Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

The industry is expanding the definition of MMO

12467

Comments

  • GardavsshadeGardavsshade Cedar Springs, MIPosts: 766Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quizzical

    They're definitely multiplayer and online games, and MMO doesn't and shouldn't automatically imply MMORPG.

    That leaves the question as how many players it takes to be "massively" multiplayer, and that's nearly impossible to define.  Even if we agree that 2 players per instance is not massively multiplayer and 10,000 is, I don't think you can justify saying that n players per instance is not massively multiplayer and n+1 is for any value of n.

    And even if you could, the number of players per instance varies in many games, whether by area of the game, time of day, or whatever.  Surely it doesn't make sense to claim that a game is an MMO at peak hours and is not an MMO in the middle of the night.

    "MMO" is shorthand for "MMORPG" as far as I use the term, and that's how I read it, so YES MMO to me = MMORPG.

    But hey.... even THIS webite can't tell the difference between a mmorpg and a mmofps,or any other kind of online game.... (and there many different kinds and should be dealt with individually with seperate websites imo) so I am not surprised that your useage of the term MMO Quizzical is the one often used. I do not fault you for this, but I will always disagree with it.

    As far as how many people it takes for it to be "Multiplayer"? Well I am old school on that one, 500 is enough for me and I do NOT agree with Instancing in MMORPGs anymore after how I have seen it used. I also tack on to that arbitrary popluation number a "feature requirement" for a game to be multiplayer.... at least 20% of all content must require 2 or more Players to work together in a group to complete it. That was how the old MMORPGs worked and as far as I am concerned that is how they STILL should work. I do not agree witht eh newer idea that almost all MMORPG content should be soloable. **If you want a solo game then go play a console game or single player PC game, not a MMORPG.

    In regards to the OP: As far as what the "Industry" does, well, they do what they want to do. When the "MMO Industry" decides to use the term MMO to stand for practically every type of multiplayer online game then just proves they either don't know the difference between them or don't care what the difference is, and I think they really don't care to be honest. They car eabout their quarterly reports and their stock prices and dividends, not about MMORPG or any other Online gaming in my opinion.

    The days when MMO Devs actually cared sincerely about MMORPGs and other Online Games is over. Devs, and the Marketing Execs that are their Supervisors care about their paychecks first, and thier games second. As far as I am concerned they might as well go make Widgets in China.

    I make no apologies for my opinion, nor will I change it no matter how many people buy a pretty box at Walmart and go home and install it to discover they just bought a MMORPG...

  • NitthNitth AustraliaPosts: 3,684Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Gardavsshade
    "MMO" is shorthand for "MMORPG" as far as I use the term, and that's how I read it, so YES MMO to me = MMORPG.

    Then i would beg you to reconsider your ideal, Your limiting yourself the possibilities of what a Massively Multiplayer on line Game could be.

    Free from the constraints of rpg rules if it wants to be.

    image
    TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

  • GardavsshadeGardavsshade Cedar Springs, MIPosts: 766Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nitth

     


    Originally posted by Gardavsshade
    "MMO" is shorthand for "MMORPG" as far as I use the term, and that's how I read it, so YES MMO to me = MMORPG.

     

    Then i would beg you to reconsider your ideal, Your limiting yourself the possibilities of what a Massively Multiplayer on line Game could be.

    Free from the constraints of rpg rules if it wants to be.

    No. I am perfectly content with MMORPG being a narrowly defined and particular genre of online gaming that appeals to a small minority.

    To me the biggest problem in MMORPG genre is that there are far too many people joining it that want to change it into something it wasn't before. I have one word to say to that kind of mentality....

     

    Begone.

     

    If you don't like how MMORPGs were and are, then go elsewhere for your entertainment. There are many, MANY, other gaming options to enjoy. I enjoy MMORPGs as they were, I want to see them go back to what they were, and I will not apologise for my opinion on that.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Cuathon
    Well flower is just as much a concept as MMO. Can we redefine flower to include boulders? Rose might be concrete but flower is just a category of objects with arbitrarily decided characteristics.Draw Something has a record of wins and losses in its scoring system, it has persistent characters engaged in competition. It has a virtual world, a conceptual space in which 2 minds attempt to communicate. It doesn't have physical landscapes if that is what you are disagreeing with. Draw Something's userbase is the whole of facebook potentially.I understand both sides of the argument. But you can't have a meaningful conversation about it because as you say concepts are arbitrary.A meaningful conversation requires common ground whereby you manipulate a persons beliefs to show that if they believe this they must believe that. That is how debate works. Why do some people believe one definition and some the other? Because that's what they were told! Some of us were told this is an MMORPG by people like Bartle, Koster, and Garriot.Other people were told this is an MMORPG by marketers who wanted us to buy their games so they could suck us dry of money. Just like some people believe in Jesus because an authority figure, their parents, told them he was real, and some people believe in Allah instead.If the distinction is arbitrary we need to look at the source. One definition is sourced from the originators of the idea. Another is sourced from men in suits coopting the word because they saw that people would pay more money for a game that used that word.Why do you think there arent any equally rage filled debates about other genres? Because no one could use a redefinition of that word to make shitloads of money so no one gives a fuck about it.No one has any arguments about what is or is not a platformer. Like any other word whose redefinition doesn't result in a power exchange people are fine with the word meaning what it means.Why do people argue over interpretations of the Constitution? Because redefining legal language means real life physical and economic and political gains for the various sides.I'm sorry, I understand why some people think things that aren't MMOs are, its because they've been fooled by marketers into parting with their money.Does it make people feel bad to know that they've been duped? I don't care, its not my fault they don't use their brains to think about anything but what the popular kids are playing and who Snooki and Kim are having sex with this week.The IMPORTANCE of this war might not be the same as whether marriage includes gay people. But its CAUSES and the PRINCIPLES involved are identical. Protecting and increasing the wealth of the kyirarchy, aka the people who already have most of the power and money.

    The concept of MMO is arbitrary. It can be changed. Abstract concepts do in fact change, all the time. Sometimes they change because something concrete pops up letting us know our concept was wrong, and sometimes they just change because people have changed.

    There's an entire branch of study called Etymology that studies how words and their meanings change over time. It's just a natural part of how humans work. The changing definition of MMO would be something that a person who studies Etymology would study. It would be neat if a linguist showed up here and said something.

    I'm afraid I would fall into the category of people who's not that worried about which definition becomes the common one. I think the legacy definition is far more clearly defined, and is easier to apply. I think the new definition will win, because not too many people are worried about it. The industry is expanding the definition of MMO, and they'll probably be successful. At that point, most of the planet will have no idea that something happened, and most of the people that were aware of the change will just shrug.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • CuathonCuathon University City, NYPosts: 2,211Member
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     


    Originally posted by Cuathon
    Well flower is just as much a concept as MMO. Can we redefine flower to include boulders? Rose might be concrete but flower is just a category of objects with arbitrarily decided characteristics.

     

    Draw Something has a record of wins and losses in its scoring system, it has persistent characters engaged in competition. It has a virtual world, a conceptual space in which 2 minds attempt to communicate. It doesn't have physical landscapes if that is what you are disagreeing with. Draw Something's userbase is the whole of facebook potentially.

    I understand both sides of the argument. But you can't have a meaningful conversation about it because as you say concepts are arbitrary.

    A meaningful conversation requires common ground whereby you manipulate a persons beliefs to show that if they believe this they must believe that. That is how debate works. 

    Why do some people believe one definition and some the other? Because that's what they were told! Some of us were told this is an MMORPG by people like Bartle, Koster, and Garriot.

    Other people were told this is an MMORPG by marketers who wanted us to buy their games so they could suck us dry of money. Just like some people believe in Jesus because an authority figure, their parents, told them he was real, and some people believe in Allah instead.

    If the distinction is arbitrary we need to look at the source. One definition is sourced from the originators of the idea. Another is sourced from men in suits coopting the word because they saw that people would pay more money for a game that used that word.

    Why do you think there arent any equally rage filled debates about other genres? Because no one could use a redefinition of that word to make shitloads of money so no one gives a fuck about it.

    No one has any arguments about what is or is not a platformer. Like any other word whose redefinition doesn't result in a power exchange people are fine with the word meaning what it means.

    Why do people argue over interpretations of the Constitution? Because redefining legal language means real life physical and economic and political gains for the various sides.

    I'm sorry, I understand why some people think things that aren't MMOs are, its because they've been fooled by marketers into parting with their money.

    Does it make people feel bad to know that they've been duped? I don't care, its not my fault they don't use their brains to think about anything but what the popular kids are playing and who Snooki and Kim are having sex with this week.

    The IMPORTANCE of this war might not be the same as whether marriage includes gay people. But its CAUSES and the PRINCIPLES involved are identical. Protecting and increasing the wealth of the kyirarchy, aka the people who already have most of the power and money.



    The concept of MMO is arbitrary. It can be changed. Abstract concepts do in fact change, all the time. Sometimes they change because something concrete pops up letting us know our concept was wrong, and sometimes they just change because people have changed.

    There's an entire branch of study called Etymology that studies how words and their meanings change over time. It's just a natural part of how humans work. The changing definition of MMO would be something that a person who studies Etymology would study. It would be neat if a linguist showed up here and said something.

    I'm afraid I would fall into the category of people who's not that worried about which definition becomes the common one. I think the legacy definition is far more clearly defined, and is easier to apply. I think the new definition will win, because not too many people are worried about it. The industry is expanding the definition of MMO, and they'll probably be successful. At that point, most of the planet will have no idea that something happened, and most of the people that were aware of the change will just shrug.

     

    I agree that it is arbitrary. That's why I was talking about why there is a push to change it. That was rather the whole point of my post.

    I have done some studies in linguistics but I'm too much of a generalist to get a degree. If it helps my brother is majoring in Linguistics and may or may not pursue a further degree.

    I gave my impression of why the definition of MMO, and most definitions, change. Power differentials.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Nitth
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Originally posted by Nitth
    Originally posted by Cuathon
    "Player 0 can interact with Player 1,000 in LoL. They can also interaction with Player 2 and Player 10,000. It allows for a massive amount of interaction. The only thing that's been dropped as a requirement is the persistent, shared world. It has nothing to do with the number of people and nothing to do with making a permanent, sandbox style change to the world. Players can interact through an Auction House and it's still an interaction. Players can send each other mail and it's an interaction."

    doom with irc does not make doom mmo.

    Mmo/rpg also has a concurrent connection requirement.




    It's not possible in Doom for the interactions to be persistent. In LoL, your wins and losses are persistent, as well as your team makeup. These things are part of the game itself and not something that people just keep track of outside of the game. You also can't sell things to each other. So I'd would agree.

    Now, it also depends on which definition you're talking about too. The original definition was that the game had to have a persistent, shared world. This implied that players had avatars in the world.

    The industry is trying to redefine the term "MMO", but they aren't doing it by typing up a definition. They're just throwing out examples of games and calling them MMOs. So I've made some assumptions based on those examples. Their new definition has a shared virtual world. The player's interactions with other players is persistent, even if the world isn't. In LoL, the player has a win/loss record. That is a persistent interaction. *shrug*

    I'm not arguing in favor of one definition over the other. I'm trying to clarify what the definitions are, and what would or would not be an MMO, depending on which definition you use. I expect the new definition will win, because it's easier to lump things in under an existing term than to create a new term and have it catch on.

    For the record i don't believe "mmo's" require a persistent world.
    I think the persistent part derives from the rpg aspect of mmorpg. I mean think about it; what other genres have worlds? (not stages or maps)

    Now a shooter classically contains a map on which players are allowed an avatar. Its perfectly acceptable in my book to call a game that hosts a massive amount of concurrent users on a map, at the same time an mmo.

    LoL as it stands now is not massive, You have a maximum of 10 concurrent users (maybe more for custom) that no ware near qualifies for massive. thats why it should be labeled moba or such.




    Originally, having a persistent world was what allowed the RPG aspects to exist. If the world wasn't persistent, then neither were your actions. The 'world' was a leaderboard and auction house.

    In other genres, the stages or maps are virtual worlds. Sometimes they were shared, but they weren't persistent. In fact, there was very little persistence in multi-player game play. That's what having a virtual world added.

    One of the only consistent things about the MMO definitions, both legacy and new is that there must be a virtual world, and that virtual world must be shared. Persistence is also common to both definitions, but how the persistence is allowed is different. Both definitions have a massive number of player interactions that have persistent results. Leader boards are persistent results of player interactions. Leveling up skills or getting XP is another persistent result of player interactions. It's the interactions that are massive and persistent, not necessarily the number of players. Because of the persistence, the number of interactions build up over time, becoming massive. This is consistent between the legacy definition of MMOs and the new definition of MMOs.

    It's all well and good to have your own definition, but you're competing against both the people who created the term, and the people who are redefining the term. Both definitions are consistent within themselves and both can be consistently applied. You've got some work ahead of you if you want more people to use your definition.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     


    It's all well and good to have your own definition, but you're competing against both the people who created the term, and the people who are redefining the term. Both definitions are consistent within themselves and both can be consistently applied. You've got some work ahead of you if you want more people to use your definition.

     

    The definitions i posted are used by the industry, including research marketing firms, and gaming press. Everyone can have their own definition.

    However, i am posting what the current industry thinking is. And obviously i put the word "expanding" in the title because it is certainly different from the original. But things change all teh time. That should come at no surprise to anyone.

  • NitthNitth AustraliaPosts: 3,684Member Uncommon

    [quote]Originally posted by Gardavsshade


    Originally posted by Nitth  

    Originally posted by Gardavsshade "MMO" is shorthand for "MMORPG" as far as I use the term, and that's how I read it, so YES MMO to me = MMORPG.   Then i would beg you to reconsider your ideal, Your limiting yourself the possibilities of what a Massively Multiplayer on line Game could be. Free from the constraints of rpg rules if it wants to be.
    No. I am perfectly content with MMORPG being a narrowly defined and particular genre of online gaming that appeals to a small minority.

    To me the biggest problem in MMORPG genre is that there are far too many people joining it that want to change it into something it wasn't before. I have one word to say to that kind of mentality....

     

    Begone.


    I'm talking about breaking mmo and mmorpg...

    I'm an mmorpg purist. everything else goes into mmo<stufix>, seems logical?


    If you don't like how MMORPGs were and are, then go elsewhere for your entertainment. There are many, MANY, other gaming options to enjoy. I enjoy MMORPGs as they were, I want to see them go back to what they were, and I will not apologise for my opinion on that.

    You have no idea about me, You should think about that before labeling me.

    image
    TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Gardavsshade
     

    No. I am perfectly content with MMORPG being a narrowly defined and particular genre of online gaming that appeals to a small minority.

    To me the biggest problem in MMORPG genre is that there are far too many people joining it that want to change it into something it wasn't before. I have one word to say to that kind of mentality....

     

    Begone.

     

    If you don't like how MMORPGs were and are, then go elsewhere for your entertainment. There are many, MANY, other gaming options to enjoy. I enjoy MMORPGs as they were, I want to see them go back to what they were, and I will not apologise for my opinion on that.

    But you can't have everything you want, do you?

    Are you asking much of the MMO industry "begone"? If so, you probably will be disappointed because they are not going anywhere.

    In fact, MMO like LOL are probably more popular than all the "narrowly defined MMOs" added together.

    And lastly, other people have no obligation to use your "narrow definition". Personally i will use the industry standard.

  • IndolIndol O''Fallon, MOPosts: 189Member

    There is no point in the term MMO if League of Legends can be considered one. Just like there would be no point in the term FPS if Tetris was considered one.

     

    Describing LoL as an MMO does nothing because there is no distinction between it and other non-massively multiplayer online games.

     

    Are people arguing that all online games are now MMO's regardless of how little sense that makes?

     

    I can't believe i'm even joining this ridiculous debate. image

  • OnomasOnomas Rock Hill, SCPosts: 1,128Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Gardavsshade
     

    No. I am perfectly content with MMORPG being a narrowly defined and particular genre of online gaming that appeals to a small minority.

    To me the biggest problem in MMORPG genre is that there are far too many people joining it that want to change it into something it wasn't before. I have one word to say to that kind of mentality....

     

    Begone.

     

    If you don't like how MMORPGs were and are, then go elsewhere for your entertainment. There are many, MANY, other gaming options to enjoy. I enjoy MMORPGs as they were, I want to see them go back to what they were, and I will not apologise for my opinion on that.

    But you can't have everything you want, do you?

    Are you asking much of the MMO industry "begone"? If so, you probably will be disappointed because they are not going anywhere.

    In fact, MMO like LOL are probably more popular than all the "narrowly defined MMOs" added together.

    And lastly, other people have no obligation to use your "narrow definition". Personally i will use the industry standard.

    I think he was refering to people like you to begone lol.

    And honestly LOL isnt a game, its a battle arena based off of a real mmorpg.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Onomas
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Gardavsshade
     

    No. I am perfectly content with MMORPG being a narrowly defined and particular genre of online gaming that appeals to a small minority.

    To me the biggest problem in MMORPG genre is that there are far too many people joining it that want to change it into something it wasn't before. I have one word to say to that kind of mentality....

     

    Begone.

     

    If you don't like how MMORPGs were and are, then go elsewhere for your entertainment. There are many, MANY, other gaming options to enjoy. I enjoy MMORPGs as they were, I want to see them go back to what they were, and I will not apologise for my opinion on that.

    But you can't have everything you want, do you?

    Are you asking much of the MMO industry "begone"? If so, you probably will be disappointed because they are not going anywhere.

    In fact, MMO like LOL are probably more popular than all the "narrowly defined MMOs" added together.

    And lastly, other people have no obligation to use your "narrow definition". Personally i will use the industry standard.

    I think he was refering to people like you to begone lol.

    And honestly LOL isnt a game, its a battle arena based off of a real mmorpg.

    Obviously neither the industry nor I are going to be gone. But life can be full of disappointment, right?

    LOL is classified as a MMO by the industry. It is included in the list of MMOs of this website. Definition is just for convenient, so if you don't mind, i will use the industry definition, instead of your personal definition. That way, more people can understand me.

     

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Originally posted by lizardbones  


    It's all well and good to have your own definition, but you're competing against both the people who created the term, and the people who are redefining the term. Both definitions are consistent within themselves and both can be consistently applied. You've got some work ahead of you if you want more people to use your definition.  
    The definitions i posted are used by the industry, including research marketing firms, and gaming press. Everyone can have their own definition.

    However, i am posting what the current industry thinking is. And obviously i put the word "expanding" in the title because it is certainly different from the original. But things change all teh time. That should come at no surprise to anyone.



    Hey! I wasn't even talking to you! But I am now.

    Yeah, things do change all the time, especially definitions. There's a whole branch of linguistics based on words and language changing over time. It's a basic piece of human behavior.

    I don't know that people are surprised so much that they are not happy with the idea that the term can just change. I mean, think about it, if terms can just change randomly or just be changed on purpose, it makes our language incredibly fluid. Language determines a lot about how we think, so changing the language is a way to change how we think. I don't know if it's worse that it can just happen spontaneously, or if it's worse that it can be done on purpose, for any reason.

    I have a short attention span, so I have to do research just to keep track of what people are talking about anyway. Doesn't matter either way to me, really. I'd like it better if things changed based on what works better, or if there was some consistency, but whatever. English hasn't been stable or consistent for hundreds of years...don't see any reason to start now.

    ** edit **
    Forgot the word "track".

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by lizardbones


    I don't know that people are surprised so much that they are not happy with the idea that the term can just change. I mean, think about it, if terms can just change randomly or just be changed on purpose, it makes our language incredibly fluid. Language determines a lot about how we think, so changing the language is a way to change how we think. I don't know if it's worse that it can just happen spontaneously, or if it's worse that it can be done on purpose, for any reason.
     
    That is a good point. People holding onto past ideas certainly are upset, and threatened by changes.

    I have a short attention span, so I have to do research just to keep of what people are talking about anyway. Doesn't matter either way to me, really. I'd like it better if things changed based on what works better, or if there was some consistency, but whatever. English hasn't been stable or consistent for hundreds of years...don't see any reason to start now.

    I think the industry broaden the definition of MMOs because games are broadening their gameplay style to attact different kinds of players. That is very natural.

    "Better" is obviously in the eye of the beholder. I do like game variety, and it is better to have MOBA, arena battle, pve lobby focus, and also world games, then JUST world games.

     

  • IndolIndol O''Fallon, MOPosts: 189Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Onomas
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Gardavsshade
     

    No. I am perfectly content with MMORPG being a narrowly defined and particular genre of online gaming that appeals to a small minority.

    To me the biggest problem in MMORPG genre is that there are far too many people joining it that want to change it into something it wasn't before. I have one word to say to that kind of mentality....

     

    Begone.

     

    If you don't like how MMORPGs were and are, then go elsewhere for your entertainment. There are many, MANY, other gaming options to enjoy. I enjoy MMORPGs as they were, I want to see them go back to what they were, and I will not apologise for my opinion on that.

    But you can't have everything you want, do you?

    Are you asking much of the MMO industry "begone"? If so, you probably will be disappointed because they are not going anywhere.

    In fact, MMO like LOL are probably more popular than all the "narrowly defined MMOs" added together.

    And lastly, other people have no obligation to use your "narrow definition". Personally i will use the industry standard.

    I think he was refering to people like you to begone lol.

    And honestly LOL isnt a game, its a battle arena based off of a real mmorpg.

    Obviously neither the industry nor I are going to be gone. But life can be full of disappointment, right?

    LOL is classified as a MMO by the industry. It is included in the list of MMOs of this website. Definition is just for convenient, so if you don't mind, i will use the industry definition, instead of your personal definition. That way, more people can understand me.

     

    How does the term MMO help to describe LoL?

     

    If both WoW and LoL are to be considered MMO's, then what purpose is there to use the term MMO other than "this game is played online.".

     

    If you told someone that was unfamiliar with either WoW or LoL that they were "both MMO's" that would only serve to obfuscate the fact that they're completely and utterly different games on a very basic level.

     

    Categorizations like MMO and MOBA are there to clearly define what a game is.  If LoL can be categorized as an MMO, then what do you call WoW? If you call them both MMO's, you're accomplishing absolutely nothing other than replacing the word 'online' with MMO while simultaneously disregarding the specifics of each game, which is 100% pointless and confusing.

     

    Instead of blindly following the industries suit, you should stop and ask yourself if it is intelligent to do so.

  • RoyalPhunkRoyalPhunk Vancouver, BCPosts: 174Member
    Originally posted by bcbully

    I think OP is confusing mmo and mmorpg.

     

    A sqaure is a rectangle, but a rectangle is not a square type of thing. Mmorpgs are mmos, but mmos are not mmorpgs.

    This^

  • IndolIndol O''Fallon, MOPosts: 189Member

    Cuathon understands and boldly explains the big picture. Respect.

  • OrtwigOrtwig Cambridge, MAPosts: 1,159Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Cuathon
    Originally posted by Ortwig
    Why do we care about the definition of an MMO?  My guess is so that people can hit others over the head with it in forums.

    Or maybe we care about precision of terminology because we want to make sure we are all on the same page.

    How many discussions on this site would be totally unnecessary if we had precise language?

    Diablo 3 is a multiplayer coop lobby based game. EvE is a single persistant dynamic world based game.

    Bam 90% of the threads on this site suddenly become irrelevant. Instead its all carried under the originally quite precise but currently entirely meaningless umbrella term MMO.

    Its my suggestion that MMORPG.com added certain games to this site not only because their popularity drives page hits and activity but because lumping them all under the MMO umbrella generates a massive amount of discussion which makes the site seem more popular to advertisers and which increases clickthrough on adds by providing the ability to post vastly more controversial threads which means players are refreshing and rechecking dozens more threads that they posted in due to the intense split between the various mmo camps than would otherwise be the case.

    Hell if I were running a website with flagging popularity and were primarily interested in financial gains its certainly one of many strategies I would employ to raise revenue.

    If they didn't think of that idea it shows how lacking their business skills are. All the major game companies purposely spark controversy for business purposes as has been covered in threads and articles on this very site.

    My point proven by the direction the thread has taken.  ;)

  • BanquettoBanquetto CityPosts: 1,037Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Indol
    How does the term MMO help to describe LoL?
     If both WoW and LoL are to be considered MMO's, then what purpose is there to use the term MMO other than "this game is played online.".
     If you told someone that was unfamiliar with either WoW or LoL that they were "both MMO's" that would only serve to obfuscate the fact that they're completely and utterly different games on a very basic level.


    The (unhelpful) way it helps is that those who would expand the term "MMO" to cover games like "LoL" are basically redefining "Massively" to mean "Popular".


    LoL and WoW are both Popular Multiplayer Online games. They're online, and millions of people play them.


    I guess one benefit of this definition is that Alganon would no longer be an MMO. :-)

  • OnomasOnomas Rock Hill, SCPosts: 1,128Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Onomas
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Gardavsshade
     

    No. I am perfectly content with MMORPG being a narrowly defined and particular genre of online gaming that appeals to a small minority.

    To me the biggest problem in MMORPG genre is that there are far too many people joining it that want to change it into something it wasn't before. I have one word to say to that kind of mentality....

     

    Begone.

     

    If you don't like how MMORPGs were and are, then go elsewhere for your entertainment. There are many, MANY, other gaming options to enjoy. I enjoy MMORPGs as they were, I want to see them go back to what they were, and I will not apologise for my opinion on that.

    But you can't have everything you want, do you?

    Are you asking much of the MMO industry "begone"? If so, you probably will be disappointed because they are not going anywhere.

    In fact, MMO like LOL are probably more popular than all the "narrowly defined MMOs" added together.

    And lastly, other people have no obligation to use your "narrow definition". Personally i will use the industry standard.

    I think he was refering to people like you to begone lol.

    And honestly LOL isnt a game, its a battle arena based off of a real mmorpg.

    Obviously neither the industry nor I are going to be gone. But life can be full of disappointment, right?

    LOL is classified as a MMO by the industry. It is included in the list of MMOs of this website. Definition is just for convenient, so if you don't mind, i will use the industry definition, instead of your personal definition. That way, more people can understand me.

     

    No, you are wrong. Even LOL main website does not classify it as a mmo or a mmorpg. A multiplayer online game is what they call it. I already copied and pasted that information a page or 2 back. You just seem to ignore the facts lol.

    Do you know what MOBA stands for? Because you seem confused.

    MULTIPLAYER ONLINE battle arena. Does not say MMOBA, this its not a mmo or a mmorpg.

    And to repost from their website to help clarify for you:

    "Join millions of players in an award winning Multiplayer Online Battle Arena. Download and play today!"

    Its says join millions, not play with millions like true mmo sites and they say its just a multiplayer online game.

    "

    League of Legends is a session-based game. Matchmaking occurs based on the average Elo ratings of each individual players, with slight proprietary adjustments.[8]

    The game can currently be played in five different modes: Tutorial, Custom, Co-Op vs. AI, Normal and Ranked. Custom mode allows players to manually create custom game sessions that other players can find on a game list and join. Co-op vs. AI is a mode where players are matched either alone or as part of a group against a team of bots."

     

    Pretty simple to understand thta this is no MMO at all. Its a lobby game, thus a multiplayer online game. I think you confuse mmo and mog.

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Lol is a MOBA
    Diablo is a cooprpg
    Planetside is a mmo
    Wow is a mmorpg
    Eve is a virtual world
  • IcewhiteIcewhite Elmhurst, ILPosts: 6,403Member
    Originally posted by lizardbones

    I don't know that people are surprised so much that they are not happy with the idea that the term can just change.

    I think it's safe to say that this message board stands as a monument to just how badly players, in general, oppose change.

    Particularly if we get to argue about it a lot along the way.

    Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.

  • sagilsagil StockholmPosts: 291Member

    if any of you dont know what mmo is, then you surely havent played many. lol is a multiplayer lobby game. mmo can have an open world with lobbies, but that turns off a real mmo enthusiast. thats what we now call sandbox and themepark. funny that old forum posters dont know this and get everything over their head.

    written from my ipad.

  • OrtwigOrtwig Cambridge, MAPosts: 1,159Member Uncommon
    Is it rock?  Is it techno?  Is it grunge?  Is it psychedelic?  Categeries mean nothing.  Get used to ambiguity  -- it's a wonderful thing.  ;)
  • NitthNitth AustraliaPosts: 3,684Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Ortwig
    Is it rock?  Is it techno?  Is it grunge?  Is it psychedelic?  Categeries mean nothing.  Get used to ambiguity  -- it's a wonderful thing.  ;)

    What are you trying to say? That their music?. Could someone screaming in your ear be music too? :P

    image
    TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

Sign In or Register to comment.