Haha, you actually made a thread about this? It seems it must have really annoyed you.
@OP, Let's hear your definition of an MMO. You'll get dozens of different replies as to what an MMO truly is. The fact is, there isn't an official definition (wikipedia & online dictionaries don't count), and there never will be.
An MMO is composed of many different concepts and protocols, which is ever-changing.
Massively Multiplayer Online is the definition..... I don't understand how that can confuse a lot of you. MMO is literally the definition. Its not a genre that can be argued. Its a description of the game. MMORPG is a genre. MMO is a descriptor. It is defined already. It has nothing to do with a persistent or open world like some confused people state. Its all about how many people are playing together. If the game is segregated into 5vs5, thats only 10 people playing together. That is not massive. Chess is not a massive multiplayer game just because millions play it.
Saying it's "Massively Multiplayer Online", just isn't enough. You need to be more detailed than that.
What is your definitive definition of a Massively Multiplayer Online Roleplaying Game?
Take each word separately and define each one using standards and protocols from video game development, then apply all that together and tell me which is a "pure" MMORPG.
My point is, each MMO is designed differently, whether it's server infrastructure, networking, communication, persistence, databases, etc.
The real issue here, is the word "Massively". What constitutes massively? Is it hundreds, thousands? Do they have to occupy a specific space, or can they be spread out? Do they need to be on a single server, or spread across multiple servers? Do they need to be in the open-world or does instancing count?
There isn't an official definition, or an official criteria. The genre is abstract. The sooner people realize this, the sooner these debates will end. lol.
Sorry but I'm gonna have to weigh in here.
Have to say your arguments don't hold water for me. MMO is descriptive of one aspect of MMORPG and it relates to one thing only, the number of concurrent connections to the game server.
As for the questions you pose well lets look at the time when the term was created and why. If you think back to the late 90's we had really great mulit-player online games like Quake or Half Life and the ton of mods for it, which had a massive, huge player base. But those servers could only provide space for 32 players. Battlefield came along and that number went to 64, wowzers.
Now we look at UO and EQ and we see hundreds of players together in the same zones on servers which have thousands of players connected to them. Now we are not just talking multiplayer, we suddenly have massively multi-player and it's online. This was the reason MMO was phrased the way it was. It was online and it was MASSIVELY Multi-player, not regular multi-player. Here we had these online multi-player games that allowed for hundreds of players to gather together and interact with each other. Multi-player just didn't cut the mustard any longer and so the term Massively Multi-player was used instead.
This is where the MMO part of MMORPG came from. Purely as a description of the numbers of concurrent players who were connected to the same game world and playing together. No abstraction just cold, hard numbers.
It baffles me how anyone can get this so wrong. If you just take 10 minutes to sit and think about what was going on back in the late 90's and look at the games we played then and how things were changing and where the developments in the tech were taking us. It should be fairly obvious if you take the time to think it over.
And so what if it was 20 years ago and things have moved on, that still doesn't change the fact that 20 players is multi-player and not massively multi-player. 20 still means 20, 50 still means 50 and 200 is still 200. Massively multi-player still means Massively multi-player.
The OP has a valid point. We rely on these guys at sites like this to give us news on MMO's and other games too, let's be honest, and that's fine. But they really should know the difference between an MMO and a multi-player game. They're professional journalists for gods sake. They're bread and butter is the English language, and language has definition, it gives definition to the communication of ideas and thoughts between individuals. You'd think that they, of all people, should be getting it right.
I have to stop now or I'll be typing for the next 8 hours about this. Yes, it bugs me too, a lot.
I agree with the the OP.They're just bait click articles to get MMO/MMORPG players to click. Soon Call of Duty will be an MMO because you have levels. The genre is pretty dry though.
So you've never criticized anything, because your policy is to simply bend over and take the bad service when someone gives it to you? That's a pretty degenerative policy. Just because you're not running a news channel that doesn't mean you can't criticize Fox News. Just because you're not running a MMO site that doesn't mean you should be willing to accept people who fail to know what MMO means.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Perhaps this site could do with more open-minded fans who are willing to expand their gaming horizons? No?
T
This site definitely needs this very badly.
I play all types of games. But just like I got to ESPN to read about sports and not world news. I don't go to MMORPG to read about MOBA being branded as MMORPG.
Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal I play all types of games. But just like I got to ESPN to read about sports and not world news. I don't go to MMORPG to read about MOBA being branded as MMORPG.
Then just read the articles about MMOs and skip the other ones.
FFS, how perfect are your lives that something as infinitely trivial as 'this game isn't an MMO' can be such a source of trauma and outrage? I'm serious, I'd kill - I'd goddam murder whatever motherfuckers it takes - to have a life so amazingly free of any inconvenience, conflict or setback that something as small as this could be such a source of anguish or discontent for me.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal I play all types of games. But just like I got to ESPN to read about sports and not world news. I don't go to MMORPG to read about MOBA being branded as MMORPG.
Then just read the articles about MMOs and skip the other ones.
FFS, how perfect are your lives that something as infinitely trivial as 'this game isn't an MMO' can be such a source of trauma and outrage? I'm serious, I'd kill - I'd goddam murder whatever motherfuckers it takes - to have a life so amazingly free of any inconvenience, conflict or setback that something as small as this could be such a source of anguish or discontent for me.
Trauma, outrage, anguish? For pretty much all of us I'm guessing no. Frankly I'm surprised you're surprised that so many people have an issue with this sudden outbreak of stupidity where a chunk of the community starts calling cars buses. While I'm certainly not traumatized by this event, I am however still scratching my head. Probably the oddest thing I've seen on these forums in the decade since I first started reading.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Originally posted by General-Zod People need to start using the "Search" field instead of opening the 100th discussion thread about something that's already been explained to death.
Start a new thread about a previously discussed topic, you're bitched at for starting redundant threads.
Search for an existing, older thread on a topic to add to, you're bitched at for necro-posting.
It's one or the other around here. Either way, you're gonna get bitched at by someone, whom had the choice to simply not click on the thread link in the first place.
Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal I play all types of games. But just like I got to ESPN to read about sports and not world news. I don't go to MMORPG to read about MOBA being branded as MMORPG.
Then just read the articles about MMOs and skip the other ones.
FFS, how perfect are your lives that something as infinitely trivial as 'this game isn't an MMO' can be such a source of trauma and outrage? I'm serious, I'd kill - I'd goddam murder whatever motherfuckers it takes - to have a life so amazingly free of any inconvenience, conflict or setback that something as small as this could be such a source of anguish or discontent for me.
Dude, it's a given that anyone who spends time talking about games we play on our $2000 computers on this site is relatively free of any inconvenience.
Especially those who have the extra time to participate in a thread they're personally fed up with.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal I play all types of games. But just like I got to ESPN to read about sports and not world news. I don't go to MMORPG to read about MOBA being branded as MMORPG.
Then just read the articles about MMOs and skip the other ones.
FFS, how perfect are your lives that something as infinitely trivial as 'this game isn't an MMO' can be such a source of trauma and outrage? I'm serious, I'd kill - I'd goddam murder whatever motherfuckers it takes - to have a life so amazingly free of any inconvenience, conflict or setback that something as small as this could be such a source of anguish or discontent for me.
Dude, it's a given that anyone who spends time talking about games we play on our $2000 computers on this site is relatively free of any inconvenience.
Especially those who have the extra time to participate in a thread they're personally fed up with.
Eh, I guess so. :'(
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Originally posted by General-Zod People need to start using the "Search" field instead of opening the 100th discussion thread about something that's already been explained to death.
Start a new thread about a previously discussed topic, you're bitched at for starting redundant threads.
Search for an existing, older thread on a topic to add to, you're bitched at for necro-posting.
It's one or the other around here. Either way, you're gonna get bitched at by someone, whom had the choice to simply not click on the thread link in the first place.
OR..
You can search for an existing thread on a topic, observe and receive the answer to your question and possibly even read a post that mirrored any comment you were going to contribute.
Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal I play all types of games. But just like I got to ESPN to read about sports and not world news. I don't go to MMORPG to read about MOBA being branded as MMORPG.
Then just read the articles about MMOs and skip the other ones.
FFS, how perfect are your lives that something as infinitely trivial as 'this game isn't an MMO' can be such a source of trauma and outrage? I'm serious, I'd kill - I'd goddam murder whatever motherfuckers it takes - to have a life so amazingly free of any inconvenience, conflict or setback that something as small as this could be such a source of anguish or discontent for me.
Tramatic? Lol, you could say the same thing about how trivial anything regarding gaming is. We should all just ignore all discussion and just play what's been put out there. Close down the forums lol.
Do MMORPGs just tell their players stop whining, pay me and play the game. MMORPG.com is delivery a product as well. Declaring my annoyance with the site is well within my first world problem range.
In the game industry an MMOG is a game with servers that can hold thousands of people. At least thats what the teacher said in a gaming and simulations course I took in college once, hes an older guy who worked in big game companies. He quit when EA offered him a job though lol.
Both GW and Destiny servers can hold thousands of people. The definition in the industry is not based on how many players can be on screen in the same zones, its defined by how many can be in the same server.
Yet interestingly enough the creators of GW1 didn't label their game a MMO, they invented a new term CORPG, which more accurately describes some other titles today being called MMOs.
Moral of story, and something my grandfather taught me, never take a teacher's words as gospel, if they really knew anything they would be out in the marketplace, and not teaching.
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
They did indeed, and corpg described nicely the multiplayer intent behind the game. Legendary game . It's also a good description for some mmorpg that are heavily instance and lobby/city based which has muddied the waters endlessly by shifting from being mmorpg.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Originally posted by Kyleran Yet interestingly enough the creators of GW1 didn't label their game a MMO, they invented a new term CORPG, which more accurately describes some other titles today being called MMOs.
Moral of story, and something my grandfather taught me, never take a teacher's words as gospel, if they really knew anything they would be out in the marketplace, and not teaching.
He was in the market place and then he wanted to teach and then he went back to the market place when EA hired him. I met the EA people at the school too. He was the one who brought the gaming and simulations program into the college in the first place. Hes kind of old so has a lot of experience in the industry. The teacher was simply stating what the majority of the industry defines it as, he wasnt talking about what customers defines it as.
Comments
Sorry but I'm gonna have to weigh in here.
Have to say your arguments don't hold water for me. MMO is descriptive of one aspect of MMORPG and it relates to one thing only, the number of concurrent connections to the game server.
As for the questions you pose well lets look at the time when the term was created and why. If you think back to the late 90's we had really great mulit-player online games like Quake or Half Life and the ton of mods for it, which had a massive, huge player base. But those servers could only provide space for 32 players. Battlefield came along and that number went to 64, wowzers.
Now we look at UO and EQ and we see hundreds of players together in the same zones on servers which have thousands of players connected to them. Now we are not just talking multiplayer, we suddenly have massively multi-player and it's online. This was the reason MMO was phrased the way it was. It was online and it was MASSIVELY Multi-player, not regular multi-player. Here we had these online multi-player games that allowed for hundreds of players to gather together and interact with each other. Multi-player just didn't cut the mustard any longer and so the term Massively Multi-player was used instead.
This is where the MMO part of MMORPG came from. Purely as a description of the numbers of concurrent players who were connected to the same game world and playing together. No abstraction just cold, hard numbers.
It baffles me how anyone can get this so wrong. If you just take 10 minutes to sit and think about what was going on back in the late 90's and look at the games we played then and how things were changing and where the developments in the tech were taking us. It should be fairly obvious if you take the time to think it over.
And so what if it was 20 years ago and things have moved on, that still doesn't change the fact that 20 players is multi-player and not massively multi-player. 20 still means 20, 50 still means 50 and 200 is still 200. Massively multi-player still means Massively multi-player.
The OP has a valid point. We rely on these guys at sites like this to give us news on MMO's and other games too, let's be honest, and that's fine. But they really should know the difference between an MMO and a multi-player game. They're professional journalists for gods sake. They're bread and butter is the English language, and language has definition, it gives definition to the communication of ideas and thoughts between individuals. You'd think that they, of all people, should be getting it right.
I have to stop now or I'll be typing for the next 8 hours about this. Yes, it bugs me too, a lot.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
We have a winner.
Those who can't do, critique.
So you've never criticized anything, because your policy is to simply bend over and take the bad service when someone gives it to you? That's a pretty degenerative policy. Just because you're not running a news channel that doesn't mean you can't criticize Fox News. Just because you're not running a MMO site that doesn't mean you should be willing to accept people who fail to know what MMO means.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
This site definitely needs this very badly.
QFT
Pointless argument # 100,590,058.
Yes the site covers MMO's and OTHER games.
Ooops not everyone agrees on what is what.
WHO CARES this is the site with the most coverage.
I play all types of games. But just like I got to ESPN to read about sports and not world news. I don't go to MMORPG to read about MOBA being branded as MMORPG.
Of course, you're highly qualified to be a auto-mechanic critic because you can make a car payment.
Yes, yes, they do.
Let's just agree to disagree on who routinely posts nonsense, shall we?
Then just read the articles about MMOs and skip the other ones.
FFS, how perfect are your lives that something as infinitely trivial as 'this game isn't an MMO' can be such a source of trauma and outrage? I'm serious, I'd kill - I'd goddam murder whatever motherfuckers it takes - to have a life so amazingly free of any inconvenience, conflict or setback that something as small as this could be such a source of anguish or discontent for me.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I liken it to the idea that an HOV lane only requires two occupants...
Trauma, outrage, anguish? For pretty much all of us I'm guessing no. Frankly I'm surprised you're surprised that so many people have an issue with this sudden outbreak of stupidity where a chunk of the community starts calling cars buses. While I'm certainly not traumatized by this event, I am however still scratching my head. Probably the oddest thing I've seen on these forums in the decade since I first started reading.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Start a new thread about a previously discussed topic, you're bitched at for starting redundant threads.
Search for an existing, older thread on a topic to add to, you're bitched at for necro-posting.
It's one or the other around here. Either way, you're gonna get bitched at by someone, whom had the choice to simply not click on the thread link in the first place.
Dude, it's a given that anyone who spends time talking about games we play on our $2000 computers on this site is relatively free of any inconvenience.
Especially those who have the extra time to participate in a thread they're personally fed up with.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Eh, I guess so. :'(
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
OR..
You can search for an existing thread on a topic, observe and receive the answer to your question and possibly even read a post that mirrored any comment you were going to contribute.
Redundancy solved!
Tramatic? Lol, you could say the same thing about how trivial anything regarding gaming is. We should all just ignore all discussion and just play what's been put out there. Close down the forums lol.
Do MMORPGs just tell their players stop whining, pay me and play the game. MMORPG.com is delivery a product as well. Declaring my annoyance with the site is well within my first world problem range.
In the game industry an MMOG is a game with servers that can hold thousands of people. At least thats what the teacher said in a gaming and simulations course I took in college once, hes an older guy who worked in big game companies. He quit when EA offered him a job though lol.
Both GW and Destiny servers can hold thousands of people. The definition in the industry is not based on how many players can be on screen in the same zones, its defined by how many can be in the same server.
Moral of story, and something my grandfather taught me, never take a teacher's words as gospel, if they really knew anything they would be out in the marketplace, and not teaching.
"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
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
He was in the market place and then he wanted to teach and then he went back to the market place when EA hired him. I met the EA people at the school too. He was the one who brought the gaming and simulations program into the college in the first place. Hes kind of old so has a lot of experience in the industry. The teacher was simply stating what the majority of the industry defines it as, he wasnt talking about what customers defines it as.
Personally I think all they need to do is change the name of the site.
Welcome to the: "MMORPG's are Dead!" forums.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
Western MMORPG are dying. More are closing than opening.
No you missed the memo.
They are dead.
I read it here, so it is true.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!