Guild Wars had persistent cities, towns and outposts, but the rest was instanced. I guess if GW counts as not having a persistent world, then DDO would count as well, since it uses the same idea (persistent cities, instanced adventure areas).
I suppose we should focus on the gameplay element. After all, these are all games for entertainment. If the persistent areas are served as lobbies, and are not involved in most of the gameplay, i wouldn't count them as "persistent world".
I think it should only count if significant amount of gameplay happens there.
I never played GW1. Can you craft in the cities? What about NPC vendors and dueling other players?
* Could you pick up a quest, do all the steps of the quest and complete the quest within the confines of the persistent city?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Guild Wars had persistent cities, towns and outposts, but the rest was instanced. I guess if GW counts as not having a persistent world, then DDO would count as well, since it uses the same idea (persistent cities, instanced adventure areas).
I suppose we should focus on the gameplay element. After all, these are all games for entertainment. If the persistent areas are served as lobbies, and are not involved in most of the gameplay, i wouldn't count them as "persistent world".
I think it should only count if significant amount of gameplay happens there.
I never played GW1. Can you craft in the cities? What about NPC vendors and dueling other players?
* Could you pick up a quest, do all the steps of the quest and complete the quest within the confines of the persistent city?
I only played GW1 briefly quite some time ago. My impression is that i have never encountered a quest that i can do 100% inside a city. I am spending 99% of the time in instances.
However, i do NOT see all the content, so i cannot say for sure that everything is like that.
BTW, how about GW2? Did they completely do away with this system.
You were expecting a serious answer to a troll thread?
How is this a troll thread?
Because the post is vague. Do you know since mmorpg.com left its starting genres for cash income by promoting singleplayer games on this site also that includes a lot of non-mmo's and non-mmorpg's. Though the majority of players here still think entirely about these when making topics and posts. Not games that are single player, singleplayer with multiplayer support, lobby games, rts, or fps games.
Majority of these games listed are not mmorpgs, and some arent even mmo's. So a vague question usualy gets vague responses.
If he titled the topic mmo games or mmorpgs without persistant worlds instead of games on this site, then it would be a different story. Then you could label all the text based browsers they have here as well.
But persistant worlds ar3e not just about mmorpgs, PW's were in games well before the mmorpg days as early as the mid 80's in single player style games. So the topic is vague, needs clarification to what he is getting at.
Seems kinda like OP just wants to stir of controversy. If that's the case, By the way, none of the games you listed are MMO's, that's why they dont have persistant worlds.
Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV Have played: You name it If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.
Guild Wars had persistent cities, towns and outposts, but the rest was instanced. I guess if GW counts as not having a persistent world, then DDO would count as well, since it uses the same idea (persistent cities, instanced adventure areas).
I suppose we should focus on the gameplay element. After all, these are all games for entertainment. If the persistent areas are served as lobbies, and are not involved in most of the gameplay, i wouldn't count them as "persistent world".
I think it should only count if significant amount of gameplay happens there.
1st:
Nobody is upset, but you...
You are trying to redefine what a persitant world is, because a few months back you didn't get it, now it is your new favorite defense mechnism/talking point.
2nd:
If persistant "areas".. (do you mean world) are being served as lobbies... it is still persistant. You cannot redefine it as a non-persistant game with lobbies, because that is how you perceive it.
You don't even have a firm understanding of what you are talking about and mix talking-points constantly. So hilarious to listen to you thread-crap everywhere about this subject, when u have no understanding, or even a definition of what your talking about.
I bet you cannot even define a "lobby game"..! (ie: There are no Avitars in a lobby, because you waiting to get into a game world).
3rd:
We understand YOU wouldn't consider a persistant words as such, if it can be used for anything else, such as players gathering for an action-adventure.
We understand you don't understand^... & that you understand so little, that you must actively try to re-label what a "persistant world" is, because you are incapable of playing any other gamestyle. You are simply a lobby queen w/shinny armor and feel good & comforted by the artificial instanced wall that makes you even (in your eyes) with harden players.
We get it... your afraid of open persistant worlds and because you are afraid, you want to relabel everything as a lobby...
But, unfortuneatly for you... Narius you don't get to redefine, or relabel things. You must accept them as they are. Face it kiddo.. You are at the wrng website, this is MMORPG.com, not battlenet, or Battlefield...
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
You were expecting a serious answer to a troll thread?
How is this a troll thread?
Someone is just upset that a) there are games listed here with forums that have no persistent world, and they can't do a thing about it, and b) they don't even want to face a thread with information about which game has a persistent world, and which one not.
It is obviously there is serious debate about how to even view that (as the discussion about DDO & GW). I think you can ignore them, and focus on the discussions. They are the trolls.
When did this become a "serious debate"? Aren't you the one who constantly proclaims video games are purely entertainment? Let's call a spade a spade, this is forum PvP, nothing more.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own. -- Herman Melville
Originally posted by Aeonblades Seems kinda like OP just wants to stir of controversy. If that's the case, By the way, none of the games you listed are MMO's, that's why they dont have persistant worlds.
And yet they are listed here with forums. So i suppose the scope of this site is all online games, and NOT MMORPGs.
You were expecting a serious answer to a troll thread?
How is this a troll thread?
Someone is just upset that a) there are games listed here with forums that have no persistent world, and they can't do a thing about it, and b) they don't even want to face a thread with information about which game has a persistent world, and which one not.
It is obviously there is serious debate about how to even view that (as the discussion about DDO & GW). I think you can ignore them, and focus on the discussions. They are the trolls.
When did this become a "serious debate"? Aren't you the one who constantly proclaims video games are purely entertainment? Let's call a spade a spade, this is forum PvP, nothing more.
And "serious debate" is good entertainment, isn't it? So is this forum a persistent world, if we can pvp in it?
Originally posted by Aeonblades Seems kinda like OP just wants to stir of controversy. If that's the case, By the way, none of the games you listed are MMO's, that's why they dont have persistant worlds.
And yet they are listed here with forums. So i suppose the scope of this site is all online games, and NOT MMORPGs.
So what kind of online games do you like?
The kind with persistant worlds, not glorified ARPG's with lobbies.
Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV Have played: You name it If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.
But, unfortuneatly for you... Narius you don't get to redefine, or relabel things. You must accept them as they are. Face it kiddo.. You are at the wrng website, this is MMORPG.com, not battlenet, or Battlefield...
wait .. so you agree or not agree with the list? In your opinion, do these games have persistent world or not?
Don't tell me you think all the games supported (with a forum) in MMORPG have persistent worlds?
Originally posted by Aeonblades Seems kinda like OP just wants to stir of controversy. If that's the case, By the way, none of the games you listed are MMO's, that's why they dont have persistant worlds.
And yet they are listed here with forums. So i suppose the scope of this site is all online games, and NOT MMORPGs.
So what kind of online games do you like?
The kind with persistant worlds, not glorified ARPG's with lobbies.
Do you think there are MMOs that are "glorified ARPGs with lobbies"? I supose you must. Because ARPGs are just APRGs, they are not "glorified" ARPGs.
When did this become a "serious debate"? Aren't you the one who constantly proclaims video games are purely entertainment? Let's call a spade a spade, this is forum PvP, nothing more.
And "serious debate" is good entertainment, isn't it? So is this forum a persistent world, if we can pvp in it?
Haha! If it is a persistant world, you can't put it on your list. Plus, you'll get people asking for "end game" content.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own. -- Herman Melville
Originally posted by Aeonblades Seems kinda like OP just wants to stir of controversy. If that's the case, By the way, none of the games you listed are MMO's, that's why they dont have persistant worlds.
And yet they are listed here with forums. So i suppose the scope of this site is all online games, and NOT MMORPGs.
So what kind of online games do you like?
The kind with persistant worlds, not glorified ARPG's with lobbies.
Do you think there are MMOs that are "glorified ARPGs with lobbies"? I supose you must. Because ARPGs are just APRGs, they are not "glorified" ARPGs.
No. I really don't see where you are going with this. If it is lobbied, it is not an MMO, its just an RPG with an online element.
Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV Have played: You name it If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.
When did this become a "serious debate"? Aren't you the one who constantly proclaims video games are purely entertainment? Let's call a spade a spade, this is forum PvP, nothing more.
And "serious debate" is good entertainment, isn't it? So is this forum a persistent world, if we can pvp in it?
Haha! If it is a persistant world, you can't put it on your list. Plus, you'll get people asking for "end game" content.
Not "my" list .. it is a MMORPG.com list :P
"end game" content .. isn't THIS (forum pvp) end game content already? I don't see any more level progression .. do you?
Now we need some good gear to enhance my pvp powers .. i have the sword of google, and the shield of sarcasm, what do you have?
Originally posted by allendale5 Wouldn't the reverse of this list be shorter?
probably not. However, you are wlecomed to make the two lists and compare. I will, of course, concede the point if indeed the reverse of the list is shorter.
GW1 can have hundreds of players in one non-combat area doing mini-games (holidays) and up to 32 players in combat areas (factions quests) so I think its ok to call it a MMORPG. Definently on the boundaries of the term though so I don't blame anyone for calling it otherwise... The devs themselves even play it safe and call it a CORPG.
Please do not remove Diablo 3 or GW1 from the website. Both were ok games that deserve to be on this site because they are strong multiplayer RPGs with a central log in server.
The other games I mostly do not recognize.
You can't blame MMORPG.COM for trying to expand their reach a little... There is only so much news and fans of mmorpg's, I think they feel tied down.
GW1 can have hundreds of players in one non-combat area doing mini-games (holidays) and up to 32 players in combat areas (factions quests) so I think its ok to call it a MMORPG. Definently on the boundaries of the term though so I don't blame anyone for calling it otherwise... The devs themselves even play it safe and call it a CORPG.
Please do not remove Diablo 3 or GW1 from the website. Both were ok games that deserve to be on this site because they are strong multiplayer RPGs with a central log in server.
The other games I mostly do not recognize.
You can't blame MMORPG.COM for trying to expand their reach a little... There is only so much news and fans of mmorpg's, I think they feel tied down.
I don't think MMORPG.com is going to remove these games. In fact, games like Diablo has a lot of common audience with MMOs like WOW, and the playstyle (click a button to do a dungeon) has a lot of similarities and overlaps.
The point of the list is to inform people which is which. Personally there are games listed by some here that i do not recognize. And now i can go check that out. So that pretty much accomplish one of my goals.
Have to admit, I've been disappointed with almost every MMO shooter. Not because they're shooters, but because they are not MMOs. They might as well just be your typical multiplayer game, with nothing but a matchmaking server, for individual matches. The only thing that's persistent or massive is the collection of character stats and the like. There's no massive world involved, at all.
It's like if WoW had nothing but LFG queues and raids. No other zones, not even Ogrimmar. It wouldn't be an MMO. Why is it that shooters get a pass for it?
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
Comments
I never played GW1. Can you craft in the cities? What about NPC vendors and dueling other players?
* Could you pick up a quest, do all the steps of the quest and complete the quest within the confines of the persistent city?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Continent of the Ninth Seal (C9)
very similar to Vindictus, nice visuals and animations. Horrible non persistent world.
I only played GW1 briefly quite some time ago. My impression is that i have never encountered a quest that i can do 100% inside a city. I am spending 99% of the time in instances.
However, i do NOT see all the content, so i cannot say for sure that everything is like that.
BTW, how about GW2? Did they completely do away with this system.
Because the post is vague. Do you know since mmorpg.com left its starting genres for cash income by promoting singleplayer games on this site also that includes a lot of non-mmo's and non-mmorpg's. Though the majority of players here still think entirely about these when making topics and posts. Not games that are single player, singleplayer with multiplayer support, lobby games, rts, or fps games.
Majority of these games listed are not mmorpgs, and some arent even mmo's. So a vague question usualy gets vague responses.
If he titled the topic mmo games or mmorpgs without persistant worlds instead of games on this site, then it would be a different story. Then you could label all the text based browsers they have here as well.
But persistant worlds ar3e not just about mmorpgs, PW's were in games well before the mmorpg days as early as the mid 80's in single player style games. So the topic is vague, needs clarification to what he is getting at.
Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV
Have played: You name it
If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.
1st:
Nobody is upset, but you...
You are trying to redefine what a persitant world is, because a few months back you didn't get it, now it is your new favorite defense mechnism/talking point.
2nd:
If persistant "areas".. (do you mean world) are being served as lobbies... it is still persistant. You cannot redefine it as a non-persistant game with lobbies, because that is how you perceive it.
You don't even have a firm understanding of what you are talking about and mix talking-points constantly. So hilarious to listen to you thread-crap everywhere about this subject, when u have no understanding, or even a definition of what your talking about.
I bet you cannot even define a "lobby game"..! (ie: There are no Avitars in a lobby, because you waiting to get into a game world).
3rd:
We understand YOU wouldn't consider a persistant words as such, if it can be used for anything else, such as players gathering for an action-adventure.
We understand you don't understand^... & that you understand so little, that you must actively try to re-label what a "persistant world" is, because you are incapable of playing any other gamestyle. You are simply a lobby queen w/shinny armor and feel good & comforted by the artificial instanced wall that makes you even (in your eyes) with harden players.
We get it... your afraid of open persistant worlds and because you are afraid, you want to relabel everything as a lobby...
But, unfortuneatly for you... Narius you don't get to redefine, or relabel things. You must accept them as they are. Face it kiddo.. You are at the wrng website, this is MMORPG.com, not battlenet, or Battlefield...
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
-Nariusseldon
When did this become a "serious debate"? Aren't you the one who constantly proclaims video games are purely entertainment? Let's call a spade a spade, this is forum PvP, nothing more.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.
-- Herman Melville
And yet they are listed here with forums. So i suppose the scope of this site is all online games, and NOT MMORPGs.
So what kind of online games do you like?
And "serious debate" is good entertainment, isn't it? So is this forum a persistent world, if we can pvp in it?
The kind with persistant worlds, not glorified ARPG's with lobbies.
Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV
Have played: You name it
If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.
wait .. so you agree or not agree with the list? In your opinion, do these games have persistent world or not?
Don't tell me you think all the games supported (with a forum) in MMORPG have persistent worlds?
Do you think there are MMOs that are "glorified ARPGs with lobbies"? I supose you must. Because ARPGs are just APRGs, they are not "glorified" ARPGs.
Haha! If it is a persistant world, you can't put it on your list. Plus, you'll get people asking for "end game" content.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.
-- Herman Melville
No. I really don't see where you are going with this. If it is lobbied, it is not an MMO, its just an RPG with an online element.
Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV
Have played: You name it
If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.
Not "my" list .. it is a MMORPG.com list :P
"end game" content .. isn't THIS (forum pvp) end game content already? I don't see any more level progression .. do you?
Now we need some good gear to enhance my pvp powers .. i have the sword of google, and the shield of sarcasm, what do you have?
Oh, i missed SMITE. One more to the list.
Anything else?
probably not. However, you are wlecomed to make the two lists and compare. I will, of course, concede the point if indeed the reverse of the list is shorter.
nice .. you seem to know some of these less well-known games. I will redo the master list. Thanks for the addition.
GW1 can have hundreds of players in one non-combat area doing mini-games (holidays) and up to 32 players in combat areas (factions quests) so I think its ok to call it a MMORPG. Definently on the boundaries of the term though so I don't blame anyone for calling it otherwise... The devs themselves even play it safe and call it a CORPG.
Please do not remove Diablo 3 or GW1 from the website. Both were ok games that deserve to be on this site because they are strong multiplayer RPGs with a central log in server.
The other games I mostly do not recognize.
You can't blame MMORPG.COM for trying to expand their reach a little... There is only so much news and fans of mmorpg's, I think they feel tied down.
Play as your fav retro characters: cnd-online.net. My site: www.lysle.net. Blog: creatingaworld.blogspot.com.
I don't think MMORPG.com is going to remove these games. In fact, games like Diablo has a lot of common audience with MMOs like WOW, and the playstyle (click a button to do a dungeon) has a lot of similarities and overlaps.
The point of the list is to inform people which is which. Personally there are games listed by some here that i do not recognize. And now i can go check that out. So that pretty much accomplish one of my goals.
Have to admit, I've been disappointed with almost every MMO shooter. Not because they're shooters, but because they are not MMOs. They might as well just be your typical multiplayer game, with nothing but a matchmaking server, for individual matches. The only thing that's persistent or massive is the collection of character stats and the like. There's no massive world involved, at all.
It's like if WoW had nothing but LFG queues and raids. No other zones, not even Ogrimmar. It wouldn't be an MMO. Why is it that shooters get a pass for it?
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.