Right now a mmo is nothing more than end game,so less than 1% of a game and that is what people are supporting,the rest is a race or if possible ,completely ignore levels 1-90 and just buy an end game character.
Just having players in a login screen and listing the number of players logged in does not a MO make if you can't actually see the players.The common trend in this end game era is instancing,so you might see 1% of the server,good job on the MMO feel ,lol crappy developers out there right now. The sad reality is most games could not handle non instancing and players would likely quit if they can't have it easy mode,instant gratification,so i can't fully blame Blizzard?wow using one example because it is the superficial gamer's who want this instancing end game treadmill,Blizzard is just selling what sells.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Lol .. using the crippled mobile version as evidence. Not only the non-mobile version says "MMO games", it has a specific label next to each game.
lol... you using it in the first place as some sort of argument is a joke. I was only pointing out the discrepancy in the two sites and why someone wouldn't understand why you would say such a ridiculous thing in the first place.
nah .. the joke is on those who think MMO has to be "massively MP". Isn't it poetic that the sites they discuss MMOs will classify world of tanks as one?
I just say it requires more then than multiplayer and let them argue that one.
I just say people can classify MMOs as whatever they like, and there is little you can do about it. Heck, they just do it without any argument, and they are not likely to listen to people arguing on forums.
They're kind of hybrids. Bigger than standard mp games, but smaller in scale than classic mmo's. Still, even on an mmo you generally aren't doing content with more players than that anyway. Dungeon groups are much smaller. Raid groups are smaller. Pvp instances are smaller. You've basically got all the players you need to have a good time in an environment that's much more interactive than the average mmo's. This obsession with numbers is a bit silly imo.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
They're kind of hybrids. Bigger than standard mp games, but smaller in scale than classic mmo's. Still, even on an mmo you generally aren't doing content with more players than that anyway. Dungeon groups are much smaller. Raid groups are smaller. Pvp instances are smaller. You've basically got all the players you need to have a good time in an environment that's much more interactive than the average mmo's. This obsession with numbers is a bit silly imo.
In fact, it is not a coincidence that most gameplay in MMOs, even WoW, does not involve "massively multiplayer". As you have pointed out raid & dungeons are pretty much small group gameplay.
In fact, the "world" is pretty much just a 3D lobby at end game. You may as well be playing a diablo-like game.
As for an example - ARK describes itself as an MMO right on its Steam Store page. Definitely not an MMO by MMO standards, though.
I can't stand these Micro-MO games. Too many variations between servers. Too many admins-on-a-whim per server. Too few rules, or too many rules that are not universal to each server. Too chaotic of a player base in terms of numbers playing - 100 one day, and 5 next month. No transfer of characters, or transfer of characters between servers with different rule sets. Too many cliques, one clan on one server can just take over the whole thing. And the buy-to-play model of these games doesn't do enough to ensure a mature player base on each server.
Even the MMOs coming out, can barely call themselves MMOs though. Instanced games, where players walk around a city and then instance into areas with only a few other people, barely meets the criteria of an MMO since most of the action takes place away form the masses.
MOBAs like to call themselves MMOs, but they're really just glorified Quake-style game servers.
Then the MMO market has been saturated by a huge number of indie attempts that the 1,000 people who may have played one game, have been divided 10 different ways into 10 games.
Small publishers and developers have also take the reigns on some tried and true game styles, but... they're small. Their games generally lack the rules the larger games have - it's easier to allow a free-for-all, then to implement limits and hire GMs to investigate abuse. They need money, so they implement cash shops; they enter early access too early for fast cash, but their popularity dies down quickly; the actively support the player abuse in order to bring in more money to their cash shops... etc. etc. etc.
Unless a legitimate company starts to work on a classic style MMO, with the thousands of players in a single world, open-ended gameplay, universal, player driven economy and crafting, a capable staff and constant support for their game, then we're not going to be seeing a legitimate MMO for a very, very, very long time
Unless a legitimate company starts to work on a classic style MMO, with the thousands of players in a single world, open-ended gameplay, universal, player driven economy and crafting, a capable staff and constant support for their game, then we're not going to be seeing a legitimate MMO for a very, very, very long time
You are not. Most players don't care about the kind of games.
And the world does not really need "legitimate MMO". There is nothing wrong with just current "MMOs" if players are having fun.
But to answer your question a rifle is a gun, but a gun isn't necessarily a rifle.
Yep, and while a MMO is a multiplayer game, not all multiplayer games are MMOs.
When mmos get a concrete definition like rifle has then there may be less confusion. The difference here is that MMO is an ambiguous marketing term. A rifle is a concrete object with clearly definable characteristics.
From wikipedia
A rifle is a firearm designed to be fired from the shoulder, with a barrel that has a helical groove or pattern of grooves ("rifling")
cut into the barrel walls. The raised areas of the rifling are called
"lands," which make contact with the projectile (for small arms usage,
called a bullet), imparting spin around an axis corresponding to the orientation of the weapon.
Those are all clearly defined easily measured characteristics. Gaming, mmos, and multiplayer games have very little concrete to work with and a lot of variables that make clear definitions a challenge.
Interesting, despite there being a very clear definition of a concrete item, the same wiki article goes on to say:
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Since when did a Volvo 140 turned into a Porsche 970?
when people do not care enough to distinguish them? Lucky for Volvo and Porsche, that has not happened to them yet.
You cannot say the same for MMO though.
I'm curious Narius. Whilst I enjoy your particular brand of trolling, it is extremely rare for you to ever post an actual opinion. Would you be able to give us one on this subject?
If you feel able, please could you define what you, personally, believe an MMO to be?
Since when did a Volvo 140 turned into a Porsche 970?
when people do not care enough to distinguish them? Lucky for Volvo and Porsche, that has not happened to them yet.
You cannot say the same for MMO though.
No it's the same. The idiots who can't tell the difference between massively multiplayer and just multiplayer look just like some moron who can't tell the difference between a Volvo and a Porsche.
Only instead of a Volvo and Porsche it might as well be a unicycle and a train.
"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Since when did a Volvo 140 turned into a Porsche 970?
when people do not care enough to distinguish them? Lucky for Volvo and Porsche, that has not happened to them yet.
You cannot say the same for MMO though.
I'm curious Narius. Whilst I enjoy your particular brand of trolling, it is extremely rare for you to ever post an actual opinion. Would you be able to give us one on this subject?
If you feel able, please could you define what you, personally, believe an MMO to be?
No. First, the mystery will be gone and it will be less fun. Second, i don't care enough to define it carefully. It is much more fun to read around and see how diverse the opinions (or well, some here will defend with their lives that theirs are not opinions, but ironclad logic) are.
I am, however, of the opinion that whatever a MMO is, it is not as important to most than you might think.
Since when did a Volvo 140 turned into a Porsche 970?
when people do not care enough to distinguish them? Lucky for Volvo and Porsche, that has not happened to them yet.
You cannot say the same for MMO though.
I'm curious Narius. Whilst I enjoy your particular brand of trolling, it is extremely rare for you to ever post an actual opinion. Would you be able to give us one on this subject?
If you feel able, please could you define what you, personally, believe an MMO to be?
No. First, the mystery will be gone and it will be less fun. Second, i don't care enough to define it carefully. It is much more fun to read around and see how diverse the opinions (or well, some here will defend with their lives that theirs are not opinions, but ironclad logic) are.
I am, however, of the opinion that whatever a MMO is, it is not as important to most than you might think.
You know the difference and don't care because you have fun trolling.
Mystery solved.
"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Comments
Just having players in a login screen and listing the number of players logged in does not a MO make if you can't actually see the players.The common trend in this end game era is instancing,so you might see 1% of the server,good job on the MMO feel ,lol crappy developers out there right now.
The sad reality is most games could not handle non instancing and players would likely quit if they can't have it easy mode,instant gratification,so i can't fully blame Blizzard?wow using one example because it is the superficial gamer's who want this instancing end game treadmill,Blizzard is just selling what sells.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
nah .. the joke is on those who think MMO has to be "massively MP". Isn't it poetic that the sites they discuss MMOs will classify world of tanks as one?
But apathy? I think the lack of critical thinking here is to assume if you yell loud enough, people will care enough to listen.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/
In fact, the "world" is pretty much just a 3D lobby at end game. You may as well be playing a diablo-like game.
As for an example - ARK describes itself as an MMO right on its Steam Store page. Definitely not an MMO by MMO standards, though.
I can't stand these Micro-MO games. Too many variations between servers. Too many admins-on-a-whim per server. Too few rules, or too many rules that are not universal to each server. Too chaotic of a player base in terms of numbers playing - 100 one day, and 5 next month. No transfer of characters, or transfer of characters between servers with different rule sets. Too many cliques, one clan on one server can just take over the whole thing. And the buy-to-play model of these games doesn't do enough to ensure a mature player base on each server.
Even the MMOs coming out, can barely call themselves MMOs though. Instanced games, where players walk around a city and then instance into areas with only a few other people, barely meets the criteria of an MMO since most of the action takes place away form the masses.
MOBAs like to call themselves MMOs, but they're really just glorified Quake-style game servers.
Then the MMO market has been saturated by a huge number of indie attempts that the 1,000 people who may have played one game, have been divided 10 different ways into 10 games.
Small publishers and developers have also take the reigns on some tried and true game styles, but... they're small. Their games generally lack the rules the larger games have - it's easier to allow a free-for-all, then to implement limits and hire GMs to investigate abuse. They need money, so they implement cash shops; they enter early access too early for fast cash, but their popularity dies down quickly; the actively support the player abuse in order to bring in more money to their cash shops... etc. etc. etc.
Unless a legitimate company starts to work on a classic style MMO, with the thousands of players in a single world, open-ended gameplay, universal, player driven economy and crafting, a capable staff and constant support for their game, then we're not going to be seeing a legitimate MMO for a very, very, very long time
And the world does not really need "legitimate MMO". There is nothing wrong with just current "MMOs" if players are having fun.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
It called Solitaire: The Definitive MMO Experience. . .
"The word "rifle" is now used for any long hand-held aimed device activated by a trigger, such as Air rifles and the Personnel halting and stimulation response rifle. Rifles are used in warfare, hunting and shooting sports."
This includes assault rifles which can also be called (incorrectly) machine guns, repeating rifles and perhaps shotguns using "rifled" slugs.
Heck in Fallout New Vegas we have laser, plasma, and anti matter "rifles" so clearly the concept has changed from the original definition.
So perhaps its time MMOs did as well.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
You cannot say the same for MMO though.
If you feel able, please could you define what you, personally, believe an MMO to be?
Only instead of a Volvo and Porsche it might as well be a unicycle and a train.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/I am, however, of the opinion that whatever a MMO is, it is not as important to most than you might think.
Mystery solved.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/Now you know why everything under the sun is listed as MMOs here. Otherwise, there will be a lot fewer games to talk about.
Paradoxically, people here don't talk about specific games much anyway. The forum is more for arguing about age-old feuds like pvp vs pve and so on.