"and with community Warfare inplace those criterias will be filled. We can argue for ever about what the "massive"  part actually means and while i on a conceptual level agree with you i have come to accept that the meaning and use of the MMO*insert what ever* will change over time.

Originally posted by tawess

Originally posted by kadepsyson

Originally posted by tawess
Because you seem to very fixated on the physical "world" as in walking around in a physical area. While i consider that community warfare will provide the persistant world.

I can lift a world map of Earth and hold it in my hands.  I can't lift the world Earth with my hands.

That's the difference between looking at a map, that colors change on, and having a game world.

As much is i would like to have Luthien / Siam / Rasalhauge / New Avalon / Tharkad / Atreus / Outreach in game as social hubs they would fill no other purpoes. But that is in your mind al  that is missing to make this a MMO?

 

MMO still just means "Massive Multiplayer Online"and with community Warfare inplace those criterias will be filled. We can argue for ever about what the "massive"  part actually means and while i on a conceptual level agree with you i have come to accept that the meaning and use of the MMO*insert what ever* will change over time.

Well the multiplayer isn't massive though.  It's just 24 people at a time.  A persistant WORLD helps fit it into some definitions, but without being massively multiplayer, it'd just be a multiplayer online game.

---

Originally posted by Mackeh
Just read that this state of the art 2012 MMO will have 12 v 12 which may be scaled back to 8 v 8 

I was playing 40 v 40 in WOW 6 years ago and 25 v 25 in the 90's in Quake.

Such small minded developers we have now, they have the best servers the fastest broadband yet they are only capable of churning out small minded games, WOT, MWO, WOP etc

No wonder the Blizzard devs are so smug, they are light years ahead of most other companies.

---

MORPG.

Originally posted by Nitth

 

---

Originally posted by Mackeh
Just read that this state of the art 2012 MMO will have 12 v 12 which may be scaled back to 8 v 8 

 

I was playing 40 v 40 in WOW 6 years ago and 25 v 25 in the 90's in Quake.

Such small minded developers we have now, they have the best servers the fastest broadband yet they are only capable of churning out small minded games, WOT, MWO, WOP etc

No wonder the Blizzard devs are so smug, they are light years ahead of most other companies.

---

 

MORPG.

Heck, even the "RP" part of it is debatable.  You role-play a mechwarrior about as much as I role-play a Spartan in Halo.  Perhaps less.

IF they ever get the community warefare in place then depending on how exactly it works then sure maybe it could be classed as an MMO... but as it stands right now MWO is not an MMO and its as simple as that...

You mean it's not finished yet?

 

This is breaking news. We better alert the media to this discovery.

Well thats why everyone return after some time to wow. Smoooth and awesome bg, some of zones are very large like tol barad and wintergrasp, best open world pvp with huge raids on opponent cities. I like MechWarrior online but 8vs8 only bg is just not enough

OP:

It is am mmo. There are going to be consequences to the state of the political climate to the universe if you lose that 1 fight or 1 planet.

It is just not implemented yet because it is still in early BETA

You do know it is still in early BETA rite?

Originally posted by Mackeh

Just read that this state of the art 2012 MMO will have 12 v 12 which may be scaled back to 8 v 8 

I was playing 40 v 40 in WOW 6 years ago and 25 v 25 in the 90's in Quake.

Such small minded developers we have now, they have the best servers the fastest broadband yet they are only capable of churning out small minded games, WOT, MWO, WOP etc

No wonder the Blizzard devs are so smug, they are light years ahead of most other companies.

Well you do realize Wow is probably the lowest tech PC big name title in this genre?You can enjoy MANY things in WOW but TECh is NOT one of them.

I have seen mech warrior and to be honest ,it is far from a high tech state of the art game either.

However i really cannot get into commenting on how misleading dveloipers have become to sell their games.It is no wonder so many gamers come away unhappy and complaining about games,it is becuase many try to lie or mislead them.

Myself personally,i enjoy 1 on 1 the best for the msot skillfull type competition,The bigger the less interested i am.

Example i was around when FPS and Esports started back in the days of Quake and unreal.The MOST i would ever play was 4 players,anymore i found the game play less skillfull with more backstabbing or players getting clean up duty on the battle leftovers.I love the battle of wits between two players ,trying to outwit each otehr.

So imo i would have no problem at all with their setup.

 

Originally posted by Mackeh

Just read that this state of the art 2012 MMO will have 12 v 12 which may be scaled back to 8 v 8 

I was playing 40 v 40 in WOW 6 years ago and 25 v 25 in the 90's in Quake.

Such small minded developers we have now, they have the best servers the fastest broadband yet they are only capable of churning out small minded games, WOT, MWO, WOP etc

No wonder the Blizzard devs are so smug, they are light years ahead of most other companies.

Zerg vs Tatical,  which do you prefer?  As for me, i prefer the tatical aspect of smaller battles.

Originally posted by aRtFuLThinG

OP:

It is am mmo. There are going to be consequences to the state of the political climate to the universe if you lose that 1 fight or 1 planet.

It is just not implemented yet because it is still in early BETA

You do know it is still in early BETA rite?

Really don't like the direction of mmo's are going then. I mean you sit at a launcher, you can not communicate with any players you need to use forums or third party voip. even then how do you make friends in game? so you sit at a launcher totally discconnected from all other players and then launch into an 8v8 battle that lasts 6-10 minutes then you are kicked back to the launcher. yup feels like an mmo to me.

Edit: what's wrong with just calling a game a multiplayer game or an online game that has feature x. Like creating a story form the won or lost battles. I mean I feel the gaming industry just wants to slap the term MMo on any game just so they can charge monthly fees or sell stuff for real money in game if it's "ftp".

Maybe wiki should rediffine MMO to mean any game that takes real money from the player throughout it's lifecycle.