Howdy, Stranger!

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

World of Tanks: Not Exactly an MMO

SBFordSBFord Former Associate EditorMember LegendaryPosts: 33,126

In his latest article for MMORPG.com, columnist Bill Murphy takes readers on a brief tour of World of Tanks and tackles the issue of whether or not WoT is truly an MMO. Find out what Bill saw, or didn't see, in his time playing World of Tanks.

We’re often dealing with the question of what games deserve to be called MMOs and what games don’t deserve to be listed on our site. In this particular case, that of World of Tanks, we’re looking squarely at a title that probably shouldn’t be listed on our site. For while it’s a fun death-match style game all about tanks and the havoc they can be a part of, it’s not really anything more than that.

Read more Not Exactly an MMO.


image


¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 


«13456

Comments

  • MrbloodworthMrbloodworth Member Posts: 5,615

    *Editor’s Note: As a result of Bill’s assessment, we will likely be removing the game from our list within the next few days.

     

    Why? Thats silly. The term MMO (that really should be MMG, Massively multiplayer games. I don't ever recall playing "onlines".) is ever changing, some of the things he listed are not requirements of that term. If they were, you have more than just this title to remove then. If you really want to get picky, you need to remove any games thats not a MMORPG.


    You are going to find more and more games coming to market that you can’t list if you decide to not evolve along with the market.

    ----------
    "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me

    "No, your wrong.." - Random user #123

    "Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.

    How are you?" -Me

  • wizyywizyy Member UncommonPosts: 629

    I don't think that assesment is accurate. I'm in beta and there's always around 4000 players online. Also, there will be CLAN WARS involved, which is MMO without a doubt.

    http://www.massively.com/2010/06/03/details-announced-for-clan-wars-in-world-of-tanks/

  • gauge2k3gauge2k3 Member Posts: 442

    It's not an mmo yet.  It will be at launch though.  There will be a huge clan battle system with people holding territory and all that.  The system is similair to Europa or Hearts of Iron.  It is closed beta.  Before you make a determination that it won't be an MMO, why don't you look at what it's supposed to be at launch.

     

    If you added a "town" for people to hang out in, this would be more of an MMO than the original guildwars with all it's instancing.  You can have more than guild wars numbers in a single zone too.  Toss in a few "quests".  Albeit I didn't think guildwars was an MMO.  Still don't.  It's diablo with a 3D chat room and some PvP.  But once you see world of tanks clan system, I think you will start to see the massive scope of it.

  • docminusdocminus Member Posts: 717

    first of all - thanks for the article, makes me want to give it a shot at least.

    second, I kind of wonder the same as Mrbloodworth in as much as that there might be other games as well here which might have to be reconsidered if they should be here or not. Alternatively, that mmorpg might want to adopt to the evolving market. I do though disagree at the same time regarding that notion -  things like CoD, BF, basically anything with an online part and a bit of an evolving skill/xp system would end up here, and I don't believe that that should be the scope of this site.

    If one wants to be picky, perhaps the MMORPG should have a subtitle such as "persistant online worlds" which would simply the definition of which games to expect to find here.

    How about :  "persistant(M)MORPG.com" ?

    imageimage

  • Christopher8Christopher8 Member Posts: 134

    It's beta...

  • FadedbombFadedbomb Member Posts: 2,081

    Finally!!! The staff of MMORPG are FINALLY omitting games that attempt to claim the "MMO" title but are actually more than 80% Matchmaking games.

     

     

    Other games that require your attention to be removed and are NEARLY identicle to World of Tanks include:

    -Huxley Online

    -Global Agenda

    etc etc...

     

     

    ANY game that does not have a persistant world in which more than 200players CAN reside and INTERACT with each other is NOT an MMO of ANY sort. Trying to support the fact that Global Agenda is an "MMOFPS" would be like trying to defend the argument that Call of Duty is an MMOFPS, and you will be LAUGHED at if you tried to do so.

     

    If you're not an old MMO player I could see how you can confuse what an MMO is considering what WoW has done to the genre.

     

    -Faded

     

    ps: typing this on a shitty computer that's not mine atm :). Sorry for mispellings if any, hard to see.

    The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity:
    Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.

  • MrbloodworthMrbloodworth Member Posts: 5,615

    Many traditional MMORPG/DIKU games that have persistent worlds do not even support 200 players in one place, so that’s a bit silly. And they have lower net speed requirements than the shooter titles. Asynchronous VS synchronous systems.


     


    What’s really the issue is, if it’s not a RPG (meaning combat system) and doesn’t have elves, its not a MMG.


     


    Fact is, multiplayer games are becoming closer to MMG's, and MMG's are becoming closer to multiplayer games. There soon won't be a diffrence anymore.


     


    Evolve with it, or be a cranky old-timer clutching to ever quest one.

    ----------
    "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me

    "No, your wrong.." - Random user #123

    "Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.

    How are you?" -Me

  • mmoguy43mmoguy43 Member UncommonPosts: 2,770

    World of Tanks, not exactly an MMO... GO ON what else? What else doesn't belong on this site even though "gamers want it here"? Are you acutally going to take them off or are you going to keep using them here as an excuess to have something to write about? Yeah, way to stick it to the fans that wanted the GREY-mmo here.

  • pentatholpentathol Member Posts: 8

    Quite a knee-jerk reaction here by mmorpg.com.  The game is in beta and will have the requisite features at release that put it in the category of global agenda, shattered galaxy, navy field, and many other games that are listed on this site.  You want to remove it and narrow your definition of MMO's, at least be consistent and go through your entire games list.

  • YamotaYamota Member UncommonPosts: 6,593

    I for one applaud this decision. I play almost exclusively MMORPGs so I have no interest in other type of games. There are lots of other sites for those.

    However I would like to make it even more narrower. Hyper-instanced games like STO should not be on this site for the same reason. Instancing is the complete opposite of persistant so when a game is COMPLETELY instanced then it lacks a persistant world and should hence be removed from the site.

  • risenbonesrisenbones Member Posts: 194

    Yep I have to agree with those people asking for a wait and see before removing the title from your game list.  This game (while working remarkably well) is in early stages of Beta with a biggish patch coming in the next month adding more maps and a join with friends option along with various balance tweaks.

     

    The Devs seem to be following a slowly slowly approach making sure all the stuff they have now works before adding new stuff which could make broken things evan more broken.  The overview and over reaction of removing the title seems to be extremely pre mature as not all promised features are implimented yet.  If your going to remove it based on that then all games still in development/beta need to be removed from the site till people actually get to play said features until then they are just so much hot air.

    The lesser of two evils is still evil.

    There is nothing more dangerous than a true believer.

  • MokweeMokwee Member Posts: 286

    it is NOT an mmo dammit.

     

    its a multiplayer game internet only on specific maps...

     

    hardly an mmo

  • MrbloodworthMrbloodworth Member Posts: 5,615

    Originally posted by Yamota



    Instancing is the complete opposite of persistant


     

    Thoes two things are not related.

    ----------
    "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me

    "No, your wrong.." - Random user #123

    "Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.

    How are you?" -Me

  • zantaxzantax Member Posts: 254

    I didn't realize this was a question....

    M - Massive

    M - Multiplayer

    O - Online

    R - Role

    P - Playing

    G - Game

     

    World of Tanks is more of a

    M - Massive

    M - Multiplayer

    O - Online

    F - First

    P - Person

    S - Shooter

     

    The game is Massive, there quite a few maps

    The game is Multiplaer, Many people can log on at the same time

    The game is Online, that is where you play it

    You play as a TANK, remind you of EVE a bit there so that makes it First Person

    Also you Shoot other tanks, THAT IS IT!!! SO it is a shooter.

    That should answer the question if it is an MMO right there, it is an MMO just not an MMORPG.

  • GreyedGreyed Member UncommonPosts: 137

    Finally.  As previous posters say, now take it to other games in a similar manner.

     

    To defend it the term is MMO.  The key phrases are...

     

    Massively

    Multiplayer

    Online

     

    No one would deny that this is multiplayer on online.  But Massively?  No.  It has 20v20 (if memory serves).  Do we consider TF2 an MMO @ 16v16?  BF2142 @32v32?  No?  Why not if titles like Global agenda (10v10) and WoT (20v20) get the moniker?  Because everyone is on the same "server".  Sorry, I don't consider a global chat room as being multiplayer because we're playing nothing.

     

    It boils down to this.  When the players are playing the game what is the limitation?  If it is smaller than FPS titles which we don't consider MMOs then just because they retain control over the servers doesn't alter the fact they are not massive.  Want massive in that field?  Planetside.  World War II Online.  Hundreds of combatants in a shared world.  THAT is massive.

    Not just another pretty color.

  • MrbloodworthMrbloodworth Member Posts: 5,615

    If you think that triditional DIKU games support ever single player on one server or that the zones are trulyseamless, you are mistaken.

    ----------
    "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me

    "No, your wrong.." - Random user #123

    "Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.

    How are you?" -Me

  • LawlmonsterLawlmonster Member UncommonPosts: 1,085

    Originally posted by Greyed

    It boils down to this.  When the players are playing the game what is the limitation?  If it is smaller than FPS titles which we don't consider MMOs then just because they retain control over the servers doesn't alter the fact they are not massive.  Want massive in that field?  Planetside.  World War II Online.  Hundreds of combatants in a shared world.  THAT is massive.

    Agreed. I'd like to add more, but that about wraps it up.

    "This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)

  • YuuiYuui Member UncommonPosts: 723

    Aaaand with this im off the mmorpg.com.
     
    Once a great realm, now only ruins remain with savage beasts baiting  you at every post, with evil wizards creating illusions of grandeur upon the new king's clothes, with the citiziens who enjoy tearing others to pieces.
     
    Few years in the future this website will only list World of Warcraft, TOR and <insertthegamedevspaidtohypehere>
     
    Hopefully by that time the remaining community will only be the hardcore snobs...oh wait...that already happened.
     
     
    Obviously world of tanks, a game that will involve thousands of players warring for territories of europe, clans fighting between themselves and players going against each other in graphical enviroinment, is not a mmo game, because:
    A) Devs did not pay the website to hype it like most likely happened with TOR/Tera/etc,etc,etc.
    B) The Article Author did not like the game.
    C) TPTB has a biased view upon this game and would like to write another article about TOR...

    # A GRIM, ODD, ARCANE SKY
    # ANY GOD, I MARK SACRED
    # A MASKED CRY ADORING
    # A DREAMY, SICK DRAGON

  • BenthonBenthon Member Posts: 2,069

    Originally posted by Yuui

    Aaaand with this im off the mmorpg.com.

     

    Once a great realm, now only ruins remain with savage beasts baiting  you at every post, with evil wizards creating illusions of grandeur upon the new king's clothes, with the citiziens who enjoy tearing others to pieces.

     

    Few years in the future this website will only list World of Warcraft, TOR and

     

    Hopefully by that time the remaining community will only be the hardcore snobs...oh wait...that already happened.

     

     

    Obviously world of tanks, a game that will involve thousands of players warring for territories of europe, clans fighting between themselves and players going against each other in graphical enviroinment, is not a mmo game, because:

    A) Devs did not pay the website to hype it like most likely happened with TOR/Tera/etc,etc,etc.

    B) The Article Author did not like the game.

    C) TPTB has a biased view upon this game and would like to write another article about TOR...

    Sounds like you're an angry supporter of WoT because it didn't make it on MMORPG. Lets criticize a whole website because my video game didn't make it on the list! It's obviously controversial, maybe the website mods will pull it, maybe not. Global Agenda is a tad different in the spectrum that does make it an MMO.

     

    He who keeps his cool best wins.

  • WielandWieland Member Posts: 27

    They have Need for Speed World on the list so it doesnt make sense to remove World of Tanks.

    Or take Lords of Ultima for example. Its not on the list but it qualifies as a MMO.

     

    As soon as WoT gets its ClanWars running its definitely a MMO.

  • Gabby-airGabby-air Member UncommonPosts: 3,440

    Hopefully you''ll also get rid of all the other non MMO games present in your game list...and there are quite a few of them.

  • OzmodanOzmodan Member EpicPosts: 9,548

    Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

    *Editor’s Note: As a result of Bill’s assessment, we will likely be removing the game from our list within the next few days.

     

    Why? Thats silly. The term MMO (that really should be MMG, Massively multiplayer games. I don't ever recall playing "onlines".) is ever changing, some of the things he listed are not requirements of that term. If they were, you have more than just this title to remove then. If you really want to get picky, you need to remove any games thats not a MMORPG.


    You are going to find more and more games coming to market that you can’t list if you decide to not evolve along with the market.

    If you have to include anything multiplayer then you have to add all the fps games too.  There are plenty of sites that cover those games, I don't see where this site has to do so too.  Just makes no sense at all, especially since the primary game choice is MMO for most posters.

  • JTJT Member Posts: 401

    As it is currently, think of it as Battlefield with tanks.

  • KhalathwyrKhalathwyr Member Posts: 3,138

    I'd agree. If your going to yank WOT then Need For Speed World need to drop as well.

    "Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."

    Kickstarter 2 / Naysayers 0

  • McGamerMcGamer Member UncommonPosts: 1,059

    Originally posted by Mrbloodworth



    Many traditional MMORPG/DIKU games that have persistent worlds do not even support 200 players in one place, so that’s a bit silly. And they have lower net speed requirements than the shooter titles. Asynchronous VS synchronous systems.


     


    What’s really the issue is, if it’s not a RPG (meaning combat system) and doesn’t have elves, its not a MMG.


     


    Fact is, multiplayer games are becoming closer to MMG's, and MMG's are becoming closer to multiplayer games. There soon won't be a diffrence anymore.


     


    Evolve with it, or be a cranky old-timer clutching to ever quest one.


     

    So you expect this site to accept your suggestion or you will call them names...? That's pretty funny

Sign In or Register to comment.